That, and making his players attend class and be legit student-athletes. That would've been my answer, even if it wasn't from a UNC fan. If they weren't in class when someone checked, they were in deep $hit.
Unpopular Opinions ITT.
- Thread starter lurkeraspect84
- Start date
Not sure why asking that question would mean I've lost the argument? At the end of the day, whenever I see this topic i immediately think which coach could consistently have the most success if both coaches had the exact same players. That is where Roy....and frankly everyone else falls short when compared to Knight. Which is why i feel asking the question of who you'd want drawing up the final play is important.
Just look at each coaches NBA player tree. Im guessing that Roy has had double the amount of nba players as Knight did. If this is correct, it means Knight achieved roughly the same numbers with less talent then Roy did. Imo...thats your answer about who is the better coach.
Serious question....would you still feel like he has eclipsed Knight if the question was "who had the better basketball mind"?(for a lack of a better term)
Who has the best basketball mind is a tough question to answer. I guess I’d say Knight since he’s pretty well thought of as being one of the greatest basketball thinkers that’s ever lived. Roy is too but Knight has always stood out amongst his peers in that regard.
I’m not sure if Roy has had twice as many players in the NBA as Knight. You gotta take into account that the league has more teams now than it did when Knight was at his best. I think I’ve read on here that Roy has only coached 1 NBA All Star ever in Paul Pierce. I might be wrong though. I’m pretty sure @Sevro knows Roy’s history of NBA players well but I may have the wrong poster.
This is where we are getting into the weeds on coaching. Roy has had a lot of guys drafted but only one nba all-star to date. Yet he has more championships than Dean Smith. To me, it would indicate Roy has created a system that elevates the player above his actual skill set. So perhaps guys like Dean and Knight were better teachers of the game whereas K and Roy have created better systems in which to win.
A lot of that is due to the culture and times. When Dean and Knight started coaching, basketball wasn’t big business. Develop of their kids was just as important as winning. Now it’s a bunch of mercenaries. It’s really hard to compare eras.
How many coaches have had numerous NBA all-stars?
I doubt that Roy would have matched Knight's success with his players.
Dean never had a problem getting the talent. The talent coming to Carolina was top shelf. Knight, I would say, got more out of less. That's not to discredit Dean. Plus head to head, I don't think a Knight coached Indiana team ever lost to Dean.
K, in my opinion, was a better coach earlier in his career. I'm not saying he's not still good, but he isn't what he once was.
The plus on Roy is the system. Fast point guard, get out and run, and crash the boards. The negative is in today's time, that system doesn't put as many kids in a position to showcase their talents as much as K's system does.
But the last 3 seasons K has had the best freshmen classes, and the elite 8 has been our max.
Solid points. Where do you think K got his system? The primary change with Duke and K over the years has been their recruiting.
Tbh not sure how to figure in recruiting when trying to decide what spot to put Knight. Yes, Knight never pulled in the type of high end player that the other top coaches did. But since thats not the style of play Knight wanted, or the type of players, is he behind in this department?
Thats a serious question, is Tony Bennett knocked down a few rows on the coaching hierarchy because he's never been able to pull in the top end players like Roy, Cal, self and coach K has? Or, should he be considered an equal of theirs in recruiting since he only went after (and got a lot of them) they type pf players that fit his system?
Imo this type of question is why these types of lists are so hard to get figured out. Everyone is grading different tests that all have different questions to them. As i said earlier, whenever a list like this comes up..i immediately go to who was the best in game coach and who got the most out of their players. These are at the top of my test because it fits who i think is the best coach not named coach K.
However, a North Carolina fan, or a Kansas fan will end up having recruiting top players high up on their list because it helps further their argument for the coach at their school.
Personally, i honestly don't think either person is wrong here.
I’m sorry but I’m sick of the damn humaria commercial. It’s some shit band with every nationality so nobody is left out and the lead singer is eye candy who probably can’t sing. Then they all pile in their creepy rv like they are on a world tour. The commercial sucks and needs to go
What might be an unpopular opinion is that i legitimately hate most of you all who posted in this tread! This thread has had me triggered more then I'd ever want to admit.
Good post. I’ve said before that ranking coaches is a really hard thing to do but the main thing we have to go by our wins, championships, Final Fours, etc. That’s why I put Roy ahead of Knight.
I can’t believe I’m saying this but ole Roy is the master of getting guys who are ranked 4-5 star players to stay atleast 3 years. Sure most don’t do much in the nba, but they stick around and play deep into the tournament. Some should go yet they continue to come back. I guess the cokes are too good to leave for the nba.
If you decide to go on tv and get married at first sight, you must remain married and live in one of those tiny houses people build and seem to love to live in.
Similar threads
