Statements
LOS ANGELES -- The Lakers lost Dan Hurley on Monday.
The Lakers seem to have lost the thread.
Hurley turned down the Lakers' six-year, $70 million offer.
This is not a shock.
Hurley has a chance to chase a third straight NCAA championship.
The Lakers' Dilemma
The Lakers' job may have been a poisoned chalice. There was no guarantee that a hard-charging, no-NBA-experience hire like Hurley would fit well with LeBron James. LeBron has exacting standards and a particular view of how teams should operate. He prefers to be a partner with a head coach rather than a subordinate.
The Lakers do not seem to know what they're doing. They do not seem to know whom they'd like to become. The Lakers embarrassed themselves by chasing a gamble. In this context, Hurley was indeed a gamble. The Lakers were spurned in a public, slow-moving manner, which makes the organization look small and provides a sheen of amateurism. It begs the question of why they would put themselves out there for a college coach who didn't want the job.
Hurley might have been a huge success in Los Angeles. He is a proven winner, and scouts and front-office personnel have been impressed with the tactical level of UConn's teams. Maybe Hurley would have made the leap from college basketball to NBA coaching, as Brad Stevens and Billy Donovan have done successfully. However, the past does not always predict the future. Many are skeptical of college head coaches at the NBA level.
Public Rejection and Its Consequences
Being turned down publicly is one thing. Being the Lakers and getting turned down by a college coach is another. JJ Redick must feel stung. Redick gave off "I'll-confirm-my-new-head-coaching-gig-vibes" on his podcast. Having to go on national TV and pretend he hadn't been dumped for someone else must have been hard.
James Borrego was left in a strange limbo-meets-rejection over the past few days. The candidates with NBA experience watched the Lakers' failed press with Hurley. The Lakers' two strongest candidates could not have been more different. Hurley would have been an investment in a longer game, looking toward a post-LeBron reality. He might have turned three first-round picks into groundwork for a youthful team.
On the other hand, Redick would signal a focus on LeBron's waning years, emphasizing competing in the short term. Redick might trade three first-round picks for a star player. These are very different visions, and the Lakers seem to be operating as if hiring an NBA head coach is like scrolling through Netflix. It's not a sound way to run an NBA organization. There are consequences for a slipshod approach.
The Leverage of LeBron
Hurley turning down the Lakers makes it hard to find a winning candidate. The Lakers cannot afford for LeBron to decide to go somewhere else. LeBron has plenty of leverage and might have a firmer say in who gets the coaching gig. LeBron and the new coach might push to trade for another star. While that would be a fine, well-thought-out plan, it should not be an unintended consequence of being embarrassed by Hurley.
The Lakers chased a shocker in going after Hurley. The biggest surprise is that the team Hurley passed on has no real plan. The Lakers do not know their vision to win in the future. This exposes a deeper problem within the organization: a lack of coherence and long-term strategy.
Conclusion
The episode with Dan Hurley serves as a lesson for the Lakers and perhaps other NBA franchises: there must be a consistent and clear vision. Recruitment processes shouldn't merely be about optics or chasing ambitious names without a grounded plan. The Lakers have the potential to realign their strategy, particularly with a star like LeBron James still on their roster. However, this will require introspection and a commitment to sound, strategic decision-making. The ball is now in their court, but only time will reveal if they can play it right.
Quotes
"I can do better."