http://sports.espn.go.com/los-angeles/nba/news/story?id=5146034 I hate this guy for his arrogance, but his track record has been stellar. I would love to see what he can do with this loaded roster. I'd be okay with PA throwin $$$ at the guy for a shot at the title.
I don't think he's done that great of a job this year. I was reading in the LA Times that players are staying after practice to work with Artest because he still doesn't know the offense. Artest is crazy but he ain't stupid. Would the triangle work with this team? Roy is a lot of things but a MJ or Kobe he's not.
Our roster is anything but loaded, depleted is more like it, and Jackhole has never been one to seek out a challenge. That's why his record is what it is. He only coaches the most stacked teams in big markets where he's guaranteed an easy go of it. Most over-rated coach in the league.
He's been very stubborn at the point guard position as well. He plays Fisher too much, doesn't really seem to acknowledge his huge flaws.
Oh, I'm certain that his work ethic isn't nearly as strong as Nate's, and he probably doesn't have as good a rapport with his players like Nate does either. But he does have experience, and that's huge in the playoffs. And while Roy doesn't have the scoring drive that the other two did, he's still plenty capable. And the triangle was instilled as a means to take apart those box and 1s and doubling defenses that teams played against Jordan. Roy faced similar defenses this year, and had quite a bit of trouble with it. I think he'd benefit most from having Jackson as coach.
I think it was Kobe that realized he needed to start covering Westbrook. He told Phil he wanted to guard that guy, otherwise it still would have been Fisher I believe.
Talent isn't everything. There have been lots of teams over the years that have been stacked with talent but didn't win. LeBron could really use a Phil Jackson to get over the top. The 2000 Blazers could've used him. The 97 & 98 Jazz could've used him. The Kobe (and Shaq) Lakers couldn't win before or after him. The Bulls couldn't win before him. The Suns have never won and they've had a ton of talent over the years. The Mavs haven't won. They could use him. Phil has been good at taking talent players and getting them to the finish line like no other coach in the history of the game.
When healthy, I think we have the deepest team in the league, with essentially every skill and need covered.
He's going to follow LeBron and likely will end up in Cleveland. You know Phil, he doesn't like a challenge. What would he do with a roster without a player of Jordan & Pippen, Bryant & Oneal's caliber?
Phil didn't do a great job in last year's post-season either. Again we had the same issues at the 1. Except Fisher played at an average level in the Finals (helps that Nelson was injured) and Kobe, Gasol, Odom, Ariza were very hot throughout the post-season. Shannon Brown was feeling it and clearly defending Billups/Deron better. Either Shannon or Farmar was superior against Houston and the quickness of Brooks.
Died or moved to Oregon, pretty much the same thing. I thought he was dead but it must have been the stroke he had last year that I was thinking of.
Phil Jackson is NOT attainable. At least, not by us. The only team I can conceivably see him leaving the Lakers for would be the Bulls if they got Dwayne Wade (or LeBron James...). He'll only coach in a huge market that has the players to compete for a championship. That's all he's ever done - why would he change now? This is posturing to get the Lakers to pay out the big bucks. Surely they've learned from the last time they tried to go without Phil how much he's worth?
Phil wouldn't come here unless Paul Allen paid him 10 times the salary he could get anywhere else. And he's certainly not worth that cost. I'm not a huge fan pf Phil, but I guarantee you he would have benched Rudy long ago if he were coaching this roster in the playoffs. He doesn't suffer crappy European players well.
