The Lakers made one crucial mistake in firing Byron Scott
What took the Los Angeles Lakers so long?
Bringing Byron Scott back as coach next season would have been an atrocious decision. We're talking "Begging Dwight Howard to come back"-caliber awfulness here, people. No matter how much the organization might love the former Lakers player, parting ways with Scott was the only move that made any sense.
If Los Angeles had quickly come to that conclusion, this team would be in great position for the first time in a number of years. They had the opportunity to lure any coach they wanted to southern California, and the field this summer was ripe for the picking -- and they watched it pass right by as Scott twisted in the wind.
Instead, the top two candidates with NBA coaching experience are gone. Scott Brooks is now the Washington Wizards head coach, and Tom Thibodeau is on his way to Minnesota. The loss of the former is unfortunate. Brooks is a skilled player development coach; he could have lifted the likes of Jordan Clarkson, Julius Randle and D'Angelo Russell to the height of their potential and set the stage for a bright future in Los Angeles.
Missing out on Thibodeau, though, is the one that really hurts. Thibodeau is known as a defensive guru, which the Lakers desperately need. Remember, Scott was hired on the strength of his abilities as a defensive coach. He then torpedoed the Lakers' already abysmal defense, sinking them to the very bottom of the league. Thibs would make this defense better simply by existing.
But the former Bulls coach is so much more than his defensive success. He's also the man who helped Derrick Rose become an MVP-level player, pre-injury. Around the league, he's known as something of a point guard whisperer. Imagining what he could have done with Russell is equal parts thrilling and depressing -- a dream situation that will never have a chance to be.
By all accounts, Thibs wanted to be the next Lakers head coach. Given the current state of the organization, that should be considered an elite skill in and of itself.
As @WojVerticalNBA has reported, Tom Thibodeau absolutely would have given the Lakers a look. Timing is everything in life.
— Zach Lowe (@ZachLowe_NBA) April 25, 2016
And the Lakers had to know that Thibodeau wanted the job, which raises the alarming question of why they kept Scott for almost two weeks after the end of the season. As far as we can gather, there are five reasons that make some sense:
1. The Lakers know who they want as their next head coach, they think they can get him, and it's not Thibodeau or Brooks
In that case, it's probably this guy:
No, not Kobe. The guy on the left. Luke Walton.
2. They thought coaching candidates would wait longer
Brooks and Thibodeau did agree to terms with their new teams fairly quickly, which might have caught Los Angeles off-guard. It seems unlikely that the Lakers would overrate their own pull after several down years, but it's not completely out of the question. If hubris is the cause, then this is a quintessentially Lakers-esque mistake.
3. There was an obligation to a member of the Lakers family
The Lakers undoubtedly knew that Scott wasn't the answer going forward. He's family, however, and you don't just fire family without exploring all possibilities. We could easily see Mitch Kupchak and the Buss family sitting down with Scott and going over everything that went wrong -- and right! -- this season. If they did their due diligence in evaluating Scott and doing right by him, that would take time.
Remember, even Mike D'Antoni took almost until May to decide he was done with the Lakers (and vice-versa), despite being so thoroughly reviled by the greater Lakers fiefdom. The Lakers apparently take their time in switching coaches.
4. The organization is locked in a 'Game of Thrones'-style struggle
We know that not everyone in the Buss family is on the same page internally. It would seem plausible that one faction wanted Scott to stay, another wanted him gone, and it took a week or so for things to shake out.
5. Kobe Bryant
Consider where we are today. The Lakers have fired Scott. As a result, all anyone wants to talk about is who might replace him and what this means for the future of the purple and gold. Do you notice whom we're no longer talking about, though?
We celebrated the hell out of Kobe for days after his final game, and rightfully so. If Los Angeles had parted ways with Scott immediately after the end of the season, however, then that celebration comes to an abrupt halt. We couldn't have that, of course. 2015-16 was in no way about the future of the Lakers organization; it was all about Kobe and the past. Hanging onto Scott for a little while longer allowed us to remember the good times in Los Angeles and not worry about the harrowing future that lies ahead.
Unfortunately, that future is what really matters. The Lakers are still a destination franchise, as evidenced by Thibodeau's interest in the team. Free agents want to come to Los Angeles. They want to redeem this organization and lead it back to the promised land of rings and parades. But for how much longer will that be true if the Lakers don't nail this coaching hire and turn things around? A presitigious franchise can reach rock bottom awfully quickly. Right, Zen Master?
"Right."
It would have been completely nonsensical for the Lakers to miss out on some of the best coaching candidates in a misguided attempt to keep the Kobe train rolling for a few more days -- but because we're talking about the Lakers, we can't rule it out.
---
Whatever the reason, the Lakers' hesitation in firing Scott is the last in a line of mistakes during his tenure. Los Angeles still has plenty of options from which to choose, of course, including what is assumed to be their No. 1 choice in Luke Walton. Things could still work out.
But by waiting so long, the Lakers artificially reduced their odds at making the right hire, and at a time when they can no longer afford such missteps. If the Lakers fail to bring the right coach on board this summer, they'll dig themselves an even deeper hole -- while having to live with the knowledge that they ignored their best lifeline back to the surface.
