50 replies to this topic

[West Coast]

From everything that has gone on today, who is your pick to be Lakers next coach? It looks like its a two man race between The Zen Master and Pringles.

Here are my thoughts on both:


Phil Jackson -

The obvious fan favorite and most successful coach in history. Looks like the player preference as well. We can go on and on about him, but here are my concerns. Phil is obviously a quick fix. He'd be here this year and MAYBE next season depending on his health. In another year or two, we would have to find a new head coach and there's no telling who could be available.

What really intrigues me about Phil Jackson is the fact that Dwight Howard wants him as coach AND Phil said a couple years ago that Dwight is the one guy he'd build around if he were starting a franchise. Also it would really make Dwight happy if a guy he wants would be named coached, it would definitely give bonus points to the organization heading into the off-season.


Mike D'Antoni -

Very good offensive mind. Would bring an exciting offensive strategy to LA (although I don't think it would be a 7 seconds or less offense). He's never had the weapons he would have here in LA and with the talk of the no defense part of his philosophy, it's very good to hear that he wants to make sure that changes and would hire a "defensive coordinator" to really get the defense on point. He would also be a long term option for this team going forward. His flashy offense would be something that the Buss family might want. My concerns is the defense of course. He would need to bring in a very good defensive coach to make sure that part of the floor gets corrected.

[Lakerace24]

PJ all the way.

[Cowboys&LakersFan]

Phil Jackson and it's not even a debate really. Pringles is a great offensive coach, but defensively is horrible. Doesn't preach defense at all and you can't have that if you expect win a championship. Phil is a great motivator, knows how to handle egos, and preaches defense.

Edited by Cowboys&LakersFan, November 09, 2012 - 11:11 PM.

[j0k3r]

no question..Phil "Zen Master" JACKSON!

[bigfetz]

11 > 0. enough said

[West Coast]

Phil Jackson and it's not even a debate really. Pringles is a great offensive coach, but defensively is horrible. Doesn't preach defense at all and you can't have that if you expect win a championship. Phil is a great motivator, knows how to handle egos, and preaches defense.

It is a move that would pay off at both ends of the floor. D'Antoni has been telling friends for months that he looks forward to hiring a "defensive coordinator'' in some form (the exact title to be determined) the next time he becomes an NBA coach. In those conversations, D'Antoni has acknowledged that he allowed his prolific gains on offense to define his persona as a coach, creating an impression that he was indifferent to defense -- an impression that he has promised to change with his next head-coaching job.

D'Antoni has long insisted that he has cared about defense, but that he lacked defensive-minded players in Phoenix during the Suns' run of four straight seasons of 54 wins or more through 2007-08. The weakness of players who could excel at both ends of the floor was affirmed when the Suns tried and failed to emphasize defense by hiring Terry Porter to replace D'Antoni. Porter went 28-23 in 2008-09 before the Suns replaced him at midseason with Alvin Gentry, who restored much of D'Antoni's system, guiding the Suns back to a 54-win season on their way to the 2010 Western Conference finals.

[Goku]

I don't see how D'Antoni is even an option when Phil is involved. The mere presence of him wlil change things drastically.

[djcovi]

How ridiculous would that question have sounded 2 years ago? It should still sound ridiculous, we must have short memories lol. Phil motherbleeping Jackson, he's one of the greatest basketball minds ever. Mike Antoni can coach, but come on now. Zen Master

[Projekt]

Can we ban whoever votes for Pringles?

[Majesty]

Depends really, which system benefits our players the most and offers the last level of "adjustment" for the majority of the team.

I'm not gonna scream

OHB YEAH PHIOL CAUSE HE GOAT LALALALAH!!

Which system would offer the least amount of adjustment time for our unit, that a majority of our players can pick up on and those that can't would adjust to the fastest.

That should be who we hire.

Edited by Majesty, November 09, 2012 - 11:17 PM.

[djcovi]

Depends really, which system benefits our players the most and offers the last level of "adjustment" for the majority of the team.

I'm not gonna scream

OHB YEAH PHIOL CAUSE HE GOAT LALALALAH!!

Which system would offer the least amount of adjustment time for our unit, that a majority of our players can pick up on and those that can't would adjust to the fastest.

That should be who we hire.

We should hire the better coach, that's all there is to it. Phil is the better coach. He has PROVEN that he can come in to a brand new situation and win immediately. 1999; first year on the job in LA, 67 wins, championship.

[serenityy]

Potatoes, Pringles and KFC. Two of these items share something minor in common.

[West Coast]

Depends really, which system benefits our players the most and offers the last level of "adjustment" for the majority of the team.

I'm not gonna scream

OHB YEAH PHIOL CAUSE HE GOAT LALALALAH!!

Which system would offer the least amount of adjustment time for our unit, that a majority of our players can pick up on and those that can't would adjust to the fastest.

That should be who we hire.

Well the adjustment won't be a factor for either IMO. When Phil first took over the Lakers, they started 30-5 in their first 40 games. In his second stint, they struggled and were around .500 for the season but that roster consisted of Smush and Kwame.

D'Antoni's offense is more free flowing so there really wouldn't be an adjustment period there.

One thing people need to really look at is the long term aspect of the team. Best case scenario is Phil coaches the team for 2 years, then we go into that off-season with Dwight and Nash under contract, bring in a new coach and start off a new era under Dwight.

[Majesty]

We should hire the better coach, that's all there is to it. Phil is the better coach. He has PROVEN that he can come in to a brand new situation and win immediately. 1999; first year on the job in LA, 67 wins, championship.

Yes but he's also shown what that system does when the personnel doesn't fit(Kobe Lakers from 2004 till 2008) only Kobe understood his system and they never made it out of the first round.

So what's more important that we find out is that we pick the coach whom has the system that benefits our team the most. With a team of this talent the triangle could win it, the question is what we'd do with Nash in it.

With D'antoni it would CERTAINLY do wonders for our bench unit and get us some easy points. So Idk both have their strengths and weaknesses. The question is which would take the least amount of time to adjust to for the team as a whole. THAT is what is the major factor.

[Jackson]

Phil. 19-0, and counting.

[bigvee]

Well the adjustment won't be a factor for either IMO. When Phil first took over the Lakers, they started 30-5 in their first 40 games. In his second stint, they struggled and were around .500 for the season but that roster consisted of Smush and Kwame.

D'Antoni's offense is more free flowing so there really wouldn't be an adjustment period there.

One thing people need to really look at is the long term aspect of the team. Best case scenario is Phil coaches the team for 2 years, then we go into that off-season with Dwight and Nash under contract, bring in a new coach and start off a new era under Dwight.

This. This is why I hope (granted we get him) Phil comes in with a great assistant coach who Dwight will be fond of. That way, whoever he comes in with learns from Phil, if he already hasn't in the past, and can take over the Lakers with Dwight being okay with it.

I hope Phil comes for 3 years, 3 peat, and retire (again). Am I asking too much?

[bigfetz]

Yes but he's also shown what that system does when the personnel doesn't fit(Kobe Lakers from 2004 till 2008) only Kobe understood his system and they never made it out of the first round.

So what's more important that we find out is that we pick the coach whom has the system that benefits our team the most. With a team of this talent the triangle could win it, the question is what we'd do with Nash in it.

With D'antoni it would CERTAINLY do wonders for our bench unit and get us some easy points. So Idk both have their strengths and weaknesses. The question is which would take the least amount of time to adjust to for the team as a whole. THAT is what is the major factor.

You mean the smush parker and kwame brown era lol. Theres a difference between wrong personel and just really [expletive]ty players

[djcovi]

Yes but he's also shown what that system does when the personnel doesn't fit(Kobe Lakers from 2004 till 2008) only Kobe understood his system and they never made it out of the first round.

So what's more important that we find out is that we pick the coach whom has the system that benefits our team the most. With a team of this talent the triangle could win it, the question is what we'd do with Nash in it.

With D'antoni it would CERTAINLY do wonders for our bench unit and get us some easy points. So Idk both have their strengths and weaknesses. The question is which would take the least amount of time to adjust to for the team as a whole. THAT is what is the major factor.

I would say lineups consisting of Kwame Brown, Smush Parker, Luke Walton, etc. were to blame during that stretch, not the system lol.

But in all honesty I wouldn't be bummed necessarily if Mike got the job. I want Phil though, I think he's the right man for the job.

[Lakers4Life]

Given a choice I dont think anyone picks Pringles.

It simply comes down to this

11-0

Edited by Lakers4Life, November 09, 2012 - 11:37 PM.

[West Coast]

Yes but he's also shown what that system does when the personnel doesn't fit(Kobe Lakers from 2004 till 2008) only Kobe understood his system and they never made it out of the first round.

So what's more important that we find out is that we pick the coach whom has the system that benefits our team the most. With a team of this talent the triangle could win it, the question is what we'd do with Nash in it.

With D'antoni it would CERTAINLY do wonders for our bench unit and get us some easy points. So Idk both have their strengths and weaknesses. The question is which would take the least amount of time to adjust to for the team as a whole. THAT is what is the major factor.

That's a mute point because this personnel is head and shoulders above what they had when he came around for his second run.

I think their is a misconception that if Phil comes in that he would mis-use Nash, but with Nash being the shooter that he is, he is a fantastic fit for the triangle offense and I'm sure Phil would allow Nash to do what he does as well. People automatically point to Gary Payton in the triangle, but GP was not the shooter that Nash is.

When you really look at this roster, its set up perfectly for a Phil Jackson team opposed to a run and gun D'Antoni team. Both will be successful IMO, but the Lakers may go with what has worked in the past opposed to an unknown. Seems like the players want Phil as well and that's really what matters.

I look at the long term vs short term aspect as being the major factor. But what Dwight wants is really important at this point as well.