NBA 2012-13 Discussion

[gblews]

Mike Brown should never have been hired. The Lakers FO (particularly Jim Buss) will have to take the hit over this one. This is Jim's second inappropriate coaching choice, Rudy Tomjanovich being his first. We could have had Rick Adelman 2 seasons ago, or Brian Shaw, but Jimmy gets blown away by Mike's F'n DvD interview presentation.

I hope it's Phil. Second choice would be Jerry Sloan. Push comes to shove, I could live with the overrated Nate McMillan -- but HELL NO to D'Antoni. His teams never play defense and always choke in the playoffs.

[Timby]

gblews wrote:

---

I hope it's Phil. Second choice would be Jerry Sloan. Push comes to shove, I could live with the overrated Nate McMillan -- but HELL NO to D'Antoni. His teams never play defense and always choke in the playoffs.

Jackson might not be an ideal fit; most of the core from when he last coached the team is gone, so he'd have to effectively re-install the triangle offense. He and Jim Buss don't get along at all, either. If he did get the job, I guarantee you it would just be as a stopgap for the remainder of the season, while a full coaching search went on. He's 67 and pretty clearly doesn't want to coach until his hip falls off. (Even prior to his final season, he was wanting to only coach home games and let Shaw lead the team on the road.)

Jerry Sloan is a hell of a coach and I'd love to see him get a ring, but he and Dwight Howard would be a match made in Hell. And given that that Sloan had a breakdown over the strain of having Utah management back him 99.9 percent in his fight with Deron Williams instead of 100 percent, I'm not sure the Los Angeles media market and the Buss family is a great fit for him.

Comedy option: Stan Van Gundy.

[SmoothieX]

The time to get rid of him would have been in the offseason where, as you noted, they would have had more options and the new HC would have had a chance to implement his system in training camp. 5 games really isn't a fair shakedown though.

I don't know all the hot assistants right now, but assuming they don't poach one from another team (Shaw is now in Indy) it doesn't leave a ton of options.

Jackson is a short-term solution. They don't play defense now just imagine if D'antoni got the gig. People like Jerry Sloan, Mike Dunleavy, or Don Nelson are aging retreads that are also not long term fixes. I don't think a relatively young, inexperienced coach like Nate McMillan would command the respects of a bunch of stars.

Stan Van Gundy would be hilarious, I can just see Howard's head exploding upon hearing the news. Jeff Van Gundy isn't the worst option but I could see him ruffling feathers too.

They need a Joe Torre type of guy who can manage the egos of an all star team on paper put together with aging, disparate parts. I could see Coach K working, since he's got Kobe's and Howard's respect from the Olympic teams, but he'll never leave Duke. Who that leaves, I don't know.

D'antoni might be the best option. Nash thrived in his system and he was an assistant on the last couple of Olympic teams.

[gblews]

Timby wrote:

---

Jackson might not be an ideal fit; most of the core from when he last coached the team is gone, so he'd have to effectively re-install the triangle offense.

I don't think the number of guys who have played for Phil before is really a factor. Most new (for a particular team) coaches don't have any players who have played for them before. But there are still Kobe, Ebanks, Pau, MWP, all either starters or rotational guys. As for the Triangle, Phil might decide to install it (if he decides to install it) in small enough increments that it won't overwhelm the team. IMO, the Tri is not as complicated as the Princeton.

He and Jim Buss don't get along at all, either. If he did get the job, I guarantee you it would just be as a stopgap for the remainder of the season, while a full coaching search went on. He's 67 and pretty clearly doesn't want to coach until his hip falls off. (Even prior to his final season, he was wanting to only coach home games and let Shaw lead the team on the road.)[/i]

The stuff about Phil and Jim Buss's relationship all stems from Phil's comment about their not having a relationship rather being about confrontations and wars of words. Jim and Kobe had no relationship up until last season when they finally sat down together and talked. After that, it was fine.

Well of course it will only be a "stop gap". The Lakers have a 2 year window; that is the reason Mike was let go, and the reason Phil is being considered -- because he is the guy best equipped to win now. If it is Phil, it will likely be a 2 year deal with maybe a third as Phil's option.

Phil has had two hip replacements. His girlfriend, Jeanie tweeted all summer long that he is healthy and ready to coach. Phil, more than anyone, knows what that means. He has had more than a year way from coaching so I suspect his batteries have been recharged and he is ready to go.

[Timby]

gblews wrote:

---

I don't think the number of guys who have played for Phil before is really a factor. Most new (for a particular team) coaches don't have any players who have played for them before. But there are still Kobe, Ebanks, Pau, MWP, all either starters or rotational guys. As for the Triangle, Phil might decide to install it (if he decides to install it) in small enough increments that it won't overwhelm the team. IMO, the Tri is not as complicated as the Princeton.

The triangle is pretty complicated and requires rigorous practice. Remember, Kobe Bryant came thisclose to demanding a trade because he fucking hated the triangle. Steve Nash would also be wasted in the triangle, and Howard might have a hard time picking it up, too: It was really an anomaly that they made it to the Finals without Karl Malone ever learning it.

Sure, it's definitely less complicated than the Princeton, but that's like saying overhauling an engine is less complicated than putting a man on the moon -- there's still a lot of stuff going on, and the Lakers don't have the advantage of a training camp for a learning period: They'll have to adapt in the middle of a season (assuming Jackson gets the job).

It's also worth noting that Tex Winter isn't available to help in training, either.

]
The stuff about Phil and Jim Buss's relationship all stems from Phil's comment about their not having a relationship rather being about confrontations and wars of words. Jim and Kobe had no relationship up until last season when they finally sat down together and talked. After that, it was fine.

Buss pretty clearly resented the amount of input that Jackson had in Kupchak's personnel decisions, for what it's worth, and sources have been reporting that one of the conditions for him getting the job is that he'll have to accept a significantly reduced role over personnel. Word is that Jackson has said that he wants even more input over personnel / organizational moves, and he wants a limited travel schedule (probably only sticking to West Coast swings, I would guess), so there are some philosophical issues to be worked out, there. The Lakers probably don't want to hire Phil Jackson and then wind up with Kurt Rambis running the team 50 percent of the time, which is why they're interviewing Mike Dunleavy tomorrow.

I'm not saying Jackson's a poor fit (he's probably the best fit); having grown up in Chicago and seen what he did with the Bulls, I think he's the greatest of all time. I'm just saying he'd be coming in and dealing with a very different roster than he last worked with. That roster was built for Mike Brown's systems, not Phil Jackson's, so there will be some pains -- and they won't have a lot of time to get the ship righted, no matter whom they hire.

Edit: Jackson has told the team that he's pretty insistent on both the travel restrictions and the personnel thing, so both sides have agreed to table discussions for a couple of days; Lakers did a phone interview with D'Antoni today and are interviewing Mike Dunleavy tomorrow.

[gblews]

Timby wrote:

---

The triangle is pretty complicated and requires rigorous practice. Remember, Kobe Bryant came thisclose to demanding a trade because he fucking hated the triangle.

This NEVER happened.

Steve Nash would also be wasted in the triangle, and Howard might have a hard time picking it up, too: It was really an anomaly that they made it to the Finals without Karl Malone ever learning it.

Nash wouldn't be wasted running the Tri. He is a smart guy, a great shooter and passer, and can get into the lane -- all skills that help any offense. The Triangle (as with the Princeton) simply would not require the ball to be in his hands as much as a pick and roll offense would. And where did you get the notion that Karl had trouble with the Tri? He played great in the offense. Perhaps you're thinking of Gary Peyton.

Well, anything might happen but keep in mind, Dwight plays center which is the easiet of all the positions in the Triangle to learn

Sure, it's definitely less complicated than the Princeton, but that's like saying overhauling an engine is less complicated than putting a man on the moon -- there's still a lot of stuff going on, and the Lakers don't have the advantage of a training camp for a learning period: They'll have to adapt in the middle of a season (assuming Jackson gets the job).

It's also worth noting that Tex Winter isn't available to help in training, either.

If PJ comes on board, it will be the second time he has taken the reins in mid-season although the last time, he had more guys who were familiar with the offense. I think the team wouldn't run as much from Triangle sets and would rely more on some pick and roll.

We'll surely miss Tex, though I think more for his straight forward opinions on the game and how it's played more than for teaching the offense. They can have Kurt Rambis and Jimmy Cleamons handle that.

Buss pretty clearly resented the amount of input that Jackson had in Kupchak's personnel decisions, for what it's worth, and sources have been reporting that one of the conditions for him getting the job is that he'll have to accept a significantly reduced role over personnel. Word is that Jackson has said that he wants even more input over personnel / organizational moves, and he wants a limited travel schedule (probably only sticking to West Coast swings, I would guess), so there are some philosophical issues to be worked out, there. The Lakers probably don't want to hire Phil Jackson and then wind up with Kurt Rambis running the team 50 percent of the time, which is why they're interviewing Mike Dunleavy tomorrow.

The team stated today that the they are about 95% certain Phil will be the coach so that sounds like they have pretty much accepted whatever Phil's "dealbreakers" may be. Now, whether or not he accept's theirs is the question. It certainly isn't 100% that he will.

I'm not saying Jackson's a poor fit (he's probably the best fit); having grown up in Chicago and seen what he did with the Bulls, I think he's the greatest of all time. I'm just saying he'd be coming in and dealing with a very different roster than he last worked with. That roster was built for Mike Brown's systems, not Phil Jackson's, so there will be some pains -- and they won't have a lot of time to get the ship righted, no matter whom they hire.

There are 77 or so games left in the season. That is plenty of time. This is a team full of veterans, not guys who are new to the league.

Edit: Jackson has told the team that he's pretty insistent on both the travel restrictions and the personnel thing, so both sides have agreed to table discussions for a couple of days; Lakers did a phone interview with D'Antoni today and are interviewing Mike Dunleavy tomorrow.

The team has stated that they are continuing the interview process in the event that Jackson does not take the job. From what I have been reading, although no formal offer has been made, the team has made it clear to PJ that he is their guy if things can be worked out to their mutual satisfaction.

[Timby]

gblews wrote:

---

This NEVER happened.

During Jackson's first season with the Lakers, Bryant got incredibly frustrated with the triangle's focus on the center (and the close relationship that O'Neal developed with Jackson), and he had several episodes of lashing out over what he felt to be a reduced role. Obviously, they've mended their fences, but the triangle is not a simple offense.

Nash wouldn't be wasted running the Tri. He is a smart guy, a great shooter and passer, and can get into the lane -- all skills that help any offense. The Triangle (as with the Princeton) simply would not require the ball to be in his hands as much as a pick and roll offense would.

The triangle offense relies on wing players to do the bulk of the ball handling beyond half-court. Nash is not a good fit in that offense.

Well, anything might happen but keep in mind, Dwight plays center which is the easiet of all the positions in the Triangle to learn

Howard's a bi-polar headcase, though. It's hard to believe that picking up a new offense in the middle of a season would be terribly easy for him.

If PJ comes on board, it will be the second time he has taken the reins in mid-season

Huh? Jackson returned to the Lakers in June 2005, well after their season was done; Frank Hamblen took over the team after Rudy T resigned out of nowhere.

The team stated today that the they are about 95% certain Phil will be the coach so that sounds like they have pretty much accepted whatever Phil's "dealbreakers" may be. Now, whether or not he accept's theirs is the question. It certainly isn't 100% that he will.

The team made no such statement; it came from an unnamed source (which is almost certainly Jackson's agent, trying to get leverage over the organization after the fanbase has been screaming for him to return).

There are 77 or so games left in the season. That is plenty of time. This is a team full of veterans, not guys who are new to the league.

Being a veteran doesn't mean you pick things up that much more quickly. A team doesn't suddenly and magically pick up a new playing system out of the blue after having worked in a different system throughout training camp and the like.

The team has stated that they are continuing the interview process in the event that Jackson does not take the job. From what I have been reading, although no formal offer has been made, the team has made it clear to PJ that he is their guy if things can be worked out to their mutual satisfaction.

Just as the leaks about the job being Jackson's if he wants it are almost assuredly coming from his agent as a leverage thing, I guarantee you that the interview with Dunleavy is a leverage move on the Lakers' part. They're telling Jackson that they're more than willing to go with another candidate if he decides to throw a tantrum about not wanting to travel.

[gblews]

Timby wrote:

---

During Jackson's first season with the Lakers, Bryant got incredibly frustrated with the triangle's focus on the center (and the close relationship that O'Neal developed with Jackson), and he had several episodes of lashing out over what he felt to be a reduced role. Obviously, they've mended their fences, but the triangle is not a simple offense.

Where do you get this stuff? Kobe became frustrated with the player and person Shaq was and that had little to do with the Triangle. Shaq was the no. 1 offensive option and that also had nothing to do with the Tri. Kobe never "lashed out because of a reduced role". Since Kobe came into the league Shaq was the no. 1 option on the Lakers. Why would Kobe's role be decreased? In fact, Kobe's role increased over the years as he developed. You may be basing your belief that Phil and Shaq were close on the fact that Phil felt Shaq should be the no. 1 option. But Kobe, "frustrated" because of the relationship...no. And none of this happened in PJ's first year with the team as you state.

BTW, the offense has no particular "focus" on the center position beyond the fact that the offense is initiated through that position. When Phil came back and coached the team after Shaq left, the Lakers ran the tri more like more like the Bulls did.

The triangle offense relies on wing players to do the bulk of the ball handling beyond half-court. Nash is not a good fit in that offense.

And so you think that because Nash plays point guard, he is incapable of playing on the wing? With Nash's ball handling and shooting skills, there is no reason he can't play on the wing although that won't likely be his designated role. The fact that the tri doesn't require a traditional "point guard", teams who run it can opt for a bigger (and sometimes less skilled) player alongside a 2-guard type.

Howard's a bi-polar headcase, though. It's hard to believe that picking up a new offense in the middle of a season would be terribly easy for him.

I don't care how big a head case he may be, the offense requires smarts not mental stability (MWP notwithstanding), and Dwight plays the easiest position to learn in the offense.

Huh? Jackson returned to the Lakers in June 2005, well after their season was done; Frank Hamblen took over the team after Rudy T resigned out of nowhere.

Okay.

The team made no such statement; it came from an unnamed source

True, but you were quoting Chris Broussard at ESPN and that guy is wrong way more often than he is right. I'll take the LA Times unnamed sources over Broussard any day when it comes to the Lakers.

Being a veteran doesn't mean you pick things up that much more quickly.

Yeah...it does, especially when there are guys on the team who have run the offense before.

I'll bet Nash knows the offense pretty well himself after having played against it for so many games. Besides that, the Lakers haven't been the only team he (and likely other guys) have seen play the tri in the west. San Antonio, and Minnesota have both run plays from triangle sets.

The team has stated that they are continuing the interview process in the event that Jackson does not take the job. From what I have been reading, although no formal offer has been made, the team has made it clear to PJ that he is their guy if things can be worked out to their mutual satisfaction.

Just as the leaks about the job being Jackson's if he wants it are almost assuredly coming from his agent as a leverage thing, I guarantee you that the interview with Dunleavy is a leverage move on the Lakers' part. They're telling Jackson that they're more than willing to go with another candidate if he decides to throw a tantrum about not wanting to travel.

Neither you nor I can confirm who the sources of the leaks are, but it is still a negotiation and both sides have things they want. One of the other things I've read is that PJ wants more say in basketball decisions -- now that could be way more of a sticking point than travel, if true.

I think they will work it out and the team will pick up the offense in time to be a significant factor in the playoffs and that is all that really matters.

[Neroon]

So.... the Lakers hire Mike D'Antoni instead of Phil Jackson? From what I had been reading, Jackson was ready to sign with them.

[Alidar Jarok]

I'm getting the impression he wanted to sign with them, but also wanted to play hardball and get certain conditions the Lakers didn't want to deal with, so they went with someone else.

[SmoothieX]

He probably figured the Lakers were desperate enough to agree to everything. No one demand was all that big, but he was asking for a lot of stuff - control over personnel, a salary well above the going rate, reduced travel, and a handpicked successor. Plus if you go by what the analysts say, the triangle offense is a bad match for Nash and Howard.

Nash played for D'antoni. Kobe and Howard played for him on Team USA. So they are familiar with his style.

[Borgminister]

Defense! Defense!

[Timby]

AMAZING.

[Neroon]

An interesting littl ebit more infor on D'Antoni's hiring. Link.

Apparently, D'Antoni and Kobe have a good relationship, which already makes this an upgrade over hiring Brown.

[gblews]

The level of confusion is high even for the Lakers. As of Sunday, from reliable reports, it sounded like the job was Phil's to accept or decline -- but there were also reports that no offer had been made. How does one accept an offer that has not been made? Did the Lakers give Phil the "impression" the job was his, then before he could accept (it was supposed to be Monday), offer the job to D'Antoni? I would hate to think the Lakers would be that unprofessional.

I really don't know what part of the roster Mitch and the Buss's are seeing as compatible with D'Antoni's run and gun style, shoot every 7 seconds or whatever the hell it is. We have two slashers. The Lakers, so far, have also not shown a great ability to hit from beyond the arc, so haow is this a D'Antoni team?

The team is set up with a two season (maybe three), window and you bring in a coach after the season starts, who has never coached in the Finals much less won a championship. I don't care what PJ's demands were, we are talking about a 6th ring for Kobe in the next 2-3 years.

This is on Jimmy Buss for hiring Mike Brown and his damn DvDs. Jimmy "handpicked" Tomjanovich and Brown, two of the worst coaching hires in team history and now he thinks he has some cred with D'Antoni? This truly sucks.