What's Bud's future?

[EazyRoc]

8 minutes ago, bleachkit said:

Mark Jackson is terrible. He was horrible in Golden State, fighting with management, not playing to his guys strengths. It was clearly evident when Steve Kerr arrived, how much Jackson had been holding them back.

That is actually very false according to Steve Kerr himself. Also, Jackson didn't get along with ownership due to personal reasons I won't describe in this post. You can google it. I think he left a lot to be desired offensively, but the players loved him. Jackson laid the foundation for that first Warriors championship, but Kerr made ball movement that teams top priority offensively. Also, I wasn't really being serious. I really like Bud as a coach and hope we keep him. I think if he had a roster like GSW had that year, they would've won about 75 games (ok, not really)

[Watchman]

19 hours ago, JTB said:

@Diesel I don't understand your philosophy behind the mike brown next coach if bud gets fired?

schlenk just left a franchise where there was ball movement and Spurs like offense. I'm really going to question how smart Schlenk is if he hires an heavy ISO coach in mike brown...really?...Schlenk seems to really admire the way the warriors play so even if bud is fired which I doubt..I still don't expect heavy ISO coach mike brown to be his replacement.

i could care less that brown was an assistant coach for the warriors. He don't know offense and doesn't deserve any credit for what or who the Warriors are!

so what are you basing your prediction on with mike brown as the next head coach because he surely isn't a Spurs type coach so I'm just trying to understand why he is the 1st coach you believe is Buds replacement if we even get to that point?

And exactly who was the lead assistant from Schlenk's last job?  Mike Brown.  Asked and answered.

[Watchman]

19 hours ago, JTB said:

@Diesel I don't understand your philosophy behind the mike brown next coach if bud gets fired?

schlenk just left a franchise where there was ball movement and Spurs like offense. I'm really going to question how smart Schlenk is if he hires an heavy ISO coach in mike brown...really?...Schlenk seems to really admire the way the warriors play so even if bud is fired which I doubt..I still don't expect heavy ISO coach mike brown to be his replacement.

i could care less that brown was an assistant coach for the warriors. He don't know offense and doesn't deserve any credit for what or who the Warriors are!

so what are you basing your prediction on with mike brown as the next head coach because he surely isn't a Spurs type coach so I'm just trying to understand why he is the 1st coach you believe is Buds replacement if we even get to that point?

First reply didn't post so I made this one.  Then of course, it posted when I hit, "submit."

Edited June 30, 2017 by Watchman

[Diesel]

8 hours ago, Peoriabird said:

Mike Brown will not be Bud's replacement...this is just a typical pro-Bud scare tactic to get more posters to support Bud by presenting the scenario of Bud or some terrible coach. Same thing happened with the Falcons and Mike Smith. We will have plenty of better options vs the status quo.

Nope.  Just like Walton before him.  Guys who take over for Kerr and show that they can run the ship... they are next in line for coaching vacancies.  That's without Schlenk being the new GM.  Add Schlenk being the new GM and knowing that Brown will follow what Schlenk says... I think unless Brown is picked up by another team, you can expect that he's on Schlenk's short list. 

[TheNorthCydeRises]

On 6/29/2017 at 6:56 PM, bleachkit said:

I honestly do not care for Bud anymore. He could have gone to bat for Ferry, but instead just exploited a faux controversy and turned into a power grab for himself. Ferry's moves were brilliant, traded Joe and Marvin, got Milsap and Korver on the cheap, got Bazemore and JYD for pennies, drafted Schröder. He bought low and he sold high. But Bud saw his chance to have total control and couldn't pass that up. Bud's moves have been nothing short of an unmitigated disaster. Giving near max contacts to one dimensional players like Baze and Dwight. Refusing to part with Horford or Milsap at the deadline, even though we had solid offers, both times foolishly overuling Wilcox. Now we buy high and sell low. Even if he is a good coach, I don't think I will even have a high opinion of him again.

Ferry is a big reason why we don't have any of those guys right now.  The whole "flexibility" notion also means that guys can bounce right out of town on you.   Then if you're not willing to go into the Luxury Tax to retain your "core", you're in a hamster wheel . . until you get thrown off of it.

 

[AHF]

Who did Ferry fail to keep again?

[nathan2331]

Who did Ferry fail to keep again?

Not signing Demarre Carroll and Paul Millsap to 3 or 4 year contracts when they initially signed in Atlanta was a huge mistake in hindsight. Instead of keeping our core together and adding more pieces as the salary cap went up we didn't have their bird rights to be able to go over the cap.

 

Sent from my Z981 using Tapatalk

 

 

[AHF]

On 7/1/2017 at 0:07 AM, nathan2331 said:

Not signing Demarre Carroll and Paul Millsap to 3 or 4 year contracts when they initially signed in Atlanta was a huge mistake in hindsight. Instead of keeping our core together and adding more pieces as the salary cap went up we didn't have their bird rights to be able to go over the cap.

 

Sent from my Z981 using Tapatalk

 

 

How is it a mistake when he tried to do it but they didn't want longer deals?  Not trying to sign them for longer, I get but it is undisputed he tried to get additional years on both deals.

[nathan2331]

How is it a mistake when he tried to do it but they didn't want longer deals?  Not trying to sign them for longer, I get but it is undisputed he tried to get additional years on both deals.

How much leverage did Carroll and Millsap have that they'd refuse to sign for 3 years? Carroll was nothing special before he came to Atlanta, and I don't see why Millsap would have rejected 3 yrs/36 mil. Maybe I'm just mistaken, but we would have been better off giving them more money per year rather than giving them two years and losing out on their bird rights. Those two year deals handicapped us from building on the 60-win team. I say this all in hindsight of course.

 

Sent from my Z981 using Tapatalk