Glad we agree that the second Bulls three-peat featured a much better supporting cast. I would also agree that the first Bulls three-peat had a fairly similar supporting cast to the big three era Heat and they have produced very similar results, a three-peat for the Bulls and back to back titles for Miami as well as two additional Finals appearances. I watched the early 90's Bulls, as well as the 80's Bulls.
NBA: *** Official 2014 NBA Playoffs Thread ***
- Thread starter CycloneRulzzz
- Start date
Glad we agree that the second Bulls three-peat featured a much better supporting cast. I would also agree that the first Bulls three-peat had a fairly similar supporting cast to the big three era Heat and they have produced very similar results, a three-peat for the Bulls and back to back titles for Miami as well as two additional Finals appearances. I watched the early 90's Bulls, as well as the 80's Bulls.
I don't think I even need to mention how dumb it is to judge someone's career on two games, you already know that. I said earlier that Miami's offense was not good in 2011, Spoelstra definitely gets some blame for that, no argument. But I'm guessing when the offense improved significantly as the Heat went to a small ball lineup and developed their offensive identity, Spoelstra won't get any credit from you on that. But I'll just stand by the fact that "below average coaches" don't win titles, the list of title winning coaches I posted earlier speaks for itself.
That's cool, you never know, I'll remove myself from a discussion about 70s sports because beyond stats I have no real clue. For example I never watched Wilt play live, I feel I can understand what he did somewhat through stats, but I'm not going to get in some passionate argument with someone who saw him play dozens of times.
The truth is as long as his career is made up of mostly being LeBron's coach there will be radical disagreement about Spoelstra. If he succeeds with another talented cast over and over like Jackson he'll be validated. If he can win consistently with average talent he'll be validated through a different path. If he were to retire today people would probably disagree on him forever.
Spoelstra is a terrible coach. Coach Pop played him like a puppet. Spoelstra has benefited by his environment. Give just about any nba coach lebron wade and bosh and you would have seen the same results.
You're right, no way a Spoelstra coached team would ever be able to beat a Popovich coached team in a series.
Nice try my man, but I didn't say that. You take Lebron wade and bosh and put any nba coach to replace spo, I'm saying almost any coach would have at a mimnimum the exact same results as spoelstra. And there are plenty of coaches that would have ended up having much successful seasons. Not only that but as good as lebron already is, I think that if lebron had a real coach, he would be a much better player.
If Erik Spoelstra coached the Thunder, they would have four titles already! Hypothetical statements are fun. Also, please list in what ways LeBron would have become a better player. Under Spoelstra, he's been unleashed to his full defensive capability guarding pretty much everyone on the floor, he's developed an extremely effective post game, he's improved his three point shot, he's shooting an insanely high percentage from the floor.
Last edited:
It's not a hypothetical statement that an extremely high % of Spoelstra's coaching has been done with an elite roster and the best player in the world.
It's not a hypothetical statement that when an elite team gets blown out at home two games in a row in the NBA finals that there could have been a better game plan.
You're simply trolling if you can't admit coaching disparity is a big part of the reason this series is leaning heavily toward San Antonio at this point. It's been a master vs. an average coach at best...and when I say average NBA coach I acknowledge an average NBA coach is still an elite coach, but he's going against a master and being outclassed in that the last two games haven't even been close.
Last edited:
Saying any other coach would have had at minimum the same success as Spoelstra is a completely hypothetical statement. From your response, I don't think you know what that word means though.
Phil Jackson lost to a Detroit Pistons team led by Chauncey Billups in five games, despite having far and away the two best players in the series. The Lakers failed to even score 80 points in two of those games. No doubt Jackson's coaching cost the Lakers that series. Any average NBA coach would have been able to score 80 points with Kobe and Shaq.
I didn't say that for sure, it's possible but who knows. I said what I said and it's not a hypothetical but you ignore it.
You saying you know Spoelstra is doing better than a typical NBA coach with this team is just as hypothetical as the people you're raging against.
We know for sure he has been taken behind the wood shed at home two games in a row. We know for sure he doesn't have a large sample of coaching not-LeBron-James in the NBA. That's what I said.
Who says Phil Jackson can never be outcoached? I'm sure he can and has been, you called him the greatest ever. I simply called him an excellent coach.
Spoelstra is being outcoached right now, you're a cartoon to not admit it or deflect it into something bigger. It doesn't even have to mean he's a bad coach, it can mean he's a good coach facing a master who has his team playing like a well oiled machine.
what word? "Hypothetical"?
It is not a hypothetical that the majority of Spoelstra's NBA head coaching has been done with the best player in the world and a loaded roster.
It is not a hypothetical that when a team is good enough to make the NBA finals, wins a road game in the finals, then gets blown out at home two games in a row (without suffering injuries) their game plan could clearly have been better even in a loss.
I've never said he wasn't being outcoached, Pop is a great coach. You're building a strawman argument, I've disagreed with the assessment that he's a below average or terrible coach.
I think Spoelstra is probably an average to good NBA coach. They really had the deck stacked against them for the rematch:
-Popovich now has several games of experience dealing with Miami's defense, so they aren't going to get caught off-guard this time
-San Antonio upgraded from Gary Neal to the Patty Mills/Marco Bellinelli combo, didn't lose any other contributors, got Manu healthier than last year, and Kawhi improved a lot
-Miami lost Mike Miller, only added semi-washed up Rashard Lewis, and saw steep age-related declines from Wade, Allen, and Battier.
So since this went a tight 7 games last year, why exactly is it surprising that the Spurs are dominating this series?
Agree with the rest but if the bolded is true it's just more reason Spoelstra would be outclassed by Pop.
It's not a surprise to me SA is winning or could win the series, it's a surprise to me (and the expert former coaches broadcasting the game) that they're blowing out a team with LeBron James on it in the NBA finals on the road. And I can't rationalize it any other way than the game plan quality having an impact.
Where the crap is Battier this year in the Finals? I think Spo is f'ing up not playing him more....the dude is great on defense and can flat out shoot the 3.
