Reply With Quote
Talented suck ups to their owners honestly. Bryan is the biggest puppet MLSE has ever hired.
I swear that I or a couple of other smart peeps that can talk ball on here could do a better job than half these re s. Im reading that Toronto is close to landing Rudy Gay and it got me thinking just how incompetent the management up in Toronto has been...I cant remember the last time they made a good move. If theyre not overpaying Landry Fields or trying to land a washed up Nash with a ridiculous contract, theyre dead set on making Bargnani the face of their franchise even though hes a terrible player to build around. You also look at some of the contracts Brooklyn gave out and traded for, how bad the Knicks were for most of the 2000s, Otis Smith being a ing re in Orlando, Joe Johnson getting $130 mill in Atlanta, Rashard Lewis being the 2nd highest paid player in the NBA for a while, etc, etc. Why are a bunch of these guys so incompetent?
Talented suck ups to their owners honestly. Bryan is the biggest puppet MLSE has ever hired.
Not graduating from utsa tbh
^ you talkin bout massa?
The whole "not about what you know, but who you know" thing rings true here.
Do you think a good GM would trade David Lee for Boris Diaw?
Canadian fans aren't as discriminating as the rest of us.
I think a good GM would figure out that Diaw makes a fraction of what Lee makes, tbh.
You think a good GM wouldve signed Amare to a max instead of Bosh in ~2010 ?
Kerr was a good GM and he wanted to then quit because Sarver wouldn't let him, so yeah, I do.
I like Kerr but what exactly did he do in Phoenix that was noteworthy, tbh? Could be wrong but the biggest move I remember him making was bringing in Shaq which didnt even work out all that well tbh. Also IIRC wouldnt he had been willing to trade Amare if the JJ Hickson(lol) wouldve been included ?
Bringing in Shaq didn't work, but he had to do something different to actually try and win. Not only that, Hickson has proven to be a pretty damn solid player (one of like 5 guys averaging a double double). Also, the Shaq move didn't cripple them at all. Sure with the benefit of looking back the Shaq move was a bust, but you have to take some chances - you just don't take the ones that do irrevocable damage.
And yes, BKY has some bad contracts, however, they went from not a playoff team to a top 3 seed overnight. While not a contender, they are still solid and have room to make moves (although trades might be a little tougher). Not every team is going to be a legit contender, but a team with a shot at making it to the Conference Finals is nothing to sneeze at (especially when you were a non-playoff team just the season before.)
I agree that the Shaq move was worth a try, and like I said I like Kerr but I just dont think he did anything that jumped out.
Admittedly had no idea Hickson was playing so well in Portland tbh, last I had heard of him was he got cut by the Kings and was picked off waivers by Portland. But either way I just dont see how DoK uses Kerr as a reason why signing Amare to the max wouldve been a good move...especially with the benefit of hindsight.
Taking a team that was on the decline and headed nowhere fast to a team that came within 2 games of the NBA finals was noteworthy.
Trading Diaw and Raja Bell for Jason Richardson and Jared Dudley was the noteworthy move I attribute to Kerr. He completely fleeced Charlotte.
Now you're moving the goal posts and using strawman arguments. You originally asked would a good GM have given Amare a max deal in 2010 (so hindsight is irrelevant), not would it have been a good move.
Since you decided to make hindsight part of this argument, trading Amare for JJ Hickson would have been a great move on Kerr's part.
But to answer your question - yes, there are a lot of bad GM's. For reasons beyond me, people keep making the same mistakes over and over. I'm assuming a lot of that is because they are thinking very short-term due to the nature of the job and like many people they get caught up in name value/hype over many other things.
However, I also believe there are a lot of variables that we as fans do not consider that a GM has to - hence the pretty big gap in what many think a team should do (i.e. tank if you aren't a contender from a fan perspective vs. push for the 8th seed if you are a GM) and what actually happens.
Fans, by in large, usually think only of the on the court ramifications of a move where a GM has financial restrictions (unless your last name is Kupchak) in addition to a lot of other factors.
That is so dishonest. Sure there had been a decline but its not like Phoenix was free falling or anything.
Sure, with the benefit of hindsight (see you use it when its convenient too). Although Diaw was the starting center for their playoff teams and Bell was a solid role player, so not sure I would go as far as saying he completely fleeced Charlotte.
Why wouldnt hindsight be used? Especially since alot of the worries about Amare at the time ended up being true.
Wouldve been a terrible move if we had this same discussion about a year ago. But sure it wouldnt have been a bad move, now that Hickson seems to have got his together.
The were the oldest team in the NBA and hadn't gotten to the conference finals since 2006.
Bell looked absolutely done at the time of the trade and Diaw hadn't been a starter since 2007. Keep revising history.
Richardson was the 3rd scoring wheel in the 2010 team that neither Bell or Diaw would have ever been. Richardson was so much better than anyone else in the trade it was a great deal. Seeing how much you love Diaw I'm not expecting you to look at it without bias tho.
Because your original question was asking about what a GM would do without the benefit of hindsight. Do you seriously struggle to understand this?
With the benefit of hindsight, it would have been a great move. That's irrelevant since hindsight had nothing to do with your original question and you only brought it up after I didn't give you the answer you wanted. I was making a point.
Someone who thinks that Diaw>Lee would definitely not make a good GM.
Because your original question was asking about what a GM would do without the benefit of hindsight. Do you seriously struggle to understand this?[quote]
My original question was what would a good GM have done. A good GM wouldve taken into consideration all the uncertainties surrounding Amares future and not signed him to a long-term deal. Hindsight confirms that that was the smart move.
The fact Kerr wanted to, and the fact Walsh did (widely considered a good GM) disagrees with this. Giving Amare a max deal after the 2010 season isn't even close to other max deals given out recently in terms of stupidity.
Amare wasn't exactly struggling to find places where he could get a max deal.
Alot of non-deserving players have plenty of suitors ready to give them a max deal, that doesnt prove anything tbh. Neither does the fact that worse max deals have been given. Im curious to know how you consider a move that not only had some red flags but ultimately doesnt end up working out good? Thats so dumb and stubborn tbh.
JJ Hickson going HAM tonight
not gonna be easy for a proud mexican though, when the majority of your team don't speak no spanish or
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
