Andrew Goudelock > Steve Kerr

Goudelock is more athletic and a better a defensive player. He also has more offensive range. He can drive and hit the midrange floater. Neither fit the great PG playmaker types, but Goudelock can still drive and create at times.

Also, Kerr was almost exclusively a spot up shooter. Goudelock is a "non-rhythm" shooter. He doesn't need the play created for him to hit the 3-ball. He's like Reggie Miller in that he can just jack it up wherever, whenever, and there's a good chance he'll make it.

Goudelock is Steve Kerr with more skill and athleticism.

If we're handing out an award for raw skills, that MIGHT be true.

But you don't dethrone one of the best outside shooters in NBA history in one season. Kerr has an impressive body of work as a shooter.

ok...so you are comparing rookie who made few 3s with one of best shooters of all time...now thats beyond exaggeration...

No.

Steve was a pure shooter. Drew is a scorer.

Another dog of a thread by Doberman

So you're saying that if we could hypothetically trade Goudelock for a prime Steve Kerr, you wouldn't do it? I mean, why trade the better player for the worse one, right?


LOL

GoldHammish wrote:So you're saying that if we could hypothetically trade Goudelock for a prime Steve Kerr, you wouldn't do it? I mean, why trade the better player for the worse one, right?


LOL

Don't you dare go bringing logic and reason into this thread. How dare you.

Is this a joke thread?

3 games in double figures and averaging 4 points a game and we're going there.......

Sirron wrote:Another dog of a thread by Doberman

Haaaaaaa!

TIME wrote:Is this a joke thread?

Has to be

Sirron wrote:Another dog of a thread by Doberman

Why?

No.

But I do share your sense of optimism on gl0ck. He's reminding me of what Gibson what to the Cavs. Rookie, SG in PG body, ability to shoot the 3 very well.

IMO we maybe actually have a player that will contribute in the NBA.

Doberman wrote:Goudelock is more athletic and a better a defensive player. He also has more offensive range. He can drive and hit the midrange floater. Neither fit the great PG playmaker types, but Goudelock can still drive and create at times.

Also, Kerr was almost exclusively a spot up shooter. Goudelock is a "non-rhythm" shooter. He doesn't need the play created for him to hit the 3-ball. He's like Reggie Miller in that he can just jack it up wherever, whenever, and there's a good chance he'll make it.

Goudelock is Steve Kerr with more skill and athleticism.

Kerr wasn't just a great shooter, he was a clutch shooter. I would have to see Goudelock perform in the playoffs before I would begin to compare his shooting to Kerr.

By the way, there is no such thing as someone who is "just a shooter" when you're talking about someone who played in the triangle for most of his career. Phil Jackson would never let that happen.

Doberman wrote:

Sirron wrote:Another dog of a thread by Doberman

Why?

I probably missed a few threads you might have made, but from what I remember, this is our team (according to you). I know you're probably joking half the time, but if we were to take some of the threads seriously, we have...

Best SG in the game.
Best C in the game.
Pau = Perennial all star.
Up to here, everything is reasonable. Bynum isn't the best C in the game, but we can just disagree on that. Then, we get...

Ebanks = Eddie Jones.
Goudelock > Kerr.

In other words, we have Jordan-lite, Super Dwight, Euro Tim Duncan, super Steve Kerr, and Eddie Jones. Despite all that, Steve Blake is our MVP.

With that kind of roster, how in the world is this team only 13-9?

thkthebest wrote:

Doberman wrote:

Sirron wrote:Another dog of a thread by Doberman

Why?

I probably missed a few threads you might have made, but from what I remember, this is our team (according to you). I know you're probably joking half the time, but if we were to take some of the threads seriously, we have...

Best SG in the game.
Best C in the game.
Pau = Perennial all star.
Up to here, everything is reasonable. Bynum isn't the best C in the game, but we can just disagree on that. Then, we get...

Ebanks = Eddie Jones.
Goudelock > Kerr.

In other words, we have Jordan-lite, Super Dwight, Euro Tim Duncan, super Steve Kerr, and Eddie Jones. Despite all that, Steve Blake is our MVP.

With that kind of roster, how in the world is this team only 13-9?

I said "Eddie Jr." as in a poor man's version of him. And it's still early. The Spurs started 6-8 in the 99 season, and the Pistons started 16-13 in 04 when they won it.

Steve was valued enough to be on, what, 5 championship teams? And he retired with one of the highest 3 point FG percentages of all time.

Let's see what G-lock does in the next decade or so.

This far in I'd say Goudlock might be a better GM and that's about it.

TIME wrote:Is this a joke thread?

Some people crave attention.

I wonder if OP was around during Farmar rookie year, I bet he would've done a thread Farmar>>>>cp3

Ugh.

I don't care about the Kerr comparison....but one thing I am seeing from Glock is that he's actually a more effective version of Fish. Like Fish, he can't make PG quality passes, but he can shoot and he can dribble penetrate and even create his own shot which Fish cannot do often at all.

If we were still running the Tri....I'd say we'd found our first truly viable Fisher replacement.

Steve Kerr averaged 6ppg if Goudelock in his minds eye doesn't see himself worthy of that comparison he's set the bar ridiculously low for himself. Not sure how much credit the Kerr's, Paxson's Horry's and Fishers of the world deserve in general they are like the little fish who swim around the big sharks. They live off greatness not sure how much can be valued in making wide open shots even if they happen to occur in pressure situations.

I think we probably give them too much credit for simply doing their jobs on a stage the great players provide for them if Kerr spends a career on a bad team does he even have much of a career.

Goudelock might be able to carve a much more productive career out than Kerr thats not a stretch to make that comparison .

G-Lock>Nash