Phil Jackson

mason55 · #1 10-29-2005, 04:25 AM

I don't really like basketball (I'm a hockey/CFB fan) but I just saw a stat that Phil has won the NBA championship 9 out of 14 years (When Jordan was gone plus a few when the Lakers sucked).

Is he one of the greatest coaches ever? This seems like a ridiculous record. Has any other coach won the NBA title 66% of his seasons?

Benholio · #2 10-29-2005, 04:33 AM

+

=

mason55 · #3 10-29-2005, 04:37 AM

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.

Benholio · #4 10-29-2005, 04:44 AM

Well, he may or may not be a great coach, I'm just saying that an average coach would have won a bunch of trophies with those teams. The finals MVPs for his championships were Jordan (6 times) and Shaq (3 times).

Also, I don't think 'lots' of teams have had 2 superstars the calibre of jordan/pippen and shaq/kobe. Jordan and Shaq are frequently argued as the #1 and #2 best players of all time.

mason55 · #5 10-29-2005, 05:24 AM

[ QUOTE ]

Also, I don't think 'lots' of teams have had 2 superstars the calibre of jordan/pippen and shaq/kobe. Jordan and Shaq are frequently argued as the #1 and #2 best players of all time.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't know whether Phil is a good coach, but he had Jordan forever and when Jordan was gone they sucked.

However, how many championships did Shaq win before Phil? Zero.

So I don't think you can say "oh he had Shaq and Jordan." We have no evidence about what would have happened to Jordan in his prime (his time with Washington doesn't count) and Shaq in his prime DIDN'T win a championship without Phil.

Benholio · #6 10-29-2005, 06:51 AM

[ QUOTE ]

I don't know whether Phil is a good coach, but he had Jordan forever and when Jordan was gone they sucked.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is a pretty good indicator that Jordan was more important than Jackson, but I don't think you are really disputing that.

[ QUOTE ]

However, how many championships did Shaq win before Phil? Zero.

[/ QUOTE ]

You could think of it that way, or you could think of it as how many championships did Shaq win before Kobe came into his own?

[ QUOTE ]

So I don't think you can say "oh he had Shaq and Jordan." We have no evidence about what would have happened to Jordan in his prime (his time with Washington doesn't count) and Shaq in his prime DIDN'T win a championship without Phil.

[/ QUOTE ]

Maybe he's a great coach, I'm just saying that having the talent he had is the main cause of those 9 championships. I think just about any coach wins 7+ titles with those teams.

holeplug · #7 10-29-2005, 11:08 AM

[ QUOTE ]
I don't know whether Phil is a good coach, but he had Jordan forever and when Jordan was gone they sucked.

[/ QUOTE ]

No they didn't. Jordan was gone in 1994 for the entire season and most people thought the Bulls would reach around 40-45 wins without him but they won 55 games, a lot higher than was predicted. The next year Jordan was gone for 3/4 of the year and they won 47 games, good for 5th in the conference.

Steve00007 · #8 10-31-2005, 03:59 AM

[ 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.

ClassicBob · #9 10-29-2005, 12:44 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Jordan and Shaq are frequently argued as the #1 and #2 best players of all time.

[/ QUOTE ]

I have never heard anyone argue Shaq as being the #2 player of all time.

Benholio · #10 10-29-2005, 04:47 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Jordan and Shaq are frequently argued as the #1 and #2 best players of all time.

[/ QUOTE ]

I have never heard anyone argue Shaq as being the #2 player of all time.

[/ QUOTE ]

I phrased that funny, what I mean to say is that Jordan and Shaq are both often argued to be the greatest player of all time. Note: I am not saying either one of them is, just that they were good enough to be considered.

google: shaq greatest of all time