NBA Playoffs Conference Finals Game Thread
- Thread starter jon abbey
- Start date
The turnaround was HUGE clutch shot---the bail-out fall call on the prior trip was awful. Then again, so was the missed goaltend off the glass, so....
Miami Spurs again, (with 3 a New York team v. La team or Blackhawks in the NHL)
BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
F this S
BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
F this S
it's more the players having all the control in the league. They control for the most part where the power lies and where it doesn't. Spurs are an exception to that rule, even if I was rooting against thembbc23 said:
Duncan is a legend. His OT performance is everything that is special about him and his career. He took over the game on the block by schooling Ibaka with just straight craftiness. Even his foul call, that was just such a smart veteran move. Duncan knew that even if he missed the shot, if he initiated a little contact and faded away, the refs might call a foul, and they did. He was also extremely vocal on the court and backed everyone one up on defense. Just the ultimate alpha dog.
The Spurs are the only team capable of beating the Heat, so this is a good result.
I think It's time to possibly consider Pop the greatest coach ever.
I think It's time to possibly consider Pop the greatest coach ever.
Going to be a tough fought series again. Spurs were oh so close last year. Let's hope they can finish the deal this year
Games 2-5 were epic?riboflav said:
http://www.basketball-reference.com/boxscores/201306090MIA.html
http://www.basketball-reference.com/boxscores/201306110SAS.html
http://www.basketball-reference.com/boxscores/201306130SAS.html
http://www.basketball-reference.com/boxscores/201306160SAS.html
In any case, it's like the Wicked Witch of the West v. Satan. Once is more than enough.
I don't understand this at all. The Spurs have home court where they are nearly invincible and are the defending champions over Miami with better Kawhi Leonard FT shooting while OKC matches up horribly with the Heat.bball831 said:
Miami was undoubtably better off with OKC stealing a Game 7 in San Antonio. These finals are gonna be a war now.
Did you miss Wade and Mike Miller hobbling through the playoffs the past two seasons?Kliq said:
I don't know what metrics should be used to evaluate coaches in the NBA. I know joe gibbs is a good football coach, same with parcells and belichik.
But for the NBA, people say great coaches are Red, P. Jackson, Pop and I just think Bill Russell, MJ/Shaq&Kobe, Duncan
I mean, is Eric Spoelstra one of the best NBA coaches ever? If not, why not?
But for the NBA, people say great coaches are Red, P. Jackson, Pop and I just think Bill Russell, MJ/Shaq&Kobe, Duncan
I mean, is Eric Spoelstra one of the best NBA coaches ever? If not, why not?
I'm with you 99% on this. The best coaches are the best leaders......period. It had nothing at all to do with x's and o's like it did 50 years ago. Everyone runs the same stuff the only difference is the talent of the star players.luckiestman said:
Greatness is the result of star players and continuity. No doubt Pop is among the best......I'm just not sure how much difference there is between the "best" coach and a competent one.
luckiestman said:
Agree. I mean there is a universe somewhere where LeBron James is complaining to Bill Simmons over beer, "It's really hard to beat Rick Pitino."
Along a similar vein, Bobby Knight was asked once if he was nervous about losing a game when he found IND down by double-digits in the 2nd half. He said, "I was worried until I looked at the other bench and saw Dale Brown." I wonder if that's how Pops felt last night.
Hopefully Tim can pull out one more. If not, :-(
The difference between Pop and those other NBA coaches is that his message has continued to resonate for 20 years. Pitino would have been more successful in Boston with Tim Duncan, but no way he sticks around long enough to get 4 rings and make 6 finals appearances.wade boggs chicken dinner said:
triniSox said:
What would the case for Pop over Red Auerbach look like? I think it doesn't exist.
I wouldn't put Pop over Phil Jackson either, though I can imagine a case on that one based on managing through transitions
I wonder. The Spurs did just fine in the 2nd half and overtime without Parker. Their system is more important than the individuals playing it. They make the right passes and the right rotations on defense on just about every possession. Also, Patty Mills (who BTW will be an unrestricted FA in July) did a very creditable job filling in, as he has on quite a few occasions.
I understand that people are tired of watching the Spurs in the Finals. Then again, they do stuff like this:
So I'm ok with it.
So I'm ok with it.
To play devils advocate on Red. There is no doubt he was a brilliant mastermind at taking advantage of less creative thinking GM's/Owners. He's the greatest GM in the history of the game and I LOVE RED!PedroKsBambino said:
How well does his coaching alone compare to others? He won championship after championship in an 8-TEAM LEAGUE with 2 rounds of playoffs, a semi-final typically againt a .500 or so team followed by the championship series while allowing his group of HOFers to be taken to 7 games on multiple occasions by teams with regular season losing records.
Only Red could have assembled those players in the manner with which he did......but my dog could have allowed below .500 teams to get to a 7th game agaiant this group also. The coach has a minimal impact on these games......moreso now than ever.
Edit: After Red left the bench an inexperienced coach in Bill Russell won a couple championships too......and let's not even get into KC Jones whose greatest skill was knowing when to get out of the way which is probably as essential a skill that an NBA coach can have.
HomeRunBaker said:
While I agree that coaches are somewhat overrated, I think it's a gross exaggeration to say that "everyone runs the same stuff, the difference is talent" or what makes a good coach is whether he's a leader of men.
Reading Lowe on Grantland is a bit of chore because his columns so rich in substance, but everyone who reads him, sees that teams do not run the same things all the time. There is a ton of difference in the schemes they have and more importantly in the kind of adjustments coaches make to various challenges they face, like let's say when the Heat had trouble with David West guarding Ray Allen in the first game of the Eastern Conference finals.
As far as Popovich is concerned, he has to be in the conversation for best all time. I certainly consider him better than the overrated Phil Jackson and I do so for many reasons. Popovich was the first to understand the crucial role of corner 3 and to orient his teams towards attacking and defending this shot. His innovative in resting his players during the long season, ensuring their health and longevity; this is something he probably got from soccer rotations mind you and he's still ahead of the curve as very few teams choose to rest their stars. As a result, a ton of teams face injuries throughout the long season, but the Spurs remain relatively healthy (knock on wood).
When you see the Spurs roster, you don't see the kind of talent that would be a no brainer to win the hyper competitive West year in year out. There's a ton of players who are either considered too old or washed up in other places and yet they still perform above expectation. Tim Duncan is 38 and he's still killing it, but KG on the same age has a giant fork sticking from his back. Ginobili puts in the same numbers per 36 at an age when guards his age are out of the league. Boris Diaw was a nobody in Charlotte and he transforms into a vital cog in the Spurs machine. The examples are endless. That's why every year for the past 4-5 years, pundits said that the Spurs too old and they pick some one else to come out of the west. I don't think many people expected them win the West again and reach the finals yet again. The feeling last year was of a final chance lost for the Spurs.
Last, but not least, look at the gif above. That kind of ball movement isn't a product of individual talent. It's a product of coaching and the Spurs do it all the time. Do you see the plays they run? They re above and beyond in creativity and movement than what all other teams run.
So yeah, Popovich is probably the best coach of at least the last 20 years and he deserves all the adulation, because he's still underrated.
jon abbey said:
well said.
riboflav said:
and that greatness leads to this -- can't wait for the rematch between the league's 2 best teams, greatness that does have a ton to do with great coaching (Pop especially, but both are really good) and front offices. I do hope Parker is healthy both so the teams are at their best and so the Spurs have a better chance to win -- guess he's currently scheduled to play game 1, so will see what he looks like.
Don't take this as me knocking Pop because I feel he is at the top of the list and even possibly/likely one of the exceptions to my general rule.Nick Kaufman said:
Schemes such as the corner 3 he gets absolute credit for no doubt. I've always preached floor spacing on this board going back a decade as the most critical element of an offense to open up penetrating lanes and avoiding double teaming the post.
I have trouble giving him credit for the idea of resting old/beat up players over the course of 82 games.....it was Pop's arrogance of doing so in high profile regular season games (oxymoron I know) that was all about "look at me I'm smarter than you" which I love when it's my coach (see: Belichick, William) but despise it when it's not. It's more common sense than anything and Pop did not begin doing this until he was firmly established with the cache to throw a big FU directly at Stern.
Scott Brooks is simply in over his head as any scout worth his weight will tell you that having a big on Ray Allen with zero chance of denying him the ball off screens is a recipe for disaster as once the ball is in his hands his quick release can get a shot off over any immobile big.....you can defend Allen with Jackson or even Fisher who are quick enough to slide above the screens and into the passing lanes to deny entry to Allen.
As far as the individual skills of a player such as passing and awareness.....I'm sorry but those are the players individual skills and strengths. Even in Charlotte, Diaw was a point forward and excellent passer......Duncan had these instincts as a freshman at Wake Forest which opened my eyes......Parker grew up with his Dad playing professionally and is an excellent passer with tremendous awareness. Pop gets credit, along with Buford, for ACQUIRING the ideal player for Pops system.......not for teaching an individual skill that already exists.
Doc did the same with the Celtics particularly in the case of KG the day he arrived in 2007 taking his regular season minutes from 39 to 30-32 a game. It's not innovative it's common sense in looking at the big picture. Anyone who criticizes a coach for best preparing their team for the playoffs does not have their priorities in order.Devizier said:
HomeRunBaker said:
I think most of that doesn't stand up to historical analysis, though. Believe they only got taken to a game 7 by a team with a losing record once, in the first year they won a title...thus you're overplaying that series quite a bit. And your dog probably would have lost game 7 anyway!
The three things I can't help but give Red the coach credit for are:
1. Implementing the fast break offense that fit his roster, and was the key to their early success
2. Integrating new players in without losing a beat (Cousy out, Havlicek in and all the changes in role players along the way)
3. Motivating the player who was both the greatest winner in the history of team sports and one of the most complicated personalities, Bill Russell.
For me, the overall record of success and the way he got there is just beyond dispute...and well beyond that of any competitor. I'm not sure that a number of those HOF would be there absent being on those Celtics teams, so it's a little bit of a tautology to say that he's a product of those players.
BigSoxFan said:
I have never heard this criticism before, and it doesn't make much sense to me. Agreed that three of those four Finals wins were against relatively weak teams, but the Spurs had to beat a ton of great teams out West to get there almost every year. 1999 was a strike year, but they beat 60 win teams each of the other seasons just to get to the Finals. I don't think anyone is questioning the Duncan/Popovich era in any way, and again I am the biggest Spurs hater in the world.
BigSoxFan said:
Interesting, it's a bit hard because historically great teams rarely lose playoff series. But the Spurs knocked out the Lakers both the season before and the season after their threepeat, the Pistons were in the midst of six straight trips to the conference finals and were defending champions when SA beat them in the Finals (as you said), and the Suns were arguably the best offensive team of all time and would have won a title or two if SA hadn't kept knocking them out.