Archive

Tom Izzo to coach the Cavaliers?

  • krazie45
    SQ_Crazies;381318 wrote:If you think Gilbert is a "hands off" owner, then you don't know shit.

    He's hands on in the sense that he puts his hands on his wallet and opens it. Cleveland has a "hands on" owner that tries to impose his own will on things too much and that's Randy Lerner (though he's finally learned his lesson by turning things over to Holmgren). Gilbert came in, put Ferry in control, and only after the results didn't meet his goals is he now taking a bigger role in finding people who will meet those goals. Anyone who thinks otherwise doesn't know shit about the Cleveland Cavaliers.
  • SQ_Crazies
    hoops23;381325 wrote:Windy and just about every other source involved said Ferry had full control.

    That is the biggest reason Ferry is no longer around. Gilbert wanted to have a bigger say-so in the decision making and Ferry wanted full control still. They didn't see eye-to-eye on the situation and decided to split ways.

    Yeah, that was known for awhile--they said that's how it would be when Ferry was hired. But still, anyone who thinks Dan Gilbert is a "hands off" owner doesn't know shit.

    Study some other owners in the NBA and all of pro sports and get back to me...
  • hoops23
    No owner is a hands off owner as they all have direct control over any situation.

    However, Ferry was allowed to go and make the hires he wanted, sign the FA's he wanted, and make the trades he wanted.

    Ferry was given full permission to do so by Gilbert. Since Ferry failed AGAIN to get us a ring, Gilbert is now taking a bigger role with the team as he is now overseeing the moves being made himself.
  • krazie45
    Ok let the record show that in the world of SQ, unless you are playing golf in Dubai during the season you are a "hands on" owner.


    Oh and there's this:

    http://www.cleveland.com/livingston/index.ssf/2010/05/cleveland_cavaliers_owner_dan.html
    Since buying the team at the tail end of the 2004-05 season, Gilbert has earned the image of an engaged, activist owner. It makes it easier to field a winning team by inheriting LeBron James, of course, but since then, Gilbert has pressed most of the right buttons with the fans. He also has learned to adopt a hands-off policy in other areas.
  • SQ_Crazies
    Hey, don't lecture me on Ferry. As soon as the season ended, I believe I was the only one who said that if Brown goes then Ferry should too.

    To say no owner is a hands off owner is a great example of you not knowing what the fuck you're talking about.
  • SQ_Crazies
    LOL, post all you want--I've been through this with you two time and time again. You sound like dipshits every time, but I won't waste my time or yours this time. Might as well end the discussion right now. I know that no matter what I say, no matter how it's backed up, you'll always argue differently--because you have a personal vendetta. I could tell you the grass in my yard is green and show it to you and you'd still disagree, so lets not fill up ANOTHER thread with meaningless, terrible discussion.
  • krazie45
    I was one who thought Ferry did a pretty good job, but if Gilbert wanted him gone I trust his decision being he is the best owner the city of Cleveland has seen in a long long time.
  • SQ_Crazies
    krazie45;381335 wrote: he is the best owner the city of Cleveland has seen in a long long time.

    Well there is something that is absolutely not debatable.
  • krazie45
    SQ_Crazies;381334 wrote:LOL, post all you want--I've been through this with you two time and time again. You sound like dipshits every time, but I won't waste my time or yours this time. Might as well end the discussion right now. I know that no matter what I say, no matter how it's backed up, you'll always argue differently--because you have a personal vendetta. I could tell you the grass in my yard is green and show it to you and you'd still disagree, so lets not fill up ANOTHER thread with meaningless, terrible discussion.

    Haha I bring up a quote, you spew nothing but your vague opinions and I'm the dipshit? and you're the one with the backed up facts?

    You're done with the conversation because you've added nothing to it. "If you think Gilbert is a hands off owner you don't know shit." Well I guess that's it then, SQ has spoken so he has to be right. I mean I only quoted a columnist who follows basketball and the Cavs for a living who says the complete opposite but if we don't take SQ's word for it at face value we're all dipshits. LOL
  • krazie45
    BTW folks here's some of the intellectual fact-backed gems that SQ has submitted to this "conversation of dipshits"
    If you think Gilbert is a "hands off" owner, then you don't know shit.
    But still, anyone who thinks Dan Gilbert is a "hands off" owner doesn't know shit
    To say no owner is a hands off owner is a great example of you not knowing what the fuck you're talking about
    and then goes on to say:
    I know that no matter what I say, no matter how it's backed up, you'll always argue differently

    Hey guys, if you like mint chocolate chip ice cream than you're a terrorist. If you argue differently you're a dipshit. I'm not even going to address anyone that disagrees with this because i know no matter what proof I show, everyone is just out to spite me.
  • SQ_Crazies
    Like I said, go study some other professional owners and get back to me. Until then, it's very, very clear to anyone who does understand this that you don't have a fucking clue.
  • End of Line
    I doubt it.
  • hoops23
    SQ_Crazies;381343 wrote:Like I said, go study some other professional owners and get back to me. Until then, it's very, very clear to anyone who does understand this that you don't have a fucking clue.

    You keep saying the same stupid shit time after time.

    You bring nothing to the table aside from random swears and 3rd grade level insults.

    You're not even making sense in his thread, as facts were provided to back up our comments, yet we "don't know what we're talking about".

    In you're mind, you are never wrong. I feel sorry for you.

    God bless.
  • krazie45
    SQ_Crazies;381343 wrote:Like I said, go study some other professional owners and get back to me. Until then, it's very, very clear to anyone who does understand this that you don't have a fucking clue.

    There are 29 other NBA owners, 32 NFL owners, 30 MLB owners. Am I supposed to read all of their biographies? Is there somewhere where I can see like a percentage of how much they meddle in day to day operations? Is there some sort of ranking that lists them from top to bottom in how they use their hands in relation to their team? I'm not a "Hands-on/hands-off" major but when most people say a "hands on" owner the names that come to mind are those of the Mark Cuban, Al Davis, George Steinbrenner, Donnie Walsh, I'm sure Michael Jordan will be pretty hands on, you know guys that are constantly in the headlines for their teams. I don't think the guy that barely makes any public appearances/press conferences, defers most control to the GM, and rarely comments on anything basketball related to the team is considered a "hands on" owner. I mean feel free to link me to something that proves otherwise but I guess if not we'll just have to take your word for it with your vast knowledge of the innerworkings of the front offices for every professional sports team.


    Sorry I have papers to write and finals to study for. I don't really have the time to get my sports management masters in the next 15 minutes.
  • SQ_Crazies
    Because I'm not going to hold your God damn hand for you, I'm sick of doing that--because it doesn't matter. Like my green grass analogy. I've tried to hit you with some knowledge many times in the past--doesn't matter, you still want to be a fucktard. Do your own research. Dan Gilbert isn't anywhere near being "hands off".
  • hoops23
    lol @ you hitting people with knowledge. Too bad it never backfired, you could use some of your own.
  • krazie45
    LOL hold my hand. You should be a lawyer or a politician because that would work just GREAT in a courtroom or debate.

    "Your honor, I'm not going to hold your or the jury's damn hand here. My client is innocent and anyone who doesn't think so is a dipshit. If you want to know why just study his life and every case in recorded American history. The prosecution's arguments and facts are irrelevant."

    "My opponent brings up some statistics for how he can improve the economic situation. I'm here to tell you, my fellow Americans, that I'm not here to hold your damn hands. If you want to know why I'd be a good president just study past American presidents and you'll see how I can improve the situation."


    I've given you the names of "hands on" owners (I even forgot to mention Jerry Jones, so Jerry Jones). "Hands on" owners are those that:

    -Handle the day to day operations of their team
    -Constantly veto the authority of the GM and coach on decisions of personnel, strategy, etc.
    -Are highly visible in the media with their opinions on what the front office and coaches are doing.
    -Are hiring and firing people at a high rate within the organization.


    Now what about Dan Gilbert leads you to believe he does ANY of those things? He doesn't handle day to day operations. He left the power on personnel decisions in the hands of Ferry, Brown, and even LeBron. He isn't constantly holding press conferences and making his presence known by sitting courtside and yelling at officials. He's had 1 GM and 1 coach that he's hired during his tenure. Sooooo after all of these, you know, arguments I've brought up. What about Dan Gilbert makes him hands off? I'm not going to hold your damn hand SQ, you actually need to first provide your criteria for what makes a hands on owner and two provide arguments to support why Dan Gilbert fits that bill.

    Dan Gilbert is a hands on owner of QUICKEN LOANS. Apparently unless he leaves his credit card at the Q for the front office and spends the season in Cabo he's a hands on owner. Ferry had the guys he wanted to get. He made the deals. Gilbert was willing to go over the luxury tax to appease this because he trusted Ferry's judgement (after all he gave him the job). When that didn't work he decided to move in a new direction which apparently has changed his entire identity as an owner. I mean this is just starting to get ridiculous.

    I mean I've honestly been searching for ONE opinion that says Dan Gilbert is a hands on owner. Nowhere will you find Dan Gilbert's name among this term. I have found multiple articles, including the Bill Livingston one I cited saying Gilbert was indeed a "hands off" owner, contradicting your claims. Maybe you're the one SQ that need to do the studying about other pro sports owners. Gilbert has been willing to spend money on this franchise. But he's put people in place that make the basketball decisions. It used to be Danny Ferry, now it's Chris Grant. Ferry wanted to maintain complete control, Gilbert saw how that worked out the past few years and decided it wasn't in the best interest for the team. Everything the guy touches turns to gold in a business sense so even if he did take more interest in roster, front office decisions, and day to day operations he probably would actually get the Cavs on a better track. He has basketball people that tell him what needs to be done and what it costs....then he opens up his wallet.
  • SQ_Crazies
    Holy shit.

    You're such a media drone who thinks they're an expert. This is why we don't see eye to eye on most of these NBA discussions. This is why I've recently stopped even trying to argue my points. You're behind my friend. Get on my level, hoe.
  • hoops23
    lol, oh no, he just busted out the "Get on my level, hoe" line. This mutha fucka just called you a gardening tool dude.

    And then the hypocrisy to tell somebody else that they think they're an expert, when this guy acts like everything he says is a fact! LMAO.
  • SQ_Crazies
    What did I say?

    I said he isn't hands off owner.

    That is a fact. In all this time you've been spending arguing with me, you could have been doing some research on professional owners who literally own a franchise because they're rich and it's a cool social thing to do. Those are hands off owners. But since I said you don't know shit if you think he's hands off, you instantly jump to the conclusion that I'm saying he's Mark Cuban. LOL...wtf? I didn't say that either, just simply, he isn't hands off.

    So fucking easy to get you pawns sweating, tells me all I need to know.
  • krazie45
    Ok now I'm going to write my paper because this is like arguing with a brick wall....

    I'm not an "expert". I don't get paid by a newspaper or sports broadcasting network to cover sports. I don't have access to insider info that outlines the day to day operations of the Cleveland Cavaliers. That's why I make my arguments based on my observations of watching basketball for years, observing owners and their roles with teams, and then make those arguments and CITE things that back it up. As someone who always brings up LeBron's stats to show why he's the best player in the NBA (something I agree with btw) I would figure you would appreciate this kind of reasoning. You however have decided to take the skyhook/capone route of just giving your opinions, trying to pass them off as fact, and make no sound arguments to back them up.....and I'M not on YOUR level? The fact is that you're not an expert either and you don't even give any reasoning to what you say. You say it and if we don't believe it then we're dipshits.

    Now if we were talking about something relating to Ohio State athletics then I could say I'm an expert because I DO have that kind of insider information and I DO have that expertise. However since I don't have that kind of expertise with the Cavs I support my arguments with people who do. Now if IN YOUR OPINION (which has proven to mean jack shit in terms of NBA basketball, no offense and I didn't want to bring it up, but see Celtics, Collapse of) Dan Gilbert is a "hands on" owner than that's fine (though it would be nice if you could actually provide reasons as to why you think that way but I suppose it's not completely necessary it just gives you, you know, credibility), but for you to come on here and declare that "Dan Gilbert is a hands on owner because I say so. So let it be written so let it be done. I am the great SQ, may you suck from my balls of unlimited professional sports knowledge!"....well, you're the only the one that looks like a dipshit my friend.
  • krazie45
    SQ_Crazies;381397 wrote:What did I say?

    I said he isn't hands off owner.

    That is a fact. In all this time you've been spending arguing with me, you could have been doing some research on professional owners who literally own a franchise because they're right and it's a cool social thing to do. Those are hands off owners. But since I said you don't know shit if you think he's hands off, you instantly jump to the conclusion that I'm saying he's Mark Cuban. LOL...wtf? I didn't say that either, just simply, he isn't hands off.

    So fucking easy to get you pawns sweating, tells me all I need to know.

    Wow, for the first time in this thread you actually gave a reason as to why he's a "hands on" owner. Congratulations. Was that so hard to do an hour ago? You are saying that he's a hands on owner because he actually invests in the franchise. That's an alright opinion to have. It's not a fact, but it's what you perceive a hands on owner to be....and by the way I'm not sweating, I'm pretty cool and collected. I haven't used half as many swear words as you and actually most of them were quoting/mocking you. I'm just bored.

    See the problem with your definition is that there are very few MAJORITY owners who fit your criteria for being hands off. Would you say Usher is a hands on owner of the Cavs? I mean he shows up every once in a while, he's been at some press conferences, he has a cool Cavs jacket....is he hands on? Is Jay-Z a hands on owner of the Nets? I mean he only actually owns about 1% of them but he's always talking about them. He spearheaded the move to Brooklyn. He's always sitting courtside at games. I suppose that makes him hands on.

    To me a hands on owner is one that is directly involved with most of the operations and personnel decisions of the team and one that constantly has a presence over the team and in the media. Dan Gilbert doesn't do that with the Cavs (unlike his actual businesses like Quicken Loans, Fathead, and his Casino he's putting in Cleveland among others) so to me he's not a hands on owner. See I could own stock in a company. I could invest my money into the company. I could even attend a shareholders meeting. Does that make me a hands on owner of the company? No. In your opinion with your criteria he may be hands on....that's fine. But don't act like your definition of "hands on" is the all-world definition of hands on. I've got papers to write, I've proven my point, in a few hours people are going to read this thread and point out how dumb you look and you don't have to care because you're on this different level of sports knowledge than the rest of us. Go ahead and stay there, I won't be joining you. I prefer using reason and logic to throwing out blanket opinions as facts......have fun on nutjob island
  • SQ_Crazies
    LOL, did you miss my posts about why I wasn't giving a reason? It's fucking pointless.

    And I'm only talking about majority owners, duh. Who the fuck cares about minority owners? You could be a fucking minority owner.
  • krazie45
    SQ_Crazies;381404 wrote:LOL, did you miss my posts about why I wasn't giving a reason? It's fucking pointless.

    And I'm only talking about majority owners, duh. Who the fuck cares about minority owners? You could be a fucking minority owner.

    No considering most of your posts were once sentence statements calling me dumb because I didn't agree with you it's pretty hard to miss much. You have a different opinion of what makes an owner hands on....congrats. I disagreed with that and said/proved why. You called me names because I didn't agree with your opinion (instead of actually trying to rebut it or give some type of actual opinion as to why you feel that way). You try to pass yourself off as an expert when you're not....that's why no one on here takes your opinion seriously. Put the foil back on your head, we'll see you on the spaceship soon.

    Dan Gilbert cares a lot more about his actual businesses than the Cavs. The Cavs are a side investment of his. Something he does because billionaire sports fans tend to do that kind of thing. He isn't hands on in the day to day operations of the team. That's how I define an owner's involvement. He's a passionate owner no doubt. I think he really does want to bring a championship to Cleveland. But to say that he doesn't let his appointed basketball personnel handle things is just a false statement.
  • SQ_Crazies
    LOL, I could have posted somewhere in here that the world was flat--you're like my fucking mother, you wouldn't have even known.