http://www.nola.com/hornets/t-p/index.ssf?/base/sports-1/1084950036259460.xml In NBA, power rests with players Wednesday, May 19, 2004 Peter Finney According to reports, Byron Scott, a candidate for the Hornets' head coaching job, had a nice interview with owner George Shinn. That's nice. So what else is new? Listen to what Scott's agent, Brian McInery, told The New York Times. "The issue is," McInery said, "do the owners have a commitment to putting together a winner, a championship team, over the time it takes to develop it? It's not salary anymore. It's going to be about seeking a commitment from management: What authority does the coach have with players?" And there's more. "Do you have a coach if one or two or three players are not happy, you move your family, your children, your cat, your dog, and because someone does not like you, you can be told to leave? This is going to be a big subject. Coaches have to be considered at an equal level, asking, 'What influence do I have with players?' Byron wants to make sure he has authority." Good luck. In the NBA, McInery has to know "authority" depends on who the coach is and who the player or players are. You read these comments and you're pretty sure, in regard to Scott's January firing by the New Jersey Nets, Jason Kidd had more "authority" than a head coach who had taken the Nets to the NBA Finals the past two seasons. Rightly or wrongly, it was Kidd's voice that was heard by management. Is Kidd an excellent point guard? You bet; good enough to be pursued by the Spurs after last season. But keep in mind Kidd's voice was responsible for a franchise setback. That's because he agreed to a $103 million package to re-sign with the Nets, only after the franchise agreed to invest $20 million in signing Alonzo Mourning, whose future was clouded, and quickly ended, by a kidney illness. And remember, Kidd is battling to take his team past the Pistons and into the Eastern Conference finals, under Scott's successor, 33-year-old Lawrence Frank, youngest coach in the NBA. In the usual coaching carousel, Scott may wind up with some options. Should the Sacramento Kings lose Game 7 to the Minnesota Timberwolves, he could be a candidate to succeed Rick Adelman if the Kings make a change. As for the Hornets, who'll be moving into the Western Conference next season, Scott has to know the first order of business would be Jamal Mashburn. Should he be traded? Can he be traded? At what price? Mashburn played 19 games this season for $8.5 million. The last you heard from a player who quit on his team was a player trashing the franchise for not handling his knee injury properly, an all-pro whine that made no sense, that came at the start of a playoff series against Miami. It resulted in Mashburn, who flew with the team to Miami, being told to disassociate himself from the Hornets. While Mashburn's comments will have a negative impact on his value in a possible trade, it had no financial impact on the player. Wherever he plays next season, Mashburn is guaranteed no less than $9.3 million. If he remains with the Hornets, and if the Hornets still want him for 2005-06, he would be their property for a guaranteed $10.075 million. Are you with me, folks? The biggest question facing the new coach of this city's franchise is simple: If you agree Mashburn and his 20-plus scoring average are a key to success, can he coexist on the court with Baron Davis? Forget the saga of Tim Floyd. Paul Silas before him found it a daunting task. There's no question who the "man" is. All you have to do is go to the salary ledger. Davis played the 2003-04 season for $10.067 million. He'll play the next five seasons for $11.3 million, $12.5 million, $13.8 million, $15.1 million, $16.3 million. All of it guaranteed through 2008-09. Eat your hearts out, NFL guys, where guaranteed money usually comes in bonus form, where guaranteed contracts are few and far between. Even Davis can look up at Shaquille O'Neal, who is playing this season for $26.2 million. Shaq will play next season for $29.4 million and the season after that for $32.4 million. Following the 2007 season, I'm guessing Shaq and the Lakers will sit down and talk "real" money. Guaranteed, perhaps, until Shaq turns 50. Looking back, I'll never forget the day the Lakers decided to pay Magic Johnson $1 million a year. Whereupon, I came up with one of those astute observations: "That's it. It can't go any higher." . . . . . . . Peter Finney be reached at [email protected] or (504) 826-3802. --

※ 發信站: 批踢踢實業坊(ptt.cc) ◆ From: 218.166.77.4