as for management the matter is buss should be given the boot, the very reason why phil jackson wasnt hired is because he doesnt want to be proven wrong as he also got rid of whatever phil jackson influence in laker land. he wanted to prove that he can create a championship team and get rings for years to come outside of the traingle offense, outside the what he seems to think as BS phil jackson doctrine.
as we all know phil jackson is good to players and is a hard ass with management. if it were you would you put the guy again where you work hard to get rid off?
I think the Jim Buss vs Jackson is a fair point - and I do expect that you're right, but aren't we ignoring Mitch Kupchak? Kupchak's had an amazing off-season - one of quite a few, and to put Jackson in would mean a significant impact on what his job would be from that point on. That would be treating one of the association's best GMs pretty harshly.
I do feel that quite a few people here expect that *Phil Jackson* would have been the *Phil Jackson of 2008-10*, not the *Phil Jackson of 2011*.
May I ask why people expect that?
Last edited by malice at 11/14/2012 3:29:08 AM
http://with-malice.com/ - The half-crazed ramblings of a Lakers fanatic in Japan