DarkHawk wrote:Not sure it'd be a good idea to potentially accept the LAL job, if offered, until he knows what pick they get.
If they end up with 3 or nothing, I would pass.
Why is the pick a deal breaker?
Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums
Moderators: Domejandro, infinite11285, Harry Garris, ken6199, Dirk, bisme37, KingDavid, bwgood77, zimpy27, cupcakesnake
DarkHawk wrote:Not sure it'd be a good idea to potentially accept the LAL job, if offered, until he knows what pick they get.
If they end up with 3 or nothing, I would pass.
GoranTragic wrote:It should read Lakers offering Walton free dinner and night out on the town.
Threethrows wrote:Spens1 wrote:Pre-req is that he is able to explain thoroughly how the warriors run and what makes them tick and how he would be able to implement that here or where he would tweak it to make it better or better fit the lakers and the staff.
Presuming he can do all that and impress at interviews this would be a dream signing (if only we could get all 3 of Messina, Ollie and Walton though, that would be the dream team of coaching)
That's something you do after you get hired. At worst if he stays on with the Warriors he will still have many other coaching opportunities. Be vague but confident, and teams will want you... they already do.
BombsquadSammy wrote:GoranTragic wrote:It should read Lakers offering Walton free dinner and night out on the town.
"Do it, Luke. If you handle yourself right, you'll get to do it twice."
-L. Aldridge
BombsquadSammy wrote:GoranTragic wrote:It should read Lakers offering Walton free dinner and night out on the town.
"Do it, Luke. If you handle yourself right, you'll get to do it twice."
-L. Aldridge
ken6199 wrote:BombsquadSammy wrote:GoranTragic wrote:It should read Lakers offering Walton free dinner and night out on the town.
"Do it, Luke. If you handle yourself right, you'll get to do it twice."
-L. Aldridge
Nah, dude no longer has his twitter account. This must be coming from one of your multiple sauces.
dham1974 wrote:DarkHawk wrote:Not sure it'd be a good idea to potentially accept the LAL job, if offered, until he knows what pick they get.
If they end up with 3 or nothing, I would pass.
Why is the pick a deal breaker?
Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums
DarkHawk wrote:dham1974 wrote:DarkHawk wrote:Not sure it'd be a good idea to potentially accept the LAL job, if offered, until he knows what pick they get.
If they end up with 3 or nothing, I would pass.
Why is the pick a deal breaker?
Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums
No one knows how he'll do with a serious lack of talent on the team.
Fisher might have come off as a better coach had he gone to the Warriors instead of Kerr.
Brooks may not have been as in demand if he didn't have Durant, Westbrook, and Harden at his disposal.
Scott, while not the best coach, is still a really good one. Same goes for George Carl. People judge based on team results.
If Walton goes to a Lakers team with the same roster, plus some mediocre signings (and potentially no draft pick or missing out on a top 2) it'll be hard for him to come out of this looking good.
For a first chance, I'd rather go somewhere that there's a bit of hope going forward. Not where there is controversy and uncertainty.
Just my opinion.
Kings2013 wrote:He was an albatross contract as a player, which I would think would've left more of a aftertaste in Lakers fans eyes, but doesn't seem to
sanitylaker wrote:GOD no
He has stolen enough money from the Lakers during his career. Any coach would have done what he did with Curry and the rest of the GS roster.
I want a proven coach.
The Prodigy wrote:DarkHawk wrote:dham1974 wrote:Why is the pick a deal breaker?
Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums
No one knows how he'll do with a serious lack of talent on the team.
Fisher might have come off as a better coach had he gone to the Warriors instead of Kerr.
Brooks may not have been as in demand if he didn't have Durant, Westbrook, and Harden at his disposal.
Scott, while not the best coach, is still a really good one. Same goes for George Carl. People judge based on team results.
If Walton goes to a Lakers team with the same roster, plus some mediocre signings (and potentially no draft pick or missing out on a top 2) it'll be hard for him to come out of this looking good.
For a first chance, I'd rather go somewhere that there's a bit of hope going forward. Not where there is controversy and uncertainty.
Just my opinion.
I'm curious to know what your opinion of Scott is based on.
DarkHawk wrote:The Prodigy wrote:DarkHawk wrote:
No one knows how he'll do with a serious lack of talent on the team.
Fisher might have come off as a better coach had he gone to the Warriors instead of Kerr.
Brooks may not have been as in demand if he didn't have Durant, Westbrook, and Harden at his disposal.
Scott, while not the best coach, is still a really good one. Same goes for George Carl. People judge based on team results.
If Walton goes to a Lakers team with the same roster, plus some mediocre signings (and potentially no draft pick or missing out on a top 2) it'll be hard for him to come out of this looking good.
For a first chance, I'd rather go somewhere that there's a bit of hope going forward. Not where there is controversy and uncertainty.
Just my opinion.
I'm curious to know what your opinion of Scott is based on.
Hornets. Showed he could coach talent.
The Prodigy wrote:DarkHawk wrote:The Prodigy wrote:
I'm curious to know what your opinion of Scott is based on.
Hornets. Showed he could coach talent.
Care to expand?
DarkHawk wrote:The Prodigy wrote:DarkHawk wrote:
Hornets. Showed he could coach talent.
Care to expand?
He has been part of teams have had good records. If he's a bad coach, he wouldn't have been around as long as he has been.
Alvin Gentry had a poor finish to his Suns career and still found a job in New Orleans.
Didn't say he's a great coach. He's still around for a reason though and chances are, he'll find a head coaching gig again eventually.
DarkHawk wrote:The Prodigy wrote:DarkHawk wrote:
No one knows how he'll do with a serious lack of talent on the team.
Fisher might have come off as a better coach had he gone to the Warriors instead of Kerr.
Brooks may not have been as in demand if he didn't have Durant, Westbrook, and Harden at his disposal.
Scott, while not the best coach, is still a really good one. Same goes for George Carl. People judge based on team results.
If Walton goes to a Lakers team with the same roster, plus some mediocre signings (and potentially no draft pick or missing out on a top 2) it'll be hard for him to come out of this looking good.
For a first chance, I'd rather go somewhere that there's a bit of hope going forward. Not where there is controversy and uncertainty.
Just my opinion.
I'm curious to know what your opinion of Scott is based on.
Hornets. Showed he could coach talent.