The league announced on Tuesday that Steve Kerr was selected as the NBA’s Coach of the Year. Kerr missed the first 43 games of the season while recovering from multiple operations on his back, but it appears voters were willing to overlook that in light of Golden State’s 73-9 record overall, the best in the history of the league. The Warriors adapted seamlessly to his absence, going 39-4 under acting head coach Luke Walton, who was also eligible for the award.
Kerr, 50, maintained a consistent presence around the team in practices while he was recovering, and it was clear the relaxed tone he set during last year’s championship season remained. He finished second in last year’s voting to Mike Budenholzer. Golden State went 34-5 to close the regular season after Kerr returned in January, though a knee injury that will sideline Stephen Curry for at least the next two weeks threatens Golden State’s bid for a repeat championship.
This brings me to the topic for today: Should Steve Kerr have won Coach of the Year?
There’s no denying the success Kerr has had since arriving in Golden State, and it is certainly a credit to him and his staff that the team seemingly didn’t lose a beat despite his early-season absence. But is coaching under half a season’s worth of games, no matter how successful the team was, worthy of snagging such a prestigious award? The success the Warriors had under Walton’s command certainly lends weight to the argument that Kerr wasn’t necessarily deserving of the accolade, but it’s arguable that it was his system and culture that allowed the team to continue to be successful in his absence.
But what say you? Are you OK with Kerr winning the award, or do you feel another coach was more deserving? Take to the comments section to lend your support to Kerr’s selection, or if you are on the other side of the argument, share with us whom you believe should have won the award this season. We look forward to what you have to say.
I think the award should of went to the Golden State Warriors coaching staff! That would be fair considering Kerr missed half the season while they went undefeated during that span.
I sorta agree. I think it should’ve been shared by both Walton and Kerr. They both coached the team. If impossible if give it too Stotts or Popovich.
I don’t think so. Would any player ever win an MVP while missing 43 games?
EXACTLY!
Kawhi Leonard might, after winning DPOY last year missing 20+ games
I cannot see something like that happening unless a player averages 50 pts on 60% fg with 8 rebounds and 4 blks.
Kawhi missed 18 games last year but even if he had missed 20 that’s like 25% of their games as opposed to more than half that Kerr missed
I don’t think so. I agree with @mikey that the only way he should’ve won was if him and Walton shared the award. Kerr was around the team for most of the year, but Walton still had to do his fair share of coaching that first half of the year (if anything, Walton should’ve gotten it since he had a better W-L record than Kerr). I think Stotts and Stevens should’ve been ahead of Kerr/Walton. After those two, Pop, Joerger, Clifford, and Kerr/Walton should’ve rounded out the top 6 in no particular order.
Nobody overcame more adversity this season than Dave Joerger. I understand that Kerr won because of the record, but he and Walton didn’t have to handle 28 players.
Does managing 28 players equate to coach of the year. Joerger had a horrible 2nd half record. They slid from a string five seed to a weak 7th seed. No blaming just the luck of the draw. While the warriors is deserving my 2nd nomination would’ve been Brad Stevens. Did a great job with the Celtics. But Stotts is more deserving of it than anyone if we are sticking with one coach winning the award.
In Joerger’s defense, you can definetly blame the Grizzlies slide on the fact that Gasol and Conley got hurt. The fact that they still made the playoffs is impressive, although I agee that he shouldn’t win Coach of the Year, he should be in the top 6 at least.
Stotts got robbed. No way anyone should win any award for half a season.
Totally agree on Stotts! The Portland Trailblazers lost FOUR of their five starting players to free agency, rebuilt around a young core (none of whom were consistent starters last year), and still made the playoffs easily, with the potential to move to the later rounds. There is no reason Terry Stotts shouldn’t have won this.
Byron Scott should have won it just for having to put up with the Lakers!
After a lot of deliberation, I’d go with Steve Clifford. He lost MKG the first day of the preseason, and was able to change that team into a space and pace offense, while maintaining top 7 defensive efficiency, and finish with 48 wins. I liked them coming into training camp, but I didn’t think they coud recover from losing MKG. They made some good moves to help them get there, but I feel like Clifford is one of the most prepared coaches in the league, and what he was able to do was most surprising. I had Portland at 45-47
wins before the season. I didn’t think that would make them the seed, but they still pretty much got to the win total I predicted. Still, it was a good job by Stotts to get those pieces together and use them right.
I would list it as 1. Clifford
2.Spoelstra
3.Brad Stevens
4.Dwane Casey
5.Dave Joerger
6.Terry Stotts
7.Gregg Popovich
8.Quinn Snyder
9.Rick Carlisle
10.Doc Rivers
11.SVG
12.Steve Kerr
Ya I’m ok with it only because he didn’t win it last year. So basically this is a COY award for the last 2 years. When u go back in history and look at this warriors team the last 2 seasons and if Kerr didn’t win it this year u would say, how the heck didn’t a coach win the COY with 2 historic seasons back to back like that. So my take is this is basically rewarding him for the last 2 seasons and for the history books, it may not sit well to look at it that way since it is a season by season base award, but that’s the only thing I can see that would justify Kerr winning it this year.
Fred Hoiberg wasn’t in the running?