John Hollinger - NBA's Most Overrated/Underrated

[TheStig]

Re:John Hollinger - NBA's Most Overrated/Underrate

Kush77 wrote:

Diddy1122 wrote:

Kush77 wrote:

Diddy1122 wrote:

I'm not arguing the first half of the decade. He did an amazing job then. But the past 3 seasons after were mediocre & the past 2 seasons downright awful.

If you are looking at an entire decade you need to take all seasons into account. And if you do that logic points to RC Buford. Small market team, best record of any sports team other than Yankees over the past 10 years, 2 championships, Ginobli in the 2nd round, Parker in the late 1st round, Oberto in the 2nd round, managed to keep the greatest PF in the game in town for his entire career, & has kept flexibility under the salary cap every season. I just cannot understand how anyone in their right mind would think Dumars is better.

Should the GM of the decade be Mitch Kupchak? Drafted Bynum, traded for Gasol, brought back Phil Jackson. Rebuilt the Lakers around Kobe? Just throwing that out there.

I would say no. I mean just look at San Antonio. They have the Alamo & the Spurs, that's it. It's not like they have an owner who's just going to throw money around the way that Buss & Dolan do. Buford built that team around Duncan with excellent scouting, drafting, FA signings, all the while staying right at the LT threshold. And in San Antonio of all places!

You're really looking at it from a small market standpoint and I would buy that if this was MLB. They sellout in S.A. and would still make money if they had to go over the LT. I'm sure they would if they had to but they lucked out with good value contracts in Manu and Parker.
For example, If Duncan was a FA after the 2005 season and giving him a max would send them over the tax, they of course would sign him. the same with Parker. Staying at the LT is nice for the owners but I don't think the Spurs have been in any kind of financial dire straits during this decade where staying under the LT would get you extra credit.

Common Kush. If Buford could spend the LT, he would have still had Scola and Jackson. Jackson was a key piece they let go to stay under the LT. He was only signed away for the MLE. Thats not even mentioning good subs like Udrich or Brown. They could have had so much more to work with. I mean, Buford couldn't even pay Scola less than the MLE. All of what your saying detracts from the owner and is a huge plus in the gms rep. Seeing as we are discussing GMs its very relevant.

 

[Shakes]

Re:John Hollinger - NBA's Most Overrated/Underrate

Kush77 wrote:

Should the GM of the decade be Mitch Kupchak? Drafted Bynum, traded for Gasol, brought back Phil Jackson. Rebuilt the Lakers around Kobe? Just throwing that out there.

He also traded a guy who went on to be a two time all-star for Kwame Brown, which even at the time people thought was a ridiculously bad move. Lakers fans were calling for his head. Of course he later turned Kwame into Gasol, so I guess if Dumars can flip Ben Gordon for Dwayne Wade or something down the line, all will be forgiven.

 

[??? ??????]

Re:John Hollinger - NBA's Most Overrated/Underrate

I thought the Ben Gordon signing was fine in its own right, but he ruined the rebuilding by signing Charlie Villanueva the next day.

I think the best strategy that Dumars could use is to try to get himself a clean slate. I think dealing with Cleveland would be the best.

They could offer Ben Gordon, Richard Hamilton, and Charlie Villanueva for Shaquille O'neal and Delonte West.

You immediately clear out three big contracts, and give yourself another chance to rebuild, and tank out the rest of this year for a top 5 pick.

 

[Fred]

Diddy1122 wrote:

Oh & I just have to add him passing on Carmelo Anthony to take Darko. I mean I don't know anyone in the world at that time who would've made that move. It's beyond stupid. It reaches a level of stupidity not even Bush could reach. And people can argue they were a good team already, which is true, but wouldn't logic dictate that adding a superstar caliber player who just won a NCAA National Championship would only make your team even better? And if anyone says Melo wouldn't start because Prince was already there, you probably still need your food cut for you.

I love how we are rewriting history. Can you find me one quote from June of 2003 that really torched that move from Dumars? Of course, it's easy to criticize it now. Let's compare that move to Krause trading Brand for Chandler, when the entire universe immediately and correctly called JK a complete moron...everyone but Boers and Bernstein. I'm guessing Chad Form approved of the move:

“Darko is really one of a kind. He runs the floor, handles the ball, shoots an NBA three and plays with his back to the basket. So you can slot him at the 3, 4 or 5. Okay, a few other guys can do that, too, but what sets Darko apart is his toughness in the post … Fact is, Darko plays in attack mode at both ends of the floor. The more you push, the more he pushes back.”
– ESPN’s Chad Ford on NBA Draft prospect Darko Milicic, in the June 23rd, 2003 issue of ESPN the Magazine

 

[Fred]

Re:John Hollinger - NBA's Most Overrated/Underrate

Kush77 wrote:

Diddy1122 wrote:

I'm not arguing the first half of the decade. He did an amazing job then. But the past 3 seasons after were mediocre & the past 2 seasons downright awful.

If you are looking at an entire decade you need to take all seasons into account. And if you do that logic points to RC Buford. Small market team, best record of any sports team other than Yankees over the past 10 years, 2 championships, Ginobli in the 2nd round, Parker in the late 1st round, Oberto in the 2nd round, managed to keep the greatest PF in the game in town for his entire career, & has kept flexibility under the salary cap every season. I just cannot understand how anyone in their right mind would think Dumars is better.

Should the GM of the decade be Mitch Kupchak? Drafted Bynum, traded for Gasol, brought back Phil Jackson. Rebuilt the Lakers around Kobe? Just throwing that out there.

Mitch took over for Jerry West. He was handed Kobe Bryant. How hard is it after that, really? Check out what Joe started the decade with. He started his job with Grant Hill, their only viable asset, telling him he was leaving as a free agent. He turned that into a sign and trade for Ben Wallace.

 

[Diddy1122]

Fred wrote:

Diddy1122 wrote:

Oh & I just have to add him passing on Carmelo Anthony to take Darko. I mean I don't know anyone in the world at that time who would've made that move. It's beyond stupid. It reaches a level of stupidity not even Bush could reach. And people can argue they were a good team already, which is true, but wouldn't logic dictate that adding a superstar caliber player who just won a NCAA National Championship would only make your team even better? And if anyone says Melo wouldn't start because Prince was already there, you probably still need your food cut for you.

I love how we are rewriting history. Can you find me one quote from June of 2003 that really torched that move from Dumars? Of course, it's easy to criticize it now. Let's compare that move to Krause trading Brand for Chandler, when the entire universe immediately and correctly called JK a complete moron...everyone but Boers and Bernstein. I'm guessing Chad Form approved of the move:

“Darko is really one of a kind. He runs the floor, handles the ball, shoots an NBA three and plays with his back to the basket. So you can slot him at the 3, 4 or 5. Okay, a few other guys can do that, too, but what sets Darko apart is his toughness in the post … Fact is, Darko plays in attack mode at both ends of the floor. The more you push, the more he pushes back.”
– ESPN’s Chad Ford on NBA Draft prospect Darko Milicic, in the June 23rd, 2003 issue of ESPN the Magazine

Ok perhaps I sensationalized that a bit but the majority of NBA fans were saying WTF? at that move. And Chad Ford is a friggin' moron like the majority of ESPN's bball writers. Jalen Rose is an analyst, need I say more? Look at what he was saying about Darko. Have you ever seen anything like that from this kid? I doubt Ford watched a single game that kid played. My favorite line being "what sets Darko apart is his toughness in the post". I spit coke all over my computer screen when I read that. Tough & Darko should never be in the same sentence, hell that goes for almost all Euro players.

They didn't criticize it because the Pistons were a good team at the time, whereas the Bulls were the laughing stock of the league & Brand was the only real talent on the team. But having just watched Anthony destroy Hinrich & the Jayhawks in the NCCA Championship Game to me & alot of other fans, he was the hands down #2 pick of the draft. No one knew crap about Darko other than they kept calling him the next Dirk.

In general I don't like Euro players, maybe it's because the Bulls have been so bad at drafting them, or the fact that most Euro players turn into WNBA players when they enter the Big Boys league. So whenever someone comes out touting so & so as the next Toni or Dirk or Manu or Pau I just roll my eyes. And that decision by Dumars kept that franchise going from good to great for years to come all because he had Teyshaun Prince at SF already. Prince over Melo? There's no logic that explains away that stupidity.

 

[Kush77]

Re:John Hollinger - NBA's Most Overrated/Underrate

TheStig wrote:
Common Kush. If Buford could spend the LT, he would have still had Scola and Jackson. Jackson was a key piece they let go to stay under the LT. He was only signed away for the MLE. Thats not even mentioning good subs like Udrich or Brown. They could have had so much more to work with. I mean, Buford couldn't even pay Scola less than the MLE. All of what your saying detracts from the owner and is a huge plus in the gms rep. Seeing as we are discussing GMs its very relevant.[/quote]

I don't know. Maybe they didn't value Stephen Jackson that much. And maybe they didn't think Scola would work for him.

So what does that say. That the owner of the Spurs is cheap. Okay, it's not like the Spurs would go bankrupt if they went into the LT. They are a title winning franchise that I'm sure makes money. So that's on the owner if he doesn't want to spend. I don't think it makes Buford a better GM that Joe Dumars. He did already have Tim Duncan. And we've seen with the Bulls in the 90's that when you have the great player it's easier to build around that. Dumars didn't have the great player.

 

[Kush77]

Re:John Hollinger - NBA's Most Overrated/Underrate

Shakes wrote:

Kush77 wrote:

Should the GM of the decade be Mitch Kupchak? Drafted Bynum, traded for Gasol, brought back Phil Jackson. Rebuilt the Lakers around Kobe? Just throwing that out there.

He also traded a guy who went on to be a two time all-star for Kwame Brown, which even at the time people thought was a ridiculously bad move. Lakers fans were calling for his head. Of course he later turned Kwame into Gasol, so I guess if Dumars can flip Ben Gordon for Dwayne Wade or something down the line, all will be forgiven.

God that was an awful move. I said it at the time. Forgot about that one.

 

[Shakes]

Re:John Hollinger - NBA's Most Overrated/Underrate

??? ?????? wrote:

I thought the Ben Gordon signing was fine in its own right, but he ruined the rebuilding by signing Charlie Villanueva the next day.

The Charlie V signing at least made sense from a team balance point of view. Signing a SG for 11.6 million a year when you just extended your SG for 11 million a year is dumb.

 

[houheffna]

Re:John Hollinger - NBA's Most Overrated/Underrate

The Charlie V signing at least made sense from a team balance point of view. Signing a SG for 11.6 million a year when you just extended your SG for 11 million a year is dumb.

I thought it was 11.8 but I digress...you are not going to get anyone on here to admit that signing Gordon for that money was a bad idea all things considered...it was stupid to pay him that money if they had NO shooting guard...let alone having Hamilton, who ages by the second.

 

[TheStig]

Re:John Hollinger - NBA's Most Overrated/Underrate

Kush77 wrote:

TheStig wrote:
Common Kush. If Buford could spend the LT, he would have still had Scola and Jackson. Jackson was a key piece they let go to stay under the LT. He was only signed away for the MLE. Thats not even mentioning good subs like Udrich or Brown. They could have had so much more to work with. I mean, Buford couldn't even pay Scola less than the MLE. All of what your saying detracts from the owner and is a huge plus in the gms rep. Seeing as we are discussing GMs its very relevant.

I don't know. Maybe they didn't value Stephen Jackson that much. And maybe they didn't think Scola would work for him.

So what does that say. That the owner of the Spurs is cheap. Okay, it's not like the Spurs would go bankrupt if they went into the LT. They are a title winning franchise that I'm sure makes money. So that's on the owner if he doesn't want to spend. I don't think it makes Buford a better GM that Joe Dumars. He did already have Tim Duncan. And we've seen with the Bulls in the 90's that when you have the great player it's easier to build around that. Dumars didn't have the great player.[/quote]

They valued those two a lot. Jackson was a signifigant piece in their title run. They also only got rid of Scola for the LT and sold him to dump some salary.

Its not just that. He is a better drafter, Parker and Gonobli are allstars, prince and okur are just nice players. Buford has more rings and plays in a tougher confernce. Do you think the Pistons make it out of the west? Let alone 6 straight ecfs? You can talk about stars but how many rings did KG win in Minny or Barkley in Phoenix or Malone in Utah. Its not that easy, let alone when all you have to rebuild with is late firsts. He got two really good picks and a bunch of contributors out of late firsts.

 

[TheStig]

Re:John Hollinger - NBA's Most Overrated/Underrate

Shakes wrote:

??? ?????? wrote:

I thought the Ben Gordon signing was fine in its own right, but he ruined the rebuilding by signing Charlie Villanueva the next day.

The Charlie V signing at least made sense from a team balance point of view. Signing a SG for 11.6 million a year when you just extended your SG for 11 million a year is dumb.

Your picking on a guy who has been out most of the year. The guy has missed more games this year than the previous 5 combined. IMO the dumb move was resigning rip. With him as an expiring/on his way out, you could have gotten a good piece.

 

[Shakes]

Re:John Hollinger - NBA's Most Overrated/Underrate

TheStig wrote:

Shakes wrote:

??? ?????? wrote:

I thought the Ben Gordon signing was fine in its own right, but he ruined the rebuilding by signing Charlie Villanueva the next day.

The Charlie V signing at least made sense from a team balance point of view. Signing a SG for 11.6 million a year when you just extended your SG for 11 million a year is dumb.

Your picking on a guy who has been out most of the year. The guy has missed more games this year than the previous 5 combined. IMO the dumb move was resigning rip. With him as an expiring/on his way out, you could have gotten a good piece.

I'm not picking on Ben Gordon, I'm picking on signing him when they had already signed Hamilton. Yes signing Hamilton was stupid, but once it was done, spending big money on another SG was even dumber.

 

[TheStig]

Re:John Hollinger - NBA's Most Overrated/Underrate

Shakes wrote:

TheStig wrote:

Shakes wrote:

??? ?????? wrote:

I thought the Ben Gordon signing was fine in its own right, but he ruined the rebuilding by signing Charlie Villanueva the next day.

The Charlie V signing at least made sense from a team balance point of view. Signing a SG for 11.6 million a year when you just extended your SG for 11 million a year is dumb.

Your picking on a guy who has been out most of the year. The guy has missed more games this year than the previous 5 combined. IMO the dumb move was resigning rip. With him as an expiring/on his way out, you could have gotten a good piece.

I'm not picking on Ben Gordon, I'm picking on signing him when they had already signed Hamilton. Yes signing Hamilton was stupid, but once it was done, spending big money on another SG was even dumber.

I really think they were trying to move rip and it just didn't work for them. Rip was being offered for Boozer and TC over the summer. Personally, if I was Detroit, I tank for a pg/sf and trade Rip and Prince for a pg or sf or cap room and sign Haywood over the summer.

 

[jsain360]

Re:John Hollinger - NBA's Most Overrated/Underrate

Trade Hinrich now!!, TRADE Hinrich now!!, TRADE HINRICH now!!, TRADE HINRICH NOW!!!, don't fall into the trap of mediocrity that is HINRICH.