Nalod wrote:GustavBahler wrote:Jmpasq wrote:GustavBahler wrote:Two years too late for a trade for a top ten pick who is showing something. Wrong side of 30.
Its to bad Billy King has no assets left, He traded a top 10 pick for Gerald Wallace
Couldn't understand how King got the Nets gig. He had some late drafting success before he left Philly, but that shouldnt have been enough to be given the keys to another franchise.
I've discussed this before and its with precent many times:
GM is not the boss, the owner is. Ted Lenois directed Grunfeld after buying the team to rebuild with Yoot. Its failed and in most situations GM gets fired. If Grunfeld protested or made it clear to his owner its not a good move, he remained in good standing. If it was grunfelds idea then you can his ass.
Isiah in NY had a bad run. God awful after neophyte Layden had started to hold on to picks and had expirings. No owner allows its GM to get into the kind of Tax hell they got to without endorsing the program. Isiah never got fired for having followed his owners starphing directive.
Layden took McDyess which was a 100 million contract. He was a star in his prime. Despite the risks who makes a deal with that kind of money? Did Layden so convince Dolan to do it? I doubt it.
DOlan was grumpy about having Donnie walsh forced upon him and after striking out on Lebron they signed AMare despite the mountains of evidence it was a bad idea. Does a GM have the power to spend 100 mil?
Then Dolan goes out and blows half the team for another star in Melo.
DOes anyone really think King has some mojo over Phrokerov? My take is the Russian is beind a lot of the moves and in no certain terms would the owner, especially a hands on type alpha dog like him would ever not have final say or involvement. The Trade for Pierce and Garnett normally gets you fired, but in my mind if king said "I don't think this is something we should do......." then he is golden and its why he keeps his job. Im just guessing.
further precedence is our very Yankees in the George era. He was very loyal to Gene Michael and his other GM's while the bench managers were fired and rehired on a whim. When the owner is making the decisions he has to own part of it and not fire the GM who might not agree.
We can go on and on.
None of this explains how King got another gig. Some owners have directed their GMs to do a complete rebuild and its paid off, the Magic being the latest example. Owners are sometimes convinced by their Presidents or GMs to make a move. I seriously doubt that Dolan told Layden that he specifically wanted MCDyess and his gimpy knees. Mills was the one who suggested Isiah as GM.
Don't believe Dolan made Layden sign players to deals far larger than they were worth, with connections to the Utah Jazz, his old home. Just like Isiah liked bringing in players from the Chicago area. The owner is responsible for the personel he brings in, and that applies to the GM as well. Dolan has wreaked havoc with this franchise, but that doesnt completely absolve his mgmt team for the poor decisions they've made.
As for for Prohkorov, who you have defended vigorously up to this point, I dont believe he hired King just to be his flunkie. Pretty sure he had some trust in his abilities as a GM or he wouldnt have guaranteed a championship in short order.
Think any Riley offer if interested would only be Dragic, Deng and Andersen for Melo and Calderon. Hurdles: Dragic cant be traded until after mid Jan and Melo would have to waive his no trade though he might do so to play with Wade and Bosh. Knicks get younger and more atheletic at pg, save $15 in 16- 17 as they shed Calderon $ for 16-17 as well as Dengs and Andersens and then save the diff of Dragic-Melo $8mil in 18 and 19. Dont think Knicks would take that offer unless they thought extra $ could feasibly be employed towards acquiring a Durant or Beal in 16-17 FA