re: Pop vs Phil. Who you got?

quote:

---

well its a stupid fricking scenario

---

Was just meant to spark debate and have people actually think about what they're saying. Do you think Popovich could have coached those teams to titles that Phil did? Do you think Phil could have done the same with Pop's teams? What's so stupid about that if we're really debating they're coaching skills and not their "gm" skills of bringing in players?

quote:

---

We have no idea how Pops would have done with those Laker teams. Would his style have worked with a young, arrogant Kobe and a Shaq at his peak?

---

No, we don't know but that's why I think it is interesting to think about and discuss.

quote:

---

Pops is a great coach, but its a tad ridiculous when people pretend he's worked with shite talent

---

agreed. especially when many people consider tim duncan the best PF of all time.


i love both coaches. both have been exceptional at coaching basketball and all the intricacies of the craft. phillip gets the nod b/c of his overall success, but its not as lopsided as the 11-4 title count would have you believe.


both are just terrific coaches. i feel like picking one somehow demeans the other. thats not what i want to do. its just.... despite phillip's massive amount of premium players in their primes, its not like any coach could do shite before or after phil showed up. you could argue his greatest talent was knowing when was the right time, but like i said, no one before or after phil was lighting it up. phil jackson is completely under rated in his ability to get big ego stars to play together as a team

quote:

---

I know man. Must have been really hard coaching Jordan, Pippen, and the rest of those teams. They certainly weren't winning shite without Phil

---

How many rings did those teams win without Phil??? Yep, 0

Phil is an amazing coach obviously, but if I'm picking a head coach before I know who any of the players will be give me Pop all day

If I have a team with some talented yet ego filled players, I'll prolly take Phil

Zen Master

Not that I wouldn't take the players Phil had over the players Pop has/had, but let's be honest. Parker, Duncan and Ginobli aren't slouches. That and their FO is pretty good about getting smaller pieces and role players to fit their system.

That being said, Phil 11 times out of 10.

ETA: Not bashing Pop. Getting him or Phil to coach your franchise is a massive win/win situation.

People acting as if Phil couldn't control Pip are completely blowing the whole bench fiasco out of proportion. It was one incident. Pippen deserved that shot. Kukoc was the better play. It's hilarious how one play can help define a career sometimes.

Also, calling Pippen a "huge ego" player is equally laughable. He flawlessly played Robin to MJ's Batman for his entire prime career minus those 2 years. God forbid he wanted a lifetime achievement "big shot moment".

Phil Jackson can suck a nut for his attitude towards NOLA, but damn if the triangle offense wasn't the coolest coaching invention in basketball history. I take Phil grudgingly.

Pop made it close, and it's easy to pick him because of his success with such an old roster still being the focal point of the team. People are completely discrediting that he had Tim Duncan, arguably the greatest PF in the history of the NBA, to anchor his run.

quote:

---

Pop has done more with less in San An

---

To be correct, Pop has done less with less.

Pop easily for me