Truer Words NEVER Spoken: Robert Horry

[Kreuk]

That was not a close out game

uhh okay. well spurs had homecourt and they won the first two games by 10 points a piece... when fish hit that shot it pretty much took all of the wind out of their sails. we stole one and then won one at home...

.04 doesnt happen - spurs take that game... then we go to LA - maybe/ probably win one, but we'd have to come back to san antonio for game 7... things could have been different had fisher not hit that shot...

and dont get me started about dallas heroics that resulted in the mavs going to the finals and losing to the heat...

IMHO the spurs wouldve beat both the pistons and the heat and pop wouldve had two more rings.

[LLcoleJ]

uhh okay. well spurs had homecourt and they won the first two games by 10 points a piece... when fish hit that shot it pretty much took all of the wind out of their sails. we stole one and then won one at home...

.04 doesnt happen - spurs take that game... then we go to LA - maybe/ probably win one, but we'd have to come back to san antonio for game 7... things could have been different had fisher not hit that shot...

and dont get me started about dallas heroics that resulted in the mavs going to the finals and losing to the heat...

IMHO the spurs wouldve beat both the pistons and the heat and pop wouldve had two more rings.

uhh okay..didnt you tell me earlier that you are not a "what if" er? And " wind out of sails" is that a coaching term that pop uses?

[Kreuk]

LOL once again. I dont use the words "what if" anywhere in my post and you bring it up. you're consistent. ill give you that. phil the only thing youre promoting is your dislike of pop for whatever reason.

i like pjax. i like pop. but i give the nod to pop. sorry.

[LLcoleJ]

LOL once again. I dont use the words "what if" anywhere in my post and you bring it up. you're consistent. ill give you that. phil the only thing youre promoting is your dislike of pop for whatever reason.

i like pjax. i like pop. but i give the nod to pop. sorry.

I never said you used the term "what if" However, you are making conclusions based on that game. Your entire point is " IF " Fisher misses that shot then everything would have been differnet. I merely said, that wasnt a close out game and the Spurs had plenty of opportunities AFTER that shot to still win the series.

Also, I have said, in just about every thread, how much I admire Pop and I think he is fantastic. You either dont read what I write , or purposely lie to make your points.

[NDaATL]

Just because Horry thinks Pop is the better coach doesn't mean he's the better coach. I would say Phil is a better offensive coach and Pop a better defensive one. Although both have coached great defensive teams.

About the "not yelling at star players" thing, I don't think that's a measure of great coaching. Some players respond better when they get yelled at, others respond better by being encouraged. Obviously Horry is the former.

Honestly I don't know which one is better but they are both great coaches.

[NO-KG-AI]

I think if Phil felt yelling would get the most out of a particular player, he would do it. Kobe and Michael were going to give it everything no matter how much he yelled, and Shaq was going to do what he wanted regardless, so more yelling from Phil could only make things worse in my eyes.

[NDaATL]

Yeah Michael did most of the yelling anyway, if you screwed up he was going to let you know about it. With a leader like that on the floor it makes your job easier.

[NDaATL]

I don't think Jackson is overrated, I think he's the 2nd best coach in the NBA next to Pop..no way Spurs win more titles with him though, especially when you consider defense was the key..

Yeah, those Bulls' teams were never any good at defense...

[HarlemHeat37]

I was comparing the Spurs teams to the Lakers team, because that was the comparison some were making, based on the playoffs earlier in the decade..

Pop's system masks average defenders like Parker, and masks horrible defenders like Finley..he's been doing this for a while now..

[Bgil]

-= original quote snipped =-



I don't see how there's more talent..

Paul is better than Duncan at this point..West is better than Parker and Ginobili..the Hornets youth in their role players is a big advantage over the Spurs..

San Antonio has actually never been THAT talented on paper..if you look at the role players, a lot of them wouldn't be special on any other team..speaks volumes on the chemistry Pop has built..

On paper, the Spurs have had their shot at more talent than anyone else in the leauge:
Stephen Jackson, Manu Ginobili, Udrih, Tony Parker, Oberto, Scola, Barbosa, Salmons, Finley, Barry, NVE, Might Mouse, Brent Barry, Bowen, Horry

RC Buford has done a far better job at acquiring talented players than Mitch has for Phil. For most of our championship run we had scrubs starting and being backed up by even bigger scrubs. Jsut think about how many players leave the spurs and blow up (Udrih, Jackson, Scola etc.)

[Bgil]

I don't see Pop taking this current Laker team nearly as far as Phil has the last few seasons. Too many fragile ego's too put up with Pop's style.

[Blame Rasho]

-= original quote snipped =-



On paper, the Spurs have had their shot at more talent than anyone else in the leauge:
Stephen Jackson, Manu Ginobili, Udrih, Tony Parker, Oberto, Scola, Barbosa, Salmons, Finley, Barry, NVE, Might Mouse, Brent Barry, Bowen, Horry

RC Buford has done a far better job at acquiring talented players than Mitch has for Phil. For most of our championship run we had scrubs starting and being backed up by even bigger scrubs. Jsut think about how many players leave the spurs and blow up (Udrih, Jackson, Scola etc.)

What a terrible post...

[HarlemHeat37]

-= original quote snipped =-



On paper, the Spurs have had their shot at more talent than anyone else in the leauge:
Stephen Jackson, Manu Ginobili, Udrih, Tony Parker, Oberto, Scola, Barbosa, Salmons, Finley, Barry, NVE, Might Mouse, Brent Barry, Bowen, Horry

RC Buford has done a far better job at acquiring talented players than Mitch has for Phil. For most of our championship run we had scrubs starting and being backed up by even bigger scrubs. Jsut think about how many players leave the spurs and blow up (Udrih, Jackson, Scola etc.)

I agree about acquiring talent, but when you look at the yearly roster of the Spurs, they don't stand out as an extremely talented team..look at the Spurs last year..the problem isn't acquiring talent, it's just that Pop's system doesn't require players with versatility and multiple talents..the role players don't rank among the most talented IMO, they look better because of the system..

Pop HAS had talent..obviously..nobody wins titles without talent..but him and Duncan won in 2003 without another all-star, and when you compare him to the other great coaches, his teams do lack talent..Duncan has been the only superstar on the team..Ginobili and Parker have never cracked the top 15 players in the NBA IMO, and maybe not even the top 20..

Jackson has had 2 top 3-5 players every year during the Lakers 3-peat and similar(although Pippen wasn't as good as top 3-5) with the Bulls..

that's all the "talent" factor means..just comparing..

I agree that Pop wouldn't have been as successful with the Lakers though..he's a hard ass, and he makes points with his players when they **** up..he'll leave you on the court during a blow out(if you played bad) as an embarrassment at times(not often, but I've seen it a fair amount of times)..he'll give other players minutes over you to anger you..he'll call a timeout and yell at you for the smallest mistake..but that's what I love about him..he goes out to war with his players..he's picked up technicals and purposely got ejected to fire up the team a million times..I wouldn't want any other coach..

[Bgil]

I agree that Pop wouldn't have been as successful with the Lakers though..he's a hard ass, and he makes points with his players when they **** up..he'll leave you on the court during a blow out(if you played bad) as an embarrassment at times(not often, but I've seen it a fair amount of times)..he'll give other players minutes over you to anger you..he'll call a timeout and yell at you for the smallest mistake..but that's what I love about him..he goes out to war with his players..he's picked up technicals and purposely got ejected to fire up the team a million times..I wouldn't want any other coach..

I love Pop. One of my favorite moments was when he subbed Oberto out of the game (about 30 seconds into the first quarter) just to yell at him about the defensive lapse he made on the first play of the game. Then immediately called another time out to inserted Oberto back in the game. Oberto missed something like 20 seconds of game time.

Pop HAS had talent..obviously..nobody wins titles without talent..but him and Duncan won in 2003 without another all-star, and when you compare him to the other great coaches, his teams do lack talent..Duncan has been the only superstar on the team..Ginobili and Parker have never cracked the top 15 players in the NBA IMO, and maybe not even the top 20..

they still had a ton of talent even if they're system did restrict players: Jackson went to ATL the following year and put up 18+, Gino was 26 and a superstar international player, Parker played great, Steve Smith, Malik Rose, D-Rob, Bowen, Willis, Kerr, Claxton...

No scrubs in their playoff rotations that's for sure. The Lakers started Madsen, Samaki Walker, George, Fisher, and all sorts of other scrubs that season.

[loveslakers126]

9 > 4

In a month it might be 10 > 4

[dingclancy]

Q: Who is the only ACTIVE NBA coach inducted in the hall of fame?
Choo on that!

[CITYOFANGELSX3]

who cares? There both great. End of argument.

[Thugmelo]

Agree completely. Which is Jackson, for that reason alone, was the absolutely ideal coach for the Kobe-Shaq Lakers.

That team would have imploded a lot earlier than it finally did had he not been there to manage, manipulate and cajole two players who, for all their immense talent, more often than not disliked, if not outright hated, each other.

Thus, Jackson's first stint in L.A. can be summed up as thus: Prior to his arrival, the Lakers were getting bombed out of the playoffs on a regular basis. He shows up, and all of a sudden everything clicks and the team starts to reel off titles. That didn't just happen by chance. Nor was it just chance that Jackson was able to prove himself to a skeptical Michael Jordan and earn his complete respect/trust.

Would Popovich have done better? Who knows? He's certainly done fantastic with the cards he's been dealt in San Antonio. But it would have taken an entirely different skill set than he's shown in terms of working with some of the most coachable cornerstones in NBA history -- a completely ego-free superstar in Tim Duncan, an All-Star willing to come off the bench without a whimper and another who was mature enough to start in the league as an 18-year-old rookie.

He hasn't had a single crisis in San Antonio to deal with -- ever. Jackson, during championship runs 2 and 3, was putting out fires on a seemingly weekly basis, and still managed to keep the ship from sinking. That alone negates the "roll-out-the-ball" theory people like to use to discredit his accomplishments.

Thing is, PJ was a huge part of these problems and controversies on his team. He fueled the fire with Kobe/Shaq by favoring Shaq over Kobe and placating to Shaq too much. He'd also make comments publicly which would alienate players.

Pop has never done such things. He doesn't alienate and pick favorites on his teams. So imo, i don't think we would've seen the many problems we saw with PJ had Pop replaced him.

This is how i see it, PJ is a terrific basketball coach but his expertise it seems is with the minds of players. He knows how to play mind games to perfection and to get his teams up. Pop seems to be better with the X and O's along with defense.

I'd take Pop if i had a choice. PJ's fetish for all offense no defense as exampled by his fetish with Brian cook, Smush parker, Vlad, Walton etc turns me off.

[fisher]

-= original quote snipped =-



On paper, the Spurs have had their shot at more talent than anyone else in the leauge:
Stephen Jackson, Manu Ginobili, Udrih, Tony Parker, Oberto, Scola, Barbosa, Salmons, Finley, Barry, NVE, Might Mouse, Brent Barry, Bowen, Horry.)

This is one of the worst arguments I have ever seen. The Lakers could have had Tony Parker (drafted w/ last pick of first round), Manu Ginobli (drafted late 2nd round), Luis Scola (drafted late 2nd round), Oberto (undrafted), Barbosa (drafted w/ last pick of first round), and Udrih (28th overall pick in his draft as well). The Lakers passed those guys up in the draft (IOW, the Lakers actually had first crack at all those players over the Spurs). The only one you could make a case for was John Salmons, but even then that was a late 1rst round pick and they only picked one spot higher than the Lakers did in his draft.

The Lakers could have also picked up guys like Brent Barry, Stephen Jackson, Bruce Bowen, and Michael Finley via free agency (none of those guys was a big name free agent when the Spurs picked them up). Nick Van Exel and Robert Horry used to be Lakers, so what exactly are you getting at about them?

The only real superstar that fell into Popovich's lap was Tim Duncan.

RC Buford has done a far better job at acquiring talented players than Mitch has for Phil. For most of our championship run we had scrubs starting and being backed up by even bigger scrubs. Jsut think about how many players leave the spurs and blow up (Udrih, Jackson, Scola etc.)

Again, let me interject some facts here: Popovich was the Spurs GM until 2002. He was the one who drafted Ginobli, Parker, Scola, Barbosa. He was the one who made the free agent pick ups (outside of Finley who everyone thought was washed up).