Requiem for a Season: Clippers 126 Warriors 121 — Game 7

I would have  loved to have watched this game at home, and to have it on tape. Instead, due to the dark alchemies of pipes, drywall, microbes and time, I was once again forced to watch from a sportsbar — the Fiddler’s Green in San Rafael, with their fine selection of Belgian beers and Irish whiskeys.    

And for some reason, my recollection of this game, and in particular the second half, is foggy. I remember very well the game starting off at the Warriors pace. Perhaps the fastest pace we’ve seen all season.

I remember very well Mark Jackson trying to rectify his mistake of game 6, and starting the game by calling Klay Thompson’ number.

I remember very well the return of the Curry/Lee pick and roll, and how fabulously it worked in creating open shots, with Lee playing point guard in the middle of the floor.

I also remember very well Lee in the high post, running UCLA, pulling DeAndre Jordan all the way out of the lane, and finding Iggy posted up on Redick in the lane.

And I remember the Warriors ending the first half up 8.

These are things I have clear memories of. What I don’t remember is why it all ended in the second half. Why the pace ground to a halt, and the offense stopped clicking. Was it simply that the Clippers turned up the heat? Or did the Warriors get away from what worked so well in the first half.

For one of the first times this season, I find myself in need of a recap.

The Officiating: I wrote in the previous thread how the style in which this game was officiated would go a long ways towards determining its outcome. And to my amazement, the officiating came down solidly on the side of the Warriors. They let the big men play. And behold, Lee and Green avoided foul trouble, and the ball was rebounded, and the Warriors ran like the wind and rained threes.

They also called Chris Paul for fouling Curry in the act of shooting a three pointer, and caught the Clippers grabbing and bodying Curry on his drives.

It was like the officials were determined to rectify every previous wrong in the series. Those 16 free throws were not due to Curry deciding to do something different in this game than he had in the previous games.

The Pace: I thought the pace with which the Warriors opened this game was the fastest all season. You can see that reflected in the final score, obviously.

Unfortunately, their beautiful first quarter run was interrupted by some ghastly open-court turnovers. I strongly suspect that these were due to the Warriors playing at a faster pace than they were used to.

What if they had played this way the entire season, instead of walking the ball up like the middle of the pack teams?

Curry: Finally put up the kind of stat line the media wanted from him. But if you ask me, the Warriors relied a little too much on hero ball down the stretch, when what worked in the first half — and in previous games — may have worked better.

Have to mention his defense, because nobody else will. He worked extremely hard on that end, and those steals down the stretch helped keep the Warriors in the game.

Klay: The Clippers were determined not to leave him open, which lead to a lot of drives, which lead to his 7 assists. Not a playmaker?

6 free throws, but it could have been more. I remember in particular a drive in which he was confronted by Jordan at the basket. Rather than leaning into the contact to get the foul, Klay leaned away, extending his left arm as far away from possible, and attempting a Curryesque dipsy-do.

In the playoffs, you got to take that hit.

Lee: I came away vaguely disappointed by this performance, as I’m sure Lee himself was. He was not a factor offensively in crunchtime. And had a bad turnover down the stretch.

But is it fair to remember Lee’s performance this way? Here is where I miss being able to review the game tape. What kind of offense were the Warriors running down the stretch? I think they went away from pick and roll, and the high post. I know his turnover occurred on an isolation post-up, which is not the best way to use him against this Clippers front line.

I also note his team high 13 rebounds, despite having to battle DeAndre Jordan. And I note his team high +7. Clearly David Lee does things for his team that go unnoticed by pundits and fans alike. Including me.

The drumbeat of the ridiculous meme of Lee’s expendability is again growing loud. But it’s not Harrison Barnes who is his obvious replacement this year, but Draymond Green.

I’ll point out what is obvious to me. Draymond Green is not a starting power forward. Do you really expect the Warriors to double team every time they face Blake Griffin, or Kevin Love, or LaMarcus Aldridge, or Zach Randolph, or…?

And did you happen to miss Draymond Green putting a hand on his back, and grimacing while attempting to stretch his back out, on the free throw line in this game 7?

82 games of that and he’d be ground to a pulp. Draymond Green is a great player, yes. But he’s not a starting power forward.

Green: Just like him to have his best performance of the season, in the biggest game of the season. I can still hear Bob Fitzgerald whining dolefully in my ear: “I just don’t think threes are Draymond’s game….”

He’s going to be in the league a long time. The next Shane Battier.

Iggy: Got out-played by JJ Redick and Jamal Crawford in the biggest game of the season.

Which is kind of the playoff rap against him, isn’t it?

Jermaine O’Neal: His attempted incarnation of Willis Reed fell flat. His appearance was disastrous for the Warriors: -6 in 3 minutes. Would have been -8 if pulled after 2.

Did he really need to play in this game? Mark Jackson was paying tribute to his ancient warrior. Wouldn’t  have it any other way.

Crawford: Once again, played the sixth man. Looked like he got it going a bit in this game. Liked the look of the Curry/Crawford backcourt, with Crawford playing the point. Liked the way the Warriors could push the tempo with him. Why didn’t Mark Jackson accept him onto the team in this role? And what would have happened if he’d gotten every one of Harrison Barnes’ minutes in this game?

I mourn the loss of what could have been, this season.

Mokur: Found his shot in this game. Let it fly, with no thinking. +2. Could have played more minutes, in my opinion. Could have started on Blake Griffin, in my opinion.

Mokur was Mokur.

And I rest my case.

Barnes: The coup de grace fell due to Barnes being late on a defensive rotation, and helplessly watching a DeAndre Jordan slam.

Provoking this death-squeal on twitter: “Why the hell is Barnes in in crunch-time?”

Mark Jackson: Haven’t been a great fan of his performance this season, but have to say I admired what he did in this game.

Admired the game plan. Admired the pace with which the Warriors played. Admired, for the most part, the rotations. Greatly admired the ensemble, and particularly that tie.

God go with you, Mark Jackson.

Thus ends my requiem.

 

579 Responses to Requiem for a Season: Clippers 126 Warriors 121 — Game 7

  1. Felt,
    Loved following you this season. What would you like to see the warriors do in the off season to move up a notch. There seem to be many teams willing to play a stretch four and at the same time have a banger inside. It seems we could use the banger. Bogat can’t be counted on and Festus has missed a whole season. The warriors seem to have some pieces other teams would cherish should be fun to watch Meyers and West make up the roster for 2015. Can’t wait for the summer league to start.

  2. dave buchanan

    Jackson is gone. Loved this quote I heard from a friend who had asked Lacob over the summer for a comment on Jackson. The reply was, “dumbest person I have ever met”. Think of it, to a man whose degree and career was formulated in epidemiology, religion has to be an anathema. The plan to dump Jackson must have been hatched a while ago and in some way allowed or even contributed to the unraveling of the coaching staff.

    • Lacob knew upfront that Jackson was a preacher and was going to stay active in his church, so I don’t think Jackson’s personal faith was, or is, an issue with Lacob.

      If Lacob has problems with Jackson (who really knows?), it’s more likely to be over the PR messes, lack of participation in player personnel decisions, or the unusually short works hours Jackson puts in for a pro coach. Lacob may also wonder why the team didn’t do better with a healthy Bogut and the addition of Iggy, etc., or do better player development. Maybe he dislikes Jackson’s handling of the press – some reporters are starting to call him abrasive.

      If Lacob fires Jackson, it won’t be over Jackson’s faith. He has plenty of other reasons to want more and better from a coach.

  3. Here’s an analysis of the closing minutes that, shockingly, doesn’t blame Harrison Barnes for everything (the narrator would never make it on this board!):

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cW7KAwMojaY

    Although one of the first clips is Draymond making a sensational block on Chris Paul at 4:05, and he later gets an important rebound, one consistent theme of the final 2 minutes is Green getting beaten on defense or making mistakes. Not that this isn’t understandable — he was most likely mentally/physically out of gas given the load of heavy minutes, his aggressive style of play, and the immense demand of guarding the Clippers’ best players on every possession (and yes, I saw that back-stretching at the FT line, too). But even so, the facts are this:

    *2:15 remaining – Blake Griffin backs Draymond all the way to the rim for a point-blank layup
    *1:18 – Chris Paul gets past Draymond easily for a floater in the lane that misses, but becomes a dunk by Jordan because Lee had to rotate to stop Paul’s penetration
    *0:58 – Griffin also catches Draymond leaning the wrong way and spins past him easily for an acrobatic 3-point play

    This last play is the one where Feltbot excoriates Barnes for rotating late, but Harrison was caught in the same dilemma as Lee on the preceding two: once Draymond is beaten, Lee/Barnes has to basically choose between not rotating (and letting Paul/Griffin score uncontested at the rim) or giving up a dunk to Jordan after the rotation.

    And then there’s the big possession with 30 seconds left, where Draymond (or MJax) gambles enormously trying to trap Jamal Crawford eighty feet from the basket. Once Crawford loops the crosscourt pass to Griffin, the W’s defense has little hope — Klay is reluctant to stop the ball because that means Chris Paul getting it with an open path to the rim, and once Blake gets past him (with Curry in the corner guarding Redick), it’s a 2-on-1 with Barnes… the same no-win situation I just mentioned.

    To blame Barnes for the latter two baskets without noting that Green was being abused repeatedly (again, for understandable reasons) in the closing minutes just shows how the anti-Harrison fetish is actually diminishing this board’s ability to comprehend the game.

    • Glad you bring this up, because it reminds me of a major quibble I had with Jackson down the stretch: He stopped double teaming Blake Griffin! I thought that was inexplicable, and Green and the Warriors got torched for it. Green can’t guard him Mano a Mano. On the other hand, Redick and Crawford made it pick your poison.

      As far as your other points, I’m struggling through the fog… I used twitter as a memory aid regarding Barnes’ late rotation, the last of a multitude this season.

      If you have a defense of Barnes’ game or season, feel free to give it.

      • I’m not interested in an all-or-nothing discussion of whether Barnes is a surefire future All-Star instead of a bust. Just trying to provide a little perspective & fact-checking to reduce the echo-chamber effect here.

        But if it helps, I will point you to your (grudging) praise of his Game 1, and his highly efficient, effective Game 4. And regarding his defense, check out the video here from 6:40-7:00 (covering the Clippers’ final possession in Game 6):

        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ihgp74NWfc0

        As Collison pushes the ball after a rebound, Barnes (1) sees Draymond ball-chasing Collison and starts to drift right to cover Jamal Crawford; (2) sees Collison getting past Draymond and reverses left in time to challenge the layup, helping to force a miss; (3) is also in position to deter Crawford’s follow-up drive, forcing a pass out to the corner; and then (4) races out to the perimeter to challenge Crawford’s 3-point attempt without leaving his feet or fouling (obviously an especially difficult, but important task given Jamal’s famed flopping abilities).

        Doesn’t seem particularly clueless to me.

        • Sometimes the lightbulb appears to switch on, the physical gifts are there, and some talent, which makes the inconsistency and lack of fire in his play even more puzzling and disappointing.

  4. we’re all grateful for your efforts here, felt boss, besieged as you are with contractors and insurance claims and hotel living. you might be comforted by yesterday’s S.Ostler post mortem for GS — he concludes with a tribute to speights.

  5. When my predilect teams’ season ends, the NBA season ends. Watching two other teams play just has no interest for me; it’s 2+ hours of mindless torture.

    I would just as soon watch the WNBA playoffs. Maybe feel even a bit more passion;)

    Nice blog. I’ll be checking in whenever anything Warrior-related happens.

  6. Long time reader and first time poster here from Australia.

    I really enjoy reading your analysis and thoughts which vary immensely from other mainstream blogs. Thanks for spending your time and effort sharing your thoughts.

    Email me and I’m happy to loan you my league pass account so you can catch the last game again. I’ll need it for the rest of the finals though!

  7. Feltbot,

    Appreciate your blog very much.
    Your analysis for the season was incisive and not of the usual party line available at all hours from people like Bob Fitzgerald, and Ric Bucher. You have a place in Bay Area media.

    The Warriors had a wonderful season with 54 wins and a second straight visit to the playoffs. Played the Clippers to the max.

    One quibble about Mark Jackson (and you do give praise sometimes). His players play and their effort is not questioned. That is half the job (at least) of an NBA coach. If and when he leaves the Dubs, I would not be surprised to see some current Warriors join him.

  8. Thanks once more for your time and insight, FB.

    This was a hardship. Next time the Warriors make the playoffs and a pipe bursts in your house, ask around. Maybe we can chip in and rent you an apartment with cable or put you up for the night.

  9. “Do you really expect the Warriors to double team every time they face Blake Griffin, or Kevin Love, or LaMarcus Aldridge, or Zach Randolph, or…?”

    Why not? And this raises the question, why not when Lee is at PF too?

    • this is pretty much out of the nelson ‘book on big men’, Prof. Z. a big’s ability on offense isn’t really tested ’til you see how he responds to the double team. it’s a reason he was betrayed and ousted from NY — he knew ewing was a dead end and wanted to try to land o’neal.

  10. Thanks for blogging all year. Good show.

  11. with ‘requiem’ as a theme, it’s appropriate that the two teams with ties to the late great Ramsay made it to the next round. his passing and memorials had to compete in the hoops news with the playoffs. the Buf/SD/LA franchise didn’t win a playoff series between his coaching tenure in Buf and the Brand team of 2006 ; Por reminds us every game of their debt to the man.
    Ramsay was another exemplar that ‘the greatest generation’ isn’t just a cliche phrase. he left undergrad study to serve in Navy demolition in the war, the unit that evolved into SEALs, when they had rudimentary gear and technology, and no margin for error in physical conditioning, razor sharp mental acuity, surgical precision of execution. studied coaching on his own from films of great college coaches while he played semi pro hoops and coached high school. went from college coaching at the top of the profession into the front office for Phi only because an eye ailment forced him to take a break from coaching, ended up collaborating with Hannum on one of the two teams (St.L also coached by Hannum the sole other) to deny a Russell Bos squad the trophy.

    watching his Por teams was an experience of the joy of hoops that few championship teams evoke. safe to say he taught everyone he came in contact with, even the radio listeners like me, something about hoops or life.

    • +1

      • two of the singular, unforgettable talents who came into the association under Ramsay’s tutelage and changed the game were Walton and McAdoo, yet my memories of him on the sidelines are more indelible (for one thing, his hair was always the same). Mao could have used him as the template for the Great Helmsman. his attire was composed, unruffled, neat, understated ; if he knelt on the sideline he’d be poised and alert like a perched raptor, eagle visaged, eagle-eyed, a precisely folded white towel under the knee of his trousers.

    • Amen. Over the last few years Ramsey’s radio work during the playoffs was great to hear while in the car. Each time I was reminded of his knowledge and fairness in analyzing the games. Quite a contrast to what we just heard from JVG and his announcer sidekick. Thanks Moto-san. (And F.B. too for all your work, especially at a time when you have “other things” occupying your time.)

  12. Thanks for the kind words guys. Appreciate it.

    • Yours is pretty much the only blog I can read these days without throwing up in my mouth a little bit. Kudos.

      I hope when you get everything worked out on the homefront you’ll be able to contribute to the offseason discusssion.

  13. Mr. Feltbot. Great season, your commentary and guidance essential to its understanding and enjoyment.

    1 thing about that 3rd quarter, according to your PopCorn link, DLee was pulled for Mokur, during the 3rd quarter. Perhaps it would have been better to rest Green and play Mokur and Lee together during most of that 3rd quarter, as the offense was stalling without Lee and certainly Mokur is able to man-up Griffin and wear him down for awhile, preparing Green to return in the 4th quarter.

    If you find the time, it would be cool to see your take on the current Clips-OKC and Blazers-Spurs games.

  14. Crap. The Warriors only tuned up the Clippers for OKC. The Dubs were 1-2 against OKC, losing by a net total of a whopping 6 points. They could have run with them in the playoffs.

    They really lost game 7 in the third quarter by slowing down—20 points. There was less ball movement and they weren’t getting good looks. This allowed the Clippers to get back into the game and build an offensive rhythm. It was Clipper shooting that did them in, not their front court. Rivers said it himself, that by moving the ball quickly they found openings, the perimeter started knocking down shots, and this opened up their bigs.

    I kind of liked Steve Kerr as announcer, but never really paid much attention. I listened last night. He’s really uninspired.

    Curry is “adamant” they keep Jackson; Stein says sources say the FO is thinking about Stan Van Gundy as well. I wonder how attractive an environment this is for prospects.

    Making a motivator the top coach is just a flawed model. There are reasons why the head is on top of our bodies and our hearts in the middle.

  15. From AW’s The Miracle of St. Anthony, his book about Bob Hurley, maybe the greatest high school coach ever, on Erman:

    “He had become an important connection for Hurley in the school, someone with his finger on the pulse of his players. He could see potential problems and deal with them. Because he was young, just twenty-seven, the kids confided in him. They trusted him. They knew he wouldn’t run back to Hurley with stuff, but would help them. He was a full-time teacher and a part-time coach, psychologist, counselor and friend.”

    Again, Erman quit a high paying job with a prestigious law firm to coach at St. Anthony’s. He had a minor role in actual coaching—it was, after all, his first job in the field.

    More later—this is a great book. Have you read this youtired?

  16. cosmicballoon

    Feltbot, this season would not have been as interesting without your insights and the community you’ve created here. Thank you.

    Back to thw team…who do we pin the blame of the Nedovic pick on? What a disaster for the Warriors this season….a guy who occasionally lit up the D-League and played no meaningful minutes in GS this season. I like Kuzmic a little better, but what were the Warriors doing picking a project big man when they knew Ezeli would be out the whole season?

    • Indeed.

      The bench was an absolute fiasco this year. Not sure I can ever recall a similar, paired with such an outstanding frontline.

  17. More recommended reading for the Feltbot book club:

    http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2011/10/the-shame-of-college-sports/308643/?single_page=true

    The Shame of College Sports, by Taylor Branch, in the Atlantic. It also appeared in Best American Sports Writing 2012.

    “Slavery analogies should be used carefully. College athletes are not slaves. Yet to survey the scene—corporations and universities enriching themselves on the backs of uncompensated young men, whose status as ‘student-athletes’ deprives them of the right to due process guaranteed by the Constitution—is to catch an unmistakable whiff of the plantation. Perhaps a more apt metaphor is colonialism: college sports, as overseen by the NCAA, is a system imposed by well-meaning paternalists and rationalized with hoary sentiments about caring for the well-being of the colonized. But it is, nonetheless, unjust. The NCAA, in its zealous defense of bogus principles, sometimes destroys the dreams of innocent young athletes.”

    He backs this up, in great detail.

  18. Thanks, once again, for all your outstanding insights.

    Agree with you that Green is not a starter. Still needs to become more consistent on offensive side of the ball. Also agree Warriors should keep D. Lee.

    Although understandable, player’s have no business getting into and expressing their preference for keeping a coach. That decision solely rests with the owner and front office. Have little doubt that with a new coach Curry will reduce his high number of turnovers next year.

  19. Ish hitting fan for Mark Jackson today…

    • From a TK tweet:

      One major flash point, according to a source: Mark Jackson and asst-GM Kirk Lacob have zero relationship since a blow-up recently.

  20. ESPN & Yahoo reporting Warriors announced Jackson’s firing today.

    Apparently, Kerr is the top replacement candidate. Oh please not that.

    Please hire D’Antoni. Please.

  21. I’m going out on a limb to make a big prediction: Kent Bazemore will return to the Warriors this summer.

    • I wouldn’t be surprised by that, and not just for reasons related to Jackson coaching/not coaching.

      Given his contract status, the front office could have looked at the Lakers trade as comparable to sending him to the D-League for court minutes/experience he wouldn’t get otherwise.

    • I think the Kent Bazemore situation was a factor in the firing decision.

  22. Ultimately, all Jackson proved was that he could coach a handful of very talented and coachable players. After that—

    And the team is back in the hands of an amateur.

    Oyez, oyey! The coach is dead. Long live the coach.

    xxxxxDon Nelson
    xxxxxKeith Smart
    xxxxxMark Jackson
    ?

  23. Time for a golf break from our favorite four hitters (why are KT and HB hitting irons?), with commentary on the state of the team and today’s events. Note especially JL and HB’s reactions:

  24. I can’t stop thinking about that Van Gundy rant on the broadcast. It seemeed egregious at the time, and even more so in refelection.

    Any chance he was publicly grandstanding, whilst privately positioning himself for a position he knew was vacant?

    I guess time will tell. For the record, I am on the Feltbot/D’Antoni ticket.

  25. From TK’s interview with Lacob:

    -Q: You came in and said you were willing to take risks–like hiring Mark Jackson. How much of a risk is it to fire a guy after going from 47 to 51…

    -LACOB: You forgot the 23 (laughs).

    [The 23 refers to the year of the tank—JL is tagging Jackson with this.]

    On the hiring and firing of Jackson:

    -LACOB: Look, I know that’s out there. But the truth is, this is Bob Myers’ decision.

    I have the final say, yes. And he has input certainly from Jerry as a consultant and adviser, and from Kirk and Travis. That is our group, OK? And we are a consensus kind of decision-making group.

    This is his decision (pointing to Myers). This is his fire and his hire and I have certainly a role in it, no question.

    But to put all the onus on me, as I’m some sort of too tough ogre, I think… somebody people would like to create in stories. It’s not really true.

    http://blogs.mercurynews.com/kawakami/2014/05/06/joe-lacob-on-the-mark-jackson-firing-steph-currys-emotions-ownership-pressure-and-demands-and-more/

    • Compare with:

      • More transparent propaganda from rgg. Too bad. It tends to invalidate his good insights.

        How about some facts instead:

        Elsewhere in the interview, Lacob said again that he wants a management team that works together to achieve consensus. He grudgingly admitted that Jackson didn’t handle that aspect of the job well. It’s an important part of a coach’s job.

        A few other things slipped out too, but basically I think it’s pretty admirable that Lacob tried so hard not to trash Jackson. He doesn’t sound like a bad guy to me. Certainly not a criminal like Nixon.

      • Oddly, Nixon may NOT have been a crook. Although I hated the guy and he definitely was a dirty politician, there is a train of thought that points to him being the intended victim of Watergate–he did lose his job because of a very amateurish burglary committed by professionals. I shed no tears for Nixon, yet he looks great by comparison to some recent presidents.

        Anybody hoping for a D’Antoni type coach to replace Jackson–as I am–is going to be sorely disappointed by Lacob. Dammit the Warriors are HIS toy and if someone doesn’t play the way he wants–walk-it-up bigman ball with lots of Harrison Barnes–then he’s going to take his Warriors away!

        • That’s some train. All those “professionals” got ruined along with their supposed target.

          Re Lacob’s preferred offensive strategy, I doubt he cares much as long as it works. If nothing else, Lacob got to see a lot of different looks under Jackson, and smallball clearly worked, often. I think everyone probably learned stuff over the last 3 years, including Lacob.

          Besides, if the next coach is better at “managing upward,” maybe he can lead the management team’s thinking on strategy. As a coach should.

    • Jackson was Lacob’s hire all the way. This has been linked. For example from TK:

      But his loudest message was the personal chemistry he feels with Jackson, and that he felt from the moment he met with him in LA. This is Lacob’s hire, and all his. He connected with Jackson on a “glasses-half-full” level, which also eliminated 90% of the battle-tested, properly cynical coaches in this league.Coaches who have looked at the Warriors all-offense, no-accountability, politics and PR-driven machine with trepidation. Not Lacob’s regime, of course.

      Lacob wanted something new. He believes his players will respond to that, and he didn’t want a crusty guy barking about all the failures of the past.

      —–JOE LACOB, post-presser/
      -Q: Seems obvious that you’re convinced this is the guy.

      -LACOB: I will tell you I am positive that he is the best candidate we could’ve hired to be the head coach of this team. And I said it, maybe not well, in the introduction to this press conference, I actually believe he’s the most experienced, as well as the best, guy we could’ve hired.

      http://blogs.mercurynews.com/kawakami/2011/06/10/joe-lacob-on-mark-jackson-i-wanted-somebody-with-a-fresh-approach/

      My father was a successful business executive. He was also honest. When credit was earned, he made sure it was passed around. He also took responsibility seriously. Whenever problems arose within his purview, from his actions, from that of those below him—or even above—he always took responsibility, even if he didn’t have a hand in them or had made the decisions. And if he was at fault himself, this was immediately recognized and he took things from there.

      Had I wanted to work for the firm (no chance), he would have put me at the bottom to see if I could work my way up. I had to prove myself and learn from the experience. Kirk Lacob, however, after a handful of internships his father must have got for him, in a few short years went to Ass’t GM. and we don’t know how long he will rest there. This would have been incomprehensible to my father.

      I also know this, that if I ever got into a dispute with one of his managers, he would have been livid—

      At me, for questioning the authority of someone he had hired, regardless of what that manager might have done. Overseeing and putting the manager in line was his job. Nor would I have been in any position to be critical, again regardless.

      And if I had risen to a position equal or above the manager, he still would have been livid for not working out the damn problem myself. He had better things to do.

      • Not sure I understand the point of your comment, rgg.

        Yes, Lacob hired Jackson. Now he and his guys feel it’s time to move on. The End.

        As for your dad story, I can kinda relate but don’t see how it, or your Kirk reference, are pertinent. What am I missing?

        • I should know better, Hat, but I’ll try again. In Lacob’s comment above, at the top, from his interview today with TK, he makes both Jackson’s hiring and firing as Meyers’s decision:

          “This is his decision (pointing to Myers). This is his fire and his hire.”

          Not only is Lacob lying, he’s also not taking responsibility for a major decision in an organization he runs.

          My father, however, would never have hired someone like Jackson in the first place. He didn’t hire people for feel or show, but because they knew their stuff and had experience. But then my father had experience as well, decades, from the day he was discharged from the Army in WWII.

          He was also a Republican, btw. Nixon’s dishonesty saddened him a great deal.

          • Meant to add, but I fear this will not get through. I believe you recognized this in your comment. Jackson allegedly was fired for not working with the organization, and one of his flareups was with Kirk, thus my comment on Kirk, a member of the “team.” And my amazement a responsible manager would even put Kirk in that position in the first place.

            West has made it clear he had nothing to do with the Jackson hire. Should I link that again?

          • Lacob has never denied hiring Jackson. Myers wasn’t even with the Ws when Jackson was hired.

            Lacob’s comment “…his fire and his hire…” is a statement that at this time leading the decision-making about the coach is Myers’ job. As it should be. GMs do that.

            Lacob made it clear that Jackson “didn’t fit” not just with management, but the 200-member organization as a whole. Kirk’s name hasn’t come up in that discussion. Whether or not Kirk is an asset to the organization, Lacob is making the right decision about Jackson. So why even mention Kirk unless you simply want to bad-mouth Lacob? Kirk has nothing to do with this.

            Do you think your father might have hired Jackson if he felt that his firm needed a showman? Lacob needed one, or felt he did.

            Lacob also needed a coach willing to tank the first season, and he had a good replacement in the wings if it turned out that Jackson couldn’t coach to win. To me that all sounds pretty cynical and ruthless, but certainly not dumb. Based on all the available evidence, rgg, you constantly and repeatedly underestimate Lacob’s intelligence and ability.

    • my favorite parts came when lacob attempted to consign credit for the decision to terminate onto his protege, myers. this might be a positive sign, if the owner is actually delegating most of the quest for the next coach to myers. the highlight for me, k. asks if the preacher’s public religiosity (not his words of course) were a problem, and lacob squirms, ‘I don’t really want to answer that question because I don’t know that there’s a good answer, one way or the other’.

      • “I don’t know that there’s a good answer, one way or the other.”

        If Lacob prays hard enough tonight, he will find an answer. I dunno, though. He’s had three years to think about that one.

        • C’mon guys. There IS no good answer to that question.

          Here’s the thing, though: it’s not a question that should come up.

          As a business owner, I absolutely would fire a manager who made religion a hot button issue in my firm.

          And I absolutely would not discuss it with the press, for the obvious reason that it’s a no-possible-win topic. I mean, look at you two jokers, laughing at Lacob “squirming” about it. Imagine how much entertainment/outrage people on both sides of the issue would have if Lacob even attempted to answer that question.

  26. What exactly has put Fred Hoiberg in the crosshairs as a possible replacement?

    Both he and Harrison Barnes grew up in Ames, Iowa. Coincidence? Part of some large and mystical pattern?

  27. Guess 100+ victories in two years ain’t cuttin it! As a long time fan , these last two seasons have been great. The team actually has some pull with the best- whether thanks to the coach, or inspite of him. MJax was part of it and that can’t be denied

    You know what opinions are like, and now they’re all on the net for everyone to savor. Most of what I know about the GS-MJax situation I’ve gleened online. So I like to disregard alot of it, and trust my own eyes.

    I saw 90% of the games this season, and found myself frequently questioning MJ’s decisions. In my opinion, he was not a good strategist. There was no definable offensive scheme. Too often it came down to Steph single-handedly saving the day. He is a unique talent who could take the team far in his prime, if given the right supporting cast.
    So I think MJax can be effectively replaced

    I read somewhere Nate McMillan is a candidate for coach. I specifically remember watching a game where his Blazer team humiliated Mike Montgomerys Wubs. They weren’t a much more talented team, but their execution was obviously better and
    left me wishing the team would just make a sound decision and hire someone like him. He was always was a leader with class, and he won alot of games. If he wants to coach again I hope he’s considered

  28. While our FO has been contemplating Jackson’s firing for some time, it doesn’t sound like they had a solid plan for his replacement. They were in the same position three years ago when they fired Smart, and look what happened.

    Hard to believe Kerr won’t go to the Knicks and Phil (I hope). Also hard to believe he would have been any good here.

    Brad Stevens with the Celtics might be an interesting experiment, but he’s coaching a rebuilding team in a solid organization. Was his strength his ability, as a college coach, to develop young players? That could pay off in the interim, and if he develops into a competent coach, he’ll stay on.

    A rookie coach, and especially a college coach, will face the pressure of expectations of continuing a winning season for the Warriors. A drop in wins with this roster will be a serious disappointment. Besides, with this roster and cap, there just isn’t much young talent to develop or who will get much playing time. An assistant coach could fill this job anyway.

    Nor will a rookie coach or probably Kerr have the resources and knowledge to select a good supporting staff, so we’re back to square one again here as well, without a knowledgable FO to make the selections. He’ll have to live with the personnel and directives they give him.

    Hard to believe an established coach with experience, who might be able to select assistants, would want to come here unless he is given full support, freedom, and a fairly lengthy contract.

    Fat chance.

    So maybe only a less proven coach would come here simply because he wants a job, who will try to live with this organization the best he can (listening to Kirk Lacob with his StatVu reports, etc.), with whatever assistants he can scrounge up or those the FO selects for him. Likely, he’ll have to cope with Harrison Barnes as well.

    At least were in familiar territory. This organization is sounding more and more like the one we’ve known and loved over the past decades.

    Maybe they’ll give Mike Montgomery another shot?

  29. GSW/JL/transparency:

    “Since purchasing the Warriors and assuming control of the team on November 12, 2010, Lacob has been the driving force behind many of the creative changes that have transpired with the organization, including several prominent personnel additions and an emphasis on transparency.”

    http://www.nba.com/warriors/joelacob

  30. Steve Kerr/Mike D’Antoni (and why we’ll never see D’Antoni):

    D’Antoni and the Suns parted ways after Phoenix lost a first round series to the San Antonio Spurs in 2008. D’Antoni was upset that then-general manager Steve Kerr was pushing him to hire a defensive assistant. A year earlier, Kerr suggested Tom Thibodeau for the job but D’Antoni resisted. Thibodeau eventually joined Doc Rivers’ staff and the Boston Celtics went on to win the NBA Championship and reach the Finals twice in three years.

    “I think we got frustrated and I got frustrated. That’s why I left,” D’Antoni said. “We were there, it seemed like we deserved it, and then it seemed like something happened all the time. Maybe we weren’t good enough either. We have to understand that.

    “I probably irrationally made a decision right when the season was over. You should take a month to figure it out. I shouldn’t have left. That was my fault.”

    Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/basketball/knicks/antoni-shouldn-new-york-article-1.1209649#ixzz3131DVvDy

  31. Marcus Thompson drops the “submissiveness” word:

    http://www.mercurynews.com/marcus-thompson/ci_25710619/thompson-warriors-tempt-fate-by-firing-jackson

    Like it or not, for MT and Monte Poole, and presumably for some players as well, there was a racial angle to this firing.

    I don’t really see that myself. And I think these writers might be conflating the distaste for Jackson bringing religion into the workplace, indeed painting the franchise in the colors of his religion, with racism.

    But I did note at the time of assistant-gate that the dysfunction in Jackson’s locker rooms occurred along racial lines. That certainly doesn’t help the perception. And perceptions are dangerous for Lacob in the post-Sterling world of the NBA.

    • The opposite of submissive is assertive and independent. These have never been traits sought by Lacob. They thought Jackson could stir the guys and look good in the NBA world, and that others would handle the rest.

      But since you’ve raised race, Kerr doesn’t appear to be very assertive. In fact he looks to be an awfully well behaved wh—

      Never mind.

      • I’m not the one who raised race. Check MT’s twitter timeline, and Poole’s piece on the firing.

        I’ve been responding.

        • Sorry. And twitter still confuses me, but I get the drift from Poole’s piece. Lacob is out of his element here, though, and might yet cross some lines.

          • You know, however, that Lacob thought it was a really neat idea to get a black coach to attract other black players. Not exactly a plantation mentality, but not exactly enlightenment, either.

      • I loved this part:

        “Yes, even in 2014, a black man must be careful how forcefully he casts his brashness, for there is the risk of being slapped with ticket for committing the social violation of hubris.”

        News flash for Monte Poole: you can drop that word “black” from the sentence. It’s true for all: hubris is a negative for anyone who needs to work with others.

    • Wow. That is the worst possible way to rephrase what Lacob clearly and openly stated he wanted in a coach and in every member of his management team. It’s also just plain wrong.

      Jackson didn’t participate in FO decision-making. If he had, he’d have had MORE say in the direction of the team, not less. Just exactly how would that have made him “submissive?” How does inviting/requiring a coach to work well with others in the FO become a demand that the coach be submissive? That is inflammatory nonsense, and MTII should be ashamed to suggest it.

      Jackson himself fired Scalabrini for being sassy, right? Does that mean Scal wasn’t “submissive” enough? What a crappy thing for MTII to say.

      • hope you understand that Monte Poole who works for the lacobite p.r. front csnbayarea is a different individual than Marcus Thompson II (MTII). poole formerly had the position at the bayareanewsgroup that MThompsonII holds at present.

        • right. FB posted two links.

          MT suggested that Lacob required Jackson to be submissive. That is a stupid and inflammatory thing to say.

          Poole says black men have to avoid hubris. That is correct. All people who want to get along with others must avoid hubris.

          Hope that clarifies things.

    • cosmicballoon

      Another angle on the MT piece, he argues that team chemistry has been important to the Warriors success. I can’t remember the last the team chemistry was the key ingredient in winning championships. It’s all about having the best players, and the Warriors seriously might have top 3 or 4 talent on this roster…which IMO was underutilized by Jackson all season long because he played so much isolation ball. Team chemistry may have helped them get to 51 wins, but Jackson’s strategy probably kept them from 55 or 56.

  32. Killion on the religion issue:
    http://blog.sfgate.com/killion/2014/05/06/jacksons-religious-views-an-issue-with-warriors/#23116101=0

    Odd to me that no one else in the press has picked up on the fact that Jackson sometimes referred to people he didn’t like as “the devil.”

    That is a very charged term, with connotations of the Nation of Islam referring to the white race as “white devils,” and also of anti-semitism.

    I’d be very interested to know who exactly Jackson called “the devil.”

    • cosmicballoon

      Felty, irresponsible journalism by Killion — that’s one of those ‘he’s gone’ pot shots that should only be made if she was willing to write who she heard it from. It’s fairly obvious that all the journalists were tired of Jackson’s rhetoric and how he dodged questions with worn out statements. Therefore, Killion decides to speculate with unfounded claims on several fronts. where was the criticism before the firing? Woe is actual hard nose reporting in the Bay Area.

      • I completely agree with you that it was utterly cowardly of the Warriors media to duck this issue until now, and have been saying so for years.

        I don’t think that means it’s unethical for them to bring it up now, though. And as for the specifics of the Killion piece, obviously she has a source who doesn’t want their identity revealed. Does that mean she shouldn’t report it? I don’t know, I find it somewhat newsworthy, given all the innuendo swirling around this story.

        The question of whether the source is well-placed and credible is something we have to trust to Killion and her editor. That may make us uncomfortable, but I wouldn’t call it irresponsible journalism.

        • the ‘devil’ and pastor jackson theme is given fuller treatment over on warriorsworld.net (e.s. strauss’ former abode), “Gods, Devils, and Dysfunction” by Jesse Taylor. one problem, taylor conceals his actual identity, and lists in his bona fides that he’s worked seventeen years in p.r. for three n.b.a. teams including Sac and GS. his account is quite plausible, but effective agit-prop should be. if we’re getting discharge from the offices of Ridder & co., there’s no way we can tell if Killion is feeding from the same trough. we’ll see if amick, lowe, wojnarowski pick it up and go further to establish its credibility.

  33. MJax had to go. Walk-up, ISO, slow-it-down-with-a-lead basketball does not fit the Warriors best players, not even Bogut, and thats what MJax prefers, despite what he says. Maybe it did somewhat with JJ running the point. Not now. The JJ-MJax style was a transition, just like Meyers correctly stated. Thats done and needs to be forgotten.

    No doubt Kent Bazemore shared his experience of D’Antoni with his former team mates.

    Call it wishful thinking — D’Antoni will be the new coach, and Bazemore will be back with the Warriors.

    Remember that 2 guard game D’Antoni runs to the side base line from an opponents made basket? Can you imagine Curry and Thomspon ruuning it or Curry and Iggy or Bazemore. The combinations and permutations are wonderful to contemplate.

  34. What I take away from Jackson’s firing is that Myers and Lacob have no confidence in Jackson’s coaching ability. And both have a concept how the team should be constructed and how the game should be played.

    The real question for me is will the FO allow the next coach the freedom he needs to coach or will they attempt to influence what the coach does with the team. Any prospective future coach should think twice seeming the type “A” know it all front office they will be coaching under.

    One can only hope in the end they hire a coach they have enough faith in that they’ll refrain from interfering with.

    In my own view the hiring of Jackson was a huge mistake since the FO knew he was not an “x” and “o,” and thought they could overcome such shortcoming by hiring Malone.

    Look for Warriors to hire a retread. The only guy I really would like to see the Warriors hire is Jeff Van Gundy.

    Given there history on trading for Bogut, resigning him to a long term contract even though he’s injury prone, not amnestying Biedrens, drafting Thompson over Leonard, passing on good trades (Barnes for Lowry),and losing Jack, there is not much hope they’ll get the hiring of a new coach correct.

  35. Felt
    I think that MJax not living in the area of the team he coaches was a big deal. When you have so many young players isn’t the coaching staff necessary to work with these guys in the off season. If you have video guys etc. and watch film you can tell how to get the players to improve. Preaching down in LA isn’t going to help Harrison Barnes reach his potential or get Klay to rebound better. Taking some time off between the season and summer league is one thing but living out of the area doesn’t seem to be a good tactical decision. these guys are paid an enormous amount of money could you imagine Harbaugh living in Michigan in the off season? Also having the best assistant coaches think Popovich helps the team and second teamers improve and know their rolls. I think this was a critical matter in the decision.

    • I’m certain you are right. I think there were several very legitimate reasons why Lacob was dissatisfied with Jackson.

    • That’s kind of silly to me. Players have houses all over the country. Curry goes back to North Carolina in the off-season.

      Jackson has a daughter going to USF. He said on the Dan Patrick show he was the first in last out every day, and I have no reason not to believe that.

      If they fired him because his wife lived in LA, that’s pretty ridiculous. I hope that’s not true.

    • Guys, there’s no reason to guess about Jackson’s firing. Lacob did give his reasons. He specifically said that Jackson needed to do better at managing upward and at a peer level.

      In other words, Jackson didn’t communicate sufficiently with other members of the front office. Lacob and Myers felt that it was important. I think they’re right – a good coach is more than a floor general, he contributes to managing the team, like on personnel decisions, for example.

      All the rest – the cranky relations with the press, the divisiveness within the coaching staff, banning West from practices, the summer time off and everything else you can think of – Lacob didn’t even mention. Because while none of those issues played in Jackson’s favor, they weren’t the big problem.

  36. I’d feel a lot better about the players’ defense of Jackson if their discussion involved specific matters of superior coaching rather than loyalty, and I haven’t seen anything here. Loyalty without critical appreciation is always suspect.

    For me, the first red flag for Jackson is that he never tried first to prove himself as an assistant. I believe he never sought this and turned down offers? Then again, that would have taken him out of the public eye and the attention of owners such as, uh, Lacob. Come to think of it, Kerr hasn’t tried being an assistant, either, has he? He has no experience.

    Lacob set the terms of dissolution himself when he selected a figurehead instead of someone with experience and knowledge. What did he expect? But that seems to be a major theme with his organization.

    One reason I object to blanket criticism of religion is that it removes criticism of a specific religious figure, such as Jackson. And I suspect we have more reason to be critical than his views of gays, where the NBA and much of our society will not shine well. Did Lacob expect Jackson to give up his church? Did he go down and listen to one of his sermons? Did he not have any idea of what he was getting into three years ago?

    Bob Hurley, the legendary high school coach of Saint Anthony’s had his players say hail Mary’s as a matter of routine, not surprising behavior in a parochial school. Then again, that didn’t prevent him from launching f-bombs left and right during practice or threatening to throw his players’ asses out of the gym—or actually throwing them out. But his anger always served a purpose.

    Jackson objected to profanity, however. That didn’t prevent him from pursuing obscene behavior in disguised ways. I’m not sure I’d feel comfortable about a coaching staff that didn’t blow their tops and swear profusely from time to time.

    I also question an organization that can’t handle some strong egos, or those other than the owner’s.

    Speaking of Richard Nixon, I’d love to hear what was on Erman’s tapes. I don’t recall news they were confiscated. What happened to them?

    • Jackson did not agree that his public religiosity was an issue, contending that the Warriors used it for positive PR.

      “I think it’s unfortunate because if it was true, you don’t encourage media to come do a piece on my church, on my ministry, the work on my faith,” he said in the interview.

      As for Kirk Lacob:

      “I had no problem with Kirk,” Jackson said in the radio interview. “Kirk is a guy who runs the Santa Cruz Warriors [of the the NBA Development League]. He’s the assistant GM, and I had no problem with Kirk. Here’s my question: If that’s true, then make Kirk available and let Kirk talk about it, because as far as I know there was no issue.”

      http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/10896827/mark-jackson-happy-results-golden-state-warriors-upset-way-firing-handled

      He has two points here. Why haven’t we heard anything from Junior, anyway? Dad keeps referring to him as one of the brain trust.

      There are several levels of dysfunction here, not all of them in the locker room.

      • Right. Religion wasn’t the issue. Kirk wasn’t the issue. Lacob said what the issue was, and it’s actually an important one.

    • +1

    • from available sources (including MThompsonII) last summer, hunter was jackson’s hire. before replacing gentry in Phx he was in charge of the player development of w.johnson and k.marshall, both of whom went to LA and salvaged their careers (johnson once a fairly high lottery pick who failed to meet Min’s expectations). the best way to evaluate assistant coaches is to coach against them or with them on the same staff, and neither could apply because jackson never worked as a coach before GS. apparently it was p.myers and hunter, jackson confidants, who erman suspected were mocking him to players.

  37. More interesting nuggets from Ric Bucher

    http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2054405-united-on-court-divided-off-it-warriors-face-tough-climb-after-jackson-firing

    It’s clear now that Erman was working for Warriors mgmt (and probably the idiot prince) when he secretly taped the coaches.

    The reason why Jackson wore black to Game 7? It’s what Mafiosi back in NYC donned when expecting to get whacked.

    The question everyone forgot to ask Jackson: doesn’t this indicate he expected to lose Game 7?

    • The only scenario that makes sense if that mgmnt put Erman up to it and provided him a safety net. I guess they had to fire him, but if no one presses charges, it’s not a legal issue, is it?

    • warriorsablaze

      It’s logical, but not necessarily true that Erman was taping at the request of the FO. He may have been gathering evidence to take to them to make his case, but that doesn’t mean he was put up to it by them. If he were setup by the FO and then subsequently fired I don’t think he would have gone quietly. I sure as hell wouldn’t have.

      • cosmicballoon

        Erman was acting like a little rat. I can’t believe he’s coming out of this perceived as the victim.

        • warriorsablaze

          What is this prison? Who cares if he was gonna rat if the reports about how MJax was handling him and the locker room in general are true? I’d rather that stuff come to light.

    • GooseLosGatos

      Who is the ‘idiot prince’?

    • Good recap of issues we all know, with one new addition:

      “Jackson carefully cultivated the image that he was loved by his players…But according to sources with direct knowledge of the situation, not everyone felt the same way, with roughly half the locker room ambivalent or worse in their views on Jackson.”

  38. One of the most glaring Jackson errors was to play Barnes more minutes than Green. We all harped on that all year. Surely, both Jackson and the management are both responsible for that error. Both are responsible for the Warriors not winning more games during the season.

    When also adds in the getting rid of two coaches it appears the “culture” is much worse than under Nellie’s tenure. Heads in the front office should roll.

    • A head did roll, and the next coach won’t do those things.

      There’s a message in the way Jackson’s departure was handled. Lacob could have said something like “by mutual agreement, Jackson’s going to focus on his ministry” or some such.

      Lacob didn’t take that route because he wanted the world to know he fired Mark Jackson’s ass for cause. That would make it easier for players and others outside the organization to understand that the Jackson culture was considered unacceptable, and would not be tolerated. That’s a good thing.

    • ” Surely, both Jackson and the management are both responsible for that error.”

      It’s not clear to me. Or it’s worrisome. If the FO is as into analytics as they appear to be, then they should have realized long ago how inferior Barnes is. So either they are incompetent in using analytics or it didn’t play any kind of role in dictating his playing time. If it’s the latter, I assume that’s due to a disconnect between FO and Jackson.

      • warriorsablaze

        Well, if all the reports coming out are true… the conspiracy theory that the FO forced MJax to play HB as much as he did can’t be true. Seems MJax wasn’t willing to take basketball advice from anyone…not even his assistants.

        • Which reports? I’m curious. And can you come up with speculation? That Jackson stubbornly persisted with Barnes would be another serious of criticism against him. But the team needed another solid bench player, and with the roster he was given, Barnes was the only option. The problem is complicated, of course, by his poor use of Barnes.

          Yet the player Lacob tanked for, the player Lacob so heavily promoted, the player who got so much publicity and appeared in those ads—he didn’t have a hand in this?

      • It was probably a disconnect, along the lines of Jackson telling the FO what they wanted to hear. That sort of thing happens all the time, especially when someone is feeling heat.

  39. This makes four years the organization has not stabilized the coaching position, and it’s a serious failure on their part for which they have neither shown recognition nor taken responsibility. Much has been lost, including all that time to give the team an identity and experience together to take into the next season. Continuity is a significant reason the Spurs keep winning year after year.

    Another is that the Spurs recognize the value of a competent, strong coach. The Warrior organization never realized that value from the start. Smart was inserted as a placeholder, while Jackson’s selection is egregious proof—experience and strategic knowledge were not criteria in his selection. Nor is it clear they even understood the terms that might define a successful coach, especially for the talent on this team. And there is little evidence they wanted to give a coach the independence and authority he needs.

    And with that, we have no reason to think they will find a better replacement. Their top selection is ample proof.

  40. So, you rather warriors stayed with Mark Jackson for the sake of stability ?? He got 3 years and warriors got maximum out of him. Hopefully, we will get that next coach a warriors lifer but you have to remember a Popovich and a Sloan are very rare.

    • Is that a response to me? Not at all. He had to go. But Jackson is just a scapegoat. I have no confidence in this organization until it solves its own internal problems, in this case knowing how to find a coach and giving him the position he needs. We see no evidence this will happen any time soon.

      • Then, what are you complaining about when they fired Mark Jackson. Warriors front office is the reason this team is in back to back playoffs. Yes, they did some mistakes but they have made more good decisions than bad decisions. They did earn warriors fans respect, atleast they earned my respect and benefit of doubt.

  41. To vouch this is no proof,
    Without more certain and more overt test
    Than these thin habits and poor likelihoods
    Of modern seeming do prefer against him.

    The Duke speaks in Othello.

    I contemplated Othello comparisons last night, and they will be a stretch. Desdemona especially presents a problem, and to tag Iago on any member of the FO would be an indulgence.

    I did not especially like Jackson. His rigid morality and strategy constrained him from flexible, sensible decisions on and off the court. His spiritualism and coaching were conflated, and both masked ambitions and ego he did not recognize, with ill effect. Yet his corniness grew on me and there were times I liked him. I couldn’t say he was a bad man without being a hypocrite myself. And he always stood strong and passionate, and led his troops into many victories, substantial ones and near losses last week. Most of his troops were loyal to him, almost all from the top of the roster. The only figure to emerge yet who didn’t get along with him is Bogut, but his last coach didn’t have good things to say about him either. I can’t view his firing without a sense of loss and disturbance.

    Othello’s real problem wasn’t Iago. The motiveless malignity was the world that allowed Iago to exist and fester and work his ill will on Othello. Othello was never a part of his world and in no real sense was accepted. His position depended solely on his ability to serve Venetian nobility’s own self interests and protect them from their enemies. After that, he lived in a vacuum, with only his troops for community. His marriage to Desdemona split this world, and the only way to close the rift was to have Othello destroy the source, his marriage to her, by his own hands. But the pressure was all around him.

    Jackson struck out on his own and separated himself from the organization, with questionable and destructive behavior. But he lived in a vacuum as well, and in no sense was he ever accepted as belonging to it. Keep wining and maybe, just maybe, he can keep leading the troops—this was the only term of his acceptance. It is a poisonous environment. Race will come into play, though not overtly or maliciously. There is simply no one in the organization who understands his world or that of the players, a problem across the NBA, and this lack of understanding can lead to distance and misunderstanding and neglect. But also we get questionable behavior from the organization and the picture of its world is not attractive. Character is promoted, but only on the narrowest and most suspect of terms—how well someone fits in with the FO’s wishes and doesn’t make waves—and character in the real sense of the word has not been displayed, but rather contradicted with dishonesty and dissembling. The winning culture Lacob wants does not appear to be built on anything substantial.

    Meanwhile, Ottoman ships appear on the horizon, and the team has no one to lead them into battle.

  42. “Darren Erman was full of integrity and earnestness, looking forward, like me, every day to see what Hurley had awaiting us in the gym.”

    Wojnarowski, Adrian. The Miracle of St. Anthony: A Season with Coach Bob Hurley and Basketball’s Most Improbable Dynasty

    I trust Woj on many levels, his understanding of the game and of people and situations. His judgment is solid, a major reason I read him.

    Being in the locker room must have been sheer torture. It’s still hard to figure out what happened and why, but I can’t believe he cracked up. He was in close contact with the FO, even after he was fired—Bucher’s piece supports this. After the news of the recording leaked out, the FO was put in a difficult position, I guess, or maybe they were too worried about bad publicity. It wouldn’t be the first time. But obviously he couldn’t stay with Jackson any longer regardless. He sure landed on his feet in a hurry, though, and it’s hard to believe there wasn’t communication with the FO and Boston. Yet he may well have represented the kind of talent the team desperately needs, and I still wonder why they didn’t protect them, especially as they were, apparently, already decided about firing Jackson, barring a miraculous run in the playoffs.

    At any rate, he’s moved to a better organization, and I’m happy for him.

    • cosmicballoon

      Disagree wholeheartedly about Erman. Anyone willing to cross the line he crossed in order to further himself is not someone I want in my camp, no matter wlhow hard he works and how skilled he is. Sorry.

      • cosmicballoon

        Doubtful that he ever gets to the level of GM (which he seemed to be on track for) simply because of this incident.

      • We still don’t know anything, but from everything I’ve read, he didn’t do it for advancement. Not only would it have been out of character, it would have made no sense. He’s going to show tapes to prospective clubs? Learn more about the guy.

  43. Just as who the Warriors new coach will be is important to the Warriors going forward. so will our seeing if the Warriors brass will improve the roster over this year’s roster.

    And given the mess they’ve created it will not be easy task.

    Especially, since their past actions or non-actions do not demonstrate they possess the insight as to who to trade, who do trade for, who to sign as free agents, and how to overcome the fact the Warriors have no draft picks.

  44. Another reason to dump Jackson—he speaks out on the assistant coach firings:

    http://nba.si.com/2014/05/07/mark-jackson-fired-warriors-brian-scalabrine-darren-erman/

    His language, however, in its diffuseness and evasion, sounds awfully familiar—reread Lacob’s latest interview.

    • Thank heavens we won’t have to listen to that self-centered gasbag anymore.

      • cosmicballoon

        Jackson’s trademark, never actually getting to the point. No specifics, ever.

  45. The main reason to fire Jackson, of course:

    Not to belabor a point made often, and well, in basketball circles over the course of the season, but the perception of Golden State as an offensive juggernaut is simply false – this Warriors team was built on defense, finishing fourth in the NBA in Defensive Rating by allowing 102.6 points per 100 possessions. Meanwhile, the team was barely above average on offense, ranked 12th at a 107.5 Offensive Rating (as compared with a league average of 106.7 ppoints/100 possessions). Even among Western Conference playoff teams, Golden State ranked best in terms of defense, but second-worst offensively.

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fancy-stats/wp/2014/05/07/golden-state-fired-mark-jackson-because-warriors-should-have-been-better/

    And Partnow supports this well. Good read, with both stats and explanation.

    • Lacob was clear that his main reasons for firing Jackson were organizational, not the team’s on-court performance.

      Given the reasons Lacob cited, he was just as likely to fire Jackson if the team had done better. So the article may be well-written and well-documented, but it’s probably not an accurate picture of what made the axe come down.

  46. MThompsonII has followed up with another essay, “Warriors, Mark Jackson, and the Question of Race”. he’s clear at the start that he does not consider lacob and myers racist or prejudiced. cultural differences place greater burdens on the minority and MTII regrets the preacher felt unable to make concessions. his portrait of lacob is a bit like dorian gray’s, but more nuanced than his senior colleague Jenkin’s, amusing as it was to have the mighty owner derided as ‘pathetic’.

      • ++

        rgg,

        Great article, Marcus Thompson (not to be confused by the less informed who confuse him with another African American writer, Monte Poole :-))

        Really puts the Sterling player revolt in context. I am sure a lot of players on the team and league agree with MT, hence the player revolt against Donald Sterling.

        There are some Americans who realize racism is alive and well in America. Many Americans ignore it, because they are not affected, but his antidotes are common.

        Thanks for the link,

        • don’t you mean ‘anecdotes’ rather than ‘antidotes’ ? so far racism has proven itself fairly resistant to antidotes. reforming our behaviour and conduct, our actions and words, will have to suffice if we can keep our biases and prejudices confined to our thoughts.

      • “Lacob however doesn’t strike me as the type who feels the need to acquiesce to the people who work for him. They need to learn how to deal with him. And that’s fine. But that’s not how the great owners n this league have worked.” put another way, lacob and sterling have more in common than the lacobites would care to admit. one of sterling’s many legal scuffles involved a sex worker, and he said I paid for it, that means I decide what I want ; his position with housing discrimination was similar — I own the buildings, I control who gets to use them.

        this essay should be required reading for any coaching candidate, particularly the part about providing a positive working environment for curry, which would not depend on the coach’s skin color or religion.

    • Why is it a great piece? Why does the fact that racism exists mean that race was significant in this case?

      I found this piece an inchoate morass, full of too many fallacious arguments to even catalogue.

      Nor will I bother trying. It’s never worth it when this much feeling is involved.

      Have to say one thing though. I loved this throwaway phrase: “freedom to pray.”

      That’s a freedom that Doc Rivers doesn’t believe in.

      • MT reminded me of a comment McCallum made about Alvin Gentry, who has a lightning quick wit:

        Gentry, who is black, is comfortable making jokes across color lines, but it bothers him that reporters invariably come to him looking for the black-man-with-a-hard-life story (“ My father kicked our ass if we didn’t do well in school and my mother cooked breakfast for my brothers, sisters, and I every day of our life when we were growing up”) and angers him when he and other African-Americans are described as “articulate.” “It’s like a surprise we can talk,” he says. “White people are never described as articulate.”

        from his book Seven Seconds or Less

        Let’s let the pronoun case go.

        I’m not going to convince you and won’t try. It’s not even something I can do, and that is the real point.

        MT’s arguments fall apart only when you take his purpose to be keeping Jackson or saying that he was fired because of race, and these he does not do. Rather, he is setting a context, one stirred by events last week and one too easily glossed over. We do not know what it is like to be black, or to be a black player, or a black coach. Marcus gives that a shot. Others are speaking up now, recently Jordan, who grew up in NC with the Klan. We saw many hints of it during the contract negotiations. And MT most reveals his purpose and establishes credibility in his patient telling. He knows he will be dismissed out of hand.

        Nor do we know the world of owners, where we also got a peek last week. Marcus gives this a shot as well. It is too often a world that is accepted, without question.

        And both worlds are horribly separated, but the last one holds most of the cards.

        Did we ever see evidence Jackson actually was abusive in his religion? I haven’t looked that closely, though it wouldn’t surprise me. He most likely created an environment where such might happen.

        The overwhelming number of NBA players are black, and if they have any religious affiliation, it is most likely going to be a version of protestantism, often their own. I am also reluctant to criticize religion because of that. I don’t know their faith closely, but am distant from it. I do know, however, for so many years, especially in the South, but also elsewhere, it was a source for faith and identity along with a place to house those, which they couldn’t find anywhere else. It also provided a common denominator for comparison with faithful whites, a lever to crack spiritual corruption. Start with MLK and work your way out.

        I also know there is plenty of room for criticism in those religions. Baldwin gives a good shot in his novel.

        • Another Gentry anecdote from Seven Seconds, which might help explain why Rivers keeps religion under wraps:

          He tells the story of B. J. Armstrong coming to Charlotte and being greeted by Anthony Mason, a noted thug on the court. Gentry really rolls on this one.

          “So, Anthony Mason tells B. J., ‘Yo man, we all get together and pray after the game.’

          “B.J. says, ‘Well, that’s cool, but it’s not my style. I got my own beliefs and stuff.’

          “But, see, this isn’t good enough for Anthony. ‘Nah, man, we do it after games. As a team.’

          And B.J. still says, ‘Sorry, man.’

          “So Anthony’s getting more and more angry, and he says, ‘So, you ain’t going to pray with us?’

          And B.J. says, ‘Sorry, but…’

          “So now, Mason cuts him off. ‘Well, fuck you, motherfucker, if you ain’t going to pray with us.’ ”

          D’Antoni laughs. “Now, there’s the Christian spirit at work.”

      • Article was indeed well written, and took courage from the otherwise ‘fraidy cat’ Lacob and NBA press reporters. The situation is common in other industries as well as the NBA. Took a lot of courage to write as it hits close to home for many including his employers.

        From the article:

        “That’s what we’re talking about here. A society within the society. Jackson, despite playing 17 years, is an outsider in this society. His name got him a shot, his mouth got him the job. But if you talk to just about any black coach privately, they’ll tell you Jackson was fired because he has a shorter leash. He doesn’t have those relationships in that circle, those familial and historic connections to that society. And when he had the chance to cultivate them, he didn’t. If you believe the reports coming out about him, he did the opposite of cultivating. Nor does he have a championship under his belt. So he didn’t get the leeway.”…

        “Access has always been at the forefront of race relations, even in the NBA, and it isn’t solved. The NBA is among the leaders in this area but hardly a immune. Some of this stuff is built in, systematic, and doesn’t require malice for it to actually exist. And getting all defensive about it at the mere mention doesn’t help make the NBA even better in this area. (Yes, the NBA has several areas where some of this race and culture issues are obvious, including age limits).”

        “Jackson isn’t excluded because he is African-American. But it certainly is harder to break into and stay in that culture because he is not inherently from it. It explains partly why Lionel Hollins and Sam Mitchell have only had one shot so far despite being fairly successful. Meanwhile, Terry Stotts was hired in Portland without having a winning record in his four years in Milwaukee. Avery Johnson and Nate McMillan are respected coaches who never seem to be on the coveted short list. Maybe they are bad dudes who can’t manage upwards and sideways. And maybe all the white retreads are great at it. Or maybe not.”

  47. felt boss, did you catch Voulgaris’ twits re. d’Antoni ? he thinks the prudent course would be to hire a coach who incorporates the best of the d’Antoni game, but not the actual man. D’Antoni advocates, do not ignore your candidate’s age. lacob seems to be partial to old school hoops, which would lessen d’Antoni’s appeal, but does he want a coach who’s older than him ?

    • He’s never liked D’Antoni. I disagree.

      • if bovada is a wagering house, do they actually get enough action on who becomes the next woeyrs coach for their odds to shift ? apparently, and correct me as ignorant, bovada feels the interested bettors like v.gundy’s chances over kerr’s.

        • Yes. Knicks still favored to get Kerr, which apparently makes SVG a favorite here.

          Go Knicks go!

    • A lot of phone calls have been made the past few days. What kind of source might have been privy to these? If true, the players involved have to have some clout, and we can make some good guesses here. I’m curious why they want SVG and how they came to such a decision in such a short time.

      • The obvious answer is that the Ws FO has been quietly assembling a list of options for months, not days. SVG is the most proven coaching candidate available who’s not close to retirement.

  48. Maui Nelli

    Zach Lowe: The End of Mark Jackson and a New Beginning for the Warriors

    http://grantland.com/the-triangle/mark-jackson-fired-golden-state-warriors/

  49. Actually, I like Steve Kerr. I think he would be a great department chair. He would encourage faculty to get along and soothe divisiveness in meetings. He would represent their interests well to administration and be respected by deans and higher ups. And he would look good to the public. It’s not hard to see why Lacob likes him. But department chairs do not motivate faculty or make any serious strategic decisions or give any kind of training. They only administrate and work compromises.

    Kerr does not seem especially inspired as announcer—and I see Voulgaris shares that opinion. He should know, and he’s probably listened to him hundreds of times over the years. Nor does Kerr appear to have a forceful or decisive personality. As a player, did he tell Jordan what to do or give Jackson input? He only followed and fit in. It’s hard to see him firing up the players and keeping them on course. It’s also hard to believe he would be a good strategic coach without a lot of help. Part of the attraction to the Knicks’ job is that he would be working with Phil Jackson, who not only has knowledge and experience (put debates here aside) but also clout in the organization. Kerr wouldn’t have anything or anyone remotely similar here, no one to give good advice and the power to make it stick. The organization would still be without a controlling head.

    The Warriors need a capable and influential mind who should be its effective center, and the place to look is the position where it is most needed, the head coach. No one in the organization now knows that much, or knows enough. And, take your pick but don’t take sides, no one talks well in the organization. They don’t even have a common language or set of common experience. And without those, the organization falls apart. Really, Lacob had no control at all. Everyone went their separate ways, with disastrous effects. All he could do was fire, when it was already too late.

    I’m going to start having good thoughts about SVG, the most likely option.

    And maybe when that happens, there will less fighting here. We’ve split and fallen apart with the organization.

  50. Lacob makes Jerry West’s role and influence clear:

    What is Jerry West’s influence?: “I have a great relationship with him. We talk a lot on the phone. Bob talks to him most days. … Jerry has the same influence he had when he came in. He’s ‘The Logo.’ He has 50 years of experience. We listen to him. He deserves to be listened to. Anyone who doesn’t is crazy. He’s got an incredible amount of experience in every aspect of this game. We don’t do everything he suggests or says, and that’s the role. We highlighted that when we brought Jerry on. ‘Hey, you’re an advisor. Just so you know, it’s Bob’s job. He’s running it.’ He’s been great about that. Now, he does react. He does get upset over certain things. He’s emotional, but that has nothing to do with what he recommends or what influence he has. Honestly, he’s been a spectacular resource for us. What you guys don’t focus on as much and probably don’t understand is that Jerry is involved in a lot of other things, besides basketball. He helps us with sponsorships and in the community. Actually, a lot. He’s been a great resource. He’s a multi-faceted individual, with a lot of value. … It’s well chronicled that, in the draft, he likes certain guys and the rest of us don’t agree. We vote on these things. He’s been outvoted, just so you know.

    http://blog.sfgate.com/warriors/2014/05/06/warriors-owner-joe-lacob-says-firing-mark-jackson-wasnt-willy-nilly/

    • “I am the GM.”

      No one in this organization has ever had any real power, but Joe Lacob. And the interest in Steve Kerr indicates that he would love to keep it that way.

      • Kerr would be a disaster, for all the reasons I listed above and then some.

        At least Lacob is looking at veteran coaches now. Maybe he’s finally learned something. Look at all the embarrassing things that have been made public—the coach firings, the open dissent among the players, etc. And much as he shifts responsibility to his “group,” he is the direct cause and the name mentioned most in the media.

        Whoever gets the job had better take a crash course in PR and corporate mentality. He will need to be able to negotiate some treacherous grounds. And actually, I wish Steve Kerr would come aboard as camp counselor or something. I’m serious. He really could be effective here.

        D’Antoni has been stereotyped broadly as someone who does not care about defense, and it just isn’t true. I was watching a Knicks game (against us?) some time ago, and the announcer said just that, that it wasn’t true. I’m not sure it wasn’t Kerr.

        I am not an ogre—JL.
        I am not a crook—RMN.

        (Or Lacob = King Richard II?)

        • the different characters in the expanding cast of candidates have widely varying histories as far as their skills in avoiding collisions or getting crushed by the cogs and flywheels of the organizational clock. kerr’s reputation of course comes solely from his corporate skills and diffuse know-how from playing and broadcasting, no coaching background. he knows the lacobites far better than the others. [a good reason he'd prefer to work for the big jackson]. d’antoni has learned the politics in more diverse settings than van gundy, but that also means he’s failed in more places. any of the veteran candidates will be engaged in their own due diligence gathering intelligence on the lacobites.

  51. “Kirk Lacob: SportVU data helped Warriors figure out specific issue on defense last season that coaches couldn’t pick up on tape.”

    Last season, Malone would have at least listened politely, or maybe seen the value, if it was there. Imagine how Jackson would have received Kirk when he appeared with his tapes and printouts.

  52. via Diamond Leung, Mark Jackson did a 5 week religious video series from his Warriors office, wearing Warriors colors.

    https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=1LYw0XuWBZI

    Why was this not reported by the Bay Area media until now? Not a story? Why is it being reported now? Who alerted Leung to this link?

    • simplest explanation (Wm. of Ockham), the story got spiked. on the topic of how the media has treated the religion angle, the J.Taylor on warriorsworld who recently put out a piece on the preacher vs. the devil followed up with declarations on facebook, that he had the story in early May from his sources but considered not publishing it, deciding after the termination to do so. he denies that his sources were lacob, myers, or from their p.r. machine.

      youtube reminds me of a huge hoard of loot, like the archives/warehouse of a national museum in one of the long time major powers, lots of stuff hidden because it was looted or has dubious provenance. jackson was once asked why he wouldn’t learn the trade as an assistant coach, and he replied he couldn’t ask his wife to move out of their home because he was taking a pay cut from his broadcasting salary. supposedly there are youtube videos of his wife in full ‘real housewives of van nuys’ mode, showing off her clothes and bling.

      • Simpler than that the reporters didn’t find it newsworthy?

        • warriorsablaze

          Possibly… could be that they really never saw it. As Moto said, it’s easy for things to get buried on youtube, with MJ’s videos probably targeted to his congregation only. I mean, had any of us seen it before now? Why would a reporter necessarily have seen it? It’s likely it got pulled up from bottom of the youtube ocean due to the current attention being focused on MJ.

  53. Well, a D’Antoni upgrade. Word now is that Warriors are planning to contact both Thibodeaux and D’Antoni.

    • there’s been about a dozen names thrown into the hat now, but lacob probably has his own short list of two or three he’d be serious about. in his last coach quest, there was one he wanted above the rest, but the candidate declined, budenholzer. if he’s seriously interested in hoiberg, he probably won’t even get the coach for an interview. lacobite p.r. would like everyone to believe how attractive the vacancy is, but the best candidates know there will always be more offers coming in the future if they’re patient.

      hornacek has the longest tenure of any coach in the pacific division, and if popovich is excluded from the math, the average tenure at present is less than 24 months.

      • Actually contacting him is the upgrade. Before he was just a name in the hat.

        • In fact you have to wonder. Did seeing Bazemore go down to LA and perform well under D’Antoni catch the FO’s attention? They have a solid veteran core. Developing players, especially on a tight budget, has to be a top priority.

  54. (Wow, I can’t settle down and get to work today.)

    Strong book recommendation: The Miracle of St. Anthony: A Season with Coach Bob Hurley and Basketball’s Most Improbable Dynasty, Adrian Wojnarowski

    This is a must read for anyone who’s coached basketball or sat on the sidelines watching their sons play, as I did for many years. Hurley had a phenomenal record—state championships, national rankings—and you see how he did it. His rundown gym was a mecca for college recruiters from top schools, and Hurley had great success in placing players, all levels of college play. There’s a lot here—prep basketball today, the corrupting influences of AA, the mechanics of recruiting, what inner city kids’ lives are like, where they live, what they go through to play and get their lives together.

    Mostly, it is about basketball, which is why I read it, after all the fluff and distractions of the past season.

    And you get a lot of basketball here as AW looks at practices, strategies, and player and team development, along with descriptions of many games, where AW is quite good, making them come alive with insight. I could carry his analysis over to NBA play. Hurly looks to be a complete package, from mechanics to a flexible strategy for opposing teams and everything in between. This is what a coach should be like.

    Except he’s not just about basketball. Basketball was a way for him to prepare kids for life and give them a chance through the game. He had excellent discretion in placing them in schools where they might most develop and get a degree they’ll need later in life. His efforts and the team’s success also helped keep a struggling school alive for decades.

    Not many pros came out of the school however, and almost none noteworthy, other than his son. He probably didn’t get that much talent and he certainly didn’t get the size. He developed what he had and got them to play together. His defenses were a terror on top teams.

    And again, we get an introduction to Darren Erman, who looks like the real deal to me.

    He is also a tough Jersey City guy, son of a cop. He tolerates no slackness or disrespect, and will stand up when he has to. He once took on Rollie Massimino, the pompous and arrogant Villanova coach, for insulting one of his players:

    “I will kick your ass right out the front door,” Hurley barked, and by then, Danny Hurley had felt so uncomfortable in the living room with the tension between his father and Massimino, he retreated to the staircase and watched from there. Eventually, he called up to his older brother. “Hey, Bobby, come down here. I think Dad’s gonna fight Rollie.” That never happened, but Hurley did chase Massimino, down the stairs, out the door and onto Ferncliff Road. Hurley encouraged the assistants to let Rollie loose, but wisely, they stuffed him into the car and sped away. And if they peeked back in the rearview mirror, they could still see Bob Hurley standing in the middle of the street, shaking his fist in the air.

    • On my list thanks.

    • the vegas team last summer was a pretty good indicator that erman was the best assistant other than malone on the preacher’s staff. whether it was the lacobites or the preacher’s Rosencrantz and Guildenstern who engineered his downfall, they succeeded in sidetracking his career.

  55. GooseLosGatos

    Interesting comments coming from Stephen A. Smith on Bogut who just called him a ‘Tin Man’. Bogut responded to Smith via Tweets.

    Why do I get the feeling M. Jackson is a Smith source and Smith is putting this out for that very reason.

    I don’t always drink the Bogut ‘Koolaid’ but psyched he fired back. Lot more undertones to this conversation though never a ‘comfortable’ subject to discuss.

    • I hadn’t considered Jackson’s camp as the source, but that’s an intriguing thought.

    • Hmm Goose why would you think that? What do Stephen A and Mark Jackson have in common?

      • Seriously, this again? Stephen A.’s source was 1) an insider, and 2) someone with an axe to grind with Bogut. If you think Jackson is an unlikely candidate, give us a better one.

        • You have often written about Bogut’s fragility the past two years or so. I wouldn’t want you on a jury! Need more facts.

          Seriously and obviously, we don’t know who the source really is, that is my whole point. I think it is wrong to jump to superficial conclusions which are not substantiated.

          An anonymous source is well…anonymous.

          Here are some obvious ‘other’ candidates:

          1) Former Bucks coach Scott Skiles who had previously had issues with Andrew and his ‘injuries’. Also, include his assistant coaches.

          2) Any one of his Bucks or Warrior team mates who have watched him sit out a number of games. Including the key series versus Clips as well as the 60 or so games he sat out last year.
          3) Assistants Pete Myers, or Lindsey Hunter. Doesn’t mean Mark Jackson knew about it.
          4) Portland Trailblazers – Lamarcus Aldridge, Wes Matthews, Mo Williams etc..
          5) Los Angeles Clippers – Chris Paul, Blake Griffin, De Andre Jordan, Matt Barnes etc.
          6) Any NBA player/coach/executive repeating rumors they have heard from other players.
          7) Any NBA television analyst repeating rumors in discussion with players or their own observations. Especially coaches who generally despise players who ‘dog’ it.
          8) Someone else? Scott Bayless? Stephen A himself?

          Jumping on Mark Jackson without any evidence is hitting someone while they are down, a.k.a piling on. And a heavy charge to make for no reason. As bad as the ACTUAL anonymous source charge of Bogut being a ‘tin man with no heart’. AB has the right to defend himself against the person (if any) who made the comment to Stephen A in the first place.

          We get it, you don’t like Mark Jackson. That’s cool. Coaching is Just back your charges up with facts.

          • Doesn’t the timing of this make it more likely that a Jackson partisan is involved? Since when is it a crime to speculate about this on a blog?

            More to the point, since when is it a racial crime? Several of the people you mentioned are black. Should we tar you with the same brush you used on Goose?

          • cosmicballoon

            Stephen A. is well connected in the NBA, so his source could be any anyone…and Bogut sure hasn’t won over many as far as I can tell. Why would Jackson be taking pot shots at former players. He never gives specifics about anybody. Why would he start now?

      • WheresMyChippy

        Hmm, let’s see:

        They’re both christians? They’re both egotistical blowhards? They both think they know more about basketball than they actually do? They both have worked for ESPN? They both have goatees? They both think Jackson shouldn’t have been fired?

        Am I missing one?

      • s.a.s. and jackson have an association going back to when the preacher was a member of the sports media. jackson has benefitted from a legion of sympathizers and former colleagues in the sports media and blogging mini-verse, including paler faced locals like jenkins and ostler. smith has called bogut ‘bogus’ for some time, from well before the rift between jackson and the lacobites became a media event.

      • footnote to my comment that s.a.smith’s connection to jackson goes back a bit — smith is a native of Queens, and grew up idolizing guards from Queens by his own account naming Jackson, Lloyd Daniels, Kenny Smith, and Kenny Anderson.

        • Then it is done! Mark Jackson is Stephen A.’s source! I also heard that both MJ and Stephen A both have uncles who are plumbers.

          “me thinks thou dost protest too much”.

          Next in the news: Mark Jackson also responsible for Knicks downfall because he grew up in Queens! And Chris Mullin’s bad decision making, you guess it…the fault of MJax.

      • GooseLosGatos

        Is Steve A. racist? I’ll be blunt – I wonder. I know he protects certain athletes who give him information and access but in fairness to him so do many NBA ‘journalists’ (I use that word loosely) including Rick Bucher who’s notorious for it.
        He’s protected Carmelo & Iverson for years and I’m positive that if Carmelo were white Steven A. would have tarred and feathered him 100 times over by now. He’s also been highly critical of European players in general.
        It may also be that black athletes are more comfortable with Smith than a white reporter (if I were black I might feel the same way frankly).
        I do know that it is rumored that Bogut thought Mark Jackson was ‘full of carp’ most of the time and likely made that clear in his exit interview. I also know that I can’t think of anybody else who would have that big an axe to grind with Bogut. Why call Bogut out – that’s pretty darn random if you ask me. Mark Jackson is the only logical candidate and Jackson has been making a lot of ‘read between the lines’ statements full of vinegar over the past few days.
        Also, my gut feeling is that if Bogut were black he wouldn’t have called him out – if you’ve watched Stephen A. over the years there’s been a strong pattern here.
        Racism sucks and sadly is a fact of life. I wasn’t in Steven A.’s shoes growing up. However I do feel he has a racial ‘bent’ to his journalism if you can call it that.

        • According to basketball-reference.com, Andrew Bogut has missed 231 games in his career. One must also add at least the 7 playoff games he missed this year (I believe he missed other playoff games, I am too lazy to go and research this aspect).

          Here is the year by year rundown:
          06-07 16 games
          07-08 4 games
          08-09 46 games
          09-10 13 games
          10-11 17 games
          11-12 70 games
          12-13 50 games
          13-14 15 games

          Jackson if he even had the thought was sharing an idea likely held by others already. Not original or a secret.

    • It’s a miracle of modern medicine that Bogut can run and jump at all.

      Hey, SAS, go get pounded to scrap, break a rib, then let Blake Griffin beat on your chest. Risk a debilitating lifetime injury! Or are you a tin man?

      Right.

      Bogut shouldn’t have to defend himself against jerks. This is one of those situations where a real coach would step in and tell SAS what’s what.

    • The Bogus tag has been around for some time:

      http://www.rotowire.com/basketball/showArticle.htm?id=17058

      Doesn’t Nelson still call him Bogus? I think I heard that in his last interview. He has before.

      Meanwhile, Bogut has made the Urban Dictionary (three variants):

      http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Bogut

    • Speculation is that Bogut suffered his cracked rib from a Faried elbow, last game he played against Denver. Could it have been retaliation for this and other plays?

  56. Quotation from AW’s book/Miracle at St. Anthony’s

    “We were in Vegas at the AAU event last summer, recruiting some kids on a South Dakota team. They come in, all white kids, beautiful uniforms, four coaches, parents in tow, running all kinds of offenses and defenses. So, I told my assistants, ‘Now, watch this. See this team here? Eight black kids from Jersey City. Shitty uniforms, no parents, not even a coach. Just a chaperone somewhere there.’

    “So, I tell my assistants, ‘Watch these Jersey City kids kick the shit out of that team.’

    “They’re like, ‘Why? What’s special about them?’

    “I told them, ‘They will not say a word to the refs. They will not say a word to the other kids. They’ll get on each other’s backs for not taking the charge, not closing out, not stopping penetration.’

    “So the game starts, and they were huddling at the free-throw line, one or two kids were yelling about not closing on penetration. They’re coaching themselves.

    “My assistants finally said to me, ‘Holy shit, these kids play like they’re possessed, like they’re freaking animals. Who are they?’

    “I said, ‘Well, they’re Bob Hurley’s kids.’ ”

    —Pat Kennedy, former Florida State and DePaul coach, currently at Towson University

  57. GooseLosGatos

    Feltbot,
    there is a clear distinction between being ‘injury prone’ and lacking toughness and heart. I’ve never felt Bogut lacked either or least not enough to warrant being labeled as ‘soft’ basically. Cousins pretty much hid under a table in my observations of their games.

    That being said, how would you characterize Bogut’s ‘toughness’? Curious as to your POV?

  58. Very interesting podcast debate between Bill Simmons and Zach Lowe on the BS Report. Part 2 of 3 covers the Warriors future prospects in the Western Conference with Lowe taking the positive view and Simmons the negative view against the Dubs. Good listen covering many of the points discussed on this blog.

    http://sports.espn.go.com/espnradio/podcast/archive?id=2864045

    • simmons is a comedy writer who has successfully commercialized his loud, opinionated fan persona, in part by folding sports together with pop culture. senior advisor west acc. to simmons is a champion second guesser, the unhappiest man in sports, and most coaches would want to conduct their stuff away from his stink eye.

  59. Everything I’ve been saying about Joe Lacob now becoming mainstream opinion:

    http://www.sfgate.com/warriors/article/Warriors-front-office-may-be-factor-for-coach-5467126.php

    • He might want college coaches, because “he wants the credit and could probably take it if the coach wasn’t someone who everybody knew,” the source said.

    • Lacob: “We know best, we hope. We know all of the details. We’re the guys on the inside. We know what we feel we need to do. We will listen to a lot of people, form an opinion and then try to do what we think is the right thing.”

      It’s amazing what a closed circle Lacob works in. Who are the “we” who know best? Meyers? Kirk? He made it clear that West is merely listened to but that he has no influence and often is ignored, that he is most useful for promotion. It is also clear who has the final say, regardless of what is said.

    • Show me a billionaire who doesn’t think he’s boss.

      • I think it’s disingenuous to compare Lacob’s role in the organization, with say, Jerry Buss or any other for that matter. Not even with Mark Cuban, particularly when he first took over the Mavs.

        Most owners are smart enough, and in control of themselves enough, to entrust the basketball decisions to basketball professionals.

        • I think it’s disingenuous to pretend that you know the inner workings of the Warriors organization. If what you suppose were true – if Lacob personally makes all decisions – why would he hire Rick Weltz and The Logo? Why not replace the PR staff? Why keep Riley on board? Why not fill every position in the organization with neophytes that Lacob can push around? Hell, if nothing else it would have been $millions cheaper that way.

          Lacob’s only exceptions to experienced bball guys were Myers, Jackson and Kirk. Myers wasn’t experienced as a GM, but he’s hardly a basketball newb. The jury is still out on his bball smarts, I guess, but he did turn out to be a nifty dealmaker. Of course Jackson was a newb, but the Ws needed someone willing to whore himself out for the first season’s tank job. It’s unlikely a real coach would have done that. Kirk is one of the team’s largest investors (and Lacob’s son, AND in need of a job), and after a rocky start he has actually done well with the Santa Cruz Warriors. 3 newbs, yes, but all people who have delivered what the Ws needed.

          Lacob has repeatedly emphasized that the Ws are a consensus-driven organization. He explicitly stated that Jackson’s non-participation in the management group-think was the main reason for dropping Jackson. You don’t seem to believe any of that, I guess because it contradicts your personal theories about Lacob’s ego, etc.

          In lieu of compelling evidence to the contrary, I always assume people are telling the truth. Try it that way. It’s usually right.

          Besides, I can’t imagine how you think Lacob is more involved in bball decisions than Mark Cuban. Lacob is assembling a $billion arena package. That has to be where most of his time and attention goes. If not, he’s got his business priorities all wrong. I doubt that very much.

          • Huh? Lacob’s extensive interference in basketball matters is a matter of public record.

            http://feltbot.com/2012/05/29/the-truth-about-bob-myers-warriors-gm/

            Since I wrote that piece, we’ve learned the following about Joe Lacob’s role:

            He appointed his son the GM of the Santa Cruz affiliate, and made him assistant GM of the Warriors.

            He requires his basketball men, in meetings, to listen to Kirk’s opinions. (This I actually know from 2 inside sources. But it was confirmed by the reported blowout between Kirk and MJ.)

            He was the guy who interviewed Harrison Barnes pre-draft. And according to him, he made the decision to draft Barnes on the basis of that interview. Overruling Jerry West to do so.

            He required Mark Jackson to start Barnes, and give him extensive minutes. Unless of course, you think Mark Jackson is the kind of coach who willingly gives egregiously bad rookies big minutes over much better and established veterans.

            It is he, not Bob Myers, who takes credit for every major move the Warriors make, in interviews with TK.

            Since the Jackson firing, several NBA journalists have published pieces calling Lacob “meddlesome”, a guy who second-guesses every coaching decision, and a nightmare to work for who might scare off coaching candidates. Not strictly “evidence”… but it is reasonable to assume a basis for these articles, even if you were ignorant of everything chronicled above.

            In my lifetime of watching the NBA, I have not seen one other owner so involve himself in basketball operations. Not one. And it’s not even close.

            By contrast, Mark Cuban let Don Nelson make every single personnel and basketball decision for several years, until that fateful decision not to re-sign Steve Nash. Since then, he’s involved himself in personnel decisions, but knew enough to hire the most experienced and knowledgeable coaches in the basketball business. And if you think he tells Rick Carlisle what to do, the way Joe and Kirk told Mark Jackson, well…

          • An hour after writing this, I was watching local news and witnessed a replay of Joe Lacob talking about his decision to hire Mark Jackson. These are his words:

            “I had a list of 10 characteristics on my bulletin board of everything we wanted in a coach. And Mark Jackson had all of them.”

            Lacob was the only member of the organization who interviewed Jackson.

          • Sorry, Felt, but referencing your own words doesn’t count as evidence.

            I don’t doubt that Lacob is the boss, and early on he called all the shots. Then he built an organization.

            Remember the recent TK interview? “(pointing to Myers) This is his fire and his hire.” And I do think it is. Myers couldn’t handle that decision on Day 1, but he can now. And when he selects a coach, he’ll have to explain his choice and get Lacob’s buy-in. It’s simply how $multi-billion companies work, and it’s precisely how Jerry Buss signed off on every coach who ever worked for him. I don’t get why it seems so different to you when Lacob does it.

            In my fevered imagination, Lacob pictures himself as Jean Luc Picard. Get everyone’s opinion, then make the decision and run with it, right or wrong. That’s why the boss gets the big bux, to put himself out there like that.

            It’s also a kind of personal safeguard against mistakes – if you make the wrong decision for all the right reasons, you can’t be faulted. One thing you consistently overlook, Felt, is that Joe is not the owner. He reports to the owners committee. You think Peter Guber couldn’t replace Lacob overnight?

            Lacob has bosses too. That gives him a lot less latitude than someone like Cuban or Sterling. Unlike them, Lacob has to justify the choices he makes, his management style, every word spoken to the press by anyone in his organization, and everything else that goes on in the company. They say shit flows downhill. In a corporation it flows uphill too.

            One final point, and you shouldn’t gloss over this as you have. Lacob is a business manager. NBA team operations barely break even. That’s not where the money is.

            Right now Lacob is working on a $multi-billion arena project. That has to be where he’s spending the majority of his time and energy. If he didn’t he’d be nuts. He’s not nuts.

  60. Here are some questions to stir the pot on a Saturday morning:

    1. If Steve Kerr were the head coach the last two seasons with the same record, would he have been fired?

    We wouldn’t have had locker room flares, but for a variety of reasons I suspect the record would have been lower, though they still would have done well with the roster. Which leads to the second question:

    2. If Steve Kerr were the head coach with a lesser record, would he have been fired?

    And I bet no. For reasons worth some thought. Which leads to the question of relevance:

    3. If Kerr had been retained, whatever his record, would the team have moved forward next season?

    I.e., what might he do for the team now if they get him? He is the top choice.

    Note Kerr was high on Earl Clark, one of his last decisions with the Suns:

    http://www.azcentral.com/sports/suns/articles/2012/06/28/20120628steve-kerr-says-phoenix-suns-thought-they-had-stephen-curry.html

    • My point here, if not obvious, is that Kerr should be a good company man. As far as the evidence allows, it’s the main reason they are considering him. So I’m wondering, for this reason, if they will stick with him (or would have stuck with him had he been hired a few years ago) with an equal or lesser record, the latter a distinct possibility.

  61. GoososGatos

    M. Jackson is a players coach in a guaranteed contract league – a good quality to have.

    My main issue with Mark is that you can only manufacture so many ‘us against the world’ controversies to motivate your team. Players eventually burn out on that approach.

    • Lest we forget, there were lots of issues with Mark Jackson.

      – Despite their offensive firepower, the Ws were the 12th ranked offense in the league. Next-to-last among playoff teams.
      – Draymond Green 25 min./game.
      – Steve Blake < 5 min./game.
      – Speights @ 4, not 5, despite playing better than JON.
      – Limited PnRs.
      – Heavy reliance on iso's.
      – No answer for double-teams (Lee post-ups, Curry traps).
      – Zero offensive sets for the 2nd unit.
      – The worst 2nd team in the NBA.
      – Bazemore, round peg/square hole.
      – Douglas, round peg/square hole.
      – Nedovic, Kuzmic non-development.
      – Sometimes bizarre defensive assignments (Barnes on quick 2 guards?).
      – Playing Ezeli with a torn ACL (and massive knee brace).

      And that's just a partial list of the game-time failures alone.

      Off the court, Jackson:
      – Antagonized reporters with bullshit and sometimes prickly answers. He even accused the press of making up controversies. Yeah, that's good PR, uh huh.
      – Antagonized a player with a stupid joke about his injury, then refused to correct himself or apologize.
      – Failed to participate in offseason management activities. If you have any doubt about that, read Myers' press releases about how drafts and trades were decided, and try to find any mention of Jackson.
      – Repeatedly threw his players under the bus after losses (in the first season. He cut back on that in Year 2 and 3.)
      – The hack-a-Dwight game. An all-time NBA low-light.
      – Refused to EVER accept responsibility for losses, even when his game plan was clearly the problem.
      – Mismanaged the coaching staff. Fired an assistant coach IN FRONT OF OTHER COACHES AND PLAYERS. Publicly humiliating an employee is not strictly illegal, but it is never, ever done by a professional manager. In a recent interview Jackson himself said he should have stepped in to solve the conflict months earlier. That's right. People have friction sometimes. Competent managers solve it. The failure was Jackson's.
      – Do we even need to mention the extortionist girlfriend?

      We've blown a lot of column space discussing whether Jackson's religious emphasis or race/cultural heritage were factors. Jackson himself said they were not, so speculating about those issues now is us calling Jackson a liar. I take Jackson at his word, on those topics and on most everything else (except the tanking). Whenever he has spoken meaningfully (i.e., not bloviating), he has (almost) always been truthful. So there's no reason to question his honesty now.

      The point here is that there were TONS of reasons for Lacob & Co. to believe they could have a better coach. Basketball reasons, organizational reasons. PR and press relations. Locker room harmony. Any single one of those problems can get a coach fired. Jackson had them all.

      So if you all want to speculate on incipient, inherent racism/religious prejudice/enormous ego conflicts, well fine, have at it. But you're probably wrong, and you're insulting both Warriors management and Mark Jackson himself.

      In the end, everybody walks away better off anyway. In Jackson's own words, the Warriors gave him an opportunity that no one else did, in all the years he openly lobbied for a coaching job. With that opportunity, Jackson said he "proved" he could coach. He walks away a coach, no longer just a wannabe. That's a win.

      For Lacob's part, he got a coach willing to tank (and pretend otherwise), and one who radically improved the team's record even while handicapping the team with Barnes. Looking back, Lacob won from this deal too. Moving forward, he can have better coaching. All good things.

      For us fans it's been an upward curve for 3 years, with a better coach on deck now. We win too. So what's the problem?

      • cosmicballoon

        Hat, thanks for collecting all of this into one post.
        +1

        • Thanks, CB. To be honest, I write all this crap mostly for myself, as a way to sort of think it through out loud. But it’s nice to know somebody else reads it.

  62. http://mescherysmusings.blogspot.com/

    Some thoughts regarding coaching and the Warriors players.

  63. Kerr and his agent name their terms to the Knicks:

    http://www.cbssports.com/nba/eye-on-basketball/24557386/report-steve-kerr-seeking-five-year-30-million-deal-from-knicks

    He’s not being passive here. Presumably he’s still negotiating with them, presumably he’s still considering the Warriors, presumably he’s asking something similar from GSW?

    Word now is he will announce Monday.

    • Kerr is looking for stability, understandably. If he feels he can ask for this, you have to wonder what other coaches with credibility and who do have experience might ask of GSW.

    • Hollins, from CBS:

      “It’s an interesting candidate considering Hollins was reportedly not retained by the Grizzlies after his contract expired for precisely the same reason Jackson was let go — not getting along with ownership.

      “He would provide the Warriors a motivational leader who emphasizes defense and can relate to the players, a carryover from Jackson, but the offensive issues the Warriors strugged with likely wouldn’t be solved through Hollins’ inside-out approach. The Grizzlies’ offense was low in efficiency nearly every year under Hollins, but their defense was often elite.”

      http://www.cbssports.com/nba/eye-on-basketball/24557174/report-lionel-hollins-to-interview-for-warriors-job-next-week

      • Just because he’s being offered an interview doesn’t mean he’s a candidate. He’s not.

        • Just curious. Why are you so certain? And why is he being interviewed?

          I’m sure the FO will make a show of looking at a lot of candidates, many of them they aren’t interested in, just to make it look like they are trying hard. But that leaves us guessing as to who they do take seriously, aside from Kerr.

          • Window dressing.

            He was fired for a lot of the same reasons Jackson was. Too old school, couldn’t connect with new school ownership and management, and refused to play the new bench they provided him.

            He’s a horrible fit for the Warriors, and they know it.

          • D’Antoni has to be window dressing as well. Which leaves us wondering who they will take seriously and what we’ll end up with.

        • Agreed, Hollins is just due diligence and smoke screen.

          Sounds to me like SVG is the leading candidate now.

      • whatever hoops hollins might have learned from Ramsey, it isn’t apparent in his offense. his Mem teams consistently came up with some of the ugliest ball in the association. would be very surprised myself, if lacob hires anyone older than he is.

  64. Hurley a very tough coach on his players. Never praises them and flies off the handle when they fail to execute properly. No fun for high school kids in his system. Great defensive mind but his offensive sets from the 50’s. Never heard of the spread four.

  65. Don’t think that Warriors authorized Erman to tape conversations between coaches and players.,If the Warriors did so and then fired Erman after authorizing him to tape the Warriors are one wacky organization. Wouldn’t mind seeing the Warriors hiring a young assistant NBA coach like Erman or Scalebrine, although sure neither would now be hired.

  66. Some interesting (and scary) Tom Meschery rememorances from the old Cow Palace Warriors on ALs blog in response to a Moto post:

    “My first memory of attending a Warriors’ game at the Cow Palace. Meschery became enraged at the refs, grabbed a folding chair and charged after the ref through the stands screaming that he was going to kill him. Ref ran right out of the building. Cops finally grabbed Meschery. He was a wild man.”

    “One of the first Warrior games I attended as a youth, we had great seats literally on the court at the Cow Palace, directly behind one of the baskets. We were so close that the ball came to me a couple of times and I was amazed at how big these players were up close and in person. Tom Meschery had been picked to play for the new expansion team, Seattle, after a long career as a Warrior. There was some rough play underneath the basket, when Meschery threw some punches at Jerry Lucas. He put up his fists and cleared away from traffic, expecting to defend himself against a retaliatory attack. His eyes were crazed. I was afraid for my own safety, because there was nowhere to escape these big guys if the fight spilled into the crowd. I mean these guys were BIG, and Meschery was volatile. Luckily, the refs gained control and cooler heads prevailed. That was my introduction to the “non-contact sport of basketball”. Pretty rough under the basket.”

  67. Lacob puts us at ease as to how important it is to have an experienced coach:

    ‘‘We will look at all the basic aspects such as basketball experience, and I don’t mean coaching necessarily. . . . In this case it might be more coaching experience, it might not. We’re kind of open to that.”

    And he adds an important stipulation:

    ‘But it has to be someone with good pedigree, someone who’s a leader, someone who can deal with the pressure of a situation.”

    http://www.bostonglobe.com/sports/2014/05/08/nba-notes-warriors-have-ideas-new-coach/K2ZqsI2GwdtzLZ9RVY613K/story.html

    I am intrigued, as always, with the “we.” I’m sure Jerry West, after all his years in the NBA, with so many different NBA players, slammed his fist on the table and shouted, dammit guys, we gotta get someone with pedigree this time, and the rest discussed this and could only agree.

    Lacob has set the agenda. He’s the suited Kobe Bryant of front offices.

    “Pedigree,” of course, is a loaded word, but it need not involve race. After all, Lacob was most impressed with Harrison Barnes’ character. Reread his interview with TK about his reasons for selecting him. The word “character” has been floated around a lot elsewhere, though it seems to have limited—and suspect—definition. As far as I can tell, it means the ability to be polite, quietly get along, and follow orders. And we’ve seen the word, in its more common usage, violated liberally in the upper order.

    What Lacob did not see in Barnes is a defect in character in another sense, his ability to assert himself, be aggressive, and fight for his team. There are honest ways to do this. This type of character, however, Lacob cannot seem to handle. He may not know how to recognize it either.

    Reread MT II’s piece:

    http://blogs.mercurynews.com/thompson/2014/05/08/warriors-mark-jackson-and-the-question-of-race/

    He describes a world of management and connections that Kerr easily fit into, that is overwhelmingly white, though race might not have been a factor at all in Jackson’s firing or Kerr’s selection.

    But look at this world in another perspective. It is the upper echelons who are handicapped, at least when it comes time to assemble a team and organization. They are completely divorced from the NBA and the world of basketball, and they do not have the means or vision to understand it. They do not know the codes, practices, and maneuvers, the forming of other type of personality necessary to succeed both as an individual player on the court and as a team member, which takes years to acquire, starting in the players’ early years. The same goes for coaches, who might have played themselves, but who also have spent years on the front lines negotiating the same issues. It’s an entirely different experience, with its own set of concepts and conflicts, and it’s not the kind of experience you get sitting around a conference table and staring at a computer screen.

    The FO is only aware of its own sense of manners and the rarefied air of statistics, this remote itself and highly suspect. Put simply, their world doesn’t prepare them to make good decisions most related to the game.

    As far as handling “the pressure of a situation,”—see Lacob’s quote—I don’t disagree with Jackson’s firing, but he did an extraordinary job handling pressure in the playoffs. He was also a determined leader—listen to his players. That he was fractious off the court I do not doubt, but there’s another side here. We see no evidence Lacob & son can handle the pressure well at all, certainly not the pressure of a determined and headstrong coach, and likely not the other pressures involved in a competitive sport.

    The goal here, after all, is to assemble a good basketball team. The world of the NBA is about basketball, not corporate comity.

    I thought.

    • Another example. Lacob on West, in interview linked @57:

      “Now, he does react. He does get upset over certain things. He’s emotional. . . .”

      Obviously Lacob has trouble handling strong emotions. I can’t imagine good players or coaches not having strong emotions, not given what it takes to be competitive in the NBA.

    • By “pedigree” I think Lacob simply means what Jerry West refers to as the coaching tree. Kerr has an impressive on its face Phil Jackson/Greg Popovich pedigree. Impressive to some, that is. I would automatically exclude anyone from my search who had been influenced by Jackson. And unlike Lacob, I don’t view playing for someone the equivalent of working with them. Particularly when you’re not a point guard, nor even a starter.

      SVG’s pedigree is Pat Riley and the Heat. Presumably favorable in Lacob’s eyes.

      • A more favorable interpretation—who else on the list has good pedigree?

        • since you read the McCallum book about d’Antoni, you know about d’A’s tremendous pedigree, but for all we know lacob considers it meaningless because it’s all Italiano to him. he’s just as likely to summon up another of his buzz words, ‘re-tread’. lacob and his former coach jackson share a confidence man persona [lacob made his $$ selling confidence in his acquisitions], in a neutral sense of the term. their rhetoric serves to deflect and obscure as much as it reveals, so it’s best to go by their actions. and where they choose not to act, of course.

          successful hoops is a collaboration, but coaches depend more on it than the players with their dependency on both the execs and the players. v.gundy like p.riley, the older jackson, nelson, karl, is one of the handful who have succeeded with different teams. rivers has evolved into one, but his was a long and winding course, and now he’s assumed executive powers.

          • I’m assuming they won’t take D’Antoni seriously. Kerr’s pedigree by FB’s take is not overly impressive (more impressive than MJ’s?), and that they would take him immediately without review of other candidates suggests heavily they have other senses of the word in mind.

      • Still my major concerns are relevant. He has to have someone he’s comfortable with, and his range here looks to be limited. And the word “character” has come up too many times, in questionable ways.

    • Supporting my point about “character,” Lacob on HB:

      “More than anything, what I really loved, he’s an unbelievable high-character kid. Our character, our maturity, our culture, obviously that matters a lot here.”

      from his interview with TK

      http://blogs.mercurynews.com/kawakami/2012/06/28/joe-lacob-on-barnes-ezeli-piers-3032-and-mark-jacksons-troubles/

  68. It just struck me that one reason for Jackson’s firing has been under-reported. It allows Lacob to get out from under the blame of drafting Barnes.

    • How so?

    • warriorsablaze

      Kind of a stretch…I don’t see your angle.

      The only way he gets out from under the blame is if Barnes suddenly becomes good next season under a new coach. In which case, he gets to claim credit for the pick and MJax gets blame for lack of development during his tenure.

      • jackson isn’t taking the fall for the flat developmental curve on barnes’ chart. on the grantland podcasts there’s an extended conversation between bucher and simmons, of which about 30 min. is a post mortem of the woeyr disintegration. they consider the trade for iguodala the first domino to fall, by increasing barnes’ minutes with the bench gang. last season of course the preacher enjoyed the relative luxury of two veteran bench scorers. one of the new additions was speights for his scoring and boards, but by nearly all accounts he was way out of shape. well into Jan 2014 he was maintaining his gunner ways (among team leaders in attempts per minutes) with miserable shooting pct. douglas was signed with some hope he could shoot 3’s, but he was injured most of the opening months when the preacher was attempting to re-formulate how to play the bench.

        the expectations from the suits re. barnes was pretty obvious — the investment had to be given playing time to develop, and they had the handful of playoff games vs. Den and SA as supporting evidence for their confidence. this would only be coaxing the preacher to do what he’d intend anyway ; barnes made him look good in those playoff games. barnes gets miscast as the designated bench scorer, but he also choked as a starter when iguodala was injured. however the lacobites perceived the preacher shutting them out or defying them, how he played barnes wasn’t part of that brief.

        • Bball being a team game, it might seem fair to blame some of Barnes’ struggles this year on his playing more minutes with the 2nd unit. But.

          Barnes played MORE total minutes/game this season than last. He was the featured scorer on the 2nd unit, so he got more shot attempts per game this season, not fewer. With both units, Barnes’ scoring attempts came mostly on iso’s – there was essentially no team play involved, so you have to question whether teammate play could have had much effect on his scoring efficiency in any case.

          Barnes started during the weeks Iggy was out with injury. When Iggy was playing, Barnes continued to log more minutes with the first unit than any other non-starter. And last year Barnes was typically the first starter off the floor, the remainder of his time coming with varying combinations of non-starters. In other words, Barnes’ total overall time playing with the first unit this year was almost unchanged from last year. It’s easy enough to verify that with NBAWOWY, but I haven’t taken the time and probably won’t. If anyone else does want to do the homework, I’d be interested. My guess is that the difference is less than 10% from last year.

          That does NOT account for a 30% drop in scoring efficiency. Barnes stank it up this year. Check the numbers:

          http://espn.go.com/nba/player/stats/_/id/6578/harrison-barnes

          Of special note, Barnes’ season total assists rose by 18, and his turnovers dropped by 15. My eyes tell me that there is a direct connection between those numbers – the best thing Barnes could do this year was GET RID OF THE DAMN BALL. Take away his 3-pt. shots and Barnes shot just .419 on 2-pt attempts this season, compared to .464 last year.

          The difference in Barnes’ performance this year was Barnes, not his surrounding teammates. The guy couldn’t sink a shot with a hand in his face. The league knows that about him now. THAT was the difference between this year’s Barnes and last year’s.

          • Oops, just re-read that post. Barnes’ shooting efficiency didn’t drop by .300. His 2-pters dropped by .045, 3-pt. shooting by .012. A significant dropoff, but not 30%.

  69. I wonder if Mark Jackson is praying for Michael Sam.

  70. Always thought Nelson’s system far superior to D’Antonio’s team and had ability to make adjustments while D’Antonio did not.

    Lacob will always be saddled with drafting Barnes.

  71. MT II gives a more sympathetic look at Barnes—I missed this when it came out (we need a better way to find MT now that he isn’t in the list of links). He didn’t have an easy go of it growing up, and one thing is certain. He knew he wasn’t playing well and his confidence flagged:

    “When two bad games grows to four, grows to six, to a month, to two months,” said Barnes, “you start thinking when will this hard work pay off? … There was a point in time where (the Warriors) probably could have gotten the 15th player off each team, and he would’ve given them more production than I was. It’s true.”

    http://www.mercurynews.com/marcus-thompson/ci_25656057/thompson-warriors-barnes-bounces-back

    Most he shows the weaknesses in the roster. Even his good games need to be qualified, and I’m not at all convinced much last season offered promise.

    Lottery picks bust all the time. The team had to allow for this possibility and have alternatives. Yet he was expected to play a heavy role on our off the bench, this expectation largely based on a handful of games in the playoffs last year, these under special and limited circumstances, and there really wasn’t anyone who could fill in for him. (Green of course should have played more minutes, but he didn’t offer the scoring HB supposedly had).

    We can only wonder what the next coach will do, and most here are skeptical he has the needed skills or will develop him.

    Or wonder what Lacob will expect that coach to do.

    He wasn’t helped by the heavy expectations put on him by the team’s PR. Speaking of which, why didn’t we get ads for Lee and Curry? It is intriguing that Bazemore was featured in one.

  72. What about Alvin Gentry? His pedigree is good:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alvin_Gentry

    “Gentry figured out how to blend the two styles of D’Antoni and Porter. Comparing his coaching to D’Antoni, Gentry said ‘We are not seven seconds or less. We’re 12 seconds or under. We don’t take a lot of really quick shots. We don’t play with that breakneck pace. We play with a rhythm.’ Spurs head coach Gregg Popovich remarked ‘One thing about Phoenix is they are better defensively than in the past. They’re much more active, much more committed, they’ve taken responsibility to a much more significant degree than ever before.'”

    This should be a selling point for the GSW FO.

    It’s hard to know what to make of his record as head coach when you consider his rosters and clubs, especially the Clippers.

  73. Interesting that Doc Rivers resorted to a Don Nelson trick to guard Kevin Durant yesterday. Nellie guarded him with Monta Ellis, to take away his dribble. Rivers used Chris Paul.

  74. Stan Van Gundy on why coaches are getting fired today:

    “I think a large part of it is that there’s sort of been a new breed of general manager coming into the league. We had younger guys. We’ve got guys not coming from coaching backgrounds as much. More guys coming from the analytics backgrounds. And they want different things than their head coaches. And I think in large part, I think a lot of them, [you] hire younger GMs without a coaching background.

    “My theory is that not all, but some of those guys are intimidated by experienced coaches that have their way of doing things and they’re more comfortable having younger guys, first-time guys that they feel will listen to them more, that they will have more control over. So, there definitely has been a change. I think it’s more coming from the GM side, but all of these things in the NBA tend to run in cycles, so we’ll just have to see where it goes.”

    http://espn.go.com/blog/truehoop/post/_/id/62392/qa-stan-van-gundy-part-1

    Good interview by ES. What goes for GM’s goes for owners (and our owner is the GM). That SVG knows this is a plus. Presumably he might think of ways to deal with it.

  75. for those who gained anything from reading MThompsonII’s essay on the team, jackson, and race, the piece is cited and expanded fairly eloquently by D.Aldridge, the unofficial official voice of nba.com/Disney-espn. “Split between Jackson, Warriors, a complicated, messy Affair”. he concludes expressing skepticism that lacob will learn anything from the crisis.

    • There is an ELEPHANT in the room that neither Lacob, MT2 nor Aldridge are willing to even mention, let alone discuss.

      Thompson calls it creating “freedom to pray.”

      Aldridge says Evangelical Christians are “misunderstood.”

      Lacob recognizes a third rail when he sees one, and will not ever say a word about it.

      I’ve talked about it though, and will continue to talk about it. Where the real bigotry in the Warriors franchise has resided these last three years. If you don’t understand where I’m coming from, read Doc Rivers on why he bans prayer from his locker rooms, or google what Aldridge slyly minimizes as Jackson’s “less than full embrace” of Jason Collins. Or read Killion on Jackson’s use of the term “the devil” to describe those he didn’t like.

      I know bigotry when I see it, have dealt with it and fought it all my life. I also know BS when I see it. And I’m calling BS.

      Because no one else in the Warriors media has enough guts to do it themselves.

      • We sure look at elephants here! I just read Ann Killion’s piece, and here is the offending comment:

        “I will say this,” Jackson said the day of the news. “We live in a country that allows you to be whoever you want to be. As a Christian man, I serve a God that gives you free will to be who you want to be. As a Christian man, I have beliefs of what’s right and what’s wrong. That being said, I know Jason Collins, I know his family, and am certainly praying for them at this time.”

        I remember the incident about the church member caught for drugs, and believe I linked it long ago. Who did he call devils?

        As evasive as Jackson is, there can’t be any mistaking his gist: gayness goes against his religion.

        NO ONE has defended Jackson’s character. NO ONE has defended his religion either. But does that make him a harmful bigot and his religion a total sham? Someone who should be excluded from coaching for that alone, as Sterling has been excluded from ownership?

        As far his his religious views on gays, I don’t think you’ll find many, if any, established religions decades ago that wouldn’t have said something similar, or not been similarly evasive. I don’t know where things are now, but still suspect he’d be in good company. And I’ll comment here myself quickly: it would be reason enough to question those religions. But every religion has been working out the kinks as long as they’ve been around, and the list of their questionable views is long. Start with the way women were seen. But we don’t reject them out of hand just because of that, or shouldn’t. We do, however, hope they reform.

        Do we have any evidence Jackson has worked bigotry against any individual in or outside the organization? Or that his views are so strong that he would do so? If so, I would be concerned, and find this behavior damning. But I haven’t seen that yet.

        I listened to the tape you linked he made for his church at a Warrior facility. I don’t like it, but while it might mask something questionable, I can’t see anything objectionable. We don’t have any evidence that he has forced his views on players or anyone, or that anyone has been excluded for not going along. If that happened, again I’d find that behavior damning in itself, and if coercion is a serious tenet of his religion, it is sufficient cause to dismiss it. But again, I haven’t looked at his religion closely. Nor, apparently, has anyone else.

        There are reasons why priests and shamans separate themselves from the world. The mix clouds their judgment and puts them in compromising positions. While I can’t speak for Jackson, I feel it’s a decision a man of the cloth should make. But it’s certainly something the FO should have thought of when they hired a preacher. He’s not going to quit being a preacher. Just his title will make people uneasy, even if he keeps quiet. Did the FO ask if he planned to have prayers? Did they consider the implications? If they did, they gave him the green light. If they didn’t, they were awfully shortsighted, in fact stupid.

        There are a lot of reasons to keep religion out of the locker room, or at least contained, the way Rivers does it, and a lot of them have to do with the uneasiness and sensitivities of others, not the religious figure himself, which may not be that solid themselves but still have to be respected.

        Put religion aside. Should we condemn players or coaches or owners, etc. because of their views on gays? I suspect if a survey were conducted, we’d find a lot of similar answers, sans religious justification. And if a campaign were started to weed out wrongheaded views, we’d have a mess. Listen to the Barkley tape below, at the end. He said we shouldn’t start crucifying people because they weren’t cool with Jason Collins. He is right with all he says.

        The point is, I don’t think we’ve seen enough to condemn Jackson, though certainly enough to question him and hope he comes around. But it doesn’t negate MT II or Aldridge’s concerns, and nothing they have said has been invalidated.

        Killion’s remarks are just too easy, in fact are glib. Her accusations are serious, and she should have made a better case. But most of her pieces are glib.

        Barkley won my undying respect for his comments on Collins. Barkley is a good man. Listen to the whole thing:

        • Last thought: Sterling’s behavior is the real context for MT II’s and Aldridge’s pieces. Jackson’s firing just gave them an opening to air some general concerns that apply across the league, not just with Jackson, that seldom get said.

        • It is astonishing to me that you of all people don’t grasp the issues at play here, rgg. Do you really not understand why it is forbidden for managers to impose their religion IN THE WORKPLACE in virtually every major company in this country? Do you really not understand why it might be deeply offensive to Joe Lacob to have Jackson transform his official position into a platform for Christian proselytizing? Why even a Christian owner might be deeply concerned?

          Take a moment to envision Mark Jackson as the Warriors owner, and seeing his franchise being appropriated by a preacher of the Muslim faith, who spreads his prayer rug in the locker room, holds prayer sessions on the court after games, takes his players to his mosque, tweets I Praise Allah! after every victory on his official twitter page, and makes a 5 part series of religious videos from his Warriors office, wearing Warriors gear. Would Mark Jackson keep that coach on? Should he?

          Now take a moment to visualize Marcus Thompson or David Aldridge taking the side of that Imam or Mullah against Mark Jackson, the owner. Is that working for you? Easy to visualize that?

          If you can’t visualize that, and I sure can’t, then there is bigotry at issue.

          Now take a moment to visualize non-Christians in the Warriors locker room, or in the Warriors offices, and how they might feel being excluded from the inner sanctum, or referred to as devils. Abdul-Jabbar, Yao Ming, Casspri. Or atheists. If you can’t visualize this, I refer you to the article where Doc Rivers outlined his reasons for banning prayer from his locker room. Rivers recognized bigotry when he saw it, and didn’t want to be a part of it.

          Something I don’t expect you to get, and no one else is getting (at least in print) is Thompson and Aldridge’s oh so subtle references to Lacob not “getting” Mark Jackson, and the role of Christianity in the African-American experience, or “misunderstanding” Christian Evangelism. They are speaking in code, to a select audience. The code of anti-semitism.

          Rather fashionable at the moment, after the idiocy of Donald Sterling.

          • I’m enjoying this. Where’s the link to Rivers on religion? Will get back.

          • Feltbot,

            Codes? Can you please be specific. Anti Semitism? Can you enlighten? Racial discrimination is abhorrent, and freedom of religion is expected in this country. Yet both racism and religious persecution are all too prevalent in America.

            However, I don’t understand your charges on both Jackson and Thomson. Substance please…

          • There are several versions of the Amick piece. This one is longer and goes into River’s specific beliefs.:

            http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nba/2014/05/03/nba-clippers-warriors-doc-rivers-mark-jackson-monty-williams-religion/8658755/

            Note Phil Jackson’s early practice:

            Before training camps with the Chicago Bulls and Los Angeles Lakers, Phil Jackson — who said he borrowed this technique from NFL coaching legend Vince Lombardi — would line his players up in a row on the baseline and say: “God has ordained me to coach you young men, and I embrace the role I’ve been given. If you wish to accept the game I embrace and follow my coaching as a sign of your commitment, step across that line.”

            But he stopped that.

            1. The comment that Mark Jackson is a bigot is overwhelmingly damning, and, as far as I can tell, unwarranted. I hate his view on gays, but he is not alone and I don’t know how far he takes this (would he have fought getting Collins?). Also, I can’t think of any context to make the judgment or what purpose it serves. Maybe it’s true, but there’s not enough evidence.

            2. We have no evidence his is a corrupt religion. But none of us have looked at it closely, certainly not me.

            3. We live in a society that will ridicule religion in general and black churches (and others) in particular for reasons that have nothing to do with freedom or independent spirituality, but are suspect themselves. And they will ridicule Jackson as a preacher. It is in this second context that I believe MT and Aldridge spoke, and I appreciated their comments. Neither said that was the reason he was fired nor believed he should have been reinstated.

            And many players, like the coach, have strong beliefs, and they should feel protected. It’s not hard to imagine a world where they go in the closet themselves for fear of being ridiculed. You and I have both seen this. It’s not so much the case now, however.

            4. We have no evidence that Jackson has been coercive or exclusive in his practices. If there was, there are serious concerns. This issue is complicated by the support of many players who deny this, including Klay, who was raised Catholic. I don’t think they were brainwashed.

            But it doesn’t matter. A situation was created that could have led to problems, no matter how good the intentions. Lacob and Jackson should have sat down and worked this out three years ago, which I seriously doubt happened. Jackson should have kept prayer out of the locker room. He should have made that decision himself, for good reason. I doubt he has that perspective.

            But that still doesn’t solve the problem. Every NBA arena has a chapel. What’s supposed to happen there? Wouldn’t it be potentially intimidating if coach and many players went there by themselves, voluntarily, and then returned?

            Really, the only thing that makes sense to me is that Jackson leaves his collar at home and stays completely out of all religious activities of any sort. It’s not in his makeup.

            Better, don’t hire a preacher.

    • OK, moto, I read the article and I didn’t get what you got. I also had a few quibbles. Here’s one:

      Talking about Jackson, Aldridge says “…he got his team to buy what he was selling, and that’s all coaching in the NBA is.”

      If that were true, Keith Smart would be a HOFer. If Aldridge believes it, he’s a fool. If he doesn’t believe it, he’s intentionally distorting the truth.

      I keep reading these articles that speculate about ways the Ws management could have possibly been more sensitive, flexible and respectful. But no one, including Aldridge and MTII, has ever cited a single incident that showed that the FO was less than respectful and accomodating of Mark Jackson. At the same time, there are many well-documented examples of Jackson disrespecting players, coaches, the press and even members of Ws management.

      Respect is a two-way street. Could Ws management have been more accomodating? Probably. Could Jackson have? No question.

      Jackson will probably get another NBA coaching job someday. He got that career thanks to Joe Lacob, who got lots of criticism for hiring him in the first place. I haven’t heard Jackson complain about getting the job or losing it. That being the case, Jackson supporters are not entitled to a different opinion on the matter. Including David Aldridge.

      • what was your impression of ‘what you got’ ? aldridge’s views don’t represent mine in any way. just thought they might be worth reviewing, because they’re probably representative of a fair number of players and reporters, and his position/experience and perspective into owners, coaches, players. if you want a category to type cast me, it’s probably the thoroughly discredited, old school brand of secular humanism. respect for all spiritual beliefs and practices, which means favored or exclusive treatment for none, outside of the institutions dedicated to their adherents.

        don’t agree that smart’s players ‘bought into’ his pitch to the same degree as jackson’s, but their contract situations were also very different — it was more apparent that most of the players had to play for themselves and their next contract.

        • I also fall largely into that category. I like to tell people my religion is the US constitution.

          I missed your “what u got?” reference.

        • I have a complicated (and messy) system of skepticism I won’t bore anyone with, though I like to think it’s based on more than a set of laws. But I also didn’t have it hard growing up. I wasn’t faced with challenges to my existence or identity many athletes, especially blacks, had to face. I also have the benefits of a fairly deep education (and was and remain a mediocre athlete, so I’m compensating anyway).

          Listen to these guys, especially ours. They are deeply moved by their religion, however imperfect its manifestations. Like it or not, the faith of coach and players was a significant reason for their success. It helped keep them strong.

          How many times have you heard an athlete thank God at the end of the game and hear someone in the room jeer or see him roll his eyes?

          Should we tell athletes to stop doing that? More to the point, what should be allowed? What if you only had two or three athletes on a team who were religious? Wouldn’t they feel isolated and pressured? Shouldn’t they have some way to maintain their faith within the context of a game, where they are most put to the test, and have some kind of sanction? I assume this is why arenas have chapels. They need to feel comfortable they can go there and that they will be supported.

          It gets tricky after that. What if a lot of players and their coach have strong faiths? Won’t they create counter-pressure by their numbers? What should be allowed? I don’t think this one is easy at all.

        • I wasn’t going to go here, but you asked. You thought Aldridge’s article was worth reading, I didn’t see any value in it. Mostly a rehash of unsubstantiated – and now pointless – speculations we’ve all already read from MT II, Kawakami and others. It stretches for a false equivalency between Jackson’s performance/behavior and that of Ws management. They are not equivalent. Lacob paid Jackson’s salary. He’s fully entitled to specify how Jackson earns it. For his part, Jackson was out of line on a number of issues. There is no comparison.

          Re Smart, he was popular among players at Sacramento, too. The point is that a coach’s popularity is pretty much irrelevant. If that’s the best that can be said about Jackson, then he’s a lousy coach. Give me a cranky Thibodeau instead, any day.

          • did not recommend the article to those who’ve rejected the views of the jackson sympathizers, and specified that it overlapped or reinforced what MThompsonII wrote earlier. each of us can choose our own course of intellectual honesty, and for me it means reviewing opinions from those coming from much different realms of experiences than mine, like yours.

          • moto, I always read/listen to other people’s opinions up to a point, then I start screening them out. I insist on intellectual honesty, so I tune out Ted Nugent, for example. Why bother to listen? Nazis are relentlessly stupid and evil.

            I also have a quality screen for bull. In my work I parse individual words for nuance, accuracy, and direction of spin. (unlike here, where I just spew). I work with writers and reporters every day, and read miles of news, opinion, hype, PR and advertising every day. I have to be able to tell the difference between those things. It’s my job.

            I’ve mentioned all that before. I don’t bring it up often because it feels like I’m pulling rank rather than talking clearly and persuasively. Now I’m pulling rank here.

            In my professional opinion, Aldridge’s article was an attempt to smear Lacob by supposition and innuendo. That’s the kind of thing we’re used to reading from talented amateurs with an agenda (like rgg), not professional sports columnists.

            I don’t know any of the principles in the story, I don’t really care about them as people, and I’m not defending anyone. I just hate destructive, mean-spirited bullshit delivered as fact. Aldridge’s piece is echo-chamber propaganda. Not fact, not news.

  76. geraldmcgrew

    Dean Baker (@DeanBaker13): Will Richard Parsons do better with Clippers than with Time-Warner or Citigroup?

    http://www.cepr.net/index.php/blogs/director-watch/richard-d-parsons-director-of-the-day

  77. Rgg, you keep circling around to the same place without ever once considering the issue. It’s not about what is in Mark Jackson’s heart. It’s about what he did. The workplace environment he created. And whether that could justify firing him.

    Proselytizing in the workplace is a form of religious harassment, that has it’s own area in civil rights law. I suggest you google the subject yourself, but here’s a head start:

    http://www.ehow.com/about_6714689_legally-considered-religious-harassment-workplace_.html

    http://www.workforce.com/articles/employee-fired-for-religious-proselytizing

    Religious harassment is a form of bigotry. Not hard to see why, right? It makes a whole class of people feel uncomfortable about their identity. Worry about how they fit in, about their chances for continued employment, let alone preferment. This is what Doc Rivers recognized, and why he put an end to the bigotry of organized prayer in his workplace.

    What Mark Jackson did, how he BEHAVED, would have gotten him fired from every major company in the country, every non-denominational college or university, and many other places of employment.

    It would have gotten Marcus Thompson fired from the Bay Area News Group, and David Aldridge fired from TNT and ESPN, if they had behaved similarly.

    And yet it’s somehow appropriate for a sports franchise? The storyline we were treated to by these luminaries is that Joe Lacob somehow didn’t “get” where Mark Jackson was coming from. Wink. Wink.

    Which brings me back to the subject of what’s in Mark Jackson’s heart. Hope this doesn’t get you all confused about the above, because it’s really not the issue. However,

    Why was Darren Erman ostracized by Mark Jackson and his coaching staff? Ridiculed behind his back to the players?

    Why did Mark Jackson reassign his parking spot?

    What could have caused Erman such pain that he took the desperate measure of attempting to record his colleagues?

    What could have caused the Warriors and Celtics to view Erman’s wildly inappropriate and possibly illegal actions as justified or excusable on some level?

    Who was it in the Warriors organization that Jackson referred to as “the devil”?

    These are questions that Marcus Thompson and David Aldridge have no interest in, but which for some reason are still tumbling around in my head. Together.

    I took another look at TKs piece on the Erman firing this morning before writing this. This was the top comment I came across:

    Steve Frank • a month ago
    jew media protecting jew Erman.
    • Reply•Share ›

    Mr. Frank is right about one thing. There is bias in the media.

    • cosmicballoon

      This has to be one of the oddest NBA coaching cases of all time, and Jackson certainly brought it upon himself.

      Your last statement, Feltbot, about bias in the media is certainly true. Each of those Warriors reporters have their own opinion and their own sources, yet none of them are really sure what to make of this situation — the Scalabrine and Erman issues — and then the firing of Jackson after a pretty well coached playoff series. Every one of these moves has been emotionally charged and it just proves how complicated Mark Jackson is. Jackson’s premise that he would “be fine” regardless of the outcome of the coaching carousel threw everything into a tizzy for the media members. They never saw him get mad and he always had the same controlled persona. All the time.

      I believe they (and we) were unable to understand Mark Jackson because he never had a message based on “intellectual honesty” as Hat is so fond of saying. Almost every one of his pressers was full of BS that did not compute with sports reporters. He simply did not use facts when describing situations, plays in the game, or elsewhere. He had a worldview bigger than basketball, yet his job was to coach basketball. The reporters would have done better to educate themselves on his worldview and Christianity and have a discussion on that front, and see how basketball fit in.

      I think the players began to understand Jackson, because at heart, Jackson is a preacher and his audience was his team. The preaching did not work on his coaching staff (at least in part), and thus the Erman and Scalabrine situations. Here’s where Jackson’s inexperience as a manager came in. He did not know how to properly deal with people when they disagreed with him. He was fond of saying that everyone in the building is on the same page. The only way to do that is to get rid of the people who were not on the same page, and so he did that. Jackson did not understand that a healthy tension is what makes organizations great. Harmony is rarely, if ever found in an extremely high level workplace. High level employees have their own ideas and opinions and when they come together and agree on a best course of action, good things happen. The 49ers area a great example of this. Jackson’s idea of a harmonious workplace does not compute — hopefully he learns from this as he takes on his next job.

    • Thanks, Feltbot, and I’m glad this is being aired, finally. I have no argument against your first and major point whatsoever. One of the reasons I haven’t given this much thought is that in all the places I’ve been, it’s hard for me to imagine anyone doing what Jackson has done. Everyone has better sense. Every person associated with a church I’ve known would have known what to do. Also I haven’t been paying much attention. I turned the tv off so as not to listen to his post-game spiels.

      I doubt there’s much question that if Jackson were a white fundamentalist, the least sign of such behavior would not have been tolerated. Likely he would never have been hired. And he would have been crucified in the press, at least around here. Anyone should have seen this coming, at least the potential, and the real question is why it wasn’t and strict guidelines not laid down by the FO at the start. It was a grave error. But by all appearances, not only had Jackson entrenched in and removed himself, the FO were unable to talk to him or have any influence.

      I’ll give a casual answer which might be on course: Jackson was indulged in this behavior because he was black. There’s an implied condescension here: my rules don’t apply to you. The issue is complicated by the fact most of his players were black and many followed him. Still, there’s a malignant neglect here (cf. Moynihan’s benign neglect) which may have helped undo Jackson, and it comes from the separation of the worlds of the owners and players, which has taken its toll. MT and Aldridge helped us see that. This is not a sympathetic defense of Jackson, either, just a statement of a broader problem. When two sides are so seriously separated, there are going to be problems where cause can never be precisely placed.

      But give this one a shot. What would have been an acceptable solution for Jackson? Should he have been allowed, say, to go with his players to chapel before games? But that would have been potentially imposing. Or should he have simply abjured from any religious behavior whatsoever? I don’t know the answer and am curious to hear yours. As I said above, the only thing I can figure out is that Jackson should have completely removed religion and such practice from the team. And really this had to be his decision, since the FO can’t monitor everything that goes on in the locker room.

      Or maybe they tried to.

      Keep going with this. With a new coach, what should Steph and Green and others be allowed to do with their beliefs within the context of the game and arena? Again I’m not clear, but answering this would reveal the real subtleties and ambiguities of the issue.

      Seriously, FB, moto, CB, and others: what is an acceptable practice?

      As for his heart, I have no idea. I don’t know enough and my opinion is worthless anyway. Scalabrine and Ermine weren’t his hires, however, and they may have represented the them vs. me mentality this environment allowed. And the owners selected white assistants; he selected black.

      My Othello comparison might work in several ways. Othello was a good soldier who won respect because he protected Venice from its enemies. That were the only term of his acceptance. He was also a poor judge of character who gave into suspicion, superstition, and jealousy, causing him to expel a good officer and brutally murder his innocent wife. There is no defense for his behavior, no cause to wish him to keep his post had he not killed himself. Had he lived, however, I’d be curious to hear the Venetian debate if more Ottoman ships appeared on the horizon at the end of the play. But it was his distance from this world and its racial stereotypes that allowed Iago to undo him so thoroughly in about ten minutes of talk. Reread Act III.

      Our world, like Othello’s, is fractured in so many ways, with so many issues lingering that have not been aired or resolved. Ultimately Sterling’s ouster is unsettling in all that it has stirred up without much understanding. And getting rid of him really doesn’t solve much of anything.

      Antisemitism—I didn’t realize Lacob was Jewish, as are many other key figures in the NBA. He also didn’t have it easy starting out. His parents were working class. When I searched for his background and relationship to Judaism, this page came up near the top (it’s toxic):

      http://racerules.wordpress.com/2011/12/25/the-complete-infestation-of-jewish-nba-owners/

      No one talks about antisemitism in the NBA—is there anything here?

    • Were Jackson’s religious expressions (can’t use “Proselytizing”, since I don’t know he tried to convert anyone) the reason why Rivers did not want to share the chapel with Jackson?

    • Pretty strong charges. Can you elaborate Feltbot?

      A strong tenet in the US Constitution is freedom of religion, and of course separation of Church and State. If your charges are correct, Jackson should have been fired (well I guess he was :-)) for that reason.

      If you went to any games during the season, or at least listened to Tim Roy on the post game shows. The Warriors sponsored Mark Jackson’s post game sermons, center court. Several hone games (between 5 and 15).

      Sooo maybe Lacob didn’t mind or a strong personality like Joe would have quashed the sermons for sure.

      Are all black evangelicals racist? Are white evangelicals (read Tea Party) racist?

      Who cares about Jackson, but I think you carry a wide and dangerous paintbrush.

    • If Darren Erman was harrassed by Jackson as you say, why didn’t he report it to Warrior’s management. MJacks would have been fired after an HR investigation.

      Instead, Erman was fired for supposedly taping private conversations (which technicall is illegal). Your charges don’t stand up to the known facts. Who/What is your source?

      • cosmicballoon

        +1 Barry. Feltbot, I am shocked you are taking Erman’s side in this. He made a decision to tape meetings, likely for the ownership, or at the least to confirm some suspicion he had about Jackson. Maybe Jackson felt entitled to be in meetings where he wasn’t invited. At any rate, I don’t see how Jackson’s religion is any more illegal than Erman illegally taping conversations. If I were Jackson, I would have fired him too.

        Obviously part of the blame is on Jackson for letting things get that far, but Erman was the one who decided to break the law. I would love to hear his justification.

  78. Sounds like SVG is out.

    • From TK’s report?

      “According to an NBA source, coaching candidate Stan Van Gundy told the Warriors he wanted total control of basketball decisions as a condition of taking the job.”

      Which may yet just be a bargaining point.

      But also note this:

      “Woj is now reporting that Kerr and the Knicks are stalemated right now and the Warriors plan to go back in hard to try to land Kerr. . . . I’ve been told by Warriors sources that salary is not going to be an issue in this search.”

      http://blogs.mercurynews.com/kawakami/2014/05/13/warriors-and-stan-van-gundy-seem-to-be-heading-in-different-directions-so-what-was-that-about-and-whos-next/

      Storm clouds on the horizon. . . .

      • Does that mean draft picks and trades?

      • The real point here is that this organization needs to have a good basketball mind control basketball decisions. They don’t have this, and until they do, I don’t have much hope for GSW at all. How quickly could this club go downhill in the next few years if they don’t solidify coaching and make good roster decisions, starting next season? Lee and Iguodala are aging, with no one to replace them. Bogut, whatever his worth, is aging as well, with lingering conditions. And there’s almost nothing on the bench.

    • Twitter recap.

    • From AW an hour ago:

      “Nevertheless, Van Gundy hasn’t ruled out coaching the Warriors, sources told Yahoo Sports. He was impressed with the Warriors’ management structure and ownership during his meeting with them, sources said.”

  79. D’Antoni

    D’Antoni

    D’Antoni

    D’Antoni

    D’Antoni

    D’Antoni

    D’Antoni

    D’Antoni

    D’Antoni

    D’Antoni

    • Odds: zero.

      • You may be right, book maker, but follow my twisted logic:
        SVG is too good to kiss Lacob’s derriere. D’Antoni is just the right amount of hungry to play nice, and has just the right kind of skills to win.

        D’Antoni will win with Curry/Lee. He may ask for a no trade on Curry / Lee for 2 years (Lee’s contract duration), but I think Lacob would agree to that and call it his own idea.
        D’Antoni will agree to bring in a defensive assistant.
        D’Antoni will let Lacob and Myers feel like big shots.
        D’Antoni is hard enough to break Lacob’s rules in the game, smart enough know when to do it to win, not so smart that no one believes it is just a mistake, and not so proud he can’t pretend to be sorry afterwards.
        D’Antoni will pull in Nash to coach Curry.
        D’Antoni will rest Bogut enough to heal his ankles / elbow / rib / back.

        OK, maybe not entirely realistic. Betting with my heart there. You win, book maker.

  80. I watched, The Street Stops Here, a documentary about Hurley and the St. Anthony team. Good flick and Netflix has it.

    One of the joys was seeing clips of their wins over a team with Tyreke Evans and another over a Kobe Bryant team—with two St. Anthony starters benched for disciplinary reasons. Recap:

    http://articles.philly.com/1995-12-23/sports/25669597_1_lower-merion-kobe-bryant-defense

  81. Cavs are looking at Gentry, D’Antoni, and Del Negro.

    Meanwhile, Mike Brown needs a job. . . .

    • brown has four years at $4 m. per annum coming from his überkapitalist owner, so offers have to start above that. the eastern conference is providing competition for the candidates, several still working in the playoffs besides gentry.

      MThompson II thinks hollins will be next up for the lacobites. in the dynamic western conference, things could turn ugly quickly with either kerr or hollins, but lacob needs an education and a mediocre season or two that he can’t say were by his design could accelerate his learning curve.

  82. While we’re at it, the NBA is unique in its support of pre-game chapel, a 34 year old tradition:

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/11/nba-pre-game-chapel-prayer_n_2459118.html

    This complicates the debates above, somewhat, my only point.

  83. Jason Whitlock pulls out all the stops here:

    http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/10925905/whitlock-donald-sterling-apology

    “I get why the NBA wants Donald Sterling to go away. His transparency is overshadowing the games. I hope he sticks around until we’re forced to address the elephants he keeps putting center court.”

  84. GooseLosGatos

    Curious to everyone’s opinions of Nedovic & ‘The Kuz’?

    I hope they can bring something next year…

    • cosmicballoon

      Good call Goose. I think Ned is a bust. To me he is a very conventional player with above average quickness and a below average shot. I do not see enough explosiveness from hi to be a top notch backup point guard. He couldn’t even dominate in the D League.

      Kuzmic, I think, has a ;future in the league. In his limited minutes I saw a 7 footer who is hungry to rebound, run, and attack the basket. Plus, he’s not afraid to shoot free throws. It might be wishful thinking, but I could see him spelling Bogut next season because he has a more developed offensive game than Ezeli. It was a shame that Jackson did not play him more. I did not see him as a negative while on the floor.

  85. SVG out—agreed with Detroit. I can’t say I blame him.

  86. Wow, Kerr is an uninspired announcer. One platitude after another. I never paid much attention before. And flat. Can you imagine him trying to fire the guys up when they’re ten down?

    Kerr is asking the Knicks 5 years x $6m. You have to believe Lacob is trying to match or beat that. Or maybe more money for fewer years. Are they confident enough in their decision to commit that long? They’d be stuck with it. And that’s a lot of money to pay so he can keep calling his own shots.

  87. I posted a link that showed how Blake Griffin had a coach helping him with his free throw, which has improved dramatically. And he’s hitting the midrange as well now, I would assume because of more coaching, which helped the Clips get out to an early lead tonight.

    But Lee stopped shooting the midrange, where he’s been effective for years. Was he told to stop shooting it, or did he lose confidence and decided to back off? But in the latter case, who was there to help him get his stroke back? And they sure could have used it in the playoffs.

    Let’s hope we get a full staff this time.

    • cosmicballoon

      Agree. There is no reason for Lee not to shoot that jump shot after we watched Griffin succeed with that shot.

      On another Clippers note. Chris Paul choked away last night’s game with several bad turnovers down the stretch. He’s once again choking in the playoffs — a common theme in his career.

  88. The FO sounded confident they would make a decision soon, but it doesn’t look like they had a chance, not on their terms. So unless Kerr changes his mind, it looks like we’ll be sitting on our hands for several weeks and longer, waiting for the playoffs to end so assistants can be interviewed. In fact the process may drag out for months and they may have to scramble to get anyone.

    I suspect it would be the polite thing for Kerr to do to say he was interested in the GSW offer, since Lacob & Son flew out. It would also help speed his negotiations with the Knicks. And, money aside, he’d be much better of in NY, with Jackson’s help and support.

    I don’t know why Thibodeaux would feel any more comfortable here than at Chicago, unless the FO changes their terms and gives him the control they won’t give others. He also has a roster in Chicago closer to his conception of the game. If he came here, he’d have to tear the roster up to get his kind of lineup, which I suppose might work in 3-4 years, somewhat. He might also try to make Curry a Derrick Rose, and we know how that worked out.

    In fact there will be competition for good coaches, who may be able to set their terms, following Van Gundy’s example. I’m curious exactly what SVG asked for, but it sounded like he just wanted control over the roster, which is what he needs.

    Unless the FO dips down into the college ranks, which at best will be an experiment over years of trial and error. No comparisons to Jim Harbaugh can be made. Harbaugh was ready to step in to the NFL immediately and knew who to bring with him. And he was given independence.

    ‘Tis bitter cold and I am sick at heart.

    • What GSW passed up:

      “Stan is a proven winner in our league. He instills his teams with passion, purpose and toughness,” Pistons owner Tom Gores said in a statement. “He is a great teacher who will help our players grow and develop.

      “Stan is more than just a great coach, he’s a great leader. What I’m most excited about is how Stan can help us shape the franchise and instill what it means to be the best. He’s also a great communicator. My time with Stan has me convinced that he will bring our players, team and community to a very proud place.”

      http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/10930909/detroit-pistons-hire-stan-van-gundy-coach

  89. You have to wonder how potential coaches view the organization. So much seems clear from what has been said and done the last years, especially this past season:

    1. You have to win 50+ wins and make a deep run in the playoffs. Your first year.

    2. You have to play the roster they give you. You won’t have much, if any, influence in selection of new players.

    And I wonder how much influence Jackson had in any roster decision during his 3 year stay. I suspect little or none at all.

    3. You will have to take the assistant coaches they give you.

    Did Jackson have any input here?

    4. You will have limited influence in operations and decisions in general, if any. You speak to and will always be under a higher authority, with little independence.

    And while we never found evidence for this, they will have to wonder if the FO will also dictate how they expect you to play, that you meet their priorities in addition to #1 and #2, i.e., show good defensive stats regardless of what you have to do to get them.

    Otherwise they’ll send you packing in short order. A two year stay might be a realistic expectation, regardless of your contract.

    Doesn’t sound attractive to me. The terms will also stagger if not stunt the team’s growth.

    • 5. Meant to add: You will also have to pay attention to stats and those cameras and whatever reports and suggestions the Assistant GM makes, possibly follow them.

    • 1. No problem. If that idiot MJ can do it…

      2. Not a problem. Jackson vacationed in LA every summer and apparently didn’t communicate when he was in the office. The FO wanted his input and didn’t get it. It was one of the reasons he was fired.

      3. Nonsense. Jackson claimed he had full management backing for his coaching hires and non-hires. Not replacing Malone, then firing two assistants proved it.

      4. Welcome to American business, rgg. Very few people are as free as academics to say any damn thing that pops into their head. That’s because, unlike academics, high-level managers in the real world are held accountable for their words and works. Anyone who didn’t consult with their peers on major decisions would have to be an idiot. Like Jackson.

  90. OKC should have kept Reggie Williams and got him going. They need more offensive options, and don’t have them and/or aren’t looking for them. The attention Westbrook and Durant gets should give all kinds of openings. This will hurt them in the playoffs, eventually.

  91. Found something that might make Frank’s head explode:

    “Stan studies the game, and he found offensive rebounding just isn’t important to winning,” says Steve Clifford, the Bobcats head coach and a Van Gundy assistant in Orlando. “Stealing the ball and creating turnovers are not usually factors in winning big.”

    http://grantland.com/the-triangle/detroit-pistons-stan-van-gundy/

    • ” But it’s possible Van Gundy, so interested in perfect spacing, might view Drummond as the only keeper here.”

      Perfect spacing? What’s that?

      A sin of the past.

      • Credit to Tom Gores for following good business practice, hiring a true professional and giving him authority and latitude to do his work. SVG has proven experience, is a disciplined student of the game, and has resources at hand. I understand his position largely means he has control of player acquisitions but also answers to and can only be fired by Gores, not the GM, although that’s a minor distinction at GSW.

        I’m curious to see how he does, and how long his courtship with Gores lasts. Dumars left him with a mess of a roster, however, so it may take several years:

        http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nba-ball-dont-lie/detroit-pistons-owner-tom-gores-discusses-appear-imminent-190737563–nba.html

        Apparently the main sticking point for Kerr, a guaranteed fourth year with the Knicks, has been been resolved. GSW offered him the same—will they do so with other candidates?

    • Good read. We lost a shot at a good coach, maybe at a future.

    • Det and Mich can really use positive news, good for them. a flesh, blood, and bone hoops guy running a hoops organization, while in oaktown it’s a venture capitalist and a players’ agent. van G. will have time, space, resources for the re-tool, the next coach for lacob gets to cope with impatience and shadow puppetry.

      • The Pistons are owned by a VC as well. SVG makes sense for them because they needed to replace both coach and GM. They save a few bux by hiring just one guy.

        The Ws aren’t going to replace Lacob, Myers or West anytime soon. They need a coach those guys can work in unison with. On that score they didn’t disqualify SVG, he disqualified himself with his comments about modern GMs, and with his demands. C’est la vie.

        After their experience with Jackson, the Ws had to be somewhat cautious about SVG anyway. The last thing they need is another coach who won’t play well with others.

        • They wouldn’t have needed to replace anybody. SVG is not going to actually do the leg work, that’s why Detroit is hiring Otis Smith to do it for him. Bob Myers could easily fill that role and is arguably doing it right now anyway. SVG probably just wants final say on personnel decisions.

          • Exactly. Every accomplished coach wants control over personnel. And any accomplished coach would be appalled that the Warriors have a narcissistic neophyte controlling their personnel decisions.

            SVG wasn’t hired because the guy he would be replacing is Lacob.

          • Well, Felt, that’s certainly a theory.

  92. FeltbotsFakeGirlfriend

    Feltbot Even though it is a long shot what are your thoughts on Tom Thibodeau?

  93. warriorfaithful

    This just in from Woj.

    Steve Kerr signs to be Coach for the warriors 5 years $35 million.

    I will be watching the Warrior’s in 6 years

  94. On a certain level, this is absolutely hilarious. I can’t wait to see the players’ reactions.

    Didn’t Joe Lacob just tell us that Stephen Curry trusted him? Ahahaha.

    • So Mokerr?

    • Spears tweet:

      “We love Kerr. Incredibly prepared. We got him because of our players. The Golden State Warriors’ future is bright,” Joe Lacob says in text.

      • More Spears tweets:

        Lacob on Kerr: “Very bright. Very personable. Very, very prepared. I have always liked him… but he sold our group. Bob, Jerry, loved him”

        “Bob (Myers) and Steve (Kerr) are going to be fantastic. I am ecstatic,” – Joe Lacob said.

        Joe Lacob also said in text that Steve Kerr is a “great organizational fit.”

    • this qualifies as a significant p.r. coup for the lacobites. kerr immediately jumps up into the elite level of coaches in terms of compensation, but as we’ve seen with the $$ thrown to celebrate/promote the team’s move to SF, they’re not shy about spending if they think it helps them look good. a protracted recruitment campaign for the coach of ‘one of the flagship franchises’ was not going to burnish their image.

      their budget for the coaching staff will probably go from economy level to premier. need to see more results from their scouting and talent eval.

      • Likely and necessary, moto, and our best hope. I’m guessing they start hitting assistants next, especially from the playoff teams, if they can pry them loose.

        Maybe they can get an upscale high church chaplain this time as well. I’m thinking Episcopalian.

    • Maui Nellie

      Sounds like Curry is ok with his new coach.

      Q: We’ve talked about how badly you wanted Curry in the 2009 draft and almost got him. I’d imagine Curry was a giant pull for you here?

      -KERR: It was huge. I talked to him tonight and I told him this is retribution for that deal falling through back in ’09. (Laughs.)

      A big part of the pull was not just Steph but the whole roster. It’s a really skilled, talented team.

      They’ve done a lot of good things the last couple years, they play both ends which was very important. This is not a renovation by any means.

      This is more just this team has done great things the last couple years and let’s try to build on that.

      I love the mentality. I think Mark really instilled a defensive identity and the emphasis on rebounding. He did a lot of really good things. That makes my job a lot easier.

      I’m able to build on that rather than starting to try to build a foundation. The foundation is already there.

      It’s really an attractive job.

      -Q: Not asking about the specifics, but that sounds like your talk with Curry tonight went well. Is that accurate?

      -KERR: It was great. We laughed about the draft stuff from a couple years ago. He was very positive and we’re planing on getting together soon.

      I’ve got to work a couple more weeks with Turner to finish off my season with them. We’re planning to get together but we didn’t get into any details about strategy or anything like that.

      But he expressed his desire to talk more about the team and expectations and how we can get better and all that. I’m looking forward to all that and looking forward to calling the rest of the guys in the next day or two.

      • Steph is always going to be upbeat and diplomatic. The only encouraging thing here is that Steph has some ideas, and maybe Kerr will listen. Steph may have the most influence on the direction of the team the next few years, and this may not be a bad thing. Let’s see what he’s learned.

  95. Have no problem with Kerr hiring. Smart guy who played for POP, best coach in NBA (spurs) for two years. Definitely a leader. Challenge now is to improve roster for next season.

  96. WheresMyChippy

    Too little too late but I just found something that really changed my mind about Lionel Hollins:

    “My identity was tied to the team’s identity,” Hollins said of his defensive-minded, slow-paced, “grit-grind” teams in Memphis. “But the only things I’d like to be tied to were that they were tough, they were aggressive, and they never quit. The rest of it was because of who they [the Grizzlies roster] were. They were a very physical, inside dominant team. That’s why we played that way. We weren’t a great team in terms of taking care of the ball when we played fast, so we slowed it down.

    “When I first came to Memphis I wanted to run, and we tried to run, but it just wasn’t the makeup of the team. Being out allows me to go and look at the up-tempo teams and different styles of ball movement and playing side to side that we kind of got away from because we had a dominant set of big people inside and we took advantage of it. The next team I get may not be that way. So I want to make sure I’m prepared to play whatever style is necessary for us to play.”

    Dammit Warriors. So many good options available and you go with the WORST one..

    • by no means the worst. the owner gets to feel really good about himself and his team, and not feel he’s compromised or conceded anything. there’s blowback about hollins, whether it’s accurate or not, that lacob wouldn’t care for — telling the new exec not to coach a player in one of the Mem practices, or resisting application of ‘analytics’.

  97. I do want to believe (too hopefully?) that Kerr will bring in a full staff. I will be curious to know how much Lacob is now prepared to pay for them. But have they ever brought in a shooting coach, for example, any of the four years?

    But here is the test: What is the minimum amount of wins Kerr has to have plus minimum playoff experience to keep his job the next seasons? And I’m betting we’ll see him all five seasons.

    If the Warriors win fewer than 50 games next season, finish 6th or lower, and go out the first round, does he keep his job? How much lower will be tolerated?

    Etc.

    • kerr himself might fill the vacancy for shooting coach. when his players talk about the coach winning a shooting competition with them, they’ll probably have to push themselves a little harder, at least.

  98. Steve, Bob, Joe, and Kirk will work together well in their VC Org. This was the only way it was going to work out for the present day GSW. Not so sure JWest will be included.

    • I think this is more likely to bring West back into the fold, not less.

    • cosmicballoon

      Lacob is so pleased with himself. It disgusts me. He just hired someone who looks like him and talks like him, and he’s thrilled.

  99. Maui Nellie

    Some interesting comments from Kerr:

    Kerr: The biggest thing in the NBA over the past decade is everybody is trying to get corner three’s; every team is doing that now. I played for the Spurs and Gregg Popovich was probably the first coach in the league to try and do everything possible to deny the corner three. He was kind of a step ahead of everyone. Game
    plans are definitely designed now to run people off three-point lines, keep them away from the rim, and force them into tougher two-point shots. There’s no secret there.

    Now, it’s probably time to go deeper into the game. If you shoot a ton of three’s, we know the math works out – you shoot 50 percent from two, and 33 percent from three and it’s the same thing – but what’s the deeper implication? What about the long rebounds? What about those times when you’re not pulling the ball out of the net, and you’re running a fast-break? How does that affect the defense, and the
    team that’s shooting all those three’s? That’s what I’m interested in.”

    KERR: I’ve been preparing for this for a while. I’ve really thought things through in terms of my coaching philosophy. There’s all kinds of stuff I have.. I guess you would call my doctrines, just putting my thoughts on paper.

    Jeff Van Gundy told me two years ago, when I said I’d really like to coach, what should I do, he said put all of your thoughts on paper, everything you think is important for a team. Put it on paper. Just a chance to get thoughts together and think about it. And that was great advice.

    I’ve done that. Gone over in detail what my expectations would be for a team and how I’d like to play, how my staff would look like, what the daily routine would be, everything from social media, training staff, assist coaching staff… I’ve put a lot of thought in this.

    -Q: So do you think you’ll be running the Triangle with this team?
    Maybe this personnel isn’t best suited for that? Will you run a different offense than the Triangle?

    -KERR: It will be influenced by the Triangle but it will not look like the Bulls of the ’90s,I can tell you that.

    The game has changed and I think my philosophy would reflect that. For instance, I would be crazy to do away with screen and roll with Steph–he’s devastating in it. We’ll do plenty of that.

    But we have the opportunity to make some strides offensively and I think that will be reflected in my influences–which have been Popovich and Phil and Lenny Wilkens…They’ve all been coaches who emphasized ball movement, spacing and
    flow and having a a system to rely on and that’s what i’m looking to give.

    And this year when I really decided I think I’m going to do this, I put together some scouting reports and synopses on the team. So I had stuff prepared for various teams and when the Warriors job opened up, I worked hard on just thinking about their team and what I would like to do and that sort of thing.

    • So bye bye walk up three? Bye bye Draymond at stretch four?

      • Why do you say that?

        • Like his mentor, he’s more concerned about what happens when you miss a three than when you make one.

          You know that mantra about missed corner threes that Fitz is so fond of howling? He’s quoting Phil Jackson.

          • I think you heard more than he actually said. Do you think there’s any chance Kerr has an offense that runs as much ISO as Jackson did? As long as that doesn’t happen, I think we’ll be ok.

          • EZ, Kerr has already said how great Steph’s screen and roll action is, and that he wants a motion offense. Whatever he means by “motion,” it’s not postups and iso’s, so I think Kerr is at least aware of basic modern offensive philosophy.

            I’m more concerned about Kerr’s ability as a people manager and game manager, both huge weaknesses of his predecessor.

            There’s no reason to think that someone who has never managed people will suddenly discover that he’s a master at it. And when Kerr faces an average-to-good coach, he undoubtedly will be out-coached during games, at least for awhile. Nellie could spank Kerr while sleepwalking AND flirting with the cutie in the front row AND discussing poker strategy with SJax.

            As a rookie coach, Kerr will lose some games for his team. They might win more games next year anyway. It would be hard to screw up worse than Jackson did.

    • Well, he’s articulate. But these general musings don’t sound like much or add up to anything coherent or meaningful. General ideas don’t mean anything until they have been put into practice, tested, and had their details worked out, which, of course, he hasn’t done. He sounds like an academic.

      • We had the Preacher, now we’ll have the Professor.

        • If results matter, I’ll take a preacher over a professor any day. See below. But I’d like to think there is a third option, i.e. a real head coach.

  100. How deep and how relevant is Kerr’s playing experience? I watched a bit way back when but have forgotten. He looks like a role player for very, very solid teams, who came off the bench and knocked down shots, and not much more. In his prime, he played 20+ minutes, got a couple of assists, and averaged about 8 points, and less in the playoffs for Chicago. For the Spurs those numbers are cut in half.

    But someone in PR is on the bal. I went to Wikipedia last night and he is first listed as GSW’s new head coach!

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steve_Kerr

  101. What the hell is a system like the triangle, and do we have any reason to think it would work, whatever it is, especially for this roster? As Feltbot keeps pointing out, the triangle only worked for the studs in Chicago and LA. It should get a good test in NY with Melo. It should also fail.

    Jackson had many attractive ideas gleaned from watching and commenting on games, which Feltbot listed in his positive review when he was hired. Yet he went away from them, for reasons that have not been analyzed. One possibility is that he was under pressure to win, perhaps with some direction from the FO, and he got tentative and conservative. Why won’t the same happen to Kerr?

    And do we have any reason to think Kerr can think on the fly, and react and make quick adjustments during a game, or learn from mistakes and correct his system as the season wears on? He has zip experience here.

    He will have more assistants, and we can assume he will listen to them. He will also get advice from the FO and their boy. Do we have any reason to think he can assimilate all this and make a decisive and successful synthesis? That he will, in fact, get good advice from an organization that has no solid basketball mind? That he can stand against the FO and do something that makes more sense?

    What we found out from Jackson is that he always coached better when the starters played and were healthy—or rather the players were able to make up for deficiencies. But there were times they faltered with flawed strategy—and everyone criticized them for turnovers and not moving the ball.

    Another serious test for the team is how to bring up and play the subs, where Jackson failed miserably. Hopefully he and his assistants can develop them better individually—but can he put them together and have them perform?

    What are Kerr’s views on Steve Blake? Will he want to keep him, and, if so, what will he do with him?

    What on earth will he do with Barnes?

    The team needs to bring in fresh talent and fill holes, but the budget is tight. Will Kerr have any input here or will he have to take what the FO decides? If he does have input, will his decisions be good? A lot of his decisions as GM at Phoenix were questionable, and if the team did well eventually—and briefly—the major factor may have been Nash (cf. Curry).

    Most, can he fire the team up and motivate them? Has he ever raised his voice or expressed any strong emotion? The guys have character and will play hard regardless, but will they have passion? A major reason they did so well this season—and they did do well, 51 wins plus a 7 game, close series with the Clippers—is because the guys played with passion.

    We may suspect the reasons, but the guys played their hearts out for Jackson. There is no contesting this. In fact an argument could be made that all the friction with the FO caused this passion. Jackson’s split from the FO increased the tension and forced their allegiance to Jackson’s side, aligning themselves in a clear course. Thus they didn’t play in spite of the conflicts, but because of them. A team needs some kind of dynamics to get it going.

    I still hesitate here. Even with all the foul smells coming from the locker room, the guys, whom we trust, were absolutely committed to Jackson. More needs to be learned here.

    I’m analyzing cause and effect, not defending Jackson. We have every reason to believe they would have done even better with this passion had they been better coached. Without this commitment and the same coaching, they would have done worse. Also there was too much going on in the locker room that couldn’t be supported, regardless.

    In short, there is no good reason to think Kerr will do better. Best case scenario is that we’ll see the same season—tentative coaching with the same problematic roster—but without the passion and conviction. I predict fewer than 50 wins and maybe an eighth spot in the playoffs. Their fate will largely depend upon how much the rest of the Western teams develop, and several teams are off to a good start.

    Worst case scenario is that the brain trust blows the roster up and makes another “transcendent” deal, with results I don’t want to think about.

  102. Nary a peep from Steph’s twitter.

    • cosmicballoon

      Steph is a smart man. I’m sure he’s pissed about the firing, but he realizes that he needs to keep a low profile right now for the good of everyone involved.

      • cosmicballoon

        We should all be glad Dwight Howard is not around.

        • How long is Dwight’s contract with Houston? Is there any reason to think they may not try again? He’s been Lacob’s first priority for years, to the exclusion of other decisions.

  103. Steve Kerr is not wimp, however. This just got linked elsewhere, and it’s a great read:

    http://espn.go.com/new-york/nba/story/_/id/10895607/golden-state-warriors-steve-kerr-tough-enough-nba-coaching

    Nor is he untested by experience in life. From what I’ve seen, I like him a great deal. I can readily identify with his reserve and thought. His character looks rock solid. Whether or not he’ll make a good coach is the question.

    Maybe he’ll have the strength to learn from his mistakes and negotiate the hazards of this unbalanced and narrow-minded organization. There are some pluses here.

    • In many ways his hiring is an unconscious recognition of the FO’s deficiencies. He will be able to do with others what they cannot.

    • And with that, gentlemen (and Mary!), in spite of serious reservations, given that he’ll be around anyway for a while, and especially given the serious deficiencies of this organization, I’m on board with Kerr. He may be the best shot to pull this organization together and give it direction.

      Eventually.

      • The price being paid here, of course, is greatness. But there’s too much in the organization stacked against greatness anyway.

  104. Silence here, especially from the Boss. Are you going to hold forth, FB?

    Kerr is going to have one advantage Smart and Jackson never had. Barring disaster, he should keep his job several years, most likely all five, and can plan accordingly.

    I predict utterly ambiguous results the next years, but that they won’t matter. If the team declines, there will explanations to justify it. Really it isn’t about wins and losses, but Lacob having the control he wants of the organization.

    Really, the coach isn’t the most important position now, or won’t matter until they make the change they most need and get a real GM who can build a full, coherent roster. Lacob has made it clear he isn’t going to change that and let someone else make these decisions. If you want to say Meyers is the GM and he continues to make the same decisions, it’s still the same problem.

  105. The Othello comparison is now complete. Protection of Cyrpus has gone to Casio, the bookish commander without field experience but one of their own:

    One Michael Cassio, a Florentine,
    A fellow almost damn’d in a fair wife;
    That never set a squadron in the field,
    Nor the division of a battle knows
    More than a spinster; unless the bookish theoric,
    Wherein the toged consuls can propose
    As masterly as he: mere prattle, without practise,
    Is all his soldiership.

    How well will he do in the next battle?

  106. You can probably deduce my reaction to the Kerr hire from twitter and comments above. I’m on vacation now and in no mood to express my full thoughts — which is probably a good thing. But it also makes sense to wait and see who the Warriors hire as lead assistant. Alvin Gentry would mean something very different from Jim Cleamons, for example.

    One thing I think we can safely assume is that it won’t be another white guy with no cred. Because if it is… Oh boy.

    • Why would Gentry leave LA and come here? Unless they put up a lot of bucks.

      • Gentry has connections with both Welts and Kerr, who hired him to coach the Suns.

        And a friend of mine pointed out to me that it looks like Tyron Lue, not Gentry, is Doc’s lead guy.

        • A ray of sunshine—and Kerr probably could work with him.

          Did he have no influence over Rivers on offense? It looks like they ran more this year and spread the court.

  107. “There will definitely be triangle elements. With the rule changes and this roster, I think it’s important to run and get shots early. I think it would be crazy to take screen-and-roll away from Steph Curry, and there’s not a lot of screen-and-roll in the triangle. We’re not going to be looking at the 90s Chicago Bulls. I really want to take advantage of the passing abilities of (Andrew) Bogut and (David) Lee. I really want to utilize everybody skills in playing with tempo, flow and rhythm.”

    -Steve Kerr

    http://blog.sfgate.com/warriors/2014/05/15/3324/

  108. Much has been revealed about Jackson and I’m sure more is to come. Much will be valid. But all this criticism has become moot: the Preacher is gone.

    But criticism of Jackson deflects the real concerns, past and future. What kind of environment—”culture”—did he work in and will this be changed?

    -Q: You came in and said you were willing to take risks–like hiring Mark Jackson. How much of a risk is it to fire a guy after going from 47 to 51…

    -LACOB: You forgot the 23 (laughs).

    http://blogs.mercurynews.com/kawakami/2014/05/06/joe-lacob-on-the-mark-jackson-firing-steph-currys-emotions-ownership-pressure-and-demands-and-more/

    Note what Lacob is doing here. He’s tagging Jackson with the 23 win season. His comment as much as anything reveals the nature of the culture and its sense of support and responsibility.

    Let us refresh our memories: this is the season Ellis was traded for the injured Bogut and they were left without him and a center. Also there were injuries to Lee and Curry. And it was the season of the tank. But what should have been an opportunity to develop bench players never happened because the players they might have developed were let go and no serious players with potential brought up. It was, however, a good opportunity for Klay. Otherwise, it was a lost opportunity. It might have been a good chance for Jackson to develop as well, though he didn’t have much to work with. By all appearances, he soldiered it well enough.

    Something developed over three years to the breaking point. Was the FO unable by any means to recognize problems and use the powers of persuasion to put Jackson on the right course? We see no evidence to the contrary. Jackson’s only terms of relationship seemed to be perform or get fired.

    One thing is certain: Jackson’s tenure was provisional and uncertain. He probably would have been canned had they not done well last season. And even after last season his contract was not renewed. So how certain and secure did he feel going into this season?

    But also Jackson was hired because he would appeal to the NBA world and would be able to motivate his players. Here he succeeded well. This has to be an untenable model for a head coach, or for the successful ones. How many great coaches would accept this?

    I doubt there’s any question Jackson could have worked better with Malone, as well as the other assistants, and learned from them, that he himself didn’t recognize the value of what they had to offer. But the FO themselves set the priorities by not putting strategy at the top of their list and the top of the coaching staff. Read what Lacob has to say about x’s and o’s when he defended Jackson’s hire:

    -Q: Did you need to talk X’s and O’s with him, just because he hasn’t coached at this level?

    -LACOB: When you say talk X’s and O’s, we’re not going to be drawing up plays on a board.

    -Q: What offense are you going to play, how will you defend the pick-and-roll…

    -LACOB: Of course. But those are just words. I could probably interview you and you could probably give me good answers on how you would coach a team, too, right? (JOKINGLY SPOKEN I HOPE.)

    I may not believe it. It’s an interview. Until you see somebody actually do it… And it’s not about X’s and O’s, it’s about who can get the guys to play that hard. Who’s going to organize them properly. Who has the experience to know why this guy isn’t performing the way he should. Who’s going to put the pieces together in the right way. Who has the sense from being on the court for a lot of years, who knows how the pieces are going to fit together. That’s important.

    I interviewed a lot of assistant coaches in this process who are very good assistants. At the end of the day… it’s hard for me to get compelled by some of them, even though they might have had all the X’s and O’s that you refer to… they sounded really good with respect to X’s and O’s… but I wasn’t convinced they could move from that chair as the assistant to this chair as the head coach and lead. Make it happen.

    http://blogs.mercurynews.com/kawakami/2011/06/10/joe-lacob-on-mark-jackson-i-wanted-somebody-with-a-fresh-approach/

  109. GooseLosGatos

    On First Take yesterday morning, Stephen A. in discussing Kerr hiring referred to Bogut as ‘Bogus.’

    Of course this was Mark Jackson’s doing. Why call out Bogut now – he’s had 8 years previous to do it.

    And I’ve heard Bogut saw through Jackson’s BS and wasn’t a Koolaid drinker….

    • warriorsablaze

      I believe he’s been calling out Bogut long before the MJ stuff…. but the MJ situation surely got him more fired up.

  110. warriorsablaze

    Just in case you thought all the stuff leaking about MJax was made up or exaggerated, here’s the highest character guy in the whole organization on KNBR this morning… our man Jim Barnett:

    “He and I got along, but we hardly know each other…it wasn’t the kind of relationship I’ve had with other coaches quite frankly. I was never able to go to a practice, we were banned from practice, we weren’t part of the group. I always felt like it was MJ against the world, us against them, and he had that kind of philosophy. And therefore I hardly know him- I don’t know him more today than I did three years ago.”

  111. I am completely on board with Steve Kerr, but for a single and simple reason: he may be the only way to bring continuity and coherence to a lopsided organization that does not communicate well nor understands what it takes to build a winning club.

    He will be listened to. He will be trusted. He will heal wounds and bridge gaps, or at least try to. He is bright, and hopefully he will learn. He will be given support and time to develop. And hopefully he will have a good staff and work with them. Most, hopefully he will gain a voice and will be heard and have influence. I doubt there are many (any?) coaches who could do this and succeed on any level given Lacob’s terms.

    The only question that remains is how much compromise we will have to take and how much opportunity has been passed up. We had every reason to believe this team, with the right direction and decisions, could have done very well this season. It’s unlikely that potential will be realized any time soon.

    But really, the main position of concern is the GM. If the roster isn’t improved and maintained, the head coach won’t matter that much. Lacob has made it clear that he doesn’t want to pass this off to anyone with knowledge and experience and give that person authority. Van Gundy never had a chance with this club. You want to say Meyers is the GM? Fine, but same problem.

    So much has already been determined for next year and the following seasons by the GM’s roster:

    Bogut

    Will take a significant part of the cap the next three years and thus limit other options. He missed 22 games this season. His offense dropped to below significance—7 points a game—and he was much less effective the last months. I doubt this was because Jackson didn’t try—he did, and played the kind of game that might take advantage of his size. I’m guessing elbow problems and a fear of getting to the free throw line, plus maybe other health factors. His mobility looked off and on all season. We have no reason to believe that health issues won’t linger as he ages, or that others won’t crop up. Which means the team will be forced to find—

    Backup centers

    Hopefully Ezeli will return to health, but he’s still a rookie with limited offense. They’ll still need others. Kuzmic? Really? Keep O’Neal? Or find someone else?

    Already a significant chunk of the cap and roster spots are tied up in the center position.

    Barnes

    Has been promoted and treated as a fifth or sixth major player on the team, as well as a significant backup should a starter go down. The evidence this season was dismal. How much longer will the GM persist in this experiment, how much more salary will be sunk here? Lost is the development of whatever player might take his place if he were traded.

    The bench (other than Green)

    There’s just not much here and certainly almost no experience, with the Warriors or elsewhere. And there’s not much money left to work with. They still don’t have a good backup PG. (Look at what Reggie Jackson did for OKC.) The upside with Kerr is that it’s hard to believe he and and a good staff couldn’t do better with whatever they end up with.

    The future?

    Iguodala and Lee will start to age out and their contracts will be up in 3 or so years anyway. Again, Bogut, 3 years. Thompson will draw a good salary. Let us hope (or pray) they ante up for Green. So what resources will be left and will the GM make good decisions?

    Review the list. Give the FO credit for Klay (who was probably most taken so they could trade Ellis, but he has surprised). Give provisional credit for Iguodala, provisional because his performance tailed off this season, most on offense, plus injuries, leaving questions in the future. Count our blessings on Riley’s late draft find in Green.

    After that?

    Lacob has spent most of his trade efforts and cash in centers, pursuing Howard all these years, his futile attempts at getting Chandler and Jordan, his compromises—Brown, Biedrins, etc. Which meant other options at other positions were put aside. Is there any reason to think he will reverse this trend or make better decisions? If Bogut declines, will he try to go for a big name center once again?

    The rest of the spots on the roster have not worked out at all, easily proved because they aren’t here anymore. [Bracket Bazemore, still only a hopeful.]

    Maybe Kerr and a good staff will develop coherence and gain influence. It’s the teams best and only shot.

    We’ll still need a preacher, though, to give us hope.

    • cosmicballoon

      Egg, I can’t get on board with this over pessimistic view of the roster and team. The Bogut contract is looking like the only major roster snafu. As for the bench, Green, Crawford and Sleights can play key roles in a nice 8 man rotation. Ezeli returning ads size and defensive acumen. Kuzmic might be able to play a roll, but I think Nedovic is already a bust. Maybe the draft will yield a backup point guard who can play both ways, or maybe a backup power forward who can defend and run.

      It was the coaching that caused Iggy to be inefective on offense. Kerr’s interview with Tolbert on KNBR gave us a glimpse at his offensive philosophy. It is so much more in line with the current NBA and he recognizes the strengths of this roster.

      Your pessimism is awful because its likely the Warriors will win 51 or more games and make a run next season as long as Kerr is able to stay out of the way. The team has a string core and they are coming I to their prime. What is the problem?

      • Speights can also fill in at center, so they may be covered there, though questions will remain about Ezeli and Kuzmic.

        But backup point guard? What draft picks do they have? 2nd. round, right? And he will be inexperienced.

        Are they going to pony up $3m for Crawford? I doubt it. And he really hasn’t proven himself as a solid PG.

        Keep Steve Blake? At what price and why? He got $4m this season.

        But note both Speights and Crawford played best with a real point guard, Curry. Who else do they have who can set up players—and give Curry a rest?

        And unless Barnes steps up, they’ll be short backups at 3 and 4. Who will anchor the 2nd unit? Who will pick up the slack if Iguodala or Curry go down? Lee? Or at least give them a break?

        I don’t see a strong, full roster that can withstand the strain and stress of a full season. We saw what happened when Iguodala went down.

        This doesn’t look good to me at all.

        • warriorsablaze

          Blake was a more than capable backup PG until MJax got a hold of him.

          In the type of motion/modified triangle offense Kerr has been hinting at I think you’ll find Blake quite solid, as he has been his whole career . In a simple, undisciplined offense with little player movement like MJax built, he’s not a guy who can “create” offense and is less useful.

          • I suspect we’ll hear about this triangle offense from our boss eventually. It worked with Kobe, and Kobe liked Blake because he fed him. D’Antoni, however, I believe, had a favorable word for Blake. Then again, with all the injuries, D’Antoni was scrounging for point guards.

            But Blake will have to have someone to feed, and unless Barnes turns around or the starters play heavy minutes, he still won’t have anywhere to go. And he’s not and has never been much of a scorer—7 points per game over his 10 year career.

            But yes, let’s not criticize any sub who played under Jackson.

          • warriorsablaze

            We’re just going to have to wait and see about the offense… I haven’t heard the interview, but apparently Kerr described the philosophy as some mixture of the Bulls triangle and Spurs motion offenses… with a plan to push the tempo heavily.

            We’ll have to see how it’s implemented and executed before we can really know what he has in store.

          • cosmicballoon

            You should listen to the KNBR interview before discussing Kerr’s offensive ideas. I was encouraged by his offensive philosophy — he said he wants to get out and run and then get into half court sets. He said he would use more motion, and less ISO. He did not make it sound like he is going to run the triangle. He said he would run some principles of the triangle like using Bogut and Lee’s passing ability. Apparently using bigs as passers is an element of the triangle that he likes in today’s game.

      • Curry averaged 36 minutes a game—and 42 in the postseason. He didn’t have a good backup.

        But look at what Reggie Jackson has done for OKC, after being developed over 3 years—27 minutes a game in the post season, with good effect. Look at Patty Mills, essentially a reject, and how he has developed over the years for the Spurs, how he has filled in during the season and playoffs, especially the last game when Parker went down. 16 minutes a game this post season.

        The Warriors have nothing comparable, not even a player in the works.

        I do hope Iguodala and Lee’s offense improves, and suspect MJ’s coaching was a factor. I also hope they won’t have to play heavy minutes next year and that they can maintain their health.

        • warriorsablaze

          I think you’ll find that Curry’s minutes are not going to go down significantly no matter who ends up as our back up PG.

          His minutes are not excessive at all. He’s behind Lebron, Carmelo, Harden, and Durant… to name a few. You have to play your superstar to win… probably even more so when your best player is also your PG and is key for nearly everything we do on offense.

        • warriorsablaze

          As for Reggie Jackson and Mills… sometimes teams get lucky with 2nd round picks (as we did with Draymond) or fringe players who make an unexpected leap.

          Nedo could very well be one of those guys for us. He had a lot injury problems this season, but was pretty dominant in the D-league… which doesn’t necessarily mean much other than he’s at least in that purgatory that exists between the two leagues…as is Seth Curry. Always a possibility one of them makes the jump to being an effective player.

          • Maybe OKC and the Spurs got lucky—although in the Spurs’ case, they took a chance on a player everyone else rejected, largely because of size. But they stuck with both guards and developed them over a period of 3 years. GSW hasn’t stuck with a single backup PG over the past 4 years, unless they keep Crawford and Blake, which is unlikely. And neither, as you say, was developed especially well this past season.

            As for minutes, watch what Curry has to do while he’s in the game. On offense he has to push through double teams and traps, work hard to get open shots, run through screens. On defense, he has to cover faster guards and he still runs all over the court picking up boards and steals. Every now and then he gets a break when he plays off the ball. Otherwise he is in motion nonstop.

            Then watch Lebron and Durant. They are able to find rest while in the game. They will guard larger, slower players and can be imposing on defense just by standing there, because of their size and length. On offense they get all kinds of breaks as well. They can draw defensive players just by standing anywhere on the court. They can also score from anywhere and don’t have to work to get position or shots. Curry has to make all kinds of compensations because of his size and strength.

            Melo, of course, doesn’t strain himself much at all on defense.

          • I’m with you, WAB. The constant pessimism and negativity from “some people” on this site about the roster doesn’t seem warranted.

            It’s also tedious to see the daily copy-and-paste repeats on the topic. Egg has concerns. We got it! Now let’s move on.

            There’s reason for hope too.

          • cosmicballoon

            And Westbrook’s injury problems opened the door for Jackson. If Westbrook hadn’t been injured, I doubt Jackson is the same player today.

            Mills is a product of the Spurs system, along with Green, Jelly Bellinelli and Boras Diaw. Pop is amazing.

    • rgg +1

      Don’t forget to add Iggie to the list of mistakes.

      $ 48 million over four years.

      Myers et al, said they wanted him to play point to take the pressure off Steph. Didn’t happen. They dearly missed Jarret Jack and would have had to pay far less for JJ, freeing up more money for others. We all miss Jack and I bet he misses the team too.

      ‘Dre’ was generally not effective as a point guard (especially after pulling the hamstring). We all saw him on offense versus the Clippers and unable to take advantage of JJ Reddick. Offensively he was inconsistent at best.

      To obtain Igoudala, the Warriors gave up two expiring contracts in Biedrins and Jefferson. They also gave up two draft picks. Was Iggie worth it?

      I believe Feltbot mentioned the his lack of results may have been caused by his injuries. One still has to ask if Iggie is going to get better during the remaining portion of his contract (three years), or is he on a downward trend in skills. He will be 31 in January. His PG was 9 points, the lowest except for his rookie year.

      • cosmicballoon

        marco, Iggy didn’t show much during the regular season…and I blame Mark Jackson’s offensive philosophy for this. Iggy is not a post up player (wait, who on the Warriors roster is???) yet the Warriors had the highest post up percentage in the league. If Iggy is running, he will still average 13 to 15 ppg. I believe we will see a return to form next season.

        The curious case of Jarrett Jack — this has not been addressed adequately on this blog. Jack had a career year in GS and then went to Cleveland and stunk it up. Jack was the Warriors closer, yet no one whined about him the way they whined about Monta Ellis. Yet for Curry to take over as the Warriors 4th quarter guy, Jack (the alpha dog in the 4th) had to get out of the way. In my view, the Warriors got a career year out of Jack and jettisoned him at the right time. It reminds me a lot of Juan Uribe with the SF Giants. Uribe played extremely well during the 2010 WS year and then walked. He signed with the Dodgers and played terribly for several years. The Giants looked like geniuses letting him go, because Pablo Sandoval needed room to mature into the Giants everyday 3rd baseman. I see the Jack situation the same way.

      • warriorsablaze

        This is generally where people are just missing what Iggy brings to the floor. Like Draymond, he’s unlikely to put up 20ppg on this team and his impact isn’t always obvious. He led the league in RAPM because he impacts so many aspects of the game. I think he has been drastically underrated by fans at every stop in his career.

        Besides his injury slowing him down at times, the other issue to me is a MJax one. This is another elite transition player largely forced into walk-it-up, iso-grind basketball… which plays to none of Iggy’s strengths.

        • Dubs will improve significantly if he can score and take the stress off Curry. this season it was painful when he shot from the outside. teams would leaving him open.

          They still need a backup at pt guard too.

      • The Warriors went from 44 to 54 Pythagorean wins. That’s a huge improvement. Most of that is due to Iguodala. There’s no way around that fact.

        • Curry carried the team with an incredible year, just willing the team to victories.

          Green was far more notable with his ability to guard multiple positions and his great improvement in shooting.

          Iggie missed twenty games, hard to imagine him being responsible for the ten game improvement.

    • I see I didn’t make my point at the end explicit. This is a comment about Steve Kerr. I am completely on board with him, and my hope is that he will be joined by a good staff who will gain influence and be heard and give direction to the club and, most importantly, help make good decisions for the roster, the next season and the seasons to come. This may be the team’s best shot, the way the organization is designed.

      I could keep going down the list of significant backup point guards, of course. Augustin, Collison, etc.

      • Blake, Jordan, etc.

        • cosmicballoon

          +1

          Mark Jackson was the reason Blake and Crawford stunk. Crawford was having a career year with Boston and suddenly becomes worse than his career averages with GS. No injury. That tells me the offensive philosophy is the problem, not the player.

          • What are you saying, CB? That the Warriors should keep both Crawford and Blake? Pay Crawford’s qualifying offer of $3.2m? Blake’s $4m? Or maybe they can negotiate Blake down.

            I’d kind of like to believe in Crawford, but his performance with Boston, a rebuilding team, was very erratic and they didn’t see a future. Adjust for minutes, and I don’t see much difference between Boston and GSW. He played heavy minutes for Boston, and his overall percentages were not promising—40%, and about 33% on 3’s by my quick estimate. You can find his game log here:

            http://espn.go.com/nba/player/gamelog/_/id/4243/jordan-crawford

            It’s only a prediction, but I’m skeptical the team will keep either at that cost. But I guess we’ll find out. If so, they’ll have to find someone else.

          • Also, I’m having trouble finding that money, the cause of my skepticism they’ll keep them. Salaries for next season here:

            http://hoopshype.com/salaries/golden_state.htm

            And they still have a full roster to pay for.

          • And it looks like the Knicks will pursue Steve Blake.

          • rgg, you’re communicating your concerns about the roster and the judgment of the Warriors FO clearly enough. The problem here is that, as always, no one sees any point in agreeing with you.

            What is is, dude. If Myers can upgrade/save on the roster, he will. If he can’t, he won’t. Any “concern” we may have on the matter is irrelevant. Wait and see.

          • The only thing Blake and Crawford have in common:

            1) Mediocre. Very replaceable.
            2) Lacob won’t pay either top dollar. If they want the $, they won’t play in the Bay next year. They were both half year rents this year.

          • cosmicballoon

            I’d like to keep Crawford, who at 25 years old is a decent NBA player. Blake at $4M per is not worth the money.

            The guys I wouldn’t mind seeing gone: JO, Nedovic, Bogut (b/c of his contract) and Blake.

            That’s all.

  112. Xavier Alumni

    No cb,

    Jordan Crawford’s best years were in Washington 2010-2012.

    http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/c/crawfjo02.html.

    • cosmicballoon

      Oh please. Go back and look at the stat averages per game during his time in Boston this season. Almost every one of his percentages was at its highest for his entire career during his time in Boston this season. He was scoring more efficiently AND passing the ball more than ever. In Boston this season his assists were up to 5.7 per game, more than two more than he had ever averages before. It was clear he had matured into a decent NBA player before he came to GS. Then Mark Jackson couldn’t figure out how to use him.

      • Xavier Alumni (r great)

        He was starting for a bad team (with a great coach by the way) in Boston. I am thankful JC played behind Steph and Klay limiting his minutes.

        I just hope he gets a big pay day next year (likely from a team in the Eastern Conference Development League :-) )

  113. Felty, post 102

    My head did not explode when I rend Van Gundy saying that offensive rebounds and stealing the ball resulting in turnovers do not determine a game. Van Gundy’s argument is that he rather have his team get back on defense rather then go for offensive rebounds, as such prevents scoring and doesn’t want his team going for steals and thus creating turnovers because the risk of failing to do so results in the offensive player having the advantage due to the missed steal.

    His limited argument is virtually irrelevant to the point that I have been making.

    I speak in terms of having players that create extra possessions for their team or not having players that give the opposing team extra possessions. No one will argue that having a net extra possessions differential over the other team sis a factor in every game, although not necessarily the determining factor. Wouldn’t every team take having at least 1-9 extra possession during the course if a game over their opponent? Of course,they would.

    Basically, one compares a teams offensive rebounds against the opponent, If team A has three more offensive rebounds than team B, then team A team has three extra possessions. Then we compare Team A turnovers to teams B turnovers. If team B committed 7 less turnovers then team A, then team B has a net overall 4 net extra possessions (7-3) for the game. Wouldn’t you rather have team B? Of course.

    Blocks also effect extra possessions but since we don’t easily know whether the team that made the block I have not included them in my analysis although such surely could be relevant to team’s extra possession.

    Van Gundy point is that he would rather not make a priority getting extra possessions for he would rather play defense and lower the other team’s FG percentage. Such is not unreasonable. But, is hurtful if the opponent outshoots you from the field also unless you want to argue that the FG percentage of the opponent would have even been higher if the team went for offensive rebounds.

    Nellie had a different take. He wanted the opponent go to the offensive glass, and fail to do so, so he could get a defensive rebound and run.But this resulted in such a high minus offensive rebound differential that the Warriors had a hard time overcoming but succeeded at times since the Warriors made easy baskets and shot a high FG percentage.

    Van Gundy is not arguing that he does not care if his team makes more turnovers than his opponent. He argues simply he does not want his team going for risky steals. Surely,he wants to make steals by intercepting passes in passing lanes.

    He makes no argument that he does not give a damn if his players run over opponents, throw the ball out of bounds, or travels with the ball. All are turnovers. And he surely wants to win that turnover differential and would argue that such is a factor in each game. Only an idiot would argue otherwise.

    What i look for in a good coach is keeping their own turnovers down. Nellie did that, Jackson did not. Curry seemed to commit more turnovers each hear after Nellie left. Haven’t looked at Van Gundy’s coaching at Orlando but I always though his team turnover the ball over more. Confident that Kerr will keep turnovers down no matter what offense he runs although one hopes the Warrior will run..Getting rid of Jackson is the best thing to ever happen for Curry even though he doesn’t realize that.

    The Warriors need more extra possession guys who can produce extra possessions like Iggy, and players like K.Leonard for the Spurs.

    • “Blocks also effect extra possessions but since we don’t easily know whether the team that made the block I have not included them in my analysis although such surely could be relevant to team’s extra possession”

      FYI, I have this data on my nbawowy site.

  114. Maui Nellie

    An interesting article written almost 3 years ago about the triangle offense (which includes quotes from Steve Kerr).

    http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2011/writers/paul_forrester/08/10/triangle/index.html#ixzz31wpxc52r

    • “It’s alarming that so many coaches have tried and not had success,” Kerr said. “I’ve had this debate with myself since I’ve thought about coaching at some point in my life, and if I were to do so at the NBA level, I’m not sure I would implement the triangle. I believe in spacing and ball movement and angles and backdoor cuts and using the defense’s pressure against itself. Those are all things the triangle does. But it’s a little tricky because it does take time for the players to adapt and really feel confident with it, and one thing NBA coaches don’t have is time. If they mess around trying to run the triangle for a year or two and they don’t have success, then that’s it.”

      Read More: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2011/writers/paul_forrester/08/10/triangle/index.html#ixzz31zT6XV89

  115. Maui Nellie

    Draymond Green to @GottliebShow: “I’m going to be looking forward to learning and picking up what Coach Kerr has to offer.”

    Draymond Green to @GottliebShow on Steve Kerr earning trust: “Bringing a championship pedigree, who doesn’t want to listen to a champion?”

    Jerry West to Sirius XM: “We need somebody who can create a shot off the dribble. We need a little more shooting from the outside.”

    Jerry West tells Sirius GSW “so many players so dependent” on Steph,
    Klay. “We need another player to relieve a little pressure from them.”

    Jerry West on Sirius XM disagrees w/Mark Jackson claim it was
    “championship or failure.” “We didn’t say we had a championship-caliber team.”

    Jerry West to Sirius XM notes Warriors 1st or 2nd in league in shots
    taken w/o a pass. “Against good teams, that’s going to get you beat.”

    • Draymond: Smart, smart man.

      Jerry West is stating the obvious, that the Ws need more diversity in the offensive attack. Real coaching from a real coach should do it. Let’s see if we get some of that.

      The Ws had the fewest passes per possession in the league, by a wide margin. It’s kinda surprising that West didn’t know that for a fact.

  116. The media has to do the best it can with what it’s fed, but I don’t think we ever got an accurate picture of the Kerr negotiations. The way it was presented, Kerr was too deeply engaged in Knicks negotiations and too strongly attached to Phil Jackson to give GSW serious consideration. It sounded like he had closed off negotiations with GSW—or GSW pulled out because they realized they wouldn’t get him—and only changed his mind late Tuesday night, when the FO flew out, while he was still negotiating with the Knicks and got the extension he wanted.

    But this Times piece says he always had strong reservations about Dolan and didn’t look forward to being under Jackson, where it would be hard to be his own man, all understandable. The job at GSW was always more attractive for a variety of reasons—close to home, the roster, the greater supposed freedom.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2014/05/16/sports/basketball/for-kerr-knicks-job-had-its-pros-jackson-and-cons-dolan.html?_r=0

    So it would be interesting to reconstruct the scenario. It looks like he was holding out to get as much as he could from GSW, most a long term contract, which he got. The Times writer made this comment:

    “The ability to misdirect should serve Kerr well as he begins the next phase of his professional life.”

    That’s not necessarily a bad thing to have and it may prove useful and beneficial.

    • This also explains why they didn’t push harder for Van Gundy, in fact makes us doubt they made much of a push at all. Their consideration of him may simply have been for show. Another possible interpretation is that GSW was simply waiting to see the Knicks’ best offer so they could top it. And Kerr made his decision awfully soon after that offer.

      • Interesting indeed.

      • Stating the obvious, GSW had full confidence from the start they would get Kerr and never gave any other coach serious consideration, barring the utterly unforeseen (i.e., a mammoth offer from the Knicks?). This plan might have been in the works for weeks—or months.

      • You’re probably right, rgg. Van Gundy’s desire for full control never seemed like a good fit for a “consensus-driven” management team, and his occasional bouts of frankness in front of a microphone wouldn’t play well with the careful info control the Ws prefer. I think he’ll be GREAT for Detroit, but would have chafed here.

        So Kerr was always the leading Ws candidate, SVG was a distant fallback alternative, and Kerr’s agent negotiated cleverly.

    • Oh, let’s keep going with this. Lacob debated keeping Jackson for a long time, and by all accounts, change was being contemplated seriously towards the end of the season, and really earlier.

      So the biggest obstacle would be GSW making a run in the playoffs, which would make his change look perverse. You have to wonder: was Lacob secretly hoping they went out soon? He certainly had to have been conflicted here.

    • DP: Clear something up, Stan. Were you offered the Golden State job?

      SVG: No, I was not.

      http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2066282-stan-van-gundy-says-warriors-never-formally-offered-him-coaching-gig

  117. Good read on Stan Van Gundy’s hire and plan, plus a look at another culture:

    “This is the defining moment,” Gores said of ceding the sideline and front office to Van Gundy. “It is the most important decision we have made as an organization. Not only did we hire a coach and president of basketball, we are resetting the culture of the franchise. I am convinced, I’m so confident that this is going to work. We both have the passion for it. I know he’s going to be as prepared as ever when it comes to any decision we’re making.”

    And, my, is Van Gundy prepared. His first meeting with Gores lasted six and a half hours, and along with a massive playbook, he brought a binder that detailed his vision of how his front office would operate.

    “I’ve given it a lot of thought,” Van Gundy said. “I didn’t just walk in and have a discussion — I walked in with a plan of an organizational structure and staffing and principles and processes. These are things that I’ve thought about for a long time — and for the last two years, I’ve had a lot of time to think and to put things down.”

    http://www.detroitbadboys.com/2014/5/16/5722908/stan-van-gundy-pistons-tom-gores-coach-team-president

    • Fair enough. Gores wants to be less involved in the Pistons than Lacob is in the Ws. He has a far lower potential financial payback, so that’s appropriate.

  118. AW tweet:

    “Among staff possibilities for Golden State coach Steve Kerr: Andy Greer (Chicago) and Nick Nurse (Toronto), sources tell Yahoo Sports.”

    No pepper on the table yet.

  119. Thinking about unrestricted free agents we should be looking at. Top choices for me at each position.

    PG – Patty Mills

    SG – Jodie Meeks

    SF – Michael Beasley (hey, he’s better than Barnes!)

    PF – Boris Diaw

    C – Channing Frye

    Are any of these guys realistic for us with just the MLE? Probably Meeks is available. Patty Mills probably worked himself a fairly big payday this season. Diaw might want to stay with the Spurs. I’d be surprised if Frye or Beasley took the MLE. It’s a pretty meh free agent class as it is. After these guys, it’s a lot of dregs.

    • Thoughts on Ramon Sessions? I believe he is a UFA

      • It wouldn’t surprise me if we end up with Sessions or Devin Harris. Patty Mills is more of an aspirational choice.

      • Hat, come on. Which of those are signing for the MLE?

        • a) The Ws don’t need to stay under the lux cap. No one does.

          b) The Ws could stretch to afford Ariza or Lowry, especially if they dropped a couple of guys from their current roster, which will probably happen.

          c) Would you take Deng in a sign-and-trade for Bogut+Barnes? I would.

          • “a) The Ws don’t need to stay under the lux cap. No one does.”

            No, but they can’t sign a free agent if it takes them over the cap. That’s not me saying that, it’s the CBA.

            “b) The Ws could stretch to afford Ariza or Lowry, especially if they dropped a couple of guys from their current roster, which will probably happen.”

            You can’t just “drop” guys. You have to trade them and take back salary and stuff. It’s one of those technicalities that matter.

            “c) Would you take Deng in a sign-and-trade for Bogut+Barnes? I would.”

            You want Deng and Iguodala?

          • Also, Lowry stands to make $10-12M, at least if he re-signs with Toronto.

            Are we paying him that to come off the bench?

          • So I don’t get any of my wish list? Waaaah!

            Re adding Deng, there are precedents for a two-SF attack. Besides Nellieball, one that comes to mind is the 1998-2000 Pistons with Grant Hill and Jerry Stackhouse. Their team W-L records weren’t great, but there were lots of reasons for that not having to do with that combo. It was a terrifying offensive attack, partly because, like Nellieball, it created real mismatch problems for most opponents.

            I’m sure you’re right, though, EZ. Deng ain’t happening. The Ws need a good 3-and-D backup at SF. But we’ll probably have Barnes.

    • How about Livingston ? I wouldn’t take chance with Beasley but Frye is a good pick. How about Blair ?

  120. The Marcus Thompson interview FB retweeted is well worth listening to, especially if you want to put closure on the Jackson firing, as I do. Marcus, I suspect, is closer to the guys and the locker room than anyone else, even and especially the FO.

    http://www.sbnation.com/2014/5/15/5718272/mark-jackson-fired-warriors-coach-race-politics-joe-lacob

    As for religion behind the scenes, MT fully concedes it is a delicate issue that needs tact and distance, which didn’t happen. He says it wasn’t abusive or disruptive in itself, no more than other things that can disrupt a team, that the guys weren’t badly divided over it. But he does suggest, rather vaguely, that it got awfully heavy.

    He also suggests another factor that hasn’t been discussed, the involvement of the players themselves. One reason things may have got heavy is that the players supported the prayers, most our point guard, who as ball distributor and team leader, holds great influence. The Preacher may well have toned it down if his prayers only got blank stares. You get the sense, too, that something developed over the years that grew to a head. I don’t recall much protest or concerns earlier, except from those who didn’t like religion in general or the Preacher specifically.

    Nothing is ever as neat as we like, and any development necessarily involves all the organization, directly or indirectly, one way or another. Sacrificing Jackson at the altar might make people feel good, but it doesn’t solve the people’s problems or resolve their conflicts.

    Putting MJ on hold by not extending his contract last summer is a significant factor. It made him a provisional lame duck, which would have influenced everything. In effect, players were given an either/or situation where they were forced to choose, and most went with MJ. But consider another scenario: What if the players, sensing this—and they had to know—turned away from him or against him, or, more likely, became less motivated and together? That happens all the time, and imagine what kind of season they might have had then. At best, it would have been much worse.

    MT’s interview also has great anecdotes. He said someone created a bingo card for MJ press conferences, that had all his platitudes and cliches.

    As for the new regime, it sounds like we’re going from Charlie Parker to Dave Brubeck. Take five, gentlemen, but I’m contemplating finding another jazz station.

  121. Big Data is here and isn’t going away. Of course there will be a use for stats from sophisticated minds who understand the game, i.e. an experienced coach. But it sounds like some—the newly enlightened—can’t see or accept anything unless it is presented in pictures and numbers.

    Look at the profound revelations in this piece:

    “The data from SportVU has helped teams determine that the 3-point shot is one of the most efficient ways to score points and has underscored the importance of taking uncontested shots.”

    Duh.

    “According to data from the NBA’s website, Clippers star Blake Griffin takes the vast majority of his shots at or near the basket, where he’s an excellent shooter. But he also takes a lot of long two-point shots in the arc around the foul stripe; despite favoring that area, he’s a relatively poor shooter there.”

    Duh.

    But this is misleading. Griffin shot the midrange quite well in the playoffs, especially in the early going. If these stats were drawn only from the Clipper series, they’re horribly skewed. Without a big athletic GSW front court, of course Griffin will score up front. Something similar will be true against most other teams.

    Lee, on the other hand, who has a good shot only took a handful I recall, taking, in effect, potential scoring from the team. This also prevented Lee from opening up the defense by drawing the front court out. (Yes, the 3 point shot would draw the defense out further, no Lee doesn’t have one. But better to use what he has.) And he struggled in the paint when posting up, for obvious reasons: he was badly overmatched.

    To take this bald observation about the midrange shot and build a strategy around it is a categorical mistake. Many teams are now focusing their defense on the paint and perimeter, leaving the midrange open. If the midrange is what you are given, you have to be able to exploit it.

    http://www.mercurynews.com/business/ci_25785249/big-data-meets-big-time-basketball?source=rss

    • rgg, an opinion without evidence is worth only as much as the speaker’s reputation for accuracy. Sensible people have a perfectly understandable lack of faith and trust in a speaker who doesn’t provide credible evidence for an opinion. You have that problem with the Ws front office. “Trust me” is not supporting evidence.

      Data is evidence. Evidence has value, even if it merely supports the “obvious.” Duh.

  122. I suppose this is common knowledge, but Kerr makes it clear he left Phoenix because of the owner Sarver:

    “It’s worth noting that Kerr is maybe the only GM in history to resign instead of sticking around for as long as possible, so he clearly has some strong feelings on the actions of small-market hawks like Gilbert and Suns owner Robert Sarver. As Kerr mentions, general managers make cost-cutting measures because of ownership pressures and are never stopped for vague ‘basketball reasons.'”

    http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/blog/ball_dont_lie/post/Steve-Kerr-tells-Dan-Gilbert-to-8220-get-over-?urn=nba-wp11757

    • the article (and previous impressions of kerr) gives me some hope for the possibility of collaboration between kerr and myers with player and roster development. its writer seems absurdly naive though if he thinks those two networks have much to do with getting their consumers to think critically about the propaganda/entertainment being ingested. in re. to the vetoed trade of paul, if der Große Kommissar stern intended to inhibit the bussies’ hegemony of the west, his cure greatly boosted the fortunes of the sterlings. expelling sterling will end up costing tens of millions, but all parties involved seem to be printing money at will and oprah as a new owner will pay dividends in p.r.

      your earlier reference to Bird and Brubeck — to whom or what were you comparing them ? the two might have more in common than you’ve allowed, considering the contribution of Desmond to the music we most associate with Brubeck and the sophisticated music intelligence of Bird.

      • My main thought here is that Kerr was not going to stick around with an organization he didn’t like. He seems to be perceptive, so presumably has found an organization he can work with at GSW, and that’s good news.

        As for collaboration with Meyers and the rest, that is the sole reason for my acceptance of Kerr. Lacob has won. He will always win. He has set the terms, so we have to hope for the best possible compromise, and Kerr may be the best person to work it. But that’s not an especially strong duo, especially in the case of Meyers, who has no deep connection with the court. So I’m hoping Kerr fills in here and can persuade him. This remains to be seen.

        Comparing Mark Jackson to Parker is a stretch. After all, they played different instruments. But each was very much his own man, for better and for worse, and each had strong roots to the culture—including ethnic experience and expressions—of their professions, NBA/jazz.

        À chacun son goût, I suppose, when it comes to hoops and music. I just don’t listen to much west coast jazz and only see it as an interesting side route from the body of the music. I’ll listen to Stan Getz and Bill Evans. Brubeck I never get around to. It looks like Kerr was mostly a sideman for Chicago and San Antonio, given his production and minutes—I’m not sure how much is gained by association with their coaches—and his cultural development is elsewhere, in other ethnic climes.

        I think the real question here is what kind of music the players want to hear, what will move then to perform. This isn’t my choice.

        • any number of top notch n.b.a. guards would be a better comparison to Bird than the Queens jackson in terms of playing style — wilkens, monroe, thomas. o.t.o.h., if you are breaking down the preacher’s rhetorical preferences and considering similar improvisational style, a blues player like bb king, muddy waters is a better comparison.

          since you enjoy Bill Evans, hope you’ve had the opportunity to see K.Jarrett when he’s with his ‘standards trio’.

          the players probably liked how the preacher encouraged their passions and gave them plenty of freedom, but he often neglected to correct their mistakes. he also failed to develop transition and open court offense, which gives the greatest room for playing with verve and freedom. the main core of players is smart and disciplined enough to appreciate another coaching style if it proves to be efficient and winning.

          • I look at Jackson because he was the coach of the former regime and that cultural representative. The others would not be considered. But of course there were many technical flaws, as we have been reviewing here all year.

            I admire your admiration and hope for Kerr’s strategic mind and ability to implement it. I hope it works, but at this point such optimism is merely a matter of faith. What I don’t know is how the players will respond to the new culture Kerr represents. It don’t mean a think if it ain’t got that swing, as I believe many musical spokespersons have told us.

          • It has been an unsettling few weeks on several fronts, what with all that Sterling stirred up.

            If Kerr is being brought in to improve offense, which I applaud, I wonder why this wasn’t a priority four years ago. It certainly wasn’t the case with Smart. And that wasn’t why Erman and Scalabrine were brought in. Wasn’t Malone brought in for defense? Was he an offensive mind? I’m not clear here. Nor did the team really bring in offensive players during that time, unless you count minor players who have come and gone (and may soon depart again). But West, I hear, is asking for more offensive players now. Why wasn’t that obvious last year before the season began?

            Although we have assistant coach X, who Jackson refused to hire. We don’t know what kind of coach he would have been.

          • In Nelson’s last season the Warriors finished 14th on offense and 29th in defense.

            In Smart’s first and only season they finished 12 on offense and 26th on defense. Defense was understandably a priority.

            In MJ’s first season (the tank year) they finished 14th on offense and 27th on defense.

            In his second season they finished 11th on offense and 14th on defense.

            In his third and final season they finished 12th on offense and 4th in defense.

            I think it’s fair to give credit to Jackson for playing a large role in bringing the Warriors from the 3rd or 4th worst defense in the league to the 3rd or fourth best. Of course, credit also goes to Bogut, Iguodala, Klay, and Draymond.

            Either way (or both way), the FO made a decision to improve the defense as a priority, and they accomplished it. Now, the hope is that the offense can be improved. I think that’s fairly reasonable.

      • Continuing with the comparison, I’m about as impressed with the Kerr triangle as I am with the 9/8 time signature for Blue Rondo a la Turk.

        • if you weren’t being facetious about the 9/8 time signature, try listening to Balkan folk music.

          • Most of what music I know of music east of Austria I got from Bartok, which I appreciate a great deal. I haven’t given Balkan folk music a shot, but that was not my point of criticism. I was referring instead to Brubeck’s appropriation of it, which I find gimmicky, as I do Kerr’s triangle.

      • Perhaps I should be more direct. The point of my Jackson/Kerr, Parker/Brubeck comparison was racial. Both jazz and basketball are deeply rooted in the African American culture, from which both have drawn power and expression. My opinion doesn’t matter here. Does it make a difference to the players? They spoke quite loud this season, in spite of Jackson’s lack of technical virtuosity (here the Parker comparison breaks down). And I note that so far there is no position or support for that culture from the head coach on up in the organization.

        • merci for making the reference point of your comparison explicit, because the difference between Bird and Brubeck that first comes to my mind, and overwhelms all other differences in the context of their art (rather than their society), Bird was a revolutionary who indelibly changed his art form for all who came after, a model for imitation and emulation for many, many. when you mention Evans or Getz, ‘great musicians’ or ‘profoundly influential’ (in Evans’ case) come to my mind, not their pale skin tone.
          even among NY hoops players who made it to the big show and thrived, jackson of course has his share of admirers like the espn gabber s.a. smith, but probably has a limited legacy as far as kids wanting to imitate him the way players imitated Bird. World B. Free or Metta W. Peace had lots of admirers too, and there are dozens of others.

  123. Another take on the Kerr negotiations:

    http://www.cbssports.com/nba/eye-on-basketball/24565154/report-knicks-lost-out-on-steve-kerr-because-of-3-year-13-million-offer

    According to them, Kerr is getting 5 years, $22m, not $25. Dolan tried to pay as little as he could, and was the major obstacle.

    Kerr had to have entertained the Knicks offer seriously and would have waited to see how it played out. That doesn’t contradict, however, the theory that he took the GSW offer seriously as well, was always considering it as a possibility, and that GSW always had strong reason to think they were in the running, in fact were confident they’d get him. GSW had to wait and see what the Knick’s final offer was, as well as wait for the playoffs to conclude. And they acted awfully damn quickly after the Warriors lost to the Clips.

    Excerpt:

    “When I saw Phil today he looked like a guy who had lost $60 million,” said one league executive who was in Chicago. “Last summer he looked refreshed when I saw him. Now he really looks beaten down. He didn’t look good.”

    Also, as I linked above, Stan Van Gundy was never made an offer from GSW, which makes us question whether he was a top priority, as well gives evidence they thought they could work a deal with Kerr.

  124. Fantasy trade! Steven Adams > Barnes.

    Dream on.

    So it is the season to put Lee back on the block again. The current regime has always looked to build around a center—I guess that’s Bogut—rather than find the player who might best complement Lee and build a system around him. He has never had a good, sizable, two-way partner to play with, and these are more affordable than even mediocre centers.

    I have a picture of Lee playing years from now in the scrap heap, Milwaukee maybe, playing his heart out, scars from head to toe, and having fans say what a bum he is and wishing he were traded.

    Life is just like that.

  125. I just like to know what’s going on. Here’s one to think about:

    Most of us have been under the impression Jackson was being reviewed this season for suitability to continue on as head coach. And when it was discovered he was not, we believed Lacob was going to make a thorough search of all available replacements.

    Consider another scenario: Lacob never intended to keep Jackson and wanted to put Kerr in his place as soon as possible, regardless of how well Jackson did, and had been planning this possibility for a year or longer, if and when he could work it out.

    Lacob never took anyone else seriously. Hiring Kerr, however, would have taken time to consider and develop, and if I’m right, the seeds of change may have been sown some time after Jackson was first hired. Kerr, fresh off leaving Phoenix, wouldn’t then have been an option. And he had to develop a name by broadcasting first.

    I think most of us were surprised Kerr was taken so seriously as a head coach. There was little real pursuit of him by anyone until this year, when Jackson and Lacob stepped up. And one thing is close to certain: Lacob is fully satisfied Kerr is the best replacement. He was ready to jump and picked him up quickly and gave him a long and expensive contract.

    Lacob and Kerr have beens friends for years and played golf together. Do you think they talked about the NBA? Do you think Kerr talked about his interest in coaching? Do you not wonder if, at some point, Lacob decided he wished he had Kerr instead of Jackson?

    I’m talking about strong desires and possibilities, not a strict and absolute plan. Nothing was certain, and everyone had to keep his options open. Lacob had to take seriously the possibility the Knicks would get Kerr, or even, though less likely, someone else. Kerr had to take the Knicks’ offer seriously. Lacob would have put out feelers for a good alternative—Van Gundy. And I suppose Lacob kept a miracle in the back of his mind, that Jackson’s team might make a deep run, though I suspect it would have had to have been performance nothing short of miraculous.

    If Lacob talked to Van Gundy at all, both had to realize they’d never come to terms. Lacob wouldn’t give up the control SVG wanted, and they both knew it. SVG himself said he never got an offer, not even something short of the Detroit offer that might have been attractive.

    It was the Times piece I linked above that got me thinking. The Knicks offer was not that attractive to Kerr, for the reasons given. He really wanted to go to GSW and had good reason to think he would get the position. Odds are good Lacob and he have been casually discussing this for a long time. Still, he had to keep the Knicks option open. And he had to let negotiations run their course so he could consider what he might get. Lacob had to be prepared to lose him.

    But things went bang, bang, bang. The Knicks improved their offer. Within hours Lacob came up with his offer, which gave Kerr the length he wanted. And Kerr took the job. He was prepared to make his case quickly of what he wanted to do with GSW, though most likely he had been preparing it well in advance. (SVG may have done the same with Detroit.) It wasn’t a last minute appeal by Lacob on Tuesday that tipped the scales. Rather, he was waiting to see what offer from the Knicks he would have to top. And he had to wait until GSW was out of the playoffs.

    All of this is within Lacob’s rights. If you think Kerr is the best possible coach for the Warriors, it is a hard but good move.

    Likely, Lacob has been considering just the possibility of Kerr for several years. Any manager always considers options. But this one got legs, and there’s a good chance the possibility of Kerr was what kept him from extending Jackson’s contract last summer, when Lacob saw things for Kerr shaping up.

    None of this means Jackson should have stayed. I believe everyone here thought he had to go. But consider what his relationship with the FO might have been all season, only getting strict terms for reemployment and sensing, from vague discussions, how much he was wanted. It certainly would have put an uptight person in a tight spot, and it changes our perception of the season.

    Water under the bridge. It’s time to give this mess a rest.

    • Jackson was hired to tank the first season. The seeds of change were sown within days of Jackson’s hiring, when Malone was brought in.

      The Kerr hiring had obviously been in the works for some time. To my knowledge, the Ws interviewed no one to replace Jackson, not even Kerr. As you say, the most difficult part of the changeover was in staging it properly. As you also say, the topic is moot.

      One point that seems to be overlooked about Kerr’s choice of the Ws: No “Winningest Coach in History” for a boss. Despite all the speculation we hear about Lacob’s egomania, Kerr has the chance for more say in FO decisions here than he would have in NY. Add that to Kerr’s longstanding relationship with the boss, and it has to count for something.

  126. GooseLosGatos

    Curious of any of you guys think Draymond can develop into a 40 minute starter at some point?

    • that is not the best utilization of a player like him, or most players for that matter. players who expend tons of energy on defense and the boards shouldn’t put in those kind of minutes — thibodeau tries to do it with some of his guys, runs into injury risks, but generally he also avoids giving them consecutive games with heavy loads. look at the minutes popovich gives his core players, with the expectation that they’re never letting up on defense when they’re out on the court.

      • Green’s a hard guy to slot into a starting position. He’s not the team’s best big, the Ws have two who are bigger and better at what they do. He’s not the best SF, that’s Iggy. He’s a good ballhandler and even floor general, but the Ws have far better guards.

        I think part of what makes Green effective is that he’s so different from anyone he might sub in for – and he can sub in for anyone. Which might make him the ideal 6th man.

      • cosmicballoon

        Against some teams Green should play heavy minutes, and against others he should probably play 15 to 20. Considering the physical pounding he has to take when guarding bugs, I don’t see it as a problem.

        • “Against some teams Green should play heavy minutes, and against others he should probably play 15 to 20.”

          I can’t think of any team in the league where Draymond should only play 15 to 20 minutes. We’re not Miami. We don’t have the talent to limit his minutes like that. Unless blowout.

          • cosmicballoon

            Memphis came to mind for me. ZBo and Gasol can score over him easily. If he’s playing 3 then Klay or Iggy has to sit. Generally speaking Green should be playing heavy minutes, but my point is that when he has to guard bigs over long stretches, he will get beat up.

          • Huh? Draymond was our best defender against Randolph.

          • A healthy Bogut was by far the best defender of Randolph. That crossmatch worked beautifully once someone on the team suggested it to Mark Jackson. Believe I recapped one or more of those games.

            And spot minutes do not equate to a full game. There is simply no way that Green can check ZBo without help for 20 minutes, let alone 30.

            You do want him to have a full career, right? He was dealing with back pain by the end of the Clippers series.

          • Of course Bogut is a better defender. I assumed we’re talking about guys who aren’t defending DeAndre Jordan.

            You honestly believe Lee is tougher than Draymond? No way. The Clippers series definitively proved Green’s superiority in that respect. I’d take Draymond on Randolph 10 times out of 10 compared to Lee.

            Does he need help? Well, if it helps, then sure. Does Lee need help? Absolutely. Again, the Clippers series made that plainly obvious too.

          • *sorry I got a bit confused with Clippers and Grizzlies.

            Are we talking about cross-matching Bogut on Randolph and Lee or Draymond on Randolph? I’d take Draymond defensively any day.

          • cosmicballoon

            EvanZ, the point is that Draymond can survive a series or two banging against the big boys, but we haven’t seen an 82 game season with him having to bang regularly with the 4s and 5s of the league. If he was indeed complaining of back trouble like Felty says, it’s plainly obvious that Draymond can’t guard 4s and 5s for 35 or 40 minutes per game. THEREFORE, he has to take minutes away from Klay and Iggy.

            It brings up the interesting questio — is Dray more valuable than Iggy going forward?

          • Take away minutes? You’re talking about 3 different positions. There’s not nearly enough talent on this team where Draymond can’t get 30+ mpg.

            (Unless Mark Jackson comes back.)

          • The cross match was Bogut on Randolph and Lee on Gasol. I don’t think Draymond can guard either.

            You’re confused by two other issues in my mind. First, I’m not sure what you mean by help. Lee plays every single big man in the NBA straight up, without the help of a double team. And he’s a pretty good defender in the post. Draymond simply cannot guard the bigger power forwards and centers in the post without help.

            Secondly, the playoffs are not the regular season. It is far easier to matchup small in the playoffs, with fewer overall games and a lot more rest between games. Draymond can no more go 82 regular season games starting at power forward than could Harrison Barnes. He was already in trouble physically by the middle of game 7 of the first round.

        • “Lee plays every single big man in the NBA straight up, without the help of a double team.”

          I think you have blinders on when it comes to Lee. I’ll take Draymond’s defense at the 4 over Lee any day. I’m not sure what physical or mental advantage you think Lee has over him. Can you explain?

          Draymond is stronger and quicker. The only thing Lee might have is an inch or two reach advantage but he hardly uses it to good effect. So what exactly is it about Lee that you think makes him better? Or more durable? Draymond has missed how many games the last two seasons?

          • So you want to compare DG’s defense with the aid of a double team, against Lee’s defense straight up? Trust me, that’s all we saw in the last series, and in the regular season.

            You are never, ever going to realize your dream of DG starting at the 4. It’s a pipe dream. He’s too small to stand up to that punishment in a single game, let alone for 82 games.

    • Are there any “40 minute” starters in the league? Maybe Kobe in his prime. Curry led the team last season at 36.5 mpg.

    • Start and 30+. Yes at SF. No at PF.

      • +1. Does Draymond make Andre expendable? That’s a tough question
        but if his contract means we will have a hard time resigning Klay and Dray then yes for me. I don’t like the 2013/14 Andre. Cant shoot a lick for 48million.

        • Expendable? The Warriors need more talent not less.

          • I get that they need more talent. I thought it was a good question to ask the community. I mean for what they are paying him and the production he provides could potentially be a negative to the futures of Klay, Draymond and future talent(FA) coming in. I like Andre’s game but that 48 million is a crippler. BTW I’m not coming at you EvanZ. I very much like your thought process and the communities as a whole. Best Blog out there hands down.(man down) HA

          • cosmicballoon

            Drew, good point! Bogut was a worse signing and if there is any way to dump that salary, that should be a higher priority IMO.

        • +1 Drew

          Dam good question either way. Warriors gave up a lot, and dueto his and AB’s contract are nearly over the cap.

          When you look at the money, the number of games missed (19), and his decline offensively, it makes one wonder. Plus the two salary exceptions and the two draft picks the Dubs gave up to get him.

          Lacob still has to write the $36 million checks for the next three years. He is not likely to get any takers at least for another year or two, especially given his injuries to the hamstring and knee this season.

          Hopefully, he can improve on his stats and play more games next year.

          • cosmicballoon

            I don’t think hindsight is appropriate in this case. No one had any idea that Draymond would blossom into the player he is now. Coming out of Michigan he was a bit overweight and didn’t have an outside shot. No one knew that Draymond would eliminate both of those problems. It’s becoming a fair question to ask if Draymond going forward is more valuable than Iggy.

            I am certain, even though Iggy is not an expiring, that he has some value on the open market. There were some injuries this year (and last, if I recall), but Iggy is still a beast when healthy, and I would argue it was Mark Jackson’s offensive philosophy that killed Iggy’s value later in the season. He was not getting opportunities for most of the second half of the season. On another team, he would.

          • Of course hindsight is not appropriate. It never is.

            Iguodala is not historically an injury prone player. He’s only had a couple seasons with significant injuries.

            As for Iguodala’s “stats”, I for one am glad he defers so easily to better scorers that this team has. That’s not a problem, it’s a bonus. Most stars aren’t capable of letting others take the lionshare of the glory. Draymond and Iguodala are rare exceptions.

            As for Draymond vs. Iguodala, this is the height of folly for a team that overall has a talent deficit. The Warriors need even more talent to be a true contender. You don’t trade Iguodala unless it nets, I don’t know…actually, I don’t know. Iguodala is a huge value to this team.

          • Marco, I assume you’re talking about Iggy’s offensive decline, but I don’t see it. On his previous teams he was the 1st or 2nd offensive option. On the Ws this season he was the fourth option after Curry, Thompson and Lee, as he should be. They didn’t run any plays for Iggy. All of his shots were either solo efforts or last-second bailouts.

            As the 4th option, Iggy did pretty well on offense. He also KILLED on defense, ultimately recording the highest +- in the league. Iggy delivered precisely what the team needed from him. And he did it while playing on 1.5 legs most of the season.

          • EvanZ, isn’t Iggy the best player in the world?

          • But Hat,

            Of course he is above average, but is he worth the ching-ching sacrificed to pay him in lieu of other good players who would help more.

            Don’t ya just cringe when he takes that 18ft open shot because his man is doubling and/or rotating over to another Dub? When he making that shot okay, but this year he definitely hesitated to shoot.

            He will be here next year, hopefully his numbers will improve.

          • @feltbot, yes.

          • @marco

            “Don’t ya just cringe when he takes that 18ft open shot because his man is doubling and/or rotating over to another Dub? When he making that shot okay, but this year he definitely hesitated to shoot.”

            So I don’t get it. You do want him to take that shot or you don’t?

          • Evanz,

            Just because Curry is playing the point (AI failed there this year, and his man is trapping Curry who then has a harder time scoring himself). I would rather have Steph or Klay (or Dreymond, JC etc) take the shot. Again, its only because they spend a lot of money for a seemingly limited offensive player. Iggy to his credit is a willing passer to a better shooter.

          • $12M for a guy who is top 10 in RAPM is not a lot. It’s actually a great value.

          • Oh No Evanz,

            Not the RAPM ratings again. I was just going by observation. The analytic make me dizzy!

            I went over to:
            http://stats-for-the-nba.appspot.com/ratings/2014.html

            CP3, Lebron, Patrick Beverly, Kevin Love, and I am totally impressed.

            However, upon evaluting this RAPM stat, I realized the only reason Igoudala is rated so high is that his defensive component is 4-5 times larger than 95% of his NBA peers.

            His value is inflated because his defensive component is the highest in the NBA at 5.8. Mind you Lebron’s component value -0.6! Now, I would like to know who thinks Iggie is a better defensive player than Lebron among others! Defensive player of the year, Joakim Noah was at 1.3 and De Andre Jordan was 0.6. (D. Green was at 2.6).

            Also, 95% of NBA players have a defensive component of around 1.0.

            When we look at AI’s offensive RAPM component he falls dramatically to 0.8. So the only reason for the his high RAPM is because of an inflated defensive component.

            RAPM is questionable benchmark for sure. Igoudala is a good defender, I just don’t agree he is that much better than the rest of the league.

          • “I would like to know who thinks Iggie is a better defensive player than Lebron among others!”

            A lot of people think that, especially during the regular season.

            You’ve heard of “LeCoast” no doubt?

          • cosmicballoon

            EvanZ, he just asked a very valid question about Iggy compared to Noah and Jordan. Do you have an explanation? Jordan almost singlehandedly destroyed the Warriors offense in the playoff series, virtually eliminating Lee’s drives to the basket while in the game.

          • If you look at Jordan and Noah in prior years, their DRAPM was much higher. I would assume this season is an outlier for both of them. Iguodala has had consistently high DRAPM for a long time, so I have a lot of confidence in it.

  127. Andrew Bogut just said in an interview on Australian TV that players were absolutely willing to boycott game 5. Which I think was pretty widely reported. However, he mentioned the manner in which it was to be executed which I though was very interesting.

    By his report the players were going to go through full warmups without mention of the boycott. Then at tip off, when the ball was tossed, both teams were going to turn and make there way back to the locker rooms without making a play for the ball.

    Now that would have had maximum impact! And I think goes a way to explaining where the heads were at during that infamous game 5.

    Apologies if this had been reported elsewhere but it was a wrinkle I wasn’t aware of.

  128. Worries me AI, Boges, and DLee are 30 and had serious injuries this past season.

    82 regular season games is way too much, imo. To me, 60 regular season games would be about right, then the playoffs as they are currently structured.

    • Marc,

      Most impartial observers agree with you about the number of games. Unfortunately, the players don’t want a 20% pay cut and neither do the owners.

    • Players would like larger sized rosters. That’s the way to go.

  129. With the hiring if Steve Kerr who I think wii be an excellent coach, our attention should not turn to who will be on the roster next year and whether the team will be significantly improved. What type offense we run is virtually immaterial if the roster is not upgraded.

    • Frank, “virtually immaterial?” Couldn’t disagree more.

      Talent-wise, the Ws measure up well against any team in the league. The 2nd unit could be improved, but by definition a 2nd team player isn’t going to make a big difference in the overall W-L record.

      A bad coach can make anyone look/perform badly. A good coach can make an imperfect team reach its potential. Phoenix is a good example.

      A bad coach mis-uses players. Barnes isn’t ready to create his own shots, so he should never have been burdened with iso’s this season. Bazemore proved he can play point, but not in Jackson’s slow, deliberate style. Smart tried to make Curry play like Acie Law, not Curry-style. And so on.

      I (and lots of others) said it early and often this season: The Coach Was The Problem. It’s a fact.

      That doesn’t mean Kerr is an improvement. As a first-year coach, I think he’ll get out-coached for at least the first half of next season. Even Jason Kidd said that he himself had a good eye for the game, but not a “coach’s eye.” Kidd said it was a different way of looking at the game, and it was something he had to learn.

      So while Kerr is a rookie who will make rookie coaching mistakes, at least he’s not Jackson. Hopefully, Kerr will be able to recognize what he doesn’t know, and fill in the blanks far more quickly than Jackson ever did. If he picks it up as quickly as Kidd did, next season should be pretty awesome.

      • “The 2nd unit could be improved, but by definition a 2nd team player isn’t going to make a big difference in the overall W-L record.”

        This is a fallacy. Big difference? Sure, it’s not a 20 or 30 win difference. Can a good bench make a 5-10 win difference? I think so. And that’s HUGE. The Warriors would have had home court advantage and a 3rd or 4th seed with 10 more wins.

        The Spurs are the Spurs because of their bench. To marginalize the importance of our bench is silly given we don’t have the same starting talent as a team like Miami or San Antonio or LAC. We need a bench to make up for it.

        • EZ, as you yourself said, we’re not looking at wholesale roster changes this season. 1 different bench player is not going to transform the bench. If we get a transformative player, he’s – by definition – not a bench player.

          • That’s not at all true. If our bench had Jamal Crawford, it would be transformative.

            Do you notice how these really good teams get bench players to sign at bargain rates? Somehow, we need that to happen. There’s no other way.

          • Why settle for Jamal? Why not ask for Manu?

          • Hat, you’re making my point for me. We don’t have either or even a reasonable facsimile.

          • Draymond.

          • Green is not a regular starter for this team or any other. Too small and light for a big, too weak offensively for a small. He can’t create his own shot. Other than rebound/putbacks, offhand I’d guess that 80-90% of his scores are assisted.

            Despite his limitations, Green is a brilliant player, and transformative in his own way. When he’s on the floor, at any position, the team suddenly plays Draymondball. The bball IQ of the team goes up noticeably. Faster pace, better ball movement, hellacious D, with Green somehow in the middle of most good things happening on court.

            There’s your #1 bench guy. Talent-wise, the rest of the bench is on par with most others in the league – competent players all, each limited in some way that makes them not first-string. Just like Jamal Crawford.

            The Ws 2nd unit definitely could use another scorer, and I expect that will be a priority for Myers this summer. Someone like, say, Toney Douglas. Or even Barnes, if the team uses him properly – he’s not a bad 3-pt shooter when he gets open looks.

            I honestly don’t think the Ws bench was that short of talent this past season. They got bad results, but that was mostly due to poor team play. A coaching failure, not a talent shortage.

          • Draymond is clearly our #1 bench guy. But he’s not a scorer last I checked.

            Most great teams have a bench scorer. We don’t even have a good one.

          • Assuming Myers doesn’t bring in another scorer, Jordan Crawford could be that guy. A great initiator, good at creating shots for himself. In the right system (actually, given ANY offensive system), he could be a decent PG.

            But I think Myers et. al. see basically the same things we do, and they will probably try to acquire another wing scorer/PG. If nothing else, the competition would help keep Jordan C focused.

  130. Sign of things to come? Kerr argued OKC should have stayed big 2nd. half against the Spurs in order to slow their offense, instead of going small to generate more offense to keep up with and push the Spurs. Which makes us wonder how he would coach the Warriors against the Spurs in particular, and what his offensive strategy is in general. (And Jackson’s plan against SA was probably his worst.)

    Comparison with OKC is complicated by two factors, however. When OKC goes big, it can count on two dominant scorers in Durant and Westbrook, although they were contained by the Spurs fairly well. Also when OKC goes small, it really doesn’t have—or hasn’t developed—the other scorers to make small ball work.

    Which leads to the question of priorities in the roster this summer. Instead of tearing up the roster to get a big name and paying a heavy price, the Warriors should follow SA’s lead and flesh out the whole roster. The top six players (starters plus Green) did very, very well. Much as we like Green, however, he still isn’t a consistent scorer, especially outside—he shot 28% on the 3 postseason and 33% during the regular season. A midrange two way player, with more strength in scoring, who could fill in at 3 or 4—what Barnes is supposed to be—would help a great deal. Also (he keeps saying it!) a capable backup point guard who can also shoot and drive on occasion, if Crawford isn’t capable here.

    What the team gains by those additions is flexibility, along with backups to provide starters rest or fill in when they go down. Even if Love, overall, is that much better than Lee, which I don’t believe, acquiring him would exact a price and leave holes in the roster.

    I’m not sure how much we can ask for here. A scoring center, of course, would be great, but that’s out of the question, barring miraculous trade. A sizable scoring big would be great too, but they aren’t cheap and out of range as well. If Speights can be brought out more, however, he might fill in well enough, and he can stand in at center.

    • I gave a list of UFA’s that could be available for the MLE. It’s a short list, and even some of those are unrealistic.

      We really don’t have much flexibility right now.

      • EZ, you’re assuming the Ws make no trades, draft swaps (+cash?) or multi-team deals. If you assume instead that all options (and players) are on the table, things don’t look so frozen. Lacob has said many times that that is the team’s approach to managing the roster, and Myers has proven to be a pretty creative deal maker.

        That being said, I doubt the Ws will make big roster changes this summer, just minor ones. They’d want to get players who fit in the new system. When they have a new system.

        • I’m not assuming no trades, but they would be mostly sideways moves at this point. We don’t have big expiring contracts left or many draft picks to dangle.

          It’s just a fact.

          • Do the Ws need a big deal at this point, or would they do better by letting the current starting 5 run together for another year?

            Do they need a different starter or two? If so, who should the FO try to upgrade?

            In theory, all trades are “sideways” moves, at least salary-wise. To get something, you give up something. I don’t know who the Ws would give up.

            I think the Ws need to upgrade the 2nd unit, but I expect that to happen with or without adding new players to the roster. Ezeli’s coming back, JON should be healthier (for awhile), and Kuzmic/Nedo will both be more experienced. Maybe the team lets Blake leave.

      • The first test, of course, will be what they do with Barnes. He might have more trade value than we realize, especially if other organizations base their assessment on his performance in the two playoffs, and he might be packaged.

  131. I’m sure I’m wrong somewhere @142. We don’t know enough to flesh out the outline. But one thing is certain that surprised us, that Lacob is fully satisfied with Kerr, and most likely he was his top choice among all possible candidates. It is also very highly likely he had been entertaining his strong desire to replace Jackson and bring Kerr in for a year, if not longer, if he could work it out.

    Which leads to an interesting scenario. What if the Warriors did beat the Clippers? Could Kerr have stalled the Knicks another ten days or so? If not, what other option would Lacob have pursued? What was going on in his mind the last minutes of game 7 against the Clips?

    Enough.

    I am relieved, though not enthused. The past four years have been marred by instability and uncertainty in the organization, most over the head coach, which has affected the players as well as us. It has just been too damn distracting. Lost here, last season, is the brilliant play, the 10 game winning streak, being a second shy of sweeping Miami. The organization should settle down now.

    So clean slate time, and I’m hoping for the best.

    I’m also loading up with rotten eggs and tomatoes to throw, just in case.

  132. I’d be curious to get Roy Williams’ (UNC coach) full opinion of Barnes, and of course we’ll never hear it. He won’t criticize one of his former players.

    This article makes clear what Barnes had to deal with—and how destructive the media and hype machine can be. The media pumped up Barnes tremendously right of the bat—and went at him mercilessly when he stumbled.

    “And I get sick and I don’t mean to jump on anybody, but after the first game we play, and he had six turnovers or four turnovers or something like that, and ESPN does a special on how great he is. And then he struggled a little bit and ESPN did something to me that was very embarrassing to me today – put up that that a kid’s 1,175 in field-goal percentage in the country; that’s just ridiculous. And then somebody says, ‘Well, if he hadn’t have gone 0-for 12 against Minnesota, I’m sure he’d be in the top 1,000.’ Now I’m not getting on you, but that’s sick. If you’ve got enough balls to make somebody a big hero like that than admit you were wrong instead of start picking on a kid. Now I had to get that off my chest. But to answer your question.”

    http://www.thesportsbank.net/nba-draft-stock-report/uncs-roy-williams-calls-out-espns-hyprocritical-coverage-of-harrison-barnes/

    He’s been dealing with hype both years with the Warriors, and the expectations they created.

    • barnes himself with his own interviews before his rookie season encouraged the hype. he admitted he was building his ‘brand’. we saw a different personality presented during his prolonged slump this season when he admitted he’d been playing lousy not just for a game or two but for weeks at a time.
      can only let the professionals who have an actual stake in his disposal, kerr and myers, determine what’s coming for the young man.

  133. Why is fate rewarding Dan Gilbert?

    • Where are our stats guys? The Cavs had a 1.7% chance of getting #1 tonight, and that makes three #1 picks in four years. Can anybody calculate the odds of that happening? Aren’t we approaching the infinitesimal? Has anything ever happened in the entire universe during its existence with those odds?

  134. cosmicballoon

    Apparently David Lee was miserable this season, according to Eric Byrnes on KNBR. Just one more reason to dump Jackson.

    http://www.bayareasportsguy.com/eric-byrnes-2013-14-was-david-lees-most-miserable-basketball-season/

    Lee is a classy player and it’s impressive that he kept his mouth shut all season long (Same with Bogut). Kerr should bring back some professionalism back to the Warriors situation. I’m putting it out here right now:
    If healthy, the Warriors win 58 to 60 games next season. Jackson was holding them back with his offensive philosophy and Kerr will not.

  135. This thread is getting too unwieldy. I can’t be the only one who thinks so.

    Felt, can you start an off-season thread or something? Part 1 of many maybe?

  136. GooseLosGatos

    Sorry but I don’t know how to put the link on my IPhone but if you Google David Lee it comes up under news. The article lacked details but said they want to open cap room to sign another Superstar to compliment Curry – odd because I can’t think of who is likely & plausible this off-season.

  137. This is bizarre and confusing on a half dozen fronts:

    http://blogs.mercurynews.com/kawakami/2014/05/20/joe-lacob-interview-transcript-on-the-chances-of-a-big-trade-david-lees-value-kerrs-offensive-plan-and-the-expectationgoal-game/

    TK’s transcript of his recent interview with Lacob.

    I think he really thought the team would be at the top after 4-5 years. That, after all, is what he said when he took over. Now he’s talking about a five year plan, which is sensible, though five year plans have had limited success in the past, in other countries with different political systems than ours.

    It’s a relief to hear the organization talking about offense and making it a priority, for the first time I recall. We can thank Jackson for that. They saw the effects of a stalled offense, though they didn’t get the point with Smart. The comparison with the Spurs is intriguing and cause for hope. At least there’s recognition of the need of strategy and a strategist, whatever Kerr can bring here.

    Criticism of Lacob aside, although I suspect he cares about it, Lacob has high expectations (artificially high), and I wouldn’t be surprised he isn’t being critical of himself. He’s had a heavy influence, and is recognizing several mistakes now, not least of which is hiring his third coach. Also— bracket Jackson’s forays—the organization really wasn’t put together and didn’t communicate well. Other decisions must be sitting on him heavily. All of which suggests he’s finally ready to put more authority in the hands of Meyers and his head coach, which hasn’t happened before. This is an improvement.

    Maybe.

    The CBS piece FB linked in his tweet suggests the plays for Love and Melo may just be theatre to show GSW is a major player. Or maybe he still has stardust in his eyes. If so, prayer is becoming attractive.

    Is there a chaplain in the house?

  138. Matt Moore at CBS on the merits of a Lee/Orlando trade:

    “Anyway, if the Magic did this it would essentially be suicide. The worst thing you can do with a rebuilding project is try to rush it, and the worst way to try and rush it is with players like Lee. To be clear, Lee’s a good player who’s unfairly maligned for his defense with no consideration of his offense and effort contributions. But the Magic are the opposite of a team to need him. There’s not only no need to rush the rebuilding process, but there are substantial reasons not to. Trying to do so simply ties up your cap and lands you back in the lottery, desperately hoping that luck will bail you out and rejuvenate your woe-begotten franchise.”

    http://www.cbssports.com/nba/eye-on-basketball/24568669/report-magic-could-have-interest-in-trade-for-david-lee

  139. If the Warriors are so eager to free up money the next few season so they can make a big deal, why aren’t they looking to move Bogut?

    I can think of two good reasons.

    • the current regime has much more of its credibility invested in bogut than in lee. a starting center is tougher to replace than the starting four, and they’re clearly not ready psychologically/conceptually to embrace going center-free like Mia or Brk.
      the lacobites always need to display their willingness to spend big to secure an elite player to complement curry. their limited assets after the iguodala gambit pretty much dictate that lee’s contract has to be dispatched to put fuel in their bandwagon.

      • Nelson, in the last year of his regime, thought a versatile, two-way 4/5 was more important than a center, which is why they got Lee. These also were in very short supply, with few good options, which is why Lee commanded a hefty salary.

        The idea is to make significant roster moves to improve the team. Bogut’s limited but useful services might be supplied by a lesser and cheaper light, and whatever losses offset by the benefits of whatever player they picked up with the money.

        Your interpretation of credibility and psychological need (is there any difference) was my first reason. My second was I doubt they could get anyone to pick up his contract.

  140. Maui Nellie

    Feltbot, I saw your tweet that read “In the end, the hiring of Steve Kerr has absolutely nothing to do with basketball, and everything to do with Joe Lacob.” I respect your opinion and love your blog but I was very impressed listening to this interview of Kerr yesterday on KNBR. He doesn’t sound like someone who has “nothing to do with basketball”, in fact, just the opposite. I like his ideas, was wondering what you thought about the interview? Thanks.

    Part 1

    http://cdn.stationcaster.com/stations/knbr/media/mpeg/5_20__New_W_s_Head_Coach_Steve_Kerr_Part_1-1400627477.mp3

    Part 2

    http://cdn.stationcaster.com/stations/knbr/media/mpeg/5_20__New_W_s_Head_Coach_Steve_Kerr_Part_2-1400627340.mp3

    • GooseLosGatos

      For all the Lacob hate, out of 10 other owners who wanted to buy the franchise – how many would have rebuilt the team to a perennial playoff contender within 24 months after 1 playoff appearance in 15 years. That’s a rhetorical question by the way. Hard enough to rebuild an NBA franchise in 5 years let alone 24 months.

      The league is marketed on players and its never ‘cool’ to praise owners or cut them some slack – they make a good villain & better talk radio.

      Forest from the trees Feltbot….

      • Thanks to the David Lee trade, Lacob inherited a playoff core, that Nellie could have had pointed at the playoffs in the first year of Lacob’s ownership.

    • Here’s a simple explanation for my tweet:

      1) SVG is a proven, brilliant basketball coach, rumored to be the favorite choice of some Warriors players (read Curry). He could have been the Warriors first choice, if Lacob had been willing to cede control over personnel decisions.

      Bottom line, SVG had no intention of working under an amateur GM. Do you really think he’d rather be living in Detroit and coaching a rebuild?

      2) Despite the power of his power point presentation, Kerr was hired because Lacob likes him, and because he knows how to be a good corporate employee. Read between the lines of what Myers and Lacob said, and you will see the words “humble”, “respectful” and “humility” come up a lot.

      How many great coaches in NBA history do those words describe?

      I like everything Kerr is saying about the future direction of the franchise — up tempo, early offense, stretch four, passing offense — but those things have been completely obvious to know-nothing amateurs like myself for years.

      Bottom line, Kerr is a 48 year old rookie coach who failed upward. (Would he even want to be a coach if he had any prayer of getting another GM job?)

      Clearly, he wasn’t hired for basketball reasons. No one has any idea what kind of Xs and Os coach he’ll make, least of all himself. No one has any idea whether he can lead a locker room.

      He was hired so that Joe Lacob can reassert and retain his control over every level of Warriors basketball operations.

      • GooseLosGatos

        I know it’s not ‘cool’ to praise & trust a billionaire venture capitalist who got to where he is through an impoverished background – first member of his family to graduate from college by the way.

        But given how far we’ve come in less than 4 years I guess I’m ‘uncool’ to say I give him the benefit of the doubt.

        What was that saying…… Oh yeah – ‘Think Different’

        • I’m not clear… do you trust Joe Lacob because he’s a billionaire, or because he’s a venture capitalist? Is there anyone who got rich from the internet/Greenspan/Wall Street bubble whom you wouldn’t trust?

          Donald Sterling is another billionaire rag to riches story. Would we have been correct to trust his basketball decisions over the last 40 years? The basketball decisions of all other billionaire NBA owners? Or just Lacob?

          Do you trust Lacob because he inherited the playoff core of Stephen Curry and David Lee, or because after 2 years of intentional tanking, he finally decided to surround them with enough role players to field a team?

          Is your definition of “Think Different” hiring a 48 year old member of your golf circle who has no prior coaching experience?

          It sounds very similar to the way corporate directors are hired. If that is “think different”, then clearly I need to change the way I think.

          • GooseLosGatos

            It’s easy to pick apart the Joe Lacob mistakes – but little time is ever spent discussing his many successes – drafting Klay, Ezeli, Green. Trading for Bogut to help turn Cuirry into a superstar. Hiring Jerry West. Getting Iggy. Revamping the training staff. Being named best run sports franchise last month. We can quibble about Myers & M. Jackson it they were innovative moves that personally I thought helped the franchise.

            How many of the prospective GS would be owners could have transformed the team in such a short span of time? I doubt any others would have the franchise where it is now.

            As to ‘Think Different’ – it’s easy and fun to hate on someone like Lacob but far harder to acknowledge what he has done – at least for some.

          • GooseLosGatos

            And by the way, love the site & smart analysis boardering on brilliant at times. But in my estimation, Lacob is far more often seen and portrayed for what he’s not than what he is and more importantly what he has accomplished in such a short span of time . TK

          • This is far better analysis than your first comment. And it may not be easy to find in the sprawl of the site, but I have never shied away from commending Lacob for what I viewed as his good moves.

            Is it OK if I judge this move independently of those?

          • You are more patient than I am, Goose, and must be younger. But four years is a long time to wait, especially when we see clubs turning around with less talent in a much shorter time. Some of your other praise has been open to serious debate here.

            As for training staff, etc., as of now the team has none and only one head coach. No one in four years was brought up who is around now who might have provided continuity and support. This is an egregious error—and it’s still not certain the problem has been solved.

          • cosmicballoon

            So the biggest error is hiring an inexperienced coach and letting him pick his own staff. Now Lacob is doing the same exact thing again, except he has more control over the coach this time.

            Rgg- the organization has turned itself around whether you like it or not. The Warriors are still on the upswing in terms of their roster and ability to compete. We are just getting into Curry and Thompson’s primes. They are unquestionably the best scoring backcourt on the NBA. The roster and players are the positive. The coaching situation is the negative so far. Jackson showed his limitations (offense) and Kerr is an unknown commodity. That’s the weakness here. If the roster takes to Kerr and remains healthy, the Warriors should be playing in the finals in 2-3 years. I have never seen a better team in GS, including run TMC.

    • cosmicballoon

      I agree with Feltbot’s tweet…why else would he hire a second consecutive coach with no experience. It’s ludicrous.

      That said, Kerr may be the best and right choice and he might succeed quickly because he seems like a guy with a great head on his shoulders and a decent basketball mind. This was one of the factors, not THE factor, in making this decision. That being said, Kerr will almost certainly be out coached this season. It took Jackson 3 whole years to figure out how to properly do rotations. Let’s see how Kerr does.

  141. I’ll leave this thread up another day in case anyone wants to discuss @157. Tomorrow, new thread for a new era.

  142. We get “trade Lee” chatter every few months, don’t we? There ought to be a rule: no one gets to bring it up unless they have real alternatives that would really improve the team.

    20 & 10, people. That’s not Harrison Barnes, and it’s not D Green. It’s D Lee, the only Warrior who has done it in the last 3 years. The guy who has ALWAYS done it, rain or shine, through good teams and bad.

    The only trade I’ve heard discussed that could replace Lee’s numbers would be Lee for Love – but what happens to Love’s scoring numbers if he’s not the featured shooter? And if you thought Lee’s D was bad, watch Love in action when Peckovic’s not around. Pee-yoo! And if you thought Lee was expensive, check out Love’s deal. Lee looks like a bargain in comparison.

    • Lee would be a better bargain if somehow he could find his jump shot again. I’m not sure how much of that was due to MJ, but at times it was painful to watch him think about shooting the jumper and then decide to take it into trouble, spin and get blocked. I like Lee a lot but with an MIA jump shot he messes up spacing with Bogut in there. You guys have any thoughts as to what happened to that jumper? he used to be money with that.

    • ” but what happens to Love’s scoring numbers if he’s not the featured shooter?”

      He’d be even more efficient?

      You do realize as the featured scorer for Minnesota he shot 59% TS on 29% USG. That is essentially what Curry gave us this season and it is far better than Klay or Lee.

      I can only imagine that surrounded by Curry and Klay, Love becomes even better offensively. It’s a no-brainer trade. That’s why it won’t happen.

      • The first reason the trade is a no brainer is that Love is several years younger. The second reason is that Lee is now afflicted with a chronic injury. The third is that Lacob will never hire a GM or coach who puts Lee in the right system and uses him correctly.

        Possible reasons not to do the trade: 1) Love’s teammates have never liked him. He got into it with Barea and at least one other this season. 2) He’s not a leader. Ricky Rubio just gave an interview stating just that. 3) His teams have always performed far worse than their talent or coaching would suggest. 4) (And you will never, ever see this in print anywhere else) He is a far worse defender than David Lee. 5) Love will cost much more than Lee.

        • It’s a scary thought that Lee has a chronic injury. If so, do you think he would even pass a physical? That has to happen for a trade to occur.

          • I’m not a doctor, but I doubt it’s coincidental that Lee suffered two straight season ending “abdominal” tears or strains, and then a hamstring tear or weakness on the same side in the third season.

            But no, these would not cause him to fail a physical when “healed”.

          • Lees injury seems to be the nerves around the waist connecting to the leg and back and is chronic.

        • What Kevin Love most has is what David Lee most lacks, the ability to draw attention to himself and appear a “star.”

          • I wouldn’t exactly call Kevin Love an engaging persona. He has nothing on Blake Griffin, who is at least funny in Kia commercials.

          • Stars don’t have to be engaging anymore. And Griffin didn’t appear on the cover of a video game as Love did (which was it? EA Sports NCAA? My son and I used to play it).

  143. It looks like Alvin Gentry getting a lot of interest for head coaching jobs, which makes him highly unlikely to join Kerr.

    A damn shame. One of a handful of coaches perfect to lead a Stephen Curry team.

  144. GooseLosGatos

    Feltbot,

    you don’t think Jerry West was a good hire? Could we have got Iggy without having an ex player agent as GM and then got a first round pick for 400K through 3 trades in 15 minutes? Klay at 14 was a steal… M. Jackson deserved to be let go but he was the right hire for the right time…. (yes, I know you disagree)

    I guess I’m just a glass half-full guy…

    • Im not a particular fan of Jerry West as a GM. Virtually all of his success can be attributed to luck. Drafting Magic, working for the most desirable free agent location in the league. Kobe was a particular farce, the result of an arm-bending power play.

      Having said that, when has Lacob ever listened to him? Defied him on Jackson, again on Barnes. Do you think Kerr was West’s choice?

      Klay was an 11, but obviously a great pick. Maybe that was West.

      I’m not impressed with anything involving the Iggy transaction, except that it remedied the open sore of the Barnes pick. Not $48m for 4 years, not giving up Jarrett Jack and the cap space for a Landry replacement, not giving up 2 first rounders to dump a contract that should have been amnestied years before if Lacob was telling the truth about being willing to spend money to win. Not even Iggy himself — a glorified role player who has come up small in every playoff series he’s played in.

      Mark Jackson the right hire for the time? Lacob started with a Hall of Fame coach on his payroll, who was ready to rock an allstar pick and roll combo from day one, and forego the whole hellish 2 years of tanking fiasco.

      I’m the true glass half full guy, who has kept his optimism in the face of one of the most egregiously incompetent (and arrogant) managements in the league.

      • “I’m the true glass half full guy”

        A shot glass maybe.

      • the lead-up p.r. to the thompson draft was unusual, and led me to suspect that west was the primary mover. they didn’t obscure their interest in thompson, nor that he was the personal choice of west. generally there are mixed expectations placed on the lower end of the lottery, and they seemed content to give west either the blame or the credit. west’s contributions to LA as g.m. were all in the ‘no-brainer’ class — bryant essentially chose them, as o’neal did when he became a free agent. rather less successful in Mem, with one good season from his pick as coach, h.brown, and a mixed bag of player acquisitions that included r.gay and b.cardinal.

        the owner seems incapable of appreciating the ‘hold’. he couldn’t hold his single amnesty coupon to close an impact deal, nor the expiring contracts on biedrins and jefferson. he seems in love with the publicity of making or at least chasing deals, intent on proving he can ‘get there’ (wherever that is) quicker than his peers.

      • GooseLosGatos

        Kinda speechless after that diatribe.

        Renovation & success in the NBA is all luck – no skill.

        Jerry West was a crappy GM; Joe Lacob is a bad owner; Mark Jackson has no worth as a coach in a guaranteed contract league; Lacob is really cheap; Etc Etc Etc

        Sensing a little pattern here…

        Joe hired the wrong guy – we should start a grass roots campaign for FB as GM as its clear all these folks are 100% incompetent & totally unqualified & wrong about pretty much everything – oh except winning 51 & making it to the playoffs last 2 after going 1 and 15 playoff wise.

        Joe called the wrong guy – we should grass-roots nominate you for GM…

        • Here’s a suggestion for you if you want your opinions taken seriously: If you don’t like the conclusions, concentrate on refuting the analysis before starting in on the ad hominem attacks.

          And try to bear in mind that Joe Lacob STARTED with one of the best players in the league, if not in league history. And an allstar center/PF. And Monta Ellis. And a guy in charge who was not only a Hall of Fame coach, but the best GM in league history. That’s what he started with.

          4 years ago.

          And yet here we are again, starting all over with yet another rookie coach. Lacob’s third in 4 years. And a roster that is still deeply flawed, and capped out for years to come.

          And irony of ironies, with Lacob apparently finally willing to listen to the suggestion that he rejected out of hand 4 years ago: That the league has changed, and this team needs to play Nellieball with a stretch four.

          Where would Don Nelson or Greg Popovich or Pat Riley or Stan van Gundy or Darryl Morey have had this team given the same 4 years?

          That’s my standard. You can have yours.

          • the disrespectful manner lacob chose when he fired nelson is in fact the first example of his inability to adopt a ‘hold’ position. there wasn’t even a shadow puppet show about starting over with a fresh cast, because he retained riley, rowell, and smart.

            on one of the busiest GS fan blogs, the piece inaugurating the kerr era praised him as having played under the ‘two greatest coaches of the modern era’, excluding Wilkens from the ‘greatest’ and the ‘modern era'(many of his wins actually came in the 90’s for Atl but with limited post season success against tough eastern conference competition), apparently. fine if the big jackson and popovich are called the most successful based on their championships. but many fans, including lacob, don’t include nelson, or ramsay, with the ‘greatest’, absurd.

          • GooseLosGatos

            1) The roster is not ‘stuck in cement’ through its contracts & cap. All of their big contract player have ‘asset’ value. Bogut – flaws and all is tradeable & for more than just cap space – voted 11 best defensive player GM’s this year and in a center starved league that makes him a commodity. Iggy – same thing. Lee – same thing – you’re already getting a sense Lee has some real value for certain types of teams around the league injuries amd all. And I suspect you could get more than cap room for each and get the trades done fairly quickly.

            Furthermore, just about any roster that goes from the basement to 51 wins in three years will have its imperfections. The Warriors were smart in that all their player acquisitions are ‘team guys’ who aren’t lockeroom cancers and do have value to one degree or another. And credit to Myers as I get the sense he will burn the phone lines to find those few deals that will upgrade the roster further.

            2) As to your affinity for Van Gundy – brilliant strategic coach who tailors the system to his players but who also grates on them. He’s had a history of being tuned out by his players both in Miami. Would he last 3+ years in a player’s league? Kerr will not have that problem.

            3) Jerry West – overrated…Huuuhhhh????? Yes, he traded up for Kobe and a few other teams would have signed him had his agent not strong armed them – but West did spot him where most others didn’t. West has always been brilliant at finding Derreck Fisher/Draymond Green type players in the late 1st/2nd round who have 12+ year careers and are what he describes as valuable pieces of any contender. Did Jerry luck into some great players like Magic & Shaq – yes. But he also assembled most of the pheriperal players who are integral to any contending team becoming a Dynasty.

            Was it an accident West spotted Klay? If teams could do-over that draft he’d likely be a top 3 pick. And was it an accident that he got Memphis into the playoffs for the first time in franchise history within just 2 years of becoming GM of the franchise without any high picks or any superstar free agent signings. He simply pieced together a winning roster with spare parts around the league.

            4)Why does not having prior head coaching experience automatically preclude you from being a good first year head coach? Pat Riley went from the broadcast booth to the Championship. Phil Jackson though an assistant replaced Doug Collins and that was considered highly unconventional for the time.

            And as for Kerr simply being a pawn for Lacob. Again, you’re seeing more and more front offices in all sports emphatically state that having good communication lines between GM, owner and coach is of paramount importance in a day and age where the coaches tool kit is much larger (analyitics, etc). That was the same model both the Giants and 49ers used in selecting their coaches & to great success. In his pressed Kerr adroitly pointed out that he learned that lesson from his own GM experience where he admitted he had made mistakes as did Myers and Lacob apparently – a key trait in any successful person and organization. He also mentioned that having good communication with the team’s owner is of tremendous importance when a team doesn’t live up to expectations because the owner and coach can have an honest smart dialogue as opposed to an emotional impulsive reaction from either side.

            5) And having an involved owner doesn’t necessitate the results have to be bad. Dolan – yes. Cuban – no. Lacob isn’t as involved as Cuban initially was & things have turned out pretty well for that franchise. Also, players knowing that the owner is involved creates a higher level of accountability for the players in my estimation.

            6) Is Myers a pawn – in a sense yes. But I think his background as a player agent gives the Warriors an edge in trades, signings and even scouting. The Warriors trade for a first round pick last year for 400k was one of the more remarkable feats I’ve seen by a GM (3 trades in 30 minutes). I guarantee Myers agent background was the main reason that could occurr and I doubt there would be even 3 other GM’s in the league who could have pulled that off. That bodes well for the future when other opportunities arise.

            Also, when managing the new CBA requires GM’s to think 3 to 4 moves ahead now it’s also a huge advantage to have a player agent background. Need info on a player you’d like to trade for or draft – player agents are often more plugged-in & aware of the inner workers of teams & players than many GM’s and Myers has those contacts. Myers would have never made the mistake Cleveland and even Bird/D. Walsh lead Indiana did of signing Bynum – see, he would have known of the potential problems through his contacts. And Myers isn’t some basketball neophyte – he played 4 years at UCLA.

            Does Myers have a non-traditional GM background – yes. But hiring him was a counter-intuitive innovative hire that will reap rewards based on his qualifications in a league where everyone wants a leg up. Also, part of being a GM is delegating – that’s was scouting staffs are for..

            7) Mark Jackson was a good hire for the state of the team & franchise 3 years ago. Yes, that’s what I said. The most important part of changing a losing non-defensive franchise (besides the personell) is installing a winning culture and embedding a defensive DNA into the team & franchise. And even with all Mark’s failings – I believe he accomplished that which is impressive considering the rosters haven’t had what I would desribe as ‘natural’ defenders for the most part. Did he outlive his usefulness – yes. But it was the right hire for the right time.

            8) To the point I’ve been harping on – Lacob has his faults but he has been overall an incredible upgrade from the previous regime/ownership & a more than competent owner. He deserves that credit and as a long suffering Warrior’s fan I’m personally grateful he does own the franchise -weather it’s cool to praise a VC Billionaire somewhat meddling owner or not. He’s admitted he’s made mistakes but if we’ve come this far in a little over 2 years why not have some faith that maybe he can bring a championship to the Bay Area in the next 3.

  145. Saw this at LA Times:

    “Golden State’s new coach, Steve Kerr, has had several conversations over the past few weeks with Gentry about a post as Warriors associate head coach in charge of the offense.”

    He’s trying. . . .

    • That’s great news, but three teams are reported interested in him for head coach.

      • I heard they wanted someone with head coach experience. Here’s hoping they can persuade him with an assistant job that has some authority in it.

  146. Felty: agree with everything you say about our awful owner Joe Lacob,
    Wish you would agree that K. Leonard was a far superior pick over Thompson.

    No reason for you to hold your tongue in the past nor going forward.

    • I don’t know how Felt will feel about this (probably mixed), but Klay right now has is tied for the highest RAPM in his draft class and if you go by ESPN’s RPM (a supposed improvement on RAPM), Klay has the highest rating.

      Klay is on an upwards trajectory for 3 straight seasons and I don’t see any reason for that to stop now.

    • I’d best hold my tongue about RAPM — except to say I have a theory why Iggy’s is so distorted that I should run by EvanZ sometime.

      Why should we compare Klay and Kawhi? How can we? Two great young players who contribute in very different ways.

  147. Kerr speaking of turning over the reins of the offense to Gentry is disconcerting. Would seem to indicate he’s not a creator and thinker. No Bill Walsh.

    • why would a creative mind be content with that broadcast gig ? journalists, and a few, exceptional bloggers like our boss show more creativity as far as sharing a perspective on the game.

  148. CB @ 157 et al.,

    Again, I admire your patience. I assume you saw FB’s reply as well.

    Career years are precious commodities. Several from top players have simply been wasted or not brought to potential. But also lost are years not spent bringing along a full roster, helping them develop an identity and confidence and consistency. Instead after four years, GS is starting over once again with a new coaching regime, and we can only hope they can find that identity before too long and, for once, maintain it. Curry himself has had to play under three different coaches in his years. He must feel like Alex Smith and the former 49s. David Lee certainly should.

    And really, they’ve only brought along maybe five players, four if Lee is traded. It’s hard to count Barnes, or even Bogut, who hasn’t played that much. Ezeli, of course, was down with injury. As for the rest of the spots, they have either departed or soon will.

    Look at what San Antonio was able to do tonight with unknown foreigners and rejects and undervalued players, players they found, kept, and developed under the same system and coach. And the Spurs were able to beat GSW with their second unit this season. Check the roster here, if you’ve forgotten:

    http://espn.go.com/nba/boxscore?id=400489255

    The real test will be whether or not they can improve the roster and deepen it in the years to come. The evidence isn’t great that they can, and it will be the major test of the new regime. Meanwhile San Antonio keeps rolling along with their old men.

    • For the first time in four years, the FO is talking about some kind of coherent offensive strategy, this from Kerr’s classroom lecture at the presser.

      For the first time in four years, the FO recognizes the need for a full, experienced coaching staff and says it is now willing to pay for it, though we haven’t seen it yet. Think the best for Malone and Erman, but both were new and, for different reasons, didn’t stick around. After that, nada.

      For the first time in four years, the FO recognizes the need to move authority to a strategist, although this to a student of the game, and maybe whomever they pick up.

      For the first time in four years, the team is talking about the need for two-way players, this from Kerr’s comments on OKC last night.

      These are things that should have been recognized day one.

    • cosmicballoon

      I hear what you are saying, and I totally agree that the ownership’s coaching decisions have been the central factor that has held this team back. I think we are ignoring the fact that Thompson, Curry and Lee are developing continuity together with Iggy and Bogut learning how to play together, etc.

      Remember the beginning of this past season when the team was running a pass-first offense that was destroying teams before Iggy got hurt? That was where the Warriors need to be — and the closest thing to what San Antonio does on the court. Jackson, in his stupidity, decided to go away from that once Iggy went down, and we saw 0nly glimpses the rest of the season. With Green’s development, there is absolutely not reason Kerr can’t install an offense that has that same capability.

      I literally think Jackson’s reliance on ISO’s this year killed the season. It misused David Lee, misused Bogut, mis-used Iggy and misused Thompson. (Curry in an ISO is a thing of beauty because he doesn’t post up).

      If Kerr can install an offense that doesn’t rely on isolation 25% of the time, any role players will do, especially if the Warriors can find a stretch 4. (Wait, they have one — BARNES).

      • Yeah, not just Barnes, but Green. And a stretch-five, Mokur.

        It seems like Kerr is thinking of something very specific: Non-smallball stretch fours. Think Amir Johnson, Patrick Patterson, Ryan Anderson etc. Or maybe Love, of course.

        Very clear, of course, that he has no intention to play either Green or Barnes significant minutes at the four.

      • What will be forgotten is that the FO has changed its mind on offense. It’s hard to track down precise statements, because they weren’t made and there wasn’t anyone qualified to articulate them, but the original desire was to go to a more ball controlled offense based on a big center. What we won’t find is what the FO told their coaches, but I can’t believe there wasn’t word from above.

        That was the attraction to Bogut—and this statement was made—pass to him in the low post where he will draw defenders and then kick out to the shooters. And the belief was they had plenty of offense and they kept loading up on defensive players.

        It didn’t work because Bogut can’t finish under the bucket and it’s an ineffective plan in the NBA today anyway.

        It was what Smart tried his first and only season—posting up Biedrins—which didn’t work and then Biedrins went MIA anyway and they had to improvise the rest of the way without any real center.

        Smart bent over backwards to please the FO—MT II made this point. I still find it odd that someone who spent years under Nelson reversed course.

        Jackson, in exile partly self-imposed but in all likelihood because the FO early decided not to rehire him anyway, probably acted on his own, reverting to the old school basketball he knew, and his decisions were just baffling. But there was no voice to give opposition, in part because Jackson wouldn’t listen, but also because there was no offensive mind put in place from the start.

  149. How would Love have performed offensively and defensively if he were in Lee’s shoes the past years?

    Year 1: Lee had no bona fide center at all or much size elsewhere. Biedrins started and went MIA, with no one else other than scrubs at center, though Udoh, undersized, filled in valiantly.

    Year 2: Same deal, when Brown went down and Biedrins again was MIA. Then of course the trade, and Lee went down himself.

    Year 3: Having to play with a rookie center because Bogut was out most of the season (and they did quite well, btw).

    Year 4: Having to play under Jackson’s offensive scheme. But guess what happened on defense. They team finally had centers and the team defense improved dramatically.

    Most of the stats on Lee’s defense during years 1-3 are just meaningless. He had too little help and too much to compensate for.

  150. Pingback: The Steve Kerr Era: Open Thread - Feltbot's Warriors Blog