Would you Keep Bryan (with impassioned case for keeping him)
Posted: Wed Apr 13, 2011 4:31 pm
Okay, like Bryan Colangelo or not, I think that one thing everybody would agree on is that he would not have much trouble finding another GM job if he wanted to.
Given that, I think this idea of a two year offer would be nothing more than a slap in the face. Sure, he could have some kind of side deal with Tannenbaum, but why would he stay and work in a city where the majority owner (for as long as the Teachers are in, anyway) clearly doesn't want him around? If I were him and had his kind of options I wouldn't be willing to throw my reputation out the window (as he would be by taking a 2 yr contract) on the off chance that Tannenbaum winds up being able to gain control. He##, once the word leaked out last month or whenever it was about the teachers guy being against my re-hiring it might have sealed the deal on my leaving if I were him. Unless the Pension fund was out of ownership by the time we were negotiating.
To all of the people blindly hating BC, it's a marathon, not a sprint. Where were all of you calling for BC to be fired after his first season? Hmmm, you were strangely silent then. Now, after a couple of years with attempts made at building around Bosh that failed he has started in a new direction. Why are you not willing to try and wait it out and see if the guy who built one good team and one great (PHX) team and won executive of the year twice can turn this around?
Especially when he seems, clearly, to be on the right track.
Prospects for current roster? Check. Demar, Ed, Jerryd, James Johnson aren't an MJ and Pippen base or anything, but they all appear to be solid players that you would have no problem having on your team.
High draft pick coming up? Check.
Cap flexibility? We aren't last year's Heat in terms of having two players under contract or anything, but we definitely are not in some kind of horrid salary situation. And don't try and tell me that Andrea's contract is some kind of millstone around the neck of the franchise. In this day's NBA a 10 mill contract for a guy who has scored 20+ppg is eminently moveable. If you, for some insane reason, think that it is then I think Hedo's contract would like to have a chat with you.
Based on all of that what, exactly is it that makes you think we're so clearly on the wrong track and headed towards death, doom, and destruction?
Sure, there have been mistakes, primarily the transactions for Hedo and Jermaine, but in both of those cases he fixed the problem, literally, in less than a year. Letting Bosh leave was a mistake as well in hindsight, but, as many point out, when we were exiting the all-star break ready to make a push for home court in the playoffs not many people were calling for the trade to happen. Also, where are all the Cuban bashers that should be out there for him letting a two-time mvp walk? Sometimes, stuff happens.
Basically, what I don't really get is what, exactly, is the alternative that the BC haters are putting out there that is going to be so much better? In my mind, there are two formulas for success and every team should be pursuing one of them.
1) If you have a transcendent player like Kobe/Shaq/Tim Duncan you always, always, always, keep them (if you can) and build around them.
2) Failing having that transcendent player, you have to build a competitive *team*. Maybe built around a good/very good player, but still a *team* is what you need to build. KG in Minn versus KG in Boston is a perfect example of an unsuccessful and a successful version of this approach. The recent good Pistons teams, Riley's 'Zo-based Heat and Knicks teams are also good examples.
So, how do you go about building these teams?
Option one is totally beyond our control. Unless we somehow become a destination of choice for players, like the Miami of the north or something, getting that kind of player won't, likely, have anything to do with any skill of our GM. It will require the ping pong balls to bounce the right way in the right draft year.
So, that leaves option two. How to best go about option two? Let's look at the track records of the best teams in the league and try to copy them since they would, appear, to have the perfect gameplan.
Chicago
Good now, but have absolutely suuuuuucked for a good part of the last decade and benefited tremendously from lucking into Derrick Rose when they were already not an absolutely horrible team.
So, would you hire Gar Forman instead of Bryan? Since none of the major drafts which are the basis for the success of this team took place on his watch it would be hard to use the success of the current team as a compelling reason to take him on.
Miami
An incredibly unique situation that has never happened before and won't likely happen again, totally irreproducible. Still, I would be willing to accept that Pat Riley would be a pretty good GM and would be a step up for us. FYI though, despite the fact that I'm saying he's good, he's not some kind of miracle worker. If Pat Riley was in the exact same situation last summer but he was the President of the Milwaukee Bucks instead of the Miami Heat there's no way in H-E-L-L he would have got *either* one of Bosh or Lebron, and he probably would have lost Wade too. Now, he probably would never *have* been GM of Milwaukee either, but that's another argument:)
Boston
Danny Ainge has had some good success the last few years because of a few good moves that he made in assembling this current team. His winning % in his first four seasons though? 42%. Bryan's winning percentage with the Raptors that you all want to fire him for? 45%. Eliminate this obvious tanking year? 49%
Orlando
Otis Smith? Really? Now that I look at the over-all record it does seem like he hasn't actually done that badly. Always nice to have the best defensive centre in basketball to build around though. And, in case you didn't know, Dwight wasn't his draft. That was under the previous regime. Also, how did that letting Hedo go and trading for Vince thing work out?
LA
Good before, good now. Three years in between, after Shaq left and before Pau arrived? .492 winning percentage. Almost the identical winning percentage that you want to fire Bryan for. Also, I'd subtract a not insignificant number of points from his resume due to him having, seemingly, the destination city of choice for NBA players to play in.
Detroit
What's that you say? Why is one of the worst teams in the league included on this list? Because if you go back two or three years ago Joe Dumars was widely considered an incredibly good GM and John Hammond was thought of as another genius, just waiting to get his opportunity. Fast forward a few years. Detroit and Milwaukee both suck to about the same degree and both Dumars and Hammond are being questioned. Ben Gordon and Charlie V? Really?
Oklahoma City
Sam Presti does seem like he's got his head on straight here. Though, a case could definitely be made that he has had some high draft picks and may have lucked into this generation's Kobe instead of its Sam Bowie. Still, those are "if's" and if you're only going to evaluate based on performance I would definitely give him my stamp of approval as a replacement for Bryan.
Dallas
I don't follow them enough to know who the heck can really take the most credit for the success of the team due to Mark Cuban's, seemingly, overpowering hand being in everything. But, since Mark Cuban took over in 2000 they have averaged 56 wins for a winning percentage 69%. So, if you can figure out who's responsible for this success, please sign me up.
San Antonio
You want Dallas' success *plus* three championships during the same time window along with a first place overall finish this year? Go get us RC Buford. Since he took over in 2002 they have averaged 57.5 wins for a winning percentage of 70%. Of course, they have had TD for that whole time and the four years before that they also won 70% of their games so....?
So, this mile-long post fully digested, I would like to see somebody make a logical argument for why we would get rid of BC. Is he RC, the Cuban Frankenstein GM, or Riley? No, he isn't. Is his record as good as Kupchak or Presti, even? No. But why don't you go give any of those guys a call and let me know how you make out?
So, failing getting those GM's, you are looking at the second tier like Ainge, Gar Forman, Otis Smith, and Joe Dumars. These gentlemen, however, while also unavailable right now, have also demonstrated that they are eminently capable of fielding some questionable teams (ainge, dumars) and/or have not really accomplished anything more than Bryan has in his career (Forman, Smith).
So, why would you be willing to throw your team into flux just for a shot at, seemingly, the same level of performance? When, if you accept my Bryan=these guys argument, there's no reason to believe he couldn't bring a championship to town just like Ainge and Dumars did? In spite of their clearly demonstrated deficiencies.
BTW, if you choose "Replace him", can you try justify it with a logical argument and outline what, exactly, your alternative is?
Given that, I think this idea of a two year offer would be nothing more than a slap in the face. Sure, he could have some kind of side deal with Tannenbaum, but why would he stay and work in a city where the majority owner (for as long as the Teachers are in, anyway) clearly doesn't want him around? If I were him and had his kind of options I wouldn't be willing to throw my reputation out the window (as he would be by taking a 2 yr contract) on the off chance that Tannenbaum winds up being able to gain control. He##, once the word leaked out last month or whenever it was about the teachers guy being against my re-hiring it might have sealed the deal on my leaving if I were him. Unless the Pension fund was out of ownership by the time we were negotiating.
To all of the people blindly hating BC, it's a marathon, not a sprint. Where were all of you calling for BC to be fired after his first season? Hmmm, you were strangely silent then. Now, after a couple of years with attempts made at building around Bosh that failed he has started in a new direction. Why are you not willing to try and wait it out and see if the guy who built one good team and one great (PHX) team and won executive of the year twice can turn this around?
Especially when he seems, clearly, to be on the right track.
Prospects for current roster? Check. Demar, Ed, Jerryd, James Johnson aren't an MJ and Pippen base or anything, but they all appear to be solid players that you would have no problem having on your team.
High draft pick coming up? Check.
Cap flexibility? We aren't last year's Heat in terms of having two players under contract or anything, but we definitely are not in some kind of horrid salary situation. And don't try and tell me that Andrea's contract is some kind of millstone around the neck of the franchise. In this day's NBA a 10 mill contract for a guy who has scored 20+ppg is eminently moveable. If you, for some insane reason, think that it is then I think Hedo's contract would like to have a chat with you.
Based on all of that what, exactly is it that makes you think we're so clearly on the wrong track and headed towards death, doom, and destruction?
Sure, there have been mistakes, primarily the transactions for Hedo and Jermaine, but in both of those cases he fixed the problem, literally, in less than a year. Letting Bosh leave was a mistake as well in hindsight, but, as many point out, when we were exiting the all-star break ready to make a push for home court in the playoffs not many people were calling for the trade to happen. Also, where are all the Cuban bashers that should be out there for him letting a two-time mvp walk? Sometimes, stuff happens.
Basically, what I don't really get is what, exactly, is the alternative that the BC haters are putting out there that is going to be so much better? In my mind, there are two formulas for success and every team should be pursuing one of them.
1) If you have a transcendent player like Kobe/Shaq/Tim Duncan you always, always, always, keep them (if you can) and build around them.
2) Failing having that transcendent player, you have to build a competitive *team*. Maybe built around a good/very good player, but still a *team* is what you need to build. KG in Minn versus KG in Boston is a perfect example of an unsuccessful and a successful version of this approach. The recent good Pistons teams, Riley's 'Zo-based Heat and Knicks teams are also good examples.
So, how do you go about building these teams?
Option one is totally beyond our control. Unless we somehow become a destination of choice for players, like the Miami of the north or something, getting that kind of player won't, likely, have anything to do with any skill of our GM. It will require the ping pong balls to bounce the right way in the right draft year.
So, that leaves option two. How to best go about option two? Let's look at the track records of the best teams in the league and try to copy them since they would, appear, to have the perfect gameplan.
Chicago
Good now, but have absolutely suuuuuucked for a good part of the last decade and benefited tremendously from lucking into Derrick Rose when they were already not an absolutely horrible team.
So, would you hire Gar Forman instead of Bryan? Since none of the major drafts which are the basis for the success of this team took place on his watch it would be hard to use the success of the current team as a compelling reason to take him on.
Miami
An incredibly unique situation that has never happened before and won't likely happen again, totally irreproducible. Still, I would be willing to accept that Pat Riley would be a pretty good GM and would be a step up for us. FYI though, despite the fact that I'm saying he's good, he's not some kind of miracle worker. If Pat Riley was in the exact same situation last summer but he was the President of the Milwaukee Bucks instead of the Miami Heat there's no way in H-E-L-L he would have got *either* one of Bosh or Lebron, and he probably would have lost Wade too. Now, he probably would never *have* been GM of Milwaukee either, but that's another argument:)
Boston
Danny Ainge has had some good success the last few years because of a few good moves that he made in assembling this current team. His winning % in his first four seasons though? 42%. Bryan's winning percentage with the Raptors that you all want to fire him for? 45%. Eliminate this obvious tanking year? 49%
Orlando
Otis Smith? Really? Now that I look at the over-all record it does seem like he hasn't actually done that badly. Always nice to have the best defensive centre in basketball to build around though. And, in case you didn't know, Dwight wasn't his draft. That was under the previous regime. Also, how did that letting Hedo go and trading for Vince thing work out?
LA
Good before, good now. Three years in between, after Shaq left and before Pau arrived? .492 winning percentage. Almost the identical winning percentage that you want to fire Bryan for. Also, I'd subtract a not insignificant number of points from his resume due to him having, seemingly, the destination city of choice for NBA players to play in.
Detroit
What's that you say? Why is one of the worst teams in the league included on this list? Because if you go back two or three years ago Joe Dumars was widely considered an incredibly good GM and John Hammond was thought of as another genius, just waiting to get his opportunity. Fast forward a few years. Detroit and Milwaukee both suck to about the same degree and both Dumars and Hammond are being questioned. Ben Gordon and Charlie V? Really?
Oklahoma City
Sam Presti does seem like he's got his head on straight here. Though, a case could definitely be made that he has had some high draft picks and may have lucked into this generation's Kobe instead of its Sam Bowie. Still, those are "if's" and if you're only going to evaluate based on performance I would definitely give him my stamp of approval as a replacement for Bryan.
Dallas
I don't follow them enough to know who the heck can really take the most credit for the success of the team due to Mark Cuban's, seemingly, overpowering hand being in everything. But, since Mark Cuban took over in 2000 they have averaged 56 wins for a winning percentage 69%. So, if you can figure out who's responsible for this success, please sign me up.
San Antonio
You want Dallas' success *plus* three championships during the same time window along with a first place overall finish this year? Go get us RC Buford. Since he took over in 2002 they have averaged 57.5 wins for a winning percentage of 70%. Of course, they have had TD for that whole time and the four years before that they also won 70% of their games so....?
So, this mile-long post fully digested, I would like to see somebody make a logical argument for why we would get rid of BC. Is he RC, the Cuban Frankenstein GM, or Riley? No, he isn't. Is his record as good as Kupchak or Presti, even? No. But why don't you go give any of those guys a call and let me know how you make out?
So, failing getting those GM's, you are looking at the second tier like Ainge, Gar Forman, Otis Smith, and Joe Dumars. These gentlemen, however, while also unavailable right now, have also demonstrated that they are eminently capable of fielding some questionable teams (ainge, dumars) and/or have not really accomplished anything more than Bryan has in his career (Forman, Smith).
So, why would you be willing to throw your team into flux just for a shot at, seemingly, the same level of performance? When, if you accept my Bryan=these guys argument, there's no reason to believe he couldn't bring a championship to town just like Ainge and Dumars did? In spite of their clearly demonstrated deficiencies.
BTW, if you choose "Replace him", can you try justify it with a logical argument and outline what, exactly, your alternative is?
