RealGM

.
The first "I love Ernie" thread, a 100-page monstrosity of questionable value, is here. (Grin.)

Have also rolled the "I hate Ernie" thread into this thread as well. THAT original can be found here.

Go Wizards!

.
From the original "I love Ernie" thread --

milellie111 wrote:Thanks CCJ. Seems like anyone who's not down with overturning the management is labeled as a troll. I'm not saying that Wizards management is perfect and yes they have made some mistakes, but when you step back from critiquing one particular move and you look at the sum total of where the team stands, there's a lot to be proud of and much to look forward to.

I think this is a good post, milellie111. You get into trouble and people think you're a troll when you assert that Ernie is a GREAT GM (he's not, as he's made more than his share of mistakes - as even you admit). It also doesn't help you when you either imply or outright directly say that you can't be a fan of the team unless you have a love of Ernie (and/or Uncle Ted). Nothing can be further from the truth.

Parallel: I don't know of many (any) Dan Snyder fans. But the Washington football franchise still has lots of local fans. Anyone who'll publicly assert that in order to be fan of the franchise, you also have to be a fan of Dan Snyder would be beat up by a mob. Or worse. And to stay in the parallel, imagine going on ExtremeSkins and having your own "Dan Snyder is the best owner in the NFL" thread and only posting there when Washington wins. People would hunt you down.

Same here with your assertion that Ernie is a GREAT gm.

To turn this discussion on its head. Instead of being a fan of Grunfeld, I'd challenge you to be a fan of the *franchise* -- that means emotionally investing in the team on a game-by-game basis. It should kill you when we turn the ball over a lot. We should marvel at John Wall's speed. Rookie Kelly Oubre can close out on a shooter so damn quickly while still under control that it boggles my mind. THESE are things which be worthy of posting about.

Looking forward to seeing you in game threads chatting about basketball stuff and lending your opinion to the cacophony of voices.

Pine

Regarding Ernie:

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SHoNWwhzh3M[/youtube]

I will say he may get a modicum of credit of Porter turns out to be better the Noel since that is the only lottery pick he made against the grain that has turned out well for him. All his other not obvious selections are still a catastrophic dumpster fire.

Jordan Clarkson SMDH!

He's good at drafting in the top 3.

He's decent at making stopgap trades(Hump, Duds)

That's about it.


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

Skills:

-Turning the rights to 2 top 5 NBA players (Curry and Kawhi) and making it disappear with nothing to show for it within 3 years.

Things I like about Ernie:

He's unquestionably loyal, just ask his mustache.

Grunfeld has built a top backcourt in the league that should play at a high level for years. Made the Wizards respectable again as a top team in the East. Some fans are delusional.

milellie111 wrote:Grunfeld has built a top backcourt in the league that should play at a high level for years. Made the Wizards respectable again as a top team in the East. Some fans are delusional.

We've never been a top 4 seed in a weak eastern conference best to my knowledge in the John Wall era, maybe it is different in the universe you ascribe to? Yes?

milellie111 wrote:Some fans are delusional.

Yes, some fans sure are.

milellie111 wrote:Grunfeld has built a top backcourt in the league that should play at a high level for years. Made the Wizards respectable again as a top team in the East. Some fans are delusional.

All Wizards fans are to some degree delusional. I've talked about this many times in other threads.

milellie111 wrote:Grunfeld has built a top backcourt in the league....

So, literally, what you mean is that Ernie got lucky w/ the ping pong balls in 2010, and he picked the guy who was thought of (by and large: not saying it was 100% across the globe) as the default choice. This is true. And, you are also saying that 2 years later when he had the #3 pick in 2012, he picked the guy who was the default choice as Best Player Available at that pick. This too is true.

I'm glad he made those picks rather than making some kind of whacko choices at those spots. But, what I don't see is why this is evidence that Ernie is a "great" GM, or that they mean he's "proven doubters wrong." And I don't think you'd be able to make an argument that they do mean these things.

Rather, what these picks mean is that with a 1-3 pick, Ernie is likely to take the same guy other GMs would take. One can say the same thing about the pick of Porter in 2013; Otto Porter was considered the likely default #3 pick. When we lucked out again w/ the ping pong balls and got #3, one widely-quoted response from another GM was "Enjoy Otto Porter."

I can't see how any of these 3 picks qualify Ernie as... anything at all.

There are only a few ways to be an outstanding GM. If I'm right (and I'd be happy to hear where I'm wrong) they are:

1. Add assets to your team through the draft that turn out to be core pieces, guys who develop into excellent players you either want to keep or, if your roster is unbalanced, whom you are able to trade for picks and players whom otherwise you would not be able to get. I.e. picks *higher* than the one you used to pick the original guy and/or really good "core piece" type players at the positions where you are unbalanced and have a need.

2. Add assets to your team that turn out to be core pieces (as defined in #1 above) by signing excellent FAs.

3. Add such assets by way of other trades.

4. Add the right bandaid-players when necessary: a "band-aid player" is a veteran who fits a need and is a bargain at his price, but he's never going to have the quality described in #1 above of being tradeable for more than you had to give up to get him.

That's it. I can't think of anything else.

Ernie's shown no ability to do #1 except by choosing 3 default guys at the top of 3 drafts. And, possibly, tho the evidence isn't in yet, by trading up to nab Kelly Oubre. None of the 14 other draft choices he's had since 2010 fit that bill. Now, no one is 100%. That's not the problem. Seraphin was a risk worth taking, for example. But every one of those picks has been a whiff in the above sense, or else has been traded to no purpose. That includes Satoransky, because if he does come here it'll be at a market salary, at least to begin with. It includes Booker whom we let walk as a FA.

Nor has Ernie shown any ability to do #2. Nor #3 -- w/ the sole possible exception of Gortat, and I'd argue that -- tho I like the player and have liked him since he was with Orlando -- we paid way too much for him (given his being an expiring salary) because a previous Ernie screw up had left us w/o a Center. As to the Okariza trade, if you pay $28m for a guy, and you get 2000 minutes out of him, I'm unimpressed w/ your GM skills. Ariza was here 2 years and is gone; not an asset for which we got value but the opposite, a move that left no trace on the team.

Ernie has been hit or miss w/ #4, acquiring band-aid players. There's been a long list of useless guys, and there are a few who are ok. None of them helped build the team. The best of them, Paul Pierce, at least helped make it all the more fun to be a Wizards fan. I'm grateful for that, but Pierce isn't a Wizard. The other good bandaids include Sessions, Humphries & Gooden. The bad ones... that's a long list. Almost as long as the list of wasted picks.

Not a good GM at all.

payitforward wrote:

milellie111 wrote:Grunfeld has built a top backcourt in the league....

So, literally, what you mean is that Ernie got lucky w/ the ping pong balls in 2010, and he picked the guy who was thought of (by and large: not saying it was 100% across the globe) as the default choice. This is true. And, you are also saying that 2 years later when he had the #3 pick in 2012, he picked the guy who was the default choice as Best Player Available at that pick. This too is true.

I'm glad he made those picks rather than making some kind of whacko choices at those spots. But, what I don't see is why this is evidence that Ernie is a "great" GM, or that they mean he's "proven doubters wrong." And I don't think you'd be able to make an argument that they do mean these things.

Rather, what these picks mean is that with a 1-3 pick, Ernie is likely to take the same guy other GMs would take. One can say the same thing about the pick of Porter in 2013; Otto Porter was considered the likely default #3 pick. When we lucked out again w/ the ping pong balls and got #3, one widely-quoted response from another GM was "Enjoy Otto Porter."

I can't see how any of these 3 picks qualify Ernie as... anything at all.

There are only a few ways to be an outstanding GM. If I'm right (and I'd be happy to hear where I'm wrong) they are:

1. Add assets to your team through the draft that turn out to be core pieces, guys who develop into excellent players you either want to keep or, if your roster is unbalanced, whom you are able to trade for picks and players whom otherwise you would not be able to get. I.e. picks *higher* than the one you used to pick the original guy and/or really good "core piece" type players at the positions where you are unbalanced and have a need.

2. Add assets to your team that turn out to be core pieces (as defined in #1 above) by signing excellent FAs.

3. Add such assets by way of other trades.

4. Add the right bandaid-players when necessary: a "band-aid player" is a veteran who fits a need and is a bargain at his price, but he's never going to have the quality described in #1 above of being tradeable for more than you had to give up to get him.

That's it. I can't think of anything else.

Ernie's shown no ability to do #1 except by choosing 3 default guys at the top of 3 drafts. And, possibly, tho the evidence isn't in yet, by trading up to nab Kelly Oubre. None of the 14 other draft choices he's had since 2010 fit that bill. Now, no one is 100%. That's not the problem. Seraphin was a risk worth taking, for example. But every one of those picks has been a whiff in the above sense, or else has been traded to no purpose. That includes Satoransky, because if he does come here it'll be at a market salary, at least to begin with. It includes Booker whom we let walk as a FA.

Nor has Ernie shown any ability to do #2. Nor #3 -- w/ the sole possible exception of Gortat, and I'd argue that -- tho I like the player and have liked him since he was with Orlando -- we paid way too much for him (given his being an expiring salary) because a previous Ernie screw up had left us w/o a Center. As to the Okariza trade, if you pay $28m for a guy, and you get 2000 minutes out of him, I'm unimpressed w/ your GM skills. Ariza was here 2 years and is gone; not an asset for which we got value but the opposite, a move that left no trace on the team.

Ernie has been hit or miss w/ #4, acquiring band-aid players. There's been a long list of useless guys, and there are a few who are ok. None of them helped build the team. The best of them, Paul Pierce, at least helped make it all the more fun to be a Wizards fan. I'm grateful for that, but Pierce isn't a Wizard. The other good bandaids include Sessions, Humphries & Gooden. The bad ones... that's a long list. Almost as long as the list of wasted picks.

Not a good GM at all.

Impressive write up but at the end of the day results speak. Last year the Wiz were 1 game way from the Eastern Conference Finals. Can't deny that.

Nice Pine - at least the Subjects aren't slanted one way or the other. And EG is a terrific GM - just not a terrific NBA GM.

He does have some skills - does some decent trades. Fixes problems that he creates.

But drafting wouldn't be one of those skills - or recognizing talent in general - at least if you look at his overall draft record. One could cherry pick but that would be about it.

And if we are looking at results, we would look long-term right? Like his complete tenure?

My two cents. Looking forward to his departure so that I can buy season tickets

Pineappleheadindc, now THAT is outstanding what you did renaming this thread and adding perspective to milellie111.

This is a much better debate that won't hit hot buttons as "proving doubters wrong" did.

Thanks, pine.


"Trade down and draft Demarcus Cousins plus a pick" 2010
"Kirk Cousins will be a starting QB" (even over Griffin) 2012
Dejuan Blair is as good as ever. 2015

I think "or lack thereof" should be added to the thread title.

tontoz wrote:I think "or lack thereof" should be added to the thread title.

Cosign

I haven't had time to study the issue in any rigorous way, but I continue to suspect that the anointing of Wall and Beal as The Best Backcourt, or even One of The Best Backcourts is premature, at best. Put "potentially" in front of the label, and I'm fine with the claim.

TheSecretWeapon wrote:I haven't had time to study the issue in any rigorous way, but I continue to suspect that the anointing of Wall and Beal as The Best Backcourt, or even One of The Best Backcourts is premature, at best. Put "potentially" in front of the label, and I'm fine with the claim.

Well, it looks like Best Backcourt is out of reach. Wall will never be as good as Curry, and probably won't even get all that close. Curry is definitely a top 3 player in the league, and is arguably the best. I don't see Wall cracking the top 10, and if he does, it won't be higher than 8th or so.

And for now, Klay Thompson remains quite a bit better than Beal (though I think Beal has the capability of closing the gap).

payitforward wrote: One can say the same thing about the pick of Porter in 2013; Otto Porter was considered the likely default #3 pick. When we lucked out again w/ the ping pong balls and got #3, one widely-quoted response from another GM was "Enjoy Otto Porter."

I can't see how any of these 3 picks qualify Ernie as... anything at all.
............

And, possibly, tho the evidence isn't in yet, by trading up to nab Kelly Oubre. None of the 14 other draft choices he's had since 2010 fit that bill. Now, no one is 100%.
That includes Satoransky, because if he does come here it'll be at a market salary, at least to begin with. It includes Booker whom we let walk as a FA.

As to the Okariza trade, if you pay $28m for a guy, and you get 2000 minutes out of him, I'm unimpressed w/ your GM skills. Ariza was here 2 years and is gone; not an asset for which we got value but the opposite, a move that left no trace on the team.

Ernie has been hit or miss w/ #4, acquiring band-aid players. There's been a long list of useless guys, and there are a few who are ok. None of them helped build the team. The best of them, Paul Pierce, at least helped make it all the more fun to be a Wizards fan. I'm grateful for that, but Pierce isn't a Wizard. The other good bandaids include Sessions, Humphries & Gooden. The bad ones... that's a long list. Almost as long as the list of wasted picks.

Not a good GM at all.

I have to disagree. I still think EG is at best a C+, maybe B- GM on a good day. But you're selling some things short.

1) Porter: Alex Len and Noel were very much in play for that 3rd pick (and maybe Zeller to a lesser degree) and EG made the right pick. Not only is Otto better than them from a statistical stand point. He is also a more valuable player because his chameleon like skill set allow him to fit in with most any lineup and do the little things that win championships. Noel is a real rigged/awkward player fit wise and requires you to build around him.

2) Oubre: The trade up to 15 clearly show that Oubre was a target and not simply the BPA. This to me has more weight than other picks (Both Positively and Negatively) as he was "Your Guy". He could very well hit a home run with that. Boston, Bucks, and Rockets GMs get credit for their team building and they were left with Rozier, Vaughn, and Dekker. Time will Tell, but I think EG killed it here

3) Satoransky: The criticism of the Sato pick had some relevance when Draymond and Middleton broke out, but Middleton just signed for 70M and is looking to be falling back to earth rapidly. Sato, meanwhile, has been expanding his skill set year over year and looks like a legit 6th man on a contender. His impact (not skill set, but impact) compares favorably to Mirotic and I'll take that for 3-5M a year every day and twice on Sunday. Also, he will make much less than your "Market Value" as he is not on the open market. We own his rights. He'll sign for half the contract Terrance Freaking Ross just signed...HALF

4) OkaRiza: To say Ariza was a move that "Left no Trace on the team" is absurd. Wall needed to taste success or the consistent losing would have worn him down. Ariza provided leadership and allowed our team/ Wall to work with a real 3 & D forward and provide us stronger guidance on how to build around Wall and Beal.

5) Pierce: Like Ariza... You say he is no longer a Wizard and discount what he did for Wall, Beal, and most importantly...Otto.