My wife could have coached Jordan, Pippen, Shaq and Kobe to a couple of championships.The Lakers surround Kobe with Luke Walton and Lamar Odom for three years and Jackson couldn't get past the first round.
Who gets blamed? The dude hittin' the buzzer beaters. Go figure.
Jackson must be using those Zen mind control techniques on the sports media and Laker fans, because this guy escapes criticism like a NeoCon.
25 comments:
So let's review:
Phil has won a ring with and without Kobe.
Shaq has won a ring with and without Kobe.
Kobe has only won a ring with Phil and Shaq.
So one can deduce that Kobe can score but he can't WIN a ring.
What do any of these points have to do with whether Phil Jackson is overrated or not?
They really don't Insurgent.
But Casper can no more pass up an opportunity to disparage a young black man than a pitbull can pass up an opportunity to tear up a pork chop.
Other than walk water, what can Kobe do?
Give him a Center as good as the guard Shaq has.
Hell, give him Elton Brand and he would deliver a championship every year.
The Triangle Offense is as big a myth as WMD's.
II
"What do any of these points have to do with whether Phil Jackson is overrated or not?"
I really think you and DV smoke from the same bong! and don't pass it around.
Phil Jackson led the Bull's to six NBA titles. His reputation was furthered when his next team, the Los Angeles Lakers, won three consecutive NBA titles.
DV
"But Casper can no more pass up an opportunity to disparage a young black man than a pitbull can pass up an opportunity to tear up a pork chop."
If I recall both Shaq and Jordan are black. Your just admire men who don't want to conform to the concept of team!
DV
"But Casper can no more pass up an opportunity to disparage a young black man than a pitbull can pass up an opportunity to tear up a pork chop."
If I recall both Shaq and Jordan are black. Your just admire men who don't want to conform to the concept of team!
BTW II have you ever in the past year disagreed with DV or do you admire him as well!? Me and others think so...Better not let the hubby know ;)
Ah come on Casper.
Why you gotta say some jive shit like that?
If you polled any highly intelligent, intellectually honest people, free of the encumberances of mental slavery, you would find a tremendous amount of agreement with Denmark Vesey there also.
If you polled those same people and sought their opinions regarding The Philosphies of Casper ... Oh well.
So don't try to switch up the issue. As lovable and huggable as I am, aint nobody agreeing with me for any reason other than shared perspective, intense intelligence and intellectual courage.
DV
"As lovable and huggable as I am..."
See... that's where this problem/crush starts as per the highschool days creates the illusion of intellect when in fact it's infatuation. Women like the men they love ;)
Anyway Jackson wasn't Jordan's only coach during his career. But he was the only coach he won 6 championships with. So you figure out the math.
You funny Casper. I could ask the same question of your feelings for Michael Fisher.
Perhaps that would explain why any discussion of homosexuality elicits 10 comments from you with ad nauseum citations of studies saying it's normal. LOL!!! :-)
Intellectual Insurgent said...
You funny Casper. I could ask the same question of your feelings for Michael Fisher.
Ahhhhhhhhhhh LOLOL ...
She got you man. Give it up.
II
I could ask the same question of your feelings for Michael Fisher
Rewind the tape I have disagreed with Fish on several occasions. Like the who daughter thang!... So don't even get it twisted. It's cool if you have a crush II ... I won't tell nobody ;)
DV
"Ahhhhhhhhhhh LOLOL ...
She got you man. Give it up."
I knew you would come to her defense ;) Like T.I. in shining armor...!
What I'm wondering now is how much the coach is really responsible for a team's success or failure, especially in modern sports and how much is he just an overseer per se, there to make sure the product is profitable. An overseer making sure everyone tows the company line.
Phil was one who was smart enough to know the men working the machine could work without much interference from him and he'd receive much of the glory and spoils. He was lauded for letting the individuals on his team express some of that and overseeing each accordingly.
This is like the manager in other industries that gives you more freedom (and are usually universally loved like Phil), but still needs you to perform the labor so all is well with the suits above.
It's cool if you have a crush II ... I won't tell nobody ;)
Whew, thanks Casper. I knew I could count on you to keep my deepest darkest secrets. Whatever happens though, please don't tell DV! LOL!! :-)
The fact you felt the need to respond to the Fisher comment on the merits makes me wonder about you homie..."I don't like Fisher, I disagreed with him once", arms folded, lips poked out.
Thou dost protest much.
Casper said...
So let's review:
"Phil has won a ring with and without Kobe.
Shaq has won a ring with and without Kobe.
Kobe has only won a ring with Phil and Shaq.
So one can deduce that Kobe can score but he can't WIN a ring."
Mr. Madison, what you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.
(P.S. I'm not objecting to this from my normal perch as self righteous black logic evaluator, I'm just a Huuuuuge Kobe Stan and hating on him is hating on the juego bonito. Hater.)
(P.P.S. The logic is jacked up though, fallacy of denying the antecedent ;)
Additionally,
Rudy T was also Kobe's coach and he won 2 rings in Houston. So it must be Kobe who is overrated as a player to lead his teams to rings.
Coaching is much more than designing plays and executing strategies. Sometimes style makes the difference. David Halberstam's biography of Michael Jordan shows Phil Jackson as a man who was able to hold together disparate and opposing influences among players and owners in pursuit of excellence. This is the essential but obscured part of Jackson's legacy.
As a Knick fan, I too used to believe that Jackson's prestige was derived from the privilege of having been associated with the greatest player to ever lace up basketball sneakers. However, I'm now able to appreciate how Jackson earned his right to be arguably the greatest coach by initially working for meager compensation in the CBA and Puerto Rico before coming to the NBA.
While in the NBA he won the respect and loyalty of Michael Jordan and got him to trust his teammates. He skillfully managed the competing egos of his players and maintaned a degree of autonomy that was always threatened with encroachment from GM Jerry Krause and owner Jerry Reinsdorf.
One thing about the triangle offense is that it helped prolong Jordan's career. Unlike Julius Erving and Dominique Wilkins, players of comparable physical ability, Jordan didn't need to constantly drive and explode to the basket and his not inconsiderable energy was conserved. The triple post was particularly effective for Jordan and the caliber players surrounding him. It's specious reasoning to advocate that Jordan would have been a champion regardless of who was his coach.
Great post Submariner.
Great post.
Almost got me actually.
You are right. Jackson held those tremendous energies and egos together on that Chicago team. Yes, Jackson is the chief engineer of the Triangle offense and yes, the triangle was ideal for Jordan's style of play.
However, the ultimate test of a coach, is winning in situations that other coaches would not win.
Were that not the case, there would be no reason to pay any coach a dime's more than any other.
Out of 100 top coaches, how many could have won a championship with Pippen and Jordan?
How many could have won with Shaq and Kobe?
Angelo Dundee was a damn good boxing trainer, not until he met a kid named Cassius Clay, did he become "great".
I think terms like "great" should be reserved for the cats making it happen on the floor with creativity, will power and artistry.
Picasso was a great artist, no one calls his agent "Great".
"Bum Phillips once said of Don Shula, "He can take his'n and beat your'n, and he can take your'n and beat his'n." You would be hard-pressed to find many people who are positive Jackson could take your'n and beat his'n. Unless your'n included Kevin Garnett, Dwyane Wade and Steve Nash." Chicago Tribune
Again, you are limiting your prerequisites for great coaching to execution on the field of play. In the era before free agency and large player salaries you and other traditionalists are correct. But today's coaches have to walk a fine line between demands from players, management and their own overinflated egos.
Recently, my beloved Yankees parted company with Joe Torre. I like Torre but I think his skill is overrated. The prestige of a Phil Jackson or Joe Torre parallels the rise of what Vanguard founder Jack Bogle calls management capitalism. Power and influence is increasingly removed from owners and shareholders to managers. The same, with reservation, can be said for coaches. They indeed receive too much credit for team successes. The notoriety of a coach matches the celebrity bestowed on CEOs. The compensation of both goes far beyond the value they bring.
The authority of a Don Shula was absolute. Could Bill Russell have discarded Red Auerbach the way Kobe Bryant did Phil Jackson? Nonpareil athletes presently exert tremendous influence on a coach's tenure. The purist in me agrees with you but the game and its dynamics have fundamentally changed.
I forgot to add that coaching in professional sports, particularly basketball, has evolved beyond the chess paradigm that you describe. It's much more like speed car racing. Sure, what's under the hood matters. But more important is the person behind the steering wheel making constant adjustments and taking into account variables like weather and track conditions and making hundreds of descisions based on a combination of rational and irrational factors.
Interesting points submariner.
Integral to the concept of "talent", is rarity.
If everyone could paint like Picasso, we wouldn't know who he was.
Kobe, Jordan, Pippen, Shaq, Nash, Bird etc... are all RARE talents.
Is what Jackson does ... rare?
or
Could 100 other pro coaches have done pretty much the same thing?
The NASCAR fellas do make those cars go around the track, but they are not Jeff Gordon because they can be easily replaced.
Like the Tribune says ... Until Jackson wins without a Kobe AND a Shaq or a Jordan AND a Pippen - he should ride the bench when it comes to all time great coaches.
I'm not sure many coaches could reproduce what Jackson has done. And even he couldn't recreate a dynasty in LA that equalled what he did in Chicago. Talent is essential but just as necessary is the personal interactions with coach and player. This is where Jackson has excelled. Formulating and executing a plan is part of it. But a bigger part is making players cohere to a philosophy not intrinsically their own and preventing owners and players from steering you off course the way Avery Johnson fell victim.
Face it DV Kobe is a great athlete but not the winner you think he is. Joe Montana wasn't the athlete you thought he was but a winner. One major factor that your not accounting for is that great leaders are only as good as their followers are willing to adhere to the plan. Kobe drove Shaq away and Phil one other time before he wised up. But by then he fucked up that sqaud/franchise. Good players don't want to join him. So you can't ask the impossible from even a great coach.
Post a Comment