From the Archives: Bob Cousy Interview, June 15, 2004
On June 15, 2004, I did a phone interview with Bob Cousy. At that time, I was working on a feature story about Cousy's teammate Sam Jones. During our conversation, Cousy provided insight and background information for not only the Jones article but many other articles as well.
Bob Cousy is a living legend and a basketball pioneer who played collegiately for Holy Cross more than 70 years ago before running the point for the Boston Celtics' first six championship teams (1957, 1959-63). Cousy led the NBA in assists for eight straight seasons (1953-60), a record that stood until John Stockton led the league in assists for nine straight seasons (1988-96).
It is unfortunate that Cousy's greatness is misunderstood by people who lack basic knowledge of basketball history. Cousy was not only inducted in the Naismith Memorial Basketball Hall of Fame in 1971, but he was selected to each of the NBA's special anniversary teams: 25th, 35th, 50th, 75th. The only other players chosen for all four teams are George Mikan, Bob Pettit, and Bill Russell.
After his playing career, Cousy was a successful college coach at Boston College (114-38, five postseason appearances in six seasons, NIT runner-up in 1969), and he coached briefly in the NBA as well. When Cousy coached the Kansas City-Omaha Kings (now known as the Sacramento Kings), Nate Archibald became the first--and still only--player to lead the NBA in scoring and assists in the same season (1972-73).
Cousy received the Presidential Medal of Freedom in 2019.
It was a privilege to spend so much time talking hoops with Bob Cousy, and I think that now is the perfect time to share the knowledge that he shared with me. Some of the quotes from this interview have appeared in previous articles that I wrote, but the interview has never been published in full before. I have edited it slightly for clarity, and I have embedded links to relevant articles published subsequent to the interview:
Friedman: "The genesis of this article came from an interview that I did with Slick Leonard, the Pacers broadcaster. He mentioned to me that he thought that Sam Jones is possibly the most underrated NBA guard ever. I am interested in your perspective as a teammate of Sam Jones. What was it that made him such a special player?"
Cousy: "A whole lot of God-given physical skills, obviously, with a pretty acute intensity for the game. I'm always a little startled when I hear announcers talk about this jock or that jock on a professional level and how competitive they are and how much they want to win. Hell, it's kind of a basic requirement for all professionals in any field that you have to come to it with a certain passion, but I would agree that some have it to a larger degree than others. But the point is that Sam had a very competitive attitude. I'm not sure that's not more germane to those of us who came out of the ghettoes of those years, and of course if you were black and you came out of the ghettoes that made you even more passionate and urgent about being successful at what you were doing, which in his case was (playing) a sport with a lot of God-given skills. I don't know if I'd go so far as to say that Sam was in fact the most underrated guard who ever played, but I'd vote for the top three, David."
Friedman: "I noticed in researching this article that Sam Jones averaged 27 points per game in game sevens, and that Boston went 9-0 in those games. Obviously, that scoring average was even higher than his regular season average. From your perspective playing alongside him, what enabled him to be even more successful in a high pressure situation--a game seven situation--than he was in the regular season or in other playoff games?"
Cousy: "I was completely unaware of that, as is most of the world I think, and that is an interesting stat, because that is, obviously, I would say astounding really. All of us that played with the Celtics during those years benefited from having played--especially, I guess, myself in terms of being the playmaker--with six or seven other Hall of Famers. So the defenses, whether in game seven or otherwise, were not able to focus on any one individual. These days, when it was Pippen and Michael, or even L.A. now--I mean it's fine to talk about Malone and Payton, but they're almost ignoring them to focus on Shaq and Kobe--but even with two guys it's a hell of a lot easier than trying to carry the load by yourself. But when you're surrounded by six or seven other guys it's a little easier to do your thing. And I guess an explanation--as I said, I was unaware of that stat--where Sam is concerned, the fact that you just told me that Leonard said he was perhaps the most underrated guard. If in fact there is truth to this and if in fact the opponents did not give him his due respect, that also--given his talent level--could be the explanation of why he did so well in game sevens. In other words, if they were busy watching me or Heinsohn or Sharman or whoever in the seventh games, if they were more concerned about some of us than they were with Sam, then obviously they made a mistake. That stat proves it."
Friedman: "In that sense, it would almost be a little like--taking a current example with the Lakers of a couple years ago--if the opponent is keying on Shaq or Kobe then it leaves an opening for Robert Horry. Obviously, Horry is not as good of a player as Sam Jones was, but it leaves an opening for someone else to make shots if the other team is keying on someone else, and that could be a part of it."
Cousy: "I wouldn't use that analogy myself, at least where Horry is concerned, but as a general statement there might be some truth to that. If in preparation for game sevens--but, I'll tell you, I don't know how they could be overlooking Sam. Sam was as pure of a shooter--with the people I played with, he and Sharman were the purest shooters who came through that period. You can talk about Jerry West and Oscar Robertson, but Sam, in my judgment, would outshoot any of those guys. I've said for years that it was a joy playing with people like Sharman and Sam because both of them moved extremely well without the ball, and I don't think that I ever gave it to them when they didn't make the damn shot. Now that's an exaggeration, obviously, but in my mind I felt that way.
When I was on the floor with either one they were always my first option because as a point guard you are playing percentages all the time out there. Both of them moved very well without the ball. Sharman was a little more relentless, he just kept making circles and he was a bitch to guard. In Sam's case, he was about as quick as any guard that has ever played the game. I read where Sam has said that all we had to do was find the open shot and the ball would be there waiting for us. In Sam's case, as I said, I knew when he made his move all I had to do was put the ball where he was supposed to be and the timing was such that he would get there just in time to catch it and throw the damn thing up and the defender would always be a step behind because of Sam's quickness. He was an extraordinary athlete and from the standpoint of basketball and the point guard's version of it he was a joy to play with because you knew that he could always get free."
Friedman: One of the things that is interesting about the Celtics of your era--and this has been noted by other people before--is that you basically trained your replacement. In a lot of cases you would have a Hall of Fame caliber player playing behind you, like Ramsey preparing Havlicek to be the sixth man or, in your case, as a guard, while you and Sharman were starting you had K.C. Jones and Sam Jones coming off of the bench."
Cousy: "Four Hall of Famers, not a bad lineup."
Friedman: "Right, yeah. I have a two part question: what was your role mentoring Sam Jones when you were a veteran and he came in, and then also, on the flip side of that, how did it help your career when you look at the bench and see a young guy with all this talent to realize that you have to maintain a high level of play to keep your job?'
Cousy: "I wasn't dealing with Sam in terms of how to become the point guard. K.C. became the point guard."
Friedman: "I understand that you played different positions, but just from the standpoint of being a veteran--or would you say your mentoring was more directed toward K.C.?"
Cousy: "Yeah. KC was going to replace me and become the playmaker. It was important that he and Sam be on the same page just as Sharman and I were. Most of this is instinctive, David, especially in basketball. In other sports--I don't know about hockey, but in football, for instance, a lot of people carry out assignments on each play and everything is structured and disciplined. Basketball is more of a free-flowing game of instinct and reaction to an action. It's not so much how long you play with someone--depending on how alert and acute his mental process is, you just develop little hand signals, head signals, eye signals as to what to do in the middle of the action.
In Sam's case, he was even easier to feed in an open court situation than Sharman because of his speed and quickness. Normally people associate basketball players with height, but in my judgment speed and quickness is what separates the men from the boys. In an open court situation, given Sam's ability to back door a player or change his direction or make a quick move, if the defender--if I were out there with him and we had some court to work with--made the slightest mistake, if he didn't respect Sam's quickness every minute, if he tried to overplay and keep the ball from getting to Sam, that in itself--the minute he knew he was being overplayed, the minute I saw it I knew that Sam was going to go backdoor. It was just a matter of waiting. This is not something you learn at that level. You learn this in the schoolyards of the world that we all came through. In that sense, there wasn't any kind of tutoring.
Arnold (Cousy is one of the few people who always called Red Auerbach by his actual first name, Arnold) made his big speech my first year--'I don't give a shit how Cousy throws the ball as long as it gets to the intended receiver'--because that first year they weren't quite catching all my passes. Well, that was a momentary response. I mean, this is not rocket science. By the time guys get to this level they have a lot of skills, some guys have more than others. In terms of learning to play with myself or any so-called quarterback, you are talking about a matter of weeks, you're not talking about two seasons. With a player like Sam, hell, you can almost do it from day one. So, it wasn't a question of sitting down--self interest motivates what most of us do in sports or otherwise. Sam knew that in order to get the ball from me he had to find that open spot and he knew that I would get the ball to him. I knew that Sam had the quickness to do that. So we're kind of waiting on each other to react to every situation. That's why, in my judgment, in basketball--unlike in other sports--you can't predetermine. Every time down the floor is a different situation. You can't predetermine. Your action is a reaction to what the defender is doing. Both players, after you've played with a guy for--never mind six years--six days you acclimate yourself pretty quickly. Now it's a question of utilizing your particular skills.
Where Sam and I were concerned, it was a matter of him having confidence in my passing skills and my vision to know once he made that move and that cut and got away from his defender even momentarily, as he said, the ball would be there ready to shoot. He didn't have to put it on the floor. Offense in basketball, the criteria in my judgment is to be effective with the least amount of wasted motion. Sam and I could do both. I didn't want to waste a single pass. Sam had the ability to get to that open spot and know that the ball would be there. It was kind of acclimating ourselves to each other and that did not take a long period of time."
Friedman: "What you're saying reminds me of something that Charles Barkley says sometimes on the TNT broadcasts. He says that, in a sense, basketball is an easy game--that great players make it easy, but that bad players make it difficult. What you are saying is that with the Celtics you had a lot of cerebral players, players who picked up the game quickly, and had God-given ability, and the more great players you had out there the easier the game was."
Cousy: "Plus we played in a system that lent itself to that, David. We relied primarily on transition rather than set plays. There was always constant movement. We were always trying to impose the maximum pressure on the opponent whether it was on defense or offense. We tried to ram it down their throats all the time. We always tried to have them backpedaling and trying to decide what we were going to do. When you have that kind of speed and quickness, God, you can pretty much call your own offense in that kind of situation."
Friedman: "I would say, isn't that something that is really missing from today's game?"
Cousy: "Completely."
Friedman: "What stunned me--I covered a couple of the Pistons-Pacers playoff games--you would see so many times that there would be a three-on-two or the potential of a three-on-two break and the point guard dribbles to the foul line and then circles back out."
Cousy: "There are 29 teams in the league, David, and maybe three or four of them are running in transition (the Charlotte Bobcats--later renamed as the Charlotte Hornets--became the NBA's 30th team in the 2004-05 season, after this interview took place). We could talk about this all day. I think it's a basic insecurity, I think that it's all the pressures on the coaches today, I think partially that it's ego--they want to stand up and hold up numbers. 'Look at that, he's orchestrating everything.' It's not that kind of game. Basketball, unlike the other sports, is a game of free flow."
Friedman: "At least, it should be."
Cousy: "Yeah. That's the way I learned it and I'll go to my grave believing that. I had this discussion yesterday with a successful college coach in our area who tries to coach the same way. The more you structure it, especially on a professional level--you need a basic structure and discipline, I'm not saying go out there and go schoolyard, where the critics will say, 'Oh shit, they're throwing the ball all over the lot.' You need a basic structure, but once that is put in place the rest of it has to be--the option of a play in basketball works better 90% of the time than the play itself. The more you structure yourself--that's why all of these coaches today spend so much money on film and preparation. All of them know what the other teams are going to do. It still comes down to the individual moves of the players, and when you over-structure on a professional level, in my judgment, you neutralize (your own) superior talent. Maybe on a college level, high school level, as you go down the line, sure you need more structure and discipline because you are not dealing with that level of skilled players, so they need more coaching and more structure. But on this level, to structure to the point that 24 or 25 of the 29 coaches do is missing a golden opportunity, not exploiting your skilled players to the degree that you should be, and as a result I think for the most part you get underachievement instead of overachievement. You've got to let the players on this level have confidence in their skills and their abilities."
Friedman: "I definitely agree with that. Getting back to Sam Jones, for a lot of my readers who would not have had the opportunity to see Sam Jones play, what current or recent guard reminds you most of him either in terms of shooting ability or performance in the clutch? What recent guard would be reminiscent of Sam in some way?"
Cousy: "David, I've been asked that about myself over the years. I don't know. If you are talking about Hall of Famers or great athletes in any sport, I think that we all develop our own signature. I momentarily identified with Ernie D (Ernie DiGregorio), in terms of a small portion of his game. We used to like to do a few things the same way. Other than that, I was never able to say. Everyone says John Stockton--"
Friedman: "Of course."
Cousy: "But we didn't play the same. Our styles were completely different, even though we utilized some of the same weapons.
Sam's signature was that backboard shot, but Sam could hurt you in every way imaginable. The only other one you would say that about would be Michael Jordan, but I wouldn't compare them, not so much because of skills, but Sam and Michael didn't play the same even though they utilized some of the same--they covered the board the same way. The point is that Sam was an absolute scoring machine. You might say Jerry West, he liked to use the backboard shot from time to time, but they weren't the same. I don't know. When I think of various centers who played the game--no one played like Kareem, certainly no one played like Russell, no one to this point plays like Shaq. No one springs to mind when you ask who reminds me of Sam. He was a great one and I haven't seen anyone who was able to score with the kind of proficiency that Sam did."
Friedman: "I asked the same question of Tommy Heinsohn when I interviewed him a couple days ago for this article and the name he threw out there--in terms of a guy who, like Sam, has the long distance game, the mid-range game, and the ability to drive, and that very few guards have a complete game like that--was Rip Hamilton from Detroit. Do you see any similarity there in terms of having all of the shots?"
Cousy: "As usual, I disagree with everything that Tommy says, including that (Cousy laughs). Number one, I don't think that Hamilton is going to be a Hall of Famer. He may--he has already played better in this series (the 2004 NBA Finals) than I thought he was capable of playing, and I hope that he continues tonight (game five) but I don't see any similarity other than the fact that they are both good shooters. Especially at this stage of the game. God, I think that is vastly underrating Sam."
Friedman: "I think that he meant it more from the standpoint of style, not necessarily skill. I didn't understand him to mean that Rip Hamilton is as good as Sam Jones--he made it pretty clear that he did not think that--but from the standpoint of style, because my question was not just about skill, but about style, the idea of someone who can shoot a variety of shots, not just a three point shooter or a driver."
Cousy: "I guess Tommy is more of a visionary than I am. I don't see anything of Sam's in Hamilton's game."
Friedman: "Well, I'll make sure to put it in there that you two completely disagreed on that (Cousy laughs)--I'll give you both equal time on that. I thought that it was an interesting comparison, but I see your point as well.
Back to what you said about Stockton for a minute, I guess obviously people make that comparison because your physical size is similar and you both accumulated high assist totals, but I guess a big difference people overlook is that in your day you were a big time scorer. You were in the top 10 or 15 in scoring for several years, whereas Stockton was not that type of scorer. Wouldn't that be another difference between the two of you?"
Cousy: "I made the reference earlier that in my judgment a good point guard is primarily concerned with accomplishing whatever he has to accomplish with the least amount of wasted motion. I never tried to throw an unnecessary pass or a meaningless pass if I could avoid it. This is what I saw in Stockton's game. I think that Stockton did the same thing and I had great respect for that, but we did it in different ways, and other than that our games were not similar. Stockton could score when he had to score--I didn't have to because I was surrounded by a bunch of scorers, so I knew what my role was, but when it came time to shoot--the effectiveness of a good point guard is obviously affected by how he can generate offense when necessary to gain the respect of the opponent. If the defender feels you are not a legitimate offensive threat then he is going to play you accordingly and make it much more difficult for you to be a playmaker, so one complements the other. The minute that a guard disrespects your shooting it's going to be tougher to do your passing game, so you've got to be enough of an offensive threat to keep the defense honest--which both Stockton and I were--and keep them playing and reacting to the faking that you are doing so that you can make your plays."
Friedman: "One last question I wanted to ask you about Sam Jones. I appreciate the time you have taken and the thoughtful answers you have given. This question is similar to one that was asked to Bill Russell. After he had retired, he was asked about playing against Kareem, and he responded, 'Young man, you have the question backwards.' So in asking this question I don't mean it as disrespect or that I am presuming the answer. I'm interested in your analysis of this. Picture Sam Jones in his prime playing against Kobe Bryant or Tracy McGrady in their primes. What would these matchups be like?"
Cousy: "They'd have a bitch of a time guarding each other, if that's the question. I'm asked all the time, 'Could you play in today's game?' and my reaction is the same as Russell's--a lot of guys playing today couldn't have played in our day, simply because there were less teams and the talent was more concentrated. If you are talking about Hall of Fame athletes in any sport, it transcends the time period. Baseball players that I have spoken to--Ted Williams, Hank Aaron, Joe DiMaggio--Joe and Ted went to their deathbeds swearing that yesteryear's players were better than today's players. I don't know enough about it to make that judgment. I know that in all the other sports, like track and field, the records have fallen. Basketball, I look at the All-Star Game now and say, 'God, that is not the game that we played many years ago.' When I jumped as high as I could I got the bottom of the net and when Michael jumps as high as he can he jumps over the damn backboard. Yes, they've gotten bigger, better, stronger in basketball. Whether they execute the skills as well as we did, I would argue that point--the passing, dribbling, how to play the game skills, I think we could hold our own. When you are talking about Hall of Famers, Sam could easily play in today's era and give Kobe and Tracy and whoever all they could handle. When you are talking about McGrady, Kobe, Sam Jones--I mean, nobody could stop these guys. They have so many offensive weapons, unless you commit two or even three people to them you are not going to slow them down a lot. Sometimes they slow themselves down, like Kobe in this series (2004 NBA Finals), I don't know whether the business in Colorado has finally gotten to him or what, but he is not only ineffective in terms of being Kobe Bryant but he is losing his cool as well and he's not passing the ball the way he should. A lot of things go into the equation. Sam transcends the ages as well."
Friedman: "Right. I believe that. The point that I was getting at--as I indicated when I prefaced the question--I didn't mean that he couldn't (play well today). From an analytical standpoint--Sam went about 6-4 right?"
Cousy: "Yes."
Friedman: "Kobe and McGrady are 6-7 or 6-8. I was wondering, in one's mind's eye, picturing the matchup--Sam would bring the superior shooting, they would bring the superior size, what would the matchup actually look like or how would it go? I guess you would say that Sam would use his speed and quickness to get his shot off--"
Cousy: "Yeah, but these guys aren't slow either, David. As I said earlier, in my mind that's what separates the men from the boys. Both Tracy and Kobe, for their size, have speed in abundance as well, so what Sam would be giving up in height and maybe a little in strength he would make up by maybe being a little quicker and faster than these guys, but he wouldn't be blowing by anybody. All of us would be competitive, whether Sam is as good as Kobe, let someone else decide that. In our day at that point in time, God, there was no one who could create offensively as effectively as Sam could."
Friedman: "I've always thought--I wonder if you agree with this, I think that it is along the lines of what you are saying--that in looking at the players over the years that the top players from any era could compete with the top players from any other era, but what about the players who were 8-9-10 on the rosters in the 1950s or 1960s, do you think that they could compete?"
Cousy: "Well, if you are talking 8-9 as opposed to 11-12, the chances are that they would make the team simply because back then we only had eight teams or 10 teams but now there are 29 teams and there will be 30 next year. There are 29 teams but you only have about four centers in the league, David. How many point guards do you have? We have less than four. There are a lot of people who play that position, but I've been asked recently to name the top point guards. I get to Jason Kidd and Tony Parker and then I have to stop and think. You know what I'm saying? The chances are that (players) eight and nine could play today simply because there are so many more teams. Eleven and twelve I doubt."
Friedman: "The speed and quickness might become too big of a factor, right?"
Cousy: "Simply because of numbers. The situation in basketball today, it's sad when you see what the Celtics are going to have to go through--when you get to the bottom of the heap or close to the bottom, it can take you 20 years to rebuild because the demand is so much greater than the supply. I have no explanation for that. Basketball is the number two sport in the world in terms of participation. We have millions of kids playing it. I don't know why we don't produce more quality point guards and big people to play on the NBA level, but most teams in the NBA--even teams that have a center-type player--are utilizing the two power forward format. Look at Dallas, they have a 7-7 guy sitting on the bench for the most part--"
Friedman: "Shawn Bradley."
Cousy: "Yeah, Shawn Bradley. The point is, I have no explanation why (we aren't developing more point guards and centers) with all these kids (in America)--that's why we're looking for talent in China, Yugoslavia, Asia, and all these places. We're (America) just not producing enough talent to stock 29 teams--you can put bodies out there, but what you have--maybe that's the game plan for the NBA, in order to reach parity let's go to complete mediocrity. But the problem with that, as we've seen in the last eight or 10 years, is that creates two or three excellent teams, a half dozen good teams, and then the rest is just some degree of mediocrity. When you are shelling out 70, 80, 100 bucks--1000 bucks in some places--for a ticket to see L.A. play Milwaukee or Memphis--well, Memphis was fairly competitive this year--but that's not going to draw a lot of fans when you have that kind of differential between the teams, and that's what we've had in the NBA for quite a while now."
Friedman: "The lack of point guards is somewhat of a mystery, but I think that at least part of what happened with the lack of centers is that players who in the past would have been told, 'You're a center, get on the block,' are now called power forwards. Like Garnett or Duncan, in the past those guys would have been centers and the coach would have said, 'Look, you're a center, go on the block and play defense.' Now, they're called power forwards and they play facing the basket and they do all these other things."
Cousy: "That's a good point. The Hall of Fame just created this Bob Cousy point guard award. Jameer Nelson won it this year, the first year."
Friedman: "Right."
Cousy: "We created it because as players are coming through the schoolyards--even the point guards--they are getting bigger and stronger and they don't have to rely as much upon finesse. So they are not thinking about setting up (other players) as much as they are thinking about dunking. So the emphasis in the schoolyards as these guys are coming through maybe is having something to do with their mindset. They are not simply focusing on being point guards. There was some kind of disconnect, I thought, in the 1970s, and then Magic and Bird came along and reinvigorated the schoolyard kids in terms of the passing game because both of them did it so effectively. I think we are at a point where we need that kind of boost or impetus right now."
Friedman: "That brings up a natural question. What do you think of LeBron James? Can he have that kind of impact?"
Cousy: "Oh yes. I saw him only once, but this kid is the real McCoy. He can be whatever he wants to be. Maravich could have been the best point guard that ever played, but he was always with a team that needed him to score 35 points to be competitive, so despite his massive playmaking skills and what he could do with the ball and his vision he is remembered more as a scoring guard than as a creative guard--but that was because of his circumstances. LeBron is with a middle of the road team right now, but he could go either way--he could become a great scoring guard but in my judgment he has the skills to be a great point guard as well."
Friedman: "He seems to have tremendous court vision."
Cousy: "Absolutely. Absolutely. I saw him once, his first game in Boston earlier this year. We did the game (as local broadcasters). He didn't have a particularly effective game scoring--I think he scored 14, or whatever, but after the first quarter I was saying, 'This kid is the real McCoy.' I think he's going to be a great one in the Magic Johnson mold."
Friedman: "He sees the open man even when that man might not even realize that he is open and he delivers the ball."
Cousy: "Absolutely. He's going to be a great one."
Friedman: "Thank you very much for your time. I appreciate it. It was a great honor to speak with you."
Cousy: "Have a good day."
Friedman: "Thanks, you too."
Labels: Bill Russell, Bob Cousy, Boston Celtics, K.C. Jones, Kobe Bryant, LeBron James, Pete Maravich, Red Auerbach, Rip Hamilton, Sam Jones, Tommy Heinsohn
posted by David Friedman @ 10:04 PM
K.C. Jones: Consummate Champion
Players and teams talk so much about the thrill of winning just one championship that it is worth remembering and emphasizing that K.C. Jones, who passed away earlier today at the age of 88, won two NCAA titles, an Olympic gold medal, and eight NBA titles as a player before winning two NBA titles as an assistant coach (1972 Lakers, 1981 Celtics) and two more NBA titles as a head coach. Only two players have won more NBA titles than Jones: his Boston teammates Bill Russell (11) and Sam Jones (10).
K.C. Jones may be the most underrated head coach in NBA history. He not only coached the best Boston Celtics teams of the 1980s--one of which, the 1986 Celtics, will forever be on the short list of greatest single season teams ever--but his regular season winning percentage of .674 ranks sixth in NBA history (minimum of 200 regular season games coached), trailing only Steve Kerr, Phil Jackson, Billy Cunningham, Larry Bird, and Gregg Popovich (Jones is only .001 percentage points behind Popovich, so Jones may move past Popovich on that list this season unless the San Antonio Spurs perform much better than expected). Jones' playoff winning percentage of .587 ranks 13th in NBA history (minimum of 60 playoff games coached). Jones is one of eight coaches who have won two NBA titles; only six coaches have won more than two NBA titles (Phil Jackson, Red Auerbach, John Kundla, Pat Riley, Gregg Popovich, and Steve Kerr).
As a player, Jones was not a great shooter but he was cerebral, tough, and athletic. Jones was drafted by the NFL's L.A. Rams, and he might have made the final cut had he not injured his knee; despite only spending a brief time with the Rams, Jones is credited with being the first defensive back to utilize "bump and run" coverage technique.
Jones' partnership with Russell dates back to their days at the University of San Francisco, where they captured NCAA titles in 1955 and 1956 while putting together a 55 game winning streak. Russell was such a dominant defender that he would tell Jones to run to a particular spot so that Russell could block a shot directly to Jones to start the fast break! The combination of elite athletic ability and supreme basketball IQ/mental toughness is impossible to beat. It is not an accident that Russell and Jones won at every level (college, Olympics, NBA), and anyone who assumes that they would not be very successful as players in this era fails to understand the essence of championship competition.
Jones' NBA statistics are not eye-popping, but he ranked third in the league in assists for three straight seasons (1964-66), each time trailing only Oscar Robertson and Guy Rodgers. The Celtics won the championship during each of those seasons, and it speaks volumes that Jones was not only a stout defensive player for those squads but that he was also the team's quarterback after Bob Cousy retired.
Jones' Boston teammate Tommy Heinsohn passed away a few weeks ago. I interviewed Heinsohn on June 10, 2004. A few days later, I interviewed K.C. Jones. At the time, I was working on an article about their Boston teammate Sam Jones (the article appeared in the December 2004 issue of Basketball Digest), but our wide ranging conversation covered not only Sam Jones but also Bill Russell, Larry Bird, Bill Fitch, Phil Jackson, Michael Jordan, Kobe Bryant, and more.
My K.C. Jones interview has never been published in full anywhere, though some quotes and insights from that interview have appeared in various articles that I wrote. Here, in tribute to Jones, is that June 20, 2004 interview:
Friedman: "The idea for this article came out of an
interview that I did with Slick Leonard, the Pacers’ broadcaster. He mentioned
that he felt that Sam Jones is the most underrated guard in the history of the
NBA. From your perspective as a teammate of Sam's, what made him a special,
unique player?"
Jones: "What made him unique? That's kind of hard to
explain. He had such supreme confidence in his shot. One example that I recall
is when he went for a nine foot jumper and Wilt came over to block it and while
Sam was in the air he said, 'You can't get this one baby' and it went off the
backboard and in."
Friedman: "Was that the game that Wilt went after Sam? I
read about a game in which Sam so infuriated Wilt—telling him that he couldn't
block his shot—that Wilt went after him."
Jones: "I'm not sure if it was that game. I don't think that
Wilt would go after somebody for trash talking. I think that something physical
happened and Wilt went over to shake Sam's hand to say, 'Let's put it behind
us' and Sam thought that he was coming after him so he picked up a stool from
behind the basket."
Friedman: "Oh, so it was kind of a misunderstanding."
Jones: "Yeah."
Friedman: "I noticed in researching this article that Sam
Jones averaged 27 points per game in game seven situations and that the Celtics
were 9-0 in those games. Obviously, that was above his regular season scoring
average. What enabled him to be so successful in clutch situations?"
Jones: "He very seldom went to the basket for the layup. He
would drive and then pull up for the jumper. We did all kinds of things to get
him open or to get Havlicek open. That's the way we played. That's similar to
what Detroit is
trying to do now, work for your teammate. Sam could go one-on-one. He had a
stutter step that would kind of halt your defense and then all of a sudden he
just glides by you. He did that to me in a scrimmage and it just totally blew
my mind that he was so smooth with that. He was driving on the right side from
around the top of the key extended. It looked like he was going to pull up. He
just hesitated, I stopped and then he just went by me. In our offense we always
tried to get him open for shots. When Russell would get the ball for his play
he could just take the ball and shoot it because it was the '6' play but he
would not shoot the ball unless Sam and Havlicek were not open. That's the way
we played. So we liked to get out shooters open because that's the high
percentage play."
Friedman: "Would that be a play where Russell would be
getting the ball on the block looking for cutters and Sam would cut off of
him?"
Jones: "He'd mainly look for our shooters. He wouldn't look
for me or Satch (Tom Sanders), even if I was open. One time he got an offensive
rebound and I was five feet away from him saying, 'Bill, Bill, Bill' and he
looked me in the eye, reached around and threw the ball in the corner to Sam,
which I thought was the right play. Some other player in my position would have
been (ticked) off and then you have a problem but that's not the way we did it."
Friedman: "Right, because your role was not as a shooter on
the team."
Jones: "Yeah, but other teams have guys who are not shooters
but if they are not passed the ball they are ready to fight. My point is, I
considered that the best play because we want the ball in the hands of the guy
with the highest shooting percentage."
Friedman: "You mentioned guarding Sam in a scrimmage. Did
you usually guard him or were you usually on the same team with you playing
point and him playing shooting guard?"
Jones: "I didn't usually guard him. I don't know what
happened in that practice, but that was the first time I guarded him, I
believe. I guarded Bill Sharman most times in practice. I either guarded
Sharman or Bob Cousy."
Friedman: "You mentioned the Detroit Pistons. For my readers
who did not have a chance to see Sam play, what current or recent guard would
you say is most similar to him either in shooting ability or performance in the
clutch?"
Jones: "I guess Jerry West would be one. Maybe Hamilton. He would be
another."
Friedman: "Hamilton from Detroit?"
Jones: "Yeah."
Friedman: "That's interesting. Tommy Heinsohn also mentioned
him. Heinsohn mentioned Hamilton
because he has a variety of shots—the long distance game, the mid-range game
and the driving game. So you would see a similarity from that standpoint?"
Jones: "Oh, yeah. More times than not when Hamilton is driving he pulls up for the
jumper. If he has the defense beaten he goes straight to the basket. More times
than not he's running without the ball and he spends a lot of energy running
around to get open and then he has to go to the other end and play aggressive
defense. That man is in awesome shape. What's like Sam is that he moves without
the ball and when he gets the ball he's going right up for the shot."
Friedman: "What's interesting is that when I brought that
comparison up to Bob Cousy, who I later interviewed, he didn't like that particular
comparison because he didn't think that there was anyone in the modern game who
could really be compared with Sam. It's interesting to me to talk to his
teammates and hear their different perspectives. You are the second one who
brought up Rip Hamilton, which is interesting to me."
Jones: "What did Cousy say as far as comparisons go?"
Friedman: "Well, he was looking strictly on the basis of
skill level and when I brought up that Tom Heinsohn had mentioned Rip Hamilton,
Cousy replied that, for one thing, he didn't see Hamilton as a Hall of Famer and to him that
was disrespectful of Sam Jones' talent. He felt that Rip Hamilton has not
proven that he is a Hall of Famer. I made the point that what Heinsohn had said
to me was not that Hamilton is as good as Sam Jones, but that their styles are
similar in terms of having a variety of shots. There are very few modern guards
who really have a complete game in terms of being able to shoot from deep, from
mid-range and being able to drive. Most guards today only have one of the
three."
Jones: "Yes."
Friedman: "So there is a comparison there from the
standpoint of style. No one is saying that Rip Hamilton is an all-time great—"
Jones: "It's a little early for that."
Friedman: "Right, of course."
Jones: "He's only been in the league a few years."
Friedman: "Right, he's only been around for a few years and
this is his first championship."
Jones: "Yeah. You take Kobe,
you take Hamilton,
you take Sam, you take Jerry West—in crunch time you are looking for these
people, you want these people to have the ball."
Friedman: "So from the standpoint of producing in the clutch
you would put Kobe
in there as well because he hits last second shots. He and Sam had different
playing styles, but they both produced in the clutch."
Jones: "The style is different, but what I'm saying is that
in crunch time you want the ball to go to your best shooters. That's what I'm
saying. I'm not talking about style—whether they use a spin move or all
that—I'm saying in crunch time the ball goes to your best shooters. They
approach it in different ways."
Friedman: "Sure. Another thing I want to ask you about—and I
know that a similar question was once asked of Bill Russell about a
hypothetical matchup with Kareem and his response was, 'Young man, you have the
question backwards'—I'm interested from your perspective how you would picture
a matchup of Sam Jones in his prime playing against Kobe or McGrady, what would
that matchup be like, what strengths would Sam Jones use to counteract Kobe or
McGrady, who are both a little taller than Sam?"
Jones: "Kobe
would have a very difficult time staying with Sam defensively."
Friedman: "From a speed standpoint?"
Jones: "Yes, from speed or quickness, whatever you want to
call it. Could Kobe stay with Hamilton? I don't think so. Kobe
couldn't stay with Sam and maybe Sam couldn't stay with Kobe. Thinking in terms of guarding each
other, I don't see it in that mode. There are changes and moves that can be
made; they can guard other people so that they don't wear themselves out and
wear their minds out guarding the best player on the other team."
Friedman: "So if they played against each other it would be
a real shootout because they both would be scoring a lot."
Jones: "Well, yeah. They are masters of the offensive end,
they don't master the defensive end. So you have to be someone who is defensive
oriented to guard the Kobes and the Same Jones and the Hamiltons. That's what
happened in Chicago when Drexler from Portland was guarding Jordan (in the 1992 Finals). I
thought that was not a good move, putting Drexler on Jordan."
Friedman: "You're wearing out your best player."
Jones: "Yes, plus you experience a defeatist attitude, a
sense of fear, guarding Jordan.
Why would I put one of my best shooters out there to guard Jordan? It
doesn’t make any sense to me."
Friedman: "So from your standpoint, if Sam Jones was playing
at the same time as Kobe
they might not even be guarding each other. You might cross-match or do
something so that they wouldn't be facing each other."
Jones: "I think that would be the best move. If you saw
Drexler in the game, it just took his mind away."
Friedman: "You're talking about the game in the Finals when Jordan hit all
those three pointers."
Jones: "Yeah, whichever game that was. I know that Drexler
is an offensive player and great at being an offensive player. How many great
shooters do you see who are great on the defensive end?"
Friedman: "Very few."
Jones: "Very few."
Friedman: "Actually, Jordan would probably be one of the
exceptions since he was Defensive Player of the Year in addition to winning all
of the scoring titles. But your point is well taken. If you have a minute, I'd
like to switch gears. I'd be interested to ask you some questions specifically
about your career for use in a future article. I see some parallels between
your coaching career and Phil Jackson's coaching career in terms of reluctance
in some quarters to give you credit for your teams' success. With Phil Jackson,
he has won nine championships but people say, 'He always had the best player.
He had Jordan or he had
Shaq' and I think that kind of echoes from your career in Boston when you won championships but people
said that you had a Hall of Fame frontline. Do you see a parallel in that sense?"
Jones: "There was a great coach before I got to the Celtics,
Bill Fitch. He was a great coach. He did a super job of winning the
championship in 1981. I had the same players and went to the Finals four times
in five years and won two championships."
Friedman: "Right. That’s a very similar run to what Jackson just had with the
Lakers, winning three titles in five years."
Jones: "What you mentioned was that because I had these high
profile players, that's how I was able to have a championship team and go to
the Finals that often. That's what you're saying, right?"
Friedman: "I'm not saying that. I'm saying that's a
criticism that others have said. I don't think that it is valid. I think that
it is a challenge—and I wanted you to speak about this—when you have that many
talented players to get them to accept roles and to understand what has to be
done to win."
Jones: "I was speaking to the criticism. Of course, I'm not
an entertainer, which all coaches should be, because the media lives off of
that. I was just the opposite. I guess you are saying that (people say) that Jackson was a quiet guy
sitting on the sidelines and only reason he won was because he had Jordan and
Pippen. That really doesn’t make a lot of sense to me."
Friedman: "I agree."
Jones: "Here's what you've got. In college, the best coaches
are the ones who do the best scouting. They come up with the Okafors and the
Bill Russells and the Kareems. Without these great players, these great
individuals, how are you going to get there? Shaq and Kobe, they won for three years. Then Jackson is criticized for
having Jordan and Pippen. I don't understand that."
Friedman: "I don't understand it either. I think that it is
a great challenge. The team that you had in Boston, which had Bird, McHale and Parish—any
one of those guys could demand 25 shots a game. You were able to get them to
work together to understand how to share the ball and—"
Jones: "It's the same thing with Bill Fitch. He had the same
players and he did a great job with them to win a championship. But there
wasn't any question that he had Larry Bird and Kevin McHale and Danny Ainge. He
is not mentioned in the same way as Jackson
and I am."
Friedman: "When you first took over in Boston what was the biggest challenge that
you faced?"
Jones: "The biggest obstacle is always the communication
factor. If you don't have good communication between you and your top players,
then you are really alone. What Jackson did in Chicago was he had Jordan
and Pippen as his protectors. Jerry Sloan did that in Chicago
and he also did it with Malone and Stockton in Utah. I'm sure Jackson did that with Shaq."
Friedman: "So the key thing is to first make sure that the
big star buys into your program and accepts what you are doing and then
everyone else falls into line?"
Jones: "Those players have to be included. Your top two
players, like Russell and Cousy. It's even better if you have three players.
Your major guys are the ones who have to be included in your strategy planning.
They have thoughts. Red Auerbach did that with Cousy and Russell. If you don't
do that there is a fence there. You are alone. A wall is up."
Friedman: "You mentioned something about demeanor, that you
were not a media darling or doing things that the media would pick up on and
that is similar to Phil Jackson, because sometimes people will criticize him by
saying, 'Look what is going on on the court and he is sitting there looking at
his fingernails.' When you were on the sidelines you were not very
demonstrative. Your teams were very effective. People would turn that into a
criticism. I think that that is another way that you were similar to Phil
Jackson. You had a very calm demeanor on the courtside, you weren’t running
around or getting technicals."
Jones: "That's the entertainment factor. John Wooden seldom
got off the bench, but that's what the media looks for and some coaches have a
way of giving them what they want. Rick Pitino is great on the sidelines with
the press and his demeanor on the court. That's awesome stuff. You have others
who do the same thing and that's their coaching style."
Friedman: "From your standpoint, coaching—"
Jones: "Larry Brown in Detroit,
what does he do?"
Friedman: "To me, he is a little bit of a mixture. A lot of
times he is getting up and getting excited but sometimes—I think that he is a
hybrid. I think he is in the middle. He is not as demonstrative as some, but he
is not always just sitting there quietly—"
Jones: "Not in the playoffs (laughs). Maybe in the regular
season. In the regular season there is a tomorrow."
Friedman: "Right. Your coaching philosophy, as I understand
it, is your coaching was done in practice. You prepared the team for what they
had to do and you didn't need to do a lot of histrionics on the sidelines—"
Jones: "It wasn't me to be that demonstrative and it's not Jackson to do that.
Brown, same thing there. Then you have others—Bill Fitch was great, he was up
on the sidelines. He could have been a comedian on the stage because he was
great with the media and he was a super bright person."
Friedman: "One other thing that I wanted to ask you about is
something that I recall and then I see it all the time on ESPN Classic. I
noticed something about where Larry Bird would receive the ball. Usually when
you have a great player who is predominantly right handed, when they catch the
ball on the block—whether is it Shaq or Hakeem or Duncan—you can go down the
line—they usually like that left block. What I noticed a lot of times—"
Jones: "The left block facing the basket?"
Friedman: "Right. Exactly. The left block facing the basket.
If you picture Hakeem posting up or Shaq, they usually run to that left block.
That seems to be where the great players who are right handed tend to go."
Jones: "Except for Kareem."
Friedman: "Right."
Jones: "Kareem liked the right block."
Friedman: "Yeah. But I noticed with Larry Bird a lot of
times when he ran that exchange with Parish or if he was posting up and Ainge
or Dennis Johnson were feeding him, a lot of times Bird would go to the right
block or even the right side midway between the foul line and the block. I
wondered if there was a particular reason why he received the ball there. I
don't remember a lot of great players who were right handed getting the ball
there. I've always been curious about that."
Jones: "Well, hey, that’s something new to me. I never
thought about that. Of course, guys have special places they like to be. Right
handed guys like to be on the right block, is that what you’re saying?"
Friedman: "Well, my observation—maybe I’m wrong and you can
correct me. It seems to me that right hand dominant players tend to go to the
left block—I'm thinking of Shaq, Tim Duncan, Hakeem Olajuwon. I know that you
mentioned Kareem. I think that he would go to either block."
Jones: "Yeah."
Friedman: "I noticed a lot of times with Larry Bird—I
remember watching it during the 1980s and then I see it again on ESPN Classic—a
lot of times he was getting the ball on the right wing, midway between the foul
line and the post. I didn't know if this was by design or if that was where he
liked to get the ball or if it had anything to do with the spacing of the other
players. I didn't know if there was a grand reason behind it or it just
happened that way."
Jones: "Well I never saw a grand reason behind Larry doing
that. Of course, shooters follow the ball, and if you are a Reggie Miller or a
Larry Bird or whoever, it's wherever you get the ball and deal with it. But
then there are plays that put you in position to do that. Then it's, 'What side
do you want it on?' or 'What block do you want it on?' Then you know that’s the
way it goes and that’s how it’s dealt with."
Friedman: "Oh, OK. It seemed like he would get the ball a
lot of times in that area. I even noticed it when they replayed the old 1979
NCAA Championship against Magic Johnson. I didn't know if it was something that
developed early in his career for some reason. I know that he was effective
anywhere on the court, but I didn't know if there was a particular reason he
liked that spot, kind of midway between the foul line and the post. If he had a
smaller guy it seemed like he would back him in—"
Jones: "Yeah."
Friedman: "If he had a bigger guy he would drive. In the
(1988 playoff) game against Dominique, it seemed like he was getting the ball a
lot of times in that spot and then he would wheel around and drive into the
lane, like in that fourth quarter when he had 20 points."
Jones: "Yeah. Of course, players have spots that they like
or positions that they like to be in to make their favorite move down there.
You’re saying left block and right block and some of them could do both, but I
was never really that aware of that except coming off certain plays if he
wanted to post up he would come to either block, the block that he liked best.
More times than not, Larry was on the right side of the court as a forward.
Kevin was always on the block—him or Robert."
Friedman: "Right. Bird would be kind of in a mid-post
position, between the foul line and the block or even outside the three point
line."
Jones: "Yeah, Larry would come from the right side or the
left side or coming off a screen set by Robert or Kevin. A lot of times he was
on the right post."
Friedman: "Yeah, that’s what I'm saying. I noticed that on
tape. I found that interesting. I didn't know if there was a specific reason. I
guess some of that just comes out of the flow of the game."
Jones: "Yeah. It comes out of the flow of the game. What
about other players? Hamilton,
he does that circle thing, he comes around to the right side a lot of times and
all of a sudden he’s up in the air for the shot."
Friedman: "He's perpetual motion."
Jones: "Yeah, but all he is doing is trying to get open.
It's like a 1-4 setup, two guys on the right block, one guy on the left block
and the point guard's up top. Hamilton’s
down under the basket trying to find which way he can go to get the defense
knocked off. So he'll fake this way and go that way. Or fake this way and go
the other way. He's coming around and that's how he gets open."
Friedman: "He kind of bounces around like a pinball. He
reads, he goes by one of his big men and reads which way his defender is going
and he pops out the other way."
Jones: "Yeah. He's doing a mile run to get open to get his
shot on a court that is what, 50 by 90?"
Friedman: "Right. Exactly."
Jones: "But that's him. There are different ways of doing
it. Oscar Robertson would dribble you this way or that way for 15 seconds, let
you make a mistake with one of his subtle fakes and he's by you. Different
strokes."
Friedman: "Oscar's philosophy, as I understand it, was
always that he was never satisfied. If he had a 15 foot shot, he would try to
back you in or fake so that he could get a 12 foot shot. If he had a 12 foot
shot, he was always trying to get closer to the basket, and of course he had
great size, so he was always trying to get the closer shot. He was never
satisfied."
Jones: "Well, why not?" (laughs)
Friedman: "Sure, it makes sense. Well, the current players
don't always necessarily think that way. If the shot is open then they think it
is a good shot. They are not trying to get closer. It’s not the same type of
approach. Of course, Oscar's approach makes sense."
Jones: "That's what you work for. If you can get it, you get
it, but you have to work for it."
Friedman: "One more thing that I want to ask you—"
Jones: "There is one thing that I want to say. You were
talking about that I had Larry Bird and Kevin McHale and all those people and
that's how I was able to win. Then, I mentioned Bill Fitch. But I was not mentioning
Bill Fitch in a negative way."
Friedman: "No, I understand."
Jones: "I was talking about the critics and what they were
saying. If I had these people here and that is the reason that I got to the
Finals and won championships—he was coaching the same guys."
Friedman: "No, I understand your point exactly."
Jones: "I wanted to be clear on that."
Friedman: "OK, no problem there. I understand what you are
saying. Just to make it clear from my standpoint, I don't believe that that is
a valid criticism. I am bringing up something that other people have said to
get your reaction to it."
Jones: "That's what I was reacting to, not something that
you said, but what you were asking."
Friedman: "When I thought about it and realized that I would
have the opportunity to speak with you about Sam Jones, I was also thinking
about a future article that I could write about you in a similar vein. The
article that I am writing about Sam Jones is called 'Reconsidered,' when I look
at somebody's career and take a different perspective—look at someone who has
been underrated or neglected. I was thinking that in a future article I could
do something very similar about your coaching career, because I see a lot of
parallels between your coaching career and Phil Jackson's in terms of not
receiving what I would consider to be adequate credit. Like you say, they don't
look at Bill Fitch that way for whatever reason, but, sometimes, critics will
say, well someone had the players—and someone else may have had the same players
and they don’t make that criticism—it doesn't always seem fair."
Jones: "Look, that's being—what do you call it—not biased,
but that's going straight at the coaches, K.C. or Jackson, because they had the
talent. Those critics are saying that they really don't think much of these two
coaches."
Friedman: "Right and some of it also gets back to what you
were talking about in terms of how the coach may relate to the media or how the
media perceives them."
Jones: "That's it right there. Bill Fitch had a great
ability in controlling the media through his humor. He'd jump up every now and
then and scream. They'd feel the spirit he put into it—a great communicator and
that's what the media wants. That's what they accept. With a guy like me,
they're not going to get much, because I'm the guy who sits quietly on the
bench."
Friedman: "Right. In that sense also, although he hasn't won
a championship as a coach, there is a little similarity between you and Maurice
Cheeks from a demeanor standpoint. Maurice Cheeks is not real demonstrative, he
is kind of quiet and that doesn't mean that the person is not coaching, that's
just his personality—"
Jones: "If he had been in there and won a couple
championships then he would have the same problem I have." (laughs)
Friedman: "Right. Exactly."
Jones: "And Dr. Jack Ramsay."
Friedman: "Right. One other thing that I want to ask you
about is not the happiest memory from your coaching career, but I want to have
your perspective on it. History is generally told from the standpoint of who
won—also, in light of what happened this year in the Finals when we had an
upset, of course. You coached the Washington Bullets in the Finals against Golden State
(in 1975) and that was a team that was considered to be the favorite but you
did not win. We always read the story from the perspective of what Rick Barry
did or Golden State or whatever, but from your
standpoint what do you feel like happened in that series? From your standpoint
why did that series go the way it did?"
Jones: "Well, the scenario was that there was a circus that
was going on during the Finals in San
Francisco. So that changed the whole format from the
usual 2-2-1-1-1. The change was we had the choice of playing game one in San Francisco and the next two in Washington or the other way around. I made
the mistake of taking the first game at home and being on the road for the next
two. You make a boo-boo like that, it makes it very difficult to win the
championship as the favorite."
Friedman: "What you're saying is that when you lost the
first game it put you behind the eight ball because you didn't have the home
court advantage that you expected to have."
Jones: "Yeah, that was what the format was. By them winning
the first game—and they won it narrowly, because we missed a layup that
would've won the game—Golden State now felt confident as all get out, rather
than being intimidated by the 2-2-1-1-1."
Friedman: "That's something that I know about because I've
researched that series a little bit and read about what happened, but that's
something that is not mentioned a lot when people talk about the upset or what
Rick Barry did, but that was a big disadvantage—"
Jones: "What you're saying is that they just come out with
their thoughts about how I did a terrible job because I was favored, but
without mentioning how the series was set up. Nothing is mentioned about the
circus, nothing is mentioned about the 1-2 format."
Friedman: "That also says something about where the NBA
ranked in the sports universe or the entertainment universe at that time. I
don't think that kind of scheduling could happen in today's NBA. I don't think
that there could be some type of scheduling snafu where you end up playing
1-2—"
Jones: "Golden State, they had that schedule set (with the circus)
because they felt that Golden
State would not (still)
be in the playoffs. So they used that playoff time to have the circus but all
of a sudden Golden State beat Chicago
and then it was like, 'Oh, (shoot).'"
Friedman: "Right, 'What are we going to do?'"
Jones: "'We have a circus here, da-da-da,' and the
commissioner said, 'OK, 1-2.'"
Friedman: "But nowadays the NBA is such a huge business I
don't think that anyone—even the Orlando Magic with the horrible record that
they had last year—would have scheduled a circus to be in there during playoff
time until they were mathematically eliminated. I don't think that anyone would
say before the season starts, 'I don't think that we're going to be in the
playoffs, let's have the circus here in May.' Well, I won't take up any more of
your time. Thank you so much for your help with the Sam Jones article. As I
mentioned, at some point I would like to do a 'K.C. Jones Reconsidered' dealing
with your coaching career."
A few minutes after the conclusion of the interview, K.C.
Jones called back to state that he wanted it on the record that "Bill Fitch was
a better coach than I was." K.C. Jones made it very clear that his comments
about both of them having the same players but Fitch's coaching skills not
being critiqued in the media the same way that his were did not mean that he
did not respect Fitch as a coach. I reassured K.C. Jones that I understood what
he had meant during the interview and that I have no intention of trying to
create some type of rift with Coach Fitch. The operative comparison is between
the laid back bench demeanors of both Jones and Jackson.
It speaks volumes about Jones' character (1) that he spent so much time doing an in depth interview with a writer who he did not know and who is not famous and (2) that he put so much thought into his answers, to the point of calling me back to clarify that he meant no disrespect to Coach Fitch. Longtime 20 Second Timeout readers know that Julius Erving is my favorite player of all-time. It goes without saying that I was not rooting for Jones' teams during the 1980s--but I hope that it is also evident how much I respect him, and how much research and preparation I did (for a basketball lifetime, not just for one interview) before I spoke with him.
I am happy that I shared that time with K.C. Jones, and I hope that this interview helps basketball fans cultivate a greater appreciation for his accomplishments. I never wrote the "K.C. Jones Reconsidered" article, but in a sense that is what this article is. K.C. Jones deserves to be reconsidered, and to always be remembered as a championship player and a championship coach.
Labels: Bill Russell, Boston Celtics, Clyde Drexler, K.C. Jones, Kobe Bryant, Larry Bird, Michael Jordan, Phil Jackson, Richard Hamilton, Sam Jones, Slick Leonard, Tommy Heinsohn
posted by David Friedman @ 7:09 PM
