# So we are 5-9...whats your take so far as a Blazer fan?



## mixum (Mar 19, 2003)

Heres my thoughts thus far. Im happy they won 5 games since i didnt think they would win 5 all year. I feel we are a SG away from being decent and winning 30-37 games. With that said ,losing these close games like tonight vs the Wiz are tough to sit through when you see the blazers basically hand them the game because they cant score consistantly but thats rebuilding. The good news is, we are done with the longest road trip of our season and look like we are improving.

Heres a few things i like and i dont like thus far.

1. Zach and Miles have played well....and if they listen to Nate...thats a nice little tandem. Its even better if we resign Joel and get a qulaity SG.

2. Telfair is too inconsistant at the moment but shows some nice flashes every other game that could make him decent. Jack looked lost the last few games but will be a quality backup in the NBA.

3. Monia should not be starting.....its amazes we how little Webster plays and thats my biggest knock on Nate. Monia is not that good at all.

4. Outalw looks so lost out there its not funny. He does have a decent shot and good blocking ability but just doesnt seem to understand the game at all. I know hes young but even webster seems to have a better grip then Travis.

5. Love Nate....best thing to happen to the Blazers in years. If we had Cheeks...we would be 1-13!

6. Miles has done a nice job and is without a doubt the best all around player on thsi team.

7. Zach has comeback alot quicker then anyone thought but still sucks on defense.

8. Dixon is Damon part 2...less talented.

All in all im pleased and dissapointed because i feel we could have at least 3-4 more wins but maybe those will start coming in the next months. I think if someone told Blazer fans in October after some of those preseason nightmares....that we would be 5-9, all of us would have taken it pretty quick considering our schedule and looooooong road trip. So i ask my fellow blazer fans...are u content with the November start?

Nice job Blazers!


----------



## ProudBFan (Apr 29, 2003)

Solid post, mixum. And I can't say I disagree with any of your takes. 5-9 is one more loss / one fewer win than I would have liked to have seen coming off this 7-game roadie but hey, young team learning a new system and learning to play with each other... Sounds like a lot of excuses, but that's what I see... along with a lot of potential. They clearly have issues to address (like Telfair occasionally trying to do too much, finding a consistent SG to plug into the starting role, perimeter defense, and the whole 3rd quarter bugaboo), but I have confidence that they will. Lots of games left to play, and I didn't think they'd really start showing signs of improvement until the 2nd half of the season anyway.

Again, nice post, mixum. Nice to see the negatives aren't getting you down this time around.

PBF


----------



## SheedSoNasty (Dec 31, 2002)

Good post, mixum. And yes, as a Blazer fan who knows that this is a rebuilding year led by young players, I am pleased with this team thus far. Of course, a trade or two wouldn't hurt right about now.


----------



## quick (Feb 13, 2004)

I think this team is doing all that they can that a winning team does. If only the offense was excuted better late in games.


----------



## NBAGOD (Aug 26, 2004)

I think this is about where I expected at this point. It's a little scary that Zach and darius have been healthy and played well and Portland is still only 5-9.....plus, the schedule has been kinda light with Atlanta twice, NY twice ,etc......if there are injuries, it could get real ugly. Overall I said 25 - 30 wins, best case scenario, and that might happen if things hold form.


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

They are on pace for 29-30 wins...I had predicted 30 so based on that factor they are doing what I expected. What I hadn't expected was how many close games they would be in only to lose in the closing minutes. Now on the pace aspect when you look at the fact that 9 of their opeing 14 games on the road, including 7 in a row on the east coast...You can't be too dissatisfied.


----------



## ProudBFan (Apr 29, 2003)

SheedSoNasty said:


> Good post, mixum. And yes, as a Blazer fan who knows that this is a rebuilding year led by young players, I am pleased with this team thus far. Of course, a trade or two wouldn't hurt right about now.


I'm beginning to think that Nate's probably had enough time to know who he's got, who he needs, and who he doesn't need by now and is beginning to ask for roster tweaks.

1. Obviously Ruben's going to be on the block, but the possibility of actually finding someone to take him seems to be growing dimmer by the day.
2. Telfair and Jack seem to be holding the PG spot down pretty well, so Blake might be extraneous as well. And if one of 'em goes down to injury, we've got Dixon who can spell the de-facto starter.
3. We definately don't need both Outlaw and Khryapa backing up Miles (although it would hurt like hell to see either one of them leave).
4. We definately need a consistent SG to plunk down into the starting SG spot, which would make Dixon and/or Monia expendable. Webster's up-side over the long haul is much higher than either of them IMO, so get a legit starter in here to show him how it's done and you improve that position both now and in the future.
5. We also definately need a legit backup PF (one with an expiring contract, preferably).

IMO, we shouldn't make any changes at Center, because when Theo is healthy he's the perfect backup for Joel (his game is so similar to Joel's that nothing much changes for the rest of the team defensively when Joel sits down and Theo comes in). And when Theo isn't healthy, we've got Ha to spell Joel.

So (IMO)...

On the trading block:

Ruben
Blake
Outlaw -OR- Khryapa
Monia -OR- Dixon (need to keep Dixon if Blake goes)

And in return, we need:

1. Legit starting SG
2. Legit backup PF

Nate's got to see this as well by now. And if so, he's probably bugging Nash each and every day to get him what he needs. Because the sooner they do it, the sooner they get on with gelling and, eventually, competing.

PBF


----------



## CatchNRelease (Jan 2, 2003)

The team is about where I thought they'd be now. I was guessing about 32 wins, and they're on a pace for about 29 now. I expect that they'll get better as the season goes on.

I'm lov'n Zach's outside shot, but hope he doesn't forget that his bread and butter is in the post. I'm liking that he seems to see the double team coming better than in the past. I'm hating how he just doesn't see to have the desire to play tough defense.

I agree that ST seems to improve in some respect every game or so. I love that he's hitting the three pointers at a 36% clip. I like that he's a pretty good FT shooter, to complement his driving ability. I hate watching him not finish on those amazing drives...kinda reminds of Damon in that regard. I think that he'll develop into a pass-first floor general, with a stroke that complements his quickness to the basket.

Webster is going to be something special, if he can learn even average defense. That kid can shoot. There's you SG Mixum, you're just going to have to wait a while.

Miles has been better than I had hoped. He's got a nice all round game, and seems to have bought into Nate's plan. It still seems like he's just going through the motions sometimes, though. I'm gonna hope that he's just working hard and making it look easy.

Damn, I hope we can keep Joel. He's the anchor on D. He could give more offense if they'd run more pick 'n rolls for him. 

Nate's been great...'nuf said.

This is a pretty solid core to build around. We have a coach that can pull them into a team. We have pretty good pick coming this off season. The payroll is reasonable. The future is bright.

Nice post Mix, good to see you coming around.

Go Blazers


----------



## ProudBFan (Apr 29, 2003)

Happy 300, CatchNRelease!

:clap:

PBF


----------



## Trader Ed (Jun 17, 2002)

I predicted 5 wins in November... and 35 for the year. So far about on course

But I have to say outside of not seeing more of Khryapa, Outlaw, Monia, and Webster I am fairly happy with what they are doing. They have been tougher at times than I thought, but other times very inconsistant. They show glimpses of hope.

I really wanted a backup PF all summer and still do. I want more rebounding and I want far less turnovers. Also better FT shooting.

Cautiously optimisitc... me thinks...


----------



## BlayZa (Dec 31, 2002)

doing better than i expected , but as ive said in a few other posts we've probably had one of the easier schedules thus far so my prediction of around 25 is still what im expecting.

telfair is hot n cold , as is miles and zach - but miles to his credit is more hot than recent seasons althought his attention seems to wander still.

our rebounding is just horrible ESPECIALLY the amount of offensive boards we give up but we seem to block a fair amount of shots so thats some positive on D.

we still have no real shooter , well not a reliable one at least - a lot of them seem to be able to put the shots up without too much of a problem..


----------



## Blaze43 (Jun 2, 2003)

With a new coach and system plus all the young players we have, the team is ahead of where I thought they would be at this piont in the season. 

There were some games we could have won with a more experienced roster, but those loses are part of being young. For the most part they have come out and played very hard every night with a couple of exceptions. At this point that is all I really ask of this team, to come out and play hard and compete.

I thought we would be in big trouble when Patterson was sent home. To my suprise the team has shown they very well live with out his services.

Once again Blazer basketball is fun to watch and I look forward to every game. :clap:


----------



## gambitnut (Jan 4, 2003)

ProudBFan said:


> 4. We definately need a consistent SG to plunk down into the starting SG spot, which would make Dixon and/or Monia expendable. Webster's up-side over the long haul is much higher than either of them IMO, so get a legit starter in here to show him how it's done and you improve that position both now and in the future.


I'm not totally sure about this. I think Webster will be ready to start faster than most of expected.



> 5. We also definately need a legit backup PF (one with an expiring contract, preferably).
> 
> IMO, we shouldn't make any changes at Center, because when Theo is healthy he's the perfect backup for Joel (his game is so similar to Joel's that nothing much changes for the rest of the team defensively when Joel sits down and Theo comes in). And when Theo isn't healthy, we've got Ha to spell Joel.


I think we need a backup big man. If the only player we can get in a trade is more of a natural center, Theo can play backup PF.



> So (IMO)...
> 
> On the trading block:
> 
> ...


If we could, I'd like to get a slightly better backup PG and wouldn't mind trading both Dixon and Blake. Also, as I said in another thread, it doesn't seem right to break them up.:clown:

I would say my trading block would be

Patterson
Dixon
Blake
Smith

and I would add in either of our draft picks and/or ONE of

Outlaw
Khryapa
Monia

if it would help us make a really nice trade.


----------



## gambitnut (Jan 4, 2003)

Nice post Mixum. A top SG would be nice, but only if they don't have a long contract and we can let them go soon so Webster can take over. Also, the flashes Telfair has shown make me think he could turn out to be a bit better than decent. Other than that, I agree with everything.

One more thing, I can't believe nobody has mentioned rebounding when listing our problems.


----------



## gambitnut (Jan 4, 2003)

gambitnut said:


> Nice post Mixum. A top SG would be nice, but only if they don't have a long contract and we can let them go soon so Webster can take over. Also, the flashes Telfair has shown make me think he could turn out to be a bit better than decent. Other than that, I agree with everything.
> 
> One more thing, I can't believe nobody has mentioned rebounding when listing our problems.


Of course two people mention our lack of rebounding while I'm posting.


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

One concern...

3 of the Blazers 5 wins were against Atlanta and New York...2 of the worst teams in the NBA to date this season.


----------



## chromekilla (Aug 21, 2005)

I would like to see Dixon,Blake,Patterson and Monia traded.Webster has talent and the time that monia gets takes away from him and id much rather have webster in the game.Id like us to have one more win and one less loss then we have.


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

Zidane said:


> I would like to see Dixon,Blake,Patterson and Monia traded.Webster has talent and the time that monia gets takes away from him and id much rather have webster in the game.Id like us to have one more win and one less loss then we have.


If we get rid of Dixon someone has to be able to back up Webster...Monia has backup SG written all over him IMO


----------



## MARIS61 (Apr 28, 2003)

I'm a little disappointed. I thought we'd start the season with more enthusiasm. I expected better team defense. I expected to see Zach pass out of the double-team for assists. I expected pick and rolls and fastbreaks off blocked shots. I expected a more even distribution of PT so EVERYONE got a chance to show their stuff.

Now that we're "all in" on this idea of developing a young Superteam that is destined to dominate the league for the better part of a decade, let's get them playing together more in games and speed up the process or rather not slow it down by sheltering the rookies.

My lineup :

I would play ALL these guys at least SOME minutes in every game.

C JOEL, HA, THEO
PF ZACH, THEO, VIKTOR
SF DARIUS, VIKTOR, TRAVIS
SG SERGEI, MARTELL, TRAVIS
PG SEBASTIAN, JARRETT

I see these guys all staying here and being key players, with Theo playing fewer minutes next year but maybe becoming a coach in the long run.

Zach or Darius may get traded due to attitude although Darius has surprised me so far. Zach doesn't seem to be on board with Nate's style or his wishes and may be the odd man out in a trade eventually.

BUH-BYE!:
RUBEN, CHARLES, STEVE, JUAN

Take a PF in next draft. Maybe 2 or 3 of them.


----------



## chromekilla (Aug 21, 2005)

Towards the end of the season i hope that they use the young lineup more the the "veterans".Most blazer fan's are'nt really thinking were winning more the 25 games so i hope we get them some time.Zach needs to work on d and Miles is by far out best player and im shocked at that.I figured it would be the oppisate(spelling).


----------



## gambitnut (Jan 4, 2003)

MARIS61 said:


> I'm a little disappointed. I thought we'd start the season with more enthusiasm. I expected better team defense. I expected to see Zach pass out of the double-team for assists. I expected pick and rolls and fastbreaks off blocked shots. I expected a more even distribution of PT so EVERYONE got a chance to show their stuff.
> 
> Now that we're "all in" on this idea of developing a young Superteam that is destined to dominate the league for the better part of a decade, let's get them playing together more in games and speed up the process or rather not slow it down by sheltering the rookies.
> 
> ...


I totally forgot about Charles Smith. I definitely agree with you about him, we have little use for him. I added him to my trade list as well.


----------



## CatchNRelease (Jan 2, 2003)

Schilly said:


> One concern...
> 
> 3 of the Blazers 5 wins were against Atlanta and New York...2 of the worst teams in the NBA to date this season.


On the half full side of that glass, they were able to hang with a red hot Pistons team and they beat a decent Grizz team on their floor.

:cheers: 

Go Blazers


----------



## LameR (Jan 4, 2004)

Kind of pleasently surprised at times, but also expected a lot of rough times (especially early on). So...I'm alright with it I guess?


----------



## ThatBlazerGuy (May 1, 2003)

Im suprised, but also totally convinced that one or even two of Monia, Viktor and Outlaw have to be moved. Miles is playing as good if not better than any of us ever envisioned Outlaw playing(At least me). Webster has shown he is the SG of the future. I think our biggest problem right now is PF. I want to trade Zach. I know he is great offensivley, but that means NOTHING when you give up so much on defense. He is a volume shooter, and slows down every aspect of our offense. Zach for Odom! Do it now Nash!


----------



## Sambonius (May 21, 2003)

ThatBlazerGuy said:


> Zach for Odom! Do it now Nash!


Not a GM in the league would give up Zach for Odom. Odom isn't even a true PF and he's way too inconsistent to consider a guy that bring 20 and 10 to almost every game. I'd rather Portland either trade for a really good up and coming pf now or wait til the draft to perhaps get Lemarcus Aldridge.


----------



## chromekilla (Aug 21, 2005)

Monia,Kryapha,Zach for Elton Brand,filler i would do it even though i like the Russians they really dont have any place.I would much rather keep em and trade dixon,smith,blake,ruben for a 2007 1st round pick and a Back up pf.


----------



## Goldmember (May 24, 2003)

I think Nate needs to change the lineup. Now that I've seen what they've got I think our rotation from now on should be:

Telfair
Monia
Darius
Zach
Joel

Jack
Webster
Outlaw/Khryapa (alternating)
Theo
Ha

Let's remove Dixon from the regular rotation. Sorry bro. Ruben too. 
Imagine a Theo / Ha frontcourt. That would be scary. You'd have to run all the plays for Webster and Outlaw in that second unit, but would that be a bad thing?

Dixon, Smith, Ruben, these three "vets" aren't good enough, or that superior to their young counterparts to warrant playing them over the developement of the young guys. They wont make a difference in the win column more than a small handful of games.


----------



## handclap problematic (Nov 6, 2003)

I agree basically with what Maris has written in this thread. However, I still don't see what everyone's beef with Randolph is. I watch him and see a damned good player. He isn't the best at defense, but he is doing a decent job. Watch a game and just focus on Zach.... You will see a guy who moves his feet well on defense and tries hard... honestly, do it. I Tivo'ed several games and replayed them just to focus on such aspects....and Zach always tries. His main problem is that he sometimes has trouble getting out on perimeter shooters after a double team. And honestly, this is the Blazers biggest problem as a team. Once we double a player, all of our players have a hard time adjusting. Sometimes a player won't cover the player that was left for the double. Our switching is horrid....and that is everybody, not just Zach. ****, I saw Monia do it a couple of times tonight. I guess I just dont see the big deal about trading Zach. He looks like a guy who wants to win. He may not be the best, but he does a good job and cares about the team.

This is all my opinion....so keep that in mind.

Prunetang


----------



## hasoos (Jan 3, 2003)

:devil2: Good post Mixum, I disagree with a few parts, like I don't think Monia is a bad player, I think he is just new to playing. He didn't get many minutes at CSKA becauase they knew he was coming to the NBA, so him playing against high level of competition is just like any other rookie coming in: It is a totally new experience. I also think he could appear to be a lot better if the team would actually pass him the ball when he is open. Freezing him out of the offense does not help the team any. 

While Dixon is a reincarnate of Damon in some ways, I still think he is better then Damon. He definitly is a better defender, if only because he is taller. Put it this way. I don't see opposing PG shooting jumpers like he isn't even there at least. They were both equally bad at stopping opposing PG penetration. 

I do agree that Webster needs his minutes, and as far as I am concerned we should throw Webster into the fire! :devil2:


----------



## CatchNRelease (Jan 2, 2003)

ThatBlazerGuy said:


> ... I think our biggest problem right now is PF. I want to trade Zach. I know he is great offensivley, but that means NOTHING when you give up so much on defense. He is a volume shooter, and slows down every aspect of our offense. Zach for Odom! Do it now Nash!


I don't consider Zach a volume shooter. Most guys I consider volume shooters shoot over 20 attempts per game. Zach averages 16 shots per game, which isn't too many for your first or second scoring option, IMO.

I'm not against trading Zach, but I'd want something damned good for him....Odom's close, but not enough, if I were Nash.

Go Blazers


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

They're off to the start I expected... as we all knew, and as Schilly pointed out earlier in this thread, two games against Atlanta were going to make our record look better. That we only won by a combined 3 points in those two games might actually bode worse than I'd anticipated.

We had our longest road trip of the year, and getting that out of the way is good. But we've been pretty darn healthy, with Zach and Darius (each of whom have had significant injury issues the past year or two) playing lots of minutes and only Theo really missing any time because of injury. Whether Joel, in particular, can remain healthy is a big question mark for me.

Another one is whether Portland is going to turn into a decent home team. There's a real chance that this young squad will be able to be more competitive at home than on the road, and if that's the case then we should be over 30 wins this year.

Man, I wish Oden were in the upcoming draft. 

Ed O.


----------



## wastro (Dec 19, 2004)

I don't know if it's just a lack of size in the backcourt, but our perimeter defense is pretty awful.

Zach could be tougher on D, too.

Rebounds, rebounds, rebounds. That's the name of the game right now ...

... well, that and controlling turnovers.


----------



## meru (Jul 2, 2003)

Schilly said:


> If we get rid of Dixon someone has to be able to back up Webster...Monia has backup SG written all over him IMO


So, presumably, Webster's backup would be... Monia.


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

meru said:


> So, presumably, Webster's backup would be... Monia.


Exactly...the poster I was commenting on was suggesting moving both Dixon and Monia


----------



## Fork (Jan 2, 2003)

5-9 is about what I would have expected at this point, so I shouldn't be disappointed, but I am.

I think we've shown enough flashes, even extended flashes, of being better than 5-9. I hope our record improves, but I'm not counting on it and even if it doesn't, that might not be such a bad thing. 

Whatever gets us LaMarcus Aldridge.


----------



## RPCity (Aug 29, 2005)

wastro said:


> I don't know if it's just a lack of size in the backcourt, but our perimeter defense is pretty awful.


I dont think size has much to do with it....its just young players who are facing better offensive players than they ever have before and still trying to learn defensive prinicpals. They know what to do (stay in front of your man, move your feet, ect) but its harder to execute against the quality opposition they are facing now.


----------



## gatorpops (Dec 17, 2004)

My take on the team is that they are progressing at a better rate than I thought. Considering the job Nate had coming in here it is just amazing to me that the team is doing as well as it is. This said, I too want them to execute and at times hustle more - think move and pass and rebound and defend. 

The amazing thing is they are not a veteran team, and vet teams have a real problem gelling together early in the season - think NY - and recent past Blazer teams have had problems getting it together early as well. 

This young team is getting better at many things progressively. 
Zack made some good passes out of the post last night and the team moved the ball at times unlike any time this year. Three, four and even five passes at one time last night and scored a gimmie at the rim. Flashes of brillience at times. If they do what they did last night on some of those sequences they will become a very good team. 

They missed Theo the last couple of games and maybe lost one or two they should have won. I had predicted a 40 win season and that is not likely and was probably overly optomistic. Thirty five wins is very doable however. 

Remember this team is made up of very young players and very new to each other. Even if they were vets they would have to learn the strengths and weaknesses of their teammates. There are a couple of holes to fill yet but I am not sure of what they are. If Theo stays healthy, a big if, The rebounding and shot blocking stay ok, not great, but ok. 

Anyway the team is very exciting when they play hard.


----------



## RedHot&Rolling (Jun 26, 2004)

Reasons to be optimist:
Miles improvement
Zach recovery
Athleticism/shooting of Webster, Monia (as rookies)
Nate's coaching

Reasons for Pessimism:
Zach's defensive lapses
Team rebounding
Inconsistent play at PG
Inconsistent play at SG
Joel's pending Free Agency
Wasted signings of Blake and Smith
Ruben's continued existence on the roster
Khryapa's absense


----------



## dwood615 (Jul 20, 2004)

Heres My Look On It


It Could Be Worse


----------



## J_Bird (Mar 18, 2005)

Very nice post Mixum. I agree with all of the points you make except #3.  I like what I have seen from Monia, and think as he gets more acclimated to the team, the pace of the NBA game, and consistent playing time he will become a valuable part of the rotation. 
I am happy with where the Blazers are at right now, as a team. I was expecting the inconsistent play from the Blazers going into the season, as young as this team is. And yes, 3 of our wins this season have come against some of the worst teams in the league, but I would hope that over the course of the season, under the tutelage of Nate, our team will imrove their level of play so that we might challenge any team that doesn't come ready to play. 
I agree with the poster who expressed concerns that Zach isn't buying into Nate's system. Between his shot selection, continued troubles passing out of the double and triple teams, and some of the comments made over the course of the season, it appears Zach isn't interested in McMillan's approach to playing the game. This could become a major concern as the season wears on, because this team needs Zach on board if they are going to be competitive.


----------



## mook (Dec 31, 2002)

I'm still pretty disappointed that my team had to get this bad. Watching Sheed do well on the Pistons is in many ways more painful than watching Jermaine do well for the Pacers. At least with Jermaine, we didn't really know how good he was. 

Could you imagine how much fun this team could've been with a front court of Miles, Randolph and Sheed, with Przybilla the first guy off the bench? Joel comes in and Miles and Wallace are so versatile you just slide them around to fill in holes. *sigh* 

Anyway, I'm generally pretty optimistic, so the team is doing about as well as I'd expected. But as a fan I always hope to be pleasantly surprised.


----------



## mook (Dec 31, 2002)

J_Bird said:


> I agree with the poster who expressed concerns that Zach isn't buying into Nate's system. Between his shot selection, continued troubles passing out of the double and triple teams, and some of the comments made over the course of the season, it appears Zach isn't interested in McMillan's approach to playing the game. This could become a major concern as the season wears on, because this team needs Zach on board if they are going to be competitive.


I just don't see it. Randolph's turnovers are at a career low as a starter. he's shooting at a decent 47% clip, while adding about 7 more feet to his range from a few seasons ago. he's passing much better than I've ever seen him at any point in his career--he'd have much better assist numbers if anybody else other than Miles could score. in games we've won, he's averaged 55% shooting, 23 points and 12.5 boards. he +11.5 according to 82games.com, second only to Miles. 

his defense still sucks. but Miles and Randolph are practically the only reason we've won any games this year.


----------



## STOMP (Jan 1, 2003)

theWanker said:


> I'm still pretty disappointed that my team had to get this bad. Watching Sheed do well on the Pistons is in many ways more painful than watching Jermaine do well for the Pacers. At least with Jermaine, we didn't really know how good he was.
> 
> Could you imagine how much fun this team could've been with a front court of Miles, Randolph and Sheed, with Przybilla the first guy off the bench? Joel comes in and Miles and Wallace are so versatile you just slide them around to fill in holes. *sigh*


I've imagined the posibilities of a front court with Wallace in place of Theo as well (I think it would be one of the best in the league), but I've stayed away from bringing it up to avoid the inevitable junk from the usual suspects... but since you're here to take the heat, I'm hoping it's safe for me to agree :clown: 

Even if this was so, I still think the club would be struggling for wins with this backcourt.

STOMP


----------



## mook (Dec 31, 2002)

yeah, we'd probably be right around the .500 mark. however, I think players like Webster and Telfair would be doing better because Sheed is a good passer and would create a lot of space with his ability to shoot from distance. 

a Sheed/Telfair pick and roll would be a lot of fun to watch. unlike the Sheed/Damon version, teams would be really worried about Telfair's penetration. with Sheed/Damon, teams just had to make sure neither guy got open 20 foot looks.


----------



## mook (Dec 31, 2002)

I still feel like Telfair and Randolph could develop a pick and roll game eventually. Randolph just doesn't seem to have the instincts, timing and ability to set a good pick to make it work. kind of surprising, since the guy makes a living based on timing, instincts and his big body.


----------



## chromekilla (Aug 21, 2005)

I wish we would have kept sheed.I think out franchise has made some of the worst decisions that a fransice can make as far at the out come.We took sam,bowie instead of mj cmon we could have been in chitowns place and winning all the games and be respected,jermaine we left go,rasheed we traded.We had an opprutunity to get some of the best players to ever play the games we let 2 of them go and didn't draft the right person.During draft sam bowie either filled a position we needed or had better camps.If we had drafted mj,kept sheed,and jermaine we would have had one of the best teams.If we added in a center like sabonis.Got a good sg like clyde we could have dominated.Oh well i guess people make mistakes and u can't go about life wondering about everything that coulda would shoulda happened.


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

Another issue to consider...In the last 2 games Portland has faced the #1 and #4 scorers in the NBA, both of whom are tweener guards. In another loss (miami) they faced who I consider is the best guard in the NBA right now.

ACtually Portland has had to face some very prolific Guards to start the season....

Rip Hamilton
Baron Davis
Stephon Marbury (2 times)
Dwayne Wade
Allen Iverson
Gilbert Arenas

Next 2 games not such great gurads
Indiana and Utah


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

I didn't even point out Chauncey Billups and Jason Richardson.


----------



## Fork (Jan 2, 2003)

STOMP said:


> I've imagined the posibilities of a front court with Wallace in place of Theo as well (I think it would be one of the best in the league), but I've stayed away from bringing it up to avoid the inevitable junk from the usual suspects... but since you're here to take the heat, I'm hoping it's safe for me to agree :clown:
> 
> STOMP


No, it's not safe.

Yes, Wallace is a great complimentary player and I'd love to still have him on our team. But how many times must it be said: he wasn't going to re-sign with us. We didn't even have the option of keeping him. 

This is one area where John Nash gets too much flak from people. We aquired talent when we would have lost him for nothing.


----------



## tlong (Jan 6, 2003)

Schilly said:


> I didn't even point out Chauncey Billups and Jason Richardson.


Actually I think our problem lies more in the frontcourt than the backcourt.


----------



## Blazer Maven (Sep 27, 2005)

theWanker said:


> yeah, we'd probably be right around the .500 mark. however, I think players like Webster and Telfair would be doing better because Sheed is a good passer and would create a lot of space with his ability to shoot from distance.
> 
> a Sheed/Telfair pick and roll would be a lot of fun to watch. unlike the Sheed/Damon version, teams would be really worried about Telfair's penetration. with Sheed/Damon, teams just had to make sure neither guy got open 20 foot looks.


Sheed cannot set a pick to save his life! He constantly slips the pick on the smaller player, and pops out for the open jump shop. Zach does exactly the same thing, which succeeds in doing nothing but create an open 18 foot jump shot and does not "pick" the smaller player.

On the other hand, Joel sets a killer pick and can roll to the hoop effectively.


----------



## mook (Dec 31, 2002)

Schilly said:


> Another issue to consider...In the last 2 games Portland has faced the #1 and #4 scorers in the NBA, both of whom are tweener guards. In another loss (miami) they faced who I consider is the best guard in the NBA right now.
> 
> ACtually Portland has had to face some very prolific Guards to start the season....
> 
> ...


Problem is that most NBA teams have at least one pretty good guard, and just about all of them will expose the mediocrity we have at those positions. 

what we really need is Outlaw, Webster and Telfair to mature by about 5 years a piece in the next two weeks. 

Nash, get on that.


----------



## STOMP (Jan 1, 2003)

Fork said:


> No, it's not safe.
> 
> Yes, Wallace is a great complimentary player and I'd love to still have him on our team. But how many times must it be said: he wasn't going to re-sign with us. We didn't even have the option of keeping him.
> 
> This is one area where John Nash gets too much flak from people. We aquired talent when we would have lost him for nothing.


Thats Nash's word that he wouldn't have resigned... why would anyone would take a GM's word at face value, especially when he's got obvious reasons why he might bend the truth a bit is beyond me. 

And for the umpteenth time, Portland would have been better off if he had just walked and cleared capspace. They would have been much better off if Nash had taken Detroit's offer of expiring deals and picks. Claiming that he takes too much flak when he chose the worst of all known options  

...and btw, thats what I said prior to and immediately following that disasterous trade as well, so please don't bother with the 20/20 hindsite arguement.

STOMP


----------



## tlong (Jan 6, 2003)

STOMP said:


> Thats Nash's word that he wouldn't have resigned... why would anyone would take a GM's word at face value, especially when he's got obvious reasons why he might bend the truth a bit is beyond me.
> 
> And for the umpteenth time, Portland would have been better off if he had just walked and cleared capspace. They would have been much better off if Nash had taken Detroit's offer of expiring deals and picks. Claiming that he takes too much flak when he chose the worst of all known options
> 
> ...



Actually I liked the deal at the time. Of course I didn't expect us to let Reef just walk though.


----------



## HOWIE (Dec 30, 2002)

tlong said:


> Actually I liked the deal at the time. Of course I didn't expect us to let Reef just walk though.


Wouldn't it have been a different team if Rahim stayed and Portland traded Randolph for Redd? I could have lived with that.


----------



## Fork (Jan 2, 2003)

STOMP said:


> Thats Nash's word that he wouldn't have resigned... why would anyone would take a GM's word at face value, especially when he's got obvious reasons why he might bend the truth a bit is beyond me.


Actually, Sheed himself said that. 

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?id=1731427

"[Wallace] is set to earn $17 million in the final year of his contract, and already indicated that he did not want to re-sign with Portland."

He said it himself in an interview about two weeks before the trade. 



STOMP said:


> And for the umpteenth time, Portland would have been better off if he had just walked and cleared capspace. They would have been much better off if Nash had taken Detroit's offer of expiring deals and picks. Claiming that he takes too much flak when he chose the worst of all known options


Actually, there are only two clear mistakes Nash made during the whole fiasco. One was resigning Theo Ratliff to a ridiculous contract extenstion. Trading for SAR and Theo was a pretty decent deal, since (at that time) it appeared that we still had an outside shot at the playoffs (we went on a season high 5 game winning streak ONE week after the trade and we only missed the playoffs by a couple wins.) Not to mention, SAR and Theo each had some value as trade bait. Of course, that brings us to another Nash mistake, which was to let SAR walk for nothing. (Since we had a deal lined up with NJ, I am willing to give Nash partial credit on that one.)

I think that letting Sheed walk for cap space would have done us no good at all. We wouldn't have been under the cap, so we wouldn't have been able to attract any free agents. 



STOMP said:


> ...and btw, thats what I said prior to and immediately following that disasterous trade as well, so please don't bother with the 20/20 hindsite arguement.
> 
> STOMP


It's okay, I believe you.


----------



## Verro (Jul 4, 2005)

Pretty much agree with everything from the original post other than Monia. He's got a good +/- and is one of the few players on the team with a high basketball IQ. He'll be a solid back up to Webster and he should also be able to play some 3.


----------



## WebZen (Oct 10, 2005)

theWanker said:


> Could you imagine how much fun this team could've been with a front court of Miles, Randolph and Sheed, with Przybilla the first guy off the bench? Joel comes in and Miles and Wallace are so versatile you just slide them around to fill in holes. *sigh*


I remember when we traded McInnis for Miles and we did have the Miles, Randolph and Sheed frontcourt. We also went on something like a ten game winning streak. Then the trade deadline arrived and Sheed got traded. I wonder how the rest of the season would have gone if we had kept Sheed. NBA Finals? I think that was one of the most dynamic frontcourts ever. Too bad we didn't let them at least finish up the season with Sheed.


----------



## STOMP (Jan 1, 2003)

Fork said:


> Actually, Sheed himself said that.
> 
> http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?id=1731427
> 
> ...


I heard and read several Wallace interviews in the weeks prior to the trade, and every time he indicated that he hoped to resign with Portland. The last interview where I heard this was following a victory in that hot stretch following the Miles-McInnis trade. I'm absolutely positive if there was a public quote made about not wanting to come back that it would have been all over our boards here and I'd recall it. The closest comment to that was the "cut the check" one, but I hardly inturpreted that to be that he was definitely leaving... I took it to mean that he was sure that someone would pay him if Portland wouldn't.

Of course there is the possibility that he was repeatedly saying glowing things in public about wanting to resign and the opposite to management, but I still feel that the choice management made had little chance to succeed without other major trades to realign the roster. Unfortunately those needed moves never came, and even worse was tying up roughly 1/4 of Portland's capspace in an oft-injured one trick pony on the downside of his career.

Anyways, I was enjoying the thought of how much better Portland's club would be with Wallace in Theo's place... I'll try not to do that here again.

STOMP


----------



## Fork (Jan 2, 2003)

STOMP said:


> Anyways, I was enjoying the thought of how much better Portland's club would be with Wallace in Theo's place... I'll try not to do that here again.
> 
> STOMP


Don't need to get defensive. 

I agree, we would be better with Sheed. But I just don't believe that it was an option.

The thing about John Nash is that he generally seems to be a straight shooter. He basically all but said he was going to pick Telfair...and he did. He all but said he'd pick Webster...and he did. He's admitted mistakes (such as signing Przybilla to a two year deal and resigning Ratliff) and he's rarely, if ever, straight up lied about his players futures. I think he was telling the truth about Sheed's reluctance to re-sign.


----------



## RedHot&Rolling (Jun 26, 2004)

STOMP said:


> .....Anyways, I was enjoying *the thought of how much better Portland's club would be* with Wallace in Theo's place... I'll try not to do that here again. -STOMP


By 10-15 games. Not a deep playoff, mentally tough championship caliber team. Rasheed didn't lead the Pistons to victory in the championship - he was along for the ride. Big Ben, Billups and Rip under the guidance of LB are the real reasons they won.

We always asked Rasheed to be the leader on this team. He wasn't interested in the job. He wouldn't have stayed with us. And if he had, he'd have made us pay through the nose.

I - am glad he's gone from here.


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

theWanker said:


> Problem is that most NBA teams have at least one pretty good guard, and just about all of them will expose the mediocrity we have at those positions.
> 
> what we really need is Outlaw, Webster and Telfair to mature by about 5 years a piece in the next two weeks.
> 
> Nash, get on that.


True but games like Tomorrow night (Tinsley and Jackson) and Utah (Williams and Giricek) have to be a whole lot less intimidating.


----------



## STOMP (Jan 1, 2003)

Fork said:


> Don't need to get defensive.


and you don't need to say... _"Sheed himself said that."_ ... when there is no quote in public existence including the link you provided. I'm just trying to keep matters strait and not let speculations pass as facts.



> I agree, we would be better with Sheed. But I just don't believe that it was an option.


thats cool, we all have our guesses. Mine was he would have resigned if management wanted him back, but obviously they wanted to go another direction. I just wish they had made better choices on how to proceed. 



> The thing about John Nash is that he generally seems to be a straight shooter. He basically all but said he was going to pick Telfair...and he did. He all but said he'd pick Webster...and he did. He's admitted mistakes (such as signing Przybilla to a two year deal and resigning Ratliff) and he's rarely, if ever, straight up lied about his players futures.


In this past week we had Mo directly contradicting Nash's accounts of why SAR was a starter... Mo also seemed to imply with the... _"I'm not going to bury Nash, he was doing what he thought was best for the club"_... comment that he was buttoning his lips on other things that didn't sit well with him regarding his former GM. 

We've got our wires crossed on some of the other things you listed as well. I never read or heard of him admitting mistakes regarding signing Joel or resigning Theo. On Joel, I've read him claiming that JP's agent didn't want more then 2 years, omitting what he was offering for that 3rd year. I've never heard any sort of admission of making a mistake in prematurely resignings of Theo and/or Zach. If only he'd exercised the patience that Blazer management is now asking their fans to show, Portland could have invested in Joel instead of Theo. If Zach would have really wanted to follow through with his threat to not resign if not extended in advance, his best option for a greater then MLE deal would have been a S&T which I'd imagine could have netted the Blazers some serious talent. Of course SAR and his bird rights were in hand as a backup plan had Nash chosen to play hardball with Zach's contract demands.

Again, I don't take what Nash says at face value, especially when he's got such obvious reasons to mask the truth (unlike his open plans of his intentions to draft Telfair and Martell who no one else was likely to take). I don't hold that against him as I view spinning and lying as an important part of his job.

STOMP


----------



## CatchNRelease (Jan 2, 2003)

STOMP said:


> I've imagined the posibilities of a front court with Wallace in place of Theo as well (I think it would be one of the best in the league), but I've stayed away from bringing it up to avoid the inevitable junk from the usual suspects... but since you're here to take the heat, I'm hoping it's safe for me to agree :clown:
> 
> Even if this was so, I still think the club would be struggling for wins with this backcourt.
> 
> STOMP


I think they would win a few more games with Wallace on the team. That's a big upgrade in talent. I don't want to re-hash all the Wallace arguments with you, I just have a question.

Reading the article that Fork linked, which doesn't list all the stuff Wallace did here, do you think Wallace would have a positive influence on the development of a team of young guys like we have now?

Go Blazers


----------



## mook (Dec 31, 2002)

CatchNRelease said:


> Reading the article that Fork linked, which doesn't list all the stuff Wallace did here, do you think Wallace would have a positive influence on the development of a team of young guys like we have now?
> 
> Go Blazers


he didn't seem to do any damage to Zach Randolph and Jermaine O'Neal. 

Bonzi Wells was a jerk by most accounts before he became a Blazer, and if you wanted to single out one Blazer for steering Bonzi to the dark side of jerkwaddom, I think you pin that blame squarely on JR Rider. 

I have never read a quote from any of the people who've played with Sheed through the years saying he was anything but a great teammate. refs hate him, half of Portland's fan base want him dead, he's even frustrated a coach or two (particularly Dunleavy at times), but teammates got along with him fine. 

except maybe Ruben Boumtje-Boumtje.


----------



## STOMP (Jan 1, 2003)

CatchNRelease said:


> I think they would win a few more games with Wallace on the team. That's a big upgrade in talent. I don't want to re-hash all the Wallace arguments with you, I just have a question.


good... I don't want that either



> do you think Wallace would have a positive influence on the development of a team of young guys like we have now?


It's my opinion that we're in very poor position to judge that sort of thing with any player. What I do know is that the statements by Sheed's various teammates and coaches over the years are at odds with what the local reporters would lead you to believe. Basically, I really don't know the answere to your question but as theWanker noted, young players have developed with him over the course of his career. 

I hardly think/thought he was perfect or anything like that, but I do think he's significantly better option for a team to have pulling down 10M a year then Theo... his versatility on both ends of the court allowed him to positively blend with most any decent player.

Do you think Ratliff's presence has much of anything to do with whether Telfair or Martell develope? I think thats up to those individual players and to a lesser extent the coaches.

STOMP


----------



## RedHot&Rolling (Jun 26, 2004)

STOMP said:


> ....I think thats up to those individual players and to a lesser extent the coaches. -STOMP


Good points, Stomp.


----------

