RealGM Comments on Oden & KP
RealGM appraises OKC potential, but comments on Oden vs Durant and KP's summer.
For insecure Blazer fans that love to see positive reinforcement about drafting Greg:
In the interest of full disclosure, I was absolutely in favor of picking Oden over Durant in the 2007 debate. I remain solidly committed to that position even after Oden's injury and the quicker than expected development of Durant as a scorer. My position is based more on Oden being a center and the relative dearth of quality at that position than it does with comparing the two players in a vacuum. For the same reason, I would rather start a franchise with Dwight Howard than LeBron even though I believe LeBron is a vastly superior talent.
Food for thought on KP:
I avoided making Portland comparisons throughout this piece as much as possible, but it is worth noting that Kevin Pritchard was in an identical situation at the 2009 Trade Deadline and during this past summer's free agency period. Instead of using his cap space and talent depth on a blockbuster for a younger player to grow old with Brandon Roy, Oden and LaMarcus Aldridge, he improved the team in the short-term with Andre Miller. If the Blazers perpetually fall just a little bit short, I think this is the summer where Pritchard will be criticized for being too conservative/unimaginative.
Email
PrintComments
re: Food for thought on KP
Instead of using his cap space and talent depth on a blockbuster for a younger player to grow old with Brandon Roy, Oden and LaMarcus Aldridge, he improved the team in the short-term with Andre Miller.
Who, exactly, fits the criteria that is suggested in this paragraph? I can think of some guys I would like, but none who would have been available for our peripheral pieces.
1. Available for a somewhat reasonable price
2. Fits a need on the team (PG much better than Blake, SF much better than Batum/Webster/Outlaw)
3. Fits the age range
4. Fits the character of the team
This is the ideal criteria for a player we would like to have acquired with our assets. We took Andre Miller because he fits 3 of the 4. I hate when people (especially in an otherwise great article) make throwaway statements like KP was too conservative/unimaginative. In fact, the opposite is true. KP tried to make a big splash, but was thwarted twice. At least go out on a limb and suggest an alternative.
"It’s a good ol’ fashioned Rip City beat down!"
by Magnum on Sep 27, 2009 3:01 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
He could mean trading up for a better point guard to grow with the team in the draft. Or Sessions. So there is competition for the vaunted "point guard of the future".
"I think he can still play" - Kevin Pritchard on Juwan Howard
by Norsktroll on Sep 27, 2009 5:27 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
A little PG on the Nets?
A “young enough” PG on the Bulls?
An injury prone high flier on the Bobcats?
There are plenty of alternatives floating around out there.
Also, the price is kind of irrelevant, seeing as there is nothing else we can buy after this summer.
Still, short term success can help hold a team together, and it can also attract winner to want to sign with your team.
*Unless KP has a secret plan that makes this statement incorrect.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><>
by staylost on Sep 27, 2009 8:43 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Wait, I get the Gerald Wallace reference...
…but who on the Nets and Bulls are you imagining we could have traded for that would help us, and we could get?
M—
by Mortimer on Sep 27, 2009 2:57 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Doy doy doy
Hinrich, of course… how could I forget.
Devin Harris was never gettable for Outlaw, though. That rumor was dead before it even started.
For some reason, I worried you were referencing the silly LMA FOR BULLS #1 PICK stuff last season, as if the Bulls would consider that.
M—
by Mortimer on Sep 27, 2009 6:33 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
smh. How could you forget?
"If the Lakers are Hollywood, then we are South Central." - Clipper fan.
by Cablinasian on Sep 27, 2009 10:15 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
If you mean Harris, no chance
It’s clear that a deal for Hinrich was only plausible in the minds of Blazer fans. The Bulls just didn’t want what we had to offer. They don’t need Outlaw, Blake is a downgrade and they aren’t desperate to shed salary.
Again, what reason would the Bobcats have had to trade Crash? Outlaw is a downgrade, they have potential at the PG slot and a serviceable big man so they don’t need Joel.
The price is relevant. Clearly these teams weren’t interested in trading their players for some combination of Outlaw, Blake, filler, picks, and a little cap relief. Clearly we don’t want to give up any of the Big 3, Rudy, Batum (maybe even Bayless). We were giving too little and they wanted too much.
"It’s a good ol’ fashioned Rip City beat down!"
by Magnum on Sep 27, 2009 3:16 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think NJ would be willing to deal Harris
If KP put Rudy in the offer, and I floated several 3-way trade proposals this summer with details. Quick has said that KP is really high on Devin (he called Harris a “special fit”) but the Blazer’s GM also seems reluctant to part with Rudy at this time, so the NJ trade possibility remains remote. (We’ll have to see how the Nets play during the first half of the season to get a better gauge on their 2010 offseason plans)
Hinrich was a good idea at the deadline because Blake was hurt and RLEC made the contracts match-up. Once the deadline passed and RLEC evaporated, I sold all of my “Cap’n Kirk to PDX” stock. (Ben Gordon signing with Detroit was just the final nail in the coffin, but the way Hinrich played against Boston in the first round had already put him “out of reach” assuming KP was ever really interested in his fellow Jayhawk)
Then, BT Smith came along and told us that KP had discussions with Philly about a deal for Andre Miller at the deadline. Maybe the 76’ers were asking for ‘too much" back then, but knowing what we know now about Andre’s BBIQ, KP’s hesitation most likely “cost” Portland the 1st round series against Houston.
In the long run, maybe that doesn’t seem like much. But what if Roy and company had gotten past Houston and then played L*A tough in the 2nd round and lost? They would’ve at least gained some valuable experience playing the L*kers in the post season, and we’d know a lot more about how Miller will interact with his new teammates heading into this season, if Andre had been with them down the stretch, last year. (And there would definitely be even more “buzz” about the Blazers around the league right now, if they had advanced beyond the first round last April)
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 5:46 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
We mighta' beat the Rockets with Andre Miller
But you can’t argue against getting a guy ya want for “free” (meaning, not trading anyone on your roster for him) since at the very least we’d have to match salaries and that means losing guys we could use and still want to keep— at least for a deal later on.
If we wanted Andre then and didn’t pull the trigger, it’s likely because we could get him later for just cap space, or by doing a sign n’ trade if we went ahead and used the cap space on someone like Hedo (as if that woulda’ ever happened).
Can’t argue with free!
M—
by Mortimer on Sep 27, 2009 6:35 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
I agree free is good, but you can't argue that Miller was our FA plan all along.
Miller was our 5th choice for a FA, after everyone but Sessions had been taken.
by BlazerFanSince1970 on Sep 27, 2009 6:41 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don't think he was our plan, I agree
But I don’t mind him being kept as option-C over moving guys for him last season, because I don’t think he would have made the ultimate difference in the playoffs. A difference, sure, and the 2nd round woulda’ been sweet, but I dunno if it would have been worth moving who we’d have to move to match salaries and whatnot.
I could see us having him as one of our FA options (there wasn’t a long list), who we knew we could get for ‘free’ if other options didn’t work out, or to do a cheaper sign n’ trade deal… which would have been for less than what he made last year, and means we have less salary to match and maybe we even have some cap space left over to make it a pretty easy trade to make.
That is imagining that they woulda’ been happy with Andre all along. I, personally, imagine him as someone they said “well, he’s out there and he’s nice, but we’ll try other stuff first” and then when they finally met him and stuff he becomes “well this isn’t bad at all, I like this guy”.
After that it becomes easy to be happy with how things turned out, even though he truly wasn’t option-A. But, things change.
And either way, last season it’d be a heftier price than signing him outright or for a MLE-sized sign n’ trade if we had signed Hedo or Milsap.
Wait, who would be option 3 and 4 over Andre? I am blanking today. All I got is Hedo and Milsap.
M—
by Mortimer on Sep 27, 2009 6:59 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
They first tried seriously to make a deal for Lee.
They had a sit down but couldn’t find a sign and trade that made NY or Lee happy enough. Lee obviously had problems with playing time (no telling what KP told him – but it worked with Millsap), and NY wants to figure out how to sign a max FA next year and still keep Lee. That could be tough because of the cap hold on Lee next summer, but if they can’t get the FA they want they will try to resign Lee for sure. So NY wasn’t ready to take scraps for Lee in a sign and trade. Those “negotiations” were mentioned by Quick, Lee’s agent, and Lee so I think its pretty certain it happened.
Then they went and talked to Odom. I doubt they figured they had much chance of getting Odom, but they at least checked out the possibilities before making an offer to Miller. Odom was a similar fit to Hedo.
So by my count they had two SF/PFs, one PF, and one PF/C on their FA list before they got to a PG (Miller).
by BlazerFanSince1970 on Sep 27, 2009 7:26 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I wouldn't say that
The fact that there was an informal communication with Odom hardly means they wanted him more than Miller. They probably had similar conversations with Bass and McDyess and 29 rival GMs, etc, etc, etc.
"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 1:04 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
They apparently talked to Odom's agent just prior to offering Miller a contract.
So why do that unless you would rather have him? It’s not like they were trying to save money by passing up Miller. Odom would have cost them more than Miller so I see that as making a last check about someone they would have preferred but probably didn’t think they could get.
by BlazerFanSince1970 on Sep 28, 2009 1:17 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
One possible answer
If you have a shot at Odom, it strengthens your negotiating hand with Miller.
I’m not saying that was the case. But I think Odom didn’t really fit the culture. While his undoubted ability would have been a good fit, I don’t think his mindset towards life would have really fit very well in Portland right now. And while some people may not like that, it is a factor in KP’s decision-making, and one which I applaud.
I’m not saying they never would have brought in Odom. But I think we probably just shouldn’t read too much into contacts with free agents. The contact with Lee was apparently more substantial, so might mean more.
"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 6:36 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Fair point. If Odom had really been willing to come here
they could have used that to get a better deal with Miller. However, Miller didn’t have that many options anyway. He probably could have got a one year deal with NY. I don’t know if Philly’s one year offer was still on the table.
by BlazerFanSince1970 on Sep 28, 2009 9:42 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don't think NJ is willing to part with Harris for Rudy+.
You’ve argued that Rudy is going to play about 10-12 minutes behind Roy this year, and won’t get any backcourt minutes at all with Roy in a PG/SG combo, and that Nate will only play a 3-guard offense for “some” favorable match ups (i.e. not a regular part of his rotation). If all that were true (and I don’t think it is) then Rudy would get 10-12 minutes most nights and maybe 20 minutes “some” nights. Is that still your position, or have I expressed it wrong?
( I think Rudy averages at least 25 minutes, but I’m not looking to argue your position, we have done that plenty already.)
But if you are correct that Rudy gets something like 15 minutes average, and if NJ would trade Harris for Rudy plus pieces not involving Roy, LMA, or Oden (which I don’t believe they would), then KP would be absolutely crazy not to trade Rudy for Harris tonight before media day tomorrow. Isn’t that the logical conclusion from your comments about Rudy’s playing time and NJ’s willingness to trade Harris for Rudy?
by BlazerFanSince1970 on Sep 27, 2009 6:36 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I agree, no way Thorn trades Harris for a bench player
Devin Harris has proven himself a star and one of the better young PGs who can play two-ways. Rudy is famous and popular, but he isn’t a star. Neither is Outlaw. We are not getting Harris for anything short of LMA, and even then I see NJ saying “nah”.
Even back when he was a Mav and his stats were artificially lower, there was no way to get him for bench players.
Mortie Pie
by Mortimer on Sep 27, 2009 7:01 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
several things that should make Rudy attractive to NJ
He’s a 2 guard, and they need an upgrade at that position
His contract is extremely affordable, and that’s important to the Nets as they head into the 2010 FA period
Fernandez may never become a “star” in Portland, but he has the sex appeal to be a very-marketable player on the east coast. We’ve seen how he turns the ladies heads in Portland, multiply that by a factor of 10 as the Nets get ready to move to Brooklyn
Rudy’s minutes will be squeezed in Portland. That won’t be the case for most other teams, including NJ. it’s not yours truly who will be “limiting” him to any amount of PT per game, it’s the improvement of Batum, the return of Webster, the addition of Miller and Roy’s reduced weight that makes it appear that Brandon’s not planning on playing as much SF as last year, when Nic was a rookie and Martell was on the DL.
Rudy is going to have a fight on his hands just to maintain his minutes, but his expectations are to have a more “important” role in the Blazer’s offense. I’d like to make a rosie prediction that “everything will work out just fine” (like KP does) but we’ve both watched NBA basketball long enough to know that you can’t keep a gaggle of young vets all happy if they’re getting 20 mpg and they know they should be getting more. Agents get involved, feelings get hurt. The press gets wind of the discontent (or makes up stories about it) and before you know it there’s a firestorm on talk radio.
KP can say “it’s not my problem, I’m not the coach” and Nate can say “the players will decide how much they play” but it’s never really that simple. Last year, Webster’s foot injury actually did Nate a favor, because it enabled him to find more PT for Rudy by playing a 3 guard lineup. If there’s no “serendipitous” injury this fall, the logjam at the wing positions we discussed last September will finally hit the fan, except for this time around Batum won’t be the rookie that doesn’t deserve to play, like at this time last year.
There’s no groundswell to deal Rudy at the present, but that could turn on a dime the moment he or his agent make a peep about “not being important enough” or not getting enough playing time to “progress” in his path to stardom. At that point, it may be too late for Nate to deal Rudy and get a player he covets, like Harris. He might have to settle for a deal that is unpopular in Portland, like the Hedo contract almost was. KP has done the heavy lifting and put a deep, young and talented roster together. Now he’s gonna need to make the really tough decisions, like how many of these great kids are going to be long-time Blazers, and how many need to be replaced with veteran role players who will be content to sit on the bench until they’re number is called? As we learned throughout the Whitsitt era, chemistry matters. “Too much” talent can turn into a team becoming less than the sum of the individual parts.
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 10:02 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I've heard all of that from you before, but it evades the question.
But if you are correct that Rudy gets something like 15 minutes average, and if NJ would trade Harris for Rudy plus pieces not involving Roy, LMA, or Oden (which I don’t believe they would), then KP would be absolutely crazy not to trade Rudy for Harris tonight before media day tomorrow. Isn’t that the logical conclusion from your comments about Rudy’s playing time and NJ’s willingness to trade Harris for Rudy?
In other words, if you are right that Rudy gets only 15 minutes, and if you are right that NJ will trade Harris for Rudy, then why no trade already? Do you think KP is so dumb he would keep a 15 minute backup SG when he could have Harris?
by BlazerFanSince1970 on Sep 27, 2009 10:53 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Right
Obviously Nate and KP talk to each other occasionally. If Nate isn’t going to make minutes for Rudy, and KP has been told he can have Harris for Rudy and pieces, Nate is telling KP, “Go for it,” and KP is doing so.
So one of the assumptions is wrong. Either Nate expects to find more than 15 mpg for Rudy, or the Rudy for Harris deal is not available.
My guess is both. Nate does expect to find more then 15 mpg for Rudy, and the Rudy plus pieces for Harris deal is not available.
NJ just got a really wealthy owner, apparently. They have much less incentive to dump salary than they’ve had in the past. And Harris is part of the bait to attract a high-profile FA. None of the superstars want to play on a rotten team. But a team with an outstanding young PG? That is attractive.
Harris is not on the market. That makes no sense at all, no matter what some hack wrote at draft time. We could convince NJ to trade him by offering Brandon, or Greg, or LMA plus Rudy.
"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 1:14 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Exactly. I believe both assumptions are wrong.
Harris is important to them, and it would take one of our Big 3 to get him. Also Nate will find minutes for Rudy.
I think the decision on whether to trade Rudy probably comes next summer, so Nate will get him minutes and try to find a “permanent” fit for him this year. I only give that a 50% chance of success however.
I don’t want to re-open the “where does Rudy fit” discussion again. But I wouldn’t be surprised if Paul Allen made a promise to Rudy that if he wasn’t getting X minutes after two years we would trade him rather than forcing him to stay four years. That’s just my hunch, based on Allen going to Spain just before Rudy signed with us to convince him to give up loads of money to join the Blazers.
This is such an amazing parallel with the Petrovic situation that I’m sure Allen recognized that from day one, and won’t let Rudy be traded without first making sure there is no way he can fit here. Plus Rudy is far more of a fan favorite, and has already contributed more than Petro did before he was traded to NJ (another eerie parallel with regard to this discussion).
by BlazerFanSince1970 on Sep 28, 2009 2:00 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think that is right
No way Rudy comes without some kind of understanding that either A) he gets PT B) he gets released or C) he gets traded. He was giving up too much to just come sit on the bench.
Probably there is a gentleman’s agreement that after two years, if he wants a trade, all he has to do is tell KP, and if they can’t swing a deal, they will release him to go back to Spain.
The best way to prevent that is to make sure he likes his role and we win lots of games. If we can make the WCF, that taste of success is something he’ll want again. It doesn’t have to mean more minutes, but it does mean a role that plays to his strengths.
If Rudy only plays 20 mpg, but it is running, slashing, moving without the ball, pressing on defense, etc, he will probably like that a lot more than 25 mpg of standing on the 3 point line.
"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 6:32 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Ah, I misunderstood your question
My bad. As far as the Harris deal, I think the odds of that went down the day MIller was signed. But (if I remember right) I was using Devin as an example of a player that KP covets who might’ve been available in the past and could be again, in the future. (I’ve also used Ricky Rubio’s “rights” as a potential “lure” for a Rudy deal…) I’m not trying to get rid of #5 at all costs, I just foresee complications with his PT coming up and I like to think “ahead” about possible destinations that would be attractive to KP and what the Blazers might need in the future (Miller’s age = younger PG needed, etc)
As far as any “secret deal” between Allen and Rudy to guarantee Fernadez “X” amount of PT, if that agreement ever came to light can you imagine how the other Blazer players might feel about it? (It would be like the “bonus baby” in baseball who gets more opportunities to pitch even though the 13th round draft choice may have better stuff.) Life isn’t fair, but that’s another “scenario” where locker room discontent could be incubated. Nate is right, the players should have to earn their PT. If Rudy is a better “fit” with the Roy and Miller then he’ll play, but hopefully not because McMillian has to meet an artificial “quota” of minutes to “keep Rudy happy” That smacks of affirmative action, not NBA roster competition
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 5:01 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don't see any way
that Rudy would have been guaranteed a certain number of minutes. I do suspect that there was some kind of agreement that he could say “trade me or let me go back to Europe” and the team would honor that if he wasn’t happy with his minutes.
And other players would understand and respect that. He passed up millions to come over.
"if Nate has Roy or Miller in the game at all times, that stagnation will turn into conflagration" -- two4larue
by jscot on Sep 29, 2009 1:02 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Rudy + whoever we would be okay giving up
Does not equal Harris, who is paid extremely fairly, is young, and very good.
Rudy could be a sex symbol, but right now he isn’t a starting SG on a good team. He’s a popular 6th man. Him, plus Trout, plus Bayless, plus Joel, plus Blake, do not equal getting Harris even if you could somehow trade all of them at once.
I love Devin Harris, would kill to have him as the Blazers PG for the next 8 years, but that’s because he is good. It’s why the Nets won’t deal him when he’s the perfect combo of good, affordable, and young.
Not for a guy who won’t be as popular when put in a position to not look as good— as a starter and big 3 on a team.
M—
by Mortimer on Sep 27, 2009 11:51 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
In udder words
His handsomeness won’t matter because he isn’t as good as Devin Harris, and we can’t combine him with anyone who would be better than Devin Harris, unless you start talking LMA.
That sort of marketability, if it would indeed happen how you describe, is great for Rudy but pretty meaningless for the Nets. And nuthin’ makes someone less attractive then being not as good as the guy you were dealt for.
I like Rudy, and wanna keep him, but he just isn’t close to the same level, and his popularity and marketability to not compensate for that at all. They upgrade their SG but then have a gaping hole at PG caused by trading one of the best young PGs in the NBA for a backup SG.
Morty
by Mortimer on Sep 27, 2009 11:55 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Absolutely. I love Rudy, but
i’d help pack his bags and send him to NJ in a minute for Harris. I’d send Rudy + Bayless + (Miller or Webster or Blake) but that wouldn’t be enough for NJ.
by BlazerFanSince1970 on Sep 28, 2009 1:08 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Any combo of guys outside our big 3
I’d be happy to deal for Harris, and I’d think twice about LMA if we had a plan to get a good PF.
LMA + Batum would be too much, but LMA + Blake might not.
Pehaps I’ll change my mind this season, with Andre Miller, and if he can make Bayless copy him to get minutes (which is how I envision their unofficial mentorship helping Bayless).
M—
by Mortimer on Sep 28, 2009 3:00 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Uh
Obviously he was supposed to trade Rudy, Batum, Outlaw, Bayless, Webster, Blake, Przybilla, RLEC and two future 1st rd draft picks for Chris Paul and Peja’s contract. Because three great players is much better than two great players and six other good ones.
made em jump like Rod Strickland
by Guaranteed on Sep 27, 2009 4:30 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
You wouldn't do it?
*Unless KP has a secret plan that makes this statement incorrect.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><>
by staylost on Sep 27, 2009 8:44 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don't know if would do that trade.
We COULD have…
Paul / Sessions / Mills
Roy / Crawford
Peja / Udoka / Cunningham
LMA / Howard / Pendergraph
Oden / Pendergraph / Collins
…maybe. Didn’t really fact check this too much. Not really sure if I like it more than our current roster. And I firmly believe that our team is capable of finding a high-quality, long-term solution at the point guard.
I always say good point guards have a way of coming out of nowhere. Billups (after 5 seasons he goes from mediocre to greatness), Parker (27th pick??), Rondo, even guys like Derek Fisher, NateMac, and Avery Johnson in their days (I realize Derek is still playing).
Don’t know if I could part with all of that team-oriented talent when our own great point guard might already be on the team, or at least right around the corner.
"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 Sep 27, 2009 12:33 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
The thing
with these types of reviews is that they are basing their opinions on the now. As if the Blazers are going to ride off into the sunset with Miller and never think of another PG. No, Miller is a fill for the next two seasons. Expect a move. KP is NOT conservative. He just realizes that the curve is in the future. Miller is a placeholder for whoever emerges from the roster or who KP picks up in the future.
While he could have been more aggressive, I dont think any move short of landing Lebron would win them a championship this year. Wait until this team matures to be past the avg age in the league. Their experience, skill and talent, with the addition of a great PG like Rajon Rondo(someone the Blazers would absolutely benefit with).
Miller will definitely show glimpses of what this team will look like with a real, semi-to-elite level PG. If he is not on the roster, they’ll go out and get him.
"Both Anthony Carter and Jameer Nelson were downright jubilant in the Magic locker room postgame. Carter said to no one in particular, "Brandon Roy, that man is unstoppable, it's like he's playing NBA Live" and Nelson was cracking on his teammates for not being able to guard Brandon. The kinds of jokes you can make when you win."
by loyal_blazer on Sep 27, 2009 8:38 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
FanShots
Quick hits of video, photos, quotes, chats, links and lists that you find around the web.
Recommended FanShots
Recent FanShots
Certain photos copyright © 2009 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
