Let's start with my all time favorite example Phil Jackson. No one is dusputing 10 rings but is it all that impressive when you look at the players he's always had? The guy has always had the best player in the league while other times had arguably had the two best players at the same time. I remember watching a Bulls video showing an in game huddle. Jackson is yelling at the Bulls "Don't leave Michael alone out there, it's not time!" Translation = Keep it close and give the ball to MJ come cruch time.

Chuck Daly with the Bad Boy Pistons, Riley with the Showtime Lakers and the Heat, Tomjanovich with the Rockets, Gregg Popovich with the Spurs. Doc Rivers was always considered a decent coach but give the guy Rondo, KG, Allen and Pierce and now he's a great coach.

Motivation, schemes, etc. means nothing unless you have the players. Erik Spoelstra will be the next to be annointed as a great coach if and when the Heat win it all. It won't be that he had 2 of the top 5 players in the league with one of the best PF's in the game. It will be that he was able to get them to play together and had them check their ego's at the door. The truth of the matter is that it's all on the players.

Agree or disagree?

Sure, it helps, an awful lot.

But look at Jerry Sloan. Yes, he had Malone and Stockton, but when they left they barely missed a beat. Yes, they restocked, but more than anything I think Sloan simply is a great coach. Consistent.

I thought Rivers was a good coach, long before he got to Boston. Yes, I wanted him after he got canned for the 1 and whatever started his squad had in Orlando.

I know I criticize Jackson for always having the best players- but I think that creates a challenge. I think we've seen it on our squad after the Melo trade.

All the regular guys - the role players- figure we got two superstars, they can do everything. We just show up.

I mean, put yourself in some of these guys shoes getting paid squat, and your co worker is getting paid more in a year than you'll probably see in your career. How motivated are you going to be?

I think you've got to give credit to these guys.

franco12 wrote:Disagree.

Sure, it helps, an awful lot.

But look at Jerry Sloan. Yes, he had Malone and Stockton, but when they left they barely missed a beat. Yes, they restocked, but more than anything I think Sloan simply is a great coach. Consistent.

I thought Rivers was a good coach, long before he got to Boston. Yes, I wanted him after he got canned for the 1 and whatever started his squad had in Orlando.

I know I criticize Jackson for always having the best players- but I think that creates a challenge. I think we've seen it on our squad after the Melo trade.

All the regular guys - the role players- figure we got two superstars, they can do everything. We just show up.

I mean, put yourself in some of these guys shoes getting paid squat, and your co worker is getting paid more in a year than you'll probably see in your career. How motivated are you going to be?

I think you've got to give credit to these guys.

John Stockton retired in 2003. Malone left the Jazz that year too.

The Jazz were only 2 games over .500 the next year.
30 games under the next year.
Exactly .500 Deron Williams rookie year.
It was only in Deron's 2nd year where they finished better.

The Knicks haven't drafted a low cost rookie of Deron's caliber since...Ewing?

Doc Rivers

1999 Orlando .500
2000 4 games over .500 with T-Mac in his prime and the Grant Hill disaster
2001 6 games over .500

He lost in the first round with a Paul Pierce/Al jefferson/Gary Payton squad
16 games under .500 the next year with Pierce/Al jefferson/rookie Kendrick perkins and he completely "failed to develop" high flyer Gerald Green

The next year the celtics went SIXTEEN games under .500 24-58 in a putrid Atlantic Division with

Pierce/Al Jefferson/Rookie Rondo/Sophomore Perkins

People were calling for his head. He didn't have a clue about the rotation. He was failing to develop the young guys.
Bla bla bla.

Now he's a great coach.

My point isn't that Rivers or Sloan are horrible coaches. It took a combination of some crazy trades plus striking gold on rondo and perkins and getting the perfect vets to teach them how to be pros plus a coach that turned out to be good at managing all those personalities PLUS tom thibodeau putting a great defensive system in place with veteran stars who recognized that D was important to get a championship.

Before that Rivers did have Pierce (who is shockingly underrated/cold blooded) and one of the best low post players in the game (Al Jefferson) plus two rooks he "should have developed" and flawed but talented headcase players like Ricky Davis and it just wasn't the right mix.

I'm sure some of the losing was his fault but a TON of it was just not having what he had in KG/Pierce/Ray/Tom Thib/Mature Rondo/Mature Perkins etc.

It's just so sports radio easy to say "OMG Rivers is CLUELESS we'll NEVER win anything with him at the helm, get rid of this bum."

I think people overrate the impact coaches have on teams vs talent and chemistry in terms of the pieces actually fitting together.

knicks1248 wrote:

SlimChin wrote:how about coaches making great players? i read on espn that no one in the sixers averages more that 15pts. now that's some good coaching...

I was a little down on doug collins for COY, but i change my mind on that, he's done a great job over there and should be right in the mix.