Reply With Quote
it started last season Clippers series, but more and more basketall nerds/watchers/insiders are waking up to his case and questioning the anointed coaching deity...
This by far his most embarrassingly coached series..
it started last season Clippers series, but more and more basketall nerds/watchers/insiders are waking up to his case and questioning the anointed coaching deity...
This by far his most embarrassingly coached series..
That guy knows what he's talking about, tbh... It's only a matter of time until the national media wakes up and ethers this poor man's Bob Hill
Dude is close to 70. What happens at your companies when the execs reach this age? They retire and enjoy the good life. Why is coaching basketball any different?
Except Pop has had similar ups before, 2006 for example, when he was still relatively young(er)
Please indicate if you listen to the clip before posting.
I'm waiting for a non-emotional take down of pop. Haven't seen one yet
9 minute mark, that's all I got for you.
I listened to it. Seemed like a very rational argument they were making.
Pop should've gone small a long time ago. It's the ultimate counter to when you're getting beat with size..I made a thread about it and it showed success in the 2nd half. But to Pops defense pretty much every game was compe ive and with that its hard to truly make sound adjustments. Donovan getting blown out Game 1 was a blessing in disguise for them. Told him immediately things had to change.
Sometimes it is all about making shots or execution but a coaches job in EVERY sport is to put his players in the best place to succeed. That to me is his biggest weakness as a coach. For example asking 6'8-6'9 players to properly box out and muscle 7'0 260+ players for a rebound..that's a lot to ask of players..especially 30+yr olds. Or asking your bench to score running a dribble hand off with players who can't penetrate.
I started a thead about it but nobody replied.
In pops mind, he did go small. But his version of small is not a big sized 3 like Kawhi at 4. It's two/too small 4s playing 4 and 5.
It's not the first time that Pop has screwed up and it won't be the last time but absolutely nobody will light his ass up with follow up questions or write pieces about it locally to any level that it will matter. Next year the media will hype him up as being this great coach when the only great thing he did was sit on a bench that had Tim Duncan on it.
What's the point of going small when patty and slowmo can't throw it in the ocean? You actually need decent guards to go small. Steph, klay, lillard and cj aren't walking through those doors. We live and die with tony tissot.
I don't think the spurs even have the personnel to field an effective small ball lineup. What lineup could they have gone with Parker,Manu,Green,Kawhi,Lma? Mills,Parker,Green,Manu,Kawhi? Parker,Manu,Green,Kawhi,Diaw? Look at the Warriors small ball line up of Livingston,Curry,Klay,Barnes,Green or Curry,Andre,Klay,Barnes,Greens. Compare the Warriors small ball lineups to the Spurs and you will see a vast difference in speed,athleticism,3 point shooting. For small ball to be effective you have to have great shooting,speed, athleticism to combat physically a bigger opponent. The Spurs don't have any of that with their small ball lineups.I started a thead about it but nobody replied.
In pops mind, he did go small. But his version of small is not a big sized 3 like Kawhi at 4. It's two/too small 4s playing 4 and 5.
I listened, they said "pop got out coached" but then backpedaled saying okc played great.
Small ball is a hypothetical. All of guards sucked, so I don't see why you'd reward them. Starting leonard at the 4 moves him off Durant.
Great podcast though, but most of what they say I've read here. They suck off pop at the end per par
argument - spurs missed wide open shots, spurs lack of athleticism led to rushed shots. - WRONG
negating thunder second chance pts - WRONG
the beautiful game doesn't work - WRONG
Uncertain why it matters
Saying "we don't know X's and O's like Pop or how to freeze a PnR" then following that with "but it might work to..." is just folly. You don't have a good idea just because it wasn't proven to be a bad one.
Tony Parker being older has anything to do with loss of the beautiful game - WRONG
So since we don't have the personnel to go small, let's continue to go small anyway with the Diaw/West combo that was absolutely e from day one.
It was just unfortunately a bad match up. I don't think there was really a clear cut solution to deal with lack of size against the thunder's bigs. Had Duncan not declined the way he did this year the Spurs probably would have had enough to keep Adam and Kanter off the boards. Duncan's decline had huge ripples in this series.
Many people already realized that for some time.
Unfortuntely, Pop is too stubborn to acknowledge that fact.
Pop had a whole season to figure that out after OKC bludgeoned his Turd Towers in the first meeting. And since Pop clearly wanted to settle for the 2nd seed in the playoffs, he knows what's coming. That lack of preparation is inexcusable.
It's evident that there are still many people on this forum that don't realize it since they keep on screaming Pop should have played small ball in this series. Heading into this season Pop wanted to try for one last time to win with the old vets he had. I think RC and him will gut this team and start rebuilding this off-season much like they did in the summer of '01 after getting swept by the Lakers.
TRUE!I started a thead about it but nobody replied.
In pops mind, he did go small. But his version of small is not a big sized 3 like Kawhi at 4. It's two/too small 4s playing 4 and 5.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
