Consensus on Luke Walton?
Posted: Sat Apr 14, 2018 12:40 am
After enduring our losingest seasons under Byron Scott from 2014-2016, the Lakers have measurably improved under his successor, having added onto their previous-win total by 9 wins each season under Luke Walton. There's still a long way to trek before they're renascently title-contending, but it's conclusible enough that we're no longer in the ninth circle as Lakers fans.
It is the most precarious position to hire for the team because it's naturally fraught with wildcards as to how the coach will jell with his team; naturally, it's also the jumpiest, as us Lakers fans can attest to, having seen the stead switch hands 4 times this decade so far. Walton will be longer-tenured than his last-three predecessors according to the front office, who have repeatedly declared him as their "coach of the future;" now, with two seasons under his tenure in the books, I'm curious to see how the fanbase feels about it.
As for my personal stance...
I'm all but sold on Walton as our long-term head coach at this point. Having been chastened by our recent years in the doldrums, I've become much more appreciative of whatever modicum of success we find in the regular season at this stage, and I would have found it fanciful to expect much more than 35 wins with our roster's unseasoned youth and fitful health.
Where do I see Luke Walton's fingerprints on our upsurgent success?
1. Defense.
A team's defense—the good and the bad—is primordially attributable to the coaching staff, as it behooves them to not only architect the defensive schemes but to motivate players to buy in it—easier said than done with the typical immaturities and egos of a rebuilding team. A roster's personnel can palliate defensive deficiencies, but the onus of teamwork logistics is mainly on the coach.
As such, it's no coincidence that our defensive culture deteriorated with the turnover of coaches we've been subjected to this decade, plummeting to the bottom rung once our last title-contention team (to put it liberally) disformed in 2013. Every coach rightly proclaimed it as a priority to improve the team's defense in these rebuilding efforts; but it was more platitudinous than substantive under Byron Scott, whose team was ranked dead-last on that end of the floor by his termination in 2016.
This continued throughout Luke's first season; and I started having misgivings towards him because of it, but they've been banished this season where we've finally seen appreciable improvement on that end. We're now ranked 13th in defensive efficiency—a mountainous improvement from dead-last in the previous season and the biggest attributability to our improved win total. The defensive personnel deserves credit—namely Brook Lopez (good rim-protector), KCP, and Lonzo Ball (he's been a nice revelation on that end of the floor), but the needle wouldn't have moved that meteorically if Walton weren't upholding his own role as coach.
Do I think Luke Walton will be an elite defensive coach? Probably not, since he seems to be too mellow to maximize his team's intensity; however, it didn't prevent Phil Jackson from forging a championship-acceptable defensive culture, and I think Luke is intelligent enough of a coach to devise sound defensive schemes while doing enough to motivate his players to buy into it.
Lakers still had their inconsistencies on that end this year, but it's a great upgrade from being consistently putrid on it for all of the previous-four seasons.
2. Rapport-building and player development.
As a young, millennial-friendly coach, the players seem to have been nothing but supportive towards Luke. He's been the good cop to contrast from the bad cop in his predecessor, as Byron Scott repeatedly impugned his players' efforts in the press-conference probably just as much as, if not more than, in the locker-room—and indelicately enough that his players didn't always mince their words with him when it was their turn on the podium.
Diplomacy is an indispensable skill for coach, because they are the biggest adversary of player egos. Walton has shown to be the type of coach that players can banter with and be lavished with praise on, but they still sense his gravitas whenever he needs to hold them accountable; that makes his criticism all the more respectable to them, as some have noted him as the type of coach you'd want to play hard for just to avoid disappointing.
Convincing players to buy into a system is just as vital for devising the system itself, which Luke Walton has shown the expressive leadership to do.
3. Walton's own upside.
Remember that Luke Walton is a project in his own right; as the youngest coach in the league with only a smattering of prior head-coaching experience under his belt before this tenure, he has similar upgrowth to be done as his players do. I personally wished he had at least 2-3 more assistant-coaching years under his belt moving into the head-coaching gig, but it won't bog him down from improving while he already has his foot in the door.
As a studious and open-minded coach, his own prime has yet to come. Naturally, he still has his own shortcomings as a coach, but they are much more endurable when they can be considered growing pains rather than rigid flaws that would more likely be entrenched in much older, better-tenured coaches.
Working in the shadows of Phil Jackson and Steve Kerr, he's already had a wealth of empirical insight moving into the role, and everything about his personality has indicated to me that he's pliable enough to continue improving. What he already knows has helped usher this franchise in the right direction, and what he currently doesn't know can, and likely will, be learned as he grows with his team.
It is the most precarious position to hire for the team because it's naturally fraught with wildcards as to how the coach will jell with his team; naturally, it's also the jumpiest, as us Lakers fans can attest to, having seen the stead switch hands 4 times this decade so far. Walton will be longer-tenured than his last-three predecessors according to the front office, who have repeatedly declared him as their "coach of the future;" now, with two seasons under his tenure in the books, I'm curious to see how the fanbase feels about it.
As for my personal stance...
I'm all but sold on Walton as our long-term head coach at this point. Having been chastened by our recent years in the doldrums, I've become much more appreciative of whatever modicum of success we find in the regular season at this stage, and I would have found it fanciful to expect much more than 35 wins with our roster's unseasoned youth and fitful health.
Where do I see Luke Walton's fingerprints on our upsurgent success?
1. Defense.
A team's defense—the good and the bad—is primordially attributable to the coaching staff, as it behooves them to not only architect the defensive schemes but to motivate players to buy in it—easier said than done with the typical immaturities and egos of a rebuilding team. A roster's personnel can palliate defensive deficiencies, but the onus of teamwork logistics is mainly on the coach.
As such, it's no coincidence that our defensive culture deteriorated with the turnover of coaches we've been subjected to this decade, plummeting to the bottom rung once our last title-contention team (to put it liberally) disformed in 2013. Every coach rightly proclaimed it as a priority to improve the team's defense in these rebuilding efforts; but it was more platitudinous than substantive under Byron Scott, whose team was ranked dead-last on that end of the floor by his termination in 2016.
This continued throughout Luke's first season; and I started having misgivings towards him because of it, but they've been banished this season where we've finally seen appreciable improvement on that end. We're now ranked 13th in defensive efficiency—a mountainous improvement from dead-last in the previous season and the biggest attributability to our improved win total. The defensive personnel deserves credit—namely Brook Lopez (good rim-protector), KCP, and Lonzo Ball (he's been a nice revelation on that end of the floor), but the needle wouldn't have moved that meteorically if Walton weren't upholding his own role as coach.
Do I think Luke Walton will be an elite defensive coach? Probably not, since he seems to be too mellow to maximize his team's intensity; however, it didn't prevent Phil Jackson from forging a championship-acceptable defensive culture, and I think Luke is intelligent enough of a coach to devise sound defensive schemes while doing enough to motivate his players to buy into it.
Lakers still had their inconsistencies on that end this year, but it's a great upgrade from being consistently putrid on it for all of the previous-four seasons.
2. Rapport-building and player development.
As a young, millennial-friendly coach, the players seem to have been nothing but supportive towards Luke. He's been the good cop to contrast from the bad cop in his predecessor, as Byron Scott repeatedly impugned his players' efforts in the press-conference probably just as much as, if not more than, in the locker-room—and indelicately enough that his players didn't always mince their words with him when it was their turn on the podium.
Diplomacy is an indispensable skill for coach, because they are the biggest adversary of player egos. Walton has shown to be the type of coach that players can banter with and be lavished with praise on, but they still sense his gravitas whenever he needs to hold them accountable; that makes his criticism all the more respectable to them, as some have noted him as the type of coach you'd want to play hard for just to avoid disappointing.
Convincing players to buy into a system is just as vital for devising the system itself, which Luke Walton has shown the expressive leadership to do.
3. Walton's own upside.
Remember that Luke Walton is a project in his own right; as the youngest coach in the league with only a smattering of prior head-coaching experience under his belt before this tenure, he has similar upgrowth to be done as his players do. I personally wished he had at least 2-3 more assistant-coaching years under his belt moving into the head-coaching gig, but it won't bog him down from improving while he already has his foot in the door.
As a studious and open-minded coach, his own prime has yet to come. Naturally, he still has his own shortcomings as a coach, but they are much more endurable when they can be considered growing pains rather than rigid flaws that would more likely be entrenched in much older, better-tenured coaches.
Working in the shadows of Phil Jackson and Steve Kerr, he's already had a wealth of empirical insight moving into the role, and everything about his personality has indicated to me that he's pliable enough to continue improving. What he already knows has helped usher this franchise in the right direction, and what he currently doesn't know can, and likely will, be learned as he grows with his team.
