The Lakers Next Coach

[trojanfan12]

While I don't think D'Antoni has been given a fair opportunity. I think we all know, that in professional sports, a season like the Lakers are having almost always demands a scapegoat and 95% of the time, it's the coach.

GM's rarely get fired and Mitch has a strong enough track record and league wide respect that he is likely safe as well. Mitch being fired seems highly unlikely.

Owners do not fire themselves, so unless Jeannie enacts the rumored clause that allows her to take over (very unlikely with Phil headed to the Knicks, imo) Jim isn't going anywhere and the best Lakers fans can hope for is that he either is smarter than he has appeared or he'll finally sit down, shut up and let Mitch do his job without interference.

Here are some candidates for us to discuss. Of course, feel free to add anyone that you may have in mind that may not be on this list:

Mike D'Antoni - I know, I know. He's "Dontknowi", he's "Dumbtoni", he NEVER coaches defense and doesn't care if his team gives up 150 points a game because he thinks they'll score 151. Now that we have that out of the way:

Case For: While the team has not always played well (understatement) they have always played hard. He has not been given a fair shot to show what he can do and there seems to be some growing support among the media and previous coaches that he should be brought back, at least for the last season of his contract to see what he can do with a better, healthier lineup. Also, the idea behind bringing him in was for the Showtime era offense which his system is very close to.

Case Against: While it is an exaggeration that he never emphasizes/doesn't care about defense, the fact is that defense never has been and never will be his strong suit. While the Showtime era Lakers were not known as defensive stalwarts, they played enough defense when it mattered to net 9 finals trips and 5 titles. If he is retained, the defense will HAVE to improve. You don't have to be the best defense in the league to win a title, but you have to be at least middle of the pack and able to get stops when needed. Also, for whatever reason, has there been a more hated coach in Lakers history? I honestly think that some Lakers fans would rather have Mike Brown back.

Steve Kerr - Interesting one. Rumored to be Phil's first choice for the Knicks. He was asked about it on the Dan Patrick Show this morning and refused to give any direct answers on any job. He said that he may be interested in coaching. He also said "I live in San Diego, so I'd be more excited if it were a West Coast job".

Case For: Championship pedigree from his Bulls days. He's young enough that he could be the coach for a very long time and he has a very good basketball mind. His analysis when he's doing games is pretty much always spot on. He also has that "connection to Phil" that many Lakers fans seem to crave.

Case Against: No coaching experience and let's face it, it's a whole lot easier to look smart in the broadcast booth than on the sidelines. We have no idea how he'll respond to coaching.

Byron Scott: One of those who seems to be at or near the top of most Lakers fans wish list.

Case For: He's a former Laker with direct ties to the Showtime era. A return to that type of play is what drove the D'Antoni hiring, so why not bring in a guy who was actually part of it? He has zero ties to Phil, which seems to be what Jim wants. He has had success as a head coach and was able to guide the Nets to the finals twice. He understands the Lakers culture and the "championship or bust" mentality that Kobe alluded to.

Case Against: His success seems to come at a price. He has been fired from each of his head coaching jobs and usually amid some type of "player mutiny". Perhaps he is too "old school" for today's players?

Brian Shaw: A championship pedigree from both the Bulls and the Lakers and the coach that most Lakers fans wanted to replace Phil when he left the 2nd time.

Case For: Seems to be a good coach and doesn't seem to be as tied to the triangle offense as originally thought. Also seems to be able to relate to today's player. He was a Lakers assistant from 2005-2011, so like Byron Scott, he understands Lakers culture. Also, he was the one that Kobe most strongly endorsed when Phil left.

Case Against: Part of the reason that he wasn't hired to replace Phil was his ties to Phil. Every ring he has was won with Phil as his coach. He is also currently coaching the Nuggets, so unless he is fired, the Lakers will likely have to wait until that contract ends to be able to even speak to him. Would Lakers fans be good with retaining D'Antoni for a couple of seasons to possibly get Shaw?

Kurt Rambis: Another coach on the Lakers fans wish list, although not a high as some others.

Case For: Like Byron Scott, he has direct ties to the Showtime era. He understands the culture of the Lakers and has had 3 different coaching stints as an assistant. He has head coaching experience having taken over in 1999 when Del Harris was fired. He went 24-13 before being replaced by Phil and in Minnesota.

Case Against: His head coaching experience has been less than spectacular. He was fired after 2 seasons with a 32-132 record. This begs the question: Was it bad coaching or bad talent?

What do you all think?

 

[mrwallace2ku]

I'd have to check the Byron Scott box TF12.

He is still young enough to be able to "wait out" the re-birth of a new Laker team.

 

[Shaqdaddy11]

I'm on the Byron Scott bandwagon too. And as he's part of the TWC team, he's seen pretty much all of the abysmal games the Lakers have played first hand. He knows what went wrong this year and he knows how to fix it.

He's also played with Kobe before so i'm pretty sure those two are on good terms.

 

[trojanfan12]

I'd have to check the Byron Scott box TF12.

He is still young enough to be able to "wait out" the re-birth of a new Laker team.

I think he would probably be the "odds on favorite" (at least for Lakers fans). As you said, he's young enough to be there through a re-build. Also, watching him on Lakers pre-game and post-games shows, he seems to be personally offended by what has happened this season. I think he would take immense pride in restoring the Lakers to prominence.

 

[Shaqdaddy11]

Also, watching him on Lakers pre-game and post-games shows, he seems to be personally offended by what has happened this season. I think he would take immense pride in restoring the Lakers to prominence.

And that is exactly why I want the guy.

Trojan, im a bit on the fence with D'Antoni too. In a way I agree he hasn't been able to work on a fully healthy team but at the end of the day, they way our healthy players come out and give up 130 night after night is just embarrassing for the Lakers. And enough is enough.

B Scott all the way.

 

[trojanfan12]

And that is exactly why I want the guy.

Trojan, im a bit on the fence with D'Antoni too. In a way I agree he hasn't been able to work on a fully healthy team but at the end of the day, they way our healthy players come out and give up 130 night after night is just embarrassing for the Lakers. And enough is enough.

B Scott all the way.

I agree to a point about 130 points a game. But you have to remember, the defensive end of the floor is where the injuries are going to show up the most.

These are NBA players, offense if NEVER going to be a problem if you give them shots. You can randomly pick NBA players from different teams, throw them on the court together and they will score points. Especially in an offense like D'Antoni's.

The myth is that defense is strictly about effort and because of that, there is no excuse for poor defense. However, that's not entirely true. Defense is also about communication and trust.

For example, if you're defending the paint and you have to rotate over to a different player, but don't have the familiarity and trust with the player who is supposed to rotate and cover your spot, you're likely to hesitate which means that you will now be late on your rotation. In the NBA, that split second of hesitation results in layups, dunks or wide open 3's.

When you watch the truly good defensive teams like the Spurs, Bulls and Heat, they are almost always on time with their rotations because they have that trust from playing together.

Imo, dumping the defensive issues on D'Antoni (especially with Rambis hired to be the "DC") because he isn't known as a defensive coach, is simply too easy.

End of the day, I know that I'm very likely to lose my "Defending D'Antoni" argument and most of my fellow Lakers fans want him gone. I just want to make sure that whatever the Lakers decide to do re: the coach, that they take their time and do it right.

In other words, get the right guy and make sure that he is "locked down" before firing D'Antoni. Part of the reason that there have been so many questions about the Lakers FO is because they didn't have someone locked down before they fired Mike Brown.

 

[mrwallace2ku]

Sometimes even good coaches end up in bad situations. Time for the Lakers "cleansing" in my OP.

 

[TheSnowdog]

I'm a Jeff van Gundy fan so I might be a bit biased there but fandom aside I think JVG is a pretty good coach and was hoping the Sixers would have hired him (although I don't think it would have helped with the Sixers in the middle of an epic tank season)

 

[trojanfan12]

I'm a Jeff van Gundy fan so I might be a bit biased there but fandom aside I think JVG is a pretty good coach and was hoping the Sixers would have hired him (although I don't think it would have helped with the Sixers in the middle of an epic tank season)

Not a bad choice at all. He's a good, proven coach that I think understands today's players and he's feisty as hell, so no players or front office folks would be able to walk all over him.

I sure would miss some of his rants in the broadcast booth.

 

[wildturkey]

I'm calling Stan Van Gundy and George Karl before anyone else. And I won't even consider Scott or Rambis. You're chasing glory years if you really think they're good candidates. They aren't good coaches. People seriously need to get over this "Lakers brand" stuff. It means nothing. You have to be able to coach, period.

 

[LALakersboy24.7]

I'm calling Stan Van Gundy and George Karl before anyone else. And I won't even consider Scott or Rambis. You're chasing glory years if you really think they're good candidate.

Vangundy is a fucken idiot & George Karl is not the answer, we need someone to remind these Lakers players what it's like to wear the Purple & Gold. Scott & Rambis have won championship as players & have coached in the league for sometime now & know what they are talking about when they see this debacle going on with Dumbtoni & the team. Second you're forgetting that Scott was coach of the year when he was in NO & Chris Paul loved playing for him.

They aren't good coaches. People seriously need to get over this "Lakers brand" stuff. It means nothing. You have to be able to coach, period.

What do you mean Lakers brand means nothing ?? Get off the crack pipe bro or remove the Lakers as your favorite team from your profile.

 

[wildturkey]

You think too much like a fan. It's not college. Being part of the "family" doesn't mean much in the professional ranks. How much did Pat Riley wear the purple and gold before he joined? What about Phil? It doesn't matter. Ability does. You can't be so close-minded. That's what I'm saying in the brand doesn't matter. It's the pros. Ability and cash drive things far more than being apart of a brand. It's hard for fans to see that sometimes.

And you're dead wrong on SVG. He's a great coach and pretty darn smart. You should listen to him break down the games on NBCSN or on radio shows. His team in Miami was solid and then Pat Riley took it from him. And he consistently got great efforts out of the Magic with Dwight and not much else and the only reason he was fired because Orlando was trying to appease Dwight's mood swings. You said you want a reminder what it means to wear the colors? What it means is a commitment to winning through toughness and dedication to each other, a trademark of SVG teams.

BTW, a large part of the reason Scott was fired in NO was Paul, and a chunk of the team, quit on him. It's happened everywhere he's been. He's average at best. He can have top talent, but can't figure it out and the players tune him out.

 

[LALakersboy24.7]

You think too much like a fan. It's not college. Being part of the "family" doesn't mean much in the professional ranks. How much did Pat Riley wear the purple and gold before he joined? What about Phil? It doesn't matter. Ability does. You can't be so close-minded. It's hard for fans to see that.

I think like a fan because I'm a die hard Lakers fan. Pat Riley was a booth guy before he became a coach if you forgot & Phil we all know him & Jim have their differences & it something that happens often in the NBA it's part of the buisness, but the Lakers do need to go back to what they use to be like as a whole franchise & part of the family attitude because that's how they won. Look at how much they have gone away from that & see how well that's gone for them. Not too good right ??

And you're dead wrong on SVG. He's a great coach and pretty darn smart. His team in Miami was solid and then Pat Riley took it from him. And he consistently got great efforts out of the Magic with Dwight and not much else and the only reason he was fired because Orlando was trying to appease Dwight's mood swings. You said you want a reminder what it means to wear the colors? What it means is a commitment to winning through toughness and commitment, a trademark of SVG teams.

SVG has never won jack shit & most players don't like his ass, where is he at now ?? NO JOB!! it's no secret that Dwight got him booted out. SVG would just be another disaster just like dumbtoni. Yes I can see it now these young Lakers players will follow this little guys leadership because he has an outstanding trademark.

BTW, a large part of the reason Scott was fired in NO was Paul, and a chunk of the team, quit on him. It's happened everywhere he's been. He's average at best. He can have top talent, but can't figure it out and the players tune him out.

Same thing happen to Phil in 2010 the team quit on him, does this mean his a bad coach ??

 

[Retroram52]

I still think B. Shaw is the guy but since he is tied up in Denver for the foreseeable future, I guess will have to go with someody else if Don'tknowi is fired.

 

[Silas]

I agree to a point about 130 points a game. But you have to remember, the defensive end of the floor is where the injuries are going to show up the most.

These are NBA players, offense if NEVER going to be a problem if you give them shots. You can randomly pick NBA players from different teams, throw them on the court together and they will score points. Especially in an offense like D'Antoni's.

The myth is that defense is strictly about effort and because of that, there is no excuse for poor defense. However, that's not entirely true. Defense is also about communication and trust.

For example, if you're defending the paint and you have to rotate over to a different player, but don't have the familiarity and trust with the player who is supposed to rotate and cover your spot, you're likely to hesitate which means that you will now be late on your rotation. In the NBA, that split second of hesitation results in layups, dunks or wide open 3's.

When you watch the truly good defensive teams like the Spurs, Bulls and Heat, they are almost always on time with their rotations because they have that trust from playing together.

Imo, dumping the defensive issues on D'Antoni (especially with Rambis hired to be the "DC") because he isn't known as a defensive coach, is simply too easy.

End of the day, I know that I'm very likely to lose my "Defending D'Antoni" argument and most of my fellow Lakers fans want him gone. I just want to make sure that whatever the Lakers decide to do re: the coach, that they take their time and do it right.

In other words, get the right guy and make sure that he is "locked down" before firing D'Antoni. Part of the reason that there have been so many questions about the Lakers FO is because they didn't have someone locked down before they fired Mike Brown.

I agree with many of your points about D'Antoni, especially where Defense is concerned. A problem with D'Antoni, is that I sense he has never been able to get everyone to buy in to his system; especially Kobe.
That is probably enough of a reason right there to make a coaching change.

 

[trojanfan12]

I agree with many of your points about D'Antoni, especially where Defense is concerned. A problem with D'Antoni, is that I sense he has never been able to get everyone to buy in to his system; especially Kobe.
That is probably enough of a reason right there to make a coaching change.

In Kobe's first full season under D'Antoni, he had no training camp and played in 6 games. Exactly when was he supposed to buy in?

This is what I'm saying. People are acting like D'Antoni was handed a healthy talented team, instead of a pile of spare parts, most of whom will never start another NBA game in their lives and a few of whom will never play another minute in the NBA after this season.

Fire him if the Lakers feel they must, but let's not kid ourselves into believing that D'Antoni is the reason this team sucks or that any other coach (including Phil) would have done much, if any, better with this roster.

D'Antoni was handed rancid Bologna and we're expecting him to serve Prime Rib?

 

[trojanfan12]

You think too much like a fan. It's not college. Being part of the "family" doesn't mean much in the professional ranks. How much did Pat Riley wear the purple and gold before he joined? What about Phil? It doesn't matter. Ability does. You can't be so close-minded. That's what I'm saying in the brand doesn't matter. It's the pros. Ability and cash drive things far more than being apart of a brand. It's hard for fans to see that sometimes.

And you're dead wrong on SVG. He's a great coach and pretty darn smart. You should listen to him break down the games on NBCSN or on radio shows. His team in Miami was solid and then Pat Riley took it from him. And he consistently got great efforts out of the Magic with Dwight and not much else and the only reason he was fired because Orlando was trying to appease Dwight's mood swings. You said you want a reminder what it means to wear the colors? What it means is a commitment to winning through toughness and dedication to each other, a trademark of SVG teams.

BTW, a large part of the reason Scott was fired in NO was Paul, and a chunk of the team, quit on him. It's happened everywhere he's been. He's average at best. He can have top talent, but can't figure it out and the players tune him out.

Riley played for the Lakers from 1970-1975 and was an important bench player on the 1972 69-13 team. He then was in the broadcast booth with Chick Hearn for a couple of seasons before he was asked to become Paul Westhead's assistant coach when he was named head coach after Jack McKinney nearly died in a bicycle accident. So, Riles was actually a Laker for a few years prior to becoming the head coach.

As for the rest of your post. Can't really disagree with much. Of the Van Gundy's, I prefer Jeff, but don't really have an issue with Stan. The crap in Orlando is on Dwight and their FO, not Stan.

I have the same concerns about Scott. Hopefully, he's learned something and might change his approach a little if he were hired. Plus, the point about someone like Byron Scott, it's not simply about him being a former Laker, it's about his championship experience and knowing that's the culture and what is expected when you're a Laker.

That's what was different with the Phil hire in 1999. Not that he was ever a Laker, but he had won 6 championships.

 

[wildturkey]

I think like a fan because I'm a die hard Lakers fan. Pat Riley was a booth guy before he became a coach if you forgot & Phil we all know him & Jim have their differences & it something that happens often in the NBA it's part of the buisness, but the Lakers do need to go back to what they use to be like as a whole franchise & part of the family attitude because that's how they won. Look at how much they have gone away from that & see how well that's gone for them. Not too good right ??



SVG has never won jack shit & most players don't like his ass, where is he at now ?? NO JOB!! it's no secret that Dwight got him booted out. SVG would just be another disaster just like dumbtoni. Yes I can see it now these young Lakers players will follow this little guys leadership because he has an outstanding trademark.



Same thing happen to Phil in 2010 the team quit on him, does this mean his a bad coach ??

Yeah, they quit on Phil in 2010. But Scott has had teams quit on him everywhere he's been. That's a huge difference. It's not a one time thing. It's a trend. 11 rings, 1 quit team vs no rings, 3 quit teams. There is no comparison. And SVG is out of work right now because he's chosen to stay out of work. He's said he's open to coaching someday but likes what he's doing and has turned down opportunities since being let go. It's great that you're a die hard fan but sometimes people need to step back and view things differently to gain perspective.

Too many fans overvalue being a Laker. It's the first thing many bring up when they talk about coaches. It is not that important. The culture is winning and you win with the same principles regardless of location; talent, teaching, and dedication to the team as a whole. There are much better candidates out there than the guys that have been with the Lakers.

And thanks to trojan, I had forgotten Riley was a player on the Lakers. Before my time but that could have easily been corrected had I bothered to look it up.

I'd also be open to JVG but my only concern with him is he's been out of the game for awhile now. A lot has changed schematically. He's smart for sure but its just something to think about. Generally in most sports for coaches, the longer you stay out, the harder it is to get back in and be successful.

 

[LALakersboy24.7]

Yeah, they quit on Phil in 2010. But Scott has had teams quit on him everywhere he's been. That's a huge difference. It's not a one time thing. It's a trend. 11 rings, 1 quit team vs no rings, 3 quit teams. There is no comparison. And SVG is out of work right now because he's chosen to stay out of work. He's said he's open to coaching someday but likes what he's doing and has turned down opportunities since being let go. It's great that you're a die hard fan but sometimes people need to step back and view things differently to gain perspective.

Here's the thing, just because your a bad coach or relevant somewhere else doesn't mean your the right coach for a particular team. Byron & Rambis are much more wise then they were 3-5 years ago. They would be a much better pick IMO to coach a young Lakers team like this one. It takes a right mixture of cocktail to get it done. SVG does not fit the bill to coach a Lakers team, I can see it now watching his post game interviews after every Lakers loss.

One thing that this franchise has cared about is the fan base & that's what it's all about, especially if you live in LA & know the culture here. Jim Buss needs to please the fan base & fire Dumbtoni as 90% of all Lakers fans want him gone & hire at least a decent coach that a majority of the fan base will at least approve along with Kobe. I doubt anybody with the last name Van Gundy will be approved by most fans.

Too many fans overvalue being a Laker. It's the first thing many bring up when they talk about coaches. It is not that important. The culture is winning and you win with the same principles regardless of location; talent, teaching, and dedication to the team as a whole. There are much better candidates out there than the guys that have been with the Lakers.

Like I said previously it takes the right mixture of players & coaches to click. You can have a better candidate, but that won't mean his the best for that team & I'm not interested in what's the principles other teams have wether they are the same or not. & The principles are different in other teams from top to bottom, even if their are similarities, not all franchises care about winning in all honesty, that's why you have fucked up owners that make a fan base suffer for so many years & it's well known that the Lakers have held winning principles at a much higher standard & is what's made them glorious like no other franchise, period.

Second they're not really a lot of better candidates right now, most NBA teams are taking younger coaches now a days.

 

[wildturkey]

You're making a totally baseless assumption that Scott and Rambis are "wiser". What could you possibly base that on? By virtue of time? That means nothing. They could just as easily have learned nothing. And what makes them better for the current team? Hell, Rambis is on the roster, supposedly to help the defense if you believe stuff from the start of the year, and that clearly hasn't worked out. This is what I'm talking about. To me, the biggest reason you feel they're better fits is simply because they have history with the Lakers. That isn't enough. And it doesn't mean jack if you can't coach. Scott has issues and his track record indicates he's getting worse. Rambis is even more unimpressive. Hell, D'Antoni is actually more accomplished and qualified than he is.

BTW, if you're looking to coach a young team, once again SVG is a good candidate. His system is organized, disciplined, and team oriented. That is EXACTLY what young players need. From reading your posts, I'm beginning to think you only dislike him because he can be a whiny jerk in interviews. If that's the case, so what. Jerks win all the time. Pops and Rick Carlisle treat the media like shit but they still field good teams