Whether Dave Joerger fired himself, or the Memphis Grizzlies essentially made Joerger fire himself, one thing’s for sure: The Grizzlies remain one of the strangest organizations in the NBA — not necessarily in a bad way, but with a clarity which is impossible to ignore.
Some organizations are well-run, others immensely dysfunctional. The Grizzlies just might be that rare specimen of a franchise which owns both labels at the same time. That’s the first reaction to Joerger’s depature, which was made official Saturday morning.
Adrian Wojnarowski has more here:
The latest details on Dave Joerger's dismissal, Memphis' search and Joerger-Kings. @WojVerticalNBA report: https://t.co/OlKmIwWrNQ
— Ball Don’t Lie (@Balldontlie) May 7, 2016
Let’s save the Joerger-to-the-Sacramento-Kings angle for another day and a separate story. Let’s also hold off on the Phil Jackson vacation column as well (but trust us, we’ll address the topic before too long). Right now, simply consider how Memphis will — and won’t — be different as a result of Joerger’s exit.
Start with the coaching side of the equation in Tennessee: While this parting could be viewed as a negative for the Grizzlies, one must first recall that Joerger — a great fit for the roster he coached — was the product of the similarly vexing decision to let Lionel Hollins walk. The Grizzlies and Hollins didn’t see eye-to-eye at the end, and so Joerger has replicated that pattern. Coaches who realistically took the Grizzlies as far as they could go did not enjoy extended tenures in Memphis. Such a dynamic could scare off more coaches.
However, much as Memphis didn’t suffer from the Hollins-to-Joerger transition, it doesn’t appear to be in a bad spot now that Joerger is gone. If the Grizzlies do indeed land Frank Vogel in the coming days, they’ll have moved into yet another good coaching situation in spite of running off Hollins and Joerger. Knowing Vogel was available might have been the very trigger-cum-excuse the Grizz needed to pull the trigger on the Joerger dismissal. Such awareness reflects an organization which knows what it’s doing, even if the doings are often debatable.
See what’s meant by identifying the Grizzlies as well-run and dysfunctional at the same time?
Let’s now turn to the roster, though. This is the more difficult realm of adjustment for the franchise, also something Vogel must be clear about before he signs on the dotted line to become the team’s next coach.
The Grizzlies, as they exist, are not long for this world. Marc Gasol, Zach Randolph, Tony Allen, Mike Conley, and the rest of a decidedly older core group do not have many productive NBA years in front of them. The Grizzlies — if they haven’t reached their natural endpoint before a reboot — are damn close. Hiring a new coach invites the likelihood of a substantial restructuring sooner rather than later, but that being the case, why did the organization bring in Matt Barnes and — more specifically — Lance Stephenson, a man Vogel struggled to coach effectively (because every coach struggles to coach him effectively)?
Ushering in a coaching change at this point in the franchise’s existence makes sense. Yet, in the absence of a profound roster overhaul, Vogel would be out of place in some respects in Memphis. Again, the organization simultaneously displays wisdom and a track record of previous decisions which should have led in a different direction.
The Grizzlies are the NBA franchise which has most noticeably gone big when other organizations have moved toward small ball.
The Grizz have consistently played without high-level perimeter shooters in a league which is increasingly embracing the three-point shot and the value of floor spacing, especially in the corners.
When much of the NBA zigs, the Grizzlies typically zag.
Joerger out? It’s normal business for this franchise. That the result of the move could actually be very good (Vogel) — but with the need to make radical adjustments which haven’t yet occurred, and could have been made easier with different choices the past two years — is so very Grizzlies.
Some organizations never change.
