Should Colangelo's third year option be picked up?

Yes wholeeartedly I never wanted him fired in the first place. I dont think people understand how difficult it is to bring talent to a struggling franchise, and for what it is he has done a good job yes he has some slip ups I cant defend but He does do right by the organization and need I say more about the Gay trade saving his job? no not really.

Quote:

---

joey_hesketh wrote:

Well I think you should call out those whom you feel to be flip-flopping, as I don't believe you can really take a shot at the 'general fanbase' because it is such a broad, diverse cross-section of people and opinions. And yes, there are real opinions amongst posters here.

Anyone who has been on this forum for any amount of times knows that there are PLENTY of real opinions, and PLENTY of people willing to back them up.

---

Oh no doubt. By "general fanbase" I meant the vocal ones. Or as I see it, people that don't know what the f*ck they're talking about and just love to talk nonsense and complain 24/7. Heck, it might even be the "vocal minority, silent majority" thing.

I don't have to call anyone out, just simply take look at the comment section of the articles and right here at the forums.

Quote:

---

Rapstor4Life wrote:

Yes wholeeartedly I never wanted him fired in the first place. I dont think people understand how difficult it is to bring talent to a struggling franchise, and for what it is he has done a good job yes he has some slip ups I cant defend but He does do right by the organization and need I say more about the Gay trade saving his job? no not really.

---

Colangelo's winning percentage as GM is about the same as previous 6 years. Terrible. He has no playoff series wins and they will miss the playoffs for five years running. 1 season over 500 in 7 years. Not a single all star drafted, traded for or signed by BC. The Gay trade is 4 games in. It is ludicrous to judge that trade today, let alone call it a game changer.

He should have been fired 3 years ago. Alas, it is not to be.

Quote:

---

Matt52 wrote:

As circumstances change, opinions can and often do change. I don't see a problem with that especially when the ongoing 'building' is starting to finally show signs of progress.

---

I think this point is the golden ticket. Its exactly this, and I would completely understand if BC doubters had a change of heart, if even slight, because of the recent move and potential future moves.

Quote:

---

Sig wrote:

Oh no doubt. By "general fanbase" I meant the vocal ones. Or as I see it, people that don't know what the f*ck they're talking about and just love to talk nonsense and complain 24/7. Heck, it might even be the "vocal minority, silent majority" thing.

I don't have to call anyone out, just simply take look at the comment section of the articles and right here at the forums.

---

I agree with matt that this is a valid discussion piece and people seem to be stating their opinions on the matter.. no offense but u seem to be the only one on this thread talking nonsense and complaining.. ironic.

Quote:

---

Sig wrote:

Oh no doubt. By "general fanbase" I meant the vocal ones. Or as I see it, people that don't know what the f*ck they're talking about and just love to talk nonsense and complain 24/7. Heck, it might even be the "vocal minority, silent majority" thing.

I don't have to call anyone out, just simply take look at the comment section of the articles and right here at the forums.

---

Well, you seem to be on these forums quite a bit. You also seem to be disrespecting people without calling anyone specific out, and also not offering any position on the actual topic being discussed.....So, from now on, I guess I will just assume that you're talking about yourself and that you don't know what the f*ck you're talking about.

Quote:

---

Matt52 wrote:

The point of the forums is discussion, no? I think this is a relevant topic of discussion.

---

Of course it is. But I think I know why you decided to make it now - to test the waters and see how people feel now after a big win where people are sure to have lightened up on Bargnani and Colangelo. You're expecting opinions to change, as did I.

Quote:

---

Matt52 wrote:

I think your opinion would be valid if people - myself included - were looking to give him a 5 year extension. But the topic of conversation is his third year option.

---

I fail to see how what I said is not valid? It's not an opinion, it's fact, happens all the time.

What difference does the length of his extension make? The fact of the matter is that you people that were calling for his head literally 10 days ago(!); still want him here. Okay...... that's great. I'm not disagreeing with anything, but was the Rudy Gay deal all it took to win some of you over? To make you forget of all the fucking mind-blowingly stupid things that have happened in the not-at-all distant past? Is your twitter campaign still running? Or is it on a hiatus? I see that you've voted in favor of an extension.

Quote:

---

Matt52 wrote:

Why not see where this goes? If things go well, great. If things go bad, the team is set for a proper rebuild with someone new in charge.

---

Why not see where this goes? Isn't that exactly what was said back when Chris Bosh left? Or when we traded for O'Neal? (which was awful btw) Or when we played 2 full seasons with lineups starring overrated volume shooters, 3rd stringers, and D-leaguers? Where we also won about 10 meaningless games that f*cked us over in the draft?

Why not have someone new in charge right now? What, only Colangelo knows a good route to go from here?

Quote:

---

Matt52 wrote:

Colangelo spent 2 years talking about financial flexibility and making big trades only to give away all his financial flexibility and then make a big trade. It has taken him 5 years to start to add serious talent to the roster but he is doing it.

---

Nice job BC. I'm guessing those four years were just test runs and not actual attempts at doing your ridiculously over-payed job.

Quote:

---

Matt52 wrote:

As circumstances change, opinions can and often do change. I don't see a problem with that especially when the ongoing 'building' is starting to finally show signs of progress.

---

Yes, opinions do change. But many are going to opposite sides of the spectrum based off of 2 games, which is astonishing to me. Same thing goes for opinions on Rudy Gay.

---

I hope you don't take what I said the wrong way, it wasn't attacks on you, just clearing things up a little :)

It seems that I have made some people a little upset... sorry

Quote:

---

FoxMachine wrote:

I agree with matt that this is a valid discussion piece and people seem to be stating their opinions on the matter.. no offense but u seem to be the only one on this thread talking nonsense and complaining.. ironic.

---

What did I type that would indicate me talking nonsense? Is it not true?

Quote:

---

white men can't jump wrote:

Well, you seem to be on these forums quite a bit. You also seem to be disrespecting people without calling anyone specific out, and also not offering any position on the actual topic being discussed.....So, from now on, I guess I will just assume that you're talking about yourself and that you don't know what the f*ck you're talking about.

---

My stance on the topic has always been the same. Which is to not judge things based off of a small sample and make drastic conclusions.

Not a fan of pointing people out in particular as it leads to writing essays which I'm also not a fan of. I once failed English class..

Yeah, I probably shouldn't have said "don't know what the f*ck they're talking about"...

m'bad guys

After the Gay trade and probably more to come, it is quite clear it(option) will be picked up. If not these trades make no sense. Despite the long play off drought, I'm still in favour of this. It seems like BC is using this year to add some valuable pieces for next year. It only makes sense to keep him for another year to see if his moves are paying off.

Quote:

---

Sig wrote:

My stance on the topic has always been the same. Which is to not judge things based off of a small sample and make drastic conclusions.

Not a fan of pointing people out in particular as it leads to writing essays which I'm also not a fan of. I once failed English class..

Yeah, I probably shouldn't have said "don't know what the f*ck they're talking about"...

m'bad guys

---

Not sure what the point of THAT whole thing was but anyway.....

As it relates to the thread my opinion on Extending BC has always been the same.... Who else would we get to do it that would be better?

In the whole league there are really only a couple of guys who have a track record of being able to take teams (that are not the celtics or lakers) and make them competitive with really keen moves. Sam presti, San Antonio's GM (don't know his name), Kevin o'connor, Pat Riley and maybe Denver's GM.

Anyone else we get to fill the position will be another guy coming and in moving player A to team B and then we cross our fingers.

At least with BC we know:

1. He can make moves and it does not take him long to drastically change the whole team if he doesn't like where we are headed

2. He drafts well (I am including the bargnani pick which at the time still made a lot of sense...his babying of bargs did not)

3. He has managed to put together a playoff calibre team at this point and we have more talent today than we have had in 10 years.

BC has made critical mistakes in his tenure, hedo and triano being by far the worst, but it makes no sense to change him unless we can bring on someone with a proven track record.

Quote:

---

Sig wrote:

What did I type that would indicate me talking nonsense? Is it not true?

---

to call out people for changing their opinions when they feel that circumstances have changed for the better is total nonsense and totally off topic from the thread... we get it, you don't like BC. But people have made some very good arguments as to why his third year option should be picked up and I haven't heard a great argument as to why it shouldn't..

as far as you talking about the vocal people on here like they don't know what they're talking about and all they do is complain and don't have any opinions.. back up dude.. you are not immune to this, ive seen you complain and talk nonsense on this forum just like all of us do from time to time. so what?? I seem to recall after the Boston game you were "complaining" how gay didn't get enough touches in the 4th quarter and u were upset that he wasn't taking more shots.. I didn't call you out and say "you don't know what the fuck you're talking about" I just informed you that gay was actually 1/9 in the 4th quarter..

no need to get all out of sorts and make ridiculous comments like that when people have a different opinion than yours, especially when you don't even want to give your opinion. that's just nonsense.

Quote:

---

BallaBalla wrote:

Not sure what the point of THAT whole thing was but anyway.....

As it relates to the thread my opinion on Extending BC has always been the same.... Who else would we get to do it that would be better?

In the whole league there are really only a couple of guys who have a track record of being able to take teams (that are not the celtics or lakers) and make them competitive with really keen moves. Sam presti, San Antonio's GM (don't know his name), Kevin o'connor, Pat Riley and maybe Denver's GM.

Anyone else we get to fill the position will be another guy coming and in moving player A to team B and then we cross our fingers.

At least with BC we know:

1. He can make moves and it does not take him long to drastically change the whole team if he doesn't like where we are headed

2. He drafts well (I am including the bargnani pick which at the time still made a lot of sense...his babying of bargs did not)

3. He has managed to put together a playoff calibre team at this point and we have more talent today than we have had in 10 years.

BC has made critical mistakes in his tenure, hedo and triano being by far the worst, but it makes no sense to change him unless we can bring on someone with a proven track record.

---

This is a lot of what I think too....I mostly wanted to say San Antonio's guy is RC Buford.

It's also funny that Denver's (Ujiri) was from BC's front office.

Quote:

---

white men can't jump wrote:

It's also funny that Denver's (Ujiri) was from BC's front office.

---

This was going to the hiring that I would point too. These sorts of finds are few and far between. Just like AA with the Jays. Sometimes, a young Gem will come up the ranks.

Quote:

---

Sig wrote:

My stance on the topic has always been the same. Which is to not judge things based off of a small sample and make drastic conclusions.

Not a fan of pointing people out in particular as it leads to writing essays which I'm also not a fan of. I once failed English class..

Yeah, I probably shouldn't have said "don't know what the f*ck they're talking about"...

m'bad guys

---

Well I'm judging him on his whole tenure, but also on where the team is. He has certainly made mistakes, but he has also not been a total disaster. You have not made an argument for why Colangelo should be let go other than the subjective "I don't like him" one. My argument was mainly rational. To let go of BC now, after the trade and with much less flexibility, as well as likely no pick until next year, there's no way it makes much sense. IT's not a good situation to offer the job to somebody, and will instantly put some better candidates off, be they known names or unknowns...

It's also why if you hated him, the best chance to see him let go pre-trade was way back after Triano's last season. A new GM could've been offered his choice of new coach, and we had a high lottery pick, though I'm glad that JV was chosen and glad BC made the selection, so who knows how things could've been different.

I'll back up sig on this one. To go from bc has to go, to ask for his third year option to be picked up is pretty ridiculous. I mean if he had gotten rid of bargnani, then sure, I can see some opinions change, but I would definitely say that I've seen some flip-flopping. Mostly, I think it's about wanting the franchise to be successful and hoping for the best from the people involved. Which isn't necessarily a bad thing, but does lead to heartbreak.

As for me, I did vote for his third year option to be picked up, but I've never called for his head to roll. This whole season I wanted to see what he would do with bargnani, and still do! If bargnani is traded or comes off the bench for the rest of the season then I have no issue with his 3rd option being picked up. However if bargnani works his way back as a starter, then I definitely what him gone BC and bargs both.

There was no point in the ownership allowing the Gay trade unless they were willing to see how it worked out for at least 1 year. I don't think it makes sense from an ownership stand point to bring in a new guy, who may want to blow it up and do his own thing. I think that ownership has already decided to pick up his 3rd year unless something happens that they really don't like.

Quote:

---

ezz_bee wrote:

I'll back up sig on this one. To go from bc has to go, to ask for his third year option to be picked up is pretty ridiculous. I mean if he had gotten rid of bargnani, then sure, I can see some opinions change, but I would definitely say that I've seen some flip-flopping. Mostly, I think it's about wanting the franchise to be successful and hoping for the best from the people involved. Which isn't necessarily a bad thing, but does lead to heartbreak.

As for me, I did vote for his third year option to be picked up, but I've never called for his head to roll. This whole season I wanted to see what he would do with bargnani, and still do! If bargnani is traded or comes off the bench for the rest of the season then I have no issue with his 3rd option being picked up. However if bargnani works his way back as a starter, then I definitely what him gone BC and bargs both.

There was no point in the ownership allowing the Gay trade unless they were willing to see how it worked out for at least 1 year. I don't think it makes sense from an ownership stand point to bring in a new guy, who may want to blow it up and do his own thing. I think that ownership has already decided to pick up his 3rd year unless something happens that they really don't like.

---

So why cant you and sig see why it makes sense for people to change their minds about BC getting his 3rd year option?

I've never called for BC's head either but I can certainly see why it makes logical sense for people who were against BC to have changed their minds about him picking up the option. It's not flip-flopping when the whole situation changes. Its adapting to change using logical thinking. I don't get what the big deal is about people changing their minds like its a cardinal sin or something, especially when the circumstances have changed.

Quote:

---

Sig wrote:

Of course it is. But I think I know why you decided to make it now - to test the waters and see how people feel now after a big win where people are sure to have lightened up on Bargnani and Colangelo. You're expecting opinions to change, as did I.

---

I don't really care about others opinion except to promote discussion. I'm not dipping my toe in. I stated my opinion - I plunged in. If everyone here said to fire him asap I'd still be saying I think his 3rd year option should be picked up.

Quote:

---

Sig wrote:

I fail to see how what I said is not valid? It's not an opinion, it's fact, happens all the time.

What difference does the length of his extension make? The fact of the matter is that you people that were calling for his head literally 10 days ago(!); still want him here. Okay...... that's great. I'm not disagreeing with anything, but was the Rudy Gay deal all it took to win some of you over? To make you forget of all the fucking mind-blowingly stupid things that have happened in the not-at-all distant past? Is your twitter campaign still running? Or is it on a hiatus? I see that you've voted in favor of an extension.

---

The length of the extension is irrelevant. The point is "EXTENSION" is not what I am talking about. I am talking about picking up his 3rd year option. That means he is not under contract beyond next season and that is the point. BC (like him or not, agree with him or not, trust him or not) is in the middle of something here. One more season is going to give an indication if he is on the right path or not.

Landing Rudy Gay for Jose/ED/2nd rd pick was a coup, a huge talent upgrade, and addresses a hole that has been left unplugged for 5 years.

Quote:

---

Sig wrote:

Why not see where this goes? Isn't that exactly what was said back when Chris Bosh left? Or when we traded for O'Neal? (which was awful btw) Or when we played 2 full seasons with lineups starring overrated volume shooters, 3rd stringers, and D-leaguers? Where we also won about 10 meaningless games that f*cked us over in the draft?

Why not have someone new in charge right now? What, only Colangelo knows a good route to go from here?

---

I don't think the current situation can be compared to Bosh, JO, or the last 2 seasons.

Why not have someone new? Sure that is an option but there appears to be progress in the current plan for the first time in a long time.

I did not say Colangelo only knows a good route to go from here. I said it will be evident in one more season success or failure given the length of contracts of Gay and Lowry and the development of DD/JV/TR.

Quote:

---

Sig wrote:

Nice job BC. I'm guessing those four years were just test runs and not actual attempts at doing your ridiculously over-payed job.

---

You sound bitter. If you are upset at the amount people in professional sports get paid you should not follow. But it should be pointed out BC did take a cut in years and pay on this 2 years extension with option for year 3.

Quote:

---

Sig wrote:

Yes, opinions do change. But many are going to opposite sides of the spectrum based off of 2 games, which is astonishing to me. Same thing goes for opinions on Rudy Gay.

---

I hope you don't take what I said the wrong way, it wasn't attacks on you, just clearing things up a little :)

---

People have the right to have an opinion. You come off judgmental in your posts. I think that is why the backlash. Personally I was always down with the Gay trade and still want Bargnani gone. I've softened on BC but that is because whether he is successful or not, the franchise is actually set up for a proper rebuild in 2 seasons with someone new in charge should things fail miserably.... as it would appear you think will.

Quote:

---

octothorp wrote:

Well, that's pretty black and white. You'd want to see Colangelo's option picked up if he trades Bargnani for a worse player on a similar contract (Let's say, Tyrus Thomas, for the sake of argument)? Similarly, you'd want to let go of Colangelo if he keeps Bargnani, makes a couple depth moves, and the team goes on a crazy streak from here until the end of the season with Bargnani as a big part of that?

Don't get me wrong, Bargnani is still the first big contract guy I'd want to trade on this team. But moving him to save his job should be the last thing anyone wants BC to do.

---

There's nothing in my post that hinted that Bargs should just be moved for anything including someone like a Boozer, in order for him to stay. What I'm saying is that not picking up his option while Bargs is around is just a means to end the love affair (that includes them getting into a crazy streak - streaks end, then what?). Let's say that it does "work out" BC will not move him. We know it will never "work out".