I buy the premise of of the NBA being a players' league. However, the use of the word only caught my attention. It's such an absolute word that it has a tendency of standing out. I've bolded them above.
- On the first one, I agree with the gist that the NBA is a players league. However, it wasn't just through the largesse of Robinson and Duncan that Popovich survived. He had to earn their respect via his abilities. And the respect came about because he seems to know what he's doing. Given that he's still succeeding after Robinson and Duncan retired, I think he's still demonstrating that acumen.
- As for Becky Hammon succeeding only because players felt that they had to be on best behavior? Did that also mean they felt compelled to play well? In a league where most are looking to show "Look what I can do!" Sure, players are aware of who their coaches are (well, at least we hope so), but Pop would expect the players to respect any coach he assigned to run the summer league team. And to posit her success on a presumed pressure to be on best behavior is a little denigrating to Becky's ability.
Once again, this may be just the use of the word "only," but it makes a difference in the way I interpret your remarks.
BTW, I think Hammon can coach heck out of any team on the floor. What I would ask is if she can adjust to working with players that come in as kids and are young adults when they leave. Trying to deal with individuals in a collective environment. Becky was a pretty driven individual...will she realized she's not everyone?