Reply With Quote
ya this is dumb...every coach has great players!!! riley is at fault cause he had magic and kareem?? rudy t cause he had hakeem?? what about jerry sloan with stockton and malone?? great players make great coaches!!!
Well. this is the offseason, and you can expect many stupid threads, like trade away 6 players and get Kobe (oh, wait, that one has already been done).....
Well anyway, you will hear tirades about how old we have gotten and how we need to dump half the team, and how the FO is stupid and Holt is cheap and it will go on and on until November, and probably past then.
But, you get my drift.
ya this is dumb...every coach has great players!!! riley is at fault cause he had magic and kareem?? rudy t cause he had hakeem?? what about jerry sloan with stockton and malone?? great players make great coaches!!!
Peskys threads should have asterisks by them
Fine. Give me an asterisk. I don't care. , I welcome it. I'll be in great freaking company. Cause haters can find a reason to give an asterisk to EVERY champion if they look hard enough. So bring it on. Give me an asterisk. Let's party!!!
I think Phil thinks that any season when he did not win a le is an * to the other team.
Exactly! He's a bag.
And the same goes for all the haters out there who refuse to give the Spurs credit for what they've accomplished by talking about asterisks. But instead of getting pissed about it, I'm just going to have fun and start handing out my own asterisks, since it seems that's the cool thing to do these days (especially if you're a Mavs fan/Suns fan/media bag/or whatever).
So I guess Larry Brown is the greatest coach of all time because he won his ring without an all time great?
phil jackson was successful with teams that were already built to win before he took over. Doug Collins built the bulls and Del Harris built the lakers.
I don't know about the asterisk but with the fiasco that is the lakers, he hasn't done as the so called zen master and I think it proves that he is really not all that.
USELESS THREAD
Besides this has nothing to do with the Spurs, please take this to the "I'm a hater" forum
Guys the thread starter is right in some good sense.
Phil won't coach teams that are not loaded. That's why he left the Lakers, and then came back. When he came back he must have thought he was a better coach or something but, in 2 seasons he has done such a horrible job with the Lakers and the first team he's ever had that's just average or below it. he left the Bulls cause they were finished. He just got a lucky draw getting good teams and won les, through good coaching and assistants and players. He on the other hand could not find talent to save his life like better coaches can like Pop for one.
The guy is y, but a good coach. Not a great one.
ya but pop wouldnt be a great coach without tim duncan..i mean at least phil jackson created the triangle..pop started 4 down lol
Auerbach built his team. Phil never took a job, until his latest stint with the Lakers, where the team hadn't at least made the Conference Finals. He's good at selecting jobs, but when presented with a normal one star team, he's flamed out, big time.
He's gravy trained FOUR H.O.F. players, in pairs and in their primes, and one brilliant assistant, Tex Winter.
Tex Winter created the triple post offense. Phil just hired him, and borrowed and renamed it.
EXACTLY
asterisks are happy
He's making 10 mil a year and boning Jeannie.
The dudes got the ultimate golden parachute.
Go Phil!
We won't have to worry about the Lakers for the next 3-4 years.
Oh, I'm not saying he ain't living The Life of Riley. He's just not the basketball coach that you might think if you read a lot of media. I'd consider him an average coach who picked great jobs.
He's making 10 mil a year and boning Jeannie.
The dudes got the ultimate golden parachute.
Go Phil!
We won't have to worry about the Lakers for the next 3-4 years.
Excellent basketball analysis. Red Auerbach was a in' hack too.
that's stupid. so is tony parker's career thus far have an asterick because he plays with tim duncan?
I'll bet you wouldn't be saying that if the Spurs had won those 2 years.
Are you people really that dense?
The point here is not that every coach should have an asterisk if they coached good players. That would be re ed. And that's NOT a point you can infer from pesky's original post unless you're being a little . The point of pesky's original post is that Phil Jax had such a ridiculous amount of player talent that even a monkey could have coached some of those teams to the championship. Therefore, he deserved some asterisks. Pop has never had anywhere near the amount of talent on any team that he has ever coached. Sure, he's been in a good situation here with Duncan. But guess what assholes? Neither Duncan NOR Pop would have 4 rings without the other. Therefore, no asterisks are deserved (at least not on that basis).
So everyone shut up with the Duncan/Pop/Tony asterisk . PESKY'S POST IN NO WAY INVOKES ANY ANALOGY TO THE SPURS AND THEIR SITUATION. Please quit acting as if saying "Phil Jackson deserves asterisks" requires one to admit that "Pop deserves asterisks," because it doesn't, and idiots who think that need to go back to school and learn some ing logic.
He still has the rings! Like him or not, he didn't blow the chances given... Special thanks to "Tex" Winter... Nobody did it like "Red" Auerbach baby!!!
Shot at 2007-06-23
The Spurs still have the rings with "1999" stamped on them. The rings alone (in most people's minds) don't remove an asterisk. If your response to the claim that Phil Jackson himself should have an asterisk next to his career is to "look at the rings," then you also have to say that the Spurs' first championship should be asteriskless simply because they won the le. That's kind of an inane response, since you can't claim that winning a le under any cir stance imaginable is still legitimate. What if the Spurs bus had crashed on the way to the Q for game 4, everyone died, the Spurs forfeited games 4-7, and the league gave the le to Cleveland? Do you think that championship wouldn't deserve an asterisk simply because "the Cavs have the rings!" Of course not.
The point is that extenuating cir stances (like a shortened regular season) can affect the reporting of championship history (but not necessarily the legitimacy of the le). I don't think PJax deserves an asterisk because then you'd have to pass one out to Wooden for having the most recruiting power and one to the entire New York Yankees franchise for having the most money. If you start slapping asterisks onto anything that isn't straight up skill and relies on factors extrinsic to the sport itself (like dumb luck for instance), almost everyone would get one. But I still think Phil Jackson is way overrated as a coach and was a lucky mother er, and therefore, that this thread isn't as worthless as everyone is making it out to be.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
