(06-15-2021, 01:39 PM)omahen Wrote: True. But he also basically says that FO has been a failure for "20 years", failing to build around the two generational stars. How changes have to be made as they are obviously not successful. Bob is not with Mavs for 20 years - it was an attempt to change what needs to be changed.
Yes, the article was wrapped around the FO's "failures."
I don't see that he has a specific solution.
For example, he says that Mark has been dictating front office policy for over twenty years. If the policy has been sound, but Donnie has executed it poorly, then that would be on Donnie. But there is disagreement over whether the policy itself has been sound. Josh Bowe summarized the policy post-championship as swinging for the fences on high-profile free agents, combined with making value plays on role players in order to be in position for the next home run opportunity, and argued that it was a policy that has been proven to be a failure. Cato did not disagree.
So, does that argue that Donnie should be fired, or that Cuban should stand back and let him do his job?
Cato also believes that bringing a new voice in was a good thing, and laments that it was so poorly implemented. He doesn't say whether he thinks that Bob was the right or wrong voice. He notes that Luka doesn't like Bob, and that Bob is poor at interpersonal skills. But also that Cuban values the new perspectives that he has brought to the organization. So, do they keep Bob and maybe keep him away from Luka? Get rid of Bob and get another high-level analytics guy? Something else?
It seems to me to be presented as a nuanced issue.