# Smokescreen?



## CrGiants (Dec 4, 2003)

Can't believe everyone else seems to think that Portland has no interest in Luke Jackson...

Why on Earth would Portland let on that they want him? Even if any alleged Blazers Insiders had any idea, they would not disclose that publicly so that everyone would have some sort of idea which way Portland wanted to go. 

C'mon. When was the last time any team, aside from a team with a Top 3-5 pick, came out and truly made their full intentions known prior to the draft? 

It could be that everyone, from the Blazers fan base to other teams, have fallen as Portland management wants. Not saying that's what Portland's management is doing, but I find it odd that everyone in the organization raved about Jackson as the season ended, and then he allegedly had a solid workout here, and now we're not interested? Kinda fishy to me....

Not that I want Jackson, because there are several players I'd rather have, but I would not write off Portland on drafting him, until we hear he'll be gone long before we pick. 

In all likelihood, he won't end up in Portland, but overall, he may be the best move with the thirteenth pick. It's safe talent-wise, and let's not forget the PR associated with the move. Just don't buy the BS that we're not interested in him.


----------



## Yega1979 (Mar 22, 2003)

Ahh, but maybe the Blazers want other teams to think their positive comments about Jackson are smokescreens. 

I don't really agree with your sentiments CrGiants, but that's ok. "They said something good about Luke Jackson to a media source, therefore there's no way they will draft him." Way too simplistic reasoning there.


----------



## CrGiants (Dec 4, 2003)

"They said something good about Luke Jackson to a media source, therefore there's no way they will draft him." Yega


Try not putting words in my mouth. Never said that, nor came close to it. My post was saying that Portland is more likely to draft Jackson than a lot of posters think. In fact, I more or less debated whether or not what we've heard about Portland's intentions are probable or not.

Seventy-percent of what GM's and coaches say about rumors and drafts are BS. And so much BSing occurs that sorting out reality of what will happen is hard to find. I remember Portland denying a promise to Outlaw last year, and he was still drafted. 

All I've said is don't count Jackson out just because media reports suggest as much. That could be a facade, because, truthfully, picking Jackson would likely be the best all-around move Portland could make, and I think Portland management is fully aware of that. 

But I don't discount anything coming from Portland declaring no promises were made to Snyder or Telfair, either.


----------



## CrGiants (Dec 4, 2003)

"They said something good about Luke Jackson to a media source, therefore there's no way they will draft him." Yega


Try not putting words in my mouth. Never said that, nor came close to it. My post was saying that Portland is more likely to draft Jackson than a lot of posters think. In fact, I more or less debated whether or not what we've heard about Portland's intentions are probable or not.

Seventy-percent of what GM's and coaches say about rumors and drafts are BS. And so much BSing occurs that sorting out reality of what will happen is hard to find. I remember Portland denying a promise to Outlaw last year, and he was still drafted. 

All I've said is don't count Jackson out just because media reports suggest as much. That could be a facade, because, truthfully, picking Jackson would likely be the best all-around move Portland could make, and I think Portland management is fully aware of that. 

But I don't discount anything coming from Portland declaring no promises were made to Snyder or Telfair, either. 

P.S. You don't need to agree with what I say. I don't expect and wouldn't want you to. There'd be no purpose to these boards if everyone agreed? I disagree with almost everything posted on these boards save from a few posters.


----------



## Kmurph (May 7, 2003)

> All I've said is don't count Jackson out just because media reports suggest as much. That could be a facade, because, truthfully, picking Jackson would likely be the best all-around move Portland could make, and I think Portland management is fully aware of that.


I think it is very debatable whether or not drafting Jackson is the "best" move they could make. 

As for "smokescreens", at this point who really nows? I mean Warkentein has come on SEVERAL times and gushed about Luke Jackson, but then went on to say he isn't worth the 13th pick. Both Nash and Cheeks have spoken highly of Luke as well. A majority of the "mock draft" sites have all but assumed Luke is going to POR at #13. Is all of this or part of it an elaborate smokescreen? It could be, but I have no idea.

Honestly, I think that Nash could come out and blatantly say which players he really likes and get away with it, b\c I think a lot of other GM's will hear it and say "I don't believe him". So who knows, who is really playing who here?

I think they like Luke Jackson, but I think they like a lot of other players as well or possibly better. I don't think they will pick Jackson, but I am not close enough to know squat, other than going by my own hunches from listening\reading\watching information on the players in the draft. I guess we will see next thursday.


----------



## Leroy131 (Mar 11, 2004)

I agree with KMurph, I doubt anyone puts a lot of stock into the endless amount of noise being produced in the days leading up to the draft by GMs, coaches, scouts, etc. Nobody's going to take what they say at face-value anyway. I don't really buy into the "smokescreen" theory. Just for the sake of argument, if Cleveland knew for a FACT that the Blazers were enamored with and had every intention of taking Kirk Snyder if available, does that give them any more inclination to draft him? No, they do their own scouting and they're going to take the player THEY like the best. If you assemble your draft board taking into account every comment by a GM and applying the proper psychology and reverse-psychology, you're going to be in a lot of trouble...


----------



## CrGiants (Dec 4, 2003)

Leroy, if you'd notice, I made full mention that the majority of what we hear is complete BS and even the stuff that is truthful is hard to sort from the BS. 

(Try reading the previous comment: Seventy-percent of what GM's and coaches say about rumors and drafts are BS. And so much BSing occurs that sorting out reality of what will happen is hard to find.)

Second, never called it a smokescreen. Just questioned it, hence the question mark. 

As I've already said, I don't know what I'd believe, but I certainly wouldn't count out Jackson as a possible pick at #13. That's all I've been trying to say. Several people have been writing him off at 13. I'm just saying I wouldn't be surprised, and, as I've said before, he wouldn't be my first choice. 

However, look at what he presents. He is a safe pick, someone ready to step in and contribute in some capacity almost immediately; he's from the area; he's a clean-cut, classy, respectful person; he's very intelligent. 

Face it, he may very well be Portland's safest and best option from all aspects. But if we're going for talent/potential, as we've done in the past, the SAFEST option is not the one you choose, and we therefore you go for what some might call a high-risk/high-reward type of a guy.

I feel like half of what I'm saying you guys are regurgitating in your own words and the other half you're construing to find a meaning I did not intend.

On a different tip, anyone else find it interesting that Cheeks is in the media pimping Telfair? First an "alleged" promise, now a former quality PG, our coach, talking about how great it'd be to pick up a guy like Telfair?


----------



## Leroy131 (Mar 11, 2004)

I guess I wasn't trying to refute what you were saying, I was just giving my own meandering opinion on the topic. Looking back now, it's not that obvious to me the exact point you were trying to make, but like I said, I doubt Nash has an agenda to influence a player's stock by the comments he makes to the media. I don't think you can read a lot into what a GM/coach/team official is or isn't saying about a player right now, whether it's good, lukewarm, or nothing at all...


----------



## Kmurph (May 7, 2003)

> On a different tip, anyone else find it interesting that Cheeks is in the media pimping Telfair? First an "alleged" promise, now a former quality PG, our coach, talking about how great it'd be to pick up a guy like Telfair?


Yeah it is interesting, but what does it mean? Anything?

I am not sure if it means anything, I think Cheeks likes Telfair, but that it doesn't necessarily mean we will draft him.


----------



## CrGiants (Dec 4, 2003)

Yeah it is interesting, but what does it mean? Anything?

I am not sure if it means anything, I think Cheeks likes Telfair, but that it doesn't necessarily mean we will draft him.

I agree, I'm not sure that it means anything. I guess we'll see in six days. But it certainly is interesting, if for no other reason than at times it seems Cheeks has little input as to the players on his roster, and perhaps picking Telfair would indicate otherwise, or that management really is very high on Telfair.


----------

