Do you consider Pop to be the best coach in the NBA?

[The ADMIRAL 50]

I do.

I'm not talking about the coaching jobs done this year, I'm talking about all things considered who is the best coach in the league. I think it's Pop hands down.

This issue came to mind when I saw some Pop bashing in a different thread, which happens too often here on ST. Sure we can disagree with his management of Splitter, or nitpick his decisions on when to rest guys, but IMO if you don't think he's tops in the league you're crazy.

FWIW, I did a little thinking over coaches with championship meddle and had an interesting revelation. Check out this stat I realized about current NBA head coaches:


Championships
Pop:4
All other NBA coaches combined: 2*


*Carlisle and Doc with one apiece

[smaka]

He is one of the greatest of all time imo.

[spursfan1000]

no doubt about it

[Spursfan092120]

Yes...Fuck Fabbs.

[DMC]

Based on my limited knowledge of coaching and anything to do with being inside an NBA franchise, my ignorance of other teams' personnel struggles and front office issues, histories of each coach and what support mechanisms they have in place in their respective franchises, and the fact that I am a Spurs fan, sure.

[vander]

he probably is currently, but no other coach had Tim Duncan, and self-centered NBA players have derailed a lot of promising coaching careers, so the competition isn't what it could have been/should be

[dunkman]

I voted yes, since Phil Jax isn't coaching anymore. While Pop can achieve more than Phil with less talent, Phil is more consistent. 3 threepeats and 1 back-to-back, so its hard to say Pop is better tbh fwiw imo. The Spurs could have repeated in 06. The difference isn't that big between the two and Pop's still coaching, its not set in stone.

[YoMamaIsCallin]

As opposed to whom?

Seriously.

[stéphane]

No more competition w/o Sloan and Jackson.

[ElNono]

Of those currently working, probably. I personally think Phil Jackson was better and Larry Brown/Sloan just as good if you are only talking about coaching.

[Poolboy5623]

He just won coach of the year by a wide margin...is the question even necessary??? Only the haters would say no currently. ..unless your talking "all-time".. I would say no to that but top 5-10 for sure.

[hooperflash]

No more competition w/o Sloan and Jackson.

Those two are so overrated IMO :rolleyes

[thOOdee]

i would be singing another song if splitter was just rotting on the bench still.

[therealtruth]

I voted yes, since Phil Jax isn't coaching anymore. While Pop can achieve more than Phil with less talent, Phil is more consistent. 3 threepeats and 1 back-to-back, so its hard to say Pop is better tbh fwiw imo. The Spurs could have repeated in 06. The difference isn't that big between the two and Pop's still coaching, its not set in stone.

I agree PJ was able to coach with the expectations. Pop gets uneasy in the spotlight.

[pgardn]

Sloan...

Because he lasted forever. Then put Don Nelson on the list.


This Spurs team may not win the whole thing but we are by far the most pleasurable team to watch offensively. There is no team that moves the ball around as well as we do. Because this is such a different team than we have in the past I dont think its appreciated. We have got to watch some beautiful offensive basketball, without the screaming chest-fist dunking.

Its great stuff.

[YoMamaIsCallin]

I assumed "best coach in the NBA" meant "in the NBA now".

Best ever? Tough to argue against Auerbach.

[pgardn]

I assumed "best coach in the NBA" meant "in the NBA now".

Best ever? Tough to argue against Auerbach.

This is where it gets tough. He was a pioneer, but when there are only 8-9 teams in the entire league, its a bit easier to win the whole thing.

[Dex]

Currently? Yes.

More accolades and titles than any other active coach. Pioneered a system that has become the model of several franchises. Brought up several other individuals who have become GMs or coaches for other teams. Longest tenured coach in the major American sports. Pretty easy decision, tbh.

Of all time...I think you still have to give the nod to Auerbach, but it's still a good conversation. When it comes down to Phil Jackson and Pop, that is where things become interesting. Phil Jackson had one good system, but always came into a decent situation, had the advantage of being a major market, and was lucky to have two or three of the best players of all time. Pop also had two legendary players (Duncan and Robinson), but has had more consistent success, made his teams perennial contenders, manages to piece together winning squads out of table scraps, and has adjusted his philosophies over the years. He's put together inside teams, and outside teams. He's put together great defensive squads, and offensive juggernauts. Basically, he's done more with less than Phil Jackson....but it's hard to argue with Jackson's rings.

As a Spurs fan, I put Pop and Jackson about at the same level. Maybe that's biased, but I think it's definitely debatable to say the least.