Isaiah a good GM ?

click me


Just read this article about Isaiah Thomas and his decision making which is re evaluated by this guy of RealGM.

I think its quite interesting that moves like the trade of Kurt Thomas or Malik Rose which were criticized by almost everybody turn out to be not bad at all.
(Thomas brought in Nate Robinson/Malik Rose came along with the pick of David Lee).

Further Thomas brought in the talent and trade value which is just now used by Donnie Walsh to rebuild the roster and clear some space.
Just read and post your opinion.

Was Isaiah not a bad GM at all ?

No Isaiah wasn't a good GM. He overpaid the players that wasn't good on the team, and please don't let me get started on the CBA on how he destroyed it.

Would somebody in this planet give a contract of 5y $30M to Jerome James?

He's a nice drafter, we can give him that. And that's about it.

I'd have him involved in the scouting process and the evaluation of talent for the drafts, but nothing else.

He was always a good drafter. He drafted Stoudamire and he became ROY in 96. He drafted Camby and while his injuries made him inconsistent in Toronto he showed what a great rebounder and defender he was in Denver and New York. He drafted McGrady. He drafted Ariza. He drafted Lee and Robinson, which mentioned before.The only bad pick I can think of right now has been Balkman

I don't know about calling him a good GM, if we're going to consider Jerry West the benchmark for executives doing their job properly and on-court success in measuring a GM's performance then calling Isiah Thomas a good GM is being generous. However, the suggestion that he wasn't all that bad and all the doom and gloom is an overreaction is an interesting one when you look at his tenure from the perspective of that article. I think this paragraphs gets at the heart of the matter:

The impact of Isiah’s GM mistakes has always been grossly over-rated [5], and effect of his terrible coaching (and Larry Brown’s) vastly under-rated [6]. Isiah’s biggest GM errors were ones of chemistry (see Steve Francis and Randolph trades). But GM's who move into abandoned buildings can be forgiven for collecting furniture at garage sales that might not match. Talent can always be swapped for other talent to improve chemistry. Rarely is the reverse true. While Isiah did a lot of the dirty work, few in media acknowledged his toxic working conditions [7].

He certainly managed to acquire some talented players through trades and the draft and his Knicks teams didn't always look too bad on paper; with the way the East has been weak at the lower seeds during the past five years making the Playoffs has not been a completely unreasonable goal, and indeed they qualified for the postseason in 2004, so I'd suggest Isiah's teams did have the potential for some modest success. As we all know though, the great paper teams aren't necessarily cohesive units on the court and all manner of personal and professional issues can combine to derail the season.

Then again, the opposite strategy isn't necessarily any better. The article brought up John Paxson's mistakes which is an interesting comparison because Paxson's strategy has tended to be the direct opposite of Isiah's, bringing in or getting rid of players based on perceived character "issues", at the expense of losing a good player. It's arguably had a little more success to date but not by enough to suggest it's definitely a better approach and now the Bulls find themselves in a similar position, so the point that the blunders of other GMs are overlooked or underrated compared to Isiah's mistakes is a good one.

Alot of his picks in New York though were late in the first round or second rounders. Channing Frye, iirc, was his only lottery pick in New York

I guess the difference with him and Paxson was when players have been traded or left Chicago, they have done well. The J.R. Smith and Chandler deals look really bad right now from a Bulls perspective.

And the Knicks were also left with players who were/are far easier to trade.

You think the Knicks had easier players to trade? Alot of the Knicks players were at the max or were way overpaid and didn't get minutes.

Compared to the Bulls, sure. They found a taker for Zach Randolph's contract and got a couple of expiring ones in return, which is what they wanted. I think they have had and will continue to have better luck than the Bulls in that respect as they have players who have their baggage - personality/playing style issues and as you said, bloated contracts - but there's talent and proven ability there. Supposedly there are a few teams interested in Eddy Curry despite everything that's happened and his benching this year; I doubt anyone's highly interested in Joakim Noah at this juncture. Not easy per se but I still think easier when the players have established some sort of "status" (Zach Randolph having 20-10 potential having reached it with the Blazers, for example).

No Isaiah wasn't a good GM. He overpaid the players that wasn't good on the team, and please don't let me get started on the CBA on how he destroyed it.

Thank you. Isiah was a joke, as bad as the other idiot, Layden. His run was the worst in Knick history, and I've seen plenty of bad Knicks teams.

He is an solid GM in my opinion, and a good drafter. But he just overpays the shit out of some crap players

He is an solid GM in my opinion, and a good drafter. But he just overpays the shit out of some crap players

Did you not see what went on in New York the past few years? That roster was a mess - poorly put together with little chemistry and zero basketball I.Q. Isiah won championships on teams that stressed defense and smart offense. He assembled a squad that did the opposite. He may be good at finding individual talent, but he's sorely lacking as a businessman, GM and coach. Now it's going to take a few years for Walsh to undo Zeke's mess.

I doubt he gets another GM job. I don't know of any owners as dumb as James Dolan.

Perhaps not. Walsh has already put the Knicks in a position to sign a marquee free agent or two in 2010, so a turnaround could be right around the corner. Of course, it's not exactly a ringing endorsement to say that you left a mess that someone else was able to clean up. At best, your mistakes weren't as bad as they originally appeared.