RealGM

The players of the Sacramento Kings have turned on George Karl, according to sources.

Karl has been seen as conducting inefficient practices and shootarounds, along with ineffective in-game adjustments.

The dysfunction began with DeMarcus Cousins and Karl, but it has spread throughout the locker room.

Karl is owed more than $10 million through 2018.

Via Chris Mannix/The Vertical

At least he will get paid to not do anything for 2 years..

Rated T By CBRA wrote:At least he will get paid to not do anything for 2 years..

Doubt that lol He will be getting paid twice since he will be a paid coach and will get a second job making even more while working for espn or such.

what inefective ingame adjustments?players dont exectue

bjamm wrote:

Rated T By CBRA wrote:At least he will get paid to not do anything for 2 years..

Doubt that lol He will be getting paid twice since he will be a paid coach and will get a second job making even more while working for espn or such.

Not the way it works. If he gets a new job, then the Kings will no longer have to pay him.

I'm not at all convinced he'll get one anyway. Didn't seem to be much interest before the Kings hired him, and this stint, and another couple of years of age, certainly aren't going to add to the appeal.

It would really do the Kings a service to send a message to the players by trading Cousins and Rondo. They gain nothing by firing Karl just to bring in another coach that isn't really in charge. They actually sealed their fate when they didn't let Karl suspend Cousins early in the season. There is nothing a new coach can do there to right the ship.

Winsome Gerbil wrote:Not the way it works. If he gets a new job, then the Kings will no longer have to pay him.

That would depend on his individual contract. But I've never heard of a coaching contract that would allow the Kings to pay him less because ESPN hired him to do commentary.

If George Karl has lost the players, then it is a problem with him. However, the defense is the Kings real problem. Karl is right about their rebounding and lack of transition defense. There's also a lack of perimeter defense. To fix the defense, Divac needs to get some defensive players who will play transition, rebound and guard the perimeter. It's amazing if Rudy Gay is their best defensive player, then why are they trying to trade him?

I give it by Thursday and Karl will be fired.

Obvious move.

The biggest problem for Kings is DeMarcus Cousins, because he wants to be a leader and to have 30/20 without a defense.

But, he improves himself because of Rondo.

They need a better SG and to learn how to play better defense.

Winsome Gerbil wrote:Not the way it works. If he gets a new job, then the Kings will no longer have to pay him.

Could you back that claim up? I have never heard of such a thing. An employer doesn't get to just fire someone they have under contract because he's "not working out" and then not pay them. That's what a contract is for. I'm perfectly okay with being proven wrong, though.

From here, it seems Karl has done a pretty decent job.
They have terrible management and ownership, two uncoachable players, multiple ball hogs, draft busts, and a bunch of European discards.
Yet, before last week, the team is knocking on the door of the 8th seed.

RealGM Wiretap wrote:The players of the Sacramento Kings have turned on George Karl, according to sources.
Karl has been seen as conducting inefficient practices and shootarounds, along with ineffective in-game adjustments.
The dysfunction began with DeMarcus Cousins and Karl, but it has spread throughout the locker room.
Karl is owed more than $10 million through 2018.Via Chris Mannix/The Vertical

This is the exact same things that are coming out of NY with Derek Fisher.

Melwing wrote:

Winsome Gerbil wrote:Not the way it works. If he gets a new job, then the Kings will no longer have to pay him.

Could you back that claim up? I have never heard of such a thing. An employer doesn't get to just fire someone they have under contract because he's "not working out" and then not pay them. That's what a contract is for. I'm perfectly okay with being proven wrong, though.

Its the way it has always worked in the NBA, and likely other sports. Like the players, the coaches are signing exclusive personal services contracts. Like the players, those contracts are normally guaranteed. So Coach A agrees to coach Team A for 3 years. If Team A decides to fire Coach A in Yr 1, well the team still has to live up to its side of the bargain, which was we'll pay you x amount of dollars a year for your exclusive services. Since if he's fired, the coach isn't the one who breached his side of the deal, the team still has to pay him the remainder of the contract.

BUT, the key is the "exclusive" nature of the deals. The coach agrees to coach Team A, and Team A exclusively. He can't sign a deal to also coach Team B at the same time. So if he gets fired and then goes off and seeks and gets a job from Team B, then he's breached the exclusivity of his original contract, and the remainder of it is void. So when a coach gets hired by a new team, his remaining contract with the old one winks out. One of the reasons why coaches are sometimes willing to sit out a year or two.

Winsome Gerbil wrote:...

Ah, thanks! That makes a lot of sense. I don't know how I've missed that over the years, I read a lot of this stuff. Heh.