Bob Whitsett vs. Kevin Pritchard

We'll probably have to wait for a few years. Both assembled young teams out of no where using different methods.

KP got character.

Whitsett got bad boys.


So far, KP's team has been bounced in the first round. Now struggling to make the playoffs.

Whitsett's team has made the Western Conference Finals and has had a championship window for a few years and put together a crazy good roster of players that fizzled out.

The difference is probably the speed at which the teams were assembled....Whitsett moved quickly and swiftly while KP "let it bake" philosophy.


What do you think the outcomes will be when we're comparing the teams in the future?

 

The Whitsitt teams that were title contenders weren't "young." Grant, Wallace and Stoudemire were all, by that point, prime veterans. Pippen, Sabonis and Smith were post-prime veterans. Really, only Bonzi Wells was young, among the real contributors. And he made the team even older when he dealt O'Neal and Grant for Davis and Kemp.

The main difference to me is that Pritchard built through the draft, while Whitsitt built through trades of veterans for veterans. So, Whitsitt's way was faster, but I think Pritchard's way will yield a longer benefit.

Remains to be seen, though. There's no point evaluating this at the beginning of what is meant to be the "yield" of Pritchard's work.

 

How many wins did the team Whitsitt inherited have vs KP?

How has the economy changed in the NBA and in Portland?

How many tradable assets did each team end up with?

How many championships have each won?

 

I don't think its pointless.

There are two distinct styles of assembling a team, we can't just ignore it. We have to see if the "let it bake" philosophy will really work or do you make big moves to get impact players (ala Scottie Pippen, Sheed, Steve Smith, etc).

 

I thought the JR Rider team was one of the youngest in the league at the time?

Then Whitsett mixed youth with veterans like Detlef and Scottie and Dale Davis......

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bob_Whitsitt

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kevin_Pritchard

Just a little refresher. To me, Whitsett's era began when he got Rider and Rasheed Wallace in 96. KP's era began when we got Roy and Aldridge in 06.

 

I think Whitsitt regrets not letting it bake on O'Neal. It's not an either/or, internal development and pulling in outside talent is important.

Pritchard did make a similar move to the Steve Smith acquisition in getting Andre Miller...a cagey, talented veteran who can serve a leadership/play-making role on the court. Acquiring Marcus Camby for Outlaw/Blake (two pieces deemed unlikely to be needed) was also a Whitsitt-like move.

So, it's really not a battle of two philosophies. It's who can mix them the best.

 

I didn't consider that team a real title contender and my impression is that few people did. It was seen as a promising team, but it was the big off-season of Pippen/Smith that really fueled title consideration.

 

At the time though, Dale Davis made sense.


I do think Pritchard is following a similar path in this regard.....seems to want to hold onto players longer though. more attached, while Whitsett is kind of a dick about trading players like chess pawns.

 

not a title contender, but kind of similar to last year's blazers (at least in the regular season) and this year's injury plagued blazers in which there is a lot of "heart".

 

I am not one of the Whitsitt-haters. I think he was an excellent GM, he built some impressive teams and the 1999-2000 team should have won the title...it wasn't his fault that the team went absurdly cold in that fourth quarter against LA.

I just don't think Whitsitt was clearly ahead of Pritchard at a similar point in their team-building. Whitsitt built an interesting team faster, but he started with a team that had some assets to deal. Pritchard started with one of the worst rosters in basketball.

I don't think Pritchard is too attached. He's dealt one of his prized draftees (Rodriguez) and three players he was supposedly very attached to (Jack, Blake and Outlaw). I think Pritchard only looks different from Whitsitt because he's trying to build the foundation first before looking for the imports. Whitsitt inherited an okay team and got that foundation in place much faster, so moved on to the imports (which he handled well, IMO, outside of dealing O'Neal).

 

Whitsitt operated in a different financial reality. He could spend without consequence. PA still opens the wallet, but he needs a lot more convincing than he used to. For example, Whitsitt would have taken RLEC and a couple of horrendous long-term crap deals to get the player he wanted. KP had to get value for RLEC or the best option was to just let it expire.

 

If KP can't get the Blazers to a Western Confrence title in the next few years and contenders for a stretch, my vote would go to Whitsett.

If KP can turn the Blazers into title contenders and a team that at least goes deep in the plyaoffs, than he would get my vote because he replicated what Whitsett did . . . only "the right way"

 

How many years do you give him with this core?

 

I can root for this team; these are Trail Blazers. The mercenaries Trader Bob got for this team made me root for laundry, not the players.

I may not smoke, but when it comes to hoops, I prefer homegrown.

 

But it was fun when that laundry was winning


Ptd was relevant in the NBA world . . .playoff streak, a team no one wanted to face in teh playoffs, Whitsett bringing in some big names across the league. It felt a little dirty in a way, king of like "fantasy" basketball.

 

The Yankees have won a lot of championships over the past 15 years or so by being the kings of "fantasy" baseball. Bringing in "big names" is a good thing, if they're the right "big names." If they're not the right ones, you become the Knicks or (New York) Rangers of the past 15 years.

 

I give him more time because, like you said, KP is trying to do it through the draft and development rather than going out and stealing a Brian Grant or Wallace or Pippen (it's almost like Bob let the league figure out who is good and then he goes and gets them).

But if after 5-6 years (KP has about 2 more yrs), you don't make it out of the first round and have a team that really isn't a real threat in the NBA, then I'm not big on this let it bake philosophy.

 

Not dogging Bob (onl;y said it felt dirty because of some of the types of players he brought). .. I thought he was bringing in the right big name most of the time. To add, I know he had Allen's checkbook, but still not a given to bring big names to Ptd (unlike NY).

I though Bob was very good at bringing in quality players (on the court) . . . he had a skill to it that I don't think is a lot of GMs have.