If the Lakers had Greg Popovich as their coach. . .

[SinJackal]

. . .Would the Lakers struggle this much and fail to make adjustments during games when their gameplan clearly isn't working?

I see Greg Popovich calling timeouts when the Lakers go on. . .2 point runs, when he's up by 9, when he sees a defensive mistake.

I see Phil Jackson take a snooze and eat a couple of ding dongs when the Lakers are impoding during a winnable game like tonight.

If Greg Popovich was the Lakers' coach. . .would they be better?

I'm asking legitimately, not trying to troll. Phil just seems like he doesn't care sometimes. Even during postgame interviews he seems like he doesn't care.


Edit: Since so many people seem to be replying with the same off-point reply, I'm going to have to add a disclaimer.

NOBODY is saying Phil has a bad track record, or hasn't been a good coach throughout his career. I am not saying that Popovich has had a better coaching career. I don't think either of the previous statements are true at all. Phil has had a better career, and has an excellent track record.

I'm talking about RIGHT NOW. Not their careers!

[jlauber]

. . .Would the Lakers struggle this much and fail to make adjustments during games when their gameplan clearly isn't working?

I see Greg Popovich calling timeouts when the Lakers go on. . .2 point runs, when he's up by 9, when he sees a defensive mistake.

I see Phil Jackson take a snooze and eat a couple of ding dongs when the Lakers are impoding during a winnable game like tonight.

If Greg Popovich was the Lakers' coach. . .would they be better?

I'm asking legitimately, not trying to troll. Phil just seems like he doesn't care sometimes. Even during postgame interviews he seems like he doesn't care.

LOL! I just started a similar thread.

You and I will probably get shredded here, but IMHO, Pop has been a better coach than Phil. He has taken much less talented rosters to titles, and an incredible string of 50+ win seasons.

[PowerGlove]

Phil wants his players to be able to adjust on their own.

[dwadefan11]

Yes right now triangle is not working at all right now.

However this style of play is ideal in the playoffs and if Kobe gets going again and Pau the whole offense will open up.

[artificial]

As much as I like Popovich (probably my favorite coach out there), it's not as if his teams have never struggled while having a good roster.

And you're not talking about a random coach here. Not sure you can just say "______ would be doing a better job than the freaking Zen Master".

[SinJackal]

LOL! I just started a similar thread.

You and I will probably get shredded here, but IMHO, Pop has been a better coach than Phil. He has taken much less talented rosters to titles, and an incredible string of 50+ win seasons.

Nice. I must've been finishing this out when you posted that one, I didn't see it when I went to make this thread.

I'm not sure I'd say Pop's had the better career. . .Phil's got 11 rings as a coach. I think Pop is the better coach right now though. And I honestly think it isn't even close. Pop still cares a lot. Phil clearly doesn't.

Phil strikes me as a coach who wishes he retired last year.

[8BeastlyXOIAD]

. . .Would the Lakers struggle this much and fail to make adjustments during games when their gameplan clearly isn't working?

I see Greg Popovich calling timeouts when the Lakers go on. . .2 point runs, when he's up by 9, when he sees a defensive mistake.

I see Phil Jackson take a snooze and eat a couple of ding dongs when the Lakers are impoding during a winnable game like tonight.

If Greg Popovich was the Lakers' coach. . .would they be better?

I'm asking legitimately, not trying to troll. Phil just seems like he doesn't care sometimes. Even during postgame interviews he seems like he doesn't care.


Yeah what is up with that?

[jlauber]

Nice. I must've been finishing this out when you posted that one, I didn't see it when I went to make this thread.

I'm not sure I'd say Pop's had the better career. . .Phil's got 11 rings as a coach. I think Pop is the better coach right now though. And I honestly think it isn't even close. Pop still cares a lot. Phil clearly doesn't.

Phil strikes me as a coach who wishes he retired last year.

I think that Phil has been outcoached in several post-seasons. Larry Brown in both 2001 and 2004, and Doc in 2008...not to mention Pop beating him with less talented rosters.

I will agree that Phil seems to be able to win titles with great players (not everyone can), but in terms of x's and o's...I don't see it.

[8BeastlyXOIAD]

I think that Phil has been outcoached in several post-seasons. Larry Brown in both 2001 and 2004, and Doc in 2008...not to mention Pop beating him with less talented rosters.

I will agree that Phil seems to be able to win titles with great players (not everyone can), but in terms of x's and o's...I don't see it.

2010 IMO as well

[jlauber]

I heard Phil complaining about Kobe' shooting again tonight, too. He does this several times a year...but never does anything about it.

I am a HUGE Kobe fan, but if the coach (and the other players) feel that he is jacking up shots, then bench him for a few minutes and explain it to him...instead of publicly criticizing him.

[jlauber]

2010 IMO as well

I agree. On paper the Lakers had a better team than the Celtics. And yet they nearly lost that series.

[SinJackal]

I heard Phil complaining about Kobe' shooting again tonight, too. He does this several times a year...but never does anything about it.

I am a HUGE Kobe fan, but if the coach (and the other players) feel that he is jacking up shots, then bench him for a few minutes and explain it to him...instead of publicly criticizing him.

I don't understand why they do that either and yet do nothing about it.

Agreed 100%. Phil needs to sit Kobe if he has complaints about his shot selection. Phil has the power to take Kobe out of the games. Kobe wants to stay in the games. Take him out when he's chucking and not listening. Put him back in once he's paid attention. Problem solved.

[catch24]

I don't understand why they do that either and yet do nothing about it.

Agreed 100%. Phil needs to sit Kobe if he has complaints about his shot selection. Phil has the power to take Kobe out of the games. Kobe wants to stay in the games. Take him out when he's chucking and not listening. Put him back in once he's paid attention. Problem solved.

This. To be honest the past 3 games have been absolutely horrible to watch as a fan. Our offense looks f*cking atrocious.

[SinJackal]

This. To be honest the past 3 games have been absolutely horrible to watch as a fan. Our offense looks f*cking atrocious.

At least you guys have Bynum back. Maybe now the rotations for the rest of the year can start to flesh out.

Phil should consider keep Bynum coming off the bench, since Odom and Gasol play pretty well together.

[tpols]

LOL! I just started a similar thread.

You and I will probably get shredded here, but IMHO, Pop has been a better coach than Phil. He has taken much less talented rosters to titles, and an incredible string of 50+ win seasons.
Yup he has been a better coach than phil jackson.

Phil has had the extremely fortunate opportunity to work with three all time legends in shaq, kobe, and michael. These guys were going to be very special no matter who coached them and thats how he got the majority of his rings. Now.. I do believe he is a great motivator and wise coach but pop is easily more of the 'mastermind' type coach that has everything calculated and ready to be put in place.

Pop is the Bill Belichick of the NBA. I do believe that it was pop that made duncan the defensive monster he was by creating great defensive systems where he could thrive. He, overall, has made much more out of less.

[indiefan24]

I will agree that Phil seems to be able to win titles with great players (not everyone can), but in terms of x's and o's...I don't see it.

Maybe the loss of Tex Winter has something to do with it? Obviously he was around for the Bulls era, then the first three-peat, but not really for the past several seasons since he had his stroke.

The whole "I don't give a shit" approach can be really annoying to watch, but how can you really argue with the results?

[LA KB24]

PJax/Pops/Rick Adelman/Sloan

all on the same level IMO.

[ZenMaster]

Just because you're not running up and down the sidelines during the game doesn't mean you don't care.

Phil's just a hard nosed coach when his team is losing, but ultimately the team should be better from it.

[ZenMaster]

Maybe the loss of Tex Winter has something to do with it? Obviously he was around for the Bulls era, then the first three-peat, but not really for the past several seasons since he had his stroke.

The whole "I don't give a shit" approach can be really annoying to watch, but how can you really argue with the results?

You can't, but people will always try.

[oh the horror]

You can't, but people will always try.



While its true, that one cant really argue with the fact that the man does have 11 rings...its still undeniable that there are games, where you clearly see particular players, and rotations, that ARE NOT WORKING OUT....Yet Phil will keep these players, and or rotations out on the floor.


Be it, Kobe stinking up the joint....Ron Artest losing his mind on court....Fisher getting abused, or Gasol stinking up the joint or WHATEVER.....


I believe Phil will sometimes go with the philosophy of letting grown players crash and burn on their own.....and perhaps it works, but often times, it can build bad habits out there on the floor....not to mention HORRIBLE to see as a fan.


Perhaps he knows whats up though, and maybe the Lakers (after 2 championships in a row) NEED an implosion like this for them to find some type of motivation for them to keep going.


I imagine there is a huge hangover from a championship run....and an even bigger one after 2 consecutive.....so here we are....watching LA fall apart for the moment.

[Nero Tulip]

They're the two best coaches, but with completely different styles. It's hard to tell which one is the best.

I think Jackson has always been underrated because of the players he had to work with. How many coaches won NBA titles with a shooting guard as the main man? As far as I can tell he's the only one who made it work that well.

[ZenMaster]

While its true, that one cant really argue with the fact that the man does have 11 rings...its still undeniable that there are games, where you clearly see particular players, and rotations, that ARE NOT WORKING OUT....Yet Phil will keep these players, and or rotations out on the floor.


Be it, Kobe stinking up the joint....Ron Artest losing his mind on court....Fisher getting abused, or Gasol stinking up the joint or WHATEVER.....


I believe Phil will sometimes go with the philosophy of letting grown players crash and burn on their own.....and perhaps it works, but often times, it can build bad habits out there on the floor....not to mention HORRIBLE to see as a fan.


Perhaps he knows whats up though, and maybe the Lakers (after 2 championships in a row) NEED an implosion like this for them to find some type of motivation for them to keep going.


I imagine there is a huge hangover from a championship run....and an even bigger one after 2 consecutive.....so here we are....watching LA fall apart for the moment.

I'm down with letting players crash on their own even though it isn't good too watch. They should pull together stronger when they get through it.
These players are professionals, they've been taught well in practice. It's up to them to execute what they know.

[97 bulls]

I see I gotta step in a defend phil. Why is it that when the lakers are winning kobe and gasol are the greatest ever and mvps. But when they're in a slump, its phils fault?

Jackson said before the season started that the lakers looked lathargic. The problem is not their offense or defense. The problem is they're not hungry. Kobe said theyre playing like a team thats won 2 championships. Meaning that theyre content. I can't believe people are calling out a guy that's won more championships than any other coach in sports.

And while I agree the spurs are playing great, they too always seem to settle after every championship they've won. And the lakers talent has never been that much better than the spurs. That's another falsehood. Its not like he's won with tim duncan and chopped liver.

[MikeBeas]

sam thing cause when the yboth played same decade

[JrueHoliday11]

sam thing cause when the yboth played same decade

great point

[reppy]

Different styles that have yielded success in both cases. Could you imagine Pop screaming at Kobe that way he does with Manu? Shit wouldn't last. Phil manages egos. Not sure how well Popovich would do that. Each coach has their strength.

[97 bulls]

Id also like to add that guys have flourished under jackson just like ppop. Guys like shanon brown, trever ariza, maurice evans. Jackson has turned them from nobodys to good solid contributing role players.

[SinJackal]

I see I gotta step in a defend phil. Why is it that when the lakers are winning kobe and gasol are the greatest ever and mvps. But when they're in a slump, its phils fault?

Jackson said before the season started that the lakers looked lathargic. The problem is not their offense or defense. The problem is they're not hungry. Kobe said theyre playing like a team thats won 2 championships. Meaning that theyre content. I can't believe people are calling out a guy that's won more championships than any other coach in sports.

And while I agree the spurs are playing great, they too always seem to settle after every championship they've won. And the lakers talent has never been that much better than the spurs. That's another falsehood. Its not like he's won with tim duncan and chopped liver.

While you make some logical points, I look at it this way.

Michael Jordan was the best SG ever. He beat everyone down throughout most of his career. When Jordan came back as a Wizard, he wasn't nearly as good as he used to be. Was it an insult to say he wasn't as good anymore? I don't believe it was. It was obvious. I was saying the same thing.

Nobody can deny what Phil Jackson has already done, just like nobody could deny what Jordan had already done. The fact remains though, that Jordan wasn't as good his last couple seasons. I don't think Phil's as good now. . .I thought he was subpar last season too on several occaisions.

I'm not blaming Phil for all their problems, but it seems obvious that there are a lot of problems that can be avoided if Phil asserted himself more. I always get the impression Phil comes up with a gameplan, explains it to the team, then acts like the game is the players' responsibility, and that he doesn't have to coach anymore. Almost as if he's setting himself up to have an excuse if they lose. "Well you guys didn't stick to the gameplan, that's why you lost". Not saying he says that word for word, but he hints at it during postgame interviews a lot. Of course, when the plan he sets out there doesn't work, he doesn't adjust. He just lets it implode.

Pop comes up with the gameplan, talks to the players throughout the game, and takes quick timeouts if he sees something failing or not going well. Phil seems to zonk out sometimes and take a nap no matter what's going on.


So. . .Phil is one of the top coaches in the history of the NBA easily. I just think he doesn't have it anymore. He seems like he wishes he retired.

As for the Spurs' settling after championships. . .that's not true. They have had injury issues between several of their championships (Duncan missed the 2000 playoffs), some awful calls in game 5 vs LA in 2004, another irritating call vs the Mavs in 06, and Manu got injured during the playoffs in 2008, on top of imo questionable calls in games 1 and 4 vs LA (entire 4th quarter in agme 1, and the Fisher tackle on Barry in game 4).

It isn't like they gave up or packed it in those seasons. Injury problems and some irritating calls, plus close defeats. It's not as easy for a small market team of low playoff ratings (by comparison) to actually repeat. They don't get the benefit of drawing free agents, and certainly won't get the benefit of calls (rather, it's usually the opposite).

So that's not really a fair comment.

[Yung D-Will]

This thread is unneccesary. Both are great coaches. And both do it in differnt ways.

Pop Will make the adjustment. Phil will let his players fight though to develop mental toughness.

Both work as you can clearly tell by their track record.

Just like Pat Riley does it differnt from both of them.

[sundizz]

You know oddly enough, the reason I like Phil Jackson is because I honestly don't understand him that well. I understand basketball extremely well, to the point that I usually see things clearer than the people announcing games (it annoys me a bit when they call things wrong), but Phil J i really do not understand. He really seems to understand the big picture and know that you can't force a non championship team to become champions.

He seems to understand that either a team has the makeup, the drive, the skill, and the attention to detail that will make them that championship team or not. It seems he has this unique ability to gauge what his team needs not know, but what it will need in those tough situations. His 'helping' his team by being a normal coach would make his team win more games in the regular season (for sure), but would it really help him team in the playoffs?

The playoffs seem to be made out of those singular moments where you as a fan (a true fan) recognize that yellow brick road to the top and see it happening before your eyes. Example, KG dunking it all over Gasol. The sense of defeat I felt went well beyond that point. When your 2nd best player doesn't have the 'true' toughness you can't just win on skill.

The next year it showed itself over and over that Gasol wouldn't quit. He may ge manhandled but he fully understood the larger goal.

So far I'm not really worried about this year. I think they'll be fine. Kobe is just a perfectionist so losing at any point really irks him. It's not about gelling with Phil J, it's about each player truly understanding and relishing his role on the team. Whether it be make that ONE big stop on defense, he seems to be a coach that gets role players to feel the self confidence to make that ONE play that is the difference between fishing and titles. His subtle jabs, his letting them play through it, gives players that independent confidence from their superstars (Kobe, Shaq, Jordan, Pippen) where they feel they deserve and can flourish in pressure situations.

Pop is a 10/10 strategician (made up word), coach, and gets the most out of any player. If this were college, or any other bball he would be by far the best coach ever. However, the NBA has that .01% players such as Kobe, Shaq, Mike and Phil J knows how to get the most out of them and the team surrounding them.

[All Net]

I have been scratching my head on alot of Phil's rotations and game plans this season. You just have to say well he knows best but you do wonder sometimes.

[Da KO King]

Phil Jackson is a very over-rated coach. People confuse his success with the ability to out-coach others on any given night. That simply is not the case.

Jackson has been fortunate enough that he has had some extremely talented teams to go along with his understanding of how to motivate and unite a group.

[Yung D-Will]

All I know is that the two coaches I've always respected the most were

http://a.espncdn.com/photo/2008/0521/nba_g_spurs_580.jpg
Gregg Popovich
Career Record (regular season): 576-276 (.676)
Career Record (postseason): 92-51 (.643)
Teams: San Antonio Spurs (1996-current)
No Of. Seasons: 11 seasons
Postseason Appearances: 10
NBA Championships: 4 (1999, 2003, 2005, 2007)



http://msn.foxsports.com/id/9955456
Pat Riley
Career Record (regular season): 1182-618 (.657)
Career Record (postseason): 171-111 (.606)
Teams: Los Angeles Lakers (1981-1990), New York Knicks (1991-1995), Miami Heat (1995-2003, 2005-2007; 61 games in '05-'06, 60 games in '06-'07)
No. Of Seasons: 23 seasons
Postseason Appearances: 21
NBA Championships: 5 (Lakers: 1982, 1985, 1987, 1988; Heat: 2006)

[niko]

Pop couldn't have hanlded the teams Phil has. Pop creates teams of people who are these selfless superstars, helped out immensely because his anchor players (Duncan, Manu, Robinson - who he chose btw so it's not a bad thing) are totally selfless, he can yell at them, treat them exactly the same. Phil's teams are totally the opposite, had egos to massage, etc. Want an example? Rodman. He killed a season because Pop could not control him. Yet Phil took him right after and won a title.

Ridiculous topic. We consider Pop great because he won four titles, but we are goign to diss on the eleven title winning coach? PLEASE.

BTW, Spurs fans ALWAYS underrate Duncan. Phil won because he had a GOAT SG in Jordan. WTF is Duncan? Some marginal talent Pop drags along to the promised land?

[2LeTTeRS]

PJax/Pops/Rick Adelman/Sloan

all on the same level IMO.

One of these names is not like the other.......

Oh and as the 19 win Heat that were coached by Riley, as well as the Knicks and this years Bobcats squad who were coached by Larry Brown proved just having a great coach is no guarantee of success.

[Gotterdammerung]

Want an example? Rodman. He killed a season because Pop could not control him. Yet Phil took him right after and won a title.


Two things:

One, Greg Poppovich did not coach the Spurs until he fired Bob Hill 18 games into the 1996-1997 season. Dennis Rodman had been traded to the Bulls in 1995. Bob Hill was an incompetent coach whose arrogance far exceeded his coaching acumen.

Two, a coach does not "control" a player. That's the incorrect mindset when coaching a player. You can't handle them like horses. You work with them. Players are human beings with the ability to choose, and coaches should treat them with respect. Hill tried to "control" rodman, and failed. Phil worked with Rodman, and won.

[B]

Both great coaches. Pops has done well but having never led a team to back to back titles hurts him. You can make excuses all day long for Pops but Jackson's multiple back to back titles puts him in a class by himself

[niko]

Two things:

One, Greg Poppovich did not coach the Spurs until he fired Bob Hill 18 games into the 1996-1997 season. Dennis Rodman had been traded to the Bulls in 1995. Bob Hill was an incompetent coach whose arrogance far exceeded his coaching acumen.

Two, a coach does not "control" a player. That's the incorrect mindset when coaching a player. You can't handle them like horses. You work with them. Players are human beings with the ability to choose, and coaches should treat them with respect. Hill tried to "control" rodman, and failed. Phil worked with Rodman, and won.
My bad. Rest of the point still stnads though. None of Phil's teams had "Pops guys" like he likes. It's not really a good comparison.

[ZenMaster]

Phil Jackson is a very over-rated coach. People confuse his success with the ability to out-coach others on any given night. That simply is not the case.

Jackson has been fortunate enough that he has had some extremely talented teams to go along with his understanding of how to motivate and unite a group.

But does that make him overrated?

The other side of not being an overly active in-game coach is that you teach your team more in practices. And you have practices that efficiently simulate game situations through drills that also teaches fundamentals and conditioning.

He's also the best team motivator the NBA has ever seen, a true team coach.

People mostly mention that he's had great teams with great players and that he's been lucky, but they hardly ever consider how he has affected those players through many years of coaching, except the players themselves who always give him a lot of credit.

I've seen plenty of people call Larry Brown a better coach on this board, and it's a shame.

[Gotterdammerung]

My bad. Rest of the point still stnads though. None of Phil's teams had "Pops guys" like he likes. It's not really a good comparison.
False again.:facepalm

Stephen Jackson disproves your point. He was a classic knucklehead, and Coach Pop won with him. Your agenda is getting more and more blatant every day. Troll elsewhere. :no:

[mashbelly]

Pop wouldn't have lost the 04 and 08 finals if he was coaching the lakers. He also wouldn't have squandered that 3-1 lead.

[NoGunzJustSkillz]

Nice. I must've been finishing this out when you posted that one, I didn't see it when I went to make this thread.

I'm not sure I'd say Pop's had the better career. . .Phil's got 11 rings as a coach. I think Pop is the better coach right now though. And I honestly think it isn't even close. Pop still cares a lot. Phil clearly doesn't.

Phil strikes me as a coach who wishes he retired last year.
Phil has been pulling the same sh!t for years and as frustrating as it is to watch (the no time-outs, no adjustments), it usually pays off in June.

[Allstar24]

I'll go with Phil since you can't overlook how many championships he's won. MJ-Pippen, Shaq-Kobe, Kobe-Pau...some of the greatest duos in league history but they won nothing without him. Phil is good at managing personalities. I also don't think people realize how difficult it is to win 3 in a row, he's the only one to do it so many times. Having said that, Popovich is great too. I love the way he treats his players, his focus on defense and his brilliant interviews. You can't go wrong with either but Phil is a better coach for guys like MJ, Kobe and Shaq.

[niko]

False again.:facepalm

Stephen Jackson disproves your point. He was a classic knucklehead, and Coach Pop won with him. Your agenda is getting more and more blatant every day. Troll elsewhere. :no:
What's my agenda? I didn't say Popovich sucks as a coach. This is a Phil Jackson sucks as a coach thread. I'm sorry in the Spurs fans little minds anything that doesn't give them overwhelming props is an agenda. Give it up...he has ELEVEN freaking titles. He didn't luck into 11.

[NoGunzJustSkillz]

Pop wouldn't have lost the 04 and 08 finals if he was coaching the lakers. He also wouldn't have squandered that 3-1 lead.
Does he have some magical power to heal Malone & Bynum of their injuries and somehow helps find Glove's shot?

[niko]

Does he have some magical power to heal Malone & Bynum of their injuries and somehow helps find Glove's shot?

Negative comments on the Spurs are not allowed. Yes, yes he could.

[SinJackal]

What's my agenda? I didn't say Popovich sucks as a coach. This is a Phil Jackson sucks as a coach thread. I'm sorry in the Spurs fans little minds anything that doesn't give them overwhelming props is an agenda. Give it up...he has ELEVEN freaking titles. He didn't luck into 11.

You show up in every thread about the Spurs, or any of it's players/coaching staff, and say negative things about them. Very rarely do you even throw in a token positive post about them. The ratio of negative to positive posts you make about the Spurs and it's staff are like 20-1.

Your "agena", is quite obvious. Naysay the Spurs every chance you can.

And no one is denying Phil's history as a coach. We're talking about right now. As I said before, Jordan as a Wizard wasn't the best SG in the league just because he was from 86-98. He was top 5 maximum.

Phil's career is arguably the best in NBA history. But does that mean he's the best coach NOW? It's ludicrous to claim a coach is the best right NOW, because he has the most titles of any active coach.

All his titles mean are that his career has been the best. It doesn't mean nobody can ever be a better coach than him if he's still in the NBA. That's naive arrogance on the highest level possible.



Negative comments on the Spurs are not allowed. Yes, yes he could.

Negative comments are fine. It's just irritating to read posters like yourself who say nothing BUT negative comments, and then have the audasity claim you're not an anti-Spurs troll. Which you are.

[niko]

You show up in every thread about the Spurs, or any of it's players/coaching staff, and say negative things about them. Very rarely do you even throw in a token positive post about them. The ratio of negative to positive posts you make about the Spurs and it's staff are like 20-1.

Your "agena", is quite obvious. Naysay the Spurs every chance you can.

And no one is denying Phil's history as a coach. We're talking about right now. As I said before, Jordan as a Wizard wasn't the best SG in the league just because he was from 86-98. He was top 5 maximum.

Phil's career is arguably the best in NBA history. But does that mean he's the best coach NOW? It's ludicrous to claim a coach is the best right NOW, because he has the most titles of any active coach.

All his titles mean are that his career has been the best. It doesn't mean nobody can ever be a better coach than him if he's still in the NBA. That's naive arrogance on the highest level possible.




Negative comments are fine. It's just irritating to read posters like yourself who say nothing BUT negative comments, and then have the audasity claim you're not an anti-Spurs troll. Which you are.

i didn't say anything negative about the SPurs at all. I just said i think it's ridiculous to discount Phil Jackson's accomplishments. Disagreeing with Spurs fans is always met with "YOU ARE A HATER! HOW CAN YOU DISAGREE!"

I disagree with the thought Poppovich is slam dunk obviously a better coach than Phil Jackson. If you take that as Spurs hate then i suggest you just sit there in your spurs gear and accept it because i don't think it's that ridiculous a thing to say.

[tpols]

i didn't say anything negative about the SPurs at all. I just said i think it's ridiculous to discount Phil Jackson's accomplishments. Disagreeing with Spurs fans is always met with "YOU ARE A HATER! HOW CAN YOU DISAGREE!"

I disagree with the thought Poppovich is slam dunk obviously a better coach than Phil Jackson. If you take that as Spurs hate then i suggest you just sit there in your spurs gear and accept it because i don't think it's that ridiculous a thing to say.
Although I think pop is a better fundamental and more knowledgable basketball coach, I have to defend niko here. There's nothing wrong with someone defending phil here because they are both elite coaches and phil is the winningest of all time.

Basically anyone who disagrees with anything sinjackal says is a spurs hater. I was a spurs hater for saying kobe is much better than manu last week and now niko is a spurs hater for saying phil is better than pop(which is a very valid opinion).:facepalm

[SinJackal]

i didn't say anything negative about the SPurs at all. I just said i think it's ridiculous to discount Phil Jackson's accomplishments. Disagreeing with Spurs fans is always met with "YOU ARE A HATER! HOW CAN YOU DISAGREE!"

I disagree with the thought Poppovich is slam dunk obviously a better coach than Phil Jackson. If you take that as Spurs hate then i suggest you just sit there in your spurs gear and accept it because i don't think it's that ridiculous a thing to say.

Nobody's discounting Phil's history. Quote a single post anywhere that a Spurs fan, and a non Laker-hater, has said Phil was lucky to get his titles. No one denies that he's a good coach.

You're arguing that Phil is better because he's won more titles, but that argument is for who had a better career. Nobody here is saying Pop had a better career. We're talking about now, and you're talking about whole careers.

I take your constant negative posts about the Spurs' and it's staff as hate. There's almost never any positive in there. Don't be coy and act innocent, claiming that because you disagree with one post that it doesn't make you a Spurs hater. You're well-known as a Spurs hater, one of the biggest anti-Spurs posters on the boards. Easily top 3. Probably top 1-2. This thread is not even the tip of the iceberg, this is one of your MANY anti-Spurs posts.

One post does not make you anti-Spurs. Dozens upon dozens; however, do.

[SinJackal]

Although I think pop is a better fundamental and more knowledgable basketball coach, I have to defend niko here. There's nothing wrong with someone defending phil here because they are both elite coaches and phil is the winningest of all time.

Basically anyone who disagrees with anything sinjackal says is a spurs hater. I was a spurs hater for saying kobe is much better than manu last week and now niko is a spurs hater for saying phil is better than pop(which is a very valid opinion).:facepalm

I didn't call you a Spurs hater for saying Kobe is better than Manu. Even I say Kobe is better than Manu. So clearly you're making shit up.

You're a Spurs hater because you're a troll who usually posts nothing positive except when blowing Kobe or the Lakers. You aren't one over some made up scenerio you're trying to pawn off as reality in a weak attempt at discrediting someone. Yet another fail by you.

[Gotterdammerung]

What's my agenda? I didn't say Popovich sucks as a coach.
Not only are you spouting falsehoods left & right, and being disingenuous, you're also a coward.

I'll play along. You don't have to say that Coach Pop is a bad coach to be a troll and carry an agenda. Capeesh? You're being obvious in your attempts at diminishing Pop to prop up Phil Jackson, by resorting to false statements and ignorant comments.

Yes, Phil Jackson is a great coach, no doubt, but he doesn't need your weaksauce help by bagging on other coaches with a transparent agenda.

I'm not a Spurs fan, but nobody has to be one to see the true color of your underwear.

[kantfoo]

If you bench Kobe for his shot selection, he is just going to sulk. If you let the Lakers lose a few games playing Kobe-ball, Kobe will eventually learn (for half a season anyway), and he won't sulk.

Superstars have enormous egos, and you got to manage them in a certain way. With that said, Popovich is lucky to have a maintenance-free trio in Duncan/Ginobli/Parker, while Phil Jackson has had to dealt with prima-donnas his entire career.

Whether or not Popovich is a truly good coach remains to be seen after Duncan retires.

[niko]

:facepalm
Not only are you spouting falsehoods left & right, and being disingenuous, you're also a coward.

I'll play along. You don't have to say that Coach Pop is a bad coach to be a troll and carry an agenda. Capeesh? You're being obvious in your attempts at diminishing Pop to prop up Phil Jackson, by resorting to false statements and ignorant comments.

Yes, Phil Jackson is a great coach, no doubt, but he doesn't need your weaksauce help by bagging on other coaches with a transparent agenda.

I'm not a Spurs fan, but nobody has to be one to see the true color of your underwear.
:facepalm

[step_back]

Spurs including Pop have the hunger to win, This is the most casual looking Laker team I have seen for the last few years. That being said they will snap out of it, I expect them to get back on track and seriously kick up the intensity after the all star break.

[tpols]

I didn't call you a Spurs hater for saying Kobe is better than Manu. Even I say Kobe is better than Manu. So clearly you're making shit up.

You're a Spurs hater because you're a troll who usually posts nothing positive except when blowing Kobe or the Lakers. You aren't one over some made up scenerio you're trying to pawn off as reality in a weak attempt at discrediting someone. Yet another fail by you.
Lying again:oldlol:

You were pulling in stats from years past saying that the kobe and manu were very close and then when we were talking about backcourts you said it again. It's absurd when the difference between a team's first option and working through him to create the offense is a lot different than a guy that usually comes off the bench as a sixth man for a scoring punch:facepalm

Now you're trying to say pop is definitely better than phil because your team is playing great right now and anyone that disagrees with you is a spurs hater despite the fact that he is now being compared to the guy who has coached back to back championship teams.

anyways I digress.. these spurs threads get boring quick.

[SinJackal]

Lying again:oldlol:

You were pulling in stats from years past saying that the kobe and manu were very close and then when we were talking about backcourts you said it again. It's absurd when the difference between a team's first option and working through him to create the offense is a lot different than a guy that usually comes off the bench as a sixth man for a scoring punch:facepalm

Now you're trying to say pop is definitely better than phil because your team is playing great right now and anyone that disagrees with you is a spurs hater despite the fact that he is now being compared to the guy who has coached back to back championship teams.

anyways I digress.. these spurs threads get boring quick.

Me posting stats saying Manu plays Kobe well is an entirely different thing than saying Manu is better than Kobe, which I have never done once in my life besides as an obvious joke. Nice try though, you didn't post anything that proved what you were saying to begin with, since you cannot since it didn't happen. :roll: Failpols

And yes, I think Pop is better right now because he shows that he cares, makes in-game adjustments, and helps his team along. Phil yawns and spaces out. The Lakers have a better squad, and have an inferior record. Add the two up, and yes, Pop is better right now.

And again, you're weakly trying to pawn off one thing for another. You are a Spurs hater because of all of your posts about them, not about this single post. Your label as a Spurs-hater is a sum of the parts, not a single piece. Clearly you know this already, but are making a pathetic attempt at defending yourself while deflecting. Too bad you're too poor with words for that lame attempt to be successful.

If the Spurs threads are boring to you, don't open them. You contribute nothing to them anyway. They will be much better without you. Bye newb troll.

[Gotterdammerung]

:facepalm
:facepalm
Clearly, I've been refuted by a classic argumentum ad emoticon but then again, arguing on the internet.... :oldlol:

[gts]

phil jackson has 11 rings on 3 separate three peats and is going for another.
he's been to the finals 13 times this cannot be discounted in anyway shape or form...

popovich is great and I'd gladly have him for a coach if the lakes didn't have phil but I don't think you can spew out any facts that make popovich look like a better all around coach than jackson. he may excel (pop) in some aspects of the game but for all around coaching if you have a talented team that needs that final push to get them over the hill you cannot go wrong with jackson and his record tells us so, it's not a fluke, once can be a fluke twice maybe but not 11 times

[niko]

phil jackson has 11 rings on 3 separate three peats and is going for another.
he's been to the finals 13 times this cannot be discounted in anyway shape or form...

popovich is great and I'd gladly have him for a coach if the lakes didn't have phil but I don't think you can spew out any facts that make popovich look like a better all around coach than jackson. he may excel (pop) in some aspects of the game but for all around coaching if you have a talented team that needs that final push to get them over the hill you cannot go wrong with jackson and his record tells us so, it's not a fluke, once can be a fluke twice maybe but not 11 times
Clearly. This is exactly what i said. People can have as their opinion Pop is better, but to state it as fact is ridiculous. It's clearly not inarguable.

[PowerGlove]

People bringing up rings already? :facepalm

[niko]

People bringing up rings already? :facepalm
If the Spurs didn't win four titles would we be having this conversation at all? What separate Pop from his peers is he wins. Rings is at the crux of this conversation.

[Mr. Jabbar]

phil jackson has 11 rings on 3 separate three peats and is going for another.
he's been to the finals 13 times this cannot be discounted in anyway shape or form...

popovich is great and I'd gladly have him for a coach if the lakes didn't have phil but I don't think you can spew out any facts that make popovich look like a better all around coach than jackson. he may excel (pop) in some aspects of the game but for all around coaching if you have a talented team that needs that final push to get them over the hill you cannot go wrong with jackson and his record tells us so, it's not a fluke, once can be a fluke twice maybe but not 11 times

so much win in this post.

[Gotterdammerung]

Now that the troll/hater has been sent back to his corner...

I consider Phil Jackson to be a greater All-Time coach than Coach Poppovich for the following reasons:

Now, i think the toughest thing for any coach is to win when he is supposed to win. There's almost zero pressure on weak teams and mediocre ones to win titles. But the favorite? tough titty if they flop before they taste the champagne.

Why is this the case? The greatest teams almost by default always have players with the largest egos, and they often play light-switch basketball in which they cruise through the majority of a game and then turn on their superstar skills in the end.

PJax has to overcome those in-built obstacles, and has done so at least 11 times. To dismiss his accomplishments by saying the following names: MJ, Shaq, Kobe, Pippen, is to miss the deeper truth - Shaq and MJ had zero rings for 8/7 years before PJax came to their town. He's the Mariano Riveria of coaches: the best closer ever.

His system works because the triangle is flawless when the players are synched up. Moreover, he can also persuade most of his players to sacrifice in order for the triangle to benefit everyone and thus they win. The only players that have resisted this system are Glen Rice and Kobe Bryant.

However, there's much more than X and Os in Jackson's successes. He's probably the only coach to realize the truism that every coach is an outsider, a civilian who comes dressed to battle in a jacket and a necktie. That is why discipline and motivation must ultimately come from the players themselves. That's PJax in a nutshell: create an environment where mature individuals police themselves and develop their own community.

I also rank Red Auerbach and Red Holzman and Pat Riley ahead of Poppovich on the all time coach list.

[SinJackal]

phil jackson has 11 rings on 3 separate three peats and is going for another.
he's been to the finals 13 times this cannot be discounted in anyway shape or form...

popovich is great and I'd gladly have him for a coach if the lakes didn't have phil but I don't think you can spew out any facts that make popovich look like a better all around coach than jackson. he may excel (pop) in some aspects of the game but for all around coaching if you have a talented team that needs that final push to get them over the hill you cannot go wrong with jackson and his record tells us so, it's not a fluke, once can be a fluke twice maybe but not 11 times

You, like a couple other posters, are making an argument against something that's never been said.

Nobody is saying Pop has had a better career, or that Phil was "lucky" or by some fluke won 11 rings as a coach.

So most of what you said seems like a template argument against someone saying Phil isn't a good coach. Nobody's saying that though, so I'm not sure why people are still falling back onto their template arguments that don't actually fit the discussion.

My point is that Phil seems like he wishes he retired last year, and doesn't seem to be putting in the same effort he used to, meanwhile Popovich seems fired up to win.

If somebody would actually address the question I ask and my relevant points, rather than keep pretending I said Phil was a bad coach who fluked his way to titles so your template arguments will actually fit, that would be nice.

Maybe I'm asking for too much though, and all I'm going to get is a history lessen of what Phil did 20 years ago to now, rather than have someone explain to me how Phil's current coaching is working out well for the Lakers as opposed to how Pop might do with them, which is what I'm looking for. Obviously I know Phil's won 11 titles, 6 with MJ and the Bulls, 3 with Shaq/Kobe, and 2 with the current Lakers team. We all know this. Making half your guys posts stating the obvious isn't really doing much.

And this isn't to lash out on you neccessarily gts, so excuse me for that if it seems that way. It's just, multiple people are doing the same thing and not making any points for this year's Phil whatsoever. All I'm getting is a history lessen, when I'm talking about THIS season and this current Lakers team. Michael Jordan, Shaq , and the rings they won with Phil have nothing to do with the discussion of current Phil and the current Lakers opposed to Popovich.

[NoGunzJustSkillz]

I think Pop would get more wins out of this Lakers team during the regular season than Phil Jackson does. He would certainly make a helluva replacement for Phil after this season :D

[indiefan24]

I see Phil Jackson take a snooze and eat a couple of ding dongs when the Lakers are impoding during a winnable game like tonight.

If Greg Popovich was the Lakers' coach. . .would they be better?

I really don't think his demeanor this season has been any different than years past. Jackson has always been ridiculed for his stoic expressions. He's the master at peaking his teams for the right time (playoffs) and more often than not he's been successful at it.

As for replacing Pop with Phil, sure right now he would be able to get several more wins out of this Lakers team, but I would attribute that to his more hands-on approach. Phil has complete belief in the system he has implemented which includes letting his players work through their own problems. If this means sacrificing wins during the regular season then so be it--I'm not agreeing that it's the best approach, especially since they will lose out on home court, but it's the only reason why I see him coaching this way.

We can argue all we want now about who has the better approach to coaching this season, but I'll give Phil the benefit of the doubt until the Lakers are actually eliminated.

[gts]

My point is that Phil seems like he wishes he retired last year, and doesn't seem to be putting in the same effort he used to, meanwhile Popovich seems fired up to win
If that's your point then you'd be wrong...

Phil is no more or less engaged with the team in game than the last couple years. just because he's not up and down the sidelines in the refs ears does not mean he's not putting in effort

i think you like so many see him not pacing back and forth and assume his mind is elsewhere.

this is and has been phil's style for the last few years...

i won't speak for if popovich is more fired up or less because i don't watch enough spurs games to know and plus i really don't care if he is or isn't

[97 bulls]

You, like a couple other posters, are making an argument against something that's never been said.

Nobody is saying Pop has had a better career, or that Phil was "lucky" or by some fluke won 11 rings as a coach.

So most of what you said seems like a template argument against someone saying Phil isn't a good coach. Nobody's saying that though, so I'm not sure why people are still falling back onto their template arguments that don't actually fit the discussion.

My point is that Phil seems like he wishes he retired last year, and doesn't seem to be putting in the same effort he used to, meanwhile Popovich seems fired up to win.

If somebody would actually address the question I ask and my relevant points, rather than keep pretending I said Phil was a bad coach who fluked his way to titles so your template arguments will actually fit, that would be nice.

Maybe I'm asking for too much though, and all I'm going to get is a history lessen of what Phil did 20 years ago to now, rather than have someone explain to me how Phil's current coaching is working out well for the Lakers as opposed to how Pop might do with them, which is what I'm looking for. Obviously I know Phil's won 11 titles, 6 with MJ and the Bulls, 3 with Shaq/Kobe, and 2 with the current Lakers team. We all know this. Making half your guys posts stating the obvious isn't really doing much.

And this isn't to lash out on you neccessarily gts, so excuse me for that if it seems that way. It's just, multiple people are doing the same thing and not making any points for this year's Phil whatsoever. All I'm getting is a history lessen, when I'm talking about THIS season and this current Lakers team. Michael Jordan, Shaq , and the rings they won with Phil have nothing to do with the discussion of current Phil and the current Lakers opposed to Popovich.
Ill keep it simple. Come back when pop is able to keep his team motivated enough to win back to. Back like phil has. That's the lakers only problem. Its not that they don't have it, they don't want it.

[SinJackal]

Ill keep it simple. Come back when pop is able to keep his team motivated enough to win back to. Back like phil has. That's the lakers only problem. Its not that they don't have it, they don't want it.

That's a cop out.

Would be equal to someone saying win a title without Kobe or Jordan. Something Phil clearly won't be able to do, and can only be proven years from now even if he could.

[niko]

The last two Laker seasons ended in titles, one of them beating the Spurs in a series. The last two Spur seasons have ended in playoff losses, one of them a horrific sweep at the hand of the Suns where they were totally overmatched.

Is all of this erased by the fact that the Lakers seem disengaged prior to Game 40 of the season? Of all fans who should know it's possible to cruise to a degree and kick it to 4th gear in the playoffs, you'd think SPur fans would know, right?

and again, i laugh at Spur fans saying Phil has Kobe or Jordan, Pop has DUNCAN. No, Duncan is not Jordan but i sure as hell can make at least a partially compelling argument he's Kobe.

[Jasper]

Jeff von Gondi - in a year or two will have a gig

It's either the Heat or the Lakers.

B. Scott won't get the laker gig , he is already committed to the Cav's.

Jackson is who he is ... he lets his players figure it out.. that's why he has all the rings.
Sometimes we question , why he didn't stop the rythem of the game , and he just lets his players play thru it. He was a baller' ... and has one of the better feels of the game than anyone.

I said it before : Artest should be benched and Barnes start.
It would not be a bad idea to start Blake as well , he has length to defend , and he always looks to pass first , (not like fish pass and run to the corner)
As a PG you have to support the player you pass to , incase they get into a pickle. Passing is important in the triangle , but supporting your teammates is just as valuable.
=========
I'm goin to add something I've seen over the last few games I 've watched the Lakers play :
Pau , and Kobe all the only ones playing low post , high post on the triangle , which means on the weak side the role players need to move and
be active to get layups and open shoots .. I'm not seeing that.

[97 bulls]

That's a cop out.

Would be equal to someone saying win a title without Kobe or Jordan. Something Phil clearly won't be able to do, and can only be proven years from now even if he could.
How is it a copout? The problem with the lakers is their lack of motivation to win. The same that's befell the spurs after all but their first championship. I give them a pass cuz duncan was hurt in 00.

So why does pop get a pass even though his teams lost with what was essentially the same team as when they won their championships? Why couldn't pop keep them motivated? He had duncan. Whose a top 10 alltime great too. The lakers will finish wih mid 50 wins. I see no difference.

[Number21]

The last two Laker seasons ended in titles, one of them beating the Spurs in a series.

Just a slight correction, Lakers beat Spurs in 2008, when they lost in finals. Since 2003 no team that has met the Spurs in playoffs won the title.

[Tez62]

Pop has never even repeated... how's that for inspiring "hunger" ??

Phil is going for his 4th 3peat, an amazing feat. His calm demeanor is part of what makes him great.

[SinJackal]

The last two Laker seasons ended in titles, one of them beating the Spurs in a series. The last two Spur seasons have ended in playoff losses, one of them a horrific sweep at the hand of the Suns where they were totally overmatched.

Is all of this erased by the fact that the Lakers seem disengaged prior to Game 40 of the season? Of all fans who should know it's possible to cruise to a degree and kick it to 4th gear in the playoffs, you'd think SPur fans would know, right?

and again, i laugh at Spur fans saying Phil has Kobe or Jordan, Pop has DUNCAN. No, Duncan is not Jordan but i sure as hell can make at least a partially compelling argument he's Kobe.

Your stupidity knows no bounds. I was using Jordan/Kobe as an example to explain how what he said was a cop out. I wasn't using it to belittle Phil. It was very obvious.



How is it a copout? The problem with the lakers is their lack of motivation to win. The same that's befell the spurs after all but their first championship. I give them a pass cuz duncan was hurt in 00.

So why does pop get a pass even though his teams lost with what was essentially the same team as when they won their championships? Why couldn't pop keep them motivated? He had duncan. Whose a top 10 alltime great too. The lakers will finish wih mid 50 wins. I see no difference.

Now you're using another copout. "He had Duncan".

Like I said, if you use a weak argument like, "come back to me with he wins back to backs", you're completely avoiding the argument entirely.

You're also completely incorrect in your bogus claims that the Spurs weren't motivated to win. I already explained what happened with them. Every single time but once, they had injuries to either Manu or Duncan. That's a lack of motivation. . .how exactly? If Jordan was injured, Phil wouldn't have repeated any times with the Bulls. If Shaq was injured, he wouldn't have repeated. If Kobe was injured, he wouldn't have repeated. That wouldn't be a problem with motivation, it's a health one.

Just because they didn't win, does not automatically mean it was a lack of motivation. You claiming that is a fallacy. Just because something didn't happen, doesn't mean your blanket explanation is the cause.

[97 bulls]

Your stupidity knows no bounds. I was using Jordan/Kobe as an example to explain how what he said was a cop out. I wasn't using it to belittle Phil. It was very obvious.




Now you're using another copout. "He had Duncan".

Like I said, if you use a weak argument like, "come back to me with he wins back to backs", you're completely avoiding the argument entirely.

You're also completely incorrect in your bogus claims that the Spurs weren't motivated to win. I already explained what happened with them. Every single time but once, they had injuries to either Manu or Duncan. That's a lack of motivation. . .how exactly? If Jordan was injured, Phil wouldn't have repeated any times with the Bulls. If Shaq was injured, he wouldn't have repeated. If Kobe was injured, he wouldn't have repeated. That wouldn't be a problem with motivation, it's a health one.

Just because they didn't win, does not automatically mean it was a lack of motivation. You claiming that is a fallacy. Just because something didn't happen, doesn't mean your blanket explanation is the cause.you said that jackson had kobe and michael. I thought you were implying that pop didn't have a great player to work with.

And im curious, who was injured during the years the spurs lost. And I mean who didn't play. Not who sprained an ankle in game 56 or something.

[HBKMGa]

I see Phil Jackson take a snooze and eat a couple of ding dongs when the Lakers are impoding during a winnable game like tonight.

I'm asking legitimately, not trying to troll. Phil just seems like he doesn't care sometimes. Even during postgame interviews he seems like he doesn't care.



It seems like you just stumbled upon Phil Jackson... He's always been that way win or lose.

[HBKMGa]

And im curious, who was injured during the years the spurs lost. And I mean who didn't play. Not who sprained an ankle in game 56 or something.

2000 - Duncan was hurt. Something with his knee I believe.
2004 - 0.4 sec
2008 - Ginobili was not 100%

[L.A. Jazz]

i think if Pop was/is the coach for the Lakers, Kobe would be long gone and play for another team.

it's one of PJax's strengths as a NBA coach that he can work with superstars and bring a team with extreme characters together.

[niko]

you said that jackson had kobe and michael. I thought you were implying that pop didn't have a great player to work with.

And im curious, who was injured during the years the spurs lost. And I mean who didn't play. Not who sprained an ankle in game 56 or something.

yeah, im not sure the point you made is the point you think you made.

[97 bulls]

yeah, im not sure the point you made is the point you think you made.
Say what?

[JellyBean]

If Pop was the coach of the Lakers, the Lakers would struggle. The Lakers would be playoff ready but they would crash and burn from all of the constant picking and overcoaching. There is coaching and then their is overcoaching. Pop reminds me of those coaches that overcoach. Phil, typical of us liberals, has the mindset of "We have our system. As long as you aint hurting anyone, do your thang." I look at it this way Phil would have no trouble coaching the Spurs. I'm not sure if Pop could handle Kobe. That being said, Pop has obviously managed the Spurs to the max of their talent.

[mashbelly]

the whole point of this thread is pop > jack and it's true

[97 bulls]

the whole point of this thread is pop > jack and it's true
Put alot of thought in this post mashbelly? Why not state a reason or 2. So we can have a dialouge

[PurpleChuck]

the whole point of this thread is pop > jack and it's true

They're shoulder to shoulder IMO with Sloan and Riley.

[niko]

Say what?
haha, im not very clear either.

My point was sinjackal's reference to Jordan was taken the same way by both of us - whatever his point was he was making wasn't made very clearly.

[gts]

People bringing up rings already? :facepalmisn't that their goal? they don't pay these guys millions of dollars for nothing.. this is not the clippers or kings who are just looking to get off the mat with hopes of making the playoffs. the playoffs are guaranteed with these teams and anything short of a finals run is a failure

these teams are built to win now with goals of winning the finals so discussing finals appearances is a valid points...

i won't speak for spurs fans but i know lakers fans are expecting the lakers to make a finals push, if spurs fans don't think that's what the spurs goals are then ok don't discuss rings...

[crosso√er]

It's not coincidental that Phil was able to lead a team consisting of Parker, Walton and Kwame as his starting core to the playoffs and almost upset a very good Phoenix team.

Guy knows how to coach, Pop is a lot more involved throughout a game, but Phil is a master mind that allows his team to adjust on their own. His success is undeniable, his resume is far more impressive then Pop's; so how on earth is he not better then him?

Lets not pretend that Pop does not have a terrific front office as well; that allowed him to have an ideal team to coach for over a decade now.

I have no doubt that he's among the greatest coaches of All-Time; he just isn't better then the wizard. Phil never really had bad teams; but in the four/five years he coached a Jordan-less team or the rebuilding Laker team this decade, he did a fantastic job with what he had to work with.

Last year's Spurs were certainly better then the Laker team that almost upset a #1 seed, yet Pop's team got swept. In retrospective, what exactly indicates to anyone that Pop has done better as a coach in their respective careers? Absolutely nothing.

Phil has more rings, has done a good job with mediocre teams (Bulls winning 50+ games, making the ECF without Jordan) and leading a horrible Laker team to the playoffs twice in the western conference.

Pop did consistently coach a winning team for the past 12 years, which is obviously impressive, but he never retired and come back to coach a Spurs team that were as bad as the Laker team Phil took over five years ago.

Pop's resume is legendary, Phil's resume is one of a kind.
End of thread.

[crosso√er]

:oldlol: @ SinJackal keeps leaving negative remarks every time I rebuttal his arguments. What a sad case he is. I don't even bother resulting to these stupid reputation points. The only time I ever get negatively repped I feel like it's by an eight year old child, leaving the dumbest remarks, trying to insult me.

[Indian guy]

How many times does Phil need to own Pop in the playoffs for this topic to not exist?

[crosso√er]

How many times does Phil need to own Pop in the playoffs for this topic to not exist?

A guy like SinJackal will use this season as some sort of validation as to why Pop is better though. :lol

[LA_Showtime]

Some of you guys kill me. :oldlol: Phil Jackson is a product of his players? Really? Then why were people calling for Spo's head early in the season? How come nobody else had any success with Michael or Shaq? I guess Jordan, Kobe, Shaq, Pippen, etc. should be praised for winning without a head coach.

[crosso√er]

While you make some logical points, I look at it this way.

Michael Jordan was the best SG ever. He beat everyone down throughout most of his career. When Jordan came back as a Wizard, he wasn't nearly as good as he used to be. Was it an insult to say he wasn't as good anymore? I don't believe it was. It was obvious. I was saying the same thing.

Nobody can deny what Phil Jackson has already done, just like nobody could deny what Jordan had already done. The fact remains though, that Jordan wasn't as good his last couple seasons. I don't think Phil's as good now. . .I thought he was subpar last season too on several occaisions.

I'm not blaming Phil for all their problems, but it seems obvious that there are a lot of problems that can be avoided if Phil asserted himself more. I always get the impression Phil comes up with a gameplan, explains it to the team, then acts like the game is the players' responsibility, and that he doesn't have to coach anymore. Almost as if he's setting himself up to have an excuse if they lose. "Well you guys didn't stick to the gameplan, that's why you lost". Not saying he says that word for word, but he hints at it during postgame interviews a lot. Of course, when the plan he sets out there doesn't work, he doesn't adjust. He just lets it implode.

Pop comes up with the gameplan, talks to the players throughout the game, and takes quick timeouts if he sees something failing or not going well. Phil seems to zonk out sometimes and take a nap no matter what's going on.


So. . .Phil is one of the top coaches in the history of the NBA easily. I just think he doesn't have it anymore. He seems like he wishes he retired.

As for the Spurs' settling after championships. . .that's not true. They have had injury issues between several of their championships (Duncan missed the 2000 playoffs), some awful calls in game 5 vs LA in 2004, another irritating call vs the Mavs in 06, and Manu got injured during the playoffs in 2008, on top of imo questionable calls in games 1 and 4 vs LA (entire 4th quarter in agme 1, and the Fisher tackle on Barry in game 4).

It isn't like they gave up or packed it in those seasons. Injury problems and some irritating calls, plus close defeats. It's not as easy for a small market team of low playoff ratings (by comparison) to actually repeat. They don't get the benefit of drawing free agents, and certainly won't get the benefit of calls (rather, it's usually the opposite).

So that's not really a fair comment.

So you're comparing a player to a coach?
Jordan wasn't as good because of age; if anything coaches become better as they progress through their coaching careers because they gain experience. You claiming Phil lost a step because LA are struggling is nonsense. Phil is doing nothing different this year then he has done in the past; just like in 2001 when the Lakers had a mediocre regular season and had arguably the greatest playoff run in league history.

Your comparison is completely irrelevant and pointless. Players regress as they get older, if anything, coaches get better as they get older due to experience.

Perhaps Phil isn't showing as much interest and dedication, but even then, where is the proof? He has similar body language sitting on the bench dating back to his first three-peat with LA. His wisdom and patience has consistently been the same; he lets his players adjust on their own so they can be accustomed to not making those same mistakes come playoff time.

[SinJackal]

you said that jackson had kobe and michael. I thought you were implying that pop didn't have a great player to work with.

And im curious, who was injured during the years the spurs lost. And I mean who didn't play. Not who sprained an ankle in game 56 or something.

I know what I said. It was blantantly obvious that I was using that as an example to explain to you what a cop out was, since you did not seem to understand how what you said was a cop out, which it was.

Anyway, even though you lazily asked for a list of their injuries rather than research it yourself so you can nitpick some of them later for a lazy, borderline troll tactic argument, I will give you a list anyway.


1999: First title.

2000: Duncan missed the playoffs due to injury.

2001: Spurs team wasn't really good enough to win this year. DRob declined, Sean Elliot and Avery Johnson both missed a lot of games, and those injuries still bothered them when they got back. No star players anymore after Duncan, due to DRob's decline (who was now a good roleplayer)

2002: Same story, only age catches up to a lot of the players in the Spurs' former core pre-Duncan (who were still on the team). Spurs could have won this year anyway, since Duncan was peaking. Close games when they got eliminated. They had no star players after Duncan.

2003: Core declined again, but a new core was emerging (Manu, Tony). Spurs win anyway, with peak Duncan and no other star player.

2004: Duncan's knee started giving him problems in like March, and his level of play and minutes had tapered off for the rest of the season. He still played, and was good, but not as good. You might claim this as an excuse, but you asked for who played injured in the playoffs. Duncan's knee was bothering him since March.

2005: Good health overall, except Duncan's knee didn't really improve too much, so his minutes started getting reduced. It was good enough though for him to sitll be an elite player despite that, the Spurs win this year much easier than the last title.

2006: Duncan's knee begins to really bother him. He doesn't miss a lot of games, but plays even less minutes, and posts his worst season of his career (to this point). This is also when Manu first got hobbled with a significant injury. He didn't come back 100%, and played slowed down, trying to will the Spurs to a title. It wasn't enough. Spurs narrowly get eliminated by the Mavs including a call that still annoys Spurs fans. I'm over it though, 4 titles is cool.

2007: Pretty decent health overall. Some minor probs, but nothing big. We win again.

2008: Ginobili injures both of his ankles, and was playing hurt in the playoffs.

2009: Ginobili misses the second half of the season, and the whole playoffs.

2010: Each of the Spurs' big 3 had injuries and played through them. Due to that, arguably the worst Spurs team since they tanked to get Duncan, back when DRob and Elliot both got injured for most of the season.

2011: No significant injuries yet to key players.

[SinJackal]

So you're comparing a player to a coach?
Jordan wasn't as good because of age; if anything coaches become better as they progress through their coaching careers because they gain experience. You claiming Phil lost a step because LA are struggling is nonsense. Phil is doing nothing different this year then he has done in the past; just like in 2001 when the Lakers had a mediocre regular season and had arguably the greatest playoff run in league history.

Your comparison is completely irrelevant and pointless. Players regress as they get older, if anything, coaches get better as they get older due to experience.

Perhaps Phil isn't showing as much interest and dedication, but even then, where is the proof? He has similar body language sitting on the bench dating back to his first three-peat with LA. His wisdom and patience has consistently been the same; he lets his players adjust on their own so they can be accustomed to not making those same mistakes come playoff time.

So basically, you think, no matter how old someone gets, and how much they accomplish, that they can never get tired of it despite talking retirement, and are always at 100% mentally no matter how old they get until they die.

I don't agree.



Some of you guys kill me. :oldlol: Phil Jackson is a product of his players? Really? Then why were people calling for Spo's head early in the season? How come nobody else had any success with Michael or Shaq? I guess Jordan, Kobe, Shaq, Pippen, etc. should be praised for winning without a head coach.

I didn't say Phil was a product of his players. I even specifically said that I didn't mean that, after not saying it, since people who have poor reading comprehension somehow gathered that from the posts. Stop using template arguments.

[Mr. Jabbar]

This thread is so full of :blah :blah :blah :blah

Phil > Pop

[crosso√er]

So basically, you think, no matter how old someone gets, and how much they accomplish, that they can never get tired of it despite talking retirement, and are always at 100% mentally no matter how old they get until they die.

I don't agree.




I didn't say Phil was a product of his players. I even specifically said that I didn't mean that, after not saying it, since people who have poor reading comprehension somehow gathered that from the posts. Stop using template arguments.

It's your reasoning I don't agree with, due to Phil's approach to coaching. He has never been like Larry Brown or Pop; he never asserted himself during games before. You claiming that he has lost interest in coaching is thus much harder to prove, since he hasn't really shown any assertiveness in the past to begin with. So how can you make such a conclusion, unless you know first hand, what he's doing differently this season behind closed doors?

[SinJackal]

It's your reasoning I don't agree with, due to Phil's approach to coaching. He has never been like Larry Brown or Pop; he never asserted himself during games before. You claiming that he has lost interest in coaching is thus much harder to prove, since he hasn't really shown any assertiveness in the past to begin with. So how can you make such a conclusion, unless you know first hand, what he's doing differently this season behind closed doors?

He used to be more lively with the Bulls. Not Pop-level, but certainly more than now. I watched the last 4 of the Bulls' 6 championships entire seasons, and the two in between. Phil acted much different.

But yes, it's not possible to prove (not possible to disprove either!) without looking at the record, and Lakers' success this season, while measuring it against Phil's words and reactions. So far, not so good. There's still more season left to prove otherwise, but I think the Lakers would have more wins right now with Pop. That's my opinion.

[crosso√er]

He used to be more lively with the Bulls. Not Pop-level, but certainly more than now. I watched the last 4 of the Bulls' 6 championships entire seasons, and the two in between. Phil acted much different.

But yes, it's not possible to prove (not possible to disprove either!) without looking at the record, and Lakers' success this season, while measuring it against Phil's words and reactions. So far, not so good. There's still more season left to prove otherwise, but I think the Lakers would have more wins right now with Pop. That's my opinion.

With the Bulls he was a lot more active because he was relatively a new coach and didn't have as much confidence with his x's and o's. As he has gained experience coaching and the success he's had; he started displaying a lot more confidence, patience and swagger. His assertiveness has regressed because of that.

How can you disprove something that can not be proven in the first place?

[niko]

According to Sinjackal's logic, would it be "disproved" if the Lakers outlast the Spurs this season? Because despite the ridiculous patting on the back the SPurs fans are doing to themselves right now, there is still a 50/50 at worst proposition that the last man standing is the Lakers and not the SPurs.

Am i wrong? I get the Lakers are struglling but have we 100% ruled them out?

[mashbelly]

According to Sinjackal's logic, would it be "disproved" if the Lakers outlast the Spurs this season? Because despite the ridiculous patting on the back the SPurs fans are doing to themselves right now, there is still a 50/50 at worst proposition that the last man standing is the Lakers and not the SPurs.

Am i wrong? I get the Lakers are struglling but have we 100% ruled them out?

Based on Tuesday's performance, yes.

[tpols]

Sinjackal's logic is absolutely retarded right now.

He compared michael jordan declining with old age to phil declining with old age but the thing is phil isn't an athlete. And if he's refering to mentally, phil's not some senile old geezer that is on his way to a nursing home. There are coaches just as old in the league right now that are doing just fine. If anything coaches get better as they get older because they learn more, have more experience and are in general smarter just like players grow smarter and more skilled as they age(see kobe and mj).

I believe pop is coaching better right now in terms of drawing up plays, exploiting mismatches, forming solid lineups-subs, and overall coaching during the games in general. But to claim age is affecting phil now is beyond stupid. Phil's philosophy has been to let players play through mistakes anyways. Whats even funnier is that pop is only a few years younger and has been in the coaching game just as long. This is the stupidest excuse I've seen in a while.

What a stupid comparison.:facepalm

[Alhazred]

I'm not really that worried about the Lakers right now. Yeah, they've had a bit of a rough stretch this past month, but this seems to be pretty routine for Phil's teams. They'll cruise a bit during the regular season and they might look like they have serious problems at times, but they'll pull it together come spring.

[macpierce]

sometimes from the outside looking in it looks like phil doesnt even coach :hammerhead:
popovich is great however, he would definitely be lighting a fire under the lakers ass rather than phil just smoking kush

[97 bulls]

A guy like SinJackal will use this season as some sort of validation as to why Pop is better though. :lol
But that's what im sayn. Has pop done much better in the seasons preceding his championships? No. How is what the lakers the lakers are doing so far this season an indication that pop is better than phil?

[97 bulls]

He used to be more lively with the Bulls. Not Pop-level, but certainly more than now. I watched the last 4 of the Bulls' 6 championships entire seasons, and the two in between. Phil acted much different.

But yes, it's not possible to prove (not possible to disprove either!) without looking at the record, and Lakers' success this season, while measuring it against Phil's words and reactions. So far, not so good. There's still more season left to prove otherwise, but I think the Lakers would have more wins right now with Pop. That's my opinion.
Based on what? You excuse the spurs post championship runs due to injuries. Ok, the lakers havnt had bynum the whole season. Kobe had surgery in the off season. Why no break for phil?

[niko]

Based on what? You excuse the spurs post championship runs due to injuries. Ok, the lakers havnt had bynum the whole season. Kobe had surgery in the off season. Why no break for phil?
Plus reality check here, i know the spurs look like a contender, but they certainly are not a slam dunk contender. More than likely even if this season ends without a laker title, it ends without a spurs title, for yet another year. This thread almost feels like we are assuming the spurs do better than the Lakers. I'm not there yet. this is a compelling argument after this season when the spurs outdo the Lakers, but now - not quite so much.

[tpols]

Based on what? You excuse the spurs post championship runs due to injuries. Ok, the lakers havnt had bynum the whole season. Kobe had surgery in the off season. Why no break for phil?
Because sinjackal isn't rational. He only supports viewpoints and facts/opinions in favor of his HIS team. Why would he list things that go against his agenda?