DSL Education link

Welcome to Provo's Take:

Question:

"What is your take on the recent NY Post article that suggests that Jeff Van Gundy has been fully responsible for all trades and other personnel moves since the departure of Ernie Grunfeld?"

Answer:

Like most everything else in the Post (except of course Page Six), it's pure rubbish. I'm surprised this journalist made no mention of the Free Masons. Van Gundy is not the GM, and was never in charge of personnel moves. The article doesn't even hint at why he believes this to be the case (he doesn't even claim to have a source). All other evidence suggests the opposite. Van Gundy's main source of frustration was with the cards he was dealt (several insiders have said that Van Gundy was infuriated about the contract Allan Houston received). Van Gundy never silenced Sprewell during his many campaigns to the media for a quality big man. He encouraged Sprewell, permitting Sprewell to vocalize all of the things that he was unable to. If Van Gundy was the deal maker, then Sprewell's comments would have been directed at him and he would have taken them personally. Another indication that Layden does not answer to Van Gundy is the aquisition of Howard Eisley. From the start, it was clear that Van Gundy prefers Charlie Ward, and has no need for a third point guard. However, Layden is fond of Eisley (and anyone else who has ever played for Utah, The Beehive State), so he brought him in anyway.

CLICK ABOVE TO GO TO OUR NEW MEASSAGE BOARD!