phil jackson

where is his credit.. he is the master behind all this Kobe Madness.

where's the lakers thread?..it's the master behind all lakers topics.

where's the lakers thread?..it's the master behind all lakers topics.

hahahahaha....... that was funny.......

haha, true.

Nicholson and Phil should start a I *heart* Kobe club

Nicholson and Phil should start a I *heart* Kobe club

Why?

because they *heart* kobe

And you *heart* crack? Seriously, shut the fuck up man your giving red headed people all around the world a bad name.

all 38 of them

Your dad should of used a condom.

maybe he did i dunno, why would i ask him that?

Strange as it may sound, I think if Kobe had won the MVP (still assuming there's no chance the Nash revelation is purely speculation) Phil Jackson would be getting more credit. Right now, analysts and fans alike are arguing Kobe's importance to the Lakers and making a case for him being a more deserving MVP. If he had those honours locked up, I think there'd be more of a "let's give Phil Jackson credit too" movement.

As I said... considering that Phil is coaching a very similar Lakers side and gotten them so far, it's up for debate about how much crdit he should recieve. I don't know if Kobe should get more cedit than Phil or should it be the other way around.

I think the NBA should implement more awards.

- Most improved Team(Season)/(Playoffs)

- MVP(Playoffs, i.e the entire duration, not to the championship team's "Finals MVP")

+ Most improved player (Playoffs)

+ Best Coach(Playoffs)


The criteria for 'winning' the above does not necessarily mean your team wins the championship. You just have to, improve or prove it, somehow :p

Best Coach(Playoffs)

It is unnecessary. In the playoffs, teams only go against other teams in their own conference (except for the Finals) and a team doesn't play against all the teams present in the playoffs.
The Best Coach/Coach of the Year should be based on the regular season where a team plays against all of the teams.

MVP(Playoffs, i.e the entire duration, not to the championship team's "Finals MVP")

The main purpose of the playoffs is for a team to reach the Finals. If a "Playoff MVP" doesn't reach the Finals, what's the point of his award then?

Then again didn't someone once get an MVP award leading their team to a 40-42 record? If that's true than who's to say someone making a 2nd or 3rd round exit hasn't done enough for the MVP honors?

Last time it should've been Parker or Ginobili, Duncan didn't do shit and was injured the whole time.

Yeah...leading the team in scoring 4/7 times, and in rebounds all seven games isn't doing shit...20.6ppg 14.1rpg 2.1bpg in the Finals...they shouldn't have even played him he did so little...

why the hell would you have a playoff most improved player? how does that work?

I honest to god didn't think Phil could have pulled this off. It doesn't look like he's about to lose a first round playoff series for the first time either.

I think it would definitely be interesting if Kobe beats Nash in the first round and Nash wins the MVP.

lol can the mvp award be taken away?

Only in the hearts and minds of fans and sportswriters.

why the hell would you have a playoff most improved player? how does that work?

Hmm.. probably like, comparing a player's performance in the playoffs to the season. So he might be a sleeper then, but suddenly contributes unlike his usual performance, during the playoffs.

Not a bad idea actually. It'd be good to pin-point guys who step up during the play-offs, though it'd probably go to Tim Thomas this season.

What about Bonzi Wells? Wasn't he averaging 21 and 12 through 4 games?

EDIT: 38 and 12 today... He wants a big contract real bad...