RealGM

I took down the Sund sticky which means he'll be hired tomorrow.

Based on what we've read today, cast your vote for the guy you want. I have some selected reading links below.

Here are the options:

Rick Sund
http://hoopshype.com/general_managers/rick_sund.htm

David Griffin
http://www.nba.com/suns/news/bio_griffin.html

John Hammond
http://www.nba.com/pistons/chat_mailbox ... 40428.html

Billy King
http://sports.aol.com/fanhouse/2007/12/ ... illy-king/

John Gabriel
http://hoopshype.com/general_managers/john_gabriel.htm

It would appear that is our universe to choose from.......

None of them are as good as Larry Harris. That's sad.

i go with Hammond as well, i just want a guy that has been involved with a top notch organization for a number of years. The whole culture needs to change not just a few names.

You really should put King/Brown....because Brown comes with King and he gets what he wants.

My choice is the guy I started a thread about.

Why can't Hammond work with Brown? They did in Detroit.

Where is the "GAD" choice? He has my vote.

I wouldn't be opposed to King or Hammond. It looks like King got kind of a raw deal in Philly. His team started to come together this season after he was fired.

Can't believe anyone would vote for Billy King

xTitan wrote:Can't believe anyone would vote for Billy King

I may need to go back to my old sig so that people can get a good look at the horrible moves he made in Philly.

If Bogut and Yi really play great next year, would we all want Larry Harris back as GM? I'm just responding to the King fans......

And I truly believe from what you read that Larry Brown was the guy who was pulling the trigger on the AI for Andre Miller deal, which is what got the Sixers jumpstarted.

Good stuff Reddzone.

Write-in vote:

King probably comes with Larry Brown which I'd like to give a shot. Not only that, but he DID build the 76ers of right now despite the poor moves he's made in the past. That team has a good mix of vets and young guys all of which are actually producing.

I liked this quotes from the Simmons spoof:


King: I'm also a big fan of giving out absurd contracts that tie up your cap space, for three reasons. First, it drives the fans crazy and gets them talking about the team. Second, your fans won't complain that you aren't making any big moves, simply because you can't make any big moves, your lack of cap space prohibits you from getting quality guys unless they have baggage. And third, when people look back and try to put your reign in some sort of historical context, those salary numbers will jump out even more.

Just look at what I've done in Philly: Since we made the 2001 Finals, I gave Mutombo a $68 million extension even though he could have been, like, 48 years old for all we knew. I gave $35.5 million to Aaron McKie. I gave $29 million to Eric Snow. I gave $18 million to Greg Buckner. I gave $40 million to Kenny Thomas and $25 million to Brian Skinner. I gave $25 million to Kyle Korver and $60 million to Sam Dalembert last summer. That's $300 million of contracts to guys who were either on the decline or never that good in the first place. Plus, I traded for other bad contracts, guys like Keith Van Horn, Glenn Robinson, Kevin Ollie, you name it. And then, last February, the pinnacle -- dumping three bad contracts for C-Webb, who everyone thought couldn't be traded because of his contract and because he ran with a limp. Now we have an aging team built around two past-their-prime stars and our cap space is killed through 2008. And we completely wasted Iverson's prime, when he was one of the best players of his generation.


King: See, that's where you're wrong. It's always better to make good picks in the draft -- this way, your fans can become attached to them, then you can trade them for inferior guys with bad contracts. Plus, it throws the media off your scent a little bit. I would much rather draft a decent guy, then trade him down the road, or overpay him with a crazy contract that makes no sense or kills my cap space. If you're openly tanking draft picks, it's too obvious.

Can we have a 'not sund' option? I went with Griffen, I like what the Suns have done as an org and by all accounts he's been a big part of that. Plus I don't think from the reports we can get Hammond.

paul wrote:Can we have a 'not sund' option? I went with Griffen, I like what the Suns have done as an org and by all accounts he's been a big part of that. Plus I don't think from the reports we can get Hammond.

I like Griffen too. Hammond was a major reason why Darko was picked, and that is well...

Hammond
Griffin
Gabriel
King
Sund

europa wrote:My choice is the guy I started a thread about.

I'd prefer him to Sund, but are you sure Derrick Rose is ready to be GM?