[Wages of Wins] On Coaching

Dave Berri simply doesn't matter much even in his own life.

 

So, talent wins in the NBA, that was insightful.

 

... We approve of this article.

 

I don't know anything about this Berri character but I've always agreed with his conclusion. As does Morey. The problem is Less thinks it's all that matters.

 

What about Larry Brown and the Pistons?

 

Are you talking about the team that was in the ECF the year before LB took over? And then added Rasheed Wallace the year LB was coaching them?

 

I will say this about coaching. It does seem that coaching can make somewhat of a difference in the playoffs. The old Lakers(Shaq/Kobe/NVE/Jones/Campbell teams) had all kinds of talent but failed miserably every year in the playoffs, until Phil Jackson went. The Pistons were always semi-finalists during their early 2000s heyday except Brown's 2 years, where they went to the finals and won one. Flip Saunders took over and had just as much regular season success, but couldn't get to the finals.

Now obviously the question is whether the sample size is big enough, and that seems to be my question regarding Gregg Popovich. Disregarding his talent evaluation side(finding Manu, Parker, etc.) and just look at him as a coach. It seems he always had overwhelming talent, but win sometimes, lose sometimes. While Phil Jackson always seems to win with superior talent. So in that sense, I feel Phil Jackson is better than Pop as the difference maker.

And even Phil Jackson needs superstars to win. Adelman, or any coach coming in, will have ZERO.

 

When PJ joined the Lakers, Duncan was injured for the playoffs. You don't think that had something to do with their success? Not to mention Bryant's growth as a player. He was getting better every year after coming straight from HS. I've already addressed LB - Pistons had more talent when he took them to the Finals than before. I agree Pop is overrated.

 

Phil Jackson won 6 straight championships with Jordan and Pippen. He got to the 2nd round and lost to the eventual finalist in 7 with just Pippen. He got 3-peat with the Lakers(Duncan wasn't injured every year), and got to the finals one other time. After acquiring Gasol, the Lakers once again never failed to reach the finals(again with Duncan healthy at times).

You can argue players all you want. But other than Red Aurebach(sp?), no other coach can claim such monstrous playoff result with top shelf talent. Usually such teams win sometimes, lose sometimes. Yes, even teams with the best players. Phil's star-studded teams just about always win.

 

most coaches figure out a cpl years into it that the best coach is the guy with the best team.

 

You can't say 'even teams with the best players', because no one else always had the best players. There was no one close to Jordan. No one close to the Shaq/Bryant duo. Duncan never had a Bryant to play with, or Pop may have won more championships.

 

I would say that the coach doesn't matter with one caveat- the coach can't be a moron.

 

I kind of agree. There aren't really "great coaches." But there sure are moronic coaches. That's why the question shouldn't be what coach do you want but what coach do you NOT want.

 

Regular season wins is one thing, but who among the top 8 teams gives a whoop about regular season wins?