Phx-Suns.Net

I think I'm most surprised with the Raptors record though, 12-5 with a +6.7 margin on a 7 game winning streak. Going into the season I thought they were a total disaster with a bunch of misfitting parts and having given Ingram that extension without seeing him in any game, and having fired Majiri which depressed my Raptors fan friend who is the most optimistic person I know.

Superbone wrote: ↑

Sun Nov 23, 2025 10:41 pm

Warriors have a rookie right now named Will Richard that's playing great for them and he was a deep 2nd rounder. He's even a starting. Quinten Post is a second year player that's also playing very well for the Warriors.

Both were 4 year college guys that came in fairly developed. Both also are strictly role players just being asked to do very little. They are averaging like 8 and 6 points respectively.

I think Kerr has a system that revolves around Curry and if you’re willing to sacrifice to be a part of that system, he’ll play you. The system doesn’t really lend itself to a young player who wants to develop into a star.

And I’ll restate that I don’t blame Kerr for that, but the original comment was essentially if Kerr can’t develop a young player then they probably aren’t any good and I just don’t see the evidence to support that…he’s never really developed anyone into anything other than a role player.

Ya I didn’t think they’d work either…a bunch of b-level creators that wouldn’t play well together because they all like the ball, but it seems to be working

Kerr and the Warriors have developed several young players. Right now they have Kuminga, Payton II, Podziemski, Moody, Quinten Post, and a few other young guys all getting minutes in the rotation and contributing.

I don't think their player development is tops in the league, and you can list several misses or guys they did not find a way to integrate into their team. But as others have said, several of the young guys who didn't work out in Golden State are guys who I would classify as low-BBIQ. Kerr needs young guys who can be out on the floor without harming the team, without being a large net negative. Most of the guys listed above (except maybe Kuminga) play smart, share the ball, don't chuck, and don't hurt them on defense.

I think their overall record developing young guys is fine, not exceptional, but not noteworthy for being worse than other teams in the league. Generally speaking I think they have done a decent job of trying to replenish their roster with new blood despite keeping their long-time vets like Curry, Draymond, (previously) Klay, and now Butler around and happy. That is no easy task, as we are well aware.

The whole player development thing in the NBA is a bit misconstrued. You can't turn a bad basketball player into a good one thru what's referred to as player development. There has to be some sort of foundational NBA skillset to work with and then it's still on the player to put in the work and put the work to use in live action. Were we bad at player development because of Archie Goodwin, Marquese Chriss and Dragan Bender or good at player development because of Devin Booker? If we had taken DeAaron Fox over Josh Jackson, would our player development rep be better? No amount of player development was going to turn Alex Len in Joker or even Sengun.

And yea, certain guys fit into certain systems better than others. Kuminga might be able to put up 25ppg as a #1 option, but how successful is that team going to be? If he can't fit in playing off of Curry, moving and passing the ball then will he be willing to do it on another team playing a similar style?

Split T wrote: ↑

Sun Nov 23, 2025 11:24 pm

Superbone wrote: ↑

Sun Nov 23, 2025 10:41 pm

Warriors have a rookie right now named Will Richard that's playing great for them and he was a deep 2nd rounder. He's even a starting. Quinten Post is a second year player that's also playing very well for the Warriors.

Both were 4 year college guys that came in fairly developed. Both also are strictly role players just being asked to do very little. They are averaging like 8 and 6 points respectively.

I think Kerr has a system that revolves around Curry and if you’re willing to sacrifice to be a part of that system, he’ll play you. The system doesn’t really lend itself to a young player who wants to develop into a star.

And I’ll restate that I don’t blame Kerr for that, but the original comment was essentially if Kerr can’t develop a young player then they probably aren’t any good and I just don’t see the evidence to support that…he’s never really developed anyone into anything other than a role player.

Again, tell me of a player that Kerr "couldn't develop" that amounted to anything different once they departed from Golden State. Poole is exactly the player we expected. Wiggins peaked under Kerr. Harrison Barnes became an irrelevant player essentially.

There's not a single player that Kerr "sacrificed" that then fluorished once leaving this GS system.

There's no breakout year looming for these guys. They are what they are and being set free from GS isn't going to change their trajectory

To say Kerr isn't interesting in developing young talent, you'd have to show me examples of him stifling his young talent who then fluorished under development elsewhere.

He's not Jesus. He can't turn water into wine.

specialsauce wrote: ↑

Mon Nov 24, 2025 10:01 am

Split T wrote: ↑

Sun Nov 23, 2025 11:24 pm

Superbone wrote: ↑

Sun Nov 23, 2025 10:41 pm

Warriors have a rookie right now named Will Richard that's playing great for them and he was a deep 2nd rounder. He's even a starting. Quinten Post is a second year player that's also playing very well for the Warriors.

Both were 4 year college guys that came in fairly developed. Both also are strictly role players just being asked to do very little. They are averaging like 8 and 6 points respectively.

I think Kerr has a system that revolves around Curry and if you’re willing to sacrifice to be a part of that system, he’ll play you. The system doesn’t really lend itself to a young player who wants to develop into a star.

And I’ll restate that I don’t blame Kerr for that, but the original comment was essentially if Kerr can’t develop a young player then they probably aren’t any good and I just don’t see the evidence to support that…he’s never really developed anyone into anything other than a role player.

Again, tell me of a player that Kerr "couldn't develop" that amounted to anything different once they departed from Golden State. Poole is exactly the player we expected. Wiggins peaked under Kerr. Harrison Barnes became an irrelevant player essentially.

There's not a single player that Kerr "sacrificed" that then fluorished once leaving this GS system.

There's no breakout year looming for these guys. They are what they are and being set free from GS isn't going to change their trajectory

To say Kerr isn't interesting in developing young talent, you'd have to show me examples of him stifling his young talent who then fluorished under development elsewhere.

He's not Jesus. He can't turn water into wine.

I think you have it backwards…no one is saying he’s bad at player development. The original comment made it seem like he was the best there was at development. I(and others arguing this point) don’t need to show that he failed prospects, you need to show that he succeeded. Where is the evidence that he’s elite at player development? He walked into the Curry/Klay/Dray team that was already great.

Also, calling Barnes irrelevant is interesting…he definitely produced more outside of GS. His best GS season saw him put up 17.4/9.5/2.5 per 100 possessions. He was putting up 27-28 points per 100 possessions in Dallas. He had a season in Sacramento where he was 21.3/8.8/4.6. His best TS% in GS was .573. He’s been over .600 the last 6 years and was .626 in that Sacramento year I mentioned.

Poole had basically the same numbers in Washington as he did in GS, so what exactly is Kerr/GS doing that is better for these guys than teams like Washington and Sacramento?

Split T wrote: ↑

Mon Nov 24, 2025 12:26 pm

The original comment made it seem like he was the best there was at development.

For the record, that was not my intent. It was more of a throw away comment based on Kerr's team success. But I'm glad it sparked some lively debate anyway (that I want no part of )

I’m sorry I got into it, and I apologize for speaking any ill of Marty’s favorite team.

Superbone wrote: ↑

Mon Nov 24, 2025 12:49 pm

Split T wrote: ↑

Mon Nov 24, 2025 12:26 pm

The original comment made it seem like he was the best there was at development.

For the record, that was not my intent. It was more of a throw away comment based on Kerr's team success. But I'm glad it sparked some lively debate anyway (that I want no part of )

I didn’t even remember who made the comment haha

BKinSJC wrote: ↑

Mon Nov 24, 2025 1:04 pm

I’m sorry I got into it, and I apologize for speaking any ill of Marty’s favorite team.

Split T wrote: ↑

Mon Nov 24, 2025 1:11 pm

Superbone wrote: ↑

Mon Nov 24, 2025 12:49 pm

Split T wrote: ↑

Mon Nov 24, 2025 12:26 pm

The original comment made it seem like he was the best there was at development.

For the record, that was not my intent. It was more of a throw away comment based on Kerr's team success. But I'm glad it sparked some lively debate anyway (that I want no part of )

I didn’t even remember who made the comment haha

For the record, here was my throw away response to Krypto:

viewtopic.php?p=362649#p362649

I guess the real question was if Ott could make better use of Kuminga than Kerr?

Have at it!

Superbone wrote: ↑

Mon Nov 24, 2025 2:53 pm

Split T wrote: ↑

Mon Nov 24, 2025 1:11 pm

Superbone wrote: ↑

Mon Nov 24, 2025 12:49 pm

Split T wrote: ↑

Mon Nov 24, 2025 12:26 pm

The original comment made it seem like he was the best there was at development.

For the record, that was not my intent. It was more of a throw away comment based on Kerr's team success. But I'm glad it sparked some lively debate anyway (that I want no part of )

I didn’t even remember who made the comment haha

For the record, here was my throw away response to Krypto:

viewtopic.php?p=362649#p362649

I guess the real question was if Ott could make better use of Kuminga than Kerr.

Have at it!

My point more or less was.... A lot of these guys were on this team last year and are producing far better this year and "what if" he had Kuminga. It was more a compliment to Ott than trying to throw gas on the Kuminga fire lol

Kuminga seems like one of those guys who needs to score a bunch on a losing team to mature. He needs to lose a lot to realize he needs to play within a system.