a lame duck coach and a lame duck GM?
Let me clarify, I'm not talking about winning this year - I'm talking about winning in the near term, within 3 years. While the low-rent Wiz play out the string (and Ted pays out 7-Dinner Dray and 'Shard's contracts), they're also totally mum on whether Ernie G. gets another contract, or another year, or whether they're keeping Coach Wittman. Rather than simply blasting the owner for nickel and diming his own leadership instead of paying for two (I guess three when it comes to coaches if they're paying Flip out), I have a serious question.Has ANYONE in the NBA let a team simply play out the string with coach & GM on expiring contracts and built success off of it? It seems to me the best Ted can hope for is that Ernie and Randy want to show the rest of the NBA they're actually competent despite working for the Wiz, that they'll make some good, long-term moves despite having no expectation of being around to see the fruit of their labor. And after leaving them hanging the whole season, if they have any professional pride, why would they WANT to stay? (other than lack of options)
I can't think of any team in any major sport that built successfully with this leadership model. But I'm not an expert across sports in terms of GM and coaching tenure, so . . . HAS it been done before?