Yeah, it's tough watching other teams be run by GMs who seem to know what they're doing, and then looking at ours...
I do have to agree that in the corporate world people absolutely play favorites and i have personally had my throat cut by someone who i didn't really get along with but this is a pretty big reach and Door #1 pointed out not just a couple but many reasons why it's unlikely.
Some of the points are a little off though. Olshey totally could have been on board with trusting the old staff to take Dame. He just may not have the attachment to that pick like he does CJ. He could absolutely adore Dame and all that, yet, be more proud of CJ and feel slighted he doesn't get more kudos for taking CJ. He might even think CJ could prove him right if he got the chance to be a centerpiece. Who knows, but those aren't things that are completely ridiculous in the corporate world.
I sit here and think. But what if that is actually the case? Nahh. Can't be. Can it? Nahhh Never could happen. Could it? No way.... Maybe? Nahhhh. No way.
Haha exactly. I don't want it to be true, i just can't rule it out. People get ridiculous sometimes and will deny talent just to try to make themselves look better. Hire the guy with all the technical skill to do the job? Nahhhhh. Let's hire the person that doesn't know it as well so they don't make me look bad or know more than me. It is a world of children moving chess pieces.
But this doesn't apply to Neil Olshey. Trading Dame won't make Olshey look better and he knows that. If Olshey cares about success, he keeps Dame. If he cares about looking good, he keeps Dame. You've mentioned I haven't worked in the corporate world three or four times now, but I don't buy the "corporate world" as an excuse for being illogical, especially when the one example you provide doesn't actually apply.
I posted the same thing awhile back. It’s what I call “magical thinking.” Blazer fans indulge in it because management can never really improve the team. It’s just one group of unremarkable players after another, with a few getting swapped out each year. I would argue that even our hope for Simons and Little is overblown. Will they be a little better this year? Yes. Will they make a fundamental difference in our fortunes? No. Unless you believe in magical thinking.
Logically speaking, you are full of shit. It's an issue of probabilities and possibilities and your line of magical thinking ignores reality.
But that didn't apply to Neil Olshey. Trading Dame won't make Olshey look better and he knows that. If Olshey cares about success, he keeps Dame. If he cares about looking good, he keeps Dame. You've mentioned something about the corporate world nine or ten times now, but I don't buy the "corporate world" as an excuse for assuming the illogical, especially when the one example you provide doesn't actually apply.
It's not really about the "corporate world". It's about the sports and entertainment world from what i see. Two very different worlds.
Disagree. Pointless in us going back and forth. You won't understand even a little bit because you have never worked an office job and been a part of the politics where the illogical completely makes sense.
But your example appeared to be based on the sacrifice of logic for image purposes: I don't see how Olshey would think he'd look better by trading Dame and keeping C.J. People can be completely illogical but they always have a motive behind it. What's Neil's motive that makes you think he'd sacrifice all logic and want to trade Dame and keep CJ?