Henry Abbott just put up a post all about Brandon Roy's game, ostensibly to educate folks on the East Coast who don't get to (won't try to) see him much.  He breaks down everything Brandon did during the Hornets game.  Even for those of us who follow closely and think we know what Brandon's game is all about, it's worth a read.  The man just has phenomenal control over his entire body and preternatural understanding of where everyone is at all times.  I cannot stress enough how amazing of a player and person he is.  What a great block for this team to build on!

...Breaking Down Brandon Roy

I've been thinking about how our lineups might look as far as starting, second unit, and other variations we could put together.  Dave's questions about that exact topic spurred a lot of this, as well as what other folks were responding to in their replies.  It seems to be a common assumption that Frye and/or Przybilla will be getting more minutes than people expect (want?) because of foul trouble to our other frontcourt options, especially Oden as he learns.

I'm not challenging that at all.  I think it's right on the money.  What I am wondering is how all those fouls will affect our game.  According to 82games.com ( Blazers page ) we attempted 24.5 free throws per game at 77%, and gave up 26.3 at 78%.  If we're looking at serious foul trouble in our frontcourt, we could see a much bigger disparity in those numbers.  Potentially, we could have something like a -8 or -10 free throw differential every night.  That could be a much bigger problem for us offensively than replacing Zach's numbers.  In the end, giving up free points to the opponent is about the same as not scoring points you're used to getting.  If Travis continues his aggressive drives that we saw at the very end of last season, that could help our free throw numbers.  However, thinking for myself as well as perusing everyone else's ideas of our possible lineups, I don't know if he'll see enough playing time to get significant free throw numbers, as well as the questions regarding whether he can produce like that without being the number 1 or 2 option on offense.

The other issue I see with increasing fouls in our frontcourt is how it affects the pace of the game.  It's been noted many times that we have the personnel to be a really fast, uptempo team.  Whether that's how Nate (or KP?) want it to be, the possibility is there, and in all likelihood the team will try to be as fast as is helpful.  However, if we're constantly stopping the game with fouls and free throws, where are the fastbreak opportunities?  And even if, as has been suggested, we're not a fastbreak team, but become a very quick, motion-style halfcourt team, how will the constant variation in pace from frenetic cutting and tenacious defense to standing around watching a bounce-bounce-free throw affect our guys?  It is much harder to condition for repetitive sprints and rests than constant effort in a flowing game.

Looking at the stats on 82games.com for the preeminent running teams in the NBA last year, the Golden State Warriors and the Phoenix Suns , the Warriors shot 25.8 at 72% while giving up 29.5 at 75% and the Suns shot 22.2 free throws at 81% while giving up 23.2 at 77%.  Last year, our free throw numbers were right in there with those teams, so it seems like it wouldn't be a problem, but we're looking at increasing the number of free throws we're giving up significantly.  Also, don't forget that Zach was masterful at getting fouled and drawing free throws, especially during his putbacks.  There's a quite likely possibility that we'll give up a bunch more free throws, and attempt even fewer.

How do you think our free throw differential will look next year?  Change or no change, why?  Will our foul situations affect the pace of the game we play?  How quickly can our frontcourt be coached into avoiding fouls?  Conversely, how quickly can they be coached into drawing fouls and free throws?

I'm an Oregonian, born and raised, which should make me a hereditary Blazer fan, but never really been one, except when Blazermania rubbed off on me in the early 90s like everyone else.  It was never really enough to make me care too much about the team or the sport.  I'm here to tell my story of how that has all changed.  In addition, I will include a postscript with a few thoughts on the current state of basketball, etc.  So, if you don't want to read a long, autobiographical ramble, you can just skip to the discussion inducing points at the bottom.

I played basketball in my youth, shooting in the driveway with my brothers, and playing lil' kids ball.  I quit that and stuck with soccer when my early-growth-spurt height advantage disappeared in 4th grade.  So, no real background in the fundamentals of the game.  I never even followed the sport, with the exception of the postseason runs in 1990-92.  For a while, when I actually started following sports and a bit of basketball, I professed greater admiration for college basketball because of the amateur nature, and a feeling that they were playing for a school, region, and love of the game, rather than money.  I realize that was a bit naive, but I still think there is a lot of value in that viewpoint, especially contrasted with being jaded by professionals playing for the paycheck.

In any case, I was merely a casual observer of the Trailblazers, absorbing it as passively as the rest of the local sports scene.  I watched the "Jail Blazers" years with mild contempt and some humor.  Not being closely entwined with the fortunes of the team, I was able to get more than a few chuckles from the ordeals.  I left the state and then the country for several years and completely lost any knowledge I had had of the team.  I heard rumblings about the Great Draft of '06, but nothing sunk in.  In fact, the thing that finally piqued my interest in the team was the story by Craig Lancaster of the Mercury News in the Oregonian in late October.  He was the independent journalist that the paper hired to try to describe the nasty history between the Blazers front office and the press.  I found it fascinating to see how the various clashing personalities played out to sour the whole deal.  That story, coupled with the rising optimism from Roy, Aldridge, and Pritchard, was enough to make me start caring.

But it wasn't a normal sort of fandom.  I didn't care so much about the performance of the team in games.  I certainly didn't know enough basketball to follow or appropriately judge the product on the court.  I was more interested in it as a sort of sociological case.  The resurrection of the franchise in the fans' and media's eyes.  The restoration of order and productivity within the organization.  The repairing of fractured relationships all around.  Only within the sports microcosm of Portland could this be a big story in this fashion.  It's hard to say that I was actually a fan at that point, more of a researcher.

I began reading about the team as much as I could.  Purely by accident, I began stumbling across some Blazer blogs, starting with Casey Holdahl and Jason Quick's on oregonlive.com.  I tried to get the behind the scenes dirt as much as I could.  (Thank you, Brian Berger!)  Unfortunately, it wasn't until at least two-thirds of the way through the season that I found the mecca of Blazer's Edge.  By that time, I'd been bitten, and the heady elixir was beginning to travel my veins.  Yes, I was starting to care about the team and players.  I wanted wins, not just an interesting story.  Dave, you and your well trained amateur experts (expert amateurs?) pushed me over the Edge (pun intended).  I was hooked.

Look at me now, wearing my Roybot t-shirt proudly and too often.  Drinking KP's Kool-Aid.  Wasting work time hitting the refresh button all over my favorite blogs.  Dreaming of Aldridge's devastating pick and pop next year, with Oden thundering in the putback of the rare miss.  I cannot claim to live and die by the Blazers, and hope I never do, but I am proud to say that I have embraced part of my heritage as an Oregonian, and am truly a Blazer lover.

---

So, that was perhaps more than you wanted to know, but I think it was interesting to share because I feel like I have come from a unique angle to love the team.  Without the fragmented franchise, there would actually be one less Blazer fan.  In fact, depending on how much you ascribe to this theory, it could be conceived that the wonderful situation we find ourselves in now could not have happened without the years of ineptitude.  In any case, that's my history, but on to the current and future.

-Perhaps because of the direction from which my fandom grew, I am very much set against bringing in big free agents.  Phrases like "All-Star," "marquee," "legit," and "big name" make me shudder and turn away.  I love the fact that Portland is a bit of a small backwater when it comes to the NBA.  I like the lack of national spotlight coupled with intense focus from local media.  I enjoy the way the team grew last year, slowly, organically, but together.  I love building through the draft, teaching the players what you want, and then retaining them while they prosper.  I would relish it if we slowly grew a contender over a few years, without any big media stories surrounding a free agent acquisition or trade, only to suddenly explode onto the championship tier with the same pieces that we've held for a while.  Don't get me wrong, a key veteran teacher here and there would be immensely helpful, but I don't want an over-the-top player to come in and put a stamp on a championship mold that we had been patiently grooming.

-I love Oregon.  I think it is the best state in the nation and one of the greatest places on the planet.  If players don't want to play here because of whatever perceived lack of lifestyle, that is fine with me.  I don't want someone who cannot appreciate the wonderful standard of living in a city like Portland.  A player who is not happy with his locale is not a player that will be performing at his highest.  For that reason, I gained a lot of respect for Magloire at the end of last season.  While he was talking about wanting to stay with the Blazers, one of his frequent comments was how much he loved the city and how great it would be to raise a family here.  I understand letting him go, and am not really sorry about it, but that view was more endearing to me than much of his basketball skills and shortcomings.

-My biggest pet peeve with basketball (and other sports) reporting and discussion is when people generalize singularities.  The most common instance of this is placing an "a" or "an" in front of a team or player's name.  Every single player and team is unique; to lump them into a general noun is an insult and a crutch that replaces rational discussion.  You cannot say "a Kobe or a LeBron" because there is only one Kobe and only one LeBron.  If you are referring to a general type of player, role, contract, etc., that is fine, but say "a Kobe type shooter or personality."  "If they get a Dallas or a Houston in their bracket, they won't go far."  There is only one Dallas and one Houston, and they are each unique, different teams.  Please acknowledge that.

I find this especially annoying in the NBA, which is the most individualizing of our major sports leagues, both because of the style of marketing that has become (too) common and because there are so few players and because they are so recognizable because there is no protective gear hiding them.  Also, the immediacy of cameras on the courts captures faces and expressions more than any other sport.  These are people, and the least they deserve is to be respected for their individuality.

---

Apologies for the long diary, and it may unfortunately spur several threads of competing discussion over the multiple points I've raised.  I'm sorry, and I'll try to be a bit more cohesive in the future.  Once again, I must echo others and praise everyone here for the high level of discussion and decorum.  I must also thank you for teaching me to be a better fan than I ever could have become alone.

Cheers.

PS- Poll.  Sorry.