honestly, it just basketball, if u have talent it shouldnt be hard to coach. You just have to know how to play the game.
and phil jackson does know how to play the game...especially the mental games. i wouldn't say he's better than auerbach but i also wouldn't say auerbach's better than jackson. each man is different....effectively different.
Phil Jackson has just proven that he is not the greatest coach NOW, let alone EVER. With FOUR HOFers, he still got humiliated by a team without a clearcut superstar. Oh, you can bet he'd chicken out the second he heard the word "rebuild" from the Lakers management.
I was suprised that he didn't seem to make any adjustments. I didn't really see a change in philosophy as the series progressed. Which was clearly needed.
red is right and the fact you even ponder this question makes me wonder about your knowledge of the game...
sorry for posting 3 in a row but i have to say one thing: i remember the lakers having the talent to win the title for three years before jackson but were so full of themselves, they refused to put the team first. they knew this but continued to play this way 3 years in a row. i say they knew because its COMMON FRIGGIN SENSE how to play basketball when you are a pro! EVERY coach preaches team play. (i dont think enough teams actually do it because they have no confidence in the overall talent level of the team. the lakers knew they had the talent but continued to play as individuals anyway) the only reason the lakers listened to phil was because of what they saw in chicago. jackson was the ONLY coach that they would listen to due to their incredible arrogance. my god, if they couldnt win under phil, they knew they would be looked at as the ultimate losers. THAT was their motivation...
I wouldnt say that the lakers had the talent to win before phil came actually. There is NO WAY you can say a out of hs Kobe Bryant was effective his first 3 years in the league as he was the past 5 years. Kobe was just coming into his 'own' so to say when jackson arrived there. Could PJ been the reason they won in 2000, could be, there is no way a rookie kobe and fisher could have won the title in 97, 3 years before jackson showed up. Phil Jackson may have that special thing to take a team over the top, but he is too reliant on his players coaching themselves, as shown in this series. He was simply outcoached, how could the supposed greatest coach allow his team to commit the same mistakes night in and night out in the finals at that? As for the bulls he once again came in when jordan was fulling maturing and pippin too started to become a factor, but I think Jordan's competitive fire and talent was the reason why they won so many rings, not because of PJ coaching. Give any above average coach that team and they would have coached them to a ring. PJ in my eyes, is just that, an above average coach, but not legendary or great. Larry Brown taking the clippers not once, but twice to the playoffs, that alone should put him up there for greatest coach of all time
Phil Jackson is supposed to be the best in handling egos. Apparently he can only handle two egos at a time.
If Phil Jackson came to the Rockets next season and brought a championship to Houston with the core of this roster intact, I'd be impressed. Then I'll definitely put him over Auerbach.
