re: David Griffin Q&A

Can't tell you how much it bugs me that Rachel acts like Ainge is some next level genius all the time. Have the RESULTS of his trades been lopsided? Sure, because of luck or other factors after the fact. But he didn't "talk GM's into bad trades" like Rachel seems to imply.

Let me give you an example. She mentions Colangelo. That is the Philly trade.

If I were to tell you that Team A traded the first overall pick for the 3rd and the 14th pick two years later, who would you say won that trade? The team that got the 1st pick by a LANDSLIDE, right? Well, NBA history would back you up. The 1st pick is historically worth the 3rd, 4th, 9th, and 14th picks.

But Philly takes the wrong guy and handles it poorly and now Ainge is a genius? It doesn't work like that.

Ainge also trade to give up 4 picks, one that would eventually become the 3rd overall in order to move up and get Justice Winslow. MJ says no because he is obsessed with Frank Kaminsky. But yeah, Ainge is a next level genius. Not lucky.

The Kyrie trade has produced a better player for sure, but one who could leave after playing in two total playoff series and winning one. The team was definitely tighter and more cohesive prior to his arrival. But sure, I will mark it as a win. Thats fine.

Point is that she acts like this guy is playing 4-D chess while everyone is playing checkers. She makes this point about him all the time. But in reality, this is a good GM who had some great luck and/or the teams who traded with him had some really bad luck after the fact. He is not somebody that you should be terrified to deal with, as Rachel always seems to imply.