One observation, and this is more of a general thing that happens to come out in your diary than something specifically about your diary:

I squirm a little bit calling national analysts like Anthony and Bayless "supporters" and "Blazer Believers".  The reverse is also true:  when somebody critiques the team they're not being insulting.

These guys aren't saying what they say because they like the team or root for/against us.  They're saying what they say because that's what they see.  If the Blazers start playing poorly and lose another 9 of 10 they'll say that too...for the same reason.

Personally I think this is better than them being "supporters" because when they say something you have a pretty good indication that it's real, at least from their perspective.  When people were crowing last year for Zach to make the All-Star team and nobody nationally was talking about it, that was a pretty good indication that it wasn't reality, but a fan perspective.  This isn't just a fan-thing.  The Blazers really are good...and will really be good.  We all know that, but it helps to have that confirmed from a detached perspective.  This, of course, requires people to actually be detached.  Those national guys that people complain so much about actually fill a valuable role apart from, and distinctive from, the rest of us.

Just my two cents.

--Dave