RealGM

Does anyone actually read long posts? My attention span is good for 3 sentences

GQ Hot Dog wrote:Combine workout warriors come around every year. More so in football but it's not unusual in the NBA. There's such a think as "functional athleticism" and what Mulder tested out as is far more impressive than what shows up in the games. In the end, how a guy looks in the cone or shuttle drill is irrelevant if that athleticism doesn't show up on the court.

There isn't any reason to believe his lack of impact beyond knocking down 3s is a product of poor coaching or development.

What I notice most about him is, despite good hustle, he doesn't appear to like physical play.

Totally agree that the athleticism has to show up on the court. That is why teams have coaches to help players translate their raw talent into NBA skills. There isn't any reason to believe his lack of impact beyond knocking down a few 3's is due to being a "below average athletic talent". There is reason to believe his inability to execute proper defensive rotations and (thus far) limited awareness may well be due to poor player development since these are topics that coaches are supposed to address. Coaches cannot impart greater foot speed or hops, but they should be able to help players better understand defensive rotations and assignments.

KevinMcreynolds wrote:Does anyone actually read long posts? My attention span is good for 3 sentences

And another thing - What's up with using big multi syllable words?

Samurai wrote:

GQ Hot Dog wrote:Combine workout warriors come around every year. More so in football but it's not unusual in the NBA. There's such a think as "functional athleticism" and what Mulder tested out as is far more impressive than what shows up in the games. In the end, how a guy looks in the cone or shuttle drill is irrelevant if that athleticism doesn't show up on the court.

There isn't any reason to believe his lack of impact beyond knocking down 3s is a product of poor coaching or development.

What I notice most about him is, despite good hustle, he doesn't appear to like physical play.

Totally agree that the athleticism has to show up on the court. That is why teams have coaches to help players translate their raw talent into NBA skills. There isn't any reason to believe his lack of impact beyond knocking down a few 3's is due to being a "below average athletic talent". There is reason to believe his inability to execute proper defensive rotations and (thus far) limited awareness may well be due to poor player development since these are topics that coaches are supposed to address. Coaches cannot impart greater foot speed or hops, but they should be able to help players better understand defensive rotations and assignments.

If you assume Mulder's defensive mediocrity, inability to grab rebounds(1 rpg), get steals(1 every 5 games) or get blocks(1 every 5 games) is due to poor coaching or player development I would say that assumption is belied by history. The Warriors have been coaching mediocre to poor athletes into quality defensive players since Kerr got here.

Under Kerr's tenure Leandro Barbosa turned into a passable defender which I never thought was possible after watching him on the Suns for years. Even Curry has turned into a disciplined defender.

If Mulder is that one outlier that can't seem to make an adequate impact it seems self-evident that it's because there's something about his makeup that puts him at a disadvantage rather than a sudden and inexplicable coaching failure. There's no precedence. We're routinely among the best defensive teams and the league leader in assists year after year.

That's not due to an abundance of talent, that's due to excellent and rare coaching.

There's a bizarre urge to blame Kerr for our team's troubles on this board that's verging on pathological. It's Kerr that got us from 1st or 2nd round playoff exit tops to championship in a year. A dramatic personnel change didn't coincide with that jump, it was a coaching change that precipitated it.

I would go so far as to say that Kerr is to Curry as Pop is to Duncan. An all time great coach meets an all time great player and the results are fireworks. It's folly trying to parse them because they are greater together than either would be alone.

KevinMcreynolds wrote:Does anyone actually read long posts? My attention span is good for 3 sentences

How old are you? I'm just trying to prove or disprove a stereotype.

Ah. The stupid overreactions have begun. What a surprise.

Even I see this as over reaction lol.

Unless Phil Jackson is waiting for the job... Forgedabout id.

GQ Hot Dog wrote:

Spoiler:

Samurai wrote:

GQ Hot Dog wrote:Combine workout warriors come around every year. More so in football but it's not unusual in the NBA. There's such a think as "functional athleticism" and what Mulder tested out as is far more impressive than what shows up in the games. In the end, how a guy looks in the cone or shuttle drill is irrelevant if that athleticism doesn't show up on the court.

There isn't any reason to believe his lack of impact beyond knocking down 3s is a product of poor coaching or development.

What I notice most about him is, despite good hustle, he doesn't appear to like physical play.

Totally agree that the athleticism has to show up on the court. That is why teams have coaches to help players translate their raw talent into NBA skills. There isn't any reason to believe his lack of impact beyond knocking down a few 3's is due to being a "below average athletic talent". There is reason to believe his inability to execute proper defensive rotations and (thus far) limited awareness may well be due to poor player development since these are topics that coaches are supposed to address. Coaches cannot impart greater foot speed or hops, but they should be able to help players better understand defensive rotations and assignments.

If you assume Mulder's defensive mediocrity, inability to grab rebounds(1 rpg), get steals(1 every 5 games) or get blocks(1 every 5 games) is due to poor coaching or player development I would say that assumption is belied by history. The Warriors have been coaching mediocre to poor athletes into quality defensive players since Kerr got here.

Under Kerr's tenure Leandro Barbosa turned into a passable defender which I never thought was possible after watching him on the Suns for years. Even Curry has turned into a disciplined defender.

If Mulder is that one outlier that can't seem to make an adequate impact it seems self-evident that it's because there's something about his makeup that puts him at a disadvantage rather than a sudden and inexplicable coaching failure. There's no precedence. We're routinely among the best defensive teams and the league leader in assists year after year.

That's not due to an abundance of talent, that's due to excellent and rare coaching.

There's a bizarre urge to blame Kerr for our team's troubles on this board that's verging on pathological. It's Kerr that got us from 1st or 2nd round playoff exit tops to championship in a year. A dramatic personnel change didn't coincide with that jump, it was a coaching change that precipitated it.

I would go so far as to say that Kerr is to Curry as Pop is to Duncan. An all time great coach meets an all time great player and the results are fireworks. It's folly trying to parse them because they are greater together than either would be alone.

You clearly have an agenda regarding Kerr that you are moving the goal posts in order to support an agenda. Regardless of whether Mulder's shortcomings are due to poor coaching/player development, an inability to communicate with Mulder, or Mulder's makeup, my point was your statement that Mulder was a "below average athlete by NBA standards". I have pointed out clear facts that refute that claim. Whether it is Mulder's "makeup" as you called it or ineffective player development, there is no evidence that it is due to Mulder being a "below average athlete". None. You can ignore that if it doesn't fit your agenda, but it doesn't change the facts at hand.

GQ Hot Dog wrote:Kerr is the best coach in basketball. His ability to coach the most marginally athletic 8-man rotation in the league to the 5th rated defense overall, 3rd in opponent FG% is a testament to how good he is.

We have exactly 3 + athletes on the roster in Wigs, Oubre and Wiseman and two of those guys didn't finish the season healthy. JTA, Bazemore and Paschall are mediocre athletes and the rest are below average.

Steph, Dray, Loon, Poole, Lee and Mulder are all below average athletic talents by NBA standards.

And you guys can't recognize how well Kerr did in almost coaching this bunch to the playoffs? Clueless and pathetic is what the lot of you are.

Agree with everything...except the part in bold.

Xplatformer wrote:

GQ Hot Dog wrote:Kerr is the best coach in basketball. His ability to coach the most marginally athletic 8-man rotation in the league to the 5th rated defense overall, 3rd in opponent FG% is a testament to how good he is.

We have exactly 3 + athletes on the roster in Wigs, Oubre and Wiseman and two of those guys didn't finish the season healthy. JTA, Bazemore and Paschall are mediocre athletes and the rest are below average.

Steph, Dray, Loon, Poole, Lee and Mulder are all below average athletic talents by NBA standards.

And you guys can't recognize how well Kerr did in almost coaching this bunch to the playoffs? Clueless and pathetic is what the lot of you are.

Agree with everything...except the part in bold.

I clearly wasn't talking about you.

To be fair, there are plenty of level-headed and objective Warriors fans on this board. Unfortunately the hysterical hyperventilaters are so shrill they tend to drown out the others.

Samurai wrote:

GQ Hot Dog wrote:

Spoiler:

Samurai wrote:Totally agree that the athleticism has to show up on the court. That is why teams have coaches to help players translate their raw talent into NBA skills. There isn't any reason to believe his lack of impact beyond knocking down a few 3's is due to being a "below average athletic talent". There is reason to believe his inability to execute proper defensive rotations and (thus far) limited awareness may well be due to poor player development since these are topics that coaches are supposed to address. Coaches cannot impart greater foot speed or hops, but they should be able to help players better understand defensive rotations and assignments.

If you assume Mulder's defensive mediocrity, inability to grab rebounds(1 rpg), get steals(1 every 5 games) or get blocks(1 every 5 games) is due to poor coaching or player development I would say that assumption is belied by history. The Warriors have been coaching mediocre to poor athletes into quality defensive players since Kerr got here.

Under Kerr's tenure Leandro Barbosa turned into a passable defender which I never thought was possible after watching him on the Suns for years. Even Curry has turned into a disciplined defender.

If Mulder is that one outlier that can't seem to make an adequate impact it seems self-evident that it's because there's something about his makeup that puts him at a disadvantage rather than a sudden and inexplicable coaching failure. There's no precedence. We're routinely among the best defensive teams and the league leader in assists year after year.

That's not due to an abundance of talent, that's due to excellent and rare coaching.

There's a bizarre urge to blame Kerr for our team's troubles on this board that's verging on pathological. It's Kerr that got us from 1st or 2nd round playoff exit tops to championship in a year. A dramatic personnel change didn't coincide with that jump, it was a coaching change that precipitated it.

I would go so far as to say that Kerr is to Curry as Pop is to Duncan. An all time great coach meets an all time great player and the results are fireworks. It's folly trying to parse them because they are greater together than either would be alone.

You clearly have an agenda regarding Kerr that you are moving the goal posts in order to support an agenda. Regardless of whether Mulder's shortcomings are due to poor coaching/player development, an inability to communicate with Mulder, or Mulder's makeup, my point was your statement that Mulder was a "below average athlete by NBA standards". I have pointed out clear facts that refute that claim. Whether it is Mulder's "makeup" as you called it or ineffective player development, there is no evidence that it is due to Mulder being a "below average athlete". None. You can ignore that if it doesn't fit your agenda, but it doesn't change the facts at hand.

My agenda is to give Kerr his due and all the evidence and history is in support of that effort.

Mulder is a below average athlete by NBA standards. He's got freakishly huge hands and that helps but he's not strong, he's not tough and whatever quickness he shows going around cones doesn't translate when the bullets are flying and that's all that matters.

It's you and others that have an irrational agenda to disparage one of history's finest basketball minds. The man developed the style and principles that changed the game. He forced the league to move decisively into the 3pt era(whether you appreciate it or not).

floppymoose wrote:

Kuya wrote:In the locker room he may be the best, but his in game adjustments are average.

There is literally no coach in the nba who fans say is above average at in game adjustments. The fans always know better.

Spo, Pop, Stevens, Carlisle, Bud, Malone for in game adjustments

Kuya wrote:

floppymoose wrote:

Kuya wrote:In the locker room he may be the best, but his in game adjustments are average.

There is literally no coach in the nba who fans say is above average at in game adjustments. The fans always know better.

Spo, Pop, Stevens, Carlisle, Bud, Malone for in game adjustments

It's a strange juncture to criticize Kerr for his in game adjustments. Because of injuries we were reduced to a 7 or 8 man rotation. What kind of adjustments can be made with those personnel limitations?

Kerr made the best series adjustment I've ever seen when he instituted the DL. That single adjustment won a championship.

Adjustment? Kerr: well let's see adjustments... they are beating our best 7 man rotation over the last month or so.
Hmm, Smiley? um no, Nico? ..... uh Oubre? ... Klay? where's Klay?....

What adjustment is he supposed to make?
Make Looney play the Draymond role and Dray the cutter? shrug
Kerr is not above criticism but it's silly to think he could have put a better lineup out there than he did.

The players understand about double teams and traps and how to get out of them. They understand about making adjustments.

By halftime the only thing Kerr can tell them is play with more intensity on defense, which they did in the third quarter.
Take care of the basketball, which they didn't. And make your damn fast break layups, which they didn't.

floppymoose wrote:There is literally no coach in the nba who fans say is above average at in game adjustments. The fans always know better.

What? That's completely not true. Even Rick Adelman used to be vaunted for his in-game decisions. His weaknesses were in the locker-room.

Steve Kerr didn't cause all our turnovers. This season was a do over anyway the minute Klay got hurt. Entertaining, but we were too small in the low post. It is what it is.

Not going to get on Steve this season.

Jester_ wrote:

floppymoose wrote:There is literally no coach in the nba who fans say is above average at in game adjustments. The fans always know better.

What? That's completely not true. Even Rick Adelman used to be vaunted for his in-game decisions. His weaknesses were in the locker-room.

I was referring to actual coaches of the team at the time. Coaches of other teams or past coaches are eligible for praise.

Kuya fighting for that 3rd spot in the warriors board for bad takes. Only behind Clyde and Cpower.

sonnyhill wrote:

Kuya wrote:Lol @ Kerr being the best coach in basketball

In the locker room he may be the best, but his in game adjustments are average.

Sent from my SM-N960U using RealGM mobile app

Agreed! You are correct.

Also, Kerr failed to both develop Wiseman as well as get this team into the playoffs, the two KPIs which this team had set at the beginning of the season.

So Kerr is responsible for the 8 turnovers and all the stupid fouls in the 3rd quarter against the Lakers? Because that's what kept them out of the playoffs. If you want to blame Kerr for that, OK.

xdrta+ wrote:

sonnyhill wrote:

Kuya wrote:Lol @ Kerr being the best coach in basketball

In the locker room he may be the best, but his in game adjustments are average.

Sent from my SM-N960U using RealGM mobile app

Agreed! You are correct.

Also, Kerr failed to both develop Wiseman as well as get this team into the playoffs, the two KPIs which this team had set at the beginning of the season.

So Kerr is responsible for the 8 turnovers and all the stupid fouls in the 3rd quarter against the Lakers? Because that's what kept them out of the playoffs. If you want to blame Kerr for that, OK.

No, Kerr is not "responsible for the 8 turnovers and all the stupid fouls in the 3rd quarter against the Lakers." The team played carelessly and made stupid blunders.

Kerr, however, is responsible for the disjointed strategy on how the team chose to immediately play-and-develop Wiseman as well as for not getting this team into the playoffs.

This past season's team played solid defense, had struggles with its offense, and rebounded poorly. While I am a huge Draymond Green fan, it makes no sense to play him at the same time with Looney, with both players being liabilities when it comes to scoring.

Klay's return does not ensure that this team is in the hunt for another championship. The reality check says that this team's championship run is over, especially with the big contracts committed to Wiggins, Curry, Klay, and Green.

I am not opposed to firing Kerr; however, how is that move going to improve this team? It would make more sense to move Curry in the off season before he bolts to LA to play with either LeBron or Leonard (the Warriors would receive more in return for Curry than OKC did in the Paul George trade).