Just read Clutch's article on the Adelman situation. A lot is made about the disconnect between Adelman and Morey on trades and players that the GM should be logging time. So the question i have is who is running the show? Does the GM build a team and dictates who should be playing, or does the coach say I need this go out and get it oh and by the way don't touch this. When Rudy and carrol dawson were in charge it seemed like rudy dictated to carrol what he wanted. carrol was merely a talent evaluator for the guy who was building the team. obviously some of rudy's personnel decisions cost him his job eventually. has that caused les to change his mind on how this team is run. has he ganded the rains to morey to be in charge on how this team is built only to have the coach drive the engine. who is running the team, and is the best structure? it seems to me this is a new wave in the nba and maybe an old school coach like adelman no longer fits the mold.
Phil Jackson for Lakers runs team and his GM gets him Gasol and drafts Bynum. Very simple. GM hires Celtics coach and then Coach coaches up Garnett and Allen who the GM got for him. Coach goes along with GMs moves as long as they are moving forward to build a winning team. If they alread have a winning contender or Championship team? Coach can veto any trade talk of players he feel are vital parts to their core. Coach does not interfere with rebuilding teams process ifthey are not close to contending. Thus Adelman is not out coach.
It depends on the goal of the team. Teams that are winning are more about basketball, coaching and stability. Teams that are waiting for the luck are more about draft, GM, and changing. Rockets are a GM running team which is a correct strategy for a rebuilding team.
The General Manager gives the team direction and a desired destination; the coach gets the team there.
Most Coaches and many GM's are former players, and I would think that would be helpful in evaluating talent. There are plenty of examples of former players who have been a poor coach or GM, but I think overall it is helpful to have experience as a player. I think Rudy and CD probably worked very closely together when it came to personnel decisions, so while their decisions weren't always correct, they were at least on the same page and worked well together. I'm starting to wonder if Morey is the right guy to be making the Personnel decisions. I wonder how much discussion went on between Morey and Adelman before we traded for T-Will, and then for Thabeet. Statistics can be useful, but is Morey depending too much on stats? Would we be better served by a GM who has experience as an NBA player or coach? I'm willing to give Morey a chance, but people around here are not going to be very patient.
To thetatomatis and Don FakeFan Good luck hiring a great coach by explaining your job description to them. You pretty much just told us that Morey will have no shot at getting a top coach, since we have no all-stars and we want to lose...which is why many of us worry about this. The whole idea that you have to fire a great coach when you are not contending is very questionable. Adelman proved he wanted more change faster than Les. Les insisted on hanging onto Yao and TMac too long...for the sake of winning now. Adelman is taking the blame. This is the kind of thing that makes owners very stupid in sports versus running their own businesses.
GMs get the players, coaches coach the players. Ideally you would want them to collaborate, with the GM getting the players the coach wants, and the coach playing the players the GM gets. When there is a disconnect, everyone loses.
Appears to be true everywhere except in Houston where when there is a disconnect it is the COACH who loses his job.
I think this is right. On a contending team, the coach naturally has more power because the owner knows they're on the cusp and he needs to let the coach to drive the bus. When your horizon is a couple of seasons away, the GM naturally has more power. Ideally, they'd be on the same page anyway. (a counter-example to the Rockets dynamic -- Boston trading away Perkins to protect the team long-term even though they are contending this season. Why did the owner let that one happen?)
Ideally, neither. A team needs a GM and a coach who are on the same page and have the same philosophies about where the team needs to go. They should be able to sit down and agree on the types of players they need to acquire and on which players don't fit and should be moved. They also need to have a mutual trust. If the GM brings a guy in, the coach needs to trust that the player can help the team and give him a chance, and if the coach believes a guy doesn't fit with the team, the GM needs to trust his judgement and move forward accordingly. If there's a power struggle between the coach and the GM for who "runs" the team, then no one is really running it. The coach is stuck playing players he doesn't like and the GM is stuck paying money/giving up assets for guys who get no run. It's inefficient and will lead to disaster. But if the two run the team as a team, they should be able to work together to better the team.
Although I think Perk makes the Celtics much more likely to be contenders I think it was a response to Wade, Lebron, Melo all being over there. I don't think that the Celts were too worried about the Magic as they were the Heat so they may have felt Perk for Green (to defend) would make sense now and in the future. I am not saying I agree or disagree with the move.
So the GM loses his job everywhere else? The entire direction of the team is built on Morey and Les' philosophy. Morey comes up with the plan and alternatives, Les oks them and signs on the dotted line. Adelman was only here to coach. Morey tried to collaborate by drafting him some of his players and even bringing in some old dogs like Miller. But if there is a disconnect Adelman is the first to go no questions asked. He's just the coach.
The coach should have more power on personnel decisions. He needs players that fit his system and fit his coaching personality. Also most coaches have NBA experience so they have an understanding of everything. I'm not a big fan of Morey because I just view him as sort of a stat nerd, much like those of us who are on the internets all day talking about basketball. Does this guy really know all that much about whats really happening on the basketball court. Has he ever played? Has he ever coached?
Morey and Adelman were doing a good job working in conjunction, but I think since the writing was on the wall about Adelman’s departure, Morey started doing stuff on his own. Which is fine, but I’m starting to question his judgment a little when 2 of the 3 trades this season seem pretty terrible. We gave up a first round pick for a headcase like T-Will and took on $5 million for a bleak looking project. Not to mention we helped the Grizzlies keep a young center that would have been perfect for us to nab. People are criticizing Adelman a lot for being old and too traditional, but I like having guys with different mindsets collaborating on what’s best for the team. I’m not so sure about bringing in a young coach who probably won’t question Morey very much when Morey doesn’t have a basketball background himself. Hopefully we’ll get a guy who’s more receptive to analytics, but still has good traditional basketball instincts and the backbone to back them up.
Ideally, I think the coach should have some input on personnel decisions, but not be a deciding factor. If a GM is able to bring in good talent, the coach should be flexible enough to incorporate that talent into the lineup efficiently (assuming the talent is better than what you already have). The GM should focus on getting the most value out of trades and contract negotiations, but doing so by identifying players with the help of the coaches. I DON'T think it should be the whole 'the GM brings in whatever players he wants and the coach finds a way to work them in.' But, if a GM finds a player that is clearly an upgrade and will likely help the team, the coach should be in favor of that even if he loses one of "his guys" in the process. A good example is the Drexler/Thorpe trade. A stubborn coach with say-so might have vetoed that since Thorpe was such a huge part of the team. But Drexler was clearly more talented.
I agree. I hate the Twill trade with a passion. I hated right when we did it for our first round we gave up for him that was waisted. I also hate it now. I can see why Adelman would not go along with that move. The Battier trade and Brooks trades were not great but needed. He didnt get enough for Brooks when he could have. He got nothing for Battier except Budinger freed up in the starting rotation. He needs to improve the timing of his moves to get more or improve what he gets back.
