3. Desirability for Big Name Free Agents
Allow me to present two scenarios if you are a free agent looking to sign a long term deal on the open market. In scenario A you have a coach that is young and wholly relatable due to essentially being a peer. In addition, this coach also has experience both as an NBA player and an assistant coach on highly successful teams and as parts of highly successful organizations that have won championships. What’s more, the coach in scenario A also happens to be a malleable, flexible coach willing and able to adapt to whatever situation and personnel he’s working with as that’s the environment he learned to coach in.
Then you have scenario B. In scenario B, the head coach is a former player whose been out of the league for over 20 years at this point, but is unmoving and stubborn in virtually every regard. In terms of antiquated logic and cliches, in terms of his system, and in in terms of just about every aspect of being a basketball coach, he’s stuck in the past and unwilling and unable to adapt to an evolving/evolved landscape in the NBA.
If you’re a top free agent trying to make a decision about where you want to spend the next four years of your career playing, are you going to want to play under the coach in scenario A or scenario B? The answer is scenario to 99 out of 100 big time free agents that hit the open market.
Lakers fans are privy to the knowledge that the coach in scenario B would be Byron while the coach in scenario A would be akin to Walton. As the Lakers enter an offseason where they have the cap flexibility and need to sign big free agents, having a coach like Walton that makes LA a more attractive destination is pivotal—and that matters for beyond this year as well in future free agency periods.
Next: No. 2 Accountability