Is Michael Malone the right coach for this team?

[psimanic1]

And who would you hire instead of Malone? Chauncey? Some NCAA coach? I don't think any coach would play young guys more when you give him vets he can play on every position instead..Only if Kroenke and Tim tell him he will get fired if he doesn't(wasnt that one of the reasons Karl got fired because he didn't want to play young McGee more?

[NuggetsWY]

There are some former coaches with more experience/wins than Malone.
Another option is to hire a former Spurs assistant coach. They all seem to be successful.
There are options.
As for playing rookies, some coaches do. The Knicks played Porzingis and the Twolves played two rookies serious minutes.
Another major example is Oklahoma playing Sabonis as a starter.
The Suns didn't start the year with Booker as a starter but he started 51 games, meanwhile Jokic was having an even better year according to advanced statistics and he didn't get over 20 mpg until the last 6 weeks of the season.
And there are more examples, if you'd like, we can do this all day.
There are always options.
One last example, George Karl was famous for NOT playing rookies and yet Carmelo Anthony started every game as a rookie.

[psimanic1]

Well you have Harris starting, you have Mudiay, Jokic, but if you want all young guys to play you will have to get some coach that is willing to sacrifice his and teams record in order to give all young guys more minutes, and also, you have to trade all the vets that have some value or you will have vets who want to leave Denver, and because not playing enough minutes, they won't have a lot of value...

[NuggetsWY]

You are sounding like an "all or nothing". I'm talking about a more balanced mix. LIke I just said, Minnesota's been playing more youth than most for a few years. The Lakers have been playing one or two rookies for the last couple of years, not all starting - this year too. And we can go on, some teams more successful than others. Even 15th pick Kawahi Leonard playing on a legendary team with legendary players for a legendary coach started 39 games his rookie season. I'm not saying start only young guys. It's common sense. I have been suggesting something like the following for a long time and part of it is to get young players playing and part is to protect our two veteran, injury prone small forwards.

Murray/Mudiay with Nelson playing in case of injury
Harris/Beasley with Barton playing in case of injury
Gallinari/Chandler with Hernangomez playing in case of injury
Arthur/Faried with Hernangomez playing in case of injury
Jokic/Nurkic

If a veteran is traded (please), then slide the rotation up.
Murray/Mudiay - play the hot player of the night 30 mpg
Harris 30+ mpg give Beasley the rest
Gallinari/Chandler 24 mpg each and stop banging their bodies against bigs so much
Arthur/Faried 24 mpg each adjusting based on game situations
Jokic 30+ give Nurkic the rest

If Malone was on schedule for a playoff lock, there would be room to argue but his approach leads one to believe we might not win 30 games this year. Wait a minute, that was 2 weeks ago. Now we think we can win 40 games. Then again, we have 3 great games and then get blown out and didn't even attempt to play the style that gave us three wins and the veterans played the most minutes in that game. The blame for the Nuggets' issues can NOT be placed on the young players! No way! If we are going to play inconsistent, why not play the young players? That's what young players do!

[NuggetsWY]

Oh yeah, if the vets want to leave, accommodate them, it helps the team's reputation for being player friendly. Sometimes trading a player for less than an ideal package can make a big statement to free agents of the future.

[psimanic1]

Maybe they want to do that when vets build some more value so they can trade them...

[NuggetsWY]

Maybe they want to do that when vets build some more value so they can trade them...

Do you really think our vets are building trade value the way they are playing? Bah! Gallinari and Chandler are known as injury prone and the only teams that want them are championship contenders who aren't usually in need of trades unless they have a major injury - so we wait. Faried's been offered for at least 2 or 3 years and no one seems interested. He might be having his best year yet but it's not much better than the rest of his years, but someone might want him. Nelson is a good backup PG, if a team has a major injury. The problem is, the Nuggets are NOT going to get major talent for one of them and most teams do NOT want to trade for 2 or 3 out of this group.

Barton's probably increasing his value but he's the most desirable for the Nuggets to keep.

I've been assuming Malone and the front office are in agreement but then why did the sign Arthur? To not play him? Why did they cut our third string/emergency center? To sign Gee? Or to make room for Faried at center? Speaking of Gee, we had seven wing players when we signed Gee, a wing player. Sure some were out injured but teams make do, not sign a player they don't plan to play much. Speaking of which, why did we sign Miller? To coach? He can do that without taking one of the 15 slots. Why did we bring Beasley on instead of leaving him in the D-league or sending him overseas? To not play? Sure he can learn a little by sitting on the bench but every former player in TV studios and announcing talks about the value of learning by playing. I'm no longer sure Malone and the front office are in agreement.

Not signing Arthur and Miller, stashing Hernangomez and Beasley would have given us room to sign four more one/two year contracts with veterans and improved our chances of making the playoffs, it that was the goal. Silly me, I thought we were trying to develop a serious contender a few years from now.

Next year we have two firsts and two stashes (that might come over) and we'll be even younger - then what?

This is a team that's disjointed. But at least they're starting to draw fans in and they'll make money from that and the TV revenue.

I'm thankful I get lots of Jazz games and quite a few Trailblazer and Timberwolves games too. At least those teams have a plan and are sticking to it.

[psimanic1]

None of those teams you mentioned have our problem..They all have 1-2 really good players, that MUST fullfil their potential so they can get into the playoffs, it's not like POR has good bench players behind Lillard or CJ, or MIN behind KAT, Wiggins, Lavine. If MIN had a plan they would give more minutes to Dunn or Jones(wouldn't mind him on Denver, actually i would like if we could get him).
We have a problem that we have few more young guys than we should, in same positions, and first we have to see who should we build around, and they trade other one for best offer there is..

It's not that i want to argue, but i don't think Malone is only or biggest problem here for us, i think Kroenke and Tim have their fingers in it for some reason. I think Malone is much better than those loses we got because of "his rotations", or I atleast hope so

[NuggetsWY]

Uh, OK, should we ignore Minnesota having 3 players in their second or third year?
Towns has started every game he has played, rookie year and second year.
Wiggins has started every game he has played, rookie year, second year, and third year.
Lavine has averaged 28 mpg but not started every game until this year.
Dunn is averaging 17 mpg and started just five games.

That shows they understand that Jokic & Murray might be starters and Hernangomez & Mudiay might be second string and Beasley might be an occasional - my interpretation. I have been trying to say that not every player is the same. I guess I just don't know how to say that any clearer.

They all have 1-2 really good players, that MUST fullfil their potential so they can get into the playoffs, it's not like POR has good bench players behind Lillard or CJ, or MIN behind KAT, Wiggins, Lavine. If MIN had a plan they would give more minutes to Dunn or Jones(wouldn't mind him on Denver, actually i would like if we could get him).

But that is the point; the Nuggets have 1-2 really good players, that just make me all-star level and that's Jokic and Murray. No guarantees but it sure doesn't look like any of the rest of our players have a shot at all-star at any point in the future.

Portland does have good bench players, unfortunately some of them are starting . What they don't have his that magical third reliable much less a fourth reliable scoring option. But they have built the team they wanted and surrounded their two stars with some good role players.

Minnesota does have a plan, they are playing their three young stars (first trio of 22 & under to all average over 20 ppg) and they've got some good role players around them plus they've got some other youth that may or may not become starters in the future. They've even admitted that they are still a player or two, plus some experience (hint: playing their young guys) away from being a serious contender.

Let's call this discussion an impasse and start discussing teams that gripe so much to the refs that the refs ignore them and/or make calls against them - sort of like Gallinari's increased flopping being ignored. LOL

Of course there's nothing wrong with you having one more response. Be my guest!

[The Rebel]

I would not say that we have to many young guys, I would say that we have a real problem on our roster in that we have way to much depth. They keep trying to trade for a star, when reality is we have some very very talented players that are buried under veterans that are what they are going to be, and that is solid rotation guys. It is past time the front office clears out guys like Arthur or Faried and one of Barton and Nelson.

You have to clear room for the young guys to grow, that is the front office's problem.

I will agree with psimanic1 that Malone may not have the only say in the rotations, but at the same time that is not my biggest problem with Malone. That pisses me off, but my real problem with Malone is that the offense does not fit the talent and it feels like there is not much of an offensive system, the defensive systems also do not seem to fit the talent of the young guys all that well.

That being said I think the values of guys like Arthur, Barton, Nelson, and Faried are rising pretty quickly. For years some of us have realized that how good these guys are, but with their being more featured people are starting to realize that these guys are all good role players. Reading a few different threads around this board people are starting to talk about some of these guys. With the right teams out there they can fill good and needed roles on those teams and the value is getting to be pretty solid. Now is the time that these guys should be getting moved, and give us a chance to see what the young guys have while picking up future assets. It gives the rest of the year to see what these young guys can be, where the holes are, and gives us assets to fill in those needs and replace the guys who are not going to take the next step.

Malone has his issues, but the front office has theirs as well.

[skywalker33]

Maybe they want to do that when vets build some more value so they can trade them...

Do you really think our vets are building trade value the way they are playing? Bah! Gallinari and Chandler are known as injury prone and the only teams that want them are championship contenders who aren't usually in need of trades unless they have a major injury - so we wait. Faried's been offered for at least 2 or 3 years and no one seems interested. He might be having his best year yet but it's not much better than the rest of his years, but someone might want him. Nelson is a good backup PG, if a team has a major injury. The problem is, the Nuggets are NOT going to get major talent for one of them and most teams do NOT want to trade for 2 or 3 out of this group.

Barton's probably increasing his value but he's the most desirable for the Nuggets to keep.

Well, do they build any value sitting on the bench ??

[NuggetsWY]

Well, do they build any value sitting on the bench ??

Nope! Should've been dealing some and not signing others. Just seems like there's no plan to how the team is built nor how it is playing.

[skywalker33]

Well, do they build any value sitting on the bench ??

Nope! Should've been dealing some and not signing others. Just seems like there's no plan to how the team is built nor how it is playing.

Hindsight is always 20-20 and if you're talking about 2016 trades, we are just 10 days past the start of the trade season that could include FA signees. You've mentioned Arthur in the off-season, can't say I wasn't scratching my head too, but many sa w it as a reasonable deal and him being an asset.

Trade deadline is just over 60 days away, if we can't swing at least two positive trades in that time. the FO/coach have to take the blame on a failure of this season. They say they aren't tanking, but several losses have seemed precariously peculiar to me.

[The Rebel]

Well, do they build any value sitting on the bench ??

Nope! Should've been dealing some and not signing others. Just seems like there's no plan to how the team is built nor how it is playing.

You mean like resigning Nene and trading him soon after? How many other guys has the front office done this with over the last few years.

Look at the Mozgov deal, we were all ready to kill Shaw for playing Mozgov so much when it was obvious that Nurkic was a better player than him. This front office has had 2 coaches in a row that overplayed role players over the young guys long after it is obvious the backup is the better player and option. Even back when Nene was traded, it was clear that Faried was much more effective by then. Mozgov, Foye, Afflalo, Lauvergne, Nate Robinson. The only times it has seemed to backfire on this team was with Lawson and possibly Andre Miller.

You have to admit that it is kind of a genius plan. Eventually you have to quit building trade assets and go with your young team at some point, and I think you and I both are thinking it is at that point. Maybe Malone is being forced to play the veterans to get good assets before you put the young guys where they should be.

I think guys like Arthur, Barton, Faried, and Nelson could all be getting featured, to improve their trade value, so that they can trade a couple of them and actually get fair value, while holding the team back one more year for a better draft pick.

[NuggetsWY]

Well, do they build any value sitting on the bench ??

Nope! Should've been dealing some and not signing others. Just seems like there's no plan to how the team is built nor how it is playing.

Hindsight is always 20-20 and if you're talking about 2016 trades, we are just 10 days past the start of the trade season that could include FA signees. You've mentioned Arthur in the off-season, can't say I wasn't scratching my head too, but many sa w it as a reasonable deal and him being an asset.

Trade deadline is just over 60 days away, if we can't swing at least two positive trades in that time. the FO/coach have to take the blame on a failure of this season. They say they aren't tanking, but several losses have seemed precariously peculiar to me.

When I'm teaching young people how to manage money, I frequently have to tell them that if something's on sale but you don't need it, it doesn't make sense to buy it. No trades before the deadline? That would be about as stupid as can be.

As for the team's play; I've asked before, What is our offense? How do you describe it? Are we a pick-n-roll team? Not really. A motion team? Once in a while. A fast break team? Rarely. An iso team? Too often. Who runs the offense? Mudiay until Nelson comes in and then he slides to SG? Jokic? Somethimes. Murray? Occasionally.

What's our defense? Switching man? Fight over the pick man? Double on bigs? All of the above on a rotating basis based on how a player feels?

[U hova]

If we're really trying to move out Faried that'd explain Malone using him so much. Though he should probably run a different lineup than him at Center.

[NuggetsWY]

http://bsndenver.com/i-like-the-nine-that-were-going-with-right-now-no-changes-in-store-for-nuggets-rotation/
We are 4-2 with the new line-up - so it's understandable that coach likes it. It's hard to argue with a record that, if is played consistently at 4-2 every 6 games results in a season record of around 50 wins.

The article points out that are supposedly defensive minded coach's team is "ranked 27th league-wide in defensive efficiency, giving up 108.4 points per 100 possessions, two points worse than last year. Over their past six games, since Michael Malone altered his starting lineup and cut down his rotation, the Nuggets’ defense hasn’t been any better, giving up 109.4 points per 100 possessions."
and
"Two players that were getting spot minutes for the Nuggets; Darrell Arthur and Jusuf Nurkic before the lineup change on Dec. 15, now find themselves out of the rotation. Arthur and Nurkic are also two of Denver’s better defenders."

So we are winning with offense? Yup, we can see that. OK, fans like offense - I like offense but even Golden State had to learn to play defense in order to be a contender because sometimes offenses sputter and you need to help the other team sputter worse than your sputter.

Two more thoughts:

The article points out that "Nurkic, who began the year as the Nuggets’ starting center and averaged 15.2 points and 10.6 rebounds over Denver’s first five regular season games, has recorded four straight DNP-CD’s." Wouldn't it make sense to find room for an automatic double-double player? How many NBA players average a double-double?? Hmmm ...

Malone likes his current starting nine. I get that. But that's the short-sighted "win now" that coaches have to play for or they don't get to keep their job. It's understandable but I'm on record as opposing that mentality. <sigh> But let me point out his nine-man rotation of Mudiay, Harris, Gallinari, Chandler, Jokic with a bench of Nelson, Murray, Barton, Faried is unbalanced and leaves the bench even more unbalanced. It sure seems like a smart coach could juggle things a little bit here; but at 4-2, it's hard to argue that. But am I the only one that thinks a nine-man rotation that contains five guards is probably not going to cut it against many teams? That nine man rotation consists of one center, one PF, two SFs, five guards. Jokic & Faried are the only bigs? That's my biggest concern about this nine-man rotation. But I'll say it again; 4-2 is hard to argue with.

[The Rebel]

Yesterday on my way to a meeting I was listening to Hastings on 950 the fan, and he was telling a story that Chuck Hayes had told him about his 1st day in the gym as an assistant coach during training camp. According to Hastings when Hayes walked into the gym Malone and some of the other staff kept talking about all the great guard talent we have, and that Hayes kept having to remind them that we have 2 potential franchise bigs on the team as they seemed to forget. Now this is Hayes's 1st year with the team, and for those that do not remember him he was best known for being the undersized hustle big that backed up Yao Ming in Houston and partially responsible for the Rockets making the 2nd round of the playoffs a few years ago when both Yao and McGrady were out injured. To me it confirmed that Malone never had any intention of making the Nurkic/Jokic lineup work, does not realize the potential matchup nightmares he could create, and it just pisses me off more.

I see some crazy potential in Murray, Harris is a very good player, I am still trying to be patient with Mudiay, Beasley has not had enough time to make a judgement, but the idea that the guards are what this team should be built around is stupid. I am sorry but it has been obvious for the last year that Jokic and Nurkic were this teams biggest strength, and they should be the focal point of the team, especially Jokic. If they were on a team with a good coach either one of them would be tearing up the league, and it is stupid that one rides the bench and the other gets 20 mpg and it has been that way all season, those are the guys he should be developing, and do not give me this **** about how the game has changed. Last I checked the object is still to get the ball in the hoop and stop the other team from getting the ball in the hoop, and those 2 have potential to be among the best at their positions.

It is bad enough that this team does not have a cohesive offense with movement unless Jokic has the ball in his hands, it is even worse that running seems to be the last thing on the players minds most nights, but to have guys like Jokic and Nurkic riding the bench because our coaches are too stupid to figure out how special they could be and how to use them is **** ridiculous.

This team has the potential to be the next GS team, but it is not the Warriors, they are not going to turn Faried into Green, while Murray reminds me of a young Curry he is not yet where Curry rose to, and Harris is not a D 3 guy like Thompson, they aren't the same players and Malone needs to stop trying to make them into those players. This team has the potential to be even better with Jokic and Nurkic, but the coach is too stupid to figure that out.

[The Rebel]

http://bsndenver.com/i-like-the-nine-that-were-going-with-right-now-no-changes-in-store-for-nuggets-rotation/
We are 4-2 with the new line-up - so it's understandable that coach likes it. It's hard to argue with a record that, if is played consistently at 4-2 every 6 games results in a season record of around 50 wins.

The article points out that are supposedly defensive minded coach's team is "ranked 27th league-wide in defensive efficiency, giving up 108.4 points per 100 possessions, two points worse than last year. Over their past six games, since Michael Malone altered his starting lineup and cut down his rotation, the Nuggets’ defense hasn’t been any better, giving up 109.4 points per 100 possessions."
and
"Two players that were getting spot minutes for the Nuggets; Darrell Arthur and Jusuf Nurkic before the lineup change on Dec. 15, now find themselves out of the rotation. Arthur and Nurkic are also two of Denver’s better defenders."

So we are winning with offense? Yup, we can see that. OK, fans like offense - I like offense but even Golden State had to learn to play defense in order to be a contender because sometimes offenses sputter and you need to help the other team sputter worse than your sputter.

Two more thoughts:

The article points out that "Nurkic, who began the year as the Nuggets’ starting center and averaged 15.2 points and 10.6 rebounds over Denver’s first five regular season games, has recorded four straight DNP-CD’s." Wouldn't it make sense to find room for an automatic double-double player? How many NBA players average a double-double?? Hmmm ...

Malone likes his current starting nine. I get that. But that's the short-sighted "win now" that coaches have to play for or they don't get to keep their job. It's understandable but I'm on record as opposing that mentality. <sigh> But let me point out his nine-man rotation of Mudiay, Harris, Gallinari, Chandler, Jokic with a bench of Nelson, Murray, Barton, Faried is unbalanced and leaves the bench even more unbalanced. It sure seems like a smart coach could juggle things a little bit here; but at 4-2, it's hard to argue that. But am I the only one that thinks a nine-man rotation that contains five guards is probably not going to cut it against many teams? That nine man rotation consists of one center, one PF, two SFs, five guards. Jokic & Faried are the only bigs? That's my biggest concern about this nine-man rotation. But I'll say it again; 4-2 is hard to argue with.

I will say it, the 4-2 looks nice, but reality is we have been beating up on bad and injured teams. Sure it still counts in the standings but reality is until Malone figures out how to play to his team's strengths than we are going to be lucky to beat any good teams.

[skywalker33]

Uh, OK, should we ignore Minnesota having 3 players in their second or third year?
Towns has started every game he has played, rookie year and second year.
Wiggins has started every game he has played, rookie year, second year, and third year.
Lavine has averaged 28 mpg but not started every game until this year.
Dunn is averaging 17 mpg and started just five games.

That shows they understand that Jokic & Murray might be starters and Hernangomez & Mudiay might be second string and Beasley might be an occasional - my interpretation. I have been trying to say that not every player is the same. I guess I just don't know how to say that any clearer.

They all have 1-2 really good players, that MUST fullfil their potential so they can get into the playoffs, it's not like POR has good bench players behind Lillard or CJ, or MIN behind KAT, Wiggins, Lavine. If MIN had a plan they would give more minutes to Dunn or Jones(wouldn't mind him on Denver, actually i would like if we could get him).

But that is the point; the Nuggets have 1-2 really good players, that just make me all-star level and that's Jokic and Murray. No guarantees but it sure doesn't look like any of the rest of our players have a shot at all-star at any point in the future.

Portland does have good bench players, unfortunately some of them are starting . What they don't have his that magical third reliable much less a fourth reliable scoring option. But they have built the team they wanted and surrounded their two stars with some good role players.

Minnesota does have a plan, they are playing their three young stars (first trio of 22 & under to all average over 20 ppg) and they've got some good role players around them plus they've got some other youth that may or may not become starters in the future. They've even admitted that they are still a player or two, plus some experience (hint: playing their young guys) away from being a serious contender.

Let's call this discussion an impasse and start discussing teams that gripe so much to the refs that the refs ignore them and/or make calls against them - sort of like Gallinari's increased flopping being ignored. LOL

Of course there's nothing wrong with you having one more response. Be my guest!

One thing to point out, if POR and MIN having plans is a good thing, why are they behind us in the standings with better players ??