larry brown..
- Thread starter M10Bibby
- Start date
jacobdrj
Bench
He is on my list of 7:
Goerge Karl
X-Pat Reily
Rick Adleman
X-Don Nelson
pending-Larry Brown
X-Lenny Wilkins
Jerry Slone
Three down, 4 to go...
The man can practice. His game plans are unbelievably genius. However, he couldn't mange a game if his life depended on it.
Sound farmiliar?
Goerge Karl
X-Pat Reily
Rick Adleman
X-Don Nelson
pending-Larry Brown
X-Lenny Wilkins
Jerry Slone
Three down, 4 to go...
The man can practice. His game plans are unbelievably genius. However, he couldn't mange a game if his life depended on it.
Sound farmiliar?
mikebibby1034
Bench
M10Bibby said:
he coachs the way a coach should. he makes his team play defence which is what the NBA finals are all about. if you dont have defence you will never win a championship.
PixelPusher
Starter
jacobdrj said:
looks more like a hit-list than a favorites list.jacobdrj said:
Larry Brown is the only coach I've seen call a timeout out of frustration with his team up by 15 with 3 minutes to go in the fourth quarter. He utilized his timeouts very well against the Lakers in the Finals, and his coaching is the main reason the Lakers were so out of it on offense.
He looked like the Bill Belichick of the NBA, the Lakers were the Colts, Gary Payton and Slava Medvedekno were the linebacker core (roasted all day long), Rick Fox, Derek Fisher and Kareem Rush were the receivers sans Marvin Harrison (couldn't help the offense), Devean George was Edgerrin James (kept F'ing up), Shaq was the defensive line (the lone bright spot), and Kobe was Peyton Manning.
...
By the way, the Colts are my favorite team, they just continue to meltdown against the Patriots, game after game.
Last edited:
jacobdrj
Bench
I must not see the same games that you do. I see Larry have some game plans that blew me out of the water, but game 2 of the Finals proved everything I have ever said about him. The Pistons were SO much better than that Laker squad, and Larry had such an amazing gameplan, yet once the Lakers got close in game 2, Larry ignored the momentum swing, let things go, and then made some poor poor decisions about defencive rotation and fouling as time expired in regulation. He NEVER calls time out EVER when the game is running out, he NEVER calls them durring a momentum shift.
Now Phil Jackson, he saw something that bothered him, lets see... I think it was the second game of the NBA finals in '97, he got angry at Luc Longly, and let him know about it, and that was like the Bulls' only momentum shift that game. He essentially nipped it at the bud.
I always am jokeing with my sibblings on how Larry likes to save his timeouts for after the game, so he can use them to take a game off like vacation days at work.
And would it kill him to make a play out of the timeout that would get a bucket? Rick Carlisle was a MASTER at that. Larry made only 2 sucessful ones this year that I can remember. I don't remember ANY last season.
I keep hearing the same things, from the media, and on various messageboards. I am convinced that we are watching different games.
Now Phil Jackson, he saw something that bothered him, lets see... I think it was the second game of the NBA finals in '97, he got angry at Luc Longly, and let him know about it, and that was like the Bulls' only momentum shift that game. He essentially nipped it at the bud.
I always am jokeing with my sibblings on how Larry likes to save his timeouts for after the game, so he can use them to take a game off like vacation days at work.
And would it kill him to make a play out of the timeout that would get a bucket? Rick Carlisle was a MASTER at that. Larry made only 2 sucessful ones this year that I can remember. I don't remember ANY last season.
I keep hearing the same things, from the media, and on various messageboards. I am convinced that we are watching different games.
teamdimechampionship
Bench
Can't argue with winning a championship in pro and college!
jacobdrj said:
You're talking about one game out of five. They beat the Lakers in the other four games by an average of 13 points, but you're gonna quibble with poor decision-making in one contest?
I agree that he made some dumb calls during that game, especially on the last play of regulation, but everything else he did in that series - against a team with Shaq and Kobe and the Zen-Master - was golden. I'll focus on the four wins rather than the one loss, which was a close game anyways.
Phil and Larry have two totally different coaching styles and run a totally different kind of system. Plus, it helps to have the best player in the game on your team, which is a luxury that Phil has had his entire career. It's easy to settle Luc Longley down and get him to play his role, especially when Michael Jordan is running the show.
We must be. I always see Larry Brown's teams running good plays out of timeouts. They almost always get good, high percentage shots. It's useless to talk about whether they make them or not, because the coach isn't responsible for professional players missing shots. I remember the Pistons catching back-door lob passes out of almost every timeout in the Finals.
And on top of that, when you have a team with such a dominant defense, you focus on stifling the opposition and creating easy buckets for you team in transition. That's why the Pistons were so good last year.
I mean, for a team with no superstar player (Chauncey Billups got the Finals MVP, and has never even been to an All-Star game) to trounce the Lakers the way that they did, the coach has to be doing something right. No?
jacobdrj
Bench
No, perhaps I am just assuming too much as to how much peoploe are aware of my conversations regarding LB and the other coaches mentioned. Again, I point out over and over again, I give credit where credit is due. Larry didn't mess up on the other 4 games beause he was not in a position to mess up in the other 4 games. Again, the game plan, laying off Kobe and Snaq, was brilliant. The Pistons literaly dominated based on this coaching move. I applaud Larry for this. However, as I say over and over again, just as the 4 games proves what Larry does well, game 2 was the perfect example of things I see out of him on a gamely basis. If a game, for whatever reason, goes sour, his adjustments come too late and too little.Superman said:
Superman said:
Yes, they have different coaching styles. I belive I posted this before. Larry coaches before the game, Phill coaches durring a game. I also am one of the people who has an astrix in my mind about Jackson's accomplishments because of the star power he had, but I also claim, based on my views on the differences between LB and P-Jax is that THAT is why P-Jax has 9 rings and LB 1. It is because Phill's teams were all pre-made established teams that never before had coaches who could manage a game. Because P-Jax has such an ability to manage egos and make in-game decisions and that was all he needed to do, therefore he took them over the hump. I conclude based on these obsrvations I have made about these 2 over the past 7 years, that Larry would never have succeded in the Bulls/Lakers job, and P-Jax wouldn't have known what to do with himself in the Pistons job.
Superman said:
Here I must just disagree. When I saw Rick Carlisle coach the Pistons, he used his TOs liberally, and made some ingenious plays that more often than not worked. It was almost said to be automatic. Even the ones that did not go in, as you say, you can't hold the coach responsoble for the players' actions, you could tell that they took the opposing team off guard and allowed for an impressively high percentage shot. Larry, comming out of timeouts, seems to me, to make some poor decisions about the inbounds pass and then on what happens. A poorly defined play is then exicuted leading, more often than not, to a player dribbling out the shot clock and then clanking a jumper as time expires. Again, I should give credit to where credit is due, as of late, I have counted 4 occasions where in fact the inbounds play was sucessful, but all were 3 point attempts by Rasheed Wallace. Not very high percentage, even though they DID go in. Most of this little rant is moot because LARRY DOES NOT CALL TIME OUTS! It's like he is allergic to them. I use game 2 as an example because everyone can make reference to it. I would NEVER be making these comments had I not noticed these things all season long. Everyone is due for a bad game. I saw those flaws in Larry since his Phily days.
The only guys by the way that Larry seems to call time outs on out of frusteration seem to be the guys already in his dog house. Rasheed made some of the same boneheaded plays that Mehment Okur made in regards to taking bad shots, yet Rasheed stays in the game, and Memo gets taken out and barked at AFTER MAKING THE SHOT SWOOSH!!! Wow. Just wow.
Sure he does. I keep saying what he does right, his gameplan. Yes there are no superstars on the Pistons. Thats part of the reason why Larry's message worked (for most of the team). Those who did not break, got stronger from his practices and rotations. It took a group of real professionals to do that. But Carlisle had them improving every year too. That is not a knock on Larry per se, just an obervation that it was being done before he got there. Did Larry take them over the top, yes. Carlisle needed to go, Atkins was starting to show the pressure simmering. Ben wasn't talking to him. But if I had a choice of Larry Brown coaching my team in an elimination game situation, I would take someone like Phill Jackson over Brown any day of the week.Superman said:
Now, you may ask why I pick on Larry for this one flaw, which it seems I am the only one noticing. In fact my distaste for him and the other 6 coaches stem from their inflexibility and stubbornness consistant through all of them. They have this old school mentality that if you leave a player in that is cold, you can leave him in until he warms up. To add that with their waiting to call a time out until AFTER the opponent has already FINNISHED their run, usualy spells dissaster. In contrast, it took Rick and Phill aboun 30 seconds to see something they didn't like and to call the TO to make an adjustment. If that didn't work instantly, they called ANOTHER timeout, until they got it right. With Larry, Nelly, Leny, Adleman, Karl and Slone, it could take a full minute, way after a 12-2 run is over, and a 15 point lead given up, to call a time out that doesen't help, because his inbounds plays arn't that good, and the team is already demorralized. I again point out game 2 as that is what happened, but that was certainly not the 1st time I saw that from one of those 7, and it certainly won't be the last until all 7 coaches are no longer coaching.
I appreciate the response. Perhaps there are no misunderstandings now on where I stand now that every point seems to have been addressed. Kudos.
You and I differ greatly on this matter.
1) Phil Jackson won his first 6 championships because he had the great pleasure of handling a team with Michael Jordan (who was going to win regardless), Scottie Pippen, and a host of other players who knew their roles and were good at playing them. He won his last 3 because he had the great pleasure of coaching Shaq and Kobe, and he was able to command the respect of his players because he already had 6 championship rings. That's the reason Phil has nine rings and Larry only has one; Brown has NEVER had the amount of talent on a team that Phil has had in his championship years. It has very little to do with how he manages the game; in fact, during the Laker run, it wasn't seldom that he'd allow his team to work out problems on the court - without calling timeouts or plays. Phil is notorious for letting his teams figure it out on their own. Visit any Laker fan board and ask about Phil's in-game coaching. 9 out of 10 Laker fans would disagree with you regarding his game management abilities.
2) Regardless of the differences between Larry Brown and Rick Carlisle, Brown has shown that he can keep his team playing the right way. You probably see more Pistons games than I do, so I'll take you for your word when you say that he waits too long to call timeouts, but that's not the impression that I get. I would consider Larry Brown to be one of the best in-game coaches in the League, all things considered.
1) Phil Jackson won his first 6 championships because he had the great pleasure of handling a team with Michael Jordan (who was going to win regardless), Scottie Pippen, and a host of other players who knew their roles and were good at playing them. He won his last 3 because he had the great pleasure of coaching Shaq and Kobe, and he was able to command the respect of his players because he already had 6 championship rings. That's the reason Phil has nine rings and Larry only has one; Brown has NEVER had the amount of talent on a team that Phil has had in his championship years. It has very little to do with how he manages the game; in fact, during the Laker run, it wasn't seldom that he'd allow his team to work out problems on the court - without calling timeouts or plays. Phil is notorious for letting his teams figure it out on their own. Visit any Laker fan board and ask about Phil's in-game coaching. 9 out of 10 Laker fans would disagree with you regarding his game management abilities.
2) Regardless of the differences between Larry Brown and Rick Carlisle, Brown has shown that he can keep his team playing the right way. You probably see more Pistons games than I do, so I'll take you for your word when you say that he waits too long to call timeouts, but that's not the impression that I get. I would consider Larry Brown to be one of the best in-game coaches in the League, all things considered.
jacobdrj
Bench
And to respond to that last point, as much as they may not have been given a chance, the fact remains, with Phill AND Larry, they didn't win until they got there. Later, I learned that Doug Collins was not the coach I origonaly thought him. Rick still has to prove himself I suppose in Indy. If Phil is not to be given credit, than Larry is to also not be given credit. Del Harris and Rambus couldn't do anything with that Laker team. Phil's respect got them over the hump. I do not kid myself, Larry is respected throughout the NBA, those professionals in Detroit respected Larry, and they did what he asked, even beyond what the previous coach asked, and they won.
On my list, mind you, is multi-champion Pat Reily. He won too, but I give him the least cedit, as those Lakers were going to win regardless also. I even say in spite of him.
Lenny Wilkins is also on my list, but he also has a ring.
What I am trying to get at is not whether these guys have the hardware, it is whether they have it because of them, or in spite of them.
I say with Phill, at least the last 5 were because of him. With Larry, I think a big part was in spite of him.
On my list, mind you, is multi-champion Pat Reily. He won too, but I give him the least cedit, as those Lakers were going to win regardless also. I even say in spite of him.
Lenny Wilkins is also on my list, but he also has a ring.
What I am trying to get at is not whether these guys have the hardware, it is whether they have it because of them, or in spite of them.
I say with Phill, at least the last 5 were because of him. With Larry, I think a big part was in spite of him.
jacobdrj said:
Right, because Larry Brown's Pistons were just as talented as Phil's Bulls. No? As talented as Phil's Lakers? Absolutely not. I don't understand.
You say about Pat Riley exactly what I say about Phil Jackson, especially in the case of the Bulls.
I also find it ironic that you say that the last five championships he won were more because of him than the first four, but those are the years that he did the least coaching. Those are the years that he did more pre-game preparation (Jedi mind tricks and such) than he did in-game coaching (timeouts and play-calling), and that's what you hold against Larry Brown. I just don't understand.
