|
|
#21
10-31-2005, 03:41 AM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Phil Jackson
[ QUOTE ]
this yr will be a good test for phil. all the other situations he has stepped into have been perfect. not to say he has not done a good job but he got kobie right when he was ready to get to the next level and jordan in his prime. i dont think you can compare him to l brown but he is a good coach. [/ QUOTE ] I don't think perfect is the way I would describe it. Few people were picking the Lakers to win a title when Jackson arrived in LA. Why would anyone pick them over the Spurs, who had swept the Lakers in the playoffs and beaten them 5 in a row, or over the Blazers, who had a better record and played the Lakers well during the season? Also, Utah owned the Lakers before Phil arrived, having won 6 out of the past 7 against LA. After one game in which the Lakers lost to Portland, the Lakers were happy. They thought keeping the final score close was good enough. To that Laker team, losing to Portland by 8 points was a good accomplishment. Under coaches Del Harris and Kurt Rambis, the Lakers played no defense, gave terrible effort, and often looked lost on offense when playing the elite teams. When the Lakers tried their best, they still sucked on defense, and still looked lost on offense when playing the elite teams. LA had no idea what it took to be a championship team. This was the 'perfect' situation that Phil Jackson was stepping into. 
|
|
#22
10-31-2005, 03:59 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Phil Jackson
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] However, how many championships did Shaq win before Phil? Zero. So I don't think you can say "oh he had Shaq and Jordan." If you team Shaq up with a superstar in his prime, it's far from a guarantee that Shaq wins a title. When teamed up with Penny, Wade, and even Kobe in their primes, Shaq would usually finish the postseason with no title. Shaq had his two best years (postseason and regular season) under the triangle offense that Phil installed in LA. That offense was perfect for Shaq, as it was designed for a team with a great center. It also was better than the previous Laker offenses, which involved too many players just standing around and watching Shaq. The triangle helped get his teammates more involved. Moreover, I'm guessing that Shaq shot free throws better in the playoffs with Phil as the head coach. The Lakers would have him shooting over 60% from the line during the end of the year. Also, Shaq played better defense with Phil than with other coaches. His previous coaches told him to try and avoid fouls while on defense. This explains why Shaq went from 1.7 blocks per game under Rambis to 3.0 and 2.8 blocks per game under Jackson the next two years. Finally, since Shaq played tougher defense in the middle, the rest of the defenders could play tigher man-to-man defense. That included Kobe, who played much better defense at least partly as a result of Shaq playing better defense. To sum up, as a result of Jackson Shaq played better on offense and defense, his teammates were more active offensively, his teammates played better defense, Shaq shot better from the free throw line, and as a result of all this, the team won more games. Would another coach have gotten all these same results? Since other coaches were unlikely to run the triangle, and since they were likely to want Shaq to play subpar defense, the answer is probably no.
|
|
#23
10-31-2005, 04:08 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Phil Jackson
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] Right. So. Is he a good coach? Lots of teams have 2 superstars. Hell the Heat had Shaq and Wade this year and didn't come close. Like I said, I don't follow basketball. Is Phil that good? Or has he just gotten lucky. It seems like he's past the short term and must be pretty good. [/ QUOTE ] The Heat came within one game of the finals... and they didn't have the supporting casts that the Bulls/Lakers had. Phil Jackson is an excellent coach, one of the greatest of all time. His championship record is inflated. there's no denying it, and those who try just look silly. He had the undisputed best player in the world in his prime (and another in the top five, plus a handful of very solid role players) during every one of his championship seasons. No bum off the street could take these teams to the title, but any very good coach could. He did a great job with what he had, but he was dealt a very strong hand. The best showcases for his coaching skills were the years that he didn't win the championship: the overachieving Jordanless Bulls and the very combustible and discontent Lakers teams. The fact that he got demolished by Larry Brown's Pistons despite having the most loaded lineup in recent memory does not help his case though. [/ QUOTE ] The third Lakers team that won a title had an embarrassingly poor supporting cast. Other than Shaq and Kobe, the team had very little. That's one reason why Sacramento, who was much deeper, gave them trouble. The Lakers team that lost to the Pistons didn't have the most loaded lineup in recent memory. Far from that. If I remember correctly, wasn't Slava Medvedenko starting against Rasheed Wallace in the finals? Malone was injured and did very little for LA. Gary Payton was there, but he didn't help the team much at all. Age seemed to have caught up with Payton. He was too slow on defense (just ask Chancey Billups) fit terribly with the triangle, and didn't shoot well at all. That Lakers team in the finals only had two real superstars at the time: Kobe and Shaq. Had Malone been healthy, he would have made a big difference, but he wasn't. Nobody else on that Laker squad could really play basketball too well to say the least.
|
|
#24
10-31-2005, 06:59 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Phil Jackson
[ QUOTE ]
Shaq had his two best years (postseason and regular season) under the triangle offense that Phil installed in LA. That offense was perfect for Shaq, as it was designed for a team with a great center. [/ QUOTE ] Not trying to argue since I think we agree on the big picture, but who was the Bulls' great center? Bill Wennington?
|
|
#25
10-31-2005, 10:23 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Phil Jackson
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] Shaq had his two best years (postseason and regular season) under the triangle offense that Phil installed in LA. That offense was perfect for Shaq, as it was designed for a team with a great center. [/ QUOTE ] Not trying to argue since I think we agree on the big picture, but who was the Bulls' great center? Bill Wennington? [/ QUOTE ] Cartwright was an excellent defensive center. I haven't jumped in because we've discussed this topic ad nauseum in the past, but for the newer posters in this thread, I think it is very clear that Phil is the best ever.
|
|
#27
10-31-2005, 11:43 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Phil Jackson
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] Shaq had his two best years (postseason and regular season) under the triangle offense that Phil installed in LA. That offense was perfect for Shaq, as it was designed for a team with a great center. [/ QUOTE ] Not trying to argue since I think we agree on the big picture, but who was the Bulls' great center? Bill Wennington? [/ QUOTE ] You can still run the offense without a scorer at the center position. This just means that other players will be taking the shots. Jackson obviously favors the triangle over any other offensive system, so he obviously is going to run it no matter who is at center.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
