I agree with you based on the your conclusion that 2005 does not prove Pop > Brown because of the talent and skill, but I have to disagree on the 4-5 game series comment.
Many fans were underestimating the ability of Detroit that year, and those who had any basketball knowledge knew the series was going to go at least 6, and using Spurs fans as a base to analyse talent is flawed because we are obviously biased, and some are just plain unknowledgable.
Besides, everybody and their cousins were rooting for Detroit that year for whatever reason.
On the other hand, 2004 proved that Brown > Phil Jackson.
Also to comment on T Park's
1999 and 2003 were cream years of Many and Parker?
I would love to see how Phil Jackson Spurs with Duncan, an aging Robinson, as well as no big guards would do from 2000 to 2003. The Spurs roster would not allow a triangle offense (Duncan would be perfect, but the Jacksons and Avery Johnson? Get outta here).
That's different...
Besides, I am not saying he is a top 5...just that I think there is a case for it.
And even if he is top 5? If he plays small ball against the Mavs? I want him fired.
Pop is definitely in the discussion, and if he wins another ring, he's #3 or 4.
Jackson and Red definitely rank above him. Riley has an advantage just because he's been able to demonstrate that he can win with multiple teams and multiple styles.
Of course all the different ways Pop's been able to win championships is a chicken-egg question with Tim Duncan.
No way Bill Fitch is a top 5 all-time coach. But Chuck Daly is definitely underrated.
Coming up in 2015 . . .
Whatchu talking about, Willis?
Mario Elie, Derek Anderson, Stephen Jackson, Antonio Daniels and Manu did get a le with pop in 2003.
what would Duncan say?
Flip's legacy of post season flops outweigh any other positives in his coaching career.
If Pop had 26 consecutive first round exits...he wouldn't be in this discussion.
Flip=Flop
Not that I'm hoping for this any time soon, but it would be interesting to see if he could be a successful coach in another situation. All we really know about him is what he's been able to do with a team built around Tim Duncan.
I have the same question. Of course, Auerbach did little of note in the 10+ years he coached before Bill Russell came along.
Elie, Anderson and Daniels weren't with the Spurs in 2003.
This may be the WTF? post of the day.
Man, I remember when DA got that ring. It was sweet.
Original post said:
The others most certainly were on the Spurs in 00 or 1 or 02, and 03 had both Steven Jackson and Manu.would love to see how Phil Jackson Spurs with Duncan, an aging Robinson, as well as no big guards would do from 2000 to 2003.
I think you two were reading my post as if I was saying all were on the Spurs in 2003.
Oh yeah and 6'6" Jaret Jackson also. Plenty of big guards in 2000-2006 for the Philmeister to have the Spurs repeating and doing 3 or 4 of 6 Champs.
I can't believe we got a le with such an overstacked roster at the guard position. Duncan, Robinson and Gilmore really carried the load in the paint.
Derek Anderson and Antonio Daniels were in Portland, Mario Elie retired and Manu didn't play signficant minutes then.
That left us with Stephen Jackson .... I would have guessed that ANY team will have one decent big guard, because that guy is called the starting shooting guard.
Unless you want to say that Kerr, Steve Smith and Devin Brown were decent quality big guards.
Before you go out and say Phil Jackson can win 4 ships with a team, at least know who is on the roster before you spew stuff out.
Finally, do you know how the triangle offense works? Just curious.
EDIT: Were you mentioning Kevin Willis as a big guard?
Your quote then distinctly say 2003, but if you want to talk from 00 to 03, sure. I will list out the year and the big guards available that year.
00:
Mario Elie - all you need to know is that Terry Porter averaged more points than he did that year, he played one more season with the Suns, and retired.
Jaren Jackson - he was terrible that year, he proceeded to play 25 games the two years after that, he was terrible.
Antonio Daniels - His game was still not developed at that point, he would find his game in Seattle 4 seasons later.
01:
Derek Anderson - He got hurt in the playoffs, and my assumption is that not playing in the playoffs won't help the Spurs win a championship, no?
Antonio Daniels - see above.
Jaren Jackson - see above, only he was even worse in 01.
02:
Steve Smith - Who can forget his performance in the playoffs that year? He was about as effective as Phil Jackson's 3rd or 4th guards in those championship years, but guess what? He was the Spurs 3rd leading scorer that year!
Antonio Daniels - See above. To be fair, he has improved over 00 and 01, but again, at best a 3rd or 4th guard on Phil Jackson's championship squads.
That brings us to 03, please see previous post.
I think everyone is reading the post that way; in fact, I'm nost sure there's another way to read it.
So your point is the Spurs had lots of big guards from 2000 to 2003 (although you left out Steve Smith), to refute the contention by the other post that they didn't have any?
Another coach in the NBA who deserves mentioning is Alex Hannum. He coached St. Louis to a le when Pe was there and then, when I really started following basketball closely, he was coaching the 76ers with their great teams. They won an NBA le under Hannum. He was an excellent coach and he even took an ABA team in Oakland that was horrible and took them to an ABA Championship over the Indiana Pacers. Of course, that team added Rick Barry, Doug Moe and Larry Brown to its roster but Hannum did a nice job with that bunch. Hannum was well-respected by players and coaches.
Yep. Not to mention any FAs who would have come over to Philville, ie Ron Harper (altho I'm not big on Harper, look at the les with Phil). Altho i would leave out Steve Smith.
But Kerr would play in the Phil system, as he did in the Bulls les.
Pop had no intention of playing him in WCFs Game 6 Mavs of 2003. Only injuries to Tony and Speedy got him in the 2nd half. He was the turning point of that game, no doubt.4-4 on treys and a bunch of nice entry passes to Duncan that were batted away earlier when Tony and Speedy tried it. Otherwise we were looking at 3-3.
Last edited by Fabbs; 04-11-2007 at 11:12 PM.
That doesn't answer my question.
I asked whether the Detroit Pistons' road record the last two seasons mean that Flip Saunders has done a great coaching job for the Pistons in THESE TWO SEASONS. If winning on the road is attributable to coaching, does that mean Detroit's road record the last two seasons is attributable to Flip Saunders' coaching? Answer please.
who the is Alex Hannum
He's one of the Bang Bros.
Yeah Flip deserves credit for that. But only partial and it doesn't carry as much weight with him...because he did inherit a 2 time finalist.
He also deserves credit for the record they had last year...but again, two time finalist.
Add it all up...with Flips track record in Minnesota, the fact that he alienated Ben Wallace, Heat last year...and 2 years of winning on the road just doesn't mean a whole of a lot. That's about his pinnacle as a coach...
Lots of coaches had winning records 2 years in a row though...even 3, few have done it 8 or 9 in a row like Pop....and Flip had Garnett.
Flip has something to prove, and until he proves it, like Pop has, his positives won't count near as much as his negatives.
Alex is enshrined in Springfield. Must I always have to spoonfeed?
http://www.hoophall.com/halloffamers...ex-hannum.html
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
