Was listening to Ireland a little while ago who had a take on the Mark Jackson for Kerr swap the Warriors did, with a good team performance last year. He said he had talked to a number of persons in the organization. Mark .... old school, not much use for analytics. Kerr embraces them. Mark got along well with his guys on the roster. And with virtually no one else in the organization including front office of course. Kerr gets along with everyone. (I do recall some comments came back to bite Jackson in the a**...... he made about the owner (one of the owners) or his situation and the "Gay" issue. Pretty dumb.)
I don't know if Walton has the gravitas to be a head coach, but I find Byron to be a humorless joyless man who breaks the spirit of all his young players. I genuinely worry about the effect he'll have on Randle, Clarkson and our #2. So if I had to choose, I'd rather have Walton over Byron.
I don't find that at all? Kyrie and Paul were both young when he got his hands on them and they rave about the work Scott did for him. Randle, Black, Davis, and Clarkson have all been very responsive and supportive of Byron.
Jackson made comments about Collins (first openly gay player). Ownership frowned on that. I've been following this pretty close because I go to SF Gate daily for my 49er and Giants info. Jackson was not a yeller. Kerr is. The feeling is that Jackson was full of himself and Kerr is humble. Jackson had no use for Bogut, but had a really close relationship with Curry. Bogut still holds a grudge and has said several things about Jackson this year. Jackson said his MVP vote would go to Harden. Curry was taken aback by this and when he thanked people at his trophy presentation, he left out Jackson, which was not lost on many. The Warriors ownership does not like the fact that Jackson is the announcer for a few playoff games and the Finals. They, and many Warrior fans, say he's been overly critical of the Warriors. Here's a good article on it: At the end of the day, one thing is clear. Having Mark Jackson announce Warriors playoff games is extremely awkward. Not to him, of course. “I’ve read articles that I shouldn’t be doing it,” Jackson said on an ESPN conference call Monday morning. “To me, that was laughable. It’s been a blast.” But not always for the viewers, at least not locally. Many have reported muting their television sound because they don’t feel that Jackson is impartial when it comes to the Warriors, the team that fired him last spring. There have been complaints that he sounds bitter at times, that he wants too much credit at other times. But get used to it. Jackson will be calling the NBA Finals on ABC. This awkward situation is brought to you courtesy of the ESPN-ABC family, which is either amused by the situation or unable to find a better replacement. It’s not Jackson’s fault he was given the top broadcasting slot. To the contrary, it’s an achievement that he went right from coaching the Warriors back to his former job in the booth. “I’ve seen a lot of people fade to black when they get fired or let go,” he said. “I’m fortunate to have an incredible job.” When I asked him if it was uncomfortable, like being the videographer at your ex’s wedding (an analogy that’s been popular on Twitter), he said it wasn’t. “We move on,” he said. “I’m too blessed to be stressed.” Andrew Bogut was amused by the videographer description. “That’s a good analogy,” he said. “I’d call it a caterpillar to a butterfly.” That, of course is a reference to Jackson’s comment on his first Warriors broadcast in January when he said, “You cannot disrespect the caterpillar and rave about the butterfly.” That was the first, but not the last, time that Jackson’s commentary seemed to be all about him rather than the team he was covering. He joked that Gregg Popovich should have gotten fired after losing to the Clippers in Game 7, because, well, isn’t that what happens? He has belittled Bogut’s role as an overrated “rim protector” and has not had much positive to say about his postseason play. Bogut, of course, has made no secret of his lack of relationship with Jackson, who was less than empathetic with his big man, once saying he thought Bogut injured himself sleeping. After the butterfly comment, Bogut tweeted: “My new favorite movie: The Butterfly Effect! #UNDERrated.” Last week, while answering a question about Steve Kerr, Bogut said, “Whenever you get a head coach who’s not full of himself it makes a big difference.” Of course, some of the Warriors had a strong relationship with Jackson, notably Stephen Curry, who publicly went to bat for Jackson before he was fired. Which was why it was so surprising when Jackson came out in favor of James Harden for MVP. (Bogut’s response: “Well, it was April Fool’s Day.”) “It didn’t really hurt my feelings, but it was just very surprising,” Curry said at that time. “People are going to ask what he thinks, especially with his ties to the Warriors organization and myself specifically. Surprised he said that, but it is what it is.” Still it was noteworthy when, a month later, Curry won the MVP award and thanked everyone from his high school coach to the team security guard but notably left Jackson off his lengthy list of acknowledgments. Curry said the team has moved on and that it’s not too awkward to have Jackson looming in the background of these milestone moments for the Warriors. “Not really,” Curry said. “The two regular-season games it was very weird, especially the first one. But I don’t really think about the connection with last year as much. We’re wrapped up in the here and now. We’ve talked all year about how important he was to changing our identity as a team and we still believe in that. “But we’re about this year and moving forward. It’s a healthy situation looking ahead and worrying about what’s going on now.” The here and now is amazing to watch. Jackson says his own background with the team doesn’t come into the mix. He even denied being emotional when Draymond Green gave him a brief hug after the team won the Western Conference last week. “To me, this is an assignment,” Jackson said. “It’s my job to tell the story. It is easy and is what I am paid to do. The story dictates itself to me and I relay the message to the viewers as good as I possibly can, whether it’s the Warriors or anybody else.” But is he dictating the story completely? About how Curry rebounded after putting himself on the line to fully support Kerr, and how critical that was for team chemistry? About how key the experienced coaching staff Kerr hired — exactly the kind of staff Jackson refused to have — has made such a difference for the Warriors? About how brilliantly Bogut has been playing? “As far as who I’m rooting for, I work for ESPN and ABC,” Jackson said. “I’m rooting for a great game.”
John ^^^ that's right it was Collins. But what I read was also that one of the owners especially did not appreciate since he himself was gay. Again, dumb of Jackson.
Yeah, he is openly gay. Didn't go over well at all. But even if he didn't say that, I think they wanted a change. I like Jackson and think he deserves another shot in the league, but he's made some pretty immature comments ("I guess Pop is getting fired now since he lost to the Clippers in the first round.")
College stint with my Memphis Tigers. I think he'll get a coaching chance in a few years, probably. Whether he'll be any good...we'll see. It's becoming as much about fit as it is about talent right now.
I think sarcasm, saying he shouldn't have been fired. If GS had Bogut in the playoffs last year, I believe they would've beat the Clippers.
J.R. Smith >>> balling at times this year but terminally a dumb*** Comments on Ms. Jenner. Not that she is above having shots being taken when you look at the big picture with him / her. Hard to "keep up with". Someone was killed on PCH recently because "he" (at the time) was tailgating and apparently not paying attention. While towing an off road trailer equipment rig at 50mph. Not a lot of news right now about that. http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nba-b...lyn-jenner-as--science-project-172000139.html
"once saying he thought Bogut injured himself sleeping." as a fantasy owner of Bogut this year, i literally laughed out loud
TRD is right. The young guys tend to take to Byron; both Paul and Irving loved Byron. Although, I would mention two very specific things; when Byron had Chris in New Orleans, they primarily ran a high pick in roll where Chandler was setting the screen and Chris would work off of it. They did this relentlessly, and I think even ran it 10-12 straight times against San Antonio in a series they lost. It became predictable. I think Byron and Chris both could have done a better job developing Chris off the ball more when he first got into the league. Chris moving off of screens, cutting, moving, spotting up, would have helped his game. I know he's more effective with the ball in his hands creating but being a little more diverse would have helped. Kyrie came into the league and Cleveland had an awful team. Byron pretty much ran an isolation heavy system. Kyrie excelled in those isolations. He's a terrific one on one player, but again, Kyrie never really developed the other parts of his game. Kyrie has actually gotten a lot better now that Cleveland acquired Lebron, but Kyrie has played well off the ball and has been giving better defensive effort than I ever seen; which isn't saying much, but hey, it's improvement. Scott does very good things with the young players, though. I would say Luke probably has a better understanding of X's and O's than Scott. However, Scott has 2 more years here...
I think Kyrie and CP3 have both paid lip service to Byron, but I think that was out of politeness. When your coach gets fired, you don't go out and insult him. You thank him for his time, his guidance and all the ways he helped you with your game. Very rarely do players say nasty things about their coaches on the way out. Meanwhile, in both Cleveland and New Orleans, Byron lost his locker-room and it was for this reason that he was fired. He is so humorless and uptight that it gives me a headache just to listen to him speak, and I'm not even one of his players who has to hear it non-stop every day. Just last season, he publicly lambasted his players (who were giving their all but losing game after game because the FO had failed to out together a winning roster) because they had the nerve to celebrate and be happy after a victory over the C Bags. How big of a prick do you have to be to not let something like that slide during what was already a miserable season? Forgive me, but I want my players to get some enjoyment out of the game. I want them to be happy when they win, especially when it's one of the few bright spots in an otherwise unwatchable season. To be a champion, hours and hours of hard work is required. But there is also a joy to this game and it's one of the reasons I tune in. Magic was the one of the hardest working players in the NBA, but he went out there with a smile and made the game look fun. When our coach saps that joy out of his players, I don't think we can get to the next level and I don't want to watch.
Gotcha. I criticize Byron all the time. I completely understand your position. I think Luke needs 2 years, though. I think he'll be promoted next year on the GS staff and be more hands on and be ready to go when we let Byron go. At least, that's my hope...
How is good of a shooter is Curry? This articles puts it in perspective. http://grantland.com/the-triangle/outsider-artist-understanding-the-beauty-of-steph-currys-jumper/
Yeah I disagree. You can enjoy the win without clowning around after the game to the media. Clown around with your friends, family, and teammates but the way those guys carried on in an interview during a 20 win season was embarrassing. You want to have fun? Win games. The Playoffs are fun. Just because you or I might be rubbed the wrong way by Byron Scott, doesn't mean his players are. He's a no-nonsense kind of guy and that's fine. Here's a few articles that show Byron's connection to Paul: link 1, link 2, and link 3. Chris Paul has said that Byron was "more than a coach to him" and Byron has said he "loved Chris like a son". They're very close. Here's two quotes from Irving on Byron when he was fired in Cleveland: I think things got rough this year for two reasons: 1. We've got a few guys on this squad that just aren't up for the every day grind/challenge that competing for a ring takes and 2. We stunk so Byron and the players were all frustrated. This season I don't really want to see any of that kind of celebrating unless we're contending for the playoffs. That's when Lakers have fun. I get both sides of the argument, but I side with Byron Scott that their antics were a little embarrassing. I'm with Kobe on that whole thing:
Question: Kobe seen that before Byron apparently. When the media informed Byron that Kobe reacted that way, he then took the same stance. That's fine. My question is, why did it take Byron a day or two later to have that kind of response? He didn't take note of it immediately after the game or in the locker room when guys were potentially carrying on the same behavior in the locker room after not having won a game in a long time and beating the C Bags? I think Byron was a little happy himself they won that game and beat his hated rival. There's nothing wrong with that, IMO. It just seemed he was kissing Kobe's a$$ when he took the 'we don't do that in a Lakers uniform' approach. Maybe it's just me. Another thing; just out of curiosity. When Donald was alive, he fired Del Negro because of Paul. Donald then interviewed Scott for the job. Paul could have lobbied harder for Scott, but he didn't. Paul wanted Doc Rivers over Scott. Sterling even traded draft compensation for Rivers. Paul and Scott might be as close as can be but that always struck me as strange....
