During today's show Rosie was talking about Phil Jackson going to the Hall of Fame. Rosie mentioned how Phil Jackson getting Michael to share the ball was a Hall of Fame coaching move. He mentioned the fourth quarter Game 5 of the 91 Finals.

Typical Rosie, seeing one game and using that as his argument.

I looked at Michael's career stats and Michael highest APG (8.0) came in 88-89, Doug Collins last year. In 87-88 under Collins, Michael averaged 5.9.

In Phil's eight years with Michael, Michael averaged over 5.9 APG only twice. Just going by APG, Michael seemed to share the ball as much if not more with Collins as coach than with Jackson.

Rosie also mentioned the triangle offense that Jackson instituted as another example of getting Michael to share the ball. While the triangle had it's strengths, I seem to recall quite a few times in a fourth quarter of a tough game the triangle being tossed aside in favor of Michael taking control of the game.

Understand, I am not trying to diminish Phil Jackson's achievements. Any coach who wins 9 titles should be in the Hall of Fame. In my opinion, though, the maturation of Pippen and Grant, the defensive ferocity by Jordan, Pippen and Grant (and later Rodman) and the ability by Jackson to work with the egos was more valuable to the Bulls winning than the myth the Jordan suddenly starting to share the ball.

But this is typical Rosie, making broad generalizations by watching one game, just as when he called Wisconson basketball boring after watching the Big Ten final.

You are right. This idea that Jordan was unselfish is a joke. He wasn't but I'm not bitching about it. He should have taken alot of shots. He was the greatest ever.

Triangle my ass. In the fourth quarter when the Bulls were down it was nothing but isolation plays for MJ. That's the way it was and that's the way it should have been.

Rosie cites the series against the Lakers where Pax hit a few shots because of Jordan double teams. Big fucking deal. MJ still averaged 30+ points in that series. He averaged 30+ in every playoff series.

Nice analysis, enigma. This is indeed a very typical example of Rosie's weak-ass argumentative style.

_________________
You can't see me because of internet.

The landowner effectively owns part shares in millions of part-time slaves called, "taxpayers." -Roy L
A Personal Relationship with Jesus?

Jordan shot. That's what he did. It was fine because he shot over 50% for most of his career. Rosie, don't change the facts to fit your argument about Phil Jackson.

When the Bulls were a mediocre team Jordan passed just as much. Only it was to Dave Corzine and Sam Vincent. And, well, they missed. LOL.

Actually, Jordan's former teammates have commented on his growth during that first championship run. Sam Smith has also recounted this evolution in some of his writing. After playing a "selfish" first game, Jordan responded in game two with something like 16 assists. Then in game five, with the Lakers hanging tough and Jordan playing another "selfish" game, Jackson famously called an angry timeout where he diagrammed the Bulls offensive scheme against the Lakers' defense. In the huddle, he repeatedly shouted the question to his players "Now who's open?" Everybody responded "Pax!" except Jordan. So Jackson kept asking the question until Jordan answered "Pax!" as well. After the timeout, it was clear Jackson had made his point: Jordan moved the ball to Paxson for a few wide open threes and the Bulls clinched their first title in a laugher.

Yes, Jordan was first and foremost one of the greatest scorers of all-time. But before Jackson coached him, he was also known as a loser. Jackson helped him change that image by getting him to share the ball in the crucial moments of several championship runs and thus deserves a place among the great NBA coaches.

_________________

Everybody forgets. Phil Jackson's first year was 89-90 season. The Bulls lost that year too. It was just a matter of time for Jordan.

I find it hard to beleive that if Phil Jackson was never born Jordan wouldn't have titles. Sorry.

Ehh, people say the same thing about Jackson with the Lakers, too. But the year before the Lakers won their first title, they got swept out of the playoffs, in the first round, too, if memory serves.

Jordan's greatness as a player doesn't signify that Jackson wasn't/isn't a great coach. Sorry.

_________________

Not every coach would have won those titles with those teams. But 12 or 15 from each era would have won those titles with the Bulls or Lakers. Including Doug Collins. Hell, Jordan hand picked him for his Wizzards.

Now, Del Harris wasn't one of those guys with those Lakers teams.

How can you say Doug Collins "would" have won those titles with the Bulls? In case you don't remember, he had his chance and was fired because players like Pippen and Grant were about to revolt against him. Apparently Rosenbloom isn't the only one with a faulty memory.

_________________

He went throught the growing pains. Pippen didn't like Phil early either.

Like I said Phil lost to the Pistons his first year. Doug lost to the Pistons the 2 years prior. Those were great teams.

The 86 season the Bulls lost to the Boston Celtics in the playoffs. One of the greatest teams ever.

Do you see what I'm saying? There was no shame in losing to those teams. Phil did too.

Those teams eventualy came down and the Bulls rose. Nature of the league.

Hey Midget. Last year the Lakers had a 3-1 lead against the Suns. The great Phil went on to lose that series. How the hell did that happen?

But there's a difference here: Phil got Pippen to like and respect him whereas Collins only succeeded in alienating him. Doug Collins was/is a good strategist, but he's never been able to last in any one job because he grates on his players. Collins had the same effect on Grant Hill in Detroit. So to say Collins could've had the same success as Phil is simply a misunderstanding of Collins' ability relative to Phil's.

_________________

I think the Bulls would have won a NBA title or two under Collins. As Beardwon mentioned the Bulls lost in the Eastern conference finals in six games in Collins' last year. In Jackson's first year they lost to the Pistons in seven games.

And I believe Pippen and Grant first full years as starters was in Collins' last year, so it is hard to compare Jackson success with the Bulls to Collins.

However, I do believe that the Bulls couldn't have had the sustained success under Collins as they had under Jackson. Collins was too high strung and the pressure of repeating probably would have gotten to Collins and then to the players, where with Jackson, well we know what happened.

As for Michael sharing the ball, sure there were instances where he passed to others for the big shot, Paxson and Kerr come to mind, but it seems that was more the exception than the rule. His APG were relatively constant during his career, even when the team was winning championships his APG did not significanly increase. Jordan had a 5.9 APG in his rookie year under the immortal Kevin Loughery, a number he exceeded only twice with Jackson. And I recall a 10 game period under Collins where Michael averaged a triple double.

Regarding Sam Smith observations, while I enjoy some of his work and the Jordan Rules was a great read, he does worship at the altar of Phil Jackson. He is always looking to praise Jackson, so I would take what he has to say regarding Phil with a grain of salt.

Well there's a big difference between one or two titles and six titles. So your praise for Collins is a de facto admission that he's not in Jackson's league as a coach. I agree with that view, even though I don't think he could've won more than one title, if that, with the Bulls. I would also add that in the year following Jordan's first retirement, Jackson would've beaten the Knicks in the playoffs if not for a bad call. Whatever your view of that infamous play, though, there's no question Jackson outcoached Pat Riley in that series. Is Pat Riley "just another coach", too?

As far as Jordan's statistics go, I don't see how they're relevant. The point is that Jackson was able to persuade, coerce and cajole Jordan into playing team ball when the situation called for it. He knew how and when to push Jordan's buttons, thereby helping him gain unparalleled success in the modern NBA. Sure, a lot of other coaches could've won a championship with Jordan, but leading a team to six championships in eight years is a feat that only a handful of coaches (in the entire history of the NBA) could've accomplished.

_________________

I never said that Collins was in the same league with Jackson. The point I was trying to make, and I apologize if I didn't make it clear, was that yesterday (and I am paraphrasing) Rosenbloom said that Jackson was able to make Jordan share the ball and that was a Hall of Fame coaching move.

I disagree in the premise that Jordan significantly changed his game under Jackson. I bring up the assists per game stat because it is one number that disputes Rosie's opinion. And I recall quite a few times where the whole notion of sharing the ball and the triangle offense was scrapped because Jordan needed to take control of the game, one example were both Finals with Utah when Michael took over a large portion of the series (not that I have a problem with it).

What I am trying to say is that there were times Collins was able to get Michael to share the ball, one example that sticks out was when Collins moved Jordan to point guard and he started averaging a triple double. But when push came to shove, the ball was in Michael's hands, whether the coach was Collins or Jackson.

I'm not saying Phil sucks. I'm saying others could have done it. We'll never know how many.

I also hate what Phil became. After the 1st championship he grew that ego. Natural. But it hit him harder then most.

He then would lead people to beleive that they won championships because of the books he handed out. Or because he burned incence in the locker room before the game.

And the relevant example he gave was game five against the Lakers, right? To me, that timeout is a Hall of Fame moment. A championship was on the line. The Bulls were in danger of losing the game and letting the Lakers slip back into the series. Instead of letting his superstar dictate the team's style of play, Jackson demanded Jordan play smarter. And Jordan did just that. So one coaching move helped the Bulls cement their first title. Jackson made the right move at the right time on the NBA's biggest stage. If that's not a Hall of Fame move, I don't know what is--although putting Pippen on Magic would be pretty close, too.

From the perspective of 2007, more than 15 years after the Bulls' first title run, their greatness has taken on the air of inevitability, like the Sun rising or the Earth spinning on its axis. But in the early 90s the Bulls were not presented their championship trophies like a monarch donning a crown at his coronation. They had to fight for their titles against talented, determined opposition. And in those frenzied battles, Phil Jackson made an important difference in the Bulls fortunes. He may not be the best coach of all time, but he surely belongs in the Hall of Fame.

_________________