Page 1 of 1
Why Heisley and not Wallace?
Posted: Sun Jul 26, 2009 4:47 pm
by anvil
How come all I ever hear about is Michael F'ing Heisley when reports about trades, signings, potential draft picks etc are concerned? Isn't this the dang GM's job? Is Wallace so inept that Heisley has had to step in? Or was that Heisley's plan all along, to bring in a puppet GM who'd just be happy to work in this league still so he could manipulate him.
Heisley needs to get his fat little fingers out of the basketball side of this organization and just sign the frickin cheques.
Sorry for the rant. But seriously.
Re: Why Heisley and not Wallace?
Posted: Sun Jul 26, 2009 6:52 pm
by I Am Awesome-O
Preachin' to the choir.
I think I can speak for all Grizzlies fans when I say that this is one of my biggest concerns with the franchise going forward. With Heisley calling the shots, I'm afraid we are screwed. He is always going to favor bottom-line over basketball, and his moves are always going to reflect that.
Think about it this way- if Wallace was running the show, we would have acquired Tyreke Evans and David Lee this offseason. With Heisley running the show, we have Zach Randolph and Hasheem Thabeet instead. This is obviously very, very troubling.
Re: Why Heisley and not Wallace?
Posted: Mon Jul 27, 2009 12:54 am
by anvil
Agreed. I'm a loooong time Grizz fan/lurker on this board. One of the few Vancouver residents that still loves him some Grizz. But this offseason is making me question my loyalty for the first time.
I'm excited to see what Randolph can do if he comes to camp in shape and with the right motivation. And by the sounds of things Gay/Mayo are turning it up. Building on Conley's end of the season performance we really have some really positive things to look forward too. But it's just SOOOO frustrating to think that we could have made some serious noise if Heisley hadn't jacked everything up.
I'd have loved to see Tyreke or Rubio in Memphis. I think Tyreke would have facilitated a lot of things and shored up our back court for a long time.
Sorry for the rant. But after reading about releasing Hak and having NO target in sight, i lost it.
Re: Why Heisley and not Wallace?
Posted: Mon Jul 27, 2009 2:03 pm
by jefe
Who does what Heisley just did? Who comes out and voluntarily corroborates that they're a cheapskate (owner) in the media? Really? If he has a PR guy, I'm sure he's pulling his hair out. I, for one, thought that the acquisition of Randolph sealed Hak's fake - but for the love of all that's holy, you don't come out and say you let him go for capspace with no target in sight!!!! Either appear altruistic and say you did it solely to treat Hak fairly, let him go negotiate a deal unrestricted - or lie and say there's a basketball purpose behind the move (i.e. a specific target). But don't ****ing say you did it for capspace alone!
Re: Why Heisley and not Wallace?
Posted: Mon Jul 27, 2009 4:00 pm
by anvil
So true Jefe, my sentiments exactly.
Back when the grizz were still here in vancouver, heisley was great at lying. Promised us the team wasn't going anywhere blah blah blah. I guess he just got bored with putting in that much effort.
I'm just holding onto the fact that Rudy and OJ are blowing up the USA tryouts. Serenity now!
Re: Why Heisley and not Wallace?
Posted: Mon Jul 27, 2009 8:42 pm
by Downtown
anvil, I'm also from the Vancouver area witnessed firsthand what kind of a low life Michael Heisley is. If you read my post in the Warrick thread you'll see that I don't hold much hope for this team for the future as long as Heisley is calling the shots.
It has to be hard inside on the front office knowing that they've been hired to do a job yet the owner is breathing down their necks, makes the basketball decisions even though he's just a fan and not an experienced basketball guy, and now loves to be in the spotlight being the spokesman for the team instead of letting them do their jobs.
No business can function like that and expect to grow.