Is Greg Popovich a better coach than Phil Jackson?

[GreatestLaker]

And what did Francisco Elson do outside of San Antonio?

What did Radoslav Nesterrovic do outside of San Antonio?

Danny Green wasn't even in the league, now he is a vital piece to a contending team?

Boris Diaw was eating himself out of the league, and now he is a vital piece to a contending team?

Gary Neal was a vital piece to a contending team...and he his doing exactly what for the bucks?

Outside of Parker, Duncan, and Manu, Pop is just getting bargain bin players and building a system around them. I mean he had Cory Josesph playing key minutes in the playoffs last year up until the finals...you ever seen Cory Josesph play? Dude is a point guard who can barely dribble a basketball...and you got him on the floor in game 3 and 4 of a playoff series?

Comparing him to someone like Phil is an absolute joke...Phil coached a team that had one of the greates players of all time (Jordan)...flanked by another one of the greatest players of all time (Pippen)....flanked by one of the greatest defenders and rebounders of all time (Rodman)...flanked by one of the greatest 3 point shooters of all time (Kerr)...anybody could coach that team in their sleep...hell you wouldn't even have to do any real coaching for a team like that until what...the second round of the playoffs?

Then Phil backed doored it with coaching another all-time great guard (Kobe), paired with another all time big man (Shaq)...the he back doored that with coaching another highly skilled big man who was already used to carrying a team (Gasol), while also getting to coach another great big man (Bynum)...Let's not act like if it wasn't for the knee injuries Bynum just might be a fringe hall of fame player by now...let's not act like everyone says he is an idiot, a goofball, doesn't take the game serious, is only in it for the money...and he was still dropping 20 and 10 on cats in LA like it was nothing...

Pop is the type of coach who if you give him some pieces he can put the puzzle together...Phil is the type of coach who if you give him some pieces, you will need to get another guy to put about 90% of it together...and then you can bring in Phil to help that same guy "get over the hump"

See this is exactly the type of shyt I am talking about when it comes to Phil...

So Phil can't win if he doesn't have a supremely talented big man in Bynum?

So Phil can't win if he doesn't have an all time great power forward in Karl Malone?

So Phil can't win if he doesn't have homecourt?

So then...if you don't already have great talent on your team...exactly what is Phil doing for you?

Who was Smush Parker after he left the Lakers? Smush was out of the NBA by age 26. Under the coaching of Phil he was at least a serviceable player.

Who was Kwame Brown after he left the Lakers?

Who was Trevor Ariza after he left the Lakers?

Take a look at the 06 and 07 Laker rosters and tell me if that team had any business making the playoffs. Pop never had to coach a team that bad under the Tim Duncan era. Don't act like Luke Walton, Sasha Vujicic, Dereck Fisher, Vlad Radman and Shannon Brown weren't rotational players for the 08-10 Lakers that went to 3 consecutive finals and won 2 of them.

Your argument of Bynum is fukking retarded. Bynum had stretches where he was great yes, but it never amounted to anything in the regular season and especially in the playoffs, because he was always had issues with his knees. You're bringing up a guy that averaged 6 points and 3 rebounds in the 09 playoffs and 8 points and 7 rebounds in the 2010 playoffs. Really dude?

Don't ignore the Tim Duncan factor either. Arguably the best rim protector and post player in his prime. And he had players like Robinson, Bowen, Tony Parker and Manu Ginobili.

And you're bringing up homecourt advantage? REALLY!?!?!

Greg lost with homecourt 8 times. EIGHT. (96, 00, 01, 02, 04, 06, 09, 11 & 12) and won without it 3 times (05 vs suns, 07 vs suns & 10 vs mavs)

Phil lost with homecourt twice. (04 and 11) and won without it 9 time. NINE (twice in 93, 95, 98, 01, 02, 03 and twice in 04)

 

[GreatestLaker]

The lakers were still favored to beat boston (Who struggled greatly in the playoffs up to this point) even with all the injuries and lack of HCA.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/playoffs2008/series?series=lalbos

lol @ posting an ESPN link.

 

[Jplaya2023]

lol @ posting an ESPN link.

I'm just backing up the notion that the lakers were indeed the favorites.

 

[GreatestLaker]

Irony. Of all the atrocious arguments the "Amare suspension costing the Suns the title/allowing the Spurs to win the title" argument has got to be the worst. Did the Suns not have MVP Nash out there at home for very close game 5? Did they not have their full squad for game 6? It's hilarious how people go to the ends of the earth to discredit what these Spurs have done. Were other teams not trying in 99? Do injuries not impact the playoffs every year (including 2000 when Duncan went down or in 2011 when he clearly wasn't healthy and looked like he might be done)? Spurs always had talent but not the elite level of talent that Phil's teams have had. If in 2002 I offered you Manu, TP, Bowen for Kobe would you even think about accepting that trade before and slamming the phone down? Would you even trade prime Pip for that?

How are you going to act like losing a player that was averaging 26/10 vs the Spurs wasn't a big lost for the Suns?

The entire league was out of wack in 99. A team that was the 8th seed made it to the finals. And you're just going to ignore that?

The Lakers had 2 out of the 3 best players, but the Spurs supporting cast was always better.

 

[FTBS]

How are you going to act like losing a player that was averaging 26/10 vs the Spurs wasn't a big lost for the Suns?

The entire league was out of wack in 99. A team that was the 8th seed made it to the finals. And you're just going to ignore that?

The Lakers had 2 out of the 3 best players, but the Spurs supporting cast was always better.

It was one game breh. One game at home. One game at home with MVP Nash. One game at home with MVP Nash where they lost by 3. Or in other words a very winnable game. Did they not get eliminated with Amare and his 26/10 out there in game 6? You just not gonna answer that?

The entire league was wack for a minute. It wasn't just that season. The one star per team era was not a high point in NBA history however certain teams (Bulls and Lakers) get GOAT props while the Spurs get belittled. Can't have it both ways.

You know damn well the NBA is a top heavy league. 2 of the top 3 players >>>>>>>>>> a superior supporting cast and you know it. I notice you didn't answer the question as a matter of fact you didnt' answer any of my questions.

 

[FAH1223]

Who was Smush Parker after he left the Lakers? Smush was out of the NBA by age 26. Under the coaching of Phil he was at least a serviceable player.

Who was Kwame Brown after he left the Lakers?

Who was Trevor Ariza after he left the Lakers?

Take a look at the 06 and 07 Laker rosters and tell me if that team had any business making the playoffs. Pop never had to coach a team that bad under the Tim Duncan era. Don't act like Luke Walton, Sasha Vujicic, Dereck Fisher, Vlad Radman and Shannon Brown weren't rotational players for the 08-10 Lakers that went to 3 consecutive finals and won 2 of them.

Your argument of Bynum is fukking retarded. Bynum had stretches where he was great yes, but it never amounted to anything in the regular season and especially in the playoffs, because he was always had issues with his knees. You're bringing up a guy that averaged 6 points and 3 rebounds in the 09 playoffs and 8 points and 7 rebounds in the 2010 playoffs. Really dude?

Don't ignore the Tim Duncan factor either. Arguably the best rim protector and post player in his prime. And he had players like Robinson, Bowen, Tony Parker and Manu Ginobili.

And you're bringing up homecourt advantage? REALLY!?!?!

Greg lost with homecourt 8 times. EIGHT. (96, 00, 01, 02, 04, 06, 09, 11 & 12) and won without it 3 times (05 vs suns, 07 vs suns & 10 vs mavs)

Phil lost with homecourt twice. (04 and 11) and won without it 9 time. NINE (twice in 93, 95, 98, 01, 02, 03 and twice in 04)

Ariza having his best season of his career in DC

Been playing great ball ever since he started playing with Wall last year. Playing his best ball since, well, he played with Kobe.

It's weird he didn't play this well with CP3.

 

[GreatestLaker]

It was one game breh. One game at home. One game at home with MVP Nash. One game at home with MVP Nash where they lost by 3. Or in other words a very winnable game. Did they not get eliminated with Amare and his 26/10 out there in game 6? You just not gonna answer that?

The entire league was wack for a minute. It wasn't just that season. The one star per team era was not a high point in NBA history however certain teams (Bulls and Lakers) get GOAT props while the Spurs get belittled. Can't have it both ways.

You know damn well the NBA is a top heavy league. 2 of the top 3 players >>>>>>>>>> a superior supporting cast and you know it. I notice you didn't answer the question as a matter of fact you didnt' answer any of my questions.

With Amare they probably win game 5 then they have a guaranteed game 7 at home. Just because they lost game 6 with Amare doesn't mean they would have lost game 5 and 7 with him. Losing Amare and Diaw for that one game hurt their chances to win that series. If the Heat were to lose Bosh or Wade for even one game vs the Pacers or Spurs they probably lose last year too, Yes even with "MVP Lebron".

No 1999 was a special case. You end any season 50 games into the season and the outcome will most likely always be different. Again an 8th seed made it to the finals in 99....

 

[GreatestLaker]

Ariza having his best season of his career in DC

Been playing great ball ever since he started playing with Wall last year. Playing his best ball since, well, he played with Kobe.

It's weird he didn't play this well with CP3.

Yup, 5 years later.

 

[FTBS]

With Amare they probably win game 5 then they have a guaranteed game 7 at home. Just because they lost game 6 with Amare doesn't mean they would have lost game 5 and 7 with him. Losing Amare and Diaw for that one game hurt their chances to win that series. If the Heat were to lose Bosh or Wade for even one game vs the Pacers or Spurs they probably lose last year too, Yes even with "MVP Lebron".

No 1999 was a special case. You end any season 50 games into the season and the outcome will most likely always be different. Again an 8th seed made it to the finals in 99....

Or maybe they lose. It's not like the Spurs had never beaten PHX with Amare in the lineup for every game (TWICE). People act like Amare missed the rest of the series. If he was that important and could swing things like you say then they should have won game 6, period. Don't tell me how important this guy is and then bu...bu...but when they actually get eliminated with him on the floor. There is really no excuse for them losing game 5 if we are being honest. It was right there for them at home.

Did the Heat not beat the Pacers without Bosh for almost the entire series in 12? Bosh missed most of the series against the C's as well. You certainly couldn't tell that Bosh or Wade were out there for stretches last year against Indy. The point is, you have important players missing games or series or the entire playoffs every year...some teams can overcome it, some teams can't. It's just funny how people only wanna dwell on dudes missing time when the Spurs win or Lakers lose. You never hear shyt about Duncan missing the entire 2000 playoffs.

Knicks were only an 8th seed because they played 50 games. They would have definitely been higher had they played a full season. Point is the level of competition in the league in 99 was not drastically different from that in 98 or 00.

 

[King Poetic]

Phil Better

Dudes need stop with give pop this player here or there then this would have happen

please deal with reality

 

[threattonature]

Pop is the greatest coach I've seen. I mainly love his flexibility and his willingness to adjust to his roster. I felt Riley was better than Phil in that regard as well. I'm more soured on when the Lakers got GP and Malone and refused to tinker with the offense to fit them in.

Plenty of teams have had all-time greats but rarely stayed true contenders for this long. Plus every year you look at the Spurs roster and think it's weak and wonder why the hell they make certain pickups. Next thing you know that player looks twice as good than they did before coming to the Spurs. Pop just amazes me.

 

[JahBuhLun]

Rodman did

But not with Pop, he won more with

Edit: Pop wasn't the coach when Rodman was on the team, He traded Rodman to Chicago.

 

[Big Boss]

pop>>>>>>>phil

 

[jadillac]

Rodman did

yep, and so did Buddha Edwards

 

[Bilz]

Phillip.

He never got upset in the playoffs. Only times he lost with homecourt advantage were his last year's coaching the Lakers.

Cant go wrong with either, but XI > 4

I'm pretty sure just about every single one of his playoff losses was considered an upset. Not the 2006 and 2007 ones of course but he got bent over badly in those nonetheless.