Jim Buss Q&A: Talking Lakers from family to analytics

Sam Amick | USA TODAY Sports

Show Caption Hide Caption NBA Fast Break: Buss knows this cures all USA TODAY Sports' Sam Amick discusses what it will take for Lakers to get on the right track.

The inherent nature of sitting down with a mystery man is that the questions are in great supply.

So when Lakers part owner and executive vice president of basketball operations Jim Buss agreed to visit in downtown Waikiki earlier this month, at a Kobe steakhouse on the night that Kobe Bryant returned from injury for his preseason debut no less, it was fair to assume that the totality of the USA TODAY Sports interview would be tough to reflect in just one story. Thank goodness for Q&As.

While the much-maligned Buss (and others) covered a lot of ground in our main piece, there was more that was left on the cutting room floor. From his reflections on the vetoed Chris Paul trade in Dec. 2011 to the agreed-upon timeline of his own tenure (title contention by the 2017 summer or bust) to the intricacies of his working relationship with general manager Mitch Kupchak and more, Buss took a rare departure from his private ways and was open in ways rarely seen. The following portions of the interview were not part of the main story.

Q: I know you’re looking forward, but there was a what-if that I was hoping to ask you about. Does the Chris Paul trade still haunt you a bit?

A: “I think it would have speeded up the process. Let’s put it that way. I don’t think it is going to suppress us for many years because of a trade that didn’t happen. All it did was make us alter course and maybe prolong the rebuild a year or two. It’s hard to say exactly what would have happened. Obviously I don’t like to harp on it. It is what it is, but obviously we would have been a very good team.”

Q: Have you ever spoken to David Stern about that? (The NBA owned the New Orleans Hornets at the time and the former Commissioner made the controversial decision)

A: “Oh, I think there was enough publicity on it to where I didn’t have to say anything. I love David Stern, and we had a great relationship with him as Commissioner. I think probably maybe this year or next year I’ll probably sit down and have lunch with him, to see what the thought pattern was. (Laughs)

“You have to assume that, ‘What was the thought process behind that? Why would you nix a deal that turned out to be better than the deal (that they vetoed)?...That kind of handcuffed (New Orleans) for years. It didn’t make any sense, but I want to see what they were thinking.”

Q: Were you angry, disappointed? What was the emotion?

A: “Oh, it was disappointment. Not anger. My Dad (the late Lakers owner, Dr. Jerry Buss) has taught me that, ‘What good does it do to be angry?’ Right away, within probably an hour I’d say, we were trying to strategize what we’d do – maybe within 15 minutes. Once we found, we were trying to figure out if we could up the ante (on the trade market).

“There was a lot of things, but anger wasn’t one of them. Disappointment. OK, and you just get right back to work. You take the punches with the good and the bad. That was a hard punch, but we knew it was just going to have to alter the course. But we made some great moves after that, got right back to it – with (the July 2012 trade with the Phoenix Suns for) Steve Nash. Unfortunately, his back completely went out. There was nothing you could do. I love Steve Nash. I’d do that trade again. If you give me two good years (of Nash) at 80 percent? Forget it. With Dwight Howard on the pick and roll? Forget it. I mean Vegas isn’t dumb. They knew that we did it right, and that was after Chris Paul. So we were right back at it, and now it’s just taking us a couple of years. That’s what I mean, give us two or three more years and we’ll see that we got breaks. I think Russell is going to be that good.”

Q: Looking forward then, there’s so much talk about the timeline of your tenure. But beyond the question of that timeline itself, I’d always wondered if – when it comes to working with your sibling – are those tough conversations to have? (Jim’s sister, Jeanie, has the final say in the organization as Lakers president and governor)

A: “Tough conversations? (Jeanie) just listened (laughs). It wasn’t a conversation. It was like Jeanie, ‘You know what, this is my plan. This is what I’m going to do.’ I just put it out there. She didn’t put it out there (publicly). She didn’t put any demands on me.

“I think it has worked when I put myself on the line. I think people respected that. I think your Laker fans who are worried, I think they got a lot of relief from the fact that I said, ‘Here, don’t worry, this is what we’re going to do, and if I don’t do it, you’ve got somebody else, don’t worry about it.’ I can’t fire myself. I own the team. So really, nothing would change except for I wouldn’t have those (basketball decision-making duties). I would take myself out of the decision (making process). And Jeanie was like, ‘If that’s what you want to do, that’s fine.’”

Q: How often do you think about your Dad?

A: “Every day. Yeah. I talked to him every day, probably 10 times a day. We would talk basketball, we would talk horses, we would talk gambling – not gambling, but poker. Mainly (talking) basketball seven phone calls out of 10 (every day), and the other two were ‘Hey, did you see how that guy got beat in the World Series (of Poker)?’ He was a major poker player. He was very good, but he knew his limitations. He wasn’t young enough to compete in the big games. If he had done it when he was like 30, oh I guarantee he probably would have won the World Series.”

Q: With you and Mitch, I don’t have a great sense of the dynamic there. You seem like you always get along, but can you shed some light on that relationship.

A: “Oh, it’s fantastic. I’ve been working with him for probably close to 15 years, as he’s been GM. That right? And I worked with (former Lakers executive) Jerry (West) before that. Of course I was doing more scouting with Jerry and just learning the ropes. What to look for. He has taught me things that are still very, very important to this day, and very insightful. You constantly see that he was right. (West) is right a lot of times (laughs). You can hear very intelligent people talk about it, but I put my money on Jerry West when it comes to his knowledge of the game and what makes a pro.”

Q: So are you happy for him with the success of the Warriors, or tough because it’s a so-called enemy? (West is an advisor with Golden State now)

A: “I’m just happy. We’ve got his son (director of player personnel Ryan West). We’ve got his son, so we’re fine.”

Q: I’m going to switch gears on you. Analytics have fast become a major part of the league, and there are plenty of folks who wonder if the Lakers are where they need to be when it comes to advanced statistics. What’s your perspective on that front?

A: “Do you remember when – and you might not be old enough to remember – but when computers, basically your laptop, first basically came out, the concept was that computers were going to run the world and you’re going to be so much smarter than the next guy because you have a computer. But the truth of the matter is it’s what you put into the computer. The computer just does it faster, quicker, and more accurate than you can because you have to do it by hand, but what you feed into it is the difference.

“Analytics, in basketball, when you hear that, it doesn’t mean (expletive). It doesn’t. If you tell a guy to break down basketball for you, if they don’t know basketball, they can’t break it down.”

Q: Well you guys have made some changes in that department, so how has it changed for you?

A: “We haven’t made changes. We’ve had these guys for years, and what we’re doing is trying to figure out through them what’s the best input to make an impact. I use the word ‘impact player’ all the time. ‘Impact values’ is what I have. I use my numbers to see and judge players. I use Mitch (to see) ‘Does he fit in the basketball sense?’ because you can’t just fit a number guy in there. If you have five number guys who can all perform and are all number players, they’re not going to win if they don’t get along, if they don’t fit, and that’s where you need a GM.”

Q: Without asking you to tip your hand too much, what do you mean when you say ‘my numbers’ – conceptually?

A: “I interpret other people’s numbers, take pieces from what this person’s number is – their actual mathematical basis for their number – and if I like certain parts of it, I’ll extract those factors from different people, analyze what I think and my knowledge of the game is what I feel is an impact (player).

“We’ve done our own studies. My Dad and I used to do this 10 years ago. What is the biggest impact? If you outrebound your opponent, you win more games than you don’t. Of course you do. But do you win more than (when you consider) another statistic? And you know what the statistic is. It’s shooting percentage, flat-out. If you shoot 48 (percent), and they shoot 46, you’re going to win nine out of 10 times. It’s very unusual (to not win). Now with the three-pointer, that changes things up, but you can break that down mathematically what a three-pointer is worth. If you shoot 42 (percent) at three (point range), 48 at two (point range), and the other team shoots only twos at 45, you’re going to win, because the 42 really translates to – you know what I mean? So my numbers take it – it’s a combination, a hodgepodge of different formulas. I’ve been doing for 10, 12 years.”

Q: Is this influenced by your Dad at all?

A: “My Dad didn’t have the numbers. He would use my numbers. He basically did the same thing. He’d listen to how I came up with the numbers, and then pick his parts that he liked out of the numbers, and then say, ‘Can you readjust them using ‘A,’ ‘C,’ and ‘M,’? And then he would say, ‘That’s what I think is important to basketball.’ And you’d say, ‘Ok,’ and it would come out and we would just spit it out.”

Q: That’s a smaller part of the operation, but you’ve mentioned the bigger picture of the league having changed (by way of the NBA’s current collective bargaining agreement that was put into place in 2011) a few times.

A: “(It has changed) for the better. I’m not complaining about that, by the way (laughs). Parity is great, but you just have to adjust. When you’re on a path like this, and then they change the rules, well if your path has now been altered, now you have to figure out how to keep on that path, or you just got screwed and they completely shut down your path. Whatever it takes. It’s not a problem.”

“(Jerry Buss) taught me for all these years, we’re always looking three to five years ahead. Right now, I’m not looking at this season…I don’t care about making the playoffs and getting eliminated in the playoffs. What I care about is getting the core players, because we want to get to the top, and the only way we can get to the top is to have the core players, get the free agents, have flexibility in our (salary) cap, and we’ll be there within three years. Not a problem. Boom.”

Q: With Mitch, though, do you like the way you two fit? In terms of duties and the way you complement each other, how is it?

A: “Well, I think when you go over the tape you’ll hear me talk about my numbers, my impact values, and how much I put into those numbers, how much time and effort. I work every night on them. I truly work almost every night on them, only just to tweak it, to perfect it. What’s entertainment for me is to say, ‘What (impact value) number did I have on this player who turned out to be a hell of a player? What did I miss?’ Well, you know what, ‘My numbers had him right up there.’ So I get pumped up. That’s entertainment to me.”

Q: How do you store this info?

A: “It’s on the computer. But Mitch is fantastic at piecing together a team based on what makes a great team, ok? So if he says, ‘You know what, we’re hurting a little bit at small forward, what do you think of this guy, or what do you think of this guy?’…Those aren’t guys that he picked. Those are guys that are available. And I’ll come back, and I’ll say, ‘Well Mitch, this guy fits my numbers. This guy is close, so which way would you go?’ And then he’ll ask me.

“When we first started together, he would say, ‘Well, this is the guy I want,’ and I’d say, ‘Well it’s close enough, so it doesn’t matter. Do what you want.’ But now, it has gotten to the point where he’s believing in the analytics, and he’ll say, ‘Who’s the better impact player?’ Well this is the better impact player, as opposed to this guy, but it’s close. He’ll say, ‘You know what, truthfully, they’re about 50-50 in my book,’ and then he’ll start leaning toward this (guy).

“That’s the only thing that has changed in the last eight years, is that he’s more open to that. But that’s how we work. How we work is, he’ll say who’s available. Here’s what we need. Here’s what we have to do, and I’ll say, ‘Ok, here’s the player.’ Now when it comes to player 12, 13, 14, 15 (on the roster), then I get involved to the point where I’ll say, ‘You know what, this guy on my numbers is a guy who has potential to be an impact player.’ And he’ll say, ‘Well, he’s not even drafted.’ Exactly (laughs). We’ll take him, or we’ll get him, or we’ll sign him to a guaranteed contract for one year. Let’s test him out. And we’ve done extremely well with that.”

Q: So bottom line, you feel good about the fit with Mitch?

A: “One hundred percent – not even 95. One hundred percent. I can’t do it without him, and he couldn’t do it without me.”