Wmc 15/16: We are finally at the END! BYE BYRON!!!

That...is...terrible.

 

Byron is clueless , it's not going to change ... It gonna be a struggle until management gets its ish together to correctly fill in every position in our organization ...

 

are good coaches really that hard to come by? or is the lakers organization just that bad at hiring good coaches?

either way, i'm all for giving byron this whole season to see what he can do with the slightly improved roster but going forward i just don't see byron being the coach to take this team to the next level

 

Nope...good coaches are that hard to come by. IMO. But we are kind of terrible if you look at the totality.

We've struck gold with a handful of coaches and rode them til they were dry. Bill Sharman was great in the Jerry West days. We lucked into Riles who built off of Jack Mckinney's system and Magic. Riles was great though, don't get me wrong. One of the greatest. Then we swooped up on Phil Jackson. I believe during the Mikan days it was John Kundla but I couldn't tell you a thing about him.

In between? Meh. Westhead, Dunleavy, Del Harris, Tomjanovich, the Mikes, and a bunch of other short timers.

But that is the nature of coaching in today's NBA. Look at the number of coaches that have changed over just the last few years. I am almost positive Popovich is the only coach and the Spurs are the only franchise not to make a coaching change in the last 5 years.

 

BS was .484 with Paul and .304 with Irving. Not sure I'd use the word success there. Even with the Nets, he was .317 before Kidd got there with a good team to bail Scott out in the terrible eastern conference then.

But yeah I agree. It's what he wants, a set-and-forget general on court. Remember that he also thought he was getting Lebron when he took the Cleveland job.

 

I'm on board with Byron, A lot of it has to do with his Showtime Lakers stint.Last years team was garbage, no one could have done better. Lets see how he does this year with some talent, raw talent, a big that can defend the rim for his pressure D, some perimeter defenders like A Brown, Nance, with Clarkson, A good PF defender in Bass. Defense is the name of the game, this is where Scott should prove his worth,the offense will come, especially with Kobe , Williams in the mix. This Princeton will be parred down as the season nears after they all learn the fundamentals of it.

 

It's funny you bring up Thibs. I was super high on the Thibs train all this time. Then I watched the Lakers last season, saw how ugly our offense was and realized Thibs isn't an offensive genius in the slightest.

Watching Kerr in GS made me realize that some coaches just have "it" and other coaches don't. I still think Thibs is a great coach, but the last thing we need is another hard headed coach who knows everything.

If Thibs was cool with letting an offensive coordinator run that ship, I'd be for it.

I think Carlisle is a great coach. I don't know that he's in the same league as those 4 Laker coaches but hey. Who knows, by the time Dallas dries out with Dirk and co and begin rebuilding, he might want a change. We might be in that perfect position where we're no longer rebuilding but not good enough to compete.

 

Carlisle's schemes are tailor made for this roster. He's exactly what we need.

 

1st thing Byron needs to do is not rely solely on the Princeton offense. Run it in spurts or simplify it. You can't draft a fast paced point guard and then take the ball out of his hands.

 

I think analytics is extremely overblown (kinda like "small ball") but i do think there is a place for analytics in todays game and feel like the Lakers
should get more involved with it.

 

I'm sure he's basing his "non belief" on personal experience or others experience. Analytics offer value at the very least in providing objective evaluations that are impossible for humans to do as we "bias" every decision. WTS, bias in decisions is at the very foundation of most good dynamic coaching decisions. Analytics as a decision making tool alone is a wrong way of looking at it.

What analytics can do for us won't be a determinant in our success for a few years anyway. If used correctly, I can see a potential for it's use adding a few wins a year. I think it might be a few years before a few wins a year is meaningful for us unfortunately.

 

Analytics are valuable in the sense that there is no way to watch every single game and see every single player all the time.

Analytics are like a real estate listing. The listing can give you an idea of what the house is, but you have to drive to the house and take a good look up close to really know what's there. Analytics doesn't replace scouting a player up close in person and watching that player with your own eyes. It's a tool to figure out which players to take a closer look at.

I'm getting the sense that some teams believe that using analytics means they don't have to employ as many real scouts to watch the players up close. I don't believe that's a good idea. Perhaps that's what Byron disagrees with.

 

Byron likes boobs, so essentially, he's my kind of guy.

Just wish he was a better coach.