I doubt it's universal, but I've heard enough and read enough to believe that it's not just one guy who has an axe to grind
I still don't see why it is at all important that a GM be "liked" (whatever that means) by other GMs. If a GM is going to put a personal beef with another GM get in the way of improving his owner's team, then I'd say it's the emotional GM who is the one that should be fired. Young people seem to think that being "liked" is somehow important in business. It's not.
If pro sports franchises were run like Fortune 500 companies you'd be exactly right, but they're not These are frequently ego driven enterprises where guys lose money all the time (Allen, Cuban, Gilbert, etc.) in the pursuit of on court success. So with all options being equal, who do you sit down and do business with? The guy who rubs your nose in it, or the guy who keeps his mouth shut? I don't think KP being liked or disliked absolutely impacts his ability to get deals done, but it almost certainly has an impact in the margins -- that is to say if he's offering a much better deal than a competitor, other GMs will almost certainly prefer to deal with him, but when the advantage isn't so clear a bad personal relationship could have a (minor) negative impact, especially when there are 28 other potential trading partners out there.
I completely disagree, and all of this Pritchard stuff comes from one writer, who I am now guesssing is getting spoonfed dirt by someone at Vulcan. Either that, or Warkentien is getting fed info from Vulcan, and is then blabbing it to Wojo. Pritchard turned an injured Outlaw and a mediocre Blake into Marcus Camby for 3 years, and the possibily of getting back Outlaw or Blake if he want them back. This happened in February, yet we've been reading Wojo's "Prichard is a Douche Lord" act for a near and a half. Clearly the Clippers didn't care if Pritchard is the world's biggest asshole, which he isn't.
When are "all options equal?" Generally one guy, or at most a couple, has the player(s) you want. If you need a good young big man who's not hugely overpaid, you don't have 10 GMs or 30 GMs to deal with. Usually you have one or two who have what you need and are willing to deal it. And then, if you're lucky, one of them will want what you have. At that point, how are "all options equal?" I see only two options: trade with the guy you don't like or cut off your nose to spite your face.
Back in 2002, Adrian Wojnarowski wrote a bitter article castigating Paul Allen as the worst owner in sports because he wouldn't fire Bob Whitsitt. It made me hate old Adrian boy. But watching him over the years, I've seen him bitterly criticize many other people. Now, this board thinks he has some special hatred for Pritchard or the Blazers. Nope, this is the attitude Wojnarowski always has, whenever he writes, no matter about whom. On a slightly different subject, here's something new. "I’m told Kevin Pritchard’s official response to why he’s selling his house is “life-changing events.” He is downsizing and looking to pick up a much smaller home in the area to keep when he goes somewhere else. Like many people who live here for anything length of time, he’s fallen in love with Portland and wants to stay connected with a place here year round…just not one to the tune of $3.6-million dollars." http://www.1080thefan.com/pages/2901506.php
You're right. All options being equal probably doesn't come up very often, which is why I said that it maybe only impacts deals at the margins ... as in it probably only affects something like 1-5% of his dealings with other GMs -- effectively no impact at all.
Very interesting. Here's a question about Woj, since you've read more of his articles than I have by a long stretch: is he generally right in his opinions? He called the Trader Bob situation pretty well, but that was obvious to everyone... does his opinion of KP have a similar prescience?
Woj specializes in put-down articles, like Canzano. But Woj pieces are full of facts, not just Canzano emotional fuming. You hit it when you said that what Woj wrote was "obvious to everyone." Typically he recounts the known facts (the negative side) and then throws a spitwad at his victim. So it's easy to be accurate. But in this current case, he has a secret source or two more than usual, so this is a little atypical. His accuracy isn't as obvious as usual. I would guess he's not making anything up, and really has a source or two telling him these things, but I get the impression the sources themselves are guessing. In short--I don't know.
