SportsGuy8 wrote:wushui wrote:To Sportsguy8
Yea I know, I was just asking a rhetorical question, but I think you are also failing to look at the big picture. I am under the impression that most GMs and scouts are competent people who know how to evaluate talent. If they had it their way, they could easily put together a team of average players from 1-12, but they won't win you a championship: you need all-star caliber guys for that. Obviously, all-stars aren't easy to come by, and the obvious ones are easily snatched. But from time to time, there are little gems that aren't so recognizable, and these are the talent that teams take a chance on. Whether they pan out and become a Dirk Nowitzki is hard to predict of course.
I'm not so sure that "most GMs and scouts are competent people". Scouts, yes, probably, but most GMs shouldn't have the jobs that they do. The problem is that too many teams settle on having former NBA players (and/or other NBA personell) at GM positions which is just wrong strategy. Sure, some of them are very good at it, majority not, though.
Teams should act like big companies that already found out that the best thing for business is if they put really smart people (geniuses) to be in charge, people that don't necessarily have a lot in common with the business at the beginning.
So, for NBA, a really smart person who's just a regular NBA fan would be a much better GM than a former player that just doesn't have enough brain-power for making complex decisions ... And I'm not saying they're not smart, just saying they're not super-smart.
Teams have scouts and other personell to provide them data, information, opinions, but then you have to have someone to logically connect all the dots, be able to make complex calculations in his head, think on another level and make right decisions based on all the things ... And most current GMs simply don't have the skills/tool-set for that.
It's like on the floor. You could teach Brian Scalabrine to perfection, give him world class coaching, give him all the experiences in the world, but he would still be nowhere near LeBron James. And the same applies for GMs. Someone can have all the basketball experiances in the world, have whole life concentrated around basketball, but he would still not be able to be close as good GM as some wicked genius ...
I do agree with you how and why teams take chances on certain players and that it's a lot more complex than it looks. But, the problem I have with it, is that teams don't seem to see the right % a certain player has, to be a player that they hope him to be. They should look at every player from a math standpoint and estimate what the probabilities are that he'll be a superstar, a star, a role-player, a bust, black-hole, a cancer, etc. and estimate right value (including calculated risks). I just don't think 90% of GMs are capable of that level of complex thinking and decision making ...
This is very true. Reportedly the highest IQ of any NBA GM is the Rockets GM Daryl Morey. His IQ is 160. That's definitely genius level, but it's hardly by any stretch impressive. It's actually quite an indictment that teams that have billions at stake and only a 160 IQ is the highest in the league. And yeah he's not a former basketball player or coach.
There are lots of people with IQs higher than Morey that could be hired and do a much better job than the average NBA GM does.
