Ailene Voisin: We haven't had our Phil of this coach

LMM

Starter
Ailene Voisin: We haven't had our Phil of this coach



By Ailene Voisin -- Bee Columnist
Published 2:15 am PST Friday, November 12, 2004


One of my major issues with the NBA these days is that too many of its players and coaches conform to the buttoned-down, do-the-hustle, on-the-cell phone corporate mentality.



The game needs characters.

OAS_AD('Button20');The game needs more loose lips.

But the good news for those who appreciate the offbeat elements in professional sports, including the occasional musings of one celebrated aging hippie, is that Phil Jackson is only on sabbatical.

When the right opportunity presents itself, Our Friend Phil will climb down from his Montana mountaintop, return to the sidelines and resume his entertaining rants on semi-civilization and assorted topics.

Meantime, the former Lakers coach has left his fans/critics with "The Last Season," a 272-page journal that offers an intriguing, sometimes fascinating account of his final turbulent year in Los Angeles.

If not exactly a basketball "War and Peace" classic - the coach tends to ramble self-indulgently - Jackson's effort nonetheless ranks up there at No. 5 on the Wall Street Journal best-seller list, just a few spots below "He's Just Not Into You" (no, not Kobe Bryant's response), because of his characteristic candor about all that transpired inside the untidy confines of the locker room.

The anecdotes are interesting, particularly those pertaining to Kobe's legal ordeal, Jackson's unconventional and not always successful coping methods, and the astonishing pettiness of the Shaq-Kobe feud, including the childish tale of the tape: Sensing that longtime trainer Gary Vitti was aligned with Kobe, Shaq would only allow the team's other trainer, Chip Schaefer, to perform the honors before practices and games. Kobe consequently spurned Schaefer, whom he perceived as closer to Shaq and Jackson. (And you thought the Kings had locker-room issues?)

But Jackson also saves plenty of energy and space for the Kings, just can't resist tweaking them a final time. He chides his old rivals for their repeated playoff failings, scolds Mike Bibby for boisterously celebrating a regular-season victory and offers an unflattering comparison between Kobe and Chris Webber, whom he says, "tends to hold onto the ball longer than necessary, causing the offense to stagnate."

Asked about his parting shots during a 45-minute telephone conversation Wednesday, Jackson laughed.

"Sacramento is one of my favorite cities," he said. "It's a great place to be centered in. And the Maloofs do a great job in a booming, growing community. Seriously, that (Kings-Lakers) rivalry was as good as any I've participated in. It was as tight as New York-Chicago or Boston-New York, only like two cousins fighting it out in the same state.

"(The conference finals) in 2002 is maybe the best seven-game series I've ever seen. Those last three games ... I think they had the best talent, but I thought we were going to win."

While Jackson can be as self-absorbed as any of his players, at times every bit a control freak, he invariably returns to his roots and has something insightful, often provocative to say. This was always his charm. He never stopped pondering how to improve the game, or as some would say, restore a more free-flowing style. And in contrast to most NBA coaches who struggle to communicate with their increasingly youthful players, Jackson acknowledges and aggressively addresses the psychological and sociological influences on team dynamics and relationships.

In his book, he reveals that he, too, sought counseling during his "psychological war" with the willful Bryant and says he remains mystified why few organizations retain therapists.

"Men have a difficult time with this," he said, "but the NBA has to get over it. Teams pay hundreds of thousands of dollars to specialists who train our muscles, yet are not willing to spend a dime on people who can assist those of us in the unique world of sports."

As for his relationship with Jeanie Buss and the perils of pursuing pleasure in the workplace? His final meeting with Lakers owner Jerry Buss? His degree of surprise upon learning Kobe had been charged with rape? His often-heated, in solicited, debates with trusted assistant Tex Winter. His battles with Shaq, who resisted almost always, only to relent?

Read on. And for those who have complained that he breached the sanctity of the locker room, Jackson provides his own perspective.

"It's not the Oval Office," he replies. "I knew it was going to have repercussions, and while I didn't want this to be a tell-all book, there has to be some intrigue in there. I wanted to show what goes on inside a team and how things have to be dealt with. I think this has some value for conflict resolution." The sequel awaits. The man clearly has more chapters to write and more games to coach. The only questions are when and where.
 
The thought of Phil Jackson as the next coach of the Kings is mind-boggling. I might never watch another Kings game should it happen. I suppose it would dovetail nicley with the Kings moving to Las Vegas.
 
quick dog said:
The thought of Phil Jackson as the next coach of the Kings is mind-boggling. I might never watch another Kings game should it happen. I suppose it would dovetail nicley with the Kings moving to Las Vegas.
It it meant winning - I could not care less.

Do I like and respect P. J. - HELL NO.
Do I want to see Kings win - YES PLEASE.
 
If Phil ever comes back and actually coaches a team to a championship, instead of riding on the coattails of his superstars, then he'll impress me. I don't think he'd ever be willing to coach the Kings with their current makeup. Too much team game involved.
 
Not to mention if we end up winning a championship with him, everyone would say we couldn't do it without Phil. He's the Zen master. No thanks
 
piksi said:
It it meant winning - I could not care less.

Do I like and respect P. J. - HELL NO.
Do I want to see Kings win - YES PLEASE.
No. Not even then.

Winning isn't everything. Far more honor is losing with your integrity intact then selling out to win.

It's be like deciding to become a communist country in order to win the Cold War.
 
KingKong said:
Not to mention if we end up winning a championship with him, everyone would say we couldn't do it without Phil. He's the Zen master. No thanks
Would you rather win it with him, or not win it at all?
 
Ofcourse I would rather win with him than not at all. But I still wouldn't like guy. But I would prefer to win it with our current coach.
 
Bricklayer said:
No. Not even then.

Winning isn't everything. Far more honor is losing with your integrity intact then selling out to win.

It's be like deciding to become a communist country in order to win the Cold War.
Explain to me how it could be considered "selling out" to have Phil Jackson coach our team. I would rather have Phil coach the team then Adelman.
 
I only read the title.

Phil Jackson for Kings' coach? She has no taste.
 
#1sacfan said:
Explain to me how it could be considered "selling out" to have Phil Jackson coach our team. I would rather have Phil coach the team then Adelman.
First of all, your personal preference in coaches doesn't have anything to do with what you asked Bricklayer. It's all fine and dandy that you think Jackson is a better coach than Adelman. So you'd rather have Phil Jackson coach the team; good for you. But that doesn't mean that it's not selling out.

Imagine, for a moment, that you're still in grammar school. At recess, a bully beats you up. And then, he laughs at you and makes fun of you in front of the whole school. You go to school tomorrow, and the same thing happens again. And again... and again. The bully continues not only to beat you up, but also continues to publically humiliate you. This goes on for years; quite naturally, you grow to hate him. Now the bully is a grade ahead of you, so he eventually goes to middle school, but you still continue to get beat up (who knows why; maybe other kids just see you as an easy target). And then, one day the bully comes back to your school and says that he can promise that you wont get beat up any more, and all you have to do is join his gang. But he isn't contrite about beating you up, or for humiliating you all those years; he just wants you to join him for the satisfaction of knowing that you had to kiss his *** to stop being beaten up.

At this point, you have a decision to make: do you compromise your integrity to side with the bully, the very same person who beat and humiliated you for years, or do you try to find some other means to stop getting beaten up? Well, if you chose the first solution, then you're the Sacramento Kings and you just hired Phil Jackson to become your head coach; you've decided that you can't beat him, so you might as well join him.

There's a word that describes this phenomena. And the word is "sellout."

Any person who has any self-respect tells the bully to go shove it; maybe you'll figure out a way to get by on your own. And maybe you'll have to get help from somebody else. But, for pete's sake, you don't accept help from him. Never from him.

Phil Jackson is that bully. And if he ever comes calling on the Maloof brothers, I certainly hope that they have the integrity between them to tell him to go shove it.
 
To Mr. Slim Citrus,

You, sir, are wonderful!!! :)

Marvelous analogy................simply marvelous!


Oh, and BTW - I could not agree more. Tell Phil to shove it. I would accept being a cellar dwellar forever, and be happy with my personal integrity intact, than ever ever sell out to Phil Jackson. He made it clear that he thinks we are beneath him. Winning an NBA championship is NOT everything. Looking at yourself in the mirror and being proud and happy with who you are is everything.
 
I am not sure if thats an appropriate anology but i guess i get the point. Now when you refer to "YOU" is that the team or the fans. I suppose the fans will be the right way to look at it.

For the fans they were getting beat up for a long long time, there were different bullies, different beatings but the end result was the same 25 to 30 win seasons. The only different thing that this bully did was to call you out in public.

If the fans want to take out that aspect and say that they dont want him because he said something, then the real question is what do you want to see out of this team. I have seen similar posts about players from the lakers too, saying that they wouldnt want shaq or kobe on the team cos they were the bully. But you started taking note of the bullies only when you were close enough to the current bully which is the lakers. What about the teams that beat you up night after night, you were fine taking players from them, coaches from them and what not.

imo i dont think its the bully that matters, its more about the way you started thinking about yourself recently where you think you can measure upto the bully that you want to show to the others that you can do it without him.

Didnt the pacers own the kings when miller was on their team, we welcomed him here ;)
 
KingKong said:
When was that exactly??? I don't remember the Pacers ever owning the Kings
More importantly the point was never being beat. Being beat is irrelevant. its a sporting contest, somebody ALWAYS wins and somebody ALWAYS loses.

Having it happen repeatedly and then making it personal is something else entirely.

P.S. BTW, as an aside it must really pique a certain breed of Laker fan that PJ calls Sac/L.A. a great rivalry. :)
 
Mr. S£im Citrus said:
First of all, your personal preference in coaches doesn't have anything to do with what you asked Bricklayer. It's all fine and dandy that you think Jackson is a better coach than Adelman. So you'd rather have Phil Jackson coach the team; good for you. But that doesn't mean that it's not selling out.

Imagine, for a moment, that you're still in grammar school. At recess, a bully beats you up. And then, he laughs at you and makes fun of you in front of the whole school. You go to school tomorrow, and the same thing happens again. And again... and again. The bully continues not only to beat you up, but also continues to publically humiliate you. This goes on for years; quite naturally, you grow to hate him. Now the bully is a grade ahead of you, so he eventually goes to middle school, but you still continue to get beat up (who knows why; maybe other kids just see you as an easy target). And then, one day the bully comes back to your school and says that he can promise that you wont get beat up any more, and all you have to do is join his gang. But he isn't contrite about beating you up, or for humiliating you all those years; he just wants you to join him for the satisfaction of knowing that you had to kiss his *** to stop being beaten up.

At this point, you have a decision to make: do you compromise your integrity to side with the bully, the very same person who beat and humiliated you for years, or do you try to find some other means to stop getting beaten up? Well, if you chose the first solution, then you're the Sacramento Kings and you just hired Phil Jackson to become your head coach; you've decided that you can't beat him, so you might as well join him.

There's a word that describes this phenomena. And the word is "sellout."

Any person who has any self-respect tells the bully to go shove it; maybe you'll figure out a way to get by on your own. And maybe you'll have to get help from somebody else. But, for pete's sake, you don't accept help from him. Never from him.

Phil Jackson is that bully. And if he ever comes calling on the Maloof brothers, I certainly hope that they have the integrity between them to tell him to go shove it.
Good post, only that the Kings are a business and you have to do whats best for the business. Standing up to a bully is something a youngster does to help themselves become a man in life. Not hiring a coach because he has beat you in a playoff series with an opposing team is short-sightedness and to a point moranic. Yes he has made some comments about Sacramento in the past but it was more of his attempt to draw to himself, not to rip on Sac (Remember the guys spends his time in Wyoming).

The real analogy here is if Fidel Castro had important information that could help lead to the capture of Osama Bin Laden would the U.S. pay for the information or say take it easy on Cuba to bring Bin Laden to justice. For them to say no because of integrity is stupid because it comprimises America's security just like not going after a good coach comprimises the Kings chances of winning a champioship. That being said this comparison no longer applies since the Kings have no chance of winning a championship now even with Phil coaching.
 
Mr. S£im Citrus said:
First of all, your personal preference in coaches doesn't have anything to do with what you asked Bricklayer. It's all fine and dandy that you think Jackson is a better coach than Adelman. So you'd rather have Phil Jackson coach the team; good for you. But that doesn't mean that it's not selling out.

Imagine, for a moment, that you're still in grammar school. At recess, a bully beats you up. And then, he laughs at you and makes fun of you in front of the whole school. You go to school tomorrow, and the same thing happens again. And again... and again. The bully continues not only to beat you up, but also continues to publically humiliate you. This goes on for years; quite naturally, you grow to hate him. Now the bully is a grade ahead of you, so he eventually goes to middle school, but you still continue to get beat up (who knows why; maybe other kids just see you as an easy target). And then, one day the bully comes back to your school and says that he can promise that you wont get beat up any more, and all you have to do is join his gang. But he isn't contrite about beating you up, or for humiliating you all those years; he just wants you to join him for the satisfaction of knowing that you had to kiss his *** to stop being beaten up.

At this point, you have a decision to make: do you compromise your integrity to side with the bully, the very same person who beat and humiliated you for years, or do you try to find some other means to stop getting beaten up? Well, if you chose the first solution, then you're the Sacramento Kings and you just hired Phil Jackson to become your head coach; you've decided that you can't beat him, so you might as well join him.

There's a word that describes this phenomena. And the word is "sellout."

Any person who has any self-respect tells the bully to go shove it; maybe you'll figure out a way to get by on your own. And maybe you'll have to get help from somebody else. But, for pete's sake, you don't accept help from him. Never from him.

Phil Jackson is that bully. And if he ever comes calling on the Maloof brothers, I certainly hope that they have the integrity between them to tell him to go shove it.
That's the example that you and I worked on together, huh Slim?

;)

Good work. Couldn't have said it better myself, and even if I could have, I don't need to.

In short: Word!
 
#1sacfan said:
The real analogy here is if Fidel Castro had important information that could help lead to the capture of Osama Bin Laden would the U.S. pay for the information or say take it easy on Cuba to bring Bin Laden to justice. For them to say no because of integrity is stupid because it comprimises America's security just like not going after a good coach comprimises the Kings chances of winning a champioship. That being said this comparison no longer applies since the Kings have no chance of winning a championship now even with Phil coaching.
Good point, but you have to remember that the majority of the US population still thinks that saddam was more a reason for terrorism ;)

It is done consistently by all governments, todays enemy is tomorrows friend and you have to prepare the public to accept that, we will have to wait and see if the maloofs do that if at all they try to get phil. They can start with articles in the local papers talking about how good he is and how high regards he has for the team and all that, probably more time for those wounds to heal and things will be allright.
 
The Kings do not have what it takes to bring Phil Jackson to town. They do not have what most people would call a bona fide "superstar" like Michael Jordan or Shaquille O'Neal on their roster and I firmly believe PJ's contract requires at least one of said superstars to be under contract before he'll even think about coaching a team...

Slim in the Army? sloter, dude - you really need to pay better attention.

;)
 
Guess we all know why Aileen has been so kind lately ... she wants Phil! :p

Regarding rivalry between Kings and Lakers, how could any NBA fan believe there is (or was) no rivalry? Clearly, Lakers have something Kings don't, lots of championships. The rivalry exists because Kings strongly challenged for one of those coveted championships, and I'm damn proud of it.

Anyway, no one hates the Lakers more than I. BUT, they are our proverbial "bully" because they [were] stronger. Bullying by the stronger is actually just displaced power that simply encourages rivalry. Kings need the power of the "win" to generate their own rivalries with class.

Phil Jackson is not above playing a rivalry to his advantage, the man didn't earn, what is it, 9 championship rings? if he weren't shrewd.

Is it realistic to believe PJ would or could successfully take Kings to a championship? I dunno. But I definitely wouldn't discount it simply because I hate the Lakers.

Just my .02.
 
the zen master in sac?? *BARF*

i'd get sick of hearing "oh the kings couldn't win without the genius of phil jackson" OH THE PAIN!!!!!!

i'd actually like to see the zen master go to a team like the knicks ( as the rumors say he might) let's see how he does without a future hall of famer or 2 on his team.
 
I glad you guys are opposed to it and I would be more glad if the Maloofs are opposed to it because Jackson can definitely lead the Kings to the promised land.
 
(And you thought the Kings had locker-room issues?)

No, b***h (and I use that as a term of endearment) it was just you. :)

As far as Phil, I hated his Lakers, but it was his job to beat us, so I don't hold that against him. I found his comments about us or our players more amusing than insulting. I never took them personally; I just laughed at them and smiled. I took pleasure in being one of the few teams that routinely got under Phil's skin enough for him to make such comments.

Now, do I want him as coach? NO! I tried to pinpoint why not, but I keep coming back to just a simple no.
 
Back
Top