Ferry to meet with Blazers about GM job Wednesday

So does Riley gets poor marks also?

 

If he can't keep Wade in Miami then yes.

BTW he's also won a championship.

 

So has the was about to be fired Danny Ainge

 

Varejao was Cleveland's second best player all year. By different stats, you should mean much better stats in favor of Cleveland. Jamison doesn't have to be benched just used in the right order.

SPM is regressed off APM by applying boxscore numbers. So Statistical Plus Minus is a more sophisticated version of "Magical" Adjusted plus minus.

The only two postive impact players against Boston. (Moon played 7 minutes a game):

If that player played at Derek Fisher level then he was a detriment.

I'm fine with Jamison (in the extreme short term), but the GM also hired Mike Brown. If I was the GM I would have done everything possible to get a coach that understands simple lineup basics.

 

So you weren't a KP fan either? Afterall, he kept Nate.

 

Are there times when you catch yourself and realize you don't even know what your point is anymore?

It must happen every once in a while. It has to.

I mean what is your point here? what are you talking about?

Should Nobody ever be fired again because Danny Ainge maybe almost was but wasn't and then he won a championship?

If so, then to whom does this pertain to? Pritchard? Riley? Ferry?

Who?

What is your point?

 

Well I'd have to look at more than that. GM's like KP and Ferry can have flaws, what matters is the aggregate.

So for example Mitch Kupchak respects Derek Fisher way too much, but being able to pull off the Gasol trade was impressive though. I'm also not a fan of Phil's lineups all the time, but I'd have more to consider than just that.

 

LOL, like Nate was his decision.

 

hahaha, touche'

 

Is that when Magic got...

never mind

 

I think that's a very unfair/unreasonable outlook. He inherited one of the least talented teams in the NBA and took 3 years to make it a 50 win team. After doing so, he had one, injury-riddled season which proves he can't take it to the next level? Really, one season (that was quite unusual in terms of injuries) without championship contention means he failed at the next stage?

Even New York fans, generally considered the pinnacle of panicky, impatient fans, wouldn't consider one injury-plagued season without title contention (after seeing their GM build the team from nothing to a 50 win team) a failure that makes it time to look for someone else.

 

I think without injuries, Portland would have been a dark horse title contender. They'd have needed a little luck (i.e. peaking at just the right time), but they could have defeated any other team in a series. They wouldn't have been favourites, but they had the talent when healthy to compete with anyone else.