Any point system should also dock some points for losses.
Division titles also are a worthless barometer, imo
Printable View
Any point system should also dock some points for losses.
Division titles also are a worthless barometer, imo
Not sure if Phil deserves GOAT status or Riley. Hardly a gap between the two, Pop is solid #3 tho
Retarded logic imho considering all his teams had obvious flaws. I will give him props for being innovative but that doesn't put him above a coach who's won 4 titles.Quote:
Originally Posted by Galileo
you could sign a dead corpse to be the coach of the Heat next season and he could "lead" them to atleast 50 wins so all-time win totals are meaningless to me
:lmaoQuote:
Originally Posted by baseline bum
No way you hold an NBA coaching job for 30 years unless you are a great coach. As for the short term comet coach, yeah, he might be good, but you are not hall-of-fame status after 3 years.Quote:
Originally Posted by tesseractive
I considered that, I originally was going to give 2 points for a regular season win, then dock one point for a loss, but decided against it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Blake
A lot of 'super" teams did not win a ring. The 2010/11 Heat come to mind, as do the Sixers back in '77 with George McGinnis & Doctor J. Same goes for the Sampson/Olajuwon tandem and there are others.Quote:
Originally Posted by BUMP
All timne wins means you are a great coach, because you need to hold a job for a long time.
Once again you can say that for all coaches. Besideds an NBA title isn't exactly an easy thing to get, ask John Stockton or Charles Barkley.Quote:
Originally Posted by BRHornet45
New bonus stats have been added to the original post.
should deduct points for games lost imho, and don nelson ain't nowhere close to the talk of the top. pop & george carl are the only two on that list who're still coaching in the league today imho
pop is hands down the #1 of all time if it's a list of coaches with the greatest abilities & skills of coaching, if you choose the spurs & play the dynasty mode on any version of nba live or 2k game you'd struggle to even make the playoffs tbh. pop is quite a genius who makes the most of the limited resources he has
If there was an adjustment for small market coaches, then I agree, Pop would be # 1.Quote:
Originally Posted by Latarian Milton
I don't know what you did different. Still looks just as sucky.Quote:
Originally Posted by Galileo
The biggest glaring problem with this approach is that you need to find a way to normalize the variant amounts of years coached (for example points per year) in order for anyone to take this even a quarter of the way seriously.
The fact that COY winners are almost always fired at the most 3-4 years after winning the award shows how meaningless and stupid it is. It's the award given to a coach who burns his starters out playing 40 MPG during the regular season so he gets the award because everyone says, "Wow! He really got them to over achieve!" Then a few years later people realize that the coach will never lead a serious playoff run because he doesn't manage minutes or integrate the bench. Tom Thibodeau is the latest example of this.
Jerry Sloan is also one of the most overrated coaches of all time. His teams have always been mediocre defensively, his offense consists of whoring the 1 4 pick and roll with 3 point shooters to space. That offense is great at racking up wins and maybe a few lucky playoff runs when the team's conference has a really down year (like the 1997 or 1998 Western Conference) but it'll never win a championship especially with the mediocre defense Sloan's teams played. He's a glorified Mike D'antoni, the difference being he actually expects some kind of discipline and intelligence from his players.
Not having Daly, who I consider one of the top 3, if not the best coach in the history of the NBA, makes the list useless.
Coach of the year is pointless.
Championships are era/player dependent.
Same with division title/conference championships.
Also, no way is a CoY = championship, and 2 conference championship = 1 championship.
Not trying to say your list sucks, just that I have serious reservations about the methodology.
IMO, Larry Brown is still the best coach in NBA history at getting the most out of his teams. His weakness is the fact he always seems to abruptly burn bridges and leave his team on bad terms and there are certain players he gives up on way too quickly and refuses to even try developing. The way his teams always played defense is why I put him near or at the top.
Brown's biggest flaw is he's an asshole and a whiner who doesn't know how to build rapport with his players. That's a pretty big flaw. He's a great X and O guy but a terrible manager of people, and being able to manage personalities is just as important as being technically proficient when it comes to coaching.Quote:
Originally Posted by DUNCANownsKOBE
Something people keep forgetting, tbh. Can't win shit when you can't keep the egos happyQuote:
Originally Posted by namlook
5. Don Nelson; 31 years, 1960 points
1335 wins
75 playoff wins
7 division titles
0 NBA champs
3 coach of year
6. Greg Popovich; 16 years, 1908 points
847 wins
118 playoffs wins
9 division titles
4 NBA champs
2 coach of year
Sorry man, but these point systems are a farse, and these very numbers prove it. So Nelson, with ZERO championships is rated higher than Pop simply because he coached longer and had one more media biased coach of the year award.
No offense to you, but this is exactly you can't have systems like this decide these matters...see the BCS for more evidence.
What about Red Auerbach's championships? Do we weight them less since there were less than half the teams in the league when he got some of those?
My point is, there are too many variables to account for...context changes every thing. We see this with all sports, look at football for example...how are we ever going to compare who was a better shut-down corner out of Deion Sanders and Darrelle Revis. When Deion played, corners could use their hands. With the modern rules, a DB can't touch a receiver, so as of right now, what Darrelle Revis is doing is more impressive.
Sloan got FAR more out of less talented teams than Brown did. Brown should only get 1/2 credit for the Pistons title in '04 since that team wasn't even put together by him...he pulled a Philip and took them over after they had been on the cusp for years. Carlisle gets 1/2 credit for that ring...if memory serves me correct, Dumars was responsible for the Sheed pick up, which finally put them over the top, and Brown didn't even like the Rasheed Wallace addition because he wasn't "his type of guy".Quote:
Originally Posted by DUNCANownsKOBE
Jerry Sloan showed that he could consistently keep a team competitive regardless of the talent on his roster.
Where's Rick Adleman?
Originally Posted by BRHornet45
Quote:
yea but when you're handed the likes of Michael Jordan and Shaq along with solid role players like Scottie Pippen, Pau Gasol, Kobe Bryant, etc. ... I'm sure its sooooo tough!!! all you have to do is make sure they somewhat get along on the court and show up on time.
I'm with BR here. The fundamental thing your missing is that Jackson never took a small market team to a championship. You can't compare Utah and Phoenix markets to the likes of LA, Chicago, New York etc.Quote:
Originally Posted by MattBonnerExperience
That is a good question, I always thought he was a solid coach...13, 14?Quote:
Originally Posted by Indazone
Chuck Daly has to be in the mix at 11 or 12.
Championships need to be given much more weight. Give 200 pts for a championship and see where the coaches are ranked.Quote:
Originally Posted by callo1
Any list that has Larry Brown and Don Nelson over Pop is seriously flawed.