Blazer's Edge: An SB Nation Community

Navigation: Jump to content areas:



Around SBN: Laviolette out, 'Canes turn to Maurice Bar-right-arrows



Odom's foul: Fighting on the court

This is directed somewhat at Dave but also at everyone else who promoted this thing. Nothing personal but I feel very strongly about this. I rarely post diaries, but this warrants one. I also know there is one below about Odom's foul but the angle is different enough I thought I could post a new one.

You know, I'm very surprised and disappointed that Dave is acting like it was some kind of negative that our guys didn't start swinging when Odom threw Roy to the ground. That's the kind of crap that gave the Jail Blazers their name...acting like immature little 8th graders.

EDIT 4/10: To be fair, Dave did NOT advocate swinging--I took his comments the wrong way.

Why on God's green earth would you want them to throw Kobe on his can the next time down? Kobe wasn't near the play! To "send a message?" That's completely out of line and NOT what I expect from this group. I expect mature play, taking your hits, letting the officials be the officials and not trying to take matters into your own hands.

I don't have a problem with a little stare-down and bump, like Przy will do now and then. That's fine...it shows that our players care. But to encourage a fight or to get thrown out of the game? I'm sorry, but I would NOT be watching a team that does that.

We had a bit of this conversation a while ago when Odom came into the player huddle. You know, there are always going to be Odoms in the league. If you always react with violence you're playing right into their hands.

That's all I have to say about it. I'm disappointed so many here think the Blazers should start swinging when someone does a hard or cheap foul. That's not the Blazers I know or am a fan of.

0 recs | Comment 106 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Display:

I wish
I wish the league allowed them to play like they use to........the L's gone soft.

by iDea on Apr 9, 2008 11:17 AM PDT   0 recs

Ummm...
Who said they should start swinging?  The closest I came was saying, "If there is a fight, there's a fight" meaning that we can't let the fear of the opponent getting upset or physical or even fighting stop us from being hard-nosed ourselves.  The point is if you're going to knock around our leading scorer and take him out of the air we're willing to do the same to yours.  That also answers the "Why Kobe?" question.  Do you really think it was accidental that it was Brandon Roy Odom decided to clobber?

This is a pretty simple equation:  As soon as another team feels you will not stand up to them or foul hard when it's warranted then it's going to be open season on your guy.  We haven't experienced too much of that because frankly we haven't mattered at all to anyone for the last few years.  But if we're in the heat of a playoff race (or--God forbid--in the playoffs themselves) and another team thinks they can gain an advantage by putting Roy on the floor they're going to do it.  Brandon is going to get pulverized unless we, as a team, protect him.  As I pointed out in the example this is true in baseball.  It's true in hockey too.

There was a reason Clyde Drexler didn't get walloped every time he glided through the air.  Part of it was him being as strong as an ox (which is something our guys need to work on).  But another big part of it was Jerome Kersey and Buck Williams.  You didn't have to ask.  If you cheap-shotted Clyde or even got too rough with him they were going to have you for lunch...and they meant business.  They both established that aura early in their careers and neither had to do much afterwards except exist.  That actually kept the horseplay to a minimum, which is exactly why I'm suggesting that if another team whacks you in the nose you better be ready to whack them back.  It ends this kind of stuff.

It's not confined to that hard foul on Roy either.  Odom was shoving Lamarcus around all night last night, making a big deal of being physical.  Unless and until our guys learn to deal with that and maybe dish it back "extra physical" is all you're going to see out there.

--Dave

by Dave on Apr 9, 2008 11:25 AM PDT   0 recs

I know you
didn't specifically say to start swinging, but what else does a "fight" mean if not that?

Your point is well taken about Clyde and those boys--they did make a statement and stuck to it. But I just feel like if every time a guy like Odom tries to get inside your head and throws a cheap shot (which they are going to do anyway, regardless if you have Andre the Giant on your team or not), you drop the gloves and start slugging it out--you're playing their game.

Let the refs throw them out. The refs see this kind of thing and if a hard foul is committed, the league will suspend the perp. It's not up to our guys to police the court.

by jamon51 on Apr 9, 2008 11:31 AM PDT to parent up   0 recs

"Fight"
meant, as I just said, that if the L*kers wanted to start a fight because we just "bumped" Kobe they way they "bumped" Roy then we can't be afraid of that.  I actually think taking a swing at Odom would have been an incredibly stupid response...a HUGE added bonus for the L*kers in that situation.  I would not recommend that at all.  Instead one of our guys should have done the exact same thing to Kobe...hard foul with the body, no arm or extra-curricular stuff, that put Bryant on the ground.  At some point it would enter their consciousness that they have a lot more to lose in that equation than we do and that would have been the end of it.  And I don't think they would have tried it next year either.

--Dave

by Dave on Apr 9, 2008 11:35 AM PDT to parent up   0 recs

Absolutely
The game plan for stopping Roy has been ridiculously hard fouls, and "coincidentally" these fouls seen to constantly happen when Joel is not on the floor. Dave is not advocating some brand new idea or a revolutionary new game plan, instead he is saying that we shouldn't be afraid of protecting our teammates, and that by rolling over and praying that the ref does something about it, is NOT going to stop these hard fouls.
TheOdenator

by TheOdenator on Apr 9, 2008 11:52 AM PDT to parent up   0 recs

Okay
probably a poor choice of words then. Fight has a specific meaning to me.

by jamon51 on Apr 9, 2008 12:33 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

or rather
re-reading what you said, a poor wording of the sentence. Maybe you could have said "if LA wanted to start a fight, then so be it." I wouldn't have had as much of an issue with that.

by jamon51 on Apr 9, 2008 12:41 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

Joel and Greg Oden
would have done it.  Although, I thought in the old days it was always, flatten the guy who did the flagrant foul, not the #1 scorer.  Or, flatten Kobe because he's getting to the rim.  I've never heard the baseball analogy before.  A hard foul to Kobe just because of a hard foul to Roy is an interesting concept.

by ranma on Apr 9, 2008 11:35 AM PDT to parent up   0 recs

Happens multiple times a night in hockey.
Watch the way defensive players behave in a hockey game, and apply the same strategy in a less violent manner to basketball. Defensive players check offensive players as well as the opposing defensive players. I'm not advocating that we become as aggressive as hockey players, but the same strategy applies.

by bocious on Apr 9, 2008 6:55 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

Pretty much
If someone goes after your Gretzky you don't try to rough up the goon who did it, you do the same thing to their Lemieux.  The goon is usually a lesser player anyway and doesn't care about getting scrapped up.  He just wants in your heads.  That's why he went after your star in the first place.

--Dave

by Dave on Apr 9, 2008 7:59 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

Send out
Przybillia with the cast! Right off the bench!

Nate whispers in his ear, "remember the pain Troy Hudson caused you, son? Go gettim!"

Ball Don't Lie

by bothteamsplayedhard on Apr 9, 2008 11:36 AM PDT to parent up   0 recs

Think Baseball.
In baseball and hockey the players are allowed to police themselves to a degree.I would have no problem with someone knocking Kobe on his can. If the opponent takes a shot at your big gun, you take a similar shot at their big gun. If a pitcher drills a teams top hitter, you'd better believe that a pitcher is coming high and tight on the other teams top hitter to send a message. This kind of act goes on almost every day in MLB, and rarely does it resort to violence. You only see 2-3 basebrawls a year in the league and each team there plays double the number of games in the NBA. We need the NBA to go back to the days when guys like Lucas, Malone and the like patrolled the paint. Play hard nosed, clean ball and send the unspoken message that cheap shots aimed at top players are unacceptable, and will be answered in kind. Would it be worth a one game suspension should Joel or another big guy retaliate? Absolutely! It would prevent another team from taking a cheap shot at a franchise player (who wants to be the guy whose action gets a Kobe or LBJ taken out?) and cements our guys rep as a guy who won't take the crap and give guys second thoughts about coming in the paint.
On Paul Allen's cash it should say "In Pritchard We Trust"

by kevingiard1 on Apr 10, 2008 3:56 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

Retaliation doesn't beget more violence.
It actually ends it--in basketball, that is.  Basketball players aren't fighters; if someone stands up to them, they generally back down.  But as long as your team has a rep for being bully-able, you're going to get bullied.  This is a competitive game with a lot of money and pride at stake, and teams will look for and exploit any edge they can find.  

I agree completely with Dave; he didn't advocate starting a fight.  What he was saying was that the Blazers shouldn't back down out of fear of the LAKERS turning it into a fight.  If they choose that path, you have to say, "So be it."  

"Ime caught the guy in mid-air with a fist and calmly continued his dispatching of oncoming people." -Gabe Muoneke

by hurryup09 on Apr 9, 2008 11:45 AM PDT   0 recs

my clan motto (gunn clan)
Peace or War, your choice.

There's a certain confidence in that,
not many other clans messed with them.

by holder on Apr 9, 2008 4:15 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

I agree with Dave here. You ALWAYS have to stand
up to the bully. That rarely means throwing a punch. Bully's are usually cowards who pick on those smaller then them. When you stand up to a bully it essentially calls their bluff. Being that the Blazer's are young and perceived as "nice guy's" other teams perceive this as a weakness that they can exploit. The Blazer's have to show that this will not work.

As far as playing into their hands, different situations call for different responses. Remember in the 2000 WCF Rick Fox blatantly trying to get under Pippen's skin in an obvious effort to remove Pipp from the game? Pippen kept his cool, he knew what they were doing. They were not trying to intimidate him, they were trying to get him to lose his cool to get him kicked out of the game.

An opposite example would be one from back in the day. Pretty much everyone was afraid of Xavier McDaniel. The dude was a straight up thug.Jerome Kersey went toe to toe with him and in the process not only earned the X man's respect but established himself in the league as someone you don't mess with.

Did you enjoy and support those Blazer's? Were they thugs?

You have got to draw lines in the sand. There is a big difference between establishing yourself and standing up to the bully versus being a jailblazer thug.

by jferg on Apr 9, 2008 11:48 AM PDT   0 recs

I'm not saying back down
I'm saying don't stoop to their level of fighting or retaliatory fouls.

by jamon51 on Apr 9, 2008 12:39 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

So if you don't get physical
what exactly do you do that is not backing down?

by timg56 on Apr 9, 2008 1:54 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

Keep playing hard and tough
but not stooping to their dirty tactics. Don't play tentatively.

by jamon51 on Apr 9, 2008 3:14 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

That sounds nice, but it's not always
effective.  You are relying on the refs to bail you out and to start calling your opponent for fouls.  Problem is it rarely works as a strategy.  Despite what the rule book says, the NBA has become a contact sport.  Granted the league has instructed the officials to look for hand checking and grabbing out on the perimeter, particularly with regard to the ball handler.  But a fair amount of banging, grabbing and shoving is still allowed in the paint.  

When you have an opponent who is playing physical and pushing (or exceeding) the rules, and you are not hearing a whistle, you need to realize how the game is being called and adjust accordingly.  If it's me, I make sure to start leading with my elbows.  It's amazing how fast a guy backs off after catching one.  It's not necessarily dirty, it's just one adjustment you make.

Another aspect to keep in mind is that these guys are not little leaguers or even high school or college players.  They are grown men earning a living in a very competative environment.  Intimidation is a well worn and effective tactic.  If I think my opponent can be intimidated by a little physical or rough play, then I may give it a go.  

All in all, I thought what Odom did was within the bounds of playing in the NBA.  It was against the rules and he was accordingly hit with a flagrant foul.  That's a cost benefit analysis teams and players make all the time.  

by timg56 on Apr 9, 2008 4:12 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

i agree with this
you need to realize how the game is being called and adjust accordingly.

I totally agree with your statement, and leading with your elbows isn't necessarily dirty if the refs are going to allow it on both ends. My main beef was with the call for retaliatory dirty fouls or fighting.

by jamon51 on Apr 10, 2008 10:05 AM PDT to parent up   0 recs

no
you dont step to their level, you just pay back. what does an injury to Roy would cost? just a kick out of a game? No thank. If some one wants to mess with B-Roy, he should pay all the way.

by RipCity on Apr 9, 2008 8:59 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

And remember our biggest enforcer
Maurice Lucas.  Granted he had one big scrap, but do you think anyone messed with him or any of his teammates after that?

by blazermaniac32 on Apr 9, 2008 11:55 AM PDT   0 recs

I took issue...
... with Dave writing this:

"You're going to come at our guy?  We're going to kill yours."

I know this obviously wasn't meant literally, but I still don't agree with writing it.

I agree a hard foul would have been warranted, but that's all.  Odom's foul really wasn't all that bad.

by jksnake99 on Apr 9, 2008 12:05 PM PDT   0 recs

Yeah
I should have clarified that more...got carried away with the language.

Specifically, that's what we want them to be thinking...that they don't want to come at our guy because we will do that right back to theirs and make no mistake about it.  Not that we'd actually kill them or even hurt them intentionally.  More like...you want to bounce one of your forwards off of our guy?  This is what our center looks like bouncing off of yours.  

--Dave

by Dave on Apr 9, 2008 12:54 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

This is what I think you were going for
"If they put one of our guys in the hospital..we put one of theirs in the morgue...it's the Chicago  way(insert "Portland way" here)!" (all done in a Sean Connery accent)

by 92wastheyear on Apr 9, 2008 1:23 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

I loved him in that movie
and that line was a classic.  One to live your life by.  

by timg56 on Apr 9, 2008 2:00 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

nate spoke on this...
Bold is my emphasis:

As I told our guys, that was a hard foul, it's part of the NBA.  One of the things I told our guys before the game, I think at times we have too much respect for opponents.  We kind of look at these guys and want them to like us.  Players don't care about that...  The bottom line is you're trying to win games. I thought that play showed that Brandon Roy is just Brandon Roy to the Lakers.  They gave up the foul so they completed that with a hard foul and that's how we have to learn to play.  You don't want to hurt anybody, but you come in there and you don't allow them to get the shot off.  I like what I saw as far as guys coming to Brandon's [defense].  I like that, I thought that was good.  One of the things we wanted to do was start something tonight and I thought they tried."

Nobody wants to see a serious fight but I think many people (Nate included) at least want to see some posturing and a fighting spirit.  Getting bullied can cause serious problems to a team's psyche and culture.

For more pictures and videos, check out the BlazersEdge Facebook group and www.youtube.com/blazersedgeben

by Ben. on Apr 9, 2008 12:07 PM PDT   0 recs

Posturing is okay
As long as you don't cross that line into actual fighting or dangerously hard fouls. Hurting other players is not my kind of basketball.

by jamon51 on Apr 9, 2008 12:47 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

What's funny about the quote
is the last phrase, "I thought they tried."  This is kind of what I mean about needing a new guy on the roster to help take care of some of this stuff.

If somebody is starting something you probably should know...not just think they are...maybe...if you squint just right.

As far as the trying...it's not really a "trying" thing.  You can't be taught to start something.  It's not like, "Travis, go out there, put your shoulders back...no, no...more like that.  There you go!  Now stare him in the eyes and say, 'Your mother swallows ping pong balls.'  No, not table tennis, ping pong.  It sounds better." You either have it or you don't.  Our guys are cool in many ways, but they just don't have it.  We could really use one guy who you KNOW just started something...and maybe finished it too.

--Dave

by Dave on Apr 9, 2008 2:59 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

ok

Have you ever watched Woman's basketball on any level? They are much meaner and dirtier than guy b ball players. Know why? Cause they can get away with it. Some girl players are mean and some players are very soft so the mean ones beat the crap out of the soft ones because there is no fear of retaliation. In the men's game very few things like that happen because if you do something too dirty you're going to get hit back just as hard or harder. De-taunt.

De-taunt is what allows there to be a million plus pick up basketball games everyday around the world.

I've been advocating picking up an enforcer for sometime now to protect Roy and LA and baby faced Webster.

by T REX on Apr 9, 2008 12:11 PM PDT   0 recs

Dont listen to Dave
He's just a rabble rouser.

by Sabonis4Ever on Apr 9, 2008 12:22 PM PDT   0 recs

What???
Your ad here.

by JTDuck22 on Apr 9, 2008 12:27 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

Apparently I'm in the minority here
Most everyone else seems to think that trying to foul someone else hard, possibly resulting in injury, because they fouled one of our players is fine.

I'd rather not stoop to that level.

by jamon51 on Apr 9, 2008 12:36 PM PDT   0 recs

It's all in the game
Basketball by nature is a physical sport; contact is inevitable and necessary. Administering hard fouls is as much a part of the game as shooting free throws or running pick and rolls.

Players know the game they play is, on a certain level, inherently dangerous. If they find it too unsavory, they're more than welcome to find a regular 9 to 5.

Insinuating that players "stoop to that level" when giving hard fouls is in and of itself a bit insulting.

by Lance Uppercut on Apr 9, 2008 1:20 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

Lance
There's a fine line between a hard foul and a dirty one, and I think it's about the intent. When someone grabs another player on the way up and doesn't let them get a shot off, yes there is a risk of injury. But the risk of injury is much greater when someone throws another player to the ground with the intent to send a message.

Obviously there is always a risk of injury and if you're not willing to take that risk, go home. But deliberately cheap-shotting someone is beyond that line.

by jamon51 on Apr 9, 2008 3:18 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

dude
what are you talking about? The Blazers dont even know how to foul. when they get called for fouls it is mostly touch fouls. So if some one will touch our wife, or hit her you will stand there and be mister nice guy?

by RipCity on Apr 9, 2008 9:16 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

I don't think
touching outside the basketball court and on it can be fairly compared.  Actually I was going to post a philosophical question on the main page about games in general and what we consent to or don't, kind of piggybacking on Jamon's thoughts, but Ben's interview with Chris Bowles blew me away so I'm going to leave it for another day.

--Dave

by Dave on Apr 10, 2008 1:18 AM PDT to parent up   0 recs

Ok
I compare it like this. I see a team as a family. They try to get to one goal. If some one is geting hurt in the family, the big brother goes and handles all the problems. So, when Roy got hit, they all stepped up for him. Blazers players looked like young lions roaring at an older lion, but they will get it soon

by RipCity on Apr 10, 2008 11:17 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

Blazers players looked like young lions
roaring at an older lion, but they will get it soon. I love that analogy Rip.

by annthefan on Apr 11, 2008 5:19 AM PDT to parent up   0 recs

You raise an interesting point.
Judging intent and how that effects how an act should be preceived.

For example it is ok to use deadly force if the intent is to protect yourself or others.  There still has to be a justifiable threat, but your intent is a key factor.  

But judging intent can be the proverbial slippery slope.  One of my favorite examples of this are "hate" crime laws.  Does anyone here really believe that it makes a difference if they were to be assualted over the color of their skin, their sexual orientation or for the money in their wallet.  To me, intent in this case doesn't matter.  What matters is that I was assualted.  The penalties directed towards my assailant should be the same, no matter what his intent was.

The same holds true in basketball.  It shouldn't matter if Odom's intent was to send a message or just stop Roy from scoring a basket.  What should matter is the fact that he used excessive force.  It wasn't Odom's intent that caused hurt to Brandon, it was getting slammed to the floor.  That's what should be penalized.

btw - tom gets my vote for DoW.  

by timg56 on Apr 10, 2008 7:15 AM PDT to parent up   0 recs

I just had jury duty
so this is an interesting take on it. It was an assault case too, so we had to take into account the guy's intent. In the case I was on, the guy did have motivation to have intent to harm, although we found him not guilty due to lack of evidence that he actually did anything.

Anyway, probably another long discussion....

by jamon51 on Apr 10, 2008 10:10 AM PDT to parent up   0 recs

I Don't Like Hate Crime Laws Too
I don't want to go way off topic but how do you tell someone that the death of their child is less important because they are not a minority?  I think if a person reaches a point where they want to kill someone, then hate is already an issue no matter who is involved.

I have a personal example as well.  When I was in 4th grade, I was visiting a cousin in Roseburg.  He was two years old than I, and one night he asked me if I wanted to have some fun.  We each grabbed three eggs and went out his back door, and we each threw one egg at three different houses.  My cousin hit all three houses and I only hit one.

A few months later my mom got a call from my aunt and she told my mother that my cousin and I egged a mentally disabled family's home.  I ended up grounded for a month and taken out of baseball for egging the disabled family's home.  It was simply a crime of stupidity because neither my cousin or I knew who lived in any of the homes.  But my mom's own hate crime legislation made a two week grounding into ruining my dreams of being a pro baseball players and a month of restriction.

What is love? Baby don't hurt me. Don't hurt me. No more.

by tominhawaii on Apr 10, 2008 9:21 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

okay i think
that you understand that we are not advocating hurting someone, while you are saying that we shouldn't be stooping to their level, you must realize that if we don't we have a lot more to lose (they may get a tech foul, but we lose our player for the rest of the season possibly).
The only way to keep this from happening is to make the quick statement that we aren't going to let our teammates get pushed around, and while I am sure everyone here would agree that this is regrettable, it is the best way to keep these things from happening in the first place. And while we can all agree that it would be better if this were not the case, the blazers are the team that is going to get beaten up, and this type of behavior will be perpetuated if they don't stand up for themselves.
TheOdenator

by TheOdenator on Apr 9, 2008 2:59 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

Sure I understand that
and as long as no one is advocating actual fighting (see the subject of my diary) then I'm okay with it. But advocating punching or fighting or cheap fouls in order to hurt or send a message (as I've probably way overemphasized already) is beyond what I want to see.

by jamon51 on Apr 9, 2008 3:20 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

agreed
but I think most of the difference in opinion here, is that i think most of the BE'rs wouldn't put cheap fouls in the same category as punching or fighting.
TheOdenator

by TheOdenator on Apr 10, 2008 9:01 AM PDT to parent up   0 recs

I'm about
as non-violent as it comes.  

But there comes a time to punch, too.  In 1977, when Dawkins mugged Gross, then took a huge swing at Bobby's face while Collins was holding Gross, and then backed away like the bully and coward he was, I was mighty proud of Lucas for flooring him.

Dawkins should have been charged with assault for that swing at Gross, even if he hit his teammate instead.  When you think that he swung so hard that when Gross ducked, he still hit Collins hard enough that he needed stitches, I shudder to think what would have happened if he hit Bobby.  He might have killed him.  He should have been thrown out of the league for that.

My only regret was that Lucas only knocked him down once.

I'm frequently right, but always certain

by jscot on Apr 10, 2008 9:50 AM PDT to parent up   0 recs

Here is a quote from an SI article
from around that time (thanks jc burg).

'The fact is that a top-rank enforcer rarely has to fight. Once he has earned his rank, further demonstrations are usually unnecessary. An enforcer's job is to keep things in order on the court, in whatever way works best for his team. If an opponent is taking liberties with a teammate, the enforcer sends him a message. Sometimes a glance is all it takes, sometimes a word or two, sometimes an elbow or an extra-hard pick. But if the opponent sends back a message of his own--"Are you talkin' to me?"--sterner means may be called for.

Until the Lucas-Dawkins confrontation in the playoffs, Philadelphia had been in complete charge, winning the first two games with ease. Lucas had been playing poorly. But his chilling intimidation of Dawkins changed everything. Lucas went on to cow George McGinnis into the worst shooting slump of his career, Dawkins was barely heard from, and the Trail Blazers went on to win the next four games and the championship.

"You need a rugged, we're-not-going-to-take-any-nonsense personality on a team," says Jack Ramsay, Lucas' coach. "It's important for your team to let it be known that you will not be pushed around, will not be intimidated."'

by 92wastheyear on Apr 10, 2008 10:21 AM PDT to parent up   0 recs

It's tough...
  Watching that play on re-play, it was a hard, agressive play, meant to stop Roy and send a message. The L*kers are a contender and they were playing to get a playoff edge in the west. As a Blazer fan seeing Roy hit the ground hard and then roll around in pain is something you NEVER want to see.

  I also know if I was a L*ker fan, I'd just think it was good agressive play by Odom.

  In evaluating the play and the reaction I think you must realize there is a history and a speculative future. The history is a strong rivalry between LA and Portland. The History includes Odom charging into a Blazer huddle last season.

  I think there is a speculative future as well. The Lakers know The Blazers in a few years might very well be the greatest obstacle to The L*kers success.

  Given the history, and the future that exists for these two franchises, The Blazers cannot afford to let LA even think they have a toughness edge.

  If I step back from watching Brandon land awkwardly I guess I have no problem with Odoms hard foul. However, I also have no problem with Outlaw, Aldridge and The rest of The Blazers letting him know they did not appreciate it.

  Hard fouls are a reality. Brandon is going to get knocked to his rear a lot in his career, he should expect it. I'm not advocating "hurting" anyone, but conversely if Kobe made a similar drive against Pryz or Aldridge, or Oden in the future, I would hope that Kobe would expect to be knocked on his butt as well.

  I actually thought the play that Brandon sustained the groin injury was far more dirty. That was a concious decision to allow a fellow player to remain in a position that did create a significant injury.--Last Night, Odom was being a jerk from a Blazer P.O.V. but I think it was reactionary agression and not contemplated or concious desire to injure.

  It's a tough line to walk. I do know however that The Blazers cannot afford to become even slightly intimidated by The L*kers. Not for this season, or for the future.

   IMO The Blazer/L*ker rivalry doesn't get the attention or press it deserves, it's one of the best, most heated rivalries in all of sports.

"Mother Nature started this fight, I think it's about time we ended it!"

by Krang on Apr 9, 2008 12:36 PM PDT   0 recs

Well...
"IMO The Blazer/L*ker rivalry doesn't get the attention or press it deserves, it's one of the best, most heated rivalries in all of sports."

Unfortunately, not many LA fans see it that way.

by Sabonis4Ever on Apr 9, 2008 12:41 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

They are...
  ...just too arrogant to admit it, but the history between the two franchises is well established.

  If the accension of The Blazers overlaps with the window of Kobe, Gasol and Bynum and Odom, which I think it will, LA fans will be forced to aknowledge the rivalry.

"Mother Nature started this fight, I think it's about time we ended it!"

by Krang on Apr 9, 2008 12:46 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

Another couple points
On enforcers, the greatest player ever (MJ) even had one.  His name was Charles Oakley.  Not many could mess with MJ anyway, but if anyone did, Oak was gonna make 'em regret it.  

On the importance of standing up for your star player:  There's a player Roy resembles.  This player drove to the rim, taking heavy shots every time.  He even had a commercial where the message was something like, get knocked down 7 times, get up 8.  The strategy to stop this player was also foul hard, nothing easy.  That player is Dwayne Wade.  You people know what he's doing now?  Shut down for the season.  Too many injuries from being knowcked down too hard.  I don't remember him having anyone that let the other team know it wasn't ok to keep hitting Wade hard.  So that person is important.

I don't advocate fighting either, but one of my favorite moments from last night's game (I was there) was seeing Trout get in Odom's face.  And I also agree that a hard foul on Kobe wouldn't have been out of line.

by DrivetheLane on Apr 9, 2008 12:45 PM PDT   0 recs

Man...
There are 2 ways to react to a hard and possibly dirty foul:

  1.  Dish it right back at them and send an important message: This team doesnt take that kind of #$^@.

  2.  Cower like an abused puppy and hope they dont do it again.

Taking option #2 would surely turn us in to the Portland Sissy Nannies...
Rudy > MJ

by myemic23 on Apr 9, 2008 1:28 PM PDT   0 recs

More than 2
How about Roy taking it right back in his face again?  I like the reaction of continuing to attack the basket which suggests we don't fear your hard fouls, you'll have to beat us by outplaying us, not abusing us.

by MavetheGreat on Apr 9, 2008 4:00 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

Dwayne Wade
I think DriveTheLane's comment above about Dwayne Wade not having an enforcer is a pretty good example of what happens when you keep going back for more to prove a point.

by bocious on Apr 9, 2008 11:06 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

My thoughts are

that it would've been just a good hard foul is Odom would've gone for the ball and just allowed his body contact to be him following BRoy to the basket. But he didn't go for the ball and chose to knock/push BRoy down with his body and arms and that's why it was a flagrant foul. I think all this would've been avoided if he just showed he was going after the ball, but he clearly wasn't. Therefore the outcome was what it was.

by bustabucket on Apr 9, 2008 1:31 PM PDT   0 recs

I wish it could be like jamon wants it to be
I prefer clean sports anytime. I want to see the athletes perform at their best, which they cannot do if they must watch their tail all the time.

The whole idea of laying the hammer on someone to send a message is a really sad commentary on our society. What it says is, "Winning isn't everything, it's the only thing." What about the joy of sports, of watching athletes perform at their best? What about sportsmanship -- you know, that cute little anachronistic behavior we teach our kids? Why does that suddenly fly out the window just because the other team is beating you, or because you are frustrated?

I haven't read anything about Roy's injury, and I sure hope it isn't serious, but what if a hard fall like that broke his neck? How would Odom and Phil feel about that?

Basketball is officially a non-contact sport. The rules say you cannot do what Odom did. He wasn't going after the ball, he was going after Roy. I think the league should suspend anyone for three games who gets a flagrant 1, and seven games for a flagrant 2. There's lots of boxing, wrestling, hockey, etc. for anyone looking for rough stuff.  

Yes, I'm a dreamer, but I'm also a realist. Until the league gets serious about this nonsense, Dave is right. One pitch at your best player's head means your pitcher throws one at their best player's head. When one team starts trouble, retaliation in kind is the only response that will minimize further violence.

I remember supporting the Blazers under sniper fire.

by MiledAnimal on Apr 9, 2008 1:56 PM PDT   0 recs

While I can't agree with jamon's point
I can agree with yours.

Pro basketball is not any more interesting or exciting due to players and teams being able to "send a message".  That said, it is what it is.  If actions like Odom's are part of the game (and they are), then you play that game.  

I think your suggestion of upping the penalties for flagrant fouls is not a bad one.

by timg56 on Apr 9, 2008 2:07 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

When you get hit you fight.
I have played sports all my life. I do not consider myself a dirty player nor would anyone I have played with or against describe me that way. But when I played competitive sports (not pick ups at the gym or at the local soccer pitch) it was like going to war, and thats the way you think of it. So much of sports is mental, and I think the comment that said we need to hit Kobe is dead on. For all you patsies out there that dont want to stoop to the level of the lakers, take notes here. Unless you want to see Roy hit the floor like that over his whole career, our guys need to start giving it back. When Odom sent Roy down I wanted our guys to ream him, and when he was dropping F bombs, in what looked like (if I am good at reading lips) he was saying "F*&& him" about Roy I just wanted to lay him out. There is a difference between stooping to a lower level, and not letting yourself be pushed around. It looked like 6th graders approaching a man, when Roy went down. Our guys saying "Hey you cant do that..." news flash, he just did.

Point is, you can do that. Its basketball, its sports. These are men, this is what they do, and you can bet they arent backing down. So you need to protect your guy, Roy is our guy. I am not saying be cheap, just saying when someone fouls your guy that hard that light should go on in your head saying "If thats how you wanna play... bring it." Then you put somebody on their A**!
Remember the Suns vs Spurs, Nash just got beat up that series, I mean just punished all series long, and nobody on the suns could go out and do the same thing. Thats sports, spurs win. Thats a huge reason they brought shaq in. You can bet if the Spurs play the Suns again, Bowen will be railed if he goes down the lane by Shaq. If you guys dont like physical play go watch tennis, but dont try and say we should not protect our guy. Teams need to know, if you hit Roy, send him down like that, someone on your team is hitting the deck, if you cant take it, dont dish it out. Oden is going to eat Odom for lunch next year.  

by jhill2507 on Apr 9, 2008 2:59 PM PDT   0 recs

I don't mean to single you out
but I've been seeing it more and more on ESPN and BE, and I'm fed up. Can we have a moratorium on anything sports-related being compared to going to war, please? There are no IEDs awaiting you at center court that could leave you crippled; no snipers trying to pop you during a crossover dribble; no chance of a suicide bomber wiping out the bench.

To say that ANY competitive sport is "like going to war and that's the way you think of it" is absurd. Neither you nor any other athlete wakes up the morning of their game thinking, "I could die today, so it's kill or be killed." Let's have a little awareness of the realities of war and respect for those currently facing them.

by BlazersOrBust on Apr 10, 2008 2:34 AM PDT to parent up   0 recs

Don't swing, just knock Odom down on the next trip
Tit for tat.  

Unfortunately we don't have players capable or willing to knock opponents down.  I think that was Nate's point.

by leeroyjenkins on Apr 9, 2008 3:08 PM PDT   0 recs

The problem is
that this is only a few days removed from LaMarcus fo