Clippers Hire Ty Lue
- Thread starter Flex Luger
- Start date
You haven't displayed a cogent enough point here to make me feel as though I shouldn't assume ignorance of this topic coming from your end
Ok...
Take away their superstars and they do not have their rings
Irrelevant anecdote... I doubt any serious basketball observer/participant would claim to be more fearful of a Phil Jackson in comparison to superstars such as Michael Jordan/Kobe Bryant or Shaquille O'Neal
Correlation =\= Causation obviously
Jordan never won without Pippen either whats your point...
Irrelevant Fluffery in the first half ... Steve Kerr also took over a team that had already won 51 games the previous year who's star players were just entering their primes ... insinuating that he came in a did some sort of wizardry from scratch is of course a misnomer as we've seen the wizard promptly post a disgusting (league worst) 15-50 record when removed from his superstars
Im claiming that without their superstars they wouldn't have their championship victories as made evident by Steve Kerr and his 15-50 record this season
Don't know what you mean precisely by "aint doing any winning" however if you're referencing champions this same caveat would also apply to the 29 losing coaches that get sent home with nothing every season ... its a rather irrelevant & obvious notion to dredge up as some sort of trump card tipping in coaches favor when only 1 team can win each year of course
An enormous amount of mental gymnastics in the passage "Wade wasn't known as a superstar like that yet" what does that even mean regarding his on the court production
Bringing up Greg Popovich in 99 essentially underscores my point even further ..in 1997 his superstar goes down with injury and he promptly goes 17-47 for the remainder of that season which leads him to getting arguably some would say the best PF the league has ever seen with the #1 pick ... now stacked with another superstar big man to add to his already existing HOFer in Robinson he rides the great Tim Duncan to his 1st of 5 championships just two season after that abysmal superstar depleted 1st year .... this was really a terrible example on your end
"Where were Shaq & Kobe / Malone & Stockon" is this word soup supposed to be a rhetorical question or something ... please elaborate
Chuck Daly coached Isaiah Thomas (who you're now insinuating wasn't a superstar out of desperation) ... leaving you with Larry Brown as literally the lone example to highlight your already fleeting point .... which of course only underscores how much of an exception that instance is to the clear historical rule I've referenced
So much babble here.
Literally NO ONE has said, "coaches are more important than superstars".
But you keep ignoring that there are superstars all over the league. Just having a superstar isn't enough to win a ring. You need good coaching.
Seriously, how ignorant do you have to be of NBA basketball to claim that Pop/Phil/Daly/Brown/Riley are just "average" coaches.
Isiah Thomas in the Pistons' title years didn't even make ANY All-NBA team or finish top-12 in MVP voting....if he's a superstar in '89/'90 then half the NBA had a superstar.Chuck Daly coached Isaiah Thomas (who you're now insinuating wasn't a superstar out of desperation) ... leaving you with Larry Brown as literally the lone example to highlight your already fleeting point .... which of course only underscores how much of an exception that instance is to the clear historical rule I've referenced
Isiah was a great player at the end of his prime, but EVERY knowledgable person on this board knows you're a fool if you think that Daly's coaching was not a major reason the Pistons won back-to-back titles. Other teams had MJ+Scottie, Magic+Worthy, Bird+McHale+Parish, Malone+Stockton, Drexler+Porter, KJ+Chambers+Hornacek, Price+Daughtery, Mullin+Richmond+Hardaway, David Robinson+Cummings, Dominique Wilkins + Moses Malone, Olajuwon, Barkley, Ewing, Reggie Miller, Bernard King.....that's SIXTEEN teams I can name with stars....and yet you want to claim the sole reason the Pistons beat them all was because they had IT averaging 19 and 8 on 44% shooting and coaching had nothing to do with it?
No one said you did ....your fictitious quotations don't advance the quality of these attempts at making a point nor do they increase your legitimacy tbh
Their aren't 30 LeBron James across the league their aren't 30 Kawhi Leonards ... It's interesting because you deliver shallow commentary with such authority as if your posturing is moving ...but trust me brutha ..it just isn't.... there isn't equal distribution of talent across the league and "good coaching" wont mask that when matched against the best so im really not sure what you're trying to push forward with this point here ...NBA basketball has probably been the most talent dependent sport of all the major leagues in this country
Far less ignorant than an individual who would create such a lousy strawman with a fake quote to boot as if everyone in this thread doesn't have the capability of going back thru this discussion to see exactly what has and hasn't been written by each partySeriously, how ignorant do you have to be of NBA basketball to claim that Pop/Phil/Daly/Brown/Riley are just "average" coaches.
So if your using all nba teams as the main metric to quantify superstars than your logic is that John Stockton and Mark Price were better basketball players than Isaiah Thomas in 1989 .... this is an attempted point that you believe "knowledgable people" who watch basketball would align withIsiah Thomas in the Pistons' title years didn't even make ANY All-NBA team or finish top-12 in MVP voting....if he's a superstar in '89/'90 then half the NBA had a superstar.
by this same logic is Rudy Gobert a better basketball player than Joel Embiid because he made the all nba team over him this year
Listing a bunch of players only displays how important it was the to have an equal or greater than amount of talent to avoid elimination obviously... additionally as we all know you won't play every team or every dynamic duo in the nba to get to the finals as most of these teams are knocked off by other talent enriched squads ..you play who's in front of you and with that said if Chuck Daly didn't have the superstar talent of Isaiah Thomas (as well as the several other pieces of all star talent he had at his disposal) he wouldn't have had those rings... you can try your best to make that historical truism controversial ...but its really that simple
You were the one who claimed that most championship coaches were just average because superstars are what matter. That's just dumb when 90% of championship coaches were clearly above-average.No one said you did ....your fictitious quotations don't advance the quality of these attempts at making a point nor do they increase your legitimacy tbh
Their aren't 30 LeBron James across the league their aren't 30 Kawhi Leonards ... It's interesting because you deliver shallow commentary with such authority as if your posturing is moving ...but trust me brutha ..it just isn't.... there isn't equal distribution of talent across the league and "good coaching" wont mask that when matched against the best so im really not sure what you're trying to push forward with this point here ...NBA basketball has probably been the most talent dependent sport of all the major leagues in this country
Far less ignorant than an individual who would create such a lousy strawman with a fake quote to boot as if everyone in this thread doesn't have the capability of going back thru this discussion to see exactly what has and hasn't been written by each party
So if your using all nba teams as the main metric to quantify superstars than your logic is that John Stockton and Mark Price were better basketball players than Isaiah Thomas in 1989 .... this is an attempted point that you believe "knowledgable people" who watch basketball would align with
by this same logic is Rudy Gobert a better basketball player than Joel Embiid because he made the all nba team over him this year
Listing a bunch of players only displays how important it was the to have an equal or greater than amount of talent to avoid elimination obviously... additionally as we all know you won't play every team or every dynamic duo in the nba to get to the finals as most of these teams are knocked off by other talent enriched squads ..you play who's in front of you and with that said if Chuck Daly didn't have the superstar talent of Isaiah Thomas (as well as the several other pieces of all star talent he had at his disposal) he wouldn't have had those rings... you can try your best to make that historical truism controversial ...but its really that simple
No one on Earth thought that Isiah Thomas was a top-5 player in 1989/90 or even a top-10 player. MJ, Magic, Bird, Hakeem, Ewing, David Robinson, Drexler, Barkley, Malone, Dominique were what the top-10 superstars looked like by 1990. IT ain't cracking that list. He's down in the next tier with Stockton, Mullin, KJ, Price and company.
So it's just dumb shyt to claim that Detroit won the ring because they had IT when many other teams had better superstars/duos/trios. Chuck Daly was a great coach with a great scheme that won back-to-back titles and changed the NBA. Your inability to see that just proves you don't have any idea what you're looking at.
NO ONE has made that "historical truism" controversial. NO ONE is arguing that superstars don't matter.Chuck Daly didn't have the superstar talent of Isaiah Thomas (as well as the several other pieces of all star talent he had at his disposal) he wouldn't have had those rings... you can try your best to make that historical truism controversial ...but its really that simple
But by your standards, half the league had superstars in 1990. So clearly you need more than a superstar to win a ring. And part of what you need is an above-average coach.
Trying to claim that Phil/Pop/Daly/Riley/Brown are just average coaches is wild shyt.
Coulda/Woulda/Shoulda .... The Reality is that they were still a sub .500 team when you claim they were at optimal strength with Vogel you can try to spin that however you like but I don't know how many reasonable basketball observers would celebrate that as some sort of coaching wizardry
You just said they were all injured as an excuse for vogels results so how did they build cohesion "playing together" while also all being hurt sounds like double-talk
And Issac was a 20 year old rookie in 17-18 yet you still brought him missing games up as if he has been some sort of major cog to that teams engine ... sounds like double-talk
at this point your attempts at excuse making is undercutting your point... you're going to need to pick an argument and stick to one ... if the main factor was lack of player cohesion wouldn't that in itself prove as another data point against coaching impact
Yikes.
Quote Me
Isaiah Thomas was a superstar...I'm not interested in debating your 1989 top 5 however
Chuck Daly wins 0 championships in 89/90 without superstar Isaiah Thomas on that team your desire to turn that into a controversial statement just proves that you don't have any idea of what you're looking at
No one could have watched Vogel's Pacers and not seen that Vogel was a good coach. He didn't do a great job with the Magic, but very few coaches would have. No one is calling what he did "wizardry", but it was a shytty situation. They wouldn't have been a playoff team under anyone.Coulda/Woulda/Shoulda .... The Reality is that they were still a sub .500 team when you claim they were at optimal strength with Vogel you can try to spin that however you like but I don't know how many reasonable basketball observers would celebrate that as some sort of coaching wizardry
Because cohesion builds over time through being on the team together. It obviously builds LESS when they are injured, but there was going to be far more cohesion in their 3rd year together in 2019, all playing 80 games and knowing each other inside and out, than there was in their 1st year together in 2017 or their 2nd, heavily injured year together in 2018. How is that not obvious?You just said they were all injured as an excuse for vogels results so how did they build cohesion "playing together" while also all being hurt sounds like double-talk
No, double-talk is someone claiming they had the same team in 2019 and 2018 and then trying to claim that 2018 Jonathan Isaac doesn't count cause he was young and injured even though he was a major piece of the team in 2019.And Issac was a 20 year old rookie in 17-18 yet you still brought him missing games up as if he has been some sort of major cog to that teams engine ... sounds like double-talk
In 2018 Isaac was out most of the year. But in the 25 games he did play, he averaged 20 minutes/game, so clearly he would have been important to the team even in his rookie year if he had been able to play. At the very least they were trying to develop their #6 draft pick and were willing to sacrifice wins for that.
In 2019 Isaac played 75 games, averaging 27 minutes/game (5th on the team) with 10 points (6th), 6 boards (3rd), 1.3 blocks (1st), and playing very good defense. He was a big part of their success that year.
So obviously having an available and more mature Isaac was a boost to the team. Having Terrance Ross go from playing 26 games to playing 81 games was a boost to the team. Having Gordon/Founier/Vucivic all healthy the whole year after missing 25 games each the previous year was a boost to the team.
5 of their top 6 guys went from being injured to being healthy, so claiming they had the same roster in 2018 as they had in 2019 was just ignorant. I've proven that.
Take away their superstars they don't have their rings ... its not that deep ... it's not about who's average who's goat etc etc ... its about simple common sense logical basketball observation based on historical realities
Quote Me
You said it and its what our entire argument has been based around.
It was even worse than I quoted, you claimed "nearly every championship coach" was just a an average coach lucky enough to have "the best player in the planet" on his team.Same can be said for nearly every championship coach .... so he's in good company
Just fall back and take your L already, apparently you don't even agree with your own claim anymore.
Flex Luger
Job Is Finished
A lot of words to finally extract some reality
Because dozens of other teams haven't needed 3 years together and a coaching change just to break .500
Incoherent Rambling ...No, double-talk is someone claiming they had the same team in 2019 and 2018 and then trying to claim that 2018 Jonathan Isaac doesn't count cause he was young and injured even though he was a major piece of the team in 2019.
you go on these long tangents about absolutely nothing brother ... you claimed that having gordon healthy and available in 2017 didn't count because he was a just a 21 year old but you then double-talk and make excuses for vogel missing an even younger player in 2018 in Issac when 2017 Gordon & Ibaka were measurably more productive players than 2018 & 2019 Issac and Vogel still lost
You've done nothing but Juelz for 5 paragraphs... the players you're mentioning were sub.500 when healthy in 2018 and lead them to 29 wins in 2017 ...all that rambling and excuse making doesn't move meSo obviously having an available and more mature Isaac was a boost to the team. Having Terrance Ross go from playing 26 games to playing 81 games was a boost to the team. Having Gordon/Founier/Vucivic all healthy the whole year after missing 25 games each the previous year was a boost to the team.
5 of their top 6 guys went from being injured to being healthy, so claiming they had the same roster in 2018 as they had in 2019 was just ignorant. I've proven that.
Nowhere in that quote do I write "every championship coach is average" which is why I asked you to quote me as it clearly highlights your inability to do such..the point I referenced and was commenting on was that nearly all championship coaches success is credited to their superstars ...that is what I've constantly written to you throughout our dialogue here ...the only thing taking an L here is your reading comprehension apparently brotherYou said it and its what our entire argument has been based around.
It was even worse than I quoted, you claimed "nearly every championship coach" was just a an average coach lucky enough to have "the best player in the planet" on his team.
Just fall back and take your L already, apparently you don't even agree with your own claim anymore.
Breh just admit that you don't understand basketball and give up.A lot of words to finally extract some reality
Because dozens of other teams haven't needed 3 years together and a coaching change just to break .500
Incoherent Rambling ...
you go on these long tangents about absolutely nothing brother ... you claimed that having gordon healthy and available in 2017 didn't count because he was a just a 21 year old but you then double-talk and make excuses for vogel missing an even younger player in 2018 in Issac when 2017 Gordon & Ibaka were measurably more productive players than 2018 & 2019 Issac and Vogel still lost
You've done nothing but Juelz for 5 paragraphs... the players you're mentioning were sub.500 when healthy in 2018 and lead them to 29 wins in 2017 ...all that rambling and excuse making doesn't move me
You got so much shyt logically wrong here but I'm sick of the back-and-forth cause you can't even tell when you've been schooled.
Literally thinks Pop/Phil/Daly/Brown/Riley are just average coaches.
And once again:
There's you saying what you claimed you didn't say.Same can be said for nearly every championship coach .... so he's in good company
I'll take your incapability to provide a coherent retort as a formal concessionBreh just admit that you don't understand basketball and give up.
You got so much shyt logically wrong here but I'm sick of the back-and-forth cause you can't even tell when you've been schooled.
reduced to ramblingLiterally thinks Pop/Phil/Daly/Brown/Riley are just average coaches.
And once again there's you proving to be incapable of showing where I wrote what you claim I didAnd once again:
There's you saying what you claimed you didn't say.