[ClutchFans] Interview with future Rocket GM Daryl Morey

The other way to look at it is that if you draft for a specific need, you may end up reaching on a draft pick and pass on someone that could have been a more solid prospect. Honestly we have so many holes and such paper-thin depth that I'd be happy with drafting the best player avaliable that isn't a center. Every other position can be mixed and matched with the guys that we already have.

If the bpa is a PG then so be it. But obviously if a PG and SG are really close on the Rockets board, you'd go with the SG to fill the need and get practically the best guy.

 

Our team has so many needs, needs at EVERY single position, I can't fathom them doing anything BUT drafting the best available player. The only one arguable for which there is no need is Center, but even there a back-up for Yao is a need (however given the fact that good C's are so scarce and are overvalued in NBA drafting gnerally, it's unlikely one would even fit that scneario)

BTW, I think as a general rule you'll find that most successful teams in most sports favor that approach. When you see a player, you grab him, and worry about the rest later.

 

what do you mean? the texans draft for need.



I was telling a friend while watching the superbowl, the steelers just draft good players and find spots for them.

 

Talent can be easily exchanged for fitness, but fitness is hard to be exchanged for talent. Talent is like cash with good fluidity.

If the best talent doesn't fit, he's an asset that can be changed for a lesser talented, but still solid players who fits the team, and if we are lucky, we can get a more talented player that also fits in. Talent is like a safe that offers security.

Always draft for talent unless there's really no minutes for them, not the case with the Rockets.

 

wooo...outstanding work Clutch.

gettting quotes from owners and sources who dont want to be identified??

thats for sure bigtime journalism stuff right there.

 

In a strong draft, you would be right. It would hurt to realize a year later that we missed a star. But this year is so weak that a star-caliber player is unlikely to be lurking past our drafting position. And if he did exist, we would still be unlikely to find that needle in the haystack.

Frankly, we are probably picking a scrub, just like almost every other team this year. It doesn't matter much whether somebody else's scrub is slightly better than our own benchwarmer. In this situation, fit and chemistry are much more important than a minor increment in talent.

 

YEah, I actually meant to say great scoop to Clutch as well and I was happy to see it this AM. That's why I got severely bummed when the very first post in the thread says "Fire Morey!!!" and was based on a bunch of pre-fab, processed bologna rather than anything legit.

 

Thanks, Clutch. As always, you rock.

 

If an outstanding player were available at our drafting position, then sure, we should grab him. As you said, we could always trade him later for the players we actually needed.

But what if all the better draftable players are probably NBA scrubs? They could be traded too, but not for much. So we might as well select for need.

 

If your draft board is set so that everybody available when you pick is an NBA scrub who you don't think could be a player, the the solution is simple: you trade that pick and find the greater fool who thinks otherwise, rather than settling for a "need" scrub, who by definition - ain't what you need.

 

Not necessarily. A scrub could be exactly what you need -- as a scrub. (As I write this, the scrub Desagana Diop is doing a pretty good job defending TD.) So it can be worthwhile to select for need, especially in this year's weak draft.

 

Well if he fills a need then he's not a scrub, is he? Honestly, if you've got no confidence in the players you're drafting - don't draft them.

As for Diop- Cleveland needed a center back in 2001 cause Ilgauskas had missed a ton of time the previous few years (as did every team in the perennial great big-man search). Not considering they eventually sucked there way into getting LeBron, I think that's one they wish they'd had back.

 

Wow, I just got back from work and guess what I found! After getting a reply that I thought was from a 7 years old, you are showing some sign of adulthood and maturity.

Good, it's about time.

I haven't read Justice's article on this guy. I drew my conclusion on Clutch's interview. So what? Whose Justice anyway? Just because he has those opinions, does it make them wrong? If everyone should use your way to measure opinions, maybe I should start calling everyone who agrees with you an idiot.

Highly superficial? What do you want? You want get philosophical? Statistical? You want data and charts? That's not what I do. That's Morey's job.

Yes, I think highly of Ainge's talent evaluation ability based on his draft history. It's not what he drafts but where he drafts. He never got really high picks, yet he usually gets good/serviceable players from where he drafts.
Tony Allen, Ryan Gomes, Gerald Green, Al Jefferson, Delonte West, Marcus Banks... These players are all pretty good for where they are drafted. Al Jefferson and Gerald Green have good potentials. Again, NBA draftees, especially lower ones, usually don't pan out, and very few people can get value out of almost every pick. Ainge did. To me, that's a sign of a great talent evaluater.

However, I do question his GM ability. His trades are usually controversial, and his team hasn't won alot.

I don't remember Ainge's Yao thoughts, but I would not use one incidence to judge a person even he did say it. Many people questioned Yao, even myself. I am a huge fan of his, but I didn't know if he was going to succeed like he has. So, everyone questioned him should be considered idiots?

Who is "holding 'drafting good young players' against (Morey)?" You didn't understand what I was saying. First of all, as you said, Morey's role in personnel movement is somewhat limited. So, what has he proven? What signs that are pointing to him being a good GM? Secondly, if he was involved in anything, it would have been trades and FA acquisitions. These guys they brought in have some statistical backings, right? They are all veterans, and Morey's data should prove they are worth bringing in to the Celtics, right? Guess what? My worst fear would be for the Rockets to start bring in under-achievers like Scalabrine, Lafrentz, Szczerbiak, Walker, Olowokandi, Davis and Baker. Yeah, they might have had some stats, but these guys also had lethal contracts, horrible health issues, atrocious work ethic, egregious attitude, or simply no skills.

So, I agree with you that Morey had nothing to do with Celtics' drafts and alot to do with their FA signing and player trades, but Morey's "money ball" tricks have proven to be nothing but failures that have long term effects on a franchise's cap health. That's why I said good GMs should be people person, not stats geeks. When was the last time you saw Colangelo, Dumars and West putting on a pair of glasses and reading stats sheet to justify a certain player acquisition.

"We brought Diaw in because he had spectacular PER in Atlanta", did Colangelo say that?

"Rip certainly eats Stackhouse up in effeciency ratings", did Dumars say that?

"Kobe has proven to be more well-rounded than Vlade according to my magic formula", did West say that?

OK, in the past few years, the Sonics had one, 1, not 2, one, decent season, in which they weren't a real contender anyway. You want to talk about stats, right? Statistically speaking, the Sonics have sucked. How's "money ball" working for you there? If you want to talk about the Oakland As, fine, I give that too you. They spent few money and achieve much. But that's in the MLB! And the Sonics? What a shining emblem of "money ball" in the NBA!

I have nothing against PER or whatever stats people use. But if the only track record that the future GM of my beloved team is the ability to use stats to achieve essentially nothing, does that give me confidence? Does that give you confidence? Does that give anyone confidence?

This isn't IBM, but just like IBM, the Rockets is a human organization. Leadership matters in any kinds of human organizations, let along a basketball team, which is composed of nothing but man-power. I need a leader who can evaluate talent, negotiate deals, have visions, inspire confidence, make great hiring, manage egos, support coaches/players, connect with the fans. Otherwise, why would you spend time choosing a CEO or a GM if the right lottery is all that matters? Can Morey do any of these? Who is this Morey guy anyway? What has he done? Stats? Data? Technology? PER? MIT? Hey, let's hire Weisbrod. He graduated from Harvard. Isn't that sweet?

 

I'm apparently where you are now. I don't like the hire because I don't want a GM who is essentially getting scouting "filtering up" without the credentials to disagree. I have nothing against Morey, but I am far more suspicious of Alexander's motives than I've ever been.

 

Comparison to Weisbrod = your argument has disintegrated into white dog poo

The fact that you keep harping on the Sonics shows how superficial you're being. Go back and read the sonics article about Moneyball in seattle. You'll find a lot of the same platitudes from President Wally Walker and GM Rick Sund, about stats not meaning everything, etc, that you mouth here.

That's not the "moneyball" approach. That's the DeAleck approach:

So I really don't know how that helps your cause to take a dump on a team that follows your suggestions to the letter and charaacterize them as failures.

I do know that the 31 non-moneyball teams (of course this is a fallacy since most teams do use adjusted stats to some extend) don't win the title 99% of the time, so I guess that means their approach is dogsh-t too, just like the "moneyball" approach (which in reality is the DeAleck approach)

Edit: PS, the fact that you're still trying to pin Scalabrine on Morey (you have now magically retro-invented the division of labor of Morey= FA's while Ainge = drafting - I could write a whole post on this but won't bother) indicates that 1. you don't know what you're talking about, because 2. you haven't read the thread.

Edit 2: yeah, NBA players really look to their GMs to provide confidence and be leaders, LOL. What league have you been watching?

 

Haha, you sound tired in your post, and so am I. You presented your argument and I did mine. You do come across as an informed poster. We can agree to disagree, but hey, thanks for the fun and information.

Two things I will admit:
1. I don't know the Celtics situation as I do the Rockets.
2. I don't know the Sonics situation as I do the Rockets.

But I know them well enough to make an argument, and I hope you can see why I question the Morey hiring. To sum it up, he hasn't proven anything. I am very anxious if the future of this franchise is in the hand of a rookie GM. The Isaiahs, Weisbrods, Vandeweghes and kupchaks make me very nervous these days. But I surely hope Morey succeeds here, since I am a Rockets fan and I want to see my team do well.

I no longer feel the need to get back at you to prolong this debate. I don't have the stamina and interest to keep writing long arguments, and I suspect neither do you.

 

I dont get the last question. So he devised a way for us to get a shot at the top pick or was he joking

 

Hes an attorney with almost 13,000 posts. Come on now ...........

 

Absolutely great interview, Clutch.

There is no way you can tell me you do not have journalism in your background. The structure and texture (as well as flow) of your questions is at least 5-star stuff (okay maybe I am a little bit biased).

Kudos to Clutch. Kudos to Morey for being accessible.

-------

I have good feeling about this hiring. I believe Morey will be the Yang to the coaches ying when it comes to player assessment and evaluation - since almost every coach now has big inputs in players acquisation, it is only fair to balance it out with an out-of-the-box GM.

Also Morey will gain experience along the way. He understands the limitations of numbers but yet knows that objective evaluations if well done can be an edge for us.

Looking forward to many great years under his GM-ship.

P.S. Is it just me or is Morey a 32 year old going on 43? He does not look like a 32.