WHEW!!! Do you Smell that?!

[Lurker]

Four out of the top 8 rotation guys in 3 years.  And the Lakers changed who during their 3 peat?  How many of the top 8?

And then there is the Bulls....just look at their turnover (these are their to 7 in minutes played each year):

 90-91                  91-92                   92-93
jordan,michael   pippen,scottie   pippen,scottie
pippen,scottie   jordan,michael   jordan,michael
grant,horace   grant,horace   grant,horace
cartwright,bill   paxson,john   armstrong,b.j.
paxson,john   armstrong,b.j.   williams,scott
armstrong,b.j.   cartwright,bill   cartwright,bill
king,stacey   king,stacey   king,stacey


 95-96           96-97           97-98
jordan,michael   jordan,michael   jordan,michael
pippen,scottie   pippen,scottie   rodman,dennis
kukoc,toni     rodman,dennis   harper,ron
rodman,dennis   kerr,steve     kukoc,toni
kerr,steve     harper,ron    longley,luc
harper,ron    kukoc,toni     pippen,scottie
longley,luc    longley,luc    brown,randy


And anyway if you go back to the first post I said nothing about Pop being a great coach because of that.  I said that PJ used continuity to win.  And instead of trying to disprove my statement you have to change the argument to the Spurs.

[Laker Fan]

To answer your point....my contention is that PJ has had no success without his entire coaching team.  There has been no turnover.  None of his staff have been promoted to head coaching vacancies (except Hamblin last year and that lasted less than a season).  I haven't read....even in the Bulls heydays....of other teams using Jackson's defensive schemes or emulating the Bulls style.  If anything you could say that Pop has taken Larry Brown's style (actually Dean Smith's style) and using better athletes had more success than Brown.  And it is amazing that Indiana's defense improved when one of Pop's assistants moved there to become Carlisle's lead assistant (without a drop in SA's defense).  Or that the one year Avery Johnson played for Dallas (and was a defacto assistant) their defense improved.  Show me an example of where one of PJ's assistants went on to have success elsewhere...or even help another team.

Wow Lurker, you've caught Ricks circular logic disease.

If none of Phil Jackson's assistant have ever gone on to be successful head coaches or had any success outside of his little circle, wouldn't that mean the brains of the outfit, the great coach if you will, is really Phil Jackson? Otherwise, they would leave and he would have fallen back to earth with a resounding thud. Way to make our point and paint yourself as being driven to your comments by an unreasoning and illogical bias all at the same time.

[rickortreat]

If none of Phil Jackson's assistant have ever gone on to be successful head coaches or had any success outside of his little circle, wouldn't that mean the brains of the outfit, the great coach if you will, is really Phil Jackson? Otherwise, they would leave and he would have fallen back to earth with a resounding thud. Way to make our point and paint yourself as being driven to your comments by an unreasoning and illogical bias all at the same time.

That would be one possible conclusion.  The other would be our contention that Phil isn't a good coach, and therefore his protoges aren't either.  No one emulates Phil's offense or defense in the NBA, pretty odd considering how successful he was in Chicago right!?

Much more likely is that Phil is a fraud. (sorry for raining on your parade, Lurker) A fraud with a penchant for going to teams that are ripe for a run, applying a little basketball knowledge and winning with overwhelming talent.

See what he does now with a limited squad, that's all I'm saying.  Just wait and see....

You know LA and the media there better, how patient will they be with the team?  will Phil and Buss be able to handle the criticism?  Will Kobeme?  

[Reality]

Where do you get off saying that?  If the other teams were too cheap that was their problem. If they weren't as good businessman, that was also their problem!  Besides, the NBA had a draft.  The fact is, Red was a better appraiser of talent than anyone else.

Actually my "fauly" logic is based on your comments. Since the team was able to win without Red, just on talent alone like you say about PJ, then by YOUR logic that makes Red less of a coach.

So as far as the Lakers go this year, IMO they don't have sufficient talent to compete.  It will take a miracle for them to make the playoffs.  If Phil does that, he will have proven me wrong.  Considering that more than half the teams in the league make the playoffs, that's not too much to ask is it? :huh:

Let me see Phil build a team from ground up like Red did, and I'll shut up.  IMO he can't do it and he's a fraud!  He's got the rings, and that means something, but he's never built a team and he's never overachieved with limited talent.  Why isn't that a reasonable way to evaluate a coach?    :huh:

My my Rick, your "logic" simply defies imagination! Red was a better appraiser of talent huh? Seems to me Phil Jackson must be a pretty good appraiser of talent as well, by your "logic", being as he spotted the talented teams and latched on to them. Let me ask you a question, provided of course your "logic" allows you the ability to think through the simple conclusions of us mere mortals, just exactly what kind of brilliant mind did it take to see the pure, raw, explosive talent of a Bill Rusell? A Havlicek? A Duncan? A Robinson? A Shaq? A Kobe? A Magic? A Bird? A Cousy? And on, and on, and on. Tell me, if you could coach a talented squad already assembled to the promised land, why don't you? Perchance is it because YOU CAN'T?!?!?!?!?

By your "logic", the Blazers should have had 4-5 rings through the last 10 years and Dunleavy would be coach of the century! Except  that by your "logic" he really would only be merely overated because my goodness, my Aunt Fanny could have coached that absolutely LOADED squad to victory! Circular "logic" taken to the extreme! Touche'!!!

Really Rick, I think you have set some kind of record for talking out both sides of your neck and contradicting yourself in one post, hmmmm, does that make you a great poster, or merely overrated?

I wonder, in your mind is a coach who is capable of developing a team, getting them to be strong contenders, and falling short year after year the criteria whereby a coaches greatness is measured? If so, than you are so correct, Larry Brown is the greates coach who ever lived, followed closely by Mike Dunleavy, Greg Popovich (he had Robinson and Elliot for YEARS and didn't win SQUAT), Rick Adelman, Rick Carlisle, Jerry Sloan, etc. But then, by your criteria, if they DO win anything, they immediately fall to mediocre or fraud status because after all, ANYONE could coach a team with that much talent to victory, but then, hmmm, Brown rode some coat-tails of talent over the Lakers to victory, no wait, he is simply a brilliant assessor of talent and simply KNEW Detroit only needed a "great" coach, oh wait, no, anyone could have coached that team to victory, no wait, he put that team together himself, from the ground up, no wait, he......

I'm getting a headache, this line of reasoning is too much for me, I ask you again Rick, are you sure your name isn't Lee? Not even Reality is this nebulous.

'Poser.

I'll dig up some of your old posts saying what a worthless coach Phil Jackson was.

Get a spine!

[westkoast]

Where do you get off saying that?  If the other teams were too cheap that was their problem. If they weren't as good businessman, that was also their problem!  Besides, the NBA had a draft.  The fact is, Red was a better appraiser of talent than anyone else.

Actually my "fauly" logic is based on your comments. Since the team was able to win without Red, just on talent alone like you say about PJ, then by YOUR logic that makes Red less of a coach.

So as far as the Lakers go this year, IMO they don't have sufficient talent to compete.  It will take a miracle for them to make the playoffs.  If Phil does that, he will have proven me wrong.  Considering that more than half the teams in the league make the playoffs, that's not too much to ask is it? :huh:

Let me see Phil build a team from ground up like Red did, and I'll shut up.  IMO he can't do it and he's a fraud!  He's got the rings, and that means something, but he's never built a team and he's never overachieved with limited talent.  Why isn't that a reasonable way to evaluate a coach?    :huh:

My my Rick, your "logic" simply defies imagination! Red was a better appraiser of talent huh? Seems to me Phil Jackson must be a pretty good appraiser of talent as well, by your "logic", being as he spotted the talented teams and latched on to them. Let me ask you a question, provided of course your "logic" allows you the ability to think through the simple conclusions of us mere mortals, just exactly what kind of brilliant mind did it take to see the pure, raw, explosive talent of a Bill Rusell? A Havlicek? A Duncan? A Robinson? A Shaq? A Kobe? A Magic? A Bird? A Cousy? And on, and on, and on. Tell me, if you could coach a talented squad already assembled to the promised land, why don't you? Perchance is it because YOU CAN'T?!?!?!?!?

By your "logic", the Blazers should have had 4-5 rings through the last 10 years and Dunleavy would be coach of the century! Except  that by your "logic" he really would only be merely overated because my goodness, my Aunt Fanny could have coached that absolutely LOADED squad to victory! Circular "logic" taken to the extreme! Touche'!!!

Really Rick, I think you have set some kind of record for talking out both sides of your neck and contradicting yourself in one post, hmmmm, does that make you a great poster, or merely overrated?

I wonder, in your mind is a coach who is capable of developing a team, getting them to be strong contenders, and falling short year after year the criteria whereby a coaches greatness is measured? If so, than you are so correct, Larry Brown is the greates coach who ever lived, followed closely by Mike Dunleavy, Greg Popovich (he had Robinson and Elliot for YEARS and didn't win SQUAT), Rick Adelman, Rick Carlisle, Jerry Sloan, etc. But then, by your criteria, if they DO win anything, they immediately fall to mediocre or fraud status because after all, ANYONE could coach a team with that much talent to victory, but then, hmmm, Brown rode some coat-tails of talent over the Lakers to victory, no wait, he is simply a brilliant assessor of talent and simply KNEW Detroit only needed a "great" coach, oh wait, no, anyone could have coached that team to victory, no wait, he put that team together himself, from the ground up, no wait, he......

I'm getting a headache, this line of reasoning is too much for me, I ask you again Rick, are you sure your name isn't Lee? Not even Reality is this nebulous.

'Poser.

I'll dig up some of your old posts saying what a worthless coach Phil Jackson was.

Get a spine!

Uhh Phillyarena's version of Corky....he never said PJ was worthless but said he is overrated.  Why do you need to dig when he said it in this very thread  :rofl:

Get a brain!

[Reality]

I'll dig up some of your old posts saying what a worthless coach Phil Jackson was.
 

Not talking about this post.

But then in your make up application, "We weren't posting together" beyond 2--3 years ago. :rofl:  

Continue talking to yourself.  Or group snuggle at The Laker House.

[westkoast]

I'll dig up some of your old posts saying what a worthless coach Phil Jackson was.
 

Not talking about this post.

But then in your make up application, "We weren't posting together" beyond 2--3 years ago. :rofl:  

Continue talking to yourself.  Or group snuggle at The Laker House.

The real quote was 'We all werent posting together 3-4 years ago' but you can keep bending the quote each time you use it.

Like I said Corky, he never said Phil Jackson is a horirble, pathetic coach.  I know that would just make your day but in fact he said (and always has) that he thinks Jackson is overrated.

I love bandwagon Spurs fans who think defense doesnt win championships.  They crack me up.  I find it ironic in a sense.

[Lurker]

Like I said Phil Jackson is a horirble, pathetic coach.

Now I can save this and in 3-4 years "prove" that Lakers fans (all of them of course) felt this way about Jackson.

 :rofl:  

[Guest_Randy]

Texas reading comprehension education on display!

[WayOutWest]

Lakers
Title 1
Shaq/Kobe/Rice/Green/Harper
Title 2
Shaq/Kobe/Fox/Grant/Fisher
Title 3
Shaq/Kobe/Fox/Walker/Fisher

The bench changed as well.  Harper/Salley/Foster/Hunter/Shaw/Lue came and went, the only constants were Horry and George.

Rattle off the Spurs run when you feel free.  

[Lurker]

Spurs:
2003 DRob, Duncan, Bowen, Jackson, Parker  
Bench: Manu, Rose Smith

2005 Nazr, Duncan, Bowen, Manu, Parker
Bench: Horry, Barry, Udrih(only because Devin Brown was hurt for playoffs)


And a small correction....Fisher was the starter (or at least a key contributor) on your first title team (played 78 games at 24 min/g - about the same as Harper).  He was injured in 2000-01 season and played only 20 games (avg 35+ minutes).  Otherwise he would have started that season also.  Fox also played key minutes in the first title run so there is even more continuity.

[WayOutWest]

And a small correction....Fisher was the starter (or at least a key contributor) on your first title team (played 78 games at 24 min/g - about the same as Harper).  He was injured in 2000-01 season and played only 20 games (avg 35+ minutes).  Otherwise he would have started that season also.  Fox also played key minutes in the first title run so there is even more continuity.

If that's your opinion then I don't see much difference between what Pop did and what PJ did. Looks like both guys were able to successfully move guys in and out of the lineups.  The Spurs had TD, Bowen, Manu and Paker all the way through, looks like alot of continuity there.

[Joe Vancil]

Uh...as I see it:

Phil did it with a base of Jordan/Pippen in Chicago, along with a cast of others.

Phil did it with Shaq/Kobe/Fisher/Fox in Los Angeles, along with a cast of others.

Popovich did it with Duncan in San An, along with a cast of others.
 

[WayOutWest]

Uh...as I see it:

Phil did it with a base of Jordan/Pippen in Chicago, along with a cast of others.

Phil did it with Shaq/Kobe/Fisher/Fox in Los Angeles, along with a cast of others.

Popovich did it with Duncan in San An, along with a cast of others.

Joe,

Watch your arse, Spursies might be gunning for you soon.  You dare name Fox and Fisher for the Lakers while relegating Manu, Bowen and Parker to the "cast of others" catagory?  Fox and Fisher are solid role players as are Bowen and Parker.  Manu is more of a standout amoung that group, only Horry would IMO be an equivalent of Manu.  Actually IMO Horry has been a bigger better piece to the titles of both the Lakers and Spurs than Manu has been for the Spurs.  

Better check the date on the seal you're eating cause it sounds like it went bad.

[Lurker]

Besides the fact that in all this discussion I have never held Pop up as the standard for comparison.  But I am glad that you Laker fans think so highly of him that he is the ideal that you hope Phil can achieve.  Maybe some day you will believe that Jackson has reached that level.   :up: