How good is Popovich really?

[whitemamba]

I was sitting down smoking a stogie on a nice 77 degree evening in Southern California when I realized, how good is Pop really? Legendary teams and coaches should never be exposed so easily after winning 1 title. I know the Sperms have 5 rings, but If yall had PJax at the helm, you probably would of had 6-7 tbh.. Lets revisit history, these are the years that SA has been eliminated post 'ship. Looks like they get exposed every time. I just hope Popovich doesnt fuck up USA Basketball tbh..

2000- Spurs fresh of the first ring, and they get stomped by Jason Kidd and lower seeded Suns.
2004- Lakers beat them, but lets face it, lakers were just the better team.
2006- 4th Seeded Dallas vs the #1 Seed(63-19) Spurs, another stomping by a lower seed smh.
2008- Kobe shit all over SA once again , lets just leave it at that.
2015- Losing to the Cripples.

They have been multiple times even when they had HCA.I know Pop is a good systems coach, and he knows how to win , sometimes, but the ass kickigns coming of championships makes me question if he knows how to adjust. Which looks like he doesnt.

[140]

:pop: He needs to get over himself.

[spurraider21]

macro - elite
micro - mediocre

[Chris]

https://s15-us2.ixquick.com/cgi-bin/serveimage?url=https:%2F%2Fmedia.giphy.com%2Fmedia %2F2VC9uMlSDTZfO%2Fgiphy.gif&sp=fbfcc1e866affad75bbe13eb88542883

[Koolaid_Man]

Fuck pop a zit...its all about Phil


"How can you make sense of the officiating," said U.S. assistant Gregg Popovich, Duncan's coach in San Antonio. "If Tim Duncan knew this is how the games were going to be called, he would have thought seriously about not coming."

Duncan actually took pride in the bronze medal, happy to earn some reward for sacrificing two summers to the NBA's global marketing machine.

[Buddy Mignon]

Phil owns Pop like Kobe owns Jim.

[lefty]

Good coach who turns into a mental midget vs Phil

Micromanages too much as well

[ambchang]

We all you smoke stoogies non stop. Don't have to preface your troll job with it.

[Thread]

He's a small time Charlie.

That's why he threatened to quit when Tim Duncan quit.

[Chris]

He's a small time Charlie.

That's why he threatened to quit when Tim Duncan quit.

Bend over, I'll show you a small time Charlie.

[apalisoc_9]

One of the best ever, if not the best.The biggest innovater in the modern era.. Kinda senile now though and tries to make it all about himself.

People forget he's also President of Basketball Operation.

[Fabbs]

fantastic
http://i43.tinypic.com/35beelg.jpg

[Thread]

One of the best ever, if not the best.The biggest innovater in the modern era.. Kinda senile now though and tries to make it all about himself.

People forget he's also President of Basketball Operation.

He's piss pot.

[apalisoc_9]

Give Credit where its due..Pop's ego benefits the team. It keeps everyone on bay..is it detrimental at times, sure..But it is more beneficial than deteimental.

He's easily bettee than Phil Jackson.

[SpursforSix]

He's a small time Charlie.

That's why he threatened to quit when Tim Duncan quit.

Your Kobe quit when Pau left.

[Splits]

Your Kobe quit when Pau left.

Kirby couldn't win a single playoff game after he threw Pau under the bus.

Pau on the other hand...

[namlook]

Give Credit where its due..Pop's ego benefits the team. It keeps everyone on bay..is it detrimental at times, sure..But it is more beneficial than deteimental.

He's easily bettee than Phil Jackson.

Saying Pop is easily better than Phil is like saying Kobe is easily better than Jordan. The only thing that carries weight for their legacies are the objective final results. Phil more than doubled Pop's ring count and beat him head to head when they met in the playoffs. Phil three-peated three times, repeated seven times and Pop never repeated once. Jordan never won without Phil. Pop will never be seen as the better coach from a historical perspective. The ship has sailed.

[whitemamba]

We all you smoke stoogies non stop. Don't have to preface your troll job with it.
Not a cigar aficionado amb?want me to mail you a box? It'll help you relax. Is there anything that wasn't factual about my post? What makes you think I'm trolling ?

[BD24]

http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/webkit-fake-url://5017c93d-6003-40f4-b077-f7a4357104bb/imagegif

[UNT Eagles 2016]

Congrats on the lung cancer OP

[Kidd K]

Not a cigar aficionado amb?want me to mail you a box? It'll help you relax. Is there anything that wasn't factual about my post? What makes you think I'm trolling ?

Could be the fact you brought up 2000 as if not winning in a postseason where Duncan missed every game due to a major injury is somehow the signs of a shitty team.

I would not be surprised if you weren't even watching the NBA for any of those seasons except for 2015 due to your apparent dumpster-tier level knowledge of those seasons. You just google searched the outcomes then posted as if you watched. The fuck outta here.

[whitemamba]

Could be the fact you brought up 2000 as if not winning in a postseason where Duncan missed every game due to a major injury is somehow the signs of a shitty team.

I would not be surprised if you weren't even watching the NBA for any of those seasons except for 2015 due to your apparent dumpster-tier level knowledge of those seasons. You just google searched the outcomes then posted as if you watched. The fuck outta here.

what does it matter , if i was or was not watching, the result is the same is it not? not Come on saltivius, u better come up with something better than that. You cant hide from the fact that Pop is overrated,Jim is over rated and MVParker is the real reason you have those rings.

[Thread]

what does it matter , if i was or was not watching, the result is the same is it not? not Come on saltivius, u better come up with something better than that. You cant hide from the fact that Pop is overrated,Jim is over rated and MVParker is the real reason you have those rings.

whites

[DeadlyDynasty]

Pop's greatest attribute was managing minutes and keeping old legs fresh for the postseason. He was a wizard when it came to that, and as a result the Spurs had more sustained success. Yes, Phil Jackson ruined him routinely (the only time he beat him was when PJ was undergoing an angioplasty in 2003:lol), but Phil did that to everyone. Dunleavy Sr. couldn't take it either, and Adelman just wasn't ready for Phil's psychological warfare (see Hitler comparison)

[whitemamba]

Pop's greatest attribute was managing minutes and keeping old legs fresh for the postseason. He was a wizard when it came to that, and as a result the Spurs had more sustained success. Yes, Phil Jackson ruined him routinely (the only time he beat him was when PJ was undergoing an angioplasty in 2003:lol), but Phil did that to everyone. Dunleavy Sr. couldn't take it either, and Adelman just wasn't ready for Phil's psychological warfare (see Hitler comparison)

:lol

[lefty]

All things considered , I think Adelman was Phil's toughest opponent

Only had 1 superstar in 92 and almost forced a game 7 in Chicago

Pushed the Lakers to a game 7 with a sitty Rockets team and had the cojones to send Von Wafer to the locker room (who was a good scorer off the bench back then - what happened to him by the way lol)

[lefty]

Also Adelman beat Phil in 2002

Ok the Lakers won *

[whitemamba]

Also Adelman beat Phil in 2002

Ok the Lakers won *

Dont get me started on *.. '99

[UZER]

So according to Lakerfans:

Shaq > Duncan
Phil > Pop
Kobe > Duncan


Yet Tim has more rings than Shaq, tied with Kobe even though Kobe won 3 of those playing with MVP Shaq and Phil as HC, and is tied head to head vs Kobe in the playoffs without Shaq.

[K...]

Dont get me started on *.. '99

This is stunningly irrelevant. 99 = circumstances beyond the teams control affecting all teams. This is called luck or basic uncertainty.

2002= circumstances only relevant to one team. That's called a rent.

[ambchang]

Not a cigar aficionado amb?want me to mail you a box? It'll help you relax. Is there anything that wasn't factual about my post? What makes you think I'm trolling ?

Both of us know you weren't talking cigars.

And talking about what Phil would've done is not factual. That's pretty obvious.

Your types of stoogies coming in a box is also not factual.

[HI-FI]

Dont get me started on *.. '99
please. nobody gives Lebron shit for 2012. Spurs and Heat took care of business when others couldn't. 2002 was the pinnacle of rigging, I doubt we see something like that again in our lifetime, especially with social media imo.

Not a cigar aficionado amb?want me to mail you a box? It'll help you relax. Is there anything that wasn't factual about my post? What makes you think I'm trolling ?
what you currently smoking? i found this old shitty cigar, smoked it recently and puked it up. still, been thinking of getting back in the cigar game. i've smoked so much weed the past few years that I kind of need to balance my brain back out with some stogies, plus I enjoy them.

as for your question, i agree with those that think Pop is overrated as a head coach. As a GM and President of basketball operations though (building a culture and system, communicating that vision to others, hiring the right people etc...) he's one of the GOATs.

[TDMVPDPOY]

overrated...cant defend title, doesnt reign down on p orker...fck him

[whitemamba]

please. nobody gives Lebron shit for 2012. Spurs and Heat took care of business when others couldn't. 2002 was the pinnacle of rigging, I doubt we see something like that again in our lifetime, especially with social media imo.

what you currently smoking? i found this old shitty cigar, smoked it recently and puked it up. still, been thinking of getting back in the cigar game. i've smoked so much weed the past few years that I kind of need to balance my brain back out with some stogies, plus I enjoy them.

as for your question, i agree with those that think Pop is overrated as a head coach. As a GM and President of basketball operations though (building a culture and system, communicating that vision to others, hiring the right people etc...) he's one of the GOATs.

Got a box of Bolivar Belicoso as a gift, and its pretty prime time if im honest. Nice burn, good smokey flavor. They are pretty taxed, I dont think I would of boughten them. Ramon Allones is a great one, Ashton Robusto, had a few of those this year and they were great. As for the weed, fuck it man, keep on cheefin.:toast

[whitemamba]

Both of us know you weren't talking cigars.

And talking about what Phil would've done is not factual. That's pretty obvious.

Your types of stoogies coming in a box is also not factual.

Both of us? Wrong again. Phil owns pop, thats a fact. Ill really send you one im not joking, you seem like ur panties are always tied up in bunch, sometimes you need to just relax.

[MarCowMar]

Pop really is a master. He keeps the work environment professional. Fosters team spirit. Gets players to buy in and sacrifice. Calls great plays out of timeouts. Knows when to call timeouts. Does all of the little end game substitutions right. Keeps the old timers fresh. Designed a great defense. Has probably the best and most consistent draft record. Knows how to network and bring in new talent.

The only downsides I can think of for Pop are not being able to find a way to use Rodman, and it sometimes seems like he should play the rookies a bit more often.

[ambchang]

Both of us? Wrong again. Phil owns pop, thats a fact. Ill really send you one im not joking, you seem like ur panties are always tied up in bunch, sometimes you need to just relax.

Phil owning pop and how many Phil would have won if he inherited the 96-97 Spurs. In fact, based in his track record Phil won't even take the job because he never takes teams that are fully constructed.

He doesn't have a track record in building any teams or developing any talent. He creates discords in the locker room ( players vs management with the Bulls, Kobe vs shaq in LA, throwing pau under the bus in LA) does not indicate he would have any long term success with any team.

[cobbler]

He creates discords in the locker room ( players vs management with the Bulls, Kobe vs shaq in LA, throwing pau under the bus in LA) does not indicate he would have any long term success with any team.

:rolleyes

That is his style. Right or wrong it has worked for him and the teams he's coaching. He has 6 titles over 9 years with the Bulls and 5 titles over 10 years with the Lakers. With the average tenure of an NBA coach just above 2 years I'd say he has had tremendous long term success.

...and he has better regular season and post season win percentages than Pop. And let's not forget the 4-1 dominance in head to head post season match-ups.

Put on your spinning shoes Amb. You're going to need em. :lol

[ambchang]

:rolleyes

That is his style. Right or wrong it has worked for him and the teams he's coaching. He has 6 titles over 9 years with the Bulls and 5 titles over 10 years with the Lakers. With the average tenure of an NBA coach just above 2 years I'd say he has had tremendous long term success.

...and he has better regular season and post season win percentages than Pop. And let's not forget the 4-1 dominance in head to head post season match-ups.

Put on your spinning shoes Amb. You're going to need em. :lol

How would that translate to phil would have won more than 5 with the Spurs roster?

And I don't smoke cigars.

[cobbler]

How would that translate to phil would have won more than 5 with the Spurs roster?

And I don't smoke cigars.

I don't care if you smoke cigars or not. What does that have to do with my post?

I was specifically addressing your comment (quoted) that PJ's style of coaching does not dictate that he would have any long term success with ANY team. Clearly he had just that with two.

:bang

[ambchang]

I don't care if you smoke cigars or not. What does that have to do with my post?

I was specifically addressing your comment (quoted) that PJ's style of coaching does not dictate that he would have any long term success with ANY team. Clearly he had just that with two.

:bang

I thought you were white mamba. Should have looked at username so my bad.

He had 8 years in Chicago and burned that franchise to the ground. Then did that twice at the lakers. By long term I am comparing it relative to pop with the Spurs type of long term. So no, I don't see him doing that with any team. He is great with taking a ready made team to the promised land. Not that great with building a new team and sustaining it for more than a decade.

[cobbler]

I thought you were white mamba. Should have looked at username so my bad.

He had 8 years in Chicago and burned that franchise to the ground. Then did that twice at the lakers. By long term I am comparing it relative to pop with the Spurs type of long term. So no, I don't see him doing that with any team. He is great with taking a ready made team to the promised land. Not that great with building a new team and sustaining it for more than a decade.

He was assistant coach for two years and head coach of the Bulls for nine years. Many would argue it was Jerry Krause who burned the franchise. And many would argue it is Jim Buss that has been the Lakers problem not PJ or how he left them.

Pop has the longest current tenure with one team and that deserves some credit I guess but there are only a handful of coaches that stayed with a single team more than a decade. Off the top of my head I can only think of Sloan to be in the same ballpark with Pop with regards to single team tenure so that is pretty much a ridiculous argument.

Regardless, PJ has better winning percentages over what is basically the same amount of time spread between two teams. And head to head there is no debate. I'll take wins over all else including longest single team tenure, development, or front office skills.

[midnightpulp]

Popovich is by far the better strategist, roster builder, and innovator. Not one coach from the Phil coaching tree has enjoyed any worthwhile success. Meanwhile, the league is filled with Popovich disciples from coaching to front offices.

Phil did innovate (via Tex Winter) with the Triangle in the early 90's, but later on, Jordan would often freelance out of the Triangle and just iso. The 3 peat Lakers didn't even run the Triangle that much. You don't need to when you have Shaq. Kobe would also shun the Triangle and iso.

That said, Phil's one big advantage over Pop is that he was always willing to run his players into the ground. Pop has cost us at least two titles dicking around with "managing minutes."

And :lol at Lakers fans not recognizing that Phil had considerably more talent to work with over the years.

Phil had (in their primes and peaks):

- Michael Jordan, the greatest player of all-time.
- Shaq, a top 10 player, whose peak was arguably the highest in NBA history.
- Scottie Pippen, the GOAT perimeter defender.
- Kobe Bryant, a top 15 player of all-time.
- Pau Gasol, a top 40-50 player of all-time.

And a host of great role players, from Kukoc, Rodman, Horace Grant, Rick Fox, Lamar Odom, etc, etc. And Phil always coached in big markets.

On the other hand, Popovich has coached only one top ten player of all-time during their prime and peak, and won 5 titles with him. Just one less than Phil won with the GOAT. A broken down David Robinson was probably the 2nd best player after Duncan from the 98-2014 era.

After those two, it's:

- Manu Ginobili, he's in Gasol's tier all-time.
- Tony Parker, one of the most overrated players in NBA history. Similar to how advanced stats haven't been kind to Kobe, advanced stats don't like Tony Parker.

Jury is still out on Kawhi.

I do agree the Spurs have had some fantastic role players, but nothing superior than what Phil had over the years.

Pop is in another class, really. But his micromanaging obsession is what keeps him from really driving the nail into the coffin of this debate.

My opinion: I would want Pop running 99% of everything basketball related and just switch in Phil to close quarters. Pop is fuckin' awful at closing quarters because he gets too cute with lineups, while Phil coached teams are the best quarter closing teams ever, because he's not afraid to let his stars kill themselves.

[cobbler]

4-1

[midnightpulp]

4-1

Phil has a losing record against Mike D'Antoni. Never beaten Mike D heads up, so...

Nice logic :tu

[cobbler]

Phil has a losing record against Mike D'Antoni. Never beaten Mike D heads up, so...

Nice logic :tu

I value winning number one. You know that. Championships! Playoffs and Regular season winning are secondary. Third is head to head. No lack of logic there. Mike D has no championships. You have to get past the first criteria to even consider tie breakers or subsequent criteria IMO.

One could also argue that it takes just as much to coach a team with multiple type-A greats as it does high quality role players. NBA coaches are baby sitters. Managing ego is every bit as important as X's and O's. Just as a silly example, if you put the Cavs or Warriors against the current USA team I would put my money on the former. They have learned to play together and know the pecking order.

Pop is a great coach, and has my respect. However, if I was going into a championship series with any group of players, I would take PJ over Pop every time.

PS. I love how you all rag on Kobe on a daily basis talking about how his advanced stats don't hold up and how his playoff performances are subpar and what a cancer he was etc. etc. etc. and then say he's top 15 and one of the main reasons PJ was so successful. :)

[midnightpulp]

I value winning number one. You know that. Championships! Playoffs and Regular season winning are secondary. Third is head to head. No lack of logic there. Mike D has no championships. You have to get past the first criteria to even consider tie breakers or subsequent criteria IMO.

One could also argue that it takes just as much to coach a team with multiple type-A greats as it does high quality role players. NBA coaches are baby sitters. Managing ego is every bit as important as X's and O's. Just as a silly example, if you put the Cavs or Warriors against the current USA team I would put my money on the former. They have learned to play together and know the pecking order.

Pop is a great coach, and has my respect. However, if I was going into a championship series with any group of players, I would take PJ over Pop every time.

PS. I love how you all rag on Kobe on a daily basis talking about how his advanced stats don't hold up and how his playoff performances are subpar and what a cancer he was etc. etc. etc. and then say he's top 15 and one of the main reasons PJ was so successful. :)

Kobe is overrated per casual fan perception, who value shit like per game stats and "flair."

Kobe is a top 15 player of all-time, and was one of the reasons Phil won titles. But compared to Duncan, Kirby ain't in the same area code, and this is proven easily by every statistical metric you can think of.

And :lol moving the goalposts with regard to head-to-head. "I-It only counts, um, when you've won titles!"

Head-to-head is a stupid, nonsensical criteria, for player and coaching comparisons.

Why?

For the former, basketball is a team game. Head-to-head record will only make sense when professional basketball turns into a one-on-one affair. The logical way to compare players are stats, preferably advanced.

And for coaching, it makes even less sense since each coach isn't working with identical players. Phil's teams were always better on paper than Pop's, just by virtue of having Shaq and Kobe on the same team. Pop took a team whose second best player was Derek Anderson to the Conference Finals. Think about that.

[illusioNtEk]

pop dont need to prove anything to anybody.... he transforms scrubs into solid role players other teams are dreaming to get.

[cobbler]

Kobe is overrated per casual fan perception, who value shit like per game stats and "flair."

Kobe is a top 15 player of all-time, and was one of the reasons Phil won titles. But compared to Duncan, Kirby ain't in the same area code, and this is proven easily by every statistical metric you can think of.

And :lol moving the goalposts with regard to head-to-head. "I-It only counts, um, when you've won titles!"

Head-to-head is a stupid, nonsensical criteria, for player and coaching comparisons.

Why?

For the former, basketball is a team game. Head-to-head record will only make sense when professional basketball turns into a one-on-one affair. The logical way to compare players are stats, preferably advanced.

And for coaching, it makes even less sense since each coach isn't working with identical players. Phil's teams were always better on paper than Pop's, just by virtue of having Shaq and Kobe on the same team. Pop took a team whose second best player was Derek Anderson to the Conference Finals. Think about that.

I have no problem saying Duncan had a more consistent and better statistical career. Kobe is not the end all. Not even close to my favorite Laker players. I also have no problem saying over their careers the Lakers were the better team. Championships are tied and I value defending them more than making/missing the playoffs on any given down year. And head to head with the "teams" is 4-1 Lakers.

And are you seriously going to sit there and tell me you have never watched a series and said "coach A out coached coach B"? Hmmmmmmmm.

[Will Hunting]

I have no problem saying Duncan had a more consistent and better statistical career. Kobe is not the end all. Not even close to my favorite Laker players. I also have no problem saying over their careers the Lakers were the better team. Championships are tied and I value defending them more than making/missing the playoffs on any given down year. And head to head with the "teams" is 4-1 Lakers.

And are you seriously going to sit there and tell me you have never watched a series and said "coach A out coached coach B"? Hmmmmmmmm.


You win HO.... Congrats on being the class act you are.


It's been fun guys.... Enjoyed the bantar with one and all and even you HoBitch. But thats a line that should never have been crossed.

I'm outta here. Good luck to all your teams in the future and go Lakers!

[140]

:lmao:lmao:lmao

[ambchang]

He was assistant coach for two years and head coach of the Bulls for nine years. Many would argue it was Jerry Krause who burned the franchise. And many would argue it is Jim Buss that has been the Lakers problem not PJ or how he left them.

Phil Jackson capitalized on the Krause vs. players environment, and Kukoc was basically the sacrifice in all of this. Shaq and Kobe feud was another tension that Jackson capitalized on for the short terms gains. MVPau being thrown under the bus repeatedly also led to the image of the Lakers willing to bend over backwards to accommodate Kobe, leading to $48.5 and the inability to recruit any FA of note. Is it all Phil, no, but he certainly had a hand in it.

Not to mention his power struggle with Jerry West, which forced the man out.


Pop has the longest current tenure with one team and that deserves some credit I guess but there are only a handful of coaches that stayed with a single team more than a decade. Off the top of my head I can only think of Sloan to be in the same ballpark with Pop with regards to single team tenure so that is pretty much a ridiculous argument.

So to say Jackson would have won more than 5 in place of Pop is ridiculous as well, because he couldn't have that tenure on the Spurs, or any other team for that matter.


Regardless, PJ has better winning percentages over what is basically the same amount of time spread between two teams. And head to head there is no debate. I'll take wins over all else including longest single team tenure, development, or front office skills.

While the Spurs had the best winning percentage of all of sports since 1997. And what does h2h have to do with anything about individual abilities? Jackson had Shaq and Kobe at their primes when the Spurs only had Duncan and a declining Robinson, MVPau years were when the Spurs were at their worst (relying on Ime Udoka as the cornerstone). The Spurs were always in contention, while the lakers just can't even make the playoffs in the years the Spurs went all the way (05, 14, sucked in 07). Besides, D'antoni is 2-0 vs. Jackson, so?