i just wanted to write to say hats off to my beloved lakers for their incredible run of three championships in a row, 2000-2002. i basically stopped writing about them on outsports after their first title (i can still see kobe dish to shaq for the alley-oop in game 7 against the blazers) because i felt like anything after the 2000 season was gravy and a lot of people just want to hate.

but, as a fan, i am proud of my team. many fans don't get to see their teams win a championship in their lifetime (like me and the pirates) and here i am as an adult laker fan of 23 years, seeing them win three in a row. it was a good run indeed. and by the way...we'll be back. onelove

jay

Hats off the the LAZIEST dynasty ever....

I think the "dynasty" was mainly Phil.It's pretty evident that this Laker team would never have won a title without Jackson calling the shots.He is, arguably,the master of creating a championship caliber team around one or two superstars and a supporting cast of role players.The triangle offense was the perfect fit for this particular group,and without it I think Shaq and Kobe might still be chasing that elusive first championship- maybe even on different teams. wink

HUH? Phil? yeah, phil's done a great job of taking over teams who have THE best players in the league... Over-Rated... The man's built NOTHING. A monkey would have coached his teams and won....

He takes teams that haven't won titles, and wins titles with them. Not as easy as you might think.

philly fan is right about everything. dont try to have a rational conversation or chat with him if you want to get a point across.

Now come on.... He took over a team in chicago that had THE best player the NBA's had in 20 years and won. He did nothing when Jordan retired. Where's the fabulous coaching phil? lemme get outta here before i actually have to coach and build a team.

He took over the lakers who has the 2 best players in the nba right now, and won. He's outta there now or next year. That team needs a little bit of revamping. Phil doesnt do that. He carpetbags on good teams where he is setup to do nothing but win. He'd fail if he coached any other team in the league.

Phil what should we do on this shot.... uhhhhh give it to Jordan... ooops wrong team, give it to shaq down low. Now hurry up, i'm getting bored here guys.

80% of the coaches in the NBA would have won titles with the lakers or bulls.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by PhillyFan:
[QB] Now come on.... He took over a team in chicago that had THE best player the NBA's had in 20 years and won. He did nothing when Jordan retired. Where's the fabulous coaching phil?

Dang PF,I thought we wuz finly goin to 'gree on sumptin-you yerself called the Lakers "LAZY".


I think in your mad rush to play devils advocate,you ignored the logic (did I say that eek! ) that underscores your own argument. If Phil "took over" 2 different teams with superstar players that had always horribly underachieved, isn't it logical to point to HIM (Phil) as the difference maker?I'm a little hazy on my recollection of the exact scenario in Chicago,but in LA he took over a fragmented team that had just been swept unceremoniously by the eventual Champion Spurs.His first year,the Lakers made a complete turn around. They cruised to the leagues best record,mounted a miraculous 4th quarter comeback in Game 7 vs Portland,and then totally dominated the Pacers enroute to the Title.No offense Phil F., but it's ludicrous to assert that "any coach" could've achieved the same results.The fact is that NONE of the Superstars, (Jordan,Shaq or Kobe) were ever able to win a title UNTIL they were coached by Phil.It's true that he inherited talented teams,but the bottom line is he inherited UNDERACHIEVING teams and turned them into OVERACHIEVING winners.The one constant in both Chicago and LA is Phil Jackson and his "system"- without it,neither city would've ever been able to establish a dynasty. :cool:

I might be able to agree that Phil takes underachieving teams with superstars and wins championships with them. However would he or could he take a mediocre team and stick with it long enough to build it into a champion. I think without one or two stud dominant players on a team it is very difficult to win regardless of the coach. I believe most NBA coaches would have won at least one title if they had Kobe and Shaq.

Have to go with Phillyfan here. Let Phil take a piece of crap like my Cavaliers and win a title then we can discuss his champion zen-a-bility.

Hey OSU-I think Phil is a great coach,in terms of working with limited resources.But I never said he was a MIRACLE worker. eek!

Phil takes talented players and helps them win CHAMPIONSHIP'S!!! 'Nuf said!

I think it takes a lot of skill to take talented players with HUGE egos (and Jordan/Shaq/Kobe all qualify), and not-so-talented players who may also have some ego issues (and may also be resentful of any perceived special treatment towards the superstars) and get them to work together towards the single goal of winning the championship. If this is what Phil Jackson excels at, and teams in that situation will always try and hire him if he's available (as the Lakers did) why should he go to a place like Cleveland and try and build something from scratch?

If he were no longer going to coach the Lakers, he could pick and choose from the best situations. Why would he want to go to Cleveland? I'm not sure who's in charge there but it doesn't seem like a situation where he can excel. I'm sure he wouldn't go to New Orleans, with the complete moron who runs that team.

As long as you realize Kobe and Shaq are the 2 best plyers in the NBA, I have no problem! Just remember if Horry's shot had fallen at the end of game 5, we'd be looking at a 4-peat! AII YI YII!!! LAKERSRDABOMB! 4-REAL!