Give it up Partner. Those Spurs teams were elimnated by the Drexler/Porter/Kersey/Duckworth/Williams Blazers teams of the early 90's in the second round of the playoffs. Are you seriously going to try and tell me that Spurs team, while talented, was better than that Portland squad? The Spurs were elimnated in 6 I believe and game 6 was a double overtime game. Personally, I think Brown did a miraculous job in San Antonio even with the addition of rookie David Robinson. We're talking about a 30+ game improvement over a two year span, still one of the best turnarounds in the history of the NBA. You're reaching for something to smear Larry Brown with. Problem is there just isn't much that you can smear the guy with.
Sorry....but Rudy is gone now. Can't tell him to coach our team now. Larry Brown's a good teacher. Who is available right now who is a better teacher than him and is a "big name"?
Deuce Rings, You realize the Spurs not only landed Robinson in 1989, but also Terry Cummings. Brown went there for Robinson, and the inevitable turnaround...just like he's doing with Yao Ming. Why do you say I am smearing Brown? The story of him leaving behind teams in turmoil and not doing well is widely accepted. And he did that in Robinson's prime!! Deuce, you are talking Robinson's 1st year. That proved what that team was capable of doing, pushing Portland to 7 games in the second round. 7 games. So give Brown credit, but he had ready-to-play, mature Robinson and Terry Cummings and Maurice Cheeks as PG. So, didn't that team didn't turn around and underachieve the next year (losing 3-1 to GS in the 1st Round) and the year after when Larry Brown quits midseason. Look, at the time, this was pretty much widely accepted that the Spurs were underachieving in Brown's last two years. I'm not smearing him; I'm trying to recite history. If you want to show me that they didn't underachieve his last 2 yrs at SA, or that he didn't have talent with a 25/13 Robinson and all those fire power shooters and a solid PG, then go ahead. But don't say I'm smearing him. My original point was those Spurs teams were much better than the current Rockets. The Pacer's teams were, too. He's a great coach. But he has issues, and his NBA teams have deteriorated as much as he has turned them around. He doesn't get called on that too often, because he's smart enough to exit before he starts getting serious blame. Is that the right coach? Especially at age 62?
In addition to seeing what ex-fans thought of Brown, I figured I would take a look at what he did in Philly and see how I liked it. Specifically, I was looking at his offense and his attempts to get a second scorer to play alongside Iverson. As it turns out, for 6 seasons, the second-scorer role has been a revolving door, with the players in question either fading to uselessness or getting traded. Granted, some of this may have something to do with Iverson's personality (and unique talent), but Brown can't seem to get anyone to fill the role. 97 (pre-Brown): Stackhouse (20.7 ppg). Brown got rid of him quick. I remember the papers saying he and Iverson couldn't co-exist. Followed by Coleman in one his few productive years. 98: Coleman (17.6), with Stackhouse out of the picture. He actually scores less points than when they had Stackhouse. He leaves as an FA at season's end. 99: Geiger (13.5), an FA pickup is #2. But, the heir apparent is Larry Hughes (9.1). His knock is that he shot too low a percentage and was traded. Geiger slowly fades away over the next couple of seasons. 00: Kukoc (12.4). Was supposed to be a sharpshooter and a savvy vet. But doesn't play to expectations. Soon traded away for Mutombo. 01: Mutombo (11.7) and McKie (11.6). When Mutombo and McKie are your second scorers, you're in trouble. Fortunately, Iverson is scoring over 30 a game at this point and the defense is great. Mutombo stays level the next season and McKie actually gets a little better. Before the '03 season, Mutombo is dumped and McKie has faded somewhat. 02: Coleman (15.1) is back but is knocked for being lazy and overweight. Its been said that he'd be a HOFer if he'd just try. Performed ok in '02, but disappeared again the following year (only to revive briefly for the playoffs). 03: Van Horn (15.9) is acquired for Mutombo to provide more secondary scoring. Accused of often disappearing, especially in the clutch. The general trend is that Iverson was taking more and more of the scoring load under Brown with each successive year until this last season when Iverson's scoring actually dipped a little without dropping their average for the team. The other trend is that he's constantly changing out offensive players around Iverson, never going a year with the same #2. His real second scorer types: Stackhouse, Coleman, Hughes, Kukoc and possibly van Horn are all traded or allowed to walk after a very short stint. Ok, that's enough writing. Everything below is optional reading. Notes I wrote while looking at all this stuff: In Iverson's first year, '96-'97, the 76ers averaged 100.6 ppg, with 5 players in double-figures: Iverson (23.5), Stackhouse (20.7), Coleman (18.1), Weatherspoon (12.2), and McLean (10.9). They finished 22-60. In Brown's first year, '97-'98, they averaged 93.3 ppg, led by Iverson (22.0), Coleman (17.6), Ratliff (11.2), Tim Thomas (11.0), and Joe Smith (10.3). He had traded second scorer Stackhouse for Ratliff and McKie. He traded Keith van Horn and McLean for Tim Thomas and Jim Jackson. He traded Weatherspoon and Jim Jackson for Joe Smith. They finished 31-51. In '99, they averaged 89.7 ppg, led by only 3 players in double-figures: Iverson (26.8), Geiger (13.5), Ratliff (11.2), Hughes (9.1), and Snow (8.6). Coleman and Smith left as free agents. Geiger (FA), and Hughes (draft), are new. Snow was in second place for MIP. As a recall, Hughes was thought to be the new second scorer Philly hadn't had since Stackhouse was traded. They finished 28-22 and were swept by Indiana in the second round. In '99-'00, they scored 94.8 ppg, led by Iverson (28.4), Kukoc (12.4), Hill (12.0), Ratliff (11.9), and Geiger (9.7). Supposed second scorer Larry Hughes was traded in a package for new supposed second scorer Toni Kukoc. Traded Tim Thomas for Tyrone Hill. They finished 49-33 and were again eliminated by Indiana in Round 2. In '00-'01 they scored 94.7 points led by Iverson (31.1), Mutombo (11.7), McKie (11.6), Snow (9.8), and Hill (9.6). Ratliff, Nazr and (second scorer) Kukoc were traded for Mutombo and McLeod. They went 56-26 and lost to the Lakers in the Finals. The Sixers also won MVP, Coach of the Year, 6th Man of the Year annd Defensive Player of the Year. In '01-'02, they scored 91.0 ppg, led by Iverson (31.4), Coleman (15.1), McKie (12.2), Snow (12.1), and Harpring (11.8). Mutombo also reached double-figures with 11.5. They also had a lot of injuries and only Harpring and Mutombo played near a full season's worth (which may inflate the numbers a bit). They traded Tyrone Hill for Harpring (he was later let go as an FA). They finished 43-39 and were eliminated in the first round by Boston. In '02-'03, they scored 96.8 points led by Iverson (27.6), van Horn (15.9), Snow (12.9), Kenny Thomas (10.2), and Coleman (9.4). Traded Mutombo for van Horn. Traded some scrubs for Kenny Thomas. Van Horn was supposed to be their new second scorer but was knocked for disappearing at crucial times. They finished 48-34 and were eliminated by Detroit in the second round.
We actually agree on something for a change. To say Brown has never had talent is a lie. He had more talent in Sa than he does now. He had Strickland on the bench behind Mo Cheeks to go along with David,Elliot,Anderson, and Cummings. Their 1st yr they took Portland to 7 games and that Portlan team was a veteran loaded team also. The next yr he lost in like the 2nd rd or so, then the next season he left and went to La. That La team he went to was loaded also, ask the 92-93 rockets. Most people want to look at the lack of talent he had in Philly, but most of that was his fault.After a good rookie season by Tim Thomas and 23 mins of action , he was traded for Ty Hill and Jerald Honeycutt. Larry Hughes, even though he wasn't developed yet, he was traded for Toni Kukoc.
JuanValdez, As an asterix player for your list, you should add Matt Harpring, since he left Brown to become the second scorer role in Utah.
Hmm......Harpring is like the most improved player. He fit much better with Utah than Philadelphia........and the 76ers could have used him this year.
Maybe, maybe not. They made the Finals one year and have made the playoffs the last 5 years and the 2nd round 3 times. Maybe all the moves hurt them, but they certainly weren't crippled by the moves. Trading Ratliff, Nazr, and Kukoc was a big one. That was Philly's best year, and they were traded towards the end of the season. I think they wanted Mutumbo to compete with Shaq, but they gave up a lot. But then Ratliff got hurt for a long time, which made it a good trade. It's arguable that the problem was there was only one true superstar- Iverson. If he had 2, maybe things would have been different.
It's probably going to be Brown. Let's face it. But 3-4 years is just fine. That's when this team will need a leader who can take them over the top. Somebody a little looser than Brown. So in my opinion this team would be right on schedule with Brown teaching them the fundamentals and then enforcing them. It's why I would also support Doug Collins right now. This is exactly what we need. Soomeone who can break them down and build them back up. After that, if Brown can't push them over the top Les can find someone that will.
I hear you about the Gloden State loss the following the season. While it looked bad at the time, people have got to realize that that was the Run T.M.C. Gloden State team that won 50+ games the next season. If you recall, Golden State entered the playoffs that year as one of the hottest teams in the league so it sounds as if the Spurs were facing a team that was much better than their record. Plus, you can't ignore the fact that the Spurs were built around the Little Mermaid, maybe one of the worst playoff performers ever to grace the NBA playoffs.
The Spurs may have been talented, but the Clippers team that Brown coached just doesn't qualify as a talented team. Msrk Jackson was not even near the player we know today. He was considered an average player at the time, just another no name. Loy Vaught was the team's best player and we all saw how average he was when he finally got out of L.A., signed a big free agent deal with Detroit, and then ended up being the last player off the bench for a mediocre Detroit team. I can understand someone looking at that roster and saying, "wow, that's a good team". That's kind of like looking at the Rockets 1998 roster with Barkley, Olajuwon, and Drexler and concluding that it must have been the best team ever assembled. We all know that the team's stars were in the twilight of their careers and were only a glimmer of their former selves.
Our team is young and dumb. But they have natural talent just waiting to be tapped into. The Spurs players names "seem" more talented today, now that they've had their careers. But see me in 10 years, and you'll be hearing names like Francis, Mobley, Griffin, and Yao! Those players are bettter. They just don't have the "legendary" history to back them up. And all of them are in dire need of guidance.
This is true. Rudy was a very good scout. Yep. He never wanted the coaching job in the first place. Most of the time he seemed like he was winging it. Nervous and confused.
This is a tangent and has nothing to do with Brown: but man, Terry Cummings just burst onto the scene as a rookie, looking like he was all world and a future superstar, then sort of was good for a long time but never really took it up to the next level I just looked up his stats and it is sort of eerily similar: Burst onto the scene, peaked as a rookie and had career highs in scoring, fg% and rebounding, slightly declined, and then plateaued until he got old and injured. YEAR TEAM G GS MPG FG% 3P% FT% OFF DEF RPG APG SPG BPG TO PF PPG 82-83 LAC 70 69 36.2 .523 .000 .709 4.30 6.30 10.60 2.5 1.84 .89 2.91 4.20 23.7 83-84 LAC 81 80 35.9 .494 .000 .720 4.00 5.60 9.60 1.7 1.14 .70 2.69 3.70 22.9 84-85 MIL 79 78 34.5 .495 .000 .741 3.10 6.00 9.10 2.9 1.48 .85 2.41 3.30 23.6 85-86 MIL 82 82 32.5 .474 .000 .656 2.70 5.80 8.50 2.4 1.48 .62 2.33 3.50 19.8 86-87 MIL 82 77 33.8 .511 .000 .662 2.60 5.90 8.50 2.8 1.57 .99 2.10 3.60 20.8 87-88 MIL 76 76 34.6 .485 .333 .665 2.40 4.90 7.30 2.4 1.03 .61 2.24 3.60 21.3 88-89 MIL 80 78 35.3 .467 .467 .787 3.50 4.60 8.10 2.5 1.33 .90 2.51 3.30 22.9 89-90 SAS 81 78 34.8 .475 .322 .780 2.80 5.60 8.40 2.7 1.36 .64 2.49 3.50 22.4 90-91 SAS 67 62 32.8 .484 .212 .683 2.90 4.90 7.80 2.3 .91 .45 1.96 3.40 17.6 91-92 SAS 70 67 30.7 .488 .385 .711 3.50 5.50 9.00 1.5 .83 .49 1.64 3.00 17.3 92-93 SAS 8 0 9.5 .379 .000 .500 .80 1.60 2.40 .5 .13 .13 .25 2.10 3.4 93-94 SAS 59 29 19.2 .428 .000 .589 2.20 2.80 5.00 .8 .53 .22 1.00 2.30 7.3 94-95 SAS 76 20 16.8 .483 .000 .585 1.80 3.20 5.00 .8 .47 .25 1.25 2.50 6.8 95-96 MIL 81 13 21.9 .462 .143 .650 2.00 3.50 5.50 1.1 .69 .37 .85 3.20 8.0 96-97 SEA 45 3 18.4 .486 .600 .695 1.60 2.50 4.10 .9 .73 .16 1.00 2.50 8.2 97-98 NYK 30 1 17.6 .477 .000 .700 1.40 3.10 4.50 .9 .53 .17 1.13 2.60 7.8 97-98 PHI 44 2 14.9 .458 .000 .672 1.30 2.10 3.40 .5 .50 .11 .39 2.30 5.3 98-99 GSW 50 0 20.2 .439 1.000 .711 1.90 3.20 5.10 1.2 .92 .20 1.16 3.40 9.1 99-00 GSW 22 0 18.1 .429 .000 .821 2.00 2.80 4.90 1.0 .59 .36 1.23 3.40 8.4 Career 1,183 815 28.7 .484 .295 .706 2.70 4.60 7.30 1.9 1.06 .55 1.86 3.20 16.4 Playoff 110 68 26.9 .502 .091 .706 2.30 4.50 6.70 1.6 .89 .56 1.55 3.20 15.1 All-Star 2 0 17.5 .423 .000 .833 3.00 3.00 6.00 .5 1.50 1.00 .00 2.50 13. OK, end of tangent, carry on!
larry brown's Philly review How can any sane person actually endorse the opinion of Philly Fan as a collective hole? Not to completely disregard that city's opinions, but at least let's put them in their proper perspective.
