Pop Realists, would a 5th le redeem all?

[Fabbs]

I know you aren't real bright, and I know your reading comprehension could use some work, but please tell me you aren't so stupid that you'd accuse me of being an apologist. If you can call Pop taking over a team plagued with injuries that did NOT have Tim Duncan, and was at no time mathematically likely to get him, coattail riding, but can't say the same about Phil Jackson going where the talent is, then you have a huge problem. Oh wait, it's you.

You're not the sharpest tool in the shed. Attempting to dis me on reading comprehension as you misread.

Originally Posted by Fabbs

As opposed to Pop who ousted Bob Hill and took over with Duncan, DRob and co in his 1st full year. Yeah no coatail riding there. Popapologism at its finest.

[anakha]

"Quality not quan y."
One Realist is worth a million of you trolls.

I am thinking of entering the Pop dolls selling field tho.
What a market! Right here at ST.

PopDoll buyers slogans:
"4 for 12, not 8 for 12!"
"No repeat. We repeat, No repeat." (Repeat over and over.)
No More O!, No More O!

Too bad you're not that realist.

Why go to the "You're all biased" argument so quickly? Finally ran out of points to make? Or were you getting lonely hoisting the 'Popovich sucks' banner all by yourself the past several pages?

[Allanon]

As a basketball strategist, I don't think Pop is very good at all, he won championships by having Duncan. Pop's not an X's and O's kind of guy, give Duncan the ball and he'll win the game.

What Pop excelled at was leading young men to their potential. He built the strong team hierarchy that has a definitive pecking order. This led to team harmony because everybody knew their place in the organization with Pop the defacto leader and Duncan as the First mate carrying out the orders.

After Tony Parker, I think Pop felt "I'm too old for this " and gave up on mentoring raw young players.

One of the great things about Pop was he always picked up guys who were good in character and didn't disrupt the team.

One of the worst things about Pop was he never picked up guys who might have disrupted the team but at the same time could have helped them repeat (ie. Artest, <insert high upside, troubled player here>)

[Fabbs]

^^ Oh but I am.
And fyatuk, SpursSupremist and even to an extent Obstucted Reading Comprehension are all in agreement with me.

Your weak takes have changed nothing.
Shower on.

[anakha]

^^ Oh but I am.
And fyatuk, SpursSupremist and even to an extent Obstucted Reading Comprehension are all in agreement with me.

Your weak takes have changed nothing.
Shower on.

So you consider to be on your side a guy who calls other Spurs fans 'spoiled' but es about having only 4 les, a guy who has called out your views as being anything but realistic, and a guy who's viewpoints are more middle of the road than yours.

What a coalition.

[ChuckD]

You talk as if you are part of a great majority, which is simply not true. The overwhelming majority of Spurs fans think Pop is a great coach. You are part of a small minority that has confused contorted logic, chronic complaining, and lack of basketball knowledge with "realism."

+1

+2

[ChuckD]

I always think it's funny that anyone would criticize pop for "coattail riding" when Phil Jackson waited until the Lakers had a team full of talent to take the job.

If you accuse Pop of doing anything, accuse him of "wagon hitching" and make sure to say how good a job he did of it.

+1

At both Chicago and LA, he inherited teams that had already made it to the conference finals. He also had two first team All NBA players both places. When he doesn't have that luxury, he goes on seven year le droughts. Phil can't make the nut with just one first team All NBA player, but Pop did it four times.

[ambchang]

So you consider to be on your side a guy who calls other Spurs fans 'spoiled' but es about having only 4 les, a guy who has called out your views as being anything but realistic, and a guy who's viewpoints are more middle of the road than yours.

What a coalition.

That slanted view on what is right and what is wrong, shockingly, is consistent with his views throughout this thread.

[dn0774]

I am curious in which "7/8" years you would consider Pop to have had the best roster on paper...please specify the years.

From what I can recall off hand since Pop took over the reins:

1998: Bulls/Lakers much more talent on paper, Pacers and Jazz up there as well

1999: Lakers added Rice and Kobe started to develop/Rockets picked up Pip...outside of Five-O and Timmy the Spurs didn't look too hot, the Blazers had arguably more talent

2000: Shaq went nuts and gave a damn for a change and the Blazers acquired more talent too..moot tho since TD got hurt

2001: Lakers had most talent no question, especially since Derek Anderson was hurt and Davids game (aka back) was aging in dog years at this point when they "clashed" in the playoffs

2002: Lakers again although injury issues (and Shaq expanding with every passing second) hurt their record...Kings were coming up too, both squads were more talented than the Spurs imo...Spurs didnt have a reliable 2nd scoring threat from what I recall

2003: Kings/Lakers better on paper, Mavs not far behind...Never will know what woulda happend if Webber didnt go down

2004: Lakers easily better on paper altho Tony/Manu had really come into their own at this point...that being said, Spurs should have finished off Lakers no question and Pop didnt adjust

2005: Spurs

2006: Spurs

2007: Spurs

2008: Celtics more talented and post-Pau trade Lakers were close as well

I can admit Pop shrivels up at the mere mention of Phil Jackson and his in game coaching ability/adjustments are shaky at times, but I think hes is the right coach for this team. Tim apparently feels the same way since he chose to stay following his rookie contract despite not a lot of sure-fire young talent waiting in the wings.

I do wish Pop would give more "high risk/high reward" players a chance, someone mentioned Artest earlier. I think since the Rodman fiasco way back when Pop has sworn off that for life though.

[dn0774]

Oh, and why all the talk about Bob Hill? I always assumed the fact that Hill wasn't given a head coaching job again in the NBA for 10 years (and lasted 1 season at that) validated his firing. Bob Hill is a bum, ask anyone at Fordham.

[Obstructed_View]

You're not the sharpest tool in the shed. Attempting to dis me on reading comprehension as you misread.

No, I read and understood exactly what you wrote and your having specifically mentioned his first FULL season is precisely why I replied in the first place. I took issue with the fact that you intentionally worded your post to somehow suggest Pop fired Hill knowing that Tim Duncan was going to come to the Spurs, which is at best intellectually dishonest, but more likely just evidence of more factual bankruptcy from you.

Go back and read the whole exchange again and it will make sense. I dare you to admit that you missed it.

[Fabbs]

I am curious in which "7/8" years you would consider Pop to have had the best roster on paper...please specify the years.

From what I can recall off hand since Pop took over the reins:

1998: Bulls/Lakers much more talent on paper, Pacers and Jazz up there as well. True. 'Popped certainly wasn't up to utilizing Rodman while Phil certainly was. Phil once again owns Pop.

1999: Lakers added Rice and Kobe started to develop/Rockets picked up Pip...outside of Five-O and Timmy the Spurs didn't look too hot, the Blazers had arguably more talent. Spurs added Ellie and Kersey. Already had a "Big 3" of Real MVP of Timmy Dunks, DRob and Shaun Ellot with the Little General running the point. I'll take the Spurs.

2000: moot tho since TD got hurt. Agree.

2001: Lakers had most talent no question, especially since Derek Anderson was hurt and Davids game (aka back) was aging in dog years at this point when they "clashed" in the playoffs.

2002: Lakers again although injury issues (and Shaq expanding with every passing second) hurt their record...Kings were coming up too, both squads were more talented than the Spurs imo...Spurs didnt have a reliable 2nd scoring threat from what I recall. The NBA was soo rigged at this point and Fat Blob Shaqs camping in the key and bowling over completely set defenders was a joke. Ditto Bryants pampering in the playoffs, ie elbowing Bibby and a foul being called on Bibby. 2002 was a joke. Spurs might have had a better roster but I'm not pushing it.

2003: Kings/Lakers better on paper, Mavs not far behind...Never will know what woulda happend if Webber didnt go down. Far and away Real MVP Timmy Dunks along with GNob, Parker, SJax, Bowen. Spurs hands down.

2004: Lakers easily better on paper altho Tony/Manu had really come into their own at this point...that being said, Spurs should have finished off Lakers no question and Pop didnt adjust. I'll take the Spurs Big 3 over the Lakers paper tigers any day of the week. Popped goes into fetal position and gets worked 4 straight games after being up 2-0.
2005: Spurs
2006: Spurs
2007: Spurs
2008: Celtics more talented and post-Pau trade Lakers were close as well.
Late reg season game with major seeding implications played in San Antonio. Spurs go up 9 late, Popped per usual orders the Prevent Offense in the form of 4 Dumb ad nauseum to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. I give the edge to the Spurs in a 7 game series. Oh, well we never got to see that because Phil owned Popped again WCFs. The Lakers Collusion was a lot to overcome, yet Lord Dumbass stubbornly plays 60% GNob after the FO did something right for a change and got Barry and KThomas. Lord Poppy benches them both. We got to see what bringing in Barry earlier could have done. Even making the statement "We're not going to win the le without Ginobili" What a quitter and what a diss to his own bench.

I can admit Pop shrivels up at the mere mention of Phil Jackson and his in game coaching ability/adjustments are shaky at times, but I think hes is the right coach for this team. Tim apparently feels the same way since he chose to stay following his rookie contract despite not a lot of sure-fire young talent waiting in the wings.

I do wish Pop would give more "high risk/high reward" players a chance, someone mentioned Artest earlier. I think since the Rodman fiasco way back when Pop has sworn off that for life though

Great defensive coach, but too prideful and gloryhoggish to let a good offensive coach have freedom and control ie Tex Winters/Phil.

[dn0774]

From what I can recall off hand since Pop took over the reins:

1999: Lakers added Rice and Kobe started to develop/Rockets picked up Pip...outside of Five-O and Timmy the Spurs didn't look too hot, the Blazers had arguably more talent. Spurs added Ellie and Kersey. Already had a "Big 3" of Real MVP of Timmy Dunks, DRob and Shaun Ellot with the Little General running the point. I'll take the Spurs.

2003: Kings/Lakers better on paper, Mavs not far behind...Never will know what woulda happend if Webber didnt go down. Far and away Real MVP Timmy Dunks along with GNob, Parker, SJax, Bowen. Spurs hands down.

2004: Lakers easily better on paper altho Tony/Manu had really come into their own at this point...that being said, Spurs should have finished off Lakers no question and Pop didnt adjust. I'll take the Spurs Big 3 over the Lakers paper tigers any day of the week. Popped goes into fetal position and gets worked 4 straight games after being up 2-0.

Virtually all credit to the ring in '99 goes to Duncan/Robinson being at the apex of their interior defense as a duo...I cant include a guy who scored 11ppg as part of any kind of "big 3", especially with the kind of injury issues he had coming into that season...this roster was extremely short on talent overall for a championship team...does Pop get any credit here though for turning the offense over to Duncan rather than trying to live in the past with David as the focal point?

With regards to 2003, Timmy was at his individual peak without a doubt...but Manu was an unproven rookie playing out of control on occasion while Tony was still liable to get that deer in the headlights look at the mere mention of crunchtime. Neither of them were the players they are today by any stretch. SJax was a misfit coming off a 3.9ppg season. This team actually winning a ring was a testament primarily to Duncans individual greatness but Pop has to get some credit as well.

For 2004, how can you argue against Shaq/Kobe/Malone/GP on paper at the time? They were all playing at a high level going into that season (obviously GP ended up "Ben Wallacing" that year but still). If you are arguing in hindsight that the Spurs shoulda knocked them out I wont disagree, but to say the Spurs had more proven talent to begin with is false imo.

[Fabbs]

'99 while Dunks being the focal point was a no brainer IMO, still sure I'll give Pop credit for revolving the O around Tim. But as to no support beyond DRob, i disagree. While Elliott may not have been a true "Big 3rd", I nonetheless highly value role players ie he, Ellie and Avery in that series.

2003 you had SuperStevie Kerr flat preserving the series in Gm 6 or whichever that was he went 4-4 on treys and fed Tim the ball beautifully after Parker went deer/headlights. But young and inconsistent Tony was definitely "on" a couple of those Laker game thrashings. Slicing and dicing right thru their phony soft D. Credit for Popped? Some, but all taken away after the huge lead in Gm 5 was almost pissed away thanks to his m.o. of 4 Dumb with a lead.

2004 I'm fine with others like yourself finding the Lakers to be better on paper. I mean 51/49 55/45 whatever, either way is not unreasonable to me. For ^%$#s sake they were handed Malone and Payton on a silver platter. But i still liked the Spurs better, i really do (did) and think the 4 straight choke job is a disgrace, .4 or not. I do think with the previous rigged reffing in favor of the Lakers, that during the pre .4 timeout Pop had to tell his team don't even breathe on a Laker, esp that flopping got Swisher or else the refs will hand them the game. But GNobs mistake (and Pops?) was letting Swisher go to his left (shooting hand). Should have blockaded him to his right, but again being only two playoff years removed from the phoniest reffing job of all (Lakers-Kings 2002 Gm 6) and the refs giving such favoratism to that era's Lakers, maybe GNob felt he couldn't even look at Swisher wrong hence get rung up. I still say 4 straight was a disgrace and relfects on Popped as part of his "Owned by Phil" heritage.

[Fabbs]

edit: Elliott.

Got it exstatic below.
Spelling it with one t produces this: Luck_The_Fakers_Luck_The_Fakers_Luck_The_Fakers_Lu ck_The_Fakers_Luck_The_Fakers_Luck_The_Fakers_

[exstatic]

^^ whats with the Luck_the Lakers repeatedly?
Have i been hacked?

No, you just don't know how to spell Elliott. timvp added that "feature" to correct people.

[dn0774]

2003 you had SuperStevie Kerr flat preserving the series in Gm 6 or whichever that was he went 4-4 on treys and fed Tim the ball beautifully after Parker went deer/headlights. But young and inconsistent Tony was definitely "on" a couple of those Laker game thrashings. Slicing and dicing right thru their phony soft D. Credit for Popped? Some, but all taken away after the huge lead in Gm 5 was almost pissed away thanks to his m.o. of 4 Dumb with a lead.

I completely agree there...from 2003-2006/7 it seems we blew so many leads by going into turtle mode once we got them (aka playing not to lose rather than playing to win). Very frustrating to beat the brakes off a team in the 1st half and then come out without any offense to speak and watch the lead melt away.

[tlongII]

If Popovich wins a 5th le I will sing his praises. Not gonna happen though.

[xtremesteven33]

Im going out on a limb and saying that this is the best team the spurs have had in terms of talent and experience since the 2003 team.

None of the Big 3 show any major signs of breakdown or degression but rather show more cohesivness and consistency. The bench has gotten younger and talented with the improvements at the guard positions (Salim,Hill,Mason).

Also the Spurs have some reliable and smart veteran Big men who can contribute at a good level (thomas,Oberto).

Overall i am really excited to see this team play and will boldly state that i think this is the most talented and experienced team weve had since the 2003 team. We have just about as good of a chance next year as the Lakers do.

[ChumpDumper]

The NBA was soo rigged at this point

So if it's rigged, why even bother ing about the outcome?

[jayc23]

I love Pop, but he's made mistakes in the past. I'm not going to pretend they didn't happen when the discussion comes up. I love championships. The one in '06 would have been nice, too. Since that's not going to happen, I'll hope for more in the future. If the Spurs never win another one, 2006 becomes more prominent.

show me the one that makes no mistakes and let me call him God.....

Phil jackson is one of the greatest coaches of all time. would he have been with out Jordan, shaq, kobe, the world may never know

[jayc23]

If Popovich wins a 5th le I will sing his praises. Not gonna happen though.

you just worry about keeping oden from rolling his ankle

[Brutalis]

2004 was a mess. 2006 was very bitter in the way it ended and felt much like this season had it not been so rocky. Manu ultimately was the biggest reason we lost 2 of the 3 years just to throw that in there for rude manners.

2009 will be very interesting. When I dream of a 5th le, it feels different. Holy grail. Reinstating ourselves as we unfold into what appears to be an entertaining free agency that might attract what we need.

[Biernutz]

Oh crap --when is the Bob Hill was the best coach link posted? Or the Pop screwed Bob Hill link . Pop haters---get a life----

[Fabbs]

2004 was a mess. 2006 was very bitter in the way it ended and felt much like this season had it not been so rocky. Manu ultimately was the biggest reason we lost 2 of the 3 years just to throw that in there for rude manners.

2009 will be very interesting. When I dream of a 5th le, it feels different. Holy grail. Reinstating ourselves as we unfold into what appears to be an entertaining free agency that might attract what we need.

tlongII If Popovich wins a 5th le I will sing his praises. Not gonna happen though.

Indeed it will be a pleasant surprise if the Spurs with Popped can pull off #5.