Countdown to Ernie Grunfeld Firing (Part 2)

[mohammed10]

The jig is up on Miley, he is now posting more frequently to keep the troll thread alive. Remember, do not reply to him over there, reply here instead.

Here are the offending posters in the troll thread.

Yeah, I know I'm on the list, but in my defense, I'm not posting in response to milellie111, I'm posting in response to guys like Kev and others.

Top Posters In This Topic (the trolling thread)

hands11 (52)
milellie111 (48)
Nivek (34)
dckingsfan (30)
TGW (29)
montestewart (24)
leswizards (20)
payitforward (20)
closg00 (19)
MikeTheKid (18)
jayscott (13)
tontoz (12)
DCZards (9)
nate33 (9)
Dat2U (9)
Illuminaire (9)
LyricalRico (8)
pineappleheadindc (8)
verbal8 (8)
long suffrin' boulez fan (8)

Thanks Pine. Now that jayscott exposed Miley, perhaps we can get back to a proper Ernie Grunfeld thread

I cannot believe that I have < 8 posts. Man, I need to step up my game so we can stop getting Grunfelded.

[dckingsfan]

Nivek outposting me on the thread

[payitforward]

So what if Gooden only got signed a month ago and other teams passed over him. Their loss our gain. Look at his contributions. He's won games for us and is averaging over 12 ppg and 6rpg.

On Gooden -- absolutely, a good move is a good move, and signing him was a plus. And no one is doubting this.

Nor would anyone say that absolutely everything Ernie has done was a mistake -- just most of it. The result of which is that we are a mediocre team with almost no flexibility to escape that state.

As for Booker not getting in until Nene got injured, thats how the cards fall sometimes. Opportunity presents itself for the next man up.

Again, tho I'd argue that Nene wasn't very effective, this comment is perfectly logical. As with Ernie, not everything you say is a mistake, just most of it. For example:

We should be thankful that we have a legitimate backup power forward to step up. Grunfeld has ensured a measure of depth.

Why should we "be thankful?" Since he picked Trevor Booker, Ernie has had 10 draft picks, 3 of them very high lottery picks. Of those 9 guys we have one player -- 1 guy, no more! -- who plays any minutes for us. That's it. And, among them as well is one other guy who plays a meaningful, if limited role on another team -- and that guy we waived by the way!

Would you like a long list of the power forwards that people here called for us to pick w/ some of those wasted picks, and who have gone on to become big-time NBA players? Or, for that matter, other positions where we picked a non-entity and passed over guys that we here screamed for and who've shown why we liked them by their successes in the league?

Nor is Gooden -- who is signed only through the end of the year -- an example of "depth" in our squad. Our depth is who we can count on going forward. If we are going to say with truth that we count on John Wall going forward, by which we mean that a) he's good and b) he's under contract for several years going forward -- why then we have to also look at the opposite kinds of situations and say with truth that they represent damaging errors by our FO.

And that is where you won't go. Or, to put it a bit more straightforwardly, you have no analysis and no perspective. Two wins in a row and you're in here crowing. Two losses in a row and no one sees you. But the overall result of those putative 4 games is a .500 record -- not a good team at all but an average team.

If you were saying "look, Ernie is a terrific GM because he's built an average NBA team," then at least you'd be stating a fact, even if I might agree w/ your judgement. As it is, you are content to be wrong on both ends of the equation: no, this is not a particularly good NBA team, and no Ernie is not a good NBA GM.

[dckingsfan]

So what if Gooden only got signed a month ago and other teams passed over him. Their loss our gain. Look at his contributions. He's won games for us and is averaging over 12 ppg and 6rpg.

On Gooden -- absolutely, a good move is a good move, and signing him was a plus. And no one is doubting this.

Nor would anyone say that absolutely everything Ernie has done was a mistake -- just most of it. The result of which is that we are a mediocre team with almost no flexibility to escape that state.

As for Booker not getting in until Nene got injured, thats how the cards fall sometimes. Opportunity presents itself for the next man up.

Again, tho I'd argue that Nene wasn't very effective, this comment is perfectly logical. As with Ernie, not everything you say is a mistake, just most of it. For example:

We should be thankful that we have a legitimate backup power forward to step up. Grunfeld has ensured a measure of depth.

Why should we "be thankful?" Since he picked Trevor Booker, Ernie has had 10 draft picks, 3 of them very high lottery picks. Of those 9 guys we have one player -- 1 guy, no more! -- who plays any minutes for us. That's it. And, among them as well is one other guy who plays a meaningful, if limited role on another team -- and that guy we waived by the way!

Would you like a long list of the power forwards that people here called for us to pick w/ some of those wasted picks, and who have gone on to become big-time NBA players? Or, for that matter, other positions where we picked a non-entity and passed over guys that we here screamed for and who've shown why we liked them by their successes in the league?

Nor is Gooden -- who is signed only through the end of the year -- an example of "depth" in our squad. Our depth is who we can count on going forward. If we are going to say with truth that we count on John Wall going forward, by which we mean that a) he's good and b) he's under contract for several years going forward -- why then we have to also look at the opposite kinds of situations and say with truth that they represent damaging errors by our FO.

And that is where you won't go. Or, to put it a bit more straightforwardly, you have no analysis and no perspective. Two wins in a row and you're in here crowing. Two losses in a row and no one sees you. But the overall result of those putative 4 games is a .500 record -- not a good team at all but an average team.

If you were saying "look, Ernie is a terrific GM because he's built an average NBA team," then at least you'd be stating a fact, even if I might agree w/ your judgement. As it is, you are content to be wrong on both ends of the equation: no, this is not a particularly good NBA team, and no Ernie is not a good NBA GM.

Game, Set, Match - but somehow I don't think he will read all the way through and be able to digest the nuance of the post. He will come back with one specific example and assume that proves his point.

[doclinkin]

So what if Gooden only got signed a month ago and other teams passed over him. Their loss our gain. Look at his contributions. He's won games for us and is averaging over 12 ppg and 6rpg.

On Gooden -- absolutely, a good move is a good move, and signing him was a plus. And no one is doubting this.

Nor would anyone say that absolutely everything Ernie has done was a mistake -- just most of it. The result of which is that we are a mediocre team with almost no flexibility to escape that state.

And the Gooden thing may be the exception that proves the rule. It was a lazy signing, Gooden was in Bethesda was working out at the Verizon center, was amnestied and thus comes cheap willing to work for peanuts, and happened to be around when we had an injury, and after we had dropped JVes on a two-for-one deal. It was a no-brainer, if he looked good fine you can try him on a 10-day, if not, no big deal. Ernie has had a few reclamation projects that looked nice for a short time (Josh Howard played well for us, Shawn Livingston got his comeback start with us, a few others) he likes a bargain vet with something to prove, but Gooden was a freebie, can hardly count him in the credit column.

[dobrojim]

Gooden is an example that actually doesn't help EG. He's been available
all season, is clearly better than the rotation players we had that play
his position, but we only signed him when an older, injury prone player
got hurt. Gooden would be a better point in EG's favor if he had signed
him at the beginning of the year and cut some of the garbage that he
had previously brought in.

[dobrojim]

bump to move above that other silly thread

[montestewart]

bump to move above that other silly thread

You mean my new favorite thread?

[Kanyewest]

So what if Gooden only got signed a month ago and other teams passed over him. Their loss our gain. Look at his contributions. He's won games for us and is averaging over 12 ppg and 6rpg.

On Gooden -- absolutely, a good move is a good move, and signing him was a plus. And no one is doubting this.

Nor would anyone say that absolutely everything Ernie has done was a mistake -- just most of it. The result of which is that we are a mediocre team with almost no flexibility to escape that state.

And the Gooden thing may be the exception that proves the rule. It was a lazy signing, Gooden was in Bethesda was working out at the Verizon center, was amnestied and thus comes cheap willing to work for peanuts, and happened to be around when we had an injury, and after we had dropped JVes on a two-for-one deal. It was a no-brainer, if he looked good fine you can try him on a 10-day, if not, no big deal. Ernie has had a few reclamation projects that looked nice for a short time (Josh Howard played well for us, Shawn Livingston got his comeback start with us, a few others) he likes a bargain vet with something to prove, but Gooden was a freebie, can hardly count him in the credit column.

Bethesda is a nice place to live but it's also completely possible that Gooden moved near DC because the Wizards were perhaps the only team that considered picking him up. Gooden considered Washington one of the few teams that is actually trying to win a championship. http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wiz ... h-wizards/

Gooden is an example that actually doesn't help EG. He's been available
all season, is clearly better than the rotation players we had that play
his position, but we only signed him when an older, injury prone player
got hurt. Gooden would be a better point in EG's favor if he had signed
him at the beginning of the year and cut some of the garbage that he
had previously brought in.

I think the time off has actually help Gooden regain his fire. He was nowhere near as good as he was during his last few years with the Bucks. It was a running joke on why the Bucks hadn't amnestied Gooden even earlier into his contract. Not sure how EG was suppose to figure that Gooden was going to be this good, it's not like any other team was sure either and gave him a shot.

Still, the pickup of Gooden does not overshadow that EG isn't that good at evaluating talent in the draft and often undervalues the picks- either when he drafts (Vesely, Singleton) or just trades them (Jamison, Foye/Miller, Gortat).

[doclinkin]

Bethesda is a nice place to live but it's also completely possible that Gooden moved near DC because the Wizards were perhaps the only team that considered picking him up.

Or because --no shxt-- his girlfriend teaches hot yoga in Bethesda and he was bored as hell so he was working out with her.

He only played 16 games last season because of injuries and the Bucks' youth movement, and the eight months between his release and joining the Wizards was more than enough time to plump up and fall out of shape. But Gooden made sure he was good to go.

"You could say it was 18 months of not really being in an NBA game," Gooden said. "It was a good time off for my body to recover, but you do a lot of soul searching during that time off. You're on your own schedule, so you have to work."

He did much of his training in Bethesda, Md., so close to the Wizards and their facilities yet still so far from his past basketball life. His girlfriend introduced him to hot yoga, which quickly became a regular part of his routine. His hardwood work took place at the University of Maryland.

"I just worked on my game, continued to shoot," Gooden said. "I shot the ball every day, to the point where I wasn't missing anymore. I knew that once I got an opportunity that whoever signed me was going to be happy with what they were getting."

And:

Gooden had vowed to "sink his teeth into" what, all of a sudden, was a lifeboat of a chance in Washington to resurrect his career. After the Bucks had amnestied him last summer, Gooden, a former lottery pick, spent eight months waiting for someone to sign him. He's been in Bethesda, just north of the city, working out -- not at one of D.C.'s great indoor or outdoor courts, but at an L.A. Fitness.
The No. 4 overall pick in the 2002 Draft, Gooden, along with Pau Gasol and Shane Battier, were Memphis' building blocks while guys like Wes Person, Tony Massenburg and the late Lorenzen Wright were the wily vets. That seems so long ago. Now Gooden is one of the old heads.

He took up bikram yoga while he waited for the call, not believing he didn't have anything left to contribute.
"I have a passion for this game," Gooden said. "Every day I woke up, I knew that there were guys playing in NBA games, that guys were working out. So I had a dark cloud over my head, knowing that I had to be on my own schedule. I had to do something every day."

[closg00]

Good stuff on Gooden Doc, Thx for posting.

[DCZards]

Two good points Kanye that have crossed my mind as well.

Yes, it could be that the signing of a productive Gooden was simply dumb luck on EG's part. But it also could be that the Zards were keeping an eye on Drew--his basketball workouts and the fact that he was making every effort to stay in good physical condition. He was after all working out at the Verizon Ctr. occasionally and his agent represents one or two other Zards.

I definitely believe that Gooden and his body, especially at his age, have benefitted from not having played the first 3 or so months of the season.

[closg00]

Look at the heart, the dedication, the wins and the sincere desire of this team to get in the playoffs (which they will) and support them along with the coach and the GM. You can't say that you support the players, but don't support the coach, or you support the coach but not the GM.

Absolutely! And you can't say that you support the GM but not the owner.

Miley (or his chief supporter), is stooping to using a sock-puppet to keep the troll thread afloat. This is Fred Chionkis's "1st" post on the board (Over at the troll thread)

[leswizards]

IMO, the reason that EG supporters and EG haters have such a difficult time getting each other to see one another's POV is that EG supporters are judging EG based upon the outputs and the short term, whereas EG haters are judging EG based upon the inputs and the long term. What I mean by inputs is what EG has put into the team (the moves he has made), while the outputs are what are the results of EG's actions (ie, the team's record).

Since the Wizards are currently playing the pretty good basketball, as far as the EG supporters that is sufficient to prove that EG has done a good job, and there is nothing that the EG haters are going to be able to say to make them understand why they want him gone.

As far as the EG haters are concerned, you have to look past the team's current record and project where the Wizards will be in the future. As far as they are concerned, EG has made some nice move getting the Wizards to play decent basketball in the short term, but almost all of his moves to improve the team for the long run have been failures.

Trading for Miller, Ariza, Nene, and Gortat, plus signing Webster and Gooden have been pretty decent moves to help the Wizards for the short term. However, other than the Webster signing, for the long term, all of the moves are pretty inconsequential. Additionally to make those moves, EG has cost the Wizards draft picks, the BAE, and cap space. Combine that with all of his blown draft picks, and the EG haters have a hard time accepting that EG can make smart moves that will help the Wizards for the long term.

[hands11]

IMO, the reason that EG supporters and EG haters have such a difficult time getting each other to see one another's POV is that EG supporters are judging EG based upon the outputs and the short term, whereas EG haters are judging EG based upon the inputs and the long term. What I mean by inputs is what EG has put into the team (the moves he has made), while the outputs are what are the results of EG's actions (ie, the team's record).

Since the Wizards are currently playing the pretty good basketball, as far as the EG supporters that is sufficient to prove that EG has done a good job, and there is nothing that the EG haters are going to be able to say to make them understand why they want him gone.

As far as the EG haters are concerned, you have to look past the team's current record and project where the Wizards will be in the future. As far as they are concerned, EG has made some nice move getting the Wizards to play decent basketball in the short term, but almost all of his moves to improve the team for the long run have been failures.

Trading for Miller, Ariza, Nene, and Gortat, plus signing Webster and Gooden have been pretty decent moves to help the Wizards for the short term. However, other than the Webster signing, for the long term, all of the moves are pretty inconsequential. Additionally to make those moves, EG has cost the Wizards draft picks, the BAE, and cap space. Combine that with all of his blown draft picks, and the EG haters have a hard time accepting that EG can make smart moves that will help the Wizards for the long term.

Great post. I agree. Like most things, its a matter of perspective and choosing different time frames makes a huge difference in evaluating the situation. But its not about people not having the information to see others views. That has all been detailed already regarding this topic. It more about some folks not giving a rats ass about looking at things from those views. They don't care. They aren't here for that.

Its just a flame war and the gotcha game. Twisting views, putting words in people mouth, Internet egos and name calling.

Besides, people are the way they are. Some go through life complaining about what they don't have regardless, and some appreciate everything they have no matter how little. Some project negative outcomes and complain about how things aren't going to work out and others trust that things will always work out. Some live in the present, some the past and some always looking to the future.

And to make it even more complicated. Most people alternate between those things depending on situation and/or alcohol/drug consumption. lol

I guess my point is, its not about EG or no EG. You could pick any topic and people would be who they are in the conversation.

[DCZards]

I don't think it's that black-and-white, leswizards. I believe it's possible to be neither an EG supporter or an EG hater. I've been labeled an "EG supporter" almost solely based on the fact that I supported the Okafor-Ariza trade, which I still think was a good move for the franchise. I also supported the signing of Maynor, which I readily acknowledge I was dead wrong about and that that was a bad signing by EG.

I agreed with the signing of Wall to a max contract last offseason...and I still believe that was the smart move.

I wanted the Zards to draft Kawhi Leonard in 2011. Like most here, I knew little or nothing about Ves or his potential as a NBA player. The drafting of Ves as the 6th overall pick obviously turned out to be a major mistake, probably the worst decision made by EG since Ted took over as owner.

There are many other draft picks, trades, signings, etc. by EG that can now, mostly in hindsight, be considered mistakes...or at least highly questionable.

I'm on record saying that EG should be replaced. I'm just not as rabid about it as some of the so-called EG haters...and I certainly don't start or end every post with a call for EG's head. While others here may see me differently, I don't consider myself either a EG supporter or an EG hater.

I'm simply a loyal, longtime Zards' fan...who wants to see the team win...both short and long-term.

[montestewart]

Besides, people are the way they are. Some go through life complaining about what they don't have regardless, and some appreciate everything they have no matter how little. Some project negative outcomes and complain about how things aren't going to work out and others trust that things will always work out. Some live in the present, some the past and some always looking to the future.

There are those who look at the Wizards as they are, and ask why? I dream of the Wizards that could be, and ask why not?

[pineappleheadindc]

Besides, people are the way they are. Some go through life complaining about what they don't have regardless, and some appreciate everything they have no matter how little. Some project negative outcomes and complain about how things aren't going to work out and others trust that things will always work out. Some live in the present, some the past and some always looking to the future.

There are those who look at the Wizards as they are, and ask why? I dream of the Wizards that could be, and ask why not?

Monte, this post isn't necessarily addressed at *you*.

ROFL at J.R. Smith-type posters (high volume, low basketball IQ) who pull out the fan victim card anytime someone in this board doesn't toe the Monumental Sports and Entertainment party line. It's just laughable.

The "haters" include folks like Kevin Broom, published in Sports Illustrated.com, a featured on-the-air guest doing post game analysis for the official Wizards radio broadcast and whose basketball analysis has been cited in the Washington Post. They include Nate whose knowledge and statistical analysis on these boards is second to none. It includes long time fans who have loyally followed this franchise since, well....I've seen Tom Henderson play in person, in real life. Don't know who Tom Henderson is? Yeah, well sit your butt down.

That the Wizards have summoned the wherewithal to be not as sucky as usual is akin to a market "dead cat bounce". There are no long-term fundamentals behind the current 6th place Wizards.

Saying that you have to support the owner and GM to be a Wizards fan is like George W. Bush saying that you had to support the Iraq war to be a supporter of the troops. The exact same kind of "logic".

So save me the insipid framing. By almost any factual, statistical analysis, EG has been among the least successful GMs in the association. Period. End of story.

And as a prebuttal, please save me the malarkey that's sure to come about playing the victim about civil posting and crap -- which is pulled out when you have nothing of substance to say. And, again, drop the stupid framing about "haters" and how we all have to be fans of the owner and GM to be a Wizards fan. When you trot out that assertion, you (not *you* Monte, but those who say it) just look stupid.

[closg00]

LOL, good-one Monte. Some posters want us to be happy slaves.

[dandridge 10]

IMO, the reason that EG supporters and EG haters have such a difficult time getting each other to see one another's POV is that EG supporters are judging EG based upon the outputs and the short term, whereas EG haters are judging EG based upon the inputs and the long term. What I mean by inputs is what EG has put into the team (the moves he has made), while the outputs are what are the results of EG's actions (ie, the team's record).

Since the Wizards are currently playing the pretty good basketball, as far as the EG supporters that is sufficient to prove that EG has done a good job, and there is nothing that the EG haters are going to be able to say to make them understand why they want him gone.

As far as the EG haters are concerned, you have to look past the team's current record and project where the Wizards will be in the future. As far as they are concerned, EG has made some nice move getting the Wizards to play decent basketball in the short term, but almost all of his moves to improve the team for the long run have been failures.

Trading for Miller, Ariza, Nene, and Gortat, plus signing Webster and Gooden have been pretty decent moves to help the Wizards for the short term. However, other than the Webster signing, for the long term, all of the moves are pretty inconsequential. Additionally to make those moves, EG has cost the Wizards draft picks, the BAE, and cap space. Combine that with all of his blown draft picks, and the EG haters have a hard time accepting that EG can make smart moves that will help the Wizards for the long term.

To me, EG's recent short term "success" is akin to his short term success during the Arenas, Jamison, Butler years. At that time, he went all in by trading our top pick for two older vets who were not going to get us anything more than a mediocre record and a playoff birth. Once again, with the Gortat trade, EG sacrifices our future for short term mediocre gain and a playoff birth. Its deja vu all over again and I am confident it will eventually end the same way.

EG's record speaks for itself. As Jim said, third worst winning percentage in the last decade, no more than 45 wins during that time period, and numerous blown draft picks. I don't know why you guys even respond to Millie's posts. He is obviously alone or virtually alone in his views. You aren't going to convince him his is wrong. Why bother?