Phil Jackson has lost his last five finals games

GonzoLays · Post #1 » by **GonzoLays** » Sun Jun 8, 2008 7:06 pm

Has he lost the touch?

Over the past two days, he has blamed himself for not playing the bench enough; not preparing the team properly; and allowing Kobe to dominate the ball too much.

Phil has never been regarded as a great X's and O's coach (that goes to Tex Winter) but the main question is: has he lost his touch?

GreenWithEnvy · Post #2 » by **GreenWithEnvy** » Sun Jun 8, 2008 7:16 pm

i don't think so. honestly i just think its a matter of him coaching soft teams who don't rebound or defend well who matchup with hard nosed teams that are great at all of the things the lakers aren't.

magicfan4life05 · Post #3 » by **magicfan4life05** » Sun Jun 8, 2008 7:18 pm

lost last 4, not 5

unless you're counting tonight

HarlemHeat37 · Post #4 » by **HarlemHeat37** » Sun Jun 8, 2008 7:23 pm

not at all..

2004 was all about Kobe, not PJ..

Post #5 » by **loflin3hree5ive** » Sun Jun 8, 2008 7:32 pm

4 by my count as of 3:30 pm EST 6/8/08.

GonzoLays · Post #6 » by **GonzoLays** » Sun Jun 8, 2008 7:36 pm

loflin3hree5ive wrote:4 by my count as of 3:30 pm EST 6/8/08.

Give it time. :lol:

Cruel_Ruin · Post #7 » by **Cruel_Ruin** » Sun Jun 8, 2008 7:36 pm

Fire Phil

GonzoLays · Post #8 » by **GonzoLays** » Sun Jun 8, 2008 7:37 pm

HarlemHeat37 wrote:not at all..

2004 was all about Kobe, not PJ..

Its up to the coach to correct that. So its on PJ.

Farsi Man · Post #9 » by **Farsi Man** » Sun Jun 8, 2008 7:44 pm

HarlemHeat37 wrote:not at all..

2004 was all about Kobe, not PJ..

Yeah, and the Lakers winning this year was all about PJ and not Kobe. :lol:

What a joke.... :banghead:

HarlemHeat37 · Post #10 » by **HarlemHeat37** » Sun Jun 8, 2008 7:53 pm

who said that? all I've been hearing all year is how Kobe is leading his team and "trusting his teammates"..that sounds like Kobe is getting a lot of credit..

any unbiased observer of the 2004 finals could tell you that Kobe had arguably the worst finals performance by a star player in NBA history..not only because of how he played, but the shot selection and ego was disgusting..

what's Phil Jackson supposed to do in that case?..

Post #11 » by **snaquille oatmeal** » Sun Jun 8, 2008 7:53 pm

GonzoLays wrote:Has he lost the touch?

Over the past two days, he has blamed himself for not playing the bench enough; not preparing the team properly; and allowing Kobe to dominate the ball too much.

Phil has never been regarded as a great X's and O's coach (that goes to Tex Winter) but the main question is: has he lost his touch?

Tex Winters is the triangle yoda not the X's and O's guy. that would be Phil btw. Tex revises the triangle offense in practice to accomodate players streaghts, Phil is the one that calls plays and makes the adjustments on the fly during games.

TonyMontana · Post #12 » by **TonyMontana** » Sun Jun 8, 2008 8:04 pm

GonzoLays wrote: Has he lost the touch?

NO . How do you lose your touch when you have 9 rings, you take a team with a bunch of scrubs like Kwame, Smush , Brian Cook to the playoffs year after year, then this year with the addition of Pau to the finals.... :rofl:

GonzoLays wrote: Over the past two days, he has blamed himself for not playing the bench enough; not preparing the team properly; and allowing Kobe to dominate the ball too much.

Yet you guys trailed most of the game and at the half time you were down by 6 points and made good shots towrds the end of the game to lead the series by 1.
I guess he is doing something right.

GonzoLays wrote: Phil has never been regarded as a great X's and O's coach (that goes to Tex Winter) but the main question is: has he lost his touch?

Haaaaaa? REALY? Is that your theory or is there any links or anything with value that can back up your statement.
2 titles as a player.
He won his first coaching championship, leading the Albany Patroons to their first CBA title.
9 titles as a NBA coach

Three different back to back to back championship, two with the Bulls and one with LA, not even your beloved Red has achieved that ..... :rofl:

CHI 1989-90 82 55 27 .671 2nd in Central Lost in Conf. Finals
CHI 1990-91 82 61 21 .744 1st in Central Won NBA Championship
CHI 1991-92 82 67 15 .817 1st in Central Won NBA Championship
CHI 1992-93 82 57 25 .695 1st in Central Won NBA Championship
CHI 1993-94 82 55 27 .671 2nd in Central Lost in Second Round
CHI 1994-95 82 47 35 .573 3rd in Central Lost in Second Round
CHI 1995-96 82 72 10 .878 1st in Central Won NBA Championship
CHI 1996-97 82 69 13 .841 1st in Central Won NBA Championship
CHI 1997-98 82 62 20 .756 1st in Central Won NBA Championship

TonyMontana · Post #13 » by **TonyMontana** » Sun Jun 8, 2008 8:08 pm

HarlemHeat37 wrote:who said that? all I've been hearing all year is how Kobe is leading his team and "trusting his teammates"..that sounds like Kobe is getting a lot of credit..

any unbiased observer of the 2004 finals could tell you that Kobe had arguably the worst finals performance by a star player in NBA history..not only because of how he played, but the shot selection and ego was disgusting..
.

Really ? And Karl Malones injury and G.P/Shaq contribution/disapearance in the finals has nothing to do with those final either.

HarlemHeat37 · Post #14 » by **HarlemHeat37** » Sun Jun 8, 2008 8:56 pm

there's no way your team is winning when the #2 guy decides he wants all the spotlight and takes around 30 shots more then a single-covered Shaq..not only that, but shots that were usually being taken in double coverage and driven into triple coverage..

if your SG is taking 30 more shots on 38% shooting, compared to around 60% from a single-covered Shaq, that's just disgusting..

sorry, but if Karl Malone is healthy, he wasn't going to change anything from the Kobe perspective..Malone's contribution doesn't cancel out inefficient ballhogging..

Uncooked · Post #15 » by **Uncooked** » Sun Jun 8, 2008 9:10 pm

Clearly the worst coach ever, thank God we got Mike Brown instead of loser Phil Jackson.

LakerFanMan · Post #16 » by **LakerFanMan** » Sun Jun 8, 2008 9:13 pm

The Lakers lost in 04, get over it. The Pistons outplayed them, it's that simple. The Laker team was definitly more talented but they couldn't get their sh*t together. They all hade huge egos. That team definitly wasn't soft though, I don't know why people are saying that.

I really don't think it's phil though.

Joyeuse · Post #17 » by **Joyeuse** » Sun Jun 8, 2008 9:49 pm

I don't think coaches really lose their touch like that, per se, though sometimes schemes go out of fashion as other teams in the league manage to adjust to them (and that's obviously not what has happened), and I'm going to venture it's highly unlikely he's lost anything just for consecutive finals series, as the success he had prior to and in between them is not characteristic of a coach who is lacking. Further, I can't say I really blame game 1 on Phil Jackson; the Celtics' players just played better than the Lakers' players.

That said:

TonyMontana wrote:Yet you guys trailed most of the game and at the half time you were down by 6 points and made good shots towrds the end of the game to lead the series by 1.
I guess he is doing something right.

I think this is factually inaccurate, just for reference's sake. First of all, the Celtics never trailed by more than 5. Second, the Celtics held the lead for a large majority of the game, including the entire fourth quarter, and probably trailed for a total of about ten minutes throughout the whole game. There were only a few brief periods (the beginning of the game, the end of the second quarter and beginning of the third, and the middle of the third) of about two to four minutes apiece where they were behind.

DEEP3CL · Post #18 » by **DEEP3CL** » Sun Jun 8, 2008 11:23 pm

GreenWithEnvy wrote:i don't think so. honestly i just think its a matter of him coaching soft teams who don't rebound or defend well who matchup with hard nosed teams that are great at all of the things the lakers aren't.

It's not like the Celtics are this over powering team either. You guys been getting lost in the sauce too much about how "physical" the Celtics suppose to be.

To me this current Celtic team don't even come close to the Celtic teams of the 80's.

The current team maybe has only three guys that really bang, PJ, Kendrick and Big Baby. Everybody else is soft.

DEEP3CL · Post #19 » by **DEEP3CL** » Sun Jun 8, 2008 11:28 pm

GonzoLays wrote:Has he lost the touch?

Over the past two days, he has blamed himself for not playing the bench enough; not preparing the team properly; and allowing Kobe to dominate the ball too much.

Phil has never been regarded as a great X's and O's coach (that goes to Tex Winter) but the main question is: has he lost his touch?

Thats news to us here in L.A. because we haven't heard jack squat about that stuff.

Plus what is the deal with this topic, you posted that on your board. You can get away with it there but when you come to the GB I'm going to lite that a$$ with that bull crap.

You start a topic and don't even have your facts right. He's lost his last 4 not 5 as you stated. Don't get too far ahead of yourself, one game don't win a series.

tnayrbrocks · Post #20 » by **tnayrbrocks** » Sun Jun 8, 2008 11:51 pm

Joyeuse wrote:I don't think coaches really lose their touch like that, per se, though sometimes schemes go out of fashion as other teams in the league manage to adjust to them (and that's obviously not what has happened), and I'm going to venture it's highly unlikely he's lost anything just for consecutive finals series, as the success he had prior to and in between them is not characteristic of a coach who is lacking. Further, I can't say I really blame game 1 on Phil Jackson; the Celtics' players just played better than the Lakers' players.

That said:

-= original quote snipped =-

I think this is factually inaccurate, just for reference's sake. First of all, the Celtics never trailed by more than 5. Second, the Celtics held the lead for a large majority of the game, including the entire fourth quarter, and probably trailed for a total of about ten minutes throughout the whole game. There were only a few brief periods (the beginning of the game, the end of the second quarter and beginning of the third, and the middle of the third) of about two to four minutes apiece where they were behind.

Outside of Garnett and a little bit of Allen in the first half, really none of the celtics got it done. The Lakers really had control of that game until Pierce went down and came back. And this was with a struggling Kobe, but we'll just have to see as the series goes on.