as a gm he wanted Phoenix to become a more defensive, inside playoff ready team. They rejected him out there and eventually went back to a hybrid dantoni system.

Say what you want, but a lot of nba coaches sucked in their playing days, Scott Brooks coming to mind. So based on his gm job, kerr would want to get physical inside and be opportunistic on the break.

Thoughts?

smackeddog wrote:So we'd have a GM with no experience of GMing and a coach with no experience of coaching- this concerns me!

Everyone has to start somewhere. Danny ainge and the Doc. Coach pop was new to the game too staying out right? Jerry Krause and Phil?

Correct me if I'm wrong but all those guys were rookie gm and coaches when they started out together

yellowboy90 wrote:gm to coach and a coach to gm. Who said Steve Kerr wants to coach. Also, how was his track record in PHX. Going after an aging Shaq does not look good but what else did he do?

yellowboy90 wrote:gm to coach and a coach to gm. Who said Steve Kerr wants to coach. Also, how was his track record in PHX. Going after an aging Shaq does not look good but what else did he do?

Fulfilled the wishes of his owner who was a flake and then he left. He stuck to his guns and was respected.

Sarver wanted to go into a different direction than what MDA did. It was time to blow it up.

What did he do? He and sarver let Amare walk. Thats smart. Sarver could not spend money as recession kicked his ass.

GM's are not like players where stats are transferable and predictable. Many fans discount that its the owner who drives the teams direction. Kerr advised Sarver on the purchase and on paper getting shaq was a good idea but if you only have 25 games to make it work its miserable.

Kerr left, maybe he wanted to blow it up, maybe he wanted to trade Nash sooner.

Im not "Sold" on any of this but Kerr also has the insight to have been a GM and can think as a GM as well.

Just to make sure everyone understands, this is still going to take 3 years to put together.

1. Year one its blown up
2. Year two we bring in a lottery pick rookie and spend our free agent money. We only have 12mil commited if we don't bring melo back.
3. Year three it starts to Gel.

Phil don't want to coach that. If Kerr is a rookie coach then he gets time to learn his chops on the bench. Meanwhile what is intriguing is the clean slate to blow it up.

Remember, Kobe and Jordan were products of the Zen Master. Their greatness was culitivated under Jax. What Phil did that was masterful was the implimentation of role players to compliment the core two stars that drove his teams. Kerr, paxton, armstrong, Rodman, Cartwright, Harper, wennington, lonlgly, etc.........Walton, Fox, Reezy, Fischer, Farmar, etc.......These are the guys that made championships happen in my book. YOu need your alpha stars no doubt, but you need a deep roster with strong role players that the alpha stars can trust.

Remember Phil Jax was a role player (led NCAA in scoring BTW!!!) and learned from the bench and learned his role. Kerr was also a role player. Don't discount these guys in different positions.

Its no guarantee by any means this will work, but its a concept I can understand. Can it be implimented???

Thats the fun part.

And best of all for Dolan, its a starphuch! If he lets phil be phil he can sell a lot of corp sponsorships. Winners want to associate with winners.

gunsnewing wrote:

Nalod wrote:

yellowboy90 wrote:gm to coach and a coach to gm. Who said Steve Kerr wants to coach. Also, how was his track record in PHX. Going after an aging Shaq does not look good but what else did he do?

Fulfilled the wishes of his owner who was a flake and then he left. He stuck to his guns and was respected.

Sarver wanted to go into a different direction than what MDA did. It was time to blow it up.

What did he do? He and sarver let Amare walk. Thats smart. Sarver could not spend money as recession kicked his ass.

GM's are not like players where stats are transferable and predictable. Many fans discount that its the owner who drives the teams direction. Kerr advised Sarver on the purchase and on paper getting shaq was a good idea but if you only have 25 games to make it work its miserable.

Kerr left, maybe he wanted to blow it up, maybe he wanted to trade Nash sooner.

Im not "Sold" on any of this but Kerr also has the insight to have been a GM and can think as a GM as well.

Just to make sure everyone understands, this is still going to take 3 years to put together.

1. Year one its blown up
2. Year two we bring in a lottery pick rookie and spend our free agent money. We only have 12mil commited if we don't bring melo back.
3. Year three it starts to Gel.

Phil don't want to coach that. If Kerr is a rookie coach then he gets time to learn his chops on the bench. Meanwhile what is intriguing is the clean slate to blow it up.

Remember, Kobe and Jordan were products of the Zen Master. Their greatness was culitivated under Jax. What Phil did that was masterful was the implimentation of role players to compliment the core two stars that drove his teams. Kerr, paxton, armstrong, Rodman, Cartwright, Harper, wennington, lonlgly, etc.........Walton, Fox, Reezy, Fischer, Farmar, etc.......These are the guys that made championships happen in my book. YOu need your alpha stars no doubt, but you need a deep roster with strong role players that the alpha stars can trust.

Remember Phil Jax was a role player (led NCAA in scoring BTW!!!) and learned from the bench and learned his role. Kerr was also a role player. Don't discount these guys in different positions.

Its no guarantee by any means this will work, but its a concept I can understand. Can it be implimented???

Thats the fun part.

And best of all for Dolan, its a starphuch! If he lets phil be phil he can sell a lot of corp sponsorships. Winners want to associate with winners.

Where's the dotted line?

Unfortunately in reality, half year into year one, Dolan decides to intervene and orchestrates a trade for Josh smith and Brandon Jennings...

VCoug wrote:

EnySpree wrote:

smackeddog wrote:So we'd have a GM with no experience of GMing and a coach with no experience of coaching- this concerns me!

Everyone has to start somewhere. Danny ainge and the Doc. Coach pop was new to the game too staying out right? Jerry Krause and Phil?

Correct me if I'm wrong but all those guys were rookie gm and coaches when they started out together

Hmm, I know Doc Rivers had coaching experience before going to Boston, he won Coach of the Year with Orlando. And Phil Jackson coached in the CBA before joining the Bulls. Ainge had been a coach but I don't think an exec.

Forgot about Orlando. He had tmac and Hill. I stand corrected. What about Pop when he came in?