Poll

Will Brad go down as one of NBA's greats?

Yes, he's a great guy
18 (40%)
Bring in the tanks and trade him for a second rounder before it's too late
1 (2.2%)
I still cannot stand his rotations
3 (6.7%)
Whatever it is you're smoking, please pass it here.
3 (6.7%)
Not with ET in the roster
2 (4.4%)
Am I the only here who cares about banner 18?
2 (4.4%)
I remember DA said something similar about Rondo last summer
3 (6.7%)
It's true because aliens
3 (6.7%)
He'll be remembered as a great coach, but not an all time great
6 (13.3%)
Eats Tommy's dust
1 (2.2%)
Red has him for breakfast
3 (6.7%)

Total Members Voted: 45

Author Topic: Very strong statement by DA on CBS  (Read 9117 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: Very strong statement by DA on CBS
« Reply #30 on: July 31, 2015, 07:19:57 PM »

Offline droopdog7

  • Paul Silas
  • ******
  • Posts: 6970
  • Tommy Points: 466
How a coach is remembered has so much to do with the players he winds up coaching.

I think we're all high on Brad Stevens, though, and I think that if we get some allstars in here in the next couple of years, Stevens has as good of a chance as anyone to go down in history for all the right reasons.
Ppl forget the other side of the coin.
Teams with good players that are not successful.
I already mentioned OKC.
Despite having DMC Sac did not even compete for a place in the playoffs last year; and Clippers have not been much of a success story either.

Also, ppl seriously think Kerr changed nothing in GSW after his arrival? The way the Curry was playing was completely different. And Budenholzer has nothing to do with the success of his team in RS?

The point is so obvious that I feel weird for even having to make it. Coaches do matter quite a lot.

Now, if you interpret this to mean 'if Pops was coaching Philly they would be a contender', I obviously do not mean that. But if Pops were coaching OKC for a couple of years, I do think we would see significant improvements.
Wuh?

OKC was incredibly successful.  They just didn't win a title.  Big difference.

And that's what people don't understand.  You get the players (and the coach) to give you a chance to win a title.  That's all you want; to be a legitimate contender.  Because that is all you can control.

Beyond that, there are too many variables.  There are simply no guarantees that one will win regardless of how good the team and the coach is.

Re: Very strong statement by DA on CBS
« Reply #31 on: July 31, 2015, 07:22:07 PM »

Offline D.o.s.

  • NCE
  • Cedric Maxwell
  • **************
  • Posts: 14061
  • Tommy Points: 1239
How a coach is remembered has so much to do with the players he winds up coaching.

I think we're all high on Brad Stevens, though, and I think that if we get some allstars in here in the next couple of years, Stevens has as good of a chance as anyone to go down in history for all the right reasons.
Ppl forget the other side of the coin.
Teams with good players that are not successful.
I already mentioned OKC.
Despite having DMC Sac did not even compete for a place in the playoffs last year; and Clippers have not been much of a success story either.

Also, ppl seriously think Kerr changed nothing in GSW after his arrival? The way the Curry was playing was completely different. And Budenholzer has nothing to do with the success of his team in RS?

The point is so obvious that I feel weird for even having to make it. Coaches do matter quite a lot.


I know of at least one coach who lead a team to a 24-58 season and then single-handedly turned his team around to win 66 games and the NBA title because his coaching just exploded, just hit some new next-level stuff, and the team's new record wasn't at all to do with the talent that his front office had assembled for him.
Sigh, I just knew someone would pick up this argument.

IMO a cheap shot. Doc was great a few years ago, now his coaching style is outdated. He might be a top 10 coach, but he might not be even that.

But, we can still leave Doc out of this conversation if you find it controversial, nothing changes at all. There are good and bad coaches and they do impact on the way their teams play.

generally speaking I think that bad coaching is tremendously more detrimental to a team than good or even great coaching is to the benefit. Vinny Del Negro, for example, fails to sub in Chris Paul during playoff games. Doc doesn't do that. I don't think Blake's game gains nearly as much versatility if VDN stays in LA, because I don't think his coaching strategy calls for it.

The point about Doc, though, is mostly to illustrate that the same coach can experience a dramatic reappraisal in  the eyes of the fans because of the players he has on the floor. There were lots of people pushing for Doc to get fired before Ainge was able to pull of the trades that brought us  the Big Three.
At least a goldfish with a Lincoln Log on its back goin' across your floor to your sock drawer has a miraculous connotation to it.

Re: Very strong statement by DA on CBS
« Reply #32 on: July 31, 2015, 07:22:40 PM »

Offline droopdog7

  • Paul Silas
  • ******
  • Posts: 6970
  • Tommy Points: 466
I think the biggest thing you can say about Pops' coaching job in SA is that his team has been so amazingly consistent even as his main guys have gotten older and the supporting cast has changed over time.

Yes, he's been blessed with one of the top 10 best players of all time, not to mention David Robinson, another top 20 guy.  Still, I don't think the Spurs would be on this amazing 50-win season streak if it weren't for Pops.  The Spurs probably wouldn't have won their most recent title if not for Pops's ability to integrate new role players.  Not many coaches could have turned Kawhi into the player he is, at least not so quickly.
I agree with everything except that Timmy is an all time top 10 and Robinson a top 20.
I mean, they might be, but it's up for debate.

I think it's pointless to enter in a 'top 10 of all time' conversation here, but it's pretty obvious you can make a legit top 10 without including Timmy.
I think if you are in the conversation to be in the top 10, then hell, you're in the top 10.  What are we waiting for; the definitive bible on the top 10 players of all time?  You yourself said it was up for debate.

And as to whether he is top 10, slam dunk to me.  The greatest PF of all time and five rings.

Re: Very strong statement by DA on CBS
« Reply #33 on: July 31, 2015, 07:22:53 PM »

Offline BballTim

  • Dave Cowens
  • ***********************
  • Posts: 23724
  • Tommy Points: 1123
How about this option?

It's a players' (and by extension, a GM's) league.  Great coaching is good to have but when it comes to titles, it's all about the players.
No, because Pops.

Pop homself says that Duncan is the reason for all of the Spurs' success. In the overseas NBA trip, Pop just said, "Now I may have been a part of 5 championship teams, but the real reason for the success is 'Coach Duncan.'"

Duncan is a huge factor no doubt. But consider that other teams had got even luckier with the draft (OKC) without anything close to SAS results.

  Considering the Spurs got Duncan and Robinson in the draft you could argue that OKC wasn't as lucky. Also, OKC had like 1 year with all three of their big guys healthy in the playoffs and went to the finals that year. Considering the talent in SA, it's hard to say that the team really overachieved due to coaching over Pop's tenure .
Other than Duncan, Kawhi, Parker, Manu et al were not top picks. Even if you think it's about the players (I don't) it has a lot to do with excellent scouting and player development.

Another thing to consider (again, even if you think that coaching does not has an impact on winning, which frankly I think is a rather silly claim): Pops was one of the first to go after non-American players. He got Zarko Paspalj in the US for instance. He gave a lot of euros opportunities and this greatly helped his team become better.

But again: coaching matters. What Jackson did in his first years in the Bulls, Pops in the SAS, Red with Boston. Saying that coaches do not matter is like saying you do not need a maestro in an orchestra or that all maestros are equally good.

  Most of what you're talking about would fall under GM work, not his coaching, so you're agreeing with the claim you originally disagreed with. And I never said coaching doesn't matter, just not to the extent that you claim in Pop's case.

Re: Very strong statement by DA on CBS
« Reply #34 on: July 31, 2015, 07:25:04 PM »

Offline droopdog7

  • Paul Silas
  • ******
  • Posts: 6970
  • Tommy Points: 466
Players > Coach.

That is all I was saying.

Re: Very strong statement by DA on CBS
« Reply #35 on: July 31, 2015, 07:25:45 PM »

Offline PhoSita

  • NCE
  • Robert Parish
  • *********************
  • Posts: 21835
  • Tommy Points: 2182

I think it's pointless to enter in a 'top 10 of all time' conversation here, but it's pretty obvious you can make a legit top 10 without including Timmy.

I completely, categorically disagree, but I guess that would be a different thread.

Still, I can't help but say that for me, Timmy is behind only MJ, Russell, Kareem, Magic, and Bird.  He's DEFINITELY ahead of Kobe, and I'd place him ahead of Wilt and Shaq as well.  He's the greatest all around player of his generation.  LeBron is the only guy playing now who I think has a chance of surpassing him, but even then he has a lot of work to do.
You’ll have to excuse my lengthiness—the reason I dread writing letters is because I am so apt to get to slinging wisdom & forget to let up. Thus much precious time is lost.
- Mark Twain

Re: Very strong statement by DA on CBS
« Reply #36 on: July 31, 2015, 07:37:17 PM »

Offline greece66

  • Tiny Archibald
  • *******
  • Posts: 7395
  • Tommy Points: 1342
  • Head Paperboy at Greenville

I think it's pointless to enter in a 'top 10 of all time' conversation here, but it's pretty obvious you can make a legit top 10 without including Timmy.

I completely, categorically disagree, but I guess that would be a different thread.

Still, I can't help but say that for me, Timmy is behind only MJ, Russell, Kareem, Magic, and Bird.  He's DEFINITELY ahead of Kobe, and I'd place him ahead of Wilt and Shaq as well.  He's the greatest all around player of his generation.  LeBron is the only guy playing now who I think has a chance of surpassing him, but even then he has a lot of work to do.
Yes.

Re: Very strong statement by DA on CBS
« Reply #37 on: July 31, 2015, 07:42:15 PM »

Offline D.o.s.

  • NCE
  • Cedric Maxwell
  • **************
  • Posts: 14061
  • Tommy Points: 1239

I think it's pointless to enter in a 'top 10 of all time' conversation here, but it's pretty obvious you can make a legit top 10 without including Timmy.

I completely, categorically disagree, but I guess that would be a different thread.

Still, I can't help but say that for me, Timmy is behind only MJ, Russell, Kareem, Magic, and Bird.  He's DEFINITELY ahead of Kobe, and I'd place him ahead of Wilt and Shaq as well.  He's the greatest all around player of his generation.  LeBron is the only guy playing now who I think has a chance of surpassing him, but even then he has a lot of work to do.

That's because you're not on the Wilt hype train enough.

Seriously how do you finish your career as the best player ever and ever will be by any legitimate individual metric and still wind up underrated.
At least a goldfish with a Lincoln Log on its back goin' across your floor to your sock drawer has a miraculous connotation to it.

Re: Very strong statement by DA on CBS
« Reply #38 on: July 31, 2015, 08:04:47 PM »

Offline knuckleballer

  • Paul Silas
  • ******
  • Posts: 6363
  • Tommy Points: 664

I think it's pointless to enter in a 'top 10 of all time' conversation here, but it's pretty obvious you can make a legit top 10 without including Timmy.

I completely, categorically disagree, but I guess that would be a different thread.

Still, I can't help but say that for me, Timmy is behind only MJ, Russell, Kareem, Magic, and Bird.  He's DEFINITELY ahead of Kobe, and I'd place him ahead of Wilt and Shaq as well.  He's the greatest all around player of his generation.  LeBron is the only guy playing now who I think has a chance of surpassing him, but even then he has a lot of work to do.

That's because you're not on the Wilt hype train enough.

Seriously how do you finish your career as the best player ever and ever will be by any legitimate individual metric and still wind up underrated.

Man, would I love to see what Wilt and Russell could do today.  I'm of the opinion that it was pure randomness that these two guys played when they did and would dominate in any generation.  People say Bill would be undersized at center today, but as I understand it he was just over 6'9" barefoot with long arms and a world class track and field high jumper.  I think both Bill and Wilt would dominate the league today.  Just my humble opinion.

Re: Very strong statement by DA on CBS
« Reply #39 on: July 31, 2015, 08:19:42 PM »

Offline greece66

  • Tiny Archibald
  • *******
  • Posts: 7395
  • Tommy Points: 1342
  • Head Paperboy at Greenville
OK we went down that path.

Resistance is futile

1.Stockton/Magic
2.MJ/Kobe
3.Larry/Lebron
4.Malone/Barkley (you could fit Timmy here)
5.Russell/Kareem/Wilt - I really cannot decide.

If we are talking of top 10 irrespective of position, Timmy's case gets even harder:

Russell, Kareem, Wilt,  Lebron: all these four are in for sure, and so is Lebron, MJ and Kobe.

So we are left with three players. You think he is better than Magic, Larry,  Barkley, Stockton? All of them IMO make a better case, and I have said nothing of Cousy and Dr J.

Again, my point is not to say that Timmy could not make it in there - you can always say he is more valuable than Stockton or Barkley, but that a top 10 without Timmy is not outrageous.

A top ten without Russell, Wilt or MJ yes, that would be a joke. But Timmy is not in that category.

Anyway, this is the definition of a food fight since comparing players from different eras is apples and oranges. Basketball was a different sport in the 50s and players today have all kinds of support today that was unavailable back then. Not to mention that the incentives are very different (players in the 50s and 60s got little money, they even had summer jobs) which means that today the pool of talent is much bigger because you have a lot more people who find bball as a professional choice attractive.
« Last Edit: July 31, 2015, 08:54:07 PM by greece666 »

Re: Very strong statement by DA on CBS
« Reply #40 on: July 31, 2015, 08:47:51 PM »

Offline greece66

  • Tiny Archibald
  • *******
  • Posts: 7395
  • Tommy Points: 1342
  • Head Paperboy at Greenville
OKC was incredibly successful.
We clearly define success very differently.

Re: Very strong statement by DA on CBS
« Reply #41 on: July 31, 2015, 09:57:56 PM »

Offline Beat LA

  • NCE
  • Don Nelson
  • ********
  • Posts: 8338
  • Tommy Points: 896
  • Mr. Emoji
Who voted for the option 'eats Tommy's dust?'  I want their name (sarcasm)! ;D That's blasphemous for even being an option!  Get off the blog, lol ;D!

Re: Very strong statement by DA on CBS
« Reply #42 on: July 31, 2015, 10:10:04 PM »

Offline Beat LA

  • NCE
  • Don Nelson
  • ********
  • Posts: 8338
  • Tommy Points: 896
  • Mr. Emoji
OK we went down that path.

Resistance is futile

1.Stockton/Magic
2.MJ/Kobe
3.Larry/Lebron
4.Malone/Barkley (you could fit Timmy here)
5.Russell/Kareem/Wilt - I really cannot decide.

If we are talking of top 10 irrespective of position, Timmy's case gets even harder:

Russell, Kareem, Wilt,  Lebron: all these four are in for sure, and so is Lebron, MJ and Kobe.

So we are left with three players. You think he is better than Magic, Larry,  Barkley, Stockton? All of them IMO make a better case, and I have said nothing of Cousy and Dr J.

Again, my point is not to say that Timmy could not make it in there - you can always say he is more valuable than Stockton or Barkley, but that a top 10 without Timmy is not outrageous.

A top ten without Russell, Wilt or MJ yes, that would be a joke. But Timmy is not in that category.

Anyway, this is the definition of a food fight since comparing players from different eras is apples and oranges. Basketball was a different sport in the 50s and players today have all kinds of support today that was unavailable back then. Not to mention that the incentives are very different (players in the 50s and 60s got little money, they even had summer jobs) which means that today the pool of talent is much bigger because you have a lot more people who find bball as a professional choice attractive.

As I haven't read through the thread, how did we get here, and where is Oscar Robertson, Jerry West, Elgin Baylor, and Julius Erving, etc.?  I also think that Zeke was better than Stockton, and while everyone tends to just give the title of 'best point guard ever' to Magic, where does Cousy fit in here, and Tiny Archibald, etc.?  There's a reason why college basketball's best point guard is the recipient of the Bob Cousy Award, not the Magic Johnson one.

Re: Very strong statement by DA on CBS
« Reply #43 on: July 31, 2015, 10:15:31 PM »

Offline greece66

  • Tiny Archibald
  • *******
  • Posts: 7395
  • Tommy Points: 1342
  • Head Paperboy at Greenville
OK we went down that path.

Resistance is futile

1.Stockton/Magic
2.MJ/Kobe
3.Larry/Lebron
4.Malone/Barkley (you could fit Timmy here)
5.Russell/Kareem/Wilt - I really cannot decide.

If we are talking of top 10 irrespective of position, Timmy's case gets even harder:

Russell, Kareem, Wilt,  Lebron: all these four are in for sure, and so is Lebron, MJ and Kobe.

So we are left with three players. You think he is better than Magic, Larry,  Barkley, Stockton? All of them IMO make a better case, and I have said nothing of Cousy and Dr J.

Again, my point is not to say that Timmy could not make it in there - you can always say he is more valuable than Stockton or Barkley, but that a top 10 without Timmy is not outrageous.

A top ten without Russell, Wilt or MJ yes, that would be a joke. But Timmy is not in that category.

Anyway, this is the definition of a food fight since comparing players from different eras is apples and oranges. Basketball was a different sport in the 50s and players today have all kinds of support today that was unavailable back then. Not to mention that the incentives are very different (players in the 50s and 60s got little money, they even had summer jobs) which means that today the pool of talent is much bigger because you have a lot more people who find bball as a professional choice attractive.

As I haven't read through the thread, how did we get here, and where is Oscar Robertson, Jerry West, Elgin Baylor, and Julius Erving, etc.?  I also think that Zeke was better than Stockton, and while everyone tends to just give the title of 'best point guard ever' to Magic, where does Cousy fit in here, and Tiny Archibald, etc.?  There's a reason why college basketball's best point guard is the recipient of the Bob Cousy Award, not the Magic Johnson one.
Otherwise you are right, my list is very heavily skewed in favour of players from the nineties.

Re: Very strong statement by DA on CBS
« Reply #44 on: July 31, 2015, 10:17:01 PM »

Offline BballTim

  • Dave Cowens
  • ***********************
  • Posts: 23724
  • Tommy Points: 1123
OK we went down that path.

Resistance is futile

1.Stockton/Magic
2.MJ/Kobe
3.Larry/Lebron
4.Malone/Barkley (you could fit Timmy here)
5.Russell/Kareem/Wilt - I really cannot decide.

If we are talking of top 10 irrespective of position, Timmy's case gets even harder:

Russell, Kareem, Wilt,  Lebron: all these four are in for sure, and so is Lebron, MJ and Kobe.

So we are left with three players. You think he is better than Magic, Larry,  Barkley, Stockton? All of them IMO make a better case, and I have said nothing of Cousy and Dr J.

Again, my point is not to say that Timmy could not make it in there - you can always say he is more valuable than Stockton or Barkley, but that a top 10 without Timmy is not outrageous.

A top ten without Russell, Wilt or MJ yes, that would be a joke. But Timmy is not in that category.

Anyway, this is the definition of a food fight since comparing players from different eras is apples and oranges. Basketball was a different sport in the 50s and players today have all kinds of support today that was unavailable back then. Not to mention that the incentives are very different (players in the 50s and 60s got little money, they even had summer jobs) which means that today the pool of talent is much bigger because you have a lot more people who find bball as a professional choice attractive.

  There's no way Stockton's on a level with Duncan. Kobe isn't really on the level of Bird or Magic either. Maybe if you're going for longevity, not on skill level or impact though. He isn't clearly above Duncan, and you'd have a fairly uphill battle claiming Malone and (moreso) Barkley were when you factor in their lack of postseason success.