3toheadmelo wrote:kNicksGmen wrote:3toheadmelo wrote:Barnes is def not a guy to say things for clicks. And if you listen to the whole clip he says good things about Mike Brown. He just simply believes that Mike Brown is not good head coach material, but instead a very good assistant. And there's nothing wrong with that.
Mike Brown was god awful coaching Prime Kobe and Gasol. So that's 2 years they should've gotten to the finals at the very least. The Kings rosters Mike Brown inherited should've at least gotten to the 2nd round of the playoffs because there was a ton of offensive firepower on those teams. But instead he was a first round exit and missed the playoffs for another 2 years.
They were a really bad defensive team though and lost in 7 to the warriors (who were nearly 3 to 1 favorites going into the series). Preseason odds had the kings at an over/under of 34.5 - so they massively overachieved.
Next year they missed the playoffs with 46 wins in the west. (over/under was 44.5 going into the season).
Saying they should have at least gotten to the 2nd round because "there was a ton of offensive firepower" on those teams is an odd statement. Their best players were Fox and Sabonis - both guys somewhere in the top 20-40 range. He got about as much as one could possibly expect out of those rosters.
I'm noticing you've never addressing how he fumbled prime Kobe and Gasol.
The Kings had 6 players scoring in double digits every single year when Mike Brown was there. There was absolutely a lot of offensive firepower on those teams. He's just not a winning head coach. It's the truth.
I honestly don't remember those lakers years well. Was it "prime" Kobe and Gasol though? Looking it up they lost to the eventual West champions OKC - so nothing too shameful there. The year before he became coach they were swept by the Mavs in the 2nd round so that lakers team wasn't some powerhouse. They didn't have success after firing him either, being swept by the spurs in the 1st round and then becoming a lottery team.
As far as the kings being an offensive powerhouse - the point was not denying they had offensive talent but rather that alone doesn't mean you should beat the heavily favored warriors (3 to 1 favorites). You make generalized statements like "he should have gotten out of the 1st round with that offensive firepower" and ignore the context. They overachieved in the regular season and lost in 7 to a better warriors team. That is not something to hold against him. The following season they overachieved their predicted win total again, and won the 1st play in game against the warriors, but lost on the road to the 7 seed pelicans. the "firepower" fox was 4/16 from 3 in the game.
