Dude- you're all over the place. What? So now you are kind of implying that Phil caused them to lose?! A coach gives direction and insight... it is up to the team to execute.
PHX- Barkley NEVER won a ring,
CLE- LeBron NEVER won a ring,
MIN- Garnett NEVER won a ring,
To add to the list above...
Very well said .....many great players and teams have not won it all. Do you think that if the NYK next year get to the Finals that they would win it all? I would bet NO based on a coach who has no Defensive philosophy. Unfortunate for Nash and the Suns, that was their fate. Can't outscore everybody. And yes, that team failed due to their coach and his philosophy, not because they can't play the game.
0
Quote Originally Posted by bmacattack:
Dude- you're all over the place. What? So now you are kind of implying that Phil caused them to lose?! A coach gives direction and insight... it is up to the team to execute.
PHX- Barkley NEVER won a ring,
CLE- LeBron NEVER won a ring,
MIN- Garnett NEVER won a ring,
To add to the list above...
Very well said .....many great players and teams have not won it all. Do you think that if the NYK next year get to the Finals that they would win it all? I would bet NO based on a coach who has no Defensive philosophy. Unfortunate for Nash and the Suns, that was their fate. Can't outscore everybody. And yes, that team failed due to their coach and his philosophy, not because they can't play the game.
There's a difference of being "in" and winning even though there's no chance that will happen...
People forget this is a team game and a season is long. Have the best 3 in the NBA does not mean you will win against a TEAM of players. A coaches system, their philosophy, way they deal with players does matter and factors in to a teams success.
If Brooks had the balls and was not worried about how Westbrook would respond, he would have put a quash to his nonsense during the season and benched him during the game. But he can't totally control what Westbrook will do, he can only persuade, guide, and probably plead with him to play differently. Until he can harness him, that will be the thing that kills OKC. Fortunate for them, they are young and hopefully will learn. That is just my opinion.
0
Quote Originally Posted by bmacattack:
There's a difference of being "in" and winning even though there's no chance that will happen...
People forget this is a team game and a season is long. Have the best 3 in the NBA does not mean you will win against a TEAM of players. A coaches system, their philosophy, way they deal with players does matter and factors in to a teams success.
If Brooks had the balls and was not worried about how Westbrook would respond, he would have put a quash to his nonsense during the season and benched him during the game. But he can't totally control what Westbrook will do, he can only persuade, guide, and probably plead with him to play differently. Until he can harness him, that will be the thing that kills OKC. Fortunate for them, they are young and hopefully will learn. That is just my opinion.
Look at the roster for the 98-99 Lakers that got swept by the Spurs. Pretty damn good. Del Harris? Phil shows up the next year and the Lakers win it all. SAME ROSTER
0
Look at the roster for the 98-99 Lakers that got swept by the Spurs. Pretty damn good. Del Harris? Phil shows up the next year and the Lakers win it all. SAME ROSTER
Just to the comment about the 94-95 team to the 95-96 Bulls roster, there wasn't just a one player difference. Besides Jordan being back for the full season, they had a turnover of 4-5 players between those years.
0
Just to the comment about the 94-95 team to the 95-96 Bulls roster, there wasn't just a one player difference. Besides Jordan being back for the full season, they had a turnover of 4-5 players between those years.
If you choose to make use of any information on this website including online sports betting services from any websites that may be featured on
this website, we strongly recommend that you carefully check your local laws before doing so.It is your sole responsibility to understand your local laws and observe them strictly.Covers does not provide
any advice or guidance as to the legality of online sports betting or other online gambling activities within your jurisdiction and you are responsible for complying with laws that are applicable to you in
your relevant locality.Covers disclaims all liability associated with your use of this website and use of any information contained on it.As a condition of using this website, you agree to hold the owner
of this website harmless from any claims arising from your use of any services on any third party website that may be featured by Covers.