NBA Season 2022-23

[Who]

GSW players speak highly of Mark Jackson except for Draymond who criticizes him for not playing Draymond at PF. But the rest of the team says very positive things about him.

The main people who say bad things about his personality come from the suits in the front office. They didn't get along with Mark Jackson. Mark wanted to be left alone with the team and coach (similar to how Phil Jackson worked). The front office wanted to be more involved and have everyone work together. It was a clash of management structures. It is not that one is right and one is wrong, they are just different. GSW front office got its way.

The players like Mark. They thought he was a very good coach (except Draymond). Iggy, Steph, Klay all say positive things aout him.

[Who]

Harden opting out, wants 'the basketball freedom to be himself', aka doesn't want to be coached.

https://twitter.com/BleacherReport/status/1658876918987358224

Harden wants to be the man again. His own team. Built around his strengths. Not playing #2 to Embiid and havin to sacrifice all the time to feed Embiid. Or trying to fit around Kyrie & Durant.

No criticism from me for that. I like seeing guys choose to be their best self. Harden is an offensive engine; he does best when things are built around him.

What's his best?

Hard to say these days. Harden may still be a 25+ppg 8-10apg guy as the main man. Is he still a top 10 player? If outside the top 10, is he comparable to Trae Young? Probably.

[gouki88]

This situation could present itself as a major dilemma for the Lakers, though, according to NBA insider Shams Charania, Simply put, LA might not be able to match whatever offer Reaves is able to receive in free agency in the offseason: “The most the Lakers can offer outright is four years, a bit over $50 million,” Shams said. “… But then, if you’re Austin Reaves, what can you get out in the marketplace? I think more and more teams around the league, teams with cap space, teams like Houston (and) San Antonio, you have to look at a guy like that because he’s not old. He’s not super young either. He’s kind of that middle-of-the-pack age range guy that is still young enough career-wise that can come in, fit among your group, be a veteran leader to an extent, but still grow and develop with your group. I think there is a concern for sure if you’re the Lakers that he’s gonna get potentially an offer sheet way, way, way higher than 50.”

Reaves is the restricted agent that I could see leaving teams this summer.  I don't think that Grant will be a big offer, but you've got to imagine that Reaves will get, bare minimum, Evan Fournier money, right?

Man, I really wanted to grab Reeves when he went undrafted. Bummer the Lakers got him.

That said, I don’t think he even plays on the Celtics.  I’m not convinced he’s significantly better than Pritchard.

He's like a 6'5" Pritchard.

Reaves is WAAAAAAY better than Pricthard.

Reaves shoots 60+% from 2 point range, as opposed to under 50% from Pritchard. He's way better at scoring at just about every spot inside than ARC than Pricthard, still a good three point shooter (tho on lower volume) and gets to the line alot, vs almost never for Pritchard. All of taht makes him a massively more efficient scorer than Pricthard.

Also, he's bigger. Which matters defensively.

Yeah...  I'm not seeing the Pritchard comparison.  They're both white, I guess, and 24 years old.  Reaves is quantitatively better, though.

Wake me up when Pritchard puts up 15 / 5 / 4 in the playoffs with good defense.

It wasn’t a Pritchard comparison, exactly.  It was that he wouldn’t get any playing time on the Celtics, like Pritchard, as liam was bemoaning a binkie not acquired.  I stand by that — Reaves wouldn’t play here, and Pritchard could play elsewhere.  I think we’ll see that next season, and if given the opportunity, the overall impact would be similar, even if they are not identical players.

I took the comment to mean Pritchard would be as good as A Reaves if Pritchard were 6 foot 5. Similar to comments by Chuck Daly (?) that said if Isiah Thomas were 6-6, he'd be the best player in the league. That the difference between Isiah and MJ was MJ was taller and that allowed him to be the more dominant basketball player. If their heights were switched, MJ 6-1 and Isiah 6-6, the results would be Isiah as the best player in the NBA.

But that Pritchard at 6-1 is equal to Reaves at 6-5 ... No.

A Reaves is a certifiable starter. He is a plus ball-handler & passer. He is a plus shooter. He can drive. He rebounds. He defends. He is a well rounded SG with size and skill.

Pritchard is a small PG who can shoot but is deficient in ball-handling & passing (important skills to be lacking in a PG) and does not impact the game much on D despite his best efforts due to his lack of size. Pritchard is a serviceable backup PG.

A Reaves would play on any team in the league. He'd be one of our top bench players here (backup SG/SF) if not our starting SG in our small ball lineup (replacing D White).

Pritchard has a place in this league as a low end backup PG on a minimum or near minimum contract. A Reaves is a starting caliber SG who will probably earn $20-25mil a year on his next deal.

Reaves would absolutely not start over White, come off it. White is a much, much better defender and a significantly better passer, with similar shooting ability. Reaves would be the 4th guard in our rotation (by a significant margin)

I like Reaves but he'd be our 5th guard after Brown, Brogdon, White, and Smart.

Sorry, had been classifying Brown as a wing. If Brown is a guard, then yeah - Reaves would be 5th.

Reaves would probably be our primary backup SF.  His size isn't ideal, but he's essentially playing SF in LA, next to Russell and Schroder.

His size not being ideal is the exact reason he wouldn't, in my mind. Mazzulla clearly likes bigger guards and wings, and loathes any who can be hunted in switch-heavy schemes - which is how I view Reaves

[celticsclay]

I really hope he gets it. 

The Bucks are expected to interview Mark Jackson for their vacant head coach position, The Athletic’s Shams Charania reports.

Oh my goodness that would be good. If they hired Jackson instead of Nurse or Williams, that would be brilliant (and mad!!)

Fingers crossed. Poor Giannis though.

Yeah, it would be a brutal waste of that big 3. Good for us, bad for basketball

is it? I can't say Jackson is a worse coach than Nurse or Williams.

Thos coaches have been to the finals and one won it all. What has Jackson done? At least it would get him off of TV.

Yeah.  Jackson was replaced in Golden State and they immediately became a dynasty.  That's a clear sign of failure to me.

Jackson was there for 3 years.  He took over a rebuilding team, lost Curry for basically a year, and then built them up.  He was let go for personality things not coaching. 

Nick Nurse took over a 59 win team that added one of the best players in the sport his first season and has gotten progressively and significantly worse since then.

Monty failed in New Orleans, had a fluke run to the Finals based mostly on other team injuries, and has failed miserably getting blown out in close out games in consecutive seasons, once in a major upset.

I have no idea if Mark Jackson is any better than Nurse or Williams, which was the point I was making.  Nurse and Monty aren't Spoelstra and it is weird people are acting like they are.  Jackson is a horrid announcer, but he wasn't a trainwreck at coach either and has a winning record in 3 seasons when one of them a young Curry barely played and they won just 23 games. Maybe Jackson couldn't have won with Curry, or maybe he got them right in the cusp and they let him go for personality reasons, but had they not he'd be sitting there with multiple titles.  Curry was 25, Klay and Dray were 23 Jackson's last season.  You know when they were right on the cusp of their prime.

Immediately after Jackson was fired, essentially the same Golden State team won 67 games (Jackson's high was 51) and a championship.

Again, he won 51 games.  With a healthy Curry, Thompson, Iguodala, Barnes, Bogut, Speights, Lee, etc.  He then lost in the first round.

That's incompetence personified.

How much of that was those players continuing to gel and develop? No doubt they took off with Kerr, but they did develop with Jackson.

Maybe they get 5 more wins from gelling and continuing to improve but 16 games seems crazy when you are starting at 50. That seems really rare to me.

[Roy H.]

I really hope he gets it. 

The Bucks are expected to interview Mark Jackson for their vacant head coach position, The Athletic’s Shams Charania reports.

Oh my goodness that would be good. If they hired Jackson instead of Nurse or Williams, that would be brilliant (and mad!!)

Fingers crossed. Poor Giannis though.

Yeah, it would be a brutal waste of that big 3. Good for us, bad for basketball

is it? I can't say Jackson is a worse coach than Nurse or Williams.

Thos coaches have been to the finals and one won it all. What has Jackson done? At least it would get him off of TV.

Yeah.  Jackson was replaced in Golden State and they immediately became a dynasty.  That's a clear sign of failure to me.

Jackson was there for 3 years.  He took over a rebuilding team, lost Curry for basically a year, and then built them up.  He was let go for personality things not coaching. 

Nick Nurse took over a 59 win team that added one of the best players in the sport his first season and has gotten progressively and significantly worse since then.

Monty failed in New Orleans, had a fluke run to the Finals based mostly on other team injuries, and has failed miserably getting blown out in close out games in consecutive seasons, once in a major upset.

I have no idea if Mark Jackson is any better than Nurse or Williams, which was the point I was making.  Nurse and Monty aren't Spoelstra and it is weird people are acting like they are.  Jackson is a horrid announcer, but he wasn't a trainwreck at coach either and has a winning record in 3 seasons when one of them a young Curry barely played and they won just 23 games. Maybe Jackson couldn't have won with Curry, or maybe he got them right in the cusp and they let him go for personality reasons, but had they not he'd be sitting there with multiple titles.  Curry was 25, Klay and Dray were 23 Jackson's last season.  You know when they were right on the cusp of their prime.

Immediately after Jackson was fired, essentially the same Golden State team won 67 games (Jackson's high was 51) and a championship.

Again, he won 51 games.  With a healthy Curry, Thompson, Iguodala, Barnes, Bogut, Speights, Lee, etc.  He then lost in the first round.

That's incompetence personified.

I think Mark Jackson was competent in that season. What he showed was inflexibility in basketball intelligence. He had a set way he thought things should work, and it wasn't going to work with that team. Playing traditional basketball with those players wasn't going to win championships. That's why he was fired. Still, he did help those guys develop and got them to the playoffs. He may eventually have helped them make it further too.

But he lacked the creativity that Kerr brought. That's really not an indictment against him. Every coach lacks Kerr's creativity. That system is brilliant and absolutely unique in modern basketball.

I'd love Jackson to get a coaching job just so I don't have to listen to his commentary. He's truly incompetent there.

I think that 25+ other coaches could have gotten Curry, Klay, Iguodala, Barnes, Green, Bogut, etc., etc. to 51 wins and a first round playoff loss.  That team had absolutely elite talent.

[Who]

Trivia: James Harden has now shot under 30% in elimination games 5 times in his career. A minimum of 10 shot attempts required. Harden is tied with Sheed for the most such games in league history by a single player since the shot clock era started.

[gouki88]

Trivia: James Harden has now shot under 30% in elimination games 5 times in his career. A minimum of 10 shot attempts required. Harden is tied with Sheed for the most such games in league history by a single player since the shot clock era started.

I don't know who I expected to lead that stat, but Sheed was not one of them.

There was a great video breakdown by Thinking Basketball on the Celtic defence shifting in G6 and G7 (more 2 big lineups, etc.), but the thing that stood out to me was how they defended Harden. Specifically, how Horford completely ignored Harden to stay attached to Embiid. Al would at times almost jump out of Harden's way, giving him an open lane to the ring. Even if Williams wasn't rotating quickly enough to stop the shot, Harden would never go for the shot or try to draw the foul. It's like he was allergic to trying to score first. Instead, he'd dump it to PJ Tucker who can't do anything on offence.

He has become such a different, unpredictable player. At least on Houston you knew he was going to score or die trying. He might shoot terribly, but there were no questions over his willingness to shoulder the offence. Now, he doesn't seem to know what his role is. We saw him torch us a couple of times, play okay a couple more, and then completely disappear and play a lot like Ben Simmons. Really weird. He needs some serious sports psychology

[tazzmaniac]

Trivia: James Harden has now shot under 30% in elimination games 5 times in his career. A minimum of 10 shot attempts required. Harden is tied with Sheed for the most such games in league history by a single player since the shot clock era started.

I don't know who I expected to lead that stat, but Sheed was not one of them.

There was a great video breakdown by Thinking Basketball on the Celtic defence shifting in G6 and G7 (more 2 big lineups, etc.), but the thing that stood out to me was how they defended Harden. Specifically, how Horford completely ignored Harden to stay attached to Embiid. Al would at times almost jump out of Harden's way, giving him an open lane to the ring. Even if Williams wasn't rotating quickly enough to stop the shot, Harden would never go for the shot or try to draw the foul. It's like he was allergic to trying to score first. Instead, he'd dump it to PJ Tucker who can't do anything on offence.

He has become such a different, unpredictable player. At least on Houston you knew he was going to score or die trying. He might shoot terribly, but there were no questions over his willingness to shoulder the offence. Now, he doesn't seem to know what his role is. We saw him torch us a couple of times, play okay a couple more, and then completely disappear and play a lot like Ben Simmons. Really weird. He needs some serious sports psychology

Maybe they gave him Simmons' locker but didn't fumigate it well enough. 

[Moranis]

I really hope he gets it. 

The Bucks are expected to interview Mark Jackson for their vacant head coach position, The Athletic’s Shams Charania reports.

Oh my goodness that would be good. If they hired Jackson instead of Nurse or Williams, that would be brilliant (and mad!!)

Fingers crossed. Poor Giannis though.

Yeah, it would be a brutal waste of that big 3. Good for us, bad for basketball

is it? I can't say Jackson is a worse coach than Nurse or Williams.

Thos coaches have been to the finals and one won it all. What has Jackson done? At least it would get him off of TV.

Yeah.  Jackson was replaced in Golden State and they immediately became a dynasty.  That's a clear sign of failure to me.

Jackson was there for 3 years.  He took over a rebuilding team, lost Curry for basically a year, and then built them up.  He was let go for personality things not coaching. 

Nick Nurse took over a 59 win team that added one of the best players in the sport his first season and has gotten progressively and significantly worse since then.

Monty failed in New Orleans, had a fluke run to the Finals based mostly on other team injuries, and has failed miserably getting blown out in close out games in consecutive seasons, once in a major upset.

I have no idea if Mark Jackson is any better than Nurse or Williams, which was the point I was making.  Nurse and Monty aren't Spoelstra and it is weird people are acting like they are.  Jackson is a horrid announcer, but he wasn't a trainwreck at coach either and has a winning record in 3 seasons when one of them a young Curry barely played and they won just 23 games. Maybe Jackson couldn't have won with Curry, or maybe he got them right in the cusp and they let him go for personality reasons, but had they not he'd be sitting there with multiple titles.  Curry was 25, Klay and Dray were 23 Jackson's last season.  You know when they were right on the cusp of their prime.

Immediately after Jackson was fired, essentially the same Golden State team won 67 games (Jackson's high was 51) and a championship.

Again, he won 51 games.  With a healthy Curry, Thompson, Iguodala, Barnes, Bogut, Speights, Lee, etc.  He then lost in the first round.

That's incompetence personified.

I think Mark Jackson was competent in that season. What he showed was inflexibility in basketball intelligence. He had a set way he thought things should work, and it wasn't going to work with that team. Playing traditional basketball with those players wasn't going to win championships. That's why he was fired. Still, he did help those guys develop and got them to the playoffs. He may eventually have helped them make it further too.

But he lacked the creativity that Kerr brought. That's really not an indictment against him. Every coach lacks Kerr's creativity. That system is brilliant and absolutely unique in modern basketball.

I'd love Jackson to get a coaching job just so I don't have to listen to his commentary. He's truly incompetent there.

I think that 25+ other coaches could have gotten Curry, Klay, Iguodala, Barnes, Green, Bogut, etc., etc. to 51 wins and a first round playoff loss.  That team had absolutely elite talent.

This is an awful lot of revisionist history.  The 3 seasons before Jackson got there the Warriors won 29, 26, and 36 games.  Jackson's 1st season, Curry in his 3rd year played in just 26 games, in which the Warriors were 13-13 and they were 10-30 without him (that was the 66 game season).  Next year they won 47 games and made the 2nd round losing to the Spurs in 6 games and they were the only team in the West to beat San Antonio in that playoffs (they swept the Lakers and Grizzlies).  They upped the wins to 51 and ended up playing the 57 win Clippers in the 1st round and lost a close hard fought 7 game series.  Steph had just finished his 5th season and was 25.  Draymond was 23 but had only finished his 2nd year.  Klay had just finished his 3rd season and was also 23. 

The Warriors were always going to get better as their main guys entered their prime.  Now maybe they don't jump 16 wins and win the title with Jackson instead of Kerr, or maybe they do.  Young teams get better.  We've seen this time and time again.  For example, the Cavs during Lebron's 1st run won 50, 50, 45, and then jumped up to 66 and 61.  Mike Brown was the coach that entire time and the majority of the core stayed the same.  Lebron just became Lebron during that time.  Oh and that 45 to 66 win jump was going from Lebron's 5th to 6th season, just like Steph.  The Bucks with Giannis went from 44 to 60 (though they did add Bud in the 60 win year), but that also correlates from Giannis' 5th season to 6th season as well.  Even the Bulls jumped 10 wins from Jordan's 5th to 6th season (though they switched coaches like the Bucks). 

The reality is, all time great players do in fact get better and they really start to form into the all time great player around year 6.  Kerr was a better fit for the Warriors, but they absolutely were going to get better even had Jackson stayed.  That is just what happens in these things.  And I think Jackson had just figured out the sweet spot as Draymond started the last 4 games against the Clippers and was awesome in that game 7.  I suspect Jackson would have carried that over the next year, just like Kerr did.

[gouki88]

I really hope he gets it. 

The Bucks are expected to interview Mark Jackson for their vacant head coach position, The Athletic’s Shams Charania reports.

Oh my goodness that would be good. If they hired Jackson instead of Nurse or Williams, that would be brilliant (and mad!!)

Fingers crossed. Poor Giannis though.

Yeah, it would be a brutal waste of that big 3. Good for us, bad for basketball

is it? I can't say Jackson is a worse coach than Nurse or Williams.

Thos coaches have been to the finals and one won it all. What has Jackson done? At least it would get him off of TV.

Yeah.  Jackson was replaced in Golden State and they immediately became a dynasty.  That's a clear sign of failure to me.

Jackson was there for 3 years.  He took over a rebuilding team, lost Curry for basically a year, and then built them up.  He was let go for personality things not coaching. 

Nick Nurse took over a 59 win team that added one of the best players in the sport his first season and has gotten progressively and significantly worse since then.

Monty failed in New Orleans, had a fluke run to the Finals based mostly on other team injuries, and has failed miserably getting blown out in close out games in consecutive seasons, once in a major upset.

I have no idea if Mark Jackson is any better than Nurse or Williams, which was the point I was making.  Nurse and Monty aren't Spoelstra and it is weird people are acting like they are.  Jackson is a horrid announcer, but he wasn't a trainwreck at coach either and has a winning record in 3 seasons when one of them a young Curry barely played and they won just 23 games. Maybe Jackson couldn't have won with Curry, or maybe he got them right in the cusp and they let him go for personality reasons, but had they not he'd be sitting there with multiple titles.  Curry was 25, Klay and Dray were 23 Jackson's last season.  You know when they were right on the cusp of their prime.

Immediately after Jackson was fired, essentially the same Golden State team won 67 games (Jackson's high was 51) and a championship.

Again, he won 51 games.  With a healthy Curry, Thompson, Iguodala, Barnes, Bogut, Speights, Lee, etc.  He then lost in the first round.

That's incompetence personified.

I think Mark Jackson was competent in that season. What he showed was inflexibility in basketball intelligence. He had a set way he thought things should work, and it wasn't going to work with that team. Playing traditional basketball with those players wasn't going to win championships. That's why he was fired. Still, he did help those guys develop and got them to the playoffs. He may eventually have helped them make it further too.

But he lacked the creativity that Kerr brought. That's really not an indictment against him. Every coach lacks Kerr's creativity. That system is brilliant and absolutely unique in modern basketball.

I'd love Jackson to get a coaching job just so I don't have to listen to his commentary. He's truly incompetent there.

I think that 25+ other coaches could have gotten Curry, Klay, Iguodala, Barnes, Green, Bogut, etc., etc. to 51 wins and a first round playoff loss.  That team had absolutely elite talent.

This is an awful lot of revisionist history.  The 3 seasons before Jackson got there the Warriors won 29, 26, and 36 games.  Jackson's 1st season, Curry in his 3rd year played in just 26 games, in which the Warriors were 13-13 and they were 10-30 without him (that was the 66 game season).  Next year they won 47 games and made the 2nd round losing to the Spurs in 6 games and they were the only team in the West to beat San Antonio in that playoffs (they swept the Lakers and Grizzlies).  They upped the wins to 51 and ended up playing the 57 win Clippers in the 1st round and lost a close hard fought 7 game series.  Steph had just finished his 5th season and was 25.  Draymond was 23 but had only finished his 2nd year.  Klay had just finished his 3rd season and was also 23. 

The Warriors were always going to get better as their main guys entered their prime.  Now maybe they don't jump 16 wins and win the title with Jackson instead of Kerr, or maybe they do.  Young teams get better.  We've seen this time and time again.  For example, the Cavs during Lebron's 1st run won 50, 50, 45, and then jumped up to 66 and 61.  Mike Brown was the coach that entire time and the majority of the core stayed the same.  Lebron just became Lebron during that time.  Oh and that 45 to 66 win jump was going from Lebron's 5th to 6th season, just like Steph.  The Bucks with Giannis went from 44 to 60 (though they did add Bud in the 60 win year), but that also correlates from Giannis' 5th season to 6th season as well.  Even the Bulls jumped 10 wins from Jordan's 5th to 6th season (though they switched coaches like the Bucks). 

The reality is, all time great players do in fact get better and they really start to form into the all time great player around year 6.  Kerr was a better fit for the Warriors, but they absolutely were going to get better even had Jackson stayed.  That is just what happens in these things.  And I think Jackson had just figured out the sweet spot as Draymond started the last 4 games against the Clippers and was awesome in that game 7.  I suspect Jackson would have carried that over the next year, just like Kerr did.

I swear you have made the exact opposite argument for long-term development of Celtics players

[Moranis]

I really hope he gets it. 

The Bucks are expected to interview Mark Jackson for their vacant head coach position, The Athletic’s Shams Charania reports.

Oh my goodness that would be good. If they hired Jackson instead of Nurse or Williams, that would be brilliant (and mad!!)

Fingers crossed. Poor Giannis though.

Yeah, it would be a brutal waste of that big 3. Good for us, bad for basketball

is it? I can't say Jackson is a worse coach than Nurse or Williams.

Thos coaches have been to the finals and one won it all. What has Jackson done? At least it would get him off of TV.

Yeah.  Jackson was replaced in Golden State and they immediately became a dynasty.  That's a clear sign of failure to me.

Jackson was there for 3 years.  He took over a rebuilding team, lost Curry for basically a year, and then built them up.  He was let go for personality things not coaching. 

Nick Nurse took over a 59 win team that added one of the best players in the sport his first season and has gotten progressively and significantly worse since then.

Monty failed in New Orleans, had a fluke run to the Finals based mostly on other team injuries, and has failed miserably getting blown out in close out games in consecutive seasons, once in a major upset.

I have no idea if Mark Jackson is any better than Nurse or Williams, which was the point I was making.  Nurse and Monty aren't Spoelstra and it is weird people are acting like they are.  Jackson is a horrid announcer, but he wasn't a trainwreck at coach either and has a winning record in 3 seasons when one of them a young Curry barely played and they won just 23 games. Maybe Jackson couldn't have won with Curry, or maybe he got them right in the cusp and they let him go for personality reasons, but had they not he'd be sitting there with multiple titles.  Curry was 25, Klay and Dray were 23 Jackson's last season.  You know when they were right on the cusp of their prime.

Immediately after Jackson was fired, essentially the same Golden State team won 67 games (Jackson's high was 51) and a championship.

Again, he won 51 games.  With a healthy Curry, Thompson, Iguodala, Barnes, Bogut, Speights, Lee, etc.  He then lost in the first round.

That's incompetence personified.

I think Mark Jackson was competent in that season. What he showed was inflexibility in basketball intelligence. He had a set way he thought things should work, and it wasn't going to work with that team. Playing traditional basketball with those players wasn't going to win championships. That's why he was fired. Still, he did help those guys develop and got them to the playoffs. He may eventually have helped them make it further too.

But he lacked the creativity that Kerr brought. That's really not an indictment against him. Every coach lacks Kerr's creativity. That system is brilliant and absolutely unique in modern basketball.

I'd love Jackson to get a coaching job just so I don't have to listen to his commentary. He's truly incompetent there.

I think that 25+ other coaches could have gotten Curry, Klay, Iguodala, Barnes, Green, Bogut, etc., etc. to 51 wins and a first round playoff loss.  That team had absolutely elite talent.

This is an awful lot of revisionist history.  The 3 seasons before Jackson got there the Warriors won 29, 26, and 36 games.  Jackson's 1st season, Curry in his 3rd year played in just 26 games, in which the Warriors were 13-13 and they were 10-30 without him (that was the 66 game season).  Next year they won 47 games and made the 2nd round losing to the Spurs in 6 games and they were the only team in the West to beat San Antonio in that playoffs (they swept the Lakers and Grizzlies).  They upped the wins to 51 and ended up playing the 57 win Clippers in the 1st round and lost a close hard fought 7 game series.  Steph had just finished his 5th season and was 25.  Draymond was 23 but had only finished his 2nd year.  Klay had just finished his 3rd season and was also 23. 

The Warriors were always going to get better as their main guys entered their prime.  Now maybe they don't jump 16 wins and win the title with Jackson instead of Kerr, or maybe they do.  Young teams get better.  We've seen this time and time again.  For example, the Cavs during Lebron's 1st run won 50, 50, 45, and then jumped up to 66 and 61.  Mike Brown was the coach that entire time and the majority of the core stayed the same.  Lebron just became Lebron during that time.  Oh and that 45 to 66 win jump was going from Lebron's 5th to 6th season, just like Steph.  The Bucks with Giannis went from 44 to 60 (though they did add Bud in the 60 win year), but that also correlates from Giannis' 5th season to 6th season as well.  Even the Bulls jumped 10 wins from Jordan's 5th to 6th season (though they switched coaches like the Bucks). 

The reality is, all time great players do in fact get better and they really start to form into the all time great player around year 6.  Kerr was a better fit for the Warriors, but they absolutely were going to get better even had Jackson stayed.  That is just what happens in these things.  And I think Jackson had just figured out the sweet spot as Draymond started the last 4 games against the Clippers and was awesome in that game 7.  I suspect Jackson would have carried that over the next year, just like Kerr did.

I swear you have made the exact opposite argument for long-term development of Celtics players

you generally don't see huge statistical jumps after year 5, but players still improve, and you can't discount the history of large win jumps by teams with an all time great player going from year 5 to 6.  That is 4 of the 15ish (depending on where you put Giannis) best players in history whose teams all took a big jump from year 5 to 6.  Heck even the C's went from 51 to 57 wins between Tatum's 5th and 6th year (and they even swapped coaches to what many on this board would call a downgrade).

[Who]

And I think Jackson had just figured out the sweet spot as Draymond started the last 4 games against the Clippers and was awesome in that game 7.  I suspect Jackson would have carried that over the next year, just like Kerr did.

Kerr was planning to start David Lee at PF if my memory serves. Only an injury in training camp or before training camp forced Kerr to turn to Draymond as a temporary starter while D Lee recovered. Draymond did well and the team played fantastically with him in the lineup so Kerr kept him there. Unplanned by Kerr but stuck with it after seeing it's efficacy.

David Lee and Andrew Bogut were one weak point in that team the season before with Mark Jackson in terms of their combined lack of quickness. Both plodders. That team was crying out for a quick footed PF who could defend (like Bogut's old partnership with Mbah a Moute). I remember Draymond being a shock all year long (2015) for how well he could defend bigger bodied PFs like Zach Randolph despite being so undersized. Draymond fit the bill perfectly. Kismet.

-------------------------

My memory of the following year (2015) was Steph going supernova. Hitting crazy shots like never seen before in terms of volume / frequency. Going from an All-Star to an MVP. Not sure whether Steph was even a clear franchise player before that. I thought that squad's 51 wins was more of a team effort situation. Steph, Iggy, Klay, Bogut, D Lee, H Barnes. That changed in 2015. Steph became the man. He took over like never before.

[Who]

"During a press conference Wednesday afternoon, Sixers president Daryl Morey said it was very natural for players to become close with people in the locker room.

Morey cited an unspecified trade where Embiid was initially unhappy with the players the Sixers dealt."

“He was very close with coach Rivers and, yeah, he was shocked about the change,” Morey said, via the Philadelphia Inquirer. “It’s my job to help convince him that the new coach is someone that he’ll have a great relationship with as well.”

Embiid not happy with Doc being fired.

[Moranis]

"During a press conference Wednesday afternoon, Sixers president Daryl Morey said it was very natural for players to become close with people in the locker room.

Morey cited an unspecified trade where Embiid was initially unhappy with the players the Sixers dealt."

“He was very close with coach Rivers and, yeah, he was shocked about the change,” Morey said, via the Philadelphia Inquirer. “It’s my job to help convince him that the new coach is someone that he’ll have a great relationship with as well.”

Embiid not happy with Doc being fired.

well then Embiid should have played better in game 7.

[Goldstar88]

Keith Pompey: Former Toronto Raptors coach Nick Nurse is meeting with Sixers ownership and management this week coming up in regards to the vacant head-coaching position, according to league sources. – via Twitter PompeyOnSixers