RealGM

Does this bother you like it does me? Why does Sund need to be there? This leads me to think rotations and everything are being forced on Drew. No-one has mentioned this yet but I see it as more insight into why things LD does just do not make sense and hurt the team chemistry. It is sad that we see more business on the floor than just basketball related decisions.

http://blogs.ajc.com/hawks/

If you can't follow the link the statement is below.

Tracy McGrady met with Hawks coach Larry Drew and general manager Rick Sund about the forward’s publicly expressed displeasure over a lack of playing time.

Both sides say they are ready to move on.

Superiorblogman wrote:This leads me to think rotations and everything are being forced on Drew. No-one has mentioned this yet but I see it as more insight into why things LD does just do not make sense and hurt the team chemistry. It is sad that we see more business on the floor than just basketball related decisions.

Ding! Ding! Ding! There have been subtle instances of this here & there, this is the latest.
Maybe they said they're shopping certain guys and willing to lose and cheat fans in the process.

I mean I don't get it. I have managed before. If you are a department manager at Wal-Mart you make the schedule for your department which is the equivalent of giving playing time. You do it by taking what you need and who can best do it and what hours they can work into account. Drew should be doing that not Sund. No reason for Sund to be there unless it is like a player evaluation type scenario. Maybe that also answers why we get stuck with bottom of the barrel coaches. No-one wants to coach with the GM butting in.

Maybe, but another way of thinking about it:

Rick Sund is Larry Drew's boss.

Rick Sund is Tracy McGrady's boss.

Tracy has issue with his immediate supervisor and expressed this publicy; their manager stepped in to mediate.

Jamaaliver wrote:Maybe, but another way of thinking about it:

Rick Sund is Larry Drew's boss.

Rick Sund is Tracy McGrady's boss.

Tracy has issue with his immediate supervisor and expressed this publicy; their manager stepped in to mediate.

Yes, that is possible but it is not his place because minutes are something that should be handled by the coach. I can see him saying that the way he handled it publicly is unacceptable but other than that he has nothing to do with how minutes are dished out. He is there to handle the business aspects not what goes on on the court. Like I said, we don't need to see the business side spill onto the court.

If you are managing a department of Wal-Mart you understand how many hours you have to give employees and what needs to be done. The hours are dished out accordingly. The general manager of the store tells you how many hours can be given before things go into overtime and such, but he can't tell you who your best employees at doing A and B are because he is not working that closely with them. Sund can't mediate that he can only say that you were out of line the way you handled it or he is out of line.

I feel like the Wal-Mart metaphor might not be the best one....

Tracy McGrady is a world famous, future Hall of Fame, former All-Star, millionaire.

Larry Drew is the lowest paid head coach in the league.

T-Mac also has a loooong history of undermining coaches, GMs & owners throughout his career. T-Mac was even a part of the group of Detroit players that revolted against their coach last year and got him fired amidst a difficult season.

I don't see an issue with a GM backing his coach, and taking action to prevent this from becoming an issue with a guy who holds quite a bit of sway/influence with the other players

Jamaaliver wrote:T-Mac also has a loooong history

You are reaching. Sund should not have signed the guy if that has anything to do with the way he handles him. You say you have no problem with a GM standing behind a coach but that is not the case. The Hawks have needed a Center for years. Where is the GM then when he is needed to stand behind the coach and the team? You are reaching.

Superiorblogman wrote: Sund should not have signed the guy if that has anything to do with the way he handles him. You say you have no problem with a GM standing behind a coach but that is not the case. The Hawks have needed a Center for years. Where is the GM then when he is needed to stand behind the coach and the team? You are reaching.

I agree that signing T=Mac was a risk given his history of dustups with front offices.

I don't exactly follow the logic about standing up for your coach when the team needs a Center. Especially when we have a 2-time all star Center on the roster and we've had Zaza, Jason Collins on the roster for years now.

I was just getting to the point that TMac's complaints carry weight. And he has a history of burning bridges with Headcoaches and GMs. (Ask Toronto fans about his part in getting his 1st head coach, Butch Carter, fired. He shortly thereafter signed with ORL. Ask Magic fans about the bridges he burned with their former GM years ago when ORL was ready to draft Dwight Howard but T-Mac wanted the pick traded instead. He was promptl traded to HOU. Ask Detroit fans about T-Mac's part in protesting HC John Kuester who was fired shortly thereafter. Detroit did not re-sign him.)

I doubt Sund intervenes if Jannero Pargo compains publicly about PT. He's a scrub. But because T-Mac is a 14 year veteran, a 7x all-star and is constantly turning on coaches when things don't go well, it seems reasonable that management would stand together (GM & HC) when sitting down with him.

Just a possibility. Are you really saying there's no iota of posibility that this could be the case? Really?

Jamaaliver wrote:

Superiorblogman wrote: Sund should not have signed the guy if that has anything to do with the way he handles him. You say you have no problem with a GM standing behind a coach but that is not the case. The Hawks have needed a Center for years. Where is the GM then when he is needed to stand behind the coach and the team? You are reaching.

I agree that signing T=Mac was a risk given his history of dustups with front offices.

I don't exactly follow the logic about standing up for your coach when the team needs a Center. Especially when we have a 2-time all star Center on the roster and we've had Zaza, Jason Collins on the roster for years now.

I was just getting to the point that TMac's complaints carry weight. And he has a history of burning bridges with Headcoaches and GMs. (Ask Toronto fans about his part in getting his 1st head coach, Butch Carter, fired. He shortly thereafter signed with ORL. Ask Magic fans about the bridges he burned with their former GM years ago when ORL was ready to draft Dwight Howard but T-Mac wanted the pick traded instead. He was promptl traded to HOU. Ask Detroit fans about T-Mac's part in protesting HC John Kuester who was fired shortly thereafter. Detroit did not re-sign him.)

I doubt Sund intervenes if Jannero Pargo compains publicly about PT. He's a scrub. But because T-Mac is a 14 year veteran, a 7x all-star and is constantly turning on coaches when things don't go well, it seems reasonable that management would stand together (GM & HC) when sitting down with him.

Just a possibility. Are you really saying there's no iota of posibility that this could be the case? Really?

You are not logical at all if you think Al is a Center just because he is playing the position at a all-star level. He is playing out of position. You are not very logical if you can't see that LD has already been undermined by his obvious incompetence.

stupid **** thread. do you not have a job?

if you have a problem with an immediate supervisor, you dont think there would be any type of mediation ?

I think/hope Sund said there was a positive Hinrich trade coming and roles would go back to what they were (McGrady point forward + Pargo scoring) vs what it is now (washed up Kirk + washed up McGrady scoring).

johnny878 wrote:stupid **** thread. do you not have a job?

if you have a problem with an immediate supervisor, you dont think there would be any type of mediation ?

No, that is not how it works. I am in management. If it worked the way you suggest the big managers would never get what they needed done. Every manager under you calls you in every time you have some type of issue with people you are suppose to be managing. Stupid little kids trying to act smart.