Is it Pop? Imho, the biggest factor outside of winning championships in determining a coaches ability is being able to changed the landscape of the NBA just because everyone else is a copycat.
No one uses the triangle. Its an overrated offensive scheme that relies on two All time Talent. Phill is overrated as Hack. Auberach coached against 5'8 white American centers.
Obviously pop has weakness as a coach and he does tons of stupid stuff but I cant think of a coach that not only won rings but also revolutionize the game of basketball.
Obvious answer is Pop because he's been able to change and adapt throught his career depending on the personnel at hand, whereas most coaches know their thing and persist with it. He (well PATFO) has revolutionized not only the in-game coaching part, but also the player development, scouting and team assembling concepts.
That said, just like with players, the most influential coaches aren't necessarily le winning ones, Nellie and D'Antoni being good examples.
Pop is in the conversation for sure. DEFINITELY NOT Phil Jackson, even though he has more rings.
Pop... just count the number of coaches and front office folks that have gone through Pop and elsewhere in the NBA.
The only closest one is Pat Riley who has got Van Gundy, Spoelstra and Byron Scott.
Pop has Budenholzer, Steve Kerr, Doc Rivers, Brett Brown, Quin Snyder. That's not including all the others who got fired (i.e. Vaughn, Mike Brown, Carlesimo, Avery Johnson, Monty Williams, Del Negro)
Certainly, in this era, it would be difficult to find anyone who's had the impact on both the way the game is played and the way that teams are managed than Pop. Nearly every week, you can find an article or a podcast in which someone credits a larger trend in the NBA to something that the Spurs did first or were among the earliest teams to adopt -- de-emphasizing offensive boards, emphasizing the corner 3, prioritizing 3-and-D guys, using extreme ball movement (and player movement) to break down defenses, conceding the midrange shot to limit shots from the arc, resting healthy players, to name a few.
And that's just the on-the-court stuff. It doesn't account for the culturally unique things the Spurs have used in managing the program -- drafting and stashing foreign players, giving multiple people voices in the decision-making processes, emphasizing a program rather than particular players, again just to name a few.
While it's true that a lot of people from within the Spurs organization have gone elsewhere to spread Pop's influence (and that includes some assistants who've planted those seeds in places without Spurs family head coaches, like Joe Prunty in Milwaukee, Don Newman in Washington, Jim Boylen in Chicago, Mario Elie in Orlando, and Paul Pressey with the Lakers, again to name a few) the testament to the Spurs influence is that even in places where there is no direct tie to the Spurs, teams are still trying to do what the Spurs do in a significant number of ways, both big and small.
It seems you are hearing praises about the "Spurs Way" more than ever before, from all areas, the media, GMs, coaches and most importantly the players. It's almost mythical. After teams get thrashed, you read the interviews from the opposing teams players and it's like "that's what they do". It's an amazing culture the PATFO have created. It can only bode well for future free agent signings.
Erik Spoelstra. He's made a huge impact in the way coaches dress.
I think the first point is absolutely correct. It's certainly become a thing in the NBA to offer praise to the Spurs.
I don't know that it will help with free agents; I'm sure that there are a lot of guys around the league who know that what Pop does is not for them. Those are the sorts of guys the Spurs will likely never chase, but there are also some who will balk at giving up their brand and game to the system and won't want any part of what the Spurs do - even if they claim publicly to respect all that it stands for.
I agree the Spurs way isn't for everyone, but with the signing of LMA and to a lesser degree DWest, I think the free agents will take a more serious look at the Spurs than maybe they have in the past, especially if they win the le.
Phil implemented a system that is almost impossible to emulate if you don't have Jordan or Jordan's Laker clone. Pop has been a step ahead of the NBA for a long time both in the front office and on the court. Every team has tried to emulate Pop in multiple facets of running a team. In the last twenty years, it has to be Pop. Pat Riley and Red Auerbach should be in the discussion as well but I feel like the rosters defined their success more than their philosophy. Larry Brown is the only other coach I can remember taking a team to a championship without a prime MVP candidate on the roster.
Pop easily, in many areas..Zach lowe just published a long piece on the waning importance of offensive rebound as team focus more on transition D and he cites few coaches around league crediting Pop for prioritizing the latter as sound strategy very early on..
http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/14...ing-room-floor
Phil Jackson is probably the greatest at making elite talent works, but i don't think he was any special as a strategist ..¨PJnever exceeded expectations when his talent is dwarfed by another team's; he even lost with much stacked roster ('04, probably also '08)..I mean do you think Jackson would have taken the Heat to 7 games in 2013 or blow the out them in 2014 with that Spurs roster..his triangle is now an archaic model without of GOAT-level SG and a HOF big....and his coaching/management tree is non-existing embarrassment 5 years after his retirement..
gotta be Pop, then Brown
Technically, whoever created the pick-and-roll or dreamed up zone defenses or things along those lines would probably be more "influential" in how basketball is played than anyone we could name, since those things are used pervasively in the game everywhere it's played.
If the question is who has the most rings - just count.
Influential? You have to put Nellie into the discussion. The people who understand don't have to be convinced. The ones who don't understand will already have their minds made up. But he's on the list.
You could make a pretty good case for Tex Winter, even though a lot of his influence was as an assistant/mentor. But he was a head coach for a while, so that counts, right?
But the most influential has to be Larry Brown. Considering the players and coaches he influenced, first at the college level, and then at the pro level? Doug Moe, Pop, George Karl, to name a few.
[Edit: I just dug out this article about Brown and his influence in the league. Pretty amazing. http://www.nba.com/encyclopedia/coac...rry_brown.html ]
Was reading that and then came across this gem in the next article
4. Boris Diaw's 'tea time'
My favorite NBA development of the past week was learning, via the great Spurs blog Pounding the Rock, that LaMarcus Aldridge has nicknamed Boris Diaw "tea time." Let Danny Green explain:
"I wish I could do what Boris does," said Green. "He makes it look very easy. LaMarcus calls him 'tea-time' because he looks like he is out there taking his time drinking tea."
This is perfect. There are few things more entertaining than watching Diaw catch the ball 25 feet from the rim and decide he's going to meander all the way to the basket with it. Diaw doesn't drive, really. The word "drive" implies a fast, straight-line action. Diaw spins, fakes, sticks his butt out, spins again, checks whether the Coyote is wearing pants, pump fakes, and just kind of arrives at the basket.
What are you supposed to do with this?
http://media.video-cdn.espn.com/gifs/mp4/DM_151123_GIF_5__1_05_59.mp4
Why not Phil Jackson? I mean look at Kobe before and after Phil. Look at Kobe and Shaq before Phil. Look at Jordan before Phil. Phil Jackson was one play from taking the Bulls to the Finals without Jordan. Without Phil Jackson we would be going after Bill Russells number of championships instead of Jordans.
Look at the OP - "most influential".
If were talking influential, you gotta look at coaches that created systems...
Pop- Motion and ball movement
Nellie- Small Ball
D'Antoni- Run, Run, Run shot in 8 seconds or less... d
Phil- Triangle
...And which are most emulated.
Pop I guess
That's not a bad way of looking at things. The only thing I'd question is that the triangle doesn't belong to Phil Jackson. Most people don't know, but Tex Winter was an assistant in Chicago before Jackson got there. And he had been teaching them the triangle for two seasons (I think) when Jackson arrived and took credit for everything. Winter didn't invent the triangle, but he perfected it. Phil Jackson benefitted almost as much from Winter as he did from Jordan. That's why he took Winter with him when he went to coach the Lakers.
The Pistons strategy had been to cut the head off the snake by beating the out of Jordan. Without Winter and HIS triangle, the Pistons had been kicking Jordan's ass in the playoffs, and might have kept doing it if Jackson had a different assistant. You can look it all up, but Phil Jackson was given credit for a lot of the genius of Tex Winter.
While youre talking Detroit, how about Chuck Daly?
Good post.
Agreed/.
Doug Moe.
He came to games drunk and disheveled.
I occasionally see Coach Moe in the parking lot at my office.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
