Official LUKE WALTON Head Coach Thread
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4 ... 537, 538, 539  Next

 
Post new topic    LakersGround.net Forum Index -> LA Lakers Lounge Reply to topic
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
44TheLogo
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 21 Feb 2009
Posts: 5820

PostPosted: Tue Apr 05, 2016 12:31 pm    Post subject:

Wright is a system coach (4 out 1 in motion). You don't want a college coach who has a system in the NBA. That's recipe for disaster. Personally, I think that to be successful, NBA coaches have to have adaptability and a mastery of all styles of play rather than just one system that they try to fit pieces into. Coach K would be successful with pros because he can adapt the style of play to fit the strengths of his personnel. Same thing with a guy like Izzo whose teams focus on defense and rebounding, which would translate to the pros. Pitino was not because he tried to bring his system of full court press to the NBA. College system guys like Boeheim (2-3), Roy Williams (secondary break), Jay Wright would struggle in the NBA without GM powers to get personnel that fit their systems, and that's without even considering whether their system would work in the NBA.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
MJST
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 06 Jul 2014
Posts: 14986

PostPosted: Tue Apr 05, 2016 12:33 pm    Post subject:

4 out 1 is what the Spurs essentially ran till they added more layers to it. And it works fine for Van Gundy.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
44TheLogo
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 21 Feb 2009
Posts: 5820

PostPosted: Tue Apr 05, 2016 12:35 pm    Post subject:

MJST wrote:
4 out 1 is what the Spurs essentially ran till they added more layers to it. And it works fine for Van Gundy.


they don't run it with 4 guards and stan van gundy has GM powers. if you bring in a system guy you better give him GM powers.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
BigGameHames
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 24 May 2015
Posts: 4120

PostPosted: Tue Apr 05, 2016 1:02 pm    Post subject:

44TheLogo wrote:
Wright is a system coach (4 out 1 in motion). You don't want a college coach who has a system in the NBA. That's recipe for disaster. Personally, I think that to be successful, NBA coaches have to have adaptability and a mastery of all styles of play rather than just one system that they try to fit pieces into. Coach K would be successful with pros because he can adapt the style of play to fit the strengths of his personnel. Same thing with a guy like Izzo whose teams focus on defense and rebounding, which would translate to the pros. Pitino was not because he tried to bring his system of full court press to the NBA. College system guys like Boeheim (2-3), Roy Williams (secondary break), Jay Wright would struggle in the NBA without GM powers to get personnel that fit their systems, and that's without even considering whether their system would work in the NBA.


A 4 out 1 in motion isn't a super strict system. It's fairly adaptable in itself. More of a structure to build off of than a strict system IMO.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
BigGameHames
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 24 May 2015
Posts: 4120

PostPosted: Tue Apr 05, 2016 1:07 pm    Post subject:

Russell1 wrote:
I think Clarkson and Russell can do what Wright does on defense but I would like a better defender than Clarkson at the 2. He switches a lot and helping the helper is big in his defensive system. Lead your guy to a helper or wall and scramble to get a body on the open guy.


The Lakers are absolutely horrid at helping the helper this year. Probably the most frustrating part of their defense this year IMO so if he focuses on that its a major plus. Russell Randle and Nance all have a chance to become versatile defenders so I don't mind a defense with lots of switching. I think a better defender at the two than Clarkson is ideal for every system
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
wildcat
Starting Rotation
Starting Rotation


Joined: 18 Oct 2006
Posts: 633

PostPosted: Tue Apr 05, 2016 1:10 pm    Post subject:

44TheLogo wrote:
Wright is a system coach (4 out 1 in motion). You don't want a college coach who has a system in the NBA. That's recipe for disaster. Personally, I think that to be successful, NBA coaches have to have adaptability and a mastery of all styles of play rather than just one system that they try to fit pieces into. Coach K would be successful with pros because he can adapt the style of play to fit the strengths of his personnel. Same thing with a guy like Izzo whose teams focus on defense and rebounding, which would translate to the pros. Pitino was not because he tried to bring his system of full court press to the NBA. College system guys like Boeheim (2-3), Roy Williams (secondary break), Jay Wright would struggle in the NBA without GM powers to get personnel that fit their systems, and that's without even considering whether their system would work in the NBA.


Tex Winter, a college coach, had a system that was used by 11 NBA championship teams. A system is precisely what the Lakers need.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Theseus
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 15 Dec 2007
Posts: 5960

PostPosted: Tue Apr 05, 2016 1:23 pm    Post subject:

D Fish. He can start dating Khloe Kardashian. It will be great
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
44TheLogo
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 21 Feb 2009
Posts: 5820

PostPosted: Tue Apr 05, 2016 1:50 pm    Post subject:

wildcat wrote:
44TheLogo wrote:
Wright is a system coach (4 out 1 in motion). You don't want a college coach who has a system in the NBA. That's recipe for disaster. Personally, I think that to be successful, NBA coaches have to have adaptability and a mastery of all styles of play rather than just one system that they try to fit pieces into. Coach K would be successful with pros because he can adapt the style of play to fit the strengths of his personnel. Same thing with a guy like Izzo whose teams focus on defense and rebounding, which would translate to the pros. Pitino was not because he tried to bring his system of full court press to the NBA. College system guys like Boeheim (2-3), Roy Williams (secondary break), Jay Wright would struggle in the NBA without GM powers to get personnel that fit their systems, and that's without even considering whether their system would work in the NBA.


Tex Winter, a college coach, had a system that was used by 11 NBA championship teams. A system is precisely what the Lakers need.


yup just as all those successful triangle teams without phil jackson, kobe bryant, shaquille o'neal, and michael jordan proves right?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
44TheLogo
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 21 Feb 2009
Posts: 5820

PostPosted: Tue Apr 05, 2016 1:53 pm    Post subject:

BigGameHames wrote:
44TheLogo wrote:
Wright is a system coach (4 out 1 in motion). You don't want a college coach who has a system in the NBA. That's recipe for disaster. Personally, I think that to be successful, NBA coaches have to have adaptability and a mastery of all styles of play rather than just one system that they try to fit pieces into. Coach K would be successful with pros because he can adapt the style of play to fit the strengths of his personnel. Same thing with a guy like Izzo whose teams focus on defense and rebounding, which would translate to the pros. Pitino was not because he tried to bring his system of full court press to the NBA. College system guys like Boeheim (2-3), Roy Williams (secondary break), Jay Wright would struggle in the NBA without GM powers to get personnel that fit their systems, and that's without even considering whether their system would work in the NBA.


A 4 out 1 in motion isn't a super strict system. It's fairly adaptable in itself. More of a structure to build off of than a strict system IMO.


every "system" is a structure to build off of. they all need the right personnel to succeed. my point, again, is that to have a system coach succeed in the NBA, that system coach needs to have GM powers to find the right personnel. are you ready to give a college coach carte blanche to be coach AND make personnel decisions?

the first question is, can this system work in the NBA? if you think yes, it can, then the second question is, do we have a GM who understands this system as well as the coach we want does? if not, then are we ready to hand over the reigns of personnel and salary and all the things that come with being a GM to this coach?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
tnell
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 23 Jun 2011
Posts: 3007
Location: Over the River And Through The Woods

PostPosted: Tue Apr 05, 2016 1:56 pm    Post subject:

What about a Ime Udoka?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
PG13
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 23 Jun 2015
Posts: 3244

PostPosted: Tue Apr 05, 2016 1:57 pm    Post subject:

44TheLogo wrote:
Wright is a system coach (4 out 1 in motion). You don't want a college coach who has a system in the NBA. That's recipe for disaster. Personally, I think that to be successful, NBA coaches have to have adaptability and a mastery of all styles of play rather than just one system that they try to fit pieces into. Coach K would be successful with pros because he can adapt the style of play to fit the strengths of his personnel. Same thing with a guy like Izzo whose teams focus on defense and rebounding, which would translate to the pros. Pitino was not because he tried to bring his system of full court press to the NBA. College system guys like Boeheim (2-3), Roy Williams (secondary break), Jay Wright would struggle in the NBA without GM powers to get personnel that fit their systems, and that's without even considering whether their system would work in the NBA.


He is bright, I am sure he can adapt and add more layers to his system. But in college he played the hand that was delt, he couldn't recruit the big names but there was a market for the types of players he could get and he has a good system for that. I mean when he had Foye and Lowery it was more pick and roll based, he allows players to play to their strengths. He even fed the 7 footer on mismatches he had throughout the season and tournament

Imagine his defensive system with a Biyambo or Whiteside as the last line of defense?.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
KindCrippler2000
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 02 May 2003
Posts: 11784

PostPosted: Tue Apr 05, 2016 1:59 pm    Post subject:

Anyone but Byron... even Scooby-Doo will work.
_________________
"Stats are killing basketball. This is a very subjective game, a lot of things happen that you can't measure with stats. Very different details matter. The way I see basketball, the most important things don't show up in statistics." - Marc Gasol
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
pmacla
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 31 Aug 2012
Posts: 7457
Location: Los Angeles, CA

PostPosted: Tue Apr 05, 2016 2:01 pm    Post subject:

Mindripper2000 wrote:
Anyone but Byron... even Scooby-Doo will work.


as long as all fans get a box of Scooby snacks to the opener i am al lfor it
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ChickenStu
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 25 Apr 2015
Posts: 12005
Location: Anaheim, CA

PostPosted: Tue Apr 05, 2016 2:01 pm    Post subject:

44TheLogo wrote:
BigGameHames wrote:
44TheLogo wrote:
Wright is a system coach (4 out 1 in motion). You don't want a college coach who has a system in the NBA. That's recipe for disaster. Personally, I think that to be successful, NBA coaches have to have adaptability and a mastery of all styles of play rather than just one system that they try to fit pieces into. Coach K would be successful with pros because he can adapt the style of play to fit the strengths of his personnel. Same thing with a guy like Izzo whose teams focus on defense and rebounding, which would translate to the pros. Pitino was not because he tried to bring his system of full court press to the NBA. College system guys like Boeheim (2-3), Roy Williams (secondary break), Jay Wright would struggle in the NBA without GM powers to get personnel that fit their systems, and that's without even considering whether their system would work in the NBA.


A 4 out 1 in motion isn't a super strict system. It's fairly adaptable in itself. More of a structure to build off of than a strict system IMO.


every "system" is a structure to build off of. they all need the right personnel to succeed. my point, again, is that to have a system coach succeed in the NBA, that system coach needs to have GM powers to find the right personnel. are you ready to give a college coach carte blanche to be coach AND make personnel decisions?

the first question is, can this system work in the NBA? if you think yes, it can, then the second question is, do we have a GM who understands this system as well as the coach we want does? if not, then are we ready to hand over the reigns of personnel and salary and all the things that come with being a GM to this coach?


I'm trying to remember, and perhaps you can provide some knowledge on this: did Brad Stevens have a system at Butler? Is he doing things with the Celtics that are very similar, or has he totally adapted to the pro game?
_________________
For #25: Huerter, Jontay, Okogie, DiVincenzo, Holiday, Brunson, Melton
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
PG13
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 23 Jun 2015
Posts: 3244

PostPosted: Tue Apr 05, 2016 2:07 pm    Post subject:

ChickenStu wrote:
44TheLogo wrote:
BigGameHames wrote:
44TheLogo wrote:
Wright is a system coach (4 out 1 in motion). You don't want a college coach who has a system in the NBA. That's recipe for disaster. Personally, I think that to be successful, NBA coaches have to have adaptability and a mastery of all styles of play rather than just one system that they try to fit pieces into. Coach K would be successful with pros because he can adapt the style of play to fit the strengths of his personnel. Same thing with a guy like Izzo whose teams focus on defense and rebounding, which would translate to the pros. Pitino was not because he tried to bring his system of full court press to the NBA. College system guys like Boeheim (2-3), Roy Williams (secondary break), Jay Wright would struggle in the NBA without GM powers to get personnel that fit their systems, and that's without even considering whether their system would work in the NBA.


A 4 out 1 in motion isn't a super strict system. It's fairly adaptable in itself. More of a structure to build off of than a strict system IMO.


every "system" is a structure to build off of. they all need the right personnel to succeed. my point, again, is that to have a system coach succeed in the NBA, that system coach needs to have GM powers to find the right personnel. are you ready to give a college coach carte blanche to be coach AND make personnel decisions?

the first question is, can this system work in the NBA? if you think yes, it can, then the second question is, do we have a GM who understands this system as well as the coach we want does? if not, then are we ready to hand over the reigns of personnel and salary and all the things that come with being a GM to this coach?


I'm trying to remember, and perhaps you can provide some knowledge on this: did Brad Stevens have a system at Butler? Is he doing things with the Celtics that are very similar, or has he totally adapted to the pro game?


He runs similar stuff but at a quicker pace. In college his teams would play slower, but I guess with better players in the NBA he is able to pick up the pace. He did go inside more to the bigs at Butler and seems more guard oriented in the NBA.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
44TheLogo
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 21 Feb 2009
Posts: 5820

PostPosted: Tue Apr 05, 2016 2:11 pm    Post subject:

ChickenStu wrote:
44TheLogo wrote:
BigGameHames wrote:
44TheLogo wrote:
Wright is a system coach (4 out 1 in motion). You don't want a college coach who has a system in the NBA. That's recipe for disaster. Personally, I think that to be successful, NBA coaches have to have adaptability and a mastery of all styles of play rather than just one system that they try to fit pieces into. Coach K would be successful with pros because he can adapt the style of play to fit the strengths of his personnel. Same thing with a guy like Izzo whose teams focus on defense and rebounding, which would translate to the pros. Pitino was not because he tried to bring his system of full court press to the NBA. College system guys like Boeheim (2-3), Roy Williams (secondary break), Jay Wright would struggle in the NBA without GM powers to get personnel that fit their systems, and that's without even considering whether their system would work in the NBA.


A 4 out 1 in motion isn't a super strict system. It's fairly adaptable in itself. More of a structure to build off of than a strict system IMO.


every "system" is a structure to build off of. they all need the right personnel to succeed. my point, again, is that to have a system coach succeed in the NBA, that system coach needs to have GM powers to find the right personnel. are you ready to give a college coach carte blanche to be coach AND make personnel decisions?

the first question is, can this system work in the NBA? if you think yes, it can, then the second question is, do we have a GM who understands this system as well as the coach we want does? if not, then are we ready to hand over the reigns of personnel and salary and all the things that come with being a GM to this coach?


I'm trying to remember, and perhaps you can provide some knowledge on this: did Brad Stevens have a system at Butler? Is he doing things with the Celtics that are very similar, or has he totally adapted to the pro game?


Stevens had a motion offense at Butler. I think people are misunderstanding what I'm saying. Every team should have a system in place, and that system should be adapted to suit the personnel available. I am not against systems. I am against coaches who only know and only coach one system for their entire career, because it is inevitably going to be the system they know the best, and so for them to replicate whatever success they have had at one level, they will have to use that same system at the next level. In college, these coaches can recruit players to fit the system of their choice. In the pros, that is not possible unless they are the GM. I am vehemently against a coach also being a GM unless they have really spent time in the front office understanding cap space, salary negotiations, draft talent evaluation, etc. etc. It's a totally different mindspace.

With respect to Stevens adapting to the NBA game - just consider this. Butler under Stevens was never above 200th in the nation in pace. The Celtics are 3rd in the NBA in pace. He played a methodical half court style in college, but now plays a fast pace and open style in the pros.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
PG13
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 23 Jun 2015
Posts: 3244

PostPosted: Tue Apr 05, 2016 2:15 pm    Post subject:

44TheLogo wrote:
ChickenStu wrote:
44TheLogo wrote:
BigGameHames wrote:
44TheLogo wrote:
Wright is a system coach (4 out 1 in motion). You don't want a college coach who has a system in the NBA. That's recipe for disaster. Personally, I think that to be successful, NBA coaches have to have adaptability and a mastery of all styles of play rather than just one system that they try to fit pieces into. Coach K would be successful with pros because he can adapt the style of play to fit the strengths of his personnel. Same thing with a guy like Izzo whose teams focus on defense and rebounding, which would translate to the pros. Pitino was not because he tried to bring his system of full court press to the NBA. College system guys like Boeheim (2-3), Roy Williams (secondary break), Jay Wright would struggle in the NBA without GM powers to get personnel that fit their systems, and that's without even considering whether their system would work in the NBA.


A 4 out 1 in motion isn't a super strict system. It's fairly adaptable in itself. More of a structure to build off of than a strict system IMO.


every "system" is a structure to build off of. they all need the right personnel to succeed. my point, again, is that to have a system coach succeed in the NBA, that system coach needs to have GM powers to find the right personnel. are you ready to give a college coach carte blanche to be coach AND make personnel decisions?

the first question is, can this system work in the NBA? if you think yes, it can, then the second question is, do we have a GM who understands this system as well as the coach we want does? if not, then are we ready to hand over the reigns of personnel and salary and all the things that come with being a GM to this coach?


I'm trying to remember, and perhaps you can provide some knowledge on this: did Brad Stevens have a system at Butler? Is he doing things with the Celtics that are very similar, or has he totally adapted to the pro game?


Stevens had a motion offense at Butler. I think people are misunderstanding what I'm saying. Every team should have a system in place, and that system should be adapted to suit the personnel available. I am not against systems. I am against coaches who only know and only coach one system for their entire career, because it is inevitably going to be the system they know the best, and so for them to replicate whatever success they have had at one level, they will have to use that same system at the next level. In college, these coaches can recruit players to fit the system of their choice. In the pros, that is not possible unless they are the GM. I am vehemently against a coach also being a GM unless they have really spent time in the front office understanding cap space, salary negotiations, draft talent evaluation, etc. etc. It's a totally different mindspace.

With respect to Stevens adapting to the NBA game - just consider this. Butler under Stevens was never above 200th in the nation in pace. The Celtics are 3rd in the NBA in pace. He played a methodical half court style in college, but now plays a fast pace and open style in the pros.


He had to play a slower pace in college though because he didn't have the best players and slowing the game down gave his team a better chance of winning.

Wright isn't any different than Stevens as far as having a system in college, but Wright still is able to play a faster style because his system is guard oriented and to have success at the college level you need to have good guards. He has done fine for the job he is asked to do.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
kikanga
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 15 Sep 2012
Posts: 16747
Location: La La Land

PostPosted: Tue Apr 05, 2016 2:20 pm    Post subject:

If I was Luke and I was considering what job would be the easiest to take as my first head coach job. I'd pick Minny.
They got another lotto pick joining their impressive young roster this offseason . An average coach leads them to 10-15 more wins next year, easy.
Just via natural progression from Wiggins, towns, Lavine, and Dieng.
_________________
"The fundamental cause of trouble in the world today is that the stupid are cocksure while the intelligent are full of doubt" - Bertrand Russell
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
KobeRe-Loaded
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 09 Dec 2003
Posts: 14944

PostPosted: Tue Apr 05, 2016 2:21 pm    Post subject:

I'm sold on Wright because ...

- Communication/Development
- Adjustments
- Game Planning

If the Lakers are keeping this young core together and adding a guy like Simmons or Ingram. He's the guy to bring in as head coach. Plus I think he's savvy enough to understand how to play the media in LA. He dresses well too ... maybe switch up the pin stripe suits a bit.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
KobeRe-Loaded
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 09 Dec 2003
Posts: 14944

PostPosted: Tue Apr 05, 2016 2:22 pm    Post subject:

kikanga wrote:
If I was Luke and I was considering what job would be the easiest to take as my first head coach job. I'd pick Minny.
They got another lotto pick joining their impressive young roster this offseason . An average coach leads them to 10-15 more wins next year, easy.
Just via natural progression from Wiggins, towns, Lavine, and Dieng.


Luke is smart to stick around in G St. Kerr is still not physically 100%. After this season is over he will likely have to have another back operation to fix the leaking spinal fluid.
_________________
#11/08/16 America became GREAT again
#Avatar-gate
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
kikanga
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 15 Sep 2012
Posts: 16747
Location: La La Land

PostPosted: Tue Apr 05, 2016 2:25 pm    Post subject:

KobeRe-Loaded wrote:
kikanga wrote:
If I was Luke and I was considering what job would be the easiest to take as my first head coach job. I'd pick Minny.
They got another lotto pick joining their impressive young roster this offseason . An average coach leads them to 10-15 more wins next year, easy.
Just via natural progression from Wiggins, towns, Lavine, and Dieng.


Luke is smart to stick around in G St. Kerr is still not physically 100%. After this season is over he will likely have to have another back operation to fix the leaking spinal fluid.


Feel bad for Kerr. But I agree. Staying in GS is Luke's best option at the moment.
_________________
"The fundamental cause of trouble in the world today is that the stupid are cocksure while the intelligent are full of doubt" - Bertrand Russell
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
bonkers
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 25 Apr 2013
Posts: 5884

PostPosted: Tue Apr 05, 2016 2:29 pm    Post subject:

Was Hoiberg a system coach at Iowa St? I just remember that they were a team that liked to push tempo, but it doesn't seem like he's doing well in Chicago. Also, has Billy Donovan brought anything to the table for OKC or is it just the usual KD/Westbrook show?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Mini Mamba
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 06 May 2013
Posts: 4876

PostPosted: Tue Apr 05, 2016 2:31 pm    Post subject:

If Luke and Wright both stay I'd be very interested in bringing Messina back.

He wouldn't be a retread and has spent the last few seasons learning from Popovich in San Antonio.

I hope the front office considers him and gives him an interview.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
22
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 05 Apr 2013
Posts: 15861

PostPosted: Tue Apr 05, 2016 2:33 pm    Post subject:

I think Hoiberg should have gone to a younger team w/o an identity yet i.e. us.

Hard to change the culture with all those vets in Chi
_________________
Blake Griffin's ankles beware....Randle is coming
The youngins are YOUNG, let them learn.


Last edited by 22 on Tue Apr 05, 2016 3:06 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
jonnybravo
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 21 Sep 2007
Posts: 23966

PostPosted: Tue Apr 05, 2016 2:36 pm    Post subject:

kikanga wrote:
KobeRe-Loaded wrote:
kikanga wrote:
If I was Luke and I was considering what job would be the easiest to take as my first head coach job. I'd pick Minny.
They got another lotto pick joining their impressive young roster this offseason . An average coach leads them to 10-15 more wins next year, easy.
Just via natural progression from Wiggins, towns, Lavine, and Dieng.


Luke is smart to stick around in G St. Kerr is still not physically 100%. After this season is over he will likely have to have another back operation to fix the leaking spinal fluid.


Feel bad for Kerr. But I agree. Staying in GS is Luke's best option at the moment.


Depends on how much he's getting paid in GS and what kind of guarantees he gets in the future. Sometimes you have to strike when your name is hot. There's a huge gap between making a few hundred K/year as an assistant and nailing a 25M/5 year contract as a head coach. Easy to say when it's not our pocket book that's doing the talking. It took 30 freaking years for Thibodeau to get a crack at a HC job in the NBA with a full 21 of those years as an NBA assistant HC.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic    LakersGround.net Forum Index -> LA Lakers Lounge All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4 ... 537, 538, 539  Next
Page 3 of 539
Jump to:  

 
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum






Graphics by uberzev
© 1995-2010 LakersGround.net. All Rights Reserved. Privacy Policy. Terms of Use.
LakersGround is an unofficial news source serving the fan community since 1995.
We are in no way associated with the Los Angeles Lakers or the National Basketball Association.


Powered by phpBB