Why do things cancel out? Pop won the spurs some and lost the spurs some. But the spurs wouldn’t even be in the position to lose some without a system that plays to their strengths.
Some people say ceos and executives don’t matter, like organizations can just prosper. My opinion is that they can’t. The right direction has to be set and there has to be a guy to rally the troops. Napoleon made a difference, genghis khan made a difference, Churchill made a difference. Why can’t coaches?
You guys acted like everybody knew the warriors were destined for a dynastic run. That is rewriting history. They were an up and coming team like the grizzlies were a few years ago or Sacramento last year. Or the wolves this year. They weren’t even on the OKC path. The Kerr system and having a revolutionary switch heavy defence with so much emphasis on outside shooting was the key.
Whose system was it? Coaches don’t just put in day to day game to game changes. They set directions. Sure there are the cases in which coaches adjust and get one ups on the other team, like the for tat in the wolves nuggets series, but the most important aspect is the overall style and direction that plays to a teams strength.
Ultimately a team still need talent, but if you put a so so coach with great talent, the guidance will not be there.
Either that or the all time great player and core that are conveniently found on virtually every multi time champion.
Kerr got lucky to arrive at the right time and because he's white and was a part of and friendly with the media, they pretended his genius propelled them forward.
He even admitted he had Green penciled in as a 15-20 mpg backup wing/forward and that he only became a starting/closing forward/small ball five due to injuries. That stroke of dumb luck organically lent itself to switching . . . don't kid yourself, it's always about the players.
Curry was an anomoly and a three point heavy driven offence was unprecedented. Nobody tried it and Kerr did. GSW was solidly in the novelty act category like those don nelson teams before they won their first le.
Kerr got lucky to arrive at the right time and because he's white and was a part of and friendly with the media, they pretended his genius propelled them forward.
He even admitted he had Green penciled in as a 15-20 mpg backup wing/forward and that he only became a starting/closing forward/small ball five due to injuries. That stroke of dumb luck organically lent itself to switching . . . don't kid yourself, it's always about the players.
To say GSW is not a dynasty is just insane at this point. 4 les within a decade. Changed the entire offensive direction of a league. If that’s not a dynasty I’m not sure what is.
He was flexible enough to use Draymond. Every team has some luck. The key is to take advantage of it.
Of course on a Friday...amb brings it in his inimitable way. On Friday.
amb
I'll go again...
amb
Yeah and it was driven by him, just like the Spurs prime Duncan offense was driven by his ISO scoring in the low-mid post, back to the basket or facing. It didn't take ingenuity to figure that out.
Kerr got them as they were entering their prime. Had it been the other way around, with the same unprecedented breaks with Jackson, they have the same success.
Only if you're a casual or part of the brainwashed masses. The first 3 have zero credibility and the 4th barely does. Influence on the game doesn't quality them for it either.
No, he didn't have much choice due to injuries (namely Lee) and the rest is history.
Jackson sucked. You can argue he was the coach that held the warriors back but nobody was arguing for a motion offence for the warriors. Kerr and his staff did. They also put in a solid defence (routinely top 5) that allowed them to win it all multiple times. To say Kerr just lucked into it is just asinine.
Whether they have credibility is outside of your point. You don’t get to write history. They won 4.
No, Jackson was largely irrelevant, just like Kerr (he just inherited them when they were further along) and all the others. If his magical system had so much impact, then why were they at the bottom of the league when injuries finally struck? Criticize Jackson all you want, but they were terrible defensively for eons and became a solid defensive team under him and without great personnel. But who needs facts?
Wrong, it is my point and I get to contextualize and determine my standard the same way you do. They were too gutless to attempt to earn it (even if you want to set aside the non Durant ones, that leaves 2 which is obviously not a dynasty), so they don't get to have their cake and eat it too.
Last edited by TD 21; 06-08-2024 at 05:51 PM.
To say coaching is irrelevant based on Jacksons and kerrs results are beyond illogical. Just because the team struggled when players got injuries doesn’t mean the coaching was irrelevant. The system was installed with the players in mind. Of course it will struggle without the players. The players are a huge part of the reason teams win or lose. You can’t put yinka dare and stromile swift in place of Duncan and expect to win a le, let alone five. You can’t green subs ute shaq for Duncan and expect them to win, or duncan for Dirk. The system plays to the strengths and weaknesses of these players which is the entire point of how coaching is relevant.
As for your point about them not being a dynasty, you getting to contextualize what is originally a subjective point, while the vast majority of people agree the warriors are a dynasty, underlines how your point is out of touch with reality. You can apply this thinning to every single point and detach yourself from reality, makes you do different from the MAGA crowd, some cidal terrorist or lunatic shouting at the corner of the street (in terms of thinking pattern).
No, it's largely irrelevant period; at least in the way most easy to judge, which is X's and O's. The notion that certain ones know something that other ones don't or are going to utilize it in a way unforeseen or trick someone, is asinine.
The vast majority of people just base things off of results. They see the number 4 and that's enough for them. It was for me too pre Warriors, who (along with S bag) distorted results and I'm not rewarding them for it by mentioning them in the same breathe with the Celtics, Lakers, Bulls and Spurs, who earned the designation. That's not the same as saying I don't acknowledge the results; they just lack credibility.
Imagine plopping in Olajuwon on the Bulls in '92 or Bryant on the Spurs in '04, etc.
Because in the bitter end it is commanded by "just" "results" I learned that the punishing way when the Lakers couldn't persevere over the Celtics. WTF could I do but go back home and suffer the indignation of total loss. Then lo & hold we did persevere vs. the Celtics, and you know what MSM did? Yeah, they did this: said it wasn't that big of deal, that just making the Finals, the playoff was good enough from that day forward. Can imagine purporting that to Dale?
Uh, uh. We started one way some 60+ years ago, and we ain't a changin.. Not for money, marbles nor chalk.
...Make the playoffs & win the last game you play, or, your human garbage.
Let us proceed...
At least in the cases of the Warriors and S bag, not to me, it isn't. They gamed the system, so they don't get to sit at the table with those who didn't.
I know you're old and probably stuck in your ways, but the worst explanation for something is defaulting to that's how it's always been.
The system is liable to be gamed. I got no problem citing them for gaming it. I wish the Lakers would game it instead of honoring Minnesota Floyd instead.
no coach in the world can save this tyass Laker roster. They won't even make the play-in next season
Heartily agreed. We were both lucky and cursed to have James ring like that. We ain't done since cept chase down White people.
Or Barkley with olajuwon and drexler or Malone and Payton with shaq and Kobe. Or Dwight and nash with MVPau and kobe. Didn’t work out. Players have shown that they are horrible in X and Os historically, either as a broadcaster, or a coach. Other than a few high end PGs players have also shown they can’t develop plays that well either.
All this without even mentioning the ego massaging and baby sitting aspects.
I don't know what you're talking about, but Barkley, Olajuwon, Drexler, Malone, Payton and Nash were all past their prime when those teams formed and Howard was playing hurt.
That's not at all comparable to Durant signing with the Warriors when they were all in their prime.
Please inform how rookie coach Avery Johnsons system beat GOAT Craig Popplevichs most stacked lineup system in the 2006 playoffs.
Can the Lakers get Magic back after Hurley rejects them?
Magic knows everything.
My mistake, mistook you using the Durant situation as an example of coaching doesn't matter, but point stands, there were an incredible amount on talent on certain teams that don't win, because the styles do not mesh. I have no problems saying that Durant's level of cowardice was unprecedented, and I also believe they do not deserve any credit as some soft of team building genius, but as a team of pure dominance? The team was stacked, they can only be considered a dynasty, especially in an age where long terms dominance is tough to do due to the cap rules.I don't know what you're talking about, but Barkley, Olajuwon, Drexler, Malone, Payton and Nash were all past their prime when those teams formed and Howard was playing hurt.
That's not at all comparable to Durant signing with the Warriors when they were all in their prime.
As for players not retain information, you make is sound like every team is the same, they are not. You cannot have the same system with Olajuwon as you have with Curry, nor can you have a Jordan centred system applied to the Bad Boys. This isn't a cut and paste exercise, there are many different ways to win, even though there are some basic required building blocks (talent, defensive and offensive systems, bench, etc ...)
Joe Mazzulla slapping main stream media one question at a time
And Hurley turned down BronBron and the Avengers
No, because they were old, sometimes ego got in the way and other times the fit wasn't great.
All of their level of cowardice was unprecedented, those weasels just allowed Durant take the entirety of it (to be sure, he deserved the most since no one had a gun to his head) because they were too gutless to admit their role in it.
The dominance didn't happen organically though, so it's irrelevant. Just like it'd have with the examples I cited.
You again missed the point. It's not about "system", it's about you acting as if most of the players are clueless and need coaches to hold their hands when in comes to X's and O's, which is ridiculous.
Knew enough to not reject the Celtics on & off the court, but to embrace them, humanized them and finally beat them. Those get together's by CBS with him and Bird were a riot. Magic would be all buddy-buddy and lovin' him some Bird and Bird would sit there with that pained smile on his face like he couldn't pass water. I don't know whether, truth be told he was conning the Celtics and Bird, or, being genuinely kind, but they were hard to watch. It'd get to Bird's turn to smootch ass and his heart wasn't in it. I'd go over to TCM real quick...I was uncomfortable. I was embarrassed for Bird, for getting conned into these things by Stern.
Excusing that mutton headed Mult this conversation by you fellows is super fine.
Good memories.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote