Originally Posted by BlackVVaves
You're basing your premise on this notion that Mitch, Jim, and Jerry wanted Phil over anyone, and signed D'Antoni out of panic that Phil wouldn't sign.
The truth is, for better or for worse, the Lakers front office...from Jerry to Mitch...did not think the Triangle was the best system for their team.
Also something interesting. Mitch has said that Jerry (not Jim, though he's still an idiot anyway) has always wanted the Lakers to return to an up-tempo offense as depicted by his Showtime Lakers. It's just that (as a competent owner) he saw that the Triangle was bringing results in the form of championships, and he wasn't going to argue with results.
Apparently he saw the chance to get his wish of a faster pace Lakers squad, and jumped on it. But, if that's the case, why the **** did you let your son hire Mike Brown over another offensive genius in Rick Adelman?
i appreciate all that, but i still say that anyone with sense makes PJ the #1 candidate, period.
yes, the triangle might theoretically be worse than an uptempo offense, but... IT'S PHIL JACKSON. the idea that he couldn't or wouldn't adapt to fit the current personnel is patently absurd. not to mention, the triangle is not really the key to PJ's success, anyway. tex winter, yes, phil jackson, no. IMO the key to jackson's success is the brilliant way he managed and motivated his stars, and that could have worked with a number of systems.
don't even need to consider the fact that mike d'antoni's offense has never brought deep playoff success. such a consideration should be irrelevant while PJ was a possibility.