mjkvol wrote:Eyeamok wrote:Who would we get if Doc Rivers was fired. Last night Mark Jackson put in the first shot to be considered the next 76ers coach. He kept saying challenge the call challenge the call.
Now some my scoff at Mark Jackson as the head coach and he does come with baggage but have you ever listened to the key championship Warriors players talk about Jackson ? They love him, absolutely love him and they did not even win a title with them, but he got them prepared to win a title. Kerr is a good coach and took them across the finish line. But make no mistake Jackson did a lot of the heavy lifting. Secondly Jackson was able to thrive and do well in NY as a point guard. If the 7ers keep Simmons, Jackson might be able to work wonders with him, without "throwing him under the bus" (Simmons was not really thrown under the bus but..you know what people like to say).
Just a thought.
It's funny, but I was thinking about the same thing while watching the game and come to a completely different conclusion. Jackson to me is a Doc clone - they both played in the same era, and both have underachieved with talented teams due to being stuck in a mindset of how the game was played 20-30 years ago.
The reason Kerr succeeded where Jackson didn't at GS is he had a vision of what that group could accomplish with a more modern approach, one that Jackson would never have had the capability of enacting. Kerr unleashed that group in a way that in many ways revolutionized the game. With Jackson as coach there isn't a chance they become 3-time (should've been 4-time) champs.
The reason why players love Jackson is probably similar to why players love Rivers - both are players' coaches who empathize what these guys have to deal with and know how to work with the multiple egos of a team. The problem is in the X's and O's - neither guy has ever had an original thought, and both are stubbornly stuck in 'their' way of doing things.
Just my opinion, of course.
I am not high on Marc Jackson as an analyst or a coach. Besides the religious stuff that he brings into the locker room that I'm not a fan of, for all of his reputation as a players' coach, there were a lot of reports that he caused a pretty toxic work environment.
Kerr on the other hand, comes in and progressively institutes a fast paced 3 heavy system that (as you said) revolutionized the game. He was not only ahead of the curve, but he (along with others) helped to blaze the trail that every other team in the league would emulate and contributed to unlocking one of the greatest offensive forces the league has ever seen in Curry.
There's definitely value in players coaches, but there's a limit to the amount of tactical blunders a team can tolerate. Also, it doesn't have to be one or the other. There are plenty of coaches out there that are capable of both having good relationships with players and are competent strategists. I don't see why a team with championships aspirations would ever settle for just the former.
