Oden was not hit by a car, he was damaged goods with the medical data to back it up. We have yet to advance out of the first round of the playoffs with the KP era squad. We still don't know who was in charge of the Roy & LMA draft, which has clearly been the draft that has given us the most fruit. KP was not the GM for that draft, and Steve Patterson claims it was under his command that those deals took place, with KP consulting. The most important decision in the hands of KP appears to have been Oden vs Durant, and it clearly to this point was the wrong decision. You can call it flawed, but I really don't think luck played a major role in this outcome. Oden has one leg that is clearly longer than the other. He admits that his hip has been identified by a doctor as a ticking time bomb. I have to assume that the Blazers did their due diligence and went with the risk. When you take on risk, you also have to own the outcome(hence the term risk). If Oden were hit by a car I would not blame KP, but clearly Oden's injuries have been basketball related and that after all is what he was chosen to do by KP. I hope that Oden can get healthy and change the outcome, and then KP's body of work will be much better. Right now the pendulum is on the terrible side. One more note about luck, the Blazers had a very low percent chance of even getting the number one pick. The fact that they got it was lucky. There was time to analyze who to choose, and to come to the best possible decision. His team didn't do that. I remember reading on Blazers edge that the stats guys disagreed with the Oden pick based on the statistical analysis of the two players. Also KP dropped several hints heading into the draft that one guy would be a scoring champ and the other would win championships. I think we can deduct that he did not think Oden would be a scoring champ at this point.
No man. I am sorry, but taking Martell Webster over Chris Paul will probably never be outdone in the history of bad Gm decisions.
Yea, but he has some slack since he did 2 things: 1. He traded an injured Grant Hill for part of the Pistons championship team, stiffing Orlando. 2. He showcased Jerry Stackhouse and then was able to parlay him into Richard Hamilton. Sure he fucked up with Darko. But at least he did some good shit to counter balance the bad.
I don't know if I'd give him credit for the Grant Hill thing. They wanted Hill back. He decided to leave for Orlando, which was a huge loss for them (or so they thought), but they were able to strike back and convince Ben Wallace to sign with them. In the end, the two teams did a sign and swap of the two players, but make no mistake, they wanted Hill back.
I would give my left nut to get Geoff Petrie back. His teams bottom out every once in a while, but he always slowly and surely builds them back up. He has a good eye for tough players and makes shrewd draft picks.
Yeah... I think it's funny that Presti gets so much credit, but he did pass on Tyreke Evans and Steph Curry. Not exactly a smart pick.
I am not so sure. Sometimes what you see from a team is just a facade. We see what they want us to see. What is really going on behind closed doors is another matter. How many times have you seen teams saying they aren't trading a player, and then the player is traded?
It was a long time ago, but it seemed like nobody knew how bad Grant's injury really was. Orlando never would have signed him to that huge contract if they had known, similarly to Portland never drafting Oden if they had known his knees would have so many problems. It's possible that Detroit knew, but I don't think they did.
It could also be possible that one of the following "many" surgeries he underwent is what really fucked him up for a long time. I believe at a certain point, they decided to just take his whole ankle apart and rebuild it because all their previous work had fucked it up.
[Cutting out the parts about whether Pritchard did a good job in team-building, since I've already done those arguments plenty earlier in the year. My response to you was largely to point out that for individual decisions, process matters over results, because luck can play a huge part in the outcome of any single decision. Results are a much better metric for overall bodies of work.] At the time, virtually no one was claiming that. Certainly not scouts, who pretty unanimously called him a spectacular prospect. And yes, scouts take durability into account. Being a fan and not having the medical data is actually a convenience to you--you can claim that data "probably" contained all the information necessary to know what would happen. Other fans cannot prove you wrong because we, also, do not have access to that data. Further, none of the injuries Oden sustained were apparently related to any previous issues, based on the medical reports. His two "major" injuries, the ones that wiped out his first and third seasons were supposedly flukes. Unless you are a doctor who has studied his injuries, I don't find you a very compelling source to say "No, they were clearly predictable based on medical information at the time of drafting, information I have not seen but am sure pointed to all of this." Do you have the medical knowledge and experience to connect a shattered knee cap with one leg being slightly longer than the other? Taking a risk is often the right choice. Of course he has to "own" the outcome (it's all a part of Pritchard's body of work), but the flawed reasoning is using the outcome to determine whether the decision was right. If you're playing blackjack and you hit on a 12, get a king and bust...the idea that the "outcome" proves than decision was wrong is highly flawed. Of course you took a risk by hitting, but all the information (in this simplified case, probabilities) dictated that taking the risk was the right decision. Just because you got a bad outcome doesn't mean you made the wrong decision by hitting on a 12. Whether taking a risk on Oden was the right decision can be argued. But the fact that the outcome, to this point, has been bad is hardly a de facto indictment of even that decision, let alone his entire period as GM.
So, does taking Durant make Presti the greatest GM in Thunder/Sonics history? How many times have the Thunder made it past the 1st round in the Presti era? BNM
Presti's greatest achievement was Westbrook. Ibaka looks nice too. I really liked the trade for Maynor as well. Other than that, not impressed. I remember I really wanted Westbrook at the time of the draft, but he kept on climbing up everybody's draft board after his workouts.
And, before you proclaim Pritchard the worst GM in Blazer history, you need a little history lesson. In 1972, Stu Inman selected LaRue Martin over Bob McAdoo and Julius Erving. In 1984, Inman selected Sam Bowie over Michael Jordan, Charles Barkley and John Stockton. In 1976, Inman selected Wally Walker over Adrian Dantley and Robert Parish. He also made several other bad draft choices and bad trades. BNM
He still hasn't answered what has been a glaring weakness. Anything resembling a competent post presence and I'll give him props. If it was up to Presti he would have picked Oden with that #2 pick. Imagine how bad the Thunder would be if Durant and Oden were drafted in that order. Presti wouldn't have a job right now. In a way he's been very lucky.
Bayless was a consensus 4-6 pick even during draft day. But then he slid to 11th in the actual draft.
