OutlawImmortal
Certified Member
Sorry! Took your quote out of context. Now I see you were talking just about the offense and I agree.
No problem, I can see how it could be read that way.
Sorry! Took your quote out of context. Now I see you were talking just about the offense and I agree.
Curry becoming a better player from year to year had more to do with it. Jackson would probably win a title with last year's team as well.I remember I was one of the very few guys that said Kerr is a much better coach than Jackson and that Kerr probably will get more out of this team than jackson. I remember I was told that we were maxed out by Jackson in terms of wins. Lol good times.
I kinda hope Luke's first day on the job involves sending the guys to summer camp for "team bonding with Popa Bill". Sure, afterwards everyone would likely fail a drug test and be suspended for the first couple of games but it'd be worth it.
Once again, just because something worked out, doesn't mean you were wrong.
Let's see. Title in Kerr's first year, broke the all-time regular season mark the 2nd year. Safe to say, that ownership wasn't wrong. There's a reason teams weren't clamoring for Jackson after he was dismissed.
L+USC does make a solid point though. Obviously, with the results they've gotten, firing Jackson and hiring Kerr wasn't the wrong choice. However, we don't know if the team would have accomplished the same or close to it with Jackson because he didn't get the chance.
Was the difference that Curry was finally healthy and it was the natural progression of this team? Was the difference Kerr being that much better than Jackson? Or was it some combination of both?
Let's see. Title in Kerr's first year, broke the all-time regular season mark the 2nd year. Safe to say, that ownership wasn't wrong. There's a reason teams weren't clamoring for Jackson after he was dismissed.
I kinda hope Luke's first day on the job involves sending the guys to summer camp for "team bonding with Popa Bill". Sure, afterwards everyone would likely fail a drug test and be suspended for the first couple of games but it'd be worth it.
L+USC does make a solid point though. Obviously, with the results they've gotten, firing Jackson and hiring Kerr wasn't the wrong choice. However, we don't know if the team would have accomplished the same or close to it with Jackson because he didn't get the chance.
Was the difference that Curry was finally healthy and it was the natural progression of this team? Was the difference Kerr being that much better than Jackson? Or was it some combination of both?
You're a genius magic. I bet no other teams have thought about going after LeBron in case he leaves.
You're a genius magic. I bet no other teams have thought about going after LeBron in case he leaves.
Yes.![]()
To be honest, I'd rather they went for Durant but it would almost be worth it just to see Wiggy flip the fuck out.
Yes.![]()