Danny Darko wrote:For those who point to Monty's lack of success do this research, please:
check out record and also players on the roster for each year. Monty actually had two good seasons where he had almost NO talent. Look for yourself. Meanwhile Lue was gifted a gelled unit with allstars and the best player in the league.
Not really a fan of this supposed two horse race, but I think I prefer Monty
Fair enough,
Monty's first year, his team won 46 games, that was great, he did it with CP3, David West (19pts,8rebs), Ariza and a healthy Emeka Okafor 10pts,10rebs/2 blocks for 74 games. They lost to the very tired Lakers in the first round, got swept by Dallas after.
The following year Monty loses CP3 and they win 21 games. Losing Paul was huge, but so did Thibs losing Rose for like 2 years, Rivers losing also Paul, Stevens loses Kyrie etc and their record wasn't that bad relatively speaking.
year 3, he gets the 19 yr old AD(yes, he might be still a bit raw) to play with Vazquez, Anderson, Gordon, they win 27 games.
That is not good IMO.
28TH defensive rating(3rd year). Luke Walton after one year, improved the Lakers from 30th to 12 best and even retained that ranking this season with major injuries and trade rumors chaos and yes with Lebron playing 55 games-His former team sucked in defense.
The following year, Monty's team won just
34 games with the 2nd year AD, Gordon, Tyreke Evans and also had defensive minded Jrue Holiday for 34 games, their Defensive ranking, still a freaking low
27th in the league. I am not saying Monty is a bad coach, He had his share of problems, professional and both emotional and family. The question is, Is Monty really considered a big upgrade over Luke Walton?
like the big Tuna Bill Parcell said, YOU ARE WHAT YOUR RECORD SAY YOU ARE.