For starters, the question was: is there any other GM that you would take over Morey if the money spent was equal? My answer was essentially: I am happy with Morey but I would be a fool to not acknowledge that Buford is the best in the business. Hopefully, that changes and Morey eventually gets on his level but you are in absolute denial if you think Morey is better right now. You can't argue with four championships. Recently? Uh, you can start with snagging Richard Jefferson for the NBA equivalent of the pupu platter. With age and injuries seemingly catching up to that decorated Spurs core, they badly needed another weapon to safeguard themselves from allowing another injury to hinder them. I mean, honestly...do you really think the Dallas fricken Mavericks beat the Spurs in a playoff series under any other circumstances? He absolutely stole Jefferson and consequently made a bold statement that the Spurs are nowhere near close to rebuilding/retooling. They needed a move to ensure that they remained serious and he delivered. Signing McDyess, Ratliff and drafting Blair are all moves that will pay huge dividends as the season progresses. Blair is going to the *the* steal of this draft. Plus, let's not forget how he signed and essentially discovered Roger Mason last year. Before last year's trade deadline he nearly flipped Mason plus a couple other worthless parts for Vince Carter. These were serious talks that ultimately never materialized, but the fact remains that Buford's eye for talent and his ability to build up and "sell" his assets is really quite remarkable.
If Morey gets to the level where he's giving up Scola for Spanoulis then count me out. Buford (as a scout, not as a GM) caught lightning in a bottle by grabbing Ginobili and Parker back when scouting foreign players was a bit more dicey... Since then his advantages have dried up a bit, and he's had a few misses.
True - But Dennis was ready when Les brought Daryl in. Daryl has been great IMO, but Dennis paid his dues and was CD's successor if Les stayed in house and promoted from within. With Daryl and his team producing the data and Dennis calling the plays, they would have been a killer front office combo. And all the while Daryl could have been groomed to be the next GM to get promoted from within.
Gregg Popovich was the GM when the Spurs drafted Duncan, Ginobili, and Parker - so you can't really give 'GM Buford' credit for those (or the 4 championships). You can give him credit for acquiring Gree-Mac, though. Edit: Internet's really slow right now, SamFisher has this covered.
Actually I can. I can argue that if you gave Morey Duncan, Ginobili, and Parker, he can surround them with YOUNG talent that can actually step up in case one of them becomes injured. Rather than having the team look like crap when they can't just rely on the big 3. First of all, who is the person responsible for the Spurs having nothing but old retreads to begin with? As for the Jefferson trade, it's not a steal. At least no more than say... Artest for nothing? It's what happens when you have an overpaid player on team losing money, and will dump such player at any price. If you look at what Orlando gave up for VC, it's not exactly any more than what Spurs offered. Btw, Buford's 1st round draft history since Parker. George Hill, Tiago Splitter(stayed in Europe), Ian Mahinmik, Beno Udrich, John Salmons(traded away), Barbosa(traded away). His best 2nd round pick was Scola(traded away). Seriously, not exactly overwhelming. Especially since his best drafted players were all traded away.
Whoa, come on bro. The next time you're in the Toyota Center, you look up, see those beautiful championship banners, and if you're like me, you might get a little choked up and shed a single tear for the memories, then you tell me the guy who put those two teams together, the guy who bled red and the only guy to bring the rings to Houston isn't the best gm this great city has ever seen. Don't get me wrong, I'm a Moery guy too, but until he brings the brass back to Houston it's a bit of a stretch to compare him to the great CD.
You can argue that but you're not answering the OP's question. I think Morey would jump for joy at the prospect of managing a team with the roster that the Spurs currently have. Instead of a roster full of stars that get hurt EVERY year, he only has to deal with it once in a while (like last year). And the Spurs didn't look like "crap" last year playing without Manu. They still made the playoffs and played the Mavs fairly well despite losing 4-1. Not bad considering how everybody looked sluggish and overwhelmed in their predictable "Give the ball to Tony Parker and get the hell out of the way" offense. They sorely lacked a dynamic wing presence so adding a healthy Manu is an instant upgrade. As is adding Richard Jefferson, who when everybody is healthy, makes the Spurs nearly impossible defend with the "Big 4" all out there at the same time. I love how Buford is surrounding Duncan with superstar level slashers and rugged interior defenders. I still maintain that NOBODY is going to want any part of this team next April. Pssh, the Celtics won a championship and remain a legit contender the same way. Just because your key players are "old" does NOT mean they should be dismissed. And yes, the Jefferson trade absolutely was a steal. The Spurs gave up three declining players that were barely in their rotation for a dynamic star like Jefferson. The opportunity cost in such a deal made the idea an absolute no-brainer from San Antonio's point of view. This is getting ridiculous. NBA Draft 101: draft order is determined by reversing each team's WL record. Guess how many losing teams the Spurs have had under Buford's watch? You guessed it: ZERO. So continuing with NBA Draft 101, now that we've established that the Spurs have never recorded a losing season under Buford and that the Spurs always had low first-round picks -- what exactly are the odds that those low first-round picks are going to pan out into superstars? Not very high, wouldn't you say? The bottom first round, second round and beyond is literally a crapshoot with no guarantees. George Hill is good and supposedly Splittler is the real deal and coming over next year. Those are two assets Buford has in his back pocket with plenty of upside. He doesn't even need them yet but they're still decent options to have on your backburner. This reminds me of the Morey "grade" thread where people were criticizing him for drafting Joey Dorsey. It's like, are really holding a GM to THAT high of a standard that we're criticizing him for his swing-and-miss on a fricken second rounder? That's exactly what this is like. Utter insanity to expect that since he's the best GM that every single move that he makes is ingenious. You can still be the best and still make a mistake here & there. What sets Buford apart from every other GM is blatantly obvious, though. ...and the Magic had to give up an impressive rookie and legit starter in this league. The deal the Spurs were reportedly offering for Vince Carter was something insane like Mason/Bowen/filler for VC. I remember being shocked that the Spurs would literally give up next to nothing in that scenario and supposedly it almost happened.
The Scola debacle was BAD on his part, no doubt. But I know your expertise on Euro's and players overseas is through the roof -- there was a major issue with Scola's buyout, was there not? The NBA mandated rule stats that a team can only pay $500K of a player's buyout -- wasn't SA hamstringed by that rule or some sort of technicality when they tried to originally sign Scola?
The rockets were as hamstrung as the spurs, IIRC, Scola basically funded it himself (less the 500) becuase he wanted to play in the NBA. Buford's mistake was that he thought longtime vaporware prospect Tiago Splitter would be in the fold, who promptly signed a deal with an even more unfavorable buyout clause.
Thanks, that sounds about right. Kind of makes you like Scola even more knowing what he did to get to the NBA. As for Splitter, I could have sworn he signed a two-year extension in 2008 meaning he's free to do whatever he wants in the Summer 2010.
Right, same as Scola - so in theory, the spurs could have had their cake and eaten it too (signed Scola from 08/09/10 and then let him walk, sign Splitter for 10/11 and beyond.) edit: should also add, this was an l-tax move by the spurs to get rid of jackie butler as well.
Why do people still make this giant sized error when referring to the back 2 back titles? Carroll Dawson was still an assistant coach when we won our back 2 back titles. Go look it up on Youtube, you'll see him clearly on the bench beside Rudy T during the playoffs on those 2 years.
GMs are over rated. You win with superstars and surround them with decent role players. Other than the pistons I can't think of a single team in the last 20 years who did not have a top 5 player.
Don't you think the GM/VP of Operations has the responsibility of acquiring those superstars and surrounding them with the right type of role players? BTW, to the RC Buford/Daryl Morey argument...I would take Morey over Buford. Who knows how much say so Buford has anyways, I think Pops and him have equal say so on personnel decisions. Just like Rudy T and CD when CD became GM. Buford and Pops main objective is to stick interchangeable parts around the Big 3. They've done a good job of it but it's pretty nice to have those Big 3 to build around, until recently their Big 3 have been relatively healthy and consistent. I heard on the radio their baseball equivalent is the Cards, which kinda makes sense. The Rockets are in a different M/O right now cause of our uncertainty over our franchise players. I'm sorta intrigued how all of this will shake out, cause Morey can't be faulted for sitting around and doing nothing.
The top 5 player is definitely necessary (except for very rare occasions) - that's fairly agreed upon. As far as your primary claim, I used to feel the same way, but I have completely changed my stance. So much of a player's fate is determined by factors outside of his control. It practically determines legacy. I look at Hakeem's career as the perfect example. He's the "lost" superstar of his generation because his meager overall success doesn't reflect his actual greatness. And this is solely because of who he had around him. It's infuriating to consider that the best players he had around him in his entire career were a 32 year old Clyde Drexler and a 3rd year Ralph Sampson - he at least reached the Finals both times. Then consider the casts Tim Duncan and Shaq, players held in much higher esteem historically, were blessed with throughout the entire durations of their careers. General management absolutely plays a critical role in success. To be a champion requires that perfect combination of greatness, shrewd management, and a bit of luck. Each factor is dependent upon the others in determining the outcome.
So.. are you saying he didn't vitally contribute to the development of those teams? During his assistant coaching tenure he worked under Del Harris, Bill Fitch, and Don Chaney all as a rocket, he worked for the Rockets for almost 30 years, and before he was struck by lighting in 1989, which severely affected his eyesight and also was degenerative, he would have been next in line to replace Chaney, which rudy eventually did in 92'. Though technically you're right he didn't take over as GM until 96', he was a vital component to the championship rosters and to the rosters almost 15 years before and after that, why do think he outlasted so many good coaches on the side lines, CD is a true Houston Rocket, if you don't believe me check his stats.
Trust me, I'm as much a Rockets homer as you and almost got teary eyed when reading your posts. But the fact remains that CD wasn't GM when we won our back to back titles. I'll give credit and note that I did read somewhere that CD and Rudy T were responsible of the Drexler deal (not Bob Weinhauer like a bunch of people say). But Sam Cassell and Robert Horry were Rudy T picks to my recollection. And Steve Patterson who was the GM back before the back to back titles, was responsible for acquiring alot of those players on those teams. So tell me if we should congratulate CD on the Mo Taylor contract, the Cato contract, the Moochie contract, the Eddie Griffin fiasco...
This is like a continuation of the 3 yr later thread. Buford is probably the best gm in the game. If you want to connect him with pop, go ahead, but the titles speak for themselves. If all that mattered were titles, then we could eliminate a lot, but if you look at aquiring highend talent through draft or trade, you have to look at rebuild jobs done by oconnor in utah,pritchard in portland,and smith in orlando.Being top 10 is a good place out of 30.
Hakeem just played in a very competitive era. There were a lot of good teams so two championships is a lot. Hakeem did have a lot of great talent around him. The sonics just had Hakeem's number. If the sonics hadn't lost to the nuggets in 94 do the rockets win the championship? I think if you are a shaq, duncan, kobe, lebron, etc. eventually the talent will come around you. Heck even KG who I don't consider great got a championship.
