i think like nate he peaked. to move forward we need a new coach and new gm. this roster isnt championship material
None of the above. If KP doesn't make a move it's because he couldn't make one that made sense for the long term. IKPWT.
I don't evaluate GMs by imaginary trades that various fans believe could have been made. I evaluate them by the moves they actually make and by the bottom-line results (the quality of the teams they build). So far, I've liked the moves Pritchard has actually made, except for the Randolph deal. I think the bottom-line results are very much in his favour as I think he inherited arguably the worst/least-promising rosters in the NBA and has built one of the most-promising rosters in the NBA, one that is contending for a playoff spot despite massive injuries. Maybe the bottom-line results will stop favouring him in the future (as some believe). If that happens, my evaluation of him will change. At this point in time, though, I see no reason to be unhappy with Pritchard. Mid-season trades aren't inherently good...they're only good when they make the team better. The lack of mid-season trades, then, is not inherently bad.
Does that rationale apply to the coach and the trainer? Do you also refuse to judge them on moves they didn't make? --For example, if the trainer hadn't bandaged anyone for 2 years, or if the coach hadn't changed the rotation for 2 years. But, you would say, the actual few bandages were good jobs, and that's all that matters. Pritchard has made practically no trades for over 2 years, and you say that therefore, any possible moves he could have made must be imaginary. Are you using common sense or wishful thinking? Also, you say you judge him only on the moves he HAS made--well, the ones which have produced nothing outnumber the ones which have panned out--Roy, Aldridge, and Miller. ...The voting option, "Paul Allen has KP so wrapped up around his finger" should of course be transposed.
No. Different jobs are evaluated differently. He's made plenty of trades, most of them on draft day. Poor reading comprehension. I said I judge him on the moves he has made and on the bottom-line results, that being the quality of the team he's assembled. While I like the majority of the moves he's made, the results are strongly in his favour, IMO. Batum and Fernandez, too. I'm not hugely enamoured of Fernandez, but I think he's a solid complementary player. I'd love to see a major consolidation trade, I've been posting about how much that would help for a couple of seasons. However, I'm not going to blast Pritchard for not making one when none of us knows if one that made sense has been available.
This. Pritchard has shown he knows what he's doing. I know there are those who have ADD and miss Trader Bob, but we're better off now.
The winning results have come from McMillan, as is proven by the fact that almost the same results occur this season no matter who plays. So you are one of the posters who thinks it's probable that the reason Pritchard hasn't traded for a veteran in his entire stay is that darn it, there just has never been a trade that made sense. All those other GMs found trades to make, but ours just hasn't found one that helps. A new theory has disproven the old common sense. It's best for GMs to sit on their fannies and never make trades.
I'd say that the Bayless trade has worked out as well. He can penetrate and has a PER over 15 in a secondary role. Brandon Rush has been terrible by comparison.
