I have two questions to ask on this thread. (1)Who is the better coach? (2)Who is the more respectable coach? Phil Jackson has won several titles by using the triangle offense and having the most dominant player in the league. Michael Jordan and now Shaq. How hard can it be to win a championship with the most dominant player in the league? Obviously, it is still quite a challenge. The Lakers, under Kurt Rambis, could not win a title with the very same roster last year. And all of a sudden, Jackson appears out of nowhere and wins them a title. Is his strategy really that good? Jackson has admitted to only coaching teams that are not in the rebuilding process and are SERIOUS contenders for the championship. Rudy T. also won a couple championships with the most dominant player in the league at the time in Hakeem Olajuwon. He won a championship with a 6th seed team. None of the players really complained about his coaching or the way he treated the players. He's a players' coach. So with those points established I would like to make my own personal opinion that Rudy T. is a more respectable coach and Phil Jackson is a slightly better coach overall. I say that because Phil has 6 rings with the Bulls and 1 with the Lakers. I have to say the last ring would have been questionable with a healthy Tim Duncan playing for the Spurs during the last playoff run. I think Rudy T. is more respectable because he has remained with the Rockets even though they are in the rebuilding process. He doesn't bail out on a team that is going to need time to become great again. By signing a multi-year contract to remain coach of the Rockets proves that he has been a Rocket through his career and will continue to be until he leaves coaching. ------------------ [This message has been edited by rock (edited August 30, 2000).]
Phil Jackson to this day has not proven himself. He has walked into great situations, with the MVP and a great supporting cast on his teams. He's never had to rebuild like Rudy, never had to win with less talent, and looking over the years at his draft picks is not as good of an evaluator of talent as Rudy. Say all you want about Rambis and the Lakers, but Kobe and Shaq simply took it to another level this season. Not due to Phil, but just them taking up their OWN game a notch. Until I see Phil Jackson prove something to me besides being able to win with a loaded roster and the MVP, I'll give both votes to Rudy. ------------------ Looking for next year's Dan Langhi? Draftsource.net ClutchTown.com 4th Friday of August= Rocket Day 1999-Steve Francis 2000-Maurice Taylor
Cat's got it pinned. Too bad most people don't realize that Shaq and Kobe have matured since they've entered the league. It's damn near impossible to win a title with a roster filled with guys under 25. ------------------ WE WILL WATCH THEM FALL... Next year [This message has been edited by AntiSonic (edited August 30, 2000).]
Im with the Cat,i have always thought Phil was over rated.Jackson is a very respectable coach but as the Cat said who cant win the championship with the best players,thats just what you are suppose to do.Now lets see Phil take a sixth seed with only 1 superstar and a team of role players to the title and i will change my vote. ------------------
Come on man.......why ask this question??? Honestly, I don't think anyone here would favor Jackson, having known what Rudy T has done for this franchise. That being said, I vote Rudy T on both counts. ------------------ There is a very fine line between "hobby" and "mental illness."
Well, he favoured Jackson himself - I guess he wanted to know what everyone else thinks. As for the LA situation before Jackson, Shaq had been injured last season (98-99) and therefore it makes it easier for Jackson to look like a guru by having a fit Shaq all season. It's like hailing Popovic as a mastercoach because the Spurs dominated after drafting Duncan. Let's see Jackson coach a team from scratch - a team filled with youngsters... Rudy T on both counts!! It'd be more fair to compare Rudy T and Pat Riley, they probably the 2 best coaches today. ------------------
Rudy T. No question. Phil Jackson has walked into two tailor-made scenarios with the best players in the game. Of course it must also be mentioned that he had success with a Scottie Pippen-led team, which, because its a blatant oxymoron, is no small task. Although Rudy T. has had some good teams to work with, he has also been a part of putting together a young, exciting team. Phil Jackson never had to rebuild(though he was never really given a choice). Although Rudy T. could doubtless have had nearly any job in the NBA(Sometimes I question whether or not he could have walked away from the Rockets.) he stuck it out and is coaching a team that will be successful. And I'll bet that Kevin Garnett never said he'd swim to Australia for Jackson. ------------------ Who would've thought Don Nelson would pass up Olumide Oyedeji not once, not twice, but thrice?
I'm sorry to say this but Phil Jackson is the superior strategist between him and Rudy. The triangle offense can be very overwhelming when you have the players who can run it, because it is not a set offense that can become stagnant and readable. While the Rockets for years were hindered by that dump-it-downlow-kick-it-out for 3, and that was totally readable to opposing defenses. The Lakers did the same thing until Phil actually instituted a fluent offense that perfectly suited both Kobe and Shaq. Defensively, Phil is also much more of a risk taker and it payed off when you see how dominant Kobe has become on defense, say what you will but Allen Iverson has NEVER been shut down that bad before in his life.
Wink Easy to take risks when u got shaq back there. and philly *is* a one trick pony I think Kobe is defensively good but .. still overrated Rocket River ------------------
Phil is better at soothing egos but as many have mentioned Phil has never had to coach a team w/out the best player in the league. If you were just starting a team (expansion or young or untalented team) you were surely look at Rudy, but if I was the owner of a talented team who couldn't get over the hump I would go with Phil. He proved he can make players play better immediately. Getting Shaq & Kobe to play defense was tough to do. Basically I'm not slamming Rudy, but if you have a very talented underachieving team I would go with Phil. Any other team I go with Rudy. ------------------
Hoop- I would disagree with one thing "I also have never seen anyone rebuild a team quicker that Rudy without spending a trillion dollars to do so ala Portland." Really our rebuilding is via trades (done by th front office not RT). I'm not sure if it is the system, the superstars or Phil but he constantly had aging vets who played above where they had in the past. AC, Harper and Horry all played big in the playoffs last year (especially Harper) after not being that vital in prior years. Also in Chicago all of the guards always played well in the system (BJ Armstrong was a good PG, Paxson, Kerr). I know most of this is not a result of Phil but he must be given some credit for getting the best out of his players (also again look at how much harder the Lakers played on defense last year). Just like in business there are peple who are better at building a boat and their are better people at sailing the ship. Not that Phil is necessarily a better coach, but he proved last year that he can take a team to the next level. As a further argument noone will like, Rudy hasn't won a title without the best player in the game either. Biggest similarity is how much all of the players seem to enjoy playing for the coaches. MJ may have played another year or two if Phil had stayed and even today MJ is loyal to Phil, as Phil is to him. Also Pip wanted to play for Phil last year so their is respect their as well. Also Phil seems to have gained the respect of Kobe & Shaq. Similarly the relationship between RT & Dream appears to be even deeper than the others and CB has an affinity for both RT and the houston fans and organization. I think it speaks very highly of both. ------------------
Originally posted by 4chuckie: I'm not sure if it is the system, the superstars or Phil but he constantly had aging vets who played above where they had in the past. AC, Harper and Horry all played big in the playoffs last year (especially Harper) after not being that vital in prior years. --------------------------------------------- A side note....... AC hasn't been to the playoffs in quite some time....he has played for Dallas. He did go with Phoenix though, and filled in well, did he not? Horry, as you know, played very well for us in the playoffs. Now as far as LA, they played him more minutes due to the matchup problems that AC had defensively (Croshere especially). Horry, I don't think was an improved player under Jackson. He didn't get as many minutes as I think he deserved. I think most would agree he could and would produce given the opportunity. Harper played a very vital role with the Bulls, maybe even moreso that with the Lakers. Sure, he did score more in the playoffs with LA than he did with Chicago. But they needed him to. The LA offense had a tendency to stagnate at times in late stretches of games. I cannot remember the Bulls offense EVER stagnating. So, I have to disagree with the notion that they played better in this system, they just played different or had different roles. So, if you want to give Phil credit for better use of resources, so be it. But I don't think he deserves credit for making these guys play better. I will agree that they were a stronger defensive team under Phil. ------------------ There is a very fine line between "hobby" and "mental illness." [This message has been edited by HOOP-T (edited September 08, 2000).]
i vote rudy on both counts: but Phil is the kinda coach that there losing by 15 and wont call a timeout that only works when you got oneal or jordan in your team. ------------------ "It wasn't a fight. He punched me one time, that's all. That's not a fight. I don't fight at 30,000 feet. I had an education." L8 vs Stack
OK, an obvious statement: The mark of a good coach is setting up a system that emphasizes the strengths and mitigates the weaknesses of his team. I think Rudy has done a good job designing two systems with the same basic principles. Let's start with the first Championship and move towards today... Olajuwon on the strongside post, Thorpe on the weak side, Max, Horry and Smith/Cassell on the perimeter. (Notice the spacing... three up top and two down.) We all understand about the offensive side (kick into Dream, the best post player of his generation, who shoots or passes to the perimeter or a slasher), but I think the real genius of Rudy was the way the offense set up the DEFENSE. With three on the perimeter (occasionally two if the weakside slashed to catch a Dream pass, ala Horry) who could shuffle back and keep the play in front, with Dream always able to beat his man back and establish defensive position, this team gave up very few transition baskets and forced opponents into halfcourt sets. For the way the game was played at the time, it was perfect spacing and a brilliant arrangement of talent for O/D. As stated before, it really helps when you have the best offensive center in the world and the best defensive center in the world rolled into one unbelieveably athletic package. Now Rudy has to change the emphasis from Post to Guard play. I think this is why he still values a long distance shooter at SF... because they will be on the perimeter and able to help out on transition D when Steve or Cat drive. Since he doesn't have a Center who can beat everyone down the floor anymore, he goes to a setup where the Center plays around the free throw line, thus cutting the distance he has to run to get into defensive position. With the opposing center probably going down the lane as soon as we shoot, that gives our center a ten foot headstart towards D. Does anyone think it is just a coincidence that Collier is a good shooter from the free throw line and Langhi can bomb? Rebounding: I think Rudy believes it is better (over the course of a game) to be in defensive position than go all out on the O boards and potentially give up a fast break. On the defensive side, I think you will see everyone, especially the guards, crashing the boards this year. I think Rudy is fixated on the O/D-D/O transition and rightly so. I don't know about Phil, but Rudy's a hell of a coach. ------------------ "Texas remains our largest unfrozen state"
I should get this out of the way, I love Rudy, in terms of a players' coach there is no equal and he is very adroit at the X's and O's as well. It is also very encouraging that he wants to take this rebuilding project heads-on, it's unfathomable to think that there will ever be a head coach after Mr. Kapaya. But in terms of head coaching success, I can't see how you can downplay 7 titles just because you have the best player in the league. Remember when we won our 2 titles, Hakeem was the most dominant player in the league (as noted by the San Antonio series). Even today, Red Auerbach is deemed one of the greatest coaches in all of professional sports. Should he not be considered an elite coach just because he had a team with immense talent and depth? Of course not, even with talent there is still nothing wrong about winning titles with the best players. ------------------ I'm not clumsy, I just have to know my surroundings.
Wink3 - Phil Jackson is a motivator. Again, motivating Shaq 2% gets alot more results than motivating John Amechi 50%. To see how good Jackson was at motivating "regular" humans, check his season record when MJ was off trying to hit curve balls. If your talking X's and O's - that comes from Tex Winter. Credit where credit's due. IMHO, if they each started with new NBA franchises Rudy would get to the Finals sooner (assuming neither of their teams were owned by Paul Allen). Also, Red Auerbach built those team...they weren't bought and handed to him. He had the presence of mind to draft Bill Russell out of USF and Larry Bird before he graduated from ISU (which was shortly thereafter made against the rules). ------------------ GATER [This message has been edited by GATER (edited September 09, 2000).]
I don't know how many times I have heard that phrase "give credit where it is due", I really thought I was giving due credit to both Rudy and Phil. Now it is time for those of you to practice what you preach, Rudy and Phil are in completely different situations with they're respective teams, I know this. Phil had nothing to do with building the Lakers franchise, I know this as well. Tex Winters created the triangle offense, I also am aware of this. But there is no such thing as championships with asterisks on them, any true Rockets fan should know this (we won our 2 championships, with or without Jordan's retirement). I prefer Rudy as my head coach any day of the week, but it seems like all anyone wants to do is act like Phil Jackson is the last person in the world who helped contribute to his last 7 titles. Just because Phil has Tex as an assistant does NOT mean he had nothing to do with implementing that offense with his players. I would love to hear any retorts to this but PLEASE do not ask me to "give credit where credit is do" or else it will be at the risk of sounding contradicting or redundant. ------------------ I'm not clumsy, I just have to know my surroundings.
You missed the whole point by fixating on one phrase. Eliminate the "give credit" part and re-read my post. Did you even go look at what the Bulls did in MJ's absence? The spirit of the thread was "who is a better coach - Jackson or Rudy T." IMHO with ALL things being equal, Rudy T is the better coach. That does not mean Phil Jackson is a BAD coach. It means he has been dealt very good hands and never had to rebuild. ------------------ GATER
