PDA

View Full Version : FSN}Charley Rosen's GM Grades



Sontayjuan
10-21-2005, 05:42 PM
I dont agree with many of these at all....just like the the other rankings/grades he does.

http://msn.foxsports.com/nba/story/5007740

How did NBA GMs fare this off-season?
Story Tools: Print Email XML
Charley Rosen / Special to FOXSports.com
Posted: 22 hours ago


Some of these guys are highly visible — the likes of Isiah Thomas, Larry Bird and Kevin McHale, watching their team play while stationed in the shadows of the passageways that lead to the locker rooms.

Others — like Houston's Carroll Dawson, Milwaukee's Larry Harris and San Antonio's R. C. Buford — are rarely recognized in public.
2005 NBA Preview

Some have fancy titles — President of Basketball Operations, Executive VP of Basketball Operations, Chief Executive Officer or simply President.

But they all perform the duties of what has been traditionally called the "General Manager."

What exactly is it that these guys do?

After conferring with their scouts and coaching staffs, they are ultimately responsible for their team's choices in the annual draft. GMs are likewise the primary negotiators of the contracts for all those involved in basketball operations — including, but not limited to players, coaches, assistant coaches, video coordinators, trainers, equipment managers and public relations staff.

An assistant GM routinely deals with the minutia of these contracts and also keeps track of his team's salary cap situation. An assistant will also handle the technicalities inherent in waiving players, signing minor-leaguers to 10-day contracts and similar details.

But the single most important duty of a general manager is deciding which players should be traded (and for whom) and which free agents should be signed. The coach is frequently, but not always, consulted on these decisions.

And therein lies a chronic problem: The GM overvaluing the players he has acquired while the coach feels that he has to suffer the consequences of coaching someone else's players.

In any case, let's take a quick look at the NBA's GMs and see how well, or how poorly, they addressed their respective team's off-season needs.

NOTE — Because any forthcoming contributions that might be made by rookies are strictly guesswork at this point, incoming school boys will simply be ignored Also, any re-signed players will likewise not be included.


Atlanta — Billy Knight
Team needed: Power player in front court. A reliable point guard. A scoring guard. Experience pills for the kiddie corps.

Team got: An over-priced Joe Johnson, who's a dependable scorer but an iffy point guard. Center Zaza Pachulia, who can rebound and defend but can't score.

Job evaluation: Making the Hawklings flight-worthy is a 3-4 year task. Knight's on the right track, but his additions are not enough to make either a significant or an immediate difference.

Grade: B-


Boston — Danny Ainge
Team needed: To get rid of Gary Payton, Antoine Walker and Paul Pierce so that the kids will have room and time in which to grow.

Team got: Two out of three ain't bad.

Job evaluation: Ainge is finally willing to take a step back for the sake of some day soon taking two steps forward.

Grade: B+


Charlotte — Bernie Bickerstaff (doubles as coach)
Team needed: Power bigs to lessen the huge load borne by Emeka Okafor. A talent up-grade throughout the rest of the roster.

Team got: Jake Voskuhl! Strictly a booby prize.

Job evaluation: Even though Bickerstaff was starving, all he could come up with was a stale donut.

Grade: F


Chicago — John Paxson
Team needed: A steady man in the middle with dynamic post-up skills. Shooters everywhere. A better point guard.

Team got: Darius Songalia, the consummate role player. Tim Thomas, the consummate underachiever. Michael Sweetney, the consummate tweener. Malik Allen, the consummate defenseless point-maker.

Job evaluation: The Eddy Curry situation had Paxson trapped between a rock and a hard place. In making good his escape he was severely bloodied.

Grade: C


Cleveland — Jim Paxson/Danny Ferry
Team needed: Bulk in front-court. A legit point guard to relieve LeBron James of some ball-handling duties. Perimeter shooters. Defensive stoppers everywhere.

Team got: A pair of sharpshooters in Damon Jones and Donyell Marshall. Larry Hughes, a ball-monopolizing, non-shooting slasher who cheats on defense. Alan Henderson, an underweight yet capable backup big.

Job evaluation: Where's the beef? Where's the defense?

Grade: C+


Dallas — Donn Nelson
Team needed: Pass-oriented point guard. High-scoring wingman. A big man who can rebound and play defense.

Team got: Doug Christie, a has-been. DeSagna Diop, a never-was who still has potential.

Job evaluation: Perhaps Nelson's phone service was disconnected during the off-season.

Grade: F


Denver — Kiki Vandeweghe
Team needed: Muscle. Perimeter shooters. Aggressive defenders.

Team got: Unless there's a trade in the works involving either Andre Miller or Earl Boykins, Earl Watson is a redundancy.

Job evaluation: Vandeweghe is overly impressed by George Karl's jump-starting the team in the second half of last season. The Nuggets aren't as good as Vandeweghe thinks they are.

Grade: D+


Detroit — Joe Dumars
Team needed: Depth everywhere. A coach who won't annoy and antagonize his players.

Team got: Dale Davis, a valuable war horse. Maurice Evans, a dynamic scorer with unlimited potential. Flip Saunders, who will open up the offense and put some fun back into the Pistons' game plan.

Job evaluation: Dumars couldn't procure a better backup point than the sub-standard one he already has (Carlos Arroyo).

Grade: A-


Golden State — Chris Mullin
Team needed: Two talented big men. A quick backup at the point. Defenders galore.

Team got: Zarko Cabarkapa, still playing like a rookie at age 25.

Job evaluation: Mullin is betting the mortgage that Baron Davis is the second coming of Michael Jordan and just might wind up homeless.

Grade: F


Houston — Carrol Dawson
Team needed: A stable, quick-footed point guard. A creative scorer off the bench. A powerhouse power forward.

Team got: The laissez-faire antics of Stromile Swift. The erratic, self-serving follies of Rafer Alston. The undersized Bogartings of Lonny Baxter.

Job evaluation: Dawson bought a bag full of fool's gold.

Grade: D


Indiana — Larry Bird
Team needed: Perimeter shooters. An active big man who can score in the pivot. A pair of miraculous healings — a physical one for Jonathan Bender and a mental one for Ron Artest.

Team got: Sarunas Jasikevicius, a paler, weaker, slower, infinitely less-talented imported version of Reggie Miller.

Job evaluation: Bird is only human. Still, the sins of seasons past cannot be so quickly redeemed.

Grade: D+


L.A. Clippers — Elgin Baylor
Team needed: Substitutes, defenders and team-oriented players at every position.

Team got: Sam Cassell and Cuttino Mobley, a pair of conscienceless machine-gunners.

Job evaluation: Another Clippers' squad fashioned in Baylor's own image — good offense, no defense.

Grade: D+


L.A. Lakers — Mitch Kupchak
Team needed: Big, long-armed point guard. A center. A power forward. A scorer for the second unit. Defenders.

Team got: Aaron McKie, a vet who will thrive backing up both wing spots. Kwame Brown, still a project.

Job evaluation: The team still lacks an experienced bruiser. And Kupchak still hasn't gotten the point.

Grade: D


Memphis — Jerry West
Team needed: Two physical, hardworking big men. A point guard who can run a team. A wingman who can score.

Team got: Damon Stoudamire, a pint-sized scorer who passes only as a last resort. Eddie Jones, a notorious softie on the downside of a disappointing career. Lorenzen Wright, a lazy big man. Raul Lopez, a bonafide playmaker who can't play a lick of defense.

Job evaluation: West had the right idea. The team desperately needed an overhaul, but the new players are too slick and not powerful enough for the Grizz to win consistently on the road.

Grade: C+


Miami — Pat Riley
Team needed: A brace of point guards. A scorer off the bench. Except for Udonis Haslem, defenders at-large.

Team got: Jason Williams, as wild and destructive as a hurricane. The decaying but still stubborn remains of Gary Payton. Antoine Walker, the perpetrator of bad shots and even worse defense. James Posey, returning from a year-long vacation in Memphis.

Job evaluation: Riley brought in lots of bodies, lot of talent and lots of potential headaches.

Grade: B-


Milwaukee — Larry Harris
Team needed: A center. A point guard. A young, active power forward. More scoring. A player-friendly coach with infinite patience.

Team got: Andrew Bogut, who already talks a big game. Bobby Simmons, a solid wingman who gets the most out of his slightly above-average talent. Charlie Bell, a shooter who doesn't do much else. Jiri Welsch, a spot shooter who needs to play in a disciplined system. Terry Stotts, a nice guy who won't inspire his players to overachieve.

Job evaluation: Harris got lucky with the apparent return to health of T. J. Ford. There's enormous pressure on Bogut to also walk the walk. The team still lacks a core of hard-nose defenders, but Harris has them moving in the right direction.

Grade: B-


Minnesota — Kevin McHale
Team needed: A strong-armed center. An unselfish point guard. Bench scorers. A no-name coach to take the blame for McHale's habitual incompetence.

Team got: Marko Jaric, who will try to do the right things but lacks speed and quickness. Nikoloz Tsitishvili, a Dirk Nowitzki wannabe. Dwane Casey, who will always smile and say positive things about his boss.

Job evaluation: The Big Ticket vs. the world. How much longer can McHale's history with the University of Minnesota keep him untouchable?

Grade: D-


New Jersey — Rod Thorn
Team needed: Experienced center who can score inside. Backup for J-Kidd. Perimeter shooters.

Team got: Marc Jackson, a chest-beating, self-aggrandizing bully with a sloppy game. Jeff McInnis, who has the talent to be a superb player, but has yet to show a mature mindset. Lamond Murray — wind him up and let him shoot, but don't expect him to pass or defend. Scott Padgett, whose shooting and hustle almost compensate for his lack of talent.

Job evaluation: Another good job by Thorn. The new roster constitutes an upgrade over the old, but the team still isn't as good as the local media hype claims.

Grade: B


New Orleans/Oklahoma City — Allan Bristow/Jeff Bower
Team needed: A sturdy point guard. More power up front. Creative scorers on the wings. Defenders at every spot.

Team got: Rasual Butler, a scorer deluxe. Kirk Snyder, a malcontent who did nothing in his rookie season. Jackson Vroman, a lean big man coming off an injury-plagued rookie season. Bostjan Nachbar, a slasher who can defend some.

Job evaluation: To quote Cordelia from King Lear, "Nothing can come of nothing."

Grade: F


New York — Isiah Thomas
Team needed: A slew of talented bigs. To get rid of expensive dead wood. A true point guard. A new coach who can turn chicken crap into chicken salad. A discernible blueprint for success.


Team got: Jerome James, bloated body with a bloated salary. In Eddy Curry, a potent scorer who doesn't rebound, play defense or pass. Jamison Brewer, a journeyman point guard. Larry Brown, a very good coach who believes all the good things said about him … and none of the bad.

Job evaluation: Zeke is still a sucker for the latest and greatest thrill.

Grade: C-


Orlando — John Weisbrod/Dave Twardzik/Otis Smith
Team needed: Perimeter shooters. Mobile small forward to reduce Grant Hill's minutes. An active center. A new coach who can relate to the modern generation of players.

Team got: Tony Battie, who just might fill the bill at center. Keyon Dooling, an out-of-control pointless guard. Brian Hill, too old-fashioned.

Job evaluation: Not nearly enough sleight of hand for the Magic to fool anybody into thinking they are playoff bound.

Grade: D-


Philadelphia — Billy King
Team needed: A viable power forward to rescue Chris Webber from totally embarrassing himself. A center who can score in the low post. A coach who can command the respect of all of the players. A second ball with which A. I.'s teammates can play.

Team got: Lee Nailon, a scorer who shoots first and never asks questions. Steven Hunter, a wonderful role player who fortuitously enough doesn't need the ball to contribute. Maurice Cheeks, who'll let A.I. express his inner child.

Job evaluation: As long as Allen Iverson continues to hog the ball, all of King's moves are strictly cosmetic.

Grade: C-


Phoenix — Bryan Colangelo
Team needed: Muscle. Defense. A backup point.

Team got: Kurt Thomas, tough, smallish and showing a mindset that's always slightly off-kilter. Eddie House, a shoot-'em-up point. Brian Grant, a vertically-challenged, hard-worker whose wheels are falling off. Raja Bell, a top-flight sub. James Jones, a larger, younger, less-talented version of Jim Jackson. Boris Diaw, good defense, bad shot.

Job evaluation: Even with Amare Stoudemire healthy, this team is neither an uptempo nor a grind-it-out outfit. Lots of sound and fury signifying nothing.

Grade: C+


Portland — John Nash
Team needed: A guard/forward who can shoot. Overall toughness. Anyone at any position (except center) who can play defense. A coach who can deal with juvenile delinquents.

Team got: Juan Dixon, a frail guard whose motto is "When in doubt, air it out." In Nate McMillan, a coach who has presence and will command respect.

Job evaluation: It's asking too much to think that Theo Ratliff and Joel Przybilla can cover up every defensive lapse.

Grade: Nash gets an "A" for signing McMillan. An "F" for the new roster. The result is a gentleman's "C."


Sacramento — Geoff Petrie
Team needed: Team-wide toughness and defense — also players with heart, sanity and more athleticism.

Team got: Shareef Abdur-Rahim, who once again will post good numbers for a bad team. Jamal Sampson, who has a slight physique and a slight game. A worthy backup for Mike Bibby in Jason Hart.

Job evaluation: Defense anyone?

Grade: C-


San Antonio — R.C. Buford
Team needed: A power center. Second-string point. Creative scorers at the wings.

Team got: Nick Van Exel and Michael Finley, dynamic point-makers who will need time to adjust. Fabrico Oberto, a banger.

Job evaluation: Slight risk of Van Exel diluting team chemistry. Otherwise a glorious off-season. That's why Buford gets big bucks.

Grade: A


Seattle — Rick Sund
Team needed: A center who can score inside and play a modicum of defense. A backup point. A dynamic coach who can keep all quiet on the western front.

Team got: Rick Brunson, smart but slow. Mikki Moore, a leaper with minimal strength.

Job evaluation: Will play with three seriously flawed centers — (1) Vitaly Potapenko, slow and foul-prone; Robert Swift is still wet behind the ears; Moore is a light-weight. Also look for the team's head-case, Danny Fortson, to take a turn in the middle. Bob Weiss is a nice guy who nevertheless just might end the season in a straitjacket (which, as long as he wears a neck tie, should not be a violation of David Stern's corporate dress code).

Grade: C


Toronto — Rob Babcock
Team needed: A mature point. Two power players, one to start at center and the other to back up both the center and the power forward slots. A scorer off the bench. Better defenders. A quantum leap in talent.

Team got: Mike James, a scorer still learning how to run a team.

Job evaluation: The Raptors will get worse before (and if) they get any better.

Grade: F+


Utah — Kevin O'Connor
Team needed: A forceful center with pivot-power. A point guard.

Team got: Milt Palacio, strictly a backup point. Devin Brown, loaded with potential. And the return of Greg Osterdawg.

Job evaluation: What were Utah's most important accomplishments during the off-season? The healing of Matt Harpring, Andre Kirilenko and Carlos Boozer. Even so, that's no reason for O'Connor to have been so passive.

Grade: D+

Washington — Ernie Grunfeld
Team needed: Defenders. A backup point with court vision. A scorer off the bench. A shooter/scorer at the two spot.

Team got: The aptly named Chucky Atkins, since "chuck" is what he wants to do. Antonio Daniels will eventually be an overall improvement over the departed Larry Hughes. Caron Butler? When it comes to killing the opponents with jumpers, Wiz fans will be able to say "the Butler did it."

Job evaluation: All the minuses have become pluses, except on defense.

Grade: C+

Mordecaii
10-21-2005, 05:45 PM
I know this is a slightly biased viewpoint, but I think this guy gave a horrible review of Larry Bird. Sarunas is a completely different type of player than Reggie so it's no fair to compare them, and we also somehow managed to get Danny who has been a huge help. I don't agree at all.

sweabs
10-21-2005, 05:47 PM
Raptors = F+.

Well, at least it's an F+, and not an F.

Frank Slade
10-21-2005, 05:55 PM
Charley Rosen / Special to FOXSports.com

Kravitz is that you ??? I thought I smelled something..


Well we might as well give up.
Apparently finley and van exel are far superior additions, then Artest, Granger Sarunas.

Oh well better luck next year....

Bball
10-21-2005, 05:56 PM
Not taking the draft into account makes his grading system extra worthless.

And where's the grade for how much money the GM was able to save the owners? ;)

-Bball

Anubis04
10-21-2005, 06:06 PM
1. Anyone who doesn't fail Isiah Thomas as a GM is incompetent.

2. "Maurice Evans, a dynamic scorer with unlimited potential."
ok...Maurice Evans is a decent backup, but this is stretching it quite a bit, I live at the University of Michigan, and every friend I ahve who is a pistons fan has basically never heard of him.

3. Dale Davis - hes a fine worker, and still a good player...but you'll be hard pressed to find anyone, even here in Michigan who believes 2 yrs, 7 million is a fair price for shaq-insurance.

I could go on, but I wont...its pretty apparent to me that Rosen is hardly being impartial, but rather simply touting players his own preconceived (and rather badly ones at that) opinions. Personally, I'm wouldnt be insulted, after all the bottom line is that
I dont care for the opinions of the incompetent.

Destined4Greatness
10-21-2005, 06:18 PM
Detroit, Charlotte, Indy, And Golden State just scream WTF too me. And San Antonio too I guess I mean come on all he had to do was say championship. Thats no skill at all.

BTW in the things he said we needed, Didn't we get them all. You know, just seems like it. But hey according to this gal Karl Malone isn't a HoF.

beast23
10-21-2005, 06:35 PM
Not taking the draft into account makes his grading system extra worthless.

And where's the grade for how much money the GM was able to save the owners? ;)

-BballAgreed. And maybe even include comments regarding the parameters or restrictions that the GM had to work with.

So I give Rosen a solid C-. Oops, see I forgot to filter in the preconditions as well. I guess I'd have to boost Rosen to an A, since I forgot to acknowledge that "he ain't working with a full 52 cards".

Shade
10-21-2005, 06:44 PM
I don't even know what to say. This guy is clearly a moron of epic magnitude.

Kaufman
10-21-2005, 06:56 PM
Agreed. Seems that Rosen might just be trying to stir up the pot.

Anthem
10-21-2005, 08:57 PM
Well, he sure likes Detroit and San Antonio.

Eindar
10-21-2005, 09:44 PM
I like the way he lambasted Charlotte, when they're working with a cap that's, what, half of the rest of the league? Idiot.

wintermute
10-21-2005, 09:53 PM
Well, he sure likes Detroit and San Antonio.

well, that's a no-brainer. championship teams obviously need less tweaking than, say, the hawks or raptors. i bet dumars and buford could have slept through the summer and still have "expert" praise them for keeping the core team intact.

despite saying that the draft will be neglected, milwaukee's bogut somehow got included in the summary. by the same token, saras should not be considered either - he's still a nba rookie, after all. either way, ignoring rookies is assinine.

is it just me, or did rosen bad-mouth practically every player he touched on?

Anubis04
10-21-2005, 09:59 PM
except maurice evans and his "limitless potential":rolleyes:

Anthem
10-21-2005, 09:59 PM
well, that's a no-brainer. championship teams obviously need less tweaking than, say, the hawks or raptors. i bet dumars and buford could have slept through the summer and still have "expert" praise them for keeping the core team intact.
If he'd said that, I might agree. But when your offseason is Evans and Davis, and that gets you an A-, and other teams did much more and get D/F, you gotta wonder.


is it just me, or did rosen bad-mouth practically every player he touched on?

It's not you. That's why he's Charlie Rosen.

NorCal_Pacerfan
10-21-2005, 10:02 PM
Not even worth the eye cycles to read it all. Complete nonsense.

Unclebuck
10-21-2005, 10:22 PM
The crazy thing is does anyone believe for one second that Saras is in any way supposed to replace Reggie. I sure don't.

Believe_in_blue
10-21-2005, 10:52 PM
The crazy thing is does anyone believe for one second that Saras is in any way supposed to replace Reggie. I sure don't.

Yeah, that was the stupidest comparison ever. Both are good shooters, thats the only thing that could possibly compare. Saras could possibly be one of the leagues best passers in a few years. Something that you would never say about Reggie. Reggie was great at moving w/o the ball. Something that you would never say about Saras. No comparison.

FreshPrince22
10-21-2005, 11:14 PM
Don't hate... Dumars is a beast. I realize that "limitless potential" is a strech. But, it's looking more and more like Maurice Evans is going to be the steal free agent of the offseason. So far he's been great, averaging:

21mpg, 12ppg (57% FG, 75% 3FG), 4rpg, 1spg, to go with stellar defense and hustle on both ends. Per ~42 minutes (starter minutes) that's about 24points and 8 boards. All that and Joe D snagged him for 1.5M per year while everyone was oogling over Finley.

Not only that, but he stole the Pistons central division rival's starting center (to be our 5th big man and Shaq insurance). I don't get why people care how much he paid. He got Evans lined up, and spent the rest on Dale. If it was a long term deal I could understand, but it's a 2 year deal. Next year that will be a great expiring contract to package up with someone to pull a dealine deal (ala Sheed trade). Expiring contracts follow one rule of thumb.... The bigger, the better. That's why he gave him as much as possible. Dumars just thinks a step ahead of most GMs in this league.

And BTW, Anubis04, they don't have to be a big name player to be a great pick-up (most fans can't grasp that concept). Dumars has made a living snagging under-the-radar guys, right before they breakout (Billups, Ben, etc.).

I still don't get how you can grade the GM's offseason yet though, since the regular season hasn't even started.

SoupIsGood
10-21-2005, 11:23 PM
I can't believe you guys read this. Rosen is bad for your health. Stay away from him.


And Davis and Evans aren't impressive FA additions. They're aright but nothing to get excited or worry about.

Sontayjuan
10-21-2005, 11:25 PM
Not only that, but he stole their central division rival's starting center(who actually would have been their backup/3rd string center if everyone was healthy) to be our 5th big man and Shaq insurance.

fixed it for ya

FreshPrince22
10-22-2005, 12:10 AM
Every time you post you seem you just want to stir the pot.

No offense, but we already have a guy for that round this way. His name is "Ronnie Artest"

We are not hating anything, but to compare the Pistons and the Pacers off season and see such a darastic change in grade is laughable.

Then again, I stopped reading after I read the Hawks and the Pacers "grades"

I can just scream out random bulls*hit while having sex and it would make up a better piece of reading then this tool Rosen has put together'

I didn't say anything about the Pacers grade. But I saw quite a few mentions of the Pistons grade being too high. So I addressed it. In fact, I think the Pacer's grade is a quite a bit too low. I don't agree with the people who count Artest as an addition that should be credited to the GM though. Sarunas will help out a lot though.

FreshPrince22
10-22-2005, 12:14 AM
fixed it for ya

who would have been the starting center last year if they were healthy? Foster? Because I seem to remember him playing during the playoffs (behind Dale). Either way, it doesn't matter. He was a big part of the comeback you guys made mid-season to get into the playoffs (and advance).

SlamSally
10-22-2005, 12:23 AM
who would have been the starting center last year if they were healthy? Foster? Because I seem to remember him playing during the playoffs (behind Dale). Either way, it doesn't matter. He was a big part of the comeback you guys made mid-season to get into the playoffs (and advance).

The reason why Foster didn't play as many minutes as Dale was because he had not fully recovered from his hip injury. Remember he had to have surgury during the offseason. Dale, from what I recall, was a no-show in the playoffs. It was Foster making the waves. That 20 rebound night was great.:-p

317Kim
10-22-2005, 12:42 AM
D+ :-o !?!? :crazy:

Guaransheed
10-22-2005, 01:39 AM
Charley Rosen / Special to FOXSports.com

Kravitz is that you ??? I thought I smelled something..


Well we might as well give up.
Apparently finley and van exel are far superior additions, then Artest, Granger Sarunas.

Oh well better luck next year....LOL sorry dude but trying to give Larry the credit for the nutjobs suspension ending is hilarious

Anthem
10-22-2005, 01:44 AM
LOL sorry dude but trying to give Larry the credit for the nutjobs suspension ending is hilarious

I have no idea what this means.

Jermaniac
10-22-2005, 11:26 AM
Thats the same guy that said Lebron James is only an average NBA player

Pacers#1Fan
10-22-2005, 01:00 PM
This guy obviously doesn't know anything about the Euro game and he didn't pay any attention to the Draft.

Raskolnikov
10-22-2005, 01:48 PM
I have no idea what this means.
I think he s trying to say in a very peculiar way that larry bird didn t have anything to do with the fact ron s suspension came to an end, so that when you evaluate larry as a GM it s not fair mentioning artest (ending a players suspension is usually not what you call an off season move)

just a thought

SoupIsGood
10-22-2005, 01:50 PM
LOL sorry dude but trying to give Larry the credit for the nutjobs suspension ending is hilarious

nutjob? Hrrm... eh :hmm:

Hicks
10-22-2005, 02:22 PM
What he's saying is, you don't give the Pacers' GM a higher off-season grade because a suspended player isn't suspended anymore.

Anthem
10-22-2005, 03:18 PM
What he's saying is, you don't give the Pacers' GM a higher off-season grade because a suspended player isn't suspended anymore.

Ok, fair enough. But that doesn't mean the Pacers didn't have a good offseason.

Heck, forget Sarunas. Getting Granger at #17 should make the offseason an automatic A+.

Mourning
10-22-2005, 03:35 PM
Aggreed, but he didnt take the draft into account like the looks of it (and leaving that out is moronic by itself).

Regards,

Mourning :cool:

Bball
10-22-2005, 03:49 PM
Ok, fair enough. But that doesn't mean the Pacers didn't have a good offseason.

Heck, forget Sarunas. Getting Granger at #17 should make the offseason an automatic A+.

He said he wasn't going to take the draft into account because those players haven't played yet.

That's why I say his grading is 'whacked'. You have to take the draft into account to grade a GM...

-Bball

Hicks
10-22-2005, 03:51 PM
Ok, fair enough. But that doesn't mean the Pacers didn't have a good offseason.

Heck, forget Sarunas. Getting Granger at #17 should make the offseason an automatic A+.

I would agree with that.

Destined4Greatness
10-22-2005, 03:58 PM
Yet he talked about Bogus.

Anthem
10-22-2005, 04:26 PM
He said he wasn't going to take the draft into account because those players haven't played yet.

Fine. That's a stupid way to judge, but fine. My problem was he didn't even judge us on what he said we needed.

He said we needed "Perimeter shooters. An active big man who can score in the pivot. A pair of miraculous healings — a physical one for Jonathan Bender and a mental one for Ron Artest."

We apparently got the healings. Yeah, it's too soon to say, but then it's also too soon to judge. Other than that, we "needed" an active big man and a shooter. We don't have room on our roster for either one. I'm content with Samaki as a backup, and Sarunas didn't come here to be our HOF shooting guard, he came to be a backup point guard.

Why not judge us like Utah? He says they needed "A forceful center with pivot-power. A point guard." His evaluation was: "What were Utah's most important accomplishments during the off-season? The healing of Matt Harpring, Andre Kirilenko and Carlos Boozer."

They got credit for players healing, but healing wasn't even mentioned in their needs.

SoupIsGood
10-22-2005, 04:29 PM
Rosen has never let logic or common sense get in the way of writing total BS.

FreshPrince22
10-22-2005, 05:02 PM
Ok, fair enough. But that doesn't mean the Pacers didn't have a good offseason.

Heck, forget Sarunas. Getting Granger at #17 should make the offseason an automatic A+.

The only GM's grades who should be affected by the Granger pick are the one's who passed over him to let him fall in your lap. It doesn't exactly take a genius to select him if he's there where the Pacers picked. It's just luck of the draw.

Bball
10-22-2005, 05:04 PM
Fine. That's a stupid way to judge, but fine. My problem was he didn't even judge us on what he said we needed.

He said we needed "Perimeter shooters. An active big man who can score in the pivot. A pair of miraculous healings a physical one for Jonathan Bender and a mental one for Ron Artest."

We apparently got the healings. Yeah, it's too soon to say, but then it's also too soon to judge. Other than that, we "needed" an active big man and a shooter. We don't have room on our roster for either one. I'm content with Samaki as a backup, and Sarunas didn't come here to be our HOF shooting guard, he came to be a backup point guard.

Why not judge us like Utah? He says they needed "A forceful center with pivot-power. A point guard." His evaluation was: "What were Utah's most important accomplishments during the off-season? The healing of Matt Harpring, Andre Kirilenko and Carlos Boozer."

They got credit for players healing, but healing wasn't even mentioned in their needs.


If someone writes a piece and finds reasons to complain or talk bad about the Pacers I don't automatically dismiss it as bad writing.

By the same token, if someone writes a glowing piece on the Pacers I don't proclaim them wise and a great writer.

In Rosen's case here, I have no problem reading his stuff and asking "WTF?". It was a terribly conceived column IMHO and had no basis in logic or reason.

Soup is Good has nailed it.

-Bball

Destined4Greatness
10-22-2005, 05:10 PM
The only GM's grades who should be affected by the Granger pick are the one's who passed over him to let him fall in your lap. It doesn't exactly take a genius to select him if he's there where the Pacers picked. It's just luck of the draw.


No bird was smart enough not to make the same stupid mistake and worry about his knee.

SoupIsGood
10-22-2005, 05:18 PM
The only GM's grades who should be affected by the Granger pick are the one's who passed over him to let him fall in your lap. It doesn't exactly take a genius to select him if he's there where the Pacers picked. It's just luck of the draw.


Somehow I think you'd be singing a different tune if Dumars had made the pick. :innocent:

Anthem
10-22-2005, 05:40 PM
The only GM's grades who should be affected by the Granger pick are the one's who passed over him to let him fall in your lap. It doesn't exactly take a genius to select him if he's there where the Pacers picked. It's just luck of the draw.

SoupisGood is right on this one.

That being said, it's kind of like shooting the moon in hearts. Whether you lose 23 points or everyone else gains 23 points is pretty much the same thing.

FreshPrince22
10-22-2005, 06:12 PM
Somehow I think you'd be singing a different tune if Dumars had made the pick. :innocent:

No, I never said he wasn't a great pickup at the spot. But, to reward him for other GM's stupidity? It's not like he reached for a player, and it turned out to be a great pick. The great pick just fell in his lap. I don't see how this should make him any better a GM. It just makes everyone who passed up on him that much worse. IMO, Danny was a no-brainer at that spot, that's why I wouldn't praise him for it. But that's just me.

SoupIsGood
10-22-2005, 07:24 PM
No, I never said he wasn't a great pickup at the spot. But, to reward him for other GM's stupidity? It's not like he reached for a player, and it turned out to be a great pick. The great pick just fell in his lap. I don't see how this should make him any better a GM. It just makes everyone who passed up on him that much worse. IMO, Danny was a no-brainer at that spot, that's why I wouldn't praise him for it. But that's just me.

A big part of being a good GM is being lucky IMO. :twocents:

sweabs
10-22-2005, 07:34 PM
No, I never said he wasn't a great pickup at the spot. But, to reward him for other GM's stupidity? It's not like he reached for a player, and it turned out to be a great pick. The great pick just fell in his lap. I don't see how this should make him any better a GM. It just makes everyone who passed up on him that much worse. IMO, Danny was a no-brainer at that spot, that's why I wouldn't praise him for it. But that's just me.

I agree with SIG on this one as well...if Dumars had of made the Granger pick we'd be hearing a different story from you.

Either way, by your mode of thinking, you can't give Dumars credit for landing Rasheed since it was due to Billy Knight's "stupidity". Your argument really makes no sense - every move is an indirect result of another GM's so-called "stupidity" as you put it. Bird could have easily taken Gerald Greene at the 17 spot by the way.

Whatever...............Darko for MVP!

BlueNGold
10-22-2005, 07:50 PM
No, I never said he wasn't a great pickup at the spot. But, to reward him for other GM's stupidity? It's not like he reached for a player, and it turned out to be a great pick. The great pick just fell in his lap. I don't see how this should make him any better a GM. It just makes everyone who passed up on him that much worse. IMO, Danny was a no-brainer at that spot, that's why I wouldn't praise him for it. But that's just me.
Danny dropped to #17 because of a perceived risk related to his health. There may have been good reason to be concerned. Apparently, many other GM's thought the same thing...and they are likely not all foolish people. I think it is more likely that one GM (Bird) and his staff was smart and/or lucky rather than 10 other GM's were idiots.

Kegboy
10-23-2005, 06:42 AM
Mr. Madison, what you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.

:applaud:

Good job, VA! I knew you could do it!