Official: JET named Sixth Man of the Year

[u2sarajevo]

lol "Great defense" off the bench.

[LonghornDub]

Carlisle going tongue-in-cheek: "Love having that defensive stopper come off the bench."

[BGMaverick9]

Carlisle showin' the humor...it's dry!

[u2sarajevo]

Cuban should be wearing a suit. He looks out of place up there.

[BGMaverick9]

Originally Posted by u2sarajevo

Cuban should be wearing a suit. He looks out of place up there.

Did he wear one for Dirk's MVP presser?
I don't think he did.

[u2sarajevo]

Originally Posted by BGMaverick9

Did he wear one for Dirk's MVP presser?
I don't think he did.

You might be right. He looks like a typical fan running up and grabbing the player and smiling as his mom snaps the picture.

[Flacolaco]

I don't recall ever seeing Cuban in a suit. He may not own a suit.

[iella]

http://blogmaverick.com/2007/01/16/w...y-anyone-does/

Why am I such a suit hater ? I’m not a suit hater, I just could never think of any good reason for any sane person to wear a suit in the first place.

Mark Cuban, ladies and gentlemen.

[u2sarajevo]

Originally Posted by iella

http://blogmaverick.com/2007/01/16/w...y-anyone-does/

I would say the answer to that is so you look professional?

[DirkFTW]

Cuban may have a suit made of Benjamins.

[iella]

I wonder what a conversation between Barney Stinson and Mark Cuban would sound like.

[Rhylan]

Suits are completely pointless. Unless you just flat out like the way they look, they serve no purpose at all.

[iella]

Originally Posted by Rhylan

Suits are completely pointless. Unless you just flat out like the way they look, they serve no purpose at all.

Or if you're trying to attract the attention of someone who likes the way they look.

I'm just saying.

[u2sarajevo]

Or if you are trying to get (or keep) a job....

[Thomas86]

[Rhylan]

I've hired 5 people in the last 3 years and the only one who I later regretted hiring just happened to also be the only one who wore a suit to the interview. The rest wore.. I dunno.. something nice sans tie and jacket.

Point is, the correlation between suit and success (or no suit and success) is nil unless you're in an environment that requires you to wear one. It all depends on the situation. And what those of us like myself and our billionaire friend Mark C. question is the requirement. Because the suit, in and of itself, accomplishes nothing unless you're cold and don't want to pack a jacket or coat.

I'll never wear a suit to a job interview - if they think I'm a suit guy, they're not getting me 'cause I despise suits. It's like Michael Bolton pretending to like Michael Bolton on Office Space. I'd never work for a place that wears suits. I'd have a tough time working for a place that has a business casual dress code. Can't stand polo shirts and khakis. Ugh.

iella has it right. I have one suit because my wife (then-girlfriend) really wanted me to get one.

[jthig32]

Originally Posted by Rhylan

I've hired 5 people in the last 3 years and the only one who I later regretted hiring just happened to also be the only one who wore a suit to the interview. The rest wore.. I dunno.. something nice sans tie and jacket.

Point is, the correlation between suit and success (or no suit and success) is nil unless you're in an environment that requires you to wear one. It all depends on the situation. And what those of us like myself and our billionaire friend Mark C. question is the requirement. Because the suit, in and of itself, accomplishes nothing unless you're cold and don't want to pack a jacket or coat.

I'll never wear a suit to a job interview - if they think I'm a suit guy, they're not getting me 'cause I despise suits. It's like Michael Bolton pretending to like Michael Bolton on Office Space. I'd never work for a place that wears suits. I'd have a tough time working for a place that has a business casual dress code. Can't stand polo shirts and khakis. Ugh.

iella has it right. I have one suit because my wife (then-girlfriend) really wanted me to get one.

Now that's interesting. Coming out of school you're told ALWAYS wear a suit unless told otherwise because some people find it unprofessional not to wear one.

For that exact reason I have one suit, and in the interview for the job I currently have, the interviewer commented (in a nice way) how out of place I looked in my suit.

I've always thought it was a catch-22. You'd hate to lose a job by not dressing your best. But your view is an interesting take.

[Underdog]

I've gotten my best jobs wearing t-shirts and jeans...

(and using words like "gotten" too!)

[LonghornDub]

I wouldn't even dream of not wearing a suit to an interview in my field, even if the particular firm or entity had a relaxed dress code (and almost every place in Austin does).

I'd have to agree with thig for the most part. I think in many white collar fields, it will never hurt you to wear one, and it may help (depending). The fact that Rhylan once hired a guy who wore a suit who then turned out to be a weaker employee says nothing generally about people who wear suits to interviews. But I definitely think it depends on who you're interviewing with, and it can be sort of tough to gauge that beforehand.

[jthig32]

Originally Posted by LonghornDub

I wouldn't even dream of not wearing a suit to an interview in my field, even if the particular firm or entity had a relaxed dress code (and almost every place in Austin does).

I'd have to agree with thig for the most part. I think in most white collar fields, it will never hurt you to wear one, and it may help (depending). The fact that Rhylan once hired a guy who wore a suit who then turned out to be a weaker employee says nothing generally about people who wear suits to interviews.

Perhaps for the best of both worlds you should wear a suit that doesn't quite fit and look a little fidgety and uncomfortable in it. Then it's obvious you've made your best effort but suits aren't really your thing.

Heck I do that naturally, don't even have to put in effort to pull that off.

[chumdawg]

Wearing a suit to an interview is about two things: 1) manners, and 2) attention to detail. If I were interviewing a guy and I didn't care about those two things, then I wouldn't care what he wore. If I were interviewing a guy and I did care about those two things, then I would.

Now, more in terms of general public goings-on...when you wear a suit it's not because you think you yourself is important, it's because you think the people around you are important.

[LonghornDub]

Originally Posted by chumdawg

Wearing a suit to an interview is about two things: 1) manners, and 2) attention to detail. If I were interviewing a guy and I didn't care about those two things, then I wouldn't care what he wore. If I were interviewing a guy and I did care about those two things, then I would.

Agreed, and both of those things are accentuated by the fact that it's the first impression you're making on the interviewer. They don't know you well enough to know if you have good manners or are meticulous, so dressing nicely can act as a shorthand signal.

[Dirkadirkastan]

Edit: Actually, what I said was inaccurate.

[chumdawg]

Originally Posted by Dirkadirkastan

Edit: Actually, what I said was inaccurate.

How do you figure? Of the five people he hired, four were wearing less than suit and tie. Given that information, who would you expect is more likely to get the job, the suited guy or the non-suited guy?

[LonghornDub]

Originally Posted by chumdawg

How do you figure? Of the five people he hired, four were wearing less than suit and tie. Given that information, who would you expect is more likely to get the job, the suited guy or the non-suited guy?

No idea what Dirka said, but it's impossible to say who is more likely to get the job on those numbers alone. You'd also have to know how many people he didn't hire and what they wore.

[chumdawg]

Originally Posted by LonghornDub

No idea what Dirka said, but it's impossible to say who is more likely to get the job on those numbers alone. You'd also have to know how many people he didn't hire and what they wore.

Even knowing that, you would still have to know what the hirer's inclinations were.

If more than 20% of the applicants wore suit and tie to the interview, you could conclude that the interviewer favored the scrubs.

But then again, it would be a small sample size, so you would be wise not to jump to conclusions.

[Dirkadirkastan]

Originally Posted by chumdawg

How do you figure? Of the five people he hired, four were wearing less than suit and tie. Given that information, who would you expect is more likely to get the job, the suited guy or the non-suited guy?

Yeah, I thought it over and that's why I retracted it. I could see both qualified and unqualified interviewees dress either way, so you probably can't read too much as the interviewer.

[chumdawg]

Originally Posted by Dirkadirkastan

Yeah, I thought it over and that's why I retracted it. I could see both qualified and unqualified interviewees dress either way, so you probably can't read too much as the interviewer.

Given that four out of the five hires were dressed in scrubs, there is a likelihood that the hirer was predisposed to prefer guys in scrubs IF the applicants wore suit and tie in a measure greater than 20%.

But again, small sample size.

[dude1394]

Anyone have a longer link to the press-conference? The stuff on nba.com is cut to death, only jet talking...

[TheMaverick]

Originally Posted by iella

I wonder what a conversation between Barney Stinson and Mark Cuban would sound like.

Mark Cuban will never wear a suit... but a pair of suitjamas? That's something he may look into.

[Rhylan]

Originally Posted by jthig32

Now that's interesting. Coming out of school you're told ALWAYS wear a suit unless told otherwise because some people find it unprofessional not to wear one.

For that exact reason I have one suit, and in the interview for the job I currently have, the interviewer commented (in a nice way) how out of place I looked in my suit.

I've always thought it was a catch-22. You'd hate to lose a job by not dressing your best. But your view is an interesting take.

I can't remember what we were told in school.. probably to wear a suit. But who in school knows anything about industry?

I don't specifically remember what all the rejects for the positions I referenced earlier wore.. generally speaking it's probably about 40% suit and 60% non for all interviewees.

We typically do the same thing - someone comes in in a suit, sees the hiring manager in jeans or shorts (depending on the time of year) and we have a laugh about it. But you quickly forget what the person is wearing once you start talking about business. Although I have had one or two stand out in my mind because the suits fit so poorly. It's just as easy to look bad in a suit as it is good.

For me personally, if I lose a job because I didn't wear a suit, I don't wanna work there. But I wouldn't lose a job because I didn't wear a suit - what I say and what I've done speaks a lot louder than whether or not I have some cloth tied around my neck in a pretty knot. I'll wear one if my wife asks me to, but not if somebody for whom I'm going to be willing to work my ass off has a hangup about it. He/she can hang that hangup on somebody else and I'll go bust butt elsewhere.

Now that I think about it, the guy I most recently hired may have worn a suit. as well. I'll ask him and see if he remembers. Either way, that just helps me prove my own point - the dress really doesn't matter as long as the interviewee doesn't come in fully casual. That would send off a red flag for me.

Chum, as in many threads actually pertaining to basketball, makes little sense and just comes off sounding uptight and cranky-old-man-ish. There are far more effective ways to demonstrate good manners and attention to detail than having your jacket match your pants. If you need to rely on someone's mode of dress to get a feel for those two dimensions of a person, you don't need to be interviewing people.

[LonghornDub]

Originally Posted by Rhylan

If you need to rely on someone's mode of dress to get a feel for those two dimensions of a person, you don't need to be interviewing people.

This is a little unfair. You could make a similar argument about any sort of signaling. One could easily argue that you shouldn't rely on a 30-60 minute (or however long) conversation to get a feel for someone's qualifications, when it often takes a lot longer than that to gauge someone's capabilities. Or you could argue that you shouldn't rely on the firmness of a guy's handshake to determine whether he carries himself with confidence.

I don't think chum (or anyone) is saying that people should rely exclusively on what a person wears in making those determinations. But to act like it can't/shouldn't serve as a signal, in tandem with other things, is more idiosyncratic on your part than anything. I've been interviewed by plenty of fantastic interviewers who very likely would not have hired me if I had been wearing anything less than a suit. It's just the social norm in some situations.

[Rhylan]

Chum said.. paraphrased.. "if I care about an interviewee's manners and attention to detail, I care whether or not he is wearing a suit."

Naturally, what you say is a lot more reasonable. But the "signal" that I go by, is just whether or not the person is put together - not specifically in a SUIT. Slacks and a button down shirt, let's say. Nothing wrong with that. That's just a suit without the jacket and tie - the two pieces of the ensemble that serve no practical function and add to the discomfort and cost.

My primary point is that people who think a suit is acceptable and anything less is unacceptable are hung up on suits, to the extent that it defies all logic. Cuban's point, that I agree with, is that if there's no external reason for requiring your employees to wear a suit - say they're not seeing any clients in person - then you're not serving any positive purpose by requiring the suit be worn.

[LonghornDub]

Originally Posted by Rhylan

Chum said.. paraphrased.. "if I care about an interviewee's manners and attention to detail, I care whether or not he is wearing a suit."

Naturally, what you say is a lot more reasonable. But the "signal" that I go by, is just whether or not the person is put together - not specifically in a SUIT. Slacks and a button down shirt, let's say. Nothing wrong with that. That's just a suit without the jacket and tie - the two pieces of the ensemble that serve no practical function and add to the discomfort and cost.

My primary point is that people who think a suit is acceptable and anything less is unacceptable are hung up on suits, to the extent that it defies all logic. Cuban's point, that I agree with, is that if there's no external reason for requiring your employees to wear a suit - say they're not seeing any clients in person - then you're not serving any positive purpose by requiring the suit be worn.

I agree completely with all that. Requiring employees to wear suits in any non-client service industry, or when there's no external reason to do so, is whacky.

Beyond that, I think I'm probably looking at this from the perspective of my field, in which everyone wears suits to interviews. If I were in business, and I was interviewing with a company I knew didn't require their employees to wear suits, I'm thinking I wouldn't wear one to an interview either. I'd probably do as you said and dress nicely in a jacket and slacks.

[chumdawg]

Originally Posted by Rhylan

Chum said.. paraphrased.. "if I care about an interviewee's manners and attention to detail, I care whether or not he is wearing a suit."

Naturally, what you say is a lot more reasonable. But the "signal" that I go by, is just whether or not the person is put together - not specifically in a SUIT. Slacks and a button down shirt, let's say. Nothing wrong with that. That's just a suit without the jacket and tie - the two pieces of the ensemble that serve no practical function and add to the discomfort and cost.

My primary point is that people who think a suit is acceptable and anything less is unacceptable are hung up on suits, to the extent that it defies all logic. Cuban's point, that I agree with, is that if there's no external reason for requiring your employees to wear a suit - say they're not seeing any clients in person - then you're not serving any positive purpose by requiring the suit be worn.

The fact that you think pants and a shirt are "a suit without the jacket and tie" speaks volumes. That you would say they "serve no practical function" seals the deal.

I don't begrudge you your simplistic world, where shorts and a t-shirt are uniform enough. But you live on the margin, bro.

[Underdog]

I hope JET's 6th Man award yields a good trade this offseason...

(seriously, he hasn't showed up for the playoffs since 2006 - we need ship him for a defensive-minded shooting guard while his value is maxed!)

[LonghornDub]

Yeah, other than a nice shot today and a good showing in Game 5 @ SA, he's been completely nonexistent. And, in fact, he almost lost us Game 4 against SA with his electrifying 3-17 performance.

[Underdog]

Originally Posted by LonghornDub

Yeah, other than a nice shot today and a good showing in Game 5 @ SA, he's been completely nonexistent. And, in fact, he almost lost us Game 4 against SA with his electrifying 3-17 performance.

He also sucked in the Golden State and New Orleans series too - dude can only play on one end of the court (when his shot isn't cold...)

Seems like he carries the most psychological baggage from the '06 Finals...

[LonghornDub]

Originally Posted by Underdog

He also sucked in the Golden State and New Orleans series too - dude can only play on one end of the court (when his shot isn't cold...)

Seems like he carries the most psychological baggage from the '06 Finals...

That could be the case. He had a good shot of being the series MVP if we had pulled it out. 32 points in Game 1, best player again in Game 2, and then 35 points in the abomination that was Game 5. But he was so terrible in Game 6 that it may have really messed with him.

[tcat075]

I excuse this Game 3 performance because of JET's clutch 3 pointer at the end of the game.

JET had decent Game 5's and Game 3's against the Spurs.

But all the other games? JET's performance has just been horrendous.