Our "informed" national media

by blazerbeliever97504 on Aug 28, 2009 12:28 PM PDT

Daves article on the media in general was very insightful and got me thinking. I, and im sure most of you have been looking for any kind of news that has "Blazers" somewhere in the article. I have read alot of things about our Blazers, they are actually getting pretty hyped. Talks of deep playoffs runs and 60 win seasons, etc. There are a few things that stick out in my mind.

First, while its nice to have high expectations its also concerning. Even with the addition of Andre Miller we will still be one of, if not the youngest team. This inherantly(sp?) means the outcome of the new season is somewhat iffy. I know alot of you will point to the fact we won 54 games which put us with the second best overall record with out 'dre but that honestly means nothing going into the new season execpt for the confidence it will provide. I mean really, would we be happy and look at it is a posative if we won say 50 games and got a 5th or 6th seed and bounced from the first round next year? My guess is no. Now take that same scenario and apply it to this year. If we won 50 games last year and had a 5th or 6th seed but still got bounced we would have been just as happy with that as the real outcome. My piont being, it allmost seems unrealistic to expect a 60 win year and a deep playoff run. Do we have a chance? Absolutely. Realistic? Probly not.

Second: It allmost seems assumed that we will start our run at several titles next year, again 60 wins, deep playoff runs etc. I enjoy this on the surface but when you delve deeper(which by the way national media seems to not do for the most part) you see there are alot of question marks. If a team is set to make multiple runs at a title it should not have the questions marks we have. Among them, Will Oden pan out? Will Andre Miller mesh well with this team? Bayless? Outlaw? Webster? Back up PF? I think you see what i mean. Its great to get the hype we are getting but untill our guys prove 60 wins is attainable and deep playoff runs are attainable its just that, Hype.

While our national media trys its best to be informed and insightful they IMO fall entirely too short. This is not there fualt, they are not lazy, they are not stupid, its just too much info for any one man or woman to retain. Reading this back to check for spelling errors i noticed that this is a somewhat random rant but my overall point is........dont get caught up in the hype and if our guys dont live up to the hype dont be mad, disappointed sure but dont be mad. Take solice in the fact that we still have a great bunch of guys that we can be proud of for off the court actions as much as on the court actions.

P.S. I do think the national media does a good job for the most part but our local coverage is much more insightful. This is why i prefer O-live(though the bloggers on there leave alot to be desired), Bedge, etc.

Tweet Comment 13 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Some good points

Especially the part about backup PF. I guess it’s Dante or Travis. Big question mark.

Still, the biggest stat I look at is we were 34-7 at home last season. I put us at 59 wins this season but my non-scientific projection had just 2 home losses (Cleveland, plus either S.A. or L.A.). I’m not assuming any improvement on the road until I see it, which is a big X if we’re looking at starting a run at the ring.

by jiminut on Aug 28, 2009 1:07 PM PDT reply actions

One of the best predictors has always been recent performance

That is why so many Blazer Fans are anticipating 60w’s next year. Our roster changes are minimal; swapping Sergio for Miller and Frye for Cunningham/Pendegraph. These changes can’t be anything but a net positive as Miller is widely better than Sergio (will he fit?, please give me a break Miller is more than a journeyman). Meanwhile, Frye is the backup 4 and 3rd string 5 whose minutes are now assigne to Trout and the rookies. This will only hurt if the sustains a major injury at the positions 4 or 5. We are as deep as any team in the league though. The biggest roster change is the return of Webster. That is the major unknown. Even if Martell had no impact we are no worse off than last year since his backups are still in place. As for expecting a deep playoff run, It seems more unlikely to find an opponent that matches up so well against us as Houston did last year than to have another 1st round exit. It really will only be easier with another year of seasoning.

by NWfan on Aug 28, 2009 1:42 PM PDT reply actions

We'll break 60 wins

But we might not get further than the second round, and if we are unlucky we could even lose in the first round. So I guess I would say I think some of the optimism is very realistic, and some of it is overblown. Enough of our young players will improve that we’ll win more games, but we still probably run into one of the elites (LA or SA) as early as the second round, and the playoffs is a different ball game.

It’s spelled “inherently”, since you asked. You gave a good guess for not knowing.

"if Nate has Roy or Miller in the game at all times, that stagnation will turn into conflagration" -- two4larue

by jscot on Aug 28, 2009 2:14 PM PDT reply actions

In Here, Antly?

by LaoTzu on Aug 29, 2009 10:37 AM PDT up reply actions

I'm ok with the same winning percentage

as last year, long as the Blazers are building momentum for the playoffs. I suspect we’ll pass last year’s record. We’re not that far away. I’ve heard comments to the effect of “Houston owned us…” etc. The reality is we lost 2 games by a total of what, 4 points (I could be wrong) or so. Not far at all from being in the second round. We’ll get there this year.

by hellsfrozenover on Aug 28, 2009 2:16 PM PDT reply actions

Houston owned us

Game 1 was a disaster. But hey, that’s what we were told to expect from these young guys with no playoff experience. I was more hopeful than that but sometimes the experts know what they’re talking about.

by jiminut on Aug 28, 2009 3:13 PM PDT up reply actions

yea it was

but Yao shot lights out (and never did the rest of the series). I tend to think that was more of a fluke game than anything else.

by hellsfrozenover on Aug 28, 2009 3:32 PM PDT up reply actions

Yao never did again

because we started aggressively doubling him, letting Scola go off instead of letting Joel try to play him straight up. It’s not like Yao was just on fire that game and hit a cold streak. We adjusted our entire defense to stop Yao after game 1.

by Royster on Aug 28, 2009 4:54 PM PDT up reply actions

But Yao WAS on fire in Game 1

by LaoTzu on Aug 29, 2009 10:38 AM PDT up reply actions

RT: While our national media trys its best to be informed and insightful

Losing 4 games to 2 in the first round does not get you “noticed” by the east coast

If the Blazers had won 1 more regular season game and had completed Denver’s “path” to the WCF and lost to L*A, there would be a lot more pro-Blazer sentiment from the national media

Regular season stats and the W-L record need to be thrown in the waste basket, Blazer fans. Now that the playoffs are a “given” for the next 10 years, we have to start thinking like L*ker and Celtic fans have done for decades: any outcome “less” than the conference finals means that the season was not successful.

This kind of thinking will smash the “little brother” syndrome. Start knocking L*A out of the playoffs and we’ll have a legitimate rivalry, again. Like in ‘77 and ’89-’92

When reached 39 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!

by two4larue on Aug 28, 2009 3:20 PM PDT reply actions

I would address point #2 by disagreeing

Every team had question marks going into last year, including the eventual champs (toughness, consistant effort….ect). It is not that there are not question marks….it is how the questions get answered in the playoffs that count

"I'm tired" -Me

by 92wastheyear on Aug 29, 2009 10:59 AM PDT reply actions

Show me a "championship contending" team this year

that doesn’t have question marks?

Boston? Will Rasheed play well off the bench? Will Rondo stop being a distraction? Will Big Baby’s contract kill his production?
Cavs? How will Shaq fit in? LBJ has already made some weird comments about Shaq coming to the cavs, this might not be a match made in heaven.
Orlando? They got rid of a very big part of their offense in Turkeyglue, how will it change with Carter?
Lakers? Artest? Can he work out? Bynum? Will he stay healthy?

Every team has question marks, and in my opinion the questions about the BLazers are far less important than then ones I just asked about these 4 championship contenders.

Ben II Blazersedge.com || New to Blazers' Edge?

by usmcr3049 on Aug 29, 2009 12:12 PM PDT reply actions

I dont think i expressed my point clearly...

its not that i think contenders dont have question marks…….the point i was trying to make is that if we are truely poised for a 10 year run at multiple titles we should not have these type of question marks. I mean if we were looking at maybe a one and done type scenario or something like that…….similar to the type of boats the Celtics, Cavs, and possably the Magic are in than yes….its all about how we answer these questions.

We are set up for the next 10+ years to be a contender BUT the question marks i pointed out just seem to point to me that we are not ready for atleast another year to start that run. I am trying to think of the last team that was poised for this type of run and im kinda drawing a blank. Help me out here but the closest i can think of is the 90s bulls, though they could not be more different in alot of ways. But they did dominate for basically the whole decade of the 90s.

The thing with the bulls is that they allways had question marks yes, but for the most part they were minor ones. You allways knew what Jordan would do, you allways knew what Scottie gave you, between Horace Grant and Dennis Rodman you could pretty much bet on defense and rebounding, Center by platoon, PG, sure just as long as you can shoot and be clutch. (sorry Ron Harper) Yes there was the, How would this player or that player work out, but they were solid as a rock.

With us, you pretty much know Roy will lead, Joel will rebound and play D, LMA will do his thing and that about it…..I could be off base and if so, fair enough but i just want everyone to understand my point.

by blazerbeliever97504 on Aug 29, 2009 3:35 PM PDT reply actions