Steve Kerr: The Road to Acceptance

phpBB [video]

"Yeah, OK, good shot."

What do you guys think of Steve Kerr? Is he really a good coach or is he getting carried by the staff and players?

A bit of both. It's still too early to declare him a really good coach, although I do think he's cut out for the gig. Having a good staff and a talented roster makes him look even better, but I believe he still deserves his due.

It reminds me a little of Larry Bird's first year in Indiana, in which he was named Coach of the Year. Rick Carlisle arguably deserved a decent amount of credit for that, but that doesn't mean that Bird was just the notable name who didn't actually do anything and got all the credit anyway. If all keeps going well, I can see Kerr coaching them for a number of seasons.

Curry's just dangerous. If it wasn't for his ankle problem, they'd have possibly could have knocked off the Spurs last year.

A bit of both. It's still too early to declare him a really good coach, although I do think he's cut out for the gig. Having a good staff and a talented roster makes him look even better, but I believe he still deserves his due.

It reminds me a little of Larry Bird's first year in Indiana, in which he was named Coach of the Year. Rick Carlisle arguably deserved a decent amount of credit for that, but that doesn't mean that Bird was just the notable name who didn't actually do anything and got all the credit anyway. If all keeps going well, I can see Kerr coaching them for a number of seasons.

I think Kerr is different to likes of Bird, Rivers, and Phil who are old school. Perhaps he's unique, not anything like Phil or Pop(I think Kerr's bit more laid back) despite the experience playing for them.

According to benji's espn Analytic ranking, Kerr seems to be more open to 'analytic' approach and sees the value in moneyball. Yep, it's early but the Warriors are doing well and this is a good sign.



Doc Rivers, he's been making bad moves in my opinion. Davis, Turkglu, and his son. Gambling on old guys that are at least couple years removed from seeing even average productive days, then bringing in his son who clearly has a low ceiling and probably not going to make much difference even it plays out well.

Phil, need we say more. He hasn't been no SVG.

Bird: Kawhi for Hill trade was his biggest mistake. George Hill's ceiling clearly wasn't high, it seems he gave up on Kawhi too early.



Kerr imo will be handed a bigger role with piling up success as a coach. Kidd was given it too early and people are liking him already but I think Kerr will be better. Hiring ex-player as a GM often turns out to be a bad move(it's like giving Barkley a team) but Kerr I think is an unique one here. He seems to be humble and willing to adapt to ever changing game. Yep, I am Kerr biased atm.

Kawhi was a draft day trade, how could Bird give up on a player that hasn't even played a single second of practice for the team, Pacers then also had a healthy Danny Granger, a young Paul George and Lance Stephenson.

What do you guys think of Steve Kerr? Is he really a good coach or is he getting carried by the staff and players?

Too early to tell at this point (playoffs perhaps) and because of inheriting the same team from last season which did well too. For now he looks like a better motivator than Mark Jackson or Scott Brooks judging by the team's best record in the NBA.

My bad. For some reason I thought Bird traded him after 1 season.

That shot has a very fine line between been Steph Curry or been JR Smith worthy.

I think Kerr is different to likes of Bird, Rivers, and Phil who are old school. Perhaps he's unique, not anything like Phil or Pop(I think Kerr's bit more laid back) despite the experience playing for them.

I wasn't comparing them in terms of style, approach, or philosophy. The comparison to Bird was in terms of being a former NBA player becoming a first time NBA head coach, without any prior coaching experience, who immediately found success. In both cases, their staff deserves credit and having a talented roster at their disposal helps too, but in their own ways, they both did (or are doing) a good job.

At least for the moment, Kerr seems to have made a great decision. Imagine him in NYK in place of Derek Fisher.

He definitely made the right call. Dolan continues to be an embarrassment, Phil is finding out that putting together a team is harder than he gave Red Auerbach credit for, and while Fisher still seems to have Phil's support, the players have been thrown under the bus.

Kerr made the right move, he took over a current playoff team with one of the best players in the league.

Fisher on the other hand took over a team that had just being thrown together with a shoot first star (melo) in one of the hardest city's to coach in.

The players initially blamed triangle toughness of learning curve.

Are they still using triangle offense in New York?

I don't think I ever saw the triangle ran properly this season in NY.

We seemed to give up on it quickly in play and break into an iso

Though I do understand some of the players gripes about running the triangle, it's probably the most documented offences in the history of basketball.

It's no wonder a lot of teams know where the ball is going.