for king and country
- Jan 20, 2007
How they’re run… compared to what?We have whatever Minnesota, Dallas and Atlanta are doing in real time to see how poorly teams are operated.
I guess Dallas can dream on Wemby tonight, since they worked so hard to lose the last week of the season to avoid the PLAY-IN game. Which we all know is a waste of time, those teams never go anywhere in the NBA playoffs.
Beyond that, I’m not sure what you mean here. HRB makes a lot more sense to me on the economics and business stuff.
Specific directives of the organization, which also, as you suggest, fuck with what lower management can do. To say nothing of the lower levels. Like, can you imagine working your ass off to become an elite player, and you’re playing your ass off for a big contract… and the people at the top don’t really care about how the team does?Are we referring to the actual operations of the organization or the specific directives from ownership? There is a big difference between the two. I think most/all teams operate very well in such a competitive environment....but sometimes their work is negated by these directives. For years, Chris Wallace was ridiculed and a laughingstock by anyone who didn't recognize that his moves were financially motivated by the agenda given to him. There are a ton of examples on the other end as well....Nets, Wolves, etc.
I’m not even talking about tanking for draft picks. The monopoly issue is way bigger than that, right? You qualify your statement with “in such a competitive environment” and I agree 100%. Like, revenue sharing is the exact opposite of market discipline. Imagine if the NBA (or any of our pro leagues) had relegation like in premiere league soccer? Although I actually suspect that the issue is in the mid-range teams that do… well enough. Imagine if revenue were a function of success? As in, like in most industries in our economy?
And it’s not just weird for the players. I know people have interviewed and also got jobs at lower level positions for research and analytics and they say that it’s… they say it’s fucking weird. Lots of ex-players and adjacent who really have no idea what the people whom they are managing are actually doing or, more to the point, can do. I had a mentee at the ‘49ers recently tell a guy, you know, you don’t have to spend a couple weeks finding that data—I can write you some code in 15 minutes. Nope.
And the differences are, from what I’m told, stark. Like, another mentee of mine interviewed to be a data comp engineer at both Charlotte and Boston, and he said it was night and day as to how they were run. (Hint: Boston was better. )
Pro teams can’t fail in this market. They can do better and worse, but they’re not subjected to real market pressure, yeah? Hell, they get subsidized if they do a shit job.
Like you said: Given their environment.
Lower level people bust their asses because they want to work in the industry. As such, the talent pool the teams can draw from is enormous. So they could staff those positions with people of any size, shape, race, or creed all of whom would be qualified.
The fact that there is so much nepotism and hookups in such a lucrative industry speaks volumes, yeah?
If it’s not clear, I’m fascinated by this stuff. And Boston fans have been blessed with some great ownership, although I think the Bruins has to be forced into it by league rule changes, and the Red Sox may be suffering from an ownership that has become less interested since achieving great success that they’ve banked. The thing I think of a lot is Belichick. People frequently talk about the fact that his dad was a coach and he was breaking down film as a kid as a key to his success. Wanna knkw a couple other things about Belichick? Well, his mom was a teacher and he didn’t come up through the Div I GA route but rather has a degree in economics from a world class school. Wonder where he got that idea of looking for players who played positions that he felt undervalued by the market, eh?
Danny Ainge hiring Brad Stevens was genius.
Now do the "woke hires" part.
Know what praeteririo is? It’s a Latin term for the rhetorical technique of bringing something up by claiming that you’re not going to bring it up. I mention it in Latin to underscore the fact that people have been doing it for thousands of years.I deleted the post and I'm not touching that 3rd rail. YMMV on what some NBA teams are doing with their front offices.
And I don’t care what people at summer league grouse about; that kind of whining happens all over. But if you don’t want to talk about, stop talking about it, yes?
“Third rail”… motherfucker, please.
(FWIW, a Dope considered burning you to the ground over this.)