Will Pop retire with Duncan?

[sharkenleo]

What do you think?

I used to think so, but with the team we've built this season, I'm really hopeful for the future without Duncan. And if Pop stays on after Duncan, Spurs will continue to stay relevant in the West for a long time.

All that said, I hope Duncan doesn't retire anytime soon. :p:

[SequSpur]

I hear is negotiating with New York to join them. The largest contract in NBA coaching history.

[Splits]

^ actually, Pop taming NYC would be successful and hilarious.

[gospursgojas]

Pops gonna be Phils asst in NY tbh

[Rapper]

Pop will retire with Duncan when TD is 40 years old. Atfer that, Pop will sign a new contract with NYC where he could get 10 M a year

[Richie]

If we have to rebuild through the draft I doubt pop would want to coach a losing team. It would actually be worse for a team trying to rebuild in the draft to have a good coach squeezing an extra 5 wins out of a bad team

[100%duncan]

I want him to. Don't want to mess with his winning percentage,brah.

[Spur|n|Austin]

Pop will retire with Duncan when TD is 40 years old. Atfer that, Pop will sign a new contract with NYC where he could get 10 M a year

I'm curious, how does one retire while signing a new contract?

[sharkenleo]

Am I naive in thinking that Pop would not sign with another team? My thinking is when he leaves the Spurs, it's because he is retiring from coaching, period. If he wants to keep coaching, he'll stay in San Antonio.

May be overestimating his loyalty, but that's just what I think.

[jestersmash]

Am I naive in thinking that Pop would not sign with another team? My thinking is when he leaves the Spurs, it's because he is retiring from coaching, period. If he wants to keep coaching, he'll stay in San Antonio.

May be overestimating his loyalty, but that's just what I think.

Wait, what? Is this some form of new age spurfan trolling? :lmao

You've stated exactly what most spurs fans expect Pop to do. This is the most probable scenario for Pop. Why are you making it sound like this is a long shot?

Also, for what it's worth, Pop has answered this question in one of his previous "mailbags." He's not going to coach another team in the NBA. Once he retires from coaching the spurs, he somewhat jokingly said that wouldn't be opposed to coaching a high school team just for the hell of it.

[Aztecfan03]

If we have to rebuild through the draft I doubt pop would want to coach a losing team. It would actually be worse for a team trying to rebuild in the draft to have a good coach squeezing an extra 5 wins out of a bad team

SO it would be better to have a bad coach? And when they finally get good, bring in a new coach and new system? really?

[spursdotcom]

My last recollection of it being mentioned was in one of our mailbags.

http://www.nba.com/spurs/features/pop_mailbag_0912.html

:toast

[sharkenleo]

Wait, what? Is this some form of new age spurfan trolling? :lmao

You've stated exactly what most spurs fans expect Pop to do. This is the most probable scenario for Pop. Why are you making it sound like this is a long shot?

Also, for what it's worth, Pop has answered this question in one of his previous "mailbags." He's not going to coach another team in the NBA. Once he retires from coaching the spurs, he somewhat jokingly said that wouldn't be opposed to coaching a high school team just for the hell of it.

Ok, so the NYC people were trolling then. Good, cause that was the first I'd heard of it and thought I was out of the loop about something.

[Richie]

SO it would be better to have a bad coach? And when they finally get good, bring in a new coach and new system? really?

Better than being stuck in a middle ground of late lottery/first round playoff fodder with no chance of really contending like Atlanta and not picking up any top level talent from the draft.

The Spurs aren't the Lakers or Celtics, we aren't going to attract top free agents so the draft is the only option, which means being bad for a few years. If you're gonna be a bad team, you might as well be a terrible team.

Duncan and Ginobili will both retire in the next couple years and unless we somehow pick up some MVP level talent, we should trade Parker for some young talent/picks.

[MultiTroll]

Report: The Spurs are ‘preparing’ for Gregg Popovich’s retirement in 1-2 years - Pounding The Rock (https://www.poundingtherock.com/2021/10/16/22730651/report-the-spurs-are-preparing-for-gregg-popovichs-retirement-in-1-2-years)

1449453272230678528

[stnick2261]

Report: The Spurs are ‘preparing’ for Gregg Popovich’s retirement in 1-2 years - Pounding The Rock (https://www.poundingtherock.com/2021/10/16/22730651/report-the-spurs-are-preparing-for-gregg-popovichs-retirement-in-1-2-years)

1449453272230678528

My top 2 are definitely Becky Hammon and Dan Hurley (the UCONN head coach) who are both attempting to 3-peat their respective championships.

[MultiTroll]

My top 2 are definitely Becky Hammon and Dan Hurley (the UCONN head coach) who are both attempting to 3-peat their respective championships.
That article was October, 2021.
Sorry if i inadvertantly created false hope.

Timmy Dunker retired in July 2016.

The Dictator has remained in office for going on 9 years now.

[stnick2261]

That article was October, 2021.
Sorry if i inadvertantly created false hope.

Timmy Dunker retired in July 2016.

The Dictator has remained in office for going on 9 years now.

Dammit :oops

[exstatic]

My top 2 are definitely Becky Hammon and Dan Hurley (the UCONN head coach) who are both attempting to 3-peat their respective championships.

My top 2 are Quin Snyder and Will Hardy. Both run very European offenses, and have Spurs roots.

I was watching a pod, and the host and Tyrese Halliburton were both raving over one single play that Snyder called when the Hawks played the Pacers.

[tim_duncan_fan]

It's a Wemby problem (benefit?) now. If Vic decides Pop isn't actually providing any guidance/game-planning (which is how the past 4-5 seasons have looked), he can deal with it rather easily.

[exstatic]

It's a Wemby problem (benefit?) now. If Vic decides Pop isn't actually providing any guidance/game-planning (which is how the past 4-5 seasons have looked), he can deal with it rather easily.

I know this might surprise you, being caught in the ST echo chamber, but I’d say that Wemby’s view of Pop is quite different from yours, and that he won’t push him out the door and in fact may urge him to stay.

[tim_duncan_fan]

I know this might surprise you, being caught in the ST echo chamber, but I’d say that Wemby’s view of Pop is quite different from yours, and that he won’t push him out the door and in fact may urge him to stay.

Fam, I have read your posts before, so I know you can read. I used at least two words that indicate I don't have a view on Vic's opinion of Pop. And the main thrust of the comment is that, whatever the case, it's essentially Vic's decision.

Personally, I want Pop to win some shit and recover his mystique a bit. There was some "Top Coaches" list floating around the internet a week or two ago, and I don't think Pop's name was where one might expect it to be. That's a function of the last few years of Spurs ball and people like Spoe making something at least kinda-sorta decent out of nothing fairly consistently.

[stnick2261]

My top 2 are Quin Snyder and Will Hardy. Both run very European offenses, and have Spurs roots.

I was watching a pod, and the host and Tyrese Halliburton were both raving over one single play that Snyder called when the Hawks played the Pacers.

While Becky Hammon and Dan Hurley are still my top 2... I do like both Quin Snyder and Will Hardy.

I loved when Snyder ran the Austin Toros. He was known as a coach who loved teaching fundamentals to young players. I also wanted him when he was making the move to Atlanta, but Pop didn't leave at that point. It's hard to read into his bad record at Atlanta with how poorly the team is built. At 57, he's the oldest one of this group (Hurley is 51, Hammon is 47, and Hardy is only 36 which is nuts).

It's hard to read into Will Hardy. He's super smart. He knows the Spurs system. He could end up coaching for 40 years. He's not doing good at Utah, but they are actively tanking. He's worked under Pop and Ime Udoka. I think the sky's the limit for him, we just haven't seen any real results yet.

I still think Dan Hurley is the smartest of the group (he had a beautiful game going with Castle and Clingan last year), but I'd be happy with any of them.

Edit: typos

[rankingtear]

Mitch Johnson. The playstyle is pretty much cemented by the time Pop steps down. They only need a good soldier like Mazulla or Daigneut to keep it running.

[spurraider21]

really upset budenholzer wound up in phoenix

[james evans]

Popovich aint retiring. He's like a Supreme Court Justice. The only way he's leaving the Spurs coaching job is by death haha.

[SouthernFried]

The Spurs are more entertaining off the court than on. But, I don't care about off the court stuff and I'll watch Wemby highlights on ESPN.

How the Mavs shaping up this year?

[Mugen]

jesus christ what a depressing thread

[MultiTroll]

^ Victor will be throwing down some triple doubles soon enough with or without Pops hinderance.

Cheerful news is coming soon.

[Sugus]

The Spurs are more entertaining off the court than on. But, I don't care about off the court stuff and I'll watch Wemby highlights on ESPN.

How the Mavs shaping up this year?

Huh? The Spurs were quite an entertaining team on the court last season, with an almost guaranteed Wemby highlight or more every game that he played, even during their losing streaks; and a comparatively very boring off-court team, with mostly young, unknown players with little to no drama to be had or followed.

Hell, Keldon's "will-he-won't-he" decision regarding his number change was one of the more noteworthy Spurs stories off the court, and even that ended up being an uncontroversial nothing-burger :lol

[z0sa]

2012 (date of OP) is a great example of why Pop is top3 but not the GOAT coach. It was like the end of 2004 all over again - in an even worse way, as we weren't playing the Shaq-Kobe-PJ Lakers but a young, untested OKC team. Highly talented, no doubt, but we should never have been backdoor swept by them.

[MultiTroll]

2012 (date of OP) is a great example of why Pop is top3 but not the GOAT coach. It was like the end of 2004 all over again - in an even worse way, as we weren't playing the Shaq-Kobe-PJ Lakers but a young, untested OKC team. Highly talented, no doubt, but we should never have been backdoor swept by them.
As one of the members of ST that views Pop realistically, 2012 was one of the most obvious ref phuck over jobs in NBA history.
I included it in my poll as potentially one of Pops best coaching years.
"Give me some nasty" was effective as hell and great to have viewed.

[LeBowen]

2012 (date of OP) is a great example of why Pop is top3 but not the GOAT coach. It was like the end of 2004 all over again - in an even worse way, as we weren't playing the Shaq-Kobe-PJ Lakers but a young, untested OKC team. Highly talented, no doubt, but we should never have been backdoor swept by them.

And who's the GOAT in your opinion?
Obviously Pop has had some fails, 2012 included, but much like the players, coaches have their peaks.
Pop is the only one who at least somewhat managed to adapt to modern trends and completely revamp his coaching style.

What did Phil do when Shaq left? What did he do after he left the Lakers? Yeah, he wasn't the coach, but his front office decisions completely ruined the Knicks.
He had one great gameplan, had the best talent and was amazing at man management. Never adapted, looked completely out of place by the time he was done.

[z0sa]

As one of the members of ST that views Pop realistically, 2012 was one of the most obvious ref phuck over jobs in NBA history.
I included it in my poll as potentially one of Pops best coaching years.
"Give me some nasty" was effective as hell and great to have viewed.

Referees are supposed to be worked by the coaching staff. If we got fucked over, some of that should lie at Pop's feet.

It was effective all the way until it wasn't, and we were back-door swept. If 2004 never happened, it'd be more debatable. Yet Pop was at the head of two monumental breakdowns where we had homecourt, had all the momentum up 2-0, and somehow still lost. Both would have been Finals berths, as well (2004 is more debatable on this one, too, obviously).

[z0sa]

And who's the GOAT in your opinion?
Obviously Pop has had some fails, 2012 included, but much like the players, coaches have their peaks.
Pop is the only one who at least somewhat managed to adapt to modern trends and completely revamp his coaching style.

What did Phil do when Shaq left? What did he do after he left the Lakers? Yeah, he wasn't the coach, but his front office decisions completely ruined the Knicks.
He had one great gameplan, had the best talent and was amazing at man management. Never adapted, looked completely out of place by the time he was done.

PJ is the GOAT, in my humble opinion. You don't rip off essentially 4 3peats in 20 seasons (in the more modern eras he coached in) and not be the GOAT. Likewise, PJ didn't need to revamp his coaching style all the time. He found a system that worked, and stuck with it, forcing others to adjust. Pop may have revamped his aura and coaching style more, but that's as much a downfall when you look at seasons like 2006, where going small, again in my humble opinion, at least cost us yet another Finals berth and a possible 3/4peat of our own, if you want to include 2004 in the mix (where PJ outcoached him, mind you).

[exstatic]

PJ is the GOAT, in my humble opinion. You don't rip off essentially 4 3peats in 20 seasons and not be the GOAT. Likewise, PJ didn't need to revamp his coaching style all the time. He found a system that worked, and stuck with it, forcing others to adjust. Pop may have revamped his aura and coaching style more, but that's as much a downfall when you look at seasons like 2006, where going small, again in my humble opinion, at least cost us yet another Finals berth and a possible 3/4peat of our own, if you want to include 2004 in the mix (where PJ outcoached him, mind you).

:lol PJ inherited two teams that each had two All NBA players and had each been to the conference Finals. Didn’t need to revamp his coaching style? More like couldn’t. He didn’t really even understand the triangle, leaning heavily on Tex Winter. PJ retired the year after Tex did. Phil was a master motivator and manipulator, but don’t pretend he was some great Xs and Os guy. He wasn’t. He also wasn’t a developer of talent, riding old guys until they retired, then going out and getting more old guys.

[z0sa]

:lol PJ inherited two teams that each had two All NBA players and had each been to the conference Finals. Didn’t need to revamp his coaching style? More like couldn’t. He didn’t really even understand the triangle, leaning heavily on Tex Winter. PJ retired the year after Tex did. Phil was a master motivator and manipulator, but don’t pretend he was some great Xs and Os guy. He wasn’t. He also wasn’t a developer of talent, riding old guys until they retired, then going out and getting more old guys.

Coaching at the pro level isn't nearly as much about X's and O's as much as it's about exactly what you just mentioned, manipulating these various million and even billionaire egos into working together and winning ball games. Besides, I didn't say he was some great X's and O's guy, dude. :lol I said he found a system and stuck with it. Pop is immune, as usual, to all of your criticism in this regard because he's never stepped down from head-coaching/the locker room for the last 3 decades or so is essentially opaque to outsiders. I'm sure there's plenty of stories just like the one you're talking about with Pop, only they've been buried by the various trappings of Pop's dictatorship in our small market, just one-team-town politics. You don't even think (or at least, mention as a possibility) about this, though.

[LeBowen]

:lol PJ inherited two teams that each had two All NBA players and had each been to the conference Finals. Didn’t need to revamp his coaching style? More like couldn’t. He didn’t really even understand the triangle, leaning heavily on Tex Winter. PJ retired the year after Tex did. Phil was a master motivator and manipulator, but don’t pretend he was some great Xs and Os guy. He wasn’t. He also wasn’t a developer of talent, riding old guys until they retired, then going out and getting more old guys.

Exactly.
Phil was the best ceiling raiser, but he had 0 adaptability skills and couldn't do shit without teams that weren't stacked. As we've seen during MJ's retirement and after Kobe kicked Shaq out.

[z0sa]

Exactly.
Phil was the best ceiling raiser, but he had 0 adaptability skills

Simply isn't true at all. Not even worth debating if that's your take, tbh. What other coaches are you referencing that did shit with teams that weren't stacked? It's not some kind of gotcha, bro. Shitty teams aren't going anywhere, but great teams might, with a great coach.

Popovich had some of the smallest egos the world has ever seen (from stars in pro sports) on his team. PJ had some of the biggest.

[LeBowen]

Simply isn't true at all. Not even worth debating if that's your take, tbh.

How isn't it true? He had one system for 30 years.
Pop played every brand of basketball there was over his 30 years. Yeah, he has his flaws, quite a few of them, but Phil's biggest quality was ego management.


What other coaches are you referencing that did shit with teams that weren't stacked?

How would you rate Jerry Sloan's career with very limited Jazz rosters? Almost took down the Bulls with Hornacek as their third best player.
Spoelstra has been winning playoff series with next to nothing ever since Lebron left.


Shitty teams aren't going anywhere, but great teams might, with a great coach.

Shitty teams can't win a ring, but great coaches can certainly make them overachieve, even if it's just the regular season.


Popovich had some of the smallest egos the world has ever seen (from stars in pro sports) on his team. PJ had some of the biggest.

And that's relevant how?

[Seventyniner]

Exactly.
Phil was the best ceiling raiser, but he had 0 adaptability skills and couldn't do shit without teams that weren't stacked. As we've seen during MJ's retirement and after Kobe kicked Shaq out.

Larry Brown was the bizarro Phil. He was great at raising teams' floors and could adapt to any situation but needed the (non?) stars to align to get even one ring.

[z0sa]

How isn't it true? He had one system for 30 years.

PJ's system also worked for 20+ years. And, adjustments aren't just made on the offensive end. And, you'd have to be crazy to think the 08-10 Lakers played the same as the 00-04 Lakers, who also played the same as the 91-98 (Jordan season) Bulls. They ran the same system but the focuses, both offensively and defensively, wildly fluctuated.


Pop played every brand of basketball there was over his 30 years. Yeah, he has his flaws, quite a few of them, but Phil's biggest quality was ego management.

Phil's biggest quality was winning rings, which he has considerably more than Popovich. He also has many repeats and 3peats under his belt, as we're both well aware. PJ also won 4 out of 5 against Pop, and was an Horry miss from likely being 5 out of 5. Surely that counts for something in your book, or are we disregarding head to head records as well in this alternate reality?

Look, Pop is definitely one of the best of all-time. It's certainly arguable that he's the GOAT. But it's a homer take to say PJ simply inherited teams and never did anything to manage those teams, never made adjustments in series or with teams, that managing the massive egos he had is not related to his coaching prowess. Quite the opposite is true, and that's where he made his money and won his rings. He was specifically sought out for these skills in the 2000s, qualities which are most important in a head coach.


How would you rate Jerry Sloan's career with very limited Jazz rosters? Almost took down the Bulls with Hornacek as their third best player.

Sloan lasted a long time, and it's clear we modeled our franchise on the Jazz. You want to talk about irrelevant, though, this is it. Almost winning counts for much less than, you know, actually ringing? Sloan lost, twice, against PJ's Bulls. You want to blame the Jordan Rules, sure, go ahead. That has little or nothing to do with PJ's coaching. Pop would have used the same advantage(s) PJ did, as any coach would. Makes no sense to act differently or that, because Sloan "overachieved" by getting to the Finals twice with "only" Stockton-Malone, he's somehow is better than Jackson. He couldn't have done better than PJ did, which is the yardstick we're forced to use since PJ didn't underachieve by any stretch of the imagination.

Even Phil Jackson's non-Jordan team in the 90's did fine, using this type of measurement, anyway. Saying he couldn't drag an utterly shit Kobe-led team to the playoffs isn't a reflection on his coaching any worse than Pop's lottery seasons, either. It's not like he managed the Kawhi debacle to our benefit, for example.


Spoelstra has been winning playoff series with next to nothing ever since Lebron left.

Yeah, Popovich won plenty of playoff series, too. Is winning playoff series more important than winning rings, specifically, winning multiple rings in a row? I'd say no, but I respect your opinion that longevity, winning lots of regular season contests, and adjusting your coaching style counts for more in your eyes. I'm more interested in winning titles, even if there's (relatively small, in terms of PJ's coaching stretches) lulls in between these massive runs.

That's just the thing, too, that I keep mentioning - Pop couldn't repeat or threepeat, despite having top-tier talented teams full of players who were willing to put their egos aside. Since we're talking about Jackson, let's especially focus on 2004, where Pop was clearly out-coached in our collapse. PJ turned that team around when it looked like a monumental underachievement was about to occur. Of course, they still went on to the lose in the Finals, but that wasn't Pop's doing. Unless, of course, you're arguing Pop also had no role in the 04 Spurs being back-door swept by a feuding, injured and old Lakers team just waiting to implode at the drop of a hat?


Shitty teams can't win a ring, but great coaches can certainly make them overachieve, even if it's just the regular season.

Overachieving in the regular season is straight fool's gold - to me. It's good for the owners and there's plenty of positive trickle down effect on the city, sure, no question. I love having competitive teams year in and year out, but the goal is to win it all. In a coaching comparison, how much good you did for the owners' and city's bank accounts isn't something I'm factoring in heavily, though sure, it's got some minor importance. Much less value than ringing and repeatedly, though, which will always bring up values more than just winning regular season games.

Now, if Pop had won 7 or 8, and had at least one repeat or especially 3peat under his belt, he'd definitely be my pick for the GOAT. But, unfortunately for us, he didn't. The only real argument here for Pop then, must be something like Tim just couldn't pull it off in spite of Pop's overachievement, which I find hard to believe. Especially in 2004 and 2006, when Tim was absolutely in his prime and a 4peat or at least, a repeat Finals berth were more than achievable; Spurs were essentially 2 wins away from doing so in 04, if not for a Derek Fisher shot and a really embarrassing effort in Games 3-6.




And that's relevant how?

PJ coaching some of the pro sports' biggest egos has nothing to do with them playing together and winning? That's where we differ, and markedly.

X's and O's are critical but easily delegated to assistant coaches - they're just not as important to a head coach, because a team that can win a title has rotation players who know their plays and system inside and out, anyway. It doesn't take more than 1-2 seasons, max, for even role players (who are high level) to understand any great coach's system inside and out. Adjusting your coaching style is somewhat important, too, I'll admit - but getting your players to play together and win is the direct purview of the head coach, and their most important job, by far. It's why shoving a bunch of players with massive egos together typically results in implosion, and it did even with PJ's teams.

But -- PJ was able to greatly extend the windows of these teams, while increasing cohesion and extracting the most potential out of his players to the tune of multiple 3peats. Having stacked teams helped, certainly - not arguing that, but it's not like Pop didn't have massively stacked teams, and for years upon years. And, you're ignoring that having stacked teams usually makes the coach's job a lot more difficult, not easier. Pop is the exception, having had some great players who were willing to buy in, something PJ's players repeatedly had to be manipulated and coaxed into doing. These teams were also in two of the largest markets, working within political webs constantly strung with ever-increasing intrigue, egotism and bias both inside and outside of the organizations involved. There's no apples to apples comparison with San Antonio, by any stretch of the imagination.

Yet Jackson still made it happen 11 times with 13 Finals appearances, and that's that. If you want to argue more specifically that PJ wasn't as good as Pop at X's and O's, or at player development even, okay I'll buy that - though some might say some of Pop's "talent acquisition" directly reflects the realities of pro sports in a small market, and so again there's not a direct comparison here to be had. Furthermore, Jackson and Jordan were both ringless in 1987, when he joined the team as an assistant coach. How many more years together should they have spent before ringing in order to have the same value as Pop does (or not be considered part of a "pre-built superteam" like the healthy Duncan/Robinson Spurs immediately were), may I ask?

In the end, though, in my opinion winning is what's going to be more heavily weighted in an objective discussion. Pop has done plenty of that, just not nearly as much as PJ (no one outside of Red Auerbach in the old days can hold a candle to him in that regard).

Pop had plenty of talent, and at least two golden opportunities (perhaps 3 or 4 if you want to count 2012/13 and others such as 2008 in the mix) to achieve the repeat that would have brought him into the same realm as Jackson and to a lesser extent, Auerbach. He didn't, and 4 out of 5 times, it was Phil Jackson who knocked him off, too. It is what it is. I love Pop and what he's done for the city, the titles he's brought us. He isn't the GOAT, though. Maybe that's due to him not team hopping or whatever, sure, but there's plenty of coaches who took over the reigns of teams and never achieved anything close to Phil Jackson.

[MultiTroll]

And who's the GOAT in your opinion?
Of all of them or of Pops Duncan Championships?

GOAT All Time is always an opinion with no real way of proving.
Red Auerbach gets my vote. I firmly believe had Bird not did the idiotic self induced injuries of broken hand in bar fight and doing his own cement work and seriously screwing up his back the Celts could have at least 3 peated. Add Lenny Bias and it could have been kept going into the early 90s.
Regardless, 11 of 13 is impressive as hell. 8 team league or not.

Pops, eh lets save that for the Pops Best Coaching year thread. Link:
Spurs: To you, what was Greg Pops best coaching year? (spurstalk.com) (https://www.spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=265029&highlight=Pops+best+coaching)


Pop is the only one who at least somewhat managed to adapt to modern trends and completely revamp his coaching style.
You'd have to give me some examples. I have not seen any. Culminating with Sochan at point guard.


What did Phil do when Shaq left?
Wept.
What could he do ? He had tried to tell Buss that Kirby was the problem and to trade him. Bryant was Buss' pet + Shaq didn't do any favors by shouting out "Pay me" publicly to diss Buss. So Phil solderied on for a year or so then said phuck this as to trying to work wiith POS Bryant.
Came back in 2008-09 and got the rigged trade of MVPau to go with stacked lineup of fairly healthy Odom, very good at time role player Kirby and the continued backing of Laker refs.


but his front office decisions completely ruined the Knicks.
He had one great gameplan, had the best talent and was amazing at man management. Never adapted, looked completely out of place by the time he was done.
Phil sucked as GM in NY no doubt.
Popped has been equally bad his last 5 years, short of the Wemby ping pong ball miracle.

Two of the 4 times Pop and Phil met really irk me. 2004 and 2008.
2004 Spurs up 2-0 Phil absolutely did adjust, agreeing with Gary Paytons suggestion to crap can the triangle and go with pick and roll. Pop made absolutely no counter and got fucking back door swept. 2008 the Lakers did have the better roster but he could have made way more noise with the rigged Derek Swisher obvious foul to end Game 4 and essentially the series.

[LeBowen]

PJ's system also worked for 20+ years. And, adjustments aren't just made on the offensive end. And, you'd have to be crazy to think the 08-10 Lakers played the same as the 00-04 Lakers, who also played the same as the 91-98 (Jordan season) Bulls. They ran the same system but the focuses, both offensively and defensively, wildly fluctuated.

Obviously they made changes according to their personnel, but it was still all about the triangle and it's variations.
Meanwhile we went from twin towers, to post-centric Duncan play, to two playmakers generating offense, to beautiful game, then back to post-centric LMA offense.


Phil's biggest quality was winning rings, which he has considerably more than Popovich. He also has many repeats and 3peats under his belt, as we're both well aware. PJ also won 4 out of 5 against Pop, and was an Horry miss from likely being 5 out of 5. Surely that counts for something in your book, or are we disregarding head to head records as well in this alternate reality?

Look, Pop is definitely one of the best of all-time. It's certainly arguable that he's the GOAT. But it's a homer take to say PJ simply inherited teams and never did anything to manage those teams, never made adjustments in series or with teams, that managing the massive egos he had is not related to his coaching prowess. Quite the opposite is true, and that's where he made his money and won his rings. He was specifically sought out for these skills in the 2000s, qualities which are most important in a head coach.

Sloan lasted a long time, and it's clear we modeled our franchise on the Jazz. You want to talk about irrelevant, though, this is it. Almost winning counts for much less than, you know, actually ringing? Sloan lost, twice, against PJ's Bulls. You want to blame the Jordan Rules, sure, go ahead. That has little or nothing to do with PJ's coaching. Pop would have used the same advantage(s) PJ did, as any coach would. Makes no sense to act differently or that, because Sloan "overachieved" by getting to the Finals twice with "only" Stockton-Malone, he's somehow is better than Jackson. He couldn't have done better than PJ did, which is the yardstick we're forced to use since PJ didn't underachieve by any stretch of the imagination.

Even Phil Jackson's non-Jordan team in the 90's did fine, using this type of measurement, anyway. Saying he couldn't drag an utterly shit Kobe-led team to the playoffs isn't a reflection on his coaching any worse than Pop's lottery seasons, either. It's not like he managed the Kawhi debacle to our benefit, for example.

Yeah, Popovich won plenty of playoff series, too. Is winning playoff series more important than winning rings, specifically, winning multiple rings in a row? I'd say no, but I respect your opinion that longevity, winning lots of regular season contests, and adjusting your coaching style counts for more in your eyes. I'm more interested in winning titles, even if there's (relatively small, in terms of PJ's coaching stretches) lulls in between these massive runs.

That's just the thing, too, that I keep mentioning - Pop couldn't repeat or threepeat, despite having top-tier talented teams full of players who were willing to put their egos aside. Since we're talking about Jackson, let's especially focus on 2004, where Pop was clearly out-coached in our collapse. PJ turned that team around when it looked like a monumental underachievement was about to occur. Of course, they still went on to the lose in the Finals, but that wasn't Pop's doing. Unless, of course, you're arguing Pop also had no role in the 04 Spurs being back-door swept by a feuding, injured and old Lakers team just waiting to implode at the drop of a hat?

Overachieving in the regular season is straight fool's gold - to me. It's good for the owners and there's plenty of positive trickle down effect on the city, sure, no question. I love having competitive teams year in and year out, but the goal is to win it all. In a coaching comparison, how much good you did for the owners' and city's bank accounts isn't something I'm factoring in heavily, though sure, it's got some minor importance. Much less value than ringing and repeatedly, though, which will always bring up values more than just winning regular season games.

Now, if Pop had won 7 or 8, and had at least one repeat or especially 3peat under his belt, he'd definitely be my pick for the GOAT. But, unfortunately for us, he didn't. The only real argument here for Pop then, must be something like Tim just couldn't pull it off in spite of Pop's overachievement, which I find hard to believe. Especially in 2004 and 2006, when Tim was absolutely in his prime and a 4peat or at least, a repeat Finals berth were more than achievable; Spurs were essentially 2 wins away from doing so in 04, if not for a Derek Fisher shot and a really embarrassing effort in Games 3-6.


I genuinely appreciate you put a lot of effort in writing all of this, but after reading it thoroughly a couple of times, to me it just comes down to us having a different view on basketball.
You're way too much into rings culture for my liking.
Things have to be put into context and not everyone plays by the same rules. Especially not someone who coached big market teams everyone wants to join.
I just think winning with small market teams (not necessarily Spurs) is way more valuable than doing it with biggest franchises. Yeah, we have a lot of dumpster fire big market teams, but still.
It's easy to look like a mastermind when you got the GOAT on your team taking over whenever it's needed.

I didn't say Sloan was better than Jackson, I just wanted to see what you think about him.
Someone who never won't can't be better, but as I said, it wasn't a fair contest.

Overachieving in regular season is fool's gold if it happens constantly and then the team underpeforms in the playoffs, but for young coaches it's the best way to get noticed. Coaches who weren't good NBA players have no other way of getting to the top.

As for Pop, I always say we were 2 plays away from a 5 peat. How much of it is on him is debateable. I'll also never get over 2013 and Duncan-less lineup in that play. OKC losses in 2012 and 2016 are also questionable.


And, you're ignoring that having stacked teams usually makes the coach's job a lot more difficult, not easier.

And yet most title winning teams are stacked.


Pop had plenty of talent, and at least two golden opportunities (perhaps 3 or 4 if you want to count 2012/13 and others such as 2008 in the mix) to achieve the repeat that would have brought him into the same realm as Jackson and to a lesser extent, Auerbach. He didn't, and 4 out of 5 times, it was Phil Jackson who knocked him off, too. It is what it is. I love Pop and what he's done for the city, the titles he's brought us. He isn't the GOAT, though. Maybe that's due to him not team hopping or whatever, sure, but there's plenty of coaches who took over the reigns of teams and never achieved anything close to Phil Jackson.

My take is that it can't really be compared fairly because as I already said it's a different game depending on where you coach.
Also, it's not about just longetivity, but longetivity in one place. I don't think Phil would've been able to stay in one place for 20 years, eventually his mind-games and motivation runs it's course and environment becomes toxic.

Just one more thing about free agents.
LMA was the only big name who joined in his prime.
What if we got JKidd in 2003? Or Jermaine O'Neal a few years later?
We were always a top3 contender and couldn't get any big name to join. If Lakers had our roster, those free agents would be desperately trying to get to LA.
That's why it was never a fair game.

[ambchang]

Phil Jackson is basically the Kobe Bryant of coaching.

Both of them clearly had talent, all time level talent, but both were wildly overrated for them taking credit for some one else’s work, someone who actually benefited their careers.

Kobe had public spats with shaq, belittled MVPau, and had run ins with Phil Jackson, while continuously shifted blame of his failure to his teammates. There is no doubt those people were critical to him winning five rings, which through careful marketing and self promotion, kobe somehow got all the credit for.

Phil Jackson turned his team against jerry Krause and then Jerry west, had very public spats with them and eventually burned bridges with both franchises. He turned shaq and kobe against each other and in all these instances caused the eventual downfall of the teams. His one schtick was to create an us vs them environment and when the team was clearly more talented than anyone else in the league, the them was often internal. He rode his success with the bulls the entire career, earning respect with later teams that he managed. No doubt he took advantage of that but it was proven it wasn’t sustainable as the teams all eventually burned out. If Krause didn’t build the bulls and west didn’t build the lakers, Phil Jackson wouldn’t have these players to build his own successes on.

As much as phil outcoached pop in 2004, the reverse happened in 2003. The only difference is that pop got all the blame in 2004, while 2003 fell on shaq. Jackson basically was able to avoid all the criticisms of his failures. 2003, 2004 vs pistons, 2005 missing the playoffs, 2006 kobe refusing to shoot (where was his ego management there), 2007 underachieving, 2008 getting their shit pushed in by the Celtics, 2011 massive collapse vs the Mavs. If you want to highlight failures for pop, you have to do it for Phil.

Phil clearly had the most stacked teams on his teams. He had two top ten players on his rosters including the GOAT (jordan and shaq), another top 20 player (kobe) and a top 30 (Pippen). Pop had duncan (top 10), and a top 25 (admiral). That’s it.

For me there are multiple goat coaches, Larry brown was great but GM Larry brown undermined him, Chu I daly was fantastic in terms of ego management and team identity but his career was too short, Pop was the one who was able to change with the times the best but he routinely outsmarts himself, Jack Ramsey brought in fitness to the league and of course the OG red Auerbach who built teams, dog managed and won 9 rings.

Then there are other great coaches who didn’t have (enough) rings, Lenny Wilkins (only one with the weakest champs in nba history), don nelson (too weird), even Rick adelman (loser mentality).

[lefty]

Phil Jackson is basically the Kobe Bryant of coaching.

Both of them clearly had talent, all time level talent, but both were wildly overrated for them taking credit for some one else’s work, someone who actually benefited their careers.

Kobe had public spats with shaq, belittled MVPau, and had run ins with Phil Jackson, while continuously shifted blame of his failure to his teammates. There is no doubt those people were critical to him winning five rings, which through careful marketing and self promotion, kobe somehow got all the credit for.

Phil Jackson turned his team against jerry Krause and then Jerry west, had very public spats with them and eventually burned bridges with both franchises. He turned shaq and kobe against each other and in all these instances caused the eventual downfall of the teams. His one schtick was to create an us vs them environment and when the team was clearly more talented than anyone else in the league, the them was often internal. He rode his success with the bulls the entire career, earning respect with later teams that he managed. No doubt he took advantage of that but it was proven it wasn’t sustainable as the teams all eventually burned out. If Krause didn’t build the bulls and west didn’t build the lakers, Phil Jackson wouldn’t have these players to build his own successes on.

As much as phil outcoached pop in 2004, the reverse happened in 2003. The only difference is that pop got all the blame in 2004, while 2003 fell on shaq. Jackson basically was able to avoid all the criticisms of his failures. 2003, 2004 vs pistons, 2005 missing the playoffs, 2006 kobe refusing to shoot (where was his ego management there), 2007 underachieving, 2008 getting their shit pushed in by the Celtics, 2011 massive collapse vs the Mavs. If you want to highlight failures for pop, you have to do it for Phil.

Phil clearly had the most stacked teams on his teams. He had two top ten players on his rosters including the GOAT (jordan and shaq), another top 20 player (kobe) and a top 30 (Pippen). Pop had duncan (top 10), and a top 25 (admiral). That’s it.

For me there are multiple goat coaches, Larry brown was great but GM Larry brown undermined him, Chu I daly was fantastic in terms of ego management and team identity but his career was too short, Pop was the one who was able to change with the times the best but he routinely outsmarts himself, Jack Ramsey brought in fitness to the league and of course the OG red Auerbach who built teams, dog managed and won 9 rings.

Then there are other great coaches who didn’t have (enough) rings, Lenny Wilkins (only one with the weakest champs in nba history), don nelson (too weird), even Rick adelman (loser mentality).

It’s worth noting Daly also won COTY with Orlando

Before that he did a decent job with NJ bit never had a full roster, Kenny Anderson misses the 93 playoffs, and Petrovic sadly passed away a few weeks later

[Splits]

https://www.gannett-cdn.com/presto/2021/01/21/USAT/b9a31b27-3529-4f12-be23-2e79c1e9f5d6-AP_YE_Sports_Deaths.jpg?crop=3108,2072,x0,y0

[Pauleta14]

As one of the members of ST that views Pop realistically, 2012 was one of the most obvious ref phuck over jobs in NBA history.
I included it in my poll as potentially one of Pops best coaching years.
"Give me some nasty" was effective as hell and great to have viewed.

Yep. Most underrated season of the Pop era, refs made sure Lebron doesn't face the Spurs after the humiliation vs Dallas a year before

The offense was a juggernaut, TP was at his peak and unguardable

Defense average but offense made up for it (until game 3 vs Okc)

[exstatic]

Yep. Most underrated season of the Pop era, refs made sure Lebron doesn't face the Spurs after the humiliation vs Dallas a year before

The offense was a juggernaut, TP was at his peak and unguardable

Defense average but offense made up for it (until game 3 vs Okc)

Ridiculous box from one of those OKC games: Perk and Ibaka went a combined 22-22 and we lost by 6 points.

[Pauleta14]

Ridiculous box from one of those OKC games: Perk and Ibaka went a combined 22-22 and we lost by 6 points.

Probably my biggest frustration after the 0.4 robbery

13' was on us

Was it the season NBA started giving post game repports on their missed calls and 2 of those defeats should've been Ws? (Manu's steal on the side lines and forgot the other one)

[Ed Helicopter Jones]

Pop should have retired with Duncan like he said he would.

There would’ve been a decades, long debate over the Spurs Dynasty and whether it was due to Coach Pop or to Tim Duncan.

Pop’s legacy has been tarnished a bit by trying to see the Spurs through this rebuild. He doesn’t even show up on the GM survey as one of the league’s top coaches.

[LeBowen]

Tbh, post-Timmy team was too good for him to retire. Who knows what would've happened if not for Zaza and uncle.
He should've retired in 2018 after Kawhi nephew asked for a trade.
Getting DDR was just prolonging the inevitable. We got lucky, but if those 14% balls didn't fall our way, we'd be the worst team in the league three even after making 3 top10 picks.

My biggest fear is that Brett Brown is next in line since all the good coaches took new jobs as of late. I'd rather give the job to Becky than Brett Brown, tbh.
Maybe we get Kerr in a couple of years when Steph retires, but I don't think he plans on coaching for much longer due to his back issues.

[exstatic]

Tbh, post-Timmy team was too good for him to retire. Who knows what would've happened if not for Zaza and uncle.
He should've retired in 2018 after Kawhi nephew asked for a trade.
Getting DDR was just prolonging the inevitable. We got lucky, but if those 14% balls didn't fall our way, we'd be the worst team in the league three even after making 3 top10 picks.

My biggest fear is that Brett Brown is next in line since all the good coaches took new jobs as of late. I'd rather give the job to Becky than Brett Brown, tbh.
Maybe we get Kerr in a couple of years when Steph retires, but I don't think he plans on coaching for much longer due to his back issues.

You remember when Tim said he’d play until the wheels fell off? Well, they did. He already had a bad bone on bone knee that required the brace. During the OKC series that year, his right knee went out. He continued to play, but wasn’t effective,because he literally couldn’t get off the ground. He gave it a couple of weeks of test after the season, then went back into the gym, but it wasn’t any better. That was when he announced his retirement. It wasn’t a snap decision, and there was really no choice.

[quentin_compson]

Maybe the Spurs could somehow convince Will Hardy to come back to San Antonio. He would be a great successor, I think.

[exstatic]

Maybe the Spurs could somehow convince Will Hardy to come back to San Antonio. He would be a great successor, I think.

I want Will Hardy or Quin Snyder on the bench.

[spurraider21]

I want Will Hardy or Quin Snyder on the bench.
cia pop planted snyder with the hawks to ruin their season in a year where they owe us their pick, causing him to get fired and return home

either that or pop pulled a RBG and stayed on the bench too long, preventing us from adequately replacing him with somebody like Budenholzer who was just chilling, available

[Ice009]

Yeah, 2012, the reason OKC got their shit pushed in, in the finals was because they never should have been there in the first place. They didn't earn it and they weren't the best team in the WC. The Spurs got screwed over that series. Touch fouls in the 4 quarter of some of those games, Spurs in the bonus within minutes in the 4th quarter of game 6. Goal tending call let go in the critical game 5 that turned into a 3 And 1 for James Harden. Fu$#king ridiculous.

[Ice009]

You remember when Tim said he’d play until the wheels fell off? Well, they did. He already had a bad bone on bone knee that required the brace. During the OKC series that year, his right knee went out. He continued to play, but wasn’t effective,because he literally couldn’t get off the ground. He gave it a couple of weeks of test after the season, then went back into the gym, but it wasn’t any better. That was when he announced his retirement. It wasn’t a snap decision, and there was really no choice.

I can't remember. Didn't TD hurt that good knee towards the end of the season? He was actually playing great up to that point from what I remember. He was looking like he could play a couple more seasons before that happened. I actually teared up a bit in that game when he went down. When he came back, he wasn't playing anywhere near the same and I was a bit worried. I can't remember if he hurt it again in the playoffs?

I also remember after the season, Tim usually starts training 3-4 weeks after the season finishes for him, but I think I read he told the Spurs he couldn't go and his knee hadn't gotten any better. They tried to tell him to take more time, take as long as he wants (they didn't want him to retire), but I think he called it at that point as he couldn't play with two bad knees.

[ambchang]

Yeah, 2012, the reason OKC got their shit pushed in, in the finals was because they never should have been there in the first place. They didn't earn it and they weren't the best team in the WC. The Spurs got screwed over that series. Touch fouls in the 4 quarter of some of those games, Spurs in the bonus within minutes in the 4th quarter of game 6. Goal tending call let go in the critical game 5 that turned into a 3 And 1 for James Harden. Fu$#king ridiculous.

The league tried so hard to push Durant as a legit lebron rival, while at the same time legitimize clay Bennett underhanded shit move against the sonics.

[Tyronn Lue]

The league tried so hard to push Durant as a legit lebron rival, while at the same time legitimize clay Bennett underhanded shit move against the sonics.
They did the same with Kobe and Lebron, it just never materialized in the offseason. There are very few NBA constructed rivals throughout the history of the NBA. Most are organic, thankfully.