Phil Jackson calls Knicks roster "clumsy"

[Knicksfansince92]

Kobe is top 5 when everything is said and done he will have
Most pts scored
2 finals MVp
5 rings
14 allstars
8 1st team def
possibly 3 olympic medals
etc.......

Name 5 players better than that

[fender0577]

What knowledge have you shown? You have backed up nothing. I gave my opinion but I back it up with basketball knowledge.

All you said was that Kobe and Shaq were top 5 players all time. What is your basis for saying that?

Dude it's really not that serious, i didn't really get in to it, i just said those two are in my top five.I didn't debate yours, like i said before, it's your opinion, what part didn't you understand, calm down buddy.This is a Phil Jackson thread, last time i checked.If you don't know what's my basis for saying that, you never will.

[KBlack25]

Dude threw out a lot of subliminal messages that he was open to possibly returning to NY the team he won his rings playing for and get paid in a top market to coach.

I am not saying its nostalgia, nor am I saying he would of took the job. But to not even be contacted for a job interview when your arguably the greatest coach ever and you have a ton of rings.

It makes sense he would be a bit pissed and knowing how Phil loves to snipe through the media this interview and its timing makes sense.

with that said like I said earlier I am not arguing his points because as of right now their valid.

I'd be surprised if Phil lost one wink of sleep over it.

[Crazy⑧s]

Subjective is a convenient out in this regard.

You either know the game or you don't. Go look at Wilt's numbers.

They are an emaculate collection of proliferation for the most part unseen throughout NBA history (Jordan's consistent efficient and high scoring for his entire career withstanding). Dude averaged over 20 rebounds for the majority of his career. One season he averaged 50 ppg and 25 rpg. I can't say definitively, but I simply do not believe Shaq could put those kinds of numbers up in any era. He's a legit all-time great big, but he's not Wilt.

Wilt played against guys that were for the most part smaller no doubt, but IMO the players and the way game was played was alot tougher then than it is now or was even in the 90s. Back then you could get away with all kinds of pushing and holding. Also the height of most bigs on average compared to the tallest players I don't think is that drastically from what it is now (on NBA teams today you still have few 7 footers). Almost every team had guy that was atleast 6'9". Wilt would always be doubled, tripled and many times quadruple teamed and it didn't matter. He wasn't JUST bigger than everyone else. He was an unbelivably skilled and athletic big for his size. He also played against some nice centers that included Russell, guys like Walt Belamy, Wes Unseld and one Willis Reed. There was definitely comp in 60s to 70s era.

Russell was the similar. I believe he'd dominate in this era also. He would out hustle and outsmart most players in the league today. Russell was also very athletic. Probably his greatest assets were his will and smarts. He boasted bball IQ that is probably amongst the highest of any player in the history of the league. Let us not forget, Russell is the only baller to ever win a title as a player/coach. That's some boss ****. And he won 11 championships. He is the greatest winner in any sport, ever.

These two guys, Bill Russell and Wilt Chamberlain would ROCK the league as it's presently constituted.

Make no mistake, I'm not one of these guys who thinks talent cannot travel across eras. I think they'd put in work similar to what they put in in their day. If Rodman can average 14- 18 rebounds multiple seasons why couldn't Russell or Wilt average their 20 or more in this era. To say otherwise does not make sense logically. If Jordan can average 30-37 throughout his career, why couldn't Wilt average 40, or even 50.

Some of you really don't understand the talent level of the old era players.

And to the person who said Bird wouldn't work over dudes in this era because of some athleticism deficit.

Smh..

Bird would absolutely **** on most of today's league of more athletic players as he did throughout the 80's against players that were more athletic than he. Bird was just one unbelievably skilled whiteboy, who at 6'9" could handle it well (like a guard), get a shot off virtually anywhere in the gym and whos IQ was off the charts as well. Bird like Russell and Magic for that matter, played the game at a higher plane mentally than than almost all of the players from their respective eras. Combine that with their skills and you have the kind of foundation that a team can feed off of for a shot at mutliple championships during their respective career windows.

Basketball smarts makes up for soooooooooo much in the league, no matter what era you happen to be from.

Yes Kobe and Shaq have their rightful places in NBA historical hierarchy, but one mustn't get **** twisted. As I said, top 10-15 and you can bring them into the discussion.

There's 2 players I'd put ahead of Kobe at his position and at least 4 players I'd put ahead of Shaq at his:

1. Jordan
2. Oscar Robertson
3. Kobe
4. West
5. Wade

1. Russell
2. Wilt
3. Abdul-Jabbar
4. Olajawon
5. Shaq

I'm not just talking just to talk.

Ranking players is subjective, yes... But you also have to use logic and have context.

As i said:

Wilt - probably the most potent combo of scoring and rebounding the league has ever seen - 1 title

Russell - greatest winner of all-time -11 titles

Bird - could play all five positions. The greatest shooter of all-time IMO, clutch, great passer and rebounder - 5 titles

Jordan - the GOAT nuff said - 6 titles

Magic - at 6'9" guy with freakish ball skills, clutch, off the charts awareness - 5 titles

One would have to assume you've watched a lot of full games from 'the day', considering how confident you are in your logic, Ron.

[ronoranina]

One would have to assume you've watched a lot of full games from 'the day', considering how confident you are in your logic, Ron.

Yes I've seen a good amount.

The following is post from yahoo answers from some dude who did some conclusive digging.


Did Bill Russell and Wilt Chamberlain face weak competition?

Two of the NBA's greatest players, Bill Russel and Wilt Chamberlain, are often criticized for playing in a "weak" era. This is far from the truth, as the 1960s were a very good time for basketball. A much smaller league meant more competition for fewer spots. The fact that only the 121 best basketball players in the world could play in the NBA condensed the talent pool to nine teams. In the modern NBA, over half of the teams don't even have one all star player, nevertheless hall of famers. Examining the teams in the mid 1960s, all nine of them had Hall of Fame talents:

Boston Celtics: Bill Russel, John Havlicek, Sam Jones, Tommy Heinsolm
Cincinnati Royals: Oscar Robertson, Jerry Lucas
Philadelphia 76ers: Hal Greer
New York Knicks: Willis Reed
San Francisco Warriors: Wilt Chamberlain, Nate Thurmond
St. Louis Hawks: Bob Pettit
Los Angeles Lakers: Jerry West, Elgin Baylor
Detroit Pistons: David Bing, Dave Debusschere
Baltimore Bullets: Walt Bellamy

Russel and Chamberlain faced various legends on a nightly basis, yet still were known as the best players of their generation. Throughout the decade, the two were subject to strong competition Some of the great players Russel and Chamberlain faced included:

1960-1964:

Dolph Schayes
Bob Pettit
Walt Bellamy
Jerry Lucas

1965-1968:

Willis Reed
Elvin Hayes
Wes Unseld
Nate Thurmond

1969-1972:

Kareem Abdul Jabbar
Bob Lanier
Artis Gilmore
Billy Cunningham
Dave Cowens

One reason fans tend to lash out at these legends is the absurd stats of not only Russel and Chamberlain, but average players as well, as it was not uncommon for a player to average 15-20 rebounds per game. There are several reasons for the high rebound rates of these players:

a. A high tempo offense. The average team in 1965 shot about 600 more shots than a team in 1985 and about 1400 more shots than a team in 2005.

b. Less fouls called. In 1965, the average team had 2076 personal fouls per season. In 2005, 1856 personal fouls were called. But keep in mind that 1400 more shots were attempted, yet only 200 less fouls called. The result, a lowing field goal percentage, and more shots allowed to be rebounded.

When adjusting the field goal percentage to 45% and reducing the shots taken to the normal rate today, the rebounding rate drops to a more familiar rate for most players. Elgin Baylor would dropped to around 9 boards a game and Nate Thurmond to around 12. However, both Bill Russel and Wilt Chamberlain, even with the adjusted stats, still averaged between 16-20 rebounds per game, showing that they truly did dominate like few others.

Another common misperception is that Bill Russel and Wilt Chamberlain played against only 6'6" white centers. That is completely false. Here are the NBA players from 1960-1972 6'11" or taller who played at least 3 years in the NBA: (list does not include Wilt Chamberlain)

Kareem Abdul Jabbar: 7'2"
Dennis Awtrey: 6'11"
Walt Bellamy: 6'11"
Tom Boerwinkle: 7'0"
Nate Bowmen: 6'11"
Mel Counts: 7'0"
Walter Dukes: 7'0"
Jim Eakins: 6'11"
Ray Felix: 6'11"
Hank Finkel: 7'0"
Artis Gilmore: 7'2"
Swede Halbrook: 7'3"
Reggie Harding: 7'0"
Bob Lanier: 6'11"
Jim McDaniels: 6'11"
Otto Moore: 6'11"
Dave Newmark: 7'0"
Rich Niemann: 7'0"
Billy Paultz: 6'11"
Craig Raymond: 6'11"
Elmore Smith: 7'0"
Chuck Share: 6'11"
Ronald Taylor: 7'1"
Nate Thurmond: 6'11"
Walt Wesley: 6'11"

Two other factors to keep in mind:

a. The NBA was less interested in promoting itself 40 years ago, and therefore, did not see the need to measure players with their shoes on. Almost all players today are listed 1-2 inches taller than their actual height.

b. The NBA had 1/3 of the players that they do now. That means Bill Russel and Wilt Chamberlain faced these 25 guys 3 times more often than they would in the modern nba scheduling.

The truth is, height will never be more of a factor than skill. With several exceptions, players over 7' are typically not very successful. At a collegian level, only three 7 footers have made all-American first team in the last twenty years: Shaquille O'Neal, Andrew Bogut, and Chris Mihm. In this years all star game, Dirk Nowitzki, Pau Gasol, and Chris Kaman were the only three of 30 players selected to be 7 feet, and all are known far more for their skill sets than dominating with size. If height was such a significant factor, then Manute Bol, Shawn Bradly, and Gheorghe Muresan would be hall of fame players, not just fan favorite scrubs.

The overall talent of the 1960s is greatly underestimated as well. The stamina that players in the 1960s have is far greater than anything seen today

1965 Top 3 in minutes played per game
1. Oscar Robertson, 45.6 mpg
2. Bill Russel, 45.2 mpg
3. Wilt Chamberlain, 44.4 mpg

2005 Top 3 in minutes played per game
1. Lebron James, 42.3 mpg
2. Allen Iverson, 42.3 mpg
3. Gilbert Arenas 40.9 mpg

In addition, teams never walked up the court and held the ball for 12


I found this interesting also..


Wilt and Russell faced each other 142 times during the 10 seasons in which they competed head-to-head. That's 14x per season. Then there was Nate Thurmond. Then Willis Reed. Then Walt Bellamy. Then Wes Unseld. Then Elvin Hayes. Then Jerry Lucas.

Heck, Wilt and Kareem faced each other 27x in only 3 full seasons of playing against each other (their careers overlapped by 4 seasons, but Wilt did not play against Kareem in 1970, when Wilt missed most of the season after tearing up his knee).

Shaq doesn't play 27 games against a HOF center over any 5 year period.

Food for thought.

Sorry for staying off topic.

[Wargames]

I'd be surprised if Phil lost one wink of sleep over it.

we'll never know but the new rumor is phil is looking at 2 teams in the west with the thunder as number 1 and the Lakers as number 2.

The way the thunder's coach is being out coached by Spoelstra (who isn't that great of a coach himself) really leaves that door open as a possibility for them seeking Phil out and they have a roster that would fit phil's triangle better.

[p0nder]

Wow. talk about going off the rails. lol

Phil is sour about not getting a call i'm sure, as he'd like the ego stroked even if he wouldn't take the job. I guess the knock on him will always be that he needed gift wrapped teams. he seems fine with that.

As for the top 5, etc. it really is subjective and comes down to your view point on basketball. Some people claim that the dominant force in basketball is correlated to size and so the centers tend to get more love. Others feel that point guards as the floor generals are where we should look to see the greats. Others feel that players like Jordan and Magic took it to a different level of competition and were among a tier that may never be seen again.

A lot of the same names get thrown around in these discussions but the ranking of them differs slightly. From where I sit I'd have to say Jordan was the best talent that ever graced the basketball floor and we will be looking for the "next jordan" for a long time.