Posted: Sun Jul 24, 2022 6:39 pm Post subject: Who is the (movable) Andrew Friedman of the NBA?
The contrast between the superbly-run Dodgers and the not-so-superbly-run Lakers organization is stark. I know that a lot of us have hoped that the Buss family would sell the team to a deep-pocketed owner, but given the way the Lakers' ownership is structured, a sale is probably not realistic.
Given Jeannie's personality, I doubt if this is realistic either, but I wonder if it's possible to hire a top-notch team president who could turn the Lakers around, similar to the role that Andrew Friedman has played for the Dodgers.
If so, who do you think is the (potentially movable) Andrew Friedman of the NBA?
A top notch team president would want to restructure and his own people. They will never happen with Rambis and the Buss boys all in the front office and scouting department.
A top notch team president would want to restructure and his own people. They will never happen with Rambis and the Buss boys all in the front office and scouting department.
The smaller market guys like Presti aren't really comparable. Friedman uses his team's economic clout effectively. That's a more difficult skill than people think, because most big money teams wind up wasting a lot of money. But is someone like Presti going to work in an environment in which immediate results are expected? Probably not. _________________ Internet Argument Resolved
The smaller market guys like Presti aren't really comparable. Friedman uses his team's economic clout effectively. That's a more difficult skill than people think, because most big money teams wind up wasting a lot of money. But is someone like Presti going to work in an environment in which immediate results are expected? Probably not.
The same thing was said about Friedman though when he was with the small market and low budget Tampa Rays.
The smaller market guys like Presti aren't really comparable. Friedman uses his team's economic clout effectively. That's a more difficult skill than people think, because most big money teams wind up wasting a lot of money. But is someone like Presti going to work in an environment in which immediate results are expected? Probably not.
Friedman came from Tampa Bay. That’s why he knew how to build a legitimate baseball ops and given that the Dodgers can spend the most it makes it unfair to the rest of the league lol.
Joined: 24 Dec 2007 Posts: 36150 Location: Santa Clarita, CA (Hell) ->>>>>Ithaca, NY -≥≥≥≥≥Berkeley, CA
Posted: Sun Jul 24, 2022 9:28 pm Post subject:
I mean, for what it’s worth, the two ownerships have won the same number of championships since they took over: 1. _________________ Damian Lillard shatters Dwight Coward's championship dreams:
Posted: Sun Jul 24, 2022 10:02 pm Post subject: Re: Who is the (movable) Andrew Friedman of the NBA?
markjay wrote:
The contrast between the superbly-run Dodgers and the not-so-superbly-run Lakers organization is stark. I know that a lot of us have hoped that the Buss family would sell the team to a deep-pocketed owner, but given the way the Lakers' ownership is structured, a sale is probably not realistic.
Given Jeannie's personality, I doubt if this is realistic either, but I wonder if it's possible to hire a top-notch team president who could turn the Lakers around, similar to the role that Andrew Friedman has played for the Dodgers.
If so, who do you think is the (potentially movable) Andrew Friedman of the NBA?
In addition to some of the other comments, I think it's a mistake to assume that having a owner with deep pockets would inherently increase the team's chance of success.
The problem really hasn't been the amount the Lakers spend. It's that they have at times spent poorly; they have chased stars instead of worrying about players fit; and they have changed the roster for no particular reason. Those are management issues that have nothing to do with how big a wallet the owner has.
I think it's also a mistake to assume that a deep pocketed owner would be indifferent to the luxury tax. The NBA is full of rich owners who do pay attention to the bottom line.
So you don't think Jeanie would sell but you think she would be willing to hire an outsider? Currently, who in the Lakers front office is an outsider, aka not an acquaintance of Jeanie? I don't get why people think it would be hard to sell the team. All it would take is for all six Buss kids to agree to it. If the team is heading downhill and the Lakers start to lose valuation, they will sell.
Joined: 10 Apr 2001 Posts: 65135 Location: Orange County, CA
Posted: Mon Jul 25, 2022 6:08 am Post subject:
lakersfever714 wrote:
So you don't think Jeanie would sell but you think she would be willing to hire an outsider? Currently, who in the Lakers front office is an outsider, aka not an acquaintance of Jeanie? I don't get why people think it would be hard to sell the team. All it would take is for all six Buss kids to agree to it. If the team is heading downhill and the Lakers start to lose valuation, they will sell.
6 Buss kids. And why would any of them let go of the Laker brand? LA is so big, that even them, "losing valuation" is still what, one of the top 3 most expensive NBA teams to purchase? _________________ Resident Car Nut.
I mean, for what it’s worth, the two ownerships have won the same number of championships since they took over: 1.
Right. And if you have to bet, which team will get the 2nd one first?
Also, if not for the cheating Astros, they’d have 2 already.
That's a pretty weak argument if you only look at ring totals in different sports. Winning a championship in the MLB and NBA couldn't be more different. An all-time great in baseball could never directly the impact the game in a way a basketball player could. Basketball is a star-driven game and baseball is a complete team game. Mike Trout is the LeBron of this current generation in the MLB and he has exactly 1 playoff appearance to his credit, and it was a 3 game sweep. Having generational talents like Kobe/Shaq/LeBron on your team gives you a huge leg-up on putting together a championship-winning team.
The current Dodgers ownership group has consistently put out a competitive, championship-contending team pretty much from day 1. They've made the playoffs in each of the 9 full seasons since the team has been under their control (ownership changed over during the 2012 season). During that same time, the Lakers have been to the playoffs twice (which is the LBJ era), with the 1 title and 1 first round exit.
Presti has the most parallels to Friedman. They both came up in small markets and developed strong reputations for identifying and developing talent. Friedman was snatched up by the Dodgers, who gave him one of the biggest contracts for a FO exec in baseball. I am keeping hope alive that the Lakers do the same with Presti if new ownership eventually takes over.
Presti has the most parallels to Friedman. They both came up in small markets and developed strong reputations for identifying and developing talent. Friedman was snatched up by the Dodgers, who gave him one of the biggest contracts for a FO exec in baseball. I am keeping hope alive that the Lakers do the same with Presti if new ownership eventually takes over.
unlikely... Jeannie basically tripled down on her faith in her brain dead trust of Rambii-Magic-PJ-Pelinka and if that ever blows up completely she probably find some other associate or former Laker to throw all her trust in _________________ (bleep) Kawhi
Presti has the most parallels to Friedman. They both came up in small markets and developed strong reputations for identifying and developing talent. Friedman was snatched up by the Dodgers, who gave him one of the biggest contracts for a FO exec in baseball. I am keeping hope alive that the Lakers do the same with Presti if new ownership eventually takes over.
unlikely... Jeannie basically tripled down on her faith in her brain dead trust of Rambii-Magic-PJ-Pelinka and if that ever blows up completely she probably find some other associate or former Laker to throw all her trust in
Yep, see last sentence of my post. It isn't happening under the Buss regime, but hopefully we luck our way into a ring in one of Lebron's final years to pass the Celtics and the Buss family decides to move forward with selling.
Joined: 09 Apr 2012 Posts: 1985 Location: Southern California
Posted: Wed Aug 10, 2022 10:49 am Post subject:
CandyCanes wrote:
I mean, for what it’s worth, the two ownerships have won the same number of championships since they took over: 1.
This is quite the take here.
Dodgers win year in and year out and use their financial clout to get top notch management and they spread that money through all levels of their organization including scouting and development. They are the winningest franchise in the game over the last decade and are set up to win for years to come.
Lakers outside the "ring" in 2020 have by in large been bad for a close to a decade now, make silly and short sighted personnel moves, and are set up to be irrelevant for the next few years while their owner only wants to keep management within her inner circle.
The two organizations couldn't be more different and I religiously have followed both for 30 years. _________________ 17 time World Champions
Joined: 14 Apr 2001 Posts: 144583 Location: The Gold Coast
Posted: Wed Aug 10, 2022 4:25 pm Post subject:
I would compare the Lakers to the Chicago Bears. Both being ran by kids who will never live up to their ancestors (Jerry Buss and Papa Bear). Both were fortunate to win a title with lots of losing around them. Hopefully the Lakers won’t get to the point where stars start asking out as we are seeing in Chicago. _________________ RIP mom. 11-21-1933 to 6-14-2023.
Posted: Thu Aug 11, 2022 7:06 am Post subject: Re: Who is the (movable) Andrew Friedman of the NBA?
activeverb wrote:
markjay wrote:
The contrast between the superbly-run Dodgers and the not-so-superbly-run Lakers organization is stark. I know that a lot of us have hoped that the Buss family would sell the team to a deep-pocketed owner, but given the way the Lakers' ownership is structured, a sale is probably not realistic.
Given Jeannie's personality, I doubt if this is realistic either, but I wonder if it's possible to hire a top-notch team president who could turn the Lakers around, similar to the role that Andrew Friedman has played for the Dodgers.
If so, who do you think is the (potentially movable) Andrew Friedman of the NBA?
In addition to some of the other comments, I think it's a mistake to assume that having a owner with deep pockets would inherently increase the team's chance of success.
The problem really hasn't been the amount the Lakers spend. It's that they have at times spent poorly; they have chased stars instead of worrying about players fit; and they have changed the roster for no particular reason. Those are management issues that have nothing to do with how big a wallet the owner has.
I think it's also a mistake to assume that a deep pocketed owner would be indifferent to the luxury tax. The NBA is full of rich owners who do pay attention to the bottom line.
That. The Blazers were owned by one of the richest guys in the country for 30 years and won nothing. Lakers have the 5th biggest payroll in the league, so it's not a problem of investing more money. _________________ ....
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum