Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: Jerry Sandusky's Wife Tries To Run A Reporter Over

Game 55 Recap: Blazers 108, Phoenix 101

Long Story Short:  The Blazers take advantage of the Suns' overconfidence, draining shot after shot in the first half and then gutting out the inevitable second-half comeback to take a nice win on the road, making up for last night's fourth-quarter nightmare.

The Game

You knew something was up in this game from the opening moments.  The Suns got the tip and Jason Richardson streaked out for the layup with only Andre Miller near him.  "Oh great," you thought, "here come the first two points of the slaughter."  But wahoo and huzzah, Miller blocked the shot (WHA?), his first of three blocks on the night (WHAAAA?!?) and the Blazers calmly got it down to Juwan Howard for a short jumper.  That was followed by a turnover and another jumper.  Then another turnover and another jumper.  Then a missed shot by Steve Nash and another jumper.  At this point the Blazers led 8-0 and the Suns started furiously flipping through their scripts trying to find out where it said that in Act One.

The first quarter continued basically along those lines.  The Suns played rancid efense and took a potpourri of shots on offense.  Some of those shots smelled like spring flowers.  Some of those shots smelled like what the spring flower potpourri is supposedly covering.  The Blazers, meanwhile, took advantage of the Suns' efense, helping themselves to any mid-range jumper they wanted.  If you look in the scouting book under "Portland" you'll find that mid-range jumpers are all they do.  It was as if the Suns hatched a fiendish plot to ruin John Wayne's movie career by casting him as a cowboy.  End result:  Portland 30, Phoenix 20 after one.

In the second quarter everything turned around, naturally.  The sleeping giant awoke and...huh?  What's that?  Still sleeping?  Indeed they were.  Like a surly teenager with a zero-period class Phoenix cried out, "Just five more minutes, mom!" when coach Alvin Gentry set the alarm buzzing.  Robin Lopez took a couple of Hefty Man shots right at the rim at the beginning of the period and it quickly became apparent that Blazers would have a hard time dealing with his size and strength.  So, of course, the Suns ignored him.  Instead they decided that Channing Frye should get some shots in the paint.  And Miley Cyrus should audition for the Metropolitan Opera.  And Andy Dick should become a Supreme Court Justice.  And maybe the Suns should have thrown away their Big Book of Bright Ideas, or at least made sure they weren't reading it upside down.  Soooo...their offense got a little better, as in three points' worth.  Meanwhile they continue to rack up turnovers, giving Portland extra chances.  Jerryd Bayless punished them early in the quarter with drives and free throws.  Steve Blake heated up later in the period along with LaMarcus Aldridge and Dante Cunningham.  The efense was back in full force and Portland scored 30 again.  The Blazers go into the locker room up 60-44, a 16-point lead over Phoenix in their building.

You knew the Suns would come out with a flurry in the third and this time they actually managed it.  They had three layups plus a jumper and a free throw before the 7-minute mark.  The Blazers hit a couple of jumpers but it looked like the tide was turning as far as shot quality.  Portland preserved 13 points of its lead after the Phoenix onslaught, at which time the Suns figured, "Digging 3 points out of that lead is good enough for now.  We'll get the rest in the fourth."  The Blazers, meanwhile, said, "Three layups?  We didn't know that many were allowed.  Hey coach, can we... Huh?  Yes?  OK then."  Andre Miller makes a layup, LaMarcus Aldridge adds another, Jeff Pendergraph scores at the rim and is fouled.  Throw a couple of made jumpers in there too and Portland's lead is up to a full 20, then 22.  Only a brief 3-pointer flurry to end the quarter brought the Suns back within 16.  The Blazers enter the final quarter with that lead.

The surly teenager finally got out of bed in the fourth as the Suns began the period with two conventional three-point plays and a made three-pointer, scoring 9 in their first 4 possessions and cutting the Portland lead to 7 with 10:30 left.  "See ma?  I told you I'd get to it!  (Huff!)"  Then Steve Blake and Nicolas Batum looked over to the Blazer bench.  "Three pointers?  We didn't know those were allowed.  Hey coach, can we...Huh?  Yes?  OK then."  Bam!  Nicolas drains one.  Bam!  Steve drains another.  Then the layup people showed up again.  Cunningham layup.  Miller layup.  Cunningham dunk.  Miller layup.  "We love efense!!!"  Phoenix tried to match but they got killed by Goran Dragic who couldn't run the offense or shoot or hold onto the ball.  They wanted ever so badly to get Steve Nash in the game for him but the clock never seemed to stop to allow it.  At the 6:00 mark the Blazers led by 16 again.  It was time for Phoenix to make its last surge.

The surge started with the Suns finally playing some decent "D".  They swarmed and scrambled, forcing the Blazers deep on the court, shooting threes while covered with the clock winding down.  Naturally the Blazers' shooting percentage went into the toilet.  Phoenix also made a run on offense, started by a couple of buckets from Frye.  Then Nash and Amare Stoudamire remembered that they were supposed to be All-Stars carrying the team.  They started pumping in shots as fast as they could.  Most of them were successful too.  The problem was that the Suns couldn't hold onto the ball on half of the possessions between those shots.  They made more bad passes than the Butabi Brothers.  The Blazers weren't hitting shots and the lead shrunk to 7, but at a certain point the clock ran out on the comeback.  Phoenix was forced to foul to get possession.  Unlike those guarded threes, the Blazers did fine making free throws.  Steve Nash hit a three to bring Phoenix within 4 but nobody could connect on another distance shot and the Blazers charity-striped their way to the 8-point victory.

Portland shot 58.4% for the game, handily beating Phoenix's 47%.  The Blazers only attempted 9 threes and the offense prospered for it, at least against this team.  Portland matched the Suns exactly in free throws and rebounding and actually beat them by 2 in fast break points.  Portland had 10 steals and 20 points off of turnovers which helped provide the edge.  But the main story of the game is that Phoenix took it for granted for way too long and the Blazers responded by taking what was offered them.  Had the Suns come out and murdered Portland in the first period the Blazers probably would have shrugged and lost.  But when you let a team shoot 80% for the period even the most disheartened squad will perk up and figure there's only half an hour of basketball left to play.  Why ruin a good thing?  The Blazers didn't tonight.  No sympathy for the Suns.  They're undoubtedly the better team right now but--as the Blazers will soon learn when the roster finally gets off the ground--"better team" has to be proven on the court every night.  When you start thinking you're the better team before you play the game instead of after you get into trouble.

Individual Observations

Letting LaMarcus Aldridge have comfortable mid-range jumpers is a big, big mistake.  Make him put the ball on the floor.  Push him outside farther.  The Suns did none of that.  LMA feasted to the tune of 11-17 shooting and 22 points.  It was good that in a night when the guards were getting decent shots too they remembered to feed the big guy.  Sometimes that's a problem.  LaMarcus was also partially responsible for the late-game points the Blazers scored even though he didn't tally too many of them himself.  The Suns perked up their coverage by running two and sometimes three people at him.  He got the ball out in those situations and the Suns didn't rotate at all.  It's nice to have a guy who draws that attention.

Steve Blake had a very, very nice game.  He was aggressive but not crazy on offense from the get-go.  He took every shot he could get without disrupting the offense and with nobody on the other side interested in watching him he sank 7-12, ending up with 20 points.  Oh, he also had 12 assists.  Did I mention the efense?

Andre Miller also got wide-eyed and drove to the lane for a bevy of layups and short jumpers.  He scored 20 on 8-15 shooting and added 7 rebounds and 5 assists.

Dante Cunningham looked like a cross between Inspector Gadget and The Terminator out there.  He blocked one shot that seemed like it was at scoreboard height.  After getting served a massive in-your-face dunk by Amare Stoudamire early in the game he returned the favor with interest late, making the Phoenix crowd gasp in horror and awe.  He played the Jerome Kersey hustle role again on defense and the boards.  13 points, 6-7 shooting, 4 rebounds in 21 minutes.

Martell Webster and Juwan Howard both did alright.  Webster hit 5-7 shots, had 4 rebounds, and added 3 steals.  Howard hit 5-10 with 5 rebounds.  Each had 10 points.  I liked that Martell wasn't all three-crazy.  There were better shots to be had.

Jeff Pendergraph wowed the home crowd with 5 points and 2 rebounds in 10 minutes.  He also wowed them the wrong way with 3 turnovers and 3 personal fouls in that span.  Pendy Smash!

Now we get to the not-as-great news.  Rudy Fernandez, Jerryd Bayless, and Nicolas Batum had sub-par games.  Batum had a couple of credible defensive stands and that nice three we mentioned.  Bayless hit 5-6 free throws.  But these three were pretty anemic.  Nic had the best game of them.  Fernandez had an especially rough night with 2 turnovers and 4 fouls in 7 minutes.  It looks like he's tired, hurt, or maybe has just given up.  He's not ahead of the game in the least.  He's reacting to everything that's happening instead of being proactive.  Bayless had trouble quarterbacking the team when called upon and is back to looking uncomfortable unless he's on the drive.  I guess we didn't need these three with other players stepping up but the other players wouldn't have gotten the chance to step up had these three been on. 

Final Thoughts

This game makes up in some ways for the loss yesterday.  More importantly it sends the Blazers into the break on a positive note and still in possession of a decent record.  We'll see how the team is transformed after the intermission.  Brandon Roy?  Travis Outlaw?  Even without centers Portland can still put up a fight with those guys back.  Even just Roy would provide a major transformation.  Portland hasn't excelled in the last few weeks but they didn't fall apart completely either.  Tonight preserved that trend and will hopefully give us momentum going into next week.

Boxscore

Check out some undoubtedly angry people at BrightSideoftheSun.

Homers rejoice!  Your incredible Jersey Contest scores can be viewed hereWe are aware that the Nash/Miller-Bayless answer is incorrect.  We'll fix it.

--Dave (blazersub@yahoo.com)

Comment 136 comments  |  0 recs  | 

Do you like this story?

Comments

Display:

Great win! Totally unexpected.

I’m lovin’ me some Dante the past week or so.

Hit it. Yes he did. Ohhhh yeah.

by Badalona Baddie on Feb 10, 2010 10:30 PM PST reply actions  

Jersey Contest

The Nash assist question was given the wrong answer, it should be fewer, not more :)

by krizzikinz on Feb 10, 2010 10:32 PM PST reply actions  

Crud

I put down “Bayless” when I meant “Blake”. Ugh. We’ll fix it.

—Dave

by Dave on Feb 10, 2010 10:38 PM PST up reply actions  

Ugh,

can I say I read it as Miller and Blake?

That was like a poem
It was beautiful, man.

#52 by Mortimer on Dec 17, 2009 10:35 PM PST

by Sashland on Feb 11, 2010 10:26 AM PST up reply actions  

Blake: SELL HIGH!

Everyone in the league watch this tonight?!

It’s STEVE BLAKE — he’s a stopper, a leader, a shooter with ice in his veins!

You know you want him! Now available for your used Kwame Browns!

by travis13 on Feb 10, 2010 10:32 PM PST reply actions  

LOL

I give you points for both consistency and flexibility.

The consistency to never change your mind and the flexibility to change your argument as needed.

#7 #10 #25 #52 -- #5 & #88 are back!

by jscot on Feb 11, 2010 6:43 AM PST up reply actions  

From about the worst game we've played all year

To one of the best, nice.

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

by skywaker9 on Feb 10, 2010 10:35 PM PST reply actions  

Dante says you dunk on me

I DUNK IN YOUR FACE:

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

by skywaker9 on Feb 10, 2010 10:38 PM PST reply actions   2 recs

Thats the picture I expected to see here today....

I <3 Dante !!

Enjoy the break, come back and finish strong.

Small ball does not win championships.....

Go Blazers !!

by FrenchieFan on Feb 11, 2010 10:45 AM PST up reply actions  

I could have sworn

Amare tried to hurt him as he came down from that dunk. Did anyone feel the same way? I just thought it was pretty fishy how Amare grabbed one leg so that he couldn’t land balanced, and ended up doing a weird two-step landing with the latter leg caught up on Amare’s hand that had no obvious reason to be there.

Actually I had a funny feeling about Amare’s intentions on two other plays, although I’m having trouble remembering them now. Definitely that crash to the floor early on where he felt a Blazer (Webster?) on his back and moved into him to prevent a graceful landing. Something late in the game, too.

by scottacoma on Feb 12, 2010 12:27 PM PST up reply actions  

Also, Blazers bringing people back too soon

There’s no way Nic should be playing right now, not if that little bump from Amare is hurting him that badly. This is just foolish, and it’s becoming a trend. Roy was brought back too soon in Philly. Webster last year. I’m hoping Travis isn’t the next example.

I’m forgetting someone here. But it’s a growing, unsettling trend.

by travis13 on Feb 10, 2010 10:39 PM PST reply actions  

Nic has been playing awesome

Our next game isn’t for what, six days, relax.

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

by skywaker9 on Feb 10, 2010 10:40 PM PST up reply actions  

Playing well

Yeah, sure he’s playing well.

But relax? Regarding injuries to our Blazers? Nah, not happening this year. Not planning to relax next year, either. His shoulder isn’t fully ready and that’s pretty clear. And yeah, he’s been playing really well. Love the guy.

by travis13 on Feb 11, 2010 1:11 AM PST up reply actions  

doctors tod him that there would be a lot of pain from time to time

Awesomeness (ô'səm-nes)
1. n. Something that inspires awe
2. n. Nicolas Batum

by thomasikehara on Feb 11, 2010 6:58 AM PST up reply actions  

Wa, wa, wa.

Bet you complain about rainy days because you can’t work in the yard and on sunny days because you have to water the plants.

We’ve been all over the topic of how qualified (or not) the Blazer training staff is and the results are in – fans don’t have a clue, but don’t let that stop them from trying to make people believe they do.

Clarence, It's better to have a gun and not need it, then need a gun and not have it.

by timg56 on Feb 11, 2010 8:28 AM PST up reply actions  

sure

but qualifications and short-sightedness meet on the training table.

by travis13 on Feb 11, 2010 11:20 AM PST up reply actions  

And Sophia was on Talkin' Ball tonight

To boot:

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

by skywaker9 on Feb 10, 2010 10:44 PM PST reply actions  

Ask yourself this question (be honest now)

What can Travis Outlaw do on a basketball court that Dante Cunningham can’t already do better?

If you said “pass up an open shot, dribble once or twice, elevate and take an off-balance fall-away jumper with a hand in his face” you win the prize!

I so do not want to see Travis replacing Dante in the rotation after a week or so…so how about an Outlaw+Mills for Ronny Turiaf trade, and then let’s get ready to move back up the WC standings?

When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!

by two4larue on Feb 10, 2010 10:45 PM PST reply actions  

I'LL BITE

What can Travis Outlaw do on a basketball court that Dante Cunningham can’t already do better?
1. be a legit scoring option (creates his own shots)
2. stretch the D (shoot threes)
3. average 13ppg over a season

blah blah blah blah lame comment - lame commenter

by Bandwagon Butcher on Feb 10, 2010 10:54 PM PST up reply actions   3 recs

This is true.

They are very, very different players. I’m not sure comparing them makes any sense, I think it’s Rudy, Bayless and Batum that make Outlaw’s scoring less important.

Batum brings the doom.

by The Running Man on Feb 10, 2010 11:41 PM PST up reply actions  

Or their lack of scoring that makes him more important than ever.

How often this season has the second unit come in and killed us this year. Granted, we haven’t had much of a second unit. But at least Outlaw gives us a scoring option. That’s something the Rudy, Bayless and Batum group haven’t given us much of lately with any consistency. Not that Outlaw himself was consistent per se, but more consistent than what we have.

πεντήκοντα δύο

Blazersedge.com || New to Blazers' Edge?

by T Darkstar on Feb 11, 2010 7:32 AM PST up reply actions  

4. Provide sweet interviews of his fellow Blazers!

5. Catch catfish!
6. Be the pride of Starkville, MS!

But seriously, I am liking me some Dante as well. I hope he still can carve out some PT. We could put a ridiculously athletic group on the floor with Roy, Batum/Webster, Cunningham, Outlaw, & Aldridge?

by clinchmobb on Feb 10, 2010 11:42 PM PST up reply actions  

I don't like Turiaf, but some similar thought has crossed my mind.

The questions about Dante are 1) Can he put the ball on the floor at least enough to create space to get off his shot? 2) Will he develop an ability to shoot the 3?

The answer to 1) is really unclear at this point. One thing about playing college ball for 4 yrs is that if you play in a disciplined offense, you really get used to doing nothing one-on-one. This means you’re less likely to make mistakes, but also can leave you so disciplined that showing initiative may seem unsound. Dante may have a lot of stuff he can do that we haven’t seen, but as a rookie he’s no doubt been wise to fit in, hustle and not make mistakes. If he has an open shot he takes it (and shoots a very high percentage out to maybe 18 ft.)

2) He never made any 3s at the college distance. It seems like I remember Villanova having a guard-heavy offense, so it’s possible he seldom saw the ball. His form looks good — he gets plenty of arc on his shot — but Dante shooting 3s comfortably may not happen until next year. Outlaw didn’t even think about shooting 3s until he’d been in the NBA for several years.

The fact that the default-position, so to speak, of Dante’s game is defense, rebounding and hustle makes him a very interesting player if he expands his offense a bit. Dave’s comparison to Jerome Kersey seems apt.

ignacio

by ignacio on Feb 10, 2010 11:40 PM PST up reply actions  

Agreed

Dante and Trav brings different things on table. Outlaw is really a 3 and Dante is a 4. While I do believe Dante would eventually have range that extends to the 3 point line, I doubt he’ll be a perimeter scorer like Travis. More likely, he develops a high elbow game or a hybrid back to the basket game. Couple of moves he made off high post area already showed glimpses that he has those in development. (not this game…in previous games)

"I think he’s been doing some good things. I think he’s been doing some good things. He’s had to play a lot of minutes lately with Blake being out. I think he’s been doing some good things." -Nate McMillan

by xedubx on Feb 11, 2010 12:31 AM PST up reply actions  

Even I have to admit Larue has a point....

but I’d still rather trade Martell :)

Small ball does not win championships.....

Go Blazers !!

by FrenchieFan on Feb 11, 2010 10:49 AM PST up reply actions  

We fail to recognize hw much Travis helps in the 4th

Dante is very good, and has been a pleasant suprise, but Travis has bailed us out so many times with his ugly , headscratching fadeaways that I can’t just let him go for Ronnie Turiaf. We have had several 4th quarters this year when we have had Brandon and when we havn’t where we just can’t score in the final 4 minutes. With Travis I believe we win those games (The Memphis home game, and the New Orleans game is what I was thinkin of)

"Good, Better, Best, never let it rest until your good is your better and your better is your best." Tim Duncan

by flynn4blazers on Feb 10, 2010 10:49 PM PST reply actions  

Travis will never shy away from the big shot, unlike LMA

Travis highlights the fact that this team needs a solid second option (usually Travis) behind Roy in crunchtime. There are other guys on this team who can score, but only Roy and Outlaw consistently show up in the last minute or two of a tight game. I still think Outlaw should be traded for the right player, but this team will need someone to step up in the 4th quarter.

Of course, Nate could just play Dante instead of Outlaw and that alone would result in 10 fewer points per game for the oppostition from Travis’ nonexistant weakside defense!

by lil'stink on Feb 10, 2010 11:06 PM PST up reply actions  

that alone would result in 10 fewer points per game for the oppostition from Travis’ nonexistant weakside defense!

This is the point that usually gets over looked, especially after Trout’s late game shots go in a few times a season

When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!

by two4larue on Feb 11, 2010 8:27 AM PST up reply actions  

oh come on

is Dante really blocking 2 shots a game or even altering that many? He’s playing good D, but not 10 points worth per game

by 50backflips on Feb 11, 2010 11:50 AM PST up reply actions  

it's the little things

Let’s say Travis fails to block out his man, which results in a second chance hoop

Or maybe Outlaw misses a defensive rotation and leaves an opening in the defense so a penetrator is fouled and makes 2 free throws

You’re right, Cunningham alone isn’t worth 10 points more on defense, it’s the repeated mistakes that Outlaw has made in the past that (when added together) count against the team over the course of his 25-30 mpg. I’m not saying Dante (or any player) is mistake-free, but if all 5 Blazers on the floor aren’t on the same page, the opponent’s FG% goes up and Portland commit more turnovers. Better fundamentals and situational recognition leads to stingier defense and a more-efficient offense. Sure, Travis can score and get his own shot, but that’s only one facet of the game, and it shouldn’t outshine the other areas of team play

When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!

by two4larue on Feb 11, 2010 11:23 PM PST up reply actions  

Let's not forget that he also put us in some of those situations with questionable decision making as well.

While I do think Travis is still important, he is an unrestricted free agent after the season and we could definitely use a Center like Turiaf in a major, major way. Also, we have two players that can get their own shots in the 4th in Dre and Bayless. Are they good as a primary option? Of course not. But we have Roy for that (when healthy), and Miller is fine for secondary option. (and Bayless to lesser degree).

"I think he’s been doing some good things. I think he’s been doing some good things. He’s had to play a lot of minutes lately with Blake being out. I think he’s been doing some good things." -Nate McMillan

by xedubx on Feb 11, 2010 12:35 AM PST up reply actions  

Travis's poor decision making is so overstated.

So he’s not Shane Battier out there on the court. One thing is true—without Travis Outlaw, we wouldn’t have won 54 games last year. Another thing is true—with a healthy Travis Outlaw playing at last year’s level, we would have more than 31 wins this year.

by HeathBlizzard on Feb 11, 2010 9:13 AM PST up reply actions  

Ah..the ol' 54 win argument..which has no bearing whatsoever on what I am actually arguing

Let’s put it this way. Which do you think gives us best chance at making the playoffs as well as win a playoff series: return of Outlaw but no help in the middle, as opposed to getting someone like Turiaf in the middle in exchange for Outlaw? If you pick the former, KP and Roy is doing a terrific job in terms of spinning “why we didn’t get help in the middle this trade deadline when we deperately need help”.

"I think he’s been doing some good things. I think he’s been doing some good things. He’s had to play a lot of minutes lately with Blake being out. I think he’s been doing some good things." -Nate McMillan

by xedubx on Feb 11, 2010 10:58 AM PST up reply actions  

Ah the ol' making the playoff or winning a series argument

If that’s what you are interested in then yes you make the deal. If you think Travis will help us win a championship more than someone like Turiaf then you don’t.

That’s Kevin/Paul/Nate’s call and I trust them more than anyone here on Blazersedge.

#52

by blazermaniac32 on Feb 11, 2010 11:03 AM PST up reply actions  

Sigh..I think everyone is missing the point here. Outlaw is an unrestricted free agent after this year!

Even if we send him away, it doesn’t mean we won’t be able to re-sign him for the future. Please look up to the post above to look at what I am actually arguing for here. I’m not saying Outlaw is not valuable in anyway, just that we need help in the middle and Outlaw’s expiring contract could be valuable in filling that hole, especially since most of what Outlaw can bring can be covered by Miller/Bayless and Cunningham.

Is having Travis for 2 months going to help us win a championship as opposed to getting a Big for him and having a better shot at winning a playoff series this year? If anything, I think the experience of overcoming difficulties of this season and winning a playoff series this year serves as a better learning tool for future championship runs. Also, keep in mind that having Outlaw for the future means less minutes for guys like Cunningham, Batum , and Webster, as to we’d likely have to trade/let them walk instead.

"I think he’s been doing some good things. I think he’s been doing some good things. He’s had to play a lot of minutes lately with Blake being out. I think he’s been doing some good things." -Nate McMillan

by xedubx on Feb 11, 2010 11:18 AM PST up reply actions  

I like Ronny Turiaf.

I think he would fit nicely as a Blazer. But I find two problems with proposals involving trading for him.

First is the practicality of any trade. Sure Both Blake’s and Outlaw’s salary matches up with Turiaf. That doesn’t mean it’s a likely trade. For example GS has Turiaf’s services for one and possibly two seasons after this. What do they gain from trading him for what could easily be a 2 month rental? Do either Portland player fill a greater need than what Turiaf currently does? And assuming the answer is yes for Travis, is GS unlikely to have concerns ttrading for a guy coming off a foot injury?

The second is whether adding a guy like Turiaf is a significant improvement. As I said, I like him. But is he really going to contribute more points or rebounds than what Juwan Howard currently is doing? Is he significantly better than Cunningham and Pendergraph? I don’t think it is guaranteed that adding Ronny Turiaf to this team is going to result in much more than maybe an additional win or two.

So when you take all of this together, we end up talking about wanting Pritchard to make a trade with only a marginal chance of happening and likely resulting in only a marginal improvement in the team. If he pulls it off, great. I’ll root for Turiaf as whole heartedly as I do for Travis or whatever guy KP sends out for him. But I am certainly not going to think Pritchard screwed up if such a deal doesn’t happen.

Clarence, It's better to have a gun and not need it, then need a gun and not have it.

by timg56 on Feb 11, 2010 12:13 PM PST up reply actions  

Yeah..for some reason, the whole thing became about Turiaf...

But in general, it was really about “Do we try to grab a big this deadline or sit on our hands?” I used Turiaf because the original commenter mentioned him.

Anywa, both of your points are very good points. I just think that we really need more help upfront than what Travis brings to this team since between Batum, Webster, and Cunningham, I don’t think we have to worry too much of perimeter 3/4 role that Travis plays and 4th quarter secondary scorer role can be played by Miller/Bayless. (now and in the near future) As good as Howard has been for us, we really do need some size and depth upfront as well as shotblocking and additional rebounding. Pendy, while young and athletics, makes too many rotational mistakes on defense and doesn’t really help on offense, either.

"I think he’s been doing some good things. I think he’s been doing some good things. He’s had to play a lot of minutes lately with Blake being out. I think he’s been doing some good things." -Nate McMillan

by xedubx on Feb 11, 2010 5:07 PM PST up reply actions  

I too wouldn't mind seeing Portland get a center.

But I don’t really see us being able to get someone at a reasonable cost who is going to be a significant improvement over what we have. And for me that’s the key point. Unless the guy we add makes a big difference, why bother? It’s not the same as adding an Anthony Tolliver or Shav Randolph. We have to give up something of value. I’m guessing that value goes by the name of Nic Batum, or Jerryd Bayless or Rudy Fernandez or Martell Webster.

I was watching some of last night’s Cav’s Magic game and thought about my personal list of bigs I like as Blazers. Alex Varjeho (sp?), David Lee, Udonis Haslim, NIck Collison and one other guy I can’t remember at the moment. But I don’t see any of these coming to Portland in a trade. Too bad we can’t suit up Brian Grant. A little rasta monster would give me reason to believe Portland not only will make the playoffs, but could go all the way to the WCF.

Clarence, It's better to have a gun and not need it, then need a gun and not have it.

by timg56 on Feb 12, 2010 8:45 AM PST up reply actions  

We may not be able to re-sign Travis
Even if we send him away, it doesn’t mean we won’t be able to re-sign him for the future.

If we trade Travis, we can only offer him the MLE. Someone else may offer him more. If we don’t trade him, we can pay him whatever Paul Allen is willing to pay.

If we trade him and re-sign him for the MLE, it means we don’t have the MLE for any other player that KP may want to sign, including perhaps Joel Freeland.

We have to accept the possibility, maybe the probability, that trading Travis is saying goodby to Travis. Now, perhaps that is for the best, but the fact that Travis is UFA this summer most certainly does not mean that trading him is giving him up for only two months.

Of course, the big question is who would give us a player that you want for Travis. The only reasons to acquire Travis at this point are because you think he will help you in a playoff run, or because you want to offer him a lot this summer and don’t have the cap space to do it, or because you want his expiring contract to cut salary. The first is unlikely, and while Travis might get a very nice offer by the time the summer is over, I doubt he is anyone’s first target this summer.

So your potential trade partners are probably limited to those who are motivated to dump salary AND have a center or center/PF of comparable salary who will fit well with our team. And in general, those 5s or 4/5s are coveted assets, and those who have one to sell are going to be looking for more than Travis.

#7 #10 #25 #52 -- #5 & #88 are back!

by jscot on Feb 11, 2010 12:38 PM PST up reply actions  

Good points all, but

I really don’t see any team signing Trav for more than the MLE this summer in this economic environment. Whether you love him or hate him, he doesn’t justify that kind of contract.

Still, I think everyone is missing the point on a potential Travis trade. It is likely the Blazers have no interest in extending him unless its at a bargain basement price, they are not likely to re-sign him (again, unless at a bargain price) and given these constraints, you may as well trade him for someone useful rather than let him go for nothing. This isn’t a “is Travis better than Turiaf?” debate, it’s “would you rather have another player next year or nothing for Travis?”

by Pooh Richardson on Feb 11, 2010 2:07 PM PST up reply actions  

That's another question

I was responding to the “we can get Travis back if we want him” comment.

Whether we want him back is another question. And if we are just going to let him go, if KP’s assessment is the same as yours, then we’re left with the fact that other teams may have made the same assessment, or guessed ours, and so they aren’t prepared to offer much for him, figuring if they want him, they can just use their MLE to make an offer this summer.

Which goes back to my final point. The only team that is a possible trade partner is one that wants to dump salary. This isn’t a “would you rather have another player next year or nothing for Travis?” question. It’s more a question of who would give you a player you want next year in a salary dump, recognizing we aren’t talking about anyone who is highly paid.

#7 #10 #25 #52 -- #5 & #88 are back!

by jscot on Feb 12, 2010 3:00 AM PST up reply actions  

So your potential trade partners are probably limited to those who are motivated to dump salary AND have a center or center/PF of comparable salary who will fit well with our team. And in general, those 5s or 4/5s are coveted assets, and those who have one to sell are going to be looking for more than Travis.

These are some of the reasons that I’ve “whittled it down” to Turiaf. Now, I know that there have been no trade rumors re: Ronny, so far the only time we’ve heard his name mentioned in regards to the Blazers was last May or June, when Roy said RT would be a good guy to add to the team. I’ve mentioned a few times in the past that “I have no idea” what Don Nelson is looking for in a player, his lineup construction is so unconventional that any guess of “who” he’s interested in could be absolutely correct or completely silly. One thing I think we can say with certainty is that Don likes shooters and penetrators. (“Draw and kick” was a phrase I first heard to describe Nelson’s offensive strategy.) So I proposed Outlaw and Mills. They seem to fit Don’s system. Maybe a Warrior’s fan or blogger would pooh-pooh that trade proposal, or maybe they wouldn’t have a high opinion of Turiaf and would like it. I really have no idea

I think Outlaw + Mills for Turiaf is a reasonable trade suggestion for the current needs of the team, and it wouldn’t hurt the future much because Ronny can play backup 4 when needed, and the Blazer’s roster needs to be “thinned” this summer anyway, so there’s no harm if KP gets started a little early. So what if KP doesn’t trade for Turiaf next Thursday? I’ll just say that Don Nelson evidently loves Ronny to death and look forward to KP using the MLE on a different veteran big man on July 1. Or not

When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!

by two4larue on Feb 11, 2010 11:44 PM PST up reply actions  

Yeah, Turiaf would fit

I just haven’t seen any evidence that he’s available, and they wouldn’t be trading him for Outlaw, they’d be trading him for an EC. I would be surprised if they’d do that, unless they think Mills is a future star.

#7 #10 #25 #52 -- #5 & #88 are back!

by jscot on Feb 12, 2010 3:03 AM PST up reply actions  

unless, of course

Nelson likes Trav and GS decides pre-trade to make Outlaw an offer he can’t refuse on July 1

When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!

by two4larue on Feb 12, 2010 10:22 AM PST up reply actions  

I kind of half-watched the game on mute tonight while reading ...

The 2 things I noticed in my semi-attuned state:

1. Rudy absolutely stunk. We were up huge one minute, in comes Rudy, and then all of a sudden it’s a game again. Several terrible plays all in a row. Nate’s hook wasn’t nearly fast enough.

2. The Jerome Kersey comparisons are spot on for Cunningham. He’s an athletic plume of energy. Seems to be around the ball on every play. Methinks I’m seeing our future 3/4 (sorry Trav) blossom before my eyes.

"These are dreams that we have." --Rudolfo Fernandez

by bfan on Feb 10, 2010 10:53 PM PST reply actions  

I admit, never been much of a Rudy fan

And games like this fail to help me understand the love affair. Players just don’t develop a great first step and Rudy will never be able to create his own shots or beat guys off the dribble. That’s probably why I’d rather keep Bayless over Rudy, as players do become better shooter over their career.

"I think he’s been doing some good things. I think he’s been doing some good things. He’s had to play a lot of minutes lately with Blake being out. I think he’s been doing some good things." -Nate McMillan

by xedubx on Feb 11, 2010 12:39 AM PST up reply actions  

He's playing like a player

who has never been through the trade rumor mill before plays about two weeks prior to the trade deadline. I’m sure he has doubts about whether he’ll be in PDX after the break.

by Pooh Richardson on Feb 11, 2010 2:09 PM PST up reply actions  

Bayless is hurting

He’ll be fine after a few days of rest over the break. For Bayless, since he didn’t play much last year, this is hitting the rookie wall. He’s sore, banged up, and tired. He’s never played this many games in a season before, not even close.

#7 #10 #25 #52 -- #5 & #88 are back!

by jscot on Feb 12, 2010 3:05 AM PST up reply actions  

You got checked by Andre Miller

HAHAHAHAHAHA!

Right up there with being posterized by a 36-year old Juwan Howard.

by dwaynebillybob on Feb 10, 2010 10:57 PM PST reply actions  

Nice to see Dante continue to improve

I wonder if Dante’s recent play has KP kicking himself for giving LMA that huge deal.

This was a nice win, but I doubt those jumpers will be falling like that come playoff time.

KP needs to make a deal or we will be back to the good ‘ol 8th seed = first round playoff loss (aka Portland Purgatory). Roy will certainly lead this team to more wins in the regular season, but he can’t carry them in the playoffs when teams actually try to play defense and the refs swallow their whistles.

Perhaps there aren’t any deals to be made. Perhaps KP is horribly indecisive, or he overvalues players that are, in all honesty, only average or slightly above average (Rudy, JB, or Outlaw). It seems the better someone plays, the more KP wants to hold on to them. The worse they play, the lower their trade value. There is always some way to rationalize not making a deal. The ‘core’ group of guys should really be 4-6 players, but KP seems to have trouble getting it below 10.

by lil'stink on Feb 10, 2010 11:00 PM PST reply actions  

Perhaps both of our centers are injured, and everyone in our lineup not named Miller or Howard has missed time too.

I don’t think he’s to blame for the 8th seed. Given our injuries it’s pretty amazing we’re still talking playoffs at all.

That said I think we could benefit by shipping a few guys out for a reliable 4/5 banger who can contribute for a couple of years.

by dwaynebillybob on Feb 10, 2010 11:25 PM PST up reply actions  

I don't know if KP is kicking himself over LMA's ridiculously over-paid contract...

…but I think it’s pretty clear the real, true 4 on this roster is Dante, not LMA. LMA is a soft, 2-guard in a 6’11" body. That’s not going to get it done in the playoffs. Dante, on the other hand, could be a piece of the playoff puzzle for us for years to come.

by mjswoosh on Feb 11, 2010 5:08 AM PST up reply actions  

HeathBlizzard: If LMA fancies himself the next Dirk Nowitski (ie perimiter 4)...

…then he better get a handle and add a 3 pt shot to that arsenal.

Still, this ignores the bigger picture: even though Dirk is a far superior perimeter 4 than LMA and was a 2-time All-Star by age 24, how many championships has Dallas won with a soft 4 who plays out of position defensively?

Answer: ZERO.

Extrapolate that to LMA’s game. Even if he were to become as good as Dirk at his peak, which is highly unlikely. We can’t build a team around him and expect to win it all.

Deal with that.

We need a true 4 who can bang, plays D, and doesn’t shrink in the 4th.

by mjswoosh on Feb 11, 2010 11:12 PM PST up reply actions  

Since KP makes the decisions

and he’s signed LMA to five years after this one, I think we can safely say that he’s a piece of our puzzle for years to come.

Deal with it.

LMA isn’t Dirk. And we aren’t building a championship team around him. Dirk was the primary player on that team. He didn’t have a dominant defensive and rebounding center next to him. He didn’t have a second team all NBA guard next to him.

If you expect LMA to be the most important player on this team, I’ve got news for you. He’s the most important player over the last 15 games because the real franchise players have both been out injured. He might possibly be the leading scorer on our championship contending teams, but he’ll never be even the second most important player. And what he is works fine with those franchise players. There are things he could definitely improve, and you’ve identified some of them, but you overrate his overall importance to what is being built here, and thus you overrate the importance of those weaknesses in his game.

#7 #10 #25 #52 -- #5 & #88 are back!

by jscot on Feb 12, 2010 3:13 AM PST up reply actions  

I don't think so.

Dante is new…he’s having the same big confidence streak Bayless had a couple months ago. Now teams will throw double teams at him. LaMarcus was putting up with double and triple-teams last night and still managed 22 points and some huge rebounds.

There’s a reason LaMarcus was a #2 pick and Dante went in the second round.

I LOVE Dante, but he does not replace LaMarcus. They will make an amazing PF team though.

by anupam on Feb 11, 2010 2:17 PM PST up reply actions  

How many times did teams double Jerome Kersey?

There are only 5 bodies to go around. They can’t double everyone.

I’m not saying Cunninham is our upcoming second scoring option any time soon.

I’m saying that he is clearly the better option at playing the 4 spot how its SUPPOSED TO BE PLAYED on a balanced team. He plays GREAT D. He hustles. He hits open shots. He gets garbage points. These are not skills that require another team to double him.

As for LMA, he is showing himself to not be a reliable second option in the 4th quarter of close games, which is when it matters. Putting up 22 against Phoenix isn’t exactly a tough assignment considering they play defense like a high school girls squad.

LMA is a nice jump shooter. But he isn’t a true 4. Dante’ plays like what we will need out of a 4 to win big games in the playoffs. LMA does not. Simple as that.

by mjswoosh on Feb 11, 2010 11:16 PM PST up reply actions  

They don't have to double him

Dante’s scoring is all coming on open jumpers, putbacks, or running the floor on the fastbreak — the same as LMA’s, I might add.

All they have to do is have the guy defending him be more hesitant to leave him to help on others, so he doesn’t get that open jumper or a clear lane to the hoop for offensive rebounds.

Your objection to LMA is simply style. You don’t think his style of play works on a championship team. You would be right if we don’t have a center, as we don’t right now.

#7 #10 #25 #52 -- #5 & #88 are back!

by jscot on Feb 12, 2010 3:19 AM PST up reply actions  

KP has done a great job in the draft, but this is only half the battle

It is obvious that this team needs to either make a trade or go after a free agent in the offseason. Sure, KP could stand pat. Do you really want to bet on Oden and Joel being able to stay healthy for the better part of next year? Seems like quite a gamble to me.

I am not overly concerned if this team makes the playoffs or not. We make it, great, we get some more postseason experience. If we don’t make it that is nothing to be disappointed about; the Western Conference is full of solid teams and the injuries this year have been horrible. I don’t care about making a deal to solve our short term problems. The thing is, I feel that are short term problems are the same as the long term problems. Lack of big men that can stay healthy, and too many perimeter players who, quite frankly, are only slightly above average. Rudy, Martell, JB, and Outlaw are inconsistent and somewhat one dimensional. Batum still needs time to develop.

Have I ever made a post using that ‘trade checker’ ? No, and I have actually never used it. Keep on making assumptions if you like, however.

Show me a legit contender without a solid big man. This game may not be dominated by big guys like it used to, but you still need one to win come playoff time.

Oh yeah – the Blazers don’t have 9-10 ‘very good players’. This is, of course, subjective based on how one judges talent. Yes, this team has talent, but Roy is the only one who can bring it every night and wants the ball in crunchtime. I remember when people were thinking Mark Bryant was going to be an all-star after he had his first 15 point game. IMHO hometown fans often aren’t the best judge of talent for their team.

When I say 4-6 very good players I look at a team like LAL – Kobe, Gasol, Odom, Bynum (when healthy), Fisher (maybe he doesn’t fall into the ‘very good’ category, but he has had some huge moments come playoff time). The Lakers aren’t as deep as Portland, but it seemed to work for them last year.

by lil'stink on Feb 11, 2010 9:33 AM PST up reply actions  

So hometown fans over value their own players ...

… except those fans who constantly find fault with them. The fans who think Dante Cuningham is a better player than LaMarcus Aldridge obviously are qualified analysts, while those of us who think Aldridgfe is one of the best young bigs in the league are just ignorant homers.

Let’s take your Laker example. Roy, Aldridge, Oden (when he’s healthy), Miller. That’s just one less than LA, with only a counterpart to Lamar Odom missing. Of course Portland does have Pryzbilla, whom LA has no counterpart for. And then there is Batum, Webster, Fernandez and Outlaw ( a 6th Man of the year candidate last season), to account for. Your argument comes down to this – you think Lamar Odom is preferable to any mix and matching of the last 4 Blazers I named.

Clarence, It's better to have a gun and not need it, then need a gun and not have it.

by timg56 on Feb 11, 2010 11:49 AM PST up reply actions  

There are decent points being made

but can you guys do it without the badgering back and forth? It’s distracting. Plus maybe some folks would like to get into the conversation without getting in the middle of you.

—Dave

by Dave on Feb 11, 2010 12:27 PM PST up reply actions  

OK.

Clarence, It's better to have a gun and not need it, then need a gun and not have it.

by timg56 on Feb 11, 2010 2:04 PM PST up reply actions  

I'm not trying to pick a fight but here goes...

I actually don’t think Dante is better than LMA at this point. I don’t think someone who feels LMA is one of the best young bigs in the game is ignorant. He is far from an all-star quality player, however, and often disappears in the 4th quarter. I think he has more talent and ability than just about any PF in the game, but having talent and utilizing it are 2 totally different things. All in all, he has done anything but prove that he deserves that contract.

I am no Laker fan. That said, I don’t think a healthy Blazers team would beat LA in a seven game series. Kobe is better than Roy, Gasol and Bynum are better than GO and Joel, and Odom does so many things well (I am not a fan, but watching him lately makes me realize that he is a bargain at $50 million). And you can’t not factor injuries in the equation and say if we were healthy things would be different. We aren’t healthy, and we need to plan for the worst (Greg and Joel don’t return 100%) and hope for the best. Yes, the Blazers are deeper, but come playoff time you don’t need to hold back – it is do or die (well, at least best of seven)

Last year RLEC was a hot commodity. If KP put RLEC together with Trout or Rudy we might have been able to get a guy like Gerald Wallace. Perhaps Paul Allen gave orders to not trade RELC because he wanted the financial benefit for himself. I am sure there are plenty of details that we aren’t privy to. Perhaps KP has trouble pulling the trigger when it comes to making a trade, as there can be much to lose if you make a mistake. I get that. But no risk, no reward.

So KP doesn’t need to make a trade. IMHO this team won’t get over the top with the roster they have – there are too many “will’s” or “if’s”. Will Joel or GO stay healthy? For that matter, will Roy stay healthy? Will Martell, Batum, JB, and Fernandez all develop like we hope? I don’t think the answers to these questions can be answered with a resounding yes.

I, like any fan, want to see their team compete for a title. If KP can’t make a deal now or in the offseason to add bulk to our fontline, there is a decent chance we will be in the same boat next year. I liked the boat and course we were on last year much better.

by lil'stink on Feb 11, 2010 1:00 PM PST up reply actions  

I'm not picking a fight either, but I'll try it out.

Done anything but prove that he deserves that contract? Roy went down, and LaMarcus has been playing over 40 minutes a night and scoring over 20 a game, along with raising his rebounding numbers pretty significantly. Yeah, our win percentage has gone down, but how many wins did Brandon get without LaMarcus in the game? With Oden and Pryzbilla, LaMarcus didn’t need to get deep post position. Now that they’ve gone down and Brandon is out, we’ve been seeing exactly what people have been asking for: he goes towards the basket and plays much more aggressively than he used to.

We match up very well with LA. There is a reason that we consistently beat them at home (minus the last game, which is hard to take into account because both teams had their stars choosing not to play, which most likely won’t happen in a playoff series). Saying that Bynum is better than Oden is subject to debate. Were Oden healthy right now, and if he remains healthy for a large portion of next season, I would put that match up in our favor. Roy and Kobe play different styles, but Roy has been matching Kobe lately in terms of efficiency (although I will admit he is far from matching Kobe in many other aspects of the game). With a healthy team, we have several defensive stoppers, and you suggest that the bench doesn’t matter, but in the playoffs, having a deep bench can be very important in long series. We have many more players on our bench that can light up and score 20+ than most other teams I can think of in the league.

There are many risks in sports. Players are at risk of injury every time they step on the court. I think we have full reason to believe, considering the past, that we can count on Roy to be healthy for a majority of the season (yes, maybe someday that will change, but as of now I’m not concerned). I trust the doctors and trainers in evaluating the long-term health probabilities of Oden and Pryzbilla. Some players may not develop, but they all have the potential to. And what if we were to make a trade and that player didn’t play well with our system or got injured? There are so many variables to be considered.

Of course you liked last season better. And were everyone to stay healthy and the season to have gone the way everyone hoped, you would probably like this season even more. But like I said, there are so many intangibles and things that we don’t know. I trust the professionals and experts and simply cheer for our team through the good and bad.

by anupam on Feb 11, 2010 2:31 PM PST up reply actions  

I would like to expand on the point you make ...

… in the next to last paragraph.

Just how wise is it to develop a strategy that is based on always playing “What if?” What if Greg or Joel don’t comeback 100%. What if both don’t? What if Greg does prove to be injury prone and we only average 40 – 50 games a season from him? What if every one of our players not named Aldridge or Roy fail to improve their game?

We can go on and on in this vein. What if Paul Allen sells the team to an owner only interested in turning a profit? What if Brandon Roy undergoes a personal epipheny (sp?) and gives up basketball to work with school kids? What if LaMarcus Aldridge is abducted by aliens?

Yes, to some extent you want to try to provide yourself options for dealing with the unexpected. But you don’t make that the central theme of your strategy. That’s referred to as taking consel of one’s fears. Fortunately for us Blazer fans, Kevin Pritchard does not appear to be the type who fears ghosts of future come. If come next season and Portland has no Greg or Joel available, KP will look to draft a big or sign someone who he thinks can fill that spot. He doesn’t have to potentially mortgage the future so as to cater to the fears of what might or might not happen.

Clarence, It's better to have a gun and not need it, then need a gun and not have it.

by timg56 on Feb 11, 2010 3:36 PM PST up reply actions  

I think that is well put,

and you certainly can’t go into next year or any year expecting to have injuries to the extent we have this year. We also shouldn’t anticipate that Oden will never contribute for an extended period of time as if his career is already over and doomed to failure. The kid has #1 pick impact on games, and I think we have all seen his potential when healthy. That being said you must be ready to adapt should a player go down.

In response to this particular thread though – I think the course the Blazers should take, and likely the gameplan moving forward, is a combination of your two viewpoints. KP has been brilliant (Roy, Aldridge, Batum, Dante, Rudy) and given us valuable young assets, some of whom will be a part of our long term future. But assuming some assemblance of health, since fear of injury should not prevent us from reaching our potential (only injury itself should do that), I think we can agree that this team needs increased role definition and a consolidation trade to provide another upper tier player beside Roy, Aldridge, Oden, and Batum.

To me Oden is the X-factor (obviously?). Aldridge’s style is so complementary to GO that it makes President Woodrow Wilson sneak up on me, but they both need to be healthy for it to work. I actually commend what I perceive as an increase in Aldridge’s assertiveness recently.

I also think you can trade any combo of Bayless, Blake, Outlaw, Rudy, and Martell without truly affecting the core of this team. I think those guys are young, have value in their potential, game and/or expiring contracts, and can be parlayed into serviceable big man insurance PLUS either a long term PG option or a premier wing scorer (Caron/Wallace ish, who I would not mind seeing play alongside Roy AND Batum).

Roy, Aldridge, Batum, and (the forces of the Universe willing) Greg Oden are the core of this team and are the guys who you envision being on the Blazer’s upcoming championship teams. Everyone else is very nice but you have an opportunity to make your roster more top heavy (= playoff success) and clear the logjams that this roster experiences when healthy.

I fully anticipate a more significant move than just a Kurt Thomas/Tyrus Thomas/Brendan Haywood acquisition being made prior to next season. I think the time has come where something considerable is on the horizon.

by sammymohawk on Feb 11, 2010 6:07 PM PST up reply actions  

I fully anticipate a more significant move than just a Kurt Thomas/Tyrus Thomas/Brendan Haywood acquisition being made prior to next season. I think the time has come where something considerable is on the horizon.

I appreciate your optimism, but I’m not sure KP will have the “resources” to make the kind of deal you’re hoping for after next Thursday. Oh, he has the young/talented players, but he won’t have capspace or large-enough contracts that he will need to add to a deal to acquire that “upper tier player”

Jason Quick was on WaW today and said the Blazers staff realized early in the season that they indeed have “too much talent” and that a “guard or two will need to be weeded out” this summer. Besides Roy, the guards are Miller, Bayless and Rudy (no one’s sure if Blake will be back, so I’ll leave him out) I suppose Andre could be traded, but the two names that Quick mentioned were Rudy and Jerryd, because they’re stacked up behind Brandon at the 2 and KP/Nate can’t keep asking them to play only 15-20 mpg every year.

So you see the problem…these guys are only making 1-2 mil/year and you can’t acquire an “upper tier” player for that, because the salaries won’t match. The best KP can do during the offseason is to use one of these guys to move up in the draft, like he did with Jarret Jack.

So I think that we can lay our dreams of blockbuster trades to rest, next Friday. “Who will KP sign with the MLE?” will be the topic of conversation this summer, along with “will Oden’s agent accept anything less than the max extension?”

When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!

by two4larue on Feb 12, 2010 12:12 AM PST up reply actions  

A blockbuster in the next week

won’t surprise me. I don’t expect it, but I think KP would like to pull a blockbuster, and the loss of this season due to injuries will make him less hesitant to do it midseason than he would have been.

Salaries we can use to make a trade include Andre, Joel, Martell, and our ECs. Talents we can use (besides those guys) are Rudy, Nic, and Jerryd. I’ll be surprised if Nic and Jerryd go, but in a blockbuster, who knows? The point is that there is plenty of salary and talent available to make a blockbuster. That doesn’t even include the possibility of a Bosh/LMA deal.

You are right that you can’t trade Rudy or Jerryd for a big talent because of their salary. But you can if you combine them with someone who has a salary. And blockbusters usually involve multiple players.

The structure of a blockbuster is YT + MLC + EC = All-Star.
YT = Young Talent — Nic, Rudy, Jerryd
MLC = Medium Level Contract — Andre, Joel, Martell
EC = Expiring Contract — Steve, Travis

YT gives the other team the hope that, in a year or two, they’ve got a player who can come close, at least, to what their all-star gave them.

MLC gives them at least a solid role player at a respectable price, and combined with YT lets them sell to their fans that they’ve made a reasonable deal in terms of talent.

EC saves them money, which either helps them go after even more talent or cuts their losses.

We might have to sweeten the deal by throwing in a draft pick, or giving them a second EC in exchange for an ugly contract. But that is the essence of a blockbuster that could bring an all-star to Portland, and it certainly could happen in the next week.

#7 #10 #25 #52 -- #5 & #88 are back!

by jscot on Feb 12, 2010 3:34 AM PST up reply actions  

Definition of blockbuster

I think that we have assets that are valued around the league, as noted in jscot’s post. Maybe Caron or General Wallace are pie in the sky, but I do believe that some combination of Outlaw, Blake, Rudy, Rex, and Martell can be a fairly significant side of a trade that aside from chemistry considerations has virtually no effect on the core of the team (depending who you consider the core i guess). I think the roles, especially in the backcourt, need more definition. I have no problem that it has yet to happen as they are all young and we’ve needed everyone this year, but I think after next season starts…if you still have the logjam…if guards aren’t getting the minutes on a nightly basis that their ability merits…then I think we will have gone too long with all these players. In other words we will have missed the window where their value was the highest due to a combination of their youth and potential (this applies to Rex, Rudy, and Martell). They’ve showcased their abilities this season and their value will only go down over time if they’re buried in a battle for minutes that leaves each with 10-25 per night.

I think Rudy is showing preliminary signs of frustration and that his ceiling isn’t really even that high, even though he is already an exciting and skilled player.

I envision Roy, Batum, Aldridge, and Oden being 4 of this team’s championship starting 5. I think that’s been the general idea as they put the team together (with Batum being the most recent to burst onto the scene). I haven’t done the research, I don’t know who might be available, but longterm PG option anyone? I love Dre, but he’s long in the tooth and won’t be here when our average age is 27. Blake won’t be here. In my opinion Bayless should be a 6th man spark off the bench if he is here. I do like him alongside Roy but I’m not sure it’s the starting backcourt you want.

Maybe it won’t be a quote unquote blockbuster…but I absolutely think we can net a very significant piece for what we have to offer.

Clear the logjam and make the roster more powerful at the top. You’ll still have plenty of great role players left over (Dante, Przy, guys you don’t trade, etc…). It will be addition by subtraction as our remaining players will adopt their roles with confidence and flourish with a continued increase in opportunity. It will also be addition by addition, because if something like this were to happen we would be getting a good player in return. We would be trading role players, which we have a lot of, for a core piece of the puzzle. I think it makes sense and I think the ideal window is now until next season.

I’m curious who people think is a good PG for this team that might be attainable in the near future. We’ve all talked Hinrich, but is there someone better that could be available in the near future that would really round out our starting 5 for the next X number of years?

Someone who can hit the spot up 3 like Blake but you know, does all the other stuff better. (props to blake for a phenomenal performance against the Suns on Wednesday though)

by sammymohawk on Feb 12, 2010 9:07 AM PST up reply actions  

let me qualify that

by saying that some of you may feel that Bayless IS in fact the best option…or that because Roy handles so well and Batum can guard the 1 that we don’t need a true PG (which is why I thought a premier wing scorer was not a crazy idea). I welcome all of those opinions.

I think it is a great debate and I’m glad we’re in the position we are. Time to cross the fingers and say “in KP we trust, take us to the promiseland”

by sammymohawk on Feb 12, 2010 9:16 AM PST up reply actions  

Last thing...

I think Caron Butler is gonna get traded. He may go to Boston, or Houston, or Dallas. But if he ends up in Houston or Dallas…look at what they will have given up for him and tell me that we the Blazers couldn’t have provided that level of value. I still think a Butler/Haywood package is almost ideal if you can swing it. Anyway, sounds like Tyrus Thomas might be here soon. I think it’s hilarious that we may have both him and LA. I also think that if you can end up getting Caron and Tyrus for some combination of the 5 players I keep mentioning + picks/cash, then our championship window is wide open going into next year and we’ll be pesky this postseason.

by sammymohawk on Feb 12, 2010 9:25 AM PST up reply actions  

I think Bayless is a great option for us

I wouldn’t say best, but better guys aren’t going to come available.

He can defend the point (needs work, but he’s improving), and his shot will come — all that is needed is coaching and work, and he’s made progress already.

#7 #10 #25 #52 -- #5 & #88 are back!

by jscot on Feb 12, 2010 10:50 AM PST up reply actions  

we've seen some of these proposed via the trade machine

and the risk is that turning over 1/4 to 1/3 of the current roster could jeopardize the team’s chances of making the playoffs, due to continuity issues

Not to mention that many of the names mentioned (Bosh, Haywood, etc) will be UFAs in July and there’s no way to guarantee that they will resign with Portland

Unless there’s a “special fit” player (that KP has longed to acquire) who becomes available that already has a LT contract (or who KP is certain he can extend) then odds are KP won’t pull the trigger.

That’s why I’m expecting a “surgical strike” deal, 2-for-1, mid-level salaries for a veteran role player, most likely a big. This would thin the roster at guard/wing while adding an immediate need. Or more likely, KP will do nothing

When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!

by two4larue on Feb 12, 2010 9:35 AM PST up reply actions  

Yes, we could do a simple 2-1

But the only truly disruptive thing at this point would be to trade LMA plus for Bosh (I could live with that disruption, as long as we knew Bosh was staying) or to include Andre in a deal.

And including Andre is disruptive in the short term, but not long term.

I won’t be surprised if we stand pat, either. The only thing KP could do that would surprise me would be A) trade Oden B) trade Roy C) trade Batum (unless we’re getting an all-star back) D) trade LMA for less than Bosh or Duncan (and Duncan would surprise me somewhat, too).

#7 #10 #25 #52 -- #5 & #88 are back!

by jscot on Feb 12, 2010 10:55 AM PST up reply actions  

Pieces in place though?

I think those are all good viewpoints. I guess my real question is do we already have the main pieces of our championship team and the roster just needs tweaking? Or are we one more main core piece away from being truly elite? When I think about how the Celtics and Lakers are structured, with the multiple stars and supporting casts that aren’t at the same level as the Blazer’s supporting cast (imo), it seems that KP might be considering a more aggressive consolidation as a viable option for longterm success (I’m sure he considers everything though). But then again, it takes two to tango (sometimes three?) and we as fans don’t have a real good idea of who is actually available and what is actually out there to be had. The rip city uprise of the last few years has given me confidence in the current management…this trade deadline waiting game is just brutal though. The tension is palpable! Palpable I say!!!Thank goodness we have Blazersedge to keep us sane.

by sammymohawk on Feb 12, 2010 11:22 AM PST up reply actions  

Bedge keeps us sane?

AH, HAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!

I don’t know whether the pieces are in place or not, and I don’t think anyone else does, either. We can guess that Bayless is or is not the answer at PG, that Greg is going to rule the paint or the hospital, that LMA’s jump shot is going to torch the nets and keep the lane open or just fizzle, that Rudy is going to be the spark off the bench or a flop, etc. No one really knows.

If everyone that we have pans out, the pieces are in place. That doesn’t usually happen.

#7 #10 #25 #52 -- #5 & #88 are back!

by jscot on Feb 12, 2010 11:09 PM PST up reply actions  

LMA is over-rated and is paid max money for not putting up All-Star numbers.

This cannot be disputed.

No one is saying that “Cunningham is BETTER” or that he is even MORE TALENTED.

What I am saying is that for what you want out of a 4, Cunningham seems to be developing right before our eyes into that role player that scraps and plays hard D and hits open shots. You need guys like that to win close games.

You also need talented guys like LMA to hit big shots. The problem is, LMA has thus far shown himself to have no handle or capabilty of taking his man off the dribble, shooting off the dribble, drawing fouls consistently. He also lacks hustle and doesn’t play D consistently. These are MAJOR, LEGIT criticisms of a man getting paid ALL STAR $$$.

by mjswoosh on Feb 11, 2010 11:19 PM PST up reply actions  

The only thing that is undisputed here ...

… is that you are not that good at evaluating NBA players.

If LaMarcus is so over-rated, why did Portland give him the contract it did?

If LaMarcus is so over-rated, why was he just named to the US National team?

If LaMarcus is so over-reated, why is it multiple coaches and GMs have said that Aldridge is the guy they game plan around when playing Portland?

If LaMarcus is so over-rated, who exactly has been carrying this team with Roy, Oden and Outlaw out?

You don’t have to like LaMarcus, but if you are going to trash him, at least present a cognizant argument.

Clarence, It's better to have a gun and not need it, then need a gun and not have it.

by timg56 on Feb 12, 2010 9:09 AM PST up reply actions   2 recs

I would make this green if I could...

You could write the same thing about Nate’s understanding of the game and I would Rec that too. The internet is such a great place for outlet of opinion… but it is just that ….OPINION. For any of us to sit around and pretend we know as much as the professionals is silly. I would not get rid of Nate or KP for anything. They are perfect for this team and town and organization.

   RoadBlazer

by Roadblazer on Feb 11, 2010 9:43 AM PST up reply actions  

I love the mid-range jumpers by D.C!

It’s getting to the point that when he misses I’m surprised. Rice’s quote cracked me up last night, " Vilanova thanks for sending us your favorite son"!!

2-4 the who

by 24thewho on Feb 11, 2010 8:59 AM PST up reply actions  

trade batum,somewhere where he can have some offensive responsabilities.

he had 2 shoot …even bowen has more shoot in a game.
And dante is the SF which blazers need.He has profile types of the blazer’s tactics.The jump shoot style and disciplined playing.
batum need a team with groove.
by the way,blazers is not my favorite team,but you guys(the fans) are very warm and humans fans.blazers is lucky.
chapeau bas.
ps:si batum continue a rester plante dans son coin,son surnom va etre la corotte ou le legume.

by malcom X on Feb 11, 2010 2:03 AM PST reply actions  

Why would we trade him? If you think we can get someone better how will that player fit? Batum fills a role with potential to

get a lot better. If we get a star for him(unlikely) then that player may not even fit at all and ruin chemistry here. Like KP said, sometimes the best move is to not make on at all.

This is chess, don’t think checkers.

by BRoyInThe4th on Feb 11, 2010 3:52 AM PST up reply actions  

Batum is one of the 5 or 6 guys on this roster who are untradeable.

And he could eventually be the best player on the team IMHO. He’s not going anywhere.

by mjswoosh on Feb 11, 2010 5:06 AM PST up reply actions  

Gotta love Batum's upside

Why won’t Nate call more plays for him? It seems he spends most of the game running along the baseline looking for the corner 3 when he caould be so much more – all he needs is the experience of having the ball in his hands and trying to create.

by lil'stink on Feb 11, 2010 8:32 AM PST up reply actions  

i think it's a confidence thing

and some lingering effects of the shoulder injury that make him hesitant to draw contact.

Batum’s main goal in the off season will be to bulk up/toughen up.

He is going to be a beast.

by mjswoosh on Feb 12, 2010 12:07 AM PST up reply actions  

I've also been surprised that he hasn't been more involved in the offense

but I did appreciate how Nic helped out with the ball-handling when the Suns were trapping Portland late in the game. For now Batum is a glue guy, but I expect he will become much more of a star as he gains more NBA experience

When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!

by two4larue on Feb 11, 2010 8:36 AM PST up reply actions  

Y5k sayeth: "ah-Whoooooooot ah-woooooooot"

I wa shellshocked most of the game. Same as the other night, only completely different.

Seeking whimsy

by Y5k on Feb 11, 2010 5:30 AM PST via mobile reply actions  

Fun quote from Bright Side of the Sun
Not to take anything from the Blazers. They played hard. They made big shots. They defended well and most important was this quote from Andre Miller, “We have done that a couple of times this year. Lose a game then come back and win, so it just shows a lot of character and a lot of fight in this team.”

That must be nice.

Link

#7 #10 #25 #52 -- #5 & #88 are back!

by jscot on Feb 11, 2010 6:50 AM PST reply actions  

That was a good recap. I'm going to have to read their stuff more often

This was my favorite part, on Amare’s possibly last game in Phoenix:

…and played such porous defense on LaMarcus Aldridge that, to start the second half, Gentry moved him over the Juwan Howard and tried Robin Lopez on LMA. A move that clearly didn’t impact Amare’s pride at all.

Still on the Rex bandwagon.

by dan_the_man on Feb 11, 2010 9:40 AM PST up reply actions  

Did anybody read Quick's article this morning?

My head about popped off. Rudy being a key guy for a title run? I want to know who the 2 guys with rookie contracts are that he won’t trade. I assume 1 is Batum, and the other is JB or Rudy. If KP isn’t willing to part with JB or Rudy for a big man, I fear for this team.

We need a big. Not just for now, but for the future. Quick assumes that both GO and Joel will be back next year (and stay healthy for the entire season). This is naive at best. KP would be a complete fool to make this assumption. We need a big for next year – if we expect both GO and Joel to be healthy all next year we will be back in the exact same pickle we are in right now. We need a backup plan.

The only rationale I can see is if we go after someone like Haywood in the offseason – but what do we then do with the guys with expiring contracts? We need to part with most of the “talented with upside but haven’t really reached their potential” smaller guys for one or two who have proven they can play. Webster, Batum, Rudy, JB, Outlaw all on one team is a recipe for mediocrity.

by lil'stink on Feb 11, 2010 8:41 AM PST reply actions  

No one assumes both Greg and Joel

will be healthy for the entire season next year.

But if you think we’re hearing a lot of gripes about minutes crunch at the wings, just imagine if we have not two but three starting quality centers. Who all want to play at least some minutes. And chances are pretty good that for at least part of the season, all three will be healthy.

What then, if we have three guys who all want to play?

Sure, we could use one more quality big, though perhaps Pendergraph or Dante fill that role for us next year. But unless Joel isn’t coming back, it would be silly to go after Haywood this summer. If we go for another quality big, he needs to be a guy who can play PF as well as center, so he can back up LMA.

Rudy is not going to be traded unless we get something very good in return, not just a journeyman big man. Batum and/or Bayless will only be traded as part of a blockbuster, because they will be our starting SF and PG in two years time, probably sooner.

#7 #10 #25 #52 -- #5 & #88 are back!

by jscot on Feb 11, 2010 10:46 AM PST up reply actions  

While there might be gripes if we had 3 good 5s

That arrangement is going to be rather temporary since Joel is unrestricted after ’11 and (God forbid) Oden is also a restricted free agent as well. While I am not advocating not re-signing Oden, there are options out there. Perhaps the best option is getting a 4/5 for the playoff run and then letting Joel to greener pastures when he expires.

While we shouldn’t sacrifice flexibility and talent for temporary band-aids, there’s also something to be said about the learning experience of winning a playoff series, especially when the team had to scratch and claw its way for survival for most of the season due to injuries. That, I believe, could be the biggest stepping stone to a championship run next season.

"I think he’s been doing some good things. I think he’s been doing some good things. He’s had to play a lot of minutes lately with Blake being out. I think he’s been doing some good things." -Nate McMillan

by xedubx on Feb 11, 2010 11:05 AM PST up reply actions  

In KP I always trust,

and I can understand not making a deal for a quick fix.
 But …..the center position depth needs to be addressed for the future success of the team.

If we start next season with yet another rookie pg who gets to ride the merry go round, and not play for Nate, I won’t renew seats. Can’t take another season of it, I’ll watch from home.

Small ball does not win championships.....

Go Blazers !!

by FrenchieFan on Feb 11, 2010 6:39 PM PST up reply actions  

I agree that a 3rd center is a good idea

But Haywood is out of the question. Even if he’s somehow acquired in a trade next week, he’s going to be asking for a substantial raise in July, and Oden will be looking for an extension at the same time. If Joel hadn’t gotten hurt and was a threat to opt out of his contact then I could see the interest in pursuing Brendan, but it’s safe to expect Przy will be back and reports are his rehab is already ahead of schedule

So where to look for a big man? I’d like to see KP add a banger 4/5 like Turiaf next week, but if he doesn’t then we’re looking at possibly offering the MLE to a veteran FA like Brad Miller. (I know, not very exciting but) Brad is a nice high-post shooter/passer who could play alongside any of the Blazer’s current big men and he shouldn’t be demanding a lot of PT when Greg/Joel/LMA are healthy. BM’s a scrappy veteran that knows how to get under the skin of the opponents…every contending team should have at least one of these guys.

Would the MLE get it done? 1 or 2 year deal? No idea. At least he’s played on the west coast recently so maybe he’d be interested in playing for a contender out here, again

When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!

by two4larue on Feb 12, 2010 12:31 AM PST up reply actions  

Yes, Miller might be an option

Not very exciting, as you said, but who knows? No one was excited about Juwan….

Perhaps Freeland takes our MLE this year, though.

#7 #10 #25 #52 -- #5 & #88 are back!

by jscot on Feb 12, 2010 3:39 AM PST up reply actions  

Freeland

I hope not. Not that he couldn’t be a decent role player but with the additions of Pendy and Ferno I think the roster has enough young bigs to develop. I’d rather see JoelF be used as a trade chip and sign a veteran big man using the MLE. There’s already too many kids in the Euro pipeline and this season’s injuries have emphsaized the team needs experienced depth on the frontcourt

When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!

by two4larue on Feb 12, 2010 9:40 AM PST up reply actions  

Depends on whether there are any deals

Cunningham has become an attractive trade piece, I think. GMs are paying attention.

Freeland can be a 3rd center more effectively than the two young guys we have, and that’s worth considering. Remember, they wanted him to come over this summer.

#7 #10 #25 #52 -- #5 & #88 are back!

by jscot on Feb 12, 2010 10:57 AM PST up reply actions  

If they thought JoelP might opt out and not be resigned

Then I could see why they might value JoelF as his understudy. But I’ve made my feelings pretty clear, the Blazers have enough youth, they need more veteran experience in the frontcourt

Cunningham traded? I suppose, but it’s not like the majority of NBA teams didn’t have the opportunity to draft him, 9 months ago

When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!

by two4larue on Feb 12, 2010 2:53 PM PST up reply actions  

The advantage to bringing JoelF over

is not if Przy opts out, but to allow him a year to adjust to the league before Przybilla’s contract expires. The thought of replacing Joel with a rookie, and a Euro at that, is not too appealing. But if they think he’s going to be the replacement, then bringing him now to learn the league, get used to living in the U.S., get used to the travel and the long season, get used to the refs, etc, etc, may make a lot of sense.

#7 #10 #25 #52 -- #5 & #88 are back!

by jscot on Feb 12, 2010 11:12 PM PST up reply actions  

As I understand it ....

… that can be arranged.

Clarence, It's better to have a gun and not need it, then need a gun and not have it.

by timg56 on Feb 11, 2010 3:38 PM PST up reply actions  

I didn't say I could arrange it.

More importantly, I didn’t say I had any desire to do so. Were I to contemplate the demise of anyone here at BE, Tom is likely to be one of the last ones standing.

But I only believe in shooting zombies and even though some fans show all of the imagination of one, that doesn’t count.

Clarence, It's better to have a gun and not need it, then need a gun and not have it.

by timg56 on Feb 12, 2010 9:13 AM PST up reply actions  

I worry about zombies

I’m afraid I’d waste bullets shooting them in the crotch for fun.

by tominhawaii on Feb 12, 2010 3:32 PM PST up reply actions  

funny! I think I read a comment of yours stating that you would be fine with him being traded!

I think the way Rudy has been playing might be due to the possiblity of his being traded. Think this may account for Jerryd’s play as well. Or maybe it’s due to just being beat up physically.

by Natsthecat on Feb 11, 2010 4:50 PM PST up reply actions  

My distaste for Rudy is spiraling out of control...

I openly groan at the television every time he comes in the game lately.

I just don’t understand how he is untouchable the way he has been playing…Untouchable by other teams, maybe…

by clinchmobb on Feb 11, 2010 2:56 PM PST up reply actions  

Someone noted that Rudy's play may be due to the possiblity of his being traded.

I think Jerryd has been playing fairly badly lately as well…or maybe they are just physically beat up!

by Natsthecat on Feb 11, 2010 4:51 PM PST up reply actions  

Quick said that KP values Rudy higher than

Travis, Martell or Blake, because he has “star quality potential”

I agree with that, I just don’t think his potential will be realized in a Blazer’s uniform, mostly because of Roy at SG but partly because of Nate’s system. Like I wrote above, I don’t see how KP will be able to get full value for Rudy this summer, because the cap-space will be gone and he won’t have a large-enough contract (that he wants to part with, anyway) to attach to a potential “star quality” deal. Maybe KP will do something “creative” on draft day…but I’d hate to see Rudy flipped jst to move up in the draft almost as much as I like the idea of Fernandez make a public trade demand that sends his “trade value” down the rabbit hole.

If anyone can forecast a scenario where KP could get “star quality value” in exchange for Rudy (after Thursday) please chime in, because short of using him to move up into the lottery, I’m fresh out of ideas

When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!

by two4larue on Feb 12, 2010 12:43 AM PST up reply actions  

I think the "star quality potential" comment was said some time ago...

I wonder if he really thinks (and is perceived by the rest of league) the same way right now…

I with you and fresh out of ideas regarding Rudy. I root for the guy, you can’t help it, he’s charismatic. I commented in today’s mailbag from Dave that he needs to take a page out of Steve Blake’s role. He should be able to everything Blake does, he just doesn’t….

by clinchmobb on Feb 12, 2010 10:22 AM PST up reply actions  

what Blake does is old school

Steve’s limitations are obvious, but the things he does that don’t show up in the box score? Those take a deeper knowledge of the game to recognize. Coaches love him, and other players like playing with him. Talent scouts and fantasy GMs scratch their heads

Rudy was raised to play the game of BB with a completely different style of play than Steve or Nate. Can he make the adjustment to do what Blake does? How long will it take? How many minutes can Nate afford to give #5 to learn all the nuances? No one knows, but quite a few folks are detecting that this situation is coming to head.

BTW, the “star quality potential” comment was made yesterday by Quick, and he was likely referring to the interview that he recently did with KP, where Kevin wrote a list of player names on Jason’s notepad, broken down into categories. Pritchard and the Blazer’s scouting staff (and I assume Mr. Allen) are still very high on Rudy, but I’m not sure if the coaching staff is as enthusiastic about Fernandez as they were 12-18 months ago.

When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!

by two4larue on Feb 12, 2010 3:15 PM PST up reply actions  

You are probably right...

I’m pretty sure the coaching staff isn’t as high on Rudy as they were last year although Nate gives Rudy more leeway than he did last year in terms of allowing him to make mistakes and leaving him on the floor.

I listened to the Quick interview on Wheel’s show and didn’t pick up on the ‘star quality potential’ comment. I do know Pritchard said it about Rudy early in the season. Regardless, I’d still question that perception around the league and with other GM’s. Rudy’s greatest ‘star quality potential’ happened right after the last Olympics. Since then, he’s been on a slow downhill slide with the occasional flashy game or two that gives us Blazer fans hope….and perhaps Pritchard & Co., too…

by clinchmobb on Feb 14, 2010 11:44 PM PST up reply actions  

What we need

Is to not make a panic move for minimal benefit. We don’t want to shoot up roster space/cap space on a guy who provides a marginal upgrade for 27 games. We’re getting Roy and Outlaw back, we’re going to rest for a week and this team should be competitive in every game from here on out and make the playoffs.

We should only make a trade if we think we’re getting a guy who will get us past the first round of the playoffs. It would be very valuable to start a tradition of winning playoff games and the extra competition against the West’s best would be great for LMA/Roy. Plus the playing on the national TV is good practice for dealing with intense scrutiny, something we hope we have to deal with. But UNLESS we’re getting a guy who can get us to that point, we’d just be making a trade for a trade’s sake.

by seasnake333 on Feb 11, 2010 10:41 AM PST reply actions   3 recs

I'll rec this sort of thinking.

Clarence, It's better to have a gun and not need it, then need a gun and not have it.

by timg56 on Feb 11, 2010 12:16 PM PST up reply actions  

I agree.

Except, if we can move someone like Blake to get a backup center, I say we still go with it. The goal of a trade seems to lean more towards the purpose of clearing up some logjam, and not so much for making the team better.

by thetsaiguy on Feb 11, 2010 12:36 PM PST up reply actions  

If it's a logjam problem

Then I would be more in favor of waiting until Draft Day and trading then. I’d either trade down if there’s a clear talent you think can step in and complement Roy in the backcourt OR be a long-term backup big man (like a Roy Hibbert). KP and his team do very well at drafting, and I think a move in the draft using pieces that don’t fit makes a lot of sense.

by seasnake333 on Feb 11, 2010 1:45 PM PST up reply actions  

Forgot to mention

OR instead of trading up in the draft you package your pick with Rudy/Bayless/Webster for a guy you REALLY want who’s on a team that’s blowing it up and starting over. By the draft you’ll know who’s going into rebuild mode and then good players will be available. Either way, wait until draft day.

by seasnake333 on Feb 11, 2010 1:52 PM PST up reply actions  

In case anyone cares (and you might later)

we have now won the playoff tie-breaker against Phoenix, since we are 2-0 against them with only one game remaining.

Oh, and we are only one game behind them in the standings.

#7 #10 #25 #52 -- #5 & #88 are back!

by jscot on Feb 11, 2010 10:47 AM PST reply actions  

If you're telling us this ....

… we better care.

Or else….

Clarence, It's better to have a gun and not need it, then need a gun and not have it.

by timg56 on Feb 11, 2010 12:16 PM PST up reply actions  

You're learning

#7 #10 #25 #52 -- #5 & #88 are back!

by jscot on Feb 11, 2010 12:42 PM PST up reply actions  

Something akin to an old dog ....

… turning new tricks.

Wait, that should be learning, not turning. Otherwise I’m referring to your mom.

Clarence, It's better to have a gun and not need it, then need a gun and not have it.

by timg56 on Feb 11, 2010 2:09 PM PST up reply actions  

The more you know...

:::insert twinkle star here:::

by Dave on Feb 11, 2010 12:27 PM PST up reply actions  

Charmin Frye is a GREAT player;

its just his confidence was broken because..

Nate wouldn’t play him enough last year.

If not for Nate, Charmin would be an All-Star!

by Sashland on Feb 11, 2010 3:20 PM PST reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

The ultimate coverage and analysis of the Portland Trail Blazers.

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recommended FanPosts

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

Recent FanPosts

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

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >

FanShots

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

Recommended FanShots

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

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

I miss you tiny raptor man.

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

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

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

Courtside video via Blazers Broadcasting cameraman John Curry.

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

Recent FanShots

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

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

+ New FanShot All FanShots >


Editors

Kitten_small Dave

Headshotsmall_small Ben Golliver

Lead Moderators

Getfuzzy-satchel_small Timmay!

Bucky3_small Cablinasian

Authors

Plainlc_small Storyteller

Moderators

Lamb_small T Darkstar

Small douglast

Terryporter_small prezofdeath

Small usmcr3049

Lrg_magpie_small Corvid

Wallpaper_small geoffm