Originally Posted by
Pelicanidae
*Sigh*
No, that's not what I said. Read it again.
Danny Ferry, debatably has the best resume. It's perfectly possible to argue that Griffin has a better resume: after all, he has a ring and Ferry doesn't. It's not as cut and dry as you make it sound: Ferry's resume is essentially made up of two parts. The first is his time as Cavs GM. Like I said, that is not a GOOD thing, because all of those Cavs teams were god awful and they only won anything because Lebron James is Lebron James. The second thing he has is his time with the Hawks. Now, the Hawks were legitimately very good, but they fell apart relatively quickly because the construction was unable to sustain success. So that's Ferry's resume. Failing with Cleveland, and being great but short-lived in Atlanta.
You can prefer that over anyone else, sure. He's certainly more experienced than some of the other names, and that Atlanta team, though short lived, really was excellent. But don't act like he just has the best, undisputed resume that nobody else can touch.
''So if the Pelicans hire him, it is because they are lazy?''. No. And I didn't say that. I said that if they hire him, it is either because he is the best pick, or because they're being lazy. The issue is that we, as fans, cannot know which, because they aren't going to tell us. Maybe they hire him and they do it because they agree with you and think he has the best resume. Totally possible. But we won't KNOW that, so there will always be a question mark.