Everyone is speculating. No one here knows the reality of the situation.
So, if you're trying to win...why bring in Mike Brown? Ok, they realized the mistake and fired him but then made a lateral move by bringing in another coach in D'Antoni who has the same amount of rings as MB: ZERO. One couldn't coach offense and the current one can't coach defense.
What I DO know is that Phil Jackson is a proven winner. If it's about ships, isn't the answer obvious?
Also, why did LA shun Brian Shaw after PJ left?
Well if you're going to go with the rings number count theory, there's not many coaches out there that would have been good for the Lakers then.
Coaches can't be judged based off rings. Good example of that is Rick Carlisle. He was in the league for 9 years before winning his first ring. You have to look at their coaching styles and see what works. The thing that D'Antoni has going for him is that he is a players coach. Guys like playing for him, they'll play hard for him. Mike Brown didn't have that.
D'Antoni was successful in Phoenix. He then left for NY and that was a nightmare. I keep seeing this 'he's a proven loser' bit but thats ridiculous. Because he hasn't won a ring? If that's the case then Jerry Sloan is the biggest proven loser of them all.
To be fair, Mike Brown was a bad hire. We know that. I supported him when he was here because everyone deserves to prove their worth despite the past. But it didn't work out.
Everyone wanted Phil Jackson. That's not a secret. I do think the Lakers messed up in making it known he was the leading candidate and making it seem like he was going to be back. If he was just another candidate and it was known they interviewed him, then fans would be taking it a lot more in stride. But everyone expected Phil Jackson to be the coach Monday morning and when fans woke up, it was someone else.