Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: Explaining Jeremy Lin's Early, Surprising Success

Pryz not going to be ready until late November/December


Earlier this summer the story on Big Joel was that his rehab was way ahead of schedule and he would possibly be ready for training camp and season opener.  In an interview today Rich Cho said Joel will not be ready to go untill December. Cho also said he spoke with Oden and that his rehab was going good, but would not say he is going to be ready by the start of the season.  So with Camby's history of injury himself do the Blazers possibly need to go out and get a reliable center?? I dont think LMA and Pendegraph are the answer at the 5.

Good Luck Joel keep workin hard!!!!!!!

Comment 111 comments  |  0 recs  | 

Do you like this story?

Comments

Display:

What a bummer.

We should try to move Joel to New York, try to pursue Ronny Turiaf. His game is much more tailored to our slow paced offense then Golden States & you can never have too many low post defenders.

Moment of clarity

by 420Phenom on Aug 26, 2010 5:57 PM PDT reply actions  

Yea, he only played about half the season

And he’s not playing for the French national team this summer, either (I believe).

"...it was like he brought his own personal cross-wind to the arena." - Dave

by DC Blazer on Aug 27, 2010 8:32 AM PDT up reply actions  

Ronnie Turiaf...

…the gift that keeps on giving!

Pryz in December is >>>>>>>>> then Turiaf for a full season and the jury is out on if Ronnie can stay healthy. I understand that he is a big body and not a, “have to have the ball guy” but I can’t say I really see why everyone is so high on him.

by Ilikeemall on Aug 27, 2010 3:43 PM PDT up reply actions  

I don't think it's that time yet.

Cho is just playing it safe. By december we still have 3 great centers.

Anything I write after midnight should be taken with a grain of salt.
In K.P. I STILL trust.
Travis Outlaw fan from the beginning.

by llamaiguana on Aug 26, 2010 6:18 PM PDT reply actions  

Cho wouldn't commit to adding another big man for camp

but you’d think they’ll add at least one, just so they can scrimmage against some size. There’s no way Camby should be pushed hard during fall camp and preseason either, with his injury history

Who will be this year’s Jarren Collins and Juwan Howard? Stay tuned. Maybe Joe Smith, Brian Skinner, Josh Boone or Etan Thomas?

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

by two4larue on Aug 26, 2010 6:19 PM PDT reply actions  

Amundson?

I don’t think he would come to camp, given that we probably couldn’t find him a slot.

In KP I trusted!

by LaoTzu on Aug 26, 2010 11:23 PM PDT up reply actions  

Joe Smith is a 4, Brian Skinner is undersized and has been here before, and Etan Thomas is basically ...

an old Jeff Pendergraph. Josh Boone should get a guaranteed contract from somewhere, too, and Portland should only bring in a guy on a non-guaranteed contract to camp. Since I’m biased here, I’d go with Dwayne Jones — who was recently waived by the Toronto Raptors — as a big body for training camp. Yet, if the club would rather have a veteran in that role like Jarron Collins last year, I’d be fine with bringing in Didier Ilunga-Mbenga as a guy to work against Greg Oden in practice.

by AK1984 on Aug 27, 2010 12:02 AM PDT up reply actions  

camp

20 players are allowed at camp, so there will likely be a center or two in there against whom to scrimmage, even if they won’t eventually make the team.

thanks so much for your concern, but i do not require your validation in order to feel free to submit my comment.

by Kassandra on Aug 27, 2010 8:56 AM PDT up reply actions   1 recs

this is true

but the roster may need another big man to start the season. AK is right, it should be someone on a non-guaranteed deal, if possible. But you’ll usually get better quality if you dangle the BAE and cut your losses when Oden/Camby/Przybilla are all healthy. A lot depends on how the front office feels about potentially spending luxury tax dollars on what could be a only 1-2 month rental

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

by two4larue on Aug 27, 2010 10:24 AM PDT up reply actions  

Sans Louis Amundson, there isn't anyone left on the market worth the BAE. Yet, Amundson is ...

a 4, so Portland has no use for him. With that said, Kassandra is right that there’ll most certainly be another center on the training camp roster. It’ll likely be a non-guaranteed deal, too, so that removes guys like Josh Boone and Fabricio Oberto — who should receive one-year, minimum-level contracts somewhere that are guaranateed — thus, the options range from veterans such as Francisco Elson or Didier Ilunga-Mbenga, to vagabonds who’ve produced in the D-League such as Dwayne Jones or Courtney Sims, to a bust looking for another chance such as Patrick O’Bryant or Randolph Morris.

by AK1984 on Aug 27, 2010 11:02 AM PDT up reply actions  

The return of Steven "Mountain Man" Hill

"Listening to the media only increases your odds of failing at whatever you are doing" - Mark Cuban

by Norsktroll on Aug 27, 2010 12:19 PM PDT up reply actions  

If Portland wants to go the possible fan favorite route, 7'3" tall Peter John Ramos -- who's like ...

the Puerto Rican version of Ha Seung-Jin — would be an interesting camp invite. Kiwi Sean Marks would be a cool invite, too.

by AK1984 on Aug 27, 2010 12:24 PM PDT up reply actions  

This doesn't surprise me.

They should go get another big man. But they won’t.

by Aaron Sass on Aug 26, 2010 7:27 PM PDT reply actions  

Not a surprise about Joel.

Mike Barrett was just repeating what Joel told him and not factoring in Joel’s positive, can-do attitude.

"You're not too smart, are you? I like that in a man." - Matty Walker in Body Heat (1981)

by BlazerFanSince1970 on Aug 26, 2010 8:06 PM PDT reply actions  

Rudy for Orton?

wasn’t there a rumor about Orlando wanting to trade their first round draft pick Daniel Orton for Rudy?
If true make that move.

by Biph on Aug 26, 2010 8:06 PM PDT reply actions  

maybe

but we wouldn’t need him to contribute right away he would be surrounded by very good post players and maybe when Camby retires in a couple years he’ll be ready to back up Greg and get 8 points and 6 rebounds in 20 minutes of play.

by Biph on Aug 27, 2010 7:34 PM PDT up reply actions  

This is how rumors get started:
“I don’t think he’ll be back for camp. Not playing on the court. He’ll be at training camp. Right now with Joel we’re looking at probably a November or December time frame.”

Cho says “November or December.” Then you say late November/December in your headline; then in the body of your Fanshot you say December.

Exaggeration leads to confusion.

The most likely interpretation of Cho’s actual comment is that they expect Joel to be ready in November, but Cho is hedging his bets and saying Nov/Dec in order to make sure they don’t miss their timeline.

Trading Joel now seems very short sighted until we see Greg on the floor playing at full speed. Joel’s trade value will increase significantly if he can show that he is able to play at close to his pre-injury level. In addition, our team needs will be clearer is we wait to see how individual players have developed and how the team is fitting together on the floor.

by upper left corner on Aug 26, 2010 8:14 PM PDT reply actions   2 recs

This is how rumors get started
The most likely interpretation of Cho’s actual comment is that they expect Joel to be ready in November

Maybe, maybe not.

What he said was “… with Joel we’re looking at probably a November or December time frame.”

"You're not too smart, are you? I like that in a man." - Matty Walker in Body Heat (1981)

by BlazerFanSince1970 on Aug 26, 2010 9:03 PM PDT up reply actions  

K

but when someone says November/December i assume they mean late(15th+)/December not a month gap of unknown. They will be cautious with pryzyyyybilla so when cho even mentions december i believe him.

Welcome back Mr. Williams. Yes.

by RipCityBlaze on Aug 26, 2010 11:22 PM PDT up reply actions  

No problem

Given how careful and cautious Cho’s overall approach to public relations appears to be, I think you are interpreting Cho’s comments more pessimistically than is likely justified.

What he said is “November-December.” Given that Joel has already said he wants to be ready by opening night, I would interpret Cho’s comment as, “November, but I will say November-December to cover us in case Joel has a minor setback.”

by upper left corner on Aug 27, 2010 8:19 AM PDT up reply actions  

this^

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

by two4larue on Aug 27, 2010 10:26 AM PDT up reply actions  

projections

i’ve heard a lot of projections on both Joel and Greg. it appears to me that Cho is being conservative with his timelines. both will likely be ready by early november, if not sooner.

thanks so much for your concern, but i do not require your validation in order to feel free to submit my comment.

by Kassandra on Aug 27, 2010 8:58 AM PDT up reply actions  

under promise, over deliver

this bromide sums up Cho’s professional career to date

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

by two4larue on Aug 27, 2010 10:27 AM PDT up reply actions  

It worked for Scotty on the Starship Enterprise

I was born in '52, and I believe in #52. Hang in there, GO.
You too, Przy: everyone knows you're the heart & soul of the Blazers.

by hurryup09 on Aug 27, 2010 11:40 AM PDT up reply actions  

When he delivers something, we can debate about whether he over-delivered or not.

For now he is just under promising.

"You're not too smart, are you? I like that in a man." - Matty Walker in Body Heat (1981)

by BlazerFanSince1970 on Aug 27, 2010 1:08 PM PDT up reply actions  

he overdelivered for OKC

and he delivered the goods in his interview with PA

you’re not happy with Branch and Rosie?

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

by two4larue on Aug 27, 2010 2:00 PM PDT up reply actions  

How can you say he over delivered for OKC?

He wasn’t their GM. We don’t know for a fact that any players they acquired were because of his recommendation or against his recommendation. There is no way to know. We can surmise (from his claims of being an expert on the CBA) that he was instrumental in using the CBA creatively in deals, but that doesn’t qualify him to be a GM, just a “capologist”.

I don’t know Branch and Rosie. I do know they are old chums of his, previous Seattle people he worked with. So while they may be good (I don’t know) it is not a good sign that he didn’t recruit from outside his previous sphere of acquaintances. That is often a sign of insecurity on the part of a rookie manager – settling for people he is comfortable with rather than looking much wider to find the best possible people available.

That fact that Paul was so impressed by him is not totally reassuring either. Paul has hired a lot people for the Blazers that I wouldn’t want back. But hopefully Paul has learned more and more over the years so I hope for the best.

What bothers me the most about Cho is that he has zero track record or experience as a GM, and we know absolutely nothing about his philosophy on how to build a winning team. I believe the #1 duty of a successful GM is to establish the strategy to build and maintain the team. And we’ve heard nothing from Cho about that, so we simply have to wait and then figure out what that may be after he actually does something. The key to success is strategy. If you have a bad strategy it doesn’t matter how well you execute it.

(For instance, KP’s strategy was to collect the best, good character, players available and to completely ignore how they fit together as a team. He continuously said it was Nate’s job to figure out what to do with them. I think that works while you are rebuilding from ground zero, but it fails miserably when you want to take the next step to being a contender.)

So I await some real evidence of what Cho’s strategy is for the Blazers. What’s his time line to make us a contender? Does he think we need more stars or role playing veterans? Does he favor trading young potential stars like Batum for older proven veterans to make us a contender now. Conversely, does he favor moving older veterans like Miller and Camby for younger but not yet matured talent because he thinks we are still 2-3 years away? Does he think we need more experience coming off the bench, or is he ok with Matthews as our 6th man? Will he give up a more talented player to get a player with a better fit? What kind of PG does he believe we need next to Roy, a shooter or playmaker? Does he believe in Nate’s system or does he think we need to play more uptempo basketball, less iso, more movement? Does his statistics on knee injuries make him believe we should let Oden become a restricted free-agent and try to find a sign and trade for him if he has a mediocre year? Or even let him go if he gets a near max offer?

We simply know nothing about Cho’s strategy (or tactics) yet, so I’m withholding judgment until he really does something significant.

 

"You're not too smart, are you? I like that in a man." - Matty Walker in Body Heat (1981)

by BlazerFanSince1970 on Aug 27, 2010 4:30 PM PDT up reply actions  

I'm sure Cho has some sort of strategy or philosophy, and I would very much like to know it as well.

But I don’t think he’s the kind of guy that will really let that loose in the public realm. It gives away some information to other GMs, free agents, etc that gives them bargaining power.

You can measure skill and talent with your eyes, but productivity is shown through statistics.

by austinpwnz on Aug 27, 2010 10:39 PM PDT up reply actions  

Yep, I agree. It will come out gradually as he makes moves, resigns players or not, etc.

We probably won’t get a “it’s Nate’s job to figure out where to play them” or a “I never took Chemistry” quote from him. But in a year or so we will probably figure him out.

"You're not too smart, are you? I like that in a man." - Matty Walker in Body Heat (1981)

by BlazerFanSince1970 on Aug 27, 2010 11:04 PM PDT up reply actions  

To be fair, I'd distinguish Bill Branch from Steve Rosenberry. Branch is a Sam Presti ...

guy and somebody who I associate with OKC, while Rosenberry is a Rick Sund guy and somebody who I associate with Seattle.

by AK1984 on Aug 27, 2010 11:34 PM PDT up reply actions  

Branch was hired by Seattle and went to OKC with Cho. Right?

But my point was that they were former colleagues of Cho (I don’t care that it happened to be in Seattle or OKC). Hopefully they are both very good.

"You're not too smart, are you? I like that in a man." - Matty Walker in Body Heat (1981)

by BlazerFanSince1970 on Aug 28, 2010 12:10 AM PDT up reply actions  

That was a mouthful

I agree with you that there is much we do not know about Cho’s strategic thinking. In part this is because he doesn’t have a track record as “the decider,” and in part because it is abundantly clear at this point that he believes in keeping his cards close to his vest.

OTOH, I think we can make some pretty educated guesses about Cho’s approach:

1) He is obviously a data junkie;
2) He is deliberative rather than impulsive;
3) He believes in stats and is an advocate for cost effective contracts, which means that he believes in using WARP and other indices to try to fill roster needs in the most cost efficient manor possible.

From his handling of the Rudy situation, I think we can also surmise that he is not easily cowed. A lot of guys would have grabbed the first, 1st round pick they could find and cut their losses. Cho didn’t do that which suggests to me that he either wants to use Rudy as a piece of a larger trade, or he thinks Rudy should have more value, and he simply isn’t going to take less until he absolutely has to.

I also think it is reasonable to assume that looking at Presti’s approach in OKC probably gives you some insight into Cho’s thinking.

I think your implied criticism of KP was a bit over the top. Look at the players he picked up, after the foundation was laid with LMA (PF) and Roy (SG). He got his big man, Oden ©. Then he went and drafted Batum (SF) and Bayless (PG). Around these five pieces he drafted role players like DC and Pendy, signed the best available PG in Miller, consolidated Trout and Blake into a quality veteran big Camby, and traded Webster to make salary room to acquire Mathews and another scorer in Babbitt.

Not every move was golden. Sergio was a bad fit. Rudy was a flyer on a guy I’m sure he hoped would be able to do more. Rudy isn’t a bad fit with our team, the primary problem is that he isn’t happy with his role or his salary. Most of KP’s second rounders haven’t worked out, and a lot of the Euros have yet to pay off.

Overall, I see KP as drafting for position, character, and talent. Some of his guys were safe bets, some were gambles, but I think that is the smart way to develop a roster. Saying he “completely ignored how they fit together” seems pretty outrageous to me.

by upper left corner on Aug 28, 2010 12:25 PM PDT up reply actions  

Saying he "completely ignored how they fit together" seems pretty outrageous to me

He said time and time again that he drafted the best players available and it was up to Nate to figure out how to use them. Whenever he was asked about fit he responded with the same answer. I don’t think KP would consider my comment as criticism. He was proud and absolutely convinced that was the right strategy.

Not drafting Blair was a huge mistake. It was ridiculous to pass on him twice in the 2nd round (understandable that he passed on him in the first round), particularly when he drafted Pendergraph who is awful. I don’t hold it against him that he drafted Oden, most of the league would have. Overall, KP was good at drafting talent. But KP was much too slow in consolidating his talent and that certainly contributed to his demise. He only traded Trout and Blake when he had to after losing Oden and and Przy. Miller was the last free-agent standing after he first tried to get Turk, Millsap, and Lee.

"You're not too smart, are you? I like that in a man." - Matty Walker in Body Heat (1981)

by BlazerFanSince1970 on Aug 28, 2010 3:47 PM PDT up reply actions  

I interpreted KP's comments as an attempt to...

…..get out of Nate’s way. You are free to interpret them literally if you prefer, I just think it was more about turf than actually “not caring about fit”.

I’d ask you to look at the sequence in which KP acquired players. I think it is abundantly clear that he paid attention to positional needs.

A few other reactions:

1) The after the fact second guessing on Blair irritates me, every time. Twenty-nine GMs passed on Blair based on medical advice. To expect KP to ignore that advice, when the team’s two best players Roy and Oden have both struggled with knee issues, strikes me as unreasonable. In the opinion of most NBA medical staffs, Blair’s knees remain a time bomb that could go off at any minute. We won’t know if Buford’s gamble pays off until we see how long Blair plays.

2) The stats are a lot kinder to JP than the eye test. I’m not ready to give up on him. He is a strong rebounder and has potential to become a decent defender. He is never going to be a great offensive threat, but if he plays within himself and sticks to what he can do well, I think he can be a decent role player. He is a smart kid, good attitude, good effort.

3) Consolidation. I think it depends on what you saw as the timeline. I would argue that a lot of fans have been very impatient. Folks wanted consolidation before our core was set and before we had given our young talent much of a chance to develop.

KP made one consolidation trade: Blake and Trout for Camby, which I think was very good. He made another trade of Webster for Babbitt that saved money and allowed us to go after Mathews. The jury is still out on that trade. In both cases, I think KP traded the right guys off our roster.

You can certainly argue that we would have been better off pulling the trigger earlier on deals for Sergio and Rudy. On the other hand, the value of guys like Batum and Bayless has increased significantly by showing a little patience. I would have liked to have seen Rudy go last summer. I thought his limitations were pretty clear, but on the other hand, the team really needed 3 pt shooting. Rumors have circulated that PA vetoed just such a trade.

For other comments about balance and fit, please see my reply to AK just below.

by upper left corner on Aug 29, 2010 8:50 AM PDT up reply actions  

You are free to interpret them literally if you prefer, I just think it was more about turf than actually "not caring about fit".

Sorry I totally disagree. KP was very clear whenever he was specifically asked about fit. He said he thought it more important to get the best players available and Nate would figure out the best way to use them because he was very good at it (KP’s opinion of Nate). He said exactly that about fit in multiple interviews.

1. … Twenty-nine GMs passed on Blair based on medical advice.

29 other GMs did not have the 31 and 33 picks in the 2nd round. KP had already used (wasted?) his first round pick on Claver and then had two more chances to take Blair with a low risk 2nd round pick. As I said it is understandable that no GM wanted to take Blair in the first round with a guaranteed 2-year contract. But Blair went 37, the 7th pick of the 2nd round. Only 4 other GM’s passed on Blair in the 2nd round, not 29 other GMs, only 4. And no other GM had two chances to take Blair in the 2nd round, only KP. San Antonio must have thought it was Xmas when Blair dropped to them. I think it was ridiculous not to take a chance on Blair’s knees with one of those two 2nd round picks. They could have drafted him, sent him to summer league and spent the entire summer testing him before deciding what kind of contract was worth risking on him. Even then, the amount of money risked would have been small.

2… The stats are a lot kinder to JP than the eye test.

He’ll be a 10th guy at best on a healthy team. They grow on trees every year and Paul can buy all the 2nd round picks for a player like that he wants.

3. … KP made one consolidation trade: Blake and Trout for Camby … He made another trade of Webster for Babbitt that saved money and allowed us to go after Mathews

He traded Blake and Trout for Camby (a very good deal by KP) only after we lost both Joel and Oden and were in danger of not making the playoffs. So great KP trade, but he would have never went after it if it hadn’t been for injuries, IMO.

Trading Webster had absolutely nothing to do with saving money to get Matthews. (We first tried to trade Rudy to Minn for that draft pick but Rudy’s agent told Minn he would never report there.) Paul isn’t afraid of paying luxury tax (which we are still doing). He way overpaid for Camby and Matthews because he wants to build a winner and isn’t concerned about a few million extra bucks to do it. Besides, Webster would have been traded later anyway to make room for Batums minutes and Matthews minutes (Matthews isn’t getting $33M just to back up Roy).

"You're not too smart, are you? I like that in a man." - Matty Walker in Body Heat (1981)

by BlazerFanSince1970 on Aug 29, 2010 4:34 PM PDT up reply actions  

Exactly, Kevin Pritchard was all about BPA and stockpiling assets, ...

which don’t coincide with roster balance and stylistic fit. Also, even though I assume Pritchard and Nate McMillan got along on a personal level, it’s pretty clear that they had different visions regarding basketball philosophy.

by AK1984 on Aug 30, 2010 12:21 AM PDT up reply actions  

don't forget about Paul

KP let it slip last fall that Allen is enamored with quick PGs, hence the decision to keep Mills on the 15 man roster (which proved to be costly when most of the big men went down)

It remains to be seen if Cho can “handle” Paul’s PG fetish better than KP could. Kevin admitted that he has a soft spot for PGs as well, and he didn’t have any trouble keeping 3-4 of them on the 15 man roster during his term as Portland’s GM

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

by two4larue on Aug 30, 2010 2:46 PM PDT up reply actions  

One more time....

….just look at the sequence of KPs player acquisitions. It is obvious that he took positional needs heavily into consideration.

1) You didn’t address my point about the context in which the decision was being made: Roy and Oden’s knee problems. If they had drafted Blair and his knees had blown out can you imagine the howls that would have gone up in the media and among fans? Besides, we don’t even know if KP had the power to override medical recommendations.

2) I think you are greatly overstating the ease of finding decent role players, in general, and decent guys in the second round in particular. 90% of all second rounders are out of the league in two years.

3) The jury is out on the Webster deal and the Mathews signing. You guys can judge and nitpick these in a the glaring light of hindsight soon enough.

I just get sick of the standard that most local media and fans use in evaluating picks and trades. K Vance acts like every decent player you didn’t draft, but had a shot at, is a “mistake.” This is total crap. Some picks are safe, some are not. Some are for position, some are for fit.

When you are first rebuilding a roster, accumulating as much talent as possible seems obvious. As a team starts getting competitive, position becomes more important. Finally, when you are trying to win a title, you draft more for specific fit.

by upper left corner on Aug 30, 2010 8:48 AM PDT up reply actions  

It is obvious that he took positional needs heavily into consideration.

Going into last year we had Batum, Webster, Trout, and Rudy on the team. All of them needed minutes at SF (Rudy played SF on offense with Roy at SF on defense in a 3-guard lineup to get Rudy minutes). A consolidation trade was needed last summer. The only reason that didn’t blow up in Nov was that Batum and Trout got injured, and then Rudy had surgery. He finally traded Trout at the deadline but only because Oden and Joel were injured.

1) Nobody would have faulted KP for taking Blair with a 31 or 33 pick if his knees eventually failed. It’s a second round pick where you are not likely to get much of value anyway. It’s the perfect place to take a chance on a high return, high risk player. Oden and Roy have nothing to do with it.

90% of all second rounders are out of the league in two years.

2) Which makes it the perfect place to take a chance on a high return, high risk player. Most 2nd round picks don’t make a difference anyway, and we had two second round chances to get him. It’s the perfect place to do it and if he eventually failed for knee problems so what? You’ve lost almost nothing.

You guys can judge and nitpick these in a the glaring light of hindsight soon enough.

That’s just an insult.

I just get sick of the standard that most local media and fans use in evaluating picks and trades

Another insult. Your unstated standards are superior to most fans standards (also unstated)? You don’t even know what my standards are for evaluating picks and trades, other than you know I think they they should “fit” AFTER the team leaves the rebuilding stage. Vance has nothing to do with our discussion, although you apparently dislike him as much as I do.

"You're not too smart, are you? I like that in a man." - Matty Walker in Body Heat (1981)

by BlazerFanSince1970 on Aug 30, 2010 1:18 PM PDT up reply actions  

If they had drafted Blair and his knees had blown out can you imagine the howls that would have gone up in the media and among fans?

A strong/secure GM (like Buford) would have selected the BPA regardless and loved with the potential fallout. As we’ve come to realize in the past 12-15 months, KP’s gravitas in the Blazer organization (and across the league) was already eroding after the ’09 playoffs and he was unable to make draft day transactions to move up the board that day (other than to pay Sacto to take Rodriguez off his hands)

the ‘09 draft was a fiasco, especially by KP’s former standards. First of all, no 54-win team should ever draft 4 rookies, even if one of them is stashed in Europe. Maybe “the plan” before the draft was to consolidate picks and move up to select Hansbrough, but even if this was the case KP’s execution flopped and the backup plan was a hastily-packed parachute that failed to open

Dante Cunningham was a solid choice, but 1 out of 4 is a bad return, especially when Blair fell right into Portland’s lap

The 2009 free agency period (Hedon’t, Roy’s prolonged contract extension, etc) was further proof that KP was losing his grip on the GM job, and then at summer league “actual evidence” was provided that Paul Allen was very upset that he wasn’t given all of the data to decide the ’07 draft

12 months later, the man with the data (Cho) was hired

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

by two4larue on Aug 30, 2010 2:55 PM PDT up reply actions  

*lived

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

by two4larue on Aug 30, 2010 2:56 PM PDT up reply actions  

at summer league "actual evidence" was provided that Paul Allen was very upset that he wasn’t given all of the data to decide the ’07 draft

I put zero faith in that story by Vance. What is the actual evidence? If Vance saw something that was really significant, as he claims, why is he keeping the content secret? It doesn’t meet the smell test. If KP really kept something from Allen that was as significant as affecting the Oden vs Durant choice, Allen would have fired KP on the spot for cause. Until Vance is willing to reveal what the evidence is (not the source) I’ll believe he is blowing up something that was really insignificant just to make himself look relevant.

"You're not too smart, are you? I like that in a man." - Matty Walker in Body Heat (1981)

by BlazerFanSince1970 on Aug 30, 2010 5:00 PM PDT up reply actions  

I put a lot of stock in it

because Vance, Jay Allen and John Strong all have claimed to have seen the document that an unnamed NBA exec pulled out of his briefcase and showed to them at Vegas. Vance and the others didn’t reveal this scoop at the time to drive ratings, they waited and told the story after the Penn announcement made KP’s job status was already tenuous.

So, why didn’t PA fire KP right away? You’d have to ask him. But there’s no doubt now (looking back) that beginning on draft day 2009 and continuing through the Penn “was he or wasn’t he?” job offer from Minn that KP had a string of unfortunate incidents that eventually led to his dismissal. The 2007 draft data that Allen was allegedly not happy about was just one example of this

FWIW, I finally got around to listening to Quick’s interview last week, he said that Przy only weighs 252 (playing weight = 248) because Joel hasn’t had a beer since his 2nd kid was born back in Feb. Now THAT takes some dedication, Jason said that JP used to always keep his fridge stocked with Coors Light

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

by two4larue on Aug 30, 2010 9:09 PM PDT up reply actions  

Hilarious

According to Vance, Jay Allen and (and you say) John Strong, they saw a document containing information that KP supposedly hid from Paul Allen? You say they kept this a secret until KP was fired or about to be fired. First, I don’t think they kept the story a secret until then. Vance and Allen actually told this story almost a year earlier after summer league if I recall correctly, and then Vance resurrected it after KP was in trouble and began citing it as a reason that KP was in trouble (I remember at least one instance of him bringing it up and saying that they had talked about it the previous summer.)

Vance’s claim that this document was significant makes no sense. No doubt some executive showed them some document (since I doubt they would lie about something that basic). Perhaps it was something like Oden’s injury history going back to high school, or something else that bland that Vance blew up into something far beyond it’s significance.

When I heard it talked it about on 95.5 it was Vance that brought it up (claiming it was a big deal) and Jay Allen just sort of went along with Vance’s story. (I don’t recall hearing Strong discuss it.) But if it was really significant why would they refuse to reveal the contents? Vance fancies himself as a reporter. Since when do reporters bury a huge a story (i.e. not reveal the contents of the document)? Even if the three of them were BFF with KP (which I don’t think they were) why not reveal the contents now after KP was gone? It would still be a huge story now if KP kept something from Allen that would have led him to pick Durant over Oden.

But even if you think Vance, Jay Allen, and Strong are all still protecting KP’s good name (by not revealing the contents and just smearing him by saying he withheld something critical from Paul Allen – huh? How does that make sense?), just think about the story itself.

1) Why would KP shoot himself in the head by drafting Oden and keeping information about why he shouldn’t draft Oden from Paul Allen? It would only make KP look bad when Oden needed surgery, was injured. etc. and then the team would also do worse as a result? What did KP possibly have to gain by knowingly drafting damaged goods? Why not tell Allen and draft Durant?

2) Why would a certain NBA executive (apparently out to get KP) share such supposedly damaging information with a talk show hack? If he really had information that would damage KP why didn’t he send it to Woj like always? Why not send it to Quick or Brian Smith? Why not send it to ESPN or any other real sports news outlet? Pretty obviously because he didn’t have anything significant and they would have actually considered the validity and significance of the information before publishing anything. Maybe he figured that showing something supposedly “sinister” to Vance was more likely to eventually turn into a talk radio smear (i.e. I have secret information that damns KP, but I won’t reveal what it is).

3) If there really was something to this claim don’t you think Quick, Smith, or the national press would have investigated it after Vance made those claims. You never heard anything about this in the news anywhere but on 95.5 talk radio, and even Canzano stayed away from this one (which should tell you everything you need to know about it).

IMO, this is crock!

"You're not too smart, are you? I like that in a man." - Matty Walker in Body Heat (1981)

by BlazerFanSince1970 on Aug 30, 2010 10:33 PM PDT up reply actions  

they saw a document containing information that KP supposedly hid from Paul Allen?

Uh, no. They saw “actual evidence” that Paul Allen was upset that he had not received prior to the 2007 draft. No mention was made if KP knowlingly withheld the data from Allen, or if he was negligent in discovering it prior to the draft.

As far as the rest of your questions are concerned, you’re asking the wrong person. Strong was “producing” one of the WaW shows and came on the mic to corroborate Vance and Allen’s version of the story (they were all in Vegas together when this document was displayed in July 2009) Why the story has died out (or not been pursued) is not my place to say. The radio hosts felt strongly enough about the incident that they mentioned it several times on the air, and the other local reporters haven’t pursued it for their own reasons.

FWIW, I’ve never see this revelation as the “smoking gun” that ended KP’s Blazer career, just another in a series of events that led to Allen’s displeasure with Pritchard’s job performance. So I will continue mentioning it, whenever the topic is brought up

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

by two4larue on Aug 31, 2010 3:35 PM PDT up reply actions  

Webster would have been traded later

It came out later (during interviews about how Fernandez and his agent were handling his trade “request” through the media) that Webster’s agent went behind closed doors and also requested a trade for his client because it had become clear that Batum had won the starting SF job. (note: this was done prior to the draft, before the MLE for Matthews) The Blazers attempted to accomodate Marty by sending him to a team where he would have to opportunity to compete for a starting job. At least, up until Kahn added more depth at the 3

Regardless, Webster was not going to provide the Blazers with production in line with his salary (WARP casualty) unless Batum was seriously injured again. Matthews is a much-better choice as a backup 2-3, going forward, because he can replace both Fernandez and Matthews with superior perimeter defense and spread the floor from the wing positions

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

by two4larue on Aug 30, 2010 2:43 PM PDT up reply actions  

Poor Martell Webster will be stuck starting at the 2 in Minnesota, ...

which’ll be an unmitigated disaster. Webster’s backup, Corey Brewer, also isn’t equipped to play the 2 — while third-stringer Wayne Ellington is a poor man’s Rashad McCants —thus, it’ll surely be a long season in Mondale country.

by AK1984 on Aug 31, 2010 12:38 AM PDT up reply actions  

Twenty-nine GMs passed on Blair based on medical advice. To expect KP to ignore that advice, when the team’s two best players Roy and Oden have both struggled with knee issues, strikes me as unreasonable.

Are you sure that every other NBA team was in the first round early 2nd (up to choice 37?) Most years there is a team that has dealt it’s #1 choice away, and the same franchise can have several choices in the first round (the Wolves come to mind, from the ’09 draft)

Blair was drafted by the Spurs, who have the reputation of creating medical rumors to cause college prospects to slide (Batum heart problem, etc) I suspect Blair was just another one of these ruses and to say that KP was not duped along with the rest of his peers (except RC Buford…) is the opposite of praise.

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

by two4larue on Aug 30, 2010 1:23 PM PDT up reply actions  

He [Pendergraph] is never going to be a great offensive threat, but if he plays within himself and sticks to what he can do well, I think he can be a decent role player. He is a smart kid, good attitude, good effort

I suppose we should be happy if he’s a decent role player for a couple of years, based on the average results from 2nd round draft choices. But Jeff will never become what DeJuan already is, and Blair was available at #31 so this ciriticism of the ’09 draft is valid

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

by two4larue on Aug 30, 2010 1:34 PM PDT up reply actions  

Folks wanted consolidation before our core was set and before we had given our young talent much of a chance to develop

And yet, the kinds of consolidated that fans were calling for were finally done (Blake/Outlaw traded, Webster flipped, etc) months after they were “suggested” here at BE. Unfortunately, the Rudy “consolation prize” deal was not made when he still had trade value. I’m hoping Cho will be an improvement in this area, but (to be fair) KP had trouble convincing Paul that Fernandez “needed” to be dealt. last winter

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

by two4larue on Aug 30, 2010 2:06 PM PDT up reply actions  

the kinds of consolidated

should read “the kinds of consolidation deals that some fans…”

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

by two4larue on Aug 30, 2010 2:07 PM PDT up reply actions  

You can certainly argue that we would have been better off pulling the trigger earlier on deals for Sergio and Rudy

I would add Channing Frye to that discussion. As the Suns have shown, Frye had some trade value at the ‘09 deadline that was not realized by KP/Portland, and Channing was not helpful to the team’s front line during the Rocket’s series

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

by two4larue on Aug 30, 2010 2:09 PM PDT up reply actions  

With Channing Frye, that was more a matter of him being a poor fit in ...

Nate McMillan’s system — for he was used as a pick-and-pop 4/5 rather than a stretch 4/5 — than anything in Kevin Pritchard’s hands. However, if Pritchard could’ve acquired David Lee instead of Frye back in 2007 via the Zach Randolph trade, then that’s another matter altogether.

by AK1984 on Aug 31, 2010 12:42 AM PDT up reply actions  

Hmm, I'd say Kevin Pritchard didn't put much value into stylistic fit or balanced ...

roster construction. Even if he did, it certainly wasn’t his strong suit.

by AK1984 on Aug 28, 2010 9:55 PM PDT up reply actions  

I'd say Oden, LMA, Batum, and Roy.....

….are a very good, balanced core. I’d say Camby, DC, Mathews, and Bayless are a pretty nice group of bench guys who can each play two positions and give Nate a lot of flexibility.

Sergio was a terrible fit, Rudy is a stretch. Patty Mills is a PA pet. Andre was best available FA who fit a positional need, even if he didn’t fit well with Roy stylistically.

I think it is undeniable that there was some ongoing tension between KP and Nate about playing style. KP drafted guys who were more suitable for an up-tempo style, while Nate’s is more of a deliberate paced coach. KP consistently preferred players with great length and/or speed and athleticism.

Who do you blame for this conflict? My guess is that there is plenty of blame to go around, and I don’t think any of us on the outside can speak to intelligently about the inner-workings of the management team.

AK, I just think you overplay the whole “stylistic fit” “roster balance” argument. When I asked what you thought would be a balanced roster I think you suggested M Miller and D Collison as replacements for AM and WM. That seems like a pretty small amount of change in order to go from “KP knew nothing about style or balance” to, “I’m pretty happy with the roster.”

I’m not saying that KP was perfect, or that he and Nate’s views were perfectly aligned, but give KP some credit. He left the organization with an outstanding core, a wealth of young talent, and depth at every position.

by upper left corner on Aug 29, 2010 8:19 AM PDT up reply actions  

Since Mike Miller wasn't available, I'd've argued that the money would've ...

been better spent on a backup 3 who can play defense and shoot the corner 3 (e.g., Keith Bogans) along with a backup 2 who can run an offense with good handles (e.g., Roger Mason, Jr.) rather than overypaying for a backup 3 in Wes Matthews. Next to Jerryd Bayless, Mason, Jr. is the kind of big guard with court vision that you want in the backcourt.

That, of course, isn’t on Kevin Pritchard, but rather Larry Miller, Mike Born, and Chad Buchanan. From a scouting perspective, I’m in awe Born and Buchanan think that Matthews can effectively play the 2 on occasion in the high-low zone offense. To me, that puts into question their understanding of fit.

Oh well, that’s at least not as utterly ridiculous as David Kahn thinking Martell Webster can play either wing postion — regardless of whether it’s his natural 3 or the 2 — in the Triangle offense.

Also, we all know in detail why I’d prefer someone such as Darren Collison or Kirk Hinrich at the 1 alongside Brandon Roy. I stand by that, too, but there’s no need for me to rehash it.

by AK1984 on Aug 30, 2010 12:11 AM PDT up reply actions  

so I’m withholding judgment until he really does something significant.

Sounds to me that you’re already prejudiced re: Rich

that doesn’t qualify him to be a GM, just a "capologist".
I do know they are old chums of his, previous Seattle people he worked with. So while they may be good (I don’t know) it is not a good sign that he didn’t recruit from outside his previous sphere of acquaintances
What bothers me the most about Cho is that he has zero track record or experience as a GM, and we know absolutely nothing about his philosophy on how to build a winning team.

We have the track record of OKC and the first-hand references given by his former bosses (Sund, Presti) via the media. They gave him high marks and glowing reports. But I suspect you’ll dismiss these as more cronyism

I understand your “wait and see” and “let’s be objective, here” point of view. My take remains, it is possible to look at (and listen to first-and reports of) Cho’s body of work and say that he has delivered well at every level of his NBA career, up to the point of becoming the Blazer’s GM. The franchise’s future roster/transactions cannot be known, but I’m optimistic that Rich was a solid hire who will serve Portland’s front office well. Which is much better news than the team has had in this area for the past 12 months

I know you thought that Paul Allen was hot to trot re: making a big splash this offseason (CP3 rumors) and I suspect you’re disappointed that Rich hasn’t delivered on his “one or two missing pieces” statement yet, so perhaps you’re witholding judgment re: Cho until he delievers the blockbuster? I would caution that roster evaluation and patience is required; Rich has repeated that “he’s not going to make a deal just to make a deal” and there’s no reason to believe that he has missed any significant trades in the last 6-8 weeks through any inexperience with the job.

Does he think we need more stars or role playing veterans?

I’ve heard RC mention several times that more-experience needs to be added to the roster.

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

by two4larue on Aug 30, 2010 11:45 AM PDT up reply actions  

Conditioning is the issue

with both Pryz and Oden. Even if healed they might need time to condition themselves for NBA play.

by 7677maniac on Aug 28, 2010 1:15 PM PDT up reply actions  

No acquiring a center

Because that would give us 4, and we will have at least two out of Joel, Camby, and Greg healthy for large stretches of the season. Pendy and LMA can patch it at backup center if needed.

by GMan83201 on Aug 26, 2010 8:33 PM PDT reply actions  

I wanted to get a possible replacement for Joel Przybilla in undrafted rookie free agent Brian Zoubek, ...

but New Jersey signed him soon after the 2010 NBA Draft. In light of how crappy Johan Petro is as a player, I could see Zoubek as Brook Lopez’s primary backup at center sooner rather than later in New Jersey.

by AK1984 on Aug 27, 2010 12:11 AM PDT up reply actions  

I agree on Petro vs Zoubek

and on Zoubek as a Pryz replacement. But there is nothing wrong with 4 centers.

Phase 1: Collect underpants
Phase 2: ???
Phase 3: Profit!

by HailOden! on Aug 27, 2010 12:47 AM PDT up reply actions  

agree

LMA can bump up and even pender can pound for a bit… shoot, Howard did for how long last year. Don’t make a trade for a 2 month band-aid.

Sometimes I feel like I'm going in different directions...

by porterfan30 on Aug 29, 2010 9:00 PM PDT up reply actions  

Cho?

Odds are, in reality part of the comment above this signature is wrong, but since I know it is right, I'll defend it to the death. Contradict me at your peril. Never believe that having the facts on your side will make a bit of difference.

by jscot on Aug 27, 2010 1:55 AM PDT up reply actions  

mmmm...donuts

Jeff Pendergraph:
FGM - 3
FGA - 111
Min - 30
Reb - 10

by Tofu Anonymous on Aug 28, 2010 8:31 AM PDT up reply actions  

Here's an idea Mr. Cho

since he’s still injured, he has an expiring contract, and we have two other centers that are both better than him, let’s try trading Joel and others for an all-star caliber player. It’s nice to think we can win a title with the team we have now but that’s just wishful thinking.

We can get a lot on the market if we offered Joel, Andre and Batum as the main package, with fillers as well.

by 64-18 on Aug 27, 2010 12:13 AM PDT reply actions  

I disagree

Let me repeat what I wrote above:

Trading Joel now seems very short sighted until we see Greg on the floor playing at full speed. Joel’s trade value will increase significantly if he can show that he is able to play at close to his pre-injury level. In addition, our team needs will be clearer if we wait to see how individual players have developed and how the team is fitting together on the floor.

by upper left corner on Aug 27, 2010 8:22 AM PDT up reply actions  

I disagree

If Joel comes back from the injury playing at his former level, he’ll have considerable trade value—contract or no. Legit 7-foot centers who block shots, set good picks, rebound, and don’t demand touches are always in demand in the NBA. Just look at Gortot in Orlando—a slightly more mobile version of Przy.

Personally, I’d like to keep Przy if fiscally possible. The team that beats the Lakers will need to match their length. With GO, Przy, Camby, LMA, and Batum, the Blazers would do so—even if one of those guys were out with injury.

I was born in '52, and I believe in #52. Hang in there, GO.
You too, Przy: everyone knows you're the heart & soul of the Blazers.

by hurryup09 on Aug 27, 2010 11:48 AM PDT up reply actions  

Steve Kerr recently admitted that teams were still concerned about Amare's knee problems even though he had been playing healthy and explosive again for years

The best offer he ever got (for an all-star) was Biedrins, the pick that became Stephen Curry and Wright as filler.

This tells me Greg and Joel have zero trade value around the league right now.

"Listening to the media only increases your odds of failing at whatever you are doing" - Mark Cuban

by Norsktroll on Aug 27, 2010 12:21 PM PDT up reply actions  

Exactly, Joel Przybilla's off-court value in trade talks is as an expiring contract. That's ...

the financial reality — as well as an indication that his questionable health status makes an impact — at this moment in time. Also, a major consolidation trade is more likely to include a non-playoff team out to cut costs — such as the 76ers or the Wizards — than a postseason bound team wanting size on its frontline.

by AK1984 on Aug 27, 2010 12:28 PM PDT up reply actions  

Not so clear to me.

You are speaking in “black and white” terms about a topic that seems pretty “shades of gray” to me.

There are some teams who would be primarily interested in Joel as an expiring contract. There are others who might be interested in Joel as a long-term back-up who could be resigned for less money than his current contract.

Seven footers who can play defense, rebound, and block shots, don’t grow on trees.

If you disagree, how about making an argument rather than a declaration.

by upper left corner on Aug 27, 2010 12:42 PM PDT up reply actions  

Admittedly, it's a presumption. Yet, I'm still skeptical of Joel Przybilla having any ...

on-court trade value for the foreseeable future. Things might change come the trade deadline; however, if Pryzbilla is at full strength at that point in time, then there isn’t a reason to put him on the market. Heck, I’d ride out his contract in that case.

by AK1984 on Aug 27, 2010 11:38 PM PDT up reply actions  

That's exactly what I have been saying....

Hold on the Pryz now. If he comes back, he has more trade value, and the Blazers might be able to resign him for cheap. Joel is loyal, his family likes Portland, and he is pretty realistic about his future.

Signing for less money and extending his career longer by playing fewer minutes on a winning team probably makes more sense than being a starter on a crappy team for more money.

by upper left corner on Aug 28, 2010 8:03 AM PDT up reply actions  

"Hold on the Pryz now."

I’d move him right now in a consolidation trade for Andre Iguodala without a second thought.

by AK1984 on Aug 28, 2010 9:57 PM PDT up reply actions  

Iggy is a great player...

…..but how would you see that working with Batum? Do you think Iggy is available? What type of a package would it take?

by upper left corner on Aug 29, 2010 8:54 AM PDT up reply actions  

Here's the proposal itself.

http://games.espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=2cg5muv

I’d look to make it a five-team trade, though, with Rudy Fernandez going to Boston while a future first-round draft pick from the Celtics (i.e., lotto protected from 2011 through 2016 and unprotected in 2017) — along with the non-guaranteed contracts of Tony Gaffney and Oliver Lafayette as salary filler — go to the Wizards.

by AK1984 on Aug 30, 2010 12:18 AM PDT up reply actions  

Care to explain your thinking AK?

For the moment, lets leave Hinrich out of the conversation. Let’s just ask whether or not it makes sense to trade Nic, who is 21 and makes roughly $1.2, for Iggy, who is 25 and makes roughly $12 million.

I have a hard time seeing it. Iggy is a more developed player, he has been a fairly consistent high teens scorer for the last several years with a TS% that has bounced up and down around .550. He tried to do more last year without Miller and his efficiency dropped to .535. He is a stud on defense.

Nic is more efficient at a lower usage rate. Is much better from 3 pt range. He is developing into a stud on defense.

The only real advantage I see with Iggy is more developed playmaking skills.

When you factor in the economics of Nic working for 10% of what Iggy makes, and the cost of acquisition which would be Pryz + other players or assets, I just don’t see it.

To me, In an offense that should primarily run through Roy and Oden, Nic seems like the perfect fit: an extremely efficient, low usage guy who can spread the floor. Throw in extraordinary length and an ability to effectively guard the opponent’s most dangerous perimeter player regardless of position and I just don’t see the logic of the trade. The only way I let go of Nic is for a super stud PG in his prime.

by upper left corner on Aug 30, 2010 4:58 AM PDT up reply actions  

I'd prefer to have the low-usage floor spreader at the 1, ...

while the 3 is manned by a top-notch on-ball defender who can slash off the ball and drive with the ball on offense. Yet, I fully realize that acquiring Andre Iguodala would mean that Nate McMillan must be subsequently fired — for he’d totally underutilize him — and, as a result, the likelihood of such a move occurring is slim to none.

I’d also prefer a low usage player at the 4, too, so basically I place a lot of stock in the pivotman and the two wing players carrying a heavy load on offense. My advocacy for Iguodala is further based on his physical strength, since I don’t have much faith in Nicolas Batum containing LeBron James in a hypothetical NBA Finals series with the Miami Heat.

by AK1984 on Aug 30, 2010 1:28 PM PDT up reply actions  

I find it hard to understand your preferences...

To me, I see a need to balance low post scoring, penetration, and outside shooting. The more balanced the attack in each area, the harder it is for teams to stop each form of scoring. I would like to see all five starters be legitimate scoring threats because I think that makes it harder for teams to double and easier to punish them when they do.

Having said that, I find it hard to understand what difference it makes which type of scoring comes from which position. To me it seems like you work with what you have.

We have a very dominant Center who should develop into a decent-good low post threat. Having a “4” with a proficient mid range game seems like a good way to create space for GO to operate and a create room for our penetrating perimeter players. Mid-range 2 pointers aren’t the most efficient form of scoring, so I don’t want LMA to be a primary weapon, but his shooting is a powerful threat that should help the efficiency of our other players.

What difference does it make if the “1” or the “3” is the low utilization player who spreads the floor? To me your suggestion seems counterintuitive. The new handcheck rules have put a huge premium on PGs who can penetrate. Why not have penetrating PG who can collapse the defense and create opportunities for the rest of the team?

Regarding Nic, in particular, I watched the replay of the Canada game and was very impressed with his growing ability to take it to the rim off the dribble. I hope we see a lot more of that in the future.

Your point about LeBron is a good one. Nic has struggled some against big, strong 3s more than any other type of perimeter player. I think that may have been part of the logic of signing Mathews who did a nice job on Melo in the playoffs. Ultimately, I don’t think anyone is going to stop LBJ. All you can do is make him work and try to reduce his efficiency. It is a team effort, fortunately we have a lot of interior shot blockers to make him think if he muscles his way past Nic or Wesley.

I would be interested to hear more about why you prefer to see the type of utilization pattern and the skills by position that you talked about in your comment.

by upper left corner on Sep 1, 2010 9:33 AM PDT up reply actions  

Sometimes a low usage 3 and a high usage 1 is ...

best (e.g., ‘00s era Spurs), other times a high usage 3 and a low usage 1 is good (e.g., ’90s era Bulls), and on occasion both are low usage positions (e.g., present-day Lakers). I guess it just depends, y’know.

With Andre Iguodala and Brandon Roy, the one fear would be a lack of efficient floor spacing. Not even Kirk Hinrich could give the almost necessary 40% 3PT% that’d be needed from the 1 to compensate for the wings being mediocre from downtown.

The hope is that Roy would step up his long-range percentages and be able to work well with someone who can play well off the ball like Iguodala — which means getting a new coach — thus, I can see where there might be holes in my idea.

Anyway, with regards to Wesley Matthews, Carmelo Anthony destroyed him in the playoffs last season. Matthews, as it was, hacked away on defense due to an inability to contain Anthony, which allowed him to post some solid numbers over those six games.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/a/anthoca01.html

by AK1984 on Sep 1, 2010 1:28 PM PDT up reply actions  

Obviously

a deal giving up a back-up center (not to mention hurt) for a Iggy would be a no-brainer… they would laugh at that deal. “We’ll give you a exp. contract for your best player… what ya think?” If we would have to throw in Miller, then we don’t have a PG, let alone 76ers already showed they didn’t value him.

Sometimes I feel like I'm going in different directions...

by porterfan30 on Aug 29, 2010 9:04 PM PDT up reply actions  

I should've explained specifically that Nicolas Batum would also ...

be included in such a deal. I thought it was implied, but whatever.

by AK1984 on Aug 30, 2010 12:13 AM PDT up reply actions  

Sound point, but Amare Stoudemire is a different type of player than Przy

Specifically, Stoudemire’s game is based on his explosiveness. If his knee is the least bit balky, he’s an instant stiff. Not so a true center like Przy. Also, microfracture surgery is an extremely iffy procedure. Few expect the pseudo-cartilage created by the procedure to hold up like the original meniscus.

A big man like Stoudemire who explodes off of and lands on a microfracture-repaired knee is going to make any GM nervous.

Certainly GO’s trade value is greatly reduced right now and for the foreseeable future because he also has a microfracture-repaired knee (in addition to the patella injury) and is a leaper. But I’d say that if Przy came out and played well in the first half of this season, teams would be considerably less concerned about trading for him.

I was born in '52, and I believe in #52. Hang in there, GO.
You too, Przy: everyone knows you're the heart & soul of the Blazers.

by hurryup09 on Aug 27, 2010 4:29 PM PDT up reply actions  

problem

do you really think an all-star caliber player would be traded to us in exchange for how you describe Joel?

thanks so much for your concern, but i do not require your validation in order to feel free to submit my comment.

by Kassandra on Aug 27, 2010 9:00 AM PDT up reply actions   1 recs

By Cho in an interview with 1080 sports radio

See front page posts by Ben

"Listening to the media only increases your odds of failing at whatever you are doing" - Mark Cuban

by Norsktroll on Aug 27, 2010 12:24 PM PDT up reply actions  

It's all good

Oden/Camby to start off the season.
And this means that Joel will play less games period, which means less chances he gets injured, which means more likely he’ll be healthy for playoffs, which is when we actually need him.

by gtbassett on Aug 27, 2010 1:16 PM PDT reply actions  

Pryz in December

is no surprise. Wasn’t there talk early on that his injury could be career ending? Lets all hope that Pryz is able to come back at the same level of play before his injury. I agree that even the best scenario would have him at full strength no sooner than the playoffs. Also, don’t be surprised if Camby is the starting center beginning the season. As strange as it seems, he’ll probably be our only center at full health. There seems to be no guarantee yet that GO will be ready.

by toolman on Aug 27, 2010 7:28 PM PDT reply actions  

Depth

Having Oden, Pryz, Camby, and LMA that all can play center… if that isn’t enough depth? Is there another team with that much depth? Some teams don’t have one legit center.

Sometimes I feel like I'm going in different directions...

by porterfan30 on Aug 29, 2010 9:07 PM PDT 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
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.
Blazers_small
What are we missing?

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >

FanShots

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

Recommended FanShots

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
Rhino

Recent FanShots

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
It's pretty clear that the season is over already ;)
CRAZY stat from Houston game
NBA MVP Rankings... LMA @ #10
Celtics interested in Rondo - Gasol swap? ...
Batum - Top 10 NBA Sixth Men

+ 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