You are certainly welcome to that opinion. I believe the player talent is far, far, far more integral to winning than the coach. Or it shows that the team has a pretty deep, good roster, which is what most people believed going into the season. It's nice when perception matches reality. Who are all those other GMs who have made clearly beneficial trades over the past few years ("beneficial" meaning "made their team better")? IMO, a trade that makes sense for Portland would be one that either lands an impact player (veteran or otherwise) that rapidly accelerates the team's championship timetable, even if that player is costly, or else a useful player that doesn't cost Portland a player who has a chance to be important to future title runs. I don't find it surprising at all that such trades are rare and hard to come by, even for good GMs. No, not a new theory. An obvious tautology: It's good to make good trades and bad to make bad trades. Some people hold to the rather strange belief that it's always good to make trades, and it doesn't matter whether the trade helps.
Not sure if I agree. We also gave up Jarret Jack in that trade, and at this point the genuine article is looking better than "Jarret Jack on steroids". Since he has been in the starting lineup the Raptors are playing really well; he is shooting 47% and has cut down on his turnovers. And I think he's a better defender than Bayless. I might go so far as to say that at this point he is a better all around point guard than anyone on the Blazers.
Nice logic. What if the trainer only bandaged people when it benefits the team? Or if McMillan only changes the lineup when it benefits the team? That's like only trading when it benefits the team. I'm sure that if Pritchard WANTED to, he could trade the entire roster tomorrow. Just like McMillan could have 82 different starting lineups and make a substitution every time the ball goes out of bounds. And Jay Jensen could but a bandage, tourniquet, leeches, etc on every player on the roster if he felt like it. But does any of that make the team better? No...not really. Speaking of wishful thinking, all of you people bitching about trades that should be made that aren't even remotely possible is idiotic. And what exactly are these trades that haven't benefited the team? (Miller wasn't a trade, for one thing.) We actually acquired the following players via trade: Brandon Roy, Lamarcus Aldridge, Rudy Fernandez, Jerryd Bayless, Nicolas Batum, Dante Cunningham, Jeff Pendergraph. Wow. That's a lot of our players.
Oh please. Jack has a much lower AST% and a much higher TOV% than Andre Miller. His DRtg of 115 is abysmally bad and makes Andre Miller look like Bruce Bowen by comparison. Miller has 4.1 WS compared to Jack's 2.6. Miller is better and it's not close. Based on this year's performance, Jack and Bayless is a toss-up. But, given that Bayless is 5 years younger, as 1/7 the NBA experience and has a LOT more upside, I'd do that trade again in a heartbeat. I bet the Pacers wouldn't say the same. BNM
Your last paragraph: 7 out of 15 is not at all a lot for a pro team. I wouldn't include Fernandez and Bayless as trades that worked out. Pritchard could replace each with an elder Juwan Howard-like pickup and we'd be better off. The rest of your post isn't connected to what I said. Obviously, the trainer bandages, and the coach changes the rotation, only when it's good for the team. Yet obviously that will occur more than once every 2 years. Your objection is a non sequitur--it doesn't follow from my post. With your high standards, you are right that a good trade rarely happens. So you don't really believe in trades at the pro level, except maybe one a year for the whole league. Cool. I wish that Pritchard defenders would just come out and say that. I guess my response is, why not save money and fire our GM then? We already have a Business Manager, and a Player Personnel Director who could direct the scouts and the draft. Why do we need a GM if he isn't going to be constantly on the lookout for a good trade? Save some dough!
Sorry I did this wrong, this was in response to BNM: You probably don't mean it to be, but your phrase "oh please" sounds condescending; I would prefer if we discussed this issue in a more respectful manner. I'm not sure how DRtg is calculated; I will admit that I based my opinion of Jack's defense on the fact that draft express scout thought he was the best defensive PG coming out in 2005, the fact that he has the physical tools and the energy, and now the experience, so I would expect him to be a very good NBA defender, but perhaps he is not. I am sure he is not as good a distributor as Miller, but he is a better shooter, especially from the three point line. There is also the leadership issue, not sure how that shakes out. And the intangibles of whether each makes the rest of the team better, which isn't always measurable by assists. I have to admit, if he truly is a bad defender, then you are correct in your assessment.
Yes, very high standards. I believe trades should only be made if they help the team. This means trades are nearly impossible. So, any more breakfast-related posts?
what deals is he turning down? the imaginary ones on the internet chat sites? I'm with none of the above too STOMP
I can see why KP is reluctant on signing a center, but at least get a Center from the D-league for a change. Why keep on recalling Mr Mills for these last couple of games when he doesn't even play. Its stupid. Unless KP does an average deal during this summer hes worthless as a GM in my books. Cake: Good job on your non intellectual comments as they got deleted. Why don't you come up with something substantial?
