Poll: Phil Jackson

Derrick

Red Auerbach won 9 NBA titles in 11 years, while Jackson has won 9 NBA titles. Auerbach in an interview said that Jackson has never done any teaching in his career because he’s always had great players on his team to dominate. Under that theory, the question becomes can you be a great coach if you always have great players or do taking teams with less talent and reaching the playoffs define a great coach?

psavintage

The celtics won titles while there was about a total of 4 teams in basketball. You can't compare era's just like you can't compare the 80's to the 90's. You could argue all day long who could of took jordans place on the bulls............ wilt chamberlain, george mikan, bill russell, shaquille, blah blah. I don't think people understand who jordan and his allstar team really faced during the 90's. People always say jordan was triple teamed during every play, but if you look at the utah jazz series from game 1 to game 7. The two shots jordan hit as game winners were both single coverage plays. The shot on ehlo? Single coverage EHLO for heavens sake! You want to talk about being overrated?

Derrick

I have to admit that I used to believe that Jackson was a good coach because having Michael Jordan police your locker room makes life so easy for a coach. It doesn’t really prove how well Jackson could have controlled Dennis Rodman, but Jordan’s reputation in the locker room says that he was the undisputed leader and would pop you in the nose if you got out of line. Some might say the squabbles between Shaquille O’Neal and Kobe Bryant was proof that maybe Jackson couldn’t handle the stars of today...but of course, that was all false, because he's able to handle things like that. That's why he's a great coach.....

A guy like Doc Rivers with Orlando gets a lot of credit for being a great coach because he gets the Magic to the playoffs every year. Some people might say that Orlando plays in the Eastern Conference, which is viewed as the weaker conference right now, therefore it’s not considered that impressive to make the playoffs year in and year out. Larry Brown has won a total of 1,200+ games wherever he has coached and basketball has rewarded him with induction to the hall of fame. Brown is considered the ultimate teacher in the game, but does that make him better than Phil Jackson? I um...don't think so.

americanfreak

<< <i>The celtics won titles while there was about a total of 4 teams in basketball. You can't compare era's just like you can't compare the 80's to the 90's. You could argue all day long who could of took jordans place on the bulls............ wilt chamberlain, george mikan, bill russell, shaquille, blah blah. I don't think people understand who jordan and his allstar team really faced during the 90's. People always say jordan was triple teamed during every play, but if you look at the utah jazz series from game 1 to game 7. The two shots jordan hit as game winners were both single coverage plays. The shot on ehlo? Single coverage EHLO for heavens sake! You want to talk about being overrated? >>



Are you calling jordan overrated? hitting game winners with little or no time on the clock is almost just as hard to hitt them while being double or triple teamed. Just because he hit the shot agaist ehlo dosen;t make him overrated. look around he has hit game winners on alot of people. he is one of the best to ever lace up his shoes in the nba.

Vincecarder

If you win games then you are good. Plain and simple. I don't really like Jackson and think alot of other guys could have coached the Bulls back in the days and won championships but Phil is still good.

To prove once and for all if he's the best, he would have to coach an average team without an allstar. He's had Jordan and Pippen, Shaq and Kobe.....I'm sure there are alot of coaches that would pile up wins with either duo. He seems to keep everyone cool during pressure situations, that's where Jackson is the best ala "Zen Master" As for coaching skills, I think are quite a few that are better than Jackson.

Derrick

Yeah, I agree Vincecarder. Everyone acts like Phil has no "talent" or coaching skills because he's won so many games and titles and had all these great players surrounding him. He actually makes the players better with his coaching and teaching abilities and he's the Joe Torre of the NBA. Cool, calm, and collective. Hell, Auerbach made it sound like Jackson has always had stars to lead his team. This is true but Auerbach never started with the team empty either. I would say having Bob Cousy and Bill Sharman as established players and then Tommy Heinsohn and Bill Russell when the title run began isn’t such a terrible start to a team. Getting St. Louis to trade the rights to Bill Russell has nothing to do with coaching, but with his skills as a general manager. Boston literally has their entire starting team from those years in the hall of fame and that can’t be from just coaching. These were some very good players when they came into the league and the size of the league says the best players would rise to the top.

Chicago had Michael Jordan and Scottie Pippen, but couldn’t climb the hill until Pippen stopped being intimidated by Dennis Rodman when Rodman was in Detroit. The point is that Chicago doesn’t have any NBA titles except for the ones they have with Jackson as the coach. One of the best moves Chicago and Jackson made was having Tex Winters as an assistant coach. Winters is considered the father of the triangle offense and no one has really controlled that offense to date. It seems to be made for teams with stars, which opens up the offense for the role players to thrive. He wasn’t elected to the hall of fame, which is ashamed because his impact is major on the game of basketball.

Undertaker

let's not forget that the Lakers had the same team BEFORE Jackson became their coach.. they hadn't won sh!t before he arrived..
I say he's one of the best coaches ever.. whether he had Jordan & Pippen, Shaq & Kobe or not

THiTo

it's football season... get over basketball...

o and welcome back ebok...

Derrick

Hey, bball is just around the corner as well. It'll be here for you know it.

I agree Taker. Del Harris blew though! lol...remember that lame fu^ker? He couldn't coach worth a sh*t...Auerbach made it sound like Jackson has always had stars to lead his team. The Lakers have two of the best players in the NBA with Shaq and Kobe Bryant the marquee players in the NBA now. The Lakers couldn’t win in the playoffs before Jackson got there. Utah used to pick and roll that Lakers team into the ground with the experience of John Stockton and Karl Malone. Shaq had come to a point in his career where people said he’ll get his statistics but the team will never win. Kobe was a young buck that knew he was good but had no control over his game at all. It was obvious that he was from the MTV and ESPN era as he looked to make the fancy play wanting to look good over the easy one. He was in to too much one on one play over the team concept. Phil Jackson coaches in an era where players don’t seem to worry about winning until their careers are close to being over. It’s all about the bank account now and coaches have to take a look at their rosters every year, which causes no continuity for teams. Players are dropped for salary cap reasons every year and new affordable players have to be found to round out your teams. Jackson has been lucky because he’s had several stars on the team, which means all he needs to do is find role players that fit his system...which he's done...Players would love to play for the Lakers or another serious contender but they want the money first.

psavintage

I never said jordan was overrated, but I hate when 13 year old kids who know nothing about basketball try and say he did everything and is the best basketball player to ever live. Did half of the people on this board even grow up watching jordan? If you grew up watching wilt chamberlain would you think otherwise? The bulls were much more than just jordan and the single coverage during crucial moments in the finals prove that. Comparing players to diffrent situations is useless. I could say all day what if.......... iverson took kobe's place in last years finals and it was iverson and shaq vs kobe and mutombo. Who would win? See the comp these days is nothing compared to the lakers vs celtics, because it was actually a team vs team type thing. Now since michael jordan and his fellow groupies arrived everybody only wants the next superstar instead of the next great "team"

lilsun1

<< <i>The celtics won titles while there was about a total of 4 teams in basketball. You can't compare era's just like you can't compare the 80's to the 90's. You could argue all day long who could of took jordans place on the bulls............ wilt chamberlain, george mikan, bill russell, shaquille, blah blah. I don't think people understand who jordan and his allstar team really faced during the 90's. People always say jordan was triple teamed during every play, but if you look at the utah jazz series from game 1 to game 7. The two shots jordan hit as game winners were both single coverage plays. The shot on ehlo? Single coverage EHLO for heavens sake! You want to talk about being overrated? >>



Kobe had single coverage against Bobby Jackson and missed. Single covered by Walker and got the shot off a lil late so it didn't count... You can't compare era's but somehow you try and compare Kobe and Mike???

psavintage

actually bobby jackson pulled kobe's jersey. I'm not in anyway comparing era's. I'm saying it's useless and that I could compare diffrent situations all day long.

autobilia

<< <i>Red Auerbach won 9 NBA titles in 11 years, while Jackson has won 9 NBA titles. Auerbach in an interview said that Jackson has never done any teaching in his career because he’s always had great players on his team to dominate. Under that theory, the question becomes can you be a great coach if you always have great players or do taking teams with less talent and reaching the playoffs define a great coach? >>



Theory that is, but no matter how good your players are, if they can't play together, they will never win championships. Look at Jordan in his earlier days. Scoring 40, 50, 60+ points in a game and they still wasn't winning championships. Look at Penny Hardaway & Shaquille O'Neal while they were in Orlando. Penny was as good as Kobe is now back then. Penny & Shaq couldn't get along and couldn't win a championship. Shaq and Kobe was having the same problem, but Phil Jackson has always been successful in getting them to work together. Jackson did it in Chicago and then went to LA and did the same thing. Gotta give Jackson his respect. I bet if Jackson was in Sacramento or Dallas, he could turn those teams into champions. Auerbach seems to be a little jealous.

psavintage

autobilia do you know anything about basketball? To say penny was as good as kobe is ridiclious. When did penny ever average over 21.7 points per game with shaq or without him? Kobe has averaged 28.5. When did penny ever make his name as being clutch or leading his team in points throughout the playoffs like kobe already has. Once again another faker exposed.

Derrick

I agree. Auerbach never had to worry about free agency in his era. Players either walked the company line or you would be unemployed in those days. There really was no such thing as agents for players, so there was no haggling over salaries. The only movement among players was being traded. This provides for great continuity on a team knowing you will play with the same players every year. That’s a far cry from today where everyone counts the days when their contract is up so they can figure out which team is willing to pay the most. There were so few teams in the league so if you were the dominant team...then no one could do much about it.

I have to say that Jackson prepares his team well coming into the games, which makes it easier to stay calm on the sidelines during the games. A coach doesn’t have to prowl the sidelines like a lion on the hunt if they are ready to play when the game starts. I think this is where Larry Brown has his frustrations with Allen Iverson because Iverson doesn’t take practice seriously. If the stars don’t take practice seriously then the coach has to work harder during the games since his players have no clue what he is talking about in the games.

YanksFan

Welp D, because you said....
"He actually makes the players better with his coaching and teaching abilities and he's the Joe Torre of the NBA"
Instead of saying he is the Bobby Cox of the NBA, you've made my day.

I think it's gotta be a combination of great coach/great players. Jackson had Jordan, Pippen, and Rodman, now he has Shaq/Kobe. He's great at making the combo's work and flourish. I don't what he does, but if he's smart he won't change his ways anytime soon.

autobilia

<< <i>autobilia do you know anything about basketball? To say penny was as good as kobe is ridiclious. When did penny ever average over 21.7 points per game with shaq or without him? Kobe has averaged 28.5. When did penny ever make his name as being clutch or leading his team in points throughout the playoffs like kobe already has. Once again another faker exposed. >>



Kobe does what he does because Shaq draws double and triple teams (we've proven that with airkobe's pictures that he posted). Penny had outside and inside game plus brought the ball down. How many assists do Kobe get? hmmm. Points is not everything. Jordan was an example of that in his early days. Remember Jordan use to score 40, 50, and 60 points in a game. Result? No championships. Then Jordan dropped down to about 23 to 33 points and got his team involved. So, since you bring up points, was Jordan a better player when he was scoring 40 to 60 points in a game than he was only scoring roughly 30? And faker? I'll pick Baron Davis over Kobe right now because Davis is a "complete" player. Kobe is flashy and in the spotlight because he's on the Lakers team. Put Kobe on a team like Golden State, that flash would fade. Kobe is good, but overrated.

bjork73

I think Phil Jackson is the type of coach that does well managing great players. There's the types of coaches that work best with developing young players or making good teams out of non-superstar players, but Phil is the type that works well with superstars. He did it managing the Jordan/Pippen and then the Jordan/Pippen/Rodman show, and he does it with the Shaq and Kobe show. He seems to do well working closely with individuals, keeping the stars focused on the game (or at least trying to with Rodman ) when they need to be. He also seems to know what role/supporting players need to be in at any given point and time.

Think any coach can be seen as good when they have good players around them? Look at the Shaq-and-Kobe Show without Phil. Look at the Blazers. Look at the point

psavintage

Autobilia who are you kidding? You're right "baron davis" is a complete player and "kobe" is not. I remember when penny was dropping 56 in 3 quarters and winning allstar mvp's and making the big plays for his team in the playoffs and even in the finals. You're right kobe is overrated and jordan isn't? Kobe never gets doubled EVER. Exactly who are you kidding? You might be able to fool these 13 year old auto, but you can't fool an unbiased fan of the game.

autobilia

<< <i>Autobilia who are you kidding? You're right "baron davis" is a complete player and "kobe" is not. I remember when penny was dropping 56 in 3 quarters and winning allstar mvp's and making the big plays for his team in the playoffs and even in the finals. You're right kobe is overrated and jordan isn't? Kobe never gets doubled EVER. Exactly who are you kidding? You might be able to fool these 13 year old auto, but you can't fool an unbiased fan of the game. >>



I didn't say anything about Jordan overrated or not. I said you focus on points, so was Jordan a better player then when he dropped 40 to 60 points in games than he was in the final years with the Bulls dropping roughly 30. Where in that statement did I mention Jordan being overrated or not? I'm just comparing his early years to his final years with the Bulls. Kobe does get double teamed when he drives to the basket, but in basketball, you always suppose to help out in those situations. Any "unbiased" fan of the game should know that. No one is going to watch one of his team mates get beat and let the guy have an easy layup or dunk. But Shaq gets double and sometimes triple teamed even when he doesn't have the ball. Can you say that about Kobe? Only 5 people on the court from each team. If 2-3 are surrounding Shaq, that leaves at least 2 people open which means it gives players such as Kobe an open driving lane or room for an open jumper. Remove Shaq from the Lakers, Kobe wouldn't have that luxury.

psavintage

Ok so explain why kobe averages more points when shaq isn't playing? Explain the 56 in 3 quarters going 21-34 the first game the big dog left? Explain that kobe averages the same amount of assists and his rebounds go up? Are you saying kobe can only score because shaq is the game? Shaq has always said he doesn't open the lane for kobe he clogs it. He also said during the finals that he doesn't give kobe enough room to operate. Why don't you see kobe dropping 56 in 3 quarters more often? SHAQ
Both players have to be happy and thats why there winning. I've seen kobe doubled without the ball before, but not even shaq can recieve doubles long enough without the ball for it would be called illegal defense. If you want to get down to it then everybody is overrated including shaq for having kobe. Everyone is just blessed with a certain situation and some aren't. DEAL WITH IT

Derrick

ttt

I want atleast 50 votes! C'mon people...

Derrick

ttt for the last time...