Is Michael Malone the right coach for this team?

[eathb_au]

I think it's time to open this up.

He is good at developing young players and giving them confidence but that might be where it stops. He's an awful in game coach. He has never been the head coach of a good offensive or defensive team. I've seen him described as Brian Shaw with a better personality and I don't think I can disagree with that. Bottom line I think he's done a poor job of coaching the Nuggets this year.

That said would I fire him? Nope not this season. But I do have questions. I am leaning towards him not being the person that will take us back into the playoffs.

[The Rebel]

I think you have to give him until at least the end of this year, the changes with assistant coaches seemed to make things worse this year, and the iso offense crap drives me nuts, but you can see so many of the young guys improving that you have to see what happens through the end of the year.

[Powder Blue]

Rebel right about the assistant coach swap messing things up early this season. I'd venture to guess 27-28 team boards question the coach and his rotations. Thing is who do you go get? There aren't a bunch of Pop's in the unemployment line. Probably stand pat with Malone, make your move once you have the talent like they did with GK.

[eathb_au]

I guess my issue is that we are clearly trying to win right now and have done that this season in expense of a lot of young players development. I'd be fine with this except for the fact we are not actually winning.

I don't buy into the excuse that this roster is bad as well. The only really bad thing about it is the PG position. For example Gallo, Jokic and Faries are efficiency monsters. Nurkic is off the charts good in defensive metrics. Chandler is a legitimate chance of winning 6MOTY + Barton, Arthur are good roleplayers. Heck Murray who is basically a 20ppg scorer when given minute. It's just somewhat concerning that he cannot win with a talented roster.

[Powder Blue]

I just read that thru 16 games they've had 8 diff starting lineups. I'd imagine there's a rhythm to coaching as well, hard to get in one when your chess piece options always change...buuuut that's what you're paid to figure out.

[The Rebel]

I guess my issue is that we are clearly trying to win right now and have done that this season in expense of a lot of young players development. I'd be fine with this except for the fact we are not actually winning.

I don't buy into the excuse that this roster is bad as well. The only really bad thing about it is the PG position. For example Gallo, Jokic and Faries are efficiency monsters. Nurkic is off the charts good in defensive metrics. Chandler is a legitimate chance of winning 6MOTY + Barton, Arthur are good roleplayers. Heck Murray who is basically a 20ppg scorer when given minute. It's just somewhat concerning that he cannot win with a talented roster.

As Powder Blue says injuries play a part in that, as well as having too many players, I think the team needs to make a trade or two to free up minutes. If we are honest we know that some players are prima-donnas, they will throw a fit if they feel the least bit slighted. Nelson and Faried are both that way, and I would bet there are at least a couple of more on the team. Losing and having those guys throw fits will destroy the locker room and teh team, so Malone has to walk a tight rope.

I will say that all of the young guys seem to have improved last year, and seem to be improving this year, so I do not know if developmental time is a problem.

[NuggetsWY]

I do not think Malone is any better at developing young players than Karl was - basically neither one likes to play them. If Malone were good at developing young players, why does Mudiay struggle so much more than Murray? (My opinion) I think Malone is only playing Murray because his talent was too much to keep down. Malone did not seem to like playing Jokic last year and seemed to hold Nurkic back with a label of "bad attitude". This year, Malone is barely using Hernangomez, who is second in 3pt% only to Miller. He isn't really giving Beasley a chance to play. Plus, as pointed out in multiple postings: "Why did Malone pull Jokic?" Usually in the the discussion of late game. Developing players will cost wins. We all get that. Malone would rather trade for castoffs from teams with worse records than the Nuggets, over actually developing his young players. I think we mistake Malone's naturally positive verbiage and body language with "good at developing young players".

With that said, and as skeptical as I'm becoming, I've always believed it takes three years to determine the true value of a coach. At a minimum, I believe we should give him to the end of this year.

Along the way, most of the complaints against Malone come from "rotation issues" (my complaint). He does NOT like bigs. He likes to play small ball, very small. He loves-Loves-LOVES two PGs with one SG. Is it a "win now" attitude? Perhaps, probably, but I think it might be a long term trend. The only other time he was a head coach, he had Cousins and it didn't make sense to not play his big. Yet it seems to many that Nurkic and/or Jokic might have that level of talent - but it will be hard to determine if the fans of Nurkic/Jokic are right or not, until Malone gives them PT, especially end-of-game PT.

* * * Anyone thinking it's getting hard to keep Murray out of late-game PT? Three-for-three when down three and nine seconds left plus a couple big time three's in games is sure convincing me.

[skywalker33]

Malone has the reputation of being a "player's coach" and I think that's well deserved. But when it comes to wins, has he really ever done anything yet ?? I thought he had an OK year last year, especially with all the injuries (are we snake bitten there ? ) but I really feel like he isn't that good with the X's & O's.

Also, I think he's doing OK with PT for our rookies, Juancho is being brought along at a slow pace but I have seen the "rookie plays" in him as well. Beasley isn't getting the PT because of our depth, Rebel is probably right about a trade being necessary in that instance.

Malone's job is to win games, too many of which are slipping through our hands. I thought the CHI game might be a turning point, but then we get blown out in UTH then this one. We were up by 9-10pts with 3mins to go, this is where a coach is supposed to keep the team under composure IMO. I do agree with the Rebel about giving him thru the year, especially with the way the team players have developed as well as the culture.

So, anyone know the names of coaches that could take ove this young roster ??

[NuggetsWY]

Malone has the reputation of being a "player's coach" and I think that's well deserved. But when it comes to wins, has he really ever done anything yet ?? I thought he had an OK year last year, especially with all the injuries (are we snake bitten there ? ) but I really feel like he isn't that good with the X's & O's.

Also, I think he's doing OK with PT for our rookies, Juancho is being brought along at a slow pace but I have seen the "rookie plays" in him as well. Beasley isn't getting the PT because of our depth, Rebel is probably right about a trade being necessary in that instance.

Malone's job is to win games, too many of which are slipping through our hands. I thought the CHI game might be a turning point, but then we get blown out in UTH then this one. We were up by 9-10pts with 3mins to go, this is where a coach is supposed to keep the team under composure IMO. I do agree with the Rebel about giving him thru the year, especially with the way the team players have developed as well as the culture.

So, anyone know the names of coaches that could take ove this young roster ??

Hard to argue with you but "Beasley isn't getting the PT because of our depth" is drinking the kool-aid as far as I am concerned. Why sign Gee? Because we don't want to play Beasley is the only conclusion. Sure, I get it, Barton was out and so was Harris. It would cost us a win or two until they came back. Doesn't make sense to me. I like Gee. I love his hustle and he isn't a bad bench player but Beasley might just make a much better player (it would seem) and if we are going to trade him, wouldn't it be nice to show him off a little?

[SoCalNuggsFan]

I don't think beasly is ready to be a rotation player. He should develop into one but I haven't seen anything from him in preseason/garbage time to make me think he needs mins this year

[skywalker33]

Malone has the reputation of being a "player's coach" and I think that's well deserved. But when it comes to wins, has he really ever done anything yet ?? I thought he had an OK year last year, especially with all the injuries (are we snake bitten there ? ) but I really feel like he isn't that good with the X's & O's.

Also, I think he's doing OK with PT for our rookies, Juancho is being brought along at a slow pace but I have seen the "rookie plays" in him as well. Beasley isn't getting the PT because of our depth, Rebel is probably right about a trade being necessary in that instance.

Malone's job is to win games, too many of which are slipping through our hands. I thought the CHI game might be a turning point, but then we get blown out in UTH then this one. We were up by 9-10pts with 3mins to go, this is where a coach is supposed to keep the team under composure IMO. I do agree with the Rebel about giving him thru the year, especially with the way the team players have developed as well as the culture.

So, anyone know the names of coaches that could take ove this young roster ??

Hard to argue with you but "Beasley isn't getting the PT because of our depth" is drinking the kool-aid as far as I am concerned. Why sign Gee? Because we don't want to play Beasley is the only conclusion. Sure, I get it, Barton was out and so was Harris. It would cost us a win or two until they came back. Doesn't make sense to me. I like Gee. I love his hustle and he isn't a bad bench player but Beasley might just make a much better player (it would seem) and if we are going to trade him, wouldn't it be nice to show him off a little?

No, that's NOT the ONLY conclusion. With such a young team, Gee brings some veteran leadership, something Beasley doesn't have yet. Gee is also a better defender right now, hoping some of the young guys can see that could be another reason to bring in. Beasley will be a player, no doubt, just gives him more time....it's not like he's wasting away, he's only 19yrs old

[NuggetsWY]

Sure, but last year we brought in Sampson and Toupane; different situation but we have Nelson, Miller, Gallinari, Chandler, Faried and I'd add Arthur & Barton. That would be seven veteran players and adding Gee just reduces spot chances for Beasley and perhaps Murray - although he might add a win or two. Beasley is 19 and so is Murray. How old was Mudiay last year? Still not sold.

[Chuck Everett]

People keep saying Gee is a better defender like that means anything. Gee has never stopped anyone in his life on the pro level and HE CAN'T SCORE. Call the guy what he is, a one-dimensional journeyman.

[skywalker33]

People keep saying Gee is a better defender like that means anything. Gee has never stopped anyone in his life on the pro level and HE CAN'T SCORE. Call the guy what he is, a one-dimensional journeyman.

I AM going off his past here, he was a good defender then, but I can't say I've kept up on his career. Regardless, he won't last long enough to prove his wort (or worthlessness) once Harris gets back/we get healthy.

[NuggetsWY]

Here's a clip from an interesting article including a quote from Malone:

At the end of the day, Malone realized that his players were gassed due to the fact that they only had 10 active players in the contest and was proud at the effort they put fourth.

“That’s one thing I said to myself walking off: I ran that unit a lot.” Malone said. “I’m sure fatigue at some point did come into play there.”

Read more at http://milehighsports.com/michael-malone-finds-positives-overtime-loss-thunder/#KRweZUaVvSjtkbXT.99

Fatigue shouldn't be an excuse. If you look at the boxscore, Malone could have used Beasley to at least give a couple short breaks like to Nelson who played 41 minutes. More telling is that Oladipo & Westbrook both played 40+ minutes and while Denver only played nine players, OKC played ten but one only had 14 seconds. In other words, fatigue should NOT have been an issue unless Malone is saying the Nuggets aren't in very good shape.

[RRFB]

Complaining about Beasley's lack of minutes is silly to me. We knew from the moment he was drafted that the Nuggets were going to take their time with him. With all the injuries, I'd say he's already gotten more playing time than I was expecting. He and Juancho have played well in limited time, but that doesn't mean they're both ready for 25mpg. Comparing either of their situations (Murray's too) to Mudiay's last year is apples to oranges.

Malone did a great job of repairing the culture and reclaiming the locker room so quickly. He definitely deserves the opportunity to at least finish out this season. That said, I'm really sick of watching Nelson and Faried close out games while better talent sits on the bench. We've already lost so many games in disastrous fashion, there's gotta be a breaking point eventually. We keep saying that they're young and still learning how to win, but how long can we make that excuse when the coach clearly isn't even learning from his own mistakes?

[skywalker33]

Complaining about Beasley's lack of minutes is silly to me. We knew from the moment he was drafted that the Nuggets were going to take their time with him. With all the injuries, I'd say he's already gotten more playing time than I was expecting. He and Juancho have played well in limited time, but that doesn't mean they're both ready for 25mpg. Comparing either of their situations (Murray's too) to Mudiay's last year is apples to oranges.

Malone did a great job of epairing the culture and reclaiming the locker room so quickly. He definitely deserves the opportunity to at least finish out this season. That said, I'm really sicrk of watching Nelson and Faried close out games while better talent sits on the bench. We've already lost so many games in disastrous fashion, there's gotta be a breaking point eventually. We keep saying that they're young and still learning how to win, but how long can we make that excuse when the coach clearly isn't even learning from his own mistakes?

[torotoe]

Here's a clip from an interesting article including a quote from Malone:

At the end of the day, Malone realized that his players were gassed due to the fact that they only had 10 active players in the contest and was proud at the effort they put fourth.

“That’s one thing I said to myself walking off: I ran that unit a lot.” Malone said. “I’m sure fatigue at some point did come into play there.”

Read more at http://milehighsports.com/michael-malone-finds-positives-overtime-loss-thunder/#KRweZUaVvSjtkbXT.99

Fatigue shouldn't be an excuse. If you look at the boxscore, Malone could have used Beasley to at least give a couple short breaks like to Nelson who played 41 minutes. More telling is that Oladipo & Westbrook both played 40+ minutes and while Denver only played nine players, OKC played ten but one only had 14 seconds. In other words, fatigue should NOT have been an issue unless Malone is saying the Nuggets aren't in very good shape.

That quote is great. This shows that malone has an adaptability. And Malone himself is a young coach who is learning. I was flipping out during the game. Malone should have at least spelled his guys if he wanted to run that group.

[eathb_au]

As it stands Shaw currently has a better win% than Malone. And then you consider that Malone has better players and there are no reported locker room issues, it does leave a red flag.

[skywalker33]

So who are the hot coaching names out there, college or assistants names welcome ? Are there any Princeton Offense disciples out there ready to make the leap to the NBA ??