WizardsWorld wrote:This signing is proof that EG reads REALGM.
I believe that they do read this board, I think that is why we gave Almond a try; Pure conjecture on my part
Garrett Temple and Shelvin Mack. Give us the trophy now.
The link above show's Mack's best game in his stint in the D-league. He looks confident and looks like he has shed some pounds. He can't be worse than anything we have already.
TheBigThree wrote:With all due respect CCJ, I think you're wrong that this is a good sign.
Seriously, cutting a player before the season begins, especially a second year guy like Mack (which, at the time I was vehemently against), indicates that your FO didn't think he's going to grow into a player that can play in your system. I'm sure it's not something they did lightly (based on Cassell's quotes, etc).
Bringing him back is further evidence that EG clearly has no idea what he's doing, and anyone heralding this move (from a competitive standout this is a no brainer, he shouldn't have been cut) is flat out missing the point.
Yeah, admitting your mistake is nice, but it's just another piece of evidence that EG is making things up as he's going along.
Chocolate City Jordanaire wrote:TheBigThree, I can see where you are coming from and I agree that it sure does indicate Wittman and/or the FO didn't want Shelvin. Bottom line as far as I am concerned is the stats from last season. A full year's work showed Mack to be a decent sub. I don't really care that EG has reversed his position. Shelvin was better than Pargo. Could they have used imagination and creativity and gone a different direction? YES. I see your point, TBT, but I happen to be motivated by the do-right principle over getting the best talent at that spot. Mack isn't as much of a player as he is a winner in my book, if that makes any sense at all. On a minimum deal, he's okay IMO.
Nivek wrote:Neither good nor bad news. Replace Mack? Sure, why not? He was an acceptable reserve, but still was below average overall. But, there was no point attempting to replace him with guys were a) no better, and b) older and clearly not getting any better. Mack was still young enough to think he might get closer to average for a PG with experience.
But, the team drafted him, had him for a full season, a summer and a pre-season, and decided he wasn't good enough. They replaced him Price, Pargo and then Livingston. Has he "destroyed" the D-League? No. He's been above average at that level, but nothing great. Not even top PG for the D-League. So, if they've already deemed him not good enough to help the team, why are they bringing him back? Why not give a shot to Someone Else -- maybe one of those D-League PGs who's been more productive so far this season?
The team's decision-making remains a puzzle.