Phil was gifted a team on cusp of title, but lost in 90' ECF just like Collins in 89'

[3ba11]

The Bulls had the steepest upward trajectory in the league REGARDLESS of whether Phil arrived

He's just lucky that MJ wasn't a Luka or Lebron-style ball-dominator and therefore not good enough to play in the triangle.

[Axe]

Op do you think doug collins would have led the bulls to multiple titles under the flagrant foul ruling?

[3ba11]

Op do you think doug collins would have led the bulls to multiple titles under the flagrant foul ruling?


Of course

Any rule changes affect all teams

Collins nearly beat the Bad Boys with a 47-win, 6 seed so think what he would've done with a 55-win 3 seed in 1990

[Xiao Yao You]

Op do you think doug collins would have led the bulls to multiple titles under the flagrant foul ruling?

Collins was a good coach. MJ was going to win eventually. Hard to imagine he does better with anyone other than Phil though no matter the rules. Phil was a great coach. The year after MJ first retired his greatest job. Then turning a Lakers team that couldn't get past Utah's vets into champs. Was too bad they didn't have to go through the Jazz that first time though

[3ba11]

Collins was a good coach. MJ was going to win eventually. Hard to imagine he does better with anyone other than Phil though no matter the rules


Collins nearly beat the Bad Boys with a 47-win, 6 seed so think what he would've done with a 55-win 3 seed in 1990

The Bulls had the steepest upward trajectory in the league REGARDLESS of whether Phil arrived

Only MJ or his clone (Kobe) won with the triangle because they were the only perimeter players good enough to excel in a low-dribble offense

[Xiao Yao You]

Collins nearly beat the Bad Boys with a 47-win, 6 seed so think what he would've done with a 55-win 3 seed in 1990

The Bulls had the steepest upward trajectory in the league REGARDLESS of whether Phil arrived

Only MJ or his clone (Kobe) won with the triangle because they were the only perimeter players good enough to excel in a low-dribble offense

worked pretty good when MJ retired for a year anyway

[light]

The Bulls had the steepest upward trajectory in the league REGARDLESS of whether Phil arrived

He's just lucky that MJ wasn't a Luka or Lebron-style ball-dominator and therefore not good enough to play in the triangle.

Collins was a popular guy in Chicago when he was fired because he had brought them to the conference finals so Bulls fans weren’t happy about Jackson’s promotion at first. When a reporter asked Reinsdorf about the change he said this:

“Doug brought us a long way from where we had been. You cannot say he wasn’t productive. But now we have a man we feel can take us the rest of the way.”

Doug Collins was afraid to confront Jordan about his shooting. Phil was not.

According to Phil, the primary issue preventing the Bulls from being more successful was Jordan and that it was Jackson’s task “to make the Bulls less Jordan-centric” (Eleven Rings, pg 84).

Jackson had to find a way to get the ball out of Jordan’s hands and that's where the triangle came in. But in 1990 the team was still learning the triangle and, surprise, Michael Jordan was not a believer, so he remained an obstacle.

At the end of 1990 Bill Cartwright said this:

"I've got one fear, it's that I'm going to play all this time in the league and come so close and never get a ring. I only want to win. Michael's got so much talent and can do so much for this team, but I keep thinking he's going to keep us all from it unless he changes."

And on their road to the finals in 1991 Scottie Pippen said this:

"You can tell M.J. has more confidence in everyone. And I'd have to say it's come just in these playoffs (1991). He's playing team ball and for the first time I can say he's not going out there looking to score. He seems to have the feeling, and we all seem to, really, that if we play together everyone can help."

So just as Phil Jackson suspected what was preventing success for Chicago all along was Jordan and MJ didn't start playing more like LeBron until 1991.

[King Baron]

Collins nearly beat the Bad Boys with a 47-win, 6 seed so think what he would've done with a 55-win 3 seed in 1990

The Bulls had the steepest upward trajectory in the league REGARDLESS of whether Phil arrived

Only MJ or his clone (Kobe) won with the triangle because they were the only perimeter players good enough to excel in a low-dribble offense

The Bulls don't become a 55 win team without Phil. If you think any other coach would have had the guts to bench Pippen for Kukoc in 94 or handle unique personalities like Artest, Rodman, Shaq & Kobe perfectly you're mistaken.

I'm not sure why you think admitting Phil Jackson is the GOAT coach detracts from MJ. I consider Jordan the GOAT player and Phil the GOAT coach. Kobe himself wanted Phil to come back I recall as late as 2012.

[GrayGoat]

Phil maximized a 1-9 MJ into a double 3-peat monster

[Hey Yo]

Phil maximized a 1-9 MJ into a double 3-peat monster

He had one 3-peat and another one with an asterisk *

[3ba11]

The Bulls don't become a 55 win team without Phil. If you think any other coach would have had the guts to bench Pippen for Kukoc in 94 or handle unique personalities like Artest, Rodman, Shaq & Kobe perfectly you're mistaken.

I'm not sure why you think admitting Phil Jackson is the GOAT coach detracts from MJ. I consider Jordan the GOAT player and Phil the GOAT coach. Kobe himself wanted Phil to come back I recall as late as 2012.


Jordan averaged 35/6/6 with DPOY in 88' - so he was already passing, defending and playing off-ball with low turnovers - he was never a ball-dominator

So he didn't need to change anything

He just needed a top 7 team defense and a sidekick that could get 16 ppg - that's the least help that anyone needed for a dynasty, which is why MJ is goat.. Phil had nothing to do with it and everyone praises Phil over a timing coincidence

Give 88' Jordan a guy like Worthy and he 3-peats from 88-90' - no Phil needed... Take Kareem and Worthy away from Magic and he's nothing.. So people are just dumb

[AlternativeAcc.]

No Phil, No Pippen, No weak 90s.... no rings

Jordan's career was corny wwe shit. I genuinely don't count his rings

[theman93]

No Phil, No Pippen, No weak 90s.... no rings

Jordan's career was corny wwe shit. I genuinely don't count his rings

Do you also believe women can have a *****? :roll:

[King Baron]

Jordan averaged 35/6/6 with DPOY in 88' - so he was already passing, defending and playing off-ball with low turnovers - he was never a ball-dominator

So he didn't need to change anything

He just needed a top 7 team defense and a sidekick that could get 16 ppg - that's the least help that anyone needed for a dynasty, which is why MJ is goat.. Phil had nothing to do with it and everyone praises Phil over a timing coincidence

Give 88' Jordan a guy like Worthy and he 3-peats from 88-90' - no Phil needed... Take Kareem and Worthy away from Magic and he's nothing.. So people are just dumb

Phil took the Lakers to a Championship the same year he got there. It was pretty much the same team. Just like in the Bulls' case with Doug Collins, in fact we got to see the Collins/Jordan reunion on the Wizards years later. You telling me Phil doesn't take that team to the playoffs at least 1 of those 2 years?

Your argument is kind of contradictory. I mean if you give Luka premium talent conditions he also wins. I consider 2006 Kobe to be his peak year and he wanted more talent too (wanting to trade Bynum). When he got it, he won championships again with Gasol. Overall, you seem just overly biased.

I find some of your theories interesting about players that assist more than score not winning. But you're too focused on proving the idea Jordan had no help at all from any side. I'm on your side as MJ being GOAT goes. But revising history and saying there were no contributions whatsoever from any other team member or coach is just not true. I watched games of that era live.

[SouBeachTalents]

Overall, you seem just overly biased.
Understatement of the year :lol


I find some of your theories interesting about players that assist more than score not winning. But you're too focused on proving the idea Jordan had no help at all from any side. I'm on your side as MJ being GOAT goes. But revising history and saying there were no contributions whatsoever from any other team member or coach is just not true. I watched games of that era live.
The fact they lost peak Jordan a month before the season started and still won 55 games, and won at a 60 win pace in the games Pippen played, and nearly knocked off their biggest rival, and very likely would've if not for a very controversial call, speaks to how talented that supporting cast was.

It's beyond obv at this point that 3ball doesn't care about actual facts. It's been explained to him literally hundreds of times that Pippen was frequently the best 2nd option during the Bulls title run, yet he will indefinitely claim Pippen was garbage. I've also corrected him a couple of times on his claim that the '95 Bulls were lottery bound without Jordan, despite the fact they were 9 games out from being in the lottery before Jordan came back. But he simply doesn't care lol. he will indefinitely post that the '95 Bulls were lottery bound without Jordan despite that being factually untrue and having that pointed out to him.

[Axe]

Phil took the Lakers to a Championship the same year he got there. It was pretty much the same team. Just like in the Bulls' case with Doug Collins, in fact we got to see the Collins/Jordan reunion on the Wizards years later. You telling me Phil doesn't take that team to the playoffs at least 1 of those 2 years?

Your argument is kind of contradictory. I mean if you give Luka premium talent conditions he also wins. I consider 2006 Kobe to be his peak year and he wanted more talent too (wanting to trade Bynum). When he got it, he won championships again with Gasol. Overall, you seem just overly biased.

I find some of your theories interesting about players that assist more than score not winning. But you're too focused on proving the idea Jordan had no help at all from any side. I'm on your side as MJ being GOAT goes. But revising history and saying there were no contributions whatsoever from any other team member or coach is just not true. I watched games of that era live.
Op has always shown to be oblivious to facts lmao. Fools who believe in him are typically low iq casuals.

[3ba11]

Phil took the Lakers to a Championship the same year he got there.





Exactly, it was a timing thing - Phil was gifted championship teams or teams that were already on the cusp of a title with goat players reaching their apex.

So Phil is just lucky - he was a 1st time nobody coach when he won in 90/91, while MJ was already a goat candidate..

So MJ led Phil, not the other way around - MJ decided to lend his goat ability to the triangle, a crappy offense that never won without Jordan or his clone (Kobe).. It's otherwise a garbage offense that everyone literally HATES... only MJ/Kobe were skilled enough to win with it






in fact we got to see the Collins/Jordan reunion on the Wizards years later. You telling me Phil doesn't take that team to the playoffs at least 1 of those 2 years?





The Wizards were expected to win 18 more games in 2002 with Jordan in the fold, and they met this expectation (19 to 37 wins)..

So no - Phil can't do any better especially with Jordan getting hurt for the last 20 games - the Bulls were a 4 seed with Collins before Jordan got hurt, so Phil wasn't needed.





if you give Luka premium talent conditions he also wins.





The point is that Jordan didn't need to "learn how to win" - he just needed a minimal level of supporting talent to win - he didn't even need Kareem/Magic or McHale/Parish - they would've been overkill.. A Wiggins or Iggy-caliber player was enough to win 6 titles.






I find some of your theories interesting about players that assist more than score not winning.





This isn't a theory - it's historical record.

Magic/Lebron are losers on the championship level (9-10 in the Finals) - so if they can't be winners with that style, then no one can and it's just an Inferior way to play..

Furthermore, lesser ball-dominators like Nash or CP3 can't even make the Finals, or barely.. Otoh, all the off-ball guys like Bird, MJ, Curry, Kawhi, Kobe Dirk - they're all massive winners in the Finals because they have better teammate fits and brand of ball, which yields higher team ceilings/Finals records.






But revising history and saying there were no contributions whatsoever from any other team member or coach is just not true. I watched games of that era live.





You're revising what I said - I said that Jordan had the least supporting talent of any dynasty.

This is objectively true, which is why people must include Phil as part of Jordan's "help" - it's because there aren't enough stars, so you must include a coach.. This isn't done for any other player because other players have multiple all-star teammates.

Jordan only had 1 all-star teammate in his entire career, while other dynasties had 3+ all-star players at any point in time, or Shaq/Kobe.. Every dynasty had more all-stars and talent than the Bulls.. The Pistons had 3x all-stars at every starting spot.






But you're too focused on proving the idea Jordan had no help at all from any side





Imagine Houston's surprise when they got Pippen...

"Wow.. this guy sucks".. :yaohappy:


https://i.makeagif.com/media/7-15-2022/7D0vE4.gif


Ultimately, sidekick champions like Pippen are the most overrated players ever because they play at a Wiggins or Iggy caliber but the winning spotlight and ring count inflates them much higher.

If Pippen never played with Jordan, he would be like Harvey Grant (Horace's brother) - a solid NBA player that no one ever heard of

The historical record shows that outside of the dynasty system and chemistry that he grew up in, Pippen was a 14 ppg dunker that couldn't score (89' and 99').






But you're too focused on proving the idea Jordan had no help at all from any side





Everyone in history enjoyed go-to teammates that dominated and took over series with elite production.

Except Jordan

Only Jordan lacked go-to teammates and was forced to win with a team of hustlers/defenders - so only Jordan had to defeat maximum defensive attention in every series (carry scoring load)..

Due to these facts, goat haters cannot find the typical dominant performance from teammates, so they pretend that guys like Kukoc or Kerr getting 9 ppg is amazing... Or they pretend that Pippen getting 22' Westbrook numbers with woat efficiency is infact great help. .






But you're too focused on proving the idea Jordan had no help at all from any side





Everyone in history needed equal-scoring partners to attract equal defensive attention for numerous playoff runs, so they didn't always face maximum defensive attention (didn't carry scoring load).. Any period without facing maximum defensive attention is inflated stats compared to Jordan, who always defeated maximum defensive attention - he carried the scoring load in every SERIES, let alone playoff run.

Ultimately, Kenny Smith explains why MJ was the only 1-man show in history:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=4UF6Xx3F2Lo&t=01m54s

[ShawkFactory]

Exactly, it was a timing thing - Phil was gifted championship teams or teams that were already on the cusp of a title with goat players reaching their apex.

So Phil is just lucky - he was a 1st time nobody coach when he won in 90/91, while MJ was already a goat candidate..

So MJ led Phil, not the other way around - MJ decided to lend his goat ability to the triangle, a crappy offense that never won without Jordan or his clone (Kobe).. It's otherwise a garbage offense that everyone literally HATES... only MJ/Kobe were skilled enough to win with it






The Wizards were expected to win 18 more games in 2002 with Jordan in the fold, and they met this expectation (19 to 37 wins)..

So no - Phil can't do any better especially with Jordan getting hurt for the last 20 games - the Bulls were a 4 seed with Collins before Jordan got hurt, so Phil wasn't needed.





The point is that Jordan didn't need to "learn how to win" - he just needed a minimal level of supporting talent to win - he didn't even need Kareem/Magic or McHale/Parish - they would've been overkill.. A Wiggins or Iggy-caliber player was enough to win 6 titles.






This isn't a theory - it's historical record.

Magic/Lebron are losers on the championship level (9-10 in the Finals) - so if they can't be winners with that style, then no one can and it's just an Inferior way to play..

Furthermore, lesser ball-dominators like Nash or CP3 can't even make the Finals, or barely.. Otoh, all the off-ball guys like Bird, MJ, Curry, Kawhi, Kobe Dirk - they're all massive winners in the Finals because they have better teammate fits and brand of ball, which yields higher team ceilings/Finals records.






You're revising what I said - I said that Jordan had the least supporting talent of any dynasty.

This is objectively true, which is why people must include Phil as part of Jordan's "help" - it's because there aren't enough stars, so you must include a coach.. This isn't done for any other player because other players have multiple all-star teammates.

Jordan only had 1 all-star teammate in his entire career, while other dynasties had 3+ all-star players at any point in time, or Shaq/Kobe.. Every dynasty had more all-stars and talent than the Bulls.. The Pistons had 3x all-stars at every starting spot.






Imagine Houston's surprise when they got Pippen...

"Wow.. this guy sucks".. :yaohappy:


https://i.makeagif.com/media/7-15-2022/7D0vE4.gif


Ultimately, sidekick champions like Pippen are the most overrated players ever because they play at a Wiggins or Iggy caliber but the winning spotlight and ring count inflates them much higher.

If Pippen never played with Jordan, he would be like Harvey Grant (Horace's brother) - a solid NBA player that no one ever heard of

The historical record shows that outside of the dynasty system and chemistry that he grew up in, Pippen was a 14 ppg dunker that couldn't score (89' and 99').






Everyone in history enjoyed go-to teammates that dominated and took over series with elite production.

Except Jordan

Only Jordan lacked go-to teammates and was forced to win with a team of hustlers/defenders - so only Jordan had to defeat maximum defensive attention in every series (carry scoring load)..

Due to these facts, goat haters cannot find the typical dominant performance from teammates, so they pretend that guys like Kukoc or Kerr getting 9 ppg is amazing... Or they pretend that Pippen getting 22' Westbrook numbers with woat efficiency is infact great help. .






Everyone in history needed equal-scoring partners to attract equal defensive attention for numerous playoff runs, so they didn't always face maximum defensive attention (didn't carry scoring load).. Any period without facing maximum defensive attention is inflated stats compared to Jordan, who always defeated maximum defensive attention - he carried the scoring load in every SERIES, let alone playoff run.

Ultimately, Kenny Smith explains why MJ was the only 1-man show in history:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=4UF6Xx3F2Lo&t=01m54s

Jesus Christ :lol

You truly have a sickness.

[Hey Yo]

Glad to see 3ball admit that LA was on the cusp when Kobe told the Nets not to draft him cause he would only play for "on the cusp" Lakers. Ring chasing before he ever suited up.

[3ba11]

Glad to see 3ball admit that LA was on the cusp when Kobe told the Nets not to draft him cause he would only play for "on the cusp" Lakers. Ring chasing before he ever suited up.


The Lakers were on the cusp in 2000 when Phil arrived, not 96' when Kobe was drafted.

phil was simply GIFTED teams that had already taken their lumps and were on the cusp of a title with goat players reaching their apex.

So Phil is just lucky - he was a 1st time nobody coach when he won in 90/91, while MJ was already a goat candidate..

So MJ led Phil, not the other way around - MJ decided to lend his goat ability to the triangle, which was a crappy offense that never won without Jordan or his clone (Kobe).. It's otherwise a garbage offense that everyone literally HATES... only MJ/Kobe were skilled enough to win with it

[Hey Yo]

4 seeds like the 96 Lakers were on the cusp. The Nets otoh were not. Hence the reason why Kobe refused to play for them.... he was ring chasing.

[Phoenix]

Ultimately, sidekick champions like Pippen are the most overrated players ever because they play at a Wiggins or Iggy caliber but the winning spotlight and ring count inflates them much higher.



Then why isn't Tony Parker considered a top 50 player? Dude has 4 rings, a finals MVP, was an allstar for two of those rings( 2007 and 2014) and all-NBA for one of them( 2014). By your logic the winning spotlight should have catapulted his historical status but he wasn't even voted to the top 75 team. Why isn't James Worthy ranked higher? Or Joe Dumars? Multiple ring winners, all-stars, finals MVPs and by your logic should be afforded greater rankings based on 'the winning spotlight', but for some reason this only seems to apply to Scottie.

[King Baron]

"Gifted?" You can say that about any coach who won with all-time talent but I don't see you making daily threads about Popovich having Duncan, Robinson, Ginobili, Kawhi, Parker (and even losing at one point with prime Aldridge).

Where are your topics about Steve Kerr taking over for Mark Jackson and winning his first year or Nash taking over a star studded team that ended up not winning one? You think Shaq and Kobe would have made that comeback vs the stacked Trailblazers in 2000 without Phil and Collins in his place?

And if you think the coach doesn't matter, okay then, that should be your argument. 'The coach doesn't matter and talent overcomes under any circumstance.' But it's not your argument, as much as I can tell. It's mostly just to detract from MJ's teammates and coaching staff in a not so subtle way.

And you act like all-star level players like Horace Grant didn't exist on the Bulls and even go to the NBA Finals with the Orlando Magic in the same era.

You claim players were hurt by Phil's triangle system. If that was the case why did Kobe want Phil back as late as 2012? And besides that, you think every coach can handle big personalities like Phil did?

It's exactly because not every coach can handle internal issues that the TrailBlazers lost in 2000 to begin with. They certainly weren't lacking talent. I recall Rasheed throwing a towel in Sabonis' face on the court in front of cameras at one point in the season.

[ShawkFactory]

"Gifted?" You can say that about any coach who won with all-time talent but I don't see you making daily threads about Popovich having Duncan, Robinson, Ginobili, Kawhi, Parker (and even losing at one point with prime Aldridge).

Where are your topics about Steve Kerr taking over for Mark Jackson and winning his first year or Nash taking over a star studded team that ended up not winning one? You think Shaq and Kobe would have made that comeback vs the stacked Trailblazers in 2000 without Phil and Collins in his place?

And if you think the coach doesn't matter, than okay then, that should be your argument. 'The coach doesn't matter and talent overcomes under any circumstance.' But it's not your argument, as much as I can tell. It's mostly just to detract from MJ's teammates and coaching staff in a not so subtle way.

And you act like all-star level players like Horace Grant didn't exist on the Bulls and even go to the NBA Finals with the Orlando Magic in the same era.

You claim players were hurt by Phil's triangle system. If that was the case why did Kobe want Phil back as late as 2012? And besides that, you think every coach can handle big personalities like Phil did?

It's exactly because not every coach can handle internal issues that the TrailBlazers lost in 2000 to begin with. They certainly weren't lacking talent. I recall Rasheed throwing a towel in Sabonis' face on the court in front of cameras at one point in the season.

"mostly" is not the correct term.

[JBSptfn]

"Gifted?" You can say that about any coach who won with all-time talent but I don't see you making daily threads about Popovich having Duncan, Robinson, Ginobili, Kawhi, Parker (and even losing at one point with prime Aldridge).

Where are your topics about Steve Kerr taking over for Mark Jackson and winning his first year or Nash taking over a star studded team that ended up not winning one? You think Shaq and Kobe would have made that comeback vs the stacked Trailblazers in 2000 without Phil and Collins in his place?

And if you think the coach doesn't matter, okay then, that should be your argument. 'The coach doesn't matter and talent overcomes under any circumstance.' But it's not your argument, as much as I can tell. It's mostly just to detract from MJ's teammates and coaching staff in a not so subtle way.

And you act like all-star level players like Horace Grant didn't exist on the Bulls and even go to the NBA Finals with the Orlando Magic in the same era.

You claim players were hurt by Phil's triangle system. If that was the case why did Kobe want Phil back as late as 2012? And besides that, you think every coach can handle big personalities like Phil did?

It's exactly because not every coach can handle internal issues that the TrailBlazers lost in 2000 to begin with. They certainly weren't lacking talent. I recall Rasheed throwing a towel in Sabonis' face on the court in front of cameras at one point in the season.

Actually, Sheed did that at the end of the 2000-01 season, not 2000.

However, you are right with the rest. The Lakers couldn't get to the Finals in 98 and 99 with more talent. Don't see them making it without Phil. Shaq probably would have wanted out after the 1999-2000 season. He basically said so on ESPN that year.

[3ba11]

.
Regular Season

Hornacek (https://www.basketball-reference.com/players/h/hornaje01.html).... 17.7 PER.. 2.9 bpm.. 0.153 ws/48.. 42.1 vorp on 33,964 min.. 15/3/5 on 58.2 ts
Klay (https://www.basketball-reference.com/players/t/thompkl01.html)'............ 16.4 PER.. 0.7 bpm.. 0.110 ws/48.. 14.4 vorp on 20,380 min.. 19/3/2 on 57.5 ts


Playoffs

Hornacek (https://www.basketball-reference.com/players/h/hornaje01.html).... 16.5 PER.. 3.1 bpm.. 0.145 ws/48.. 14.1 vorp on 4766 min.. 15/4/4 on 57.5 ts
Klay (https://www.basketball-reference.com/players/t/thompkl01.html)'............ 14.4 PER.. 0.7 bpm.. 0.091 ws/48.... 3.1 vorp on 4570 min.. 19/3/2 on 56.0 ts


Pippen and Wiggins in Finals

Pippen....... 19 on 42%
Wiggins..... 18 on 45%


Pippen and Iggy as 1st options

Iguodala 2009 Playoffs vs Dwight.... 21.5... 6.3... 6.7... 44.9%... lost in 6 (no kukoc miracle)

Pippen 1994 Playoffs vs Ewing......... 21.7... 7.7... 4.7... 40.5%... lost in 7 (kukoc miracle)

[3ba11]

Then why isn't Tony Parker considered a top 50 player? Dude has 4 rings, a finals MVP, was an allstar for two of those rings( 2007 and 2014) and all-NBA for one of them( 2014). By your logic the winning spotlight should have catapulted his historical status but he wasn't even voted to the top 75 team. Why isn't James Worthy ranked higher? Or Joe Dumars? Multiple ring winners, all-stars, finals MVPs and by your logic should be afforded greater rankings based on 'the winning spotlight', but for some reason this only seems to apply to Scottie.


Guys like Klay and Pippen are perceived as being part of a 2-headed monster, so they get more credit than guys that have to share spotlight on a 3-star team like Parker or Worthy.. In Worthy's case, he was completely overshadowed by Magic & Kareem.. And Dumars simply didn't win enough rings, while the 91' ECF hurt the Pistons' legacy..

Ultimately, guys like Pippen and Klay benefit from their status as the "Robin" to the greatest offensive players of all-time, while Worthy and Parker compete with other Robins on their own team..

But the actual performance tells the story - Klay plays below a Hornacek level (previous post), while Pippen played at an Iggy or Wiggins-level.. But fortunately for them, the winning spotlight and perception as the "Robin" to goat players inflates them to all-time status.

[Axe]

Op seek help.

[3ba11]

"Gifted?" You can say that about any coach who won with all-time talent but I don't see you making daily threads about Popovich having Duncan, Robinson, Ginobili, Kawhi, Parker (and even losing at one point with prime Aldridge).

Where are your topics about Steve Kerr taking over for Mark Jackson and winning his first year or Nash taking over a star studded team that ended up not winning one? You think Shaq and Kobe would have made that comeback vs the stacked Trailblazers in 2000 without Phil and Collins in his place?

And if you think the coach doesn't matter, okay then, that should be your argument. 'The coach doesn't matter and talent overcomes under any circumstance.' But it's not your argument, as much as I can tell. It's mostly just to detract from MJ's teammates and coaching staff in a not so subtle way.

And you act like all-star level players like Horace Grant didn't exist on the Bulls and even go to the NBA Finals with the Orlando Magic in the same era.

You claim players were hurt by Phil's triangle system. If that was the case why did Kobe want Phil back as late as 2012? And besides that, you think every coach can handle big personalities like Phil did?

It's exactly because not every coach can handle internal issues that the TrailBlazers lost in 2000 to begin with. They certainly weren't lacking talent. I recall Rasheed throwing a towel in Sabonis' face on the court in front of cameras at one point in the season.


Phil's trick was the triangle, which only works with Jordan or his clone Kobe

It doesn't work with a ball-dominator like Luka or Lebron, so Phil wouldn't win anything with them.. He could only win with Jordan or his clone - guys that were good enough to get 30-60 in the triangle.

So Jordan gave Phil gravitas by winning with the triangle and 1st timer coach in 1991 - the ensuing 3-peat turned Phil from a rookie, nobody coach to HOF

And I don't remember Phil crossing up Pippen and tossing the alley-oop to Shaq - that was Kobe and his league-leading clutch-time points for the 00' Playoffs and Finals...

Again, the triangle was a hated offense because it didn't let players dominate the ball..

Furthermore, it never really won because it frequently didn't get teammates good looks and required bailouts throughout the game - that's why it requires the goat bailout artists to play "closer" without dominating the ball - only MJ or his clone are good enough to do that, so they're the only guys that won with the triangle.. Again, MJ made Phil.. Phil actually had the audacity to tell the GOAT: "you won't be scoring champ in this offense"... pffff

[Phoenix]

Guys like Klay and Pippen are perceived as being part of a 2-headed monster, so they get more credit than guys that have to share spotlight on a 3-star team like Parker or Worthy.. In Worthy's case, he was completely overshadowed by Magic & Kareem.. And Dumars simply didn't win enough rings, while the 91' ECF hurt the Pistons' legacy..

Ultimately, guys like Pippen and Klay benefit from their status as the "Robin" to the greatest offensive players of all-time, while Worthy and Parker compete with other Robins on their own team..

But the actual performance tells the story - Klay plays below a Hornacek level (previous post), while Pippen played at an Iggy or Wiggins-level.. But fortunately for them, the winning spotlight and perception as the "Robin" to goat players inflates them to all-time status.

You have guys who made the top 75 teams who didnt win any rings, so Dumars winning two, a finals MVP, and being a multi-time allstar and All-NBA player should have gotten him on the list. 'Winning spotlight' ain't shit to do with it, rankings in general are bullshit and full of contradictions.