View Full Version : What is Buss chose West over Jackson?

08-03-2016, 10:43 PM
Another post posed the question of the Lakers keeping Shaq instead of Kobe.

The more interesting scenario to me is them choosing West over Jackson.

West (as demonstrated by both his tenure in Memphis, which turned a perennial lottery team around in a short time in a very competitive western conference and laid the foundations for their current squad during his rebuild; and his tenure in GSW, which saw him help build a team with mid/late lotto picks while teams picking the top five failed to build playoff teams let alone dynasties).

Jackson wanted more control, West wasn't interested in having a pissing match with him, so he left. But had the ownership stuck with West, would the team have been in better shape?

It is doubtful that West could have kept Kobe and Shaq together any longer than Jackson did, but he would have certain done a better job of building a supporting cast and maximizing trades involving Shaq and others (though Mitch did a decent job in that respect).

Where Mitch was coasting on the rotation of ring chasers who were willing to sign for the vet min and use draft picks as trade bait rather than an avenue to bring in cheap talent, West would have certainly been able to use those picks to bring in young guys to surround Kobe and Shaq with. And when the Shaq trade came up, West would have likely been shrewd enough in how he handled it to make sure he got as good a return as Mitch did.

But would another coach have been able to win with Shaq/Kobe? They were dominant. Did they need an A-list coach to win? Could another coach who was willing to work under West have managed the same success?

Or would the course of the franchise been no better than what it turned out to be?

08-04-2016, 12:08 AM
"What is Buss chose West over Jackson?"

A failed thread title? :)

08-04-2016, 12:15 AM
"What is Buss chose West over Jackson?"

A failed thread title? :)


08-04-2016, 01:47 AM
As West and Phil are probably the two best ever at what they were doing (DEF West, probably Phil) and two of the smartest dudes in the history of the NBA, they SHOULD have been smart enough to realize they couldn't have anyone better in the world doing the other job, and should have worked it out. West, Phil and young Kobe with Jerry Buss at top during Kobe's run as the best player in the League is crazy. Look how Dynastic the Buford, Pop and Duncan run was. Pop and Duncan can be argued to be as good or better than Phil and Kobe, but you can't argue Buford as on West's level when it comes to shrewdly building an NBA Roster.

Which would be better to have is an interesting question. My first instinct is to say you'd be better off with West in every situation BESIDES the one where you have the best and most challenging personality wise Roster in the League, which is what made Phil so great, managing all that dynastic-ally. So, since Phil won 5 rings with the Lakers, and Mitch was brought up under West and did a pretty great job himself at rebuilding the team, I'd say you pick Phil. But seeing how awesome every team West lays his hands on becomes makes it SO hard not to West>Anyone and Everyone. lol