Time to trade away assets for picks

[DJ Fieri]

Scott, 53, has a career record of 416-521 in 13 seasons

You have to look beyond the numbers.

He took over horrible teams and made them all better. A bad coach doesn't make it to 2 NBA Finals.

 

[DJ Fieri]

You understand the teams he's had to coach recently, right? He took the Nets to back to back finals appearances, he was coach of the year in New Orleans in 2008 (and had a winning record as a coach at that time) and then he took over the Cavs job the season Lebron left. Now he's taken over a Lakers team that even if fully healthy, would have been lucky to be .500 but has lost 4 players to season ending injuries.

If you're going to look at the record and hold that against him, you should look at the teams he's been given to coach as well. It's not as if he took over good teams and drove them into the ground.

+1

 

[trojanfan12]

Well we shall see Rambunctious. The whole story is not completed unless you can see into the future.

Clearly Rambunctious is one of those fans who prefers to bitch and complain about anything and everything. Scott's record and the type of teams he's been handed has been explained, the 4 season ending injuries have been pointed out, the lack of talent on the roster has been pointed out, the Lakers 3 year plan that began this year has been discussed almost ad nauseum here in threads on the Lakers board and he still wants to bitch and complain.

That's just how some fans deal with things I guess.

 

[trojanfan12]

true enough but George Karl would have this injury riddled team playing a lot better in my humble opinion.

No he wouldn't and even if he did, all that would do is cost the Lakers a top 5 pick. I don't care if the Lakers were 100% healthy and had Phil Jackson, Red Auerbach and Pat Riley all coaching them. They would have been lucky to make the playoffs, let alone win a series.

You can call for Byron's head all you want, but there isn't another coach out there that was going to be winning anything with this roster.

 

[Retroram52]

I agree on both posts, TJF12. Many succinct and valid points.

 

[Rambunctious]

No he wouldn't and even if he did, all that would do is cost the Lakers a top 5 pick. I don't care if the Lakers were 100% healthy and had Phil Jackson, Red Auerbach and Pat Riley all coaching them. They would have been lucky to make the playoffs, let alone win a series.

You can call for Byron's head all you want, but there isn't another coach out there that was going to be winning anything with this roster.

Pure conjecture on your part...I have George Karls excellent win loss record and Scotts terrible record to trump your bologna. Go ahead and believe what you want, If Scott takes the Lakers to the finals or even the playoffs I will eat crow. However I think you will have a very long wait. But I'm only human maybe I'm wrong...I tell you what; lets take a look at Scotts college coaching record oh wait...HE HAS NONE!

 

[Rambunctious]

He would be better than Scott
Lionel Hollins NBA & ABA Basketball Coaching Record | Basketball-Reference.com

 

[Rambunctious]

and he would be better than Scott too
Alvin Gentry NBA & ABA Basketball Coaching Record | Basketball-Reference.com

Numbers don't lie..............................................

 

[Rambunctious]

Clearly Rambunctious is one of those fans who prefers to bitch and complain about anything and everything.

You have no idea what kind of fan I am. But I will tell you what kind of fan I am. I'm the kind of fan that will not stand for my favorite team to take the easy less costly road and end up being the 2nd best NBA team in LA. That makes me sick and it should make you sick as well. Mitch has been taking the easy way out for too long and it has hurt this team big time. Hiring Scott was just another example of that. When in doubt try to do what Jerry West would've done. No guts no glory.

 

[lakersrule]

I think Rambunctious has some legit concerns with Byron. George Karl was tops on my list of coaches they interviewed. I'm not so sure he would be doing much better with the current roster though. It's not a great roster.

It takes great players to go deep in the playoffs and win championships. Byron has shown he can do such with a competent roster. I think you have to consider roster construction when evaluating a coach's win/loss record.

 

[trojanfan12]

Pure conjecture on your part...I have George Karls excellent win loss record and Scotts terrible record to trump your bologna. Go ahead and believe what you want, If Scott takes the Lakers to the finals or even the playoffs I will eat crow. However I think you will have a very long wait. But I'm only human maybe I'm wrong...I tell you what; lets take a look at Scotts college coaching record oh wait...HE HAS NONE!

Stopped reading at the bolded. The fact that you think the teams George Karl was handed to coach and the teams Byron had (especially in Cleveland) were remotely close tells me all that I need to know.]

When Byron had rosters that could win, he won. When he had rosters that couldn't, he didn't. Just like any other coach.

And that's not conjecture. Any coach at any level of any sport will tell you that in order to win, ypu have to have good players.

 

[trojanfan12]

You have no idea what kind of fan I am. But I will tell you what kind of fan I am. I'm the kind of fan that will not stand for my favorite team to take the easy less costly road and end up being the 2nd best NBA team in LA. That makes me sick and it should make you sick as well. Mitch has been taking the easy way out for too long and it has hurt this team big time. Hiring Scott was just another example of that. When in doubt try to do what Jerry West would've done. No guts no glory.

In other words, you're exactly the kind of fan I said you were. Hilarious that you can't see it. Nothing wrong with it. I specifically said in my post, it's how some fans deal with it. To each their own.

Not that length of time being a Lakers fan means anything when talking about passion for the team, I've been a Lakers fan since 1970 and one thing that I've learned is patience. Every team, even the Lakers, go through down times. The difference between the Lakers and most other franchises is that the down times never last too long.

I saw the '72 team put together the longest winning streak in history and win the championship. Then I saw the team go through a downtime that lasted until 1979 when the Lakers got Magic Johnson. Then, after the last finals appearance with Magic in '91 (and MJ's first title) they went through a down period that lasted until 2000 when Phil took over the Shaq/Kobe Lakers. Then when Shaq left, it was another downtime until they got Pau. During every one of those down times, there were always some fans who chose to bitch and complain the whole time. Like I said, it's how some folks deal.

Now it's another down time and I am confident they will be back where we are used to seeing them within the next few years and the FO has said they have a 3 year plan to do it. So, I'm patient and am enjoying watching the young guys develop.

In 3 years, if the Lakers aren't significantly better, then I will be bitching and complaining right along with you.

 

[trojanfan12]

I think Rambunctious has some legit concerns with Byron. George Karl was tops on my list of coaches they interviewed. I'm not so sure he would be doing much better with the current roster though. It's not a great roster.

It takes great players to go deep in the playoffs and win championships. Byron has shown he can do such with a competent roster. I think you have to consider roster construction when evaluating a coach's win/loss record.

I disagree re: Karl. I don't dislike him as a coach and certainly wouldn't have complained if the Lakers hired him. However, what has he ever truly accomplished? He has a good regular season record, but how many championships has he won? How many times has he even taken a team to the finals? He had some very talented teams and a couple of his Denver teams were considered favorites to come out of the West.

Yet zero finals appearances.

At least when Byron had a roster that was good enough to get to the finals, he got them there.

 

[Retroram52]

Yep, we are definitely in another one of those downturn periods. Just like stocks. You have highs and then you have lows and I remember all of those lows you mentioned TJF12.

 

[wildturkey]

Stopped reading at the bolded. The fact that you think the teams George Karl was handed to coach and the teams Byron had (especially in Cleveland) were remotely close tells me all that I need to know.]

When Byron had rosters that could win, he won. When he had rosters that couldn't, he didn't. Just like any other coach.

And that's not conjecture. Any coach at any level of any sport will tell you that in order to win, ypu have to have good players.

So when you give a guy great players, he wins a few games. What makes him different than an empty suit then? You can literally say that about anyone. That's just looking for an excuse to forgive his short comings. There are coaches that can actually make a difference. Karl is one of them but I'm not getting into that. Byron Scott is not. You even acknowledged it (though unknowningly) by saying he only wins when he has good players which is a sign that his coaching isn't making all that much difference. He is average at best and at worst, he makes you wonder if he really understands that its not 1994 anymore.

 

[trojanfan12]

So when you give a guy great players, he wins a few games. What makes him different than an empty suit then? You can literally say that about anyone. That's just looking for an excuse to forgive his short comings. There are coaches that can actually make a difference. Karl is one of them but I'm not getting into that. Byron Scott is not. You even acknowledged it (though unknowningly) by saying he only wins when he has good players which is a sign that his coaching isn't making all that much difference. He is average at best and at worst, he makes you wonder if he really understands that its not 1994 anymore.

Name a coach that won without a roster of players that could win? How many championships did Phil win without a great roster? When Phil didn't have a championship roster, he didn't win championships. In fact, he did no better than Mike Brown with the same roster.

What difference has Karl ever made? He got fired in Denver because his teams underachieved and he couldn't get them past the 2nd round.

I didn't acknowledge anything unknowingly. I said when Byron has a roster that can win, he wins. Just like any other coach.

Sorry, like I said, I wouldn't have complained if the Lakers hired Karl but he has shown no more than Byron has. He hasn't even been as far in the playoffs as Byron has. Even if the Lakers gave him a talented roster, there is no evidence to show that he'd accomplish any more as the Lakers coach than Del Harris did.

He's also 10 years older than Byron. So even if the Lakers hired him, how long would he really be the coach? 5 years maybe? If that. At least with Byron there is also the possibility that he could be the coach long term if he shows he can do the job.

 

[True Lakers Fan]

I still say that the Lakers have nothing of value to trade. Most of these players are one year contracts and are either very young or players have little trade value to other teams. It's a given that the Lakers are trying to hold on to that first round draft pick and that's the correct thing to do. By getting a top five pick, Randle comes back, Ed Davis is going to be improved; the only thing left to do is to give the rest of them more minutes and let them audition for next year by developing some skills. Then in the summer the Lakers rebuild and hope they can land one or two free agents. If the Lakers are actually hoping of being contenders next season, then they would have to talk both free agents into taking less money in the first year and loading up the money in the third through 5th or 6th years so that they can finish rebuilding in 2016. The down side is that many of these players don't necessarily recognize the Lakers as the same organization that operated under the late Dr Jerry Buss and they might not have the same respect and belief that they Lakers will know how to put together a winning team and considering Jim Buss' record with wanting to keep Andrew Bynum until the last possible year that he was worth more than zero - well...... In time he will figure it out with Jeannie helping him

 

[True Lakers Fan]

I disagree re: Karl. I don't dislike him as a coach and certainly wouldn't have complained if the Lakers hired him. However, what has he ever truly accomplished? He has a good regular season record, but how many championships has he won? How many times has he even taken a team to the finals? He had some very talented teams and a couple of his Denver teams were considered favorites to come out of the West.

Yet zero finals appearances.

At least when Byron had a roster that was good enough to get to the finals, he got them there.

I think the Lakers made the right choice with Byron Scott who preaches defense and has connections with the old Lakers players that won five championships went to the finals 8 times in 10 years or something like that. I have seen even Boozer using movements that clearly Worthy taught him on one of the sessions I watched. My belief is that what has made the Lakers a more worthy opponent is their willingness to develop their own talent and teach them rather than expect players to learn on their own

 

[Rambunctious]

I hope you're right and that I'm dead wrong Trojanfan but I think this down time for the lakers will be a long one. They will stick with Scott and Kobe another two years and then they will decide to make some tough choices. Were looking at 5 years of nowhere and no playoffs in my opinion. Are you sure you're not Mitch Kupchak?

 

[True Lakers Fan]

You have no idea what kind of fan I am. But I will tell you what kind of fan I am. I'm the kind of fan that will not stand for my favorite team to take the easy less costly road and end up being the 2nd best NBA team in LA. That makes me sick and it should make you sick as well. Mitch has been taking the easy way out for too long and it has hurt this team big time. Hiring Scott was just another example of that. When in doubt try to do what Jerry West would've done. No guts no glory.

I disagree - Mitch has already put together one team that went to the finals three straight years and won two championships in 08 and 90. He also was there when Shaq demanded a trade and put together the formula of keeping Kobe for his entire career when Phil Jackson, the head coach wanted them to trade Kobe and keep Shaq in favor of Jason Kidd which would have been a good team, but not necessarily a winning championships teams. In the face of diversity and a new cba, I think he has done a good job