Simmons used the word quote, which is very important.

Also, it's heavily implied that the section that Phil browsed was the MJ section. Only if you think Simmons is a very unethical writer can you read this:
And assume anything other than Phil telling Simmons that he read the Jordan section.

Ignore lists : mark of the bitch?

EDIT: The Simmons takedown linked is funny and extremely well-written. I kinda agree with Triumph, though. There are some very clever people over there, but ultimately it just seems like the whole thing is an exercise in vitriol aimed at demonstrating their intellectual superiority. That's fine, but it doesn't really seem like the apex of dialogue either. I like my hate moderated with positivity from time to time.

Nice catch

That article mostly just came off as jealous haters gonna hate to me. It says something like there could easily, be 700 Simmons out there and attributes his rise to sheer luck which is pretty crazy. Simmons is pretty clearly good at what he does.

He says PJ quoted his book twice. Saying that there isn't going to be another Jordan isn't quoting TBoB. It is making a quite common observation that has been around pre TBoB. The fact that PJ saying there isn't going to be another Jordan = PJ quoting TBoB (twice) is absurd.

That is the point.

You answered your own question pretty quickly there.

...In El Segundo, our conversation kept circling back to MJ, and really, that's why we ended up having lunch in the first place: Jackson had quoted a Jordan argument from my NBA book in two separate interviews (that we need to stop looking for another Michael Jordan, because it's never happening), making me wonder, "Wait, did he read my book?" As it turned out, he had simply thumbed through it in a store for a few minutes before buying it for Odom for Christmas.

Was it telling that he thumbed through a 700-page book just to read the Jordan section? You tell me...

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2...simmons/110513

seems like Simmons is saying that he asked Jackson if he had read TBoB, and Jackson told him that he read the section about MJ before buying the book for Odom, no?

and i'm guessing that Jackson quoted some pretty specific stuff from the book to make his think this, because i highly doubt that Simmons thinks that he invented the "there won't be another MJ" argument. i mean that's been around as long as when guys like Jerry Stackhouse and Grant Hill were coming into the league, if not longer.

That's not really what is being discussed here though.

the issue is rather than just say "yeah, I agree with you, etc" Simmons is arrogant enough to wonder if Jackson is parroting the arguments from the book.

Not only that, he is saying he was quoting his book (twice).

For fallen hero, the fact that Simmons said he wondered if PJ read his book doesn't change things the way you think they do. Your defense doesn't hold up because he used the word quoted.

-Simmons hears PJ say very similar things to what he said in his book about Jordan.
-Simmons then thinks PJ must have read his book, because I guess he is an egomaniac who thinks he is the origin of "there will never be another Jordan."
-Simmons asks PJ is he read his book. PJ says he thumbed through it.
-Simmons then jumps to the conclusion that he only read the Jordan parts, reinforcing his ego and the fact that PJ was "quoting" his book.

That is the timeline that makes sense of him using the word quoted before asking if PJ read the book. Either that or he is the laziest writer of all time.

He never took ownership of the concept. You really think Simmons thinks "Hey, I'm being quoted!" anytime someone mentions the idea of there not being another Jordan? If Simmons says that Jackson quoted him, that probably means that Jackson attributed it to Simmons in some way, or at least referenced a specific phrase that Simmons wrote or something like that.

I mean unless someone finds the interviews with Phil, we can't know for sure. It would just take an absurd level of stupidity or narcissism for Simmons to think he was being quoted when he wasn't, and I'm not sure why some of you are so quick to put those traits on him.

Jackson could have been sent the excerpt from someone. Or flipped through it at a bookstore perhaps. It's a long-ass book, after all, and I bet a lot of players and coaches just read the stuff about themselves.

that was my argument, almost word for word, not sure why you thought I was defending him

he also must be claiming to have invented the concept of Patrick Ewing when he created "the Ewing Theory".

what an idiot Simmons is!

By saying he was quoted he is doing exactly that, taking ownership (doesn't even have to be of the concept overall, could be just PJ's concept/use of it). Yes, I know it is incredible absurd. But that's why it was brought up in the first place.

He is a writer attributing a quote to his book. It's not just a throwaway line. If it is it is really really bad writing.

But why do you assume that he wasn't quoted?

My fault

You are the king of awful analogies. What does this even mean? Why are people taking the "invented the concept" part of this so strongly? People are using that to point out the absurdity of what his choice of wording implies.

Oh and he didnt come up with the Ewing theory. A reader of his did.

i think that this is probably the case, he just phrased it rather sloppily. i mean, he can often be an interesting, enjoyable, and entertaining writer, but i don't know if anyone has ever claimed that he's a great writer. a lot of what that takedown was about, that this ain't exactly high art.

and he's almost not even a writer anymore. more of a podcaster, tweeter, TV producer, etc who writes an article once every 2-8 weeks, or whatever.

Because it isn't a thought original to Simmons or his book. It isn't a thought that PJ would miraculously discover 15 years after he stopped coaching Jordan. The whole point is how in the world could Simmons have the audacity to think he was being quoted when PJ says something like "there will never be another Jordan so we should stop looking for him."

o god make it stop.

Holy Mackerel.

If this is how your brain works then I have no idea where to go in this argument

does anyone actually have the damn book to check what more there is to his "argument" that Jackson might have used?

we should all be outraged that Simmons is attempting to take credit for something that has been said since Jordan retired the second time by large swathes of the media and fans of the NBA.

Maybe because Jackson specifically mentioned Simmons:

http://articles.latimes.com/2011/mar...ckson-20110313

The Simmons hate in here is ridiculous.

Franchise,

Saying someone quoted your book, and then paraphrasing the argument from the book, is not the same as saying you invented the argument, or that you assume any mention of said argument can be attributed to you.

Can we pile on Phil Jackson now for attributing a pretty universal sentiment to Bill Simmons?