LOL...really??...you're actually going to go there?? in the trades thread you are going thru and dreaming up CJ trades to every other team in the league. You are happily going down 29 "rabbit holes". Yet you don't want to go down the rabbit hole of what would have happened if Parsons had accepted an offer sheet Olshey actually made? apparently, you're a fan of rabbit holes as long as you control the entrance, so I'm going to widen the entrance to the Chandler Parsons rabbit hole by suggesting the reason you don't like this particular hole is because it leads to another reason to bash Olshey. I've been going down rabbit holes bashing Olshey for years, I'm not going to stop just because you're standing in front of one with a keep out sign. Sorry
There's a big difference between looking at future possibilities and speculatively rewriting history. Makes perfect sense to be willing to do one but not the other. And @hoopsjock is perfectly willing to bash Olshey for his past errors and inactions, so I'd say your characterization of him is a tad off
Not sure how you’re tying someone going through team by team and throwing out trade ideas to going into the 2016 well for the 8 millionth time to bash a GM thats pretty easy to bash without talking about Chandler Parsons.
you'll have to point out where it was that I was "rewriting history". All I did really was push back against the notion that Olshey really didn't make an offer to Parsons. I never went into what would have happened if Parsons became a Blazer other than to say his contract would now be Portland's problem that's probably true and I likely got a bit carried away...sorry hoopsjock
Didn't say you were rewriting history; I was saying that was the kind of "rabbit hole" @hoopsjock stated he wasn't interested in, which you then chided him for. My statement stands; there is nothing inconsistent about him being interested in potential future scenarios and not being interested in speculating about potential impacts of an altered past.
The ET signing looks like an executive of the year move compared to what would of happened if Parsons had picked us instead of Memphis. The guy has played 74 games total going back to the beginning of the 2016 season.
For the record, you can go down any rabbit hole you want. I am not trying to control anything about you or your posts. I personally don't like saying so and so "almost" signed here and that would have been terrible because as I mentioned, everything from that point would have been different. If you want to fantasize about what would have happened, be my guest. In the press conference for the Turner signing Olshey says he had Turner's agent on the phone and they were going to get back to him and he wouldn't let them hang up without agreeing on a deal. That somewhat contradicts that Turner was waiting to sign with us if Parsons didn't. I also put more stock into agent relationships than most probably do. I think it's very important to have good relationships with agents and sometimes that entails doing favors for them. The details of negotiations are often leaked by the agents and sometimes even exaggerated to drum up more interest or bigger offers. I choose not to read too much into stories about signings that didn't happen because of this. Several weeks before free agency I heard a rumor that Parsons was going to sign with Memphis. It's entirely possible that Portland was just used as a pawn to make sure Parsons got a max deal from Memphis. It could even have been that Olshey was okay with the agent leaking that Portland was offering a max contract even if they weren't. It was definitely a mistake to pursue Parsons and Turner so I'm not completely dismissing that but I think it's entirely plausible that Parsons was always going to sign with Memphis and that he was just trying to get the best deal possible. Now Olshey's problem has been an inability to cash in on these favors to agents. The whole point is that he can maybe get a meeting with someone he wouldn't have otherwise or something along those lines. If we signed Parsons though Olshey might not even have his job anymore so isn't there a little bit of irony there?
He was as inconsistent as he could be....he did not play well consisitantly his last couple years here at all....he was not damned good his last season....Lamarcus complained about his lack of work ethic....Neil got rid of him to try to keep Aldridge which didn't work out anyway but to say Nico was great his last year here.....he did NOTHING in the playoffs when Wes went down...Rolo didn't do anything after the break that season either....what you are alluding to is simply not the case.....
One is the past and thus irrelevant. The other is the future and possible. I know which id prefer to focus on.
Nurk is a great defender in the paint. ET, Mo and Chief deal with night in and night out with Lebron, KD, etc....it's just not a center dominant league anymore and ET, Mo and Chief are all 3 good defenders who improved our team defensively as well. for anybody who disagrees with this....I don't think ET is a good fit for our roster but he's a talented player....
Then how do you explain our defense still being near bottom of the league after attaining Aminu and Turner, but then getting good once we got Nurk? Im not saying they are trash or bad defenders, but its pretty obvious in both the eye test and the stats that our defense became good once Nurk came into play.