Teams
Forum List
Toggle sidebar

***NBA Playoffs Thread***

Status
Not open for further replies.
Jordanj6502 said:
So wait, is Westbrook a good player and well coached, or is he a ball hog that will cost his team at least 2 games in a series with the Clippers? :tongue:
Click to expand...

You would think an elite coach, could prevent that ball hogging, wouldn't you?
 
Jordanj6502 said:
So wait, is Westbrook a good player and well coached, or is he a ball hog that will cost his team at least 2 games in a series with the Clippers? :tongue:
Click to expand...

I never said the first part at all, not sure what your point is. I said Paul > Westbrook, that's it.

I think Scott Brooks did something personally to some of you guys. Has to be.
 
IHavNoCyCash said:
I never said the first part at all, not sure what your point is. I said Paul > Westbrook, that's it.

I think Scott Brooks did something personally to some of you guys. Has to be.
Click to expand...

What makes him such a good coach? The Thunder have great talent, they run more iso's than just about anybody in the league. They have a pretty simple defensive game plan too, what about Brooks makes him an elite coach?

I've said several times, he's a decent coach. Five years with a team is a good run in the NBA.
 
CyJack13 said:
What makes him such a good coach? The Thunder have great talent, they run more iso's than just about anybody in the league. They have a pretty simple defensive game plan too, what about Brooks makes him an elite coach?

I've said several times, he's a decent coach. Five years with a team is a good run in the NBA.
Click to expand...

did I ever say he was elite? Some of you guys need to read, holy cow. I posted my list of coaches better than Thibodeau,here

IHavNoCyCash said:
1) George Karl (obvious)
2) Gregg Poppovich (obvious)
3) Scott Brooks (debatable)
4) Doc Rivers (debatable)
5) Rick Carlisle (debatable)

not that hard.

once Phil comes back, he'll replace Rick
Click to expand...
Bulls fans mad I put 5 coaches arguably better than him. Turns into ******* match. Hilarity ensues.
 
theantiAIRBHG said:
George Karl sucks.
Click to expand...
karlmad.gif
 
I'm having a hard time seeing how you can say this...

CyJack13 said:
I wouldn't argue with that ranking. I'd have Karl, Spoelstra, Vogel in the same tier as Doc/Thibs, but I wouldn't be picky about the order.
Click to expand...

...but then also say this...

CyJack13 said:
Brooks.. He's been given a ton of talent
Click to expand...

...and this...

CyJack13 said:
2) Presti deserves more credit than Brooks, yes he's the one who did a great drafting and acquiring the talent on the Thunder.
Click to expand...

...and this...

CyJack13 said:
What makes him such a good coach? The Thunder have great talent,
Click to expand...

I don't see how you can praise Spoelstra for something you have been dogging Brooks about. I think CyCash is right...Brooks must have done something to you.

Or, CyCash just knows more about basketball than you do. Maybe both.
 
Spoelstra isn't a great coach, He just has 3 of the top 25 players in the league.
 
DistrictCyclone said:
I'm having a hard time seeing how you can say this...



...but then also say this...



...and this...



...and this...



I don't see how you can praise Spoelstra for something you have been dogging Brooks about. I think CyCash is right...Brooks must have done something to you.

Or, CyCash just knows more about basketball than you do. Maybe both.
Click to expand...

Spoelstra has always been a great defensive coach. He won 47 games with a front line of Michael Beasley, a washed up Jermaine O'Neal and Quinton Richardson. His defensive schemes have always been great. He was a little slow to embrace the small ball line up and to get Wade and LeBron to settle in to their current roles, but he did a great job handling their egos while facing 10x the pressure that Brooks has faced in OKC. But mainly Spoelstra's defensive coaching ability sets him apart from Brooks.
 
Last edited:
CyJack13 said:
Spoelstra has always been a great defensive coach. He won 47 games with a front line of Michael Beasley, a washed up Jermaine O'Neal and Quinton Richardson. His defensive schemes have always been great. He was a little slow to embrace the small ball line up and to get Wade and LeBron to settle in to their current roles, but he did a great job handling their egos while facing 10x the pressure that Brooks has faced in OKC. But mainly Spoelstra's defensive coaching ability sets him apart from Brooks.
Click to expand...

Spoelstra's half-court offense is not good, and his adjustments mid-game are spotty at best. Brooks > Spoelstra.

And I'm still wondering why you say that the success of Brooks' teams is primarily due to their talent while you unquestionably rank Spoelstra up there with Thibs, George Karl, and Doc Rivers when he's got the 3 of the best players in the game (including the best).
 
DistrictCyclone said:
Spoelstra's half-court offense is not good, and his adjustments mid-game are spotty at best. Brooks > Spoelstra.

And I'm still wondering why you say that the success of Brooks' teams is primarily due to their talent while you unquestionably rank Spoelstra up there with Thibs, George Karl, and Doc Rivers when he's got the 3 of the best players in the game (including the best).
Click to expand...

Miami has the most efficient offense in the league...

Hollinger's NBA Team Stats - ESPN Insider - National Basketball Association - ESPN
 
DistrictCyclone said:
Spoelstra's half-court offense is not good, and his adjustments mid-game are spotty at best. Brooks > Spoelstra.

And I'm still wondering why you say that the success of Brooks' teams is primarily due to their talent while you unquestionably rank Spoelstra up there with Thibs, George Karl, and Doc Rivers.
Click to expand...

Just told you, his defensive coaching ability. Brooks offense consists of more isos than just about any other team in the NBA. It works well, but I don't think it points to a great coaching ability. The Heat really haven't struggled in the half court this year, especially with any of their regular line ups, and he's continued to evolve their offense every year.

And yes I know the Thunder have a better defensive efficiency rating this year than Miami, OKC has improved a lot and getting rid of Harden greatly helped on that end, while the addition of Ray Allen hurt Miami's D. But in the playoffs I would expect Miami to be back to the top defensive team.

And saying Spoelstra is a better coach than Brooks isn't some extremist opinion, but I know you feel the need to argue so go ahead.

Film Study: Thunder Stars Do It Alone « NBA.com | Hang Time Blog
 
IHavNoCyCash said:
I never said the first part at all, not sure what your point is. I said Paul > Westbrook, that's it.

I think Scott Brooks did something personally to some of you guys. Has to be.
Click to expand...

IHavNoCyCash said:
You do realize have Westbrook, arguably the biggest ballhog in the playoffs?

He'll cost them 2 games by himself in the series.
Click to expand...


IHavNoCyCash said:
Westbrook was not even close to the player he was today. He was looked as just an athlete out of UCLA. Ibaka was a mid first rounder as well. The only one that came in ready was Durant. Brooks helped make Westbrook and Ibaka who they are, and he deserves credit for that. Presti didn't go the Heat way and get 2 other superstars. Presti drafted these guys based on potential and handed them to Brooks to mold.
Click to expand...

You were touting what Scott Brooks had done with Westbrook, while previously bashing him in this thread.

IHavNoCyCash said:
I thought gms and players were the only things that count? That's what you guys were rehashing, anyways.
Click to expand...

I never made that argument at any point. All I have stated is that Scott Brooks should not be considered a good coach if he loses in a series to Vinny Del Negro, and that you can't have it both ways with Westbrook. A well developed player won't cost your team 2 games in a 7 game series.


But then again, I was arguing earlier that Westbrook is a good player, and that the Thunder will beat the Clippers. And never said anything against Scott Brooks. Just against your arguments and claims that appear to be contradictory in my mind...
 
CyJack13 said:
Just told you, his defensive coaching ability. Brooks offense consists of more isos than just about any other team in the NBA. It works well, but I don't think it points to a great coaching ability. The Heat really haven't struggled in the half court this year, especially with any of their regular line ups, and he's continued to evolve their offense every year.

And yes I know the Thunder have a better defensive efficiency rating this year than Miami, OKC has improved a lot and getting rid of Harden greatly helped on that end, while the addition of Ray Allen hurt Miami's D. But in the playoffs I would expect Miami to be back to the top defensive team.

And saying Spoelstra is a better coach than Brooks isn't some extremist opinion, but I know you feel the need to argue so go ahead.

Film Study: Thunder Stars Do It Alone « NBA.com | Hang Time Blog
Click to expand...

I'll ask you a THIRD time why you credit OKC's success to their talent and not to Brooks, but hold Spoelstra immune from the same criticism.
 
DistrictCyclone said:
I'll ask you a THIRD time why you credit OKC's success to their talent and not to Brooks, but hold Spoelstra immune from the same criticism.
Click to expand...

Well since you obviously just want to argue, let's do it this way.

Spoelstra >> Brooks because Spoelstra has the RINGZZZ
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Help Support Us

Become a patron
Top Bottom
Back