Thirteen

by Dave on May 20, 2008 9:58 PM PDT Comment 78 comments

Well, you can’t win it every year I suppose. Despite my protest of the system, couched in the words “I don’t want the Blazers to move up”, I must admit I did feel a twinge of indignation when Chicago’s name was announced. The flaw in my plan: If they’re going to, why not us? But still, I remain resolved. Thirteen isn’t that bad of a pick for a .500 team. There were decades when the 13^th pick would have looked like a buffet of draftiness to this organization. Kevin Pritchard and the Blazers scouting organization will make the pick count for as much as possible, I’m sure.

One of the big questions now is, “How much is possible?” In a way, those early-teens picks are in no-man’s-land. Technically they’re a lottery pick so you expect a player who can contribute. You’re not looking for your 10^th man here. On the other hand, 12 guys have already been snatched off the board. Unless you get lucky, crafty, or both you’re probably not going to get an immediate star or even starter. (I’m sure we can find a decent handful of exceptions, but keep in mind how long the draft has been going compared to those exceptions.) The best you can say is that you hope this guy becomes a significant part of the rotation down the line but you don’t necessarily forecast him doing it this year.

Realizing this, it becomes fairly evident that unless two players are so equal on their draft board as to make them indistinguishable, the Blazers are going to have to go for the best (potential) player available here. Brandon Roy or no, you don’t want to miss out on your 18 ppg shooting guard because you went for the 6 point, 4 assist point guard. This is especially true since the Blazers have other means (impending cap space, reasonably attractive trade assets, and there will be other drafts) to address their gaps in a more targeted fashion. You don’t pull out the boomerang if you’ve got a bazooka slung over your back. You take the guy who has the best chance to playing meaningful minutes in this league and worry about how and where to play him later. If nothing else his potential and low salary should make him a decent trade prospect for the next few years.

This pick smacks of project players and maybe a little gambling. The good part: this leaves the field wide open. Young underclassmen, Europeans, college seniors, sleepers…no matter what the position all are fair game. This should make for some great draft discussion between now and June. The difficult part: if there’s one thing the Blazers don’t need more of, it’s youngsters, European projects, and the like. Those who speculate that the pick may be traded probably have a fair amount of traction to their argument. Whether trading up or out, the Blazers would probably jump at the chance to add more predictable value to this asset. They’ll like #13, but they’re unlikely to love it. The problem here is the relative unattractiveness of the asset compared to those we’ve held the last couple of years. Kevin Pritchard may be a genius, but when you approach the marketplace with $50 you don’t have near the buying power of the guy whose wallet is oozing $100’s no matter how smart or charismatic you are.

The most salient fact in the whole discussion, however, is the one I brought up while signing out of the Lottery Open Thread. Never forget, Blazer fans, that the most important new player entering the league this year will not be found anywhere on the draft board. It will be Greg Oden, hands down. Knee or no knee, every team in this draft would cheerfully trade their pick to get him. You heard about Rose and Beasley in the last few months. You knew who Greg Oden was when he was a freshman in high school. There’s a difference.

--Dave (blazersub@yahoo.com)

0 recs | Comment 78 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

We got the two best players in the draft last year

And the year before. We don’t need anymore youngsters. Brandon, LmA, Greg, and Rudy. Or Noah, Deng, Gordon, and Rose? Eat it bulls.

P.S. Do they even have a coach?

"KP has a raging Jayhawk for anyone from Kansas." Mortimer

by Sabonis4Ever on May 20, 2008 10:12 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

They also got Thomas

and Sefolosha. So really the more apt comparison is Roy, LmA, Oden, and Rudy, Martell, Jack and current pick or Thomas, Noah, Sefolosha, Deng, Gordon and Rose/Bayless.

I still like our picks better, but this is more apples to apples.

It’s too bad Chicago has squandered their opportunity in the draft with NY picks the last two years. Or maybe KP can abuse some Chicago or Minnesota GM again on draft day—Pritchslap!

by NWfan on May 20, 2008 10:48 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Rudy > Durant?

Quite possibly, but I think that’s a pretty bold statement before he plays a minute of NBA ball.

Trade Freeland!

by rockingharder on May 20, 2008 11:43 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Wow !!!

I must admit a few things : I was for drafting Durant, was expecting him to play better from the start and therefore was probably wrong unless Oden turns out to be be more injured than healthy…

Then I really hope Fernandez will be a very good player, but better than Durant ???

You can call me crazy and even if Durant has been disapointing by some standards, I think there’s close to zero chance that Fernandez will be an overall better player than Durant.

by Blenzer on May 21, 2008 6:33 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Well I wasn't' going to say

We got the two best players in the draft two years ago and the best player in the draft last year and a really good player last year.

"KP has a raging Jayhawk for anyone from Kansas." Mortimer

by Sabonis4Ever on May 21, 2008 12:00 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Kind of a ridiculous overstatement

to claim that Oden is better than Durant when he hasn’t so much as set foot on the court yet, too. Or better than Horford for that matter, who looks like he’s going to have a very good career.

LMA better than Gay or Rondo? Questionable.

by howlingfantods on May 21, 2008 1:59 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Welllllllllll

Since Oden was better than both in college, and we’ve seen Oden go up against Horford, I don’t see why it’s such a stretch to say he’s a better player.

Ok, Durant was probably a better college player, but not as physically dominating as Oden. And, Oden’s numbers will translate to the NBA like his fellow Can’t Miss Big Mans. Durant will never average a double double in the NBA, for example.

Horford is a beast, averaged a near double/double, but Oden beasted him better-er.

It’s not as if we’ve never seen Oden play the game of basketball.

Mortimer

by Mortimer on May 21, 2008 2:14 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

But obviously there's a huge difference between college and nba.

Or do you think we should’ve stuck with the championship backcourt of Juan Dixon and Steve Blake?

Yeah, Oden will probably translate. But he’s still an unproven rook until he takes to the court and demonstrates. Remember that Olowokandi and Sam Bowie were beasts in college too.

by howlingfantods on May 21, 2008 5:42 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Oh c'mon my friend dude

Olowokandi and Bowie? They weren’t beasts in college, they were just decent. Saying we don’t know how good Oden is AT ALL because he hasn’t stepped on a NBA court is silly, when we’ve all seen him in college and tearing up NBA talents such as Horford.

We’ve seen him play basketball! He isn’t unknown like Rudy.

I get that we don’t know HOW GOOD Oden will be until he plays for a few years, but questioning if he is as good as other rookies he played against and dominated? That doesn’t make sense. Whether Oden meets Horford in the NCAA championship game, or at the Rose Garden, it’s the same thing. Oden was better then, and provided he is healthy he will probably be better still.

I understand keeping expectations in check, but Oden isn’t just another rookie. He is GREG ODEN. His name sez it all!

I don’t watch much college, I don’t trust it, I think Juan Dixon and Steve Blake might not be in the NBA today if they didn’t go to a big school that won the championship. But Oden is Oden, and the others are not in the same class as him.

Why do you think so lil’ of the big guy?

Mortimer

by Mortimer on May 21, 2008 5:53 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

always funny

too get Mortimer in a debate… I mean that well Mortay

If you dont talk to your cats about catnip, who will?

by bow4meow on May 21, 2008 8:58 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Kandiman and Bowie

had better stats in college than Oden.

I’m just saying, no one who hasn’t played a lick deserves to be called better in any sense than someone who has shown that they are going to be a star in this league. Yeah, Durant’s first couple of months were pretty rocky. His last couple of months? Pretty spectacular. Still needs to eat some cheeseburgers, but he’s a surefire lock for multiple all star games.

Oden has a lot to do to prove that he belongs in this league. He needs to prove he can stay healthy. He needs to prove that he’s not the insane foul magnet he was in summer league. He needs to prove that he has the drive to improve his game. He needs to prove that he can get nba level conditioning.

Do I think he’s going to reach those goals? Yeah, actually I do. But has he yet? Hell no, he hasn’t played one NBA minute, so hold off on handing him trophies, yet, mmmk?

I swear, I live in the Bay Area and I thought Warrior fans were deluded. Blazer fans at least on this site takes delusion to a whole new level.

by howlingfantods on May 21, 2008 9:01 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

But, they didn't

Bowie averaged less points and rebounds his freshman and senior year with a two year gap to heal from injuries, and in his best season he scored 2 points more than Oden did while every other stat was lesser than Odie. Olowakandi played 10 mins a game his freshman year on a college team that I’m not even convinced really exists. “Pacific college”? That sounds like University of PHX to me. His Junior year he admittedly had good numbers, but playing against inferior competition shouldn’t have meant much then and doesn’t mean much now—and while this may be a leap of faith to you, I daresay Oden would do pretty well in two years if he transferred to Pacific College Upstairs University to the Stars.

Remember, Oden played one year, with freshman stats better than Duncan, Shaq, Hakeem, Ewing, Robinson, you name it Oden’s year was better. With one hand. I think it’s fair to say he has shown he is pretty damn good.

OBVIOUSLY, all this debate on my end assumes Oden is healthy. I understand if that might seem like a big assumption, but I am assuming all the docs and trainers are doing their job and he’ll be healthy.

If healthy, Oden has proven he is an elite athlete who will likely be a very good NBA center, and in instances where he played against other top prospects (Horford), he did very well.

I like Durant, I think Horford will be a beast, but if you think fans are DELUSIONAL to think GREG ODEN will be a good NBA center, then the entire NBA is delusional. He is a MONSTER, Howlingfantods! Being optimistic and hoping a player plays like they did as a raw NCAA freshman isn’t all that delusional. That’s how it works.

Using extreme examples like Juan Dixon or bringing up college stats that are from different (type of) players, and then being misleading with the stats doesn’t mean much.

Before Durant played a game in the NBA, would you compare him to Darius Miles because both are lanky and play the same position and were drafted high? Of course not. Is Horford the next Sheldon Williams or Chris Wilcox? Nopes. It’s not always worst case scenario.

We know that Oden is talented. We know he will likely be good in the NBA. His NCAA accomplishments, athleticism, work ethic has been proven. It is very silly and condescending to say Blazer fans are delusional just because they believe that will translate to being a good NBA player, when it has every single time before.

The argument about whether Blazer fans are counting their championship rings before they are forged out of Sterns’ stash of Nazi Gold is fine, because too many are. It’s the offseason, it’s what people do. That part can be delusional, but I think most just say it for fun. I know I do.

Mortimer

by Mortimer on May 22, 2008 11:24 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Show me where I said it's delusional

to say that Oden’s going to be good. I think it’s delusional to say stuff like Oden’s definitely going to be better than David Robinson or that LMA is definitely going to be as good as Tim Duncan or that Rudy is definitely going to be as good as GINOBILI.

Or to say that we got the best two players in the 06 and 07 drafts.

by howlingfantods on May 22, 2008 11:30 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

We were discussing Oden being good..

And you added in your response.—
“Blazer fans at least on this site takes delusion to a whole new level”

I don’t think it’s misleading or a stretch to say that you were referring to what we were discussing with that quote.

If you’re referring to the fans who put him in the Hall of Fame already, ok, that isn’t realistic as of now. We weren’t discussing that though.

Mortimer

by Mortimer on May 22, 2008 11:33 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

This whole string

is started by the guy who said we got the best two players in the 06 and 07 drafts.

by howlingfantods on May 22, 2008 11:43 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Okie

I agree with 06, and I mentioned to them above that saying Rudy will be better than Durant is goof sauce. I’m sorry if I misunderstood what you were referencing!

In a draft with Oden, Durant, Horford, etc, saying you got the two best players is silly unless you got two of those players. I don’t think we have them… yet.

But once I convince KP to offer our 2nd rounders and the rights to Nedzad Sininovicnovic, I think you might be happily surprised.

Mortimer

by Mortimer on May 22, 2008 11:49 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

06 was the Roy/LMA draft

And Howlin doesn’t think those were the best 2 players in it. FYI

"Be wary of strong drink. It can make you shoot at tax collectors... and miss" Robert A. Heinlein

by 92wastheyear on May 22, 2008 12:31 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

He thinks rondo and gay are better.

by Sabonis4Ever on May 22, 2008 12:33 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

...

....

...Huh?

Mortimer

by Mortimer on May 22, 2008 12:57 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

But...

...they aren’t.

Ok, Gay is pretty good, and I could SEE someone saying he is better than LMA, but he doesn’t play both sides of the court yet and while he’s a dynamic scorer, he isn’t a leader or a guy who helps ya win. He might be, sure, because he is very talented.

Rondo is mad overrated. He is good, sure! Very good 2nd year guard. Good defender. But if he isn’t on the Celtics with 3 superstars, he is just a guy who showed some promise but hasn’t done much yet. Like Kyle Lowry or sumthin’.

Not that I’m anti-Rondo, because he’s a good young player, but he isn’t better than Gay, LMA, Roy, Foye, who else…

Maybe he just likes to be contrary? Howling is a smart guy, so I don’t think he’s coming to these conclusions in a way that can’t be helped.

Mortimer

by Mortimer on May 22, 2008 1:01 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I think it is just a case of watchin rondo in the playoffs

While LmA is not on tv (but busting his hump none the less)

by Sabonis4Ever on May 22, 2008 1:12 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I didn't say Rondo and Gay are better

than LMA. I said that in addition to the howler of saying that we got the best two in 07, it’s also at least questionable to say that LMA is definitely better than Gay or Rondo.

FWIW, I think Gay’s pretty overrated too.

But folks around here I think maybe haven’t watched enough Rondo this year. He had a very good season—as I mentioned elsewhere, I think he’s already pretty close to being Greg Anthony-level.

by howlingfantods on May 22, 2008 1:24 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Yeah, he's solid

Rondo is solid and not as bad of a shooter as people think. Not good, certainly, but not horrible.

He’s a good to great young PG who will be very good for a long time. Not an allstar, but a PG most anyone would like to have.

Maybe it’s too simplistic because their styles are the same, but Gay screams MCGRADY to me. Good dynamic scorer, dunker, likes to chuck jumpers, athletic as all git out.

And I mean he reminds me of McGrady in all the good and bad ways.

One special thing about Gay though: I can’t remember a guy who slipped in the draft because of his attitude and perception that he won’t work to fulfill his promise, be so good so early.

Those types are often drafted higher than they should, and then aren’t all that great. Gay actually became good right on schedule.

I’m not sure why he got labeled that way, but it sure hurt his draft value. They were talking him up as a #1 pick before the NCAA season started. I remember that because it was the first time I had heard of him, in some ESPN article about him before the season started.

In PURE SKILL and talent, Gay will probably be as good as Roy and LMA. But as far as being good for a team and helping them win, Roy and LMA all the way.

Mortimer

by Mortimer on May 22, 2008 1:48 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

It's a pretty good comparison on offense

but McGrady used to be a great defender too—less so now, but remember he was the defensive specialist in his Raptor days.

I tend to think Gay’s overrated mostly because he’s just such a matador on defense. Of course, it’s hard to concentrate on defense when your team is as bad as that team is, but it’s still ugly to watch. Having Darko and Kwame as your interior defensive anchors doesn’t really help the cause, of course….

by howlingfantods on May 22, 2008 3:37 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

LmA better than rondo?

Yes. Upon being tortured by 10,000 knives if I am wrong yes. Rondo is the most overrated player ever in the history of books.

"KP has a raging Jayhawk for anyone from Kansas." Mortimer

by Sabonis4Ever on May 21, 2008 5:39 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Dude. Deefense clap clap clap deefense clap clap clap

Rondo is one of the main reasons why the Celts beat the Cavs. He personally was responsible for disrupting the opposing pg so much that LeBron had to start most offensive sets. Which is one of the main goals for opposing defenses against LeBron, force him to go one on five.

by howlingfantods on May 21, 2008 5:44 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I refuse to go into a LmA vs rondo debate

Not even worth my time.

"KP has a raging Jayhawk for anyone from Kansas." Mortimer

by Sabonis4Ever on May 21, 2008 6:14 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Ok. I'll do it for you.

Who has the higher upside? LMA by a huge margin. LMA has Antwan Jamison/Rasheed Wallace level upside, and he’s got a reasonable shot to get there, although at this moment, he’s too poor on the defense and rebounding side to consider close to reaching his upside yet. Rondo has Greg Anthony level upside, much lower obviously. But Rondo’s already pretty close to being there.

Who has actually played better in the past year? The intense ball-hawking PG who was probably the second best Celt in the series against the Cavs or the soft-ish PF who doesn’t play defense or rebound, but can score pretty well?

Yeah, I think it’s questionable, and most non-blazer fans would agree. Try not drinking the kool-aid sometime.

by howlingfantods on May 21, 2008 9:17 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I will ask one question and answer it myself

How many double teams has rondo faced? The answer is a negative number. He has been left without a defender on multiple occasions because of his teammates. But,but,but he makes good layups. Yes, cause he has three teammates that cannot be left open. If he was one of the ones traded to the wolves he would play behind telfair (who had very similar numbers this year)

by Sabonis4Ever on May 21, 2008 11:32 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

There's more to the game

than scoring, mmk? Otherwise zbo would be one of the major stars of the league.

by howlingfantods on May 22, 2008 10:02 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

LMA plays defense

at least to me

by Blenzer on May 22, 2008 7:56 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I also think the LmA vs Rondo debate

cannot be had.

Ok, Rondo has done some nice things, but Aldridge, though he has flaws in his game, is not on the same level, by very far… And I think he’ll be a good to great defender.

by Blenzer on May 22, 2008 7:55 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

isnt it against the rules?

to continue to refer to someone as ‘dude’ ?

If you dont talk to your cats about catnip, who will?

by bow4meow on May 21, 2008 8:59 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Dude, Where's My Car?

Two

by tominhawaii on May 22, 2008 5:46 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

also

I think Rudy WILL be better. two years from now, I bet Rudy is ruling if he’s getting the playing time and that’s his role. I’m still not convinced about Durant. He’s so tiny…

Here's to being hated. Come on #1 pick!

by ratbastird on May 21, 2008 2:33 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I hope Rudy is good too

But Rudy is just as tiny as Durant and not as tall and lanky.

I’d be very shocked if Rudy is ‘better’ than Durant, and I think it’s kinda an unfair expectation. If Durant was in the Euro leagues, I don’t see how anyone could possibly stop him. He’s pretty damn good, and the fact people say he had a disappointing season while scoring 20ppg with a block and a steal is a good example of how good he COULD be.

For a 19 year old, what he can do is pretty sweet. I’ll take my beloved Oden, but Rudy and Durant is an unfair comparison.

Mortimer

by Mortimer on May 21, 2008 2:51 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I'm not convinced by Durant

I think Durant vs Rudy could go either way. I also think that Durant vs Horford, Thaddeus Young, or Carl Landry could go either way. Durant may have gotten the ROY award, but I think he still has a long way to go before he really proves that he is the best player in last year’s rookie class.

by trk on May 21, 2008 3:37 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Sure, time will tell

But for a 19 year old, he WAS the best player out of the rookies that played last year, and will only improve. His play disappointed me as well, but his potential is astronomical.

Not as good as Oden, but still.

Carl Landry, though? C’mon yo, he’s just a good role player. Durant will be a superstar. Young has only shown glimpses, not as much as Thornton showed, while Durant has actually DONE it. Horford has a much better shot of being better than Durant than anyone else, aside from Oden.

It’s not that I wanna besmirch the good name of Rudy, Young, whomever, because they’re all good, but it’s just plain unfair to expect Rudy to match Durant, and criminally underestimates Durant’s potential. He wasn’t Jordan, isn’t gonna be, but he’s gonna be damn good.

Hoping Rudy matches Manu’s skill and production is being optimistic… and I think he’ll get there, based upon his age and career in Europe. Rudy will be good, great for us, exactly what we need; he isn’t a physical specimen like Durant is though, being a 6’10” SG/SF/PF with arms as long as Oden’s. He’s a freak, while in NBA terms, Rudy is ordinary.

With all of these debates, time will tell, but age, athleticism, and NBA experience is in Durant’s corner already.

We gotta be careful with our expectations of Rudy, friends! Only Pau Gasol was ‘good’ as a rookie, and there is a big jump for the kid to make. Over time, he’ll be fine, but not until then. We gotta be patient!

Mortimer

by Mortimer on May 21, 2008 3:56 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I demand that you be patient

RIGHT NOW!!!

"Be wary of strong drink. It can make you shoot at tax collectors... and miss" Robert A. Heinlein

by 92wastheyear on May 21, 2008 4:08 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs

I know

but still… i like saying it :)

Honestly, i don’t think Rudy will put up the numbers of Durant but a portion of that will be because he’s buried with talent on our team. I wasn’t and I’m still not 100% convinced on durant yet.

Here's to being hated. Come on #1 pick!

by ratbastird on May 22, 2008 9:24 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Oden will be better than MJ and Russell combined

Rudy will be better than MJ and Bird combined

Two

by tominhawaii on May 22, 2008 5:47 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Rudy?

I´ve heard he will become black too.

It never rains for everibody´s pleasure.

by amlmart1 on May 23, 2008 9:13 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

One can only hope

Two

by tominhawaii on May 23, 2008 9:56 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I´m a hope-eater too.

It never rains for everibody´s pleasure.

by amlmart1 on May 23, 2008 11:37 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I like pizza

Two

by tominhawaii on May 23, 2008 11:52 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Quiche for me. Or red and black bean pie.

"We comin along." Travis Outlaw

by annthefan on May 25, 2008 2:07 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Pie, quiche, piza...

all these are very fattening. Hope, on the other hand…

It never rains for everibody´s pleasure.

by amlmart1 on May 26, 2008 7:51 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Why not a rookie?

I think the Blazers will benefit in great ways by having a “true” rookie on the roster. I hate to glorify the rookie hazing process but it is real and relevent, with us having Greg Oden and Rudy Fernandez coming in as rookies it is going to be very difficult for this team to exist within the reality of hazing and prankish unity.

A rookie would also eleviate and relax Rudy’s rookie position on the team.

The spotlight is on, an Eric Gordon would be very beneficial for our team, talent and chemistry wise. A 2nd rounder brings nothing but a sorrowing tale of a guy who couldn’t make it or got traded(maybe).

This pick at 13 is incredibly important.

Juan Dixon Owes Me $5 Dollars.

by Outlaw is Rejector on May 20, 2008 11:07 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Koponen & Freeland

could be the rookies that everyone hazes.

I don’t think the 13th pick is that valuable to us. We have a pretty tacked team, and a freshman picked at 13 probably wouldn’t even be able to crack our rotation this year (Kevin Love might be able to, but I don’t think he will still be available). There are some upperclassmen projected to go later in the draft that would have a better chance, but they are projected to go later in the draft, and there is no guarantee that they would be able to crack our rotation either. We might as well trade the pick, if we think we can get something good for it.

by trk on May 20, 2008 11:55 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

useful pick at #13

I agree. A quality player is out there at 13 despite the under-appreciated deeper draft than most expect.

If you dont talk to your cats about catnip, who will?

by bow4meow on May 21, 2008 9:03 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Its kind of funny

that the top two draft picks this year will have a hard time winning the ROY award over Oden.

by lethaldose on May 20, 2008 11:21 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Oden's perception as a monster-in-waiting

may work against him for R.O.Y. He could average 14 points, 10 rebounds, and 2 blocks and still be called a “disappointment”, losing to a guy with 18 points and 5 assists per game.

—Dave

by Dave on May 20, 2008 11:53 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

If Oden does that and is called 'disappointing'

I will personally go door to door and punch every single pundit in the nose, destroying their stupid faces with one vengeful blow.

That’d be a sweeter than sweet rookie big man line, and would contribute to quite a few wins along the way as well. I’d hope those good stats and great team record will best Rose doing 18/5, and Beasley scoring 20/6.

Your best point: we heard of Rose and Beasley once this NCAA season started, but we knew when Oden was turning 18 like he was… what pretty girl are we waiting to turn 18 these days? I can’t think of one. Miley Cyrus will just get goofy looking. Anyways, pick your favorite underage pop star/actress lady and my point will work.

It isn’t a mistake that Oden was so vaunted. Those guys are not disappointments. We still got the #1 pick, and whatever Rudy does is gravy.

Mortimer

by Mortimer on May 21, 2008 1:41 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

What would be really funny

Is if the top 2 candidates for ROY end up being Oden and Rudy.

by trk on May 20, 2008 11:59 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

That

would be awesome

by jamon51 on May 21, 2008 1:11 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Wrong

It would be sweet AND awesome.

Mortimer

by Mortimer on May 21, 2008 1:42 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I don't think KP's satisfied.

He wants to own the league. I think he’ll make a serious play to move up in this draft to get Westbrook, possibly as high as 6 or 7 to leave nothing to chance. Several things work in our favor here:

1. After the top 2 picks, there aren’t any clear-cut choices. Without a clear-cut choice, team’s might be more open to moving down in exchange for veteran players who better fill their needs.

2. We not only have young talent, but we have young talent at multiple positions. Dave mentioned the difference between a 50 dollar bill and several crisp 100s. I submit that we ARE the team with several crisp 100s in Jack, Rudy, Travis, Martell, Frye, and Raef’s expiring contract. There are a number of teams who would have an interest in any one of these players moreso than an unproven rookie.

3. Finally, we have so much talent that we don’t even have the minutes to go around anymore. Not only do we want to move up, but it’s actually to our benefit to do so because trading away a couple nice players will free some major room for us. Look at the teams that are in the conference finals right now: San Antonio, L.A., Boston, and Detroit. None of these teams go very far into their bench when it matters. NBA teams simply cannot keep too many talented players sitting around; it’s a recipe for disaster.

In sum, we’ve got the chips, we’ve got the chops, and we’ve got the reason to make something happen to move up this year. My guess is Russell Westbrook. We’ll see in another month.

by bfan on May 21, 2008 10:18 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

good points

except Travis is not on the trading block.

If you dont talk to your cats about catnip, who will?

by bow4meow on May 21, 2008 9:06 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Never, never forget....

I love the lottery, and I love scouting young talent (the homework, the debate, the challenge for GM’s to get it right), and I love trades! That is why being a Blazer fan has been so rewarding for me over the past few years. Of course getting into the playoffs and out of the lottery is even better, but for now I love it.
So when we didn’t move up in the draft I was a little bummbed, but I cannot forget a few things that make having a low lottery pick not such a boring or useless thing…The
first being who our GM is (the most exciting GM in Blazer history), the second is what position Manu Ginobili got drafted (check that out), the thrid being Sebastian Telfair (I love Danny Ainge- xoxo), and finally that you are all right-- we are pretty much drafting two players who have HUGE upside, who play two positions that we need production at and who play those positions in the way we need (defense/ rebounding on one, scoring and passing at the other). Oden and Fernandez !
So what ever we do with our pick- who we find to draft or to trade for—this is going to be another great off season for the Blazers and us fans. And I can’t wait to see what the organization has in store for us come draft day.

by NEP_blazers on May 21, 2008 10:37 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

If you love trades

say good bye to Jarrett Jack

If you dont talk to your cats about catnip, who will?

by bow4meow on May 21, 2008 9:08 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

It's easy to say

“best player available.” Obviously everyone wants that. But what does that mean? Does that mean a guy who has a 10% chance to be an allstar, 30% chance to be a decent contributer and a 60% chance of bust, or a guy who has a 2% chance to be an allstar, 70% chance to be a contributer, and a 28% chance to be a bust?

I think if you’ve got a ton of holes and you desperately need a talent upgrade, you maybe go for the long shots. Personally, with where we’re at I’d rather reach for the type of slated to be roleplayers who look like locks to be at least decent 6th and 7th guys, like Brandon Rush or Roy Hibbert, guys who are usually drafted in the late teens.

Although there’s definitely an argument to be made that since we don’t really have any needs we can plug with the pick (assuming the guys we like like Westbrook are off the board), it could be worthwhile to use the pick as a gamble, like the Lakers taking a highschooler in Kobe when they already had Eddie Jones, who was a very good player back in the day.

I also still want to use the pick to trade for Jared Dudley, but I know that I’m probably the only one in Blazerland that thinks this. I’m starting to lean away from spending too much to get a point guard. I’d rather get Hinrich for Jack + Joel than try to get Devin Harris or Calderon for Jack, Joel, Frye, Outlaw, plus the 13th pick, or whatever other ridiculous demands those guys will probably require.

by howlingfantods on May 21, 2008 10:48 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Perimeter D

I like the steady play of Blake at the point, but we need perimeter defense at the
top of the key. Westbrook is 6’3”, with speed, hops and ability to play in the passing
lane. We have nobody who can stop (or slow down) the quick, slashing PG on the
perimeter, ala Paul, Parker, Nash, etc. I love BRoy, but at 6’6” he cannot guard the
quick PG’s. Blake ? Occasionally. JJ ? No. Sergio ? Only in his dreams. Come to
think of it, he only dreams of pounding the ball and throwing the alley oooop.
Trade up a couple of picks and then let Westbrook work on his ballhandling/passing
while Blake holds down the fort. After all, Brandon will be setting up the offense and
Martell will have improved his handle to create more off the dribble and continue to
get closer to being a defensive stopper.

It's GO time !

by walkoff41 on May 21, 2008 12:09 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Heyyyyyy

It’s the coincast guy. Where ya been?

"KP has a raging Jayhawk for anyone from Kansas." Mortimer

by Sabonis4Ever on May 21, 2008 12:30 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Do you really think

that every team would gladly trade their pick for Oden?

Let’s test it out: Offer Oden straight up to Chicago for the # 1 pick.

Be honest, folks. Wouldn’t you have to give at least a lot of thought to that proposal? Myself, I would probably pull the trigger if I was KP. Oden for Rose. Straight up. No foolin’.

Winning is everything.

by MT Suit on May 21, 2008 2:17 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

heck no

and you’re insane.

Here's to being hated. Come on #1 pick!

by ratbastird on May 21, 2008 2:37 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Lebron only

He’s the only player I might ponder and Greg’s injuries would come into play with that, but from what I hear and what I see, there is NO way I’d give Oden up for everyone else. His potential is FAR to high. Rose is nothing compared to Oden. He simply flashed at the end of the season, but who knows if that will keep going.

Here's to being hated. Come on #1 pick!

by ratbastird on May 21, 2008 2:39 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

If he's healthy

Then of course they would. He’s gonna be the biggest thing since Shaq, except with a work ethic and won’t bolt to LA.

Mortimer

by Mortimer on May 21, 2008 3:04 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Greg Oden

would be far and away the consensus #1 pick if he came out this year and it wouldn’t even be close. The Bulls would have just won the “Oden Sweepstakes”.

—Dave

by Dave on May 21, 2008 5:21 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Let's put it this way

This year KP is talking about the #1 pick possibly being available for an All-Star plus a starter. Last year’s #1 pick was not available for any offer short of LeBron James…and then only maybe.

—Dave

by Dave on May 21, 2008 5:24 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

True, but that was before the microfracture.

That changes the equation considerably.

by howlingfantods on May 21, 2008 5:52 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I trust the docs

The trainers and docs say it was a small injury, he’s been held out a looooong time, he’s healthy enough to play right now. I think we can all assume there is an asterisk that says “provided he is healthy” when discussing Oden’s impact for the year, so we don’t need to keep saying it.

Provided Oden is healthy, he is easily the best and most promising prospect out of the last few years and the best big man since Duncan or Shaq. He is genetically created in a CIA lab to win championships and be charming while doing so.

Mortimer

by Mortimer on May 21, 2008 5:55 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

He may be healthy and ready to play

but that’s not the same as saying he’s going to come back at a 100%. Even Stoudamire lost a little something from his burst, and he’s come back stronger than anyone else from microfracture.

So how much will Oden have lost? 2%? 10%? How much will that impact his game—Kidd lost some burst, but he never really relied on his athleticism. McDyess managed to have a decent post microfracture career as a support guy, but his game had to change radically and he’s not half the player he was before the surgery. Chris Webber looked like an evil, crappy twin of the original CWebb. Terrell Brandon had to straight up retire.

Let me tell you, if he hadn’t come out last year, and he spent the entire college season on the shelf rehabbing after his microfracture, there is not a chance in hell he would’ve gone first. Maybe fifth, but GMs wouldn’t risk their careers using a top 2 pick on a guy who’s spent a year rehabbing from microfracture.

by howlingfantods on May 22, 2008 11:21 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I don't say this often

but that last assertion is just not correct. Had Oden come out immediately after microfracture surgery (which is unlikely, as he probably would have spent another year in college) there’s a possibility that Durant may have gone before him. But there is no possible way he would have dropped below the second pick. He may have gone first anyway. In any other non-Durant, non-LeBron type year, including this one, he would have been the clear first pick. It wouldn’t even be close. It would be Oden and then everybody else.

—Dave

by Dave on May 22, 2008 11:29 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

We'll find out, of course

We don’t know how his knee will respond, and for me to argue as if I know it’ll be good is silly, just as arguing it will be bad is silly too. We DO know it was a smaller tear (reportedly, even when compared to Amare’s), the rest of his knee is fine, he has been (or will be) held out 6+ months longer than anyone else has, the microfracture technique has advanced far beyond the Webber/McDyess/Terrell/Penny days, and that he is in good shape as we speak.

We can see, from reports, that the diagnosis is good.

Maybe he has lost some athleticism. Maybe it’ll take some time to recover it; though in theory it should be less than Amare because of the injury and time spent resting.

He’d still be a top 2 pick, easily. He is that good and that promising. I know the only thing that can convince you of that is to SEE it on an NBA court, and that’s fine. I know you want him to be good too, but I think you poo-poo optimistic hope based off of real reports a little too much.

Mortimer

by Mortimer on May 22, 2008 11:31 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

no it doesnt

Every team would still trip over there raging jayhawks to get at Oden. Thats like saying Amari would be a great baller if it wasnt for that micro surg. Oh wait, That guy IS a great baller despite the surgury.

On what was running through his mind when the first three numbers came up in the Blazers’ favor:
"I was getting pretty excited. ... We got pretty close, but you know, no cigar. ... But I was talking to (Assistant GM) Tom Penn and, you know, we don’t make luck our policy." Kaypee!

by ptwnblzr on May 21, 2008 8:14 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

uh.. NO!

Point guards don’t forge rings, they assist. (get it?)

I've said it before, and I'll say it again . . . . . . if only because this thread so clearly invites exactly this advice:

With the 13th pick (not getting top 3 in the lottery), bank our 2008 draft picks:
trade all our picks for future draft considerations.

This involves the following picks: #13, #33 (from Memphis), #36 (from New York) and #55 (from Phoenix).
The trades I would suggest are two, of two picks each, to teams with similar qualities:
The need for young bodies now, the absence of a good draft slot now, and the possibility
of future underachievement, and therefore high first-round picks we’d receive.
Examples: San Antonio, Phoenix, Dallas, Detroit, Boston.

Trade #1: #13 and #55 for an unprotected first-round pick in 2010.
Maybe this could be top-three-protected if being unprotected is truly a dealbreaker,
but no more protection than that.

Trade #2: #33 and #36 for a lottery-protected first-round pick in 2011.

We’d add nobody now except Rudy and Oden, retain everybody from last year for at least next season
(when most of our roster is in their final contract year), do no trades before the 2009 offseason
(okay, we’ll take calls on Raef’s expiring contract at the trade deadline, but we’re playing hard-to-get),
and we’d have extra picks 3-4 year from now, with the 2010 in a position to be quite high.

Blazers have a five-on-three...and they pull it back and wait for help.

by QualityPie on May 20, 2008 6:45 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

by ptwnblzr on May 21, 2008 8:04 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I agree with your comments

I’d prefer the suns, dallas, or boston.

I expect the suns to blow their team this year or next year. Same with Dallas. Boston, I don’t see it happening for three or more years.

Here's to being hated. Come on #1 pick!

by ratbastird on May 22, 2008 9:46 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

aww shucks

I actually just copy and pasted QPs comment into my sig. mabee I said something else inteligent earlier on. QP did hit it thow, that would be sweet, we have a good team right now. 41&41, insert #1 draft pick. Twix comertial.. chika chika.. oh yah.

What did Oden say to the stork?. "Admit that you have got lost". amlmart

by ptwnblzr on May 22, 2008 10:30 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs