LApwnd wrote:Sofa King wrote:I wish the Lakers hired Steve Kerr seeing how the Dubs are playing. Steve Kerr will be the Zen Master 2.0
helps that the roster was already made for him....I highly doubt Kerr would have any more success than Scott with the roster we had. I'd take thibs as an asst. for D but Scott O kinda blows to, I'd prefer we find an asst. that can create better flowing offense. I never liked any of Scotts teams even the winning one with Nets or NOLA
He has common sense. He understands what Scott doesn't, and it's not solely a both talent.
He isn't a micromanaging dictator. That is what he learned from Phil letting Cleamons, Hamblen, and Tex a manage the team during practices and in huddles. It's what Scott did in his only coaching success with Frank and Jordan before he became touchy and got in his feelings that Jordan and Frank were more liked and respected, so he stuck to yes men. Gentry, Adams, Walton, and Collins. Gentry was a former head coach so he knows what it is to fail, succeed, and everything between similar to Cleamons. He went got his tell it to him straight up whether he wants to hear it or not guy in Adams, much like how Phil had tex, and tex would call Phil out when he crossed the line or even insult Kobe or Shaq to their face if needed. He got a guy who is smart and can mix it up with guys in practice, knows the game, and has helped a team win before in Luke which is like how Phil kept hodges, Shaw, and the like around. And lastly he got his over the top obsessive scout who will document everything about an upcoming opponent from hours over film in Collins, which is what Hamblen did. Kerr even lets them run a practice; Scott hasn't relented power or his voice since jersey and that's a vast reason he wears so fn thin on everyone everywhere he goes. It also is why his D and his O have historically sucked multiple times.
He knows roles and rotations. You don't just decide to shake things up in 20 game increments. No you see what works, who subs best for who, and what the team needs. Scott benched Lin and Booz after his magical 20 game number and let the media explain it to them. He shuffled price, Tarik, Sacre, Kelly, Wes and the like in and out based on numbers of games played over actual chemistry or feel. Kerr on the other hand made GSW get reserve charts who are the opposite of his starters in Livingston and Barbosa. Kerr set Iggy down and explained how he needed him to come off the bench and lead defensively and needed Barnes to start, while telling Barnes to settle for a smaller offensive role with the starters. He talked Bogut into a management plan, cut Lee in favor of a stretch 4 in the mold of odom/Horry/Kukoc in draymond green, and he cycles Speights and EZili over the way Jackson overused JO to he dropped dead. Steph and crew played a great year with little injuries because he managed them well, and he didn't run them ragged like Scott admitted to over using Kobe to offset his own shortcomings. He set a bar and said show me, and his team responded.
And the the biggest difference is just personality. Kerr is a PC guy, but he is also a guy who can explain himself without being insulted. Scott is abrasive, dismissive, and rubs people wrong every stop from players to management because he's well a douche. If Scott learned to communicate at all with Kidd, Martin, Jefferson, Kittles, Tyson, Peja, Bonzi, west, Kyrie, waiters, Thompson, Nick, Lin, Booz, and a number of guys everywhere he's been, he would actually have had a job stuck, get defensive effort, and not be number 2 all time for losses by a coach who coached 1000 games.
They are just worlds apart because they are wired different. Kerr knows when to not get in his own way because he's not threatened. His time as a gm may have helped him, as well as pop and Phil, but make no mistake, Kerr is better because Kerr gets it
