timvp
04-08-2005, 01:32 PM
Rummpd: Is Gregg Popovich a great coach or not?
I have always been extremely back and forth on this issue, mainly because I believe Pop greatly underutilized Malik Rose’s unusual gritty talents while he was with Spurs and won mainly because of one Tim Duncan.
That being said, I think Pop is now a great coach:
Why the change of heart?
1) Pop this year has not been afraid to use the “soft card”. The San Antonio Spurs biggest weakness is their seemingly inherent capacity as players to not show up against some teams. Pop has brought thunder down on the Spurs at least two times this year and each time the Spurs have responded soon thereafter with impressive wins.
2) The System: Some players struggle to get minutes, his rotations are seemingly bizarre at times, and we all want to throw bricks at the tube sometimes for what seems to be obvious solutions to in-game situations that he seemingly will not embrace. However, overall most players thrive in the system that preaches defense and teamwork over individual brilliance and in the end the Spurs usually mesh and get the job done.
3) Respect: A recent poll of players had Pop at the top of the list for those to play for – you cannot B.S. today’s players. He has earned it the old fashioned way through hard work. Even Kobe Bryant said he enjoyed working with Pop for the All-Star game. This is the respect that lets a Manu Ginobili or a Tony Parker sublimate their talents to winning basketball.
I also foresee a future where Pop wins without Duncan due to his system if he chooses to stick around. As such, I am now in the camp of Pop being a great coach period.
ShoogarBear: A Tale of Two Coaches:
Coach 1: 6 years, 331-161, .672 winning percentage, 4 division championships, 2 NBA Finals appearances, one NBA title. Future Hall-of-Famer.
Coach 2: 2+ years, 79-103, .434 winning percentage, fired after 18 games into season 3.
First coach? Larry Costello with Kareem Abdul-Jabbar (for five of those years). Second coach? Costello without Kareem Abdul-Jabbar.
Costello today is not considered a great coach.
This isn’t to say that Pop should be penalized because he has Duncan. But the fact is we don’t really know how well he would do without TD for a long time. What little we do know isn’t promising: an under .500 record over the last two years without him.
The measure of a coach is what he does when he doesn’t have the talent. KC Jones took five teams to the Finals and won twice, but will never go down as a great coach because he only excelled when he had the horses. Phil Jackson, for all his obnoxiousness, proved his greatness in 93-94 when he took a Bulls team with Scottie Pippen and a bunch of parts to within a Hue Hollins of the Eastern Conference Finals. Larry Brown and Pat Riley have shown they can build multiple teams up from scratch.
Maybe Pop is a truly great coach; we just don’t have the data yet. With luck, we won’t have to find out for another 7 years.
Rummpd: Pop was in an unusual situation when he took over for Bob Hill after David Robinson went down and had a far weaker team than he does now as far as depth. Granted they had Sean Elliott but who else really?
He has also become a better coach over the years and more confident in his own style and abilities.
As such, I believe that one day either through God forbid another bad injury or on the planned retirement of one Tim Duncan, Pop will remain a solid coach that given a point guard of Parker's caliber, a Ginobli and some size up front will continue to win games.
Moreover, one cannot rule out the plausibility of him helping to lock down another free agent or foreign find, who may not be a Duncan but another star.
I cannot see him ever being a .500 coach, he would not take it and demand excellence. If by some chance he failed to maintain that standard over a season and a half or so, he would voluntarily retire. One great thing about Pop is his pride.
ShoogarBear: When Pop first replaced Hill, there was no Robinson or Elliott, which would have been a disaster for anyone, but he did nothing that year to distinguish himself.
Pop is a good system coach. But some flaws are obvious: his system’s documented tendency toward offensive stagnation (which he has been working to overcome). His substitutions are often a source of confusion for all. A major weakness is his refusal (or inability) to make in-game or in-series adjustments. Even the most die-hard supporter has to concede that he was badly out-coached by Phil Jackson last year.
I concede that he has worked to improve over the years. The jury is out on whether he is a truly great coach. As a final point, I submit that if Tim hadn’t told Pop to play Kerr in the 2003 WCF, we wouldn’t even be having this conversation.
----------------------------------------
Thanks to Rummpd and ShoogarBear for this Battle Blog. The judges have given the win to ShoogarBear. Thanks to you two and to the juges.
I have always been extremely back and forth on this issue, mainly because I believe Pop greatly underutilized Malik Rose’s unusual gritty talents while he was with Spurs and won mainly because of one Tim Duncan.
That being said, I think Pop is now a great coach:
Why the change of heart?
1) Pop this year has not been afraid to use the “soft card”. The San Antonio Spurs biggest weakness is their seemingly inherent capacity as players to not show up against some teams. Pop has brought thunder down on the Spurs at least two times this year and each time the Spurs have responded soon thereafter with impressive wins.
2) The System: Some players struggle to get minutes, his rotations are seemingly bizarre at times, and we all want to throw bricks at the tube sometimes for what seems to be obvious solutions to in-game situations that he seemingly will not embrace. However, overall most players thrive in the system that preaches defense and teamwork over individual brilliance and in the end the Spurs usually mesh and get the job done.
3) Respect: A recent poll of players had Pop at the top of the list for those to play for – you cannot B.S. today’s players. He has earned it the old fashioned way through hard work. Even Kobe Bryant said he enjoyed working with Pop for the All-Star game. This is the respect that lets a Manu Ginobili or a Tony Parker sublimate their talents to winning basketball.
I also foresee a future where Pop wins without Duncan due to his system if he chooses to stick around. As such, I am now in the camp of Pop being a great coach period.
ShoogarBear: A Tale of Two Coaches:
Coach 1: 6 years, 331-161, .672 winning percentage, 4 division championships, 2 NBA Finals appearances, one NBA title. Future Hall-of-Famer.
Coach 2: 2+ years, 79-103, .434 winning percentage, fired after 18 games into season 3.
First coach? Larry Costello with Kareem Abdul-Jabbar (for five of those years). Second coach? Costello without Kareem Abdul-Jabbar.
Costello today is not considered a great coach.
This isn’t to say that Pop should be penalized because he has Duncan. But the fact is we don’t really know how well he would do without TD for a long time. What little we do know isn’t promising: an under .500 record over the last two years without him.
The measure of a coach is what he does when he doesn’t have the talent. KC Jones took five teams to the Finals and won twice, but will never go down as a great coach because he only excelled when he had the horses. Phil Jackson, for all his obnoxiousness, proved his greatness in 93-94 when he took a Bulls team with Scottie Pippen and a bunch of parts to within a Hue Hollins of the Eastern Conference Finals. Larry Brown and Pat Riley have shown they can build multiple teams up from scratch.
Maybe Pop is a truly great coach; we just don’t have the data yet. With luck, we won’t have to find out for another 7 years.
Rummpd: Pop was in an unusual situation when he took over for Bob Hill after David Robinson went down and had a far weaker team than he does now as far as depth. Granted they had Sean Elliott but who else really?
He has also become a better coach over the years and more confident in his own style and abilities.
As such, I believe that one day either through God forbid another bad injury or on the planned retirement of one Tim Duncan, Pop will remain a solid coach that given a point guard of Parker's caliber, a Ginobli and some size up front will continue to win games.
Moreover, one cannot rule out the plausibility of him helping to lock down another free agent or foreign find, who may not be a Duncan but another star.
I cannot see him ever being a .500 coach, he would not take it and demand excellence. If by some chance he failed to maintain that standard over a season and a half or so, he would voluntarily retire. One great thing about Pop is his pride.
ShoogarBear: When Pop first replaced Hill, there was no Robinson or Elliott, which would have been a disaster for anyone, but he did nothing that year to distinguish himself.
Pop is a good system coach. But some flaws are obvious: his system’s documented tendency toward offensive stagnation (which he has been working to overcome). His substitutions are often a source of confusion for all. A major weakness is his refusal (or inability) to make in-game or in-series adjustments. Even the most die-hard supporter has to concede that he was badly out-coached by Phil Jackson last year.
I concede that he has worked to improve over the years. The jury is out on whether he is a truly great coach. As a final point, I submit that if Tim hadn’t told Pop to play Kerr in the 2003 WCF, we wouldn’t even be having this conversation.
----------------------------------------
Thanks to Rummpd and ShoogarBear for this Battle Blog. The judges have given the win to ShoogarBear. Thanks to you two and to the juges.