Jump to content




Photo

Rick Adelman badly wanted the Lakers coaching gig


  • Please log in to reply
29 replies to this topic

#1 MDI

MDI

    Jesus Fan

  • 35,922 posts
  • Joined: Jul 24, 2008
  • Location:Irvine
  • Fav. Laker:Kobe Bryant

Posted September 13, 2011 - 08:04 AM

http://sports.yahoo...._twolves_091211

Adelman badly wanted the Los Angeles Lakers job, and he would’ve been hired had GM Mitch Kupchak not had to defer to Jim Buss’ desire for Mike Brown.


9u6kvo.png

 

Props to sidthekid871


#2 urkle9

urkle9

    Off The Bench

  • 1,807 posts
  • Joined: May 22, 2010
  • Location:Phoenix
  • Fan Since:Birth
  • Fav. Laker:Kobe

Posted September 13, 2011 - 08:11 AM

I really think the lakers made the right decision, I mean Brown is a winning coach, look at that cleveland team, they ONLY had Lebron, They played great defense and was a very tough team. Many teams, including Abelmans teams never made it where Brown did.

#3 pkflyers

pkflyers

  • 8,795 posts
  • Joined: Aug 04, 2008
  • Location:714/562

Posted September 13, 2011 - 08:31 AM

I really think the lakers made the right decision, I mean Brown is a winning coach, look at that cleveland team, they ONLY had Lebron, They played great defense and was a very tough team. Many teams, including Abelmans teams never made it where Brown did.

id take Adelman's 2001-2003 kings team over any of browns teams in a heartbeat


13z8pc6.jpg


#4 JRG_24

JRG_24

    Starter

  • 5,259 posts
  • Joined: Jun 28, 2009
  • Fan Since:1991
  • Fav. Laker:Ron Artest

Posted September 13, 2011 - 10:10 AM

If I can do it over again, I'd take Adelman.

#5 bigvee

bigvee

    Hall Of Fame

  • 8,578 posts
  • Joined: Jul 05, 2009
  • Location:LA
  • Fav. Laker:Samaki Walker

Posted September 13, 2011 - 12:38 PM

If I can do it over again, I'd take Adelman.

Unfortunately, it's none of our choices.

#6 LAKing85

LAKing85

    Rookie

  • 434 posts
  • Joined: Jun 15, 2009
  • Location:Marina Del Rey, CA
  • Fan Since:89'
  • Fav. Laker:Kobe "Black Mamba" Bryant

Posted September 13, 2011 - 01:14 PM

LOL, I'm sure he did as well as many other coaches who badly wanted that position.

#7 Hero

Hero

    Where imaginations run wild

  • 2,577 posts
  • Joined: Jun 18, 2009
  • Location:Behind you!
  • Name:Jerome
  • Fan Since:1990
  • Fav. Laker:Kobe Bryant, Magic Johnson

Posted September 13, 2011 - 01:35 PM

I think Mike Brown has already won me over. Besides, there's nothing we can do about it but just accept the fact that mike Brown is now our coach for the time being- or until he gets sacked.

spupissuelo.gif

RIP Dad. I miss you so very much...

July 27, 2011 4:00 AM.


#8 L.A.K.E.R

L.A.K.E.R

    Gomu Gomu

  • 14,761 posts
  • Joined: Jul 24, 2008
  • Location:California
  • Name:Shamim
  • Fan Since:2000
  • Fav. Laker:Kobe Bryant

Posted September 13, 2011 - 01:48 PM

Mhm that's great and all...wait...

Adelman badly wanted the Los Angeles Lakers job, and he would’ve been hired had GM Mitch Kupchak not had to defer to Jim Buss’ desire for Mike Brown.


Of course. Jim Buss. Like I said months ago. But of course, it was a "joint decision" between Jim, Jerry and Mitch. No way that Jim Buss had the final call.

[expletive].

#9 West Coast

West Coast

    LN Senior Editor

  • 21,366 posts
  • Joined: Jul 31, 2008
  • Location:California
  • Fav. Laker:Kobe Bryant

Posted September 13, 2011 - 04:11 PM

Oh well.

Mike Brown is our coach and that's not going to change for at least 3 seasons. Moving on...

#10 ace™

ace™

    Most Interesting

  • 10,081 posts
  • Joined: Aug 08, 2009
  • Location:Gotham City
  • Name:Ray Donovan
  • Fan Since:1997
  • Fav. Laker:Kobe Bryant

Posted September 13, 2011 - 06:09 PM

Adelman was my first choice, Mike Brown and Mike Dunleavy were the ones I did NOT want coaching this team. But we'll see what happens whenever the season gets underway.

#11 Azazello

Azazello

    Sixth Man

  • 3,431 posts
  • Joined: Dec 11, 2008

Posted September 13, 2011 - 06:23 PM

No sense crying over it now. Brown is our coach and I've accepted it. Every Lakers fan was disgusted with the defense last season. Hiring a defensive coach is a step in the right direction.

#12 Warren2ThaG

Warren2ThaG

    777

  • 7,484 posts
  • Joined: Jan 18, 2009
  • Location:Glendale, AZ.
  • Name:Danny P
  • Fan Since:1992
  • Fav. Laker:Kobe Bryant

Posted September 13, 2011 - 06:31 PM

No sense crying over it now. Brown is our coach and I've accepted it. Every Lakers fan was disgusted with the defense last season. Hiring a defensive coach is a step in the right direction.


not with Fisher starting, even Artest. Artest can barely run

All About Tha NW

russelwilsonfinalforums.jpg
"It's gonna take the man in me to conquer this insanity..." -Tupac.
-----------------------


#13 LakersChamps243

LakersChamps243

    5 rings on one hand. Onto the next. Silencing all the haters

  • 5,358 posts
  • Joined: Jul 16, 2009
  • Location:Camarillo, CA
  • Name:Stephen
  • Fan Since:Birth
  • Fav. Laker:Kobe Bryant

Posted September 13, 2011 - 08:27 PM

Adelman would have been my first choice as well but Mike Brown has won me over. He deserves his chance, so lets give it to him guys.

"Ability may get you to the top, but it takes character to keep you there" - John Wooden


#14 Notorious Arab

Notorious Arab

    Starter

  • 4,853 posts
  • Joined: Feb 06, 2009
  • Location:OC
  • Fan Since:When I came to the USA
  • Fav. Laker:Kobe Bryant

Posted September 13, 2011 - 09:10 PM

If I can do it over again, I'd take Adelman.


Posted Image


#15 Lakers_55

Lakers_55

    Lakers franchise > Celtics franchise

  • 1,401 posts
  • Joined: Jul 16, 2009
  • Location:Valley of the Sun
  • Fan Since:1967
  • Fav. Laker:Wilt Chamberlain

Posted September 14, 2011 - 06:08 AM

Yet another dig at Jim Buss.

People need to get over this Jim Buss bashing now.

Orignally, I wanted Adelman as many of you did. However, he's Phil's age. Mike Brown is young. Let's suppose Kobe plays 3 more years and gets us one title. Brown would stick around, I am certain, and be part of the rebuilding process. Give him 3-4 years, and we could win another and Lakers be contender for ewveral more years. Adelman could also win us a title in 3 years, but how much longer would he last?

Adelman = Derek Fisher, gone in a few years.
Mike Brown= Andrew Bynum, good for a long run.

Seasons the Celtics lost ECF when Lakers won the championship (7): 1953, 1954, 1972, 1980, 1982, 1988, 2002
In NBA history, the Lakers have finished better than the Celtics by a margin of 41-25!

Click for Video proof Lakers are the greatest NBA franchise
FaceBook: http://www.facebook....nCelticsBusters


#16 fido

fido

    Analyst, Moderator, Insomniac

  • 10,829 posts
  • Joined: Aug 01, 2008
  • Location:Costa Mesa, CA
  • Name:Andy
  • Fan Since:1982
  • Fav. Laker:Magic Johnson

Posted September 14, 2011 - 03:40 PM

I'm extremely happy Adelman is NOT the Lakers coach.

The Lakers made the right decision. Maybe someday we'll get to see a game coached by him, maybe.

#17 GCMD

GCMD

    All-Star

  • 6,768 posts
  • Joined: Jul 25, 2008
  • Fav. Laker:Magic Johnson

Posted September 15, 2011 - 04:19 AM

I think Adelman would have been the right choice as head coach. He's an offensive genius and this team is going to have to pickup a new offense really quickly which won't happen with Brown as coach. Plus, Adelman has had ample experience running a VETERAN team and juggling the egos of MULTIPLE superstars. Brown has no such experience.

IMHO, the ideal situation would have been Adelman as head coach and Brown as a highly paid ASSISTANT. That way, Adelman could have installed his offense, Brown could have installed his defense and Brown could LEARN from an offensive genius.

3 years from now, IF Adelman decided to retire, Brown would take over with the offense already in place and a blueprint for a winning veteran team.


That's why Brown went out and bought the best offensive coaches he could find. He's in over his head. He got thrown to the wolves and he knows it.


LA isn't CLE. Adelman knows that...he's been here, done that. If Brown doesn't hit the ground running, he may be out of a job. There would be no worries about that with Adelman...even if his defense is suspect.

Even if the Lakers win 60, no more Chips before Kobe retire = massive failure...

#18 Real Deal

Real Deal

    Legend

  • 14,860 posts
  • Joined: Jun 29, 2008
  • Location:Kansas
  • Name:Brandon
  • Fav. Laker:Kobe

Posted September 15, 2011 - 05:38 AM

I think Adelman would have been the right choice as head coach. He's an offensive genius and this team is going to have to pickup a new offense really quickly which won't happen with Brown as coach. Plus, Adelman has had ample experience running a VETERAN team and juggling the egos of MULTIPLE superstars. Brown has no such experience.

That's what assistant coaches are for. Messina is as good as Adelman, and let me just trim down my argument to the most important factor: Adelman carries around the Princeton offense. We can't run that with who we have on this roster.

As far as juggling the egos of multiple superstars...I can't name one superstar Adelman has coached. I know you meant players more along the lines of Chris Webber (who I don't consider a superstar, an all-star and superstar are two different things, but that's not too important), but C-Webb was very unselfish to begin with, which earned him the right to be considered the best passing PF in the history of the game.

Rick would be walking into unfamiliar territory. Kobe's territory. The fact is, Adelman has zero NBA Finals appearances since his Portland teams (who were very unselfish), and he has never coached a real superstar. You could probably argue for Clyde, but that was back in the late 80s and early 90s, and according to both Jack Ramsay and Rudy Tomjanovich, Drexler was one of the easiest players to coach in the league.

I don't really like going that route, though, because Doc Rivers took the wheel in Boston and won a championship with one of the greatest PF's of all time, one of the greatest shooters of all time, and arguably a top five Celtic in franchise history.

Erik Spoelstra pulled the Heat together just in time to make the NBA Finals, before losing to one of the most well-constructed teams in the last 10 years.

Adelman wins games with the Princeton, which requires shooters, something we lack. If we did have the shooters, sure, I would be in favor of it. The offense works wonders against the more athletic teams because it controls tempo, promotes passing and mismatches, and requires a post presence.

Adelman's Princeton hasn't worked since he left the Kings, though, probably due to not having Pete Carril around (after all, it's considered his offense, when he redefined it and made it what it is today back when he was coaching at Princeton, hence the name). Eddie Jordan made an attempt to run it with the Wizards, and I believe Byron Scott tried with the Hornets for the first couple of seasons with them, but both teams struggled shooting the ball, and it didn't work out for that very reason.

Above all, Adelman is a horrible defensive coach, and because we lost Rambis, I doubt we'd have a decent assistant who can teach us defense (I'm sorry, but Chuck Person is not a good defensive assistant coach). Our defense is a huge problem, the reason why we were lit up from downtown by the Mavs and why Chris Paul was able to cremate us with pick and rolls, and Adelman doesn't solve that problem.

Mike Brown installs a defensive system that is proven to be effective with a team consisting of only a couple of defensive-minded players (Cleveland was actually very good on that end of the court before LeBron was providing some of the best help D in the league, and it's because Brown knew how to utilize guys like Varejao and West, to make up for someone like Mo Williams and Daniel Gibson).

As long as Mike Brown has offensive-minded assistants, I can safely say he's the better choice. If we did have shooters, and Adelman brought with him someone like Larry Brown (which would never happen, but you get my point), then yes, the Princeton would be great in Los Angeles, and Adelman would be the top choice, assuming it wasn't Carril running the offense the entire time in Sactown (probably not, Adelman is a smart coach after all).

#19 GCMD

GCMD

    All-Star

  • 6,768 posts
  • Joined: Jul 25, 2008
  • Fav. Laker:Magic Johnson

Posted September 15, 2011 - 10:13 PM

Agree to disagree.

Defense is easier to to install at this level. At high school and below, offense often means relying on your best player. Most young kids need to have a defensive scheme to actually succeed on that end...which doesn't happen very often.


If you really want to talk about which end of the court our team is built for, defense is NOT the answer. I'm happy it will be emphasized this season but we have to many matadors playing key positions. Will a good scheme cover some of the faults? Yes. Did Brown get more out of less? Yes but with a HUGE ASTERISK - his team was very young. Our team is not young or filled with uber athletes.


I acknowledged that Adelman is not a great defensive coach but what the Princeton needs to succeed is high IQ players who pass well. That's all of our bigs and Kobe. Pau would thrive. "Kobe Decoy" would be in full effect. Cutters...

No shooters? I disagree. Fisher, Blake, Barnes, Brown. Pau is a good mid-range shooter.

I really don't believe you are suggesting that we couldn't run a motion offense (I realize that's an understatement) after running the Triangle all these years...they share MANY of the same principles.

The only semi-valid argument is we need defense...but do we need it to the point that we have to have our defensive coach out front instead of on the bench? No. He could do everything he needs to do as Adelman's assistant. If your assistant runs your offense, you are overpaid...period.

And Hollywood does NOT pay to see defense. Sorry...just a fact.

#20 Real Deal

Real Deal

    Legend

  • 14,860 posts
  • Joined: Jun 29, 2008
  • Location:Kansas
  • Name:Brandon
  • Fav. Laker:Kobe

Posted September 15, 2011 - 11:02 PM

Defense is easier to to install at this level. At high school and below, offense often means relying on your best player. Most young kids need to have a defensive scheme to actually succeed on that end...which doesn't happen very often.

Defense is easier to install in the pros? There are only a few legitimate defensive anchors in the NBA right now: Howard, Noah, Chandler, Bynum, Bogut, Okafor, Duncan and Garnett. Perkins can't handle the extra pressure in OKC and was a disappointment. Horford is a good individual defender, but not one you can anchor your defense off of.

How many 20+ PPG scorers were there last season? There were 21.

Detroit, Utah, Golden State, Phoenix and Houston were in the top 15 in offense last year. All of them missed the playoffs because, quite frankly, all of them were in the bottom 10 in defense.

All the while, every single team in the top 15 in defense made the playoffs...with the exception of the Bucks, who were a few wins away from making it, but they had lost both Bogut and Jennings for at least 15 games.

In other words, the bottom 15 (bottom half of the league) in defensive rating missed the playoffs, except for Denver, who would've played better defense if they had their team for longer than the second half of the season.

How does this all mean a defense is harder to install? Unlike a defense, an offense is based on one of two things: your facilitator (ex. Nash in Phoenix) or your primary scoring option (ex. Kobe in Los Angeles). LA has Bryant and Gasol, and they also have Drew (who should be getting the ball a little more down low as we progress into the Jim Buss era, or so we are told). They also have Odom. How many other teams have those scoring options?

We will score the ball, doesn't matter the offense. Installing a defensive scheme for older, less athletic players is far more difficult, and something many assistant coaches can't pull off.

Give me Mike Brown over Adelman. Give me the coach that learned everything he knows from one of the greatest coaches we've ever seen in Gregg Popovich.

If you really want to talk about which end of the court our team is built for, defense is NOT the answer. I'm happy it will be emphasized this season but we have to many matadors playing key positions. Will a good scheme cover some of the faults? Yes. Did Brown get more out of less? Yes but with a HUGE ASTERISK - his team was very young. Our team is not young or filled with uber athletes.

Yes, we're built for offense, which is why it's easier to apply an offense.

I acknowledged that Adelman is not a great defensive coach but what the Princeton needs to succeed is high IQ players who pass well. That's all of our bigs and Kobe. Pau would thrive. "Kobe Decoy" would be in full effect. Cutters...

We have one big that can pass well, and that's Gasol. Drew doesn't have the offensive awareness to pass well (which is why he's always stuck holding the ball), and Odom is becoming more of a spot-up shooter than a facilitator nowadays. Fisher is no passer. Ron hasn't been able to facilitate an offense since he left the Pacers. Barnes doesn't pass.

No shooters? I disagree. Fisher, Blake, Barnes, Brown. Pau is a good mid-range shooter.

We didn't have a single person shoot 40% or better from downtown last season. Ebanks and Sasha obviously don't count, considering the number they attempted.

In fact, Barnes shot around 31-32%. Artest was at around 35%. Those aren't good numbers.

In other news, Ron, Blake and Fisher all shot under 40% from the field last season. Brown shot under 43%, and he was worse than Ron from three (and he won't be back anyway).

I really don't believe you are suggesting that we couldn't run a motion offense (I realize that's an understatement) after running the Triangle all these years...they share MANY of the same principles.

Considering our Lakers were 11th in the league in FG% and an ugly 17th in 3PT%, it's hard to believe we can rely on their shooting. They were also 13th in assists.

Without a primed Kobe, and/or without Pau delivering in the post, any offense that relies on shooters will not work because, simply put, no defense will collapse.

The only semi-valid argument is we need defense...but do we need it to the point that we have to have our defensive coach out front instead of on the bench? No. He could do everything he needs to do as Adelman's assistant. If your assistant runs your offense, you are overpaid...period.

Well, I guess you'll have to tell Mike Brown and Larry Brown that they were both overpaid when one beat us in the 2004 Finals with one of the greatest defensive teams of all time, and another one found their way to the Finals with a high-ranked defensive team that was just ranked 18th on offense, not because of Brown, but because they didn't have the players on the court to score outside of LeBron.

And Hollywood does NOT pay to see defense. Sorry...just a fact.

That must be why they've enjoyed watching the Clippers for so long, a team that has only three seasons, since the mid-70's, where they ranked better than 10th in the NBA in defense (in 2006, 1991 and 1992), and 2006 was the first time they had won a playoff series since 1976.

I really don't care what people pay to see in Hollywood. They pay to see Ron on Dancing with the Stars. They probably want to see Kobe on George Lopez. So what? Championships over everything. Nothing else really matters.

If they want to watch a high-scoring offense play zero defense and miss the playoffs next season, the Rockets and the Suns need fans. They were top five in offense. The Warriors are in Oakland, same state, 7th in offense. Kevin Martin, Vince Carter, and Monta Ellis...pretty exciting.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users