With only 3 games left in Kobe’s career, the focus is almost entirely on the final moments of his brilliant career whether he wants it that way or not. After the Lakers were handled by the Pelicans on Friday, Kobe didn’t express much approval of his point guard saying the goal was to get Kobe the ball as much as possible. On the other hand, Kobe took 10 shots in the 1st quarter of that game, including seven 3-pointers! So if he doesn’t want the ball, he’s got a weird way of showing it.
Again, though, whatever Kobe wants or doesn’t want, isn’t really that relevant at this point. The retirement train left the station long ago and now we’re all on the tracks together. There’s no adjusting course so we might as enjoy the scenery. If that involves a few more forced passes into #24, what does that matter at this point (with 3 games left in the season and his career)?
So, we celebrate the player and his career however we want to. For some, that might mean continuing to root for his departure as quickly as possible. Kobe’s not the most lovable figure in sports — Nike has done a great job of playing that up lately — and I think Kobe is fine still wearing the black hat to a portion of fans. If that means eating up career highlights and reveling in what once was, that’s totally fine too. I mean, he has clips all over the web of him dominating every team in the league. Today’s opponent included.
Before @kobebryant faces @HoustonRockets for final time today, we look back at his memorable moments in HTown! #KB20 https://t.co/VZMzzL2DkF
— NBA (@NBA) April 10, 2016
Some of my favorite memories of Kobe against the Rockets come the 2009 playoffs when these teams faced off in the 2nd round. The series went 7 games, a tough battle which featured a gritty Rockets team who continued to battle even after Yao went down with a leg injury. The Lakers actually found themselves behind in the series early after losing game 1 at Staples Center. That made game 2 a must win and Kobe obliged with his best game of the series.
Kobe scored 40 of the team’s 98 points and chipped in 4 rebounds and 3 assists for good measure. Playing against Ron Artest and Shane Battier might have been the most grueling sort of defensive matchup there could have been, a combination of physicality, tactical expertise, and defensive acumen you’d have found in any wing pairing in the entire league. But there Kobe was, torching them and leading the way to a series tying win.
As for tonight, the stakes aren’t as high, but there are playoff implications. The Rockets would be eliminated from the playoff chase with a loss. After reaching the Western Conference Finals last season, not even reaching the post-season this year would complete one of most disappointing one season turnarounds (which didn’t involve great roster turnover or severe injury) in recent league history. So the Rockets should come out with their best effort — though it’s hard to predict what this Rockets team will ever do.
The Lakers, then, can play spoiler and I’m sure some fans would love nothing more than for a Kobe Bryant team to eliminate Dwight Howard from the playoffs. Whether they are capable of pulling it off, is another story of course. The Rockets have much more talent than the Lakers and, as noted, should be motivated to stay alive in the race for the post season. The Lakers have some talent to hang around, but their level of effort and execution has been so up and down in recent weeks, it’s hard to imagine them putting together the type of sustained effort to pull off the upset.
That said, I’m hoping for a W in this game. Not because of the Howard angle, but because the Lakers could really use another win. They are locked into the 2nd worst record in the NBA, so their lottery odds are set. At this point, it would be nice for the guys to get another win (or two) before the season ends. It won’t mean much to end the year with 18 games vs. the 16 they possess now, but having a few nice feelings going into summer is better than the alternative.
Where you can watch: 12:30pm start time on TWC Sportsnet. Also listen on ESPN Radio 710AM Los Angeles.
pat oslon says
I don’t care who the opponent is I alway want the Lakers to win! I’m also rooting for Kobe to go out a winner because that’s what he is all about. Go Lakers & Kobe!
Sald0gg says
Kobe saved one for Dwight. I feel it.
bleedpurplegold says
SaldOgg:
Looks like it after 1qtr….
Too many offensive rebounds for houston so far….
Sald0gg says
Agreed, but this Houston team is cookie dough soft. Would LOVE for Kobe to help pull them out of the playoffs.
24hrx. says
Metta World Peace!!
24hrx. says
Nance is up there making sandwiches…
Simonoid says
I dislike these rockets announcers. I’m sorry, but 19, 7 and 6 is not “almost a triple double”.
bleedpurplegold says
Glad i was able to see maybe kobes last big game….too bad we gave up waaay to many tos and orbs to carve out a win….
Simonoid says
Another gem, “Hakeem had actually worked with Kobe a few years back, on some part of his game, I think maybe his post game…”
What other aspect of Kobe’s game is Olajuwon going to help with, exactly? His pull up three pointers?
karen says
Did howard acknowledge kobe after the game, i didn’t see it?
mud says
it’s all Byron’s fault the Lakers lost today!
he ruined Kobe’s efforts!
hahahaha!
Simonoid says
Karen – not that was caught on the Houston broadcast, anyway. I saw Ariza, Terry, Clifford Ray, some other assistant, Harden, and Hakeem in some order.
Anonymous says
I hope Jeanie is watching this mess. i get she doesn’t want to fire Jim but can’t she just add Troy Weaver to help out. Why is the only solution Jim/Mitch or bust?
Jim/Mitch have drafted well but every other aspect of player personnel leaves much to be desired. In three years they haven’t acquired much talent other than Randle/Clatkson/Russell. And Nance is just a back of the rotation guy with a low ceiling.
No trades of note, no long term FAs, no draft and stash Euros. Relying on lottery picks is fine if you can stomach the losing it requires. But this FO has done nothing creative to accelerate the rebuild.
Anonymous says
Why is the only solution Jim/Mitch or bust?
—-
Good question. Seems like both Jeanie and Jim are content to let the Lakers bottom out to prove their respective points. It doesn’t have to be this way.
If it were a normal organization you’d like to think that space could be made to add a Troy Weaver. I mean you just set a franchise record for losses for the third year in a row — what are you holding on to?
matt says
Is it just me or is d’angelo russell incapable of staying infront of any guard he’s defending.
stats says
This game made me glad I’m not a GM, because I wouldn’t know what to do with Clarkson. On the one hand, it was one of his better shooting games, and it showcased his abilities. On the other, he’s become a worse defender than Huertas – who at least hustles – and once he gets the ball he can be a black hole. He’s young, but I’m concerned.
Gary says
If it were a normal organization you’d like to think that space could be made to add a Troy Weaver. I mean you just set a franchise record for losses for the third year in a row — what are you holding on to?
—
The Lakers are anything but normal. Putting their differences aside for the good of the organization is the right thing for Jeanie and Jim to do. I doubt it ever happens.
Mid-Wilshire says
stats,
I hear you. Actually, neither Clarkson nor Russell could guard his own shadow. Considering their defensive inadequacies, I’m not sure either one would get off the bench if they played for San Antonio.
My own feeling, however, is that this is nothing that a good coach couldn’t cure. What if Clarkson and Russell had Greg Popovich coaching them? Would that matter? I would certainly think that it would make a difference.
Well…there are no Greg Popovich’s around. But we can surely improve on Byron Scott. The kids are in the formative stages of their careers. Now is the time to get them an outstanding mentor, someone who can drill into them the proper techniques of sound defense.
I feel more strongly than ever before that we need that kind of Head Coach now. I believe that it could make all the difference in the world.
P.S. On the positive side, and to be fair, Clarkson — on offense — had a helluva game: 21 points on 9-17 shooting, 8 rebounds, and 4 assists. It was Russell who stank tonight. But Clarkson, offensively, looked good.
KO says
Well Kobe showed up.
Russell
Hibert
Kelly
Bryon
Not so much
harold says
Games like this, you really wonder what could have been if the Lakers didn’t waste prime Kobe with scrubs. Those years against the Suns probably added the mileage that ultimately brought the Achilles, and while yeah, those are freak injuries, you just wonder and wish he could have played a few more at a high level to match his uniform number.
Oh well. Hope he has a couple more games like this in him. Would love to see him go out with a 40 pt game…
rr says
I believe that it could make all the difference in the world.
—
Many believe that a head coach’s greatest impact is on Team D, in terms of schemes, etc. and there is some research to that effect. I think, however, that you are probably overstating what a coaching change can mean for any individual Laker’s development arc.
As I have been saying all year, I think a lot of people in the fanbase are still having trouble facing the possibility that the young guys the Lakers have just aren’t going to be all that great and the reality that they overrated the roster in making preseason predictions and that the conventional wisdom–that the Lakers would be the worst team in the West–was right.
It is easier to focus on the idea that Byron is an historically incompetent coach and that therefore his departure will make, to use your words, all the difference in the world. Given his track record, he will in some ways go down as such, especially having added 37-125 to his already shaky resume.
But the NBA is about talent. With Golden State winning #72 tonight, I would add that I think one reason for the fanbase’s intense fixation on Scott is that GS’s team seems to be more about culture, coaching etc than other great teams have been, since as noted by TOJW a couple of days ago, Steph Curry and Draymond Green did not profile as two guys who would leave a one-year impact on the league as large as and be as valuable as Michael Jordan and Scottie Pippen were to the 1996 Bulls. Combining that with Popovich and Buford’s remarkable and seemingly endless run of success in San Antonio and Brad Stevens’ success in Boston, Scott looks even worse and of course, in part because of those things, a lot of Lakers fans want Luke Walton here.
And that may be so, but I tend to think that GS and SA are outliers, and the other top teams in the league (CLE, LAC and OKC) are more conventional very good teams.
So, while I think a new coach is needed and can help, I will be more interested in the ping-pong balls and free agency than in who the next person on the sidelines wearing a suit is.
Mid-Wilshire says
rr,
You make some good points. Of course, we could easily discuss the relative weight and merits of good coaching endlessly. I actually agree that the NBA is a talent-driven league. There is no substitute for having truly great players on one’s team. I would never argue against that. And I, too, will be looking forward to this year’s draft with great interest.
But I do believe when you have young players, as the Lakers do, that it’s especially crucial to have a solid mentor in place. Whether Byron Scott is a good coach or not (I think not), my point is that he does not appear to be an effective mentor. And with so many of the Lakers in their formative years as NBA players, the relative importance of having a strong mentor looms especially large.
I believe that Russell, Randle, and Clarkson could unmistakably benefit from having a brilliant mentor. I don’t believe that’s a far-fetched position. I sense that they’ve never actually been taught defense…at least, not effectively. In fact, they look completely lost on defense.
If that’s the case, then I think the importance of having a capable Head Coach who could be an excellent communicator and a strong mentor — especially on defense — could be particularly significant, especially considering the stage in the development of the Lakers’ young players.
KevTheBold says
Agree Mid, and would add that if the warriors core were here at the same ages as ours, rr’s logic would extend to them as well.
Especially so for Curry.
Yes, it’s always possible for the scale to tip in any direction, but why expect it to dip into the negative?
Takes all the fun out of sports imo.
Hope, is Life !
J C says
For some reason Randle’s defensive inadequacy stands out to me. He usually doesn’t rotate or help.
Defensive teamwork must be coached, even drilled into the team’s head.
As an amateur player it always amazes me to see professionals that don’t even apply basic fundamentals to individual defense like boxing out.
If they weren’t taught in high school, how about college?
And Team Defense is the responsibility of the coach.
Byron clearly fails the eye test in this regard.
Re Kobe – simultaneously amazing and sad to see him perform so admirably in a meaningless loss.
I can imagine a parallel universe in which our team is competitive, and Kobe willingly takes on a 6th man role and averages 16 points per game in 20 minutes per night. And contributes to a winning culture for two or three more years.
I applaud Kobe’s final season as a testament to his will power- coming back after the Achilles injury etc etc. and still competing so well, still, at the NBA level.
Like all the greats, he is unique.
Darius Soriano says
The NBA is a talent league. Coaching is a talent too.
R says
http://nyti.ms/230YX2q
The above links to an interesting article about the Warrior’s rise. It seems the principle owner thinks he’s the most important factor in the team’s success.
And here all along I thought it was Steph Curry…
Kbj says
I find it hard to believe Russell and Clarkson can get much better at defense. These two guys are so bad defensively that any improvement they make will simply get them from being a terrible defender to just slightly below average. I guess that would be a huge improvement. Best case scenario is they contribute so much offensively that it not only cancels out their bad defense but there is a net gain to them being on the court a la Steve Nash.
Renato Afonso says
Since we’re talking about defense, you need to understand that while defense can be improved with good coaching and physical work (more lateral speed, more strength, etc.) there is also a natural ability to play defense. Your reaction time, your ability to read the opponents “objective”, knowing the predicatable reaction of your teammate if you get beat off the dribble either to the middle or to the baseline, and so on is something that you usually just have. It is pretty much like reading the flow of the offense and knowing where the ball is/should be going next but for the opponent. So, yes, defense can be taught and improved but Russell and Clarkson will never be good defensive players. If they become “neutral” defenders it would be a large improvement and I don’t think we can expect more than that, especially Clarkson whom I doubt can even reach that status despite having bettter physical tools than his backcourt teammate.
Randle on the other hand seems to have a problem which is easier to correct. He is capable of staying in front of his man and has enough bulk to hold his own down low. He does lack wingspan to be a good shot blocker but with enough bulk you don’t need to block shots. His main problem is team defense and to fix it you just need a good coach. Protecting the the middle when the ball is on the opposite side of your defensive assignment and other small stuff is drilled in to you through repetition in practice. It’s about memory: “If the ball is on spot X and my defensive assignment is on spot Y, I need to go to spot Z.” Obviously there are variations to this simple idea but the proper placement can be accepted as a dogma by players and still be effective, as it will give them the higher chance to provide proper help defense.
Also, another thing that may be happening with our PF’s and C’s (and I’m not saying it is happening but it happens a lot in losing teams with bad defense) is that they may be protecting their defensive reputation. When you have a backcourt that can’t stop any dribble penetration at all, you will be left with two choices:
a) stoping the dribble penetration and hope that some other wing player cuts the passing lane to their defensive assignment.
b) stick with his man and see if the perimeter players can recover and stop that penetration.
Option a) is the correct choice but because there is no second or third help it usually ends up with an assist to the open big man or even an and-1. So, after a while the big man may be sick of it, think of his next contract and simply think “let them be torched on defense, I’ll keep my man from scoring” which leads to everything we’re seeing right now.
But the worst part about all this is that there isn’t a single good defensive player on this roster and that is not on the coach. When you want to develop a team the proper way, you get those youngsters with tons of offensive potential (if they reach that potential is still to be seen) and get veterans with defensive accumen to make them work for their minutes. Scott was right in beinching Russell for defensive reasons or for blowing an assigment. The problem is that Russell was watching Lou Williams play his minutes and was learning nothing from it…
KevTheBold says
Renato, I think it wise never to say never with regards to certain rookies.
As it’s been pointed out time and time again, people said the same and more about Curry.
Those that persist in reading the future, only reveal their wishes imo.
Vasheed says
rr,
I think coaching matters. The Lakers had Shaq & Kobe with Del Harris and went no where. It wasn’t until the Lakers brought in Phil Jackson that everything came together. You do need a foundation of talent but, a coach matters in getting the most out of that talent as possible. Good coaches do this. Bad ones don’t.
Ryan P says
Remember steph curry was thought to be a bad/horrible defender when he came up. It took a defensive minded coach (Mark Jackson, I hope the FO is not looking at him) to teach up the team.
Anon#1 says
Been thinking about about Anon’s topic above regarding Jim and Jeanie and how their inability to get along has held the franchise as hostage. Previously we have always thought that it was truly a Jim/Mitch or bust equation.
The line is currently drawn as either Jim guides the Lakers deep into next year’s playoffs or Jeanie will replace him. We have always thought that it would be Jeanie that makes the decision regarding leadership of basketball operations and Jim was at her mercy.
What if Jim took the bull by the horns and made the decision a) to step up and mostly out of basketball operations b) elevate Mitch c) hire a new younger GM, like Troy Weaver.
Jeanie is supposedly a big fan of Sam Presti, so the hire of his top lieutenant should please her. This is a way for Jim to get out from the timeline associated with the promise — because management change is the end game of that scenario anyway. But more importantly, for fans, it removes yet another year of the FO treading water. No lame duck FO trying to hire a good coach or handle a pitch meeting to a key free agent.
I am not a fan of Jim’s and would just assume he was out of the picture. However, for the sake of not wasting another year without a plan other than ‘try to sign multiple max free agents and failing that to tank’ I will gladly keep him around, as a figurehead, if it means a new GM is brought on board to craft the future vision of the franchise this summer.
Keith says
On defensive effort: It’s the end of a long year horrible year. The kids have nothing to play for and their likely exhausted — having more than doubled the number of games they played in college.
The Kobe circus is not real basketball and is counter intuitive to anything they’ve seen in their careers — usually poorer players don’t get so much run or get to take so many shots.
The Kobe extension did what management needed — it provided some cover for the worst three year run in franchise history. It was a marketing success but a complete basketball failure.
Now comes the hard part. The team is still two or three years away from competing and there is no Kobe to provide any distractions. Next year is critical — it’s essential that the team provide hope and forward momentum.
Folk’s will say that there is not a fan rebellion. I think there is. Season ticket holders will stay on board as they can afford to ‘invest’ for the future. But ratings are down on TV and radio for the third straight year. Negative trends like that eventually have consequences.
Jim is on borrowed time and if progress isn’t made he will be gone. Jeanie has been fortunate that most of the fan angst has been directed at her brother. She needs to realize that she’s about a year away from feeling the heat of the fan’s discontent.
rr says
I think coaching matters.
—
Sure it does. So does the FO, the training staff, the team doctor and the scouting department. But I would much rather have an elite roster and an average coach than the opposite.
And everybody should read Renato’s post.
Vasheed says
@Renato,
I agree with pretty much everything you said. My only objection is I don’t think Randle as you say, “has the ability to read the opponents ‘objective’.” I’m hopeful you are right about the drilling in the X’s and O’s of proper positioning.
A Horse With No Name says
So, yes, defense can be taught and improved but Russell and Clarkson will never be good defensive players.
Renato has an informed opinion, but that is all it is. Clarkson will improve defensively because he has the physical tools and work ethic to do so. Key here is coaching/scheme. Too much is made of on the ball prowess and not enough of the IQ needed to play team defense. This is where Russell’s improvement will come: he has excellent length, understands the game and gets the geometry of angles which will ultimately make him a solid team defender. As for Randle, it’s going to take study and effort. As Renato points out correctly, he doesn’t need to be a shot blocker to be a good defender. His lateral quickness is exceptional as is his strength. All three of these guys have the ability to at least be competent defenders, with Randle having the highest ceiling.
Vasheed says
@Renato,
Okay maybe I have a 2nd objection. You don’t consider Nance and A. Brown defensive players?
Darius Soriano says
I would much rather have an elite roster and an average coach than the opposite.
—
This is a strawman as no one is arguing this point. RR and others have been sympathetic to Scott for two seasons, consistently pointing to FO failures and minimizing Scott’s faults as “known” and “to be expected”. And it’s fine to point out where the FO has failed (including in hiring this coach, if that’s the point being made). But, in the end, fans who want a coaching change want one because coaching matters in this league. And in the absence of having a great roster, a great coach can still make a difference. I do not believe this is an arguable point even if some want to deflect from that and talk about roster talent.
Baylor Fan says
It is still too early to judge what the Lakers have in their young core. This season was dedicated to all things Kobe. He did not practice with the team to save his body for games. He had a green light all season so people could see him shoot. He rarely played defense to maximize his time on the court. The “motion” offense still focused on isolation plays which best suits Kobe’s style of play.
Clarkson’s development mirrors these areas of focus. He has become proficient at breaking his man down and attacking the basket. He uses the threat of the drive to create his own mid-range shots. He has a shoot first pass second mind set. Jordan can keep on developing his offensive game by having all the players available for practice next season. It is one thing to learn where players like to have the ball for iso plays and quite another to anticipate where the holes in a defense will be and which players will exploit those holes. Next season can be the first for learning a modern NBA offense.
The defense has suffered from the starters not being able to practice together and the lack of complementary players. If Kobe is the main reason to be on the court, then a defensive minded 2 who can guard high scoring wings is a must. Clarkson the Russell are not good defenders (yet, hopefully) and they just exacerbated Kobe’s lack of defense. Veteran players brought in next season need to complement the young players and not replace their strengths. Having a rim protector sounds good but is pretty useless as long as the backcourt and wing players are defensive sieves. A new defensive mindset, ability to practice as a team, and a more defensively oriented wing may do wonders.
Kbj says
@Renato
I agree with all your points until the last one about sitting and watching good defensive players. I don’t believe that will help much if they don’t have a high bbiq or natural understanding. This is where coaching and veteran leadership comes in. Some players need a little extra help. You even said that defense can be improved with good coaching. Otherwise, spot on.
—
I actually believe that the best way to mitigate the issues on defense is to acquire players that can help defend the best offensive players on the other team, whether through draft or free agency. Lakers need a Avery Bradley, Draymond Green, Aaron Gordon. Lakers need a good defensive anchor in the paint like Bogut or Jordan.
I agree with rr that you can have the best defensive system in the NBA, but without the players that can execute the system, it doesn’t matter. To reiterate, Renato is spot on in saying that there is a certain innate ability that good or great defenders have that Russell or Clarkson don’t have.
A Horse With No Name says
@ Renato: When Porzingis was a draft prospect and coming into focus here in the States, you were dismissive of his talent and potential. You were (are) clearly wrong on this. Not trying to bag on you, but I take your pronouncements with a spoon of salt.
A Horse With No Name says
What if Jim took the bull by the horns and made the decision a) to step up and mostly out of basketball operations b) elevate Mitch c) hire a new younger GM, like Troy Weaver.
Very good thinking! I’ve been pondering a like peremptory strike by Jim–only something that would blow Jeanie out of the water: announce Kobe as President of Basketball Operations. That would absolutely kill the terrible possibility of Phil returning. There would be cheering in the streets. Fanbase would go crazy. Kevin Durant would sign–nah probably not–but Kobe could draw guys with a vision. Keep Mitch, hire Luke. Kobe has the brains, drive, charisma etc. to be a great executive. Would he want it though?
Anonymous says
Horse- I like the idea. One of the biggest issues with “the deadline” for Jim is this idea that many have here that Jim will silently leave and have no say so in this team thereafter but that somehow Jeannie will step in and make all hiring choices going forward. That’s not really realistic given how the trust is set up and given that IF jim leaves, he is not going to step aside and let Jeannie become defacto owner of the Lakers with no checks and balances. The reality is that if Jim steps down, he will probably promote Mitch and hire outside help, but maintain some level of control of bb operations away from Jeannie. Under this scenaio Jim will not be involved in “running” the organization day to day, but will have to sign off on coaching, major contracts, etc. I think this is a more realistic approach than anything else I’ve read recently. So, with this in mind, I would prefer an approach where he brings in the help he needs and gives up significant control to others who do not share his last name.
Anonymous says
I’m sorry, but coaching matters a hell of lot more than some of you imply. Look at the Cavs. Compare them with Golden State. Both stacked with talent. But one clearly and unquestionably better than the other in every aspect of the game that can be coached. Look at the Spurs and Golden State. Spurs have less talent but coaching is probably superior than Golden State. Sure, Golden State comes out on top because of the talent, but not by much. Now look at the Clippers. See my point?
No one is turning this Laker squad into the Golden State warriors in a single season — but my goodness, a decent coach would get at least 10 more wins out of these guys. In retrospect, the Byron hire is as much as a concession to keep give Kobe what he wants during his last year as it was to earn a year of quiet from Magic Johnson. And yes, it was a bad coaching hire for those two reasons.
This team needs an identity post Kobe. I just hope that we hire the right coach to develop that identity. I really hope we get Scottie Brooks. I think he would be a nice fit with this young core.
rr says
Darius,
Sure, coaches matter. And sure, great coaches make a difference. Based on their last three hires, I am not sure why we would be thinking that the Lakers’ FO will find one and hire him (or her) this time. But we can hope. And no, I don’t think they matter as much as roster talent. And of course, I didn’t say that anyone was arguing that point. I was just making that point.
I didn’t want Scott hired to begin with, and say that pretty much every two or three days, and I think the FO should get rid of him now and do what almost all the fans probably want: bring in a younger guy from a winning organization with better communication skills who is more analytics-friendly than Scott appears to be. So I think we probably agree there.
Where we seem to disagree is here: I blame the FO much more than I blame Scott. They hired the guy apparently without even interviewing Quin Snyder, as you yourself have noted many times. And although you like to dismiss the argument about the significance of Scott’s track record, you have never really refuted it—because you can’t. You were mostly against the hire yourself when it was made and even before it was made—because of Scott’s track record.
rr says
The post at 1251 PM just underscores what I already said upthread: the way Golden State and San Antonio have gotten to the top has created a situation such that some people are looking at coaching in a way that makes Scott look even worse. So, for that and other reasons, we have broad presumptions being made about the impact of coaching.
Are these presumptions accurate? Not sure, but I am a bit skeptical.
One thing I do agree with DS on is that a lot of good coaching is focusing on what guys are good at and putting them into position to succeed.
Anonymous says
What if Jim took the bull by the horns and made the decision a) to step up and mostly out of basketball operations b) elevate Mitch c) hire a new younger GM, like Troy Weaver.
__
This is a great solution. Jim’s future will be as an ‘owner’ if he let’s the promise play out. Jeanie will replace him and she will make the decision on what happens regarding the leadership of basketball operations.
If Jim wants to be relevant and have any role beyond ‘owner’, going forward, then he needs to act while he has the authority to do so. If he waits that authority will be taken away from him
LT Mitchell says
After the Lakers lost to Boston, Rambis was assigned to change the defense from a conventional one-on-one oriented defense to more of a Thibs stlye trapping and doubling defense. The results were immediate. Adding Artest along with the team coming back motivated played a part, but the new defensive scheme was an unappreciated part of that team’s championship run.
We also saw how this year’s offense immediately improved when a more pick and roll friendly offense was implemented late in the season.
Aside from schematic changes, a coach’s ability to recognize talent and put the best combination of players on the court can also have a significant impact on a team. This becomes magnified for teams with minimal talent like the Lakers.
LT Mitchell says
Whoever the Lakers bring in to replace Jimbo cannot be another Jimbo puppet like Kupchak. Otherwise, what would be the point? The new prez of basketball has to have the gravitas and authority to stand up to Jimbo.
Anonymous says
Good point LT. Jim has kind of run roughshod over Mitch, making him a ‘yes man’. Maybe Jim can’t play nice in the sandbox and the only solution is that he has to go completely.
R says
Where is this Mitch as puppet , as yes man coming from? Any documentation available? Just wondering.