Scott Pollard: Phil Jackson 'One Of The Most Overrated Coaches Of Our Time'

[Raiders]

But Phil Jackson won’t be held responsible. The structural incompetence of the Knicks will be blamed. And Jackson is undoubtedly writing a sequel to his enormously successful Sacred Hoops, this one apparently called Zen and the Art of Making Millions
http://news.yahoo.com/s/dailybeast/20110513/ts_dailybeast/14061_lalakerscoachphiljacksonisoverrated

My rule is that I stop reading a Bissinger piece the moment he mentions a work of his, whether it's Friday Night Lights or some other book he's desperate to pimp for street cred.

The end came quickly this time.

Thanks, Piotr. I will now adopt the Bissinger Rule, too.

 

[Liut]

KU guys still driving Scot's cars?

 

[Starman]

Since the premise is Jackson only one with super talent...are there examples of teams that didn't win with superior talent? Detroit in the 1970s had Dave Bing and Bob Lanier, both legitimate HOFers and they were pretty bad, however, I am not sure what the rest of the team looked like.

The knock in the 1960s was West and Baylor couldn't get past the Celtics (who were more loaded). I always felt the early 1980s Sixers should have won more titles with Erving, Malone, Jones, Cheeks and Toney. Again, you can point to the Celtics at that time as well.

Actually the Pistons were quite good in 1972-73 when Bing and Lanier were both healthy -- they went 52-30 and pushed the Walker-Love-Van Lier Bulls to 7 games in a playoff series which represented the franchise's high point in Detroit prior to the Bad Boys era.

Kareem was still in Milwaukee at that time so finishing third in the division was about the best they could hope for.

But they backslid to 42-40 the next season, Bing was about done, and the Pistons never got good again until Isiah arrived.

 

[Piotr Rasputin]

I guess this particular bitter former member of the 2001-02 Sacramento Kings (and roster player on Cleveland's 2007 Finals team and Boston's 2008 champions, though he saw time in a total of three playoff games between the two, all for Cleveland):

http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/p/pollasc01.html

Didn't take into account the idea that perhaps, just perhaps, Jackson might have played a part in Jordan, Shaq and Kobe becoming JORDAN, SHAQ and KOBE.

Do the NCAA Tournament chokes during Pollard's career make Roy Williams "overrated"?

 

[Mizzougrad96]

People were right to question Phil's rankings among the greatest coaches of all-time after his stint in Chicago. I'm guessing there aren't too many coaches who couldn't win a title with Jordan and Pippen. None did, and one could argue that a pretty good coach (Collins) couldn't do it, but Collins was probably a few years too early. They needed a few years to get better than the Lakers and the Pistons.

Kobe and Shaq aren't Jordan. Great players, but they're great players who need a coach who they respected. I'm guessing his time in LA was a lot harder than his time in Chicago.

 

[Deeper_Background]

Derek Fisher has 5 rings...so by the Phil-o-meter, he must be one of the all-time greatest guards.

How did Pollard get a ring with the Celtics? Didn't he play like 1/4 of a season?

 

[cyclingwriter]

Since the premise is Jackson only one with super talent...are there examples of teams that didn't win with superior talent? Detroit in the 1970s had Dave Bing and Bob Lanier, both legitimate HOFers and they were pretty bad, however, I am not sure what the rest of the team looked like.

The knock in the 1960s was West and Baylor couldn't get past the Celtics (who were more loaded). I always felt the early 1980s Sixers should have won more titles with Erving, Malone, Jones, Cheeks and Toney. Again, you can point to the Celtics at that time as well.

Actually the Pistons were quite good in 1972-73 when Bing and Lanier were both healthy -- they went 52-30 and pushed the Walker-Love-Van Lier Bulls to 7 games in a playoff series which represented the franchise's high point in Detroit prior to the Bad Boys era.

Kareem was still in Milwaukee at that time so finishing third in the division was about the best they could hope for.

But they backslid to 42-40 the next season, Bing was about done, and the Pistons never got good again until Isiah arrived.

That is true about 72-73, and I guess I though they were teammates for longer. However, they did have an overall losing record for the seasons they were together.

 

[Cubbiebum]

I guess this particular bitter former member of the 2001-02 Sacramento Kings (and roster player on Cleveland's 2007 Finals team and Boston's 2008 champions, though he saw time in a total of three playoff games between the two, all for Cleveland):

http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/p/pollasc01.html

Didn't take into account the idea that perhaps, just perhaps, Jackson might have played a part in Jordan, Shaq and Kobe becoming JORDAN, SHAQ and KOBE.

Do the NCAA Tournament chokes during Pollard's career make Roy Williams "overrated"?

The only one you could even argue that Jackson made him great is Kobe. Shaw and Jordan were already the most dominant forces in the game by the time Jackson became their coach. Kobe had already been an All-Star but he didn't really emerge until Jackson was the coach. How much was Jackson and how much was it that Kobe was already considered a phenom and just came of age? No one will ever know but at the very least Kobe was already clearly one of the next great players.

I'm not saying Jackson isn't one of the best coaches. I think he is easily the best at managing massive egos, the type that come with dominant players. Jackson isn't what made those players all-time greats.

 

[D-3 Fan]

Derek Fisher has 5 rings...so by the Phil-o-meter, he must be one of the all-time greatest guards.

Norm Stewart's lack of a single Final Four makes him a **** coach.

Come on, now.

Or Gene Keady and John Chaney.

 

[NightHawk112005]

The only thing Pollard got wrong in this was that he added "one of" at the beginning of the sentence. Other than that, take the plural off coaches and he was completely accurate.

Phil Jackson overrated? Well, duh.

 

[Tarheel316]

Pollard may also have bad memories of the 2002 Western Conference finals when the Kings missed out on going to the Finals because they were playing 5-on-8 most of the time.

 

[NightHawk112005]

Pollard may also have bad memories of the 2002 Western Conference finals when the Kings missed out on going to the Finals because they were playing 5-on-8 most of the time.

That's one thing people leave out even when making the case he's overrated: two-thirds of his threepeat in Los Angeles never should have happened. The 2000 NBA champion should have been either Portland or Indiana, because if Game 7 had been called fair, the Blazers would have eliminated the Lakers. In 2002, Sacramento should have won the title. Only in 2001 did the Lakers legitimately win the title.

Easy knock on Jackson that he had Shaq and Kobe and could only win one title without getting a LOT of extra help. Yet nobody ever makes that argument, probably because the argument is so easy to make that you don't even need to get there.

 

[Double Down]

Oh for ****'s sake.

 

[Piotr Rasputin]

Pollard may also have bad memories of the 2002 Western Conference finals when the Kings missed out on going to the Finals because they were playing 5-on-8 most of the time.

That's one thing people leave out even when making the case he's overrated: two-thirds of his threepeat in Los Angeles never should have happened. The 2000 NBA champion should have been either Portland or Indiana, because if Game 7 had been called fair, the Blazers would have eliminated the Lakers. In 2002, Sacramento should have won the title. Only in 2001 did the Lakers legitimately win the title.

Easy knock on Jackson that he had Shaq and Kobe and could only win one title without getting a LOT of extra help. Yet nobody ever makes that argument, probably because the argument is so easy to make that you don't even need to get there.

Pomposity crossed with ignorance, never a good combination.

Pollard may also have bad memories of the 2002 Western Conference finals when the Kings missed out on going to the Finals because they were playing 5-on-8 most of the time.

Amusing how this legend has grown so much. You might want to check the numbers and the calls for that series. Be sure to look at Game Five, in which the Kings enjoyed some gifts.

Kings lost the first game at home. They choked away Game Four. And they had Game Seven, at home, and couldn't hit a free throw.

But yeah, Game Six had a free-throw disparity, so the whole series must have.

 

[BYH]

Leave it to nighthawk90210, who knows everything about everything even though he was six in 2001, to get me thinking Phil Jackson was accurately rated.

 

[printdust]

Phil long ago used up his karma on MJ and Kobe.

Signed,
Buddha

 

[Starman]

Snore.

Dear Pollard:

The job of an NBA coach is not to 'develop talent' or 'rein in' his team. It is to win games, and ultimately championships.

If, in order to do that, he has to 'develop talent' or 'rein in the team,' he needs to do that too, but the bottom line is whether he wins or not.

Jackson has won a lot of games and championships. Like it or not that means he has certainly been one of the most successful coaches in NBA history.

 

[JC]

Pollard may also have bad memories of the 2002 Western Conference finals when the Kings missed out on going to the Finals because they were playing 5-on-8 most of the time.

That's one thing people leave out even when making the case he's overrated: two-thirds of his threepeat in Los Angeles never should have happened. The 2000 NBA champion should have been either Portland or Indiana, because if Game 7 had been called fair, the Blazers would have eliminated the Lakers. In 2002, Sacramento should have won the title. Only in 2001 did the Lakers legitimately win the title.

Easy knock on Jackson that he had Shaq and Kobe and could only win one title without getting a LOT of extra help. Yet nobody ever makes that argument, probably because the argument is so easy to make that you don't even need to get there.

Just ridiculous.

 

[Double Down]

What's harder to do: Build a playoff team in a league where literally half the teams make the playoffs every year and you don't even need a winning record to get there plenty of years, or to be the last team standing at the end of the longest post-season grind in sports?

I think it's fairly obvious.

 

[Mark McGwire]

What's harder to do: Build a playoff team in a league where literally half the teams make the playoffs every year and you don't even need a winning record to get there plenty of years, or to be the last team standing at the end of the longest post-season grind in sports?

I think it's fairly obvious.

What do the Stanley Cup playoffs have to do with anything?