# QUESTION: Red Auerbach or Phil Jackson?



## Rick2583 (Mar 17, 2014)

Am I the only one that thinks Phil Jackson's resume is a little bit over rated. For obvious reasons?. I mean especially when you compare it to Red Auerbach's. And before you think it, this has nothing to do with me being a Celtics fan for over 50 years. I'm just curious.


----------



## LeGoat06 (Jun 24, 2013)

Lol It's not overrated at all. Auberbachs is the one that's overrated if any. Much less teams back in the days of the Celtics dynasty.


----------



## RollWithEm (Jul 16, 2002)

Strangely, I'm inclined to agree with @LeGoat06.


----------



## Floods (Oct 25, 2005)

There were 10 teams in existence during the 60's Celtics dynasty, and Red was the only decision-maker in the league that wasn't a bumbling idiot.


----------



## Rick2583 (Mar 17, 2014)

With all due respect you guys are obviously not looking at this from the same angle that I am. Don't get me wrong Jackson was a very good coach BUT.......he picked his spots. I mean I'm not the only one that has noticed over his years of coaching that he ALWAYS put himself in win-win situations.

For the 89-90 season he took over a Bulls team that already had Jordan & Pippen. After leaving the Bulls he went right to the Bryant / O'neal Lakers. And when O'Neal left after the 04 season, So did Phil. Yes he ended up going back but my point is he never had to start off with a bad team & build. Auerbach literally built the Celtics. He took over a bad team & made them a great team. 

Agree or disagree that's the ONLY point I'm trying to make.


----------



## LeGoat06 (Jun 24, 2013)

I don't think Jackson picked his spots. He went from assistant to HC in Chicago and with LA there was no way he was going to know that Kobe was going to turn into the type of number 2 guy for Shaq that he ended up being.


----------



## LeGoat06 (Jun 24, 2013)

and the third time with LA he brought them from an under .500 team to making the playoffs as a 7 seed, then they got Pau and made 3 finals in a row including 2 rings.


----------



## RollWithEm (Jul 16, 2002)

Even if Phil literally decided he was going to coach what he considered to be the single best roster of players in the league every single season, beating 29 other teams would still be more impressive than beating 9 other teams.


----------



## Rick2583 (Mar 17, 2014)

LeGoat06 said:


> I don't think Jackson picked his spots. He went from assistant to HC in Chicago and with LA there was no way he was going to know that Kobe was going to turn into the type of number 2 guy for Shaq that he ended up being.



Disagree, Kobe was already a 20 point average guy when Phil stepped into the Lakers. So yeah, he knew & if he didn't than he wasn't watching.


----------



## Basel (Mar 31, 2005)

Rick2583 said:


> With all due respect you guys are obviously not looking at this from the same angle that I am. Don't get me wrong Jackson was a very good coach BUT.......he picked his spots. I mean I'm not the only one that has noticed over his years of coaching that he ALWAYS put himself in win-win situations.


Then how come those teams weren't winning before he was coach? Phil's coaching résumé is not overrated by any stretch of the imagination.


----------



## Knick Killer (Jul 16, 2006)

A mod should change the thread title to a Auerbach-Jackson comparison thread.


----------



## RollWithEm (Jul 16, 2002)

Knick Killer said:


> A mod should change the thread title to a Auerbach-Jackson comparison thread.


Ask and it shall be done.


----------



## Rick2583 (Mar 17, 2014)

*Re: QUESTION:*



Basel said:


> Then how come those teams weren't winning before he was coach? Phil's coaching résumé is not overrated by any stretch of the imagination.



Seriously, the 20 years prior to Jackson joining the Lakers they made the playoffs 19 times. Went to the finals 9 times & won 5 championships. So much for not winning without Jackson. 

As far as the Bulls by the time Jackson took over for the start of the 89-90 season they were already putting the pieces in place. Jordan had already been on board for a few years starting in 84-85 season, the following year they added Oakley & the year after that 1987-88 they brought in both Scotty Pippen & Horance Grant. By the time Jackson took over for the 89 season they were ripe & ready to kick ass. So it wasn't like he took over a bad team & made them winners.

Another thing to remember is this After he parted ways with the Bulls there were I believe 3-4 teams that wanted to hire him. The Lakers were one of them. And the only one that had a winning team. But hey, can't fault a guy for making the smart decision.

Look I don't mean to look down on Jackson as a coach. The Bulls it was more of a case of being in the right place at the right time. The Lakers was just a smart move to cement his legacy as a coach. I just often wondered what kind of a job he could have done with a team that was just okay, say 35-38 wins & just needed someone to get them over that hump.

Okay, I was just curious what you guys thought.


----------



## Rick2583 (Mar 17, 2014)

Knick Killer said:


> A mod should change the thread title to a Auerbach-Jackson comparison thread.



With all due respect to the MOD, he didn't create the thread, I did. So I'd like to believe that things wouldn't go down to that level on this board.

Never mind, I just noticed that it did. Oh shit.


----------



## Basel (Mar 31, 2005)

Rick2583 said:


> Seriously, the 20 years prior to Jackson joining the Lakers they made the playoffs 19 times. Went to the finals 9 times & won 5 championships. So much for not winning without Jackson.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I'm talking about those specific teams. Obviously the Lakers franchise had won before. But MJ/Pippen didn't win without Phil. Kobe/Shaq didn't win without Phil. Kobe and Pau had him, too. The other coaches couldn't get it done. 
I'm talking


----------



## Rick2583 (Mar 17, 2014)

Basel said:


> I'm talking about those specific teams. Obviously the Lakers franchise had won before. But MJ/Pippen didn't win without Phil. Kobe/Shaq didn't win without Phil. Kobe and Pau had him, too. The other coaches couldn't get it done.
> I'm talking



I wasn't going to respond to this thread any longer but I just couldn't resist your post. MJ & Pippen had only played together for 2 seasons before Phil came along. And Shaq & Kobe only 3 seasons before Phil came along. So really, it wasn't like they were waiting around for 10 years before Mr. Jackson came along to hand them a trophy.


----------



## Basel (Mar 31, 2005)

Rick2583 said:


> I wasn't going to respond to this thread any longer but I just couldn't resist your post. MJ & Pippen had only played together for 2 seasons before Phil came along. And Shaq & Kobe only 3 seasons before Phil came along. So really, it wasn't like they were waiting around for 10 years before Mr. Jackson came along to hand them a trophy.



Fact remains.


----------



## Bubbles (Nov 12, 2005)

Phil Jackson


Sent from Verticalsports.com Free App


----------



## Rick2583 (Mar 17, 2014)

Bubbles said:


> Phil Jackson
> 
> 
> Sent from Verticalsports.com Free App



Phil Jackson, Okay, you've answered the mods question. Now what's your answer to my........................................... never mind.


----------



## letsgoceltics (Aug 19, 2012)

LeGoat06 said:


> Lol It's not overrated at all. Auberbachs is the one that's overrated if any. Much less teams back in the days of the Celtics dynasty.


Bill Russell, a man among men certainly had a lot to do with Red's 11 championships. Similar to how in Phil Jackson's teams, he's never won without a top 2 player. Not making the argument that Phil is overrated. Not sure having less teams makes Red Auerbach overrated though. It just means his 11 doesn't automatically make him better than guys like Pop.


----------



## LeGoat06 (Jun 24, 2013)

letsgoceltics said:


> Bill Russell, a man among men certainly had a lot to do with Red's 11 championships. Similar to how in Phil Jackson's teams, he's never won without a top 2 player. Not making the argument that Phil is overrated. Not sure having less teams makes Red Auerbach overrated though. It just means his 11 doesn't automatically make him better than guys like Pop.


I don't think either is overrated. I just brought up that point. I said if either one of them is overrated it would be Auberbach. But imo they both are fairly underrated and people bring up Russell and Jordan, Kobe, Shaq way too much. Both dudes have a crazy amount of rings give them there fair share and be done with it


----------



## letsgoceltics (Aug 19, 2012)

LeGoat06 said:


> I don't think either is overrated. I just brought up that point. I said if either one of them is overrated it would be Auberbach. But imo they both are fairly underrated and people bring up Russell and Jordan, Kobe, Shaq way too much. Both dudes have a crazy amount of rings give them there fair share and be done with it


The Russell, Jordan, Kobe, Shaq thing is relevant. There are good coaches that find ways to win. Pop has won 3 different ways and almost won another one by focusing on the offensive end with an aging Tim Duncan. Phil coached 4 hall of famers. Pop really only won with 1 if you don't include an over-the-hill David Robinson. San Antonio's management gets a lot of credit of competing with a small-market team but what about Pop successfully intergrating Danny Green, Borris Diaw, and Patty Mills.


----------



## LeGoat06 (Jun 24, 2013)

Pop is an amazing coach


----------



## Rick2583 (Mar 17, 2014)

LeGoat06 said:


> Pop is an amazing coach




You seriously wouldn't be wrong putting Pop in the same company. The way he's held that team together is by itself a remarkable achivement, but to still be able to maintain what his players are still giving him at this stage of there careers is truly 2nd to none. Not to mention that he gets more out of his bench then any coach in the league


----------

