Sloan doesn't leave because he likes living in Utah, Phil moves on... Yeah he had the better players but the fact of the matter is that those players weren't winning anything without him, Phil Jackson made players like Jordan, Pippen, Shaq, and Kobe true GREATS, before him they were just extremely talented players with ZERO rings.
Why should the NBA's best coach (Larry Brown I won't argue with) have to coach a scrub team like the Vancouver Grizzlies? Why would he want to go there and get them to over achieve when over achieving means an early playoff exit? If he's coaching in the NBA he should be coaching championship contenders, if he's not he's wasting his time.
Easy. He goes there so people like me actually believe the hype about him being the best coach. It is funny how Larry Brown has consistently won whereever he goes, including the Clippers for God's sakes. Larry is a great coach; Jackson is an egotistical self-opportunist.
But those players were not exactly underachieving before he got there, and they were consistently losing to championship caliber teams (if not the champs). Jordan was always "the best", but he did not win until his teammates got to his level (that, and the Pistons got old). Phil Jackass had nothing to do with that. Shaq started to win once his closer (Kobe) came into his own, and once the league was void of big men. Jackass had nothing to do with that. I am not saying Phil is a bad coach, but you have to do more than win with the most dominating player to be the greatest in my opinion. In that case, I can argue that Rudy is the best coach ever. Having 9 rings, off of 9 seasons with the games best player on it, and more superstar players on your team than any other team in the league does not show me you are the best.
Larry Brown didn't win anything with the Clippers or anywhere else before Detroit. Before this season all he was good at was making bad to average teams good, this was the first season he's ever made a good team great, like Jackson always does.
I think there's one thing that everyone can agree on regarding Phil Jackson: The guy can coach talent. Meaning, give him a great ball club, and he can turn a contending team into a dynasty. And this isn't something to scoff at. Portland and Sacramento both had some of the greatest collection of talent in recent years, with ZERO combined championships. Phil had Kobe/Shaq, but pretty much scrubs elsewhere, and built a 3-year dynasty out of it. Same with the Bulls championships. Jordan/Pippen were great before Jackson, but afterwards, they became legends. As a Rockets fan, I'd LOVE to have Jackson as our coach to take us to the next level. Now, this does not mean Jackson is a "complete" coach. I tend to break down teams into several categories. Bottomfeeders, mediocre, contenders, and championship level. Some coaches are great at at turning bottomfeeders into mediocre teams, like Doc Rivers. Some coach can turn mediocre teams into contenders, like Larry Brown before this year. Some coaches are great at turning contenders into a championship caliber team. Phil Jackson does the last thing better than anyone else in the NBA. IMO, the best OVERALL coach in the NBA is Jerry Sloan. The guy proved he could build a team, become a contender, and rebuild when the stars leave. He has done it with any kind of roster. Granted, he has no rings. But looking at the whole package, I'd take him over any other coach in the NBA right now(ignoring Jazz factor).
They weren't underachieving? That Bulls team probably wasn't, but that Laker team was the most talented in the league before he got there even before Kobe Bryant became the best guard in the league. Shaq was still the most dominant player in the league, but he couldn't avoid getting swept every single season until Jackson joined him. Jordan wasn't going to be the greatest player of all time without Jackson, even he would agree with that. What big man was beating Shaq with the Magic? Once it was Hakeem. With the Lakers? Karl Malone? Shaq wasn't winning a championship without Phil Jackson and Kobe Bryant owes a lot to Phil Jackson as well. He might not teach them any basketball skills or anything like that, but he did teach them how to become true greats. You know winning a game when it doesn't look like it could be done, trusting your teammates, sacrificing for the team, just being a great player instead of a great talent. He's a hall of fame coach and one day he will get that 10th ring, hopefully with our Houston Rockets!
when I started the thread I never stated PJ is the greatest coach ever.. although (*I loath to say this) it could be argued. PJ may be an opportunist but then what is Larry Brown? He seems to jump from team to team with an excellent core in place. Any coach that has some pull will want to be in a place that will give them an opportunity to win a championship. For Coaches more than players are judged on the number of wins and championships. A player can have great stats, lots of All Star appearances, MVP's but never win a championship and still be considered great. Coaches dont have have that luxury - We may all hate Phil but we have to admit he did a great job with the teams/players that he had. I think the Lakers would have won another ring this year if Kobe worked harder.. the whole team seemed out of steam in the finals. Remember Phil isnt that old yet.. he can still coach for another 10 years at least in my opinion and who knows what might happen then. I think he has only been coaching for 15 years and has alot of years ahead of him .. He may wait and look for another potential contender and make a comeback dont count him out. Theres alot of teams with potential ... I was thinking Phil would go to NJ (pre Kmart defection) / Denver / Suns places where the coaches are not too secure in their jobs but have teams loaded with talent. Maybe not this year but who knows next.
What did Brown do that hardly anyone else did with the Clippers?? Can you name someone other than him that took the Clippers to the playoffs TWICE?? You can't because no one has (Jack Ramsay took them 3 times when they were the Buffalo Braves but the Braves were never as futile of a franchise as the Clippers, so you have to throw that out). I guarantee you that Jackson would have never won with the Pistons because he never would have taken the job in the first place since they didn't have the 2 best players in the game on their team. That is the whole point that people like me, Icehouse, and Easy are saying - Jackson doesn't do anything unless he has the best players on his team. Too bad that we will never see what a fraud Jackson really is.
Larry Brown never had the games best player either, or two of them, not even when he did win the ring. When did Portland or Sacremento have the GAMES BEST PLAYER? Their best players were arguably Sheed and Webber, who are both worse than Duncan and KG. When Phil had Shaq, he was the games best player. Kobe is arguably the games best SG. What other coach has had the best player inside and outside (arguably)? Really? Besides this year, every other coach in the last 10 years with the best player won too (Pop and Rudy).
ummm.... dont you remember when LBrown had AI at that time was considered the best player in the league.. didnt he win an MVP? J
Phil is the best closer among current coaches. LB is the best overall starter among coaches (can coach from start to finish of a franchise) Both talented, both fit different needs.
One, that team wasn't that deep or good besides AI, and not to mention he built that team from lottery up, which Phil didn't do.
Let me add this. This last season also showed that Jackson is not really that great an ego manager as advertised. He apparently could only manage two egos at a time. Four proved to be too much for him. Anyway, I've always said that all Jackson needs to do to expel that label of opportunist from him is to coach a bad team and make them good. He has yet taken up the challenge.
First of all, basketball is a TEAM game. So having the best player doesn't mean much. As for "best player = championship", using the last ten years means nothing. Rudy and Pop combined for a whopping 4 championships. Not exactly incredible sample size. Plus, it's arguable if Duncan was the best player in the NBA for his first championship. After all, Shaq was definitely in his prime that year. Actually, even if you assume Ducan was the best player that year, non-Jackson coaches with the best player still only has an 80% winning percentage with championships. While Phil is 100%, as neither Shaq nor Kobe were the best in the NBA this year.
Oooookay then. Basketball might be the major sport where having superstar players makes the MOST difference, actually.
I'm sorry but, you've got to be kidding me. The only way that can be remotely close to true is when you have a truly great coach that takes a collection of average/good players and gets them to the top. Guess what coach hasn't shown the ability to do that? Right...Phil Jackson. I'm sorry, but until Jackson takes even a decent team and turns them into a champion - Sac, Dallas, Indiana, etc. - he's proven nothing more than he can get the Best in the league together - as they are hitting their primes - and stroke their egos long enough that they focus on basketball. And that doesn't make someone a great coach.
