Pacers' Larry Bird Wins 2011-12 Exec of the Year

[Lamrock]

Executive, Team 1st 2nd 3rd Total
Larry Bird, Indiana 12 8 4 88
R.C. Buford, San Antonio 8 4 4 56
Neil Olshey, L.A. Clippers 6 7 4 55
Gar Forman, Chicago 2 2 - 16
Kevin OConnor, Utah - 2 4 10
Glen Grunwald, New York - 2 2 8
Pat Riley, Miami 1 - 2 7
Sam Presti, Oklahoma City 1 - - 5
Chris Wallace, Memphis - 1 2 5
David Kahn, Minnesota - 1 1 4[/b]

I know the Pacers were one of the most improved teams, but seems like a baffling choice given the cases for Olshey, Buford and O'Connor. Biggest move was trading Kawhi Leonard for George Hill?

[Andrew]

Yeah, I don't know about this one. For the Pacers' improvement, I'd have given Coach of the Year to Frank Vogel before giving Executive of the Year to Larry Bird. I guess it's hard to pick a clear cut winner this year given the abbreviated offseason and the fact that most of the top teams brought back largely the same rosters.

The biggest move of the season was the Clippers' acquisition of Chris Paul. Perhaps the fact that the league was involved in that one from the Hornets' end was a factor there, but when it comes down to it Neil Olshey made a great deal, even backing out and winning a game of chicken with the league to get it done. He'd be my pick.

[uly]

I think Larry bird deserves the award... He helped improve the team without trading main peace or getting superstar from other teams.. Instead he sticks to his draft picks and continued to improve them, if Hansbrough had not suffered an injury, he could be starting now for the PF position rather than getting WEST..
For the spurs....San Antonio has been on the top always, there is no improvement on that only adding good pieces...
And for the clippers, of course they got Cris Paul, Billups, butler and some added late season acquisition..

[Andrew]

The Heat and Bulls didn't trade away any of their main players either. Seeing as how they both finished better than the Pacers, shouldn't that make Pat Riley or Gar Forman Executive of the Year?

[shadowgrin]

The Pacers did improve from 8th seed last season to 3rd best team in the conference.

[Andrew]

They did, but again I'd give Vogel COY before giving EOY to Bird. The Clippers made a huge deal in getting Chris Paul, in the process going from 13th in the West to 5th and going from the butt of many a joke to a team that people were actually interested to see, actually creating expectations other than "they will suck and be in the lottery...again". Not to knock the Pacers success, but that's a bigger step up the ladder, with a more significant acquisition.

That's not to say that Bird doesn't deserve it at all, but to me it's a surprising choice because I don't think he had the strongest claim this season.

[shadowgrin]

Being the 3rd seed team in the conference while being 14 million below the cap is much better than being the 5th seed in the (more tougher?) conference that's 6 million above the cap and Bird did make the decision to retain Vogel as the head coach instead of looking for a new one.



EDIT: scumbag benji posting while my edited post haven't been accepted yet due to loading errors in wonderful IE.

[benji]

I think this is an odd award because someone might make all their most important moves two or three years ago, and then tinker around the edges, maybe add a last piece and it comes together suddenly and win the award that year. (Speaking of the Clippers, Elgin Baylor's award.)

Take Ainge's win in 2008 for example. All he did that year was get Ray Allen from a team who wanted rid of him and was gutting the roster, and then Allen and Pierce convinced KG to sign off on his deal. Which brought in the other veterans once a super-team was assembling.

But without his work in the years prior to assemble players, drafting Perkins, Jefferson, Allen, etc., letting the team lose to get another high pick while keeping Pierce, etc. neither trade ever happens.

Did Ainge do his best work assembling that talent or flipping it for veterans?

Sam Presti for example has no Exec of the Year award despite assembling the entire current Thunder team from scratch, including hiring the coach who got an award out of it.

[Andrew]

Being the 3rd seed team in the conference while being 14 million below the cap is much better than being the 5th seed in the (more tougher?) conference that's 6 million above the cap and Bird did make the decision to retain Vogel as the head coach instead of looking for a new one.

Is it really? I'd have thought moving up eight spots in a tougher conference while pulling off the trade of the year and changing the culture of a historically woeful franchise is just as good a feat, if not better.

[shadowgrin]

The trade of the year was the one that sent Chris Paul to the Lakers, oh wait...Chris Paul really wanted to stay with the Hornets and the Clippers just happened to make a beautiful sales pitch to the Hornets that they just had to trade Paul to the Clippers.
Meanwhile the Pacers are able to become the 3rd best team in the conference while still maintaing 'cap flexibility' in the near future for them to potentially sign a 'DeAndre Jordan' and still be 4 million below the cap that can be used to sign more useful players to their already deep roster.
And one season is still a bit early to be even considering 'changing the culture'. If that's the case Elton Brand and the rest of the 05-06 Clippers really changed the culture of the Clippers then. Just look at all those playoff appearances that followed.

[Andrew]

When it comes down to it, the Clippers made a trade that propelled them from 13th to 5th in the West. Bird seems to be getting credit for moves made in years gone by that have ultimately panned out, though as benji has noted that's usually the way it goes.

[shadowgrin]

Wait, I just read the tally in the OP. We're discussing whether Larry Legend deserved it or not but we missed out on David Kahn getting votes and none of us who posted here opposed or even questioned that?!?! WTF. It's Kahn! KAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHN! KAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHN!

[Andrew]

Selecting Rubio is looking like it was a good move after all, so I guess he's got that going for him.

[shadowgrin]

Selecting Rubio still doesn't forgive Kahn for Jonny Flynn.

[hova-]

Why not give the award to Bird? Just as Benji. said, this award rather goes to GMs who have done a stellar job over some years until they have success in one year.

Further, is this the trade of the year award? No - so why should Olshey get this award? Getting CP3 was obviously a great move, but any GM could have done that given the circumstances that Paul didn't want to stay in New Orleans for any longer.

Although I like the Clipps draft history, I think the Pacers have done a great job to get better year by year, not spending huge money on semi-superstar FAs and instead trying to build a team that can win games without a high volume scorer.

Lamrock, I don't know, but Kawhi for George Hill is in my eyes a deal that both parties have profited from. The Pacers were already stacked on the wings and the Spurs gambled a lot by giving away Hill, a player Pop really liked much. Hill has been pretty valuable for the Pacers as a sixth man and now as a starter instead of Collison.

[Andrew]

Why not give the award to Bird? Just as Benji. said, this award rather goes to GMs who have done a stellar job over some years until they have success in one year.

That's the way it traditionally works, but should it work that way?

And if that is the criteria for the award, wouldn't someone like Sam Presti be an even better choice?

Further, is this the trade of the year award? No - so why should Olshey get this award? Getting CP3 was obviously a great move, but any GM could have done that given the circumstances that Paul didn't want to stay in New Orleans for any longer.

Could any GM have made the deal? Perhaps, but only one actually did. It's not the Trade of the Year award, but making such a significant move is a feather in anyone's cap and surely a factor in deciding Executive of the Year.

[hova-]

Why not give the award to Bird? Just as Benji. said, this award rather goes to GMs who have done a stellar job over some years until they have success in one year.

That's the way it traditionally works, but should it work that way?

And if that is the criteria for the award, wouldn't someone like Sam Presti be an even better choice?

He should have gotten the award - but last year or the year before, because that was when they doubled their win total/won their division title which finally showed the great work of Presti.
Maybe the problem is drawing the line between what a coach does (COTY) and was the executive does (EOTY), because Brooks got rewarded for that great development of his team.

Further, is this the trade of the year award? No - so why should Olshey get this award? Getting CP3 was obviously a great move, but any GM could have done that given the circumstances that Paul didn't want to stay in New Orleans for any longer.

Could any GM have made the deal? Perhaps, but only one actually did. It's not the Trade of the Year award, but making such a significant move is a feather in anyone's cap and surely a factor in deciding Executive of the Year.

You're right, but in a way I don't like to give the GM the praise for those lopsided star-player deals that just happen because the player is not satisfied with his situation.