Things are getting pretty weird in Dunkyland (or Memphis for those that don't remember that old ad campaign).
A trade was made that no one in the country can seem to make sense of. Certainly no one who was thinking about basketball instead of the bottom line.
Rumors are breaking out that Michael Heisley is calling the shots from forcing trades down the GM's throat to telling the coaches who they can play in games. Rumors swirl that Heisley nixed a potential trade for Damon Stoudamire, forcing the team to buy him out and allow him to play for a team of his choosing at the Grizzlies expense.
Heisley however is saying that Wallace and Iavaroni practically forced him to make the trade. He has no comment on the trade rumor. I doubt anyone has asked him about the playing rotation but there has definately been any comments about it.
What is really confusing is the discrepancies on who is making the decisions. The Commercial Appeal ran two articles the Sunday after the Gasol trade was announced. The headlines reflect the growing confusion over who is really making the decisions.
Grizzlies beat writer Ron Tillery's article was titled Heisley's 'the guy making decisions'. Geoff Calkins, the CA's award winning columnist, wrote an article with the headline 'Owner feels the pain over deal, too' but has this line early in the story:
Heisley had to be persuaded by Wallace and Iavaroni to make the deal. Not the other way around.
Wait a minutes here. So was Heisley persuaded to make the deal or was he in making the decisions? An owner signing off on a deal orchestarted by his GM and Head Coach isn't exactly making decisions is he? Wouldn't that be supporting the people you hired to make these decisions in doing their job?
Thus the confusion. Is Heisley putting his imprint into every decision made on the team or is he just remaining in the background and allowing his people to do their jobs?
Right now the few fans remaining in the stands have a right to know.