Phil Jackson wouldn’t call the Spurs a dynasty, but meant no disrespect


Phil Jackson met with the New York media last week to discuss the state of the Knicks, and in speaking about the possibility of Carmelo Anthony taking less money to re-sign there this summer, took what some perceived to be an inadvertent shot at the Spurs.

But really, he was just clarifying a technicality of how we should define the word “dynasty.”

“Tim Duncan making the salary he’s making after being part of a dynasty — not a dynasty, I wouldn’t call San Antonio a dynasty — a force, a great force,” Jackson said, via the New York Daily News. “They haven’t been able to win consecutive championships, but they’ve always been there. San Antonio has had a wonderful run through Tim’s tenure there as a player. He’s agreed to take a salary cut so other players can play with him so they can be this good. And that’s the beginning of team play.”

This isn’t the younger version of Jackson the coach who had no issue trying to rile up an opponent with a jab through the media, so he wanted to make sure that no disrespect was perceived.

The Spurs and the Lakers are often debated as to which team dominated the last decade, with San Antonio winning three and a half titles (including the lockout-shortened ’99 season) while L.A. won five — three straight from 2000-2002, and back-to-back in the 2009 and 2010 seasons.

The Spurs have achieved great, great success under Popovich, and it’s been sustained much longer, with 17 consecutive playoff appearances. The Lakers, meanwhile, have been forced to experience a season or two of rebuilding mixed in here and there, and are currently in one of the more dire situations we’ve seen them face in quite some time.

It really wasn’t a shot at the Spurs. But in Phil’s eyes, the dynasty label in San Antonio simply does not apply.