FireMorey wrote:
I don't think the Butler situation was his fault. His hand was forced, as Brett Brown didn't want Butler back and Butler didn't want to be back as long as Brown and Simmons were here. From what I've seen, Brand's plan was to run it back and keep Butler, but his hand was forced. Yes, the Horford situation was a mess, but at least all it cost was money. If Harden is washed, that will hurt the Sixers more because they are likely going to re-sign Harden and they gave up picks, Simmons, and other players for him.
I think Brand did a poor job. But I'm saying his start to his Sixers tenure IMO was better than Morey's start. Brand's first two big moves were Butler and Harris. I think getting Harris was a mistake, but I wouldn't call it an awful trade. It was one they shouldn't have made, but at least Harris has been a solid player for the Sixers. I think Brand's best moves are better so far than Morey's best. And if Harden is washed, I think Morey's worst move will be worse than Brand's worst. That's how I'm evaluating it.
Well, much as I hate the term, we'll just "agree to disagree". To me, the Harris trade was a bad one at the time because of how much we gave up for a nice, empty stats kind of player, as well as because he was superfluous on that team. We talked about gauging GM's performances on results, and the result of the Butler trade was beyond disastrous, whether it was directly Brand's fault or not, and that led to two hideous signings.
His tenure created a mess that none of us believed could be solved without at least a partial blowup, but Morey retooled on the fly and got us useful players while getting out of a brutal contract and a useless player. If you want to say that the Butler trade was the best single move either man made, I'll buy that, but unless Harden turns out to be a complete disaster I'll rate Morey's tenure far higher.
