RealGM

1. A
2. B
3. C
4. D
5. F

I voted C because honestly i have no idea. steve kerr has no previous coaching experience so how can anyone be sure of how good this deal is? I also dont get why so many people are so high on him when he hasnt really shown or proven anything. though warriors are taking a huge gamble with replacing mark jackson with yet another inexperienced coach and it probably isnt considered progress for the organization. a more experienced coach like lionel hollins that has repeatedly brought a team to deep in the playoffs would have probably been the safest bet but who knows, warriors could have struck gold or struck out with this long term deal.

basketballife wrote:I voted C because honestly i have no idea. steve kerr has no previous coaching experience so how can anyone be sure of how good this deal is? I also dont get why so many people are so high on him when he hasnt really shown or proven anything. though warriors are taking a huge gamble with replacing mark jackson with yet another inexperienced coach and it probably isnt considered progress for the organization. a more experienced coach like lionel hollins that has repeatedly brought a team to deep in the playoffs would have probably been the safest bet but who knows, warriors could have struck gold or struck out with this long term deal.

Well said. I think Hollins would have been a safe choice.

Fresh360Waves wrote:

basketballife wrote:I voted C because honestly i have no idea. steve kerr has no previous coaching experience so how can anyone be sure of how good this deal is? I also dont get why so many people are so high on him when he hasnt really shown or proven anything. though warriors are taking a huge gamble with replacing mark jackson with yet another inexperienced coach and it probably isnt considered progress for the organization. a more experienced coach like lionel hollins that has repeatedly brought a team to deep in the playoffs would have probably been the safest bet but who knows, warriors could have struck gold or struck out with this long term deal.

that's why I voted F... getting rid of mark Jackson was so unnecessary for starters and hiring Kerr is nothing more then a big gamble. this will be a big hit or a big miss

For Steve Kerr, he struck gold, 5 years 25 million is nothing to laugh about, considering his lack of experience as a head coach. Well, I guess if you're Steve you're laughing all the way to the bank. Knicks are probably mad but laughing under their breath. Jeremy Lin type situation all over again.

I gave this a B in large part because of Kerr's lack of experience. I believe Kerr has some great potential despite having no coaching experience. He has a high basketball IQ and seems to have a great demeanor, and seems like someone who wont be problematic and get along with and earn the respect of players and staff. Experience or lack thereof only goes so far. Every great coach must start somewhere and NBA candidates need to understand the professional game, of which Kerr falls in that category. Marc Jackson and Jeff Hornacek have done great with no previous coaching experience, and Kerr seems as competent if not more. We'll find out next season.

another shot in the dark by Lacob. there were better coaches available- George Karl, Lionel Hollins, the Van Gundys, Kevin Ollie. the basic reason behind this move is they couldnt stand Mark Jackson, so they went w/ a guy they already know and like. hopefully its not going to take 2 years for Kerr to get up to speed as a coach. theres really no way to give this a grade above a C bc Kerr has no track record as a coach; dont know what you're getting

Stevie Wonder needs to be careful what he wished for. Expectations will be way too high: >51 wins and a deep playoff run. He also won't have Phil Jackson to be a mentor as a rookie coach. And as far as Joe Lacob is concerned, in tech nomenclature, he is Dolan 2.0. I give it a C--