I really don’t want to write about Byron Scott. In fact, I said the other day, after he made an appearance on ESPN, that I had done my final installment of #byronquotes. I mean, he is no longer the head coach of the Lakers and, with that, his influence is gone. He no longer manages the rotation, can’t bench (insert young Lakers’ player here) in crunch time again, and can’t offer any more quotes that make me roll my eyes and question why he still coaches the team.
Only, that last part isn’t 100% true. No, he’s not the coach so I no longer have to question that part. But, a recent media blitz in the wake of his firing has offered him plenty of opportunity to offer up more eye-roll-enducing quotes that incite reaction amongst Lakers’ fans and media (both local and national) alike. In the thirst for Lakers’ news, it is Byron Scott who is attempting to fill the vacuum. And maybe I am contributing to that here. But, after reading more of his comments over the last 24 hours, I simply cannot ignore him anymore. Even against my better judgement. So, here it goes…
Byron Scott seems to be the only person who does not grasp why Byron Scott is no longer the Lakers’ head coach.
First, it was comments to Rachel Nichols on her show The Jump that he was, basically, lied to by Mitch Kupchak and Jim Buss about how much time he had in this job. Sure, his contract said he had a 4 year contract with team options in year 3 and 4, but those guarantees in only years 1 and 2 seemed to escape Byron and overridden by, in his mind at least, discussions that the first 2-3 years would be difficult. As if things being “difficult” meant his team could actually lose more games in year two than in year one while regressing in nearly every statistical category
Next, he did a long sit down with Bleacher Report’s Michael Pina, where he again reiterated his sense that he had more time on the job than what he was afforded while saying “loyalty is not what it used to be“. Well, then. He also doubled down on previous comments about D’Angelo Russell’s work ethic needing to improve while also discussing Kobe’s farewell tour without providing much context about how the times Kobe did not play well may have impacted how the team performed.
And now he spoke with Mark Medina of the LA Daily News and offered up more “insight” on his time with the team and how his tenure played out. Not only did he speak on the above comments, but he went a step further about his job security by saying if he knew his job was in jeopardy, he would have played his veteran players more than they did. Here is the money quote:
“If I knew this was coming, I would have played Lou [Williams], Brandon [Bass] and guys like that a whole lot more,” Scott said, referring to his veterans in an interview with this newspaper. “They gave me the best chance to win.”
No, I did not make that quote up. He actually said that. Again, it seems Byron Scott is the only person who does not seem to understand why Byron Scott is no longer employed.
I wrote many times that Byron had a near impossible task of juggling the conflicting priorities of sending Kobe Bryant out appropriately, getting his veteran players good minutes, and developing his young players. For this alone, he deserves some compassion, if only in recognition that few people would have been successful in producing wins in this environment.
That said, Scott’s comments reflect, once and for all, why he actually is no longer employed. He still thinks he was chasing wins when in fact what he should have been chasing was progress. Those two things are often related, but, in his unique case, they actually weren’t.
Via his recent media blitz, he’s continued to hold onto the idea that his only goal was to win games. But, what many — including, I suspect, his bosses — were really looking for was a semblance of growth and development of the players on his roster and a sense that Scott grasped this concept himself. That, instead of rushing out his veterans in a hope of securing a few extra wins, that he seemed to understand putting his players in positions to succeed consistently — via his rotations, minute allocations, offensive and defensive schemes — he could grow this team towards a future. That rather than winning now, he was preparing them to be able to win games eventually.
Scott, during his tenure, never grasped this. And, even in the wake of his options not being picked up, he still doesn’t seem to get it. And this, more than anything else, I suspect, is why he’s now doing TV and print interviews rather than preparing for the draft. And it is this lack of recognition, this lack of awareness, which truly did him in. It wasn’t a lack of loyalty or even a lack of wins, Byron. It was the fact that when it was time to really show you were capable of doing the job in a manner which reflected thoughtfulness and understanding of this position at this time, you failed.
R says
its a tough business and Byron gets that.
For us fans, the end of the BS era promises a much needed reboot, and some hope for the future.
KO says
Enough enough enough.
Bryon is like a extremely over weight girl who keeps wearing tight tops and short miniskirts. Then can’t firgure out why people make faces when she walks by. Or a shop lifter who gets caught leaving the store wearing clothes from the department store with the tags still on.
Earth to Bryon you have the most losses under .500 in NBA coaching history. Forgot about coaching. Try running for Congress. They also live in denial and can lie with a streight face.
Enough enough ENOUGH
T. Rogers says
I think there is one missing piece of the narrative that Bryon is not explicitly telling. And this is the team’s desire to tank. Kobe’s going away party was a convenient distraction. But I think by December it became clear the Lakers were going nowhere and they needed to do what they could to keep their draft pick. Bryon probably feels he was “encouraged” to lose games by the people above him. Then he gets fired by those same people for seemingly losing too many games.
That has to be his angle. I think that between tanking and giving Kobe free reign Byron thinks he did what they wanted him to do. It was a dirty job. But he was willing to take one across the face for the team. And he assumed he would be rewarded for it. As crazy as it sounds I think his reaction is authentic. He really does feel doubled crossed. And I can see how that can happen. If the leadership is giving the media mixed and outright competing messages, then what kind of messages are they given to those on the inside.
All that said, Byron still needed to go. Even if he did get the orders to tank that was the perfect cover for him to get the young guys some real burn. But his pride wouldn’t let him do it.
West Coadt Ram says
you layout the case for tanking but later recognize that losing games could still be accomplished while providing development for the younger players in a system that exploits their skills. I don’t think BS accomplished any of the goals set out in his job description. His over use of Kobe in the last two years produced the worst statistics in his career, the development of the young players was slowed by his constant PUBLIC criticism, and the results on the floor speaks for itself. No only should BS not be the Lakers coach but he should never be hired as a HC in this league again. Anyone doing so is a fool and denying a more deserving candidate an opportunity.
karen says
Perfectly said. Lakers used scott, he should been offered an inside job with the lakers
Vasheed says
I’ve stated this before but what made me want Scott gone were the after game interviews. He seems to not be able to stop himself even now.
Mid-Wilshire says
To begin with, Byron should never have agreed to these interviews.
He’s not winning the sympathy vote. He’s not helping his career. (He’ll probably never coach again. After all, who’ll hire him?) He’s not helping the team. And he’s presenting himself as a classic case of sour grapes.
If I were in his shoes and I had been invited to interview with the press, I would have politely declined. Sometimes it’s best to take the high road.
LKK says
And this, more than anything else, I suspect, is why he’s now doing TV and print interviews rather than preparing for the draft……..
Is Byron still under some obligation to the team where he has to prepare for the draft? Isn’t he fired?
Also, 3rd paragraph; shouldn’t it be ” doesn’t grasp”?
Darius Soriano says
LKK,
It should have said “does not” grasp. That has been changed. As for your other question, that was my point. If Byron grasped these things, he likely still would have obligations because he’d still have a job. Alas, that is not the case.
Apollo says
Byron appears to be in the middle of a Charlie Sheenesque meltdown. Everything out of his mouth sends him deeper into his psychosis. I knew he was nuts the minute he wanted to fight fans… “Bring it!” Then I love how he “manned up” and said his account was hacked. This guy needs professional help, all kidding aside Byron needs to talk to Metta he knows someone that can help.
LKK says
At some point in time this season, when it became apparent that Kobe was no longer the force he had once been and he accepted that fact by announcing his impending retirement, I believe the focus of the front office narrowed to giving the organization a chance to retain this year’s 1st round pick.
After a while, when it became clear that this was a historically bad Lakers team, the front office put the emphasis on the retirement tour rather than winning games. They, like a lot of fans, hoped Kobe would play well and score lots of points in close losses. Mind you, this is only my opinion, based on what I saw and how the season unfolded.
Scott is a bad coach. He has poor media skills to boot but he was caught up in uncharted territory and backed up by bosses whose agenda was conflicted. The word scapegoat comes to mind.
I’m glad Byron is gone and that the FO has shown an inclination to embrace the future in hiring a progressive young coach. I am, howevever, still mindful of the indecision and dysfunction that has been present with the Lakers for far too long. Scott is gone. Time for Mitch and Jimmy to step up.
Kbj says
“‘If I knew this was coming, I would have played Lou [Williams], Brandon [Bass] and guys like that a whole lot more,’ Scott said, referring to his veterans in an interview with this newspaper. ‘They gave me the best chance to win.'”
My issue with Scott was that he played Lou and Bass too much when he should have played Black, Brown, and Russell more. So he actually felt he played Lou, Bass too little? I hope hes being purposely obtuse otherwise he sounds extremely ignorant.
Ron says
Do you actually think it would have made a sonic difference if Luke was coach for the Lakers the last two years instead of Byron, I don’t think so?
LA Lakers taking another chance on an unproven individual.
LKK says
Darius,
Thanks for the clarification. I re-read the sentence I asked about and understand what you meant. I’d also like to commend you on how you handled your commentary on Byron’s tenure with objectivity. When others lit the torches and honed the pitchforks, you put the narrative in context.
Baylor Fan says
“They gave me the best chance to win.” That is why he is The Commander. Scott did play his veterans in crunch time even as they piled up loss after loss. Maybe, just maybe, the lack of a coherent offense and defense played into the inability to resemble an NBA team. Scott’s contract did reflect some forethought on the part of the FO since they did not know when Kobe would retire. Would Kobe play 1 more year, 2 more years, or 3 more years? However many years Kobe played would be how many years Scott was the head coach. The team options on years 3 and 4 reflect that. Kobe did come back from catastrophic injury for year 3 and once he declared that it would be his last year, Scott was done as HC. If Scott had developed a rapport with the young Lakers the ending might have been different.
LKK says
T. Rogers…
Agree completely with your post.
Anonymous says
Do you actually think it would have made a sonic difference if Luke was coach for the Lakers the last two years instead of Byron, I don’t think so?
LA Lakers taking another chance on an unproven individual.
__
I think Luke would have resigned had the FO asked him to rack up losses like they did with Byron. Luke has other opportunities and wouldn’t tolerate pressure from above to deviate from a ‘win games’ approach. I always thought that Byron was beholden to the FO for the job and as such was not in a position to say ‘No’ when the ‘figure out a way to lose’ mandate came from above.
Fern says
The sad thing is that Byron actually believes this things. He is triying to make a big media tour to give excuses and triying to get another coaching job. I have a new adjective for him bitter…
Anonymous says
I just wish byron would shut up already. You can tell he’s hurt by the firing but it’s no reason to air certain issues and make those kinds of comments. You’re a professional, suck it up and move on.
Clay Bertrand says
We had a bad coach in a bad situation with each exacerbating and symbiotically feeding upon the other. I think Kobe was a big part of the “bad situation” and Byron was the bad coach. Both are gone now which should be good for us going forward.
Bad situation aside though, Byron, when the Vivek & Vlade Show is leaning toward Vinnie Del Negro and has ZERO interest in you and Kenny Smith is getting called in to a HC job interview without you getting a sniff, the writing is on the Chick-Fil-A wall. But in case it none of us has occasion to read that wall, thanks for making sure you get the message out about your coaching EVERYWHERE YOU CAN!!!! Tiger Blood!!!!
Byron will NEVER be a head coach in this league again. I doubt he even gets an assistants job. MAYBE he can get into college if he’s interested but that would require the kind of work I don’t think suits him.
Question: Had the Lakers not hired Byron, would the last NBA HC postion of his career have been Cleveland?? Would anyone else have EVER hired him after Cleveland?? Doubtful.
LT Mitchell says
I am no Byron fan, but I thought the front office threw Byron under the bus this past season.
It started in preseason with Jimbo and Mitch setting unrealistic goals by publicly stating that this team could make the playoffs. Even if Byron had done everything right, this team did not have the talent to get there. Intentionally or not, these statements helped turn Scott into a scapegoat while deflecting much of the blame away from the front office for the roster they assembled.
Byron’s contract was incentive laden based on wins. This explains why he didn’t want a rookie (DAR) to start the season with the ball in his hands and why he was benched for Lou. It also explains why he continued to play the vets, while player development took a backseat.
When it became clear that this team would not make the playoffs, the focus should have shifted to developing the young players…but Byron’s contract made that almost impossible. After all, how can the front office tell Byron to focus on player development when Byron’s contract is based on getting as many wins as possible? It’s a clear conflict of interest.
Byron deserves plenty of blame, namely for his archaic offensive philosophies…but let’s not pretend that he was dealt a good hand, and let’s not forget who the dealer was.
West Coadt Ram says
Was he incapable of negoicating better terms in his contract, he watched the roster construction given to MD. No one twisted his arm to take the job or to accept the incentives in the contract. I would say the incentives were a bonus as I think his base was in line to his coaching level.
Joel says
@Clay Bertrand
“Question: Had the Lakers not hired Byron, would the last NBA HC postion of his career have been Cleveland?? Would anyone else have EVER hired him after Cleveland?? Doubtful.”
Exactly. To an extent he was indeed a scapegoat but this was the only pretext under which he was going to get another head coaching job, so forgive me if I’m not choked up with sympathy for him.
AttilasDaughter says
During the season I thought his job was to make sure we can keep the pick.
And if we end up getting Simmons we might thank him one day.
It would be sad if the FO acted mainly because the fan base freaked out, but gave him tanking instructions before the season.
Then I could understand his frustration.
A big problem has been his attitude towards the young guys.
I was for Russell in last years draft and I doubt you would have gotten more work ethic with Okafor.
But it seems pretty clear that Russell is not that grown up.
We will just have to wait and hope he has an open mind and is growing in the right direction.
Aside from coaching issues I hope that they keep calm and make no stupid moves.
This timeline thing will cause pressure that will lead to dumb decisions.
If there is a chance to get Simmons they should keep him.
You don’t hear the expression “generational talent” very often.
AJ says
The Win/Loss record is something that was largely outside of his control and with the talent he had, most people expected the type of outcome for this season. However, he did have plenty that was within his control (minutes allocations, rotations, offensive and defensive scheme, interviews, etc.). After the first few weeks, it should have been obvious that chasing wins was a fruitless endeavor and that his priorities should have shifted to keeping Kobe healthy and featured while playing the young guys lots of minutes. But it seemed like in every conceivable way he could have messed up, he did.
He never took ownership for his own mistakes, he clearly had double standards between the vets and rookies, his lineups were often head scratching, he rarely did any in-game adjustments, his teams constantly looked unprepared, his interviews were a painful mix of throwing players under the bus/spouting cliches about manning up/deflecting blame from himself, and there was no semblance of progress. Had he simply focused on developing guys, shown a little humility, and had a scheme (even a simple one) that played to our team’s strengths, even with the same wins and losses, he’d still be the coach.
Anonymous says
Byron was a scapegoat for Jim. But, any empathy for Byron is countered by the fact that he was a very poor coach.
rr says
This is on DS’s Twitter; I think it is interesting if true:
Mike Trudell ? ?@LakersReporter
Walton sees himself as the head coach and O coordinator; he’ll bring in a defensive coach to focus on that end of the court particularly.
Travis Y. says
Great write up Darius.
The sad thing is, he really was coaching for wins. For most of the season, he would bench the rookies for vets at the end of games. A clear sign he was NOT trying to tank.
The sheer fact that not one Laker has supported bringing BS back is a clear sign that they did not enjoy being thrown under the bus, I mean being coached by BS.
Lastly, if you aren’t getting wins, you definitely need to have an offensive and defensive identity. The fact that neither was developed was the last red flag that he had to go.
How are you going to sell a free agent on an offensive system if your offense looks clearly aimless?
Good riddance to bad coaching.
Hale says
Byron getting thrown under the bus by the FO was karmic return.
55.8% chance to keep the 1st round draft pick May 17th.
Partial list of unrestricted Free agents at the 3:
Bazemore
Batum
Darrell Arthur (PO)
Brandon Rush
Solomon Hill
Mbah a Moute
Matt Barnes
Luol Deng
Dorell Wright
Gerald Green
Jordan Hamilton
Lance Thomas
Durant
Budinger
Jared Dudley
Not the strongest position in the league at the moment.
Fern says
Food for thought: During the last 20 year period, the team with the second-worst record moved up to the top pick just once, way back in 1996. The 76ers used it to select Allen Iverson.
Over the same 20 years, the second-worst team stayed in place and received the second pick of the draft only twice- the Knicks in 2006 and the Bulls in 2002.
And in the last 20 years, the team in the pre-lottery #2 position dropped to third pick five times, most recently Chicago in 2004. I got that from an article i just read. I wouldn’t get too attached to that pick…
Jim C. says
The sympathy for Byron in the comments above from some people is flatly amazing to me.
He wasn’t “thrown under the bus”. He failed completely as a coach on every single measurable statistic and still has no understanding of what he was really supposed to be doing. That quote is the most damning that you could possibly ask for because it indicates he thinks he was fired because he lost to many games.
Even with the most optimistic expectations imaginable, playing Bass and Lou a whole lot more would have resulted in, what, 3-5 more wins? Does he really think that he would still be employed in that case?
He was fired for his utter and complete failure to develop the youngsters and his persistently being an obstacle to developing them. He trashed them constantly to the press, jerked their minutes around, put together terrible offensive and defensive sets and then is surprised when they don’t always play hard for him. Wash, rinse, repeat.
It’s completely astonishing that he lasted this long as the Laker head coach given that he still seems to have absolutely zero understanding that the #1 non-Kobe related task this year (which he also almost failed by running Kobe into the ground the first two months of the season) was to develop the youngsters and not only did he fail at it, he probably set their progress back with his actions.
Nobody is arguing that he was handed a royal flush here. They’re arguing that he played the cards he did monstrously bad.
What Byron is showing himself to be right now with his grand “poor me” tour is the exact sort of way he showed himself to be all year long, a man who sees no fault at all in himself and feels he is doing – and has done – nothing wrong and trashes and tears down everyone around him.
Lance says
Byron going on this “media” blitz and making these insipid comments prove he is delusional and in extreme denial of his job performance or lack there of. It’s bad enough to be at the helm of the 2 worst seasons in LA Lakers history, but the team actually regressed in year 2. There is no way he should’ve gotten another year, especially with it being apparent the team tuned him out as the year went on.
I will admit, the front office bungled the roster before he was hired, but he had to know the team needed to exhibit progress through the season and they didn’t. He should take the high road and decline all requests but since he didn’t he probably have killed any chance of another pro job.
Jim C. says
Fern:
That history is entirely irrelevant. Math is math. We have a 56% chance of keeping the pick. No more than that, and no less.
Hale says
Dude made a few million a year for 2 years by being bad at his job. I’d buy that for a dollar.
Juan Paolo says
I truly believe he is gone because he messed with the future of the Lakers the young players for a while did not know whether they were coming or going how many minutes if they were starting or what. We know the other players were fill-ins but as Jim Buss said those other 4 are the future of the Lakers and I believe none of them had a good relationship with their coach. you could not have a good relationship with a coach when you have us tire threads across your back
minorthreatt says
It must be lousy to finally get your dream job, only because it’s turned into a Dumpster fire. But that’s why Byron was hired. He had to know he was taking a gig other people didn’t want. He took it anyway. And if he’d been a stronger candidate, he wouldn’t have wanted it either, ex-Laker or no.
If you want some small measure of progress, it’s that the most coveted new head coaching candidate wanted the Lakers job this year. Had Byron been coaching somewhere else, or been doing TV, or whatever, for the past couple of years, his name probably wouldn’t have been on anyone’s list of canditates for the Lakers job this time around.
All that said, while Byron’s media tour isn’t going to help what’s left of his image, he probably has little to lose. I can’t see him coaching again, and trash talkers prosper on TV.
Robert says
Byron needed to go, however the fact is that Luke will be our 4th coach entering our 6th year after the Phil Jackson era. That is a statement that speaks for itself. Byron is gone. The Buss he was thrown under is still on the road.
Clay Bertrand says
rr,
Nice tidbit from Darius’ Twitter!!! I hope Luke is able to get a strong D Coordinator for us. Its sooooo necessary. I like the trend of delegating Defensive duties to a guy who focuses on it. Its so tough to contain these guys these days with the no hand checking. Gotta really have the team playing together in an effective scheme. I look forward to seeing that.
DJ says
When Lakers FO hired Byron, i wrote on this blog Lakers FO don’t understand basketball, they don’t know why Bryon had success and failure. The way he talked is not consistent, after the draft , he said Russell is another Magic Johnson, and but then later Russell has sit on the bench, after several months, he said Russell is 14 years old kid, when he said that means Lakers FO not smart ( because when you interview Russel for the draft, nobody knows he is 14 years old kid). The scary thing about Lakers FO is that they can’t hire a coach, and can’t build a team from a bottom, look at Portland, the GM knows what he is doing, after they lost one star player, they add several young players, and they can still be playoff team while other team keep falling down.
Mid-Wilshire says
Today (May 6th) Mitch Kupchak held a news conference in which he spoke about the rationale behind hiring Luke Walton and other matters. Below is the link:
http://www.nba.com/lakers/?ls=iref:nba:gnav
matt says
One thing i would always think of with byron was it was like he didn’t know who his players were, he didn’t know their strengths and weaknesses and it was like he didn’t wanna know them.
I can’t why see byron feels betrayed, his firing had to happen and if he didn’t know that he’s trippin
matt says
Hale what about, evan turner, and Derrick williams
I can’t see durant leaving okc they are a great team why would he leave that
matt says
I ran across an old video of stephen a smith and skip bayless, from maybe around the middle of the season, magic Johnson said lakers in free agency need to persue durant, and at least talk to lebron, and persue derozan, and they both go on praising magic saying he has a great basketball mind, and they put down jim buss. And the whole time I’m thinking even a 10 year old would know you gotta persue those players, but free agents have options and most likely all 3 of those guys resign, easier said than done magic johnson. And Stephen a, gets paid for criticism, he’s not a coach or g.m. just a big mouth
matt says
You ever notice skip bayless always disagrees even if it makes him look stupid, its gotta be prepared that way just so stephen a can go on a rant, and look smart doing it.
Oh and magic johnson, why not go out on a limb and say, they should go after evan fournier. Instead of they need to go after durant. Duh
Patrick Lanigan says
Is anyone surprised by this? When in his coaching tenure has Scott ever taken responsibility for anything? Byron the coach would tell Byron the ex-coach to just man up, but of course Byron doesn’t own his own failures. Ever.
KevTheBold says
On another subject, Kupchak denied and disputed the rumors that they would consider trading the pick.
That’s good news to me.
Fern says
@Jim C. Yet history says that the 44% wins out most of the time. Teams have dropped of the top three 60% of the time. That’s real and can’t be ignored. I want the pick but we must be prepared for the real posibility of losing it. That’s all im saying.
KevTheBold says
So bad luck trumps math.
If so, the odds should be based on history, not percentages.
Fern says
http://espn.go.com/blog/los-angeles-lakers/post/_/id/43120/lakers-gm-preparing-as-if-team-will-lose-top-three-protected-pick-in-nba-draft-lottery As it should be…
harold says
Miscommunication, really. I think the Lakers signed Byron with the expectation that he would develop the young talent, show progress, while assuring him that the immediate win-loss would not matter especially since they had a pick to protect.
Byron probably understood it as “we’ll let you do whatever you want, don’t care about W/L and give you a chance at shaping the team after we get the pick.”
As with all jobs, you are being evaluated every second you are on the job. There is no ‘security’ that lets you do whatever you want. The only reason he lasted as long as he did is because the Lakers did not want to mar Kobe’s last season with yet another coach firing. This, of course, is as much Mitch/Jim’s fault as it is Byron’s – at some point, there should have been a sit down and a clear communication of the rubric they were going to measure Byron by. I don’t think that got communicated clearly.
KO says
That is exactly correct. Good post.
Fern says
Man!!, im just saying that we shouldn’t be acting like the pick is a done deal. Again all im saying is that in the last 20 years teams with the second worst record has fallen of the top three 12 times. Mitch is moving foward like there is no 1st round pick which is the most sensible way to go. I hope we keep it and get the #1 pick but im not counting on it.
Warren Wee Lim says
I’ve always liked Mitch Kupchak and I still do. The conservative approach is to assume we don’t have the pick, until we do. This is not about percentages, its about reality. Until 55.8% wins, we don’t have a top 3 pick. But the 55.8% represents a possibility in which we could have a top 3 pick.
To be more specific, the odds of every possibility that can happen on May 17th, go like this:
1st pick – 19.9%
2nd pick – 18.8%
3rd pick – 17.1%
4th pick – 31.9%
5th pick – 12.3%
To say 55.8% as a collective possibility is not representing the “real” odds of keeping the pick. Its either 19.9% or 18.8% or 17.1% or the remaining odds no longer matter. So the best chance you actually have is to win #1, then #2 and then #3. Otherwise, you have no pick.
So Mitch is right, we don’t have the pick until we do. Lets stop acting as if this was a sure thing, although the odds are in favor of us keeping it.
Perspective.
Kbj says
In the last draft lottery, the Lakers went from 4th to 2nd. It is very likely this could happen again except reverse with the Lakers. You can see why when you read Warren’s post and you see that there is a 31.9% chance Lakers pick drops to 4th.
Needless to say, this would be devastating. The Lakers took a dumb risk with Nash and now they are paying the price.
Mid-Wilshire says
Actually, if the Lakers do not get a top 3 pick this year, it would not be devastating.
It just means that they would delay having their #1 pick until the following NBA draft in 2017 which could actually be stronger. (A team is not allowed to lose its #1 draft pick 2 years in a row.)
If the Lakers end up with the #3 pick this year, I feel confident that they would attempt to trade it.
Also, lets not forget that they have the #32 pick in this year’s draft. In recent years, the Lakers have done quite well with late 1st round and 2nd round picks (namely, Larry Nance, Jr. and Jordan Clarkson).
Fern says
Exactly Mid, if we lose it we will have it next year for sure.
Anonymous says
Next year’s pick would be top ten, not top three.
grumpy says
Bryon unfortunately had far too many negatives to be retained. Like others, I don’t think it was necessarily the W/L record that sealed the deal, but he never seemed to connect with his players or put them in the best situation to succeed. Also, his inflammatory (calling out and insulting his players) and outrageous soundbites (aversions to using stats and three pointers) often lead to the perception, real or not, that he was clueless and not a great coach for this particular era of basketball. But we move on. May your crossed arms find peace and happiness elsewhere, Mr. Scott.
Regarding the pick, call me optimistic, but I have a good feeling we are keeping it. While there are rumors of trading the pick, which realistically, should always be an option, I hope we keep the pick/player if we get #1 or #2. Ingram and Simmons have a lot to like and they will be cost controlled assets with very bright futures ahead of them.
If we end up with #3, I wouldn’t mind trading the pick. After watching footage of some of the players who are considered viable for the 3 spot, many are either lacking franchise player talent or are very raw.
Jim C. says
Fern:
Yes, and that history is an interesting statistical aberration, but it does not change the odds.
It’s basically just small sample size variance. Imagine if you were to flip a coin 20 times. Based on 20 flips of the coin being a small number of attempts, it wouldn’t be surprising to see the coin come up heads 13 times out of 20…which would mean that you get 65% heads when it’s supposed to be a 50/50 bet.
Flip that same coin 100 or 1000 times and you’re going to get closer and closer to a 50/50 split.
I don’t think most people consider 56% to be a foregone conclusion. It’s basically nearly as close as just flipping a coin. But the odds are slightly better than even that we keep the pick and past draft history has no impact on that.
Fern says
It wouldn’t be “devastating” the Lakers still have a boatload of capspace and we would still get next year 1st rounder. The team can still be improved quite a bit around our kids and still have a pick next summer. That’s not a bad scenario actually…
Fern says
Jim C. We don’t have a pick unless the ping pong ball bounce our way. As far as im concerned, getting the #2 pick last season is as fortunate we are going to get unless proven otherwise. In other words im not sweating that pick at all until and IF we get it. If not, it’s not the end of the world…
TempleOfJamesWorthy says
I think Byron Scott may have a case (typical of highly successful highly competitve people, including professional athletes) of his ego getting in the way acknowledging reality.
It’s part of what makes highly successful people/athletes successful, the overweening confidence that even if they failed today (e.g. airballed several 3-pointers in a playoff game), that’s just part of the process of winning tomorrow.
Perhaps in Scott’s own mind, he really was hired to be the man to get the Lakers through the rebuilding process and back into respectablity. Perhaps his self-belief led him to think he really was going to be Lakers coach for years 3 and 4 of his contract. Maybe that’s what blinded him to the obvious: he was hired to be caretaker of the Kobe Bryant Retirement Tour and IF he happened to also do a decent job of developing the young talent and establishing a foundation, then he might get to coach after Kobe retired.
The only other explanation which makes sense to me is Byron knew full well what he was buying into, but didn’t quite realize how badly being Kobe Caretaker/Tankmaster Extraordinare would damage his professional reputation, so he’s trying to “spin” his record in such a way that other teams might still consider him for coaching positions.
@BrotherWalton - Twitter says
As a working man, I always feel for anyone losing their job. Wanted to get that out there, in respect to BS.
If you didn’t know, Byron was brought in to relieve MDA, after MDA did a decent job with a ragtag bunch of players. The secret tank was on and popping. MDA being with this team the last few seasons would’ve ended up in more wins than secretly desired. Hence the pick protection, the ill-timing of his dismissal.
Jim Buss’ infamous timeline. I chuckle at this. I think this is also a stealth move that the team is making. Take that for what’s it worth to you.
Love how Kobe’s deal lasted up until this money explosion in free agency the next few years. Feels like the Lakers had an idea when Kobe would call it quits. It’s often overstated, but I think the Lakers will get an unexpected name in the next three years, if not sooner. I have this weird sense that Paul George is going to finish his career in LA (either Clippers or Lakers), but that’s another story for another day.
So back to Byron.
Byron knew, for the most part, what he was getting into when he took this job. A rebuilding team masked by the last days of a franchise legend.
Just as any other job, there had to be realistic preparation, and I’m not sure that Byron did so. It’s kind of crazy sounding, but I’m happy he coached the young guys the way he did. Not every thing was sweet and friendly.
I’m pretty sure they learned a lot, good or bad. My problem was he was not sharp with the media. Often seemed to speak and react from emotion, rather than save himself today’s trouble. Prime example is the comment about playing vets more. Had it been me, I’d let those young guys have free reigns within the balance of the veterans. He was on his way to doing so, until the unexplained benching and handling of the young guns.
At this point, it seems Luke is going to have a great effect on them. The age factor and success from GSW is so cliche, but cliche isn’t always untrue or bad. I think Walton’s personality will just be healthier for guys that are only about a year or two removed from high school classrooms, rather than someone from the “Get off my lawn!” cloth cut.
I’m ready for the success, growing pains, the blowouts, and even more excited for the development of the young guys.
Another underrated thing is the Lakers finally having to build a respectable product for fans to enjoy. They likely won’t get a star, I think time will eventually turn Russell/Clarkson/Randle into their all-stars. Solid pieces will fill in behind those guys.
LTLakerFan says
Lakers were not trying to “tank”. That’s fantasy. They had dual agendas with developing the young players and embracing Kobe’s farewell, and both included playing as well as they could and winning games. Williams, Bass, etc. were not brought in to sit on the bench—that’s just silly. They were there to fill out a team that could play winning basketball, which is a critical part of developing a winning team. Scott is old-school, both in his approach to the game, and in teaching young players to be professionals. The team, for the most part, just didn’t respond to what Byron wanted from them.
I think the FO was torn about keeping Scott, and they ultimately decided they wanted someone younger, with a more contemporary philosophy of the game, and better for Russell, who apparently didn’t respond well to the style of coaching. No real scandal. Byron just didn’t see it coming.