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.
***NBA Playoffs Thread***
- Thread starter Cy$
- Start date
- Status
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.
um no? Did you read his question? He said name 5 coaches better than Thibodeau. I did. George Karl is one of the best coaches around. People are blind because they forget about past success. Karl has been to finals, Poppovich has won a couple, Brooks has been to the finals and has made one of the best teams in the NBA. Rivers has won a finals and been to another. Carlisle has a title and helped the Pistons to win a title, though Larry Brown coached that team.
I'm a huge Carlisle fan but even I can't find a way to credit him with more than one title. So let me rephrase my outrage. You think Scott Brooks is on the same level as Rick Carlisle? Brooks didn't make OKC, Sam Presti did. Brooks is a decent coach but nothing close to elite.
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.
Then he goes and does things like play Kendrick Perkins 20+ minutes a game in the playoffs. That alone drops you out of the top 5.
I've watched perkins play 15+ times this year and I still can't figure out what his role is...
really George Karl number 1? And he has how many titles? Oh yeah ZERO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
He has two roles stop Dwight Howard and stop Andrew Bynum - Pao Gasol. That's his value, when the Thunder aren't facing one of those guys, I have no idea what is his role.
George Karl >>>>>>>>>> Tom Thibodeau.
Anyone that argues needs to read up on NBA history.
he was assistant in 87, became coach at 89. Won three peat 91-93. Jackson also had Jordan already, Brooks came in with in durant and that's it.
The amount of disrespect for Scott Brooks, rebuilding the Sonics, who before he showed up, were the crap team of the NBA, is amazing. Under P.J. Carlisimo, they went 3-14, he gets canned. Now with building through the draft, they are arguably the biggest threat to the Heat to repeat.
Thibs also is his tenure as Chicago Coach has never had a fully healthy team. The fact that he has accomplished what he has in Chicago deserves recognition NO coach could do in the last three years in Chicago what Thibs has done.
You have a really weird way of arguing your point. First you jump on the Phil Jackson comparison, not a good move, because Phil won a title in his second year as Bulls head coach and first as Lakers coach, so like almost very other NBA coach ever, Brooks comes up way short as he's still in his fifth year now without a ring.
Then you mention that PJ Carlesimo got fired after going 3-14, like Brooks led some massive turn around that year, he didn't they finished with 61 losses.
I think Brooks gets an adequate amount of credit, he still has the job which is saying something, for being the decent coach that he is. The Thunder did a great of drafting getting Durant Westbrook, Harden and Ibaka. Three of those guys were top 5 picks so don't make it like they were all diamonds in the rough that Brooks uncovered. He's been given a ton of talent and he has done a pretty decent job of bringing the team along. Now comes the hard part.
1) I'm not comparing Phil and Brooks, you are.
2) So Brooks gets no credit for turning around a 60 loss team and Presti gets all of it? Makes no sense.
3) Like I've said, Ibaka and Westbrook were far from great in college/international ball. Brooks made their game better, not the gm. lol. Westbrook was a project...go look up some scouting reports before the draft..
With what you are saying, we should tell the coaches to **** off, and just have the draft since the gm is only important thing besides the players and players play street ball, first to 150 points wins.
Last edited:
1) You liked the post saying "By your logic we need to be knocking Phil down a few rungs"I took your like to mean you agreed with that sentiment guess I was wrong.
2) Presti deserves more credit than Brooks, yes he's the one who did a great drafting and acquiring the talent on the Thunder. Do you also feel that Mike Brown is a great coach for what he did with the Cavs? It's a similar situation, each are decent coaches, who got to coach great players, and unfortunately for Brooks his run with the Thunder probably will end like Brown's did with the Cavs.
3) Westbrook went 4th in a loaded draft, he's not near as raw as make him out to be. He averaged 15/5/5 his first year. Brooks has done a good job of bringing the talent along, I said that.
Not sure what you're trying to argue here. He's a decent coach, like Mike Brown was, but he's not an elite coach in the league.
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:
- Status