Notice Owners "interfering"

[Stevenson]

This time of year we hear a lot about owners who "interfere" with the basketball minds and GMs they hire. This is a common lament about Paul Allen and the draft for example.

Thoughts?

Personally, I don't get it. If it's my team, I have every right to help make personnel decisions. Maybe it's the capitalist in me, but if it's my team, it's my team. And anyway, if I am smart enough to make enough money to own an NBA franchise, I am smart enough to help decide who to draft.

This idea that owners should just hire the best basketball minds they can find and step away is hooey imo.

 

[BrianFromWA]

I've always thought that if I was lucky enough to be able to own a basketball team, it's my damned team and I'll stock it however I want. And if it doesn't jive with what the fans want, they'll stay away and I'll have poor ticket revenue, etc. If they like it they'll keep coming back and paying $12 for a beer.

There's also the "Captain of the Ship" philosophy. No, I don't have the hours in the day to tell you what the last 3 hours' worth of log readings on the auxiliary feed pump are. I have people that do that. Now, if one comes to me and says "Aux Feed Pump #2 is going down for maintenance," I have to understand the impacts. And a decision of investment of 8 figures seems like it'd be something to be more hands-on about than not.

I've never quite understood the concept of "owners should shut up and let the pros do the job." If you don't know basketball and want to delegate, sure, more power to you. But PA has no obligation to anyone to just listen to what Pritchard/Cho/Buchanan/Olshey says to do. It's his team.

 

[e_blazer]

You’ve got to figure that the Stepiens get eliminated by basketball’s version of Darwinism.

 

[handiman]

The counter-argument to the "Captain of the Ship" notion is that captains are qualified for the job, whereas people with boatloads of money (see what I did there?) have no more likelihood than average of being so.

As a coach, it's important to know what you're good at and what you aren't, and surround yourself with coaches who compliment your weaker areas. Being a team owner shouldn't be any different.

 

[riverman]

This idea that owners should just hire the best basketball minds they can find and step away is hooey imo.

well...Donald Sterling sort of did that

 

[calvin natt]

This time of year we hear a lot about owners who "interfere" with the basketball minds and GMs they hire. This is a common lament about Paul Allen and the draft for example.

Thoughts?

Personally, I don't get it. If it's my team, I have every right to help make personnel decisions. Maybe it's the capitalist in me, but if it's my team, it's my team. And anyway, if I am smart enough to make enough money to own an NBA franchise, I am smart enough to help decide who to draft.

This idea that owners should just hire the best basketball minds they can find and step away is hooey imo.

Couldn’t disagree more. Are they free to do so? Yes of course. But because you made money at Microsoft or as a venture capitalist (Warriors) how does that make you qualified to identify who’s skills translate to an NBA team? Being smart at non basketball things has zero to do with making smart basketball decisions.

 

[DaLincolnJones]

The counter-argument to the "Captain of the Ship" notion is that captains are qualified for the job, whereas people with boatloads of money (see what I did there?) have no more likelihood than average of being so.

As a coach, it's important to know what you're good at and what you aren't, and surround yourself with coaches who compliment your weaker areas. Being a team owner shouldn't be any different.

Naw, I am with Brian. This is PAs toy, and he can play with it how he wants. We all can think of teams that had owners that ran them into the ground, and ended up being laughing stock, minor league teams. When the value of a teams falls enough, most change direction to correct the errors or sell the team.

 

[BrianFromWA]

Couldn’t disagree more. Are they free to do so? Yes of course. But because you made money at Microsoft or as a venture capitalist (Warriors) how does that make you qualified to identify who’s skills translate to an NBA team? Being smart at non basketball things has zero to do with making smart basketball decisions.

"Because you were a soap opera actor..."
"Because you were an agent..."
"Because you were an engineer at Boeing..."
"Because you're David Kahn"

contrast with "longtime coaches" (like SVG, Popovich, Phil Jackson, on and on) or GOAT-level players (Magic, Michael, LeBron) who should know better, if you're right. Or even really good players like Isiah and Elgin.

Being smart at non-basketball things (more importantly, learning to learn new things quickly and well) is absolutely a special skill.

 

[Wizard Mentor]

1) To quote a wise man (@HCP ): "Learn the game, then interfere."

Paul Allen has probably been through more drafts than most of the GMs in the league.
He knows what he's doing, he trusts Neil's "golden gut."

On the other end of the spectrum, the Kings owner is at least somewhat clueless, and
should clearly lean more on his basketball people. (I could go on about the crap he's
tried, but most know already).

2) Re: "Captain" analogy.
Full Time Owner isn't the primary job description of many of the NBA owners - certainly not Mark Cuban's,
for example. If you have your hands in a lot of different pots, it's best to rely more on your
employees.

 

[SlyPokerDog]

This time of year we hear a lot about owners who "interfere" with the basketball minds and GMs they hire. This is a common lament about Paul Allen and the draft for example.

Thoughts?

Personally, I don't get it. If it's my team, I have every right to help make personnel decisions. Maybe it's the capitalist in me, but if it's my team, it's my team. And anyway, if I am smart enough to make enough money to own an NBA franchise, I am smart enough to help decide who to draft.

This idea that owners should just hire the best basketball minds they can find and step away is hooey imo.

Stepping away got PA a Super Bowl trophy.

 

[calvin natt]

"Because you were a soap opera actor..."
"Because you were an agent..."
"Because you were an engineer at Boeing..."
"Because you're David Kahn"

contrast with "longtime coaches" (like SVG, Popovich, Phil Jackson, on and on) or GOAT-level players (Magic, Michael, LeBron) who should know better, if you're right. Or even really good players like Isiah and Elgin.

Being smart at non-basketball things (more importantly, learning to learn new things quickly and well) is absolutely a special skill.

No thanks. I’ll take my owners getting the F out of the way. Hire good basketball people.

 

[jlprk]

Sometimes Canzano says that Allen interferes. Other times, Canzano flip-flops and says that Allen is the opposite--an absentee owner, why doesn't he take charge. Both times, Canzano is just guessing, to fill up newsprint. My opinion is that Allen is too mellow and patient, which is the opposite of the interfering charge.

An ideal owner hires an expert GM to evaluate players (and be a wheeler-dealer), and the owner confines his decisions to financial ones. The ideal owner e-mails the GM daily questions to motivate him, keep him on his toes, and create fun for the owner by watching the GM in action. Olshey says that that's how Allen operates, and their actions confirm it.

 

[SlyPokerDog]

Sometimes Canzano says that Allen interferes. Other times, Canzano flip-flops and says that Allen is the opposite--an absentee owner, why doesn't he take charge. Both times, Canzano is just guessing, to fill up newsprint. My opinion is that Allen is too mellow and patient, which is the opposite of the interfering charge.

An ideal owner hires an expert GM to evaluate players (and be a wheeler-dealer), and the owner confines his decisions to financial ones. The ideal owner e-mails the GM daily questions to motivate him, keep him on his toes, and create fun for the owner by watching the GM in action. Olshey says that that's how Allen operates, and their actions confirm it.

Who...gives...a...fuck...what...Canzano...says.

 

[Natebishop3]

Because owners don't always (or usually) make the right personnel decisions.

Just look at that bozo down in Sacramento.

 

[riverman]

I don't see how an owner of a franchise can "interfere" with his franchise....in Paul's case, he's having fun with it..he seems to like Neil more than some past GMs and I don't see the disconnect. Last thing the home site posted was that Paul told Neil to get us better this offseason...then Neil started saying he's targeting vets and a better bench.

 

[handiman]

Naw, I am with Brian. This is PAs toy, and he can play with it how he wants. We all can think of teams that had owners that ran them into the ground, and ended up being laughing stock, minor league teams. When the value of a teams falls enough, most change direction to correct the errors or sell the team.

Having the indisputable right to do whatever he wants with his toy, and being the best qualified to make basketball decisions, are two entirely different things. Just because they (owners) can, doesn't mean they should.

 

[BrianFromWA]

Because owners don't always (or usually) make the right personnel decisions.

Just look at that bozo down in Sacramento.

Vlade, or Vivek?

 

[DaLincolnJones]

Having the indisputable right to do whatever he wants with his toy, and being the best qualified to make basketball decisions, are two entirely different things. Just because they (owners) can, doesn't mean they should.

You can vote with your wallet. For me, I enjoy watching these guys get involved. Be it Cuban getting fined, MJ berating his top pick, NJ and the mess a Eastern European, potential mob boss can make, The Kings and their taking over the "Most Dysfunctional" title from the Clip show. On and on.

Paul has been both a great owner and a not so great owner, but all in all, I would take him over at least twenty five out of thirty owners in this league.

 

[Orion Bailey]

A smart owner ( unless he was brought up in the NBA) would understand that basketball is their hobby and good business practice does not equate to the ability to see quality NBA talent in players.

If I were an owner, I would hire the best of the best and hold them accountable, but it would be their decisions that get held accountable.

 

[Binx]

Being smart at non basketball things has zero to do with making smart basketball decisions.

Except that NBA coaches and GMs can also make really stupid basketball decisions, like taking Bowie over Jordan, and Oden over Durant.

 

[oldfisherman]

I like Paul Allen's style.
No one gets it right every time. Info is the key to making the best decisions.

That said. If I owned a team, and enjoyed being a part of the drafting process the way PA does. I would want the largest & best scouting staff in the league. There is no limit on how much PA can spend on scouting. Yet I believe the Blazers only have three scouts. And two of them are international scouts.
(not 100% sure only 3 scouts is correct)

 

[DaLincolnJones]

A smart owner ( unless he was brought up in the NBA) would understand that basketball is their hobby and good business practice does not equate to the ability to see quality NBA talent in players.

If I were an owner, I would hire the best of the best and hold them accountable, but it would be their decisions that get held accountable.

This got me to thinking. If I was an owner, I would be very involved. Yeah, use the advice of those in the know, but I would want to have a finger in the pie. Hell, that would be half of the fun.

 

[riverman]

Having the indisputable right to do whatever he wants with his toy, and being the best qualified to make basketball decisions, are two entirely different things. Just because they (owners) can, doesn't mean they should.

In Paul's case I think it's more decision by committee and Olshey and Stotts and probably Dame are all in the loop....the Knicks are a franchise that needs to separate the owner from the GM....that's been a mess for a long time...I think the Blazers have great stability in the front office..Olshey has mentioned that they draft up multiple scenarios and vet them through Paul ..Stotts seems to stay on the outside lookin' in

 

[calvin natt]

Except that NBA coaches and GMs can also make really stupid basketball decisions, like taking Bowie over Jordan, and Odom over Durant.

I’m not arguing that basketball people are perfect. But I’ll leave basketball decisions to basketball pros. If they make too many I’d find new ones. But I don’t want business men and bankers and computer guys deciding on who to take with a draft pick.

 

[Natebishop3]

Vlade, or Vivek?

Most definitely Vivek.

I still love the "Stauskus? Stauskus?" meme

 

[BBert]

I feel confident that Paul Allen doesn't micro-manage the Blazers. I'm equally confident that Allen listens to his expert advisors, and that he has the final say in important decisions like short and long-term strategies, when and how far to go over the tax, player contracts and signings, and other major financial decisions. As he should. There is no way any of us in his position would sit in the stands like a fan and not make final decisions on important matters relating to our 1.5 billion dollar company.

 

[BBert]

I’m not arguing that basketball people are perfect. But I’ll leave basketball decisions to basketball pros. If they make too many I’d find new ones. But I don’t want business men and bankers and computer guys deciding on who to take with a draft pick.

If I owned the team I wouldn't be the one evaluating players. But I would give approval, or not, based on the opinions and advice of my employees, and in the case of the Blazers, I'd want more than one voice in the room. I do that now. But at the end of the day, the buck stops with me, so I like to know what I'm approving, and why, and I don't approve it unless someone convinces me it's a good decision.

 

[RipCityDSCPL]

Vlade, or Vivek?

Yes.

 

[jlprk]

Who...gives...a...fuck...what...Canzano...says.

Because he's the (unnamed) source of the "Allen interferes" charge, which 2 previous posts (including yours) had discussed without citing the source. As the board's go-to scholastic, I keep all of you in line.

 

[SlyPokerDog]

Because he's the (unnamed) source of the "Allen interferes" charge, which 2 previous posts (including yours) had discussed without citing the source. As the board's go-to scholastic, I keep all of you in line.

And you sir are interfering with my fun.