Rich Cho new GM

[BGrantFan]

"I just feel good about this guy."

Stop being "childish" by pointing out the glaring and obvious questions surrounding this hire.

I hope Cho makes a move to put the team into title contention. He's been handed a 55-60 win team when its healthy. I also hope he never gives an interview, but when he is forced to do so, I hope he credits everybody involved in the entire organization.

 

[PtldPlatypus]

Stop being "childish" by pointing out the glaring and obvious questions surrounding this hire.

I hope Cho makes a move to put the team into title contention. He's been handed a 55-60 win team when its healthy. I also hope he never gives an interview, but when he is forced to do so, I hope he credits everybody involved in the entire organization.

Pointing out Cho's inexperience-->Not childish
Mocking those who choose to be optimistic-->Childish
Expressing disappointment over Cho's selection-->Not childish
Dogmatically claiming that we are headed for cap space and draft picks-->Childish
Contrasting KP's hire with Cho's because of the state of the team at the time-->Not childish
Automatically assuming that Cho will fail before he's done anything-->Childish

OddEnormous makes some good points, but obscures them with ridiculous ones.

 

[Ed O]

To interject, what basic concepts are you speaking of in this post?

1. Experience is a consideration, but not the SOLE consideration. Rookie GMs have had resounding success and veteran GMs have failed miserably.
2. Cho has an excellent skill set, and has positives above and beyond him merely being unknown.
3. KP is not coming back to be the GM for the Blazers any time soon.

That information is easy to understand and has been often repeated, but Odd Enormous keeps ignoring or distorting them as he throws in conniption fits in these threads. He's either being dishonest or is exceptionally dense and/or immature. I think that immature is the most charitable explanation.

Cho simply does not have time to learn on the job. He had better be ready right now, and he had better put this team over the top. He's been handed a playoff roster; very few rookie GMs get that opportunity.

I hope he's not in over his head.

I do, too. I have at least as much confidence in him as I do in all of the other available GM candidates, and I think in the long run he has a chance to be an excellent GM.

Ed O.

 

[The_Lillard_King]

I find this hiring to be questionable.

I understand the excitement of a new name who is smart, up and coming and is coming from an organization that has had recent success. But is that the type of GM the Blazers need. This isn't time to rebuild or find young new talent. In fact the new GM walks into a snake pit where a move basically has to be done this summer. You really can't go into camp with Rudy, Matthews, Bayless, Babbit and Cunningham all fighting for back up minutes behind Roy and Batum can you?

The new GM has got to make a major move this summer. Some may not have liked the moves Ferry or Pfund have made, but they proven that they can make the blockbuster deal. We are about to find out if Cho can make one, with the Blazers being the guinea pig.

I wonder what about Cho made him more appealing than Ferry or Pfund for the current GM position. Could it be Cho passed the control factor test and the other two did not? I'm not saying Cho bows down to the vulcan gods or anything like that. I just find it a curious hiring and wonder what was really behind the hiring of Cho over Ferry and Pfund.

 

[Idog1976]

So when we make a good trade, is everyone going to say that we CHOWNED them?

I like chowned better than pritchslapped.

I like it "Chowned". I feel a new Meme replicating in my brain.

 

[OddEnormous]

Pointing out Cho's inexperience-->Not childish
Mocking those who choose to be optimistic-->Childish (You may want to go back and read the thread to see who's being called names and being mocked)
Expressing disappointment over Cho's selection-->Not childish
Dogmatically claiming that we are headed for cap space and draft picks-->Childish (Once again WHOOSH! That was sarcasm as those 2 things are all he's done in OKC)
Contrasting KP's hire with Cho's because of the state of the team at the time-->Not childish
Automatically assuming that Cho will fail before he's done anything-->Childish (I have never assumed or typed that he's going to be a failure that. I don't know if he's going to be good or not. I do know that Mitch Kupchak will have absolutely nothing to do with his success or failure )

OddEnormous makes some good points, but obscures them with ridiculous ones.

Like what?

 

[BGrantFan]

I wonder what about Cho made him more appealing than Ferry or Pfund for the current GM position.

He actually wanted the job?

 

[OddEnormous]

1. Experience is a consideration, but not the SOLE consideration. Rookie GMs have had resounding success and veteran GMs have failed miserably.

The exact opposite can be said as well. For the 100th time, my issue is not with CHO in a vacuum. It's the process. If you would have read my all my posts instead of trying to come up with new and exciting insults for me, you would have read that.

2. Cho has an excellent skill set, and has positives above and beyond him merely being unknown.

I agree. He sounds like he'd be a great hire for a team who need to start from the bottom up. He's good at the CBA, cap space and collecting draft pics. 3 things we don't need... and already had with the former employees.... except those people actually had more experience. Again, if you weren't trying to insult me as quickly as possible you would have read that

3. KP is not coming back to be the GM for the Blazers any time soon.

This has nowt to do with KP other than we had to replace him.

That information is easy to understand and has been often repeated, but Odd Enormous keeps ignoring or distorting them as he throws in conniption fits in these threads. He's either being dishonest or is exceptionally dense and/or immature. I think that immature is the most charitable explanation.

That's not information. It's opinion. JUST LIKE MY STANCE. I think you're opinions are a pile of shit just like you think mine are. The only difference being that instead of refuting my opinion you name call and say I'm immature, stupid, to run along or dense because you can't think of anything else to say. Were you on the debate team?

I'm not ignoring anything. I disagree with you. I'm defending my position just like every other person on here expect you seem to have a personal issue with me. Again, I clearly gave reasons why I don't like the hire yet you say I use no reason. 10 other people say something along the lines of "I just like the feel of this" yet you don't attack THAT as having a lack of reason. Why? I assume it's because you can't give any other reason yourself for your optimism at this point so you'll just sail on the "You never know!" ship of fools.

...

 

[RoyToy]

How do you go from working at Boeing to working for a basketball organization?

 

[Fez Hammersticks]

Wow, what a bitchfest!

 

[Masbee]

Like what?

blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.

So many letters. So many words. So much nonsense.

 

[OddEnormous]

blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.

So many letters. So many words. So much nonsense.

blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.

So many letters. So many words. So much nonsense.

 

[EGame]

Is Larry Miller celebrating by taking a vacation?

I here KP might get the Hornets job... Perfect team to cheer for...

 

[RoyToy]

I here KP might get the Hornets job... Perfect team to cheer for...

Go for it

 

[EGame]

Go for it

You know I would, but I am not displeased with the organization/management as some people. It is cool that some wanted another candidate over this guy who is basically question mark. All of your posts recently have been just that: "Oh if only we had a GM, Larry Miller should be searching not being on vacation, my team is in disarray, whatever shall I do, etc." Of course, maybe now that we have a GM you will show a little variety in your posts.

 

[RoyToy]

Sorry for being critical of an organization that was showing questionable leadership.

 

[tlongII]

Excellent choice. Contrary to Odd Enormous's opinion I believe he possesses exactly what the Blazers need. His analytical skills, CBA knowledge, and legal background were lost by the franchise whene we got rid of Penn.

 

[Minstrel]

Good grief people.....they managed to pick the one candidate who might not be a downgrade. If you aren't sighing in relief right now, you need a reality check!

Compared to the flotsam that made up the rest of the pool, Cho was a low risk/high reward pick. This is the first smart decision they have made since this fustercluck started.

That sums up how I feel too. Of the floated possibilities, Cho is the only one who I felt could be a good and exciting hire.

 

[maxiep]

Randy Pfund has been out of the league for two years. Do we really think at this point he's more up to date than Cho? Sure he has more experience, but is that experience relevant?

I'll admit my bias by stating this is the guy I really wanted from the get-go.

 

[blazerboy30]

I'm actually one of the very few thats applied reason to my opinion and several times.

Actually, your first post on this topic was how Cho is going to start a rebuild, and is going to ship out Roy and Aldridge for cap space. Even though there is zero evidence to support that claim. Yeah, some "reasoning" you applied to your opinion.

Hiring a rookie at the very instant we need experience. Not to mention hiring someone with less experience than the guy we just fired. Hiring someone who's never made a big final touch trade or brought in a big free agent.

So your point is that we hired somebody that is going to make huge changes, and start a rebuild... but we just hired somebody that wont' be able to make a big trade or bring in free agents.

Nice logic and "reasoning".

 

[BGrantFan]

Actually, your first post on this topic was how Cho is going to start a rebuild, and is going to ship out Roy and Aldridge for cap space. Even though there is zero evidence to support that claim. Yeah, some "reasoning" you applied to your opinion.



So your point is that we hired somebody that is going to make huge changes, and start a rebuild... but we just hired somebody that wont' be able to make a big trade or bring in free agents.

Nice logic and "reasoning".

They must not teach sarcasm at Stanford. And again with you adding your inane and off-target two cents. Do you have any original ideas?

 

[blazerboy30]

They must not teach sarcasm at Stanford. And again with you adding your inane and off-target two cents.

Try not to feel so inadequate.

Do you have any original ideas?

None of us can have any "original ideas" on this hire, unless we want to take a wild-ass guess.

Yes, he is inexperienced in the GM role. But, IMO, it is more exciting with a higher possible reward to hire somebody that "might" turn out to be good instead of hiring a GM with experience that has proven to be mediocre, or worse than average. IMO, the other candidates have proven to be worse than average, so I prefer to take the chance with Cho.

 

[Minstrel]

Hiring a rookie at the very instant we need experience. Not to mention hiring someone with less experience than the guy we just fired. Hiring someone who's never made a big final touch trade or brought in a big free agent.

In a world where Pritchard has already been fired (I know you wouldn't have fired Pritchard, but now that he has been), whom would you have considered a solid hire to replace Pritchard?

And the reason to hire Cho is not that Kupchak or Pritchard had success in their first shot at GM. The reason to hire Cho is, after doing due diligence, believing that Cho has the intelligence, knowledge and basketball understanding to do the job best. Hopefully, that's why Portland made the hire. Examples like Kupchak simply show that inexperience isn't dooming, so one shouldn't disqualify inexperienced candidates from the pool of consideration.

 

[barfo]

How do you go from working at Boeing to working for a basketball organization?

Well, according to his bio, you start as an intern with the Sonics while you are finishing your degree in sports law.

barfo

 

[EL PRESIDENTE]

yeah, he emailed wally walker and met him at a clippers game, then interned there.

 

[OddEnormous]

In a world where Pritchard has already been fired (I know you wouldn't have fired Pritchard, but now that he has been), whom would you have considered a solid hire to replace Pritchard?

And the reason to hire Cho is not that Kupchak or Pritchard had success in their first shot at GM. The reason to hire Cho is, after doing due diligence, believing that Cho has the intelligence, knowledge and basketball understanding to do the job best. Hopefully, that's why Portland made the hire. Examples like Kupchak simply show that inexperience isn't dooming, so one shouldn't disqualify inexperienced candidates from the pool of consideration.

I know why Portland made the hire. I'm not too sure I trust those people to make a hire.

Again. The problem I have is with the PROCESS we've just gone through starting in March until today.

Utter fuckwittery....

IN

MY

OPINION.

To answer your question I'm not sure who else I would have hired. I haven't interviewed anyone or hired a "find me a GM" firm

I'm again not sure why my opinion is being questioned over and over and over again when "This just feels right" hasn't been.

I've not seen anyone give a reason other than "Just because he's inexperienced doesn't mean he won't be good."

I'm not sure if he'll he'll fail or succeed. I don't have a fucking clue. I just can't believe we've come out on the other end of this process with someone who none of us know if he can actually do the job or not at this point in the franchises story.

It's totally bizarre to me.

 

[OddEnormous]

Actually, your first post on this topic was how Cho is going to start a rebuild, and is going to ship out Roy and Aldridge for cap space. Even though there is zero evidence to support that claim. Yeah, some "reasoning" you applied to your opinion.



So your point is that we hired somebody that is going to make huge changes, and start a rebuild... but we just hired somebody that wont' be able to make a big trade or bring in free agents.

Nice logic and "reasoning".

Jesus christ.

FAIL.

 

[OddEnormous]

They must not teach sarcasm at Stanford. And again with you adding your inane and off-target two cents. Do you have any original ideas?

Try not to feel so inadequate.

So I guess the answer is no.

 

[BGrantFan]

Try not to feel so inadequate.

Yeah, that's it.

<hint, that was also sarcasm>

 

[blazerboy30]

Yeah, that's it.

<hint, that was also sarcasm>

Did you not read the rest of the post? Since you're always crying about not discussing the topic, why don't you discuss the topic?