Every day following up to the NBA Finals on June 5th between the Boston Celtics and Los Angeles Lakers, I am going to focus on 3 key matchups, compare those matchups to each team to help make an overall decision to who will win the 2008 NBA Finals.
Today, I am going to compare the match-ups between the Celtics and Lakers' Coaches. I am going to determine which team has a better coaching staff by their coach's regular season and playoff career records and two overlooked x-factors.Head Coach match-up: Phil Jackson vs. Doc Rivers
Phil Jackson's Coaching Career Records:(Los Angeles & Chicago)
17 Regular Seasons: 975 wins, 418 losses (.700)
17 Playoffs: 191 wins, 81 losses (.704)
NBA Finals: 11th appearance
World Championships: 9 rings (Bulls - 6, Lakers - 3)
Doc Rivers' Coaching Career Records:(Boston & Orlando)
9 Regular Seasons: 339 wins, 328 losses (.508)
5 Playoffs: 21 wins, 22 losses (.488)
NBA Finals: 1st appearance
World Championships: 0 rings
Phil Jackson has the higher winning percentage over Doc Rivers in the regular season (.700 - .508) and playoffs (.704 - .488), has been to the NBA Finals more than Rivers (11 - 1) and if Jackson wins another World Championship this year, he will be 10 out of 11 (.909) in his NBA Finals appearances. Rivers is a good NBA coach, but Jackson is just one championship away from being the all-time leader in championships as head coach over former Celtic coach Red Auerbach (9).
Mainly, when it comes down to careers and experience, Jackson by far has the advantage over Rivers. Advantage: Lakers (1-0)
X-Factor #1: The 2007 - 2008 Regular Season
Phil Jackson: Coming into the 2007-2008 regular season, Jackson and the Lakers organization was falling apart. Los Angeles had been knocked out of the first round in the playoffs for the third-straight year after being in the NBA Finals for four-straight years, Kobe Bryant was demanding to be traded and Jackson wasn't getting the most out of his players because his team had no chemistry. With the addition of Derek Fisher in the off-season, the mid-season gift from the Memphis Grizzlies acquiring Pau Gasol in a trade and a solid bench that he hadn't had in years, the Lakers went from a playoff team to championship contenders. It was not easy, but Jackson figured out a way for his players to play as a team and the Lakers became the #1 team in the Western Conference with a 57-25 record.
Doc Rivers: Coming into the 2007-2008 regular season, Rivers and the Celtics organization had the best offseason in their franchise history. Boston had one of their worst seasons ever, missed the playoffs for the second year in a row, there were serious rumors about trading Paul Pierce and Rivers' job was definitely on the line. Then in the 2007 NBA Draft, the Celtics got Ray Allen in a trade with the Seattle Supersonics and within a month later Boston got one of the best players in the NBA acquiring Kevin Garnett in a trade with the Minnesota Timberwolves. In those two trades, the Celtics went from one of the worst teams in the NBA to World Championship contenders. Rivers did an excellent job living up to the expectations by getting the Boston PGA (Pierce, Garnett, Allen) Tour to bond together so quickly and were the #1 team in the NBA with a 66-16 record.
After getting key players from trades, both Jackson and Rivers got their players to believe in each other, got the most out of them, coached their teams to the NBA Finals and turned their average NBA teams' into title contenders within one season. I believe that Rivers has a slight advantage here over Jackson for two reasons...
1. Rivers' team broke an NBA record this season for the differential of wins for a team in one year (2007: 24-58, 2008: 66-16) with 42 more wins than last season. Jackson's differential of wins for the Lakers was impressive with 15 wins (2007: 42-40, 2008: 57-25), but nothing close to what Rivers did with the Celtics.
2. In the season of 2007-2008, based on regular season records the Western Conference was the closest it has ever been in NBA history. The win differential in the Western Conference between the #1 and #8 seed going into the playoffs was just 7 games while the Eastern Conference's win differential was 29 games. So if the Western Conference was so much better than the Eastern Conference this season, you would think that the Lakers would have an easier time against the Eastern Conference than the Celtics would against the Western Conference. That was not the case for Rivers as his Celtics dominated the Western Conference with a 25-5 record while Jackson and his Lakers were 20-10 against the Eastern Conference. Advantage: Celtics (1-1)
X-Factor #2: The 2008 Playoffs
Phil Jackson's 2008 Playoff Rounds:
1st Round: Denver (4-0)
2nd Round: Utah (4-2)
Western Conference Finals: San Antonio (4-1)
Doc Rivers' 2008 Playoff Rounds:
1st Round: Atlanta (4-3)
2nd Round: Cleveland (4-3)
Eastern Conference Finals: Detroit (4-2)
Phil Jackson: The Lakers have pretty much coasted through the playoffs with a 12-3 record, which is impressive for how competitive the Western Conference was during the regular season. I predicted that Los Angeles were going to beat the San Antonio Spurs, but not in 5 games. Jackson was brilliant to focus on stopping the Spurs' Manu Ginobili instead of Tim Duncan because Ginobili is San Antonio's best one-on-one scorer and their much needed spark off the bench. Jackson has a very young, confident Lakers team that has proven they can beat anyone in the west and have a chance against the Celtics if they continue to play the way they have so far in the playoffs.
Doc Rivers: Although the Celtics have made it to NBA Finals with a 12-8 record, Boston has had a much longer journey to get there than expected. It was confusing that the best team in the regular season was forced to Game 7's against Atlanta and Cleveland in their first 2 rounds, causing a lot of doubts if Boston really was the best team in the NBA. Rivers kept the Celtics composed under all the pressure and beat their biggest rival in the Eastern Conference, the Detroit Pistons, by shutting down Rasheed Wallace and Tayshaun Prince. Rivers has a veteran, experienced Celtics team that has proven Boston does deserve to be in the NBA Finals and have a chance against the Celtics if they play the way they did against Detroit.
This is hard to determine which coach has an advantage for the 2008 playoffs, but I have to favor Jackson here. The Lakers knocked off the defending champions in only 5 games and made it look easy. The Celtics beat the Pistons in 6 games, but each game was a true battle and Boston had to win 2 games on the road to win the series. Another thing is Rivers has an older Celtics team and having playing 20 games already in the playoffs, I'm not sure how much energy they will have left going against Jackson's younger, high-scoring Lakers team to win a championship. Advantage: Lakers (2-1)
Coaches overall advantage: Los Angeles Lakers
No comments:
Post a Comment