Spurs lose to Grizzlies in SA Jazz lose to Clippers in Utah Lakers lose to Warriors in LA Suns lost to Heat in Miami Apparently the Rockets aren't the only ones who are not perfect. Timberwolves barely beat Sonics and the JailBlazers had to go to double overtime to beat Hawks. Still not a bad day though.
What, you mean the Rockets aren't the only team that loses?!!??? Maybe all of those coaches should be fired and all their players traded away . . .
While they're trading all of the star players off those teams, maybe the cream of the crop could somehow magically land in Houston.
I watched the Laker's game tonight. Since last Friday's showdown with Rox, Lakers looked flat for the past two games. They barely beat the Clips and looked bad losing to the Warriors tonight. It feels great watching these arrogant SOBs trying to get back to .500. By comparison, our problems don't seem as bad any more.
I'd be willing to bet that none of those teams all have losses to the Warriors, Grizzlies, Hawks, the Knicks by double digits AND to the Clippers twice
After all the sound and fury, we're only TWO games in the loss column from being 3rd in the West. Not bad. Not bad at all.
Say all you want about how other teams lose, we're young, we should stand pat....but this team isn't going anywhere with Steve and Cat together. "Give them time! They'll get better!" Ahem..... WHEN?!
How about when the front court matures? A rookie center, a second year power forward and brand spankin new small forward aren't exactly a recipe for success chemistry wise. 2.5 games behind the Spurs at the halfway mark of the season and people have the audacity to b**** and moan. How many of you wound not have accepted this situation before the season started?
The Spurs have losses to the Warriors, Grizzlies, Hawks, Knicks, Clippers and Denver! The Suns have losses to the Warriors, Grizzlies, Denver and Miami twice! The Blazers have lost to Denver twice! Fortunately the playoffs will not have these cellar dwelling teams in it. I am more interested in our play against the other top teams in the West.
Actually he did and is being paid like he did. He's a good coach when given the talent, he can make them play to their potential. However, he can never make them overacheive which means that he'll never try to rebuild a team.
How hard is it to say, "Isolate the ball for Jordan", or "Dump it down to Shaq", or "Isolate for Kobe"? The dumbass didn't even design his own triangle offense. He is not a bad coach, but no where near the top either.
I gained some respect for Phil when the Bulls only had Pippen for a year and a half and were still a top team in the East. Sure he didn't win any championships those two years, but he still had a competitive product on the floor without Air/Floor Jordan. I think he deserves some credit. In his situations I think an average coach would only have 5-6 rings instead of 9. He does have a perfect record in the NBA finals. For now I'll still take Rudy over Phil to coach the Rockets. B
I agree with B completely. He had a competitive team with Wennington, Kerr (all journeymen), and Pippen as the primary offensive threat. That was good coaching. In the NBA massaging egos is a crucial part of the job, however when he came to LA is it any coincidence that it was Kobe's 4th year, and Shaq happened to be fullt in his prime??
If you were given a team with the best talent in the league wouldn't you jump on that offer? Phil wanted to leave on top, and he had a chance to come back with the potentially best team in the league. Did you expect him to jump on the Clippers ship after he left the Bulls? One thing Phil does not have is the patience to rebuild a team. I think Phil might be just as helpless on the current Cavs as John Lucas was. In the NBA as in life, sometimes it pays off to wait for the best opportunity, instead of just taking what you can get and work up from there. I think our society values those who do well in an underdog situation rather than the favorites continuing to meet expectations. If Rudy T can stay with the Rockets and win a championship again, I think he will be the first coach to win and a championship, rebuild and win another championship with the same team. I'm not a big fan of Phil, but I think he does have some credibility because he did what Doug Collins and Del Harris couldn't with their teams. Both the Bulls and Lakers were expected to win a championship every year, and he met those expectations every year. When Jordan was out, I think all that was expected was the Bulls should be a playoff team, and they were. Doc Rivers won coach of the year when he took a Magic team with nobody (Ben Wallace was considered a nobody back then, I bet they really regret the Grant Hill trade now), and almost made the playoffs. Does this make him a great coach? In the voters eyes yes, since he exceeded expectations. When you are expected to win the championship, you really can't exceed the expectations. The best way to look at Phil is to say that he has met the expectations with every team he has been with, and you can't say that about too many current coaches. (Jerry Sloan, Larry Bird, Doc Rivers, Rick Carlisle, Jeff VanGundy come to mind as coaches that have consistently met or exceeded expectations in the past 10 years) B
