GM Blanks out

[slinslin]

Hiring Jackson as a GM while he is married to a co-owner of the Los Angeles Lakers is a terrible idea.

Even if that was not the case Jackson has been a coach all his career, he might be the worst GM and talent evaluator of all time.

 

[Chaplin]

Hiring Jackson as a GM while he is married to a co-owner of the Los Angeles Lakers is a terrible idea.

Even if that was not the case Jackson has been a coach all his career, he might be the worst GM and talent evaluator of all time.

Actually, he's not married to Jeannie and it's hard to trust anything you say based on your history and the fact that you think Asst GMs are water boys.

 

[Gaddabout]

1. I'm thrilled, as the front office is a mess. Babby needs to go, too, as does the scouting staff. But ...

2. ... that's not going to happen, because this was a from-the-top decision based on Sarver being embarrassed about openly tanking the season. I get it. Sarver can't stand it, the players were upset about it, someone's going to take the fall. It was Blanks, because he was the easiest to fire, and it helps give the casual fans in this town the impression the team is being aggressive in turning it around. Blanks was a scapegoat. This isn't likely the start of a revolution. It's just the same thing with a difference face for next year.

3. I think the new GM will be David Morway, for all the obvious reasons, but most of all he's established NBA. The good news is he was Donnie Walsh's protege. He also should be considered primary in the rebuilding of the Pacers. Bird is getting all the credit, but I know a lot of people in the NBA who say Morway did it in spite of Bird. The bad news is Morway tends to overplay his hands in negotiations, and isn't afraid of alienating relationships in doing so. He, in fact, was fired because he had pissed off Bird one too many times, not because he was bad at his job.

I don't know of Morway is EXCELLENT, but I think he's COMPETENT and much, much better than what this organization has had in a long time.

 

[slinslin]

Actually, he's not married to Jeannie and it's hard to trust anything you say based on your history and the fact that you think Asst GMs are water boys.

Oh forgive me they are engaged and soon to be married.

What suggests that Phil Jackson would be a good GM? He has no experience at all, coaching players is far different from building a roster and evaluating talent.

 

[Chaplin]

1. I'm thrilled, as the front office is a mess. Babby needs to go, too, as does the scouting staff. But ...

2. ... that's not going to happen, because this was a from-the-top decision based on Sarver being embarrassed about openly tanking the season. I get it. Sarver can't stand it, the players were upset about it, someone's going to take the fall. It was Blanks, because he was the easiest to fire, and it helps give the casual fans in this town the impression the team is being aggressive in turning it around. Blanks was a scapegoat. This isn't likely the start of a revolution. It's just the same thing with a difference face for next year.

3. I think the new GM will be David Morway, for all the obvious reasons, but most of all he's established NBA. The good news is he was Donnie Walsh's protege. He also should be considered primary in the rebuilding of the Pacers. Bird is getting all the credit, but I know a lot of people in the NBA who say Morway did it in spite of Bird. The bad news is Morway tends to overplay his hands in negotiations, and isn't afraid of alienating relationships in doing so. He, in fact, was fired because he had pissed off Bird one too many times, not because he was bad at his job.

I don't know of Morway is EXCELLENT, but I think he's COMPETENT and much, much better than what this organization has had in a long time.

A lot of good stuff there, but one thing I totally disagree with. Blanks was no scapegoat. He really was THAT bad. He might not have been ALL of the problem, but he was a big part of it.

 

[Mainstreet]

A lot of good stuff there, but one thing I totally disagree with. Blanks was no scapegoat. He really was THAT bad. He might not have been ALL of the problem, but he was a big part of it.

Totally agree that Blanks was more than a scapegoat. I did not trust his judgement when evaluating talent.

 

[Gaddabout]

A lot of good stuff there, but one thing I totally disagree with. Blanks was no scapegoat. He really was THAT bad. He might not have been ALL of the problem, but he was a big part of it.

I think you're missing my point. I agree that Blanks really was that bad, but I don't think that's the assessment of the Sarver/Babby group. I think they essentially liked Blanks until he allowed (encouraged?) Hunter to sit a healthy Dragic. Minus that incident, I think Blanks would still be GM. I also think it's telling that they parted ways with Blanks but no word on Hunter, who should be inextricable from Blanks.

That should be cause for concern.

 

[Dr. Jones]

Eh, this is just curing a symptom not the actual disease.

Exactly!

 

[Dr. Jones]

Good riddance. Now will Sarver learn from his mistakes? The new GM will be Sarver's 5th GM in seven years.

Wow.... It took me a minute to grasp how horrible this is. Great little stat.

 

[Mainstreet]

I think you're missing my point. I agree that Blanks really was that bad, but I don't think that's the assessment of the Sarver/Babby group. I think they essentially liked Blanks until he allowed (encouraged?) Hunter to sit a healthy Dragic. Minus that incident, I think Blanks would still be GM. I also think it's telling that they parted ways with Blanks but no word on Hunter, who should be inextricable from Blanks.

That should be cause for concern.

As Hunter is the Suns interim HC, I think it would be unfair to not allow him to interview for the HC position. IMO, it would be wrong to remove him from the interview process when he was placed in such an awkward situation. I generally think an interim HC should be allowed to be interview for the HC position.

In regard to your theory about Sarver and Babby not being happy that Blanks allowed Hunter to sit Dragic, this speaks well about the ethics of Sarver and Babby.

 

[Gaddabout]

As Hunter is the Suns interim HC, I think it would be unfair to not allow him to interview for the HC position. IMO, it would be wrong to remove him from the interview process when he was placed in such an awkward situation. I generally think an interim HC should be allowed to be interview for the HC position.

In regard to your theory about Sarver and Babby not being happy that Blanks allowed Hunter to sit Dragic, this speaks well about the ethics of Sarver and Babby.

I agree with both of the above. On the latter, however, that Blanks would only be out because he failed to compete when all was lost, while ignoring 3 years of ineptitude, says something about the lack of NBA management understanding for both Sarver and Babby.

I like that Sarver likes to compete. I don't like that Sarver thinks taking a step or two backwards to reset a roster is a poor business plan. The alternative is to spend money and make trades that acquire salary cap. He doesn't like that, either, for sane reasons. The third option is to take gambles on high-risk players, which typically produces the results we've seen this year and can often handicap a team's ability to improve for years. Sarver can't reinvent how to build an NBA franchise. He's ignoring 26 years of NBA free agency history.

 

[Errntknght]

Being an assistant to a GM won't make you a good GM, but if you aspire to being a GM its probably better than about any other job you could have. Even if your boss is mediocre you should be able to learn to distinguish bad moves from good ones. You will get to spend time around coaches and scouts, and learn from them - have that opportunity, at least.
I suspect that Blanks had learned enough to be a decent GM but I think his mind set was to make a big splash by being unorthodox... hence Beasley and Hunter. Marcus Morris, O'Neal, Scola and Eric Gordon might have resulted from that same impulse. Being unorthodox simply for the sake of being unorthodox is not good.

 

[Mainstreet]

He's ignoring 26 years of NBA free agency history.

Well there is the NBA's first unrestricted free agent, Tom Chambers.

 

[Gaddabout]

Being an assistant to a GM won't make you a good GM, but if you aspire to being a GM its probably better than about any other job you could have. Even if your boss is mediocre you should be able to learn to distinguish bad moves from good ones. You will get to spend time around coaches and scouts, and learn from them - have that opportunity, at least.
I suspect that Blanks had learned enough to be a decent GM but I think his mind set was to make a big splash by being unorthodox... hence Beasley and Hunter. Marcus Morris, O'Neal, Scola and Eric Gordon might have resulted from that same impulse. Being unorthodox simply for the sake of being unorthodox is not good.

I think this goes for any kind of leadership position, but anyone who's building anything worth rooting for has to have a vision for the entire organization. I don't think Blanks had that. I think he thought the position required him to show how smart and savvy he was. That can't be your goal. That has to be the result of the over-arching vision you have, from who you hire to the culture you create.

I do think Blanks is really smart. I don't think he was ready for the job, though, and he's clearly not as smart as he thinks he is. He's clearly not the evaluator of talent he thought he was.

When Cotton Fitzsimmons arrived, he said, "We're going to push the ball and be exciting." That was the vision he had for the team and it was the team identity from Day 1. Then he went out and every single deal he made was to accommodate that vision. That's what Cotton did everywhere he went. It's why he was successful (if not ultimately championship material) almost everywhere he went.

Tell me one thing Blanks ever said as Suns GM that you thought, "That's the identity he's giving the team."

As far as that goes, Kerr made the same mistake by hiring Porter. Porter came with an identity that ran counter to the roster he had. You can't simply tinker with one philosophy while holding one that's the equates to the opposite. There's pragmatism and then there's chaos. Kerr thought he was bring pragmatic, but he really just invited chaos and stagnation. The GM and the head coach weren't on the same page.

 

[ASUCHRIS]

He's ignoring 26 years of NBA free agency history.

On the bright side, he's also reinventing the NBA front office...

 

[Arizona's Finest]

I want to be happy about this and feel a little bit of hope but then I remember who is making the next hire.

Sigh.

 

[ASUCHRIS]

I want to be happy about this and feel a little bit of hope but then I remember who is making the next hire.

Sigh.

Yep. It's hard to have hope when you have arguably the worst owner in the NBA. Not so much fun in Sunsland these days.

 

[JCSunsfan]

Oh forgive me they are engaged and soon to be married.

What suggests that Phil Jackson would be a good GM? He has no experience at all, coaching players is far different from building a roster and evaluating talent.

This is hard for me to fathom. He coached most of the great players in the league for the last 25 years and game planned every day for the rest. To question his eye for talent is a huge leap.

 

[slinslin]

This is hard for me to fathom. He coached most of the great players in the league for the last 25 years and game planned every day for the rest. To question his eye for talent is a huge leap.

What does that have to do with evaluating talent again? Coaching is something completely different.
Michael Jordan has been one of the greatest players ever and fails miserably at evaluating basketball talent.

Even more so since Phil Jackson almost exclusively coached teams that included the best player (Jordan/Shaq) and were favourites to win it all no matter who was coaching.

 

[JCSunsfan]

What does that have to do with evaluating talent again? Coaching is something completely different.
Michael Jordan has been one of the greatest players ever and fails miserably at evaluating basketball talent.

Even more so since Phil Jackson almost exclusively coached teams that included the best player (Jordan/Shaq) and were favourites to win it all no matter who was coaching.

Coaches evaluate talent every day. Usually good coaches make good gms. If they fail it is because they are bad negotiatiors or they try to coach from the front office. If you cannot see that there is no way I am going to be able to convince you.

 

[slinslin]

Coaches evaluate talent every day. Usually good coaches make good gms. If they fail it is because they are bad negotiatiors or they try to coach from the front office. If you cannot see that there is no way I am going to be able to convince you.

I'd like to hear examples.

And when does a coach evaluate talent? He is given a roster to work with and practices and puts the players through drills and then plays his guys properly.
At no time does a coach have to evaluate long term talent, future prospects etc.
A coach works to win the next game. Even more so a coach like Phil Jackson that has never been part of a rebuilding process.

Phil Jackson and his Lakers ties should stay far away from the Suns.

 

[JCSunsfan]

I'd like to hear examples.

At no time does a coach have to evaluate long term talent, future prospects etc.

Phil Jackson and his Lakers ties should stay far away from the Suns.

Pat Riley, Danny Ainge, Red Auerbach, Cotton Fitzimmons, Larry Bird.

Coaches are always part of the draft and free agent recruitment process. This conversation is silly.

 

[slinslin]

Danny Ainge and Larry Bird coached for what? 2 years? Not to mention Danny Ainge was hardly a good coach and Larry Bird as a GM? What has he done?

Pat Riley as a GM what has he actually done? Drafted Beasley and then lucked out with Lebron.

 

[Arizona's Finest]

Danny Ainge and Larry Bird coached for what? 2 years? Not to mention Danny Ainge was hardly a good coach and Larry Bird as a GM? What has he done?

Pat Riley as a GM what has he actually done? Drafted Beasley and then lucked out with Lebron.

The bolded comment is one of the dumbest I have read in the history of this board and IMMEDIALTY destroys all credibility going forward.

Do your research before posting this kind of inane commentary.

 

[Chaplin]

The bolded comment is one of the dumbest I have read in the history of this board and IMMEDIALTY destroys all credibility going forward.

Do your research before posting this kind of inane commentary.

You obviously haven't been to the World Sports board. It's quite entertaining reading what he writes over there.