# If you could trade rosters...



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

If you could trade rosters with any franchise in the NBA... keep the owner the same, the city the same, but just swap players (including contracts), which teams would you NOT swap with? I don't think, unfortunately, that there are very many.

Clearly worse:

*New Orleans:* Worst combo of potential and current talent.

*Atlanta:* A couple good young players, but all their potential seems to be focused on the swing position.

Barely worse:

*Charlotte:* I don't see Okafor as a franchise player, and while I like Brezec and (to a lesser extent) Gerald Wallace, I like Portland's youth better.

*Milwaukee:* Michael Redd, Desmon Mason and... who? It's unbelievable they win as many games as they do, and that very well might be a testament to Terry Porter as a coach.

*New York:* I actually liked the Marbury acquisition a lot, but Thomas has followed it up with a bunch of weird moves. Crawford and Ariza are good pieces, but considering contracts I prefer the state of Portland's roster.

*Toronto:* Gotta love Bosh, but the rest of the team looks pedestrian long-term. They wasted a lottery pick on Arujo and I have no confidence they'll wisely use the picks they got for Carter.

Barely better:

*Utah:* Boozer and Zach are about the same, with a slight edge to Zach maybe. AK-47 is the best prospect between the two teams, and Okur's the best center. Portland's got more good player/prospects, but I'd swap with Utah if I could.

Clearly better:

Everyone else.

The Warriors look like a potentially fantastic team. Watching their young big guys coming off the bench tonight rebounding and running the floor it made me very jealous.

The Clippers aren't head-and-shoulders above the Blazers, but Brand is better than Zach and I think that Livingston will be better than Telfair... Maggette pushes the Clippers over the top.

The Nets have an aging but dangerous Kidd, a star (maybe a superstar) in Carter and Richard Jefferson backing those two up. Throw in Krstic as a top prospect and the Nets might never challenge for a title, but they've got a lot of nice pieces.

What does everyone else think?

Ed O.


----------



## RP McMurphy (Jul 17, 2003)

Good thread Ed. I guess your point is probably that people shouldn't get too excited about Portland's "youth movement," because other teams have young players too, and there's no reason to believe that Portland's young players will take them any further than the rest of these teams.

The outlook of teams like Milwaukee, Charlotte, Atlanta, New Orleans and the Clippers depends a lot on what they do with their cap room this summer. As of right now Portland is better off than all those teams except the Clippers. Some of these teams probably will end up with a bunch of nothing in free agency, but if Milwaukee or Charlotte is able to sign Joe Johnson or Larry Hughes, I like their roster better than Portland's.

I think Toronto's roster is better than Portland's, but Utah's is worse. The Jazz have sucked even when healthy and I don't think they have any players with a lot of upside. Kris Humphries and Kirk Snyder look like busts so far. The Jazz looked great in the first five games of the year, and you never know, they might all of a sudden become good again next year, but I highly doubt that will happen.

Toronto has one guy in Chris Bosh who I'm sure will be a perennial All-Star, and I'd take that over a team like Portland with a bunch of okay prospects. Just because they wasted one lottery pick doesn't mean they'll waste every pick they make, and you said not to include a team's GM in this discussion, anyway. If Bosh improves a lot next year, that team is a defensive stopper away from making the playoffs.

Philadelphia is in pretty bad shape too. They are a below average team with almost no hope of getting better in the next few years.


----------



## Scout226 (Sep 17, 2003)

Here's my list of teams I would NOT trade for:

NY- About the same reasons as Ed gave

Toronto- To me it's obvious

New Jersey- Yes, they're better than us, but in two years I don't think they will be. An aging Kidd and although Carter is playing well now, he's a gamble.

Philly- I like some of their guys, but I just don't like most of the pieces to their team

Milwaukee- Redd could bolt and then they have......uh... yeah.. 

Atlanta- 'nough said

Charlotte- 'nough said

Utah- Outside of AK and Boozer, they don't have much IMO. I'm also not sold on Okur.

Minny- I'd love to have KG, but their in a mess with Sam-I-Am and Spree

Lakers- Yeah, Kobe is a superstar and Odom is solid, but I don't like the team. Kobe has a funny way of running people out of town.

GSW- They were looking good last night, especially their back court, but I still wouldn't. I'm just not sold on huge contracts with injured players like Davis.

Memphis- I wouldn't trade the team just for Gasol.

NO- 'nough said

Some teams that are a toss-up to me:

Orlando
Washington
Sacramento
Clippers


----------



## white360 (Apr 24, 2004)

My llist would contain all nba teams.
Portland has a great lineup of players, I just don't think thay have had the right kond of coach. Give a coach like Phil Jackson a couple of years, and we would have a great team.


----------



## e_blazer1 (Feb 3, 2004)

IMO, this isn't a fair time to be asking this question. The time to ask it will be after this summer. The Blazers are at a point where several of their major players' contracts are ending. NVE's contract is major trade bait and there's a significant chance that they do a major S&T as well with either Damon or SAR. There's also the prospect of a top-5 draft pick this season to bring in a player with plenty of upside. Add to that the fact that they have pieces in Ruben Patterson and Theo Ratliff who don't really fit into Portland's future, but will be of interest to other teams around the league, and there's plenty of opportunity to make another trade that doesn't add to the team salary. I'm very Bullish on the Blazers' future. I think there will be 3-4 significant new players on the Blazers' roster next fall. That's the point at which we should discuss whether we'd want to trade rosters with other teams around the league.

The Blazers will be significantly better next season and they will have a new coach to guide the team's development. There's plenty of reason to be Bullish on the Blazers right now.


----------



## mook (Dec 31, 2002)

it's tough for me to say because we have so many darned "potential" players. the homer in me thinks Miles, Outlaw, Randolph and Telfair stand at least a small chance of being top 5 NBA players at their position. they're all so young, you just don't know what could happen. and we have a decent lottery pick coming up too. 

if one of them transitions into an elite player, things won't look nearly so grim in a year or two. 

but then I guess I sound like just about every diehard fan of an incredibly bad team.


----------



## white360 (Apr 24, 2004)

theWanker said:


> it's tough for me to say because we have so many darned "potential" players. the homer in me thinks Miles, Outlaw, Randolph and Telfair stand at least a small chance of being top 5 NBA players at their position.


Agree with all of them, but not Miles.


Edit: fix quote code


----------



## STOMP (Jan 1, 2003)

Ed O said:


> The Warriors look like a potentially fantastic team. Watching their young big guys coming off the bench tonight rebounding and running the floor it made me very jealous.


Andris Biedrins is looking really good eh? Just going off of the pre-draft hype, I really wanted Nash to somehow maneuver up to get the 6-10 4/5. Defensive minded, athletic, well coordinated, and he doesn't turn 19 until next month. I was suprised that Pheonix gave up on Cabarkapa as he seems like a well coorinated athletic big as well. Just curious, has your opinion on Foyal changed since last summer? Since they dealt off Dale and Cliffy, AF has been doing a real nice job rebounding and blocking shots IMO. 

Anyways the W's... Mullin and Co has largely bet their future on Baron staying healthy, but if he does I think they've a very bright future. Why Nash wasn't interested in him is a real headscratcher for me.

STOMP


----------



## meru (Jul 2, 2003)

Teams I'd be DAMN tempted to change rosters with:

Chicago: I'm not sold on Eddie Curry, but I love Deng, Hinrich and Gordon, they're VERY young, and they're already in the playoffs.

Phoenix: If only because they play such a fun brand of bball. And they've recently shown they can do it even without Nash, which they'll need to, as he's fragile and over 30. (But Nash is one of my fave players as a person, too. Both his parents are English, you know [or at least, they used to be].)

Washington: Hughes being a free agent is a bummer, but again, young, exciting guards, good style of play. Kwame Brown can go blow, and I'm not a huge Jamison fan, but Etan Thomas is another I'm-a-fan-of-the-person player (he's a poet, y'know).

I would've said Denver and Utah at the beginning of the season, and I still love Kirilenko, but I'm REALLY turned off Carmelo.

I guess that there are so few, when there should be so many, shows the force of my sentimental attachment to Portland. Ask fans of ANY other team if they'd swap rosters with Portland, and I doubt anyone outside of maybe New York would do it. Even Atlanta have the two Joshes to look forward to.


----------



## RedHot&Rolling (Jun 26, 2004)

e_blazer1 said:


> IMO, this isn't a fair time to be asking this question. The time to ask it will be after this summer. ........
> 
> The Blazers will be significantly better next season and they will have a new coach to guide the team's development. There's plenty of reason to be Bullish on the Blazers right now.


Although I agree with your point of view, I think the Blazers will NOT be any better next year, than what we've had this season. We probably won't be the worst team in the league - but .500 will be a longshot.

But I like what they've decided to do. Develop some young players, see what we've got and play better ball. I have been in the POST-DAMON camp for a few years now - although he had his best year EVER last season IMHO. I am eager for a change in our Guard-corps. I like what I see from Telfair - but the SG is still a mystery. I don't know if I've seen Frahm hit a shot this season when I've been watching.

Outlaw seems to be the one youngster really seizing the moment right now. I hope they keep him. Otherwise, I hope Nash can do something. This season has obviously been a huge dissappointment.


----------



## STOMP (Jan 1, 2003)

RedHot&Rolling said:


> This season has obviously been a huge dissappointment.


the only huge disappointment for me has been with Nash's failures at turning his expiring deals/various assets into a valuble piece for the future. Given the lack of personel moves, I don't think the on court results have been surprising at all. What talent the team does have is pretty young and not very complimentry (IMO). It was apparent going in (to me anyways) that this would be another season of transition. The guards looked especially weak from the outset and it's hard to win with bad guards.

It's entirely possible that Nash has played his cards close to perfectly. Maybe he aced the draft and maybe he was right not doing the deals he was offered... I have my doubts on this, but time will tell. 

STOMP


----------



## Iwatas (Aug 3, 2003)

I guess I am just too much of a homer, but I wouldn't trade our squad for any other. This is NOT because the Blazers are a good team, but because the resulting team would not be *our* Trailblazers.

I want the team to win. I am very happy with Trade-Bob kinds of moves. But I have too much emotional investment in even the poor players we have to swap them en masse, and keep any kind of affiliation to the Blazers. And it would take several years of a new roster before I got behind it -- and by then it would not be the same team we swapped for.

So I'll root for the young guys to get better, I'll root for a great lottery pick, and I'll root for some brilliant trades. But I have gotten attached to even players like Telfair, Zach, Pryz, etc. I hope they reach their potential.


----------



## RedHot&Rolling (Jun 26, 2004)

STOMP said:


> the only huge disappointment for me has been with Nash's failures at turning his expiring deals/various assets into a valuble piece for the future. Given the lack of personel moves, I don't think the on court results have been surprising at all. What talent the team does have is pretty young and not very complimentry (IMO). It was apparent going in (to me anyways) that this would be another season of transition. The guards looked especially weak from the outset and it's hard to win with bad guards.
> 
> It's entirely possible that Nash has played his cards close to perfectly. Maybe he aced the draft and maybe he was right not doing the deals he was offered... I have my doubts on this, but time will tell.
> 
> STOMP


Well said. I especially agree with the part about Nash turning expiring deals into SOMETHING!! So far - though - nothing.


----------



## Kmurph (May 7, 2003)

At this point, who can say? I don't think Utah is a better team than POR is today...

But I would say the two are close in comparison....

It will be REAL interesting to see who drafted better b\t the two teams....LAST Year and THIS year, ss these two teams have a a lot of similarities. 

They both are on the decline and rebuilding....
They both had LONG consecutive playoff streaks snapped.... 
They both just signed a young player (Kirilenko\Zach) to a MAX level deal....
They both have cap locked themselves with questionable signings (Boozer\Okur and Miles\Theo)....
They both have players (Boozer - Miles/Zach) whom several members of the media and fans are at odds with....
They both have had several draft picks recently (04' & 05') to rebuild from.....
They both had late lottery picks last year (UTA 14 & 16 - POR 13 -22 & 23) near each other and now each has a (potentially) Top 5 draft pick this year.....

I think it will be really interesting to see which of these two teams rises above the other.

Who will\has drafted better?

Utah w\ Snyder & Humphries and ???? (05' lotto pick)

or Portland w\ Telfair, Khryapa, Monia and ???? (05' lotto pick)

IMO the players selected on 04' & 05' will have a large say in determining each franchises future.

Whose FA signings were better?

UTA w\ Boozer & Okur
or
POR w\ Miles & Theo (in essence)

Whose designated "Franchise" player will be better long term?

The "oft injured\offensively passive" Kirilenko?
The hardworking, and much maligned "ballhog\lazy defender" Zach?

(Niether are worth their contracts IMO)

I think POR is better now, but if POR loses SAR, NVE & Damon ALL next year (VERY likely) and recieves very little in return, or worse...nothing, then I don't see how they will be better than Utah. Unless, POR hits the jackpot on draft day (If there even is such a player in this year's draft) ....

And that is the funny thing about the NBA, one player can significantly improve your franchise. Nash (or whoever the GM is) has a CRITICAL task this year for POR. Can they get something for SAR (for sure), NVE (they better) and Damon? Can they SUCCESSFULLY draft with a TOP 5 pick, when the stakes are OH so much higher? The answer to those questions IMO, will go along ways in determining if POR is better than UTA next year, and how "bright" POR future really is.

I think many of the draft prognosticators declared Utah's draft a success and POR a failure. I wonder if many of them would say the same now? But more important IMO, is who is going to be smiling wider 3 years from now? 

Regarding GS, I agree with Stomp....Their future in large extent rests on Baron Davis regaining his form, and shedding his "oft-injured" ways. They have had several of these young players (Dunleavy, Richardson, Murphy, Foyle) for awhile now and sucked. The improvment of Pietrus, Biedrins, Cabarcapka (how did they steal this kid?), R.White and Tskitishvilli (Can you say A LOT of young potential?) will have a lot to do with how far up they go. But I'd be quite happy with their roster today.

AND they will in all llikelyhood ADD a Top 6 pick this year to that stable of young talent(I have to believe they will pass POR down the stretch...UTA passing POR is a another matter) ...

Yikes...

I'd say GS future looks VERY bright. POR future? Cloudy at present......


----------



## Buck Williams (May 16, 2004)

Maybe an unpopuler opinion but here it goes

Detroit - Rasheed wallace is a cancer period.


----------



## Buck Williams (May 16, 2004)

Also i think Denver will come down to earth soon and relize carmelo is overrated as hell and kmart is a no talent steroid monkey and will get caught


----------



## HOWIE (Dec 30, 2002)

Blazerben4 said:


> Also i think Denver will come down to earth soon and relize carmelo is overrated as hell and kmart is a no talent steroid monkey and will get caught



So Blazerben4 tell us how you really feel! :biggrin: 

The teams that I wouldn't trade rosters with would be the following:
Atlanta, um Atlanta, oh and New Orleans, and um....oh did I mention Atlanta? :biggrin: 

Gee, I really need to think about that......but teams that I would trade for would be Phoenix, Detroit and Miami.....but maybe not in that order.


----------



## MARIS61 (Apr 28, 2003)

None.

I like the young guys we have and we just may as well fill in the blanks with a couple more young guys at this point.

I love the high flying high scoring type of game we had with Kersey and Co. and I'm hoping for that style of team. I think we have better athletes this time around.

If only we could land the perfect coach for them. I think he's going to relatively new to the NBA, which is a risk. But there are no experienced coaches that I feel would be right for these guys.


----------



## CanJohno (Feb 11, 2005)

Iwatas said:


> I guess I am just too much of a homer, but I wouldn't trade our squad for any other. This is NOT because the Blazers are a good team, but because the resulting team would not be *our* Trailblazers.
> 
> I want the team to win. I am very happy with Trade-Bob kinds of moves. But I have too much emotional investment in even the poor players we have to swap them en masse, and keep any kind of affiliation to the Blazers. And it would take several years of a new roster before I got behind it -- and by then it would not be the same team we swapped for.
> 
> So I'll root for the young guys to get better, I'll root for a great lottery pick, and I'll root for some brilliant trades. But I have gotten attached to even players like Telfair, Zach, Pryz, etc. I hope they reach their potential.







MARIS61 said:


> None.
> 
> I like the young guys we have and we just may as well fill in the blanks with a couple more young guys at this point.
> 
> ...



:clap: 

I'd post my own, original, response... but the two of you already laid out, exactly, how I feel about the question! Well said! :cheers:


----------



## STOMP (Jan 1, 2003)

I root for the team more then the players, so I'm sure that I could get used to rooting for a new set of guys if Portland were to do a swap with another team's roster. That said, if somehow I was put in the position to do a switcharoo, I'd ask for a year extention. Ha and Telfair are just babes in the league tuning up their bodies for the first time through diet and working out properly... look how much it's benefited Travis having a year of focusing on hoops under his belt. Though he's been a pro for a few years in Russia, Vic is probably limited by his foot injury and lack of conditioning, and I've really no idea what Monia and (my big hope) Sinanovic will bring to the table next year. There is a pretty good chance Portland will be adding a couple more decent talents via the draft and a trade (or two) as well.

Basically I'd like to get a better idea of just how green my own lawn can be before I get too worked up over whats on the other side of the fence. Given the amount of unknowns on this club, I'm not even sure what the main needs will be with the future mix. I'd probably like to see a 4/5 defensive banger added, and a slick combo guard would be nice, but those players might be added this offseason. To me the biggest question is the same as it's been... Zach or SAR... and what can be had for each.

STOMP


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

STOMP said:


> Basically I'd like to get a better idea of just how green my own lawn can be before I get too worked up over whats on the other side of the fence. Given the amount of unknowns on this club, I'm not even sure what the main needs will be with the future mix. I'd probably like to see a 4/5 defensive banger added, and a slick combo guard would be nice, but those players might be added this offseason. To me the biggest question is the same as it's been... Zach or SAR... and what can be had for each.
> 
> STOMP


and the grass isn't always greener on the other side of the fence.


----------



## meru (Jul 2, 2003)

Now I've thought about it some more, my commitment to the current Blazers isn't really THAT strong. I'd switch rosters with:

San Antonio: Duncan for the wins, Parker and Ginobili to make it fun to watch.

Houston: sure they're old, but Yao and McGrady aren't, and they're the magnets to attract the older players wanting wins.

Cleveland: they're not great, but they have James. And he's, if not the best player in the league this year, probably next year, and certainly for many years to come.

I guess if I was convinced Telfair is going to lead us to the promised land...
But the BEST CASE SCENARIO comparison for Telfair is Isiah Thomas, and I really don't think Telfair has that evil streak. I think he's going to be a Kenny Anderson (the last super-quick, super-slight NY phenomenon) which ain't all that. I like teams that don't depend on a stereotypical PG - like the Porter/Clyde Blazers (or, essentially, every team that's won the title in living memory - even Isiah wasn't a stereotypical PG).

There are certainly many players in this league I'd give up any current Blazer to get, and that didn't use to be the case.


----------



## meru (Jul 2, 2003)

STOMP said:


> (my big hope) Sinanovic


Have we Blazer fans fallen *that* low?

(My big hope currently is Bogut.)


----------



## STOMP (Jan 1, 2003)

meru said:


> Have we Blazer fans fallen *that* low?
> 
> (My big hope currently is Bogut.)


My hopes for Sinanovic have been pretty high all along, as I believe superior size and athletism are valuble assets for a big man... a defensive minded 7'3 athlete doesn't perk your interest??? Add on the glowing reports from Nash and Cheeks on his skill developement, and I'm very interested to see what big Ned has next year. 

STOMP


----------



## hobojoe (Jun 20, 2003)

I'm on the fence with Utah's roster. Boozer's not that great (neither is Randolph in comparison), Kirilenko is the best player now and the best prospect between both teams. Telfair has at least shown flashes of being good this year, Snyder is a bust and Humphries hasn't shown much. I do think Humphries will eventually be a serviceable player for the Jazz (if they keep him), but Snyder looks like a wasted pick to me right now. I'd say Utah and Portland have about equally poor talent on their rosters.


----------



## BlayZa (Dec 31, 2002)

how could anyone not want to swap with Phoenix?

we are 17 games under .500 , they are 32 games over .500

i know people love our young guys but cmon - this team isnt good and it will in all likelyhood be worse next year. 

currently we have the 6th worst record in the league and we could get overtaken by golden state and utah possibly ending up with the 4th worst record - realistically that places us with a pick anywhere between 3-8 , bogut will not be there.

nbadraft.net currently has us with the 6th pick taking chris taft - i liked his bio lol , compared to Chris Wilcox... sounds more like a slower bigger darius miles after reading that. potential plus but as yet hasnt shown it and is passive. sigh i hope we dont go down this road again.

im liking the intl players though , that brazillian kid Splitter sounds interesting - currently 7th pick


----------



## NBAGOD (Aug 26, 2004)

This is an excellent thread.

Tough question, but realistically most teams have young players that may or may not develop into contributors....Portland's youngsters are probably further away than most team's younguns. Throw in no cap space in the near future, quality veterans on their way out and bad contracts for Theo, Zach and Darius and I'd say Portland is easily in the bottom third of the league in terms of future prospects. I'm not going to compare them to every team, but I think 2/3 to 3/4 of the league is in better shape going forward.


----------



## Fork (Jan 2, 2003)

STOMP said:


> My hopes for Sinanovic have been pretty high all along, as I believe superior size and athletism are valuble assets for a big man... a defensive minded 7'3 athlete doesn't perk your interest??? Add on the glowing reports from Nash and Cheeks on his skill developement, and I'm very interested to see what big Ned has next year.
> 
> STOMP


I think it's a pretty good indicator of Sinanovic's potential that the Blazers brought Ha over early, but not Sinanovic. 

If he really was that good, wouldn't we have brought him over this year? 

And he's not exactly dominating in Belgium this year. 14.2 minutes per game, 4.7 points and 4.7 rebounds. He's already 22 years old and he's not that impressive. That league is like Junior college level here.


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

Fork said:


> I think it's a pretty good indicator of Sinanovic's potential that the Blazers brought Ha over early, but not Sinanovic.
> 
> If he really was that good, wouldn't we have brought him over this year?
> 
> And he's not exactly dominating in Belgium this year. 14.2 minutes per game, 4.7 points and 4.7 rebounds. He's already 22 years old and he's not that impressive. That league is like Junior college level here.


I think Nedders is 21 still.

Also, I think he wasn't brought in because he had a contract with another team. Ha didn't.


----------



## LuckyAC (Aug 12, 2004)

Ed O's list is pretty close to mine, but I would tradre for Toronto's. Bosh is obviously the best prospect, and one superstar is always far more valuable than a group of solid players.


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

LuckyAC said:


> Ed O's list is pretty close to mine, but I would tradre for Toronto's. Bosh is obviously the best prospect, and one superstar is always far more valuable than a group of solid players.


so says Detroit over LA...


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

Hap said:


> so says Detroit over LA...


Detroit won one title. The Lakers won three.

I think that the Lakers would take their three titles any day.

Ed O.


----------



## LuckyAC (Aug 12, 2004)

Also the point is this is for building a team, not having a finished one. When you have one superstar, it's much easier to surround him with more talent to build a contender than it is with a few solid or even good players.


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

Yeah... to clarify, it's clear that a better team can always beat an inferior team, and inferior teams often have a superstar.

But if you start from scratch, you get a superstar first and seek to add other players to complement him as possible... that's easier to do and win with than finding just the right mix of non-superstar players.

Ed O.


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

Ed O said:


> Detroit won one title. The Lakers won three.
> 
> I think that the Lakers would take their three titles any day.
> 
> Ed O.


LA won 3 titles because of their role players (Horry, Fox, Fisher) as much as Shaq and Kobe. 

And I wouldn't say that Bosh is there just yet.


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

Hap said:


> LA won 3 titles because of their role players (Horry, Fox, Fisher) as much as Shaq and Kobe.


The completed the team, but the NBA is filled with guys like those three. The reason they won was because of Shaq and Kobe.



> And I wouldn't say that Bosh is there just yet.


Well, THIS I totally agree with.

Ed O.


----------



## MAS RipCity (Feb 22, 2003)

Ugh, Toronto's team..no thanks. yes they have Bosh, but who else? They blew their lotto pick last year on Areujo.


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

Ed O said:


> The completed the team, but the NBA is filled with guys like those three. The reason they won was because of Shaq and Kobe.


shaq and kobe were good last year. Who wasn't? Their role players.

having stars is great. But so is having role players. 



> Well, THIS I totally agree with.
> Ed O.


we're not supposed to agree Ed..it's againt the bi-laws.


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

Hap said:


> shaq and kobe were good last year. Who wasn't? Their role players.


Exactly. And the team made the Finals and was one of the top 2 or 3 teams in the NBA.

If Shaq and Kobe had been bad, and the role players good, they would have missed the playoffs.



> having stars is great. But so is having role players.


Having stars is great. Having role players is less than great. Important, but not great.

Ed O.


----------



## STOMP (Jan 1, 2003)

Fork said:


> I think it's a pretty good indicator of Sinanovic's potential that the Blazers brought Ha over early, but not Sinanovic.
> 
> If he really was that good, wouldn't we have brought him over this year?
> 
> And he's not exactly dominating in Belgium this year. 14.2 minutes per game, 4.7 points and 4.7 rebounds. He's already 22 years old and he's not that impressive. That league is like Junior college level here.


From Nash's comment that he's "made tremendous progress" overseas, I think it's very likely that he'll be here next year. Why let him stay overseas to hone his skills in a game he's never played before? Seems pretty obvious to me... why use up another roster spot on someone who is no where close to being ready to contribute? Unlike Ha, he didn't grow up with the game so everything is new...why compound the challege of learning hoops by plunging him into a whole new culture where no one speaks his language? Also why use up the cheap/rookie deal years of his career when he's working on basic fundamentals... whats the rush? 

I'm not sure why you're pointing out his lack of minutes over there as I'm sure you're aware that most talented young guys (like Monia for instance) rarely get to play ahead of the older vets. I'm also not sure why you didn't list his most impressive stat, blocked shots. Supposively he's put on some muscle since Portland drafted him and is up over 250. He turns 22 next friday.

With Ratliff fading and the good chance that Joel will be gonzo after next season, we may be seeing a lot of Ned and Ha in the not so distant future.

STOMP


----------



## Fork (Jan 2, 2003)

STOMP said:


> I'm not sure why you're pointing out his lack of minutes over there as I'm sure you're aware that most talented young guys (like Monia for instance) rarely get to play ahead of the older vets. I'm also not sure why you didn't list his most impressive stat, blocked shots. Supposively he's put on some muscle since Portland drafted him and is up over 250. He turns 22 next friday.
> 
> With Ratliff fading and the good chance that Joel will be gonzo after next season, we may be seeing a lot of Ned and Ha in the not so distant future.
> 
> STOMP


Maybe. I hope he works out for us and I admit I haven't heard John Nash's comments. But the reason I think his lack of PT is important is that he's not playing for CSKA Moscow, probably one of the top three teams outside the NBA, he's playing for a crap team in a crap league and he STILL can't get minutes. BTW, he isn't playing behind some 32 year old veteran from Europe, he's behind Marcus Douthit, who's only 2 years older than Nedzad. I think that is pretty important. 

And 1.2 blocks in 14 minutes per game is nice, not spectacular by any means. Blocks are nice, but considering he is averaging about 10 personal fouls per 48 minutes, I doubt he'd last long enough in a game to make an impact. 

I hope he does. The more center prospects the better. But at 22 years old, I think he should be farther along than he seems to be.


----------



## STOMP (Jan 1, 2003)

Fork said:


> Maybe. I hope he works out for us and I admit I haven't heard John Nash's comments. But the reason I think his lack of PT is important is that he's not playing for CSKA Moscow, probably one of the top three teams outside the NBA, he's playing for a crap team in a crap league and he STILL can't get minutes. BTW, he isn't playing behind some 32 year old veteran from Europe, he's behind Marcus Douthit, who's only 2 years older than Nedzad. I think that is pretty important.
> 
> And 1.2 blocks in 14 minutes per game is nice, not spectacular by any means. Blocks are nice, but considering he is averaging about 10 personal fouls per 48 minutes, I doubt he'd last long enough in a game to make an impact.
> 
> I hope he does. The more center prospects the better. But at 22 years old, I think he should be farther along than he seems to be.


As it's been pointed out to you several times now Ned is 21. All of his stats this past year have been accomplished by a 21 year old in only his 2nd year of organized hoops.

I find it pretty disingenuous the way you keep erring on the numbers you list to favor your argument. Marcus Douthit is 2 years and 350 days older then Sinanovic, yet you say he's only 2 years older  Douthit benefited from growing up playing hoops his whole life. He played in the Big East at Providence, and was such a scrub that he was drafted in the 2nd round by the Lakers. 

http://www.nba.com/draft2004/profiles/MarcusDouthit.html

I'm looking forward to seeing what Big Ned's got. I expect him to be very rough next season, but I hope/expect to see some real promise of a potencial diamond down the road. Thats what the professionals who judge talent for my favorite team have led me to believe.

STOMP


----------



## Fork (Jan 2, 2003)

STOMP said:


> As it's been pointed out to you several times now Ned is 21. All of his stats this past year have been accomplished by a 21 year old in only his 2nd year of organized hoops.


Since you're insinuating that I'm stupid, I won't do the math for you, since I clearly can't be counted on, but this:

Nedzad SINANOVIC

Numéro : 15
Position : 5
*Né le : 29/01/1983*
Taille : 2,20 m
Nationalité : Bosnie
Clubs précédents : Néant

Indicates to me that he's 22. Do you disagree? 

http://www.rbcverviers-pepinster.be/saison04-05/joueurs/sinanovic.php


----------



## STOMP (Jan 1, 2003)

I was wrong. I thought Ned was born on April 1st 1983... turns out he was born July 1st 1983 so he's 3 months younger then I thought. So if this date is to be believed, he's still 21.

http://nbadraft.net/profiles/nedzadsinanovic.asp

I know you're not stupid... you're actually one of my favorite posters. Looks like we have sites with different info. 

STOMP


----------



## Fork (Jan 2, 2003)

STOMP said:


> I was wrong. I thought Ned was born on April 1st 1983... turns out he was born July 1st 1983 so he's 3 months younger then I thought. So if this date is to be believed, he's still 21.
> 
> http://nbadraft.net/profiles/nedzadsinanovic.asp
> 
> ...


Yeah, the Euros are notoriously bad about getting dates right. I don't know what the real number is, I was going by the one I had seen most recently.

Either way, he could develop into a nice player. I hope he does.


----------



## MAS RipCity (Feb 22, 2003)

To answer the original question, I wouldn't deal rosters with anyone. I have gornw accustomed to these guys and am attached to most of them. It wouldn't be the same if we had a different teams roster.


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

MAS RipCity said:


> t wouldn't be the same if we had a different teams roster.


That's a good thing. This might be the worst Blazers team in 20+ years.

I'm sure that you, and almost everyone here, could become attached to new players. In any case, you're going to HAVE to, because many of the guys that are on the roster right now won't be here in another year or two.

Ed O.


----------



## MAS RipCity (Feb 22, 2003)

So Viktor,Sebastian,Travis,Zach,Sergei,Darius,Theo, and Joel ALL will be gone in a a year or two?


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

I'm sorry but some of the Blazer fans on this board, make every single prospect in the organization seem like the best thing since sliced bread.....

I'm not trying to be a downer, it would be great if Ha and Nedzad turned out to be "diamond in the rough" all-star calibur players but the likelyhood of that happening is slim to none....You have to remember these our are late second round picks and are MAJOR projects.....Ha scored 9 points and grabbed 9 rebounds in a game...Big whoop! The ABA is predominatly made up of division 3 college players.....

I mean I hope I'm wrong, but I just dont see it being very likely at all that these Blazers prospects ever become anything in this league....In my eyes these two guys are equivelant to Jason Jennings, Ruben Boumtje Boumtje or Petur Gudmundsson....


----------



## barfo (Jan 2, 2003)

zagsfan20 said:


> I'm sorry but some of the Blazer fans on this board, make every single prospect in the organization seem like the best thing since sliced bread.....


Sorta like you and that Morrison guy?



> I mean I hope I'm wrong, but I just dont see it being very likely at all that these Blazers prospects ever become anything in this league....In my eyes these two guys are equivelant to Jason Jennings, Ruben Boumtje Boumtje or Petur Gudmundsson....


We can only hope that our draft picks turn out anywhere close to the sublime perfection that is Jason Jennings. If we could start five Jason Jennings, we'd surely go undefeated and likely the opposing teams would never score at all.

barfo


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

> Sorta like you and that Morrison guy?


Except for the fact that Morrison is an elite college player and Ha and Nedzad are 7 foot blobs who havent done anything on any level....


----------



## barfo (Jan 2, 2003)

zagsfan20 said:


> Except for the fact that Morrison is an elite college player and Ha and Nedzad are 7 foot blobs who havent done anything on any level....


If Morrison stays in school long enough, will he learn to be 7 ft tall?

barfo

Edit: I actually agree with your point that we are putting too much hope into Ha and Nedzad - we've been through this center project process LOTS of times over the past few years, and so far it has resulted in a whole lot of nothing. No particular reason to believe either of these guys is going to be different.


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

barfo said:


> If Morrison stays in school long enough, will he learn to be 7 ft tall?
> 
> barfo


Just because Ha and Nedzad are 7 ft, does that ever mean they'll learn to good?


----------



## barfo (Jan 2, 2003)

zagsfan20 said:


> Just because your 7 foot tall that makes you a good player? Gimme a break, now your comparing two 7 foot second round blobs to one of the greatest players in college basketball.......


No to your question, and no to your statement, and no to your assertion 

I would not describe Ha or Nedzad as good right now. Maybe someday, maybe not.

I wasn't comparing them to Mr. Morrison, other than in height. I believe I am correct in stating that Morrison is the shortest of the three.

barfo


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

delete


----------



## STOMP (Jan 1, 2003)

zagsfan20 said:


> I'm sorry but some of the Blazer fans on this board, make every single prospect in the organization seem like the best thing since sliced bread.....
> 
> I'm not trying to be a downer, it would be great if Ha and Nedzad turned out to be "diamond in the rough" all-star calibur players but the likelyhood of that happening is slim to none....


A downer? I wouldn't call you that, I just think you're consistently well off base... in this case, what mythical poster are you speaking about? I haven't noticed anyone else but me talking up Nedzad, and I haven't spoken much about _any_ of the other prospects, let alone portraiting _every single_ one as elite/diamond in the rough type prespects. Besides, I've only spoken of Ned having elite size and athletism (which he does)... I've also spoken of him probably being _"very rough"_ next year. I'm basing my hopes on Blazer management's comments over the past couple years... you should know this as you relayed the latest Nash quote about Sinanovic "making terrific progress overseas."

http://www.basketballboards.net/forum/showthread.php?t=142122&page=2&pp=15

So what if I'm excited about seeing the 21 (or 22?) year old, long limbed, 7'3 athlete who's making terrific progress in his skill developement according to Blazer management who has actually seen him play? Back when NS was drafted, he was said to be at least 2-3 years away from being ready to start his NBA career, but that the sky was the limit to his potencial. I'm happy to see that according to those whose opinions matter, he's on schedule. 

I'm looking forward to forming an opinion based on actually seeing him play next year.

STOMP


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

MAS RipCity said:


> So Viktor,Sebastian,Travis,Zach,Sergei,Darius,Theo, and Joel ALL will be gone in a a year or two?


No. I certainly didn't write that, so you either didn't read my post or you're trying to twist what I *did* write for some reason.

Ed O.


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

STOMP said:


> A downer? I wouldn't call you that, I just think you're consistently well off base... in this case, what mythical poster are you speaking about? I haven't noticed anyone else but me talking up Nedzad, and I haven't spoken much about _any_ of the other prospects, let alone portraiting _every single_ one as elite/diamond in the rough type prespects. Besides, I've only spoken of Ned having elite size and athletism (which he does)... I've also spoken of him probably being _"very rough"_ next year. I'm basing my hopes on Blazer management's comments over the past couple years... you should know this as you relayed the latest Nash quote about Sinanovic "making terrific progress overseas."
> 
> http://www.basketballboards.net/forum/showthread.php?t=142122&page=2&pp=15
> 
> ...



How many times have you seen Nedzad play?.....

I've noticed a trend that Nash always talk extremely highly of everyone of his draft picks.....

And I have seen quite a few people talking about Nedzad coming over and making an impact......Wishful thinking but I doubt its going to happen.....


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

zagsfan20 said:


> How many times have you seen Nedzad play?.....
> 
> I've noticed a trend that Nash always talk extremely highly of everyone of his draft picks.....


interesting, considering Nedzad *wasn't* one of his picks..


----------



## STOMP (Jan 1, 2003)

zagsfan20 said:


> How many times have you seen Nedzad play?.....


obviously zero times. Thats why I said..._"I'm looking forward to forming an opinion based on actually seeing him play next year."_... in the very paragraphs you quoted.



> I've noticed a trend that Nash always talk extremely highly of everyone of his draft picks.....


any of that talk unjustified IYO? Kryapa looks like he'll eventually be at least a legit NBA rotation player to me... Telfair does as well. Ha is years away, but big guys often take much longer to develope...at 18 I don't think he's a bust. Why shouldn't we put more trust in the guy who sees these young players daily then in your pessimistic stated view? 



> And I have seen quite a few people talking about Nedzad coming over and making an impact......Wishful thinking but I doubt its going to happen.....


Really? So those people (quite a few of them at that) must have been who you were refering to earlier when you got up on your high horse and blasted away at _"some posters"_ for being overly optimistic about _"every single prospect in the organization"_... sort of strange that you would choose to do that in this thread instead of in the one(s) where all those folks were popping off about Nedzad coming over and doing this and that. I guess randomly refering to past conversations without any context is just a facet of your posting style we (as readers) will have to get used to.

STOMP


----------



## STOMP (Jan 1, 2003)

Hap said:


> interesting, considering Nedzad *wasn't* one of his picks..


according to this article he was Nash's pick...

http://nbadraft.net/draftbuzz010.htm 

_"Perhaps one of the few scouts to even see Sinanovic was Portland Trailblazer International scout Chico Averbuck, "Nash told me to make the call. I'd seen this kid and I knew he had a lot of potential. Only time will tell if he has the stuff for the NBA"_

STOMP


----------



## Blazer Ringbearer (Jan 28, 2003)

Wasn't that the transition draft where we also got Outlaw? I thought Bob was still around for that draft to help out and I don't remember if Nash was actually hired yet...


Either way, it would be great if he even gets to legit NBA players status. One more asset to either keep or move for another player.


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

STOMP said:


> according to this article he was Nash's pick...
> 
> http://nbadraft.net/draftbuzz010.htm
> 
> ...


that was a poorly written piece too. I don't recall who it was, but someone politely pointed out here that Nash was actually hired *after* the 2003 draft. 
The 2003 Draft was in June, and Nash was hired in July.


----------



## Blazer Ringbearer (Jan 28, 2003)

zagsfan20 said:


> I've noticed a trend that Nash always talk extremely highly of everyone of his draft picks.....


Just for fun, I thought I'd look up Nash's 1st round draft history.

*Portland* 
Telfair (13)
Khryapa (22)
Monia (23)

*New Jersey*
Kenyon Martin (1)
Keith Van Horn (2) in a trade sending out Tim Thomas
Kerry Kittles (8) supposedly wanted Kobe but got overruled

*Washington*
Rasheed Wallace (4)
Juwan Howard (5)
Calbert Cheaney (6) - not the best but did acquire Chris Webber later
Tom Gugliotta (6)
Kenny Anderson (2)

He spent some time with the 76ers in the 80's as well. Was he responsible for drafting Barkley? If so, great pick at #4... remember who we got?

Some pretty good picks in here. I think his rep as a great talent evaluator is justified considering there aren't really any busts in this list. Cheaney is the closest, I suppose. But all of these guys (not the Portland babies yet) have been good-great NBA pros...


----------



## gambitnut (Jan 4, 2003)

Hap said:


> that was a poorly written piece too. I don't recall who it was, but someone politely pointed out here that Nash was actually hired *after* the 2003 draft.
> The 2003 Draft was in June, and Nash was hired in July.


I also remember seeing an article somewhere saying that Nash said that we had promised Outlaw our first round pick and he didn't feel like it was his place to break the promise, implying that he was in position to do so.


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

Hap said:


> that was a poorly written piece too. I don't recall who it was, but someone politely pointed out here that Nash was actually hired *after* the 2003 draft.
> The 2003 Draft was in June, and Nash was hired in July.


Patterson was there, but he wasn't stepping on toes. I think that the confusion is that Patterson afterwards said that he didn't feel comfortable overruling the decisions of people who'd been working the whole year on scouting.

Ed O.


----------



## ATLien (Jun 18, 2002)

IMO, New York has the worst roster for the future. They are in cap hell, for life. Marbury is a loser. And they don't really have any young talent you can pen as future all stars.


----------

