Better Coach Pop or Riley?

[Yung D-Will]

http://a.espncdn.com/photo/2008/0521/nba_g_spurs_580.jpg
Gregg Popovich
Career Record (regular season): 576-276 (.676)
Career Record (postseason): 92-51 (.643)
Teams: San Antonio Spurs (1996-current)
No Of. Seasons: 11 seasons
Postseason Appearances: 10
NBA Championships: 4 (1999, 2003, 2005, 2007)



http://msn.foxsports.com/id/9955456
Pat Riley
Career Record (regular season): 1182-618 (.657)
Career Record (postseason): 171-111 (.606)
Teams: Los Angeles Lakers (1981-1990), New York Knicks (1991-1995), Miami Heat (1995-2003, 2005-2007; 61 games in '05-'06, 60 games in '06-'07)
No. Of Seasons: 23 seasons
Postseason Appearances: 21
NBA Championships: 5 (Lakers: 1982, 1985, 1987, 1988; Heat: 2006)

[Yung D-Will]

:confusedshrug:

[PaPaK]

too easy, Pop.

[Kobe 4 The Win]

Pop is a great coach but Riley was able to win a title with different teams many years apart while playing very different syles of basketball. Riley is more impressive to me. Both great coaches.

[Hotshoot]

Popa easily just watch 2005 Pistons vs Spurs finals where he out coached Larry Brown.

[gxL]

pat riley is way better..

[Yung D-Will]

Two say Pop
Two say Riley

[Lebron23]

Pat Riley

[NY-Knicks]

Pop

[Rocker09]

Pop....he has one of the most consistent and effective systems in the NBA....

[KOLBCTEW]

Riles..

[DaniloGallinari]

Pop

[joyner82]

Pop, he's didn't have Magic/Kareem/Worthy/Wade/Shaq. He had 1 great player for his prime and another towards the end of his career. Who knows what Ginobili/Parker are w/o him.

[highwhey]

pop

[plowking]

Pop, he's didn't have Magic/Kareem/Worthy/Wade/Shaq. He had 1 great player for his prime and another towards the end of his career. Who knows what Ginobili/Parker are w/o him.

Maybe they chose Riley with good reason?

Because he can handle all that.

[spursdynasty420]

gotta take pop. one of the best in nba history

[inclinerator]

pat o riley

[SinJackal]

Pop.

I have big respect for Riley, but imo his credentials are inflated due to coaching the Magic/Kareem Lakers team. He started out his career coaching them. . .seriously, come on.

Riley won nothing with the Knicks, and won nothing with the Heat either until they put together a superteam with Shaq, Payton, Wade, Walker, and Mourning, among others.

Pop has posted more high quality seasons together in a row than Riley has, and only posted a single "bad season" once in his life. . .his first season when he took over as coach and DRob injured himself.

Riley is also known as a guy who quits when the situation appears to get bleak, and obviously now is rumored to jump in now that it looks good again. I like Riley, but that is seriously embarrassing.

Also, it's widely the belief of many people that rookies who get drafted and start with the Spurs almost all end up very good players. Hell, look how many coaches coach the league now that came from the Spurs system. At least three, four if you count Popovich himself.

Pop's winning % is also better. He also (I think), has the record for most .600 or better seasons in a row as head coach of a team.

Riley's really good, but Pop's better to me.

[PowerGlove]

You notice how people are bringing up who Riley coached but when it comes to Phil Jackson none of that matters? Another ISH double standard.

Just say pop because you despise the whole miami heat organization. Be honest now.

[Rocker09]

You notice how people are bringing up who Riley coached but when it comes to Phil Jackson none of that matters? Another ISH double standard.

Just say pop because you despise the whole miami heat organization. Be honest now.

Phil has 11 rings......Phil also showed that he can win rings despite having egotistic and problematic players(shaq, kobe, Jordan, Rodman)...

If Riley reaches at least 8 rings, maybe I'll change my mind...For now, pop...

[SinJackal]

You notice how people are bringing up who Riley coached but when it comes to Phil Jackson none of that matters? Another ISH double standard.

Just say pop because you despise the whole miami heat organization. Be honest now.

I would have said Pop last year, 2 years ago, 3 years ago, 4 years ago, 5 years ago. . .what happened this year doesn't matter.

Don't generalize people because you want to bandwagon for the Heat now.

[T-bomb 25]

Pop easilly he won with less talent and 1 superstar,he and Duncan made Parker and Ginobli superstars,to me i've never seen that done before.Riley is a great great coach dont get me wrong,but it showed when he had a tad less than those Laker teams he could'nt get it done and those Knicks teams and the Mourning & Tim Hardaway Heat were more talented than the Spurs teams that won it,he had Wade and Shaq when he won a again,not hard to do,the Spurs Pop,and Duncan are moving up my ATG list almost everyday,they are everything thats great about sports.

[PowerGlove]

I would have said Pop last year, 2 years ago, 3 years ago, 4 years ago, 5 years ago. . .what happened this year doesn't matter.

Don't generalize people because you want to bandwagon for the Heat now.
Because I want to bandwagon for the heat?:roll: If I wanted to, what is stopping me? Seriously, in what scenario would that be a problem? :oldlol:

Stupid.

So defensive...did I quote you? No.

How ironic is it that you want me to stop generalizing and then you make a dumbass assumption. Says a lot about you.

Also, if you would have said Pop five years ago, you would have been laughed at.

[DaniloGallinari]

Anyone choosing Riley must be slow in the head. That is all.

[icemanfan]

1 PJax
2 Red
3 Pop
4 Pat

IMO

[Fatal9]

Riley.

[Yung D-Will]

1 PJax
2 Red
3 Pop
4 Pat

IMO
Chuck Daly saids hi

[icemanfan]

Chuck Daly saids hi
you would put him above Pat? I though about putting Larry Brown on there.Guy is a great coach but has trouble getting over the hump. I honestly think Byron Scott is under rated but he has not gotten over the hump yet.

[Yung D-Will]

I don't know about the order but if you were making a top 10 you'd have to include guys like

Sloan
Brown
Daly
Wilkins

Just not sure where they would fall

[Papaya Petee]

Riley

[icemanfan]

I don't know about the order but if you were making a top 10 you'd have to include guys like

Sloan
Brown
Daly
Wilkins

Just not sure where they would fall
Sloan is one of the all time best. He has just had some bad luck getting over the finish line.

[chopchop20]

Riley easily. Pop's teams never repeated.

Riley has coached in twice as many Finals

Riley took the Knicks to the Finals

Riley took the Heat to the Finals and won

Riley ended the Celtics curse over the Lakers with Showtime

[Yung D-Will]

Riley easily. Pop's teams never repeated.

Riley has coached in twice as many Finals

Riley took the Knicks to the Finals

Riley took the Heat to the Finals and won

Riley ended the Celtics curse over the Lakers with Showtime

Can someone explain this obsession with teams repeating?

[Fatal9]

Riley is the only coach who shut down MJ over and over again. Daly was good but his Pistons didn't stop MJ to the extent Riley's Knicks and Heat teams did (in both regular season and playoffs). MJ shot probably ~42% against his teams in the playoffs, and had some horrific shooting regular seasons against them too. He won most of his rings in the toughest era teams wise and it wasn't exactly a rosy situation when he took over (though Lakers did play in a weak ass, run and gun conference).

[chopchop20]

Can someone explain this obsession with teams repeating?

Just the rarity of it happening speaks volumes about the difficulty of accomplishing a repeat - it symbolizes dominance somewhat.

And ultimately when you accomplish it, you never have that stigma of a "one hit wonder" a la Pistons 2004

[BFRESH44]

Is this a serious question?

Riley is a legend. Pop is just a very good coach.

[Yung D-Will]

Is this a serious question?

Riley is a legend. Pop is just a very good coach.


Yes this is a serious question that's why we got a serious amount of responses
that disagree with you

[chopchop20]

Is this a serious question?

Riley is a legend. Pop is just a very good coach.
+1 :rockon:

[Kobe 4 The Win]

Riley's repeat is huge. At that time it hadn't been done since Russell's Celtics. He might have gotten a 3-Peat had Magic not pulled a hammy and missed Finals games in 89. LA had a lot of injuries in that 89 final.

[OneMoreSucka]

Does it matter who's better? Why is this even being discussed? Riley isn't even coaching this year...

[Yung D-Will]

Does it matter who's better? Why is this even being discussed? Riley isn't even coaching this year...
Didn't say he was.

They both have great coaching records an accomplishments so I was just wondering.

[magnax1]

Pop by quite a long way. Pop and Adelman are by far the best coaches in the NBA, including Phil Jackson.

[step_back]

pop imo is a better coach but I like and would rather play for riley. Pop is scary!:mad:

[Deadpool]

Popovich is a better coach but Riley is better at managing a team.

[Yung D-Will]

pop imo is a better coach but I like and would rather play for riley. Pop is scary!:mad:

I think Riley's practices might be a bit more scary :oldlol:

[Kurosawa0]

I'll go with Riley for now. I want to see if Pop does anything after Duncan retires.

[magnax1]

Karl > Adelman


/End
I laughed. Did you watch the 2008 Laker vs Rocket, or 02 King vs Laker series at all? Adelman out coaches every coach in the league during the games.

[spursdynasty420]

pops by a mile

[ZenMaster]

As great as Riley has been winning with different teams and different playing philosophy's I have to go with Pop because he has essentially changed how basketball is played, especially on defense.

[Rendezvous32]

Pop, but Riley coached flashier teams and flashier players like Kareem, Shaq, Wade, Magic, etc.

[HiphopRelated]

Pop, but Riley coached flashier teams and flashier players like Kareem, Shaq, Wade, Magic, etc.
guess the 90s passed you by

[Samvt]

http://i68.photobucket.com/albums/i2/ksp113/LookALikes/pat-riley.jpg

http://media.miamiherald.com/smedia/2010/05/03/19/7105550.embedded.prod_affiliate.56.JPG











































































































































http://thesportshernia.typepad.com/blog/images/2008/06/26/pat_riley_oj_mayo.png

[Yung D-Will]

I laughed. Did you watch the 2008 Laker vs Rocket, or 02 King vs Laker series at all? Adelman out coaches every coach in the league during the games.

Supersonics/Nuggets


/Win

[Yung D-Will]

http://a.espncdn.com/photo/2008/0521/nba_g_spurs_580.jpg
Gregg Popovich
Career Record (regular season): 576-276 (.676)
Career Record (postseason): 92-51 (.643)
Teams: San Antonio Spurs (1996-current)
No Of. Seasons: 11 seasons
Postseason Appearances: 10
NBA Championships: 4 (1999, 2003, 2005, 2007)



http://msn.foxsports.com/id/9955456
Pat Riley
Career Record (regular season): 1182-618 (.657)
Career Record (postseason): 171-111 (.606)
Teams: Los Angeles Lakers (1981-1990), New York Knicks (1991-1995), Miami Heat (1995-2003, 2005-2007; 61 games in '05-'06, 60 games in '06-'07)
No. Of Seasons: 23 seasons
Postseason Appearances: 21
NBA Championships: 5 (Lakers: 1982, 1985, 1987, 1988; Heat: 2006)

[chopchop20]

Riley got'em all... DISCOUNTED. Gangster, Pimp, Godfather, the DON!

Riley changed the game in 80's both with coaching and dressing in Armani suits

[Kurosawa0]

By the way, has anyone received a better PR boost in 2010 than Pat Riley?

[SinJackal]

Popovich. He consistently has won with the same team despite draft pick limitations, rather than jump from team to team when those teams were obviously going to begin to do well like Riley.

He also has a better overall record, and has won titles with less stacked teams. Not to take anything away from Riley though, he's easily a top 5 coach of all time.

[magnax1]

Supersonics/Nuggets


/Win
2001 Bucks and trying to trade Gary Payton for Mookie Blaylock
/automatic loss
Karl isn't that great of a coach. One common thread for all his teams is idiotic plays in the last few minutes of big games.

[Noble6-AC45]

phil jackson easily GOAT coach and he coached GOAT players



but staying on topic pop

[spursdynasty420]

As great as Riley has been winning with different teams and different playing philosophy's I have to go with Pop because he has essentially changed how basketball is played, especially on defense.


truth

[Sarcastic]

Pat Riley, and it's not even close. He has had success in different cities with different stars over a long period of time.

Poppovich has only won with Tim Duncan and that is it. When he goes to a new team and leads them to playoff success, then maybe it will be closer.

[lukekarts]

I say Riley, although it is marginal.

Pop has obviously had great success with one team, the only question mark for me is the influence of the players in those titles - Popovich hasn't proven himself elsewhere.

Riley on the other hand, hasn't had the sustained level of success, but he's moved around, and won with several teams. That shows he can adapt to different systems and different players and still get results.

So yeah, basically Riley because he's proven he can win with different players.

[chopchop20]

Popovich.

Not even close. Pat Riley is nowhere near the caliber of coach as Popovich or Phil Jackson.

If we're going to talk championships, Pop has only 1 less than Riley while only coaching half as long. Give Pop another 10 years of coaching and I guarantee he'll blow Riley's number out of the water.

Riley's whole thing is sitting back until he's got a championship caliber team and then jumping in for the glory. How hard was it to coach Magic/Kareem/Worthy or Wade/Shaq/Zo?

Pop has put in his work since Day 1 and has actually BUILT a contender. His system and methods work. He's made the Spurs into a powerhouse team.

Bottom line, Riley is mostly hype while Popovich is mostly substance.

What has Pop won with out Duncan?

Riley invented Showtime in the 80's. Totally flipped his style in the 90's and was still successful. Pop has not shown that kind of versatility or ability to adapt.

As for the ring comparisons, look at the teams/players that Riley has beaten in the Finals compared to Pop (New Jersey Nets, Detroit Pistons, Cleveland Cavaliers)

Riley, all day -- everyday -- twice on the weekends. Nuff Said!

[Batz]

As great as Riley has been winning with different teams and different playing philosophy's I have to go with Pop because he has essentially changed how basketball is played, especially on defense.
And Riley didn't? Really? He changed offense and defense. The showtime Lakers were one of the best offensive teams ever, the knicks were one of the best defensive teams ever. His coaching impact was by far bigger than Pops.

Give me The Don please.

[KoRn]

I say Riley, although it is marginal.

Pop has obviously had great success with one team, the only question mark for me is the influence of the players in those titles - Popovich hasn't proven himself elsewhere.

Riley on the other hand, hasn't had the sustained level of success, but he's moved around, and won with several teams. That shows he can adapt to different systems and different players and still get results.

So yeah, basically Riley because he's proven he can win with different players.

this. jury is still out on pop. once duncan retires, we'll see if pop can duplicate his system or adapt with different players.

[Nobler]

Riley for sure, body of work is more impressive than Pops

[ZenMaster]

I say Riley, although it is marginal.

Pop has obviously had great success with one team, the only question mark for me is the influence of the players in those titles - Popovich hasn't proven himself elsewhere.

Riley on the other hand, hasn't had the sustained level of success, but he's moved around, and won with several teams. That shows he can adapt to different systems and different players and still get results.

So yeah, basically Riley because he's proven he can win with different players.

They're coaches in the NBA, it's the top. 1 team gets a title each year and that's it, there's no point in using the "he has won different places" with coaches or players as the competition is the same.

Pop has changed how the game is played from the NBA to high school. Along with his championships that's a whole lot, and more than what Riley has done.

[chopchop20]

They're coaches in the NBA, it's the top. 1 team gets a title each year and that's it, there's no point in using the "he has won different places" with coaches or players as the competition is the same.

Pop has changed how the game is played from the NBA to high school. Along with his championships that's a whole lot, and more than what Riley has done.

:facepalm

Do some research on Showtime and it's influence on turning around the a struggling NBA league.

[Yung D-Will]

20 Pop , 21 pat

20 votes Gregg Popovich
21 votes Pat Riley

[SinJackal]

What has Pop won with out Duncan?

Riley invented Showtime in the 80's. Totally flipped his style in the 90's and was still successful. Pop has not shown that kind of versatility or ability to adapt.

As for the ring comparisons, look at the teams/players that Riley has beaten in the Finals compared to Pop (New Jersey Nets, Detroit Pistons, Cleveland Cavaliers)

Riley, all day -- everyday -- twice on the weekends. Nuff Said!

You realize you can't bash a coach for having a good player when your purpose is to prop up the accomplishments of a coach who has had far better teams, including multiple players at the same time who were better than Duncan, right?

Jabaar and Magic each > Duncan. Ewing was an extremely high quality player (who Riley failed with), and yet only wins again when he has Shaq, Wade, and a large cast of former all star greats.

What has Riley done besides fail with every team that was not obviously the best in the NBA the years he won it?

Don't forget we're talking about the guy who quit because he failed so hard with the Heat, then forced his way back when they got Shaq and all those other former all stars with Wade. If Riley does that again with this current Heat team, how can you respect that? A guy that only jumps into situations that are obviously high chance winners?

Yet you bash Popovich for? Having one star player on his team? Please. Don't act like he's overrated. He isn't.


Final point: Riley has never won a title with less than the obvious best team in the NBA. Popovich has. . .and arguably all 4 times the Spurs weren't the best team in the NBA when they won their titles.

[ZenMaster]

:facepalm

Do some research on Showtime and it's influence on turning around the a struggling NBA league.

He might have brought ratings, but you don't see teams today playing like the showtime Lakers. I guarantee you that high school and college coaches have changed how they coach ultimately because of how Pop has coached in the NBA.

Riley perfected old methods while Pop made new ones. Both thing are very admirable, but Pop's count for more.

[chopchop20]

You realize you can't bash a coach for having a good player when your purpose is to prop up the accomplishments of a coach who has had far better teams, including multiple players at the same time who were better than Duncan, right?

Jabaar and Magic each > Duncan. Ewing was an extremely high quality player (who Riley failed with), and yet only wins again when he has Shaq, Wade, and a large cast of former all star greats.

What has Riley done besides fail with every team that was not obviously the best in the NBA the years he won it?

Don't forget we're talking about the guy who quit because he failed so hard with the Heat, then forced his way back when they got Shaq and all those other former all stars with Wade. If Riley does that again with this current Heat team, how can you respect that? A guy that only jumps into situations that are obviously high chance winners?

Yet you bash Popovich for? Having one star player on his team? Please. Don't act like he's overrated. He isn't.


Final point: Riley has never won a title with less than the obvious best team in the NBA. Popovich has. . .and arguably all 4 times the Spurs weren't the best team in the NBA when they won their titles.

It works both ways if you're gonna say Riley only won coaching great players. Yeah he did, but the beat great competition unlike the Spurs.

As great as Pop is (allegedly) he's never had a team that repeated. Spurs have never been really dominate. Showtime Lakers were the best team in the 80's. During the Spurs winning run, the Lakers have been the better team.

[chopchop20]

Final point: Riley has never won a title with less than the obvious best team in the NBA. Popovich has. . .and arguably all 4 times the Spurs weren't the best team in the NBA when they won their titles.

Riley made them the best. And he beat Dr. J, Bird, Isiah, and a lot of other legendary basketball players.

[lacasner]

Pop by a slim margin.

[Yung D-Will]

21 votes Gregg Popovich
21 votes Pat Riley

[SinJackal]

It works both ways if you're gonna say Riley only won coaching great players. Yeah he did, but the beat great competition unlike the Spurs.

As great as Pop is (allegedly) he's never had a team that repeated. Spurs have never been really dominate. Showtime Lakers were the best team in the 80's. During the Spurs winning run, the Lakers have been the better team.

I know it works both ways, that's the point I was making. You're the one who was saying it's only a negative for Popovich.

How did the Spurs not beat great competition? The first two times they won a title, they had to go through the Shaq/Kobe Lakers who won every title in that 5 year span that the Spurs didnt' win. Their third title, they defeated the team that those Lakers couldn't the year before. And the fourth year they had quite obviously one of their worst teams, and yet MacGuyvered their way to a title while being power ranked around 6-7 that season.

Every time they won a title, they beat at least 1-2 teams who were considered to be better than them. The 80's Lakers defeated what, 2-3 teams total who were considered to be possibly maybe a challenge to them? But not "better" at all.

Magic, Jabaar, and Worthy. . .dude, come on. That team was more stacked than the Heat are now. Magic and Jabaar are both top 5-7 GOAT players. Duncan is like 8-9. Riley had BOTH those dudes at once. . .Pop just had the one dude, and beat better teams.



Riley made them the best. And he beat Dr. J, Bird, Isiah, and a lot of other legendary basketball players.

And Pop's team defeated stacked Shaq/Kobe teams multiple times. Got through Dirk (and Kidd) and the Mavs multiple times. Nash/Amar'e multiple times. Williams/Boozer. Paul. Kevin Garnett's teams. The last decent Knicks team. The Nets during their title push. LeBron James' Cavs. Carmello's Nuggets. The well-balanced Pistons team that won the title the year before against the Lakers.

They've literally beaten every good team and just about every good star player during their championship era. Why diminish it?

[KOLBCTEW]

Got to go with Riles.

[chopchop20]

Magic, Jabaar, and Worthy. . .dude, come on. That team was more stacked than the Heat are now. Magic and Jabaar are both top 5-7 GOAT players. Duncan is like 8-9. Riley had BOTH those dudes at once. . .Pop just had the one dude, and beat better teams.

Winning isn't just a bout great talent (look at the 60's Lakers -- has there ever been a better Big 3 than Wilt, West, and Baylor?). It takes just as much work if not more to manage great talent and their egos (Shaq & Kobe lost with Del Harris)

Also, Kareem was past his prime at the height of Showtime. Worthy was good, not great, not even a Pippen -- Magic made him better. AND they beat a more stacked Celtics team twice.


And Pop's team defeated stacked Shaq/Kobe teams multiple times. Got through Dirk (and Kidd) and the Mavs multiple times. Nash/Amar'e multiple times. Williams/Boozer. Paul. Kevin Garnett's teams. The last decent Knicks team. The Nets during their title push. LeBron James' Cavs. Carmello's Nuggets. The well-balanced Pistons team that won the title the year before against the Lakers.

You can only beat the competition in front of you, no knock on the Spurs.
None of the Spurs teams or the teams that they beat were as good as the Lakers WORST team. The Showtime Lakers would destroy them.

Yeah, the Spurs beat the Lakers a couple of times but the Lakers have the edge in the playoffs. And just consider for a moment that the Lakers have been to the NBA Finals 7 times, 3 straight times on TWO occasions during the Spurs run. Again, Pop has done a good job but this team has never established dominance IMO.

Also, Pat Riley took the Lakers to 4 straight Finals. He has a repeat on his resume. That speaks louder than what Pop has done to me.

[SinJackal]

Winning isn't just a bout great talent (look at the 60's Lakers -- has there ever been a better Big 3 than Wilt, West, and Baylor?). It takes just as much work if not more to manage great talent and their egos (Shaq & Kobe lost with Del Harris)

Also, Kareem was past his prime at the height of Showtime. Worthy was good, not great, not even a Pippen -- Magic made him better. AND they beat a more stacked Celtics team twice.



You can only beat the competition in front of you, no knock on the Spurs.
None of the Spurs teams or the teams that they beat were as good as the Lakers WORST team. The Showtime Lakers would destroy them.

Yeah, the Spurs beat the Lakers a couple of times but the Lakers have the edge in the playoffs. And just consider for a moment that the Lakers have been to the NBA Finals 7 times, 3 straight times on TWO occasions during the Spurs run. Again, Pop has done a good job but this team has never established dominance IMO.

Also, Pat Riley took the Lakers to 4 straight Finals. He has a repeat on his resume. That speaks louder than what Pop has done to me.

The 60's Lakers had to compete against the best dynasty in the history of the NBA, so it's not too surprising that they didn;'t succeed despite talent. They weren't the best team n the NBA at the time, and hence isn't a good analogy to the Showtime Lakers who clearly were the best team at least 3/4ths of every season of their existence.

Kareem was past his prime during the late stages of the Showtime Lakers though, I agree. Except their run of finals appearances in a row were when he was still a 23/8-10 guy.

I'm not sure the point you were making at the end, because all you're doing is proving that the Spurs had to defeat the obvious best team in the NBA twice to get to titles, which makes them more impressive.

And you're just showing that Riley has had better teams. Popovich has had to deal with a lot of team injuries over the years which has gimped playoff hopes on multiple occaisions. And it goes to show that the competition isn't as crappy as you think it is. How great was the western conference back in that time? It sucked balls compared to how it's been now, and hence why they got to the finals so consistently every year. Meanwhile, the only competition you cited for those Lakers were teams they did meet in the finals, which logically makes their getting to the finals a few times in a row not as impressive, while citing how the Lakers of this decade being so good just proves that the Spurs had far more competition along the way. ^_^

Don't mean to throw your own points back at you like that, but. . all true :P

[Yung D-Will]

21 votes Gregg Popovich
22 votes Pat Riley

[HiphopRelated]

Riley, surprised it's close

Riley's won more games than Pop has coached

and coached all types of styles

[chopchop20]

I'm not sure the point you were making at the end, because all you're doing is proving that the Spurs had to defeat the obvious best team in the NBA twice to get to titles, which makes them more impressive.



Well it's like this to me. You have one guy who had team that's considered legendary to this day, faced the best competition in the modern era of basketball, and were without a doubt, the best team during their peak run.

And then you have the other guy that accomplished none of the above :cheers:

[BallinSinceBirf]

Riley invented Showtime in the 80's. Totally flipped his style in the 90's and was still successful. Pop has not shown that kind of versatility or ability to adapt.

As for the ring comparisons, look at the teams/players that Riley has beaten in the Finals compared to Pop (New Jersey Nets, Detroit Pistons, Cleveland Cavaliers)
You're right. Pop should take his system which is working and totally flip it for the sake of some dumb ghetto tard to respect him.

And I agree about the championship comparisons too. Riles had to face some powerhouses like the Dallas Mavericks while Popovich and the Spurs hand-picked the weakest opponents they could. Oh, that's right, they DIDN'T have any say about what team comes out of the East. Kinda retarded holding it against Pop for beating the team that was put in front of him. It's also kinda retarded forgetting that Pop had to fight his way through a stacked Western Conference to get to the Finals all those years.

Looks like ALL your arguments are retarded. What can I expect from a crackbaby though?

[chopchop20]

And you're just showing that Riley has had better teams. Popovich has had to deal with a lot of team injuries over the years which has gimped playoff hopes on multiple occaisions. And it goes to show that the competition isn't as crappy as you think it is. How great was the western conference back in that time? It sucked balls compared to how it's been now, and hence why they got to the finals so consistently every year. Meanwhile, the only competition you cited for those Lakers were teams they did meet in the finals, which logically makes their getting to the finals a few times in a row not as impressive, while citing how the Lakers of this decade being so good just proves that the Spurs had far more competition along the way. ^_^

Riley's best Knicks team would beat Pop's best Spurs team.

[Yung D-Will]

Riley's best Knicks team would beat Pop's best Spurs team.

So I'm assuming Tim Duncan would be injured for this?

[Yung D-Will]

21 votes Gregg Popovich
23 votes Pat Riley

[chopchop20]

You're right. Pop should take his system which is working and totally flip it for the sake of some dumb ghetto tard to respect him.

And I agree about the championship comparisons too. Riles had to face some powerhouses like the Dallas Mavericks while Popovich and the Spurs hand-picked the weakest opponents they could. Oh, that's right, they DIDN'T have any say about what team comes out of the East. Kinda retarded holding it against Pop for beating the team that was put in front of him. It's also kinda retarded forgetting that Pop had to fight his way through a stacked Western Conference to get to the Finals all those years.

Looks like ALL your arguments are retarded. What can I expect from a crackbaby though?

You were the idiot who brought up how great the Lakers' talent was while neglecting to acknowledge the competition that they beat to win those championships.

[chopchop20]

So I'm assuming Tim Duncan would be injured for this?

This is based on what I saw watching those Knicks battle against MJ, who happens to be a little better than Duncan.

[HiphopRelated]

You're right. Pop should take his system which is working and totally flip it for the sake of some dumb ghetto tard to respect him.

And I agree about the championship comparisons too. Riles had to face some powerhouses like the Dallas Mavericks while Popovich and the Spurs hand-picked the weakest opponents they could. Oh, that's right, they DIDN'T have any say about what team comes out of the East. Kinda retarded holding it against Pop for beating the team that was put in front of him. It's also kinda retarded forgetting that Pop had to fight his way through a stacked Western Conference to get to the Finals all those years.

Looks like ALL your arguments are retarded. What can I expect from a crackbaby though?
you're the one sounding like the crack baby

Riley ran off 4 titles in the 80s.

Pop essentially ran off his titles in the 00s

Riley was able to adjust his style in the 90s to match his available talent and maintain a high competitive level with overachieving Knicks and Heat teams including a return to the Finals(Knicks).

Came in when the Heat were about to revolt on SVG and steered that team to a championship.

Riley's legacy is so far beyond Popovich, I'm not sure this isn't an insult.

[Ikill]

how can you honestly tell who the better coach is? You got to experience first how these coaches coach

[Rasheed1]

Pat Riley and it isnt very close at all to me...

Riley coached the 90s knicks
Riley coached the 80s Lakers
Riley coached the 06 Heat


Riley had Pat Ewing on the knicks who could match up with somebody like Duncan....

Riley's latest achievement probably is his most impressive... being able to pull off what he has this past summer makes me just shake my head at how good he has been over the years..


Pop's been great, but I wanna see what happens when TD retires...

[Yung D-Will]

21 votes Gregg Popovich
24 votes Pat Riley

[PurpleChuck]

Riley for sure.

Pop always had Duncan and gang...

[chopchop20]

Pat Riley and it isnt very close at all to me...

Riley coached the 90s knicks
Riley coached the 80s Lakers
Riley coached the 06 Heat


Riley had Pat Ewing on the knicks who could match up with somebody like Duncan....

Riley's latest achievement probably is his most impressive... being able to pull off what he has this past summer makes me just shake my head at how good he has been over the years..


Pop's been great, but I wanna see what happens when TD retires...

:applause:

Riley is a BOSS: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xZr2qOXQJ4w (2:45 :oldlol: )

[Yung D-Will]

Riley for sure.

Pop always had Duncan and gang...

I'm confused at how you guys are talking about Duncan whiles Riley won most of his championships with two people better then Duncan



21 votes Gregg Popovich
25 votes Pat Riley

[SinJackal]

Riley's best Knicks team would beat Pop's best Spurs team.

How many titles did Riley win with the Knicks again?

Zero. So I doubt it.

[Rasheed1]

:applause:

Riley is a BOSS: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xZr2qOXQJ4w (2:45 :oldlol: )


:lol You gotta respect that man.... like they said... "other teams wanted just one of them..... He got all 3"

[chopchop20]

How many titles did Riley win with the Knicks again?

Zero. So I doubt it.

Ummmmm.... not sure if you were born yet. But did you ever hear of a guy named MJ?

His full name is Michael Jordan, he wore #23 -- if you need to Google him or check out some Youtube videos.

[Rasheed1]

I'm confused at how you guys are talking about Duncan whiles Riley won most of his championships with two people better then Duncan



It isnt the quality of the player, it is the ability to win in different situations over 3 eras of basketball...

Time passes some coaches by... Some coaches can win some ways and with certain players...

Pat Riley has proven he can do many different things in different environments in different eras and put together great teams

[HiphopRelated]

I'm confused at how you guys are talking about Duncan whiles Riley won most of his championships with two people better then Duncan



21 votes Gregg Popovich
25 votes Pat Riley
point is Riley has over 2 decades and 3 eras of coaching on his side and he maintained competitive teams everywhere with all different types of squads.

Let's see what Pop can do with another core.

[chopchop20]

:lol You gotta respect that man.... like they said... "other teams wanted just one of them..... He got all 3"

Yep. Did you hear about the story of LeBron wearing #6?

November 11, 2009 -- Cavs in town to play the Heat. Riley invites LeBron to dinner with him and MJ. Riley "convinces" LeBron that it would be best not to wear #23 anymore :oldlol:

http://i.cdn.turner.com/si/multimedia/photo_gallery/0911/did.you.see.that.1113/images/michael-jordan.93020291.jpg

[SinJackal]

Ummmmm.... not sure if you were born yet. But did you ever hear of a guy named MJ?

His full name is Michael Jordan, he wore #23 -- if you need to Google him or check out some Youtube videos.

And? Have you ever heard of guys named Shaq and Kobe? Spurs lost to them too. . .except they beat them twice for two titles. Popovich doesn't have to use the Kobe/Shaq excuse, because he beat them. Riley didn't. Riley can't win unless he inherits a top 1-2 team in the league. History has proven this.

[HiphopRelated]

And? Have you ever heard of guys named Shaq and Kobe? Spurs lost to them too. . .except they beat them twice for two titles. Popovich doesn't have to use the Kobe/Shaq excuse, because he beat them. Riley didn't. Riley can't win unless he inherits a top 1-2 team in the league. History has proven this.
The Heat won 52 games in '06

[Rasheed1]

And? Have you ever heard of guys named Shaq and Kobe? Spurs lost to them too. . .except they beat them twice for two titles. Popovich doesn't have to use the Kobe/Shaq excuse, because he beat them. Riley didn't. Riley can't win unless he inherits a top 1-2 team in the league. History has proven this.


all great coaches have great teams.... :confusedshrug: its just the nature of the NBA... you need great players to win as many games as the best coaches do

[john_d]

Pop is a coach, while Riley is more of a team manager.

So i think pop is better considering the question is who is the better coach.

[SinJackal]

The Heat won 52 games in '06

Shaq only played in 59 games that year, and the Heat were 10-13 without Shaq, 42-17 with.

Meaning most of the games they lost were without Shaq, and with Shaq, won far more. They were a much better team than their record indicated, which was obvious during the playoffs.

[HiphopRelated]

nobody is holding sh1t against Pop

The Spurs' current window has closed, let's see what Pop can achieve over the next decade or 2 before you try to lump him with a guy who has won more games than Pop has coached

[chopchop20]

And? Have you ever heard of guys named Shaq and Kobe? Spurs lost to them too. . .except they beat them twice for two titles. Popovich doesn't have to use the Kobe/Shaq excuse, because he beat them. Riley didn't. Riley can't win unless he inherits a top 1-2 team in the league. History has proven this.

The Heats were a top team? :roll:

Are you saying this because that Heat team beat the Dallas Mavericks -- the team that eliminated the Spurs? :oldlol:

Man.... Pop lost to Dirk and this year got swept by Phoenix. You'd never see that on Riley's resume :cheers:

[chopchop20]

You also totally ignore the fact that Riley's championships with the Lakers were with a stacked team in a top-heavy league. He had NO competition in the West and only had to face a contender in the Finals.

And ever one of those contenders would beat the Spurs.



Riley's championship run with the Heat was one of the most piss-poor competitively in the league. .

More piss-poor than 1999, the strike year? Are you serious... the Spurs still have an asterisk beside that trophy


He came out of a horrible Eastern Conference and beat a sorry Dallas team. Wow, color me impressed

The same Dallas team that BEAT your Pop and his Spurs:confusedshrug:

[SinJackal]

The Heats were a top team? :roll:

Are you saying this because that Heat team beat the Dallas Mavericks -- the team that eliminated the Spurs? :oldlol:

Man.... Pop lost to Dirk and this year got swept by Phoenix. You'd never see that on Riley's resume :cheers:

No, I wasn't even thinking about who the Heat beat to win the title. I was simply talking about how powerful they were in the playoffs, since I actually watched them.

Pop has played Dirk's team a handful of times in the playoffs, of course he's lost to him at some point. As for the Suns, Spurs were 6-0 in the last 6 meetings against them in the playoffs up until last year, when the Spurs had obviously their worst team since Robinson was out nearly all season with injury over a decade ago. Doesn't mean anything

And FYI, Riley got swept by the Bulls not very long ago right after winning his title with the Heat. Or did you convieniently forget that?

Multiple playoff sweeps are on Riley's resume, in fact, Riley has been swept out of the playoffs THREE times, and all in the FIRST round. Not second. Even worse, he was swept out of the playoffs the very year after he won his last title. After which, he tanks a 15 win season to try and get D Rose.

[Yung D-Will]

The Heats were a top team? :roll:

Are you saying this because that Heat team beat the Dallas Mavericks -- the team that eliminated the Spurs? :oldlol:

Man.... Pop lost to Dirk and this year got swept by Phoenix. You'd never see that on Riley's resume :cheers:
Lol are you implying that Riley has never gotten swept?

[blackification]

i'd take pop over riley theres been too many games where the suns and spurs have been in a close one and i'd look at the clock and say it doesnt matter how much we are up by if this is close at the end pop will not let us win. If I was starting a new team and I could pick out of all the coaches in the nba right now im taking pop. I don't care how many PJ has won with jordan shaq and kobe.

[rmt]

More piss-poor than 1999, the strike year? Are you serious... the Spurs still have an asterisk beside that trophy9
Yet the 1999 Spurs swept Shaq and Kobe and went 15-2 in the playoffs.


The same Dallas team that BEAT your Pop and his Spurs:confusedshrug:
Dallas choked against the Heat. The Spurs were one stupid Manu foul away from advancing to face the Suns. I'd bet a lot of money on the 2006 Spurs beating the Suns and Heat to win the championship. They would have had a 3-peat.

A prime Bowen against Wade and Duncan/Nazr/Rasho against Shaq/Mourning. Parker, Ginobili, Horry, Barry, Finley, Beno vs Posey, Haslem, Payton, Walker, Williams, Kapono.

Getting back to the OP question - one thing Pop has done that Riley hasn't - is develop a player (Tony Parker) from a raw 19 year old teenager to a 3 time All-Star and Finals MVP. He has done a great job with Parker - pushing him to get better.

I don't have an opinion on who's better except that it's very close but the discussion is very similar to the Duncan/Shaq discussion where Pop (like Duncan) has had less to work with than Riley (like Shaq).

[DetroitPiston]

This is an interesting debate.

What matters most as a coach is being able to change styles and remain competitive. And while people argue that Coach A had these players, you still have to coach them. Just because you have the best doesn't guarantee anything. You still have to coach them.

For me, it's Riley but by a hair. (Or slicked hair, take your pick) Riley was able to convert from an all attacking style basketball team in the Lakers to a defensive minded team in the Knicks and remained competitive.


Can someone explain this obsession with teams repeating?

When you win a championship last season, teams set out to beat you and try and take you down. Doing it again just shows that you've still got it. Plus, it's a rare thing.

[rmt]

What matters most as a coach is being able to change styles and remain competitive.
I respectfully disagree with this. The Spurs have had the highest winning percentage in professional sports for much of the past decade and therefore, have been competitive with the system that Popovich has in place. Likewise, Jerry Sloan has a successful system in place whether the players are Malone/Stockton or Boozer/Williams.

I don't think these coaches should be penalized because they haven't switched teams but applauded because their systems work regardless of players. Obviously, we don't know how well Popovich's system would work without Duncan but we know in the case of Sloan that his system has worked regardless of the players.

[KoRn]

I respectfully disagree with this. The Spurs have had the highest winning percentage in professional sports for much of the past decade and therefore, have been competitive with the system that Popovich has in place. Likewise, Jerry Sloan has a successful system in place whether the players are Malone/Stockton or Boozer/Williams.

I don't think these coaches should be penalized because they haven't switched teams but applauded because their systems work regardless of players. Obviously, we don't know how well Popovich's system would work without Duncan but we know in the case of Sloan that his system has worked regardless of the players.

good point. we're going to have to wait til duncan retires and see what results pop can deliver with different players.

[chopchop20]

I don't think these coaches should be penalized because they haven't switched teams but applauded because their systems work regardless of players. Obviously, we don't know how well Popovich's system would work without Duncan but we know in the case of Sloan that his system has worked regardless of the players.

Pop is not being penalized for not doing it. But Riley's ability to DO IT is a testament to his ability as a coach. Not many coaches have DONE IT to that degree of success.

[LA_Showtime]

Popovich.

I think Riley's a great coach, but I hold what he did to Van Gundy against him. You know what, I never thought of this, but maybe that's why James liked Miami so much. Riley taught James power, and James used that power and basically told Cleveland go **** themselves and die.

[rmt]

good point. we're going to have to wait til duncan retires and see what results pop can deliver with different players.
Unfortunately, Pop has said that he's following Duncan through the door when he retires. Their contracts run the same length of time.

[chopchop20]

Can someone explain this obsession with teams repeating?

All the really good/great teams have done it over the last 25 years... EXCEPT the Spurs

Repeating shows that you're indisputably the best. Pop has never reached that level with the Spurs, even with his 4 rings

[chopchop20]

Popovich.

I think Riley's a great coach, but I hold what he did to Van Gundy against him. You know what, I never thought of this, but maybe that's why James liked Miami so much. Riley taught James power, and James used that power and basically told Cleveland go **** themselves and die.


I think a few people here may be holding the personal feelings about Riley against him.... which is beside the point, but it's your right to do so

Riley is no different than a lot of ruthless competitors, just like Mike. MJ has a better public perception

[rmt]

All the really good/great teams have done it over the last 25 years... EXCEPT the Spurs

Repeating shows that you're indisputably the best. Pop has never reached that level with the Spurs, even with his 4 rings

So are you saying that Larry Bird's Celtics were not a "good/great team" since they also never repeated?

[Yung D-Will]

26 votes Gregg Popovich
26 votes Pat Riley

[HiphopRelated]

Popovich.

I think Riley's a great coach, but I hold what he did to Van Gundy against him. You know what, I never thought of this, but maybe that's why James liked Miami so much. Riley taught James power, and James used that power and basically told Cleveland go **** themselves and die.
so Riley should have stood by while the team revolted on Van Gundy?

Shaq didn't like him, Zo didn't like him. That was enough for Riley to get involved.

It's ridiculous. If Stan wasn't the "Master of Panic", he would have still been coaching the Heat.

[HiphopRelated]

Unfortunately, Pop has said that he's following Duncan through the door when he retires. Their contracts run the same length of time.
well then in no way is he in the same breath as Riley if he retires with Duncan. not even close.

Riley had better teams in the 80s? Riley FACED better teams in the 80s

[Yung D-Will]

well then in no way is he in the same breath as Riley if he retires with Duncan. not even close.

Riley had better teams in the 80s? Riley FACED better teams in the 80s
Same breath as Riley? People mention Pop in the same breath as Phil.

They're all some of the greatest coaches of all time so I don't understand what you mean by not even close.

[HiphopRelated]

You coach ONE core that happened to include the widely proclaimed Goat PF with only 1 real rival(Lakers) and you've "proven" you're with Riley and Phil? BS, you're just on the road.

How the hell is that different from Riley retiring in 91? Coaching isn't playing where you have a little over a decade to prove yourself, you have to prove yourself across eras.

[rmt]

You coach ONE core that happened to include the widely proclaimed Goat PF with only 1 real rival(Lakers) and you've "proven" you're with Riley and Phil? BS, you're just on the road.

How the hell is that different from Riley retiring in 91? Coaching isn't playing where you have a little over a decade to prove yourself, you have to prove yourself across eras.

The facts are that SAS has won 4 rings, and only the Lakers, (non-Bird, Russell) Celtics and Bulls have won 4 or more. Either Popovich, Duncan or his team mates will be downplayed but some combination of these won those 4 rings with the 2 constants being Duncan and Popovich.

[Sarcastic]

I don't think anyone is saying Poppovich is a bad coach, but the fact remains that he has not lead anyone other than Duncan.

[ZenMaster]

I don't think anyone is saying Poppovich is a bad coach, but the fact remains that he has not lead anyone other than Duncan.

He's still a better basketball coach.

[CeltsGarlic]

Pop

[Sarcastic]

He's still a better basketball coach.

In what sense? Riley led a high powered fast breaking offense with the Lakers, and a shutdown defense with the Knicks. Poppovich has not shown to be as diverse as that.

[chopchop20]

The facts are that SAS has won 4 rings, and only the Lakers, (non-Bird, Russell) Celtics and Bulls have won 4 or more. Either Popovich, Duncan or his team mates will be downplayed but some combination of these won those 4 rings with the 2 constants being Duncan and Popovich.

But they haven't been the best team in their era like the Showtime Lakers were.
I'm sure the Spurs will be more appreciated as the time goes by though.

[Yung D-Will]

27 votes Gregg Popovich
26 votes Pat Riley

[Papaya Petee]

Rileyyyyy

[Yung D-Will]

27 votes Gregg Popovich
26 votes Pat Riley

Seems like it's pretty even :lol

[Papaya Petee]

Lol I must have voted 3 times now

[dbugz]

Pop for me.

[Yung D-Will]

Lol I must have voted 3 times now
I thought so. I just don't know the difference between you and PurpleChuck.

You guys have been in and out this thread

[ZenMaster]

In what sense? Riley led a high powered fast breaking offense with the Lakers, and a shutdown defense with the Knicks. Poppovich has not shown to be as diverse as that.

The game has changed because of how Pop has coached his teams. That's why he's been pretty dominant the last decade, other teams have had to catch up.

[heyhey]

Until Popovich wins with someone other than tim duncan he's a tim duncan product to me.

Pat riley has shown he can win with multiple superstars.


All time coach rankings:
Phil Jackson
Pat Riley


Popovich.

[nbacardDOTnet]

Pop.


and I could remember happening about Juwan Howard and Pat Riley .
(not a big deal tho.)

In 1995, Pat Riley wanted to get Juwan Howard as crazy huge contract.

/The Bullets offered Howard an $89 million dollar contract, and the Miami Heat outbid them with a 7-year deal estimated to be worth $98–101 million dollar. However, the Heat miscalculated their available salary under the salary cap by excluding performance bonuses for Tim Hardaway and P. J. Brown and failing to account for the impact of renegotiating Alonzo Mourning's contract before coming to terms with Howard.[116] The league rejected the contract on July 31 because the $9 million for the 1996–97 season violated the cap./

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Juwan_Howard


That offer (by Riley) was really crazy.

For example, KG 's contract was like this

/Garnett agreed on a six-year contract extension that was worth an unparalleled $126 million/


At least, Pop hasn't done like that.
(But he let Scola to Rockets tho. :lol )


and finally, Pat Riley could get OLD Juwan Howard. :lol

[ZenMaster]

[QUOTE=nbacardDOTnet]Pop.


and I could remember happening about Juwan Howard and Pat Riley .
(not a big deal tho.)

In 1995, Pat Riley wanted to get Juwan Howard as crazy huge contract.

/The Bullets offered Howard an $89 million dollar contract, and [B]the Miami Heat outbid them with a 7-year deal estimated to be worth $98

[nbacardDOTnet]

Even though you said "no big deal" these things are front office stuff, it has nothing at all to do with coaching basketball.

As I heard, Pat Riley really wanted Juwan Howard.
(like Joe Dumars really wanted Darko)

[HiphopRelated]

The game has changed because of how Pop has coached his teams. That's why he's been pretty dominant the last decade, other teams have had to catch up.
and Riley's Showtime and 90's thug ball didn't change the league?

that's ridiculous

those Lakers will be remembered more than the Spurs


If Riley retired in 1991 he's a better coach than Popovich

[ZenMaster]

and Riley's Showtime and 90's thug ball didn't change the league?

that's ridiculous

those Lakers will be remembered more than the Spurs


If Riley retired in 1991 he's a better coach than Popovich

But what Riley did was do what his teams where fitted for. Pop has made all other teams have to change how they play because of how his teams played.

Not a lot of teams, not in the NBA, college or high school coach the way they do because of the showtime Lakers or the thug Knicks, but they do because of Pop.

I'm not talking about ratings or how popular the teams are or what players they had, I'm talking about pure basketball strategy, Pop has basically perfected defensive team strategy.

[chopchop20]

But what Riley did was do what his teams where fitted for. Pop has made all other teams have to change how they play because of how his teams played.

Not a lot of teams, not in the NBA, college or high school coach the way they do because of the showtime Lakers or the thug Knicks, but they do because of Pop.

I'm not talking about ratings or how popular the teams are or what players they had, I'm talking about pure basketball strategy, Pop has basically perfected defensive team strategy.

Where are you getting this information about Pop changing the game, etc?

I don't see how Pop has perfected defensive strategy either. He's had good defensive teams, but none of the Spurs teams were as good as the 2004 Pistons or the 2008 Celtics

[HiphopRelated]

you're gonna have to show some examples of this, because quite frankly I'm not buying what you're selling.

[chopchop20]

and Riley's Showtime and 90's thug ball didn't change the league?

that's ridiculous

those Lakers will be remembered more than the Spurs


If Riley retired in 1991 he's a better coach than Popovich

Without a doubt, the Lakers vs Celtics revitalized a struggling league. They used to show the NBA Finals on tape delay until those 2 teams generated fan interest across the nation

[rmt]

none of the Spurs teams were as good as the 2004 Pistons

I seem to recall the 2005 Spurs defeating that same 2004 Pistons + McDyess in the NBA Finals.

[Andrei89]

Pat Riley

the way he coached 3 different teams with different player and alwayws got a good result is just epic

his last move is unforgetable

[Andrei89]

:lol
Yep. Did you hear about the story of LeBron wearing #6?

November 11, 2009 -- Cavs in town to play the Heat. Riley invites LeBron to dinner with him and MJ. Riley "convinces" LeBron that it would be best not to wear #23 anymore :oldlol:

http://i.cdn.turner.com/si/multimedia/photo_gallery/0911/did.you.see.that.1113/images/michael-jordan.93020291.jpg


omg i shat brix


didn't even see Jordan in there till after like 10 sec or so

[ZenMaster]

Where are you getting this information about Pop changing the game, etc?

I don't see how Pop has perfected defensive strategy either. He's had good defensive teams, but none of the Spurs teams were as good as the 2004 Pistons or the 2008 Celtics

What Pop did was make a strategy that maximizes TS% for his team, and minimizes it for the opponent.

Getting as many free throws, layups and corner 3's as possible is the objective for his offense. While the opposite goes for defense.

Pop was the first guy to make defensive schemes that would minimize the amount of corner 3's for his opponents and maximize the number of contested mid range pull up jumpers, he saw this as the key because of how players have trouble shooting off the dribble. A lot of teams have spent the last decade trying to catch up.

Pops teams are consistently one of the teams that allows the fewest number of 3pointers attempted against along with the lowest opponent free throw rate.

Example: in 2007 the Spurs opponents shot the 2nd lowest 3point% along with the lowest opponent 3point rate (3pointers/FGA's).

Shots attempted against them from <10FT :2nd 10-15FT: 3rd 16-23FT: 20th

Opponent FT rate: 2nd

What you can tell from this is that the defense would funnel everything away from the 3 point line towards the mid-range area as much as possible without giving up shooting fouls.

Entire basketball strategies for high school and college have been developed with the same ideas being the main purpose.

[chopchop20]

:lol


omg i shat brix


didn't even see Jordan in there till after like 10 sec or so

Jordan and Riley have an interesting friendship. Guess it makes sense considering that they are both ruthless competitors

[chopchop20]

What Pop did was make a strategy that maximizes TS% for his team, and minimizes it for the opponent.

Getting as many free throws, layups and corner 3's as possible is the objective for his offense. While the opposite goes for defense.

Pop was the first guy to make defensive schemes that would minimize the amount of corner 3's for his opponents and maximize the number of contested mid range pull up jumpers, he saw this as the key because of how players have trouble shooting off the dribble. A lot of teams have spent the last decade trying to catch up.

Pops teams are consistently one of the teams that allows the fewest number of 3pointers attempted against along with the lowest opponent free throw rate.

Example: in 2007 the Spurs opponents shot the 2nd lowest 3point% along with the lowest opponent 3point rate (3pointers/FGA's).

Shots attempted against them from <10FT :2nd 10-15FT: 3rd 16-23FT: 20th

Opponent FT rate: 2nd

What you can tell from this is that the defense would funnel everything away from the 3 point line towards the mid-range area as much as possible without giving up shooting fouls.

Entire basketball strategies for high school and college have been developed with the same ideas being the main purpose.

Fundamental basketball defense :confusedshrug:

You might be right about it's influence in high schools

[spursdynasty420]

I seem to recall the 2005 Spurs defeating that same 2004 Pistons + McDyess in the NBA Finals.

not only did we beat the pistons in 2005 that had a better team then 2004 POP OUT COACHED LARRY BROWN

[ZenMaster]

Fundamental basketball defense :confusedshrug:

You might be right about it's influence in high schools

Back in the day it was considered efficient to shoot a lot of mid range jumpers as big part of the offense. Pop exposed this and made his defensive schemes to fit this so the opponents mid range game was their main weapon vs the Spurs, that's why he was ahead of the curve for so long.

People here like to mention the showtime Lakers in terms of how they affected the game. But I can tell you that the 85 Lakers shot 1/6 of the 3 pointers that the 09-10 Lakers did.

Again going back to 07, The Spurs had the lowest opponent 3pt rate along with the 2nd lowest opponent 3pt%.

2nd in opponent 3pt% was Cleveland who where 7th in opponent 3pt rate, Cleveland was coached by Mike Brown, former assistant to Pop.

These things are not coincidental.

General logic would be that the team that allowed the fewest 3 pointers should be low in opponent 3pt% because one would assume that most of those 3pointers would be open shots, but because of Pop's defensive schemes his team was able to go complete opposite of that logic, and it's somewhat the same with Cleveland and Mike Brown.

[Sarcastic]

Again, not doubting that Pop is a good coach. I just want to see him do it with someone other than Duncan.

Joe Torre is a championship level manager with the NY Yankees, but he hasn't been quite as successful with other teams.

[ZenMaster]

Again, not doubting that Pop is a good coach. I just want to see him do it with someone other than Duncan.

Joe Torre is a championship level manager with the NY Yankees, but he hasn't been quite as successful with other teams.

This is not directed towards you, but the nature of the fan is always to take argument to the next step.

You say you want to see him win with someone other than Duncan. If he'd win with someone else you'd say you want to see him win with someone who's not a topX player or topX players(the argument that always come up about Jackson), like people use it a knock on coaches to have good players. A coaches job is to have good players, the best you can get and/or develop, and to win with them.

It's OK that he's only won with Duncan(which is when he started coaching the Spurs), they've faced great competition this decade, especially Shaq and Kobe have been great as well.

[DetroitPiston]

I don't think these coaches should be penalized because they haven't switched teams but applauded because their systems work regardless of players. Obviously, we don't know how well Popovich's system would work without Duncan but we know in the case of Sloan that his system has worked regardless of the players.

It's about flexibility. In any sport it's considered important to have a plan B in case plan A gets found out. Riley used a completely different system in comparison to the Lakers for the Knicks, I doubt the Knicks would've done as well as they did if they played like Showtime. If you rely on just one system it can backfire on you and can be a if you don't have an alternative system.

I have a lot of respect for both, but as I said in my first post on this thread, Riley edges it.

[ZenMaster]

Fundamental basketball defense :confusedshrug:

You might be right about it's influence in high schools

And it's also offensively, maximizing the 3point shot, lay ups and FT's and minimizing mid-range jumpers. This is why you see this new wave of players that are so good at taking it to the basket but lacks mid-range consistency.

The 3 main points for the DDM offense which has had a lot of success on the college level, lay ups, FT's and 3pointers.

[rmt]

Back in the day it was considered efficient to shoot a lot of mid range jumpers as big part of the offense. Pop exposed this and made his defensive schemes to fit this so the opponents mid range game was their main weapon vs the Spurs, that's why he was ahead of the curve for so long.


Very thoughtful point. I think that's why Dallas has given the Spurs so much trouble over the years. Pop's game plan was to force contested, long 2 pointers, and DAL was loaded with great mid-range shooters especially Nowitzki.

[chopchop20]

Back in the day it was considered efficient to shoot a lot of mid range jumpers as big part of the offense. Pop exposed this and made his defensive schemes to fit this so the opponents mid range game was their main weapon vs the Spurs, that's why he was ahead of the curve for so long.

People here like to mention the showtime Lakers in terms of how they affected the game. But I can tell you that the 85 Lakers shot 1/6 of the 3 pointers that the 09-10 Lakers did.

Again going back to 07, The Spurs had the lowest opponent 3pt rate along with the 2nd lowest opponent 3pt%.

2nd in opponent 3pt% was Cleveland who where 7th in opponent 3pt rate, Cleveland was coached by Mike Brown, former assistant to Pop.

These things are not coincidental.

General logic would be that the team that allowed the fewest 3 pointers should be low in opponent 3pt% because one would assume that most of those 3pointers would be open shots, but because of Pop's defensive schemes his team was able to go complete opposite of that logic, and it's somewhat the same with Cleveland and Mike Brown.

Again, that's more practical for high school and college -- where 3 point shooting accounts for a higher percentage of scoring.

Teams that play that style in the NBA don't win titles (Phoenix, Golden State, Orlando). In defending the 3 point shot, I don't see anything special Pop is doing that other coaches are not.

If you want to play winning defense in the NBA, your 1st priority is to stop dribble penetration - not 3 point shooting.

Go re-watch this years playoffs and look at how Phoenix swept San Antonio.

[HiphopRelated]

Again, that's more practical for high school and college -- where 3 point shooting accounts for a higher percentage of scoring.

Teams that play that style in the NBA don't win titles (Phoenix, Golden State, Orlando). In defending the 3 point shot, I don't see anything special Pop is doing that other coaches are not.

If you want to play winning defense in the NBA, your 1st priority is to stop dribble penetration - not 3 point shooting.

Go re-watch this years playoffs and look at how Phoenix swept San Antonio.
lol

[ZenMaster]

Again, that's more practical for high school and college -- where 3 point shooting accounts for a higher percentage of scoring.

Teams that play that style in the NBA don't win titles (Phoenix, Golden State, Orlando). In defending the 3 point shot, I don't see anything special Pop is doing that other coaches are not.

If you want to play winning defense in the NBA, your 1st priority is to stop dribble penetration - not 3 point shooting.

Go re-watch this years playoffs and look at how Phoenix swept San Antonio.

What does what you put in bold have to do with your answer?

This decade Pops teams are the ones with the fewest amount of 3 pointers attempted against them.

Pop found away not to give up FT's, layups and 3 pointers(especially corner 3pointers).

Like you say you don't see anything different between pop and other teams NOW, try and go back to the early/mid 00's and you'll see domination.

07 Spurs defense: Lowest opp 3pt rate, 2nd lowest opp 3pt attempted, 2nd lowest opp free throw rate, opp FG% 4th. Amazing numbers.

07 Spurs 3pt shooting: 3pt rate: 6th, 3pt%: 4th --- The facts doesn't agree with you.

2 teams stand above everybody else the last 10 years, the Lakers and the Spurs.

[ZenMaster]

Go re-watch this years playoffs and look at how Phoenix swept San Antonio.

In the NBA dribble penetration equals to lay ups, FT's and open 3pointers wouldn't you say?

Also funny to try and prove your point you mention a series in which Phoenix shot 89 3 pointers and made 41 for 45%

vs the Spurs

64 attempted and 23 made for 36%

thats 123 points vs 69, a differential of 54 points, the Spurs lost the 4 games by 37 combined.

[SinJackal]

What Pop did was make a strategy that maximizes TS% for his team, and minimizes it for the opponent.

Getting as many free throws, layups and corner 3's as possible is the objective for his offense. While the opposite goes for defense.

Pop was the first guy to make defensive schemes that would minimize the amount of corner 3's for his opponents and maximize the number of contested mid range pull up jumpers, he saw this as the key because of how players have trouble shooting off the dribble. A lot of teams have spent the last decade trying to catch up.

Pops teams are consistently one of the teams that allows the fewest number of 3pointers attempted against along with the lowest opponent free throw rate.

Example: in 2007 the Spurs opponents shot the 2nd lowest 3point% along with the lowest opponent 3point rate (3pointers/FGA's).

Shots attempted against them from <10FT :2nd 10-15FT: 3rd 16-23FT: 20th

Opponent FT rate: 2nd

What you can tell from this is that the defense would funnel everything away from the 3 point line towards the mid-range area as much as possible without giving up shooting fouls.

Entire basketball strategies for high school and college have been developed with the same ideas being the main purpose.

For a Phil Jackson fan, you're making a lot of great posts about Popovich's greatness (not just this one I'm quoting either, lots of other ones). You know a lot about why he's successful, color me impressed.

And I agree too. Pop and Jackson are imo the top two coaches ever. Minimum they are is "2 of the top 3 ever". Riley deserves respect for being successful, but people are underrating Pop way too much here.

One big reason I like Pop over Riley is because their player management is a lot different. Pop won't drive players into the ground for wins, Riley does, shortening their careers. Pop tries to MacGuyver rest in for players as much as possible.

Another reason I like Pop is because he seems to get a lot out of players that nobody expected to be any good (Parker and Hill for example). He has a long history of getting quality player out of people who used to be considered scrubs. Now, former Spurs players are considered nice pickups on the FA market even though they were considered scrubs beforehand.



Again, that's more practical for high school and college -- where 3 point shooting accounts for a higher percentage of scoring.

Teams that play that style in the NBA don't win titles (Phoenix, Golden State, Orlando). In defending the 3 point shot, I don't see anything special Pop is doing that other coaches are not.

If you want to play winning defense in the NBA, your 1st priority is to stop dribble penetration - not 3 point shooting.

Go re-watch this years playoffs and look at how Phoenix swept San Antonio.

Bad point, seeing as how Phoenix was 0-6 in their last 6 meetings prior to that, Spurs usually winning in 5-6 games maximum. So they lost 1 time in 7 meetings, giving them a .871% series win% against that team since Popovich was a coach/assistant coach for the Spurs. The Suns have a 142% series win% against the Spurs. The fact that it was a sweep is irrelevant, they had bench players red hot from three (Dragic and Frye kept jacking up contested threes and they kept going in. They and Barbosa were like 10/12 combined from three in game 3, along with J Rich's 5/7. A 15/19 total, which is just under 80% from three. And Dragic was 10/11 total until he missed his last 2 shots). A game which completely changed the complextion of the series.

Red hot shooting happens, and has happened vs the Spurs (by the Suns) before, but as you can see, was only not overcome in 1 of 7 series. I will take 6 chances in 7 to win a series any day.

[HiphopRelated]

Another reason I like Pop is because he seems to get a lot out of players that nobody expected to be any good (Parker and Hill for example). He has a long history of getting quality player out of people who used to be considered scrubs. Now, former Spurs players are considered nice pickups on the FA market even though they were considered scrubs beforehand.

--------------------

Riley has a longer history of this..

[ZenMaster]

For a Phil Jackson fan, you're making a lot of great posts about Popovich's greatness (not just this one I'm quoting either, lots of other ones). You know a lot about why he's successful, color me impressed.

And I agree too. Pop and Jackson are imo the top two coaches ever. Minimum they are is "2 of the top 3 ever". Riley deserves respect for being successful, but people are underrating Pop way too much here.

One big reason I like Pop over Riley is because their player management is a lot different. Pop won't drive players into the ground for wins, Riley does, shortening their careers. Pop tries to MacGuyver rest in for players as much as possible.

Another reason I like Pop is because he seems to get a lot out of players that nobody expected to be any good (Parker and Hill for example). He has a long history of getting quality player out of people who used to be considered scrubs. Now, former Spurs players are considered nice pickups on the FA market even though they were considered scrubs beforehand.




Bad point, seeing as how Phoenix was 0-6 in their last 6 meetings prior to that, Spurs usually winning in 5-6 games maximum. So they lost 1 time in 7 meetings, giving them a .871% series win% against that team since Popovich was a coach/assistant coach for the Spurs. The Suns have a 142% series win% against the Spurs. The fact that it was a sweep is irrelevant, they had bench players red hot from three (Dragic and Frye kept jacking up contested threes and they kept going in. They and Barbosa were like 10/12 combined from three in game 3, along with J Rich's 5/7. A 15/19 total, which is just under 80% from three. And Dragic was 10/11 total until he missed his last 2 shots). A game which completely changed the complextion of the series.

Red hot shooting happens, and has happened vs the Spurs (by the Suns) before, but as you can see, was only not overcome in 1 of 7 series. I will take 6 chances in 7 to win a series any day.

Well I'm a fan of all great coaches and Pop is special. I love Jackson for the way he coaches the mental aspect of the game to his players. His players are always calm, focused and collected. PJ does a lot of different things towards that with his players, yoga, meditation and a whole bunch of other stuff like these things:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yBE6BnHJLfo
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k6YGDBnihcQ
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n7HXXR3LsgU
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=snMPSqOjtO4&feature=related

He also coaches defense very well and understands the aspects of a successful modern defense, for example the Lakers was the #1 team this year at defending the 3pt shot.

But offensively he's kind of taken a stance I think. He's said that he sometimes regrets not changing the offense up a bit to get his team more 3 point shots, but that he knows the triangle and he's stuck with it because it plays to his beliefs as a team should be sharing the ball. By making sure everybody gets involved offensively they also get involved defensively because it's in the nature of players to play with more energy on defense and in the rebounding game if they're doing good things on offense.

A smart coach also once said, "don't coach what you can't teach". At this point, Jackson and his players know the triangle offense, there probably isn't a team in the NBA that's more self aware of its capabilities than the Lakers. So he's decided to stick with it and ride it out against the new types of playing styles that goes to maximize TS% very aggressively.
Houston is leading the charge, and if Darryl Morrey and Rick Adelman could every get their hands on just 1 or 2 real good players they could be scary.
I've made a post about this you might find interesting: http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showpost.php?p=4368001&postcount=75

Great point with Pops McGyver, he's good at handling the rotation to get the most use of his players when he needs it.
I also like his approach towards the whole NBA scene, Pops gets down to business.

[chopchop20]

In the NBA dribble penetration equals to lay ups, FT's and open 3pointers wouldn't you say?

Yes, which is why I didn't understand what you were trying to say about Pop's defensive philosophy against corner 3 pointers.


Also funny to try and prove your point you mention a series in which Phoenix shot 89 3 pointers and made 41 for 45%

What happened to the defense?

[chopchop20]

Bad point, seeing as how Phoenix was 0-6 in their last 6 meetings prior to that, Spurs usually winning in 5-6 games maximum. So they lost 1 time in 7 meetings, giving them a .871% series win% against that team since Popovich was a coach/assistant coach for the Spurs. The Suns have a 142% series win% against the Spurs. The fact that it was a sweep is irrelevant, they had bench players red hot from three (Dragic and Frye kept jacking up contested threes and they kept going in. They and Barbosa were like 10/12 combined from three in game 3, along with J Rich's 5/7. A 15/19 total, which is just under 80% from three. And Dragic was 10/11 total until he missed his last 2 shots). A game which completely changed the complextion of the series.

0-6 in their last 6 meetings didn't have anything to do with this year. They lost; the defense was not good. Pop's legendary 3 point defense (allegedly) was apparently absent and the most glaring problem was dribble penetration, either isolated or pick-n-roll. The Spurs could not stop the ball.

[HiphopRelated]

Yes, which is why I didn't understand what you were trying to say about Pop's defensive philosophy against corner 3 pointers.



What happened to the defense?
basically he doesn't really have a point.

Only thing that makes Pop special in that dissertation is having Duncan in the back as a deterrent at the rim.

I'm not really getting what's different between Pop's defensive philosophy and what Riley was doing on the Knicks and Heat to this day.

Both are based on crisp rotations and running players off the 3 point line but having someone in the paint who would make them think twice about going all the way to the rim.

Now that Timmy's legs are no longer as spry as in the earlier days, Pop's defense has begun to fall off.

[chopchop20]

Another reason I like Pop is because he seems to get a lot out of players that nobody expected to be any good (Parker and Hill for example). He has a long history of getting quality player out of people who used to be considered scrubs. Now, former Spurs players are considered nice pickups on the FA market even though they were considered scrubs beforehand.

John Starks?
Anthony Mason?
Bruce Bowen?

:confusedshrug:

[ZenMaster]

Yes, which is why I didn't understand what you were trying to say about Pop's defensive philosophy against corner 3 pointers.



What happened to the defense?

Because it is against corner 3s specifically.

They're getting old and had to play Matt Bonner a lot. Getting Tiago splitter in there along with getting Tony Parker back healthy will help a lot. George Hill is probably due for a good season as well.

[chopchop20]

basically he doesn't really have a point.

Only thing that makes Pop special in that dissertation is having Duncan in the back as a deterrent at the rim.

I'm not really getting what's different between Pop's defensive philosophy and what Riley was doing on the Knicks and Heat to this day.

Both are based on crisp rotations and running players off the 3 point line but having someone in the paint who would make them think twice about going all the way to the rim.

Now that Timmy's legs are no longer as spry as in the earlier days, Pop's defense has begun to fall off.

I agree. I mean, look at the Celtics and how they defend the 3 point line. They're great at it. I don't think Pop has ever had a defense as good as the 2008 Celtics.

Look at the Lakers defense.... it's a lot better than people give them credit for. I'd put them right up their with the Spurs. Phil Jackson is like 4-1 vs Pop in the playoffs I think.

I'm just trying to understand the point that the other guy was trying to make. He made it sound as is Pop revolutionized basketball with the way his schemes defend corner 3 pointers? Am I missing something :confusedshrug:

The 3 pointer is still lower % than a shot in the paint or midrange. Great defensive schemes don't start with guarding 3 point shooters. If you can't stop dribble penetration, the other team is going to get damn near any shot that they want.

[HiphopRelated]

I agree. I mean, look at the Celtics and how they defend the 3 point line. They're great at it. I don't think Pop has ever had a defense as good as the 2008 Celtics.

Look at the Lakers defense.... it's a lot better than people give them credit for. I'd put them right up their with the Spurs. Phil Jackson is like 4-1 vs Pop in the playoffs I think.

I'm just trying to understand the point that the other guy was trying to make. He made it sound as is Pop revolutionized basketball with the way his schemes defend corner 3 pointers? Am I missing something :confusedshrug:

The 3 pointer is still lower % than a shot in the paint or midrange. Great defensive schemes don't start with guarding 3 point shooters. If you can't stop dribble penetration, the other team is going to get damn near any shot that they want.
also, you can argue that Timmy is probably the most coachable superstar.

Phil and Riles have had to deal with a bunch of "diva" personalities over the decades and pull them together to win.

[ZenMaster]

I agree. I mean, look at the Celtics and how they defend the 3 point line. They're great at it. I don't think Pop has ever had a defense as good as the 2008 Celtics.

Look at the Lakers defense.... it's a lot better than people give them credit for. I'd put them right up their with the Spurs. Phil Jackson is like 4-1 vs Pop in the playoffs I think.

I'm just trying to understand the point that the other guy was trying to make. He made it sound as is Pop revolutionized basketball with the way his schemes defend corner 3 pointers? Am I missing something :confusedshrug:

The 3 pointer is still lower % than a shot in the paint or midrange. Great defensive schemes don't start with guarding 3 point shooters. If you can't stop dribble penetration, the other team is going to get damn near any shot that they want.

Yes that's what it's like now, teams have spent the entire decade catching up to this strategy.

That's my point about Pop and his greatness, his strategy has changed the game. It is now how basketball is played among the championship contenders. Go back 11 years and you'll see a change in how the game is played, you'll see the Spurs starting this.


It's not the % of the shot being lower that matters, it's the eFG%, 3's count for 3's you know and 2's count for 2. And a corner 3 is shorter than a long 2 pointer from the top of the key.

[HiphopRelated]

Yes that's what it's like now, teams have spent the entire decade catching up to this strategy.

That's my point about Pop and his greatness, his strategy has changed the game. It is now how basketball is played among the championship contenders. Go back 11 years and you'll see a change in how the game is played, you'll see the Spurs starting this.


It's not the % of the shot being lower that matters, it's the eFG%, 3's count for 3's you know and 2's count for 2. And a corner 3 is shorter than a long 2 pointer from the top of the key.
read this slowly

everything you're crediting Pop for was done a decade earlier by Patrick James Riley.

[chopchop20]

read this slowly

everything you're crediting Pop for was done a decade earlier by Patrick James Riley.

I'm with you. I don't see Pop's innovation.

[Yung D-Will]

So I get this thread is a pretty even split

[ZenMaster]

I'm with you. I don't see Pop's innovation.


Come on man, can't you see there's a difference in having 921 3 pointers attempts against when the league average is 1042 compared to having 886 attempts against when the league average is 1310?

There has to be a difference in the defensive priorities for the number to be far apart like that.

For a while there everyone started to shoot more 3 pointers, except for when they played the Spurs.

[Yung D-Will]

Poiley

[SinJackal]

0-6 in their last 6 meetings didn't have anything to do with this year. They lost; the defense was not good. Pop's legendary 3 point defense (allegedly) was apparently absent and the most glaring problem was dribble penetration, either isolated or pick-n-roll. The Spurs could not stop the ball.

How they've been playing the Suns for the last decade and a half doesn't have anything to do with how they've been playing them the same way for 15 years? That doesn't make any sense.

Suns jacked up tons of threes and made almost half of them. It's called being red hot. It happens. You cannot always stop players/teams from scoring at all times without fail. Nobody can. To hold Pop, and only Pop to that standard because of one series when he has clearly been successful for the SIX series with that team before that one, is ludicrous.

You can't throw out his whole career and talk about one series. You're just being overly nitpicky so you can bash Pop, and you know it.



Another reason I like Pop is because he seems to get a lot out of players that nobody expected to be any good (Parker and Hill for example). He has a long history of getting quality player out of people who used to be considered scrubs. Now, former Spurs players are considered nice pickups on the FA market even though they were considered scrubs beforehand.

--------------------

Riley has a longer history of this..

Give examples of players who sucked before joining the Heat, and were considered great once leaving. Don't list any high draft picks who were highly touted either.




0-6 in their last 6 meetings didn't have anything to do with this year. They lost; the defense was not good. Pop's legendary 3 point defense (allegedly) was apparently absent and the most glaring problem was dribble penetration, either isolated or pick-n-roll. The Spurs could not stop the ball.

So the fact that Popovich has played the Suns the same way for 15 years, and been highly successful, winning 6 of 6 times before last season regardless of the Suns having home court a lot of the time, doesn't matter because last season the Suns won for the first time in 20 years against SA in the playoffs? Are you just trying to troll now or something?

You cannot throw out someone's career accomplishments and obvious track record of success because of one season. You're being overly nitpicky and you know it.



Only thing that makes Pop special in that dissertation is having Duncan in the back as a deterrent at the rim..

Riley didn't have a Duncan-like deterrant at the rim? Oh wait, Patrick Ewing, a huge defensive threat. So yes he did.



I'm not really getting what's different between Pop's defensive philosophy and what Riley was doing on the Knicks and Heat to this day.


Come on man, can't you see there's a difference in having 921 3 pointers attempts against when the league average is 1042 compared to having 886 attempts against when the league average is 1310?

There has to be a difference in the defensive priorities for the number to be far apart like that.

For a while there everyone started to shoot more 3 pointers, except for when they played the Spurs.

^ best reply to that already been given


Now that Timmy's legs are no longer as spry as in the earlier days, Pop's defense has begun to fall off.

I'm sure it has nothing to do with Matt Bonner being the Spurs' center last season, along with Richard Jefferson not properly rotating. It must be Duncan's decline only, since Pop's defense is only good because of Duncan! gtfo dude, seriously.



basically he doesn't really have a point.

Apparently he did. You need to read rather than pick out a phrase or two to continue bantering over your point without listening to his.




John Starks?
Anthony Mason?
Bruce Bowen?

:confusedshrug:

Bowen was always a good defensive player, including before going to Miami when he was with Boston. And offensively, some of his worst seasons were with Riley. Or are you trying to put off like the one minute he played for the Heat at the beginning of his career somehow changed his playing style and way he approached the game? Please dude. Horrible example. Bowen got popular with SA. However, he was always good defensively, his whole career. No NBA coach had anything to do with it.

Mason's per minute productivity actually went down when he went to NY to play for Riley. He simply got the minutes he deserved when he went to NY. His productivity after not playing for Riley, for the next 5 years, his production went up. Can't say that's a good example.

Starks you -MIGHT- have a point, a small one that is, if Starks was actually bad to begin with, which he wasn't. He was pretty good, just wasn't getting minutes. Look at the per minute production, not "per game" production which doesn't take minutes into account.

[HiphopRelated]

Give examples of players who sucked before joining the Heat, and were considered great once leaving. Don't list any high draft picks who were highly touted either.
Ike Austin
John Starks
Udonis Haslem
Ant Mason

don't know your definition of "great".


Riley didn't have a Duncan-like deterrant at the rim? Oh wait, Patrick Ewing, a huge defensive threat. So yes he did.


this affects my point how?


I'm sure it has nothing to do with Matt Bonner being the Spurs' center last season, along with Richard Jefferson not properly rotating. It must be Duncan's decline only, since Pop's defense is only good because of Duncan! gtfo dude, seriously.


so his system only works when the players fit it?

see where the argument started about having to modify your style and the need to coach multiple cores.

And Duncan anchors the defense, of course it's good mainly because of him.

[SinJackal]

Ike Austin
John Starks
Udonis Haslem

don't know your definition of "great".

Haslem played for the Heat for two years+ before Riley stepped in and coached. Doesn't count.

Ike Austin's per minute production didn't go up, he just played more minutes with Miami. Which means he didn't improve.

John Starks was good as soon as he came into the league, but did improve after his second NBA season, so perhaps Riley can get credit for that. However, who can say he wouldn't have improved at all if he played for anyone else?

So far Starks is the only one you can even use as a point. One player in his entire from '81-'08. Pretty low there dude.



this affects my point how?

Your point was that Pop's defense was only great because he had Duncan, and that it was inferior to Riley's on the Knicks because of that. It effects your point because Riley had Ewing, and therefore you cannot claim that he had a superior defense because Duncan was on the Spurs, since Ewing, another great interior defender, played on those Knicks teams.

Also, the fact that Riley having barely 10% less 3pt shots being taken on his team than the league average pales in comparison to the stat of Pop having 33% less taken against him than league average (and even less than Riley's team, which was in an era that shot less 3 pointers, by about 15%).

[HiphopRelated]

lol @ Mason's per minute productivity.

He scored 47 career points before joining the Knicks, that doesn't warrant statistical analysis

[SinJackal]

lol @ Mason's per minute productivity.

He scored 47 career points before joining the Knicks, that doesn't warrant statistical analysis

And likewise you can't say he sucked and somehow turned into a great player just because he got more minutes. Seeing as how his production prior to that was similar based on the minutes he did play.

Also, good job ignoring the last part of my post too, that ripped apart your point of riley's defense being better than Pop's, which is clearly wasn't.

[HiphopRelated]

Haslem played for the Heat for two years+ before Riley stepped in and coached. Doesn't count.

Ike Austin's per minute production didn't go up, he just played more minutes with Miami. Which means he didn't improve.

John Starks was good as soon as he came into the league, but did improve after his second NBA season, so perhaps Riley can get credit for that. However, who can say he wouldn't have improved at all if he played for anyone else?

So far Starks is the only one you can even use as a point. One player in his entire from '81-'08. Pretty low there dude.




Your point was that Pop's defense was only great because he had Duncan, and that it was inferior to Riley's on the Knicks because of that. It effects your point because Riley had Ewing, and therefore you cannot claim that he had a superior defense because Duncan was on the Spurs, since Ewing, another great interior defender, played on those Knicks teams.

Also, the fact that Riley having barely 10% less 3pt shots being taken on his team than the league average pales in comparison to the stat of Pop having 33% less taken against him than league average (and even less than Riley's team, which was in an era that shot less 3 pointers, by about 15%).
I never said anything about inferior.

I said it was essentially the same principles. Pop may have spent more time on certain aspects and Riley on others.

The argument started on somehow Popovich revolutionizing how the NBA game is played as some positive to him although proof is seemingly hard to come by, when Riley is the one that caused Stern to modify how teams are allowed to defend.

[chopchop20]

And likewise you can't say he sucked and somehow turned into a great player just because he got more minutes. Seeing as how his production prior to that was similar based on the minutes he did play.

Also, good job ignoring the last part of my post too, that ripped apart your point of riley's defense being better than Pop's, which is clearly wasn't.

Child please.... Showtime Lakers were a better defensive team. 90's Knicks were too.

[chopchop20]

How they've been playing the Suns for the last decade and a half doesn't have anything to do with how they've been playing them the same way for 15 years? That doesn't make any sense.

Suns jacked up tons of threes and made almost half of them. It's called being red hot. It happens. You cannot always stop players/teams from scoring at all times without fail. Nobody can. To hold Pop, and only Pop to that standard because of one series when he has clearly been successful for the SIX series with that team before that one, is ludicrous.

You can't throw out his whole career and talk about one series. You're just being overly nitpicky so you can bash Pop, and you know it.


Obviously not because they weren't playing the same team that they played 15 years ago, 5 years ago, or even last year. Suns roster has different players and so does the Spurs. Bruce Bowen and Robert Horry are not walking through the door.

Why didn't the Spurs stop them from jacking up 3's? Where was this mythical defense that locks down 3 point shooters?

Nitpicky = TRUTH

[chopchop20]

lol @ Mason's per minute productivity.

He scored 47 career points before joining the Knicks, that doesn't warrant statistical analysis

Apparently everybody was good before they played for Riley. :oldlol:

Bruce Bowen was a perennial CBA reject until Riley polished his game. He had the same effect on Mason too.

[chopchop20]

Come on man, can't you see there's a difference in having 921 3 pointers attempts against when the league average is 1042 compared to having 886 attempts against when the league average is 1310?

There has to be a difference in the defensive priorities for the number to be far apart like that.

For a while there everyone started to shoot more 3 pointers, except for when they played the Spurs.

I don't really see where you're getting at with this whole thing. As if the opponents 3 point FGA (not makes) is some key metric for defenses. I mean you act like it's points in the paint or defensive rebounds.

Also, there's many ways those stats could be skewed -- such as, it's easier to drive to the hoop against the Spurs... why settle for 3's :confusedshrug:

It looks like that stat means more to you than most other people. :cheers:

[KoRn]

Obviously not because they weren't playing the same team that they played 15 years ago, 5 years ago, or even last year. Suns roster has different players and so does the Spurs. Bruce Bowen and Robert Horry are not walking through the door.

Why didn't the Spurs stop them from jacking up 3's? Where was this mythical defense that locks down 3 point shooters?

Nitpicky = TRUTH

this right here. why couldn't the spurs stop the suns offense? so the suns were just on a hot streak, no one can stop them? when the suns play the lakers in this western finals, their 3 pointers were down. why is that?

[SinJackal]

Child please.... Showtime Lakers were a better defensive team. 90's Knicks were too.

Wrong. Showtime Lakers not only gave up more points, but they did so while giving up a higher FG%, 3pt%, eFG%, and TS% than Pop's Spurs have (on average, not just a specific year). Which means they were a better defensive team.

You could make excuses about eras, but it doesn't change the fact that Pop's Spurs give up less points on less %.

Feel free to post any source showing the Showtime Lakers having better statistical defense than the Spurs. You won't find any.



Obviously not because they weren't playing the same team that they played 15 years ago, 5 years ago, or even last year. Suns roster has different players and so does the Spurs. Bruce Bowen and Robert Horry are not walking through the door.

Why didn't the Spurs stop them from jacking up 3's? Where was this mythical defense that locks down 3 point shooters?

Nitpicky = TRUTH

Yare picking out one series in 15 years and acting like that somehow defines the other thousand+ games that have been played. The Spurs have locked down their 3pt shooting 6 of 7 series ever. First you claim it's because of Duncan, now you claim it's because Bowen and Horry weren't there.

You are obviously just trolling at this point because you cannot post a legitimate argument. You can't possibly believe 4 games define over a thousand. I am not going to argue this with you anymore since you are obviously just trolling.



Apparently everybody was good before they played for Riley. :oldlol:

Bruce Bowen was a perennial CBA reject until Riley polished his game. He had the same effect on Mason too.

Nearly all of Bruce Bowen's stats and efficiancy went down when he joined the Heat. Compare to his '97-'98 season with his one season with the Heat. All stats down, only thing up was his minutes and fouls.

His defense, also did not improve over what it was in Boston. You obviously can't come up with any players who actually improved under Riley, meanwhile every player that's continued to play for him has gotten worse, and several examples used already claiming players got good with Riley, actually had their best seasons when they finally didn't play for him anymore.

[chopchop20]

Wrong. Showtime Lakers not only gave up more points, but they did so while giving up a higher FG%, 3pt%, eFG%, and TS% than Pop's Spurs have (on average, not just a specific year). Which means they were a better defensive team.

You could make excuses about eras, but it doesn't change the fact that Pop's Spurs give up less points on less %.

Feel free to post any source showing the Showtime Lakers having better statistical defense than the Spurs. You won't find any.

:oldlol: Too funny stats boy. It was all about numbers, Pop and the Spurs would be unbeatable according to you. Lakers were a very good defense during that era, and certainly a tougher-nosed team.



Yare picking out one series in 15 years and acting like that somehow defines the other thousand+ games that have been played. The Spurs have locked down their 3pt shooting 6 of 7 series ever. First you claim it's because of Duncan, now you claim it's because Bowen and Horry weren't there.

Never mentioned Duncan, you are sadly mistaken. And your argument is beyond retarded here. Those other series had different players.... hell, how many different coaches has Phoenix had during that time. Old history does not define this year's SWEEP.


You can't possibly believe 4 games define over a thousand. I am not going to argue this with you anymore since you are obviously just trolling.

Good idea, you should quit while you're behind

[SinJackal]

:oldlol: Too funny stats boy. It was all about numbers, Pop and the Spurs would be unbeatable according to you. Lakers were a very good defense during that era, and certainly a tougher-nosed team.

Wrong. Defense is one aspect of the game, it has nothing to do with offense, and so, having a top defense every year doesn't mean your offense is as good as possible during every game. So according to me, I would never say a team is unbeatable. I would say nice try in assuming that, but it wasn't a nice try, you're just grasping at straws and trying to put words in my mouth since you can't refute anything I actually do say.





Never mentioned Duncan, you are sadly mistaken. And your argument is beyond retarded here. Those other series had different players.... hell, how many different coaches has Phoenix had during that time. Old history does not define this year's SWEEP.

Whatever, hiphoprelated did. First it's Duncan, now it's supposedly Horry and Bowen. In both cases, you're each trying to look for some excuse to bash Pop's obvious good defense. Are you going to bring up David Robinson next? I mean, you're going to run out of players eventually.

Also, to point out your extreme ignorance, it's very easy to claim that any coach needed certain players to win. Without Magic and Jabaar, the Lakers would have a shitty offense and defense. Without Ewing, the Knicks defense sucks. Without Wade, the Heat don't win shit. That was easy to say, wasn't it? Try and prove that wrong.



Good idea, you should quit while you're behind

Seeing as how you never make any points, and just keep trolling, there's no reason to keep arguing about it.

[opps]

:lol :lol just dropped in on this thread & SinJackal sounds f**king mad.

[chopchop20]

:lol :lol just dropped in on this thread & SinJackal sounds f**king mad.

He's just living in the past

[PaPaK]

Pop had as much success as Riley in half the time as a coach and with less talent. nuff said.

[CLTHornets4eva]

Pop did more with less. A small market in a more competitive NBA. I applaud the way Riley was able to win for two different teams in two different eras, but I believe the quality of the stars for him was much better, especially in LA, and the Spurs won due to their gritty style and fundamentals, which a coach instills. The flash and glamour of the Riley Lakers teams was pure skill and ability of Magic to lead a team, and years later a healthy knee Dwade and an end of prime Shaq. No disrepect to Timmy or even Robinson/Manu/Parker, but only one of them could be mentioned in the same breath as Magic, Kareem, Dwade, Shaq, and to a lesser extent Worthy. The Spurs staying power in a time with more teams, more free agency, a harder salary cap, and a much more difficult Western Conference is also commendable.

[PaPaK]

^spot on, and when you take into consideration that he did all that in half the time Riley had as a coach..

[Andrei89]

I applaud the way Riley was able to win for two different teams in two different eras,


3 different eras with 3 teams

[PaPaK]

he didnt win anything with the knicks tho

[ZenMaster]

I don't really see where you're getting at with this whole thing. As if the opponents 3 point FGA (not makes) is some key metric for defenses. I mean you act like it's points in the paint or defensive rebounds.

Also, there's many ways those stats could be skewed -- such as, it's easier to drive to the hoop against the Spurs... why settle for 3's :confusedshrug:

It looks like that stat means more to you than most other people. :cheers:

I've made entire posts that shows that the Spurs played defense with the sole intention of giving up contested mid range shots. They've been one of the worst teams defending the mid-range game, but one of the best at preventing layups, free throws and corner 3 pointers.
You're taking 1 sentence from different posts without taking the entire posts into consideration, just because it fits your argument.

[Big#50]

Magic coached the Lakers. We all know what Riley did to take over the Heat job. Pop had Duncan. Both are overrated as ****. But POP is better.

[Yung D-Will]

30 Votes Pop
30 Votes Riles

[Inception]

Have we ever seen Pop win without Tim Duncan? Duncan is a coaches dream. I have my doubts about Pop after seeing him start George Hill over Parker in the finals when Parker's speed is clearly too much for Fisher. Pat has proven he can win with different players, he's very good at spotting mismatches and using them, and I don't ever recall him ever making blatantly wrong decisions.

Riley for me.

[Yung D-Will]

Have we ever seen Pop win without Tim Duncan? Duncan is a coaches dream. I have my doubts about Pop after seeing him start George Hill over Parker in the finals when Parker's speed is clearly too much for Fisher. Pat has proven he can win with different players, he's very good at spotting mismatches and using them, and I don't ever recall him ever making blatantly wrong decisions.

Riley for me.

When was this? George hill came into the leauge in 08-09 and they haven't played the Lakers in the playoffs in any of those years.

[Sarcastic]

he didnt win anything with the knicks tho

Two reasons:
1. This was during the Michael Jordan era
2. He never had a second star to play with Ewing

[Rasheed1]

Originally Posted by PaPaK
he didnt win anything with the knicks tho


:hammerhead: He took the knicks to the finals and his knicks were the only real competition Jordan's bulls had after they conquered Detroit...

the only reason he didnt make the finals every year was because Mj and the bulls were better... He took Chuck Daly's "jordan rules" and used it to hound Mike and the bulls and it led to some of the best games you'll ever see....


You can tell who is simply to young to know any better.... People who insist Riley didnt 'do anything' with the knicks obviously never saw them...

[PaPaK]

:hammerhead: He took the knicks to the finals and his knicks were the only real competition Jordan's bulls had after they conquered Detroit...

the only reason he didnt make the finals every year was because Mj and the bulls were better... He took Chuck Daly's "jordan rules" and used it to hound Mike and the bulls and it led to some of the best games you'll ever see....


You can tell who is simply to young to know any better.... People who insist Riley didnt 'do anything' with the knicks obviously never saw them...
I just respect Popovich too much altho i did only start to get into basketball in the late 90s.. but you cant deny stats and they say that Pop has a slightly better regular and postseason record %, and has won 4 titles compared to 5 in half the time.. also with less talent, but it can be argued that todays league has less talent overall compared to the 80s as there was less teams back then and it was less diluted..

Pop is more of a personal choice for me

[chopchop20]

I've made entire posts that shows that the Spurs played defense with the sole intention of giving up contested mid range shots. They've been one of the worst teams defending the mid-range game, but one of the best at preventing layups, free throws and corner 3 pointers.
You're taking 1 sentence from different posts without taking the entire posts into consideration, just because it fits your argument.

Every defensive scheme is designed to take away certain things. But what you've described is nothing particularly innovative or revolutionary. Maybe Pop took certain elements of different schemes and perfected his own process. Still, I don't see how it changed the league -- there's never been a perception that everybody in the NBA was trying to catch up with what the Spurs were doing.

[chopchop20]

I just respect Popovich too much altho i did only start to get into basketball in the late 90s.. but you cant deny stats and they say that Pop has a slightly better regular and postseason record %, and has won 4 titles compared to 5 in half the time.. also with less talent, but it can be argued that todays league has less talent overall compared to the 80s as there was less teams back then and it was less diluted..

Pop is more of a personal choice for me

It can also be argued (fairly) that the Spurs would not have beaten any of the dominant teams of that era in the Finals.

[HiphopRelated]

Every defensive scheme is designed to take away certain things. But what you've described is nothing particularly innovative or revolutionary. Maybe Pop took certain elements of different schemes and perfected his own process. Still, I don't see how it changed the league -- there's never been a perception that everybody in the NBA was trying to catch up with what the Spurs were doing.
It's honestly the 1st time I've heard that.

Which defense is not trying to get those things done in general? Who is saying, "yeah take 3s and layups"? Maybe the coach isn't good at getting his team to buy in or the personnel isn't good enough to execute(like um...the Spurs last year).

I liked Boston's defense in '08 with KG shadowing the strong side but still quick enough to rotate to the paint more than anything I've seen Popovich use.

[Yung D-Will]

Boom

[Yung D-Will]

http://a.espncdn.com/photo/2008/0521/nba_g_spurs_580.jpg
Gregg Popovich
Career Record (regular season): 576-276 (.676)
Career Record (postseason): 92-51 (.643)
Teams: San Antonio Spurs (1996-current)
No Of. Seasons: 11 seasons
Postseason Appearances: 10
NBA Championships: 4 (1999, 2003, 2005, 2007)



http://msn.foxsports.com/id/9955456
Pat Riley
Career Record (regular season): 1182-618 (.657)
Career Record (postseason): 171-111 (.606)
Teams: Los Angeles Lakers (1981-1990), New York Knicks (1991-1995), Miami Heat (1995-2003, 2005-2007; 61 games in '05-'06, 60 games in '06-'07)
No. Of Seasons: 23 seasons
Postseason Appearances: 21
NBA Championships: 5 (Lakers: 1982, 1985, 1987, 1988; Heat: 2006)

Super Boom

[The_Yearning]

Are you kidding me? Popovich 10/10.

Riley's Lakers were stacked...and we all know what happened in 2006...and I'm not even talking about how he stole the coaching job.

[Yung D-Will]

31 Votes Pop
30 Votes Riles

[magnax1]

I don't remember if I voted.... but if not I vote Mr. Popo. Probably the best coach ever. Either him or Red.

[OnceInADECADE]

Super Boom
:oldlol: :oldlol:

[Sarcastic]

I don't remember if I voted.... but if not I vote Mr. Popo. Probably the best coach ever. Either him or Red.

Phil Jackson

[OnceInADECADE]

Phil Jackson

call me when he doesnt coach a top 3 player in the NBA

[magnax1]

Phil Jackson
Phil was a great Coach in Chicago, I haven't been impressed with what He's done in LA near as much.

[Yung D-Will]

call me when he doesnt coach a top 3 player in the NBA


Greg Pop-Tim Duncan

Pat Riley-Magic/Kareem/Ewing

[Sarcastic]

call me when he doesnt coach a top 3 player in the NBA

Let me know when Popovich coaches someone other than Tim Duncan.

[Harison]

Pop

[dgnr8]

Greg Riley.. :applause: :applause:

[HiphopRelated]

Let me know when Popovich coaches someone other than Tim Duncan.
seriously...it's a comedic argument if that's the route the Pop supporters want to go

[Lodi Dodi]

Pat

[SinJackal]

Let's add a variable to the debate. Is winning a title for a team that clearly wins by far the most titles historically (due to salary/prestige drawing the biggest players), mean as much as winning one with teams who have NEVER won titles?


Celtics titles: 17

Lakers titles: 16

Bulls titles: 6

Spurs titles: 4 (0 without Popovich)

Warriors: 3

76ers: 3

Pistons: 3

Bullets: 2

Rockets: 2

Knicks: 2

Heat: 1

Bucks: 1

Blazers,: 1

"Rochester Royals": 1

Hawks: 1

Sonics: 1

Everyone else: 0


Popovich won 4 titles in 8 years with a small market team who's never won a title before, pushing the Spurs past every team in the NBA for most titles besides the top 3, including defeating great Shaq/Kobe Lakers twice and champion Pistons team that beat the Shaq/Kobe Lakers the year before on the way to 3 of those titles. :confusedshrug:

It's apparently a bitch to win a title if you're not coaching the Lakers or Celtics, since they've won more than half the total titles that've been won. (33 of 64)

[Sarcastic]

Let's add a variable to the debate. Is winning a title for a team that clearly wins by far the most titles historically (due to salary/prestige drawing the biggest players), mean as much as winning one with teams who have NEVER won titles?


Celtics titles: 17

Lakers titles: 16

Bulls titles: 6

Spurs titles: 4 (0 without Popovich)

Warriors: 3

76ers: 3

Pistons: 3

Bullets: 2

Rockets: 2

Knicks: 2

Heat: 1

Bucks: 1

Blazers,: 1

"Rochester Royals": 1

Hawks: 1

Sonics: 1

Everyone else: 0


Popovich won 4 titles in 8 years with a small market team who's never won a title before, pushing the Spurs past every team in the NBA for most titles besides the top 3, including defeating great Shaq/Kobe Lakers twice and champion Pistons team that beat the Shaq/Kobe Lakers the year before on the way to 3 of those titles. :confusedshrug:

It's apparently a bitch to win a title if you're not coaching the Lakers or Celtics, since they've won more than half the total titles that've been won. (33 of 64)


That's a little deceiving. While the Spurs never won a title, before Duncan/Pop, they have been one of the best teams in NBA history. They have only had 4 seasons in their history in which they did not make the playoffs.

Phil Jackson winning with the Bulls is more impressive. The Bulls were miserable before Jordan/Jackson.

[Bodhi]

Popovich.

When Riley took over as coach of the Lakers, they had already won a title with showtime. He just maintained a proven squad. And eventually he couldn't adjust his coaching style in the later years when the Lakers got older.

[SinJackal]

That's a little deceiving. While the Spurs never won a title, before Duncan/Pop, they have been one of the best teams in NBA history. They have only had 4 seasons in their history in which they did not make the playoffs.

Phil Jackson winning with the Bulls is more impressive. The Bulls were miserable before Jordan/Jackson.

I can't disagree with the Jackson/Bulls thing. I was actually thinking of that when I was making my post. Pop and Jackson with their Spurs/Bulls are far more impressive to me than any Celtics or Lakers runs, with the exception of the Bill Russel dynasty which has clearly never been matched, plus it was the beginning of the Celtics' dynasty, and was obviously just ridiculously dominating.

Your line about Spurs only missing the playoffs 4 times is also deceiving. They've only been an NBA team since '76, and started off with George Gervin. More than half of the league gets into the playoffs every year since they've been an NBA team. It's not that incredibly impressive, they came into the NBA with the great George Gervin who was carrying the team to barely making the playoffs each year while only reaching 50 wins a few times before they drafted DRob.

They were lucky enough to to get super high draft picks which happened to turn their fortunes around when they were down on their luck.


So. . .I agree with the Jackson comment 100%, but I think you're trying to skew the stats a little by talking about such a general thing as making the playoffs, something more than half of the NBA teams do every year, as them being a great, incredibly powerful title winning franchise. The Utah Jazz have made the playoffs nearly every year and have won 0 titles.

[Sarcastic]

Popovich.

When Riley took over as coach of the Lakers, they had already won a title with showtime. He just maintained a proven squad. And eventually he couldn't adjust his coaching style in the later years when the Lakers got older.

Did you see what he did with the Knicks? He has coached from both ends of the spectrum (incredible offense <----> incredible defense). Has Popovich done this yet?

[Yung D-Will]

Did you see what he did with the Knicks? He has coached from both ends of the spectrum (incredible offense <----> incredible defense). Has Popovich done this yet?
05?

[Sarcastic]

I can't disagree with the Jackson/Bulls thing. I was actually thinking of that when I was making my post. Pop and Jackson with their Spurs/Bulls are far more impressive to me than any Celtics or Lakers runs, with the exception of the Bill Russel dynasty which has clearly never been matched, plus it was the beginning of the Celtics' dynasty, and was obviously just ridiculously dominating.

Your line about Spurs only missing the playoffs 4 times is also deceiving. They've only been an NBA team since '76, and started off with George Gervin. More than half of the league gets into the playoffs every year since they've been an NBA team. It's not that incredibly impressive, they came into the NBA with the great George Gervin who was carrying the team to barely making the playoffs each year while only reaching 50 wins a few times before they drafted DRob.

They were lucky enough to to get super high draft picks which happened to turn their fortunes around when they were down on their luck.


So. . .I agree with the Jackson comment 100%, but I think you're trying to skew the stats a little by talking about such a general thing as making the playoffs, something more than half of the NBA teams do every year, as them being a great, incredibly powerful title winning franchise. The Utah Jazz have made the playoffs nearly every year and have won 0 titles.

30 out of 34 years is still an incredible streak. I think the Lakers are the only team that can match that type of success.

You can't just use title won as an indicator of success. You have to use palyoffs made. It is extremely hard to win a title in the NBA. If you used titles, then the 1990s Jazz and the 1990s Knicks are failures, when in actuality they were not.

[SinJackal]

Did you see what he did with the Knicks? He has coached from both ends of the spectrum (incredible offense <----> incredible defense). Has Popovich done this yet?

He adjusts his schemes based on the teams they play, and even during games when he puts in different units

Look when they've played the Mavs, Suns, etc, in the playoffs. They hugely ramp up their scoring and fast break on them. Even I was surprised to see how they could completely change the look of their team for a specific series. With Parker/Ginobili though, it was certainly doable.

They might regress back to that again during the next season. Jefferson, Blair, and Ginobili, and Hill/Parker all on the floor are a very solid fast break team with Manu/Parker running the point.

Spurs bench last season didn't put up the best stats and destroy everyone else's at random. Manu comes off the bench for a reason. They switch pace when they put in the second unit.

[Sarcastic]

05?

What about it? They were still the best defensive team, and their core was essentially the same.

Riley coached a core on the Lakers that was completely different from his core on the Knicks.

[Sarcastic]

He adjusts his schemes based on the teams they play, and even during games when he puts in different units

Look when they've played the Mavs, Suns, etc, in the playoffs. They hugely ramp up their scoring and fast break on them. Even I was surprised to see how they could completely change the look of their team for a specific series. With Parker/Ginobili though, it was certainly doable.

They might regress back to that again during the next season. Jefferson, Blair, and Ginobili, and Hill/Parker all on the floor are a very solid fast break team with Manu/Parker running the point.

Spurs bench last season didn't put up the best stats and destroy everyone else's at random. Manu comes off the bench for a reason. They switch pace when they put in the second unit.

I am not trying to knock Popovich. He is a great coach. But he still has not coached anyone other than Tim Duncan. I would like to see what type of success he could have with another superstar.

Unfortunately, I believe he said he will retire when Duncan does, so we will never know.

[nbacardDOTnet]

http://i304.photobucket.com/albums/nn200/nbacardDOTnet/zz%20NBA%20Photo%20Gallery/z%20Funny%20NBA%20Photos/Funny%20NBA%20Gifs/Coaches/d24881a3.gif

[SinJackal]

I am not trying to knock Popovich. He is a great coach. But he still has not coached anyone other than Tim Duncan. I would like to see what type of success he could have with another superstar.

Unfortunately, I believe he said he will retire when Duncan does, so we will never know.

Well, he was assistant coach and always getting into the timeouts and practice when DRob was playing, but no one will give him any credit for that prolly. Actually it's kinda funny, if you watch early 90's Spurs videos, you see Popovich doing a lot of talking and yelling and acting all edgy during timeouts. He really stands out. But again, you might not give him any credit since he was just an assistant coach. I can't really argue with that.

I don't think Pop will retire when Duncan does tbh. He'll probably stick around a little bit since the Spurs front office have somehow pieced together a good future core of young players. Blair, Hill, Splitter. When you have 25 or under C, PF, and combo guard who are all above average players, the future isn't exactly dim. Blair's a potential 15/11 guy. Splitter a 15/9 guy. Hill a 18/3/5 guy. All with pretty solid TS%. Not too bad really. If they could add in a decent FA SF or guard, they would be good even w/o the Spurs big 3. Not as good as they are with Duncan. . .but at least a 45 win team imo, assuming those players grow/improve.

Anyway. . .I hope he doesn't retire. Or at least I hope he comes back if they end up with a good FA or DP shortly after Duncan goes.



http://i304.photobucket.com/albums/nn200/nbacardDOTnet/zz%20NBA%20Photo%20Gallery/z%20Funny%20NBA%20Photos/Funny%20NBA%20Gifs/Coaches/d24881a3.gif

:facepalm Is that when Popovich pulled a hack a Shaq after the opening tip?

Only he would do that. >_> lol :X

[gts]

toss up, you're not going to go wrong with either coach...

[O.J A 6'4Mamba]

Riley. Pop won in a weak era

[Rojogaqu11]

I think Pop has a better system.

[Yung D-Will]

:bowdown:

[dude77]

Is this a serious question?

Riley is a legend . Pop is just a very good coach.

he's not 'just a very good coach' :facepalm

how can you say that about a coach who's won 4 nba titles ? let alone one which is extremely hard to accomplish

[nbacardDOTnet]

not riley

http://i304.photobucket.com/albums/nn200/nbacardDOTnet/zz%20NBA%20Photo%20Gallery/z%20Funny%20NBA%20Photos/Funny%20NBA%20Record/z%20New%20York%20Knicks/funnyPatRiley.jpg

http://i304.photobucket.com/albums/nn200/nbacardDOTnet/zz%20NBA%20Photo%20Gallery/z%20Funny%20NBA%20Photos/Funny%20NBA%20Record/z%20New%20York%20Knicks/1994NBAFinalRocketsKnicksG7-JohnStarks.jpg

http://i304.photobucket.com/albums/nn200/nbacardDOTnet/zz%20NBA%20Photo%20Gallery/z%20Funny%20NBA%20Photos/Funny%20NBA%20Record/z%20New%20York%20Knicks/1994NBAFinalG7KnicksatRockets-4Q.jpg

[dude77]

Quote:
Originally Posted by BallinSinceBirf
Popovich.

"Not even close. Pat Riley is nowhere near the caliber of coach as Popovich or Phil Jackson.

If we're going to talk championships, Pop has only 1 less than Riley while only coaching half as long. Give Pop another 10 years of coaching and I guarantee he'll blow Riley's number out of the water.

this is nothing but speculation .. we don't know what will happen

Riley's whole thing is sitting back until he's got a championship caliber team and then jumping in for the glory. How hard was it to coach Magic/Kareem/Worthy or Wade/Shaq/Zo?

it's hard to coach period .. phil jackson didn't win a title with that 04 superteam .. neither did spoelstra with his superteam in 2010 .. having the talent doesn't guarantee you anything .. that's why you have a coach .. I love how people completely minimize the impact of the coach because they have good players

Pop has put in his work since Day 1 and has actually BUILT a contender. His system and methods work. He's made the Spurs into a powerhouse team.

can't argue that .. he's an elite coach .. I have nothing against Gregg Popovich

Bottom line, Riley is mostly hype while Popovich is mostly substance."

not a fair statement to make about Riley at all .. no need to take shots at a great coach to uplift another :no: .. come on now .. Riley has great skill as a motivator and manager of a team .. 5 rings and back to back titles is an impressive resume

love these debates ..

[ThatsGame]

Come on, this is from 2010

[Xiao Yao You]

What sets Riley apart from others is that he won with the talent he had not with one just one particular system like Don Shula did in football. Showtime in LA and later with the tough Ewing/Mourning defensive squads and Wade's rookie year he had Wade/Butler/Odom all handling the ball without a true point guard. And the last title he had his defensive squad coming off the bench on a team carried by Wade. He's known for the defensive system that Jeff Van Gundy and Spoelstra continued to have success with but he showed he could win in other ways.