Phil Jackson: Why Is His Coaching Tree Wilting?
Former Los Angeles Laker Brian Shaw has been fired by the Denver Nuggets and stands as the latest example of Phil Jackson’s coaching tree not living up to expectations. At this point, with past failures like Kurt Rambis, Frank Hamblen and Jim Cleamons and present ones like Derek Fisher and Shaw, if the tree was in my backyard, I’d consider driving a penny through the trunk.
Those failures, especially the most recent examples, are more indicative of today’s NBA than of the system, though. Or, at least, Jackson would hope so.
First and foremost, the level of success any coach enjoys depends heavily on the personnel around him. Most are quick to point out that Phil Jackson wouldn’t have any of his 11 titles as a coach without Michael Jordan, Kobe Bryant, or Shaquille O’Neal, which is absolutely true. We wouldn’t hold Pat Riley up as the deity we do without Magic Johnson, Kareem Abdul-Jabbar or LeBron James, either. Same goes for Gregg Popovich and Tim Duncan.
None of Jackson’s disciples have had anywhere near the talent level it takes to succeed in the NBA. Most, if not all, of their jobs were taken as complete rebuilds of the team they were coaching. If the players improved after their departure, it might have had as much to do with typical development as the coach that took over.
Which brings me to my next point, rebuilding around the vaunted Triangle Offense takes immense patience. Look around the NBA right now. How many teams as currently constituted appear ideal to run Jackson’s system?
You’d need an unselfish point guard willing to work off the ball (think Steve Kerr or Derek Fisher), a great shooting guard (Jordan and Bryant are pretty good examples), a versatile small forward (Scottie Pippen), a skilled power forward (Pau Gasol), and, depending on the team around him, either a capable defensive center (Luc Longley is quite replaceable) or Shaq, who was a different beast altogether.
More from Lake Show Life
- Darvin Ham adds to Max Christie hype train after Lakers preseason opener
- Is LeBron James playing tonight? Latest Lakers vs Warriors update
- Can Darvin Ham put all of the Lakers puzzle pieces together?
- Lakers news: Darvin Ham knows his fifth starter, LeBron James and Rui Hachimura, Jalen Hood-Schifino praise
- Michael Malone’s painfully ironic comment has Lakers fans heated
I can only think of a handful of teams that meet even a few of those requirements. The Memphis Grizzlies have the frontline you’d like to see, but taking Mike Conley off the ball would be counterintuitive. Same goes for the Cleveland Cavaliers, where you’d switch the small forward and shooting guard roles but, again, take Kyrie Irving off the ball. As Irving is one of the most talented ball-handlers in the league, that doesn’t seem ideal.
So, to make the larger point, a team building around the system would probably have to devote at least a few years solely to finding the proper combination of players to fit the system and be okay with terrible basketball for a little while. Given how disposable coaches have become, can you see many franchises giving that kind of leeway? Yeah, me neither. The only coach I’d see given that patience is probably Phil, himself.
Given how disposable coaches have become, can you see many franchises giving that kind of leeway? Yeah, me neither.
Not only that, but if a coach does get four years or so to build the team he wants around this system and can’t make it work, it would probably take another three or four years to scrap the project. That type of risk probably doesn’t seem worth the reward to today’s more number-heavy franchises.
In terms of the actual X’s and O’s, the Triangle Offense is a fairly rigid system that flies in the face of today’s analytic-based, pace-and-space playing style. Sure, there are ways to expand and manipulate the triangle, but, at its core, the Triangle utilizes spots on the floor deemed inefficient by advanced statistics.
I’m not saying the offense can’t work; more that it has to be run at something closer than optimum efficiency to hold up next to systems that feature more efficient shot types.
It also feels necessary to bring up the idea of “coaching trees” as well. Look at the backgrounds of today’s great basketball minds. Riley was an announcer for the Lakers before he took over for Paul Westhead. Popovich learned under Larry Brown and Don Nelson before taking over in San Antonio. Jackson coached in Puerto Rico immediately before coaching the Bulls. Sure, they learned from several coaches before becoming the masterminds they are today, but not a single one of those guys are considered branches of one particular coach’s tree. Why do we insist on that type of thinking today, then?
Compare Shaw’s job in Denver to what Steve Kerr is doing in Golden State. It perfectly encapsulates what it takes to be successful as a coach in the NBA. Kerr took over with an extremely talented roster and uses aspects of both Pop and Jackson’s ideologies. Shaw’s inflexibility having come from just Jackson, combined with a less-than extremely talented, immensely immature roster in Denver directly led to Tuesday’s firing.
Can the Triangle be successful in 2015’s NBA? I’d say so, but any coach utilizing that thinking would be fighting an uphill battle. The ultimate experiment is taking place in New York, where Fisher might be granted the type of patience needed to pull it off as Jackson watches from on high. If it works, the Knicks will be set up for upwards of a decade of great basketball. If it doesn’t, well, it’s the Knicks. Their fans are used to that kind of thing.