Jim Buss open to bringing Phil back in a Consultant role

leeprettyp · Post #1 » by **leeprettyp** » Fri Aug 23, 2013 2:06 pm

Per WT from Ric Bucher article

http://basketball.realgm.com/wiretap/229523/Buss-Open-To-Bringing-Back-Phil-Jackson-In-Official-Consulting-Role

"We can call him at any time," Jim Buss said. "(GM) Mitch (Kupchak) has sat down with him several times, especially with the Dwight situation. I'd be more than happy to have him on a consultant basis. I don't think we're paying him and I don't know if he has an official title. I have no idea if Jeanie wants to sit down and discuss that. But I have no issues with him coming back or having a role."

I've never really been the biggest Bucher fan myself but this is interesting. Thoughts?

leeprettyp · Post #2 » by **leeprettyp** » Fri Aug 23, 2013 2:09 pm

Lets just say Phil does take the position.. Doesnt that make things even tougher for Mike D with Phil's shadow hanging over him even more. If its not a Phil hand selected coach the coaching philosophies will never match I believe. I want Phil back at least in some form and capacity but a move like this would seem to put Mike D on an even shorter leash IMO

AdonisDeMarion · Post #3 » by **AdonisDeMarion** » Fri Aug 23, 2013 6:08 pm

leeprettyp wrote:Lets just say Phil does take the position.. Doesnt that make things even tougher for Mike D with Phil's shadow hanging over him even more. If its not a Phil hand selected coach the coaching philosophies will never match I believe. I want Phil back at least in some form and capacity but a move like this would seem to put Mike D on an even shorter leash IMO

This is just me, I like to be the guy that sees the glass half full. MDA could learn from PJ...

Post #4 » by **Kilroy** » Fri Aug 23, 2013 6:48 pm

I get the general feeling that Phil is around the offices a lot and he and MDA sees as much of him now as he would if Phil took a consultant job.

ArC_man · Post #5 » by **ArC_man** » Fri Aug 23, 2013 6:50 pm

Mike D needs a choke collar.

Ckay · Post #6 » by **Ckay** » Fri Aug 23, 2013 7:10 pm

Doubt Phil would take the role

Post #7 » by **TyCobb** » Fri Aug 23, 2013 7:46 pm

I'm glad the air has been cleared.

Post #8 » by **dockingsched** » Fri Aug 23, 2013 10:57 pm

leeprettyp wrote:Lets just say Phil does take the position.. Doesnt that make things even tougher for Mike D with Phil's shadow hanging over him even more

with phil's history and the story behind MDA's hiring, phil's shadow is going on MDA no matter what. MDA's handled it well, he knew what he was signing up for.

leeprettyp · Post #9 » by **leeprettyp** » Sat Aug 24, 2013 1:07 am

http://basketball.realgm.com/wiretap/229531/Jeanie-Buss-I-Feel-Like-We-Failed-Dwight-Howard

Seems like Bucher gonna keep milking the Buss family and the current Lakers situation. Man how about just putting all of this in 1 solid article smh. Cant wait for us to get to training camp so we can officially move on with the team for this season.

DEEP3CL · Post #10 » by **DEEP3CL** » Sun Aug 25, 2013 6:10 am

Fellas this is the beginning of the smoke screen by Jim. No need to over dig on this stuff but it's way too obvious how this is unfolding. We know it's no way in hell Phil is taking just a "consultant" role with no title or pay with one of the top franchises in the league. He'd be laughed at in private NBA circles and so would the Lakers as coming off cheap and petty.

Like Ty said this is just really clearing the air in it's first stages.

Durins Baynes · Post #11 » by **Durins Baynes** » Sun Aug 25, 2013 6:43 am

All smoke and mirrors of a bigger Buss power struggle methinks. Not sure who they need to bring in though, it's a tough environment... whoever it is, we're probably talking in 2 years time, so maybe Stan Van Gundy in the 2015 offseason is the way to go.

leeprettyp · Post #12 » by **leeprettyp** » Sun Aug 25, 2013 3:18 pm

Yeah I do agree I also thought it was weird how Jim had to say, "We're not gonna pay him" Like Phil is an unexperienced intern or something. That did strike me quite odd

Post #13 » by **TyCobb** » Sun Aug 25, 2013 3:51 pm

I thought he said 'I don't think we're paying him', which is quite different.

Post #14 » by **dockingsched** » Sun Aug 25, 2013 3:59 pm

leeprettyp wrote:Yeah I do agree I also thought it was weird how Jim had to say, "We're not gonna pay him" Like Phil is an unexperienced intern or something. That did strike me quite odd

i believe you took that entirely the wrong way. he was talking about how the FO, specially mitch, already uses phil as a consultant even if they don't pay him for it or give him an official title and that if jeanie wants to sit down and make his role more official with a salary and/or title, he's open to that.

leeprettyp · Post #15 » by **leeprettyp** » Sun Aug 25, 2013 4:51 pm

dockingsched wrote:
leeprettyp wrote:Yeah I do agree I also thought it was weird how Jim had to say, "We're not gonna pay him" Like Phil is an unexperienced intern or something. That did strike me quite odd

i believe you took that entirely the wrong way. he was talking about how the FO, specially mitch, already uses phil as a consultant even if they don't pay him for it or give him an official title and that if jeanie wants to sit down and make his role more official with a salary and/or title, he's open to that.

Got yah.. But whether the FO decides to pay him or not doesn't matter to the fans. Why would we care? Like how Rudy T is still on the payroll with the Lakers now and has a certain position with the team still. But fans really dont care about that kind of stuff we just know he's part of the franchise in some capacity