I think the "if the money they could spend is equal" part from the OP was meant to specifically preclude Pritchard. I still can't give the title to Buford when the majority of the work was done by Pop, but O'connor and Smith are pretty good candidates.
I'm probably one of the biggest DM fans around, but I think that calling him better than Buford at this point in time is premature. Its a lot like saying Durant is better than Kobe...even if we all know Durant is gonna be the next big thing in the league and would probably surpass Bryant based on his potential and lack of issues. For all the flack Buford got for sticking with old stiffs, the Spurs right now are in amazing shape: *They still have the real Big three (sorry Celts one ring ain't gonna cut it esp. when all your big two can do is reach 2nd round) *Jefferson essentially makes it a big four *Parker is fairly young, and Blair, Mahinmi and Splitter (should he decide to come over here) have intriguing potential. George Hill and Roger Mason are really good acquisitions Like everyone else who is considered the best (Jordan, PJ/Pops), Buford's success isn't his own, he obviously had a lot of help and support along the way. amd he has his own share of misses. But the fact remains Buford is the one in charge and he calls the shots in the Spurs, so I think he should get credit for the Spurs' amazing run.
Now this post is just ridiculous. Dream and KG are poster boys for unrealized potential, and you're still saying that eventually the talent will come to you if you're good enough? Your supporting cast determines much of your legacy unless you are really head and shoulders above your peers. Wilt Chamberlain is generally considered the superior talent to Russell yet if you look at their matchups he got owned 10 consecutive times. What do you think would happen if the Rockets had picked Jordan and the Blazers got Hakeem and paired him with Clyde much sooner? Do you think the "talent" would still somehow gravitate towards Jordan and the Bulls fans would wake up one day and find that PJ, Rodman and Pippen are now working for the Rockets?
If I could take any GM in any sport...I'd probably get Bill Belicheck and whoever's really calling the shots for the Pats (the Krafts?). And then maybe I'd hire the guys who draft defense for the Baltimore Ravens (Ozzie Newsome?) to be my scouting directors. Morey's great at finding diamonds in the rough, but there remains something to be said for management of superstars and the ability to sustain a dynasty. Because of that there are probably quite a few GM's that would have to get the nod over him. Were Morey given the chance he might succeed at that kind of management, but since he doesn't have that experience yet you have to put those GMs ahead of him. That includes Epstein in Boston, the Rooneys in Pittsburgh, Stoneman with the Angels, Schuerholz back when he was leading Atlanta, and yes even Buford in San Antonio.
I wouldn't put KG and dream in the same sentence. That 93 rockets team won 55 games and were the no. 2 seed. You don't think that was a pretty good team. The sonics just had our number. Hakeem had talent around him. Don't forgot early dream while a beast was not the older wiser dream. He might put up 40, but he just didn't trust his teammates.
That great talent being? He played with role players his entire career. Compare that to the other two great big men of his era in Shaq, who, except for Penny Hardaway's rookie season, played next to a potential MVP candidate every year of his career, and Tim Duncan who was drafted onto a ready-made title contender that was stocked with sustainable talent in the subsequent years. Hakeem never played with anyone even half as good as Scottie Pippen. Hell, he didn't even have the benefit of John Stockton or Shawn Kemp. I don't know how you can posit the claim that Hakeem had great talent around him. The very prime of his career was wasted away on pitiful teams. You don't think the fact that he had no other significant talent beside him had something to do with that? They didn't have his number - he still put up monster stats against them. The one time he faced them playing next to an actual All-Star (Clyde was a shell of himself in '96), Barkley helped him dispose of them fairly easily. You don't think if he had a Kobe Bryant or a Tony Parker next to him, the outcomes in '93 and '96 might have been different? Similarly, if Shaq hadn't had Kobe, you don't think someone right now would have been saying "well, the Spurs just always had Shaq's number."? I'm not sure what you mean here. You just named as your examples 3 guys who were blessed with surrounding talent their entire careers, one guy who has never had that benefit, and another who, like Hakeem, didn't get it until the end of his physical prime. If anything, your evidence proves my point. KG only has one title which he lucked into by having the good fortune of Kevin McHale and Danny Ainge agreeing to make a deal. Do you think Tim Duncan would have 4 rings right now if he had been drafted by the Timberwolves instead of the Spurs? I don't.
A team's overall record isn't proof of supporting talent. That could just be indicative of a great player with a sufficient cast around him playing their roles ala Cleveland this past year. You don't win big in the playoffs with just that. As was said earlier, would you trust some of those clowns he played with?
what a song of praise about DM~~~ for the past season, he really did very well. but in this off season it's hard to find some compliment. All in all, this off season = extremely dull, no surprising, no big trade, no hope, no expectation, stupid rumors all around, Morey's compliments everwhere.
