Since it appears you haven't been following the Blazers lately and have no idea what you're talking about, I'll just let you go on your way.
So they've announced 3 interviews in public as who they have talked to, but they started off with secret interviews before this?
Well, until anyone can put forth some positives about him that would make him better than what we had...I'll continue on this path.
That's exactly what I'm saying. It doesn't take Larry Miller to have a face-to-face to have an interview with one of these guys.
My guess is before that, it was mroe asking if someone was interested(Presti, West, Petrie) and getting told no. Then they started their interview process.
To reiterate: the team isn't winning now, and with the new CBA, guys like Penn and Cho may be worth their weight in gold. As for the quality of the support staff, you will notice that KP brought in some very talented people. I guess that meant he wasn't qualified either! NO successful GM has a weak support staff. The job has gotten too complicated for any one person to handle alone. That is part of what brought down Trader Bob - he tried to juggle too many balls by himself, and wound up dropping them. As for hiring a woman - you find a candidate as good as KP, and your damned right I would hire them.
Ah, the old, "learn the game, then post" argument. It's pretty hard to counter that kind of devastating rhetoric.
"the team isn't winning now". ok. that's all I need to know about your view and expectations of the team then. OK..guys like Penn and Cho...good numbers guys...exactly WHY would they be better in a GM role than as an assistant to a GM then?
Seems to me you are getting hung up on form over function. I would prefer Cho in the top job with good scouts like B&B in support, to having Ferry/McHale/Kiki/etc in the top job with Cho as support. A retread is more likely to pull a John Nash and decide to not listen to anybody.
Depending on how good they are, such people could be either. A lot of what players do on the court can be quantified by numbers and, if you actually achieve the statistical Holy Grail of understanding individual player contribution to the final score then ALL of what players do on the court could be quantified by numbers. So the reason a smart numbers guy could succeed as a GM is the same reason a smart numbers guy can succeed in investing or business...there are numerical scores (stock prices, revenues, final scores of basketball games) and anyone who's able to figure out what controllable factors lead to favourable scores can be successful. Why do I think Cho might be such a person? Because he seems well-regarded. I'm not interviewing him, so I have to go by things like that.
Couldn't you say that about person and any job? "Exactly WHY would they be better in a (boss) role than as a (subordinate to that boss) then?" Our CEO would be better as a COO. Our CFO would be better as a controller. Our sales director would be better as a field salesman. That doesn't mean that they're not competent for the higher position.
Not stalking, just commenting on your brilliant tactics ... clearly maxiep has no counter for your ironclad argument. :golf clap:
