If we DID have a GM at this point, it would mean: 1. We rushed into hiring someone, or 2. We had someone lined up before KP was let go. Either one of those would open the team (and Allen) up to more bashing. And yet you continue to bitch that we've gone almost a week (A WHOLE WEEK!) without a GM. I find that amusing. Ed O.
Wow. Insight into why Whitsitt ultimately failed (after doing very good things) without it being a value judgment or references to "fantasy basketball." I think that's a fantastic point. He didn't spend a lot of time on Whitsitt, but it was one of the fairest, most reasonable assessments of his reign that I've seen.
You're an exception, Maris. BTW Paul Allen did not come from a wealthy family. His parents were a teacher and a librarian. Educated working class.
Here are your words: You're claiming that we simplify the situation to make one person the "hero" and the other a "villan". You also happen to say that we're all "SURE" our speculation is correct. If you're not telling people they lack nuance on this issue, what are you trying to say?
The Pelton article was good but I take exception to OKC is now the good young team instead of Portland. With tons of injuries, Portland was #5. With no significant injuries, OKC was #8. How did OKC supplant Portland? If next year they are #2 and Portland #7, both reasonably healthy, then I'll buy.
I found that to be slightly off, as well. The most recent OKC team wasn't as good or as young as the Blazers were the previous year, and they weren't as good as the most recent Blazers team. And all of this in spite of remarkable good luck re: injuries for the Thunder and the exact opposite for Portland. Things might change next year (as you point out) but "momentum" over the course of multiple seasons isn't worth much in my book. Ed O.
I agree completely. I don't understand how a team we beat 3-1 with tons of injuries when they had perfect health. If anything, to me it shows that they're a distant second.
