From: "Enrile, Roy" <renrile@xxxxxxxxxxxx> To: <celtics@xxxxxxxx> Subject: RE: How to fix our problems Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2004 17:48:42 -0800
Sure, I see where you're coming from. Yes I've seen a lot Byron's in-game coaching, but am not conviced he's poor at his job. His style is just like Larry (coach of the year) Bird. They both relied on good assistants, and weren't constantly overcoaching like Pitino. Maybe Byron is also like Larry in believing in preparing guys well with practice/gameplan before the game, then trusting them.
He should get to share some of the credit(along with the assistants, and mostly the players), of the Nets yearly success. This year's early struggles, then success with Frank, could have been personal friction with Scott and Kidd, instead of bad coaching. That's what Thorn implied. Riley, Brown, VanGundy, and other coaches have publicly endorsed Scott. Former teammates say he's smart and they knew he'd become a coach. He and Paul are Inglewood boys.
My main point was I see his Kings/Nets background, and can't think of anyone available who has more practical experience with Danny's vision.
-----Original Message----- From: owner-celtics@xxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-celtics@xxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Kim Malo
Hmmm, I must seem like I'm just on the hunt for things to disagess with
lately, but still... Roy - have you ever watched Byron coach, like even in a game? His assistants ran *everything* from what I saw and as a lot of media reports stated. With the evidence this year, between what happened
when he lost Jordan and when Frank took over, backing that idea. So I wouldn't hire him, if not for the controversy based (Lakerdom and his comments about Boston) reasons you probably expected.
Kim