dk7th wrote:

holfresh wrote:

dk7th wrote:

holfresh wrote:

Nalod wrote:

holfresh wrote:

Nalod wrote:Brad Stevens got 6 years.

Brad Steven had 12 years of coaching experience before the Celtics..A proven winner at the college level and is making about 3.6 per...

Of course he did. He coached kids at a mid major. Kerr played for years in the NBA in winning environments.

Information is plentiful but knowledge is a valuable comodity. Stevens is learning the NBA and Kerr needs to sit in the coach's seat.

Forget the money, is there a problem that you might have with Kerr?

Its not like Knicks grabbing someone with no NBA experience. NBA has a history of some very successful coaches who had no experience.

Kerr has no NBA coaching experience...But here is the thing...I could be wrong but to me, Phil's value was his ability to communicate and lead...It wasn't his system...I think the Knicks and this organization needs this badly, leadership...So yes, I too want Phil here...Have to highlight that because some don't believe it..Problem is Phil system has not worked in the NBA other than when Phil was on the sidelines...His assistants have all failed as head coaches...Phil seems to be only looking at coaches that he wants to implement his system and control..Well, Phil is only looking at one coach...Isn't Zen synonymous with enlightenment, far reaching, outside the box ideas...Is Phil working on his legacy and his coaching tree??..

Does Kerr strike you as a guy working another coaching gig after this??..He has been away from playing ball a long time ago, why hasn't he pursued coaching before..So now he may get the gig, he wants top dollar like Popovich??..The only reason he is even considered to be paid that is because Phil Jackson is in the front office...Doesn't strike you as a money grab and he may not be in this for the right reasons??..Does this team, this organization, need more guys coming in, tooling it???

no that is not what zen means

thus the term synonymous...

the most zen thing that jackson has uttered thus far: "I'm all about moving forward," Jackson said. "Just deal with what is and move forward. If it's in the cards, man are we fortunate. If it's not in the cards, man are we fortunate. We're going forward anyway."

zen is a form of non-attachment.

so far as kerr, you haven't been listening closely to his color commentating. it's very sharp and insightful stuff. and although i loved mark jackson's color commentating i don't recall his observations as being as clinical and coach-like. i mean "hand down man down" and "making others around you better" were lines he often used but you never got the sense he was auditioning for a coaching job.

Bro, I can draw you a list of great color analyst that bombed as head coaches..Quinn Buckner, Magic, Isiah, I can go on...

holfresh wrote:

dk7th wrote:

holfresh wrote:

dk7th wrote:

holfresh wrote:

Nalod wrote:

holfresh wrote:

Nalod wrote:Brad Stevens got 6 years.

Brad Steven had 12 years of coaching experience before the Celtics..A proven winner at the college level and is making about 3.6 per...

Of course he did. He coached kids at a mid major. Kerr played for years in the NBA in winning environments.

Information is plentiful but knowledge is a valuable comodity. Stevens is learning the NBA and Kerr needs to sit in the coach's seat.

Forget the money, is there a problem that you might have with Kerr?

Its not like Knicks grabbing someone with no NBA experience. NBA has a history of some very successful coaches who had no experience.

Kerr has no NBA coaching experience...But here is the thing...I could be wrong but to me, Phil's value was his ability to communicate and lead...It wasn't his system...I think the Knicks and this organization needs this badly, leadership...So yes, I too want Phil here...Have to highlight that because some don't believe it..Problem is Phil system has not worked in the NBA other than when Phil was on the sidelines...His assistants have all failed as head coaches...Phil seems to be only looking at coaches that he wants to implement his system and control..Well, Phil is only looking at one coach...Isn't Zen synonymous with enlightenment, far reaching, outside the box ideas...Is Phil working on his legacy and his coaching tree??..

Does Kerr strike you as a guy working another coaching gig after this??..He has been away from playing ball a long time ago, why hasn't he pursued coaching before..So now he may get the gig, he wants top dollar like Popovich??..The only reason he is even considered to be paid that is because Phil Jackson is in the front office...Doesn't strike you as a money grab and he may not be in this for the right reasons??..Does this team, this organization, need more guys coming in, tooling it???

no that is not what zen means

thus the term synonymous...

the most zen thing that jackson has uttered thus far: "I'm all about moving forward," Jackson said. "Just deal with what is and move forward. If it's in the cards, man are we fortunate. If it's not in the cards, man are we fortunate. We're going forward anyway."

zen is a form of non-attachment.

so far as kerr, you haven't been listening closely to his color commentating. it's very sharp and insightful stuff. and although i loved mark jackson's color commentating i don't recall his observations as being as clinical and coach-like. i mean "hand down man down" and "making others around you better" were lines he often used but you never got the sense he was auditioning for a coaching job.

Bro, I can draw you a list of great color analyst that bombed as head coaches..Quinn Buckner, Magic, Isiah, I can go on...

sure the list is long. does that justify not hiring him? because you spot a trend? mark jackson didn't bomb as a coach but he did not get along with the front office. at least with kerr there will be some organizational continuity. how long has it been since that has been the case? it's pretty much been utter chaos....

holfresh wrote:

Nalod wrote:

holfresh wrote:

Nalod wrote:Brad Stevens got 6 years.

Brad Steven had 12 years of coaching experience before the Celtics..A proven winner at the college level and is making about 3.6 per...

Of course he did. He coached kids at a mid major. Kerr played for years in the NBA in winning environments.

Information is plentiful but knowledge is a valuable comodity. Stevens is learning the NBA and Kerr needs to sit in the coach's seat.

Forget the money, is there a problem that you might have with Kerr?

Its not like Knicks grabbing someone with no NBA experience. NBA has a history of some very successful coaches who had no experience.

Kerr has no NBA coaching experience...But here is the thing...I could be wrong but to me, Phil's value was his ability to communicate and lead...It wasn't his system...I think the Knicks and this organization needs this badly, leadership...So yes, I too want Phil here...Have to highlight that because some don't believe it..Problem is Phil system has not worked in the NBA other than when Phil was on the sidelines...His assistants have all failed as head coaches...Phil seems to be only looking at coaches that he wants to implement his system and control..Well, Phil is only looking at one coach...Isn't Zen synonymous with enlightenment, far reaching, outside the box ideas...Is Phil working on his legacy and his coaching tree??..

Does Kerr strike you as a guy working another coaching gig after this??..He's been away from playing ball a long time ago, why hasn't he pursued coaching before..So now he may get the gig, he wants top dollar like Popovich??..The only reason he is even considered to be paid that is because Phil Jackson is in the front office...Doesn't strike you as a money grab and he may not be in this for the right reasons??..Does this team, this organization, need more guys coming in, tooling it???

Never persued coaching for family reasons.

If Phil is about communication and leadership and this is the guy he really really wants, that should be enough. Since he has not been a coach, isn't that out of the box? A fresh approach?

Money grab? Its what you do when Dolan signs the check. If knicks are relevant and ball movement is triangulated and teams trajectory is top 8 would that be a worthy price for someone other than Holfresh to pay?

Is Kerr being wooed or actively seeking employment?

My take is Phil would have taken him to Seattle if he ended there, or maybe somewhere else if he was running a team. This is the guy he wants. The money? Not my problem. Larry was not my problem, MDA was not my problem, Woody's contract no my problem.

Mike Brown got 4 years left on his contract. Cleveland does not see this as a problem. Its about getting the right guy. Not sure where you are on the MeloTree but maybe he has said he'd be more inclinded to stay. THat might increase Kerr's value to Dolan.

Just throwing it out there.

Im going to touch on why I think Phil's coaching tree has not branched out much: I don't think most teams have the right GM in place, roster in place, and assistant coach's in place. You gotta clean house and to do this with a rookie coach takes an owner with very deep pockets and appetite for a rebuild. Phils most important years were likely his first few with Bulls and with a juice card full of cred and a willing owner/GM it all came together. I very much think this is always more than just Mike/Pippen and Kobe/Shaq which most fans think is the reason why Phil wins. Don't get me wrong, its big but its about the role players and the stars trust in them.

Thus, Kerr being part of that machine, and under Pop gives him the perspective. Maybe phil sees a lot of himself in Kerr, or the two of them are just very much in synch with each other.

Hollfresh, is it the money?

holfresh wrote:

dk7th wrote:

holfresh wrote:

dk7th wrote:

holfresh wrote:

dk7th wrote:

holfresh wrote:

Nalod wrote:

holfresh wrote:

Nalod wrote:Brad Stevens got 6 years.

Brad Steven had 12 years of coaching experience before the Celtics..A proven winner at the college level and is making about 3.6 per...

Of course he did. He coached kids at a mid major. Kerr played for years in the NBA in winning environments.

Information is plentiful but knowledge is a valuable comodity. Stevens is learning the NBA and Kerr needs to sit in the coach's seat.

Forget the money, is there a problem that you might have with Kerr?

Its not like Knicks grabbing someone with no NBA experience. NBA has a history of some very successful coaches who had no experience.

Kerr has no NBA coaching experience...But here is the thing...I could be wrong but to me, Phil's value was his ability to communicate and lead...It wasn't his system...I think the Knicks and this organization needs this badly, leadership...So yes, I too want Phil here...Have to highlight that because some don't believe it..Problem is Phil system has not worked in the NBA other than when Phil was on the sidelines...His assistants have all failed as head coaches...Phil seems to be only looking at coaches that he wants to implement his system and control..Well, Phil is only looking at one coach...Isn't Zen synonymous with enlightenment, far reaching, outside the box ideas...Is Phil working on his legacy and his coaching tree??..

Does Kerr strike you as a guy working another coaching gig after this??..He has been away from playing ball a long time ago, why hasn't he pursued coaching before..So now he may get the gig, he wants top dollar like Popovich??..The only reason he is even considered to be paid that is because Phil Jackson is in the front office...Doesn't strike you as a money grab and he may not be in this for the right reasons??..Does this team, this organization, need more guys coming in, tooling it???

no that is not what zen means

thus the term synonymous...

the most zen thing that jackson has uttered thus far: "I'm all about moving forward," Jackson said. "Just deal with what is and move forward. If it's in the cards, man are we fortunate. If it's not in the cards, man are we fortunate. We're going forward anyway."

zen is a form of non-attachment.

so far as kerr, you haven't been listening closely to his color commentating. it's very sharp and insightful stuff. and although i loved mark jackson's color commentating i don't recall his observations as being as clinical and coach-like. i mean "hand down man down" and "making others around you better" were lines he often used but you never got the sense he was auditioning for a coaching job.

Bro, I can draw you a list of great color analyst that bombed as head coaches..Quinn Buckner, Magic, Isiah, I can go on...

sure the list is long. does that justify not hiring him? because you spot a trend? mark jackson didn't bomb as a coach but he did not get along with the front office. at least with kerr there will be some organizational continuity. how long has it been since that has been the case? it's pretty much been utter chaos....

No, your arguments are using ability as a color commentator to forecast his abilities as a head coach..I'm simply saying it doesn't translate...Don't twist what I'm saying, you know exactly what I'm saying...

you're saying you have seen so much failure of colormen as coaches that you choose to draw the line at steve kerr. doesn't make sense. instead of seeing it as the most cynical sort of money grab why not look at the situation as moving towards organizational continuity? how else are we going to rise out of the utter chaos and farce we have seen since dolan took over? and now that he has willingly and gratefully stepped aside and handed over total control to phil jackson, it only make sense to see what they can do without dolan's chronic meddling.

"organizational continuity" is part and parcel of a "change of culture." things must be ordered from the top down in order for it all to work.

dk7th wrote:

holfresh wrote:

dk7th wrote:

holfresh wrote:

dk7th wrote:

holfresh wrote:

dk7th wrote:

holfresh wrote:

Nalod wrote:

holfresh wrote:

Nalod wrote:Brad Stevens got 6 years.

Brad Steven had 12 years of coaching experience before the Celtics..A proven winner at the college level and is making about 3.6 per...

Of course he did. He coached kids at a mid major. Kerr played for years in the NBA in winning environments.

Information is plentiful but knowledge is a valuable comodity. Stevens is learning the NBA and Kerr needs to sit in the coach's seat.

Forget the money, is there a problem that you might have with Kerr?

Its not like Knicks grabbing someone with no NBA experience. NBA has a history of some very successful coaches who had no experience.

Kerr has no NBA coaching experience...But here is the thing...I could be wrong but to me, Phil's value was his ability to communicate and lead...It wasn't his system...I think the Knicks and this organization needs this badly, leadership...So yes, I too want Phil here...Have to highlight that because some don't believe it..Problem is Phil system has not worked in the NBA other than when Phil was on the sidelines...His assistants have all failed as head coaches...Phil seems to be only looking at coaches that he wants to implement his system and control..Well, Phil is only looking at one coach...Isn't Zen synonymous with enlightenment, far reaching, outside the box ideas...Is Phil working on his legacy and his coaching tree??..

Does Kerr strike you as a guy working another coaching gig after this??..He has been away from playing ball a long time ago, why hasn't he pursued coaching before..So now he may get the gig, he wants top dollar like Popovich??..The only reason he is even considered to be paid that is because Phil Jackson is in the front office...Doesn't strike you as a money grab and he may not be in this for the right reasons??..Does this team, this organization, need more guys coming in, tooling it???

no that is not what zen means

thus the term synonymous...

the most zen thing that jackson has uttered thus far: "I'm all about moving forward," Jackson said. "Just deal with what is and move forward. If it's in the cards, man are we fortunate. If it's not in the cards, man are we fortunate. We're going forward anyway."

zen is a form of non-attachment.

so far as kerr, you haven't been listening closely to his color commentating. it's very sharp and insightful stuff. and although i loved mark jackson's color commentating i don't recall his observations as being as clinical and coach-like. i mean "hand down man down" and "making others around you better" were lines he often used but you never got the sense he was auditioning for a coaching job.

Bro, I can draw you a list of great color analyst that bombed as head coaches..Quinn Buckner, Magic, Isiah, I can go on...

sure the list is long. does that justify not hiring him? because you spot a trend? mark jackson didn't bomb as a coach but he did not get along with the front office. at least with kerr there will be some organizational continuity. how long has it been since that has been the case? it's pretty much been utter chaos....

No, your arguments are using ability as a color commentator to forecast his abilities as a head coach..I'm simply saying it doesn't translate...Don't twist what I'm saying, you know exactly what I'm saying...

you're saying you have seen so much failure of colormen as coaches that you choose to draw the line at steve kerr. doesn't make sense. instead of seeing it as the most cynical sort of money grab why not look at the situation as moving towards organizational continuity? how else are we going to rise out of the utter chaos and farce we have seen since dolan took over? and now that he has willingly and gratefully stepped aside and handed over total control to phil jackson, it only make sense to see what they can do without dolan's chronic meddling.

"organizational continuity" is part and parcel of a "change of culture." things must be ordered from the top down in order for it all to work.

No, I am saying there is no correlation between being a good color man and a good head coach..I can do that in Spanish if it's easier for u..

dk7th wrote:

holfresh wrote:

dk7th wrote:

holfresh wrote:

dk7th wrote:

holfresh wrote:

dk7th wrote:

holfresh wrote:

dk7th wrote:

holfresh wrote:

Nalod wrote:

holfresh wrote:

Nalod wrote:Brad Stevens got 6 years.

Brad Steven had 12 years of coaching experience before the Celtics..A proven winner at the college level and is making about 3.6 per...

Of course he did. He coached kids at a mid major. Kerr played for years in the NBA in winning environments.

Information is plentiful but knowledge is a valuable comodity. Stevens is learning the NBA and Kerr needs to sit in the coach's seat.

Forget the money, is there a problem that you might have with Kerr?

Its not like Knicks grabbing someone with no NBA experience. NBA has a history of some very successful coaches who had no experience.

Kerr has no NBA coaching experience...But here is the thing...I could be wrong but to me, Phil's value was his ability to communicate and lead...It wasn't his system...I think the Knicks and this organization needs this badly, leadership...So yes, I too want Phil here...Have to highlight that because some don't believe it..Problem is Phil system has not worked in the NBA other than when Phil was on the sidelines...His assistants have all failed as head coaches...Phil seems to be only looking at coaches that he wants to implement his system and control..Well, Phil is only looking at one coach...Isn't Zen synonymous with enlightenment, far reaching, outside the box ideas...Is Phil working on his legacy and his coaching tree??..

Does Kerr strike you as a guy working another coaching gig after this??..He has been away from playing ball a long time ago, why hasn't he pursued coaching before..So now he may get the gig, he wants top dollar like Popovich??..The only reason he is even considered to be paid that is because Phil Jackson is in the front office...Doesn't strike you as a money grab and he may not be in this for the right reasons??..Does this team, this organization, need more guys coming in, tooling it???

no that is not what zen means

thus the term synonymous...

the most zen thing that jackson has uttered thus far: "I'm all about moving forward," Jackson said. "Just deal with what is and move forward. If it's in the cards, man are we fortunate. If it's not in the cards, man are we fortunate. We're going forward anyway."

zen is a form of non-attachment.

so far as kerr, you haven't been listening closely to his color commentating. it's very sharp and insightful stuff. and although i loved mark jackson's color commentating i don't recall his observations as being as clinical and coach-like. i mean "hand down man down" and "making others around you better" were lines he often used but you never got the sense he was auditioning for a coaching job.

Bro, I can draw you a list of great color analyst that bombed as head coaches..Quinn Buckner, Magic, Isiah, I can go on...

sure the list is long. does that justify not hiring him? because you spot a trend? mark jackson didn't bomb as a coach but he did not get along with the front office. at least with kerr there will be some organizational continuity. how long has it been since that has been the case? it's pretty much been utter chaos....

No, your arguments are using ability as a color commentator to forecast his abilities as a head coach..I'm simply saying it doesn't translate...Don't twist what I'm saying, you know exactly what I'm saying...

you're saying you have seen so much failure of colormen as coaches that you choose to draw the line at steve kerr. doesn't make sense. instead of seeing it as the most cynical sort of money grab why not look at the situation as moving towards organizational continuity? how else are we going to rise out of the utter chaos and farce we have seen since dolan took over? and now that he has willingly and gratefully stepped aside and handed over total control to phil jackson, it only make sense to see what they can do without dolan's chronic meddling.

"organizational continuity" is part and parcel of a "change of culture." things must be ordered from the top down in order for it all to work.

No, I am saying there is no correlation between being a good color man and a good head coach..I can do that in Spanish if it's easier for u..

yes i understand that you see it that way.

assuming you wanted mark jackson, a color man for years prior to getting into coaching, were you in favor of hiring mark jackson for the knicks? and did you applaud the warriors' hiring of mark jackson as well?

Yes, for years as a player, people commented that he would make a good coach...His approach to the game is like having a coach one the floor...Same with Doc Rivers, same with Jason Kidd..Can you say the same about Steve Kerr??..Has Kerr shown any inclination of wanting to coach in the last 20 years since retiring as a player??

holfresh wrote:

dk7th wrote:

holfresh wrote:

dk7th wrote:

holfresh wrote:

dk7th wrote:

holfresh wrote:

dk7th wrote:

holfresh wrote:

dk7th wrote:

holfresh wrote:

Nalod wrote:

holfresh wrote:

Nalod wrote:Brad Stevens got 6 years.

Brad Steven had 12 years of coaching experience before the Celtics..A proven winner at the college level and is making about 3.6 per...

Of course he did. He coached kids at a mid major. Kerr played for years in the NBA in winning environments.

Information is plentiful but knowledge is a valuable comodity. Stevens is learning the NBA and Kerr needs to sit in the coach's seat.

Forget the money, is there a problem that you might have with Kerr?

Its not like Knicks grabbing someone with no NBA experience. NBA has a history of some very successful coaches who had no experience.

Kerr has no NBA coaching experience...But here is the thing...I could be wrong but to me, Phil's value was his ability to communicate and lead...It wasn't his system...I think the Knicks and this organization needs this badly, leadership...So yes, I too want Phil here...Have to highlight that because some don't believe it..Problem is Phil system has not worked in the NBA other than when Phil was on the sidelines...His assistants have all failed as head coaches...Phil seems to be only looking at coaches that he wants to implement his system and control..Well, Phil is only looking at one coach...Isn't Zen synonymous with enlightenment, far reaching, outside the box ideas...Is Phil working on his legacy and his coaching tree??..

Does Kerr strike you as a guy working another coaching gig after this??..He has been away from playing ball a long time ago, why hasn't he pursued coaching before..So now he may get the gig, he wants top dollar like Popovich??..The only reason he is even considered to be paid that is because Phil Jackson is in the front office...Doesn't strike you as a money grab and he may not be in this for the right reasons??..Does this team, this organization, need more guys coming in, tooling it???

no that is not what zen means

thus the term synonymous...

the most zen thing that jackson has uttered thus far: "I'm all about moving forward," Jackson said. "Just deal with what is and move forward. If it's in the cards, man are we fortunate. If it's not in the cards, man are we fortunate. We're going forward anyway."

zen is a form of non-attachment.

so far as kerr, you haven't been listening closely to his color commentating. it's very sharp and insightful stuff. and although i loved mark jackson's color commentating i don't recall his observations as being as clinical and coach-like. i mean "hand down man down" and "making others around you better" were lines he often used but you never got the sense he was auditioning for a coaching job.

Bro, I can draw you a list of great color analyst that bombed as head coaches..Quinn Buckner, Magic, Isiah, I can go on...

sure the list is long. does that justify not hiring him? because you spot a trend? mark jackson didn't bomb as a coach but he did not get along with the front office. at least with kerr there will be some organizational continuity. how long has it been since that has been the case? it's pretty much been utter chaos....

No, your arguments are using ability as a color commentator to forecast his abilities as a head coach..I'm simply saying it doesn't translate...Don't twist what I'm saying, you know exactly what I'm saying...

you're saying you have seen so much failure of colormen as coaches that you choose to draw the line at steve kerr. doesn't make sense. instead of seeing it as the most cynical sort of money grab why not look at the situation as moving towards organizational continuity? how else are we going to rise out of the utter chaos and farce we have seen since dolan took over? and now that he has willingly and gratefully stepped aside and handed over total control to phil jackson, it only make sense to see what they can do without dolan's chronic meddling.

"organizational continuity" is part and parcel of a "change of culture." things must be ordered from the top down in order for it all to work.

No, I am saying there is no correlation between being a good color man and a good head coach..I can do that in Spanish if it's easier for u..

yes i understand that you see it that way.

assuming you wanted mark jackson, a color man for years prior to getting into coaching, were you in favor of hiring mark jackson for the knicks? and did you applaud the warriors' hiring of mark jackson as well?

Yes, for years as a player, people commented that he would make a good coach...His approach to the game is like having a coach one the floor...Same with Doc Rivers, same with Jason Kidd..Can you say the same about Steve Kerr??..Has Kerr shown any inclination of wanting to coach in the last 20 years since retiring as a player??

on the whole i equate point guards in basketball with catchers in baseball. in each sport they tend to gravitate towards managing/coaching more than players from other positions. i don't what "people" you are referring to when you say that jackson would make a good coach. i do know that kidd was destined to become a coach, as was doc rivers. i agree with all of that.

one thing you left out: rivers was in fact a color man for a while, wasn't he?

you're assuming that because kerr wasn't a point guard he has no business coaching a team. on the other hand, he is better-suited to running a system that doesn't rely on point guard play or point guar instinct for that matter. he played in the triangle for five years so it's probably a good idea to hire him since he and his boss are going to be on the same page in terms of a vision for the team. contrast this with the disastrous years with dolan and isiah running things, ruining things for that matter.

holfresh wrote:

H1AND1 wrote:

holfresh wrote:

dk7th wrote:

holfresh wrote:

dk7th wrote:

holfresh wrote:

dk7th wrote:

holfresh wrote:

dk7th wrote:

holfresh wrote:

dk7th wrote:

holfresh wrote:

Nalod wrote:

holfresh wrote:

Nalod wrote:Brad Stevens got 6 years.

Brad Steven had 12 years of coaching experience before the Celtics..A proven winner at the college level and is making about 3.6 per...

Of course he did. He coached kids at a mid major. Kerr played for years in the NBA in winning environments.

Information is plentiful but knowledge is a valuable comodity. Stevens is learning the NBA and Kerr needs to sit in the coach's seat.

Forget the money, is there a problem that you might have with Kerr?

Its not like Knicks grabbing someone with no NBA experience. NBA has a history of some very successful coaches who had no experience.

Kerr has no NBA coaching experience...But here is the thing...I could be wrong but to me, Phil's value was his ability to communicate and lead...It wasn't his system...I think the Knicks and this organization needs this badly, leadership...So yes, I too want Phil here...Have to highlight that because some don't believe it..Problem is Phil system has not worked in the NBA other than when Phil was on the sidelines...His assistants have all failed as head coaches...Phil seems to be only looking at coaches that he wants to implement his system and control..Well, Phil is only looking at one coach...Isn't Zen synonymous with enlightenment, far reaching, outside the box ideas...Is Phil working on his legacy and his coaching tree??..

Does Kerr strike you as a guy working another coaching gig after this??..He has been away from playing ball a long time ago, why hasn't he pursued coaching before..So now he may get the gig, he wants top dollar like Popovich??..The only reason he is even considered to be paid that is because Phil Jackson is in the front office...Doesn't strike you as a money grab and he may not be in this for the right reasons??..Does this team, this organization, need more guys coming in, tooling it???

no that is not what zen means

thus the term synonymous...

the most zen thing that jackson has uttered thus far: "I'm all about moving forward," Jackson said. "Just deal with what is and move forward. If it's in the cards, man are we fortunate. If it's not in the cards, man are we fortunate. We're going forward anyway."

zen is a form of non-attachment.

so far as kerr, you haven't been listening closely to his color commentating. it's very sharp and insightful stuff. and although i loved mark jackson's color commentating i don't recall his observations as being as clinical and coach-like. i mean "hand down man down" and "making others around you better" were lines he often used but you never got the sense he was auditioning for a coaching job.

Bro, I can draw you a list of great color analyst that bombed as head coaches..Quinn Buckner, Magic, Isiah, I can go on...

sure the list is long. does that justify not hiring him? because you spot a trend? mark jackson didn't bomb as a coach but he did not get along with the front office. at least with kerr there will be some organizational continuity. how long has it been since that has been the case? it's pretty much been utter chaos....

No, your arguments are using ability as a color commentator to forecast his abilities as a head coach..I'm simply saying it doesn't translate...Don't twist what I'm saying, you know exactly what I'm saying...

you're saying you have seen so much failure of colormen as coaches that you choose to draw the line at steve kerr. doesn't make sense. instead of seeing it as the most cynical sort of money grab why not look at the situation as moving towards organizational continuity? how else are we going to rise out of the utter chaos and farce we have seen since dolan took over? and now that he has willingly and gratefully stepped aside and handed over total control to phil jackson, it only make sense to see what they can do without dolan's chronic meddling.

"organizational continuity" is part and parcel of a "change of culture." things must be ordered from the top down in order for it all to work.

No, I am saying there is no correlation between being a good color man and a good head coach..I can do that in Spanish if it's easier for u..

yes i understand that you see it that way.

assuming you wanted mark jackson, a color man for years prior to getting into coaching, were you in favor of hiring mark jackson for the knicks? and did you applaud the warriors' hiring of mark jackson as well?

Yes, for years as a player, people commented that he would make a good coach...His approach to the game is like having a coach one the floor...Same with Doc Rivers, same with Jason Kidd..Can you say the same about Steve Kerr??..Has Kerr shown any inclination of wanting to coach in the last 20 years since retiring as a player??

Phil Jackson obviously thinks Kerr can be a good coach. I don't think he'd stake his reputation and legacy as Knick president on a guy who he had second thoughts about or who he didn't think could do the job 100%. Why do you think your impression of Kerr and his capabities is more informed than Jackson's? I wouldn't think you'd say you know Kerr better than Phil since as you said before you cannot use his color commentary as a basis for judgement on his coaching skills.

I never said that my impression and opinions are more informed than Phil Jackson..But I do think this is a message board the caters to a variance of opinions and not just to a singular thought...Bro, Where are u going with the "I know Kerr better than Phil stuff??"..Phil knowing Kerr 200 times til Sunday doesn't make him a good coach...Do you know that all of Phil's assistants have bombed as coaches in the NBA...Do you know that only Phil has made a success of the triangle in the NBA with at least the best player on the planet running it??..Why should I be now be overcomed with joy at hearing another one of Phil's lackeys with zero coaching experience is being ushered at MSG to give the triangle another try, after being "much maligned in the NBA"?? And Mr. zero experience wants to be paid like the best coaches in the game...

you know what you are entitled to your opinions and pessimism. the way you are now was the way i was back in february 2011 when they brought in a dude who never really proved himself worthy. only difference is that we are rebuilding all over again, where back then we were yanked off a rebuilding course and into win-now mode with that ridiculous trade.

we will need to see where things are after the 2015-2016 season. in the meantime i am not expecting much at all, just like i was not expecting much for the two years of walsh and d'antoni. i was willing to give them 4 years-- 2 years of roster flush and then two years of rebuild. they got only 2.5 years.

with this regime i am also willing to give them 4 years. next season is nothing and then the season after is anybody's guess, but i reckon we will have a good idea of how competent jackson's staff is going to be by then.

holfresh wrote:

H1AND1 wrote:

holfresh wrote:

dk7th wrote:

holfresh wrote:

dk7th wrote:

holfresh wrote:

dk7th wrote:

holfresh wrote:

dk7th wrote:

holfresh wrote:

dk7th wrote:

holfresh wrote:

Nalod wrote:

holfresh wrote:

Nalod wrote:Brad Stevens got 6 years.

Brad Steven had 12 years of coaching experience before the Celtics..A proven winner at the college level and is making about 3.6 per...

Of course he did. He coached kids at a mid major. Kerr played for years in the NBA in winning environments.

Information is plentiful but knowledge is a valuable comodity. Stevens is learning the NBA and Kerr needs to sit in the coach's seat.

Forget the money, is there a problem that you might have with Kerr?

Its not like Knicks grabbing someone with no NBA experience. NBA has a history of some very successful coaches who had no experience.

Kerr has no NBA coaching experience...But here is the thing...I could be wrong but to me, Phil's value was his ability to communicate and lead...It wasn't his system...I think the Knicks and this organization needs this badly, leadership...So yes, I too want Phil here...Have to highlight that because some don't believe it..Problem is Phil system has not worked in the NBA other than when Phil was on the sidelines...His assistants have all failed as head coaches...Phil seems to be only looking at coaches that he wants to implement his system and control..Well, Phil is only looking at one coach...Isn't Zen synonymous with enlightenment, far reaching, outside the box ideas...Is Phil working on his legacy and his coaching tree??..

Does Kerr strike you as a guy working another coaching gig after this??..He has been away from playing ball a long time ago, why hasn't he pursued coaching before..So now he may get the gig, he wants top dollar like Popovich??..The only reason he is even considered to be paid that is because Phil Jackson is in the front office...Doesn't strike you as a money grab and he may not be in this for the right reasons??..Does this team, this organization, need more guys coming in, tooling it???

no that is not what zen means

thus the term synonymous...

the most zen thing that jackson has uttered thus far: "I'm all about moving forward," Jackson said. "Just deal with what is and move forward. If it's in the cards, man are we fortunate. If it's not in the cards, man are we fortunate. We're going forward anyway."

zen is a form of non-attachment.

so far as kerr, you haven't been listening closely to his color commentating. it's very sharp and insightful stuff. and although i loved mark jackson's color commentating i don't recall his observations as being as clinical and coach-like. i mean "hand down man down" and "making others around you better" were lines he often used but you never got the sense he was auditioning for a coaching job.

Bro, I can draw you a list of great color analyst that bombed as head coaches..Quinn Buckner, Magic, Isiah, I can go on...

sure the list is long. does that justify not hiring him? because you spot a trend? mark jackson didn't bomb as a coach but he did not get along with the front office. at least with kerr there will be some organizational continuity. how long has it been since that has been the case? it's pretty much been utter chaos....

No, your arguments are using ability as a color commentator to forecast his abilities as a head coach..I'm simply saying it doesn't translate...Don't twist what I'm saying, you know exactly what I'm saying...

you're saying you have seen so much failure of colormen as coaches that you choose to draw the line at steve kerr. doesn't make sense. instead of seeing it as the most cynical sort of money grab why not look at the situation as moving towards organizational continuity? how else are we going to rise out of the utter chaos and farce we have seen since dolan took over? and now that he has willingly and gratefully stepped aside and handed over total control to phil jackson, it only make sense to see what they can do without dolan's chronic meddling.

"organizational continuity" is part and parcel of a "change of culture." things must be ordered from the top down in order for it all to work.

No, I am saying there is no correlation between being a good color man and a good head coach..I can do that in Spanish if it's easier for u..

yes i understand that you see it that way.

assuming you wanted mark jackson, a color man for years prior to getting into coaching, were you in favor of hiring mark jackson for the knicks? and did you applaud the warriors' hiring of mark jackson as well?

Yes, for years as a player, people commented that he would make a good coach...His approach to the game is like having a coach one the floor...Same with Doc Rivers, same with Jason Kidd..Can you say the same about Steve Kerr??..Has Kerr shown any inclination of wanting to coach in the last 20 years since retiring as a player??

Phil Jackson obviously thinks Kerr can be a good coach. I don't think he'd stake his reputation and legacy as Knick president on a guy who he had second thoughts about or who he didn't think could do the job 100%. Why do you think your impression of Kerr and his capabities is more informed than Jackson's? I wouldn't think you'd say you know Kerr better than Phil since as you said before you cannot use his color commentary as a basis for judgement on his coaching skills.

I never said that my impression and opinions are more informed than Phil Jackson..But I do think this is a message board the caters to a variance of opinions and not just to a singular thought...Bro, Where are u going with the "I know Kerr better than Phil stuff??"..Phil knowing Kerr 200 times til Sunday doesn't make him a good coach...Do you know that all of Phil's assistants have bombed as coaches in the NBA...Do you know that only Phil has made a success of the triangle in the NBA with at least the best player on the planet running it??..Why should I be now be overcomed with joy at hearing another one of Phil's lackeys with zero coaching experience is being ushered at MSG to give the triangle another try, after being "much maligned in the NBA"?? And Mr. zero experience wants to be paid like the best coaches in the game...

Hold on, first off rereading what I wrote I did not mean to imply you thought you knew more than Phil or whatever. I wrote out my thoughts badly so sorry for that. What I meant was simply that Phil, in his capacity as president of the Knicks obviously either knows or thinks he knows "something" about Kerr which gives him the impression he's make a good coach. That's my only point: Phil knows Kerr personally and thinks her make a good coach. Not trying to say anything else or try to insult you, bro.

Secondly, implying that I am somehow advancing an argument which I think has no counterpoints and with which I am trying to stifle debate is patently wrong. It's kinda funny that you're accusing me of being some sort of Pro-Kerr automaton whose here to stamp out others contrary opinions. As I've said before, I am not not pro Kerr or Anti anyone else per say I'm just of the opinion Phil should be granted some leverage on his first go around here. If he wants to hire someone with no experience I'm jumping off that cliff with him. If he proves a failure I'll have no problem admitting I was wrong and will add my voice to those who want him gone.

Finally, yes I'm not some young kid I've been a Knick fan a long time. I wasn't born yet when they won it all but a few years after so I'm still waiting a long time for a chip. Otoh, and this goes wth my general feelings that I mentioned earlier: Phil is a very ****y guy deep down and if he didn't believe he could make a triangle system work in NY I honestly don't thnk he'd choose Knicks president as the capstone to his career. He has 11 rings but if he F's up here that would CERTAINLY put a damper on his legacy and I think his legacy is very very important to him.

H1AND1 wrote:

holfresh wrote:

H1AND1 wrote:

holfresh wrote:

dk7th wrote:

holfresh wrote:

dk7th wrote:

holfresh wrote:

dk7th wrote:

holfresh wrote:

dk7th wrote:

holfresh wrote:

dk7th wrote:

holfresh wrote:

Nalod wrote:

holfresh wrote:

Nalod wrote:Brad Stevens got 6 years.

Brad Steven had 12 years of coaching experience before the Celtics..A proven winner at the college level and is making about 3.6 per...

Of course he did. He coached kids at a mid major. Kerr played for years in the NBA in winning environments.

Information is plentiful but knowledge is a valuable comodity. Stevens is learning the NBA and Kerr needs to sit in the coach's seat.

Forget the money, is there a problem that you might have with Kerr?

Its not like Knicks grabbing someone with no NBA experience. NBA has a history of some very successful coaches who had no experience.

Kerr has no NBA coaching experience...But here is the thing...I could be wrong but to me, Phil's value was his ability to communicate and lead...It wasn't his system...I think the Knicks and this organization needs this badly, leadership...So yes, I too want Phil here...Have to highlight that because some don't believe it..Problem is Phil system has not worked in the NBA other than when Phil was on the sidelines...His assistants have all failed as head coaches...Phil seems to be only looking at coaches that he wants to implement his system and control..Well, Phil is only looking at one coach...Isn't Zen synonymous with enlightenment, far reaching, outside the box ideas...Is Phil working on his legacy and his coaching tree??..

Does Kerr strike you as a guy working another coaching gig after this??..He has been away from playing ball a long time ago, why hasn't he pursued coaching before..So now he may get the gig, he wants top dollar like Popovich??..The only reason he is even considered to be paid that is because Phil Jackson is in the front office...Doesn't strike you as a money grab and he may not be in this for the right reasons??..Does this team, this organization, need more guys coming in, tooling it???

no that is not what zen means

thus the term synonymous...

the most zen thing that jackson has uttered thus far: "I'm all about moving forward," Jackson said. "Just deal with what is and move forward. If it's in the cards, man are we fortunate. If it's not in the cards, man are we fortunate. We're going forward anyway."

zen is a form of non-attachment.

so far as kerr, you haven't been listening closely to his color commentating. it's very sharp and insightful stuff. and although i loved mark jackson's color commentating i don't recall his observations as being as clinical and coach-like. i mean "hand down man down" and "making others around you better" were lines he often used but you never got the sense he was auditioning for a coaching job.

Bro, I can draw you a list of great color analyst that bombed as head coaches..Quinn Buckner, Magic, Isiah, I can go on...

sure the list is long. does that justify not hiring him? because you spot a trend? mark jackson didn't bomb as a coach but he did not get along with the front office. at least with kerr there will be some organizational continuity. how long has it been since that has been the case? it's pretty much been utter chaos....

No, your arguments are using ability as a color commentator to forecast his abilities as a head coach..I'm simply saying it doesn't translate...Don't twist what I'm saying, you know exactly what I'm saying...

you're saying you have seen so much failure of colormen as coaches that you choose to draw the line at steve kerr. doesn't make sense. instead of seeing it as the most cynical sort of money grab why not look at the situation as moving towards organizational continuity? how else are we going to rise out of the utter chaos and farce we have seen since dolan took over? and now that he has willingly and gratefully stepped aside and handed over total control to phil jackson, it only make sense to see what they can do without dolan's chronic meddling.

"organizational continuity" is part and parcel of a "change of culture." things must be ordered from the top down in order for it all to work.

No, I am saying there is no correlation between being a good color man and a good head coach..I can do that in Spanish if it's easier for u..

yes i understand that you see it that way.

assuming you wanted mark jackson, a color man for years prior to getting into coaching, were you in favor of hiring mark jackson for the knicks? and did you applaud the warriors' hiring of mark jackson as well?

Yes, for years as a player, people commented that he would make a good coach...His approach to the game is like having a coach one the floor...Same with Doc Rivers, same with Jason Kidd..Can you say the same about Steve Kerr??..Has Kerr shown any inclination of wanting to coach in the last 20 years since retiring as a player??

Phil Jackson obviously thinks Kerr can be a good coach. I don't think he'd stake his reputation and legacy as Knick president on a guy who he had second thoughts about or who he didn't think could do the job 100%. Why do you think your impression of Kerr and his capabities is more informed than Jackson's? I wouldn't think you'd say you know Kerr better than Phil since as you said before you cannot use his color commentary as a basis for judgement on his coaching skills.

I never said that my impression and opinions are more informed than Phil Jackson..But I do think this is a message board the caters to a variance of opinions and not just to a singular thought...Bro, Where are u going with the "I know Kerr better than Phil stuff??"..Phil knowing Kerr 200 times til Sunday doesn't make him a good coach...Do you know that all of Phil's assistants have bombed as coaches in the NBA...Do you know that only Phil has made a success of the triangle in the NBA with at least the best player on the planet running it??..Why should I be now be overcomed with joy at hearing another one of Phil's lackeys with zero coaching experience is being ushered at MSG to give the triangle another try, after being "much maligned in the NBA"?? And Mr. zero experience wants to be paid like the best coaches in the game...

Hold on, first off rereading what I wrote I did not mean to imply you thought you knew more than Phil or whatever. I wrote out my thoughts badly so sorry for that. What I meant was simply that Phil, in his capacity as president of the Knicks obviously either knows or thinks he knows "something" about Kerr which gives him the impression he's make a good coach. That's my only point: Phil knows Kerr personally and thinks her make a good coach. Not trying to say anything else or try to insult you, bro.

Secondly, implying that I am somehow advancing an argument which I think has no counterpoints and with which I am trying to stifle debate is patently wrong. It's kinda funny that you're accusing me of being some sort of Pro-Kerr automaton whose here to stamp out others contrary opinions. As I've said before, I am not not pro Kerr or Anti anyone else per say I'm just of the opinion Phil should be granted some leverage on his first go around here. If he wants to hire someone with no experience I'm jumping off that cliff with him. If he proves a failure I'll have no problem admitting I was wrong and will add my voice to those who want him gone.

Finally, yes I'm not some young kid I've been a Knick fan a long time. I wasn't born yet when they won it all but a few years after so I'm still waiting a long time for a chip. Otoh, and this goes wth my general feelings that I mentioned earlier: Phil is a very ****y guy deep down and if he didn't believe he could make a triangle system work in NY I honestly don't thnk he'd choose Knicks president as the capstone to his career. He has 11 rings but if he F's up here that would CERTAINLY put a damper on his legacy and I think his legacy is very very important to him.

Well said, and point taken..I think part of Phil's legacy he wants to leave behind is a coaching tree..Just an opinion..

dk7th wrote:

holfresh wrote:

H1AND1 wrote:

holfresh wrote:

dk7th wrote:

holfresh wrote:

dk7th wrote:

holfresh wrote:

dk7th wrote:

holfresh wrote:

dk7th wrote:

holfresh wrote:

dk7th wrote:

holfresh wrote:

Nalod wrote:

holfresh wrote:

Nalod wrote:Brad Stevens got 6 years.

Brad Steven had 12 years of coaching experience before the Celtics..A proven winner at the college level and is making about 3.6 per...

Of course he did. He coached kids at a mid major. Kerr played for years in the NBA in winning environments.

Information is plentiful but knowledge is a valuable comodity. Stevens is learning the NBA and Kerr needs to sit in the coach's seat.

Forget the money, is there a problem that you might have with Kerr?

Its not like Knicks grabbing someone with no NBA experience. NBA has a history of some very successful coaches who had no experience.

Kerr has no NBA coaching experience...But here is the thing...I could be wrong but to me, Phil's value was his ability to communicate and lead...It wasn't his system...I think the Knicks and this organization needs this badly, leadership...So yes, I too want Phil here...Have to highlight that because some don't believe it..Problem is Phil system has not worked in the NBA other than when Phil was on the sidelines...His assistants have all failed as head coaches...Phil seems to be only looking at coaches that he wants to implement his system and control..Well, Phil is only looking at one coach...Isn't Zen synonymous with enlightenment, far reaching, outside the box ideas...Is Phil working on his legacy and his coaching tree??..

Does Kerr strike you as a guy working another coaching gig after this??..He has been away from playing ball a long time ago, why hasn't he pursued coaching before..So now he may get the gig, he wants top dollar like Popovich??..The only reason he is even considered to be paid that is because Phil Jackson is in the front office...Doesn't strike you as a money grab and he may not be in this for the right reasons??..Does this team, this organization, need more guys coming in, tooling it???

no that is not what zen means

thus the term synonymous...

the most zen thing that jackson has uttered thus far: "I'm all about moving forward," Jackson said. "Just deal with what is and move forward. If it's in the cards, man are we fortunate. If it's not in the cards, man are we fortunate. We're going forward anyway."

zen is a form of non-attachment.

so far as kerr, you haven't been listening closely to his color commentating. it's very sharp and insightful stuff. and although i loved mark jackson's color commentating i don't recall his observations as being as clinical and coach-like. i mean "hand down man down" and "making others around you better" were lines he often used but you never got the sense he was auditioning for a coaching job.

Bro, I can draw you a list of great color analyst that bombed as head coaches..Quinn Buckner, Magic, Isiah, I can go on...

sure the list is long. does that justify not hiring him? because you spot a trend? mark jackson didn't bomb as a coach but he did not get along with the front office. at least with kerr there will be some organizational continuity. how long has it been since that has been the case? it's pretty much been utter chaos....

No, your arguments are using ability as a color commentator to forecast his abilities as a head coach..I'm simply saying it doesn't translate...Don't twist what I'm saying, you know exactly what I'm saying...

you're saying you have seen so much failure of colormen as coaches that you choose to draw the line at steve kerr. doesn't make sense. instead of seeing it as the most cynical sort of money grab why not look at the situation as moving towards organizational continuity? how else are we going to rise out of the utter chaos and farce we have seen since dolan took over? and now that he has willingly and gratefully stepped aside and handed over total control to phil jackson, it only make sense to see what they can do without dolan's chronic meddling.

"organizational continuity" is part and parcel of a "change of culture." things must be ordered from the top down in order for it all to work.

No, I am saying there is no correlation between being a good color man and a good head coach..I can do that in Spanish if it's easier for u..

yes i understand that you see it that way.

assuming you wanted mark jackson, a color man for years prior to getting into coaching, were you in favor of hiring mark jackson for the knicks? and did you applaud the warriors' hiring of mark jackson as well?

Yes, for years as a player, people commented that he would make a good coach...His approach to the game is like having a coach one the floor...Same with Doc Rivers, same with Jason Kidd..Can you say the same about Steve Kerr??..Has Kerr shown any inclination of wanting to coach in the last 20 years since retiring as a player??

Phil Jackson obviously thinks Kerr can be a good coach. I don't think he'd stake his reputation and legacy as Knick president on a guy who he had second thoughts about or who he didn't think could do the job 100%. Why do you think your impression of Kerr and his capabities is more informed than Jackson's? I wouldn't think you'd say you know Kerr better than Phil since as you said before you cannot use his color commentary as a basis for judgement on his coaching skills.

I never said that my impression and opinions are more informed than Phil Jackson..But I do think this is a message board the caters to a variance of opinions and not just to a singular thought...Bro, Where are u going with the "I know Kerr better than Phil stuff??"..Phil knowing Kerr 200 times til Sunday doesn't make him a good coach...Do you know that all of Phil's assistants have bombed as coaches in the NBA...Do you know that only Phil has made a success of the triangle in the NBA with at least the best player on the planet running it??..Why should I be now be overcomed with joy at hearing another one of Phil's lackeys with zero coaching experience is being ushered at MSG to give the triangle another try, after being "much maligned in the NBA"?? And Mr. zero experience wants to be paid like the best coaches in the game...

you know what you are entitled to your opinions and pessimism. the way you are now was the way i was back in february 2011 when they brought in a dude who never really proved himself worthy. only difference is that we are rebuilding all over again, where back then we were yanked off a rebuilding course and into win-now mode with that ridiculous trade.

we will need to see where things are after the 2015-2016 season. in the meantime i am not expecting much at all, just like i was not expecting much for the two years of walsh and d'antoni. i was willing to give them 4 years-- 2 years of roster flush and then two years of rebuild. they got only 2.5 years.

with this regime i am also willing to give them 4 years. next season is nothing and then the season after is anybody's guess, but i reckon we will have a good idea of how competent jackson's staff is going to be by then.

What kind of rebuilding course were we on with broken down Amare??..If you want to preach the gospel then tell the whole truth...