Choker wrote:Volcano wrote:Accept you're wrong on all accounts. Maybe you should try to understand what I'm saying first.
- Yes, BC does have an affinity towards Bargnani. Just because fans exaggerate something doesn't mean there isn't a truth behind it. We're talking about Bargnani's entire career. BC clearly favoured Bargs by drafting him. He couldn't see that Bargs was a misfit from the start and believed in the "new era" of big men. That's irrational. It was logical to trade him at almost all points in his career, yet it's not done yet. It doesn't take 7 years to trade one player. That's dense.
- and I said the hate wouldn't be quelled. It's about winning and losing, end of story. If Bargnani is traded and we still lose for the next couple of years, the hate would still be there. If Bargnani was traded 3 years ago and we still lose, the hate would still be the same. If Bargnani was not traded and we were winning, THEN the hate would be quelled. It's foolish of you to think otherwise.

I'm wrong on all accounts.
There was no consensus first overall pick in that draft at all. How many times does the dead horse need to be beaten before that gets through people's heads? Selecting a player that turned out to be one of the better players in the lottery is not favoring him anymore than it is picking a good pick. You can criticize him for his revolutionary of the game plan, which failed miserably, but how does that show he shows some irrational love for Bargnani?
That's a given. What you're failing to see that at this very moment the BC hate is at an all time high. Not many people are seeing this all with a clear head and their emotions are being driven by everything but logic. Not having to see Bargnani every night would make the team more bearable to watch, and it's unreasonable to think the hate would still be consistent without Bargnani. He would still get bagged on for losing, sure, but by trading him away he would quell the hate. He would need to do more than that to clear his name, obviously.
Yeah, unless someone has some fairly good info on what if any trades were out there over the years for Bargnani I think we should just drop it re. Colangelo's love affair with Andrea. I don't think Andrea has ever had a lot of attraction with GMs around the league, though after the 2010-11 season was probably his high point re. trade value. With his contract and lack of boarding, and now his drop in scoring, I don't see a lot of interest until his contract is expiring.
As to the pick, Rudy Gay was the top rated prospect for a long time leading up to the draft, probably at least a year. Bargnani's came out of nowhere to the rest of the league. We can only assume Colangelo and Gherardini scouted him thoroughly and knew what they were getting. IIRC Colangelo was effusing praise for Andrea's wonderlic scores or whatever the heck they're called. If that's to measure a guy's b-ball acumen and character and dedication, I think the test might need some revising.
I willl premise my comments with the fact that I am one of Colangelo's harshest critics, that I opened a thread several months ago titled "Who should our next GM be?" (for which I was roundly dumped on and told to shut up and get off the board), that I don't think the Bargnani pick was a bad one, but I think it's safe to say that Gay was the best prospect at that time and also would have been a pick based on need.
As Colangelo supporters up till a couple weeks ago have said in defending him, he has always drafted well. I question the "well", as I'd rather say "solidly", in that he's always gone Best Prospect (Demar, Ed, Jonas) except with Andrea (Gay) and Ross (Drummond).
Colangelo has been supported despite making some of the worst, Babcock-level moves in team history: the 3 worst, in order of blunderness, being the Jermaine trade, the Bosh non-trade and the Hedo signing. He has basically gutted the team and truly under-performed in his 7 (seven!) off-seaons here. Babcock was given less than 2 seasons before getting fired because he didn't improve the team and made some terrible moves. How has Colangelo stuck around for 7?!?!
This last off-season is the last straw. He even blew the draft, which used to be his strong point. Ross over Drummond was brutal and he basically wasted an early 2nd round pick. Pursuing Nash, without having any solid intel on Nash's desire to be part of the organization (including future management), was both foolish and crushing in terms of improving the roster. The Fields signing was pathetic. Not going after anyone else was dumbfounding: Scola or even Haywood via the amnesty, cheap veteran big men to take some pressure off Jonas. A much better option would've been Ilyasova, who though not being a true SF would still be a lot better than Fields. He would also give us the luxury of exploring Bargnani trades because we could move Ilyasova to PF. Trading for Lowry was a very good trade, though as many of us have said, in the "choice" between Lowry and Dragic (if Dragic was a possibility), the difference was that Lowry cost us assets. Extending Demar right now was a mistake in my opinion, as waiting till the end of the season wouldn't have really cost anything apart from maybe 2M more per season, in case Demar turned into a borderline star.
Colangelo gets "locked in" to a mindset and this is extremely limiting. In the past it was a big man at all costs, which unfortunately turned into Jermaine O'Neal at 30 years of age and after more than 10 seasons, with half a knee left. Then it was power forwards with Amir and Ed, with the Davis pick showing that Colangelo would draft the BPA regardless of need. Now it's wings, with Fields and Ross, and extending Demar. I think the Ross pick was a "need" and "NBA-ready" pick rather than the BPA pick, which was Drummond.
Sorry for the long post, as these are all things that we've talked about ad nauseum. But the fact is that some form of "fire or replace Colangelo" thread has been around for a long time. For me the key was how this off-season went, and I think he truly blew it. He should be fired tomorrow.