Reply With Quote
Coaches have a part in winning a le, just as players do.
So who, in your opinion, is a better coach than Pop or Larry Brown?
Coaches have a part in winning a le, just as players do.
Pop, no question. I just don't think he deserves as much of the credit for the success of the Spurs as posters on this forum would like to give him.
Edit: Sorry I misread your question. I thought you were asking who was a better coach between Pop and LB. But again, I don't think that Pop is overrated in general, just in this forum. I can't point to any coach who is clearly better than Pop, but there are a lot of good coaches out there, who, in the right situation, could be very successful. A few posters in this forum pretend that Pop made the Spurs, the Spurs would be nothing without Pop, etc., and I simply don't believe that.
That wasn't my question.
You were saying that Pop and Larry Brown were both overrated, so I was asking you who was a better coach THAN them.
I've been reading Vecsey's material for years. I didn't read this as a slam to Pop, at all. Peter drips with sarcasm. The people dissed in this article are Larry Brown and players known for being spoiled, catered-to and troublemakers.
Then you must be seeing Vecsey through rose colored glasses.
Vecsey is all wrong about Pop and the Olympic coaching, but he does have a point about Pop terrorizing and bawling out grown men in the middle of games as if he were a drill seargent and they were boot camp losers.
I can't forget how he bawled out Manu just about into the front row a few weeks ago. I think the players play well in spite of these vein-popping public humiliations and tolerate them because of everything else Pop does, rather than because of the humiliations.
Comparing Malik's bonehead jersey trick with balla trash just shows how different the Spurs' culture and accepted behavior are from other teams. I bet part of Malik's bone-headedness, and the Spurs' frequent over-passing, comes from being spooked by fear Pop's punishments, which could be part of the problem, rather than a solution.
Didn't Vescey's 'sources' confirm that Tim was headed to Orlando????
Of course, but you can't say that the team with the le is always the team with the best coach. That was my point. If les were all you had to look at, Phil Jackson has "won" more les since Pop has been a head coach than Pop has, but I don't think that makes him a better coach, and you would be hard pressed to find a Spurs fan who does think that.
Sorry about that. See my edit.
Vecsey is a guy who goes all over the place, sometimes difficult to see where he is going, but he tries to be humorous...quite sarcastically, 1st and foremost. It's all about the clever jab and the laughs with him.
People skimming through the article might see otherwise.
Well put, boutons. Pop is a good coach, but he does make mistakes. Unlike what some posters in this forum believe, everything he does is not for good reason. He is entirely human.
I agree, my point was that it is a team effort. Same conclusion but from different angles.Of course, but you can't say that the team with the le is always the team with the best coach. That was my point
right after they said he was staying.Didn't Vescey's 'sources' confirm that Tim was headed to Orlando????
on a different note, Peter Vescey looks just as old close up as far away!
He is dog on the bottom of my shoe.
He isn't funny, he doesn't know squat about b-ball, and he just sucks. Period.
My own belief is that there is only one coach in the NBA potentially that I would take straight up over Pop = Sloan despite never winning it all. In many ways he resembles Pop but his team always seem to play hard even in meaningless games.
There are several young and up and coming coaches (McMillian, D'Antonio, Van Gundy of Miami) that I would rather hand a team over to than Brown, especially if I had any young talent that Brown just destroys. Watch out too for Karl = Denver will be signficantly better with him than before. With talent, excepting in Milwaukee (and even there he gave Spurs fits) he has done pretty good over the years and gave the Bulls as much trouble as anyone in the early Payton, Kemp years.
No kidding ... I think Pete is waaaay off target. Because Pop doesn't cater to primadonnas and expects everyone to know and perform their role, that makes him the worst candidate? So I guess being on a decent track to win 3 championships in 6 years makes him overrated?
mmmKay.
I agree. This abrasive coach has managed to win a couple of championships with different teams that didn't have the supposedly magic '2-3 Superstars formula' .
Look at this year, outside of TD, we don't have superstars--or even serious all-star performers. What Pop has done is take some very good players and mold them around a superstar into an excellent team. He's able to do this virtually every year with an almost constant turnover.
That's good coaching and no gossipy ink-stained wretch should claim otherwise.
Drifting ever so slightly away from the "Vescey is an idiot" discussion...does Pop have any flaws as a coach?
He's mindnumbingly stubborn as a coach. That is a good thing when it comes to defense and providing some stability for players yet it can also be a hindrance when it comes to in-game strategy, I feel.
Also, the "he's coached 2 le teams so go yourself" boilerplate response is cute but perhaps he could've won more.
And at times he does seem to let his emotions get the better of him. It's nice that he will maintain some team discipline but he also seems to have a tendency to let his ego take over sometimes.
His stubborness also perhaps places more of a leash on Parker than he should have at this point in his career.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
