Da BOM (Blazer Optimist Manifesto)
Dave started an interesting discussion on the front page when he asked:
What one thing do the Blazers need in order to maximize their success this season?
The thing that is so encouraging about this team is that there were so many suggestions. While most had to do with Greg Oden improving in one way or another, Blazer fans could come up with many things that could make this team much, much better than the team that won 54 games last year.
The eternal off-season drags on, so in an attempt to help eternity pass slightly more quickly, I thought it was time to list our reasons for optimism.
Cowardly disclaimers
Anyone who reads many of my comments knows I like disclaimers, so that I can always say, "Well, I said this wasn't a sure thing." So we'll start with some disclaimers:
- The only defense for injuries is depth, and with a roster limited to 15 men, and economic realities (including the salary cap) no team can stockpile enough talent to safeguard against injuries derailing a season. There is no guarantee that injuries won't zap us hard this year.
- No one can predict the future, so we are only dealing in probabilities and possibilities here.
- None of the things that might happen below are guaranteed to happen. Some of them are likely. Some are unlikely. Each one could happen, and if it did, it would help us. The statistical probability of ALL of them happening is probably lower than the probability of some nutcase in Scotland ruling the world some day -- and we all know how probable that is.
- Some of these are actually mutually exclusive. It is probably not possible for Martell to have a breakout year, Nic to improve enough to earn 30 mpg, and Rudy to earn 30 mpg as well.
- I will not attempt to place precise probabilities on each of these things.
Probable Positives
(More likely than not to happen)
Individual Players
- Brandon Roy will not regress in his game, but rather stay the same or improve. He's in his fourth year, healthy, and fit. Some players do regress in his situation, but it is unlikely that he will do so.
- LaMarcus Aldridge will not regress -- same reasons as Brandon.
- Greg Oden will see at least marginal improvement in conditioning, agility, defending without fouling, and offensive effectiveness. All of these should happen just by virtue of recovery from microfracture and an extra year of experience and coaching.
- Joel Przybilla and Steve Blake may see reduced minutes, but are likely to provide similar productivity in their time on court. These players are both consistent veterans in their prime, with games based on skill and technique more than on athleticism -- there is little reason to expect any real decline in their games this year.
- Andre Miller is likely to fit in well enough to be a very significant upgrade over the Sergio/Jerryd combo at backup PG.
- Andre Miller is likely to perform at a high enough level to take some minutes from Blake and give us higher productivity during those minutes.
- The addition of Miller is also likely to mean that we are much less vulnerable to injury to our starting PG than we were last year, when we only managed 9-6 while Blake was out.
- Nic Batum is likely to improve at least marginally as an all-round player and as an offensive threat.
- Rudy Fernandez is likely to improve at least marginally after a year of learning the ropes, adjusting to culture shock, etc.
- Martell Webster is likely to provide a positive contribution by the end of the season, if not sooner.
Team Considerations
- It is probable that the coaching staff has learned some things and is progressing.
- Because most of the players have not changed, there is likely to be greater offensive synergy as they are more aware of each other's tendencies, strengths, and weaknesses. Because we have an unselfish team, this synergy will increase year to year as players are together.
- Team defense is likely to improve this year due to increased strength as young players mature, increased experience, improving execution of coaching instructions (same personnel, again), greater familiarity with opponent offensive tendencies, and greater awareness of each other. Note that every player except Steve and Joel should be expected to be better at carrying out his role within a team defense this year due to greater maturity, strength, and experience -- and Steve and Joel should not be any worse than last year.
- Team confidence is likely to be much higher this year. We aren't wondering at the start of the year whether or not we'll make the playoffs. We know we are for real. We won't have that "deer in the headlights" moment in the first home playoff game -- we know what we have to do now, and we know we can do it. The "we are winners" mindset is contagious on a team, and it is a self-fulfilling prophecy.
- We will probably push the ball more and get at least a few more easy baskets per game.
- Any injuries that keep a player out for less than 15 games are unlikely to significantly hamper us due to our tremendous depth. Nate is likely to be able to "chop and change" with twin towers, small lineups, or whatever is needed sufficiently that we can withstand the loss of almost any player and still be competitive against most teams in the league. We saw this last year when, even when Brandon went down, and with Martell out (our all-star and our other starting wing at the start of the season), we were able to go 2-2 against tough competition. Even when LMA was out we were competitive against the best for one game. This team is not worse than last year.
These are all, in my opinion, probabilities. It is very highly probable that enough of them happen to make us a significantly better team. In fact, it is a virtual certainty that we will be a better team unless we suffer a significant (as in season-ending) injury to Brandon, LMA, or Greg. The loss of Joel for much of the season would hurt badly if it happened, but it is likely that Greg's progress would significantly mitigate that loss, and the addition of Andre and progress of other players may well provide enough positive factors to fully negate it.
Real Possibilities
(I am placing here things that may happen, but which I consider reasonable possibilities. I do not consider them to be probable, but neither do I consider them unlikely.)
Individual Players
- Brandon may improve still further offensively, as Andre creates opportunities for him to be even more effective, as he develops other facets to his game, and as the increased threat of other players makes him even more deadly.
- Brandon may improve defensively as he has to carry less of the burden offensively.
- LaMarcus may marginally improve as a low post defender and defensive rebounder.
- Aldridge may become a greater scoring threat by taking the ball inside more, and possibly drawing a few more fouls as well.
- Aldridge may become a significant threat on the fast break (we saw some of this near the end of last year).
- Greg, instead of marginal improvement, may take a major step forward defensively, playing 25-28 mpg with significantly less foul trouble, patrolling the paint, blocking shots, and dominating the boards.
- Greg may take a major step forward offensively by becoming a significant low post offensive threat, with one or two effective offensive moves developed over the summer.
- Greg and/or Joel and/or LMA may become an offensive threat in the pick and roll with Andre.
- Nic may take a major step forward offensively, averaging double digits in points and earning 30 mpg.
- Martell may break out before the end of the season like many of us thought he would last year, shooting over 40% from 3 on 5-6 shots per game, with improved defense and aggressively taking the ball to the hoop.
- Rudy may become a much more well-rounded offensive threat, knocking down mid-range jumpers and taking the ball to the hoop more often.
- Rudy may become a better defender on and off the ball.
- Steve may up his shooting and the rest of his game to the point where starting PG really is a difficult decision for Nate.
- Travis may bring the rebounding the way he did in that one Houston game last year on an occasional basis, rather than once a year.
- Travis may improve at taking the ball to the hoop occasionally, rather than settling for pull up jumpers all the time, thus improving his true shooting percentage and drawing more fouls.
- Travis may improve marginally in his defensive rotations and on-the-ball defense.
- One of Pendergraph, Cunningham, or Howard may provide an important contribution at some point in the season.
Team Considerations
- We may become a very effective running team, pushing the ball up court off of rebounds and blocked shots, and creating a lot of easy baskets.
- The veteran experience of Miller and Howard, and the increased experience of the rest of the team, may bring a real improvement in handling difficult situations like back to backs on the road, tough games at tough opponents, bouncing back from tough losses to strong opponents, coping with injuries, etc. These guys may help make us more "professional". We may lose fewer games due to injuries this year.
- We may really learn how to take advantage of our shotblockers in a team defensive scheme.
- Our early schedule gives us a possible opportunity to go on a tear at the start of the season and establish ourselves as one of the unquestioned elites of the league, with possible benefits in confidence, respect from referees, etc.
- Last year, our Pythagorean predicted wins based on point differential was two greater than our actual wins. We actually underperformed in wins/losses last year by two wins. We may match or even exceeded expected wins this year.
Note that we will probably be a better team even if none of the things on this second list (the Real Possibilities) comes into play. And it is highly probable that at least some of the things on this list will happen, because most if not all of them are reasonable possibilities.
Unlikely, but Possible
There are too many things here to list. These are things that cannot really be expected, but are possible, and could have a significant impact on our fortunes if they do. Travis could become a consistent rebounder or a lock-down defender (some may laugh, but he has the physical tools, and it is easier to learn to be a lockdown defender than a good help defender). Rudy could be so good he wins Sixth Man of the Year. Everything could click for Jerryd by mid-season and he becomes a major rotation player for us at the point. Dante sets the world on fire, and takes Outlaw's minutes. KP steals a starter quality PF from someone to back up LMA, or makes a blockbuster deal to bring us a top 5 PG, or something. Martell knocks down 50% on threes, averages 15 ppg, and is a lock down defender, starting with game 1. Nic shows that he is going to make everyone forget Tayshaun Prince.
Any of those things could happen, but they aren't the kind of thing that you expect or plan on happening. We've got a great team without any of them -- but the fact that those possibilities are even out there, that KP actually has assets he could trade to pull off a blockbuster, that we have players with enough talent that we can even dream of such things, is just more reason for optimism, after the other reasons listed above.
Da BOM
This is a Blazer Optimist Manifesto -- "da BOM". We are not blind optimists, us Blazer optimists. We have sound reason to be optimistic. All of our reasons for optimism may not pan out. Life is like that. But we have enough probable reasons to be optimistic, and enough other possibilities that could greatly help us, that for Blazer fans, optimism is the real realism. It is far more realistic to expect this team to outperform last year's team than to expect it to underperform last year's. And last year, we tied for the second best record in the West.
This is not a prediction of post-season success. You have to be fortunate with injuries to have post-season success, and unless you are dominant, you may need some luck with matchups as well. Experience probably helps a little more in the post-season than in the regular season (though it helps in the regular season as well). This team is still very young, and while much more experienced this year than last, still far more inexperienced than LA or the Spurs.
This is, however, a recognition that in all probability, we have a great team this year. Not good, not even very good (we were very good last year), but great. We are one of the elites, one of the teams that people have to think about when they talk about teams that could win it all if they get some breaks. They may not know it now, but by the end of this year, they will know it.
We're ready to roll, and few teams that get in our path will come out with their ego unaffected and their losses column unchanged.
33 recs |
77 comments
Comments
im going to rec this already,
its long, and jscot posted it…. rec
"The difference between a democracy and a dictatorship is that in a democracy you vote first and take orders later; in a dictatorship you don't have to waste your time voting"
"I don't like jail, they got the wrong kind of bars in there"
Charles Bukowski
by jpaulson on Sep 23, 2009 9:19 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
You can always unrec it after reading if you don't like it
I suppose.
"if Nate has Roy or Miller in the game at all times, that stagnation will turn into conflagration" -- two4larue
by jscot on Sep 23, 2009 9:25 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
just got done reading it
I dont need to unrec it.. its awesome!
"The difference between a democracy and a dictatorship is that in a democracy you vote first and take orders later; in a dictatorship you don't have to waste your time voting"
"I don't like jail, they got the wrong kind of bars in there"
Charles Bukowski
by jpaulson on Sep 23, 2009 9:36 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah but did Jscot meet his goal of summarizing the comment to Dave's post?
I mean I can only rec this if he met that goal. And seeing as how I didn’t have time to read that post, I can’t judge myself. But otherwise I enjoyed Jscot’s “Reader’s Digest condensed version”, that I did have time to read.
by NWfan on Sep 23, 2009 11:44 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
There's things in here that weren't there
I don’t think anyone mentioned increased offensive synergy as the “one thing”, for instance. This was meant to condense and yet expand on that, by listing a whole bunch of things in our favor.
"if Nate has Roy or Miller in the game at all times, that stagnation will turn into conflagration" -- two4larue
by jscot on Sep 23, 2009 1:44 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
somebody please call the Department of Homeland Security
. . .
cuz this post is DA BOMB!!!
by SonsofShawnKemp on Sep 23, 2009 9:22 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I tried to come up with a B word that fit
but I was too tired today, I guess.
"if Nate has Roy or Miller in the game at all times, that stagnation will turn into conflagration" -- two4larue
by jscot on Sep 23, 2009 9:25 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
how about Blazers Optimist Manifesto Belated (*I should have written this a month ago) ???
by SonsofShawnKemp on Sep 23, 2009 9:26 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Doesn't work
I thought about it back then. But our roster was still unsettled, and there was lots of action on the sidebar about free agents, etc. And then we had some great stuff posted on our offense and Norsk made an epic post, so I decided I would just wait until it seemed like things were really slow, and there was little to feed our Blazer addiction.
I mean, when we’re having stuff posted about some nutcase L@ker getting married to some other nutcase, and it makes the FRONT PAGE, then it is time.
"if Nate has Roy or Miller in the game at all times, that stagnation will turn into conflagration" -- two4larue
by jscot on Sep 23, 2009 9:41 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Use Latin.
Nominative case: Manifestus Bonus
μὴ φοβοῦ, μόνον πίστευε.
by T Darkstar on Sep 23, 2009 9:44 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hmmm
Two Latin words is all it takes to exceed my capabilities.
“Et tu, Brutus”? Or something.
"if Nate has Roy or Miller in the game at all times, that stagnation will turn into conflagration" -- two4larue
by jscot on Sep 23, 2009 9:59 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
All Latin has managed to do is make me look like an ignominious smartass.
Totally worth the 12 credit hours. :)
μὴ φοβοῦ, μόνον πίστευε.
by T Darkstar on Sep 23, 2009 1:23 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I can do that without the Latin
and without even trying. Comes naturally.
"if Nate has Roy or Miller in the game at all times, that stagnation will turn into conflagration" -- two4larue
by jscot on Sep 23, 2009 1:45 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
By the great god Heinz, I bleed from 57 wounds.
Et tu, Pluto? You too would lift your leg against me? – Elgin
Without you out there, we're nowhere here
by 22baylor on Sep 23, 2009 1:34 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
None of the things that might happen below are guaranteed to happen. Some of them are likely. Some are unlikely. Each one could happen, and if it did, it would help us. The statistical probability of ALL of them happening is probably lower than the probability of some nutcase in Scotland ruling the world some day — and we all know how probable that is.
So you’re saying that everything that can happen is pretty much guaranteed to happen. Understood.
μὴ φοβοῦ, μόνον πίστευε.
by T Darkstar on Sep 23, 2009 9:36 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Yeah
I think that’s what I meant.
(Just ignore me while I go over here in the corner and scratch my head for a few minutes and try to figure this out. When I come back, I’ll probably be the ruler of the world. Or something.)
"if Nate has Roy or Miller in the game at all times, that stagnation will turn into conflagration" -- two4larue
by jscot on Sep 23, 2009 9:44 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I think Nic' play at the start of last season
was one of those unlikely, but possible events. I would look to Nic again to out perform expectations.
Backcourt game - 24/7
by pxilpooshr on Sep 23, 2009 9:51 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I agree about Nic last year
You can’t discount the possibility of that kind of thing happening.
I expect Nic to be significantly better this year. Guys that young tend to improve pretty dramatically from year to year. And the thing is, there is so much room for improvement with Nic. Not because he was bad, but because he only did some things well, and he has all the tools to do the other things well, too.
"if Nate has Roy or Miller in the game at all times, that stagnation will turn into conflagration" -- two4larue
by jscot on Sep 23, 2009 9:57 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Great post by the way.
Backcourt game - 24/7
by pxilpooshr on Sep 23, 2009 10:39 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
nice post
ok, so who’s going to write the “Da BPM?”
by jksnake99 on Sep 23, 2009 10:48 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I hope they do
so we can rip it to shreds examine it carefully for important insights.
Actually, I’ll write it right here.
“We will probably have lots of bad injuries even though our guys are young and healthy, and Trout is a horrible backup PF who did have good plus/minus stats at PF but it’s totally a fluke, and most of our players will get angry and refuse to listen to Nate because they won’t get enough playing time even though none of them have behaved like a cancer before, and LMA hasn’t been signed so will probably get angry and pout and not play well so he can’t get a good contract next year which makes perfect sense, and our third string center is LMA who is a borderline all-star at PF and taller than a lot of centers he would face, and KP is an idiot because he hasn’t brought in a better third string center or a great backup PF yet, and KP also wasted an opportunity with RLEC to grab Kirk Hinrich, and Bayless will never learn how to pass the ball and is going to kill Andre Miller and eat him one limb at a time because Andre is ahead of him on the depth chart, and doesn’t anyone in the Blazers’ front office want to acquire Jeff Foster, please? Oh, and Nate isn’t a good coach and our offense isn’t very good and Oden is going to foul out because the replacement refs will reek and David Stern is never going to reach a deal with the real refs because he is evil and wants to destroy the game. And Paul Allen will probably be killed by the Vulcans (they’ll infect him with cancer or something) for wasting money on the Blazers and then all of our good players will be sold and we’ll rebuild around Pendergraph and Patty Mills who will both be flops. And then the team will move to Seattle and Paul Allen will come back from the dead and buy all the best players but it will be TOO LATE FOR US because our team will be GONE, STOLEN!!!”
I think that pretty much covers it.
"if Nate has Roy or Miller in the game at all times, that stagnation will turn into conflagration" -- two4larue
by jscot on Sep 23, 2009 2:00 PM PDT up reply actions 10 recs
Rectacular
Love it…
OH! Your orginal post was good too, also Rec’d
Big D from Blog-A-Bull - "Pritchard is such a genius that teams just give him players for free."
Greg Oden - The only other rookie with more than 500 points, 400 rebounds, and 65 blocks in under 1400 minutes played. Since 1946
by FiveOhThree-RipCity!! on Sep 23, 2009 3:03 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
jscot, the BPM wouldn't be about the Blazers not being a good (even great) regular season team
It would be about the distinct possibility that nobody on the current roster will ever get to the point where they are “2nd best player on a championship team” good.
Now I might have to write one, to show that its very reasonable (and not worthy of lampooning) to think this team won’t ever win a title without some good fortune.
by jksnake99 on Sep 23, 2009 3:34 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
For the Portland Trail Blazers to one day be a true title contender, that rests on Greg Oden.
Externally, my worry solely for this season is that the lack of viable frontline depth at the backup 4 and third-string 5. It may cost the Portland Trail Blazers a few regular season wins ’cause of injury, a plausible #2 seed, and a chance at making the Western Conference Finals ’cause of being unable to bang in the playoffs.
Entering the playoffs once again with Travis Outlaw as the backup 4 and LaMarcus Aldridge as the emergency 5 — which is a position wherein he’ll be manhandled if Greg Oden and/or Joel Przybilla suffer foul trouble, injury, et cetera — is a disaster waiting to happen.
While Kevin Pritchard can’t control the internal development of Oden — as that is the coaching staff’s job — he can control the team’s roster construction heading into next April.
Stupid people have stupid ideas.
by AK1984 on Sep 23, 2009 4:25 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Oh, that's quite different, Snake
That’s not pessimistic.
It’s entirely possible this team never wins a championship. But in all probability we’ll be in the middle of the hunt for a championship for the next 5-6 years, and with luck we’ll win more than one.
I also think we have far more potential “second guys” than most teams. LMA could become Pau. Rudy could become Manu. Greg could become Dwight. Jerryd could become Tony (I know, a lot of people don’t think so, but it’s possible).
And the depth at every position raises another possibility — if you have this kind of team, do you need that “second guy”, or is it enough to have 3 or 4 “third guys”?
"if Nate has Roy or Miller in the game at all times, that stagnation will turn into conflagration" -- two4larue
by jscot on Sep 24, 2009 1:42 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'd say, with luck, we win one
That’s probably a good place to start. You never know in the NBA, how things will fall. Portland has had great teams before, that didn’t win a title.
I do love the make up of our team and am thrilled with the depth of talent. I’m overly optimistic that we’ll win a title with this team, within the next 4 years, but you just never know. And talk to about multiple titles is a little much.
Witty Unpredictable Talent and Natural Game
by iDea on Sep 24, 2009 10:35 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I guess
Certainly there are no guarantees. But I will say that while possible, it would be a disappointment if this team didn’t win a championship. The unique thing is that everyone is young, so they should all be getting better. Now, some players won’t, and some might even regress (Channing last year, for instance). But most are likely to improve, some significantly.
We should be one of the top 3-4 teams for the next six years, though maybe only top six this year. I don’t think we have to get lucky to get a championship — I think we have to progress normally and perhaps make one or two acquisitions to shore up a weak spot here or there.
"if Nate has Roy or Miller in the game at all times, that stagnation will turn into conflagration" -- two4larue
by jscot on Sep 24, 2009 11:30 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
one is a good place to start
I agree! – Elgin
Without you out there, we're nowhere here
by 22baylor on Sep 24, 2009 4:58 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
This was even better then the BOM above.
hakkaa päälle !
by timg56 on Sep 23, 2009 4:24 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I especially enjoyed the part in which the Portland Trail Blazers ultimately moved to Seattle.
I’m down with that 100% — even if it costs Paul Allen his life — although y’all would be none to pleased in that case.
Sarcasm aside, though, I’ll try to hit on some points from jscot’s above post.
1. Travis Outlaw is passable at the 4 when a true center like Greg Oden or Joel Przybila covers for his porous defense and inefficient offense; yet, if he’s paired next to someone who’s out of place at center (e.g., LaMarcus Aldridge), then the defense will be of NCAA quality. That’s not a good thing, either. This, folks, is why you shouldn’t be satisfied with scrubs like Juwan Howard getting a job via sick, twisted cronyism when the ballclub needs somebody of Nick Collison or Jeff Foster’s quality on it.
2. Nate McMillan is neither a good coach nor a bad coach, but rather an average coach. Yet, average coaches can win if they’re insightful motivators and have an outstanding staff working for them, which was the case in Boston recently. McMillan undoubtedly has earned the players respect, but his staff still lacks a defensive-minded genius (e.g., Tom Thibodeau) or a proven pivotman coach (e.g., Clifford Ray) on it. With head coaches, you sometimes have to take the good with the bad. As a tactician, McMillan is a dolt compared to the likes of Jeff Van Gundy, Scott Skiles, et al. Yet, because many players these days are petulant whiners, it’s difficult for a hard-nosed leader like Van Gundy or Skiles to get stuff through their thick skulls; therefore, McMillan can back his way into having better results overall.
3. Yeah, I wish Kirk Hinrich was here. Unlike Andre Miller, Hinrich is truly a perfect fit next to Brandon Roy. Hinrich plays superb defense, is lights out from downtown, can play effectively both on and off the ball, and is in the midst of his prime. Miller, however, is a fine player — especially compared to the team’s other free-agent target, Hedo Turkoglu, who’d’ve ravaged this team with his dwindling play on the court — yet, with a pure point guard in the fold who’s mediocre from beyond the arc, Roy may alter his game by relying less on driving to the basket and more heavily on jump shots like Kobe Bryant. Regardless of how the backcourt meshes, though, Miller will benefit Oden greatly due to his ability to run the pick-and-roll. Let’s hope that McMillan is ready to move the offense away from Aldridge and more onto Oden, even though I wonder if the allegedly moody Texan would be okay with a much-needed reduced role due to his so-so efficiency.
4. Jerryd Bayless will never become a valuable contributor on this team, which I’ve said since day one. I know it hurts the pride of everyone who thought that an undersized, me-first gunner like Bayless would buck the trend and be a star in the NBA, but you guys just need to suck it up and admit you’re wrong. As someone who’s admitted when he’s wrong in the past, let me just say that it’s a cathartic experience. Nevertheless, it’s still much more rewarding to be right. I do savor those moments.
5. I don’t care about the referees, who several people around here rag on way too much about in the game threads. Seriously, I abhor the game threads mostly ‘cause of the whining about officials. Unless it’s really a blatant screwjob — such as Super Bowl XL, Game 7 of the 1993 Western Conference Finals, et cetera — the referees in all professional spots deserve to be cut some slack.
6. At best, Patty Mills will be a tiny, diminutive waterbug off of the bench for Portland like Jose Juan Barea currently is for the Dallas Mavericks. For Mills, his career trajectory consists right now of his foot healing and him getting a chance somewhere overseas. Someday down the line Mills may suit up for the Trail Blazers, but I doubt it. Yet, even he does do it, y’all shouldn’t expect much out of him. Regarding Jeff Pendergraph, he’s without a position. Pendergraph has neither the range nor speed to play the 4 on either end of the court, while he’s too short to adequately defend opposing centers man-to-man and isn’t laterally quick enough to do much of anything as it pertains to weakside help.
All right, I’m worn out and need to take a break.
Stupid people have stupid ideas.
by AK1984 on Sep 23, 2009 5:09 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I would love to have Collison as our 3rd string 5
However do you think AK that an inteligent GM like Presti, who has even less depth at the 5 then Portland is going to trade one of his few talented bigs without getting a big in return? I just don’t see this happening.
"BEER IS LIVING PROOF THAT GOD LOVES US"
- Benjamin Franklin-
by We-B-Dunkin on Sep 23, 2009 5:39 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Love it when I misspell intelligent!
"BEER IS LIVING PROOF THAT GOD LOVES US"
- Benjamin Franklin-
by We-B-Dunkin on Sep 23, 2009 5:41 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Nick Collison wouldn't be just the third-string center, but he'd also be the backup ...
power forward. It’d be a two-in-one package. To get Collison from the Oklahoma City Thunder, it’d probably have to be some sort of three-team deal involving a ballclub that could use Travis Outlaw — such as the New Jersey Nets — otherwise, Sam Presti and Kevin Pritchard would be poor trading partners.
“It’s killing two birds with one stone […].
1. The team has a logjam at small forward, with Travis Outlaw as the odd man out in this equation. There’s also a quandry with Jerryd Bayless that’ll soon reach a boiling point, for there’s no way that he’ll be satisfied riding the pine as a fitfth guard.
2. The team needs a role player who can backup LaMarcus Aldridge at power forward and fill in at center if/when Greg Oden and Joel Przybilla get into foul trouble, are knicked up throughout the season, or suffer from a serious injury.
In the NBA, some guys are best served putting up empty stats on a crap team (e.g., Outlaw & Bayless) and other guys are best served as role players on a playoff powerhouse (e.g., Jeff Foster & Nick Collison).
After looking back at all of my previous trade proposals centered around this issue — with most of which being similar to one another — the following is my favorite of the bunch.
FROM NEW JERSEY
2010 First-Round Draft Pick (Via The Dallas Mavericks)
Conditional Draft Pick(s) (Via The Golden State Warriors: Top-14 Protected In 2011, Top-11 Protected In 2012, & Top-10 Protected In 2013; If First-Round Pick Isn’t Conveyed By 2013 It Becomes A 2013 Second-Round Draft Pick & 2015 Second-Round Draft Pick)
FROM OKLAHOMA CITY
Nick Collison ($6,250,000)
FROM PORTLAND
Travis Outlaw ($3,600,000)
Jerryd Bayless ($2,143,080)
TO NEW JERSEY
Travis Outlaw ($3,600,000)
TO OKLAHOMA CITY
Jerryd Bayless ($2,143,080)
TO PORTLAND
Nick Collison ($6,250,000)
2010 First-Round Draft Pick (Via The Dallas Mavericks)
Conditional Draft Pick(s) (Via The Golden State Warriors: Top-14 Protected In 2011, Top-11 Protected In 2012, & Top-10 Protected In 2013; If First-Round Pick Isn’t Conveyed By 2013 It Becomes A 2013 Second-Round Draft Pick & 2015 Second-Round Draft Pick)
http://games.espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=kr6gkq
Since the New Jersey Nets have a sizeable trade exception from the Vince Carter trade, the team can absorb Travis Outlaw’s contract. Oh, and with regards to Jerryd Bayless also being included in this deal, all I’ve got to say to that is good riddance to bad rubbish.
Realistically, though, my fear is that Kevin Pritchard will continue to stick his fingers in his ears, turn the other way, and ignore the quagmire that’s brewing on hand.
With Outlaw and Bayless likely to have dwindled playing time and none at all, respectively, they’ll both moan and groan incessently early on in the season.
Bayless’ angst doesn’t worry due to his frustration probably being bottled up or dealt with off the court through phone calls between his agent and the front office, but I can foresee Outlaw screwing with on-court chemistry by disrupting the offensive flow and chucking up stupid shots that’d make Jason McElwain stop to think twice."
http://www.blazersedge.com/2009/9/8/1021967/jason-quick-expects-a-mid-season#20957658
As you can see, I’ve gone over this before in detail. While nobody knows whether or not Presti and Kiki Vandeweghe would sign off on that proposed transaction, my thought is that they’d at least think long and hard about it. Unfortunately, I’m afraid Pritchard would be too timid to pull the trigger there.
Stupid people have stupid ideas.
by AK1984 on Sep 23, 2009 6:42 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don't see Presti doing this.
Why would he trade a big which is OKC’s weakest position for a backup utility guard. If I were KP Ido that deal in a heartbeat but I feel Presti would laugh in his face.
"BEER IS LIVING PROOF THAT GOD LOVES US"
- Benjamin Franklin-
by We-B-Dunkin on Sep 23, 2009 7:00 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
For Oklahoma City, it'd be a cost-cutting move in the interim as Sam Presti ...
tries to construct a roster that can actually play team basketball in the long haul. While I’m not a fan of Jerryd Bayless, he’d be an okay gunner off the bench next to a tall, defensive-minded combo guard who handles and distributes the rock well like Kyle Weaver.
Also, Nick Collison can’t realistically be in the Thunder’s long-term outlook. For Presti, the biggest thing for him is understanding that a frontline of Nenad Krstic and Jeff Green — who are soft and undersizeed, respectively — aren’t the type of guys Kevin Durant should be playing alongside on the frontcourt.
Rather, a one-dimensional, high-volume scorer like Durant needs men around him who can defend the post and rebound without being high usage players on offense. It’s too bad for those hicks down in OKC that Presti didn’t select Brook Lopez with the #4 pick in the 2008 NBA Draft, eh.
I’m not high on Byron Mullens or Serge Ibaka, either, but that’s Presti’s problem if he thinks that they have any real potential. Etan Thomas, meanwhile, doesn’t have much to offer in the interim, but I’m happy if his addition makes it so Presti is more willing to part ways with Collison to a team that could actually use him.
Stupid people have stupid ideas.
by AK1984 on Sep 23, 2009 7:20 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
some responses
1. Travis will be sufficient at the 4. If injuries happen, they happen. Its uncontrollable. I am pretty sure that KP and co. knows if a big goes down, mainly Joel or Oden, that the Blazers will be in a little bit of trouble, so if a trade was available to fix this problem (KP has the luxury of talking to other GMs, unlike us), or if one becomes available in the future, KP will not hesitate to pull the trigger. Juan Howard is not a big deal; he filled the 14th spot and will see little to no minutes.
2. The Nate issue is strictly opinion based. I could argue that his coaching in the Olympics disagrees with your mediocre placement of him, or that turning this team around from a lottery team to title contender speaks highly of his coaching ability, but again, that is debatable. My personal opinion is that he is an above average coach, who has done a great job with our young players. I can agree that he is not a great coach, yet… Add a couple rings though…
3. I am not really interested in who the Blazers could have picked up instead of Miller. They got Miller, and that’s fine with me. So I will leave this topic alone.
4. I think it is a bit early to say Bayles will NEVER become valuable on this team. He has hardly had the chance to prove what he can do on this team. It is still possible that he could be the Blazers point guard of the future. KP seems to think that he has the potential, so that’s good enough for me.
5. I do agree about the referees, although, new refs can and will affect this season. Whether this is a good or bad thing- who knows. I do dislike complaining about unfair calls; they are always going to be there, and it sucks.
6. Patty Mills has not played a single game in the NBA, so I am not sure how you can know what his NBA career may, or may not, consist of. He is small and quick, and those kind of point guards are proving, as of lately, to be useful. Pendergraph I really dont have an opinion on. If he helps this team out in the future, great! If not, oh well, not a big loss.
"The difference between a democracy and a dictatorship is that in a democracy you vote first and take orders later; in a dictatorship you don't have to waste your time voting"
"I don't like jail, they got the wrong kind of bars in there"
Charles Bukowski
by jpaulson on Sep 23, 2009 6:50 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hey, if you're going to use most of my best material
at least give me a shout out. I mean, besides the one at the end of your signature line ;^)
It’s not called pessimism you know, just keeping it real. I don’t want much when it comes to the Blazers, just a perennial juggernaut that will stomp the L*kers into submission and win games so easliy that even David Stern and his brainwashed crew of refs and the east coast bias of the networks can’t deny backwater Portland their rings and respect.
So, if these unrealistic expectations of a glorious Blazer dynasty means that I “question the decision-making” of the Blazer’s front office once in awhile, then I stand guilty, as charged.
When reached 39 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
by two4larue on Sep 27, 2009 8:56 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Pessimism vs. Realism
Realism doesn’t focus on all the negative possibilities. Realism looks at probabilities of both negative and positive things that could happen.
I agree with you about the possibility of every negative thing that you’ve mentioned. They all could happen. But if we’re being realistic, we have to look at the possible positive things as well, and ask ourselves about the likelihood of those things.
And then match up the likely positives and the likely negatives. On balance, the realist will find a lot more reasons to be optimistic than pessimistic about this team.
If we do not get another quality big man, that lack of depth will zap a season for us sometime in the next few years. The realist can see that. But he doesn’t assume that it will happen this year. He can also see that, even if we don’t have an injury, it is possible that the lack of big man depth could hurt us in the playoffs this year.
But he can also see many things that, even if we lack big man depth, will help to offset that lack. As you yourself said on another thread, KP’s hesitation in getting Miller at the trade deadline may have been the difference between us winning and losing the Houston series. Now, we don’t know what deal was offered, so we can’t really assess KP’s hesitation. But the presence of Miller could well have meant the difference against Houston, even without a fourth quality big man. Everyone knows we were close, and it wouldn’t have taken that much to put us over the top against them.
So the realist sees the holes that the pessimist sees, but doesn’t fixate on them.
"if Nate has Roy or Miller in the game at all times, that stagnation will turn into conflagration" -- two4larue
by jscot on Sep 28, 2009 2:18 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
the presence of Miller could well have meant the difference against Houston, even without a fourth quality big man
For me it wasn’t an either/or, but a both. I made suggestions to acquire a better backup PG and PF last February. KP chose to stand pat, and let RLEC dissolve. Then, the Blazers lost against Houston, due (in part) to weaknesses at these postitions. If it seems like I “fixate” on these facts it’s only because I expect a lot from the team and the front office.
When reached 39 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
by two4larue on Sep 28, 2009 11:29 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
OK
So would it be accurate to say we had two weaknesses last year, fixed one of them, and therefore we should be stronger, perhaps enough stronger to go quite a bit further?
But we still have that one weakness that opponents can exploit, and it would be really good to fill it if we want to have the best shot at winning it all, because without it, we still have an Achilles’ heel. We might be able to compensate for that weakness due to our other strengths, but if we lose a big man to injury, it will probably finish us in the playoffs, and it might even without an injury.
Does that sound about right?
"if Nate has Roy or Miller in the game at all times, that stagnation will turn into conflagration" -- two4larue
by jscot on Sep 28, 2009 2:12 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Y'know, I think Norsk should do it.
If anyone truly epiotmizes the term realist, it’s him. Plus, he’s respected by both homers and realists.
He doesn’t get wrapped up in mindless homerism like many folks — such as those who think Portland is entitled to a 60 win season — nor is he someone who can occasionally get a bit overanxious like myself.
The main thing that I want analyzed statistically — which might be in your wheelhouse or, perhaps, that of Kevin Pelton — is the probability of injuries on the frontline and how the team would be impacted by such an occurrence. I’m referring specifically to Greg Oden and Joel Przybilla, particularly concerning defense. Yet, I’m not worried about the wings or the point guards, since there’s plenty of depth at the wings and the two productive point guards on this team are durable guys.
For some childish reason, folks treat injuries as a dirty word; consequently, they foolishly discard the fact that some players will get hurt without a second thought. It baffles me that regarding this topic numerous folks stick their head in the sand in such a naïve way, as well as likely act all wide-eyed in bewilderment if/when injuries to the frontline do decimate this team, cost 5 to 10 of wins, and lead to it once again being ousted in the first round of the playoffs.
Stupid people have stupid ideas.
by AK1984 on Sep 23, 2009 3:46 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
yeah, everyone would read a "Blazer Realist Manifesto" by Norsktroll
or a Kevin Pelton analysis of frontcourt injuries.
by jksnake99 on Sep 23, 2009 4:01 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
He's done it
His BPM is rec’d to the top of fanshots.
"if Nate has Roy or Miller in the game at all times, that stagnation will turn into conflagration" -- two4larue
by jscot on Sep 24, 2009 2:48 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
One could make the point that one of the distinctions between ...
… an adult and a child is that the former realizes that you don’t worry about things you can’t control.
Injuries are for the most part outside the control of the players, the coaches and staff and the organization. If these folks can’t control it, what makes a fan believe he or she can? And as Dave recently stated, you can’t have a team that is capable of having an equal value replacement at every position, three deep. So it is not as if there are measures the team could be talking to deal with the possibility of injuries.
It is also ironic that some of the people who may worry about this might also be among those who worry about not enough minutes and disgruntled players, or who argue the team should trade the glut of players and “consolidate” (don’t you just love that word?) them into an all-star. That “2nd best player on a championship team” jksnake refers to.
That is why jscot’s BPM is a classic and a better effort than his original BOM. (Which was pretty nice work in it’s own right.)
hakkaa päälle !
by timg56 on Sep 23, 2009 4:39 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
We were 14-7 without Oden last year
That’s some statistical analysis.
The original post addresses injuries. In fact, it’s the first thing it discusses, with the caveat/warning that injuries could zap our season. Later, it discusses why medium-severity injuries shouldn’t overly handicap us.
Therefore, your last paragraph is just a straw man.
"if Nate has Roy or Miller in the game at all times, that stagnation will turn into conflagration" -- two4larue
by jscot on Sep 24, 2009 1:52 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Channing is gone
Frye wasn’t a great backup center by any means, but even his below-average backup center contributions haven’t been adequately replaced, on this year’s roster. Here’s hoping LMA, Greg and Joel stay completely healthy and never get into serious foul trouble at the same time in a big game, so we won’t have to find out exactly how thin the Blazer’s front court depth really is
When reached 39 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
by two4larue on Sep 27, 2009 9:11 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Channing was useless in responding to foul trouble
He just didn’t provide quality coming off the bench in that kind of situation.
He was workable in injury situations when he was going to get some quality minutes, but the spot minutes for foul cover just didn’t do it. We went small in those situations, usually, with Travis at the 4.
Obviously, we’ve signed Howard to try to address the situation. I actually think he’ll be better in spot minutes than Channing was. The danger is not foul trouble, but injuries. I think KP was hoping Pendergraph would help with injury cover by being our third string center. Perhaps Pend has absorbed our allotment of center injuries for the year. One of these years, both Greg and Joel are going to be injury free.
"if Nate has Roy or Miller in the game at all times, that stagnation will turn into conflagration" -- two4larue
by jscot on Sep 28, 2009 2:28 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Interesting, and telling, choice of words, AK.
You refer to “homers” and “realists”.
By definition realists are more realistic and homers are blinded by fandom. The opposite of a homer is not a realist. The opposite of an optimist is not a realist. The opposite of a optimist is a pessimist.
I think the case that jscot laid out above is very realistic. It isn’t a sure thing; don’t bet the mortgage. But it is more likely than not.
You can nit pick roster balance all you want. You can denigrate what Nate has accomplished in rebuilding two NBA teams. You can discount him being selected as defensive coach for Team USA. You can pronounce 21 year old lottery picks as “a bust” after 600 minutes of PT. You can fuss about our fifth string waterboy. You can do it all, but the odds are that the Blazers will have a better record next spring and a higher seed in the playoffs than they had last year. This isn’t blind homerism, it is a realistic assessment of where the team stands on the eve of this season.
by upper left corner on Sep 24, 2009 6:12 AM PDT up reply actions 3 recs
Thanks mighty ruler o' the world.
Great post. Very level-headed way to break down the upcoming season :)
"We believe" -Rudy Fernandez
by twiggs on Sep 23, 2009 10:54 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
rational homer
not easy to pull off. can’t argue with any of it, and it all adds up to good news.
by bink919 on Sep 23, 2009 11:09 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
All I can say is...
…That was dang good!.. Great though process. Great logic and most of all… Great disclaimers… Worthy of a Future Leader of the World.
by Ilikeemall on Sep 23, 2009 11:54 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Count me as a signatory to the Manifesto
hakkaa päälle !
by timg56 on Sep 23, 2009 12:19 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Thank you jscot
Rec’d for general optimism and outstanding perspective. – Elgin
Without you out there, we're nowhere here
by 22baylor on Sep 23, 2009 1:32 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
A veritable volume of veracity, Oh Victorious Viceroy!
"Aneurysm".
When Outlaw wins a game on a last-second shot, it’s called an "annthefaneurysm". QualityPie
by annthefan on Sep 23, 2009 2:23 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I think you've used Viceroy before
I would hate to think you’re slipping into redundancy already. That could have serious consequences, my dear.
"if Nate has Roy or Miller in the game at all times, that stagnation will turn into conflagration" -- two4larue
by jscot on Sep 23, 2009 2:34 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
(though I must admit your alliteration is alluring)
"if Nate has Roy or Miller in the game at all times, that stagnation will turn into conflagration" -- two4larue
by jscot on Sep 23, 2009 2:35 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Noted, my Nitpicking Nabob.
"Aneurysm".
When Outlaw wins a game on a last-second shot, it’s called an "annthefaneurysm". QualityPie
by annthefan on Sep 23, 2009 2:57 PM PDT up reply actions 3 recs
Where jscot goes the recs follow
"It’s a good ol’ fashioned Rip City beat down!"
by Magnum on Sep 23, 2009 2:45 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I would need a vacation day to finish that BOM
But I agree, we should all be optimistic for the coming season. It’s going to be wonderful….
Witty Unpredictable Talent and Natural Game
by iDea on Sep 23, 2009 2:59 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Impatient reader
Witty Unpredictable Talent and Natural Game
by iDea on Sep 24, 2009 10:49 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Awesome. You say all the things that I feel, and then you say some more so that I agree even more.
How do you do it, jscot?
I can’t wait for real basketball to start.
You can measure skill and talent with your eyes, but productivity is shown through statistics.
by austinpwnz on Sep 23, 2009 3:27 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
When you think exactly what I tell you to think
and feel exactly what I tell you to feel, then we’re getting somewhere.
Today, Bedge, tomorrow, the world.
"if Nate has Roy or Miller in the game at all times, that stagnation will turn into conflagration" -- two4larue
by jscot on Sep 24, 2009 1:57 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yes! This analysis rocks!
Jscot, you are da BOM!
I just wish I was a multitasking IT guy that is really slow at work and had as much Blazer knowledge and passion to compose such a post, and then an even more clever rebuttal to said post.
Alas, I am not. So simple praise is all I can deliver.
by 3pointer on Sep 23, 2009 4:32 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, I am really slow at work
How did you know?
"if Nate has Roy or Miller in the game at all times, that stagnation will turn into conflagration" -- two4larue
by jscot on Sep 24, 2009 1:59 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Once again you have ruled the week
maybe someday you will rule the world. At least it would be an optimistic world. That would put a lot of shock jocks out of work (to say nothing of all the other media).
Well thought out and well expressed. It is the spin perspective I want to rest in before the boo-hoo birds flock back for the winter.
by lee3022 on Sep 24, 2009 12:32 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I think it is going to be a tough season
for the boo-hoo birds. But we will have some bad road losses, and someone will get injured, and we’ll have some mediocre wins against bad teams that we should have blown out. The boo-hoo birds will have their chances to sing.
"if Nate has Roy or Miller in the game at all times, that stagnation will turn into conflagration" -- two4larue
by jscot on Sep 24, 2009 1:55 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Worries me that we think so much alike.....
…..I find it disturbing that I agree so thoroughly with a megalomaniacal Scotsman with delusions of grandeur. Maybe I should see a shrink for a check-up!
Great job of laying out the case for rational exuberance.
by upper left corner on Sep 24, 2009 6:22 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I don't believe a shrink is the answer.
For that you need only look to your 2nd paragraph.
What you need is a great job of laying.
hakkaa päälle !
by timg56 on Sep 24, 2009 9:52 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

by 
























