Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: Knicks Beat Lakers With Familiar Strategy

Welcome Aldridge and Mills

No doubt you've read, right below and at a host of other venues, the big news of the day.  (See the post following this one for all the links.)  All that's left is the veil-lifting and the smooch before LaMarcus Aldridge and the Trail Blazers officially enter wedded bliss for the next five years to the tune of $65-70 million total on the contract.  All the Blazer fans in the pews are already applauding vigorously, some no doubt dabbing their eyes with a hanky.

This is a solid move for the franchise, though not without its risks.  There's no doubt Aldridge deserved a ton of money.  His offensive and physical development have already established him as a solid player and a good bet for the future.  He's lingering in the space between a good and very good new-age power forward with definite potential to become great.  He's a good fit with Greg Oden as well.  For all of these reasons and more the Blazers had to retain him.  Both LaMarcus and his agent knew this and knew what he was worth and they got it, with perhaps a little frosting thrown in.  He's as close to a max contract as you can get without actually being maxed...just below the expectations of a superstar, almost all the pay.

The risk here is twofold.  First, the Blazers are definitely paying Aldridge based on future expectations.  That always carried uncertainty with it.  The new salary puts LaMarcus into the top 5% of league earners.  It's a potential ramp-up for Kobe Bryant and Kevin Garnett level compensation in his next contract.  He's not that player yet nor, truth be told, even that kind of prospect yet.  He's very good at the things he does well but if the Blazers need rebounding, passing, or more straight-up defense he's not going to be the guy to provide it.  This brings up the second risk.  If anything happens to Greg Oden then LaMarcus loses his counter-balance and suddenly looks overpaid as the not-quite-superstar trying to carry the frontcourt load himself.  That contract is going to be hard to move even when it comes close to expiration, as LaMarcus will be looking for at least a continuation, if not the ramped-up raise we just mentioned.  He is almost certainly going to be a Blazer for five full years now, for better or worse.  The only exception would be if there were already a superstar deal in the works for which LaMarcus' salary and potential were the ballast.  But that seems unlikely.

Whether this was a good, let alone an ideal, move for the Blazers is a moot point.  It was necessary and that's the end of the story.  As long as the team stays healthy around him and we can let LaMarcus do the things he does best it should turn out great for all involved.

The other news, also chronicled by Ben just below, was the signing of Patty Mills to fill Portland's 15th roster spot.  Minor tremors have resulted, as folks are unsure why Mills, who is injured and technically could have played overseas and still been retained  (brain cramp...2nd rounder)  is a better candidate for that slot than Ime Udoka or Jarron Collins.  Rumor has it that this wasn't Nate McMillan's first choice.  That could be expected.  A coach always wants options and Udoka or Collins would have been far more viable.  Plus the roster has already been thinned by injuries.  In spite of that, here are some possible justifications:

1.  The Blazers are committed to carrying one inexperienced foreign point guard about whom fans can speculate and dream, causing them to bash every other point guard on the roster and vilify the coach for not playing him.  It's just so Portland.

2.  Mills really is that good.  He could be the point guard of the future that the team lacks.

3.  Udoka and Collins really weren't that good.  They did, after all, accept camp invitations from a team that's stacked at their respective positions.  They also got beat out by a guy with a broken foot who plays at a position that's just as stacked.

4.  Doing it this way saved a couple bucks.

5.   The coach has plenty of input regarding the rotation spots and their back-ups, but the 15th spot is GM's Choice.  He gets to take a flyer on a guy.  Hey, if you're giving your 15th-man veteran serious playing time you've already lost the race anyway.

In any case, all will be forgotten in less than a week when the regular season tips.  For now, welcome Patty and welcome back LaMarcus.  Good to have you onboard.

--Dave (blazersub@yahoo.com

Comment 71 comments  |  0 recs  | 

Do you like this story?

Comments

Display:

I'm happy

I like Mills and I don’t care that we have to wait to see what we have in him.

I also think Aldridge is the type that will work hard and barring injury will do everything in his power to live up to the contract.

Come on, regular season!

"HA HA HA HA HA
I'm not laughing, I'm just listing the five ugliest Blazers ever."
- rockingharder

by jamon51 on Oct 22, 2009 12:34 AM PDT reply actions  

Mills

is the only one of the three with upside. As stated in the post, if any of the 3 possible candidates was getting PT it’s a bad sign for our season outside of a possible breakout…Mills is the only one for which a breakout was possible (although it is of course unlikely)

"When jumpers are outlawed only Outlaw will take jumpers"-LoadedOrygun

by DominicanAvenger on Oct 22, 2009 12:58 AM PDT up reply actions  

He's the 15th player

Even with him and Prendergraph out for now, we still have one more than one even need for a full roster.

If he pans out fine, if he doesn’t, he doesn’t, but we’ll never know if we didn’t sign him.

"Good evening Blazer fans, wherever you may be!"-Bill Schonely

by skywaker9 on Oct 22, 2009 12:34 AM PDT reply actions  

12 active players I meant

Since you can only dress 12 each day.

"Good evening Blazer fans, wherever you may be!"-Bill Schonely

by skywaker9 on Oct 22, 2009 11:32 AM PDT up reply actions  

Let's add a 6th possibility ..

“6. The coach and GM have iinput regarding the rotation spots and their back-ups, but the 15th spot is the GM’s Choice PA’s choice.”

by jayfisher on Oct 22, 2009 12:35 AM PDT reply actions  

You got it.

Stupid people have stupid ideas.

by AK1984 on Oct 22, 2009 12:48 AM PDT up reply actions  

If I were the owner

I’d be making the decisions on 1 through 15—I wouldn’t be able to help myself. So if they throw him a bone with the 15th roster spot I don’t think we have anything to complain about.

"HA HA HA HA HA
I'm not laughing, I'm just listing the five ugliest Blazers ever."
- rockingharder

by jamon51 on Oct 22, 2009 1:24 AM PDT up reply actions  

I've got no problem with that type of hands-on ownership, although any owner who governs ...

his franchise in that way needs to have a very firm grip of the sport. With football, Jerry Jones is an example of an extremely successful hands-on owner; conversely, Mike Brown is an example of a bad hands-on owner. With baseball, an example of bad hands-on ownership occurred last year when Kenji Johjima was re-signed by the Seattle Mariners due to an edict from Hiroshi Yamauchi or one of his cronies in Japan. Luckily for the M’s, that situation recently rectified itself. In the NBA, though, Mark Cuban is an example of an educated, knoweldgeable owner who has his hands in personnel decisions. Paul Allen, however, has a mighty long track record of making these brash, ill-advised basketball-related decisions; thus, it’s pure lunacy to me that he keeps on interjecting himself in spite of his ignorance on such matters.

Stupid people have stupid ideas.

by AK1984 on Oct 22, 2009 1:39 AM PDT up reply actions  

He's got a good track record recently

Nic Batum panned out so maybe he’s just riding his luck until he bombs again….

by MadBlaze on Oct 22, 2009 4:32 AM PDT up reply actions  

That is true.

PA was right on the money with Batum. I openly mocked the decision to draft Nic, so hopefully I’m wrong about Mills too.

by Nick Van Excellent on Oct 22, 2009 7:45 AM PDT up reply actions  

As a 40 year Dallas Cowboy fan I don't totally agree

Although Jerry Jones is a very intelligent man his ego cost Dallas at least 2 more championships. J.J. took what could have been the single greatest team in NFL history & ruined it, no not completely never the less foolishly.

"BEER IS LIVING PROOF THAT GOD LOVES US"
- Benjamin Franklin-

by We-B-Dunkin on Oct 22, 2009 2:31 PM PDT up reply actions  

Mills and JP will both spend some time in Idaho this year

A good thing for them and the team,I like the Idea of rolling the dice on young guys and see what you got rather than park vets on the bench

by southern oregon on Oct 22, 2009 12:59 AM PDT reply actions  

KP does not believe in Idaho

His concept seems to be that the culture here is more important and they play against much better players in practice,

"Either way we have two phenomenal units. I'm excited to play with either one." - Martell Webster

by lee3022 on Oct 22, 2009 1:38 AM PDT up reply actions  

In Idaho, Patty Mills would just be fighting for minutes against Jamaal Tatum. My guess is that if ...

Mills did get assigned to Idaho, he’d play alongside Seattle native Kevin Burleson — who, at 6’3", is a taller point guard with strong defensive abilities — in the backcourt. That way, Mills could in turn chuck away freely on offense to his heart’s content.

Stupid people have stupid ideas.

by AK1984 on Oct 22, 2009 1:47 AM PDT up reply actions  

Thats a stupid idea

Why send him to D-League (theoretically to DEVELOP him) and then have him play the same role he did in college and not attempt to see what else he might be able to offer or try to expand his game. Context matters in my mind and while Patty may have been a chucker in college, his situation necessitated that somewhat. Give him a chance and I think he might surprise you.

by MadBlaze on Oct 22, 2009 4:35 AM PDT up reply actions  

Yeah, it is "a stupid idea." That's why I gave a cynical take on what would happen if Patty ...

Mills were assigned to the Idaho Stampede of the D-League. In essence, he’d just do what he did at St Mary’s in college; that’d be a gunslinging chucker from downtown who’s got no ability to drive and finish at the cup, as well as little to offer in playmaking skills.

Frankly, the fact that we’re all debating about Mills is “stupid” in every way, shape, and form. As it is, Mills should’ve unquestionably been waived right after he had signed on the dotted line of the one-year, non-guaranteed contract that he was tendered as a second-round pick.

Stupid people have stupid ideas.

by AK1984 on Oct 22, 2009 5:26 AM PDT up reply actions  

As opposed to Bayless

A gunslinging bricker from downtown who can drive and finish at the cup as well as little to offer in playmaking skills?

Can’t we combine them a la Voltron?

"My shoulder is OK. And away we go." -- Nic Batum

by DonkeyShins on Oct 22, 2009 9:25 AM PDT up reply actions  

It is equally valid to say Mills is the second coming of Tony Parker

Probabilities be damned….just because a player doesn’t have the requisite skills now doesn’t mean he can’t acquire them. Give him a chance, see what happens and go from there.

Bottom line is that Mills has the physical tools and the moxy to compete with the best in the USA. He didn’t look overmatched against CP3 and company. That is EXACTLY the kind of player you take a chance on with the most inconsequential roster spot in the NBA.

by blacknoiseNW on Oct 22, 2009 11:28 AM PDT up reply actions  

If he is going to be pigeon-holed into the same role he played at college

then I agree he should have been waived. He took almost eight threes per game last year, there is no place for that volume here and I wouldn’t be interested in seeing him doing it anywhere; NBA, D-League, Europe, as it has no value in developing him. However, I believe he can and will develop and the end product will surprise you.

The one game a saw Mills play in person (Australia vs. NZ), I saw a capable floor leader with blinding speed. Certainly someone capable of filling an Aaron Brooks like role if he improved his ability going to the hoop. His three point shot is not a weakness, good form and a nice arc, it was simply a case of him taking too many bad shots as ‘the man’ on his team at St. Mary’s last year.

Just as a sidenote, and I’m sure you’ve heard this plenty of times, I find your analysis interesting, it is always well researched and insightful, but you do seem overly committed to one style of play. Evidence shows that super-quick point guards have value so long as they have at least a couple of NBA level skills (ie shooting, passing, driving etc) even if they are less capable on defense. My position is that last year we were shredded by this type of player, so situationally utilising Bayless or Mills to deal with this is not a very risky idea – it would be hard for them to do worse than Blake/SRod did last year. What could a defensive minded point, other than perhaps Rajon Rondo, do in this situation? Most, like Hinrich, are too slow to deal with this type of player and have built their reputations guarding more traditional point guards and two guards. It is a problem we are going to have to deal with this year, so from my perspective added someone who could fill that role for us is a smart, forward-thinking strategy.

by MadBlaze on Oct 22, 2009 12:39 PM PDT up reply actions  

If you wanted to sign a point guard who can guard the speedier guys, then Brevin ...

Knight could’ve been signed to a one-year, minimum-level contract or Kevin Pritchard could’ve attempted to trade up in the 2009 NBA Draft to select Darren Collison.

For Jerryd Bayless, he’s way too overaggressive to be an effective defender. Patty Mills, moreover, lacks the build and athleticism to be a satisfactory defender, and that’s even if he gives maximum effort.

Anyway, you’re totally correct to point out that I’m kind of “committed to one style of play.”

Stupid people have stupid ideas.

by AK1984 on Oct 22, 2009 1:44 PM PDT up reply actions  

Notice how most of your player analysis attributes absolute values?

Bayless may have demonstrated that his overaggressive – but that is a behavior that can be modified. It is not a condemnation to “bust” status. Once Bayless learns to play defense with his feet – he will BE a good defender.

Is Mills really too frail or insufficiently quick to be a good defender? That is contradictory to all the reports that Mills is “lightning” fast.

by blacknoiseNW on Oct 22, 2009 2:21 PM PDT up reply actions  

Good points.

In my opinion, Bayless being overaggressive at a young age is a good thing. It’s hard to instill a desire to work hard on defense. The odds of him getting smarter on defense are good, the odds of a player learning to try harder are not as good.

I don’t think Mills is a very good defender, but I have seen a few players where it seemed like he could stay in front of his man. You can usually hide the PG a bit anyway, so all he has to do is not be a complete liability.

by Nick Van Excellent on Oct 22, 2009 3:38 PM PDT up reply actions  

Brevin Knight is 33 and an offensive liability

My point was not so much to try and find a player to guard quick points but rather have players that can fill that role for us as it seems to be effective given current NBA rules and officiating.

Darren Collison was someone I was secretly hoping we would get and I believe had he lasted to 24 we would have picked him up. I also believe that had that happened Andre Miller would not currently be a Blazer and we would be happy relying on Collison and Bayless to share backup duties as they play sufficiently different styles to make this workable.

By the way, In some ways I like the idea of wholly committing to a defensive minded style, and for this team a commitment to defense is certainly desirable, but I don’t believe we should look for every acquisition to be a defensive player with limited offensive flexibility. We have defensive potential on this roster in Oden, Roy, LMA and Bayless (IMO) and proven ability in Batum and Przy. I am all for a rebounding, defensive minded PF/C to gain better frontcourt balance but outside of this I am more than happy for management to take risks on players who’s primary skills are on offense. That way true roster balance can be achieved, both in terms of positional need and offensive and defensive ability.

by MadBlaze on Oct 22, 2009 4:00 PM PDT up reply actions  

Collison is awesome.

I wonder if the Blazers moved up a couple spots thinking the Hornets wouldn’t take him.

He matched Mills in the pre-draft measurement for speed.

by Nick Van Excellent on Oct 22, 2009 5:50 PM PDT up reply actions  

Yeah it was 22 we picked at wasn't it

Between that and Blair I was not a happy camper on draft day. Kinda sucks for him too though, he’s never going to get a run so long as CP3 stays where as here he would have had a very realistic shot at starting within a couple of years.

Oh well.

by MadBlaze on Oct 22, 2009 6:03 PM PDT up reply actions  

Yeah, he would have been a nice pickup

Didn’t really expect it, though. And I don’t know, even if he’d been available, if they would have taken him. KP wanted a Euro to keep more cap flexibility.

I can tell you how to make an Excel spreadsheet that proves Portland wins 62 games this year.

by jscot on Oct 22, 2009 11:01 PM PDT up reply actions  

I see this as a good day for the Blazers

We lock up a PF likely much better than any replacement player.

We continue to build for the future with Mills. He was the guy too quick for CP or any of the Gold Medalists to guard as I read. And he is cheap. He replaces Shavlik who did not do much for us last year and Patty does not need to do much for us this year. But if he is able to contribute (I suspect he might) it is gravy.

Welcome indeed.

"Either way we have two phenomenal units. I'm excited to play with either one." - Martell Webster

by lee3022 on Oct 22, 2009 1:36 AM PDT reply actions  

Shavlik did not do much for us last year

Are you kidding? that chat with letsblaze was one of the highlights of the season!!!111

by medmelon on Oct 22, 2009 1:45 AM PDT up reply actions  

Why I didn't say 'nothing'

"Either way we have two phenomenal units. I'm excited to play with either one." - Martell Webster

by lee3022 on Oct 22, 2009 4:40 PM PDT up reply actions  

???
The other news, also chronicled by Ben just below, was the signing of Patty Mills to fill Portland’s 15th roster spot. Minor tremors have resulted, as folks are unsure why Mills, who is injured and technically could have played overseas and still been retained, is a better candidate for that slot than Ime Udoka or Jarron Collins.

My impression (maybe from Quick?) was that if the Blazers were to not sign him for the year he’d be considered an unrestricted free agent. Anyone have any further thoughts or, better yet, precise details about this point?

by Shawno on Oct 22, 2009 1:59 AM PDT reply actions  

Yes, if they didn’t make him a contract offer at all before the start of the season he would have become a UFA. To retain unsigned second round picks, it’s common practice to make them a one-year non-guaranteed contract offer, and usually the player just doesn’t sign it in agreement with the team until they really want to have him. You can do that indefinitely to retain the rights, every season, until the player doesn’t play professionally anymore and retires (plus 1 year).

Now if Mills actually signed the contract, and the Blazers didn’t want that hoping he would play professionally overseas (or in the D-League), he has forced their hand. Either they give him that last roster spot that might have been intended for someone else and keep him until he either does play productively or can get traded (not immediately, even if he wasn’t injured), or they simply waive his contract (that is still likely just unguaranteed) to not pay him that money and clear the roster spot. Yet then he becomes a UFA again and all 30 teams have the same chance to sign him. That allegedly is what he wanted: Not play overseas, but lock onto some NBA team. He felt that he was drafted too late, and likely isn’t happy with his spot on such a deep team, but this way he at least either is on a team or becomes a free man again.

"I think he can still play" - Kevin Pritchard on Juwan Howard

by Norsktroll on Oct 22, 2009 2:48 AM PDT up reply actions  

A second round pick should always sign the required tender.

If the team immediately or eventually cuts him he becomes an unrestricted free agent and then he has 29 other possible teams to look for a better opportunity. If he gets cut late in preseason he can always go to Europe as an option and return the following year as a free agent for another try with a more likely team.

If he doesn’t sign the required tender and goes to Europe to play a season his chances the next season are still limited to only the team that drafted him. If he then signs and he’s cut late in preseason he has limited time to try out for another team. He doesn’t have a guaranteed offer, so there’s no advantage for him to voluntarily remain in that position.

Therefore, it seems like the Blazers should have expected Mills to sign the required tender, and should have expected to face this choice. I don’t see any leverage they would have to convince him to not sign the tender and play in Europe.

A first round pick is in an entirely different situation because their contract offer is always 2-years guaranteed. If they don’t sign it, and play in Europe (sometimes for more money), they still have the same guaranteed contract waiting for them unless the drafting team decides not to renew the offer, and then they become a free agent (an even better situation for them). Plus after 3 years if the drafting team wants to pry them out of Europe they can offer more than the rookie scale contract amount. So it financially makes sense for them to decline the offer and play in Europe as long as they can make more money or want to play in Europe.

i.e. you can usually stash 1st round picks in Europe (unless they insist on coming over like Batum), but I don’t see why a 2nd round pick would allow themselves to be stashed in Europe.

by BlazerFanSince1970 on Oct 22, 2009 3:56 AM PDT up reply actions  

The funny thing is that there are not that many unsigned first round picks (seven as far as I know, with the Blazers having three), while there are a ton of unsigned second round picks.

"I think he can still play" - Kevin Pritchard on Juwan Howard

by Norsktroll on Oct 22, 2009 4:01 AM PDT up reply actions  

Well from the teams' perspective, to prevent them from signing with other NBA teams and potentially use as throw-ins for trades.

E.g. the Nuggets recently put Axel Hervelle (Real Madrid) into a deal for James White with the Rockets. Didn’t pan out, and they waived him again. And that is a productive player, in some deals it’s just a guy who will never ever see the NBA anymore.

From the players’ perspective, not so sure for the reasons you mentioned. Some likely don’t care anymore because they have good deals elsewhere and know no NBA team would be interested. But there should be some in or before their prime who still dream about the NBA and might be interested to force the issue because the team currently holding their rights isn’t presenting a good perspective to them.

The incomparable ShamSports has a listing that looks very complete and has about 75 names on it:
http://www.shamsports.com/content/pages/data/draft/unsigneddraftpicks.jsp

"I think he can still play" - Kevin Pritchard on Juwan Howard

by Norsktroll on Oct 22, 2009 5:16 AM PDT up reply actions  

Here's a theory

The team has to tender the offer in September to retain rights to a second rounder. By that point in time, most guys know they aren’t going to make the team, they’ve probably been told they won’t. So they look for a job overseas, find one, and sign an overseas contract before September. Why wait? Get that job as quickly as you can, before the jobs disappear.

But if you are signed overseas, then you can’t sign the NBA offer to force the team’s hand, like Mills did.

I would guess that is the reason that second round picks are playing in Europe while their rights are retained by NBA teams.

I can tell you how to make an Excel spreadsheet that proves Portland wins 62 games this year.

by jscot on Oct 22, 2009 11:07 PM PDT up reply actions  

Here's what the CBA says:

http://www.nbpa.com/cba_articles/article-X.php

Section 4. Negotiating Rights to Draft Rookies.
(a) A Team that drafts a player shall, during the period from the date of such NBA Draft (hereinafter, the "Initial Draft") to the date of the next Draft (hereinafter, the "Subsequent Draft"), be the only Team with which such player may negotiate or sign a Player Contract, provided that, on or before the July 15 immediately following the Initial Draft (for a First Round Pick), or in the two (2) weeks before the September 5 immediately following the Initial Draft (for a Second Round Pick), such Team has made a Required Tender to such player. If a Team has made a Required Tender to such a player and the player has not signed a Player Contract within the period between the Initial Draft and the Subsequent Draft, the Team that drafted the player shall lose its exclusive right to negotiate with the player and the player will then be eligible for selection in the Subsequent Draft.

So, as others have said, the only way to retain rights on a 2nd round pick is to make the required tender offer of a one year, non-guaranteed contract before September 5. The Blazers did that with Mills.

Lots of 2nd round picks either decide not to take that tender offer. Others cannot because they have already signed contracts with other leagues before the tender offer is made. Either way, as long as the team made the offer, they retain the rights to the 2nd round pick.

If the Blazers did not offer Mills the required tender, Mills would now be an UFA and free to sign with any other team – in the NBA or elsewhere. Because the tender offer was made, the Blazers retained exclusive rights within the NBA to negotiate with Mills until the next draft, although he could still have signed with another league’s team. So, yes, the Blazers could have made the required tender, Mills could have rejected it and played overseas and the Blazers would still have retained rights on Mills.

Dave had it right the first time. Mills could have been ‘stashed’ overseas with the team still holding his rights, although Mills would have had to agree to do so. That didn’t happen, so the only way to hold his rights – since he signed the required tender before the Oct. 15 deadline – is for the Blazers to not waive him.

"It's Our Time":http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O99POVJfglY

by Storyteller on Oct 22, 2009 1:51 PM PDT up reply actions  

I belive teams must make an offer to 2nd round draftees to retain their rights. I assume Portland made the lowest possible offer, Mills took it and, because he is injured, Portland has to pay his entire contract to release him.

Basically, Portland options were:
1. Lose Patty Mills rights, by not offering him a contract
2. Sign and waive Mills, paying his full contract and making him a free agent.
3. Sign and keep Mills

by draftjunkie on Oct 22, 2009 2:11 AM PDT reply actions  

Patty Mills may've been waived at no cost -- as his contract is non-guaranteed -- although his rights ...

would’ve been lost. Keeping Mills weighed upon what somebody thought of his potential, with Paul Allen being the one who made the final call — which I contend was the wrong one — in this case.

Stupid people have stupid ideas.

by AK1984 on Oct 22, 2009 2:37 AM PDT up reply actions  

His contract would have become fully guaranteed had he been in training camp while sustaining the injury. He never officially was. He got injured while playing under a summer league contract, only that one became guaranteed and likely has a clause that would pay him health insurance for his rehab. Remember that the Blazers only made contract offers to Cunningham and Pendergraph much later than summer league, so it’s hard to believe they made the same offer earlier to Mills. According to prosporttransactions the date of his current contract is October 16th.

"I think he can still play" - Kevin Pritchard on Juwan Howard

by Norsktroll on Oct 22, 2009 2:52 AM PDT up reply actions  

Yeah, Patty Mills didn't "Jason Richards" his way into a contract due to the foot injury.

Rather, Patty Mills pulled a “Demetris Nichols” here. Unlike Nichols with New York in 2007, Mills didn’t get waived by Portland.

Stupid people have stupid ideas.

by AK1984 on Oct 22, 2009 3:26 AM PDT up reply actions  

Well, let's hope nobody gets injured this year

Although, who knows if Collins or Udoka will even get signed by anyone else. They might still be available for a ten-day contract if we really need them. Like Dave said, if you’re giving your 15th man a lot of minutes, you’ve already lost the race (this does not apply to Shavlik). Patty Mills shouldn’t even play once this year, knock on wood.

made em jump like Rod Strickland

by Guaranteed on Oct 22, 2009 2:43 AM PDT reply actions  

Collins reportedly will sign with Phoenix as an insurance for the injured Robin Lopez (with only Channing as an experienced big man next to Amare at the moment, the other options are rookies or still very fresh in the league).

Ime had an offer to training camp from the Nuggets before he came to the Blazers, and likely there is still some team that has a use for a veteran perimeter player. They still could get released again during the season, so not impossible the Blazers could get them or players like them should they need it in January.

"I think he can still play" - Kevin Pritchard on Juwan Howard

by Norsktroll on Oct 22, 2009 2:57 AM PDT up reply actions  

I kind of wonder about this squad sometimes

Might we not be better served to take a flyer on a veteran insurance guy instead of two injured rookies? We all know about Oden and Webster’s history, but Rudy’s back spasms and Nic’s hip have me a little worried. Even Roy had a bit of a reputation as being injury-prone in his first two seasons. Przybilla almost never plays an entire 82, not to mention playoffs. Also, has Dre not been injured once ever because he is secretly Cal Ripken Jr Jr Jr, or is it just much more likely that he will now suffer his first ever super major injury this season, because he has defied the odds in the past?

Yes, we have depth, if everyone is healthy and able. Injuries are the number one reason cited by Yahoo’s season preview that we might not be as good as we should be this year. New players will work themselves out, defense we didn’t need last year, but as per this last Utah game, we can all see what happens if some key players are on the DL.

Hopefully with our depth (Bayless can play 4/5 too, right?) it won’t be a problem, but I would have to say that disease and injury (IT HAUNTS US ALL) is higher on my list of detours to the Finals than poor defense or the L$%&apostrophe@#kers.

made em jump like Rod Strickland

by Guaranteed on Oct 22, 2009 3:44 AM PDT up reply actions  

Injuries can happen to any team (see Utah last year)

as for defense it was not that it wasn’t needed,it is the more the better. A significant improvement in team D will be the difference between another 1st round exit & an extended playoff run IMO.

"BEER IS LIVING PROOF THAT GOD LOVES US"
- Benjamin Franklin-

by We-B-Dunkin on Oct 22, 2009 4:05 PM PDT up reply actions  

I am not worried about injuries...

because if you’re counting on the 15th player on your roster to save your team from injuries, you have a weak, weak team. Of all teams in the league, Portland is best suited to using the 16th spot for player development. The team is DEEP 1-14….that will be enough. If there are so many injuries you’re counting on the 15th guy to save you, your season is already lost.

"I'm a man, but I can change.....if I have to......I guess." - Red Green

by antediluvian on Oct 22, 2009 9:15 AM PDT up reply actions  

"There's no doubt Aldridge deserved a ton of money."

He’s getting a little more than a ton of $10 bills per year.

A ton (2000 pounds) of $10 bills is worth $9,080,000.

by BlazerFanSince1970 on Oct 22, 2009 3:11 AM PDT reply actions  

A few of these would be much lighter in the wallet.

Image and video hosting by TinyPic

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11744529/

On 30 Rock last week, Tracy Jordan made a joke about breaking one of those monstrosities.

Stupid people have stupid ideas.

by AK1984 on Oct 22, 2009 3:33 AM PDT up reply actions  

Let's hope hyper-inflation doesn't hit...

… and this becomes the common denomination bank note in the marketplace.

Buck Williams for the hall of fame

by Phizbin on Oct 22, 2009 7:37 AM PDT up reply actions  

Hi LaMarcus and Patty

I refuse to give any more of my oh so valuable time to the 15th roster spot

Blazer Fan

by leeroyjenkins on Oct 22, 2009 6:45 AM PDT reply actions  

With regards to Patty

I really couldn’t care less if it was a unilateral Allen decision. He at least has some semblance of upside which you can’t say about Collins or Ime. I don’t really buy that either of them, as the 15th man (sub-Scalabrine level) would have had any appreciable effect on chemistry. The only really decisions was deciding between Mills’ extremely long shot upside, rewarding Ime for being from Portland, or getting catastrophic insurance from Collins. Not exactly a compelling choice in my eyes.

by Royster on Oct 22, 2009 7:13 AM PDT reply actions  

Or...

I wonder if KP hs in mind moving Blake or Bayless soon.

"He's not your Vydas or my Vydas, he's Arvydas."

by Petro4Three on Oct 22, 2009 7:20 AM PDT reply actions  

15th spot, does it matter?

If Ime Udoka was that important to the Blazer brass, they could have kept him and let Travis go, then the travis bashers could have been Ime bashers

hg

by BBK on Oct 22, 2009 8:09 AM PDT reply actions  

Reason #1 for Mills making the roster is spot on.

A bird in the hand, anyone? As of now, it is very possible that Mills will never see a minute of NBA playing time. While I love the idea of Ime being on the team, giving him a roster spot would have been superfluous. But even though it’s the 15th spot, Collins could have provided useful insurance holding down minutes at center when Pryz or Oden get injured. If (when) that happens, who plays center when going small isn’t a viable option? What happens when Pryz is in street clothes and Oden fouls out in under 20 minutes?

I would put my money on one of their centers getting injured this year and needing someone like Collins before I bet on Mills being a bona fide NBA player. I probably would have poo poo’ed the idea of investing in Microsoft back in the day though.

by Benjamanic on Oct 22, 2009 8:18 AM PDT reply actions  

When Przybilla is in street clothes and Oden fouls out....

either Aldridge or Howard slides to the 5. Aldridge played there quite a bit in his first season.

I don’t think Nate worries so much about how his team matches up with others….there is enough Blazer talent that other teams can worry about how they match up with Portland.

"I'm a man, but I can change.....if I have to......I guess." - Red Green

by antediluvian on Oct 22, 2009 9:19 AM PDT up reply actions  

That's a pretty slight front line.

And possibly a lot of fouls on LMA when playing a team like Cleveland, Orlando, or other big teams. LMA is underrated defensively (gets a lot of deflections), but he’s not that strong and Howard isn’t known for his defense. It would have been nice to have a big body to push back on big centers, 6 hard fouls to give, and a player who knows what his role is.

I hope you’re right that they have enough talent. Just saying that there was a decent chance that Collins could have helped in some way this year but absolutely no chance that Mills will until maybe a few years down the road.

by Benjamanic on Oct 22, 2009 11:46 AM PDT up reply actions  

I guess after seeing how COllins playered

against Utah, LMA would be that good or better…same with Howard.

A third center would be a good thing………but I don’t think Collins really does much.

And in reality, it probably doesn’t matter what WE think….this sure smells like a PA move as opposed to a KP or Nate move.

"I'm a man, but I can change.....if I have to......I guess." - Red Green

by antediluvian on Oct 22, 2009 12:47 PM PDT up reply actions  

aaaaaaahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!

That was me breathing a big sigh of relief! Glad they finally signed LMA!

The Dude: Hey, careful, man, there's a beverage here!

by cavejunctionblazer on Oct 22, 2009 8:25 AM PDT reply actions  

Well, we have our core...

Let’s get it done on the court now!

The Mills thing is somewhat predictable. Another name in ever-growing long list of somewhat undersized zippy PG’s that PA fell in love with, and had to have. I’d love to see him pan out. Actually, I would have loved to see any of them pan out.

Perhaps there’s a 2 or 3 year plan where KP feels he can net an elite PG, and we are signing Mills to keep lean, but with the big $$ that’s going to the big 3 et al, the difficulty netting some bigger-city-glam-level talent (we couldn’t even convince Turkey’s wife to move here), you gotta sense those chances are getting slimmer.

I dunno, I’d just feel a bit more comfy with 1 more emergency true big, even if it’s a Luke Schenscher-ish, Hill-ish, whatever-ish. I know they want/feel that Pendy is going to be that guy, but don’t you think he’s a 4 not a 5? Hmmm…

I guess it’s #15 in the batting order, so we’re probably wasting too much time thinking about it already.

Anyhow, love me some ‘Marcus, and Mills, from all the video I’ve watched seems like a real nice high-character guy, with a decent upside.

Lace ’em up and get in there boys.

by Knobby on Oct 22, 2009 8:30 AM PDT reply actions  

As far as Aldridge goes...

Yep, I agree Dave, clarifying sentence: “Whether this was a good, let alone an ideal, move for the Blazers is a moot point. It was necessary and that’s the end of the story.”

Most Blazer fans I think are simply happy to have Aldridge as a long term Blazer. But really what choice did The Blazers have? Letting the deadline pass, and dealing with Aldridge as a restricted free-agent, after another year of play and development, and perhaps upsetting Aldridge was not really an option.

Unless Aldridge had a horrible season and/or a major injury or health problem, then restricted free agent or not, some team would of come out of woodwork and offered Aldridge at least as much as we are paying him today, probably more.

It’s alright that Vulcan and Paul Allen are more critical of Blazer spending then the Whitsitt S.P.A.M. days, that’s wise, but the other truth is that if the goal is for this team to become a perenial N.B.A. title challenger and/or win a championship then money will have to be spent. The evidence seems to be that the “blank check” days are over but that Paul Allen will spend to keep talent and build a team. What more do you want?

I think too much is immediately being made over the Mills decision. Pro or Con, and with some regrets in regards to Udoka’s and Collins personal situation, that’s life in the N.B.A. when you are a guy fighting for a 15th roster spot.

Oh, and can someone find out where Wojnarowski’s has hidden the “bugs” in One Center Court? Who is this guys contacts? How come he consistently scoops our locals?

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

by Krang on Oct 22, 2009 8:38 AM PDT reply actions  

The last one is from the Agent

the previous ones have been coming out of Denver (as told to Dave)

"And in the end
The love you take
Is equal to the love you make." -The Beatles

by 92wastheyear on Oct 22, 2009 9:58 AM PDT up reply actions  

It's all about Allen

It’s good to be the billionaire owner

by Tiparillo on Oct 22, 2009 8:49 AM PDT reply actions  

Petteri is one sad Finn today :)

"I think he can still play" - Kevin Pritchard on Juwan Howard

by Norsktroll on Oct 22, 2009 9:34 AM PDT reply actions  

Probably irrelevant to Petteri

Mills is a long shot.

I can tell you how to make an Excel spreadsheet that proves Portland wins 62 games this year.

by jscot on Oct 22, 2009 12:01 PM PDT up reply actions  

The core of a championship team

Shake on it:

"Good evening Blazer fans, wherever you may be!"-Bill Schonely

by skywaker9 on Oct 22, 2009 11:17 AM PDT reply actions  

Signing Patty isn't a bad move

Sure, he won’t see court time this year but he’s a cheaper option than either Jarron or Ime. From what I had been hearing in the news prior to the draft, had he not been injured he was a first rounder so the guy has talent. He left after his sophomore year so he’ll need some development time.

by gotissues68 on Oct 22, 2009 11:35 AM PDT reply actions  

Just something to think about...

David West signed a contract for an average of $9 million per season. If you take of your homer glasses, is LaMarcus $4 million per season better than David West? He’s a back-to-back All Star. IMO New Orleans got a good deal, but you certainly can’t say as of right now that the Blazers can say the same thing.

by JasonT on Oct 22, 2009 1:31 PM PDT reply actions  

True, but understandable

West was drafted 18th, much later than LaMarcus, and started out slow. He signed a 5 year extension for $45 million in 2006 that declines in value since he also was significantly older than LaMarcus entering the league.

Someone also asked if you would rather have Bargnani at $50 million or LaMarcus at $65/70 million. I take LaMarcus for his higher ceiling, but that’s just me and I agree it’s a bit too much in order to lock him up long-term.

"I think he can still play" - Kevin Pritchard on Juwan Howard

by Norsktroll on Oct 22, 2009 1:38 PM PDT up reply actions  

Well Deserved

Congratz to LA! He is solid, solid, solid. Would not be surprised if he is an allstar this year and leads the team in scoring, 3rd in rebounds.

As for Mills… Ime &/or Collins would not have seen the floor much anyway, and we are still looking for that pure point guard of the future. Plus it IS the 15th roster spot, might as well take a chance on an unknown commodity when the knowns have already hit their ceiling.

by Jeighdee on Oct 22, 2009 1:34 PM PDT reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

The ultimate coverage and analysis of the Portland Trail Blazers.

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recommended FanPosts

Small
The Blazers Future Regarding Free Agent Signings
Small
Thunderous Manboobies
Img_0878_1__small
Why do we hate LaMarcus Aldridge?
Small
Oregonlive "journalists" 2 new posts...same old drivel
2474796688_7cdc78828f_o_small
Greg Oden Suffers Life-Ending Injury; Gets 3-Year Extension

Recent FanPosts

Small
The Blazers' Future Regarding Trades
Small
WHAT TO DO WITH NIC BATUM BECAUSE WE WILL LOSE HIM IF NOT TRADED.
Small
Trade that helps us out now and the future
Small
How can the All-Star game be more fun and competitive?
Small
Earl Boykins!
Small
LaMarcus Aldridge about to become the 10th highest scorer in Blazers franchise  history
Small
New trade that gets us a new point and a three point shooter
Small
Portland getting.....
Small
The Sun Behind the Clouds: Blazers still on track.

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >

FanShots

Quick hits of video, photos, quotes, chats, links and lists that you find around the web.

Recommended FanShots

It's pretty clear that the season is over already ;)
Double rainbow of sadness:

1) JBay is getting shorter
2) We never got to see him with a mustache

I miss you tiny raptor man.

via The Basketball Jones http://blogs.thescore.com/tbj/2012/02/09/things-of-note-for-february-9-2012/#more-34561
Blazers Broadcasters Mike Barrett and Mike Rice re-enacted NBA referee Scott Foster's controversial goaltending call on Portland Trail Blazers forward LaMarcus Aldridge, who was defending Oklahoma City Thunder All-Star forward Kevin Durant, during this week's edition of Blazers Courtside. Remarkably, no one was injured during the taping of this segment.

Original video of the play here. 
Quotes from the players and coaches here. 
The NBA admitting it got the call wrong here. 
Dave's  extended thoughts here. 
BlazersMakr's FanShot: Major Vegas action on OKC prior to tip here. 
Audio of Chad Doing of 750 AM The Game going HAM on Foster here.

OK, that should just about wrap up the goaltending discussion.

Courtside video via Blazers Broadcasting cameraman John Curry.

-- Ben Golliver | benjamin.golliver@gmail.com | Twitter
In 2008 Tim Donaghy indicated that Scott Foster was a ref that also fixed games
Blazers Owner Paul Allen Ranked No. 3 American Philanthropist In 2011

Recent FanShots

"You Must Be Known For Your Defense, Because You Definitely Stole My Heart"
Bill Simmons: Deron Williams To Dallas 'Is A Lock'
LaMarcus Aldridge Needs Support Around Him
LaMarcus Aldridge Finds Out He's An All-Star With His Teammates
Congratulations to Portland Trail Blazers forward LaMarcus Aldridge, on his first All Star selection.

As seen on www.trailblazers.com
AWoj: Aldridge an All Star
CRAZY stat from Houston game
NBA MVP Rankings... LMA @ #10

+ New FanShot All FanShots >


Editors

Kitten_small Dave

Headshotsmall_small Ben Golliver

Lead Moderators

Getfuzzy-satchel_small Timmay!

Bucky3_small Cablinasian

Authors

Plainlc_small Storyteller

Moderators

Lamb_small T Darkstar

Small douglast

Terryporter_small prezofdeath

Small usmcr3049

Lrg_magpie_small Corvid

Wallpaper_small geoffm