| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Xepa

Joined: 11 Jul 2004 Posts: 6677 Location: somewhere in the world
|
Posted: Wed May 14, 2008 7:54 am Post subject: |
|
|
| revgen wrote: |
^Ginobli, Duncan, and Parker is a pretty big deal too.
Especially when they are surrounded with way better role players than what Shaq and Kobe had.
If Phil won those 3 titles with the 1998 Laker roster, then I could see Horry's point. |
Not during their first ring after the Lakers 3-peat.
Parker averaged 15 points, 4 assists during that ring after our 3peat.
Ginobili averaged 9 pts, 4 reb, 3 assists during that first ring after our 3peat.
So no, Gino and Parker were not as big a deal as you make them out to be. So you really have to tip your hat to Pop for developing and scouting those 2 players into the stars they are today. But just remember, they weren't stars during their first ring together. Just Duncan was.
Just my .02 _________________
Team FARMAR.
alleon86, The Bynum Supremacy, Barnstable, Massacre, nicehair911, melo061, Chicano, Kwame's Cake, lizlakers31, KobeBryant583, popo, C-mac 4.35, dj vitus, M4mb4 24 |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
kop5789
Joined: 20 Apr 2008 Posts: 504
|
Posted: Wed May 14, 2008 8:38 am Post subject: |
|
|
Rings/Smings. Rings are so dependent on other variables, such as injury, level of competition and talent, that you can never tell who's better than who by simply looking at the results, instead of the methods that lead to those results. The irony is that we might not end up with the championship, despite this being arguably Phil's best coaching job ever, due to the variables above.
Now what exactly are those methods? Well, if you're talking about coaching only, then I don't think Pop would have allowed this much rope to Farmar, and I don't think he would have done anything else different from Phil, so I'd have taken Pop. Pop would also not have been afraid to use fake timeouts, whereas Phil would not have thought to use the Hack-a-Shaq in such a clever manner. In fact, the difference in philosophy regarding those two examples alone tells me who the better coach is. Pop follows the Machivelian principles, whereas Phil still thinks certain things are too "dirty" to be bothered with. If Pop were coaching us instead of the Spurs, we'd be up 3-1, or maybe even sweep, already.
In addition, a lot of Phil's ideas have been aided by management(in other words, if Pop were here, no reasons why he couldn't learn those things from our management too), the most notable being Bynum's development or just the benefits of training in general. Phil gets to get some of his advice from Jerry Buss, Jim Buss and Mitch. Pop gets his advice from who, RC Buford? He doesn't strike me as a thinker, saved for lucking out with Ginobilli and Parker. Phil gets to debate and discuss ideas with some pretty smart people, whereas Pop has to make observations and comes up with ideas on his own basically. Pop with this team's management would have simply been an invicible combination. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
nosebleedbum
Joined: 16 Jul 2003 Posts: 1748
|
Posted: Wed May 14, 2008 9:21 am Post subject: |
|
|
Pop is a better Coach. He gets more out of his players than Jacks. The Kobe /Air offense has done wonders for the Zen. Horry 's one of those few people who can make that comparison. I'd go with his statement 100%. I like Pop's method of everyone is a whipping boy, not just one or two. Can you imagine Luke with Pop. Man, all the yelling that would go on. Phil never says anything to Luke.
Also, Pop has his hands in the FO more than Jackson. Pop and his staff knows their talents (Ginobli, Parker, Scola, Barbosa, Udrih, Salmons) all late 1st /2nd rounders Good for the rest of the league he could only keep 2 of them. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
halekulani

Joined: 14 Jul 2005 Posts: 5837
|
Posted: Wed May 14, 2008 1:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Ducasse1 wrote: |
| halekulani wrote: |
| revgen wrote: |
^Ginobli, Duncan, and Parker is a pretty big deal too.
|
since when did talent become additive?
having two top 50 players (jordan/pippen) or a top 50 and 60 player (shaq/kobe) of all time isn't the same as having a top 60 player and a few all-stars. |
Duncan is more than a top 60 player. He's the best power forward of all-time. The guy is top 10. |
even if that were true, adding tony parker or gino next to him doesn't compare to the duo of shaq/kobe or jordan/pippen
jordan alone is a GOAT and shaq is the most dominant player the league has ever seen since jordan, period. everyone would take kobe and pippen over gino and parker any day of the week. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Satan

Joined: 02 Jul 2005 Posts: 18678 Location: Fist in the air in the land of hypocricy.
|
Posted: Wed May 14, 2008 2:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Pop's top dogs have different personalities than Phil's top dogs. The best coaches tailor their approach to their players. Maybe Timmy, Gino and Tony need yelling at. _________________
Following the rights movements you clamped on with your iron fists, drugs became conveniently available for all the kids, Following the rights movements you clamped on with your iron fists, drugs became conveniently available for all the kids - System of a Down, Prison Song
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|