Pop Realists, would a 5th le redeem all?

[baseline bum]

Getting Pop was one of the greatest things to ever happen to this team. Without Pop, we lose Tim in 2000. Without Pop, this team is probably still regarded as soft like it was under Bob Hill. When Pop took the 2003 roster all the way, he proved beyond a shadow of a doubt that he was an elite and all-time great coach. You just don't win les with rosters that young and inexperienced, especially when you have to end someone else's dynasty to do it.

[Harry Callahan]

To the thread starter,

Average coaches don't win NBA les. Sure, you have to have the players, but you have to be able to put said players in a position to succeed. The Spurs inability to repeat had more to do with a mixture of bad luck, injuries (Duncan 2000 - Gino 2008), and a few phantom calls (WC Semis 2006).

[Harry Callahan]

'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.

Sean E was terrible in the Finals series for the most part in 1999 (not his fault - he was deathly ill with his kidney).

I'm sorry - I just don't think Popovich has to apoligize for anything.

BTW TS, Phil Jackson has been riding the same coattails himself if you want to go there. Six in Chicago and three in Los Angeles with two of the the top five (LA) or ten (Chicago with the greatest player ever) players in the league.

You dummies out there will see how the other half lives in a few years. You will miss Popovich then.

[dbreiden83080]

4 les in the Duncan Era, nobody has any right to be demanding anything or talking baout redemption.