azfinfanmang said:
But, I propose that a dozen coaches could have as many rings given the same situations that Phil has had.
The entire Zen thing and his two finger whistle has grown old. The Triangle is nice, he didnt invent it. He has done a good job of being a peace keeper, but if he was that good, Shaq would have been in LA another year or two.
I would like to have seen him get as much out of the Suns as Mike-D is.
phil is overrated because he didn't invent the triangle? red auerbach is overrated because he had bill russell when the average center of the time was a 6'5" stiff, right? don shula is overrated because tom landry invented the 4-3 defense, right?
i'm sure many teams would love to see phil coach their teams. if he ever wants another ring, he's going to have to accept a job somewhere else, IMO.
how do you figure shaq would have been in LA another year or two? shaq and phil were both run out of town in the same year, remember, the summer kobe was the de facto GM?
phil is not overrated; kobe is. it has always been about "being the next MJ" for him. guess what it was about for MJ? WINNING. kobe doesn't know how to win. he does know how to proclaim whose team it is; he does know how to chuck up 35 shots; he does know how to share the ball. he doesn't know when to pass and when to chuck up the shots, because it's all about perception for him. if he could let go and think about winning the game, he would be fine, IMO. instead, he's thinking of HOW he wants to win the game, and that's putting the cart before the horse. many people have said that kobe would rather be "the man" on a losing team than be a component of a winning team. he has done nothing to show otherwise.
steve kerr brought up a good point on ESPN radio this morning: in the second half, kobe might have tried to make his teammates better by attacking and creating. he still could have taken 3 shots if he wanted, but he could have created problems for the D and passed off to teammates. instead, he stood around and did nothing, because he was trying to prove a point (kerr did not add this last bit).
