Sign in to follow this  
Lord Gordon

How Much Criticism Does Wallace Deserve?

Recommended Posts

We have been to the playoffs 7 straight years. Wallace deserves zeron criticism. I think we should have a parade down beale street in his honor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We have been to the playoffs 7 straight years. Wallace deserves zeron criticism. I think we should have a parade down beale street in his honor

Not sure why you posted this, but I have never said anything that could be interpreted to being remotely close to this.  He's definitely not great, but there are worse.  He brought three of the (I hate the term) "core four" here (despite Holidayinn21's assertion that it was only two), and no, he didn't luck into Marc who was MVP in the top league in Europe.  The Darko for Q. Richardson for Zach Randolph was a great deal.  The team has drafted poorly over the last several seasons (not counting the most recent draft which the jury is still out on) but we have not had any high picks, so it's really a crapshoot at the bottom of the drafting order.  What I don't like is trading away picks for rentals.  Thabeet was a disaster which I don't attribute to Wallace, but it took that first round pick plus two others, DeMarre Carroll and a future first, to get rid of Thabeet for a half season rental of Shane Battier.  Of course, if he had not made that trade we may not have won our first playoff game and series that year.  We are in desperate need of good picks now, but don't have any.  But Levien is also to blame.  Speights, Ellington, Selby, and a first round pick for Jon Leuer?  Levien should have waited out that season trading just enough to get under the tax and addressed it in the offseason.  We might have fared better in the playoffs that year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What does Harrison getting a piddly little guaranteed contract have anything to do with Parsons? The don't even remotely play the same function.

Because they already drafted a PG that was also a rookie. They could've easily signed Harrison to a non-guaranteed deal was my point. They unnecessarily locked themselves into two rookie PGs with mike onto a 15 man roster - giving themselves no flexibility. while also knowing that Parsons was already injured.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Because they already drafted a PG that was also a rookie. They could've easily signed Harrison to a non-guaranteed deal was my point. They unnecessarily locked themselves into two rookie PGs with mike onto a 15 man roster - giving themselves no flexibility. while also knowing that Parsons was already injured.

So you think we would have been better off giving Harrison an unguaranteed deal, then waive him if necessary to let an even less ready Baldwin hold down the backup spot?  I don't think I would agree with that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So you think we would have been better off giving Harrison an unguaranteed deal, then waive him if necessary to let an even less ready Baldwin hold down the backup spot? I don't think I would agree with that.

Or maybe he would've been a more attractive trade asset if his deal could be terminated. Then we could have potentially traded for a better PG. non-guaranteed contract would just given us more flexibility period. There was no incentive to lock him up prematurely.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In my opinion, this franchise decided years ago that the best approach for this city is to continue to have the mindset of just making the playoffs each year. The public here will continue to support that philosophy. To have to rebuild this team with several years of no playoffs would be it's demise. I believe they will continue to bandaid the roster with the only goal being to make the playoffs and hope for the best from there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In my opinion, this franchise decided years ago that the best approach for this city is to continue to have the mindset of just making the playoffs each year. The public here will continue to support that philosophy. To have to rebuild this team with several years of no playoffs would be it's demise. I believe they will continue to bandaid the roster with the only goal being to make the playoffs and hope for the best from there.

 

+1

 

Wallace said as much when Pera took over the team. 

 

But why are we worried. Did you hear what Wallace said at media day after the season ended?

 

 

 

 

“We’re getting our plans together,” said Wallace, who just completed his 10th year with the franchise.

 

Doesn't that install confidence in his vision for the team? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In my opinion, this franchise decided years ago that the best approach for this city is to continue to have the mindset of just making the playoffs each year. The public here will continue to support that philosophy. To have to rebuild this team with several years of no playoffs would be it's demise. I believe they will continue to bandaid the roster with the only goal being to make the playoffs and hope for the best from there.

 

And why some refuse to acknowledge this and manage their expectations accordingly I have no idea.

 

We shall see this what happens this summer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I dont see the point of even following the team if they arent shooting for a championship

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And why some refuse to acknowledge this and manage their expectations accordingly I have no idea.

 

We shall see this what happens this summer.

Because we shouldn't have to accept mediocrity

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree about the mediocrity comment.  Just because an NBA team makes the playoffs, which half do, doesn't make them good. I believe that less than 25% of baseball teams make it.  And that goes for college basketball also.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

id rather have a competitive regular season and barely make playoffs then rebuild from scratch and risk enduring half decade of meaningless regular season games and no playoffs.

 

Unless you can aquire a generational talent then go all in otherwise keep ship going.

 

if you do decide on a rebuild please find a new gm to orchestrate it

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I dont see the point of even following the team if they arent shooting for a championship

Blowing everything up and hoping for a messiah in the draft is not shooting for a championship.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Blowing everything up and hoping for a messiah in the draft is not shooting for a championship.

Well at least you can look into the future and see some hope.

 

Look into the future with this current group and you think I wonder who's gonna get hurt this season.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

this team needs to get LUCKY in the draft

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wallace luckily doesn't get a chance to screw up another draft this summer.  But if you look at it the teams strategy drafting wise has been wrong for years. 

 

The Grizz were always the team looking for that one piece that could help push them over the hump while also needing to get younger.  Yet the team never drafted a player that could come in and help immediately.  Which in hindsight makes zero sense,  why take a rookie with potential  over a 4yr or 3yr rookie? 

 

Its more likely the older rookie will be able to help sooner than the younger rookie so you kill two birds with one stone.  I bet we can go back to each draft since GnG started and find a rookie that was older than the one we selected who probably turned out to be the better player. 

Wallace is to blame for not changing his draft strategy. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/9/2017 at 5:50 PM, Ndq0327 said:

Wallace luckily doesn't get a chance to screw up another draft this summer.  But if you look at it the teams strategy drafting wise has been wrong for years. 

 

The Grizz were always the team looking for that one piece that could help push them over the hump while also needing to get younger.  Yet the team never drafted a player that could come in and help immediately.  Which in hindsight makes zero sense,  why take a rookie with potential  over a 4yr or 3yr rookie? 

 

Its more likely the older rookie will be able to help sooner than the younger rookie so you kill two birds with one stone.  I bet we can go back to each draft since GnG started and find a rookie that was older than the one we selected who probably turned out to be the better player. 

Wallace is to blame for not changing his draft strategy. 

Wallace's draft strategy is to draft the best prospect available. He doesn't believe in drafting for need. The best opportunity to acquire talent is via the draft. You use Free Agency and Trades to fill holes in the roster but you always draft the best player available. I agree with that philosophy. It's the execution of that philosophy that has been called into question.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, chipc3 said:

Wallace's draft strategy is to draft the best prospect available. He doesn't believe in drafting for need. The best opportunity to acquire talent is via the draft. You use Free Agency and Trades to fill holes in the roster but you always draft the best player available. I agree with that philosophy. It's the execution of that philosophy that has been called into question.

 

I don't think Wallace goes by that criteria at all. What made Baldwin the BPA last year? What made Jarell the BPA the year before and What made JA better than Rodney Hood? 

 

Now I like the Jordan Adams pick and the Grizz screws it up. What metrics Wallace using to decide if one player is better than the other.

For example Malcolm Brogdon was better than Wade in college and it appears he's still better than him now.

I know for a fact Josh Richardson was better than Martin coming out of school hell we had him in for 4 workouts yet we took Martin.

 

So I'm not so sure Wallace takes the BPA it almost looks like he takes the most promising player which to my point makes no sense because they don't work on developing players.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Ndq0327 said:

I don't think Wallace goes by that criteria at all. What made Baldwin the BPA last year? What made Jarell the BPA the year before and What made JA better than Rodney Hood? 

 

Now I like the Jordan Adams pick and the Grizz screws it up. What metrics Wallace using to decide if one player is better than the other.

For example Malcolm Brogdon was better than Wade in college and it appears he's still better than him now.

I know for a fact Josh Richardson was better than Martin coming out of school hell we had him in for 4 workouts yet we took Martin.

 

So I'm not so sure Wallace takes the BPA it almost looks like he takes the most promising player which to my point makes no sense because they don't work on developing players.

I don't know how you determine how to rate players and I am not defending how Wallace rates them. I am only saying Wallace has repeatedly said that he drafts for talent, not current production, and that he uses Free Agency and trades to fill gaps in the roster. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Man he's barely did anything of that. I just can't stand to believe anything he says. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Ndq0327 said:

Man he's barely did anything of that. I just can't stand to believe anything he says. 

Wallace got into the NBA based on his ability to spot college talent (putting it in a nutshell). I think the problem is that back when he was doing that, most of those guys were playing college ball for 4 years. Too often todays one and done players are assumed to just be raw and lacking fundamentals instead of the possibility that they just won't get any better. Flaws that kept a player from being drafted 25 years ago are now more easily accepted.

I think Wallace may be a dinosaur when it comes to evaluating young prospects.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/11/2017 at 8:54 PM, Father Pat said:

Wallace got into the NBA based on his ability to spot college talent (putting it in a nutshell). I think the problem is that back when he was doing that, most of those guys were playing college ball for 4 years. Too often todays one and done players are assumed to just be raw and lacking fundamentals instead of the possibility that they just won't get any better. Flaws that kept a player from being drafted 25 years ago are now more easily accepted.

I think Wallace may be a dinosaur when it comes to evaluating young prospects.

wallace talks to many people  when he make a draft pick these pick 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, lions said:

wallace talks to many people  when he make a draft pick these pick 

No idea what point you tried to make with my post about Wallace's questionable talent evaluations.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Father Pat said:

No idea what point you tried to make with my post about Wallace's questionable talent evaluations.

i think chris wallace would not be the only person to give talent evaluation back to pera

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Sign in to follow this