Blazersedge: An SB Nation Community

Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Network Message: 50% Off: CBS/SB Nation Fantasy Baseball

Analysis Simplified: Why KP's Move Was Pretty Darn Smart


I sat up in bed tonight after ruminating on the draft more.  Here's a shorter, simpler explanation of how this all works.

What three things were we saying consistently leading up to the draft?

1.  If you draft a point guard you need someone you're sure of and who can contribute right away.  The team can't afford to spend another first-round pick on a guy that might or might not work.  In many ways a veteran would be better.

2.  If you don't draft a point guard, however, you need to swing for the fences.  Take a risk.  We don't need immediate help at other positions.  In fact we have too many (young) players at most of them.

3.  The eventual percentage move might be to trade out of the first round of this relatively weak draft entirely and save money either for cap flexibility/trade facilitation or to alleviate the specter of the luxury tax if you make a big move later and then re-up Roy and Aldridge.

See, the thing is we were regarding these as mutually exclusive goals.  Thus Lawson was your safe, attainable point guard pick.  A guy like Curry (who is more of a combo guard) or even Blair with his rebounding prowess would be your attempted home run.  You have to choose what you're shooting for.  Getting out of the first round is another choice entirely.

What KP did was manage to combine all three tenets.  He eschewed the strength of this draft--point guard--and it seems apparent that some veteran upgrade is around the corner, either to fill the third point guard spot or improve the starting lineup.  He swung for the fences with the Claver pick (the best international player on Portland's list but a guy who won't develop fully for a couple years) while managing to avoid salary obligations to same until he's actually ready to sign.  We were all thinking in two dimensions.  He was operating in three.

That's why he's the GM and we're all chasing him to catch up.

The only question left in my mind is whether this was really the "A" plan or did the Blazers have other options that either fell through or that they didn't end up liking as well.  Maybe someday we'll know.

--Dave (blazersub@yahoo.com)  

3 recs  |  Comment 419 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Display:

"Maybe someday we'll know."

T’would be nice, but I doubt we ever will.

And if we win a ring in five years, I doubt anyone will care.

by JordanLeDoux on Jun 26, 2009 2:42 AM PDT reply actions   0 recs

I would guess there was another reason we skipped from 24 to 22.

Definitely not just to get Claver. Regardless, I am stoked on Pendy. I think he will go down in history as one of the top 8 players in this draft (a la Boozer). Jut a hunch, but I am psyched to have him.

"The Edge... there is no honest way to explain it because the only people who really know where it is are the ones who have gone over."

by GonzoFan on Jun 26, 2009 2:52 AM PDT reply actions   0 recs

Pendergraph could walk into the practice facility today and school Channing.

I don’t know about one of the top 8 of the draft, but he can definitely contribute to this lineup should we choose to hold onto him.

He could also be attractive to some potential trade partners…

"The brownies,'' Fernandez said after the game. "The brownies are good for me to make three-points.''

- from Quick's Behind the Blazers Locker Room Door, 4/16/09

by ArbyOSU on Jun 26, 2009 9:35 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

That is an amazing thing to say

Without you out there, we're nowhere here

by 22baylor on Jun 26, 2009 11:23 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

"He could also be attractive to some potential trade partners…"

Sure. And then we could trade him to get a back-up PF playing 10 mpg. Oh wait, didn’t we draft a guy like that . . .

by ninjasocks on Jun 26, 2009 12:53 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

From Ben earlier in the week:

He said:

His presence was a reminder of just how far today’s draft workout crop have to go: Frye would ball all of those dudes up. And it wouldn’t be close. It’s been that type of year for pre-draft workouts here in Portland, I guess.

μὴ φοβοῦ, μόνον πίστευε.

Blazersedge.com || New to Blazers' Edge?

by T Darkstar on Jun 26, 2009 3:18 PM PDT up reply actions   2 recs

thank you T

Without you out there, we're nowhere here

by 22baylor on Jun 26, 2009 4:12 PM PDT up reply actions   1 recs

oh so NOw we're taking bens word for it,

but when it came to blakes ripping on oregon live……. /s :p

The Faith don't panic, the faith freaks out, burns out farms, and torchs small villages in the name of The Faith.

"New Man Law: If you don't show up for the draft you don't get to come later if you're picked. If you believe in yourself, show up and sit there. If nobody else believes in you, take it and cry like a man...in front of the cameras."

-Dave

by faith on Jun 27, 2009 12:27 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Thank you

Channing would own these pups

by TrailBlazerChief on Jun 27, 2009 4:15 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

wow..

pendergraph will be a mediocre nba player..

by GreatOden'sRaven on Jun 27, 2009 4:02 PM PDT up reply actions   1 recs

GO TO BED DAVE!

You and Ben have already made 4,312 posts today. Call it a night.

by BlazerTag on Jun 26, 2009 3:04 AM PDT reply actions   0 recs

Seriously.

We need you guys fresh for tomorrow so you can write 100k more posts.

From Russia With Love

by L-TrainFTW! on Jun 26, 2009 3:05 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

We need them to talk a11osu and Norkstroll off the ledge

Those dudes are BUMMED the Blazers didn’t take Dejuan Blair.

by BlazerTag on Jun 26, 2009 3:10 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

It's just that I've been spoiled in the recent past

In the last three years KP has agreed with my exact draft preference between player and pick on 7 out of his 9 first round draft choices (I wanted LMA, Roy, Sergio, Oden, Rudy, Bayless and Batum where they were taken).

I thought we shared almost identical player preferences. I really like Claver (and would’ve taken him #31), but I certainly wouldn’t have taken him over Blair. The Pendergraph and Cunningham picks are much worse, as I don’t think they’re NBA Championship quality players even as depth.

Before Xmas I started the Blair to Portland movement because I thought it was just too perfect of a match not to happen. After watching the draft unfold today, on three separate occasions it went from what would’ve been a perfect night (Blair and Claver) to disappointment. Early on in the day I thought we’d pick Claver at #31 because I remembered hearing that he wanted to be taken in the 2nd round, which is why I was even more bummed when we got him at #22. I thought we ruined the value of our #31 pick and our #22 pick in one fell swoop. Of course as it turns out Blair remained, and listening to a power forwards name being called twice in three picks and neither time being DeJuan Blair’s, made it all the worse.

I don’t need talked down from the ledge though. This team is the one that most resembles a team I would build, as there is in the league. I still think that even without upgrading much Championships are in the future, and with a great move or two, a dynasty could be in the works.

Blair is still my favorite player from this draft though (Rubio a close second), and it’ll kill me watching the Spurs all year long knowing he could have been on this team, helping us set a new standard for team rebounding excellence, and bringing a toughness few players on this team currently possess.

by as11osu on Jun 26, 2009 4:09 AM PDT up reply actions   1 recs

Agreed

I agree. It bothers me that Nate said Blair wasn’t on their draft board, not because they weren’t interested in him, but rather because they didn’t think he would be available. I sure hope that was just a PC way of saying the Blazers weren’t interested. If KP and company thought he was an inferior player, a poor fit, or feared his knees too greatly, that’s fine. If, on the other hand, we simply neglected to draft him at 33 simply because we hadn’t considered him, based on an erroneous belief that he would be gone earlier, then I’m shocked.

I realize we’re simply talking about back-ups here, but a back-up 4 with his rebounding skills could really benefit our trigger-happy second unit.

Oh well, I’m sure KP knows what he’s doing.

by DC Blazer on Jun 26, 2009 6:40 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Well said. KP strategic brilliance continues to shine

KP has drafted Sergio, Rudy, Freeland, Koponen, Batum, , and now Claver with these types of picks. Two of these guys, Rudy and Batum, make KP look like a genius. Sergio was a serviceable back-up. The jury is still out on Freeland, Koponen, and now Claver. If even one of those three turns into a starter, or a top reserve, KP’s batting average is 50%. Batting .500 will get you into the Hall of Fame. Given that most of these picks were purchased, this is a simple repeatable strategy that can be used to restock the cupboard for years to come.

The trick is in being able to accurately identify young, foreign talent. You can draft guys other teams will skip because they need help immediately and can’t afford the risk of a guy choosing to stay in Europe. We already have good depth, we can afford to take a few risks.

by upper left corner on Jun 26, 2009 7:21 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

The trick is

making sure the rest of the GM’s in the league don’t figure this one out for themselves. Always slow to come around, we probably can rely on this method a couple more…. decades.

by as11osu on Jun 26, 2009 7:27 AM PDT up reply actions   2 recs

LOL

Hillarious.

Yeah, there are a few sly dogs out there, but most of them are way beyond learning new tricks.

I know less than half of you half as well as I should like, and I like less than half of you half as well as you deserve.

by haildablazer on Jun 26, 2009 9:23 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Minny's GM went with the

draft-every-PG-and-hope-one-succeeds-theory. Good luck with that.

Rubio: “Uh yeah…it seems like I can’t get a buyout so I’ll just stay in Europe until global warming hits Minneapolis…I mean until I’m ready. Sorry ’bout that.”

by torsoheap on Jun 26, 2009 10:56 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Chad Ford said the Blazers were very interested in taking Blair

Nate said the Blazers weren’t interested in Blair at all. That sounds like a red-flag, to me

I’m beginning to wonder if Ford gets the grist for his rumor mill from Blazersedge

by two4larue on Jun 26, 2009 8:25 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

And Ford is accurate?

Seems to me, RC Buford may have played a role in emphasizing Blair’s knee issues. He did a similar job with Batum’s heart problems last year, but KP moved up to take Nic, anyway

Givony and Ford (etc) heard that Portland was high on Blair from “someone” and reported it. COuld be a snow job from KP but maybe the “experts” are just repeating what bloggers are saying

Regardless, Blair is in San Antonio. And we’ll all be monitoring his progress over the next few years

by two4larue on Jun 26, 2009 9:06 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

The MRI taken and evaluated by every team was not rumor

He was clearly red-flagged across the league. SA judged his risk to be worth it at 37 compared with the remaining players and their needs. You simply do not know what SA would have done with 22 or 31 or 33 because they did not have those picks.

The Blazers did have those picks because they acquired them (or kept them). They clearly picked the players who are best for Portland at the time of those picks.

by lee3022 on Jun 27, 2009 11:34 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

did KP ever say Blair wasn't on the board?

or was it just Nate saying that? My thought was maybe Nate wanted him but KP didn’t. And Nate’s none too happy about it, but you can’t be all…“Our GM is wrong, and we shoulda taken him” so he’s playing it like they never really considered him.

by pdxlifer on Jun 26, 2009 9:29 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Pretty safe to say Nate is not unhappy about Blair.

He doesn’t want anymore rookies. Draft-n-stashing Claver cleears up both aroster spot and cap room to get nate what he really wants – a veteran.

"The Edge... there is no honest way to explain it because the only people who really know where it is are the ones who have gone over."

by GonzoFan on Jun 28, 2009 1:37 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I'm curious

as to why Portland didn’t even at 33.

I did read that he has no ACL’s, but that didn’t seem to slow him down in college. As a second round pick, you can play him until his legs fall off and call that “good value” for the pick.

by torsoheap on Jun 26, 2009 10:58 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I went without and ACL for about three months

There’s no way a knee can function properly for an extended period of time without an ACL. Eventually, it’s going to explode, like mine did. ACL replacement surgery is one of the very worst knee operations there are. It takes A LONG time to recover to the point of activity. It took me at least three years before I had full confidence in my knee. I wasn’t playing basketball.

I'm a really really ridiculously good looking orange mocha frappaccino drinking manhammer sandwich

by hobobob on Jun 26, 2009 11:52 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Wait, he REALLY has no ACLs?

How is that possible?

That is crazy.

That weight, the knee problems, maybe it is as simple as that. It seemed TOO simple to me, but no ACLs?

Morty

by Mortimer on Jun 26, 2009 12:08 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

He has no ACLs

Hines Ward doesn’t have ACLs, neither does Roberto Garza of the Chicago Bears.

I think people were wary about how he dropped 40 pounds before the draft, to me it showed commitment. Whatever, the Spurs will enjoy having a Paul Milsap clone backup Tim Duncan.

The Chicago Bulls.....the more profitable Los Angeles Clippers.

by Ozzie Montana on Jun 26, 2009 12:13 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

The weight loss thing is a judgement call to me

Either it shows commitment, or the guy was doing it because he had to and the core problem behind the overweightness still remains.

I liked Blair a lot, so I ain’t anti-Blair at all, but no ACL’s for such a big dude is a big deal. I dunno who Hines Ward or Roberto Garza are.

I’m more just curious about the reason he fell so hard and far. If it’s “just” the knees, well, then it’s just that. A lot of teams that could really use a Blair type more than we do passed him up, so I’m hoping the story comes out over the next few weeks.

Mortimer

by Mortimer on Jun 26, 2009 12:19 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

No ACLs is a HUGE deal for a player

they wither and die once their torn. You can operate without as long as the muscles surround your knees hold the joint in place. The ACL is the primary tendon hold the knee in place. Without it, the knee will get loose and slide, eventually deteriorating all the cartilage in a knee. I wouldn’t touch a player with no ACLs.

That said, I was only responding to the comment above. I have no idea whether that’s true

I'm a really really ridiculously good looking orange mocha frappaccino drinking manhammer sandwich

by hobobob on Jun 26, 2009 12:25 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

But the problem becomes

You’ve come to rely on a guy who could be gone (more realistically than other players) at any moment, on any play, because he has no ACL.

Yeah, he’d likely be good in the meantime, you come to rely on that and expect it, and then it’s gone because he was a known risk.

I don’t think having a guy who is likely to have a career ending injury in an important role is the best idea.

Mortimer

by Mortimer on Jun 26, 2009 2:01 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

And you lose those minutes

that you could have used developing a different player.

by ninjasocks on Jun 26, 2009 2:45 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I agree, surprised this point isn't discussed

Say we had drafted Blair at 33 along with ‘graph, and they’re both okay, but Blair’s better so he gets the 10-12 mpg off the bench in the first year, and Pendergraph sits on the inactive list. Then, 10 games into the next season, someone rolls into Blair’s knee and he has career ending surgery, and we’re left with Pendergraph on the back end of a two year deal and who knows what to expect from him?

If doctors were really of the mind that it’s only a case of “when” and not “if”, why not roll with the guy who could potentially help us long term rather than give us a year or two and just end up where we were before.

For a team like SA, this isn’t an issue. They need to completely rebuild their team in two years anyways, so if Blair can only give them one or two years, no big deal. They’re restructuring anyways.

by Royster on Jun 26, 2009 2:45 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I should add I'd be totally fine if we drafted him, and risked it

BUT, it’s a big risk it seems, since you don’t even need someone to roll into his knee or some other freak accident. It could go at ANY time.

And if the risk is as big as it seems, I can understand wanting someone where you don’t gotta worry about it.

Mortimer

by Mortimer on Jun 26, 2009 3:08 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I agree, I was mildly disappointed we didn't take him

but some of these reactions about it are just over the top with these implicit guarantees that he’s going to be some sort of super Millsap. In the end, we’re still talking about a guy we’re looking for like 10 mpg from.

As far as knee issues, remember how Powe dropped because of concerns about his knees, and then everyone hailed him as an incredible pick? And then, shockingly, within three years, he has an ACL injury and who knows how he’ll come back.

by Royster on Jun 26, 2009 3:14 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I was on the verge of going pro snowboarding when I did mine

I tore the ACL snowboarding, but kept going for most of the season. It withered and went away. You couldn’t see any ACL in the MRI.

One day, I was walking down a hill, my knee gave out and trapped my medial meniscus in the joint. I had ZERO mobility with that knee. The docs tried to straighten it before the surgery, but even when two people put all their weight on it, no motion.

I had HUGE legs at the time too. Enormous. They were ridiculously strong. The doc wanted to do the surgery right away but I held off. Wish I’d listened.

I'm a really really ridiculously good looking orange mocha frappaccino drinking manhammer sandwich

by hobobob on Jun 26, 2009 3:22 PM PDT up reply actions   1 recs

How long ago did he say

that he tore his ACL’s? I thought I remembered in one of his interviews that it was in high school. Should something have been done then?

To summarize: Wade too quick, Kobe too skilled, LeBron too physical - Batum

by Ltlgto on Jun 26, 2009 3:42 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Sometimes for young people it's decided to not do the surgery

There is also ligament replacement surgery, using some fibers from the hamstring or patella. Or artificial material. I know a snowboard pro who had that done, and after a year he felt better in the surgically repaired knee than in the other one.

Of course it’s a red flag, and probably a team wouldn’t like that a players they want to start (which he wouldn’t have to on the Blazers) has quasi a built-in risk to miss a season after such a surgery. But it’s not impossible to do sports at a high level until without ACLs or with replaced ACLs until then. To my knowledge e.g. pro skier Bode Miller had microfracture and ACL surgery on one or both knees, with impacts that far exceed what you get on the court.

by Norsktroll on Jun 26, 2009 5:31 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Appreciate your personal take of this

(and sad that you had to endure that).

by lee3022 on Jun 27, 2009 11:39 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I'd still rather have the PF depth

It’s better to have two good young big men (Blair, Pend)

Then just Pend, and a ’tweener like Cunningham

You can never have too many hard fouls and bangers, come playoff time

by two4larue on Jun 26, 2009 4:04 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

He could easily play longer than two years with two ACL replacements

but average revasculation time is somewhere around nine months. Any GM with a conscience would force him to have the surgery before playing him extensive minutes. Simultaneous ACL repairs would be devastating to the health of the player otherwise. It’ll take a toll on the parts of his body that compensate for the weakness.

He’d likely develop new problems after the surgery, but even if he didn’t, it’d prolly take a few years before he’s back in the shape he is now. Microfracture is easier to recover from than two ACL replacements. These are MAJOR surgeries. Even if he gets the new ACLs from a cadaver, it’s going to be tremendously painful and take a long, long time to recover.

One more thing, this is someone’s life we’re talking about here. Encouraging someone to play basketball without ACLs after their youth (when recovery is much easier) is disgusting. The way you assume that he’d be good for two year, and talk about it callously remarks on your character. There’s more to life than basketball and dollars and the Blazers winning. The health of any human should be put ahead of whether the Blazers win or not.

I'm a really really ridiculously good looking orange mocha frappaccino drinking manhammer sandwich

by hobobob on Jun 26, 2009 3:18 PM PDT up reply actions   1 recs

Didn't KP already say he wouldn't do something like that with Darius?
“I didn’t want it on my conscience – that I had a kid have to go through a knee replacement surgery.

…I’m the kind of GM (that) I wouldn’t want that on my head that he ever had to have knee replacement."-Kevin Pritchard

by Nick Van Excellent on Jun 26, 2009 5:41 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Blair's a PF, not a C

he’ll either start alongside Duncan, or backup whatever PF starts alongside Duncan

;-)

How did you guys win that?
"We scored enough points. We scored 107, they scored 105.
-Nate McMillan Postgame, 3/4/2009

by douglast on Jun 26, 2009 2:45 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I don’t know, this dang all-star ballot here says that Timmay boy is a PF. It’s from that National Basketball Association thing so it must be true, right? ;-)

by danielfarrell on Jun 26, 2009 7:59 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

TD plays Center on his team mostly

They list him at PF on the allstar ballot because they know Yao is gonna get starting Center on the allstar team every year from the Chinese vote.

by We-B-Dunkin on Jun 27, 2009 8:39 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

It's not just that

but he’s a 6’7" projected power forward in the new NBA. That’s not a recipe for success in most cases. Could Blair overcome that with his awesome rebounding? Sure. But that doesn’t change the fact that he’d be overcoming a disadvantage. It’s not like this guy was a lock. Most other teams passed on him as well.

—Dave

by Dave on Jun 26, 2009 12:59 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Millsap and Bass have been really good.

by Cablinasian on Jun 26, 2009 1:12 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

millsap has been pretty good, bass is decent

Truth never was or can be propagated by fire and sword - Albert Gallatin

by Zaron5551 on Jun 26, 2009 2:40 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

as backup power forwards, they are excellent.

by Cablinasian on Jun 26, 2009 2:43 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Agree with that

+1

To summarize: Wade too quick, Kobe too skilled, LeBron too physical - Batum

by Ltlgto on Jun 26, 2009 3:42 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Word up

The Blazers have made it a habit of going with size whenever possible. Show me an undersided player on the team.

by Gfactor34 on Jun 26, 2009 11:53 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

i hate to use the lakers as the example, but they demonstrate it the best length wins in the NBA and they are without a doubt one of the longest teams in the association

by polo12354 on Jun 27, 2009 3:27 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

His standing reach and wingspan are more important than his actual height

Milsap, Bass, Landry, Powe, Maxiell. How many examples of “small” backup power forwards are there that prove you don’t have to be 6’11 and look like a giraffe to be a successful rebounder. It certainly never hurt Dennis Rodman or Charles Barkley being undersized for their position.

The Chicago Bulls.....the more profitable Los Angeles Clippers.

by Ozzie Montana on Jun 27, 2009 8:56 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Maybe they didn't want it on their conscience

If he has no ACLs maybe they didn’t feel “playing him until his legs fell off” was doing him any favors.

by senormateo on Jun 26, 2009 12:12 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

It's up to Blair

to determine what to do with his body. Darius is playing on bum knees and possibly risking future mobility.

by torsoheap on Jun 26, 2009 1:16 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

That's because he's living in a weed-induced haze that clouds his better judgement

wait, on second thought I don’t think he had better judgement… nm

Blazers win!

by The X-man on Jun 26, 2009 1:17 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

He's barely played

and is getting paid a hell of a lot more money for it. For a few Mil. $’s I could toast my knees and live pretty well later

To summarize: Wade too quick, Kobe too skilled, LeBron too physical - Batum

by Ltlgto on Jun 26, 2009 3:45 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Don't underestimate how good Mills is and will be

This guy proved at the Olympics that he is ready to contribute (20 points against CP3 — check Paul’s comments post game). He might not have the hyped name of some of the other top school studs, but he will be a player and KP knows this.

"You've been warned...!"
A Stern Warning : http://www.asternwarning.com

by mookie on Jun 26, 2009 3:08 AM PDT reply actions   2 recs

Regardless, even if she gets a nice new stick house, he can probably trade her some cigs for it when her rent goes up.

"The brownies,'' Fernandez said after the game. "The brownies are good for me to make three-points.''

- from Quick's Behind the Blazers Locker Room Door, 4/16/09

by ArbyOSU on Jun 26, 2009 9:39 AM PDT up reply actions   2 recs

So much over-thinking about this draft.

1. We moved from 24 to 22 because it was a no-brainer opportunity. It cost us nothing except low 2nd round picks (you can always buy more if you want them for some reason). There was no reason to suspect a grand plan for the 22 pick, just a chance someone might be available at 22 that wouldn’t be at 24.

2. No one in this draft would be a starter for the Blazers next year, so there was no reason to try to trade up into the high picks.

3. At 22 there was no one left in the draft that would help us that we couldn’t get at 31, so we drafted the best Euro we could stash for a couple of years. Standard operating procedure. No reason to suspect it is part of some other deal later.

4. We moved up to 31 in the 2nd round because KP must have worried that Pendergraph might be taken at 31 or 32. The surprise to many Blazer fans was just how little Sergio’s trade value turned out to be. I’ll bet it was quite a surprise to him too!

5. We passed on Blair because KP thought Cunningham had a better chance to succeed. GM’s usually know more about players than fans.

6. KP thought Mills was the best available player at 55, so we took him. He will probably never wear a Blazer uniform except in the summer league.

What’s so complicated about any of this? I guess it’s been so long that many have forgotten what it’s like to be a relatively high playoff team in the draft.

by BlazerFanSince1970 on Jun 26, 2009 4:15 AM PDT reply actions   0 recs

It’s a luxury to be picking so late. We should enjoy it.

Rudyculize: The act of Rudy making others look slow, dim and generally oafish.
http://www.myspace.com/y5k

by Y5k on Jun 26, 2009 4:24 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

We passed on Blair because KP thought Cunningham had a better chance to succeed. GM’s usually know more about players than fans

RC Buford picked Blair at 38. Does KP know more about players than RC?

we drafted the best Euro we could stash for a couple of years. Standard operating procedure. No reason to suspect it is part of some other deal later.

Doesn’t mean Claver won’t be dealt next week, either.

You’ve been a Blazer fan since ’70? You sure have a lot of faith in this front office, as compared to the performance of previous regimes.

I guess it’s been so long that many have forgotten what it’s like to be a relatively high playoff team in the draft.


Not that long ago. And after the team falls short for 30+ years, the expectations on the front office should be racheted up when the team reaches 54 wins and drops another first round playoff series

by two4larue on Jun 26, 2009 9:20 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

that last sentence

should not have been included in the quote

by two4larue on Jun 26, 2009 9:21 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

RC Buford picked Blair at 38

because he obviously thought that Blair was the best player available at 38.

Would that also have been the case if RC Buford had the opportunity to select at 22? 31? 33? We’ll never know, of course. But if Buford had had the opportunity to select Blair earlier and passed… well, he’d undoubtedly be scorned just another cretinous GM instead of the shining genius who had the great good sense not have any picks earlier than 38 in this year’s draft.

by knickfan on Jun 26, 2009 9:40 AM PDT up reply actions   2 recs

Mmmmm

If the Spurs were willing to use the 38th pick on Blair, I highly doubt having the opportunity to take Sergio lLull, DaJuan Summers, or Sam Young would have prevented him from doing so.

by PoliSam on Jun 26, 2009 10:49 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

But he might have been willing to use

22, 31, or 33 on Claver, Pendergraph and Cunningha.. The point was, he never had a shot at those guys, so we’ll never know for sure.

by Royster on Jun 26, 2009 11:30 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I got the point. obviously we'll never know...

but I doubt he’d have passed on Blair at 33.

by PoliSam on Jun 26, 2009 12:33 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

RC Buford may be a good GM, but he isn't right all the time

He traded Scola to the Rockets (in the division) for a 2nd-rounder. Later in the season, Popovich was complaining about it. That seems like a pretty bad move to me.

by ninjasocks on Jun 26, 2009 12:57 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

nobody makes the right move all of the time

but Buford has an excellent long term track record…. 7-2 off-suit wins sometimes in poker, but that doesn’t make it a good hand to play.

by PoliSam on Jun 26, 2009 1:03 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Implied odds are good with that hand.

Knowing how to play that hand will win you more money than rockets.

I'm a really really ridiculously good looking orange mocha frappaccino drinking manhammer sandwich

by hobobob on Jun 26, 2009 8:24 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I think a lot of us have faith in this front office

because they’re doing it right.

"Fernandez, to my eyes, is the Blazer who walks that walk most comfortably. A lot of Portland's fans (egged on, dare I say, by their local broadcasters) lament things like how Ron Artest or Yao Ming get to hit Brandon Roy's arms.

But I suspect Fernandez sees all that and thinks: We get to hit arms! Cool!"

http://myespn.go.com/blogs/truehoop/0-39-135/On-Playoff-Experience.html

by ratbastird on Jun 26, 2009 10:13 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

trust, but verify

I need confirmation. Not daily, not weekly, but at least season to season. The Houston series exposed some holes in KP’s roster that could’ve been addressed at the trading deadline, but weren’t.

Fine.

He has the draft and FA period to shore up these holes. If we come out of July with the roster at status quo will your faith be unwavering?

Much depends on which trade he makes or which FA he signs before the cap-space is eaten up by LTCs for Roy/LMA. If KP makes a signficant addition to the roster I’ll be behind him. If he does nothing or adds a questionable player via trade or FA I’ll pan his decision-making.

Blazer fans have the reputation as being savvy, so we shouldn’t just sit back and accept whatever moves the front office makes and say “they know what they’re doing, we don’t”

That’s how “Bowie instead of Jordan” drafts keep getting justified, years later

by two4larue on Jun 26, 2009 10:24 AM PDT up reply actions   1 recs

Verification season to season

would seem to hinge around whether they meet their goals. It’s impossible to notice that KP’s not failed to assemble a team each year that achieved its goal. That should warrant a great deal of credibility and earn our trust. The time for verification, even by your standards, is at the end of next season.

Not sure why, but I strongly suspect our biggest hole in the playoffs was inexperience and nervousness. That first game was an egg, an obvious result of inexperience. Our players growing will address this much more than the draft and FA acquisitions.

As observers, we need to identify the factors of success and the area of improvement through a shifting lens. I cannot stress enough that the moves made by SA, ORL and CLE were all done through positions much more stringent and inflexible than ours is now. Those examples should prove that we have much more time to move than yesterday, or this summer. This draft is consolidation and preparation, not a championship game.

I'm a really really ridiculously good looking orange mocha frappaccino drinking manhammer sandwich

by hobobob on Jun 26, 2009 12:02 PM PDT up reply actions   2 recs

If we stay put, will i be fine?

yes.

I’m not a person who’s frustrated by the blazers performance. Young players get better. I’ll be frustrated if the young talent does NOT get better. I’m not a person down on blake as I see him as an excellent point guard. he has holes, but he has self awareness as to what those holes are and plays within himself.

I see bayless becoming a much larger part. I see aldridge continuing his end of season improvement. I see webster coming back and making an impact. I see Rudy improving and even Roy improving. I see Oden being a force.

I think some tinkering needs to take place, but I’m not over eager to see it happen that I sacrifice a lot. This team has the majority of pieces it needs. Experience and freezing up killed the blazers. I think that’ll change next year because this team is a hungry bunch.

I don’t just accept any moves. There are moves that I’ve heard rumors about that I’d be ticked if we’d done them. I have no problem with the lack of moves so far. We could get players x, y, and Z, but I just don’t feel we need them if we they’re not a decent price.

"Fernandez, to my eyes, is the Blazer who walks that walk most comfortably. A lot of Portland's fans (egged on, dare I say, by their local broadcasters) lament things like how Ron Artest or Yao Ming get to hit Brandon Roy's arms.

But I suspect Fernandez sees all that and thinks: We get to hit arms! Cool!"

http://myespn.go.com/blogs/truehoop/0-39-135/On-Playoff-Experience.html

by ratbastird on Jun 26, 2009 12:13 PM PDT up reply actions   1 recs

I hear ya on this

It surprise me how alarmist people are getting while other teams trade for aged vets. Many forget what our strengths are.

I'm a really really ridiculously good looking orange mocha frappaccino drinking manhammer sandwich

by hobobob on Jun 26, 2009 12:21 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Yes.

Unwavering faith in any human doesn’t make much sense. Trusting he knows what he’s doing but still analyzing the process and results is very reasonable. It doesn’t make us any less of fans.

by Free Bayless on Jun 26, 2009 12:52 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

"RC Buford picked Blair at 38 [37]. Does KP know more about players than RC?"

Maybe, maybe not. But who’s to say that KP wouldn’t have picked Blair at 37 (or even 33) if Cunningham was gone? Who’s to say the Spurs wouldn’t have picked Cunningham at 33? We will never know those things. All we know is that KP liked Cunningham more than Blair at 33.

You’ve been a Blazer fan since ’70? You sure have a lot of faith in this front office, as compared to the performance of previous regimes.

Actually, I thought KP should have taken Blair at 33. I’d have been happy to get one decent backup PF from the draft, and I think that would have been more likely with Pendergraph and Blair. But it was a gutsy pick to take Cunningham (I made a post about that in another thread). It would have been easy and safer (job-wise) to take Blair at 33. Having already drafted Claver for stashing or trade, and drafted Pendergraph as a contender (vs Blair) for backup PF, no one would have criticized KP if Blair’s knees failed after a year or two, or Blair simply washed out due to his size (lack of height or potentially expanding girth). But that wasn’t my point above. KP simply thought Cunningham was a better pick, and went with his conviction.

Yes, I have been watching the Blazers since 1970. I went to nearly every home game for over 30 years starting on day 1 of the Blazers. (My seats were between 11 and 14 rows off the floor in the MC and RG, and I enjoyed “discussing” the game with the refs, which was especially easy and audible in MC.) I don’t claim that gives me any special talent at knowing what the Blazers should do, but I have lived through it all over the years (including Larue of course).

I think the jury is still out on KP. No question Roy and LA were great moves, but ultimately KP will be remembered for the Oden vs Durant pick if Oden should disappoint, and we probably won’t know how that turned out for a couple more years.

by BlazerFanSince1970 on Jun 26, 2009 12:17 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Well....in our mock draft on Tuesday

we (the collective Blazer GM) voted to trade out of the first round.

As we saw last night, there wasn’t a lot of value placed on trading draft picks….so KP went one better and did the Eurostash. That’s why he’s KP and we’re here. He thinks this through at another level.

by antediluvian on Jun 26, 2009 4:49 AM PDT reply actions   0 recs

Let's not put the cart before the horse

It is impossible to say that KP was “smart” during this draft. We will not know how “smart” he was until a few years from now when we find out exactly what Claver is all about. Our second round picks were good picks but not “smart” picks. They were simply the best players available at a need position. End of story.

by swg777 on Jun 26, 2009 6:21 AM PDT reply actions   0 recs

Doesn't BPA make for a smart pick?

Would not the best player available be a smarter pick? See the hole in your logic?

Agreed about not knowing for a while. We also won’t know anything about the other picks for a while. Whether it was a good move or bad move will be decided years from now, not tomorrow.

I'm a really really ridiculously good looking orange mocha frappaccino drinking manhammer sandwich

by hobobob on Jun 26, 2009 12:04 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Uh...no....

BPA is a pretty common strategy. Most teams employ it, though the perpetually bad teams certainly don’t. Therefore, common thinking isn’t necessarily smart. Therefore no hole in the logic

by swg777 on Jun 26, 2009 3:54 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Commonality precludes smart?

I'm a really really ridiculously good looking orange mocha frappaccino drinking manhammer sandwich

by hobobob on Jun 26, 2009 7:53 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

To be clear

I think many teams do that because it is smart. You kind of make the case by saying " Most teams employ it, though the perpetually bad teams certainly don’t." Does this make sense?

I'm a really really ridiculously good looking orange mocha frappaccino drinking manhammer sandwich

by hobobob on Jun 26, 2009 7:56 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Um....

99% of the time, “smart” is used as a comparitive word, is it not?

by swg777 on Jun 27, 2009 2:59 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

We should judge with what we know now,

not what we learn in several years. Just because someone turns out to be good in several years doesn’t make the decision now wrong. KP should be judged on what is known today. Just because Blazer X suffers an injury and draftee Y would have filled the hole doesn’t mean that the draft was screwed up because KP didn’t select the draftee.

I think KP accomplished the team’s goals in a very efficient way.

www.sumnerlawpc.com
www.CenterForVetRights.com

by NoGame on Jun 27, 2009 7:54 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Quit making sense.

I agree. I think this was a “less is more” kind’ve draft, and I’m OK with that. It’s hard to follow the past few drafts, what with all of the trades, high picks and all of that stuff. Anyway, I can deal with this. We should all be able to deal with this.

"The brownies,'' Fernandez said after the game. "The brownies are good for me to make three-points.''

- from Quick's Behind the Blazers Locker Room Door, 4/16/09

by ArbyOSU on Jun 26, 2009 11:33 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I'd like to add

I listened to KP at the news conference and he brought up doctors out of the blue. Basically it sounded like there may have been people turned down due to concerns by the doctors. If your favorite player was passed on, that could be part of the reason that took place.

Just tossing that out there, because it sure seemed like KP did.

"Fernandez, to my eyes, is the Blazer who walks that walk most comfortably. A lot of Portland's fans (egged on, dare I say, by their local broadcasters) lament things like how Ron Artest or Yao Ming get to hit Brandon Roy's arms.

But I suspect Fernandez sees all that and thinks: We get to hit arms! Cool!"

http://myespn.go.com/blogs/truehoop/0-39-135/On-Playoff-Experience.html

by ratbastird on Jun 26, 2009 12:15 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I, personally,

wouldn’t pick a dude without ACL’s to play professional basketball.

by torsoheap on Jun 26, 2009 1:21 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I wouldn't either

Kinda threw up red flags in my mind once I heard that

Blazers win!

by The X-man on Jun 26, 2009 1:23 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I actually JUST read that

up above. I don’t know if it wasn’t there before or I missed it. Either way, I’d guess the blazer doctors and the blazers agree with you.

"Fernandez, to my eyes, is the Blazer who walks that walk most comfortably. A lot of Portland's fans (egged on, dare I say, by their local broadcasters) lament things like how Ron Artest or Yao Ming get to hit Brandon Roy's arms.

But I suspect Fernandez sees all that and thinks: We get to hit arms! Cool!"

http://myespn.go.com/blogs/truehoop/0-39-135/On-Playoff-Experience.html

by ratbastird on Jun 26, 2009 2:44 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I hope this isn't a rumor I helped create

I’m just going off what I read here

I'm a really really ridiculously good looking orange mocha frappaccino drinking manhammer sandwich

by hobobob on Jun 26, 2009 7:53 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

All i have to say to that is "Yep."

Rudyculize: The act of Rudy making others look slow, dim and generally oafish.
http://www.myspace.com/y5k

by Y5k on Jun 26, 2009 5:47 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I guess the notion that's hard to swallow

Is the apparent implication that either Pendergraph or Cunningham > Blair, since we drafted the former and passed on the latter. With all due respect, I haven’t heard any convincing explanations why. The two explanations I have heard are:

1. 30 GMs can’t be wrong/are less likely to be wrong than any number of non-professionals, and injuries/lack of size/weight problems were sufficient to scare them away until the Spurs bit.
2. The management team literally blinded themselves and methodologically omitted Blair from consideration.

Has anyone advanced another notion? Anyone find either of these explanations as dubious as me?

Honor Alaa Abdelnaby.
First in the NBA. At least alphabetically

by OhOhOden on Jun 26, 2009 7:00 AM PDT reply actions   0 recs

Size, speed, weight, knees

Both of the guys selected were longer, leaner, faster, and just as strong. Neither had medical issues. I’m not saying that Blair might not turn-out to be a better player, I am saying that it is not crazy to think that the guys selected may be a better fit.

I trust KP, he has a proven track record as an evaluator of talent. He may be wrong in this instance, but based on his record over the last three years, I wouldn’t bet on it. He knows a lot more than I do, and more than any BEdge poster.

by upper left corner on Jun 26, 2009 7:28 AM PDT up reply actions   1 recs

Except that KPs posts here

in which case the universe explodes given this statement, “He [KP] knows a lot more than I do, and more than any BEdge poster.”

I'm a really really ridiculously good looking orange mocha frappaccino drinking manhammer sandwich

by hobobob on Jun 26, 2009 12:36 PM PDT up reply actions   1 recs

He reads here

I’d be surprised if he still actually posted directly. I imagine there would be legal ramifications for doing so if his identity was discovered. (depending on what he posted).

The thought that he might have someone else post inklings and check reactions seems feasible though.

"Fernandez, to my eyes, is the Blazer who walks that walk most comfortably. A lot of Portland's fans (egged on, dare I say, by their local broadcasters) lament things like how Ron Artest or Yao Ming get to hit Brandon Roy's arms.

But I suspect Fernandez sees all that and thinks: We get to hit arms! Cool!"

http://myespn.go.com/blogs/truehoop/0-39-135/On-Playoff-Experience.html

by ratbastird on Jun 26, 2009 2:46 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

i had exactly the "inklings" thought you described

in the Jose Calderon thread below. Seems like someone floating an idea to gauge reaction. Just for fun, mind you as I HIGHLY doubt KP would lean on the fan base for advice. By definition, the word “fan(atic)” describes someone who is irrational.

by eets on Jun 26, 2009 3:00 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Who knows? That's kind of the fun of it. Ya just never know.

He said he has before, and that’s enough for me to guess he still does. I’m sure you’re right though.

I'm a really really ridiculously good looking orange mocha frappaccino drinking manhammer sandwich

by hobobob on Jun 26, 2009 3:24 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I bet if he DOES read it

It’s just the front page, Dave/Ben stuff.

If he went into comments more than once or twice, I’d be surprised.

M.

by Mortimer on Jun 26, 2009 3:41 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

For the most part

Sergio-thread notwithstanding, BEdgers are pretty reasonable for fanatics. He probably read the comments a bit here and there. Especially Mortimer, Norsk, Storyteller, AK, and the other really smart ones…I wouldn’t doubt if they came up with a few scenarios he hasn’t thought of before (but would never admit that’s where they came from).

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

by jamon51 on Jun 26, 2009 5:22 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

What about the smart ass ones

like Tom and myself…..are you saying that KP doesn’t have a sense of humor???? Thems fightin’ words

"You're welcome friend
I love you."
- Tom "Dragline" inHawaii

by 92wastheyear on Jun 27, 2009 10:11 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

How about?

Both of the players taken can play multiple positions. Pendergraph is big enough to play center in a pinch? Injuries happen.

by kaizzer on Jun 26, 2009 8:08 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

That's a good point

and definitely something the blazers value.

"Fernandez, to my eyes, is the Blazer who walks that walk most comfortably. A lot of Portland's fans (egged on, dare I say, by their local broadcasters) lament things like how Ron Artest or Yao Ming get to hit Brandon Roy's arms.

But I suspect Fernandez sees all that and thinks: We get to hit arms! Cool!"

http://myespn.go.com/blogs/truehoop/0-39-135/On-Playoff-Experience.html

by ratbastird on Jun 26, 2009 10:28 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Anyone find either of these explanations as dubious as me?

Of course, Blair’s value/potential was confirmed when Buford picked him at 38.

If the Clippers (etc) GM had picked DeJuan later in the round, then KP’s decision to red-flag him might be more justifiable.

by two4larue on Jun 26, 2009 9:41 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

RC

might still trade him to the clips

by DucRider on Jun 26, 2009 11:56 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Or the Rockets

They’ve had a good track record with PFs they get from the Spurs.

by ninjasocks on Jun 26, 2009 12:59 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

What?

Buford picking him doesn’t validate anything unless by the same token, we let KPs picks make validations. Aside from that it’s an illogical conclusion based on the fact that a rejection of KPs must also have taken place. That didn’t happen so there’s not scenario under which Buford’s could validate Blair logically speaking. However, if you’d like to throw out the rules of logic, that makes total sense.

I'm a really really ridiculously good looking orange mocha frappaccino drinking manhammer sandwich

by hobobob on Jun 26, 2009 12:39 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

the comment

“he wasn’t on our draft board. We didn’t think he’d go that low” really raised an eyebrow. Then again, so much gamesmanship and bluffing takes place right now, that I really can’t pay too much attention to it. For KP and team to not have a plan for him or re-evaluate just seems ludicrous if they were actually interested.

They may also have something else up their sleeve. Let’s see what our line-up is when the season starts.

"Fernandez, to my eyes, is the Blazer who walks that walk most comfortably. A lot of Portland's fans (egged on, dare I say, by their local broadcasters) lament things like how Ron Artest or Yao Ming get to hit Brandon Roy's arms.

But I suspect Fernandez sees all that and thinks: We get to hit arms! Cool!"

http://myespn.go.com/blogs/truehoop/0-39-135/On-Playoff-Experience.html

by ratbastird on Jun 26, 2009 10:30 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Ever been without and ACL?

I have and can tell you that it’s not a minor thing. It’d be a HUGE discouraging factor.

I'm a really really ridiculously good looking orange mocha frappaccino drinking manhammer sandwich

by hobobob on Jun 26, 2009 12:35 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Right

I’ll save my judgment for:

A. when this kid manages to make it on the roster

B. within a month after the free agent signing period has started and we do upgrade our roster

C. when a trade is made before opening night to upgrade our roster

I respectfully disagree that this was a smart move. On a scale of one to ten, one being I think I’ll marry Cortney Love and 10 being I was smart enough to buy Texaco stock the day after GWB was elected in 2000, I’d put this at about a six. Nothing in the draft at 22 was going to make a difference for our team anyway, I was just hopeful they were going to sell the pick or trade it away along with Sergio. Bummer.

Fire Mark Mason. He's a dork, and he projects that we are ALL dorks
Fire Brian Wheeler. Homers suck.
Trade Trout, or sign someone reliable to soak up his minutes.
....Now I'm done

by SuperDave on Jun 26, 2009 7:22 AM PDT reply actions   0 recs

Ha

Well your analogy almost worked until you mentioned Texaco. Their price was $42 when he was elected and ended at $67 when he left office. Not quite a home run, maybe a double.

by da34shadow on Jun 26, 2009 12:07 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

So selling is a smarter move than aquiring a potenially good player that doesn't effect our cap?

Not to be disrespecttul, but I can’t imagine that statement fairs better on your scale than a 6. You just related a smart move to your expectations anyway, so if smart was to do what you expected then, I guess a 6 sounds close. However, I’m going out on a limb to say that we should sever what’s smart from what your expectations are. I’m not saying you’re not smart, but that it’d be smart to give credibility to those that have all day and night to analyze these scenarios and to those that have been trained to do so and to those that get paid to do so. Those sound like qualifications for relating smartness to expectations.

I'm a really really ridiculously good looking orange mocha frappaccino drinking manhammer sandwich

by hobobob on Jun 26, 2009 12:44 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I'm offended

I’m a friggen genius man!

I guess what I failed to explain is that just because KP does the right thing doesn’t make him a genius, it makes him smarter than your average Kahn. BTW, that dude is a moron. He’s totally set Rubio up to be a bad guy. Who would want to go to Minny anyway?

Fire Mark Mason. He's a dork, and he projects that we are ALL dorks
Fire Brian Wheeler. Homers suck.
Trade Trout, or sign someone reliable to soak up his minutes.
....Now I'm done

by SuperDave on Jun 26, 2009 9:38 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

If you refuse to play in a city from the start, you are the bad guy.

Ten players, two baskets, 13,000 people, one basketball. And we will decide what is done with that one basketball.

by The Pirate on Jun 27, 2009 2:12 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Honestly, if the Blazers would have taken Blair people would have been feeling much better about this draft

The real question then is why did the Blazers pass on Blair – they could have had him 3 times. You either trust team management or don’t. So if you take Blair out of the equation, did they do a decent job with what they had? I give them a C because all their primary plans must have fallen apart – somebody scooped them – they got slapped – too bad we may never know what happened.

by Sonic Boom on Jun 26, 2009 7:32 AM PDT reply actions   0 recs

The Blazers "got slapped"?

Interesting suggestion. Do you think some of the other teams might be snubbing us because of bad blood over the last year?

by Kaboomm on Jun 26, 2009 8:41 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Like the Kings? Or like the Bulls?

I'm a really really ridiculously good looking orange mocha frappaccino drinking manhammer sandwich

by hobobob on Jun 26, 2009 12:45 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

One more thing about Blair

Unbelievable but true — one of the big winners of this draft was San Antonio. With one trade and one second-rounder, they just propped themselves up into title contention for a few more years.

Only time will tell whether the Blair pick was successful or futile, but why not try it with a second-round pick? The Spurs weren’t going to do better with that pick, so it was a great move for them. If the Blazers had grabbed Blair, maybe he would have been a key piece for us, maybe not, but at least he would have been off the board.

by Kaboomm on Jun 26, 2009 8:06 AM PDT reply actions   0 recs

A 2nd round pick has no risk attached to it

Blair went from having a potential top 10 pick cap hold on a team, to dirt cheap, just the way the Spurs like it. If he pans out, the Spurs found someone who can backup Duncan, and even play next to him. If he doesn’t pan out for weight reasons or injuries, well he was a 2nd round pick, and the Spurs starting lineup is good enough to win 50+ games on their own.

That Steve Nash is exactly the same as Kirk Hinrich, but worse.
by NBA Observer on Apr 8, 2009 12:23 PM CDT

by Ozzie Montana on Jun 26, 2009 8:23 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Opportunity cost

The Blazers needed someone at the backup PF. Taking two guys with four ACLs between them is more likely to yeild a PF than two guys with two ACLs between them. I think people are seriously understimating the value of ACLs in basketball.

I'm a really really ridiculously good looking orange mocha frappaccino drinking manhammer sandwich

by hobobob on Jun 26, 2009 12:46 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I'm well aware of the importance

I’m also aware that Blair has been without ACLs for quite some time, yet had no problems playing at Pitt. His cap hold is negligible, and they’re paying the luxury tax anyways.

The Chicago Bulls.....the more profitable Los Angeles Clippers.

by Ozzie Montana on Jun 27, 2009 8:59 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

A 2nd rounder that can't make the team on talent/skill is no risk

A 2nd rounder that can’t make the team because of injury is a cap liability

by blacknoiseNW on Jun 26, 2009 5:27 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Claver looks pretty dope from the clips I'm watching, granted it's only a few

I think the Blazers are up to something in FA…duuuuuuuuuuuhhhhhhhhh

Mills seems like a good pick at 55 even if he doesn’t pan out. It’s like buying a lottery ticket for 75 cents the other guys are paying a dollar for. Picking two forwards makes it seem likelier Travis is on the move, right? And/or the team is less confident about Marty’s comeback.

I like trading Sergio. I hope the guy goes to… wherever and becomes a star. But it just wasn’t happenin’ here.

Blazer Fan

by leeroyjenkins on Jun 26, 2009 8:44 AM PDT reply actions   0 recs

Not that I know anything about Claver, but ...

if you think about possibly drafting in the 25 range for the next 10 years, we’re going to be happy to have some new blood like Claver come in a couple years from now. We don’t need him now — we might be very happy to have him (or trade him) later.

by Kaboomm on Jun 26, 2009 8:51 AM PDT up reply actions   1 recs

Only downside is that he's a borderline ginger-kid.

"The brownies,'' Fernandez said after the game. "The brownies are good for me to make three-points.''

- from Quick's Behind the Blazers Locker Room Door, 4/16/09

by ArbyOSU on Jun 26, 2009 9:41 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

And/or the team is less confident about Marty’s comeback

Cunningham does not offer much (if any) insurance at the backup SF. His game is around the basket. He’s a 3/4 ’tweener like Trav, but their skillset is not similar

If Portland is unsure re: Webster they should keep Outlaw or acquire another SF who has NBA experience (Bowen?)

by two4larue on Jun 26, 2009 9:52 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I agree with you on that

and i wonder if that uncertainty about webster might have held up a trigger from being pulled.

"Fernandez, to my eyes, is the Blazer who walks that walk most comfortably. A lot of Portland's fans (egged on, dare I say, by their local broadcasters) lament things like how Ron Artest or Yao Ming get to hit Brandon Roy's arms.

But I suspect Fernandez sees all that and thinks: We get to hit arms! Cool!"

http://myespn.go.com/blogs/truehoop/0-39-135/On-Playoff-Experience.html

by ratbastird on Jun 26, 2009 12:18 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Cunningham does most of his scoring as a mid-range catch-and-shoot player

We would really like for our SFs to be able to hit 3-point shots, which is something Cunningham is not able to do at this point. However, considering his effectiveness in the mid-range, it seems possible that he could develop a 3-point shot. Defensively, Cunningham does appear to have the lateral quickness necessary to guard smaller players on the perimeter.

I think Cunningham’s effectiveness at the SF will mostly depend on whether or not he is able to add a 3-point shot to his game. His shooting is complemented by some other desirable attributes, like hustle, energy, work ethic, basketball IQ, and defense. He is a poor ball-handler, but that shouldn’t be a big problem for him in Nate’s system that mostly uses the SF as a spot-up shooter. Actually, I think that there is a good chance Cunningham will end up being a better fit at the SF position than he is at PF.

by trk on Jun 26, 2009 1:14 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Maybe someone's mentioned this already, but

is Cunningham going to be Outlaw’s replacement for a Hinrich trade? Watching some video’s of him, there are similarities between the two…

"There goes Brandon Roy... the best there ever was in this game"

by two buck chuck on Jun 26, 2009 8:47 AM PDT reply actions   0 recs

Nice Cunningham video here

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ll2XG-sStyY

He does take a few Outlaw-type turnarounds, and also is VERY active and physical under the basket.

by Kaboomm on Jun 26, 2009 8:56 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

so outside of the turnarounds he is the anti Outlaw

Because active and physical aren’t adjectives I’d ever use to describe Trout, More like meek and confused.

Fire Mark Mason. He's a dork, and he projects that we are ALL dorks
Fire Brian Wheeler. Homers suck.
Trade Trout, or sign someone reliable to soak up his minutes.
....Now I'm done

by SuperDave on Jun 26, 2009 8:59 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Dante has no 3pt range

He is not a Nate McMillian small forward. He could develope a long distant shot, but he’s not ready to help the team at the backup 3

by two4larue on Jun 26, 2009 9:54 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

i know, after i wrote that i read your post

it’s a good one too i rec’d it…

"There goes Brandon Roy... the best there ever was in this game"

by two buck chuck on Jun 26, 2009 9:48 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Cunningham totally punked a few teams in the NCAA tournament

UCLA looked like they had never practiced rebounding in their lives.

by Twith on Jun 26, 2009 9:40 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Outlaw is not going to be traded.

At least there’s no confirmation whatsoever.

by thetsaiguy on Jun 26, 2009 11:06 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

There's no conformation

that he isn’t either.

To summarize: Wade too quick, Kobe too skilled, LeBron too physical - Batum

by Ltlgto on Jun 26, 2009 1:15 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

True...

but I don’t think we’d hear about it until after it happened. I was all for Trav being gone this upcoming season, but I’m getting more nervous as time rolls on about Webster being available to go.

To summarize: Wade too quick, Kobe too skilled, LeBron too physical - Batum

by Ltlgto on Jun 26, 2009 3:51 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Blair

How do you think Blair would fit people? Playing 2nd unit with Joel. 2 guys who can only make put backs? Everyone makes a big deal of Blair’s wingspan, but Cunningham’s standing reach is exactly the same, because he is taller and he jumps better. If he can make the 15 foot face up jumper like they say, he may be a Carl Landry type, who by the way killed us in the playoffs. As for Mills, it’s hard to believe a guy coming out 2 years early would accept going overseas. He may force the Blazers to sign him or release his rights.

by shallwemaui on Jun 26, 2009 9:38 AM PDT reply actions   0 recs

Might not see much of these guys this year

Here’s something from earlier in the week that I keep coming back to:

“His presence was a reminder of just how far today’s draft workout crop have to go: Frye would ball all of those dudes up. And it wouldn’t be close.”

If We’re moving up the timeline for championship contention, we’ve got to go after veterans who we know will fill our needs.

We got our man, but he was always our man in the 2nd round. A lot of very smart basketball guys looked at our three 2nd round picks and decided they weren’t likely enough to contribute to use a first round pick on.

All that glitters isn't chrome

by hoopla-pdx on Jun 26, 2009 10:01 AM PDT reply actions   0 recs

Picking Claver might have been smart, but the fact remains that he wasted 2 second rounders trading up with Dallas...

1. Dallas didn’t want him, otherwise they wouldn’t have traded.

2. Sacramento was CLEARLY going for Casspi.

He either freaked out and squandered the picks or else he is being disingenuous about saying that was his plan all along — my guess is that he had something going using Casspi, which fell through.

Going 24 to 22 at a big cost is ONLY a rational move if the target was Casspi.

"A bizarre and extremely rare hybrid Blazer/Laker fan, Timbo has always struggled to contain the Beast Within, like Dr. Jekyll, Bruce Banner, or Ted Kennedy." — Miled Animal

by timbo on Jun 26, 2009 10:08 AM PDT reply actions   0 recs

If we snagged him

I suspect another trade would have been in the works.

Either way, I agree that we likely didn’t get 100% what we wanted but probably snagged 75% of what we wanted.

"Fernandez, to my eyes, is the Blazer who walks that walk most comfortably. A lot of Portland's fans (egged on, dare I say, by their local broadcasters) lament things like how Ron Artest or Yao Ming get to hit Brandon Roy's arms.

But I suspect Fernandez sees all that and thinks: We get to hit arms! Cool!"

http://myespn.go.com/blogs/truehoop/0-39-135/On-Playoff-Experience.html

by ratbastird on Jun 26, 2009 10:24 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

guesswork

is all we can do…

But it seems to me that the move to #22 was probably a strategic maneuver with Sacramento. Who, as it turns out, was our only trade partner yesterday. At 22, we threaten to take Casspi. Thus giving Sacto incentive to deal with us.

So if another deal was afoot, I think it was probably with Sac.

Or is it possible that this entire draft was about trading Sergio?

For my part, I think the Blazers over-thought it on Blair.

While physical attributes obviously would play a part in selecting some one in the draft, a player’s resume must count for something as well. And in the hard-nosed proven rebounding style of PF we are looking for, DeJuan Blair had no equal in this draft.

So rationalize away, I think a lot of us would feel better about this draft if we had gotten the guy who fits the bill and was available at #33.

Blazers get a C for LACK OF IMAGINATION in this draft. Of all things!

by Blazin' on Jun 26, 2009 10:24 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Maybe

or maybe something else is up, or maybe their goals are actually different than ours.

I hope they right a book, one day, telling us EXACTLY what they were thinking on these items!

"Fernandez, to my eyes, is the Blazer who walks that walk most comfortably. A lot of Portland's fans (egged on, dare I say, by their local broadcasters) lament things like how Ron Artest or Yao Ming get to hit Brandon Roy's arms.

But I suspect Fernandez sees all that and thinks: We get to hit arms! Cool!"

http://myespn.go.com/blogs/truehoop/0-39-135/On-Playoff-Experience.html

by ratbastird on Jun 26, 2009 10:26 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Why else move to 22?

Unless they were maneuvering with Dallas.

No, given what Dallas did, who Sacto wanted, and what happened later in the draft, i think it a good chance that the move to #22 was about Sacramento, just a card to play. Whether it was KPs hope to make a 3-way move, or simply to leverage the kings to take Sergio and Pendergraph, i have no idea.

Of course, I have no idea about any of it! :)

by Blazin' on Jun 26, 2009 10:29 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

i'd also

like them to write a book.

"Fernandez, to my eyes, is the Blazer who walks that walk most comfortably. A lot of Portland's fans (egged on, dare I say, by their local broadcasters) lament things like how Ron Artest or Yao Ming get to hit Brandon Roy's arms.

But I suspect Fernandez sees all that and thinks: We get to hit arms! Cool!"

http://myespn.go.com/blogs/truehoop/0-39-135/On-Playoff-Experience.html

by ratbastird on Jun 26, 2009 12:19 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Was the move to #22

before or after the Sergio trade?

by DucRider on Jun 26, 2009 12:00 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

before

How did you guys win that?
"We scored enough points. We scored 107, they scored 105.
-Nate McMillan Postgame, 3/4/2009

by douglast on Jun 26, 2009 2:47 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

so maybe

it was done to “facilitate” the Sergio trade?

by DucRider on Jun 30, 2009 8:20 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Asset

Portland gave up two mid 50 second round picks, I would not call that a “big cost.”

by da34shadow on Jun 26, 2009 12:11 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

"Going 24 to 22 at a big cost is ONLY a rational move if the target was Casspi."

What big cost? They were low 2nd round picks. Who were they going to draft with that pick this year? If they want another next year they will just buy one. Moving up for the cost of low 2nd round picks was a no brainer, and no “plan” was necessary.

by BlazerFanSince1970 on Jun 26, 2009 12:35 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Maybe once a draft

maybe. Apart from that, I’m really a thinking de answer be no.

"Fernandez, to my eyes, is the Blazer who walks that walk most comfortably. A lot of Portland's fans (egged on, dare I say, by their local broadcasters) lament things like how Ron Artest or Yao Ming get to hit Brandon Roy's arms.

But I suspect Fernandez sees all that and thinks: We get to hit arms! Cool!"

http://myespn.go.com/blogs/truehoop/0-39-135/On-Playoff-Experience.html

by ratbastird on Jun 26, 2009 2:48 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

A second round pick was sold for $1.5M in this draft — so, yes, they can be squandered...

"A bizarre and extremely rare hybrid Blazer/Laker fan, Timbo has always struggled to contain the Beast Within, like Dr. Jekyll, Bruce Banner, or Ted Kennedy." — Miled Animal

by timbo on Jun 27, 2009 6:47 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

big cost?

The net effect was losing a player they didn’t want to pay.

by blacknoiseNW on Jun 26, 2009 5:29 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

So draft a Euro and don't pay him.

KP screwed up, gotta face facts.

"A bizarre and extremely rare hybrid Blazer/Laker fan, Timbo has always struggled to contain the Beast Within, like Dr. Jekyll, Bruce Banner, or Ted Kennedy." — Miled Animal

by timbo on Jun 27, 2009 6:47 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I'm a little surprised at so many people being down

I didn’t pay attention to the draft this year because I didn’t expect anything from it. The only two things I see are a removal of Sergio (happened) and a thinning at the SF position which has yet to happen. I suspect the thinning will give us more cap flexibility or a vet point guard in which case Blake would be gone too (although he’s a pretty nice vet at this point). I didn’t and still don’t have a huge expectation of something major back.

Or, we actually don’t have a crowding issue at SF because Webster’s foot is far worse off than expected. Seriously… how did he miss an entire season? I have an eyebrow up on that one. I could see us giving webster away just to make room for outlaw, although I’d prefer to keep Webster myself… if he can be 100% healthy. Heck, maybe front office is concerned and that’s why a bigger trade didn’t happen so we didn’t shoot ourselves in the foot.

I do suspect that KP was thwarted a little regardless of what they say. It happens though. When you’re good, others become that much more cautious and pay closer attention to every wink, smile, and sneeze looking for clues.

So, to sum it up, I think KP wanted to make some moves, was thwarted or the price was too high and so he went with a different plan that still got him a few things he wanted.

"Fernandez, to my eyes, is the Blazer who walks that walk most comfortably. A lot of Portland's fans (egged on, dare I say, by their local broadcasters) lament things like how Ron Artest or Yao Ming get to hit Brandon Roy's arms.

But I suspect Fernandez sees all that and thinks: We get to hit arms! Cool!"

http://myespn.go.com/blogs/truehoop/0-39-135/On-Playoff-Experience.html

by ratbastird on Jun 26, 2009 10:23 AM PDT reply actions   0 recs

A big rec!

Brandon Roy just destroyed everything in his path. There's your rational analysis -- Dave

Also: COMCAST SUCKS!

by TwoDeep on Jun 26, 2009 11:11 AM PDT up reply actions   1 recs

excellent stuff..

I would say that I am skeptical of the decision not to take Blair, but it’s probably not that important.

by PoliSam on Jun 26, 2009 11:23 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Well said

In the few minutes it took me to read this comment and click on the actions button, it went from 3 recs to 7 recs.

by Corvid on Jun 26, 2009 11:51 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

How critical this draft is to the success of the team

has nothing to do with whether it was a good decision to pass on Blair.

The point that is being made here is that in the 2nd round, Blair becomes low risk. You already have Pendergraph, so you’re covered. And his success in college flat out makes him a better prospect at the PF.

Looks to me like the Blazers out-thought themselves. But only time will tell.

by Blazin' on Jun 26, 2009 11:57 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

It all depends on what role

the team wants its backup PF to assume.

If they wanted a stud rebounder – who’d likely spend his limited minutes on the floor parked next to Joel or Greg under the basket – then Blair is your guy. If they wanted someone who could spread the floor with a more versatile offensive game and who is also a decent perimeter defender – then Cunningham would seem to be the better pick.

I’m not comparing Blair to Pendergraph because it’s now pretty apparent that he was one of the Blazers top targets in this draft. So, really, the choice came down to Blair or Cunningham at 33. I don’t watch enough college ball to offer any informed opinion as to who will turn out to be the better player. I’ll leave that to y’all to sort out amongst yourselves. But my guess is that the Blazer war room saw Cunningham’s skillset as being a much better fit for their purposes, Blair’s awesome rebounding prowess notwithstanding.

by knickfan on Jun 26, 2009 12:09 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

agreed

but I thought inside toughness was the thing we were looking for. The “spreading the floor with a more versatile offensive game” thing- Well, that sounds like Channing Frye. The style of player we are trying to get away from.

by Blazin' on Jun 26, 2009 12:20 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I don't know much about Cunningham

But Frye is pretty much ONLY an outside player.

Ideally, you’d like a guy who can go inside and outside, over one or the other. And if ya had to choose, you’d pick inside for a big man but, of course, you prefer a guy who can do both.

I dunno if Pendy or Cunny is that sort of dude, but Frye (right now) is only an outside player so we’d want more variety from our backup than that. Plus rebounding.

Mortimer

by Mortimer on Jun 26, 2009 12:23 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Yup

When I suggested the Blazers may have been seeking a backup four with a a “more versatile offensive game who could spread the floor” I had intended that the key word be “versatile.”

“Versatile” does not describe Channing Frye – a soft, jump-shooting, no defense, no rebound big. “One dimensional” is closer to the mark. And, as Morty suggests, that “one dimensional” tag may have also been applicable to Blair. Perhaps the Blazers saw him as little more than a rebounding specialist who would get the lion’s share of his points on putbacks and would be a liability defensively.

Conversely – based on his Draft Express Profile – it would appear that Cunnigham could offer the Blazers more than a player who would ply his trade only on the outside or inside:

Where the power forward is more likely to make his living in the NBA is with his continually developing mid-range game. Cunningham had proven to be a real threat to catch and shoot from 15-feet this season, connecting on about 50% of these shot attempts according to Synergy Sports Technology. He has good shooting form, with a smooth steady release. At this time, his range appears to be limited to foul line extended shots, so he would go a long to helping himself by extending his range a few more feet. The improvement he has made in the last year to this aspect of his game gives at least some indication that he is capable of doing this.

Making him even more of a headache at the collegiate level and potentially enticing as a pro prospect is how well Cunningham moves without the basketball. He doesn’t simply set up camp on the high post looking for the basketball, but rather will flash from the low post, dive down from the perimeter, or rotate behind a play. Clearly, the senior has a good basketball IQ, as well as the hands and length to be an effective finisher.

…Cunningham is a tremendously active player who brings a lot of hustle to the court; this is pretty evident on the defensive side of the ball. He is constantly on the move looking to make things happen and has shown both solid anticipation and great timing. Cunningham’s lateral quickness is good enough that he is able to step away from the basket and cover perimeter players without being a liability to his team, and in fact forces a fair number of turnovers with his on the ball pressure.

In fairness, the article does mention rebounding as a potential source of concern at the NBA level. However, the description of his defensive abilities and his refusal to “simply set up camp on the high post looking for the basketball” suggests a player that will definitley be more versatile than Frye and possibly more versatile than Blair as well.

by knickfan on Jun 26, 2009 1:06 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Hey, that guy sounds good

Anyone who gets their offense by cutting and making smart moves is alright in my book.

And the hustle and activity and "motor’ sounds nice too.

I’d only heard his name before this, but I’ll for sure give him a shot at earning my love. If he’s truly a hustle player with a good BBIQ and can guard most positions, shoot… that’s what we need, homie!

Mortimer

by Mortimer on Jun 26, 2009 2:15 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I want Portland to draft

a guy that can dunk from the three point line. Then there is no inside-outside debate.

by torsoheap on Jun 26, 2009 1:24 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I believe blaze can do that

"Fernandez, to my eyes, is the Blazer who walks that walk most comfortably. A lot of Portland's fans (egged on, dare I say, by their local broadcasters) lament things like how Ron Artest or Yao Ming get to hit Brandon Roy's arms.

But I suspect Fernandez sees all that and thinks: We get to hit arms! Cool!"

http://myespn.go.com/blogs/truehoop/0-39-135/On-Playoff-Experience.html

by ratbastird on Jun 26, 2009 2:50 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Maybe this guy

Huge wingspan, plus he can really fly.

by pualo on Jun 26, 2009 5:14 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Agreed.

Bedge or go home.

by Ojala John on Jun 26, 2009 1:52 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I'd rec you

But I suspect it may return during trading season.

by Timmay! on Jun 26, 2009 10:29 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Your post is so nice!

It’s like the Pritch-slap of posts!

Yeah, I hope it goes away. Now only silly folk say it.

I’d rather, if we do something good, we just chant USA. USA. USA. USA., because we are America’s Team.

Mortimer

by Mortimer on Jun 26, 2009 10:30 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

America's team. From one form of arrogance to another.

: ))))) I know you’re joshing.

Brandon Roy just destroyed everything in his path. There's your rational analysis -- Dave

Also: COMCAST SUCKS!

by TwoDeep on Jun 26, 2009 11:15 AM PDT up reply actions   1 recs

Hee hee (wink)

Oh man wait till we win a title. With how many Blazer fans are online, we’ll have so many dummies saying dumb stuff that we’ll never live it down.

And, it will be worth it.

3 CHEERS FOR AMERICA’S TEAM, THE PORTLAND TRAIL BLAZERS! Hip hip Hoorah! Hip hip Hoorah!

Mortimer

by Mortimer on Jun 26, 2009 11:25 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

The RG

should start chanting USA during player intros…

by DucRider on Jun 26, 2009 12:03 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Or at least when we intro Rudy or Batum

Let them know they’ll never be good enough, just because of where they were born.

That’ll learn ’em!

Mortimer

by Mortimer on Jun 26, 2009 12:07 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

That is my hope too - but they may just feel like they survived by avoiding significant deals with us

If it worked during the draft (ignoring us), they will try to stick with it when it comes to trades.

All that glitters isn't chrome

by hoopla-pdx on Jun 26, 2009 10:39 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Nothing about this draft says "Complete"

So, I’ll wait and see how things shake out.

I’m surprised Blair fell and we didn’t snag him, but that only underlines my belief that we had a set plan in place with an eye on trades and contract stuff in the future. The near future, like a few weeks from now, not the 2012 future or sumthin’.

Claver can become a great, KP-esque pick. He looks good. He’s a very valuable trade chip (who doesn’t like Euro talent stashed and cheap overseas?), or we do the Rudy-like recruitment push and bring him over for peanuts. It’ a swing for the fences either way, and we like that. That is rad.

I’m still hoping we can get a Hinrich, a more for-sure backup PF, etc. But the best thing about this draft is that, if anything, it helped us on our way to that. Because that is what we need… not more fun and hot young rookies.

Mortimer

by Mortimer on Jun 26, 2009 10:36 AM PDT reply actions   0 recs

I'll only be disappointed if

we make no moves after July 1, and that doesn’t seem to likely. I think we’re loading both barrels to take a shot at not 1 but 2 FA/trade aquisitions. My choice – Hinrich/Harris(less likely) and Bass/McDyess(either one).

To summarize: Wade too quick, Kobe too skilled, LeBron too physical - Batum

by Ltlgto on Jun 26, 2009 10:44 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I'm with you

We’ve become accustomed to evaluating the off-season the day after the draft because over the last couple of years, the big moves have all been made on draft day (or at least leaked about deals that will take place once the Moratorium ends).

Once I heard about the Sergio trade, I knew that the big moves of the summer would be coming after the draft – probably in July. At that point, the draft became a lot less interesting to me.

I think that Dave has it right – KP’s focus is more on what happens from here on out, rather than putting all of his attention around draft day, as has been his practice the last couple of years.

My guess is that in the last few days, KP made offers for top 5 picks, they were rejected, he decided not to offer more than what he originally offered and moved on to a different plan.

by Storyteller on Jun 26, 2009 10:53 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

conspiracy theory
My guess is that in the last few days, KP made offers for top 5 picks, they were rejected, he decided not to offer more than what he originally offered and moved on to a different plan.

That, or when Pritchard learned that Rubio was going to Minnesota, land of -40 degree weather and abundant PGs, he used his intel on the Rubio family to orchestrate an plan to undermine Rubio’s trade value.

by PoliSam on Jun 26, 2009 11:05 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

You are exactly right.

The deal for #22 was announced BEFORE the draft. The idea is that in a deal you can say “we’ll offer you the #22” as opposed to “we’ll offer you the #24.” It’s a little more attractive if that team’s guy would have gone at #23. He made a good try to get Washington’s pick but would have had to give up too much. Even though PA said “go for it”, there are still other considerations like FA and lopsided trades. Plan B was to draft someone they don’t have to pay this year, so they went with Plan B.

Don’t overthink Hansborogh or the 2 PGs taken before Portland’s pick. If they really wanted those guys, they could have gotten them. Obviously they didn’t want them. You can tell they really wanted Pendergraph because they made whatever moves were necessary to get him (giving up Sergio and cash).

Koponen - PG of the future. For Italy, that is. Book it.

by Blazerholic on Jun 26, 2009 11:13 AM PDT up reply actions   1 recs

The whole eve was greasin' the wheels for FA

There may have been some plans of trying to snatch someone, but they didn’t pan out. We’ll never know. What we probably know:

Pendy and Cunni become the new Frye/Shavlik/Ruffin’s of the bench.

Claver simmers on the back burner – who knows if he ever comes over.

Mr. St. Mary’s – same story. But in the meantime your roster is free of yet another young buck for Nate to not have to worry about.

We are on the hunt for veterans. Nate wants them, the team wants them, we need ’em.

High Vegas odds for Captain Kirk, and Hedo to be suiting up for us next year. Not sure if that puts us that much higher up the food chain, but…

Also smart money says now is when the real war room gets going.

Is there a blockbuster, I-can’t-believe-we-got-him trade out there?

by Knobby on Jun 26, 2009 11:02 AM PDT reply actions   1 recs

I'm suprised people are still talking about Hinrich

When it’s clear we could do much better. Also, remember, Frye and Blake are still here. Those guys are trade chips, and we can couple them with some of our acquired picks.

by thetsaiguy on Jun 26, 2009 11:04 AM PDT reply actions   0 recs

What is better than Hinrich?

Hinrich is talked about so much because he’s available, and a clear upgrade.

Who else is better AND available? I’d love to have Devin Harris but he isn’t available.

Morty

by Mortimer on Jun 26, 2009 11:06 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

To be completely honest, I don't know

But what I do know is that Hinrich clearly isn’t our ceiling as to what Pritch can do. He’s not that much of an upgrade over Blakeblake.

by thetsaiguy on Jun 26, 2009 11:08 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Andre Miller

Toughness (we need). Can penetrate (we need). Good character (we require). And has stated in recent months that if Philly lets him go, he’d like to come back to the West Coast.

Roy Tribute
Treat people well because Karma can hit you at any second.

by Net Ranger on Jun 26, 2009 11:13 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Wrong. You need perimeter defense to keep Oden out of foul trouble.

Hinrich is far, far better than Blake in that regard. Also far better than Miller.

You don’t need someone to penetrate when Oden is in the lane. You need someone to execute the pick and roll to perfection.

Koponen - PG of the future. For Italy, that is. Book it.

by Blazerholic on Jun 26, 2009 11:17 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Disagree. Roy ran himself into the ground last year by

being the only guy on the team who could penetrate for those ‘easy’ buckets and handoffs in crunch situations.

This team definitely needs another penetrater besides brandon.

You could put Jesus out on the perimeter, Greg needs to work on his footwork.

Roy Tribute
Treat people well because Karma can hit you at any second.

by Net Ranger on Jun 26, 2009 11:23 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

And I disagree. Roy is more than capable of bearing that load

and I want the ball in his hands instead of someone else’s..

Greg can work on his footwork during practice. He’s still going to have to cover for bad defense, whether that’s Blake or Miller, and risk picking up bogus fouls.

Defense is what needs to improve, not offense.

Koponen - PG of the future. For Italy, that is. Book it.

by Blazerholic on Jun 26, 2009 1:32 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

we need another creator

not saying we take the ball out of Roy’s hands in crunchtime. But for 3.5 quarters, it would be quite an asset to have a 2nd guy who can create off the dribble, run the pick and roll, and setup some teammates.

How did you guys win that?
"We scored enough points. We scored 107, they scored 105.
-Nate McMillan Postgame, 3/4/2009

by douglast on Jun 26, 2009 2:49 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

either that,

or run an offense that involves more than two players at a time…

by Blazin' on Jun 26, 2009 2:52 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Yes,

But, he’s older than Hinrich, a worse defender, and a worse outside shooter. If the Blazers are going to get a penetrator, I’d rather have Sessions.

by PoliSam on Jun 26, 2009 11:20 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

have you taken a gander at the statistical comparison between Sessions and young Miller? It’s astounding.

by Cablinasian on Jun 26, 2009 11:54 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

they are pretty much the same guy...

But Miller is about to hit the PG wall.

by PoliSam on Jun 26, 2009 4:51 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

He relies on his athleticism a lot and is getting up there in age. I think he’ll definitely hit the wall soon.

by Cablinasian on Jun 26, 2009 5:41 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

He's supposed to NOT be a good character though

He’s supposed to be kinda a jerk whose teammates don’t like him for every team he has played for.

With Miller, I worry about his age, his lack of a jumper, and bad defense. Since Blake tries on defense and has a great 3 point shot, I’d say he may be a better fit for this Blazer team even though Miller is a better player.

Hinrich is a great defender who can shoot as good as Blake, and he has a mid-range game and is a good pick and roll guard. He will not make an allstar game, but he will play hard and play good defense and defer to Roy.

We can get Miller if we want to, he’s very gettable. For cheaper than Hinrich.

Mortimer

by Mortimer on Jun 26, 2009 11:22 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Definitely agree with some of your points here.

What i like about Hinrich is that he’s just like Blake but with better D.

What i like about Andre is he brings different tools to the table, thus giving Nate more roster flexibility.

Totally agree, Andre isnt the outside shooter that Steve or Hin are but look at all of the shooters we have on this team.

Roy Tribute
Treat people well because Karma can hit you at any second.

by Net Ranger on Jun 26, 2009 11:30 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I think our biggest problem last season

Was our defense, not our offense. We had a very good offense that was still in its raw form… our offense will get better as LMA and Oden continue to become better post options.

So if we can maintain our (one of the league’s best) offense, and improve our defense handily, I’d be all over it. To me, that’s what Hinrich offers.

Miller is a better scorer and playmaker than Hinrich and Blake, but his defense is so much worse, making our weakness even weaker while not adding enough offensively to offset it. If we’re getting killed because only Roy can penetrate, then I guess we see what Bayless can do in the game, penetration wise.

Usually though, having a 2nd penetrator didn’t kill us, defense did, and Hinrich is a better penetrator than Blake is. MUCH better at getting his own shot off (but he isn’t great at it, it’s just Blake is really bad at that). So, I see it as improving our offense still (which we didn’t need to do), and GREATLY improving our defense (which is my biggest priority for this current team).

Andre Miller is a good player, but his age and reliance on athleticism, plus his lack of even mediocre Blake-level defense, makes me think he isn’t a good fit for us. Plus, we would also prefer a PG who doesn’t need the ball every possession, like Miller and other more pure-PGs do. We want a guy who can create offense, but not who needs to do it everytime to get the most from that player.

And if Miller isn’t being the PG, he doesn’t offer a lot more. Roy will be the PG most of the time, with the ball in his hands and creating for everyone, so the lack of a jumper and lack of other skills would hurt us with Miller. If it was a defensive upgrade, I’d be more for it, but since it’s only an offensive upgrade and even then only when he himself has the ball…

It makes life so much easier for Roy and LMA and Oden if there isn’t a guy no one has to guard at the 3 point line. Miller is a guy you can leave alone, even though he is great at other stuff offensively.

If we were more of a transition team, I think Miller would fit better.

Mortimer

by Mortimer on Jun 26, 2009 12:06 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

+1

If I never needed to be represented legally in a sports debate, I would hire Morty instantly. (I’m pretty sure I say something to this accord about Mortimer atleast 3 times a year.)

Getting Miller seems more like a Trader Bob move then a KP move. He looks great on paper and gives something the Blazers are lacking (a 2nd penetrator) but overall doesn’t fit. Remember, Jack got a ton of minutes 2 seasons ago because he offered us a 2nd Penetrator next to Roy as well, but he struggled in so many other areas.

Gimmicks don't make dynasties

by WarEaglePDX on Jun 26, 2009 1:02 PM PDT up reply actions   1 recs

You're confusing me Mort

Are you rallying for Hinrich or Miller? I think what you stated about needing more defense than rather than more offense is the key to our need at the 1. But I’d blow that all up for Devin. The cost would probably be to high though, and we don’t need to lose our positive assets.

To summarize: Wade too quick, Kobe too skilled, LeBron too physical - Batum

by Ltlgto on Jun 26, 2009 4:01 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I didn't mean to be confusing

I think we need more defense. I prefer Hinrich to Miller.

Miller is not a player without positive attributes, so I made sure to acknowledge them.

Mortimer

by Mortimer on Jun 26, 2009 9:59 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

yeah but your...........??

:) OLD.

The Faith don't panic, the faith freaks out, burns out farms, and torchs small villages in the name of The Faith.

"New Man Law: If you don't show up for the draft you don't get to come later if you're picked. If you believe in yourself, show up and sit there. If nobody else believes in you, take it and cry like a man...in front of the cameras."

-Dave

by faith on Jun 27, 2009 12:29 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

How old is you, kid?

I’s a youngin’.

And STRAIGHT STREET.

Mortimer

by Mortimer on Jun 27, 2009 1:47 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Word up Gangster....

Mad street cred respect homie.

The Faith don't panic, the faith freaks out, burns out farms, and torchs small villages in the name of The Faith.

"New Man Law: If you don't show up for the draft you don't get to come later if you're picked. If you believe in yourself, show up and sit there. If nobody else believes in you, take it and cry like a man...in front of the cameras."

-Dave

by faith on Jun 27, 2009 10:26 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Miller, poor defender?

I’d like to see your justification for stating Miller is a poor defender, even worse than Blake. As far as I see it, Miller is better than Blake although he may not be Hinrich level type of guy.

Also, just because he can’t shoot from the 3 point line, that doesn’t necessarily means he’s a poor shooter. He has a very reliable mid-range game and a money 15’ turnaround jumper. Being a poor 3 ball shooter would be a big problem if he was like Josh Smith, a poor shooter that jacks up the 3’s, but not for Miller since he knows his limitations and doesn’t shoot it.

In the end, is Blake or Hinrich going to create something for us off the dribble when they double-team Roy in the last 2 minutes? That is, provided that Roy has the energy since he was the only one doing so. This is going to be a huge problem if we do go ahead and trade Outlaw, since he is the only other player that we have that can create his own shot.

by xedubx on Jun 26, 2009 5:01 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

According to 82games.com

opponents played at a 18+ PER against Miller – well above average.

by blacknoiseNW on Jun 26, 2009 5:37 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

He makes 40% of his jump shots, that's not great by any stretch

It’s not horrible, either. He’s good at finishing at the rim. And his FG% stays high because he doesn’t even bother to attempt 3 pointers.

The Chicago Bulls.....the more profitable Los Angeles Clippers.

by Ozzie Montana on Jun 27, 2009 9:04 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

NET PER!!!!

Blake wasn’t too bad, at dead even. Even I have to admit that Hinrich, on average, can outperform his opponent. So can Miller, still. Both represent potential upgrades. Each could be considered too expensive for their net value.

by blacknoiseNW on Jun 26, 2009 5:38 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

right on!

COMCAST SUCKS!!
"Let's win the playoffs!!!!!"- Rudy Fernandez

by shamman on Jun 27, 2009 10:28 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

there are certainly a lot of vacancies

around the league that Frye can fill. If he goes, I’ll feel like I do about Sergio – good luck, maybe you’ll get more minutes and more love at your next stop, sir. – Elgin

Without you out there, we're nowhere here

by 22baylor on Jun 26, 2009 11:36 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

To bad Martell Webster's Trade Value is So low

imo, Nic Batum is the future so Webster will have to go someday. The sooner the better so Nic can become a monster.

by thetsaiguy on Jun 26, 2009 11:09 AM PDT reply actions   0 recs

emo

"Fernandez, to my eyes, is the Blazer who walks that walk most comfortably. A lot of Portland's fans (egged on, dare I say, by their local broadcasters) lament things like how Ron Artest or Yao Ming get to hit Brandon Roy's arms.

But I suspect Fernandez sees all that and thinks: We get to hit arms! Cool!"

http://myespn.go.com/blogs/truehoop/0-39-135/On-Playoff-Experience.html

by ratbastird on Jun 26, 2009 12:28 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I just realized that I don't really care about the draft.

Portland’s core is fairly set and can be tweaked or improved with a trade.

I’m just ready for the season to start again.

by torsoheap on Jun 26, 2009 11:13 AM PDT reply actions   0 recs

yup

"Fernandez, to my eyes, is the Blazer who walks that walk most comfortably. A lot of Portland's fans (egged on, dare I say, by their local broadcasters) lament things like how Ron Artest or Yao Ming get to hit Brandon Roy's arms.

But I suspect Fernandez sees all that and thinks: We get to hit arms! Cool!"

http://myespn.go.com/blogs/truehoop/0-39-135/On-Playoff-Experience.html

by ratbastird on Jun 26, 2009 12:29 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

An even simpler analysis:

The Blazers already have a very solid core of players. Improving the team on the margins through the free agency and trades is less risky than doing so through the draft. So, increasing flexibility in free agency and trades and minimizing the importance of the drafts is the prudent strategy.

by PoliSam on Jun 26, 2009 11:14 AM PDT reply actions   0 recs

I definitely wish Sergio the very best in Sac

He definitely wanted a change and got his wish. Though I’m guessing by the mid-season point he may be missing the city and team success that he had here. I could be wrong

Roy Tribute
Treat people well because Karma can hit you at any second.

by Net Ranger on Jun 26, 2009 11:33 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Sergio wasn't a "slap"

It was just a good deal for everybody — both teams and Sergio.

by Kaboomm on Jun 26, 2009 11:59 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Eh. I'm underwhelmed.

Stashing some guy overseas to not pay him isn’t exactly a genius move – it’s what everyone down in the late 20s does.

KP acted like we’re a defending title winner or something. Drafting a euro we can stash overseas for a couple of seasons, drafting a couple of stiffs who might be able to make the practice squad as the 11th man or whatever. Basically standing pat and not swinging for the fences in this draft. Nothing super wrong with that, but it seems a little odd to be proclaiming this evidence of some mad draft genius or something.

by howlingfantods on Jun 26, 2009 11:35 AM PDT reply actions   0 recs

its just smart, conservative positioning for the upcoming free agent period. Positioning is not popular and does not interest fans, but it’s ‘smart’.

by Pheesh on Jun 26, 2009 11:40 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

*shrug*

Whatever, again, it’s nothing special – I don’t think Dallas or San Antonio fans are writing odes to the smartness of their moves every year for drafting some euro they can stash overseas that don’t blow up their caps.

I’m also on the side of doing a lot more to significantly upgrade our talent since I’m apparently more pessimistic about our guys’ career paths than KP is. We’ll see what he does in free agency, but he’s already skipped two major opportunities to do so (first with RLEC and second with this draft) and it’s starting to get old hearing about how smart KP is for doing nothing.

by howlingfantods on Jun 26, 2009 11:44 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Truth is truth no matter how old and tired it sounds

KP made a smart move means KP made a smart move. Whether or not KP made a smart move isn’t going to change by whether it sounds old or not.

by thetsaiguy on Jun 26, 2009 12:03 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Every day, I go to lunch.

I eat food because I need to. If I didn’t, I’d die. It’s a smart thing I’m doing to go and eat lunch. But everyone does it everyday and it’s not a unusual or remarkable feat. I don’t sit here with my sandwich in front of my face and think to myself, “boy, I’m really smart for eating instead of starving.”

Drafting euros in the late first and second rounds to stash them overseas is an automatic move for teams. It might have been the best thing that KP could do at the time. But it’s not praiseworthy. And for us to pretend that it was kind of comes off like trying too hard to believe. It sounds like spin. In fact, lately, I’m starting to wonder if the relationship of the folks on this site is too close to the team, like I almost think I’d get more objective coverage from Mike Barrett’s blog than from the folks here.

by howlingfantods on Jun 26, 2009 12:09 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

*checks Mike's blog*

Yup, pretty similar to the coverage here.

by howlingfantods on Jun 26, 2009 12:15 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Fail analogy is fail.
The pervading reaction to the draft was, “what the hell is KP doing has he gone mad none of his picks and moves made sense!! he didn’t do anything RABBLE RABBLE”

There is a sound logical basis for the moves made, and since when is a conservative drafting style like this considered automatic or expected from Kevin Pritchard? Obviously it wasn’t expected as seen by the destroyed expectations of overreactive fans, but he made pretty appropriate moves to prepare for the free agent period. It’s not genius, especially for GM’s who do this all the time..but it’s a smart move on KP’s part to adapt his style. Nuff said.

by Pheesh on Jun 26, 2009 12:26 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

There's a big difference between saying

“KP was conservative and didn’t do anything to hurt the team, and maybe that’s all he should’ve done” and saying “this was pretty darn smart.”

by howlingfantods on Jun 26, 2009 3:14 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I agree

it was a draft, nothing especially great or bad about it. I’d be surprised if Claver ever actually puts on a Blazer jersey, though (he just seems to scream out “throw in to a larger trade” to me). I will say that I think Dave was overselling it on the positive side to somewhat counteract all of these, “ZOMG!! How could we ever pass up Blair three times??” doomsday predictors.

by Royster on Jun 26, 2009 3:17 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Right, and I sympathize with getting annoyed

by all the over-reactors and doomsday freaks, but seriously, the answer isn’t to go all pollyanna and talk about the sheer brilliance of drafting some euro project wing 10 spots ahead of where he was projected.

by howlingfantods on Jun 26, 2009 3:28 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

being pretty darn smart relative to the average fan isn't

really that impressive. Shoot, Mike Dunleavy is pretty darn smart relative to the average fan.

by howlingfantods on Jun 27, 2009 1:01 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

but we have hindsight to tell us otherwise.

Dunleavy’s performance doesn’t hold up to the standard of the “wisdom of the masses” – unlike KP’s.

by blacknoiseNW on Jun 27, 2009 10:32 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I think i get what you're saying

and I’d agree. I gave the draft a C because it was average. They did their job, they got some pieces, it wasn’t life altering, the end. Doesn’t mean it was bad, but it was just another draft day.

"Fernandez, to my eyes, is the Blazer who walks that walk most comfortably. A lot of Portland's fans (egged on, dare I say, by their local broadcasters) lament things like how Ron Artest or Yao Ming get to hit Brandon Roy's arms.

But I suspect Fernandez sees all that and thinks: We get to hit arms! Cool!"

http://myespn.go.com/blogs/truehoop/0-39-135/On-Playoff-Experience.html

by ratbastird on Jun 26, 2009 12:30 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Here is what's to come...

http://games.espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=l7vlg6

Followed by another move to land a SF to backup Batum…We keep everyone we need to.
What do ya say??

by Dude, where's my point gaurd on Jun 26, 2009 11:43 AM PDT reply actions   0 recs

I say Ryan Anderson is already on Orlando

Without you out there, we're nowhere here

by 22baylor on Jun 26, 2009 11:46 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

are you really serious?

Harris, S. Williams, Dooling, and Anderson for Blake, Outlaw, and Webster.

Well, you are giving the keys to the small-forward car to Batum, that’s great. A little scary, because if he gets injured, you’d have to get someone else. You said you wanted to make some deal for a “SF to back up Batum”, which is smart – but you’ve already traded SB, TO, and MW, so how are you going to get a small forward?

Sean Williams doesn’t light my fuse and Dooling has been all over the league – he doesn’t bowl me over, either.

I’d say Blake and one more player for Harris, otherwise I don’t need to do the deal at all.

Good luck finding your “point gaurd”. – Elgin

Without you out there, we're nowhere here

by 22baylor on Jun 26, 2009 12:18 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Devin Harris is nearly Roy-level star. Trading an injured Webster, an average Outlaw, and a role-playing Blake for an all-star with an affordable contract?

Sign me up.

New Jersey wouldn’t do it.

by Cablinasian on Jun 26, 2009 1:20 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

if Chicago tried to trade Tyrus Thomas, Kirk Hinrich, and James Johnson for Brandon Roy, would we do it? No.

That’s about the value of the package that we’d be sending New Jersey in this scenario. Devin Harris is close to Roy-level good, just one step down.

by Cablinasian on Jun 26, 2009 1:32 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Totally right

Replace Blake with Bayless and throw in Rudy and things are becoming a lot more attractive to the Nets.

by erastus25 on Jun 26, 2009 1:28 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Wait for it...Wait for it...

Pritch has freed up the cap space, has a few spare parts (3 SF’s, Rudy) to entice quality trades with other teams, and the trade exception to go for lopsided trades.

Don’t be surprised by either of the following 2 scenarios (both of which are appealing)…
     1.) We end up wtih Hinrich and either Luol Deng or better yet, Hedo Turkoglu. Don’t underestimate how Hedo’s game would instantly mesh with B-Roy and LA as well as ensure Oden is never ever double teamed. Brutal line-up to face.
     2.) Pritch sits tight and goes for the home run in next year’s free agency class (the infamous class of 2010)

Either way we get 50+ wins again this year, watch the development of our young up-and-comers and potentially add a missing piece or two.

by eets on Jun 26, 2009 12:30 PM PDT reply actions   0 recs

2.) Doesn't really work

Unless we are planning letting go of LMA or Roy. All indications point to LMA and Roy having extensions going into next season, which eliminates all cap space flexibility in the future.

Gimmicks don't make dynasties

by WarEaglePDX on Jun 26, 2009 1:19 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I'm betting LeBron, Wade and Bosh will all sign

for the minimum to play for Portland next season.

by torsoheap on Jun 26, 2009 1:27 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I like torsoheap's thinking

WarEagle…are you pretty confident about that? I think there might be room for Roy, LMA, and at least one of Turkoglu and Hinrich (maybe even both) not to mention if we sniff a trophy Allen may pony up for some luxury tax dough.

by eets on Jun 26, 2009 1:29 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I don't see the Blazers

Waiting until the end of next season and offering Roy and Aldridge qualifying offers – that’s a bit of an insult. Don’t you expect them to be given extensions this season?

That means free agency is only really relevant this off-season.

by TheMadKiwi on Jun 26, 2009 2:29 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Quick reported that LMA and Roy were likely to sign extensions this offseason, didn’t he?

by Cablinasian on Jun 26, 2009 2:36 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Yes

The plan is to use up the cap-space on FAs (or make a lopsided trade) then go over the cap to extend Roy/LMA

If the Blazers have their way, Brandon and LaMarcus will come into training camp with LTCs and no worries

by two4larue on Jun 26, 2009 4:22 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

misunderstood

I think 1.) is very possible. We have cap space this summer to sign FA’s or make lopsided trades. I am in the camp that hopes we have Hinrich (more likley) or Harris (most likely wishful thinking) as our starting PG next year. After we do make our offseason aquisitions this summer, we will offer LMA & Roy extensions, eliminating any possibility of 2.) being an option.

We will have the MLE, etc. to use next summer. Maybe we will have a big name willing to take the MLE to get a championship opportunity….but I doubt any of those names would be Lebron, Wade or Bosh.

Gimmicks don't make dynasties

by WarEaglePDX on Jun 26, 2009 2:45 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Smart At First, but Stubborn At Last

I will admit that it was smart to take a foreign player in the first round to avoid salary obligations, and to swing for the fences, so to speak, while still filling needs in the second round. So I’m not quibbling with the Claver pick.

But there is some false logic going on here. Dajuan Blair was still available at 31, and even if we REALLY liked Pendergraph at 31, Blair was ALSO available at 33, and we passed again. It’s not accidental that the Spurs picked Blair. It’s not accidental that he is being deemed the steal of the draft.

The obvious pick of Blair over a guy whose name Nate McMillan has trouble remembering in interviews (Dante Cunningham) would have been both swinging for the fences AND safe, if that’s possible. Drafting him at 33, versus at 22, if he doesn’t pan out, you’ve only used the #33 pick in the draft, and he has a non-guaranteed contract. IF he does work out, you’ve got the “steal of the draft,” and a guy who can either back up LA or be a very attractive trade asset, even if the other backup PF you drafted doesn’t work out. In essence, you’ve got two chances to find your backup PF.

As it is, you just drafted two players in Claver and Cunningham who play the position we are most likely to address in free agency (SF), the latter of whom was likened to Travis Outlaw, a guy half of Portland is screaming to trade.

I belive the Claver pick was fine. I believe the Pendergraph pick was acceptable. I believe that the reason you accumulate a million second round picks is to accumulate assets or take risks. No way Blair should have slipped below 33, unless his knees are so bad he can’t play in the league. (IF that’s true, then someone in SA should be fired, and I will rescind this post.) But, just a risk of bad knees should NOT be enough reason to pass on him at 33.

I can live with the Mills pick.

Kermit on the inbounds play, inbounds....
BATES at the horn, HE SCORES!! HE SCORES!!!!

And they are all over Billy Ray Bates! My, oh my!!!

by blazer91 on Jun 26, 2009 12:49 PM PDT reply actions   0 recs

...oh, and "He wasn't on our board"

is just stupid. If he wasn’t on the board, it’s either because we thought he was too good to fall (in which case, take him), or because we were too scared of having another big man with knee problems (again, guys too afraid to make a mistake, unless the medical staff would not clear him.)

Kermit on the inbounds play, inbounds....
BATES at the horn, HE SCORES!! HE SCORES!!!!

And they are all over Billy Ray Bates! My, oh my!!!

by blazer91 on Jun 26, 2009 12:54 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Does anyone even know how this magical "board" works?

I would love to hear the details. My guess is that before the draft, our management team sits down and ranks every single player available from 1-60. That way if the opportunity to trade up into the lottery comes along they are prepared and can take advantage. This list would take into account injuries, team needs, player’s likely future plans (e.g. staying in Spain for one more year), etc. Then, unless a trade is in the works the actual drafting of players can often be as simple as taking the next guy on the top of the list.

Based on interviews last year when KP mentioned that his predictions for other teams’ picks were right through like #17 or something, we can also assume he has a separate list with the expected choices of other teams, and top alternatives (I would love to see that list – probably the most accurate predictions anywhere).

Then I would expect that those two “boards” are constantly considered, with the latter revising the first, and opportunities to move up or down are considered depending on whether or not management expects to get screwed by another team. Hence the trade with Dallas last year to presumably steal Batum from SA (thank goodness). Does anyone know if my inferences are even close to right?

Based on this I would speculate that Nate really meant “He wasn’t even on our board (for that pick)” as in everyone chosen was higher on their list. The “we expected him to be gone already” most likely meant that they either expected another team to make a mistake or Nate was just being diplomatic. But I absolutely refuse to believe that every option had not been considered by KP. I mean, how can you even try to make a trade if you’re not familiar with the guys likely available at the pick you’re moving into? You couldn’t. And in the second round you have to be familiar with EVERYONE because it’s so much more unpredictable.

I guess my point is that I think team management almost certainly knew what they were doing when they passed on Blair. If that was a mistake, then I guess you blame the system. But considering this is the same system that pulled off the Roy/Aldridge draft and grabbed Batum and Fernandez I will gladly accept a couple talent evaluation mistakes every couple years.

by erastus25 on Jun 26, 2009 1:26 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Medical rejects would not be on the board

Once they decide not to take a medical problem that player is disqualified from the draft board.

Now we don’t know that is what happens but it is a simple answer for the boo birds.

by lee3022 on Jun 29, 2009 2:22 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

"wasn't on our board" is just being diplomatic

You expect Nate to kick Blair why he’s down by blasting the poor kid publicly?

How did you guys win that?
"We scored enough points. We scored 107, they scored 105.
-Nate McMillan Postgame, 3/4/2009

by douglast on Jun 26, 2009 2:53 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Right

He was on the board somewhere….ranked 56th or lower is all

"You're welcome friend
I love you."
- Tom "Dragline" inHawaii

by 92wastheyear on Jun 27, 2009 12:11 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

34th or lower

"You're welcome friend
I love you."
- Tom "Dragline" inHawaii

by 92wastheyear on Jun 27, 2009 12:12 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

maybe he wasn't on our board because of Darius Miles?

Drafting someone with no ACLs probably wouldn’t give the team very much leverage while simultaneously appealing the Miles’ situation. So maybe they really did just leave him off altogether in light of their pending appeal. Thoughts?

by zbrum on Jun 27, 2009 11:56 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

+1

exactly. Draft was fine except for pick #33.

by Blazin' on Jun 26, 2009 12:58 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

See above

Blair should have been the pick
Cunningham should not have been the pick

Kermit on the inbounds play, inbounds....
BATES at the horn, HE SCORES!! HE SCORES!!!!

And they are all over Billy Ray Bates! My, oh my!!!

by blazer91 on Jun 26, 2009 1:01 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

everyone commenting on Blair has yet to speak about his charachter

does anyone know if he’s a decent guy? Pritch may have decided a “gamble” wasn’t worth the headache. I heard Blair came to one of the rookie mini-camps out of shape. Not the kind of guy we’ve been building with as opposed to maniacal gym rats like BRoy JBay and MWeb

by eets on Jun 26, 2009 1:15 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

actually Blair is supposedly a really great guy. In every interview he is thoughtful, and supposedly is a terrific teammate. Character isn’t an issue with Blair.

by Cablinasian on Jun 26, 2009 1:20 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Mike Rice spoke passionately about Blair's character during the draft broadcast.

And also admitted that his son had recruited Blair and bird-dogged his eating habits.

by lee3022 on Jun 29, 2009 2:24 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Thank You!

This seems the most likely answer. First of all, he has a tattoo that says, “God’s Gift”. Secondly, I’m sure we all saw the clip of him tearing Thabeet’s arm apart to get the rebound; that was no accident. Thirdly, as you mentioned, he has poor work ethic. Apparently, he’s an animal on the court, but a slouch in the weight room.

These three factors are enough for me to support passing on him completely. How many times do we have to hear KP emphasize our team’s “culture” before it sinks in? We’re the good guys now; thugs need not apply.

This also explains why he wasn’t “on our list”. Maybe we really didn’t think he’d be available, and maybe his knees were a deal-breaker, but if his attitude was the issue that makes it very difficult to discuss in a press conference. It wouldn’t have been too cool to step out there and say, “Yeah, we could have picked Blair, but the dude’s kind of a lazy chump.” Not very professional. It’s much easier to say, “Aw shucks, I guess we just didn’t think he’d be there, and we had our eyes on somebody else.”

by 500dogs on Jun 27, 2009 6:50 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

The tattoo is lame

But ripping someone’s arm off for a rebound is EXACTLY what we want in our backup PF. That is a good thing to do to someone in a basketball game, and something I hope we do every single quarter.

I think that KP and Friends have good reasons to not get Blair, but culture and attitude aren’t likely one of them. By all reports, he is a great kid.

I also think we can guess he’s a bit lazy and doesn’t work out as hard, by his weight problem. Also doesn’t likely make good decisions with his diet. But that doesn’t make him a bad kid.

Mortimer

by Mortimer on Jun 27, 2009 7:03 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

What do we want?

A great kid, eh? Maybe you’re right. I honestly haven’t watched any interviews with the guy, but that ink says more than any of that “we all gave 110%” crap.

As far as the arm bar goes, it was overboard: plain and simple. He had the ball under control and the maneuver was unnecessary. It looked like thuggery to me. I’m with you in regards to needing a dominant physical presence at the backup PF, but there are limits.

Winning is what it’s all about, but there’s winning and then there’s winning. I prefer to be able to look my opponents in the eye and shake their hand after a game. It’s called sportsmanship, and it is obviously now a priority for this team.

But you’re right, just because he’s got a lame, terminally egotistical, tattoo, bad work ethic and a penchant for thuggery doesn’t mean he’s bad kid…oh wait, yes it does. Sorry, but if it wasn’t the knees…

by 500dogs on Jun 27, 2009 7:46 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Maybe he's a bad kid

But you’re the first in all of his years at Pitt and prepping for the draft that says he is. No one ‘in the know’ has floated that rumor. He’s known as a good kid.

I’ll give him the benefit of the doubt on the tattoo. Joel Przybilla has ‘AND-1’ and ‘NOT IN MY HOUSE’ tattoo’d on him. Those are worse for many reasons. He’s still a good guy.

I disagree on the rip-the-arm-off. That is a fair and good move. It is his ball.

Mortimer

by Mortimer on Jun 27, 2009 8:06 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

that was an epic move. Thabeet almost split in half.

by Cablinasian on Jun 27, 2009 10:01 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I don't think that Blair was ever in KP's plans

Just the fans… Even Nate said he wasn’t on their draft board.

But I guess we the fans know better…

Blazers win!

by The X-man on Jun 26, 2009 1:20 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

not on the draft board was a nice way of saying that he had bad knees. That’s the way it came across in Nate’s interview on 95.5 today.

by Cablinasian on Jun 26, 2009 1:33 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

SI had an article about doctors red flagging more guys now

apparently GMs were frustrated about it since it seemed like doctors “covering their asses”, but if I had to guess, I’d say that there probably wasn’t a single medical staff that cleared him (Buford probably just ignored his since he has to win in the next two years).

by Royster on Jun 26, 2009 1:38 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I tend to agree. Today, Nate called Blair a lottery talent, but said they didn’t pick him because of a few reasons, which the public could probably guess.

by Cablinasian on Jun 26, 2009 1:40 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Sometimes someone can be a lottery pick

…but not rank very high on a specific team’s board. For example, he doesn’t fit the team’s culture, timeline, or needs. So just because someone is generally viewed as a lottery pick doesn’t always mean that they’re even a second rounder for some specific teams.

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

by jamon51 on Jun 26, 2009 5:27 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Nate said the Blazers didn’t pick him because of a reason the public could probably guess, but said that he had lottery talent. I’m going to assume that it’s the injury issue.

by Cablinasian on Jun 26, 2009 5:43 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Or that his skillset

isnt what we seek alongside Greg or Joel.

Perhaps we want perimeter defense and midrange offense from our PF more than we want a rebound machine.

Bedge or go home.

by Ojala John on Jun 26, 2009 7:27 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

from the context of the interview, it sure seemed like the injury.

by Cablinasian on Jun 27, 2009 1:21 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

its simple

Blair was an inferior value to Cunningham. Else, he would have been selected instead. The information available to us typical fans is a fraction that available to NBA teams. They have all the information necessary to make informed decisions, so how can we possibly second guess? We can only speculate on the context for any pick. We certainly do not have the necessary information to be absolute in our conviction that this particular brain trust screwed the draft.

At the very least, we must remember that the Blazer management team represents the cutting edge in player evaluation. They use advanced metrics that make Hollinger’s look like a pre-school project. They spend millions on scouting. We spend minutes on Internet reports. We are not insiders, and we never will be.

by blacknoiseNW on Jun 26, 2009 5:45 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

is that your experience of life?

In my personal experience, i am often surprised at the incompetence and corruption of people in positions of influence. You ever hear of the Peter Principle?

 I know I shouldn’t go there, but all the money and experts in the world didn’t seem to help GW Bush much.

That said, I don’t think KP is either incompetent or corrupt. But I do think that organizations and bureaucracies are inherently prone to problems that often a lone outsider can see and avoid.

Besides all of that, we are sports fans. We are on a blog. Expressing our opinions is what we do!

by Blazin' on Jun 26, 2009 7:53 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

wow

I like bacon.

The Faith don't panic, the faith freaks out, burns out farms, and torchs small villages in the name of The Faith.

"New Man Law: If you don't show up for the draft you don't get to come later if you're picked. If you believe in yourself, show up and sit there. If nobody else believes in you, take it and cry like a man...in front of the cameras."

-Dave

by faith on Jun 26, 2009 8:07 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Any fan assuming they have the requisite knowledge to second-guess KP

is delusional. The only superior analytical tool we have at our disposal is hindsight. That will take time to develop.

In the meanwhile – incompetence and corruption is hardly the exclusive domain of those in “positions of influence”, but KP is an NBA franchise executive with a clear MO, and your analogy has no merit, here.

If you don’t know by now that the Blazers represent the “Moneyball” analogues in the NBA, then you can be prone to absolute statements such as “Blair should have been the pick…Cunningham should not have been the pick”. As an informed fan, I can acknowledge that my informed status has nothing to do with being privy to the information that does or does not support such a second guess.

I know, just as everyone else here should know, that we are blessed to have one of the most advanced, if not THE most advanced player evaluation staff in control of our favorite team. Does this mean blind trust? Hardly. Does it mean we have no legitimate basis to claim that KP made a mistake by not drafting Blair? Yes.

A lone outsider may randomly “see” a solution that comprehensive analysis fails to generate, but most often that result is either chance or at best, intuition.

Paralysis by analysis is a disease that can afflict anyone dependent on an analytical system. If the Blazer management group is inflexible and completely dependent on the output of quantitative results. However, this group has openly acknowledged that while number crunching helps them buck the prevailing wisdom (see Batum vs. Hollinger, last year, where Hollinger said Batum’s stats did not bode well for a transition to the NBA), they still rely on judgment of intangibles that can make the difference in player evaluation.

So when I say that we, as fans, lack the information necessary to say that KP’s approach to player evaluation is flawed, I do not need to invoke the specter of George Bush to support a straw man argument.

by blacknoiseNW on Jun 27, 2009 10:53 AM PDT up reply actions   2 recs

Does it mean we have no legitimate basis to claim that KP made a mistake by not drafting Blair? Yes.

I agree with most of what you’ve said. But there’s only one little problem. RC Buford picked Blair at #37. Now you have another well-informed organization who thought that DeJuan was worth the risk, picking 4 spots behind KP.

It’s not a “fans think they know more than KP argument” It’s “who will have a better NBA career, Dante Cunningham or DeJuan Blair?” We shall see

Believe me, a lot of Blazer fans thought that Jack Ramsay and Stu Inman could “do no wrong” after 1977. But those were the same guys who selected Bowie over Jordan. No team exec is irreproachable.

Eventually KP will “miss” one (keep Travis Outlaw, instead ot acquire Devin Harris in 2007?) but that doesn’t mean he should be canned the next day.

by two4larue on Jun 27, 2009 11:20 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Bowie vs. Jordan is actually a good point

in my favor. They ignored Bowie’s medical history and drafted on need, instead of value.

Then again, this draft is about people, not machines, and the human element has a certain element of uncertainty that can never be analyzed away. We fans can play with that uncertainty as much as we want, but we, like everyone else, have to wait and see history unfold before we can make absolute judgments about what was or wasn’t the best choice.

If Bowie had been healthy, he might have been a monster. Ditto Blair.

by blacknoiseNW on Jun 27, 2009 11:29 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

The Spurs had a much greater need at Power Forward than the Blazers

We have a starter that is close to being an all-star. Who do they have? Matt Bonner, Drew Gooden? Don’t include TD because he is their center.
They also have a shorter window to “get r’ done” than they Blazers. With basically one pick, what else were they going to do? Imagine if they had passed on Blair with their needs right now. You think some Blazer fans are upset? The Spurs fans would have burnt down the city.
I think this move shows us that the Blazers have a veteran power forward in mind that they will be acquiring this off season (Bass/McDyess ?). Why would we then need or take a chance on Blairs knees when we would have LMA/Bass or McDyess + Pendergraph who may last longer than the first year during the rigors of an NBA season (which is more than Blair played in all of his college career)?

To summarize: Wade too quick, Kobe too skilled, LeBron too physical - Batum

by Ltlgto on Jun 28, 2009 8:42 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

impressive retort

But in both of your comments, you don’t mention the fact that the you and I and KP all share the most critical information about a prospect: Watching them play!

Does it make a fan delusional if they watch video of both Cunningham and Blair and come away with the conclusion that Blair is the stronger player?

Is one delusional to say that one of the best rebounders to come out of college in years better suits our needs at backup PF than a guy who, in the NBA, has more of a small forward physique and playing style?

I understand that GMs steered away from Blair in this draft, and they no doubt had good reason. But I refer you, for the strategic argument, to Dave’s most recent analysis about the draft:

2. If you don’t draft a point guard, however, you need to swing for the fences. Take a risk. We don’t need immediate help at other positions. In fact we have too many (young) players at most of them.

Having already selected Pendergraph, it just seemed to make sense to take a chance here on someone who could actually make an impact.

I don’t generally go around questioning KP. He’s a golden boy as far as I’m concerned. And I’m not going to say he screwed up here. I don’t have enough information. But my eyebrow is raised by this choice. Nothing more, nothing less.

And my sniffer tells me that this draft did not flow for us like recent ones have. And those guys probably got a little rattled. Now that’s a straight up guess.

by Blazin' on Jun 27, 2009 11:57 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I am actually starting to like Cunningham

I didn’t know a lot about him before the draft, but i have been looking up information on him and he seems like a good kid: hard-working, humble, and very team-oriented. He was a 4-year college player but is still rapidly developing (was Big East most improved player this year) and probably has a significant amount of untapped potential remaining. I think he could end up developing into a pretty good SF if we end up trading Outlaw and/or Webster, and he has enough size that he could fill in at the 4 a little bit as well.

I do think we should have gone after Blair with one of the 3 picks that we could have gotten him with, but if you ignore the fact that Blair was still on the board then taking Cunningham with the #33 pick seems like a very reasonable move.

by trk on Jun 26, 2009 1:59 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

KP made me look smart

by geting 2 of the guys I wanted in Claver and JP,I was hoping for Llull at 33 and not suprised he passed on Blair. Donte was completely under my radar and Mills could be something special.

by southern oregon on Jun 26, 2009 1:32 PM PDT reply actions   0 recs

Clearing cap room...that's what this is all about.

Understand.
This was brilliant seeming inaction on the Blazers’ part.
Is this Hinrich talk all a smokescreen?
You bet.
A source in the Raptors’ front office called me, asking my advice on the franchise’s future. It’s clear that Chris Bosh is tired of border crossings and nightly dual anthems and an underachieving franchise.
Being on the phone, I couldn’t look into his eyes and read his soul.
But I could hear it in his voice.
Toronto’s slashing payroll. They’re ready to deal Bosh. They’re ready to deal anyone.
And I hear the distant strains of “ole, ole, ole!”
For Jose Calderon will soon be a Blazer, acquired for Travis Outlaw and either Steve Blake or Jerryd Bayless.
You want a real Spanish connection?
You got it. Jose to Rudy, all year and for several more years.
The Spanish embassy will be in Portland, Oregon.
Bet on it.

by Calzone on Jun 26, 2009 1:40 PM PDT reply actions   0 recs

Jose makes Steve look like Gary Payton on defense.

by Cablinasian on Jun 26, 2009 1:49 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

although I maintain that he is probably the best fit there is on offense.

by Cablinasian on Jun 26, 2009 1:49 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Understand.

For all his defensive liabilities, Calderon is a borderline top-10 NBA point guard.
I’m not a slave to stats, but his 08-09 PER of 18.8 was just below the PER of Chauncey Billups, and ahead of the following: Kidd, Miller, Derrick Rose, Sessions…and a full four points higher than Steve Blake’s PER.
Is Jose Calderon an upgrade?
You bet.

by Calzone on Jun 26, 2009 1:57 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

It would just depend on what you have to give up

in order to get him. I believe he’s a significant upgrade from Blake so it would be worth it as long as the price isn’t too steep.

by mwalter on Jun 26, 2009 1:58 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

What is too much?

Outlaw has reached his ceiling. So has Blake. Or if Toronto wanted Bayless, the kid is a gutty player and has definite upside, but we’ve also seen his deficiencies. He’s not a sure thing.

Is dealing Outlaw and Blake or Bayless is a reasonable price to pay to get Calderon?

You bet.

Remember also that Calderon has 4 years left on his contract. And $30 or so million is a commitment that the Raptors would be happy to give another team. So from their point of view this may be an equitable deal.

by Calzone on Jun 26, 2009 2:03 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Too much?

The players I’d be looking to move in a beneficial trade are Blake or Travis and to a lesser extent Bayless, Batum, and Rudy.

To get calderon I’d be willing to give up Blake or Travis – would the money saved be enough in the Raptors eyes? I don’t know that I’d give up both, but I’d be willing to part with Bayless for Calderon as well.

I’m just not sure how much beyond that I’d be willing to part with for an upgrade on the smaller end of things

by mwalter on Jun 26, 2009 2:09 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I could give up Bayless, definitely.

Batum…man. That would be tough. I really think he’s going to be a consummate role player for an elite team, maybe more than that.

Rudy…possibly. But I think it should be noted that on the business side of things Rudy is an enormous asset to the Portland Trail Blazers, especially in stoking female interest (my wife can attest to this). It would take a LOT to give up Rudy.

by Calzone on Jun 26, 2009 2:12 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Don't forget

We only have 2 PG’s now, and if you give up Blakey and Bayless for whomever, you would still need a backup PG. I suppose we could bring in the rook though. NAH!

I would also hesitate letting Batum go before Rudy.

To summarize: Wade too quick, Kobe too skilled, LeBron too physical - Batum

by Ltlgto on Jun 26, 2009 4:14 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I disagree

we’ve reached blakes ceiling. I do think we’re starting to scratch at it though.

"Fernandez, to my eyes, is the Blazer who walks that walk most comfortably. A lot of Portland's fans (egged on, dare I say, by their local broadcasters) lament things like how Ron Artest or Yao Ming get to hit Brandon Roy's arms.

But I suspect Fernandez sees all that and thinks: We get to hit arms! Cool!"

http://myespn.go.com/blogs/truehoop/0-39-135/On-Playoff-Experience.html

by ratbastird on Jun 26, 2009 2:55 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Also understand.

He’s also 8 years younger than Steve Nash.

by Calzone on Jun 26, 2009 1:59 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

He also would allow

Portland to have every Spanish-born player on its roster at some point.

by torsoheap on Jun 26, 2009 2:10 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

We'd need the Gasols to come

which is unlikely to say the least.

by Royster on Jun 26, 2009 2:46 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

F Gasol

"Oh yeah? You can Derelique my balls."

"I can Shavlick my own balls."

by Terry Gamble on Jun 26, 2009 2:46 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

and C Gasol too

If they came, though, I’d want them to leave their neckbeards at the state line.

by ninjasocks on Jun 26, 2009 3:00 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

if it was a Travis/Steve for Jose swap, I’d do it in a heartbeat, just because he’s a humongous upgrade over Steve. His scoring efficiency and ability to create off of the pick and roll are very nice.

That said, I don’t think Toronto would give him up for Steve and Travis.

by Cablinasian on Jun 26, 2009 2:05 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Add a first rounder and the Diogu trade exception.

Remember, this is the offseason of shedding contracts. Calderon’s is fairly large (though not totally unreasonable). If the Raps are going to rebuild, they may be willing to make such a deal.

by Calzone on Jun 26, 2009 2:06 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

there really is no one on the Toronto roster that we could absorb with the TE. Humphries makes too much, everyone else too little.

If the trade was Outlaw/Blake for Calderon, I would rejoice. Why? Extremely, extremely low usage rate, high scoring efficieny, great passer. His 16% USG boggles the mind.

by Cablinasian on Jun 26, 2009 2:13 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

considering that the Blazers were, what, 1st or 2nd in efficiency last season?

…adding Calderon could possibly result in the Blazers scoring every time they come down the court. Okay, I exaggerate a little.

I just think there’s a way to make this deal happen. It may involve a third team and a couple other players. It could even be part of a mega Chris Bosh deal (with Bosh going someplace else). But I have a feeling that KP has targeted Calderon, I really do.

by Calzone on Jun 26, 2009 2:19 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I disagree with you on that point. I tend to think that Calderon isn’t available for a salary dump.

by Cablinasian on Jun 26, 2009 2:29 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Dante is an excellent name

Can we agree never, ever, ever to call him “Cunny”?

by Kaboomm on Jun 26, 2009 2:28 PM PDT reply actions   0 recs

DC

if he sticks

by two4larue on Jun 26, 2009 4:24 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

NOOO

no more initial-nicks, please…I’m begging you…. TO, AI, KP, LA, BRoy, Jay-Bay, etc ad nauseum….

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

by jamon51 on Jun 26, 2009 5:30 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I'll tell you the real truth

The Blazers wanted Hansbrough but were not willing to pay that much to move up to get him. 22 was probably the highest they could move without overpaying and then the Pacers took away any hope of getting him at all. Therefore the Blazers went with their second choice in Claver.

When it comes to Blair, I don’t get that stuff at all. The Blazers are loaded in regards to Blair’s strengths, and it is the back up power forward position for KP’s sake. Who cares who is playing the back up power forward for the Blazers.

by tominhawaii on Jun 26, 2009 2:37 PM PDT reply actions   1 recs

I thought Hansbrough

going 13 was a shock going that high, until Blair landed at 37th.

To summarize: Wade too quick, Kobe too skilled, LeBron too physical - Batum

by Ltlgto on Jun 26, 2009 4:22 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I cared

in the 4th quarter of game 4 against the Rockets. When the good guys were out-rebounded 11-2 and lost by a point

by two4larue on Jun 26, 2009 4:25 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Here's my question:

Is this Cunningham kid related to Richie’s older brother? You know, the basketball player who mysteriously disappeared after the first season of Happy Days…..

by Storyteller on Jun 26, 2009 2:41 PM PDT reply actions   0 recs

I hope not

By my calculations, the Blazers have players from about 34 different countries, which is cool and whatnot for diversity and stuff, but the Blazers don’t need any Gingers.

by tominhawaii on Jun 26, 2009 3:07 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Gingers have no souls

Look @ Matt Bonner!

Blazers win!

by The X-man on Jun 26, 2009 3:10 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

what about Ginger Rogers

who did everything Fred Astaire did, only backward and in high heels. – Elgin

Without you out there, we're nowhere here

by 22baylor on Jun 26, 2009 4:27 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

but - he didn't wear high heels

or did he?? – Elgin

Without you out there, we're nowhere here

by 22baylor on Jun 29, 2009 12:45 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Sergio

Adios Sucka! I never liked Sergio.

We got an absolute Steal in Patrick Mills! This guy can flat out shoot. He didn’t play a ton last year because of his broken hand but this guy is a baller!

Patrick Mills is lightning quick. Anyone check out the Olympics?

"Oh yeah? You can Derelique my balls."

"I can Shavlick my own balls."

by Terry Gamble on Jun 26, 2009 2:46 PM PDT reply actions   0 recs

from truehoop (my bad if this was already posted):

“Those looking to react negatively to what was an unequivocally great night for the Spurs will look at the questions surrounding [DeJuan] Blair’s knees and claim he isn’t all he is cracked up to be. They will say he slid to 37 for a reason. I have two responses to that: First, there is no way in Hell the Spurs could have landed a more talented player at 37. Yes, there are a couple questions surrounding our early second round pick. Welcome to the reality of having only second round picks. Second, even if Blair’s knees are a long-term issue, they are exactly that: A long-term issue. With the Jefferson trade, the Spurs announced their intention to make a run for a 5th title and make it now. Aside from Blake Griffin, I would argue no big was more prepared to come onto an NBA squad and readily earn significant minutes than DeJuan Blair. The truth of the matter is, being able to select Blair with the 37th pick is an unmitigated coup. Blair was a dream, someone we mentioned just in case the front office became unexpectedly aggressive and moved up into the lottery. Well, sometimes dreams do come true.”

by GregOdensRings on Jun 26, 2009 3:00 PM PDT reply actions   0 recs

Oh, it's a great pick

No matter what happens. Even if he gets hurt and can never walk, or eats his way out of the league (he wouldn’t be the first) it is worth the risk for the Spurs.

He’s too clearly talented.

Mortimer

by Mortimer on Jun 26, 2009 3:02 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

You know what is grosser than gross?

What if he was at the bottom of a dump truck full of dead #$%^? Could he eat his way out of that?

by tominhawaii on Jun 26, 2009 3:11 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I believe in the kid

I think he could do it, and jump back in for seconds.

Morty

by Mortimer on Jun 26, 2009 3:42 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Ha-ha!

The “jump back in for seconds” line is priceless.

by AK1984 on Jun 26, 2009 4:04 PM PDT up reply actions   1 recs

Absolutely a great pick

The Spurs have little if anything to lose. But sometimes draft picks who were ‘supposed’ to be taken high in the first round fall for a reason (Qyntel Woods, Marciej Lampe, etc.)

by Storyteller on Jun 26, 2009 3:35 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I remember Chad for recommending Lampe over Wade

I don’t remember a chorus of analysts and writers doing the same. But obviously there is more to it for Blair when all teams seem to have heard the same rumors or seen the same evidencee, and judging from interviews and game tapes it can’t be his on-court play and his friendly character off the court.

by Norsktroll on Jun 26, 2009 5:50 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Regardless of Lampe over Wade

he was still expected to be lotto pick or a guaranteed first rounder at the very least, hence the green room invite. I don’t think anyone expected him to fall to the second.

by Royster on Jun 26, 2009 5:53 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

That was written by a spurs fan

but yes, it’s a great pick for the Spurs. Longevity has exactly zero weight for the Spurs when looking at draft picks. They need a guy who can potentially help them now, before Manu and Duncan fall apart. There weren’t many guys who could step in and contribute available at 37, so Blair was worth the risk. It’s different for us. If our medical staff was sure that his knees would fall apart within two years, then he doesn’t really help us. Sure, we have an outside shot at a title run this year, but I wouldn’t call us in serious contention just yet. If Blair’s going to be done by the time we are but ‘graph would still be around, wouldn’t that make him the better pick?

by Royster on Jun 26, 2009 3:08 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Knicks fans said similar things in 2003

when Marciej Lampe fell out of the Lottery and into their hands in the 2nd round. They claimed that every other team would rue the day that they passed on such an amazing talent. Then reality set it….

by Storyteller on Jun 26, 2009 3:29 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I couldn't agree more

All of these “day after” trade analyses are pointless, and based entirely on whichever team takes the guy that falls the farthest getting the best grade.

Lampe was a “steal”, McRoberts was a “steal” (coincidentally at 37, also), the Spurs were criticized last year for taking George Hill instead of Arthur with his kidney issues. Gerald Green was supposed to be a steal at 18, as was David Noel in the second round. Some guys that fall turn out all right (Granger, Howard), and sometimes the GMs are just right the first time.

by Royster on Jun 26, 2009 3:43 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I think the way someone falls is a good indicator

Granger and Howard both had the “low potential” anchor around their neck, from playing a few years in college, and they fell for no good reason than the GMs wanted something more intriguing over someone they KNEW was good.

I think if Blair wasn’t overweight, and had ACL’s, there is no way he falls. His game was too good. But, he did fall because of the weight and injury concerns, and I can’t think of others who fell because of that and it was proven to be faulty logic (though I am surely forgetting someone).

Green fell because of attitude, smarts, and not working out for teams, McRoberts because he wasn’t that good in college and was coasting on a past rep, and I don’t remember what happened to Lampe. I just think the reasons for why they fell is the bigger thing to focus on. Sometimes a dude is real good, but just not what people are thinking they’re looking for.

Why Blair fell is worrisome, if he truly has no ACL and is such an injury risk. He needs to get that sorted out, but unfortunately since he is already so big and just starting his career, I doubt he’ll be likely to. He’ll want to play basketball right away and get to that next deal. I can see why teams avoided getting him in the first round, with the guaranteed money, being such a HUGE injury risk.

Why did I not hear he had no ACL before the draft? I heard surgery, didn’t hear he didn’t have any anymore. Am I just clueless? I didn’t follow this draft as closely as normal…

by Mortimer on Jun 26, 2009 3:48 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

^^^^^^

Written by,
Mortimer

by Mortimer on Jun 26, 2009 3:50 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Close on there

Yeah if he really “doesn’t have ACL’s” that’s concerning. Would I still take him at 33 after nabbing a solid player like Pendergraph? Yes. It’s still up in the air. You can only hope that Pendergraph is a solid player for us and we aren’t pining for Blair-type player 12 months from now.

She lives in my lap
WORD UP.STAY.FRESCO

by Dheepan on Jun 26, 2009 3:55 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

You can only hope that Pendergraph is a solid player for us and we aren’t pining for Blair-type player 12 months from now.

Word.

 How about “pining for a player like Blair” 10 months from now when Portland is in the playoffs and still needs a banger?

by two4larue on Jun 26, 2009 4:42 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

The playoffs are all about matchups. Not every team is like Houston

and the Blazers also faced them before Yao went away.

ignacio

by ignacio on Jun 26, 2009 7:58 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

"NO ACL" sounds fishy to me.

I blew my ACL a few years back. The hospital wouldn’t take me in to have it fixed for two months because of my insurance. During that time, what was left of the ACL was absorbed back into my body.

But there were still two options after that. 1) Take a graft from the quad or hamstring, and use it to build a new ACL. 2) Use one from a cadaver.

I chose the first one, because there’s no chance of the body rejecting it.

The point is, it’s not like there’s a point at which you can’t get an ACL replacement, as far as I know, unless there’s some crazy complication, like his bones are made of teflon, and nothing can attach to them.

That said, the knee has never been the same, and never will be the same. I wouldn’t take a shot on someone who lost one ACL, much less two.

by zaruga on Jun 26, 2009 8:51 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Morty

We can see your sig line “by Mortimer” so you don’t have to sign each one…jez sayin… :)

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

by jamon51 on Jun 26, 2009 5:34 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Nuh uh

Where? Whatchoo talking about?

I’m on an Apple jr so maybe my screen cuts it off.

Mortimer

by Mortimer on Jun 26, 2009 10:09 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

it says...

“by Mortimer on Jun 26, 2009 10:09 PM PDT” in the up/reply/actions line

by mwalter on Jun 26, 2009 10:38 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

You guys are on sumthin'

I wish I could tell who was telling me this so I can tell them thank you for trying to help me, but if you don’t sign the post I can’t tell who wrote it.

That’s why I sign ’em, so people can tell who wrote it. Otherwise everyone just thinks a Robot who likes basketball wrote them from a space station or whatever.

Mortimer

by Mortimer on Jun 26, 2009 11:36 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I just got a new Texas Instruments that I got at Radio Shack

But it looks like I have the same problem :-(

Oh well, I’ll just keep signing my name to make sure everyone knows!

Mortimer

by Mortimer on Jun 27, 2009 1:46 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Nope...

all better now – whatever you did fixed the problem

by mwalter on Jun 27, 2009 2:32 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

What's with comparisons of Pendergraph to Channing Frye?

Other than they both went to Arizona schools? He’s like the exact opposite, and is a physical player.

From http://www.draftexpress.com/article/Situational-Statistics-This-Years-Power-Forward-Crop-3190/


Arguably the biggest winner of our analysis was Jeff Pendergraph, who ranked first with 1.19 PPP overall and second in finishing around the basket at 75.36%. A consummate hustle player, the only areas where Pendergraph didn’t rank near to the top in terms of efficiency were post up PPP, where he was about average at .91, and jump shooting, where his 1.05 is well above average, but came on just .6 attempts per game. Arizona State’s methodical half court offense clearly allowed Pendergraph to become an incredibly efficient player. The same can be said for Southern California’s Taj Gibson, who shot 75.36% on his finishing attempts (3rd), but seemingly sports no face-up game whatsoever.

So, a consumate hustle player, very efficient at finishing around the basket, can make jump shots but rarely attempted them. Sounds almost like the exact opposite of Frye’s game offensively, and I have not heard anything bad about him defensively. You have to like efficient players because they are excellent role players. The advanced stats the blazers used probably also rated Pendergraph highly…and combined with his workout against Hansbrough probably cemented him as their PF target.
Looking forward to seeing more of him, I think he’ll be solid off the bench. Show me something that points to him being soft?

by Pheesh on Jun 26, 2009 3:18 PM PDT reply actions   0 recs

Well

Channing actually had an inside game while he was with the cats, and even in his rookie season with the Knicks. He just turned into a useless jumpshooting scrub later on in his career.

She lives in my lap
WORD UP.STAY.FRESCO

by Dheepan on Jun 26, 2009 3:57 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

sure..

but channings inside game in college was more of a “hey I’m tall so this is where I will occasionally shoot hooks” Rather than, I DOMINATE THIS AREA NOM NOM NOM.

by Pheesh on Jun 26, 2009 4:10 PM PDT up reply actions   1 recs

I agree

And isn’t it best to have a backup power forward who knows his weaknesses and maximizes his strengths?

Someone who may not be a star (and thus doesn’t need star money) but isn’t a scrub?

Someone who brings it every night?

Someone who plays efficiently on both ends of the floor?

Someone who doesn’t need or even want shots?

I think Pendergraph could be a perfect backup 4 based on everything I’ve heard. We don’t need an all-star.

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

by jamon51 on Jun 26, 2009 5:38 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

The new Gary Trent

Blair? I remeber thinking Trent would have an impact – but its not WWF its the NBA.

Long and athletic: Pendergraft could be a solid if unspectacular player, hopiing for an active Inferno, Mills gonna make it or D league? Claver is a bet on upside like Rudy, who knows…

Seems like the Blazers were either locked out by other GM’s and/or KP would not give ups any core players (would you?) and the league just ain’t that impressed with the guys who are ‘not quite there’ that he would part with (and even we recognize their shortcomings)…

“C’ draft, but “A” for opening cap space. Seems he did what he could, no miracles (yet).
 
Apply the “Frye” test to Outlaw – who in the draft is better, now? Cna’t get good value? Just keep him for depth.

BEdge rocks.

by Sashland on Jun 26, 2009 7:32 PM PDT reply actions   0 recs

Craig Smith's more of a Trent type

Blair you have more the Tractor Traylor type…. I’m not talking level of talent, here, just styles of play.

by feral on Jun 28, 2009 7:00 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I think I know why we traded from 24 to 22 ...

… because the salary scale is more $ at 22 than 24, and if the plan was to stash that player in europe without actually signing them, you’d save more at 22 than 24. Two slots higher in the draft (used on an unsigned player) will give you a few more dollars in free agency this summer.

or am I completely wrong?

by pantsuit on Jun 26, 2009 9:43 PM PDT reply actions   0 recs

well, I could be totally crazy...

but if you don’t spend any money to sign the number 22 pick (because he’s in Europe) isn’t that the same amount of savings if you spend $0 on the number 24 pick (because they’re also playing in Europe)?

I think you’re thinking of it backwards…if they don’t end up shelling out any money, it wouldn’t make a difference which pick they took.

by mwalter on Jun 26, 2009 9:54 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Don't first round picks still have a cap-hold though?

So by picking Claver we will have less cap space that we can use this summer than we would have if we traded the pick. Also, since the rookie pay scale is higher at #22 than at #24, the cap hold should be bigger than it would have been at #24.

by trk on Jun 26, 2009 11:25 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

exactly

if our goal was cap space, the smart move would have been to trade the pick for next years’.

by Blazin' on Jun 27, 2009 12:25 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

one of the reasons

i don’t think this was a very good draft for us.

by Blazin' on Jun 27, 2009 12:26 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

but it goes away after.... july?

it does go away though, it only counts for a little while. and then counts again during?? shoot I dunno but it’s like during the rookie signing period that it counts or something…

STORYTELLER!!!! or someone smarter than me….

MODERATOR!!!! ya’ll r supose to be able to answer this right? :)

MEDIC!!!!!!

The Faith don't panic, the faith freaks out, burns out farms, and torchs small villages in the name of The Faith.

"New Man Law: If you don't show up for the draft you don't get to come later if you're picked. If you believe in yourself, show up and sit there. If nobody else believes in you, take it and cry like a man...in front of the cameras."

-Dave

by faith on Jun 27, 2009 12:37 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Fortunately, we all have access to a collective electronic brain and memory called the Internet

It isn’t infallible, we we can access such nuggets of information that answer the question at hand. For instance, a website called NBA Salary Cap FAQ answers this specific question in a roundabout way:

Usually, a 1st round pick counts against the cap based on the sliding scale for rookies. However, when a first rounder is already under contract with a non-NBA team, the drafting team can stash that player until the existing contract runs out.

Also "If a first round pick signs instead with a non-NBA team, his scale amount is excluded from the team salary on the date he signs his non-NBA contract or the first day of the regular season, whichever is later. The scale amount goes back onto the team salary on the following July 1 or when his non-NBA contract ends, whichever is earlier. In other words, these cap holds are removed for players playing outside the NBA, but only during the regular season. "

by blacknoiseNW on Jun 27, 2009 11:14 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Kevin Martin a target maybe?

The way I look at our move up 2 spots was to be ahead of Sacramento to use that pick (Casspi, a guy they wanted) Blake, Outlaw maybe, Sergio and 31st pick (Pendergraph) – maybe a different combo but the same basic idea – to trade for Martin. Who knows for sure. Add in the Ruffin trade exception maybe…

My question to you guys is if the above was the Blazers plan, would that have worked salary cap/NBA trade rules wise?

I had thought Claver would have been our target in the 2nd round, around 33rd he probably would’ve still been available.

I think that trade with Claver as a 2nd round pick up the Blazers would’ve been the clear “winners” of this draft.

I wonder if that was KP and Co’s plan…

What do you guys think?

Damn the Blazers. Damn them to hell. - 'The Sports Guy' Bill Simmons

by doublezeroduck on Jun 27, 2009 12:27 AM PDT reply actions   0 recs

they already traded sergio to em (martins still a king right? I'm dumb)... maybe a smaller part of the bigger deal?

they’d have the rights to alot of spainiards. And their own israel-ee (how do you say that?) …. rudy too? would you give em rudy and travis for …. ?? man. I duunnnnooooo.

The Faith don't panic, the faith freaks out, burns out farms, and torchs small villages in the name of The Faith.

"New Man Law: If you don't show up for the draft you don't get to come later if you're picked. If you believe in yourself, show up and sit there. If nobody else believes in you, take it and cry like a man...in front of the cameras."

-Dave

by faith on Jun 27, 2009 12:36 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

i want RUUU BEEEE OOOOOOOOOO

The Faith don't panic, the faith freaks out, burns out farms, and torchs small villages in the name of The Faith.

"New Man Law: If you don't show up for the draft you don't get to come later if you're picked. If you believe in yourself, show up and sit there. If nobody else believes in you, take it and cry like a man...in front of the cameras."

-Dave

by faith on Jun 27, 2009 12:39 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

maybe the Sergio trade was option #2?

My question is why would we move up a few spots and end up drafting a guy that, by all the things i’ve read, still would’ve been available at the early part of round 2?

I was thinking about that since it happened so i googled the Kings roster and saw Martin…. It made sense as soon as i saw his name. I don’t know, maybe i’m reading too much into it?

I think we moved in front of them to use the guy they wanted (Casspi) plus some of our young guys to get a player from them, to use it as leverage against them. Martin was the only player on the roster I would think we would’ve wanted, and as soon as I saw his name listed it made sense to me that he was probably the target for a trade… maybe even a lopsided trade that i’ve seen people talk about.

Damn the Blazers. Damn them to hell. - 'The Sports Guy' Bill Simmons

by doublezeroduck on Jun 27, 2009 1:24 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

but what I'm saying is that if we give them sergio ... litterally... we paid em to take him....

and worked em/us a exemption (dunno someone will straighten me out) ….into the deal… it could just be a move to get each roster ready for the move after the restriction period ends…. (forgive my lack of dates I know they exist but don’t know when does what)

sort of a …… beggin for sex at the highschool prom manuver….. (k that’s a bad analogy but still)

The Faith don't panic, the faith freaks out, burns out farms, and torchs small villages in the name of The Faith.

"New Man Law: If you don't show up for the draft you don't get to come later if you're picked. If you believe in yourself, show up and sit there. If nobody else believes in you, take it and cry like a man...in front of the cameras."

-Dave

by faith on Jun 27, 2009 10:24 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Why do we want Kevin Martin though?

He’s a pure SG and a HORRIBLE defender. Also a bad playmaker.

The season before last he was incredibly efficient and gets to the FT line a lot. That would be nice.

But he isn’t for sale for anything we’d give up, his contract is too nice for the Kings and he means much more to them than he would to us. We really don’t NEED his offense, and his defense is awful, and he isn’t a SF.

Petrie is a GM who has always loved Euro talent, before it was chic and vogue to do so. He was seen as a risk to take Claver, so we got in front of them to make sure we got Claver. I doubt it’d be to pressure or get ammo for a K-Mart trade. And while Claver wanted to be taken in the 2nd round so he can make more money, I assume KP and Friend are confident in their ability to recruit him over to play for the peanuts a late 1st round contract would pay. They can sic Rudy on him, fly over to see him, become friend with his parents, etc… when the time comes.

Or he’s a very attractive trade piece, because he’s so young and versatile.

I do think what we did in the draft just means we’re, for sure, adding a veteran PG and veteran backup PF. The draft for us this year was mostly superfluous, which is fine. I’d rather we be going for a vet anywho, honestly! And a vet we could use, not a guy with no defense and doesn’t play a position we need.

Martin is a fine player, but just not what we need.

Mortimer

by Mortimer on Jun 27, 2009 1:54 AM PDT up reply actions   1 recs

100%

agree – well said

by mwalter on Jun 27, 2009 12:17 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Wheels said they were targeting Hansbrough

Comcast reaired the draft show with Barrett (et al) yesterday and one of the things that I missed on draft night was they talked to Wheeler at the PF shortly after the Claver pick. Brian said that they were hoping that Psycho T would slide down to 22, or maybe if he had slid down further than Indy at 13, perhaps the Blazers had another deal in place to move up and pick him. But Indy liked TH even more, so those plans were scuttled. (And personally, I’m glad that they didn’t work out!)

Penn was on “the Fan” yesterday and mentioned that there were “4-5 draft deals that didn’t work out” for Portland, during the draft, and I think KP “settled” on Claver because of this (he probably could’ve waited and gotten Victor in the 2nd round) NOw, it’s still a “good” thing that when VC is ready to come over, his rookie salary will be fixed, just like Rudy’s is now. But it also wouldn’t surprise me to see either Claver or Pendergraph moved in a “lopsided” deal next month, if the Blazers need to add a sweetener.

This offseason isn’t over, folks, not by a long shot

by two4larue on Jun 27, 2009 10:19 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

can we call him vickie?

The Faith don't panic, the faith freaks out, burns out farms, and torchs small villages in the name of The Faith.

"New Man Law: If you don't show up for the draft you don't get to come later if you're picked. If you believe in yourself, show up and sit there. If nobody else believes in you, take it and cry like a man...in front of the cameras."

-Dave

by faith on Jun 27, 2009 10:26 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

YOU can call him that

if you like ;^)

If he comes to Portland and becomes popular, maybe we’ll call him “Gingy” or “Red” or something. I think with that his auburn hair Claver will be almost as much of a heart-throb as Rudy and Nic

something for the ladies of Portland to look forward to?

by two4larue on Jun 27, 2009 11:27 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Tyreke Evans?

Damn the Blazers. Damn them to hell. - 'The Sports Guy' Bill Simmons

by doublezeroduck on Jun 27, 2009 2:07 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Is this in response to me?

And are you asking if Tyreke is an option? Sorry if it isn’t, I’ll reply anyways l-)

He was recently the driver for a drive by shooting that his brother is going to jail for. Lotsa concerns about that, especially for the Blazers. He played some PG in college, but he seems to really be a SG. I don’t see us having room for him either, with Rudy and Roy locking down the SG spot, and he really doesn’t appear to fit the “culture” KP places such importance on.

Not a very savvy player, got moved to PG mainly to put the ball in his hands more because he isn’t good off the ball, I’m not sure about the pick for the Kings for the same reasons I don’t like him for us. I don’t understand why they didn’t take Rubio.

If they had picked Rubio, I could see maybe we’d be looking at working a deal with them. I dunno if he is a real target for us, but more likely than Tyreke or Kevin Martin.

I think they are going to try to make him a PG so he can play next to Martin, but he’s a ways away from being a real PG most likely and I don’t trust the “scene” he comes from.

Mortimer

by Mortimer on Jun 27, 2009 2:41 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

SHOULD HAVE TRADED THE PICK

At least portland could have traded the first round pick to someone else for a future first round pick. Rather than picking someone that will be overseas for several years that may or may not turn out to be a great player. Plus, do we really need a rookie SF?

So what KP should have done is trade pick 22 for a future first round pick.

by davio on Jun 27, 2009 2:42 AM PDT reply actions   0 recs

That's sorta what he did

But, he traded it to ourselves.

He isn’t expected to come over for a few years. And he’s a highly regarded young Euro prospect, just like Rudy was for years. We snagged him while his value is still coming up and it’ll only get more valuable as he ages and (likely) improves.

If he didn’t like anyone else but really liked Claver, I don’t mind him snagging who he likes a lil’ before he “needs” to if he likes the guy that much. Our Euro scouts have been spot on so far! And the kid will play against great competition in Eurolandia to help him improve.

Mortimer

by Mortimer on Jun 27, 2009 2:52 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Traded it to ourselves -- nice!

And maybe got a better player than the draft position would indicate, because he’s in Europe and he isn’t available right now. That means he might be a #12 value in 2011 that we got for #22 now. At least, that’s one theory.

by Kaboomm on Jun 27, 2009 11:18 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I don't think KP wanted a 1st round pick with a guaranteed salary

that is why he used his 1st rounder to pick a guy that this year would have been 2nd round, but in future years likely a 1st rounder. Claver would have been subject to the same “stashing rules” as a 1st or second rounder, so this really didn’t have anything to do with him, per se, other than the fact that when he does come over, he is locked into this year’s salary scale.

by blacknoiseNW on Jun 27, 2009 11:23 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

You get the sense that everyone is taking time off after that exhausting draft

It’s very tiring to wait in anticipation and then have the air let out.

by Sonic Boom on Jun 27, 2009 10:12 PM PDT reply actions   0 recs

pendergraph is alright...

as far as the rest…not impressed.

I’m sure I could be proved wrong in the future, but we basically gave sergio away for nothing and got an injured guy that might be interesting to someone else in a year…like a rubio that got hit by a truck…

yeah….hopefully we trade for someone interesting this summer…otherwise….fail…

I have my P.h.D in unreliable hyperbole.

by Eat Politicians on Jun 28, 2009 9:15 PM PDT reply actions   0 recs

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

A site by Blazer fans, for Blazer fans
Start posting about the Trail Blazers »

Join SB Nation and dive into communities focused on all your favorite teams.

Connect_with_facebook

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recommended FanPosts

Small
Sched Ahead and Updated Head to Head 3/8/10, Week Nineteen
Small
Cunningham vs. Bass
Small
Game by Game -- Our Schedule vs The Teams Just Ahead
Small
Game by Game -- Our Schedule vs The Chasing Pack
Small
TV reporter wants your perspective

Recent FanPosts

Small
Sched Ahead Daily Update, Games of 3/9
Hi_small
Calling out all the posters on BE
Editfun_small
3.10.10-Junk Drawer: Spring Break Ed.
Small
Classy Lakers blog
Small
backup point guard/center roster spots for remainder and playoffs
Small
Sched Ahead Daily Update, Games of 3/8
0215101737-01-02_small
Junk 3-9-2010
Small
Robin Lopez
Small
start bayless at pg?
Small
Something's not right

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >

FanShots

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

Recommended FanShots

dre=Dr. J
Casey Holdahl breaks it on Blazers.com... "Joel Przybilla will undergo...
Oden running?
Preview of 2010 playoffs. 

Half man, half machine. It's Oden version 2.0. Brought to you by Paul Allen and Co.
I'm still on my Nic Batum "high"... I saw a request in some comments for a Batum in Obama logo so i google obama makers and found a maker.. and made this :)

Recent FanShots

Magic coveting Clippers' Steve Blake?
"Regularized Plus-Minus" at a newish nba stats site
Deron Williams punks Derrick Rose with fast break dunk
Frye Suspended for punch!
Iverson in trouble according to S A S
This shows both the ESPN and Mike and Mike TV broadcasts, as well as the Blazer bench reaction, of the Andre Miller dunk.  Rice is beyond giddy. Also, look at Jerryd. He was in complete shock. Priceless. 

PS: Quality isn't great.
ESPN's J.A. Adande - article on the Blazer's Season
Not all blocked shots are the same (insider)
Healthy Fernandez Committed to Spain for World Championships
It may be kinda late for it but..... DRE!!!!!!!!!!!!!

+ New FanShot All FanShots >


Editors

Kitten_small Dave

Ben_small Ben.

Moderators

Pict1126_small -ken

Polar_bear_small jorga

Terryporter_small prezofdeath

Small usmcr3049

Lamb_small T Darkstar

Wallpaper_small geoffm