This is a stinging and well constructed criticism, and I've got to give some credit to the perspectives. Obviously you follow the league on not just a superfici

This is a stinging and well constructed criticism, and I've got to give some credit to the perspectives. Obviously you follow the league on not just a superficial level. You're demonstrating a lot more comprehension of the wheeling and dealing of the league. On a related note, I've heard an extended family member consistently downplaying Coach Popovich's status as one of the best coaches, it's kind of an amusing gripe, and would fit in with your poking holes in 'the narrative' so I'll sketch it out roughly (from memory): David Robinson's injury kicked off the dynasty. As Pop came to the newly bought Spurs, he fired the coach and made himself the coach. Robinson could have come back during that season, but Pop saw the opportunity to get Tim Duncan if only they could bomb out. With the tandem of Robinson and Duncan Pop knew he'd have something special, and history worked out that way. Adding other 'system' players like Manu and Parker eventually showed how much luck can continue to be a factor, because they were arguably not high-potential prospects in the context of how they turned out. Both are probably Hall of Famers. They've definitely been integral to Championships. So, yeah, it was a smart move and luck was good to the Spurs for Duncan and getting other Hall of Fame caliber pieces (who have played for YEARS now together), but the relative is pretty consistent in downplaying Pop's talent versus the players he's had to work with. This argument of course gets more traction with Leonard turning into an amazing baller. (For the record I disagree and think Pop's approach is an outlier and effective, but the criticism does amuse me)