When the richest team in the NBA takes all summer to find a coach, watching them settle on someone who has "journeyman" scratched all over his resumé might seem like a disappointment. While other franchises are nabbing interesting hires like Quin Synder or David Blatt, or proven winners like Lionel Hollins, the L.A. Lakers landed on Byron Scott, he of a career .444 winning percentage as coach, and a man who seemingly didn't get a single serious look from the other half-dozen teams hiring this offseason.
It really is a pattern-busting hire. Consider the other head coaches hired this offseason: Steve Kerr, Snyder, Blatt, Hollins, Jason Kidd, Derek Fisher, Stan Van Gundy and Flip Saunders. The final two are the only guys who'd been a head coach for at least two NBA franchises previously. Van Gundy has been one of the league's most sought-after free agents since leaving Orlando, and Saunders hired himself in Minnesota. So really, the Lakers hiring Scott, who has previously coached three teams and did not seem to be in much demand, was unique this offseason. That old coaching carousel canard would be dead (for now) if not for L.A.
More money, more problems
More money, more problems
The Lakers' decision to hire Scott is certainly boring in the context of 2014, but that doesn't make it bad. The money ($17 million over four years with only three guaranteed) represents the new norm for head coaches; in fact, Scott might be a little underpaid given his experience. Regardless, coaching salary only matters when an owner is too cheap to buy out the last year or two of a bad tenure. It doesn't count against the cap and it's dwarfed by player payroll. The Lakers have shown a willingness to buy out coaches who aren't a good fit, and this contract won't make the Buss family think twice if things go sideways.
As for Scott's chops, many will and have pointed to his dismal run in Cleveland, where the Cavaliers were consistently among the league's worst teams, especially on defense. But that was part of the deal: he coached the first post-LeBron year in which the club barely even had any youth to develop. Anderson Varejao is the only member of that team still in Cleveland, and a good portion of that roster is currently out of the league. The lineup improved gradually, adding Kyrie Irving and Tristan Thompson in 2011-12 and Dion Waiters for Scott's final, fatal season. It was a total lack of improvement in 2012-13 that felled Scott, but remember that Irving missed 23 games and Varejao only played in two dozen. Most would admit that roster was not built to win, either, and in fact another coach (Mike Brown) failed with a modified version of it a year later despite adding Luol Deng midstream.
Photo credit: USA TODAY Sports
Canning Scott in 2013 was justifiable as far as these things go in the NBA. But there were much weaker cases against Scott in his two previous dismissals. Scott took the Nets to back-to-back NBA Finals immediately prior to being fired midseason in 2003-04 (thanks J-Kidd!) and had a really solid run in New Orleans, which included a 56-win season and some pretty savvy work while Chris Paul dealt with injuries. In 2009-10, the then-Hornets started 3-6, earning Scott his walking papers. Under Jeff Bower, the team finished 37-45. I dare say Scott wasn't the problem.
So that's where the Lakers find themselves: making a typical NBA coaching carousel hire in a wholly atypical offseason, picking up an undervalued, affordable coach despite being able to afford basically any coach the franchise wants. Fit is a huge part of any coaching hire, but we really have no idea what sort of team Scott will be dealt this season until we know more about Kobe Bryant's health, and the 2015-16 season is even more mysterious at this point. But on its merits alone, this is a fine decision for a team in purgatory. No coach was going to solve the Lakers' conundrum this season, and it's unlikely Byron Scott will make things any worse.
The problem for Scott is that the Lakers' likelihood of winning big any time soon is remote, so there's a strong chance he piles up more losses than wins and ensures that this is the last NBA head coach contract he ever signs. This season is shaping up to be pure torment in L.A. The West is fantastically deep, the Clippers look poised to be great again, and the Lakers' important offseason ended up keeping much of last season's 27-win roster while adding Jeremy Lin, Ed Davis and Carlos Boozer. L.A. only keeps its pick if it ends up with a top-five selection, which will be very difficult without lottery reform. Making the playoffs may be even more difficult. Even with a healthy and spectacular Kobe in 2012-13, L.A. barely snuck in, and that team had a better supporting cast and an easier chase in the West.
Even then, simply making the playoffs isn't usually enough to sate the masses. What would Scott have to accomplish to walk away unbruised? A deep run? A sixth title for Kobe? How impossible does that look? Scott wins by getting one more big NBA contract, and that will certainly help him sleep comfortably for the rest of his life. And he gets to run the team he bleeds for. But after he's done counting money and once the sheen of returning to the Lakers dulls, he's really in a no-win situation as he ties the end of his career to that of Kobe. The odds of this working out favorably for Scott are low.
That said, as Scott knows all too well, few tenures in the NBA end well. Might as well go out in style.