Phil Jackson the Problem?

[Bricklayer]

Lakers fans have been chirping about this for a while -- but we've all seen the "turn on the winning coach' thing up close and personal around these parts, and it was easy to ignore as just over emotional fan chatter. As its gotten worse though, even the national media has picked it up: could Phil be the problem in L.A.? He acts as if he does not care anymore, and maybe its bleeding over to his team.

Coach's Zen approach not helping Lakers
by Mark Kriegel

After the first game of the Western Conference semifinals, an eight-point Laker loss at the Staples Center, Phil Jackson came to the interview podium and addressed the media in his best, most reassuring baritone:
"It's not as bad as it seems," he insisted. "We're OK."

Then, after Game 4 -- another Laker loss that saw Jackson's team spot the Yao Ming-less Rockets a 29-point lead -- the coach declared the trip a success.

"We got home-court advantage back," he said, referring to the split in Houston. "That's what we came here to do."

I had to wonder if he was having one of those LSD flashbacks...


http://msn.foxsports.com/nba/story/9576958/Coach's-Zen-approach-not-helping-Lakers

 

[Aenadin]

i always thought his ZEN is BS

he hasnt proven he can win on a team with out one or two superstars... i dont think his triangle would have worked if it wasnt an elite level player.

making excuses that they had players banged up tell that to rickywho lost his towering yao and his scoring tmac

hes just trying to lick the wounds on his wounded ego

 

[Superman]

Phil is a cool customer, and that's good for a team that might tend to get over excited at times. It's part of the reason Rick Adelman works so well in Houston, where Jeff van Gundy couldn't get over the hump.

Thing is, this Laker team plays with a sense of entitlement. They don't have that "us against the world" mentality that other good teams have. Instead, they expect the rest of the NBA to just roll over and play dead because they're the Lakers, because they came so close last year, and because they have Kobe Bryant. It's like they're just waiting for everything to fall into place so that they can assume their rightful position and rule the NBA. The Lakers and the SoCal media expected the Rockets to bow down in four or five games, and that's before Yao got hurt.

Well they're getting their wakeup call right now, and if they don't answer the bell tomorrow, it might prove that Phil isn't the right guy for this job. Phil has never been a motivator; he's always had guys on the floor to do that for him in one way or another, and his Zen stuff was to keep the team focused on the goal. That might not be what this Laker team needs, though. There's no denying the talent there, but when you look at the horrible play from Bynum since the playoffs started, the fact that guys who excelled in their supporting roles last year are struggling to contribute this year (Vujacic, Walton, Farmar), and the way this team has blown leads late in games, and it's looking like the Zen stuff is sort of counterproductive, and maybe destructive for certain guys.

I've never been of the opinion that Phil wouldn't be a great coach if not for MJ and Shaq/Kobe, but I've never thought he was the greatest thing since sliced bread, either. On the right team that just needs a little push to get over the hump, he's perfect, but this team needs more than a little push.

 

[Peter_Gibbons]

The biggest knock on Phil Jackson's career is that he never took over a bottom of the league team and built it to the top. He always took over teams that has some of the best talent on the team. He is good with getting the team together that way. I'm sure he only says that everything is alright to send a message of calm. But he knows that they are in deep **** right now. In some ways, PJ is the problem because of his substitution patterns which are really weird sometimes. Also, I guess kobe is not really the MJ or shaq that can dominate the same way during those guys' prime. So this laker team gets into more trouble then his other teams did.

 

[AriesMar27]

phil lets the players on the court try to think their way out of problems but it rarely ever works. they are lucky that most teams dont shoot threes as well as they do or they would be screwed. game 4 proved that.... when battier is getting that many open threes and they go in the lakers defense doesnt look nearly as good even though they havent done anything differnet, look at game 5 brooks and battier's shots werent going in and the team fell apart. the lakers didnt really do anything special in that game.

 

[Vlade4GM]

The problem with Phil is that he's so in love with the triangle and refuses to play any other way. He's way too stubborn and stuck in his ways.

 

[Aenadin]

triangle is failing thats just it...

his motivation etc just bull.. overated coach..

 

[bloom]

Right now the only problem I see with Phil is that he lacks the passion he once had to win. I’ve seen this for several years. I don’t know if this has to do with getting older, not liking his players, not wanting to coach anymore, etc.

But I think blaming everything on Phil is a mistake. There’s only a few really good coaches out there and he’s one of them – whether you like him or not.

Right now the only thing I wonder about is Derek Fisher. Why isn’t Jordan Farmar playing more minutes in replace of him?

I think the problem with the Lakers is the Lakers. Just like Phil said they have this “Jekyll and Hyde” attitude. One game they come out and want to dominate and the other they are soft. I think their intensity has to start and end with Kobe. If Kobe’s hot, then the rest will follow. But like Superman said, some players who were playing better last year aren’t the same this year. The other guy that you have to look at is Pau. The guy is soft unless someone knocks him in the face.

This is all about the players on the Lakers wanting to win. Their body language says it all. When they’re playing to win, they come out and play. But when they don’t care, it’s a different game.

Vlade4GM – I think you’re wrong about Phil being stuck only in the Triangle. Last year the second group coming into the game were playing more free and I think the only reason that the players aren’t really playing the free ball as they did last year, it’s because some of the players aren’t playing like last year. Jordan Farmar isn’t the same, Sasha isn’t making the same amount of shots as he used too. If they were on the same level as last year then I’m sure he would allow the same type of play – 1st unit plays the triangle, 2nd unit plays free ball.

 

[Padrino]

Lakers fans have been chirping about this for a while -- but we've all seen the "turn on the winning coach' thing up close and personal around these parts, and it was easy to ignore as just over emotional fan chatter. As its gotten worse though, even the national media has picked it up: could Phil be the problem in L.A.? He acts as if he does not care anymore, and maybe its bleeding over to his team.

Coach's Zen approach not helping Lakers
by Mark Kriegel

After the first game of the Western Conference semifinals, an eight-point Laker loss at the Staples Center, Phil Jackson came to the interview podium and addressed the media in his best, most reassuring baritone:
"It's not as bad as it seems," he insisted. "We're OK."

Then, after Game 4 -- another Laker loss that saw Jackson's team spot the Yao Ming-less Rockets a 29-point lead -- the coach declared the trip a success.

"We got home-court advantage back," he said, referring to the split in Houston. "That's what we came here to do."

I had to wonder if he was having one of those LSD flashbacks...


http://msn.foxsports.com/nba/story/9576958/Coach's-Zen-approach-not-helping-Lakers

eh...

this is all much ado about nothing, i think. phil jackson has coached one way his entire career, so it'd be strange for him to change his zen ways now...and he won't. it would also be strange for the lakers organization to cash in the chips after this season, fire phil, and try a new approach...and they won't. i don't buy for a minute that phil jackson doesn't care anymore. he's on the verge of passing red auerbach's record. phil's got a mighty calm about him at all times, but that's what he built his reputation on. he's still got a massive ego, and he still knows how to manage massive egos. he's not a motivator in the same way that, say, pat riley was, but phil jackson knows how to get to kobe bryant, and this lakers team lives and dies by kobe's effectiveness as a true superstar and facilitator...

its certainly true that this particular lakers team is among the most vulnerable title contenders we've seen in awhile. their lapses on defense are well-documented and disconcerting. but i still expect them to hand houston a loss this afternoon. denver, on the other hand, has shown truly impressive defensive resolve in the playoffs, and chauncey billups has been playing out-of-his-mind. new orleans and dallas weren't exactly the most difficult of the competition, but denver's 4-1 drubbings of both teams was still quite a feat. they're playing like the western conference's title contender, and the lakers are going to have to get serious in preparing for a matchup against a big, tough team with a scrappy, consistent bench. the lakers have played neither big nor tough in the semi's, and their bench has been largely inconsistent. phil jackson can be as zen as he wants, but he's going to need to find a way to sharpen his team's mental toughness, otherwise we're gonna see a (potentially more) interesting 'melo/'bron matchup in the nba finals, instead of the expected kobe/lebron hype...

 

[LPKingsFan]

he hasnt proven he can win on a team with out one or two superstars... i dont think his triangle would have worked if it wasnt an elite level player.

Yes, but it goes both ways. Jordan did not win before Phil, and neither did Shaq and Kobe. Coaches have always suffered from a "damned if you do, damned if you don't" perspective by the fans/media/management, which extends also to the "players win, coaches lose" mantra as well.

I don't think Phil is particularly a genius, but he's received results. Right now, I'd imagine his approach is letting the team sort things out on their own. It's pretty obvious the Lakers aren't bringing it every game, but instead of getting in the team's face about it, he's sitting back and letting them suffer the consequences if they lose. You could argue it's stupidity because he's taking a huge risk on putting the onus all on the players, and perhaps that his nonchalance is partly responsible for the team's as well, but by focing the players to step it up on their own could pay dividends later on.

Now, it took the Lakers 7 games to beat the Rockets, and it's not clear whether the Lakers learned their lesson or not. They won't get away with it against the Nuggets.

 

[Jerryaki]

He acts as if he does not care anymore, and maybe its bleeding over to his team.

They don't have that "us against the world" mentality

Right now the only problem I see with Phil is that he lacks the passion he once had to win.

agreed x3. players reflect their coach's attitude, and if i were playing for such a demure coach, i'd probably start to care a little less too. i don't think i've ever seen phil jackson ranting and raving like some other coaches (avery, SVG, d'antoni); could explain why his players are so robotic sometimes.

 

[Superman]

triangle is failing thats just it...

The Laker offense is not / has not been the problem. The problem has been the hustle and effort on defense, which, despite the blowout wins in Games 5 and 7, never surfaced in this series.

The Rockets melted down against the Lakers, and who knows why, but this wasn't a function of the Lakers finally playing up to their potential and putting the inferior team away. I'm not trying to take anything away from them, but when the Rockets are coming down and throwing the ball away, committing offensive fouls, getting called for travelling and missing free throws, I can't look at the Lakers and call them a great team that just put the hammer down. I'm not surprised that they had trouble with the Rockets, but they never imposed their will on them. They took advantage of the mistakes and lack of execution, but it's not like they were playing lockdown defense and forcing low percentage shots. You might look at the box score and say that they were forcing turnovers, but at least half (if not more) were unforced errors that resulted from a lack of focus/intelligence on the part of the Rockets. I don't know if it was the pressure of the Game 7 or the realization that they didn't belong there to begin with, but they never got it together on offense.

The thing about the Lakers is that they don't come out and just pour themselves out, give 100% effort from bell to bell, and beat their opponent into submission. Considering the talent and the coaching, you would think that they'd be unstoppable, and maybe they've hit their stride and are going to tear through the Nuggets like a piece of meat, but I just don't see it. I think they'll beat the Nuggets in five or seven games, but they're in for a hard fought five or seven games, and that's just a warmup for the East champs.

 

[Jerryaki]

The thing about the Lakers is that they don't come out and just pour themselves out, give 100% effort from bell to bell, and beat their opponent into submission. Considering the talent and the coaching, you would think that they'd be unstoppable...

really, the talent of the lakers boil down to gasol and bryant; they have okay role players rounding out their starting line-up, and their bench's capabilities are basically odom or bynum (whenever either of them decides to not suck). when one of your stars is bryant, a guy who's won it before and has been with the same coach for most of your career, he's not going to play at a high level all of the time. more often than not, he's going to get bored, and i don't believe for one second from his interviews and sound bites that he's as hungry as a lebron.

because of him, they're simply a team that plays to the level of the competition

 

[RKid]

i always thought his ZEN is BS

he hasnt proven he can win on a team with out one or two superstars... i dont think his triangle would have worked if it wasnt an elite level player.

making excuses that they had players banged up tell that to rick who lost his towering yao and his scoring tmac

hes just trying to lick the wounds on his wounded ego

But who has? What has Pop done without Duncan? Doc without KG? Riley without Shaq, Wade, Magic, Kareem and on and on.

In 2005 the Lakers were a disaster. A complete disaster. Phil came in with a team that added Kwame Brown and lost Caron Butler and nearly knocked off the juggernaut Phoenix Suns. Three years after the 05 debacle, Phil led the Lakers to the Finals. The Zen might be BS but that BS gets results.

 

[Aenadin]

But who has? What has Pop done without Duncan? Doc without KG? Riley without Shaq, Wade, Magic, Kareem and on and on.

In 2005 the Lakers were a disaster. A complete disaster. Phil came in with a team that added Kwame Brown and lost Caron Butler and nearly knocked off the juggernaut Phoenix Suns. Three years after the 05 debacle, Phil led the Lakers to the Finals. The Zen might be BS but that BS gets results.

pistons of 04?

 

[RKid]

^ Billups

There is a reason the Nuggs are in the WCF

 

[JayBird]

agreed x3. players reflect their coach's attitude, and if i were playing for such a demure coach, i'd probably start to care a little less too. i don't think i've ever seen phil jackson ranting and raving like some other coaches (avery, SVG, d'antoni); could explain why his players are so robotic sometimes.

I can't stand Phil Jackson and his "oh well, I'm too cool to care about this" attitude. But I would take that any day over Stan Van Gundy. The guy makes an *** out of himself on the sideline EVERY game, and it's borderline hilarious. The guestures, the grimaces, the damn-near TEARS every time something doesn't go his way. It's ok to show emotion, but everything in moderation. The guy's a clown.

Back to Phil - he is only a PART of the problem with this team. Honestly, I don't see much change in him now then from 2000-02, where his team was successful. He still sits for much of the game, refusing to call timeouts and letting his team play through the bad times and figure it out on their own. It's just more noticeable now because he isn't getting the results he once did.

The bigger problem is Fisher. The pg is the most important position in the triangle (must be able to penetrate, and must be able to hit the open 3, neither of which Fish has been able to do), and the guy is just plain too old to play. If Phil figures this out, starts Farmar, then has Brown come off the bench (both of whom have been outplaying Fisher the entire playoffs), this team will cruise over Denver. But shhh... don't tell Phil.

 

[Aenadin]

^ Billups

There is a reason the Nuggs are in the WCF

billups is good but hes no where near the elite level of shaq and whats his name again? the other guy he was paired with

 

[Jerryaki]

billups is good but hes no where near the elite level of shaq and whats his name again? the other guy he was paired with

his name was robert horry.

 

[Bricklayer]

The bigger problem is Fisher. The pg is the most important position in the triangle (must be able to penetrate, and must be able to hit the open 3, neither of which Fish has been able to do), and the guy is just plain too old to play. If Phil figures this out, starts Farmar, then has Brown come off the bench (both of whom have been outplaying Fisher the entire playoffs), this team will cruise over Denver. But shhh... don't tell Phil.

Well, Fisher has been a problem, but actually, the PG is basically the least important position in the triangle, at least as Phil has always won it. All that player has to do is be able to advance the ball over halfcourt, dump it off, and hit spot shots. Phil has won titles with BJ Armstrong there, John Paxson, Ron Harper, Derek Fisher...just whatever garbage happens to be laying around. The big problem for Fisher, last round in particular, is that he can't defend anymore (if he ever could). But Billups is a better matchup for him than Brooks was -- a slower, stronger PG like Fisher himself.

 

[Aenadin]

his name was robert horry.

really i thought that was will smith!? i do know the other guys name came form a big hunk of expensive Grade A BULL..... meat youd think his mother would have given him a good name not from the menu... good thing they werent eating at an english restaurant..

 

[Superman]

really, the talent of the lakers boil down to gasol and bryant; they have okay role players rounding out their starting line-up, and their bench's capabilities are basically odom or bynum (whenever either of them decides to not suck).

They don't have any stars on the bench, but they have the deepest bench in the NBA. And the starting role players are better than most other role players, too. When you consider how well that bench played last season, how guys like Vujacic and Farmar stepped up, how Brown has played this offseason... they have a good supporting cast.

 

[kennadog]

I can't stand Phil Jackson and his "oh well, I'm too cool to care about this" attitude. But I would take that any day over Stan Van Gundy. The guy makes an *** out of himself on the sideline EVERY game, and it's borderline hilarious. The guestures, the grimaces, the damn-near TEARS every time something doesn't go his way. It's ok to show emotion, but everything in moderation. The guy's a clown.

I agree. It always amazes me that some people assume that ranting and raving and yelling at players = more effective, more motivating coach or even a coach who cares more.

I'm not a fan of Phil, but I'd rather play for a coach whose under control and focused, than coaches who go ballistic every 5 minutes, often over minor stuff. Why? Because focus, control and putting energy toward what needs to be done to win is what you want to see in a leader.

I don't mind more emotion that Phil shows, but not constant ranting and raving, which gets old fast. I'd rather see a coach who most of the time is cool, calculating and focused on what needs to happen.

 

[JayBird]

I agree. It always amazes me that some people assume that ranting and raving and yelling at players = more effective, more motivating coach or even a coach who cares more.

I'm not a fan of Phil, but I'd rather play for a coach whose under control and focused, than coaches who go ballistic every 5 minutes, often over minor stuff. Why? Because focus, control and putting energy toward what needs to be done to win is what you want to see in a leader.

I don't mind more emotion that Phil shows, but not constant ranting and raving, which gets old fast. I'd rather see a coach who most of the time is cool, calculating and focused on what needs to happen.

Yep. Van Gundy and Jackson are at opposite ends of the spectrum, and neither is too effective.

The ideal coach is someone like a Popovich. Stern, business-like, calm for the most part, but when he's upset he lets the individual player know it during a timeout, and doesnt let the entire world know it with his antics DURING the flow of play.

 

[CaminoChaos]

Is Jackson the problem?

I think not.

 

[VF21]

Is Phil Jackson WITHOUT a team with Michael Jordan or Kobe/Shaq the problem? It's easy to win rings with the best talent in the league. If he manages to eke out a win with mere mortals surrounding Kobe, I may have to change my mind but thus far the Kobe-led Lakers have as many rings as the Kings.

 

[Jerryaki]

Yep. Van Gundy and Jackson are at opposite ends of the spectrum, and neither is too effective.

The ideal coach is someone like a Popovich. Stern, business-like, calm for the most part, but when he's upset he lets the individual player know it during a timeout, and doesnt let the entire world know it with his antics DURING the flow of play.

agree on popovich. maybe my use of van gundy was not a good example, i was just trying to make the point that players probably want to play for a coach who has a pulse (which i'm not sure jackson does). even the reserved adelman shows emotions some times!

 

[Jerryaki]

They don't have any stars on the bench, but they have the deepest bench in the NBA. And the starting role players are better than most other role players, too. When you consider how well that bench played last season, how guys like Vujacic and Farmar stepped up, how Brown has played this offseason... they have a good supporting cast.

i don't know if i think their bench is all that deep. farmar and vujacic haven't really been a factor in these playoffs, bynum's got some sort of confidence problem, and luke walton is still luke walton (and of course, you have odom, who's good).

the magic have a pretty darn good bench in pietrus, gortat, and courtney lee (love this guy), and suprisingly even anthony johnson has shown that he can be effective.

 

[gunks]

Is Jackson the problem?

I think not.

2 reasons Phil has those rings...

1: Jordan
2: Shaq

Him being a great coach isnt one of them.

...Phil is so overrated it isnt even funny. He's been lucky enough to be the coach of the GOAT, and the most dominant big man in recent history. The worst part is, he believes his hype and is an arrogant ***. Kobe's arrogance I understand, he's earned it with his play. But Phil's?

...I love how his excuse to losing to the Rockets without Yao or T-Mac is that they are a "Professional Basketball team". COP OUT! Compared to the ultratalented Lakers squad, the depleted Rockets are D-League.

Phil is a good coach. But his win record wouldnt be so pretty without Jordan and Shaq. I dont think he'd have a single ring either.


PS: Those are Riley's rings! Haha.

 

[CaminoChaos]

Is Phil Jackson WITHOUT a team with Michael Jordan or Kobe/Shaq the problem? It's easy to win rings with the best talent in the league. If he manages to eke out a win with mere mortals surrounding Kobe, I may have to change my mind but thus far the Kobe-led Lakers have as many rings as the Kings.

Yeah but I don't hear people saying Pop is a good coach just because he had Robinson/Duncan/Ginobili. Same goes for Red Aurbach who had Russell/Cousy.

I believe that this is a players game but I think it takes a good coach to gel the team and give them direction. Jackson had great players but so did a lot of other coaches that won a rings.

Name one Kings coach in the past 15 years that could have taken a Jordan or Kobe team all the way (except for Adelman who is a good coach)