Minnesota Sports Forum

2017 NBA management rankings, from top to bottom

http://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/19017640/nba-2017-nba-management-rankings-top-bottom

I always thought the Blazers do a pretty good job.

It's kinda sad in a way I am happy we are ranked that high. Lol

It was like we won the NBA Finals for me.

Seems like the list is limited entirely to the 2017 season.

Because I don't think anybody could logically look at Taylor's resume as owner and have him above anybody not named Vivek or Dolan. The results are there for everybody to see.

Or, people are really really high on Thibs handling both roles.

AbeVigodaLive wrote:Seems like the list is limited entirely to the 2017 season.

Because I don't think anybody could logically look at Taylor's resume as owner and have him above anybody not named Vivek or Dolan. The results are there for everybody to see.

Or, people are really really high on Thibs handling both roles.

When you look at some of the teams below them on the list...I can see why the Wolves could be above them...but it's not like you are picking great teams there. Should Bird and the Pacers be higher? Maybe but Bird fired a coach that people thought was pretty good (Orlando has sucked though) and hired a guy people don't think is all that great. Plenty of flawed teams below the Wolves. Who would have thought the Pistons would be where they are now and I think people respect SVG in general. The Wolves probably get some benefit of the doubt that they haven't had a chance to screw things up and Glen went out and got the best people for the job and as A number of people have said a positive about Glen is he doesn't come down and do a bunch of meddling. In some cases that's been bad but if the people he hires have some actual clue about what they are doing that's a big positive. I'm in no way suggesting Glen is a terrific owner...but there are some positives. Just sayin. Like I said #18 sounds great to be honest.

monsterpile wrote:

AbeVigodaLive wrote:Seems like the list is limited entirely to the 2017 season.

Because I don't think anybody could logically look at Taylor's resume as owner and have him above anybody not named Vivek or Dolan. The results are there for everybody to see.

Or, people are really really high on Thibs handling both roles.

When you look at some of the teams below them on the list...I can see why the Wolves could be above them...but it's not like you are picking great teams there. Should Bird and the Pacers be higher? Maybe but Bird fired a coach that people thought was pretty good (Orlando has sucked though) and hired a guy people don't think is all that great. Plenty of flawed teams below the Wolves. Who would have thought the Pistons would be where they are now and I think people respect SVG in general. The Wolves probably get some benefit of the doubt that they haven't had a chance to screw things up and Glen went out and got the best people for the job and as A number of people have said a positive about Glen is he doesn't come down and do a bunch of meddling. In some cases that's been bad but if the people he hires have some actual clue about what they are doing that's a big positive. I'm in no way suggesting Glen is a terrific owner...but there are some positives. Just sayin. Like I said #18 sounds great to be honest.

Indiana has made the playoffs 7 (soon to be 8) times since the Wolves last made them... while completely turning over a ECF roster at least twice.

And without picking higher than #10 in the draft... or bottoming out.

Yes. Bird and the Pacers should be higher. It's not remotely close.

AbeVigodaLive wrote:

monsterpile wrote:

AbeVigodaLive wrote:Seems like the list is limited entirely to the 2017 season.

Because I don't think anybody could logically look at Taylor's resume as owner and have him above anybody not named Vivek or Dolan. The results are there for everybody to see.

Or, people are really really high on Thibs handling both roles.

When you look at some of the teams below them on the list...I can see why the Wolves could be above them...but it's not like you are picking great teams there. Should Bird and the Pacers be higher? Maybe but Bird fired a coach that people thought was pretty good (Orlando has sucked though) and hired a guy people don't think is all that great. Plenty of flawed teams below the Wolves. Who would have thought the Pistons would be where they are now and I think people respect SVG in general. The Wolves probably get some benefit of the doubt that they haven't had a chance to screw things up and Glen went out and got the best people for the job and as A number of people have said a positive about Glen is he doesn't come down and do a bunch of meddling. In some cases that's been bad but if the people he hires have some actual clue about what they are doing that's a big positive. I'm in no way suggesting Glen is a terrific owner...but there are some positives. Just sayin. Like I said #18 sounds great to be honest.

Indiana has made the playoffs 7 (soon to be 8) times since the Wolves last made them... while completely turning over a ECF roster at least twice.

And without picking higher than #10 in the draft... or bottoming out.

Yes. Bird and the Pacers should be higher. It's not remotely close.

I was actually going to say the same thing. They retooled their core and stayed in the playoffs. It could turn for the worse if they lose George but to date it's a runaway comparison in terms of competency. This offseason up to Wiggin's looming extension and the Lavine decision is the real period to begin to look at the competency of our management. There have yet to be any major decisions outside of drafting Dunn. It is going to start to get really interesting once the real business decisions start happening for this group.

thedoper wrote:

AbeVigodaLive wrote:

monsterpile wrote:

AbeVigodaLive wrote:Seems like the list is limited entirely to the 2017 season.

Because I don't think anybody could logically look at Taylor's resume as owner and have him above anybody not named Vivek or Dolan. The results are there for everybody to see.

Or, people are really really high on Thibs handling both roles.

When you look at some of the teams below them on the list...I can see why the Wolves could be above them...but it's not like you are picking great teams there. Should Bird and the Pacers be higher? Maybe but Bird fired a coach that people thought was pretty good (Orlando has sucked though) and hired a guy people don't think is all that great. Plenty of flawed teams below the Wolves. Who would have thought the Pistons would be where they are now and I think people respect SVG in general. The Wolves probably get some benefit of the doubt that they haven't had a chance to screw things up and Glen went out and got the best people for the job and as A number of people have said a positive about Glen is he doesn't come down and do a bunch of meddling. In some cases that's been bad but if the people he hires have some actual clue about what they are doing that's a big positive. I'm in no way suggesting Glen is a terrific owner...but there are some positives. Just sayin. Like I said #18 sounds great to be honest.

Indiana has made the playoffs 7 (soon to be 8) times since the Wolves last made them... while completely turning over a ECF roster at least twice.

And without picking higher than #10 in the draft... or bottoming out.

Yes. Bird and the Pacers should be higher. It's not remotely close.

I was actually going to say the same thing. They retooled their core and stayed in the playoffs. It could turn for the worse if they lose George but to date it's a runaway comparison in terms of competency. This offseason up to Wiggin's looming extension and the Lavine decision is the real period to begin to look at the competency of our management. There have yet to be any major decisions outside of drafting Dunn. It is going to start to get really interesting once the real business decisions start happening for this group.

Just to clairify I agree the Pacers should be well above the Wolves. I am just trying to understand or put forth a rational why someone would have them at or below the the wolves. Like Abe said maybe it's completely based on 2017 and beyond. I agree the Wolves have some tough decisions ahead. So far it doesn't seem they have screwed anything up. It's only one year of work but it's still somewhat encouraging. We will see.