Moderators: Sleepy51, Chris Porter's Hair, floppymoose
Coxy wrote:CM17 wrote:[url]?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1764765527212253221%7Ctwgr%5E906411227a3a3b8e1920db7a61116dc682caf8ba%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.nba.com%2Fnews%2Fmonthly-nba-awards-february-2024[/url]
There will be some triggers on this board for this news. I'll get my popcorn, be right back..
GQ Hot Dog wrote:Kerr has done more with the least talent available of any coach in the history of the game.
floppymoose wrote:Too much Vlad. Sixers can't handle it. Solid gold.
Jester_ wrote:Coxy wrote:CM17 wrote:[url]?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1764765527212253221%7Ctwgr%5E906411227a3a3b8e1920db7a61116dc682caf8ba%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.nba.com%2Fnews%2Fmonthly-nba-awards-february-2024[/url]
There will be some triggers on this board for this news. I'll get my popcorn, be right back..
think he's gonna win this month? lol
Coxy wrote:Jester_ wrote:Coxy wrote:
There will be some triggers on this board for this news. I'll get my popcorn, be right back..
think he's gonna win this month? lol
No, and neither will Spo. That makes them the worst coaches and people in human history, let’s riot and burn stuff.
Impuniti wrote:Coxy wrote:Jester_ wrote:
think he's gonna win this month? lol
No, and neither will Spo. That makes them the worst coaches and people in human history, let’s riot and burn stuff.
Unfortunately Miami fans aren't delusional like you or other Warrior fans. Which is why you defend Kerr with vague useless statements over anything analytical, which he's been awful at all year. Most of Kerr's adjustments during that month were reverted from the awful moves he made in the beginning of the season that schmucks who don't know much about basketball could see by week 1 of the season.
Coxy wrote:Impuniti wrote:Coxy wrote:
No, and neither will Spo. That makes them the worst coaches and people in human history, let’s riot and burn stuff.
Unfortunately Miami fans aren't delusional like you or other Warrior fans. Which is why you defend Kerr with vague useless statements over anything analytical, which he's been awful at all year. Most of Kerr's adjustments during that month were reverted from the awful moves he made in the beginning of the season that schmucks who don't know much about basketball could see by week 1 of the season.
Get your CV together then, interview for the gig.
GQ Hot Dog wrote:Kerr has done more with the least talent available of any coach in the history of the game.
Coxy wrote:Impuniti wrote:Coxy wrote:
No, and neither will Spo. That makes them the worst coaches and people in human history, let’s riot and burn stuff.
Unfortunately Miami fans aren't delusional like you or other Warrior fans. Which is why you defend Kerr with vague useless statements over anything analytical, which he's been awful at all year. Most of Kerr's adjustments during that month were reverted from the awful moves he made in the beginning of the season that schmucks who don't know much about basketball could see by week 1 of the season.
Get your CV together then, interview for the gig.
Impuniti wrote:Coxy wrote:Impuniti wrote:Unfortunately Miami fans aren't delusional like you or other Warrior fans. Which is why you defend Kerr with vague useless statements over anything analytical, which he's been awful at all year. Most of Kerr's adjustments during that month were reverted from the awful moves he made in the beginning of the season that schmucks who don't know much about basketball could see by week 1 of the season.
Get your CV together then, interview for the gig.
Thank you for proving my point once more, another useless statement that never actually delve into reasons why he's not doing a horrific job.
Coxy wrote:Impuniti wrote:Coxy wrote:
Get your CV together then, interview for the gig.
Thank you for proving my point once more, another useless statement that never actually delve into reasons why he's not doing a horrific job.
Kerr makes decisions that make me scratch my head, for sure, but I’m not ignorant enough to claim to know better when I have nothing to do with NBA coaching. Even if I was that ignorant, I certainly wouldn’t then want to be arrogant about that ignorance by going on a website to claim I know better than Steve Kerr’s coaching of an NBA team.
But you do you. Always fascinating to follow along with keyboard coaching experts.
Coxy wrote:Impuniti wrote:Coxy wrote:
Get your CV together then, interview for the gig.
Thank you for proving my point once more, another useless statement that never actually delve into reasons why he's not doing a horrific job.
Kerr makes decisions that make me scratch my head, for sure, but I’m not ignorant enough to claim to know better when I have nothing to do with NBA coaching. Even if I was that ignorant, I certainly wouldn’t then want to be arrogant about that ignorance by going on a website to claim I know better than Steve Kerr’s coaching of an NBA team.
But you do you. Always fascinating to follow along with keyboard coaching experts.
michaelm wrote:Coxy wrote:Impuniti wrote:Thank you for proving my point once more, another useless statement that never actually delve into reasons why he's not doing a horrific job.
Kerr makes decisions that make me scratch my head, for sure, but I’m not ignorant enough to claim to know better when I have nothing to do with NBA coaching. Even if I was that ignorant, I certainly wouldn’t then want to be arrogant about that ignorance by going on a website to claim I know better than Steve Kerr’s coaching of an NBA team.
But you do you. Always fascinating to follow along with keyboard coaching experts.
I have come to the same point as you, who am I to say how an NBA team should be coached ?, and perhaps after a great run for nearly a decade which spoiled we GSW fans completely the team is just running out of talent which the rules are designed to cause.
Still don’t understand the 3 guard line-ups particularly in clutch moments though.
superunknown wrote:michaelm wrote:Coxy wrote:
Kerr makes decisions that make me scratch my head, for sure, but I’m not ignorant enough to claim to know better when I have nothing to do with NBA coaching. Even if I was that ignorant, I certainly wouldn’t then want to be arrogant about that ignorance by going on a website to claim I know better than Steve Kerr’s coaching of an NBA team.
But you do you. Always fascinating to follow along with keyboard coaching experts.
I have come to the same point as you, who am I to say how an NBA team should be coached ?, and perhaps after a great run for nearly a decade which spoiled we GSW fans completely the team is just running out of talent which the rules are designed to cause.
Still don’t understand the 3 guard line-ups particularly in clutch moments though.
why are you on this forum then?
michaelm wrote:superunknown wrote:michaelm wrote:I have come to the same point as you, who am I to say how an NBA team should be coached ?, and perhaps after a great run for nearly a decade which spoiled we GSW fans completely the team is just running out of talent which the rules are designed to cause.
Still don’t understand the 3 guard line-ups particularly in clutch moments though.
why are you on this forum then?
I will expand if you like. They have actually tried most of the things I thought they should, if not for as long as I thought they should have done in some cases, so I see no point railing against what may mainly be a consequence of the aging of the veteran players and the NBA equalisation rules, and a resultant roster which couldn’t contend however they were coached.
As I said I don’t see any justification for running 3 guard line-ups in the crucial moments of games however, in this or any other universe, particularly if the guards concerned are small, slow or old, and not uncommonly possessed of all 3 of those characteristics.
superunknown wrote:michaelm wrote:superunknown wrote:
why are you on this forum then?
I will expand if you like. They have actually tried most of the things I thought they should, if not for as long as I thought they should have done in some cases, so I see no point railing against what may mainly be a consequence of the aging of the veteran players and the NBA equalisation rules, and a resultant roster which couldn’t contend however they were coached.
As I said I don’t see any justification for running 3 guard line-ups in the crucial moments of games however, in this or any other universe, particularly if the guards concerned are small, slow or old, and not uncommonly possessed of all 3 of those characteristics.
even though I welcome your answer, the question referred to the statement "who am I to say how an NBA team should be coached?" to which you agreed.
if this is the principle then this board, actually the whole Real GM forum, should be shut down forever. because only NBA coaches, former NBA coaches, NBA players and former NBA players would be entitled to talk about NBA basketball, criticize or make observations. which, with all the due respect, is a silly argument to make in a forum. hence the question what are you doing here? if you think like that.
on a side note, actually think the very opposite. basketball and sport in general belong to the fans. the fans are the ones who pay for the tickets, the TV subscriptions, the merchandise and whatnot and basically allow all the people involved in the business to make business. without the fans who love the game and watch the game, the kerr of this world wouldn't earn millions of $$ to coach, the curry of thie world wouldn't earn millions of $$ to play. so fans have all the right to cheer and plaude when they are happy with a team performance, level of play or direction the team is heading to so to criticize - ofc within reason, without going off in insults or racial, religious, sexual and similar slurs - when they are not happy with a team performance, level of play or direction the team is heading to.
superunknown wrote:michaelm wrote:superunknown wrote:
why are you on this forum then?
I will expand if you like. They have actually tried most of the things I thought they should, if not for as long as I thought they should have done in some cases, so I see no point railing against what may mainly be a consequence of the aging of the veteran players and the NBA equalisation rules, and a resultant roster which couldn’t contend however they were coached.
As I said I don’t see any justification for running 3 guard line-ups in the crucial moments of games however, in this or any other universe, particularly if the guards concerned are small, slow or old, and not uncommonly possessed of all 3 of those characteristics.
even though I welcome your answer, the question referred to the statement "who am I to say how an NBA team should be coached?" to which you agreed.
if this is the principle then this board, actually the whole Real GM forum, should be shut down forever. because only NBA coaches, former NBA coaches, NBA players and former NBA players would be entitled to talk about NBA basketball, criticize or make observations. which, with all the due respect, is a silly argument to make in a forum. hence the question what are you doing here? if you think like that.
on a side note, actually think the very opposite. basketball and sport in general belong to the fans. the fans are the ones who pay for the tickets, the TV subscriptions, the merchandise and whatnot and basically allow all the people involved in the business to make business. without the fans who love the game and watch the game, the kerr of this world wouldn't earn millions of $$ to coach, the curry of thie world wouldn't earn millions of $$ to play. so fans have all the right to cheer and plaude when they are happy with a team performance, level of play or direction the team is heading to so to criticize - ofc within reason, without going off in insults or racial, religious, sexual and similar slurs - when they are not happy with a team performance, level of play or direction the team is heading to.
vvoland wrote:superunknown wrote:michaelm wrote:I will expand if you like. They have actually tried most of the things I thought they should, if not for as long as I thought they should have done in some cases, so I see no point railing against what may mainly be a consequence of the aging of the veteran players and the NBA equalisation rules, and a resultant roster which couldn’t contend however they were coached.
As I said I don’t see any justification for running 3 guard line-ups in the crucial moments of games however, in this or any other universe, particularly if the guards concerned are small, slow or old, and not uncommonly possessed of all 3 of those characteristics.
even though I welcome your answer, the question referred to the statement "who am I to say how an NBA team should be coached?" to which you agreed.
if this is the principle then this board, actually the whole Real GM forum, should be shut down forever. because only NBA coaches, former NBA coaches, NBA players and former NBA players would be entitled to talk about NBA basketball, criticize or make observations. which, with all the due respect, is a silly argument to make in a forum. hence the question what are you doing here? if you think like that.
on a side note, actually think the very opposite. basketball and sport in general belong to the fans. the fans are the ones who pay for the tickets, the TV subscriptions, the merchandise and whatnot and basically allow all the people involved in the business to make business. without the fans who love the game and watch the game, the kerr of this world wouldn't earn millions of $$ to coach, the curry of thie world wouldn't earn millions of $$ to play. so fans have all the right to cheer and plaude when they are happy with a team performance, level of play or direction the team is heading to so to criticize - ofc within reason, without going off in insults or racial, religious, sexual and similar slurs - when they are not happy with a team performance, level of play or direction the team is heading to.
Criticism is fair, as they said in Mad Men, 'that's what the money is for.' I think what frustrates most fans is when the criticism is non-stop, regardless of what happens. For example, I agree that Kerr has been poor this season. That does not mean I think he should have been fired in Dec, if for no other reason than I didn't see a replacement. It's easy to say 'burn it down' but much harder to say how to build it up.
Similarly, Kerr (or Klay) will get killed when they make a mistake but no credit when they do well. Case in point - Kerr coached his ass off last night. Defense/Offense substitutions, great use of TOs in the 4th, less predictable patterns for Curry to rest, and calling out plays most of the 4th. The result? Crickets.
Onus wrote:vvoland wrote:superunknown wrote:
even though I welcome your answer, the question referred to the statement "who am I to say how an NBA team should be coached?" to which you agreed.
if this is the principle then this board, actually the whole Real GM forum, should be shut down forever. because only NBA coaches, former NBA coaches, NBA players and former NBA players would be entitled to talk about NBA basketball, criticize or make observations. which, with all the due respect, is a silly argument to make in a forum. hence the question what are you doing here? if you think like that.
on a side note, actually think the very opposite. basketball and sport in general belong to the fans. the fans are the ones who pay for the tickets, the TV subscriptions, the merchandise and whatnot and basically allow all the people involved in the business to make business. without the fans who love the game and watch the game, the kerr of this world wouldn't earn millions of $$ to coach, the curry of thie world wouldn't earn millions of $$ to play. so fans have all the right to cheer and plaude when they are happy with a team performance, level of play or direction the team is heading to so to criticize - ofc within reason, without going off in insults or racial, religious, sexual and similar slurs - when they are not happy with a team performance, level of play or direction the team is heading to.
Criticism is fair, as they said in Mad Men, 'that's what the money is for.' I think what frustrates most fans is when the criticism is non-stop, regardless of what happens. For example, I agree that Kerr has been poor this season. That does not mean I think he should have been fired in Dec, if for no other reason than I didn't see a replacement. It's easy to say 'burn it down' but much harder to say how to build it up.
Similarly, Kerr (or Klay) will get killed when they make a mistake but no credit when they do well. Case in point - Kerr coached his ass off last night. Defense/Offense substitutions, great use of TOs in the 4th, less predictable patterns for Curry to rest, and calling out plays most of the 4th. The result? Crickets.
Kerr gets credit for a good rotation when it happens, but too often he it follows it up 1 min later removing all the goodwill.
I do agree Kerr did a good job last night. But that's his job. He's the highest paid coach in the league and we have to give him kudos for not screwing things up? Is that where we're at with him?
Kerr's criticism comes out when he screws things up. It just so happens a lot lately so much so it's become the norm that someone is bitching about him. I don't recall too much bitching about him last night.
I also think he should get credit for getting klay back in the starting line up.
vvoland wrote:Onus wrote:vvoland wrote:
Criticism is fair, as they said in Mad Men, 'that's what the money is for.' I think what frustrates most fans is when the criticism is non-stop, regardless of what happens. For example, I agree that Kerr has been poor this season. That does not mean I think he should have been fired in Dec, if for no other reason than I didn't see a replacement. It's easy to say 'burn it down' but much harder to say how to build it up.
Similarly, Kerr (or Klay) will get killed when they make a mistake but no credit when they do well. Case in point - Kerr coached his ass off last night. Defense/Offense substitutions, great use of TOs in the 4th, less predictable patterns for Curry to rest, and calling out plays most of the 4th. The result? Crickets.
Kerr gets credit for a good rotation when it happens, but too often he it follows it up 1 min later removing all the goodwill.
I do agree Kerr did a good job last night. But that's his job. He's the highest paid coach in the league and we have to give him kudos for not screwing things up? Is that where we're at with him?
Kerr's criticism comes out when he screws things up. It just so happens a lot lately so much so it's become the norm that someone is bitching about him. I don't recall too much bitching about him last night.
I also think he should get credit for getting klay back in the starting line up.
People coach like they're playing nb2k. Kerr wasn't 'not screwing things up' last night. He was one of the main reasons we won. From running plays for wigs early to get him engaged, to the defensive assignments, to steph starting the 4th.... It was an elite coaching performance and the response from this board was.... nothing. The same board that piles on the minute he keeps Klay in too long or plays CP3 with steph and podz or whatever else they don't agree with.
Moving Klay to the bench was the right call. Playing podz 30+ was the wrong call. Moving Klay back into the lineup was also the right call. Not playing moody much? probably wrong. Not playing JK early in the season? looks like a very bad decision. Not burying JK like most coaches would after he called him out publicly? Def the right one. It's a mixed bag with Kerr. I mean, look at how weird the spurs started the season, mostly due to Pop's weird lineup/style choices. Or the inconsistencies of a team coached by Spo. Two of the best coaches in the league struggled with things most fans saw very quickly. If it was up to this board, they'd all be fired, if not in front of the firing squad.
Onus wrote:vvoland wrote:Onus wrote:Kerr gets credit for a good rotation when it happens, but too often he it follows it up 1 min later removing all the goodwill.
I do agree Kerr did a good job last night. But that's his job. He's the highest paid coach in the league and we have to give him kudos for not screwing things up? Is that where we're at with him?
Kerr's criticism comes out when he screws things up. It just so happens a lot lately so much so it's become the norm that someone is bitching about him. I don't recall too much bitching about him last night.
I also think he should get credit for getting klay back in the starting line up.
People coach like they're playing nb2k. Kerr wasn't 'not screwing things up' last night. He was one of the main reasons we won. From running plays for wigs early to get him engaged, to the defensive assignments, to steph starting the 4th.... It was an elite coaching performance and the response from this board was.... nothing. The same board that piles on the minute he keeps Klay in too long or plays CP3 with steph and podz or whatever else they don't agree with.
Moving Klay to the bench was the right call. Playing podz 30+ was the wrong call. Moving Klay back into the lineup was also the right call. Not playing moody much? probably wrong. Not playing JK early in the season? looks like a very bad decision. Not burying JK like most coaches would after he called him out publicly? Def the right one. It's a mixed bag with Kerr. I mean, look at how weird the spurs started the season, mostly due to Pop's weird lineup/style choices. Or the inconsistencies of a team coached by Spo. Two of the best coaches in the league struggled with things most fans saw very quickly. If it was up to this board, they'd all be fired, if not in front of the firing squad.
Pop isn't trying to win. He's trying to develop.
What inconsistencies by spo?
Return to Golden State Warriors
