Reply With Quote
bull
I am thinking that Phil Jackson > Red Auerbach.
Phil:
Won 9 rings. Have 2 HOF players (yet to go in) at any time. He always completes the job when expected during salary cap era. Phil won 6 rings when NBA was at its peak. Total rings would have been easily 10 (at least) if not for MJs retirement. When MJ was in retirement, he took Pippen-led team to the brink of conference finals or finals. Even if we discount MJs retirement, he would have gotten his 10th ring if Karl Malone is not injured or Kobe passed the ball to Shaq. Even if someone else had coached the teams that PJ coached, I doubt this some one else would have won 9 championships. Let us say, Larry Brown coached Bulls of 90, he would have left the team after his 3rd year and traded Pippen and/or Rodman.
Red:
Won 9 rings. Have as many as 7 HOF players at any time. Well, Red worked from Boston during non-salary cap era. NBA was not at its peak when Red coached.
So my take is PJ > Red.
bull
"Always"? What about 1990, 1994, 1995, 2003?Phil:
Won 9 rings. Have 2 HOF players (yet to go in) at any time. He always completes the job when expected during salary cap era.
Elaborate please. How can you be this certain the NBA was at its peak from 1991-98?Phil won 6 rings when NBA was at its peak.
Wrong. In 1994, the Pippen-led Bulls lost in the second round. In 1995, Phil actually had MJ and they lost in the second round.Total rings would have been easily 10 (at least) if not for MJs retirement. When MJ was in retirement, he took Pippen-led team to the brink of conference finals or finals.
Not a good idea, since MJ had a lot more to do with the championships than Phil did. Though I do think Phil had a lot more influence on the Lakers.Even if we discount MJs retirement,
You're possibly correct about the 2004 Finals, except that 1) coulda, woulda, shoulda and 2) Malone doesn't play perimeter defense. The Laker guards got abused by Detroit's.he would have gotten his 10th ring if Karl Malone is not injured or Kobe passed the ball to Shaq.
There's no way to know this - and it's interesting that you picked Larry Brown, the guy who would leave any job at any time. BTW, if Brown had left after his third year, he couldn't have traded Rodman.Even if someone else had coached the teams that PJ coached, I doubt this some one else would have won 9 championships. Let us say, Larry Brown coached Bulls of 90, he would have left the team after his 3rd year and traded Pippen and/or Rodman.
Unlike Phil, Red put that team together.Red:
Won 9 rings. Have as many as 7 HOF players at any time.
True, but the rules were the same for everyone.Well, Red worked from Boston during non-salary cap era.
I agree, but all of the other coaches during that time were coaching under the same conditions - just as they were in Phil's time.NBA was not at its peak when Red coached.
My take is the opposite.So my take is PJ > Red.
Phil is nowhere near Red. Take MJ out of the equation, and it's only 3 rings for Phil. Phil owes MJ for his HOF induction. Take one HOF player from Red and he'd still have more the Phil.
I agree, Phil > Red.
The era win which Red's Celtics played was ty. All the talent was focused on one team: The Celtics
In the era in which Phil won his 6 rings with the Bulls the talent was more dispersed and harder playing field. All the talent was not centralized leading it to be more compe ive, ulnike the era in which Red coached. I mean seriously anybody on this board could have won 9 rings as the coach of Red Auerbachs' Celtics.
So, E20, it doesn't matter at all that Red Auerbach actually assembled that talent?
Red is waaaaaay better than Phil.
The man won 9 les as a coach with the SAME franchise; it's harder to do it that way
Jackson won 6 with MJ and Scottie, and then joined another franchise led by 2 younger superstars, no difficult transition at this point.
Last edited by lefty; 09-08-2007 at 10:32 PM.
9The man won 10 les as a coach with the SAME franchise; it's harder to do it that way
Oopsy; my mistake
Nope. Red>Phil
Red was light years ahead of the rest of the NBA in that era. He knew how to play it compared to the rest, it also helped that there was no salary cap they could pay the players whatever, and also a gigantic Bill Russel towering over small white defenders.
NBA and it's fans have advanced, any one of us here would be able to coach back in Red's hey day. And if given Red's oppurtunity any one of would be able to lure in talent with the Celtics being such a lucrative team in that era.
That's because everybody else sucked and all the good players were on the same team.
How many teams were in the NBA when Red coached.....
How many Michael Jordan's were in the league when Phil coached?
before Phil got there MJ had 0, Shaq had 0 and Kobe had 0. He almost essentially took the same team left by the previous coach and won consecutive les. How many modern era teams won 3 in a row? He did it thrice.
I'm not sure of the total team count, but if I count right on the teams that played in championship games about the time that the Celts were winning so many championships; there were at least 18 teams. How many beyond that that were not winning championships, I don't know.
Come on...Did anyone expect him to win ring on his 1st year as head coach? and also on 1994 and 1995 when MJ was retirement. In 2003 and 2002 the favorites were Kings. Do not forget about it. Everyone was telling it was Kings year.
When he took both the Bulls job AND the Lakers job, the teams had already been to their respective conference finals, so yes, he was expected to win
Well, we've been trying to tell you it was all about MJ. Thanks for making our point.
In 2003, no one retired. He had a championship team back, basically intact, and didn't defend.
Stupid Thread. And yes, it is necessary to say so. That's how stupid it is!
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
