Merged: Crabbe Traded to Brk

Why can't I find that thread?

 

Sure but you don't chastise him for it do you? Acknowledging a mistake and chastising someone for one are 2 different things.

You can chastise someone for a decision you disagreed with at the time but chastising him after you agree is hypocritical.

 

Wait, who the hell changed his vote ? There's one more no and one less yes than in your screenshot lol

 

I voted no and I'm not talking shit about NO

 

I believe I was a YES. I'm in the camp that we HAVE to overpay to retain or acquire quality players...... no doubt about it.

 

Screenshot or it didn't happen.

http://www.sportstwo.com/threads/allen-crabbe-signs-offer-sheet-with-nets.302566/

 

I was begrudgingly a yes for matching Crabbe. I didn't like the amount, and repeatedly referred to him as over payed over the year, but I saw matching as the lesser of two evils. I still don't think it was a bad gamble, and I'm not sure over paying him for a year really hurt the Blazers in any tangible way. If we don't get anything for the ACTE however, then matching will have really been shown to be a failed strategy. And if the goal is to simply save the money to use to pay Nurk, the Blazers may let the ACTE go the way of the RLEC.

 

Saying matching was bad because Crabbe didn't pan out is results-based thinking, and results-based thinking is bad

 

Except that young players are on a rookie scale contract. How many players take their game to another level after their rookie contract expires?

 

Huh... I voted "No" too. Go figure.

 

That's called "Results-Oriented Thinking" and it's considered really, really bad. If Allen Iverson takes a 30-footer with 18 seconds on the shot clock, and makes the shot, is it a good shot? No. If one misses a layup, does that make it a bad shot? No. Same thing applies to moves made by GMs, businessmen, layers, ballplayers,...

 

It's a combination. On any given deal, you can't be results-oriented, because luck (good or bad) has too large an impact on any single deal. But when it comes to evaluating a GM's overall record, the results are what count. That is also true for businessmen, athletes, poker players, etc. When Olshey's run with Portland ends, his process won't matter a bit when it comes to evaluating his overall body of work--the results are what will matter.

On an individual deal (or shot), I'll focus on process. On a career (or a run of significant length), I'll focus on results.

 

Absolutely. However, that's not what several on this forum are doing they're applying Results-Oriented thinking to individual deals, presumably because they don't want to acknowledge his obvious fantastic deals.

 

Yeah, that tends to happen a lot, both on deals that worked out surprisingly well and ones that worked on surprisingly poorly. I think, in this thread, though, that a lot of people would argue that the process was poor too. That Olshey overpaid on the faulty assumption that Crabbe was a rising player (the advanced numbers don't really bear out that he was significantly improving overall) and that his contract would look better as the cap rose. I personally didn't like the process and the results aren't too surprising to me.