Phil gives Red fans the blues

I never saw Red Auerbach coach a game. Not in person, not on TV, not in some creepy, sweat-soaked dream.

His days on the Boston sideline were a little before my time, and so I have no firsthand knowledge of Auerbach’s impact once the basketball was thrown in the air. I couldn’t tell you if his in-game adjustments were brilliant or if his sideline temperament was beyond compare.

All of which serves as my official disclaimer. A way of acknowledging there are details and nuances of which I have no firsthand knowledge. So, having admitted that, I will move on to the point of this column:
Phil Jackson is the greatest coach in NBA history.

And pardon me while I duck.

I have a feeling this is not a popular opinion. Fans tend to be more comfortable with coaches who are gruff and stay up all night watching video and drawing plays on grease boards. Smug hipsters like Jackson just don’t fit the mold.

I also understand there is a tendency for people to protect the icons of their younger days. Trust me, I do it all the time. Just the other morning I got in a shoving match with my 5-year-old over the artistic merits of the original Scooby Doo. I say the show jumped the shark when Fred stopped wearing an ascot. The little brat disagrees.

At any rate, I lean toward Jackson over Auerbach because of circumstances and eras. I think Jackson’s 10 titles trump Auerbach’s nine championships, and it’s not simply a question of mathematics.
It has to do with degree of difficulty. And changes in the game. And pressures in the modern era. For the interest of brevity, I will narrow the factors down to three categories.

No. 1: Jackson won his titles in an era of free agency and salary caps. It is much harder to keep a great team together today than it was for Auerbach and the Celtics in the 1950s and '60s.

This means Jackson had to contend and adapt to far more turnover than coaches of earlier eras.

Auerbach had four players (Tom Heinsohn, K.C. Jones, Sam Jones and Bill Russell) play for eight of his nine championship teams. Frank Ramsey played on seven of those teams, and Bob Cousy played on six.

Do you know how many of the same players were around for Jackson’s ninth and 10th titles?
Two.

No. 2: The NBA has expanded greatly in the last 30 years. That means more competition in the regular season, and more layers in the postseason. When Auerbach won his first title in 1957, the NBA was an eight-team league.

That year, the Celtics won the NBA Finals in seven games. They beat a St. Louis team that was 34-38 in the regular season. Two years later, the Celtics faced a 35-37 team in the Eastern Division finals, and a 33-39 team in the NBA Finals.

Not quite Frazier-Ali, eh?

No. 3: Jackson won six titles with the Bulls and four with the Lakers. Ninety-nine percent of the NBA’s coaches go entire careers without winning four championships. Jackson has done it with two different franchises.

(The only coach in one of the four major professional sports who comes close to this achievement is the NHL’s Scotty Bowman, who won five Stanley Cups with Montreal, three with Detroit and one with Pittsburgh.)

Now this is probably the point in the conversation where critics will throw up their hands and say the only reason Jackson has won so many rings is because he has been surrounded by great players. Really? Do you think?

Of course Jackson has had great players. It’s pretty hard to win one title without great players, let alone 10. Kind of like saying Casey Stengel had great players on the Yankees and Francis Ford Coppola lucked out with those Brando, Pacino, DeNiro and Duvall guys in the Godfather Trilogy. So, yes, Michael Jordan, Scottie Pippen, Shaquille O’Neal and Kobe Bryant have had a lot more to do with Jackson’s success than his triangle offense.

But here’s a little secret:

Auerbach had great players, too. According to the Hall of Fame, he had more of them than Jackson.
During the course of his nine titles in 10 years, Auerbach had 11 Hall of Fame players on his rosters. The fewest he had at any one time was four in 1966. The most was eight in 1963. Eight! That means he had three Hall of Famers hanging around the bench. Do you know who the third guy off the bench was in Chicago in 1991? Yeah, neither do I.

(For accuracy’s sake, I went back and checked. The eighth guy in Chicago’s rotation was a 30-year-old forward named Cliff Levingston. I’m guessing the Hall of Fame is not looking for his phone number.)

Hey, I’m not trying to slam Auerbach here. He is obviously a legend. He was ridiculously successful and, by most accounts, was a basketball genius. It wouldn’t surprise me if his Xs and Os were in an alphabet beyond Jackson’s.

But coaching is not simply drawing up plays and calling for substitutions. It involves setting standards, and creating an atmosphere. It requires the deft handling of personalities and knowing how to push buttons for different individuals.

Jackson may not be an innovator, but he is a master when it comes to handling a roster and motivating players.

In my book, the best ever.

[Getty Images]

Comments

[Justin]

Baloney. Jackson is only great when he surrounds himself with a team of world-beaters. When Jordan retired for good, what did Phil do? Took his ball and went home, only to come back when L.A. had Shaq and Kobe. When the Lakers lost to Detroit and dealt Shaq to Miami, what did Phil do? Took his ball and went home! It took $3 million more than any coach in NBA history had ever made to coax him back out, not to mention Jerry West practically turning the Memphis Grizzlies into a farm team for the Lake Show during his time there.

Calling Phil Jackson the greatest NBA coach of all time is like calling Paris Hilton the smartest millionaire to ever live -- it doesn't count when greatness and success is just thrown in your lap!

[Justin]

(That should be "supposedly retired for good" in reference to MJ, mind you.)

[CL]

Agree with Justin, but also: back in the day, when Red A. was winning all those championships, there were only 8 or 9 teams, meaning that there was absolutely no dilution of talent. The opponent in very game was a formidable one.

This article also fails to point out that Red was a keen evaluator of talent and a shrewd negotiator. He set up the trade with St. Louis that brought Bill Russell to Boston, along with all the other Celtics. Not only that, but Red did NOT have a slew of assistants to develop his offense, his defense, etc. In fact, Red was known for planning and staging off-season clinics to teach the dynamics and the intricacies of the game.

This article also talks about Jackson setting a standard. But how can you compare Jackson's standard to the one that Red set and had his fingerprints all over the team for years until his death just a few years ago. As a GM, Red was the genius who secured the rights to Larry Bird and then brought in the talent to surround him, and that was after the Dave Cowens' teams of the 70's. Red built the Celtics into champions in 3 different decades with entirely different personnel!

Finally, where was LA, as a franchise before jackson arrived? It had already won numerous championships and had a stream of tradition, going back to Chamberlain, Jabbar, and Magic. No need to build tradition there. And what happened to Chicago after Jackson left? Absolutely nothing - so much for setting an enduring standard.

[SC-Carl]

As a Bulls fan, I can be accused of bias but here is a fact no one has mentioned: Jackson, as a coach, has won over 50 playoff SERIES. In NBA history, there are only two other coaches who have won over 50 playoff GAMES. Also, in order to win a championship in the 50's and 60's, teams had to win 2 playoff series. Now they must win 4 playoff series. And to think I was unhappy about Jackson replacing Doug Collins as coach of the Bulls . . .

[Dag F. Nabbit]

Red was also general manager, selecting his winning players as well as coaching them. Phil only coaches and has had Krause, West and Kupcheck to thank for getting him his winning players. It was Red who got the league to allow him to draft early, so he could take junior Larry Bird and wait a year for him. Phil did nothing comparable.

Red was effectively the business manager of the Celts: fixing and negotiating contracts, overseeing operations. Phil only coaches.

Reds teams from the 50s and 60s and the 80s would have wiped the floor with Phils best teams in Chicago or LA.

[Check your facts, SC-Carl]

http://www.nba.com/history/records/playoff_victories_coaches.html

But yes, Phil Jackson is the best coach of all time. Basketball was very much a fledgling sport still in Red's heyday. He had the majority of the best players in the league on his team. He just had to get by Wilt every year. The game was far from refined as well. Typical lines had players getting 30 boards in a game. Most of the best athletes were still focusing on baseball and football at this point.

[CL]

Hey SC-Carl - perhaps YOU should check your facts a bit closer. In your first post, you claim that "In NBA history, there are only two other coaches who have won over 50 playoff GAMES." The fact is that 18 coaches have won more than 50 playoff games. Phil's record is certainly impressive, but just trying to set the record straight.

True, there were only two playoff series back in the day, but this goes back to my statement that there is much greater dilution of talent in today's game. Coaches from earlier eras did not have the opportunity to win more than two series or 8 playoff games per year. The first round or two in today's playoffs should be a cakewalk for a championship caliber team.

You also said that all Red A. had to do was get past Wilt, but he did so much more than that. Red BUILT the Celtics from scratch - Phil walked into two dynasties already in the making - sorta like Gruden coming into Tampa and winning the Super Bowl with Tony Dungy's team, except Chucky couldn't keep the momentum going forward.

Regardless, both Red and Phil will be remembered as GREAT coaches, but if I was starting a team from scratch and could choose either one, it would be Red Auerbach - he's already proven he could build a dynasty from nothing.