Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Top GM's To replace BC if MLSE finally Cans Him

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    I have respect for Joe Dumars but question the revolving door of coaches. He built a tremendous team and anyone who can win without a superstar is good in my books. His struggles to get back to contention and the contracts given out of late are worrisome.

    Danny Ferry would be an absolute "NO!" Look at the state Cleveland is in. He had an open cheque book and one of the best talents in the game.

    Warkentien, in my opinion, is questionable. DEN has been luxury tax payers for years with success but not the type of success one would hope for spending that kind of money. AI with Melo was a failure and foreseeable although he turned in to Billups which was obviously a good move. From my recollection, and correct me if I am wrong, there was a divisive nature in the DEN front office. I'm not sure how much of that was Warkentien's fault versus the owner listening to the opinions of others over his GM. Either way, in this case teh devil you know is better than the one you don't.

    I'd like to see BC stay. I've mentioned this in numerous posts. Minus 2009, the team has been competitive making hte playoffs twice and missing out last year after the team quit (5th at the ASG). This is the first proper rebuild and the foundation is certainly looking strong and sturdy, in my opinion. I hope he gets an opportunity to keep going as he has a history of rebuilding teams quickly (PHX and TOR) and this team should be competing for the playoffs after next year - again all my opinion on what I see here now and banking on good drafting.
    Last edited by mcHAPPY; Tue Mar 8, 2011, 09:17 AM.

    Comment


    • #17
      i mentioned this in another similarly-themed thread a few weeks ago, but if BC isn't extended (and i don't for a second think he won't be), i really feel their best course of action is to key on 1/2 a dozen (or so) high-level assistant GMs currently employed with what are generally considered 'model' franchises & try to pry one of them away (i mentioned guys like dennis lindsay, ryan mcdonough, keith grant, troy weaver, & - as a pipe-dream - kevin o'connor).

      of course, i'm fully aware that this will NEVER happen - MLSE has had a taste of a 'big name' GM in BC (and burke, for that matter), and they like the cache that these names bring. they also think very little of the fanbase's ability to accept a 'no-name' GM.

      as for the specific GMs mentioned in the original post - Joe D just has a poor track record over the last few years with picks, trades & FA signings...but his most egregious act was probably giving rip the most albatross-y contract in the L (IMO). few likely realize it, but it was rip's contract that initiated the AI deal (they did it for his expiring contract)...and that's what started the rapid descent into mediocrity. following that up by overpaying notorious me-first/no-D chuckers (CV & BG), drafting similar players (daye...though i think he has promise), and never replacing billups with a true PG just stink. now...the monroe pick seems gold, but that was also a fairly obvious pick to make at that spot (similar to BC picking ED).

      as for ferry...i'm really not sure what he did as GM that would make him a candidate to run another team, unless one believes that he had a magical hand in the cavs winning the 1st overall pick & selecting an all-time great (followed up by years of putting mediocre talent around him). he's probably in a role best-suited to his abilities...high-level exec of a team with an established management structure in place, where he has input, but likely little-to-no control over personnel decisions.

      warkentian - just hired by the knicks, and is likely in line (eventually) for the GM gig in NY (as long as dolan doesn't cave & give it to thomas) once walsh 'steps aside' (read: is pushed out by dolan/thomas). hmm, let's see - stay in the 'greatest' city in the world with the chance to run a storied franchise (someday) with two stars, or go to TO with the chance to do what, exactly?
      TRUE LOVE - Sometimes you know it the instant you see it across the bar.

      Comment


      • #18
        yertu damkule wrote: View Post
        i mentioned this in another similarly-themed thread a few weeks ago, but if BC isn't extended (and i don't for a second think he won't be), i really feel their best course of action is to key on 1/2 a dozen (or so) high-level assistant GMs currently employed with what are generally considered 'model' franchises & try to pry one of them away (i mentioned guys like dennis lindsay, ryan mcdonough, keith grant, troy weaver, & - as a pipe-dream - kevin o'connor).

        of course, i'm fully aware that this will NEVER happen - MLSE has had a taste of a 'big name' GM in BC (and burke, for that matter), and they like the cache that these names bring. they also think very little of the fanbase's ability to accept a 'no-name' GM.

        as for the specific GMs mentioned in the original post - Joe D just has a poor track record over the last few years with picks, trades & FA signings...but his most egregious act was probably giving rip the most albatross-y contract in the L (IMO). few likely realize it, but it was rip's contract that initiated the AI deal (they did it for his expiring contract)...and that's what started the rapid descent into mediocrity. following that up by overpaying notorious me-first/no-D chuckers (CV & BG), drafting similar players (daye...though i think he has promise), and never replacing billups with a true PG just stink. now...the monroe pick seems gold, but that was also a fairly obvious pick to make at that spot (similar to BC picking ED).

        as for ferry...i'm really not sure what he did as GM that would make him a candidate to run another team, unless one believes that he had a magical hand in the cavs winning the 1st overall pick & selecting an all-time great (followed up by years of putting mediocre talent around him). he's probably in a role best-suited to his abilities...high-level exec of a team with an established management structure in place, where he has input, but likely little-to-no control over personnel decisions.

        warkentian - just hired by the knicks, and is likely in line (eventually) for the GM gig in NY (as long as dolan doesn't cave & give it to thomas) once walsh 'steps aside' (read: is pushed out by dolan/thomas). hmm, let's see - stay in the 'greatest' city in the world with the chance to run a storied franchise (someday) with two stars, or go to TO with the chance to do what, exactly?
        Good post.

        Honestly I think the Raptors are a team that needs a big name GM for all the obvious reasons - whether BC or whoever.

        Ferry took over the Cavs in 2006. He had a 5 year contract and, reportedly, chose to walk away.

        Comment


        • #19
          I'd like to see them get rid of Colangelo because it's the only way the organization can get out from under the millstone called Bargnani. It's obvious he needs to be traded to a bench role with a contender like San Antonio, but Colangelo cannot trade him. It would be an admission of failure, and no gm can admit they failed.

          Comment


          • #20
            Brandon wrote: View Post
            I'd like to see them get rid of Colangelo because it's the only way the organization can get out from under the millstone called Bargnani. It's obvious he needs to be traded to a bench role with a contender like San Antonio, but Colangelo cannot trade him. It would be an admission of failure, and no gm can admit they failed.
            I think the trading of TJ Ford for O'Neal who was traded for Marion who was signed and traded for Turkoglu who was traded for Barbosa are all admissions of failure.

            Comment


            • #21
              yertu damkule wrote: View Post
              i mentioned this in another similarly-themed thread a few weeks ago, but if BC isn't extended (and i don't for a second think he won't be), i really feel their best course of action is to key on 1/2 a dozen (or so) high-level assistant GMs currently employed with what are generally considered 'model' franchises & try to pry one of them away (i mentioned guys like dennis lindsay, ryan mcdonough, keith grant, troy weaver, & - as a pipe-dream - kevin o'connor).
              This list makes far more sense to me than the list of three failed retreads in the first post. Hammonds ran the show in Detroit, Ferry was a failure in Cleveland, and Warkentien isn't leaving the Knicks. Maybe Elgin Baylor is available. Does Isiah Thomas need a new job? Maybe Babcock would come back?

              This is all a moot point as Colangelo is going to be brought back for the next 5 years. I hope, though based on history I don't expect, those years will be better than the last 5.

              Comment


              • #22
                Matt52 wrote: View Post
                I think the trading of TJ Ford for O'Neal who was traded for Marion who was signed and traded for Turkoglu who was traded for Barbosa are all admissions of failure.
                That's very different than the #1 pick in a draft. Even a draft as terrible as 2006. Being the #1 pick is hard both on the player, and on the gm who drafted him. The truth is that many years don't feature franchise players at that spot. But everyone expects the gm to draft such a player anyway.

                Comment


                • #23
                  this is gonna turn into yet another BC thread.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    grindhouse wrote: View Post
                    I agree with both of you but I want to put something out there some food for thought....is it possible dumars decisions as of late could be because of the money issues with the organization as a whole?
                    Does that explain giving horrible contracts to Villanueva and Gordon? Because those were very bad decisions that spent money needlessly.

                    I loved Dumars as a player, as his Detroit team is one of my all-time favourite teams, but as a GM, not so much.
                    Read my blog, The Picket Fence. Guaranteed to make you think or your money back!
                    Follow me on Twitter.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Brandon wrote: View Post
                      That's very different than the #1 pick in a draft. Even a draft as terrible as 2006. Being the #1 pick is hard both on the player, and on the gm who drafted him. The truth is that many years don't feature franchise players at that spot. But everyone expects the gm to draft such a player anyway.
                      A #1 pick who is averaging over 20ppg. He might not be what you want or expect in a number one pick but Bargnani has hardly been a failure. He is far from perfect but far from a failure. This line of thinking, in my opinion, is ridiculous.

                      To be sure I am reading the comments correct you have said:

                      Bargnani was and is a failure,
                      BC is a failure for selecting him,
                      BC is a failure for not trading him,
                      BC is a failure drafting a guy who is 15th in the league in scoring despite his flaws,
                      being the #1 pick is hard and not all #1's are franchise players,
                      however, BC is still a failure for selecting him despite all #1's not being franchise players because that is what people expect.

                      If I interpreted this correct, it sounds like neither BC or Bargnani is a failure. It sounds like people's expectations have failed them.

                      If I continue to interpret the line of reasoning correctly, any GM who did not pick the best player or a franchise player with the number 1 pick in a draft is a failure. It could also be reasoned any GM who did not draft the best player available is a failure i.e. you drafted 8 but the guy at 11 is way better.

                      Anyone else seeing the lunacy in this line of thinking?

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        What do people think of Steve Kerr?

                        I am torn on him personally. He did a great job with the Suns despite the fact that Sarver (owner) kept demanding cost cutting measures (selling draft picks, etc.). He knows when to walk away (not giving Amare $100mil due to health concerns), and finding good gems to fit the team whether it be through free agency or the draft (Frye, Dudley, etc.). If it was not for Sarver then I believe Kerr could have made moves to compete more for a championship.

                        My one complaint about him is that he (like BC) has not built a team that is focused on Defense. He attempted to with the hiring of Terry Porter to establish a tone...but did not see it through with getting appropriate players. I am not sure whether he simply does not prioritize defense (BC...) or there simply was not the team philosophy in place to make that change.

                        Kerr was not a great player, but he was a great teammate. People enjoyed playing with him and he fit a role and was successful for it. I like that he played the game with MJ, Pippen, Duncan, etc. Those are some great people to learn from. Not to mention that he played for two of the best coaches of all time to, in Phil Jackson and Greg Popovich.
                        http://twitter.com/m_shantz

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Shantz wrote: View Post
                          What do people think of Steve Kerr?

                          I am torn on him personally. He did a great job with the Suns despite the fact that Sarver (owner) kept demanding cost cutting measures (selling draft picks, etc.). He knows when to walk away (not giving Amare $100mil due to health concerns), and finding good gems to fit the team whether it be through free agency or the draft (Frye, Dudley, etc.). If it was not for Sarver then I believe Kerr could have made moves to compete more for a championship.

                          My one complaint about him is that he (like BC) has not built a team that is focused on Defense. He attempted to with the hiring of Terry Porter to establish a tone...but did not see it through with getting appropriate players. I am not sure whether he simply does not prioritize defense (BC...) or there simply was not the team philosophy in place to make that change.

                          Kerr was not a great player, but he was a great teammate. People enjoyed playing with him and he fit a role and was successful for it. I like that he played the game with MJ, Pippen, Duncan, etc. Those are some great people to learn from. Not to mention that he played for two of the best coaches of all time to, in Phil Jackson and Greg Popovich.
                          i like him too, though it would have been nice to see what he could have done given more time (and the resources he felt he needed). his big beef with sarver came about because he asked for more money for the developmental areas of the franchise (raises for coaches, expanding the scouting dept., etc.), and sarver basically told him to eff off. i think he has a good mind for the game. the main reason i didn't include him in my wishlist is that i think it would be pretty much impossible to hire him at this time - he's said that he doesn't want the time committment running a team takes until his kids have finished high school. he's probably got the luxury of waiting for when it's right for him, and that includes going to the 'right' team.
                          TRUE LOVE - Sometimes you know it the instant you see it across the bar.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            i think we really need to gauge bc's intentions before we extend him, the question is does he know how to build a succesful team based on defense? The last thing I want is another phoenix where offense takes precedents over defense, you just can't win that way.

                            Im also curious as to what BC thinks of calderon and bargnani? Does he consider that the core of the team? 2 players that aren't good defensively, one is injured more often than not, and the other plays a position in an unorthodox way that has never been a proven way to win it all.(see dirk)

                            If Colangelo is just trying to build another phoenix, as opposed to a younger Boston (which imo is the gold standard, or variations of it), or has no problem keeping bargnani and calderon then yes he needs to go.

                            Who to replace him?Assistant GM's from succesful teams (contenders)who want a shot at running a team. I.e. Boston, Lakers,OKC That's pretty much it, defensive minded contenders.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Matt52 wrote: View Post
                              A #1 pick who is averaging over 20ppg. He might not be what you want or expect in a number one pick but Bargnani has hardly been a failure. He is far from perfect but far from a failure. This line of thinking, in my opinion, is ridiculous.

                              To be sure I am reading the comments correct you have said:

                              Bargnani was and is a failure,
                              BC is a failure for selecting him,
                              BC is a failure for not trading him,
                              BC is a failure drafting a guy who is 15th in the league in scoring despite his flaws,
                              being the #1 pick is hard and not all #1's are franchise players,
                              however, BC is still a failure for selecting him despite all #1's not being franchise players because that is what people expect.

                              If I interpreted this correct, it sounds like neither BC or Bargnani is a failure. It sounds like people's expectations have failed them.

                              If I continue to interpret the line of reasoning correctly, any GM who did not pick the best player or a franchise player with the number 1 pick in a draft is a failure. It could also be reasoned any GM who did not draft the best player available is a failure i.e. you drafted 8 but the guy at 11 is way better.

                              Anyone else seeing the lunacy in this line of thinking?
                              I've seen this argument before, that being drafted #1 has hurt Bargnani's development, and I don't understand it in the least. What Bargnani is doing right now is exactly what I projected him to do five years out. I think he's developed as can be expected. He had no defensive or rebounding acumen when drafted, so there's no reason to think he would somehow acquire it. And he's become the offensive force most thought he would be.

                              Bargnani wasn't the best player from that draft, but it's hard to argue there were that many players that are better than him from that draft.
                              Read my blog, The Picket Fence. Guaranteed to make you think or your money back!
                              Follow me on Twitter.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Shantz wrote: View Post
                                What do people think of Steve Kerr?

                                I am torn on him personally. He did a great job with the Suns despite the fact that Sarver (owner) kept demanding cost cutting measures (selling draft picks, etc.). He knows when to walk away (not giving Amare $100mil due to health concerns), and finding good gems to fit the team whether it be through free agency or the draft (Frye, Dudley, etc.). If it was not for Sarver then I believe Kerr could have made moves to compete more for a championship.

                                My one complaint about him is that he (like BC) has not built a team that is focused on Defense. He attempted to with the hiring of Terry Porter to establish a tone...but did not see it through with getting appropriate players. I am not sure whether he simply does not prioritize defense (BC...) or there simply was not the team philosophy in place to make that change.

                                Kerr was not a great player, but he was a great teammate. People enjoyed playing with him and he fit a role and was successful for it. I like that he played the game with MJ, Pippen, Duncan, etc. Those are some great people to learn from. Not to mention that he played for two of the best coaches of all time to, in Phil Jackson and Greg Popovich.
                                I thought bring in Shaq was a stupid idea that he should have predicted wouldn't have turned out well. Apart from that, though, he certainly was around enough great teams.
                                Read my blog, The Picket Fence. Guaranteed to make you think or your money back!
                                Follow me on Twitter.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X