Just how lousy is Chris Wallace?

[Double Dribble]

http://slamonline.com/online/2008/02/pa ... ke-miller/

[GrizzledGrizzFan]

Have to agree with you here. Either you rebuild or you don't. If you're going to use the "we lost with Gasol so and we can lose without him" argument, you should do the same with/for Mike.

[Cubboo]

I have to admit, I admire the guys courage to still come out and do interviews and answer phone calls from anybody. That takes guts.
.
The trade away of Pau was explained as good move because we obtained a huge expiring contract in Kwame. The more obvious answer in retrospect was that Pau was traded to anyone who would take on his contract. When you receive an expiring contract, a young (very raw) player and very high draft picks (likely in the high 20s range) for a talented, but not a Franchise builder, you have gilven him away with what should be a short term goal of salary cap room. What do you do with the salary cap room? It depends on the owner- spend it on someone you consider a francise type player or pocket the difference and save money in a salary dump. CW said himself that they weren't sure if they would use the cap room to sign another player or possibly wait another year to use it. That clearly says that they aren't targeting a free agent. The problem most people I've talked to doesn't seem to be the fact we traded Pau, but was the exchange rate we recieved for him. The other disturbing prospect is the "gossip" we hear that very few teams were in negotiations for his services and he was traded to another western conference team. Honestly, we thought we could have gotten a better deal.
.
When CW discussed Mike Miller on the Verno show he stated "you just don't give away a good player for nothing" when a caller asked if he could have gotten some expiring contracts for Mike. CW beacame very defensive and even a little "peeved" about the line of questioning. I agreed with the caller, if expirings were out there to be had and the direction of the franchise was to strip it down and rebuild it from the bottom up- why wouldn't you consider it? Could it have been a move to soothe his fragile ego after he was lambasted by everyone for making a horribly bad trade? If Miller is a good player you can't give away for nothing- what was Pau?
The statements from Pat Riley say he offered to take on the contract for Brian Cardinal. The trade checker actually bears out that a Miller-Cardinal-Lowry for the expirings of JWill-Ricky Davis would have worked and the possibility of other considerations could have been built in. Riley could be CYAing the fact that he didn't make more progress, for his Miami team so I'll keep that a consideration.

The bigger perception is we are not sure who is the real gm. Is Heisley still running the show and making CW the front man for horrible trades? Or is Chris Wallace convinced that was the best deal he could get for Pau?
Either way CW is the man on the firing line and must take the heat whether he is carrying the corporate banner or just a gm who made a bad trade. Was a salary dump in the works when the embarassment of the first move hurt the ego of the GM/Owner?
Only time will tell.

[KobeFarmarEra]

Jerry West - the Puppet Master

[jefe]

Trading Miller and Cardinal for expirings would be entirely consistant with given motivation for the Gasol trade (rebuilding) - and at this point it would be better than refusing to trade them for expirings IMO. So either CW was/is being entirely disingenuous about the motive for trading Pau or Riley is being less than honest. Regardless, FWIW, I think CW is more like Darth Vader to Heisley's Emperor Palpatine - Heisley is calling the shots and CW is just doing his bidding IMO.

[GrizzledGrizzFan]

Regardless, FWIW, I think CW is more like Darth Vader to Heisley's Emperor Palpatine - Heisley is calling the shots and CW is just doing his bidding IMO.

Rating Wallace as Vaderesque is giving him too much credit. I'd rate it more as Wallace's Igor to Heisley's Dr. Frankenstein...

[SD2042]

Yes Master, coming Master.

[jefe]

-= original quote snipped =-



Rating Wallace as Vaderesque is giving him too much credit. I'd rate it more as Wallace's Igor to Heisley's Dr. Frankenstein...

Nice.

[GoGrizz]

If it is true that the Heat would have taken on Cardinal's albatross contract to go with Miller and Lowry.....then i have to wonder what in the world Wallace is thinking. We could be the "big" player in the off season, and they could build up this franchise however they see fit. Signing free agents....using the capspace to make trades, etc. But to do a halfway rebuilding makes no sense.

[Double Dribble]

Jerry West - the Puppet Master

i believe he's closer to the emperor who wears no clothes.

[Double Dribble]

Getting rid of Cardinal's contract would have been nice, but to say no thanks to someone who says, "Tell me exactly what you want. Give me your dream deal"?

[cinnamon]

That's if Riley was telling the truth.
I observe about him that the things he says are simply the things he says, and it doesn't do to make assumptions about whether they are truth, half-truth, something remotely resembling truth in some way, or something not resembling truth in any way.

[hptmatthew]

Getting rid of Cardinal's contract would have been nice, but to say no thanks to someone who says, "Tell me exactly what you want. Give me your dream deal"?

no kidding. Even disregarding the specific scenario that was involved, when another GM utters that phrase, you look at your assets, look at his, and present the dream deal. If they don't take it, oh well...but there is NO WAY that one passes up such an opportunity.

Unless you're Chris Wallace and you actually think that having Miller here for the rest of this season will help ticket sales enough to offset the extra 15 or so million in cap space that such a trade might have generated.

[Double Dribble]

That's if Riley was telling the truth.
I observe about him that the things he says are simply the things he says, and it doesn't do to make assumptions about whether they are truth, half-truth, something remotely resembling truth in some way, or something not resembling truth in any way.

I've read this four times now, and I still have no idea what you're saying. Or trying to say.

[commadoor 64]

That says he's a crap maker-upper, says what he wants to regardless of what percentage is fact or fiction.

[pardon_my_interruption]

Regardless, FWIW, I think CW is more like Darth Vader to Heisley's Emperor Palpatine - Heisley is calling the shots and CW is just doing his bidding IMO.

This is the more likely scenario.

Things we do know. Jerry West picked Wallace as his successor.

I'm pretty sure Heisley ordered the trade of his max player (Gasol) for non-basketball reasons. Thus the package we received.

I'm pretty sure him ending up in L.A. wasn't a coincidence with Heisley having a relationship with Jerry West.

Regarding Mike Miller...if you are Chris Wallace and you were pretty sure that your owner has very little intention on turning around and allowing you to utilize the cap space you create, then it wouldn't make sense to move Mike Miller just to get rid of Cardinal for cap space that you won't be able to use anyway.

I mean you aren't the one who wanted to go that route anyway. The owner was.

Trading Gasol was Heisley (for non-basketball reasons). Not trading Miller was Wallace (for basketball reasons).

Personally, I'm glad Miller wasn't used just to get rid of Cardinal.

He has more value than that.

We should be able to get something we can use on the floor if we deal Miller, besides cap space that would sit around and go unused.

There's not a team in the league that wouldn't give you an exception or expiring deal for Mike Miller on command if you wanted to move him that bad.

With this in mind, I'm not extremely down on Wallace (even though he is very unproven).

The problem with this club has always been ownership and it has been for years.

[hptmatthew]

I dig it, PMI....we should get something asset-wise that is of game benefit for MM.

But..if (and that is one huge "IF") Riley actually said "show me your dream deal".....


I say one word to him: UDONIS. If he says no, well, he says no. But I'd be darned if I didn't try to get Haslem out of him somehow. That guy is a defender and a rebounder who is not a total liability on offense by any stretch. Haslem,maybe Cook, and maybe Wright are the only players MIA has that I would even want to see in a Grizz uni. Sorry Shawn-yer gettin' past it, my man (for the Grizz' purposes, anyway).

I can just see Heisley shooting that lightning crap out of his hands as Wallace tries to get out the checkbook to show JSmoove or Monta (or even Pietrus) what we'd like to pay them...Heisley..evil is he. Exemplify the Dark Side of the Force does he.

[pardon_my_interruption]

Like the Last sentence Matt.

As far as a Miller/Haslem swap, for me it might have made sense prior to moving Pau but with Pau gone, Warrick is a better PF to start for Memphis (next to Darko), even with his defensive liabilities.

Haslem would be nice if Darko was more of a scorer but alongside Darko, I don't know.

You're not gaining anything financially (few million) by swapping Miller and Haslem and on the NBA market in general, you're giving up a more valueable asset in Miller for one with less value in Haslem.

From a basketball perspective, Miami had nothing outside of DWade Memphis could bring back that would make it a dream deal in an exchange for Miller in my opinion.

You can bring back Bobby Jones (for less) to do what Dorell Wright does. Or even find a guy in the second round of any draft for that.

[hptmatthew]

I can see the potential for some offensive ineptitude with Ud/Darko at 4/5.

However...if they would have given us one of their expirings (JWill or Andre 3000) for Cardinal and swapped Miller for Haslem...it would have been hard for me to turn that down if I were the Grizzlies GM.

Same with Nene-I think his health will not be a long-term issue, and I view him in sort of the same way as I view Haslem, but a bit more O and a bit less D coming from Nene-both good rebounders. I'd still do Miller for Nene, esp. with the way we're looking now...

[CableKC]

If Cardinal was that important to get rid of and was likely the "asking price" involved in any trade talks with Mike Miller.....why not include him as part of the "asking price" in trade talks with Gasol ( a far more valuable trading asset for the Grizzlies then Miller is )?

Unless Gasol's trade value was so low that the best trade offer that the Grizzlies got was the one from the Lakers, why make Cardinal an asking price for Miller if he wasn't somehow forced upon the Lakers for Gasol?

I could see adding $18 mil in guranteed contracts as a possible concern for any teamr.....but when you look at what you could get ( and 20/20 hindsight, what they got ) with Gasol in the Laker lineup....I can't see Cardinal's contract being a deal-breaker.