On Mark Jackson, potential NBA head coach once again

A thesis on the Kings, what we know about coaches and what we know about the mid-2010s Warriors.

Good morning. Eid Mubarak! Let’s basketball.

Bonaparte Before the Sphinx, Jean-Leon Gerome, 1886

James Ham of The Kings Beat reports that the Sacramento Kings have narrowed their list of head coach candidates down to three: Steve Clifford, Mike Brown and Mark Jackson. In narrowing the list, the Kings eliminated Mike D’Antoni and three young assistant coaches — Darvin Ham, Will Hardy and Charles Lee — from consideration.

The turn toward what NBA fandom refers to as “retreads” is causing some consternation, and Jackson’s candidacy in particular seems to be causing some agita in the Kings fandom. I have a couple of takes here as a neutral viewpoint with no strong feelings about the Kings in particular.

1. We still have minimal idea of what makes a coach successful.

As analysts and fans, we can point to successful coaches and we can point to failed coaches. But can we truly identify what makes any given coach successful or failed? I would argue that it’s really, really tough.

Consider Gregg Popovich, the greatest NBA coach of all time. He’s extremely demanding on the court. Does being an extremely demanding coach work for everyone? Hell no. Does it always work for Popovich? No! His teams have been relatively unsuccessful in recent years despite his obvious, indisputable abilities.

How we end up grading coaches is through performance of their teams — beating expectations (Tyronn Lue), playing a style that is either aesthetically pleasing or aligns with our own basketball philosophies (early D’Antoni), generating a feeling of competence and confidence (Ime Udoka). Coaches get bonus points for making tactical changes, especially during playoff series (Steve Kerr), and for sick out-of-timeout plays (Brad Stevens). If players like a coach (Monty Williams), that usually reflects well. If coaches stand up to players and maintain the respect of the roster (Erik Spoelstra), that usually reflects well. Some of us like openness and good quotes, too (Doc Rivers). Sometimes there’s just an overwhelming strong positive vibe (Willie Green).

Look how much of that is purely subjective! This is less science than any other factor in NBA analysis. We know what coaches we like. We have no clue how to measure it, at least out here in the cheap seats.

My personal philosophy on this: a bad coach can ruin a team (just like a bad boss can make a workplace nightmarish), good team culture starts at the top with the coach having a role, the vast majority of people hired to be NBA head coaches have plenty of basketball chops to get that part of the job done, there’s only so much a good coach can do and … coaches have a bigger impact on defense than offense.

2. Coaches sometimes change and grow throughout their careers.

Mike Budenholzer, at some point, got religion on his superstar player needing to play more minutes in crucial games. What was something that held the Bucks back before no longer does so, but Budenholzer changed and grew. His philosophy evolved. He is not the same coach he was a few years ago. Proof of point: Giannis Antetokounmpo would have played 40 minutes on Sunday in a Game 1 if not for garbage time. He might have played 42 minutes if not for foul trouble.

Jason Kidd’s reputation as a coach was mud before this season. He led the Mavericks to the most shocking high-performance defense this year, one that has Dallas in the mix in the Western Conference and out of the first round for the first time since 2011. Rick Carlisle didn’t have this roster playing good defense, and Rick Carlisle overall has a strong reputation as a coach. Kidd had a reputation of alienating his players. Luka Doncic has never looked happier. Things change, and people can too.

A subpoint here: what looks like a bad coach in one situation can look much different in a different situation. The Bucks didn’t need what the Mavericks need, and so on.

3. There is no recipe for a great head coach.

For every longtime assistant coach who becomes a raging success there are examples who fall flat. There are college coaches who translate well; there are college coaches who do not. There are young coaches who work out well; there are young coaches who do not. Recent former players without coaching experience? Mixed results.

Sometimes we fall in love with tropes, with recipes. They don’t always work out.

4. We only got one side of the Mark Jackson story.

I’m not a Mark Jackson truther, someone who thinks the Warriors would have ascended to the top of the world even if the franchise would have retained Jackson in 2014. And I’m sure I wrote some critical things about Jackson during and after his tenure. And I’m sure if someone had suggested the Kings hire Jackson after firing Michael Malone or George Karl, I would have had fits. (That was when I still cared about the Kings, for the record. I do not at this time.)

But let’s be real: we only really ever got the team’s version of the Mark Jackson story. Jackson, who is in the media, didn’t really talk to the media about it. Ownership did. And Warriors’ ownership told the world that Jackson was fired because no one in the organization liked him, that as the team’s leader he sowed division and dissension, that despite the team improving rapidly the vibes were bad. You remember one of Jackson’s assistants surreptitiously recording Jackson at the behest of the front office, right? And the reports about divisions within the team over religious stuff? That stuff doesn’t reflect well on Jackson’s tenure. That reality is made worse by the fact that the Warriors immediately won a title and started a dynasty when Jackson was let go.

Here’s my retort.

• Draymond Green was a reserve player under Jackson, playing behind one-time former All-Star David Lee. Lee absolutely would have been Kerr’s starting power forward … if not for injury, which elevated Green into the starting five. The Warriors started that 2014-15 season 21-2, and Lee never got his job back. The 2014-15 Warriors: how much credit do the ascensions of Steph Curry and Klay Thompson and the elevation (due to injury) of Green get vs. the replacement of Jackson with Kerr? It’s worth thinking about. Kerr’s philosophy certainly aided the rise of Curry and Klay, though to what degree?

• Curry defended Jackson. Maybe you think that follows Curry’s overall tendency to be very diplomatic and accommodating. Maybe you think it has something to do with Jackson and Curry both having strong religious identities. But there was a media battle over Jackson’s dismissal, and Curry sided with Jackson over Warriors management, even calling out Joe Lacob for undiplomatic comments. Who do you trust more about NBA basketball: Steph Curry or Joe Lacob?

• This is the one I keep coming back to when thinking about Steve Kerr, Mark Jackson and what the Warriors actually required from a coach. Are you ready? OK, here goes: LUKE WALTON, ONE OF THE LEAST SUCCESSFUL NBA HEAD COACHES OF THE LAST DECADE, WENT 39-4 AT THE HELM OF THE PRE-DURANT WARRIORS IN 2015-16. The Kings and Kings fans know all too well that Luke Walton is not the second coming of Red Auerbach. That dude went 39-4 with the Warriors while Kerr struggled with a back injury that kept him off of games and out of traveling. I think Kerr is a really good coach, maybe top-5 of this era. The biggest indictment against him as an NBA head coach is that LUKE WALTON WENT 39-4 WITH HIS TEAM. What this tells me is that my Yorkshire terrier could have coached that Warriors team to the No. 1 seed. They were so smart, excellent and self-motivated — they didn’t any help on the sideline. I mean, they went 39-4 with LUKE WALTON holding the clipboard for crying out loud. So if Mark Jackson would have been given one more year with the Warriors, given the development of Curry and Klay, the elevation of Green, the further integration of Andre Iguodala, is there any reason to believe that he couldn’t have seen the same jump Kerr did? If Luke Walton can preside over supreme excellence, why not Mark Jackson?

None of this means I think Jackson is the most deserving candidate available, or that he would lift the Kings from a hell of their own creation. But acting as though this is a sure catastrophe seems unfair to Jackson and untethered from what we actually know. Besides, even if he’s hired and he fails, the Kings fandom knows exactly how to handle that. It’s the only life they know at this point.

Scores

FRIDAY

Grizzlies 114, Timberwolves 106 (MEM wins 4-2) — This game now somehow seems like ancient history, but you’ll be unsurprised to learn or recall that it was yet another fourth quarter collapse for Minnesota, who led by as many as 13 overall and by 10 entering the final frame at home. The crowd’s tension with the lead was palpable through the T.V. screen.

Desmond Bane was the Grizzlies’ best player in the first round. What a season for that guy.

SUNDAY

Bucks 101, Celtics 89 (MIL leads 1-0) — Defensive battle with the two biggest stars shooting poorly: Giannis Antetokounmpo was 9/25 from the floor while Jayson Tatum was 6/18 (and just 2/9 on twos). But Antetokounmpo’s impact was felt far beyond beyond the scoreboard: the Bucks were +23 in his 38 minutes, and he finished with a 24-13-12 triple-double.

It’s a bad sign that the Celtics struggled to score with Milwaukee largely sending Wesley Matthews and Jrue Holiday (and help) at Tatum. Doing this allows Giannis to lock down Jaylen Brown (12 points on 4/13 shooting) and roam to help on Tatum’s drives to the hoop. It shouldn’t be possible to do both. And yet: Giannis. Tatum’s going to have to produce more against Matthews, whether through the pass or hitting his shots, to make this an unviable strategy for Milwaukee.

Brook Lopez is going to be one of those players people bring up as underappreciated in his time for decades down the line.

Early on it didn’t look like the Bucks would be able to conjure enough offense against the vicious Celtics defense with Khris Middleton out, especially with Giannis missing a lot of shots in the paint. Getting out on the break helped a lot with that: Milwaukee had 28 points in transition, the most Boston has given up in a single game all season. The C’s have to fix that to survive.

Game 2 is going to be TENSE.

Warriors 117, Grizzlies 116 (GSW leads 1-0) — What a game! I’ll take six more of those, please. Draymond Green did this in the second quarter, drawing a Flagrant-2 and getting ejected.

Within a couple of hours, he had recorded an emergency reaction podcast. Of course.

I’m surprised Green admits he thought he wouldn’t even get a Flagrant-1 for that. The facial/head hits have been really consistently called Flagrant-1s this year. I don’t think that should be a Flagrant-2. It’s not going to get downgraded by the league at this point, but that call was a stretch to me. Green’s history and reputation definitely factored in.

Anyway, incredible game the rest of the way, capped off with a Klay Thompson game-winner. Jaren Jackson Jr. lost his mind, Ja Morant was excellent, Jordan Poole was great, Stephen Curry had the game-saving stop.

Full highlights here.

Schedule

Sixers at Heat (Game 1), 7:30 ET, TNT
Mavericks at Suns (Game 1), 10 ET, TNT

Enjoy the games and be excellent to each other.