March 24, 2006

WAS BABCOCK A SCAPEGOAT FOR OWNERSHIP’S INCOMPETENCE?

       There isn’t any reason, or any purpose, in detailing the successes (few) or the failures (many) of Rob Babcock’s regime with the Toronto Raptors.  However, as more time passes and more information slips into public light it appears as if all the errors made by that management team weren’t the sole fault of that General Manager.  There are reports out pointing to ownership as the throttle behind the Vince Carter trade, and comments, made by Babcock himself, that he did not want to pay Alonzo Mourning to go away.   

      This is by no means an account of why the Raptors should not have fired Babcock—he should never have been hired in the first place.  This ownership group is too invasive to have a soft, inexperience GM (hint—John Ferguson Jr.) at its helm.  Both sports franchises need a strong-willed and experienced leader who is sure of himself and his abilities and someone who has the strength to be able to tell ownership to, politely, back off and get their own sandwich.  Bryan Colangelo looks to have that pedigree.  But Babcock did not, and when ownership began to step in and make decisions for the club, and make no mistake about it-- despite Richard Peddie’s assurances that their GM has complete autonomy--ownership made certain decisions. 

       There is no way that Babcock could have pulled the Carter trade—with all the financial obligations that came and went—without the input of ownership.  And it is not surprising, as I wrote at the time—that the trade came two days after the report surfaced that Carter gave away a play to the Supersonics in Seattle.  Vince was dealt out of town wrapped in traitor tape.  But once again there were reports that Carter was changing his mind about wanting to be dealt, and he tried to let Babcock know that there was likely a solution that would keep the high-flying whiner in Toronto.  It didn’t matter.  Ownership didn’t want Carter around anymore and they took the best deal that Babcock had at the time—which of course turned out to be a giveaway.

       When the deal was consummated Babcock insisted that Mourning would not be bought out of the remainder of his contract.  There was too much money involved and it wouldn’t be prudent of the Raptors to pay a great majority of the remainder of his contract just so Mourning could go play for Miami.  But, for whatever reason, that ideology changed after a couple of months and the Raptors gave Zo ten million to go away.  Good deal for Zo, not so good for the Raps.  Zo insisted he was too hurt to play for Toronto and in the end ownership bought into the plot.  Of course the follow-up story certainly belies that fact, doesn’t it?

       Now, I’m not saying that ownership decided to give Babcock the heave-ho because he wouldn’t stand up to them, and he certainly wasn’t turfed because the Raps lost ten million, and their best player, in the Carter deal.  Babcock was let go because he was content to ride out the full tenure of his contract and it was his plan for the Raps to be successful in the later stages of that contract.  MLSE didn’t believe that it should take two more years to clear out cap space and rebuild properly—not when they knew about the Knicks offer for Jalen Rose (one that Wayne Embry quickly embraced).  They also knew about Colangelo’s unhappiness in Phoenix and figured that the proverbial iron was hot. 

      Babcock did what he thought was best for the franchise, and he thought that ownership had the same vision.  He would often speak about how ownership understood his plan and was behind him all the way.  He didn’t realize, though, that they were behind him with a shotgun and an itchy trigger finger.