Official NBA Discussion Thread

[GatorBait19]

So we have one for MLB and NFL and with NBA playoffs heating up and the 2010 free agent class coming I though why not

 

Magic and Lakers are looking hot, could we have a rematch?

[BHK1978]

So we have one for MLB and NFL and with NBA playoffs heating up and the 2010 free agent class coming I though why not

 

Magic and Lakers are looking hot, could we have a rematch?

 

All I know is the Celtics looked like jokes on Friday night.

 

I will be happy with anybody winning, as long as it is not the Lakers.

[Tha Black Phenom]

Haha, I always thought of making this thread but always forgot/never was assed to.

 

Man, Kyle Korver was scorching tonight. 23 points, 9-10 FGs, 5-5 behind the line. It's a bummer the Jazz still lost because they deserved this win. Although D-Fish also brought the heat in this one.

[jbergey_2005]

Orlando and Cleveland is going to be a fantastic series. 3 teams(Lakers as well) seem to be at a completely different level than the rest of the teams.

[MattitudeV2]

I could see the Magic burning out in the East Finals.

[BHK1978]

I really have been out of it when it comes to the NBA in recent years. I just can't seem to get behind players like I used to. As weird as this may sound I would much rather watch the players of my youth (Bird, Jordan, Malone, Magic, etc.) than the players of today. There just seems to be something missing, maybe it is the lack of fundmentals at the pro level. I am just not sure.

 

Oh and to Shaq:

 

You might think you are the best Center of all time but I can think of at the very least three that were better (Wilt, Russell, and Kareem)!

 

I see it being Cavs vs. Lakers in the Finals. That is the money series right there.

[jbergey_2005]

I am VERY surprised the Suns are whipping the Spurs. I fully expected the Spurs to win that series. As I say that if there ever was team that could blow a 3-0 series lead it would be the Suns.

 

The overconfident Suns will likely get blown out tomorrow and could easily blow the chance to close out in Phoenix in game 5. Which leaves a game 6 in San Antonio and a game 7 in which I like the Spurs experience in that situation. A lot of "what ifs" but its so hard to jump on the Suns wagon after they have continued to disappoint in the playoffs.

[jbergey_2005]

I really have been out of it when it comes to the NBA in recent years. I just can't seem to get behind players like I used to. As weird as this may sound I would much rather watch the players of my youth (Bird, Jordan, Malone, Magic, etc.) than the players of today. There just seems to be something missing, maybe it is the lack of fundmentals at the pro level. I am just not sure.

 

Oh and to Shaq:

 

You might think you are the best Center of all time but I can think of at the very least three that were better (Wilt, Russell, and Kareem)!

 

I see it being Cavs vs. Lakers in the Finals. That is the money series right there.

 

Id agree with all of this. I think the NBA is ready for 11 foot rims and we would see more basketball players again instead of athletes that are too gifted for 10 foot rims.

[Hyde Hill]

I really have been out of it when it comes to the NBA in recent years. I just can't seem to get behind players like I used to. As weird as this may sound I would much rather watch the players of my youth (Bird, Jordan, Malone, Magic, etc.) than the players of today. There just seems to be something missing, maybe it is the lack of fundmentals at the pro level. I am just not sure.

 

Oh and to Shaq:

 

You might think you are the best Center of all time but I can think of at the very least three that were better (Wilt, Russell, and Kareem)!

 

I see it being Cavs vs. Lakers in the Finals. That is the money series right there.

 

Yeah same here BHK the early to mid 90's where a great time imho and basketball was hot. Nowadays not so much.

[BHK1978]

I think to a certain extent, the modern NBA is more about the individual players and not the team. The players seem to want to make the dazzling dunks that can get them on ESPN.

 

That is why I loved the championship Spurs teams because to me (and I must stress this is just my opinion) they played more like a team. Instead of two superstars and a bunch of background players.

 

Oh and if I never have to hear Mark Jackson and Jeff Van Gundy call another game, I will be as happy as a pig in...well you know!

[lazorbeak]

Team basketball is still what wins championships. It's the reason Phil Jackson is the single greatest coach in the history of the NBA. Sure, he has Kobe, but what did Kobe do in the time without Phil? Score 35 points a game and not get out of the first round of the playoffs? I can't get over the fact that Jackson only won coach of the year once. I'm sure he doesn't care with his ten championships and all. He's seriously over .500 in seasons he coaches in when it comes to winning the title. In a league with 29 other teams. I just don't see anybody beating the Lakers. They've got late-game poise with Fish and Kobe, a great unselfish big man in Gasol, , a great defender in Artest, young athletes like Shannon Brown and Bynum, and about four guys whose job is to shoot when they're left unguarded. They have a great, battle-tested roster and the impetus is on the rest of the league to show that they can be beaten.

 

Despite Orlando's hot start, I still don't believe in VC. The guy is not a warrior. How long before we see him on the bench with a towel covering his head? The inside-out offense only works when teams need to double team Dwight constantly and the Cavs won't do that with their bigs. Neither will the Lakers, if the Magic get that far.

 

Speaking as a Spurs fan I don't see the Suns losing: they've finally learned how to play playoff basketball and they have a lot more toughness than the Suns teams from a few years ago. I just don't think the Spurs have the wheels to make a run after last night's collapse. Ginobli and Duncan are both on the downswing and Parker's been hurt.

 

And while I like the Cavs, I don't like some of the Cavs' roster moves. I'm a big fan of hustle role players like Varejao and Delonte West, but do people really think an under-sized forward like Antwan Jamison or a 38 year old Shaquille O'Neal make them a better team? I know they're desperate to win but you don't win by signing high-profile scorers or hall of fame centers who can only give you 20 minutes a night. A big, athletic, defensive-minded forward/center (think Kendrick Perkins) and an athletic swing man who hustles and plays defense (Ronnie Brewer) would be the sort of puzzle pieces that would turn the Cavs into champions for years to come. Instead, if they don't win it this year, they're left with a worst-case scenario where LeBron leaves and the team goes back into obscurity. Best case, they're left trying to stay under the luxury tax as they pay for a bunch of aging former stars.

[BHK1978]

I am sorry but Phil Jackson is not the greatest Coach of all time. I have already gotten into this debate on here and it went on forever. Let me just say that it was the players along with Phil's coaching that got him the Championships.

[Candyman]

I am sorry but Phil Jackson is not the greatest Coach of all time. I have already gotten into this debate on here and it went on forever. Let me just say that it was the players along with Phil's coaching that got him the Championships.

 

Sorry, that argument isn't valid. I haven't seen the other debates, so I don't know who you think is better, but let's just go down the list...Red Auerbach? Please. He had KC Jones, Bob Cousy (two Hall of Famers), and oh yeah some guy named Russell. He had BETTER PLAYERS than Jackson, and his team won two titles AFTER HE LEFT...something none of Jackson's teams have come close to doing. So I KNOW you're not going to say Auerbach was in Jackson's league, if you use the "he had good players" logic. Pat Riley? James Worthy, Kareem, that Magic guy...obviously he's not in the discussion, if you can't be a great coach and have good players.

 

Chuck Daly? Dumars, Isiah, and a fifth of the rings. Greg Popovich had Tim Duncan and David Robinson, then Duncan and Parker/Ginobili, not to mention the weakest field of NBA teams the sport has ever seen. Who else is there? Jerry Sloan? He had Malone and Stockton and no rings.

 

I don't know who else you can even make an argument for. Larry Brown? Lenny Wilkens? Decent coaches...clearly not in the class of the ones I already mentioned. You can argue that Phil Jackson isn't the best coach of all time...but you're going to have to do a lot better than "he had great players" because all great coaches did. If that's your argument, you're left claiming Don Nelson is the best coach of all time lol.

[jbergey_2005]

A coach is only as good as the players around him. If you had Phil coach them Celtic teams of the 60's and 70's and Red coach the Bulls of the 90's and early 00's the results probably would have been the same.

 

Its hard to argue against Phil IMO as all he has done is win. Im not very familiar with Reds coaching but I do think it has been impressive how Phil can keep these great teams motivated. Micheal Jordan won 0 championships without Phil coaching.

[lazorbeak]

I am sorry but Phil Jackson is not the greatest Coach of all time. I have already gotten into this debate on here and it went on forever. Let me just say that it was the players along with Phil's coaching that got him the Championships.

 

Yeah no. Factually he IS the greatest coach of all time. The numbers say this pretty definitively. He has coached the team with the best record in NBA history and has the highest playoff winning percentage ever. He's coached teams to the finals 12 times in 18 seasons and won 10 championships. And he did it after free agency and the expansion of the league. Red coached teams with 9 hall of fame players in a league that expanded to ten his final year. Quick, name 9 HOF players Phil has coached: Kobe, MJ, Shaq, Pippen, um... Horace Grant? John Paxson? Derek Fisher? But he is pretty much the greatest coach at building a roster that compliments his stars and developing team chemistry. Seriously, # of rings won by Kobe, MJ, Shaq and Pippen without Jackson? 1, Shaq's ring in Miami.

 

The numbers just aren't there for any other coach in the history of the league.

[Tha Black Phenom]

Agreed, you could make that case for most coaches who won a title, some of them may have damn well rode their victory on their players' coattails. But Phil is a whole nother thing, IMO.

 

72-10... Michael Jordan, nor the Bulls definitely didn't pull that one off on their own.

[jbergey_2005]

Its easy to say Pau Gasol and Scottie Pippen are great players now but before Phil coached them they were struggling players with untapped potential. Some of the points that were made above about teams not playing team basketball is exactly what makes Phil so successful. He finds roles for guys like Trevor Ariza and tones down Kobe Bryant and Michael Jordan so they are not the only reliable source of points throughout the game.

[maskedpropaganda]

Alright Green... lets tie this up before we go back to Colinwood and King James puts a stake in our old injury riddled hearts.

 

I am surprised the Hawks haven't given Orlando a better fight. I was looking forward to that series. I guess I gave Hotlanta too much credit.

 

Not a Spurs fan and I like the Suns but I hate the Lakers and I think San An would give L.A. a much better fight then Los Suns will.

 

I guess it is gonna finally be the Kobe/Lebron showdown everyone wants to see!!!... Cept me think I will go catch up on my Dexter or something.

[lazorbeak]

Seriously the year before Phil took over in Chicago Jordan averaged over 32 points, 8 rebounds, and 8 assists a game along with almost 3 steals a game all while shooting over 50% from the field... and the Bulls still failed to reach the finals. For comparison, that's more rebounds and more steals per game than LeBron has ever averaged for a season, and LeBron has only put up that number of assists once and has only shot 50% for a season this past year and has never averaged more than 31 points per game for a season. Jordan was probably the most dominant guard in the history of the league already and had never won a title before Jackson and the triangle offense hid the team's weakness (lacking a true point guard) and played to the team's strengths. Everyone had a defined role: Pippen guarded the other team's best scorer and ran the point, Cartwright banged bodies with Patrick Ewing and other 7 footers, Horace Grant played the high post and picked up the boards, and Paxon and BJ Armstrong fired up 3's. Jordan's individual numbers dropped to a meager 6 rebounds, 5.5 assists, and 2.72 steals along with 31.5 points per game, but as soon as he had to stop doing everything the team started winning championships.

[BHK1978]

I will give you guys something; Phil is the greatest opportunist of all time due to his time with the Lakers. Now he inherited the Bulls job, so I can’t say that he took them over because he knew that they were going to win. However, they were poised for greatness and it could be looked at being in the right spot at the right time (see Joe Torre when he took over the Yankees in 1996).

 

If Phil Jackson’s coaching prowess alone was the reason for his “talent less” teams winning, then how come the same basic Bulls teams could not win a championship without Jordan. I mean if Phil Jackson is a genius who can motivate talent less players and who can make something out of nothing, why is it that for the two years that Michael decided to go and play AA Baseball, Phil was not racking up championships four and five.

 

Now the reasons why the Bulls team did not win a championship after he left was because, Jerry Krause destroyed that team. And began a rebuilding process that is still going on today. But yeah Phil could have probably turned a team with Toni Kukoč, Dickey Simpkins, and Brent Barry on it into championship team number seven.

 

Next up is his post-Bulls championships, why did Phil go to the Lakers and not a team like the Warriors, Bullets, or Clippers. Would that not test him? Well yes and that is probably the reason why he went to the Lakers. Because Phil didn’t want to be tested, he wanted to go to the team that had the greatest chance of winning a championship.

 

I mean granted he must have had a tough time coaching talent less hacks like Kobe, Shaq, Robert Horry, Ron Harper, Rick Fox and Derek Fisher. Oh the humanity! How could someone possibly be expected to win with a team like that?

 

And yeah Phil never had a stacked team like Red did with the minimum of two future Hall of Fame players and one who is already in there. Oh wait he did! The 2003-2004 team had Karl Malone, Shaq, and Kobe on the same team. Along with The Glove, Derek Fisher, Horace Grant, and Rick Fox and they still managed to lose to the Pistons who were nowhere near as talented as that Lakers team was.

 

When the team loses what did Phil do? Oh yeah he cut and ran, why should he have to go through trying to rebuild a championship team. Let Rudy T. hold the bag until the team starts to go on the upswing again. That is when you come back because, well because you have a good chance of winning again.

 

To me a hallmark of a good coach is someone who can get something out of nothing. Tom Kelly in baseball was the perfect example of this. He always managed to win without having the best talent around him. It is easy to win championships when you have great players (Jordan, Shaq, Kobe, Karl Malone, etc.) and great role players (Harper, Grant, Fisher, and to an extent Rodman) around you.

 

However, it is a lot harder to win when you do not have the talent to succeed. Look at Lenny Wilkens, what talent did he have when he coached his team to a championship? DJ and Jack Sikma and that is about it, so Lenny managed to with a championship with basically nothing. Could Phil ever boast that he took a team with hardly any talent on it and brought it to greatness?

[Tha Black Phenom]

Next up is his post-Bulls championships, why did Phil go to the Lakers and not a team like the Warriors, Bullets, or Clippers. Would that not test him? Well yes and that is probably the reason why he went to the Lakers. Because Phil didn’t want to be tested, he wanted to go to the team that had the greatest chance of winning a championship.

 

Who cares about being tested? Any coach in the world that is confident or successful, and has a chance of sniping up the Lakers would do it, in a heartbeat. Jackson just took that opportunity and ran with it.

 

I mean granted he must have had a tough time coaching talent less hacks like Kobe, Shaq, Robert Horry, Ron Harper, Rick Fox and Derek Fisher. Oh the humanity! How could someone possibly be expected to win with a team like that?

 

You do know Jackson had HUGE issues with Bryant, right? Surely you must've heard of the constant clashing between them, to a point where Phil even requested Bryant be traded off the team.

 

When Jackson left instead, everyone pointed the finger at Bryant. Including O'Neal which I think led him to being traded off the team.

 

Not only that, but Bryant and O'Neal were butting heads too back in the day and Jackson had to deal with that as well. It's not as simple as you make it seem.

 

And yeah Phil never had a stacked team like Red did with the minimum of two future Hall of Fame players and one who is already in there. Oh wait he did! The 2003-2004 team had Karl Malone, Shaq, and Kobe on the same team. Along with The Glove, Derek Fisher, Horace Grant, and Rick Fox and they still managed to lose to the Pistons who were nowhere near as talented as that Lakers team was.

 

The above tells you why.

 

When the team loses what did Phil do? Oh yeah he cut and ran, why should he have to go through trying to rebuild a championship team.

 

Yet he did.

 

To me a hallmark of a good coach is someone who can get something out of nothing. Tom Kelly in baseball was the perfect example of this. He always managed to win without having the best talent around him. It is easy to win championships when you have great players (Jordan, Shaq, Kobe, Karl Malone, etc.) and great role players (Harper, Grant, Fisher, and to an extent Rodman) around you.

 

It's not easy, it's rather what you need. You're basically describing a well-rounded team that contributes from all sides, which is what is needed to win a championship. The fact that Jackson had Jordan and Kobe in his pocket doesn't mean the world. When Jackson came back in 2005, he had to rebuild the team from almost nothing. Yeah, Kobe was there but aside from him next to nothing was working. Odom and Fisher did their stuff but it didn't go far. Even with the contribution of Gasol later on, they didn't get the job done yet. He took a team that missed the playoffs for the first time in 11 years and tried to bring them back to where they were.

 

However, it is a lot harder to win when you do not have the talent to succeed. Look at Lenny Wilkens, what talent did he have when he coached his team to a championship? DJ and Jack Sikma and that is about it, so Lenny managed to with a championship with basically nothing. Could Phil ever boast that he took a team with hardly any talent on it and brought it to greatness?

 

Maybe not. But why would he need to? He got the rings and that's all he needs. He utilized the talent well and profited from it. I could bet my house if Kobe(and let's even throw Bynum/Artest in there) were coached under any of.. most of the coaches in NBA right now, they wouldn't get as far as the semi-finals. It's one thing to have prodigies, it's another thing to know how to use em.

[GatorBait19]

Playoff equal one thing for pot. free agents

 

More money

 

Someone like Kyle Krover is playing his butt off and adding millions to his next contract he's gonna get

 

Someone like Joe Johnson or J. O'Neal (who wasnt gonna get a huge contract anyways) are losing millions with poor play

[lazorbeak]

This Rondo fellow is pretty good. 18 rebounds, 29 points and 13 assists? Wow.

 

As far as the Phil Jackson thing goes, like I said, the numbers are there, Jackson is the best ever.

 

If Phil Jackson’s coaching prowess alone was the reason for his “talent less” teams winning, then how come the same basic Bulls teams could not win a championship without Jordan. I mean if Phil Jackson is a genius who can motivate talent less players and who can make something out of nothing, why is it that for the two years that Michael decided to go and play AA Baseball, Phil was not racking up championships four and five.

 

Because a team is composed of roles, and Jordan's role, as primary scorer and perimeter help defender wasn't something that one guy could easily step in and replace? And that Bulls team the first year without Jordan still won 55 games and pushed the Knicks in the semi-finals. Compare that to say, the Spurs team that went from 59 wins to 20 wins without David Robinson. Another of Jackson's accomplishments is he's never coached a team that failed to make the playoffs, even those pretty bad Lakers squads that featured Kobe, an injury-prone Odom, and, um... Smush Parker? Devean George? Brian Cook? Remember, Fisher wasn't even on these teams, as he didn't go back to LA until he thought it meant more rings for him. Before that he was playing off-guard in Utah for the Jazz team that lost to the Mavs in the conference finals.

 

Next up is his post-Bulls championships, why did Phil go to the Lakers and not a team like the Warriors, Bullets, or Clippers. Would that not test him? Well yes and that is probably the reason why he went to the Lakers. Because Phil didn’t want to be tested, he wanted to go to the team that had the greatest chance of winning a championship.

 

He had retired from coaching and was for all intents and purposes done. Why would he go back to a head coaching job with the Wizards or Clippers? He didn't have anything to prove to anybody. Those teams didn't have the money or the system to lure him back into the game. Also Kobe and Shaq had been teammates for 3 seasons and had combined for zero championships.

 

I mean granted he must have had a tough time coaching talent less hacks like Kobe, Shaq, Robert Horry, Ron Harper, Rick Fox and Derek Fisher. Oh the humanity! How could someone possibly be expected to win with a team like that?

 

That's one of the other reasons Phil is so great: Fox, Horry, Harper, Fox, and Fish were nothing special at all. But by giving them specific roles and getting them to lock down on defense, you can roll your eyes and act like it was easy to win with them. Look at how overpaid guys leaving LA have been since Jackson took over or how guys like Jud Buechler, Scottie Pippen and the rest of the Bulls were overpaid once they were out of Chicago. The Rockets picked up Pippen and we got a guy that took too many 3-point shots and couldn't work as a traditional forward.

 

And yeah Phil never had a stacked team like Red did with the minimum of two future Hall of Fame players and one who is already in there. Oh wait he did! The 2003-2004 team had Karl Malone, Shaq, and Kobe on the same team. Along with The Glove, Derek Fisher, Horace Grant, and Rick Fox and they still managed to lose to the Pistons who were nowhere near as talented as that Lakers team was.

 

Again, Red had NINE HOF players vs 4. As far as the collapse in '04, it was a prime case of how talent DOES NOT win championships. Horace Grant wasn't on the team, and neither was Horry (who was busy winning with the Spurs). Malone and Shaq stepped on each other's toes in the low block, and Payton was a poor spot-up shooter who wasn't used to not directing an offense.

 

When the team loses what did Phil do? Oh yeah he cut and ran, why should he have to go through trying to rebuild a championship team. Let Rudy T. hold the bag until the team starts to go on the upswing again. That is when you come back because, well because you have a good chance of winning again.

 

Yes, because Phil didn't leave the team because of Kobe Bryant's ego, but because he had some devious master plan to come back and win championships once Bryant had realized he couldn't win on his own. How very devious of him!

 

It is easy to win championships when you have great players (Jordan, Shaq, Kobe, Karl Malone, etc.) and great role players (Harper, Grant, Fisher, and to an extent Rodman) around you.

 

If it easy then why can no one in the history of the sport compare to what Jackson's done? Why couldn't Rodman win on a Spurs team that featured David Robinson and Sean Eliott? Why can't the Mavs win with a team that's full of talented players every season? Why did a Blazers team that featured a great frontcourt of Sabonis, Briant Grant and Rasheed Wallace fail to even make it to a finals, even when they added pieces like Steve Smith and Scottie Pippen? Why couldn't the Kings, with Webber, Divac, Bibby, Christie, and Peja Stokavic and great role players like Turkoglu and Bobby Jackson win a title?

 

The argument that Jackson just had good players doesn't hold water since 1) the same players haven't shown an ability to win without him, and 2) hugely talented teams fail to win the championship every year. How many rings does Lebron have, despite being surrounded with a very good point guard, excellent role players, and a hall of fame center? Why haven't the Suns even made it to the finals with their talent?

[Astil]

If not Jackson then who BHK?

[jbergey_2005]

 

To me a hallmark of a good coach is someone who can get something out of nothing. Tom Kelly in baseball was the perfect example of this. He always managed to win without having the best talent around him. It is easy to win championships when you have great players (Jordan, Shaq, Kobe, Karl Malone, etc.) and great role players (Harper, Grant, Fisher, and to an extent Rodman) around you.

 

 

Im glad you brought up TK as Im a big Twins fan I he was a great manager. The problem with it is that he really didnt do squat without great players. They were on the bottom half of the AL Central his last 5-6 years as a manager. When they won the two world series rings they had a lot of talent. Kirby Puckett, Kent Hrbek, Chuck Knoblauch, Frank Viola, Bert Blyleven, Scott Erickson, Chili Davis.

 

I guess I wouldnt say they had incredible talent but they did have a Hall of Fame player and lots of good pieces to the puzzle. TK did a fine job of blending them teams together. Once he lost his talent they struggled with 70-80 wins every year.