# Channing Frye -- He'll Be Here All Week!



## soonerterp (Nov 13, 2005)

From Barrett's blog, tacked onto the end of his new post about Steve Blake's little re-introduction to Portland.



> The Blake announcement came during the lunch break at McMillan's Basketball Camp, for kids. The campers were seated in front of the stage where Blake was introduced. Channing Frye was in the weight room working out when I arrived at about 11am. He took the court after Blake's press conference ended, and got in some shooting before the camp resumed. Among the questions I heard asked of Frye were, "how tall are you?" and "are you Greg Oden?" Frye busted up and then answered, "yes, I am."


Of course, had it really been Greg Oden, would the little darlings have asked him stuff like ... 

"What was it like to have to wear short shorts? I have shorts like that in my drawer but Mom says they're underwear and tells me not to wear them outside ... "

"What was it like before there was television?"


----------



## B_&_B (Feb 19, 2004)

It's great to hear that Frye is already in Portland working out and getting familiar with his new team. I'll say it over and over, I think Frye and J.Jones are going to have a big impact on this team and will surprise many of you.


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

B_&_B said:


> It's great to hear that Frye is already in Portland working out and getting familiar with his new team. I'll say it over and over, I think Frye and J.Jones are going to have a big impact on this team and will surprise many of you.




And more importantly neither one will be implicated when the dog fighting scandal starts spreading. There is also a good chance that neither of them are associated with gamg members.


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

mediocre man said:


> And more importantly neither one will be implicated when the dog fighting scandal starts spreading. There is also a good chance that neither of them are associated with gamg members.


Yeah, it's definitely more important that they don't get into a hint of trouble than that they can actually contribute on the court.

Good point.

Ed O.


----------



## TLo (Dec 27, 2006)

mediocre man said:


> And more importantly neither one will be implicated when the dog fighting scandal starts spreading. There is also a good chance that neither of them are associated with gamg members.


I doubt either of them are on the take from the mob as well.


----------



## andalusian (Jun 29, 2006)

Yeah yeah, but how are their tonsils?


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

Ed O said:


> Yeah, it's definitely more important that they don't get into a hint of trouble than that they can actually contribute on the court.
> 
> Good point.
> 
> Ed O.




Nice to know your view on dog fighting is a hint of trouble


----------



## mook (Dec 31, 2002)

Ed O said:


> Yeah, it's definitely more important that they don't get into a hint of trouble than that they can actually contribute on the court.
> 
> Good point.
> 
> Ed O.


lol. I was thinking the same thing. 

you and I and a few others have such a fundamentally different view of the Blazers and competitive sports. it's nice and all to read about character guys, but its kind of an afterthought. it's like buying a really great beer and then worrying about what kind of coaster the bartender puts it on, or if the bartender beats his dog. 

I don't care about the coaster, nor the bartender's personal life. 

just give me a good beer. that's all.


----------



## B_&_B (Feb 19, 2004)

Any word on if there will be a press conference for Frye?


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

mook said:


> lol. I was thinking the same thing.
> 
> you and I and a few others have such a fundamentally different view of the Blazers and competitive sports. it's nice and all to read about character guys, but its kind of an afterthought. it's like buying a really great beer and then worrying about what kind of coaster the bartender puts it on, or if the bartender beats his dog.
> 
> ...




I view it as a meal. 

Zach was a fast food meal. Easy, quick, did the job, but wasn't really all that good for you

Adding piece by piece like KP is doing now will get us a much better meal in the long run, even though it might take more time to make.


----------



## Tortimer (Jun 4, 2007)

mook said:


> lol. I was thinking the same thing.
> 
> you and I and a few others have such a fundamentally different view of the Blazers and competitive sports. it's nice and all to read about character guys, but its kind of an afterthought. it's like buying a really great beer and then worrying about what kind of coaster the bartender puts it on, or if the bartender beats his dog.
> 
> ...



I really don't agree with what your saying at all. Of coarse I want to win but I really like rooting for my team or favorite players. I just can't root for someone like Zach, Sheed, B.Wells. This is one of the reasons I wanted Oden. I think he is going to be a great player in the next few years but I actually liked the guy and really could see rooting for him. I was originally thinking we should draft Durant but after watching and listening to Oden I changed my mind.


----------



## Bob Whitsitt (Jul 12, 2007)

mook said:


> lol. I was thinking the same thing.
> 
> you and I and a few others have such a fundamentally different view of the Blazers and competitive sports. it's nice and all to read about character guys, but its kind of an afterthought. it's like buying a really great beer and then worrying about what kind of coaster the bartender puts it on, or if the bartender beats his dog.
> 
> ...


I've always looked at it kind of the same way, but I think it was honestly a defense mechanism to protect my fragile opinion of the Blazers against the constant JAILBLAZERS JAILBLAZERS LOLOLOLOL I heard.

I just want a good product on the floor. If our guys are all good dudes who stay out of trouble and get along, that just makes it better.


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

mook said:


> lol. I was thinking the same thing.
> 
> you and I and a few others have such a fundamentally different view of the Blazers and competitive sports. it's nice and all to read about character guys, but its kind of an afterthought. it's like buying a really great beer and then worrying about what kind of coaster the bartender puts it on, or if the bartender beats his dog.
> 
> ...


You sure seem to have an odd way to look at things. I don't think it's the same (beer, vs a team). I really doubt you invest time and money at a beer fan forum, or watch beer on TV, or get excited when the beer you like wins a game or has a chance to win a championship. And I really doubt you get excited when the beer you like wins the "beer lotto" and gets sole use of the hops needed.


----------



## Tortimer (Jun 4, 2007)

I just watched a couple old Blazer (Drexler/Buck/Porter/Kersey) games on NBATV in the last week or so. I forgot how much I loved that team and I know most people liked Drexler best but for me it was the other three Porter/Buck/Kersey. I really liked Drexler but loved the other big 3. All 3 of them were great character guys(so was Drexler), hustled and just made you root that much harder for that Blazer team.


----------



## Yega1979 (Mar 22, 2003)

Ed O said:


> Yeah, it's definitely more important that they don't get into a hint of trouble than that they can actually contribute on the court.
> 
> Good point.
> 
> Ed O.


I want Rasheed, Bonzi and Damon back!!!! WAAAA!!!!!


----------



## ABM (Dec 30, 2002)

mook said:


> lol. I was thinking the same thing, Ed.
> 
> you and I and a few others have such a fundamentally different view of the Blazers and competitive sports. it's nice and all to read about character guys, but its kind of an afterthought. it's like buying a really great beer and then worrying about what kind of coaster the bartender puts it on, or if the bartender beats his dog.
> 
> ...


On a different note, I had posted this in the Vick thread:



Ed O said:


> The Falcons are getting HOSED... they pay for a franchise QB but can't get him on the field?
> 
> Ed O.


Sorry to break it to ya, Ed, but, IMO, it's their own undoing.

In other words (as the Blazers have also learned), it begins upstream. I mean, had the Falcons cared to employ the same type of research, background checks, interviews, etc. on Vick as the Blazers have recently embraced, then they'd probably be enjoying the services of LaDainian Tomlinson....................without all the extra-curricular circus acts, to boot.


----------



## Crimson the Cat (Dec 30, 2002)

I never really cared about players and their personal lives as long as it stayed personal and didn't negatively affect the team. To an extent, I still feel the same way, but I certainly won't waste my money watching players who get off on dog-fighting or other disgusting acts.


----------



## Blazer Ringbearer (Jan 28, 2003)

Ed O said:


> Yeah, it's definitely more important that they don't get into a *hint of trouble *than that they can actually contribute on the court.


I would just say that if this dog fighting thing did blow up and Zach was somehow implicated and charged, then Kevin trading him when he did would look very smart.

At that point, it's not just "trouble" and bad press, it would be potential jail time in the worst case and the best case would be a severe drop in Zach's potential trade value.

We can say what we want here about how much or how little character and off-court incidents matter to us, but they clearly factor into trade value... just look at all of the headcases who have been dealt for pennies on the dollar.

Zach's already perceived character issues + dogfighting scandal = full blown headcase


----------



## ebott (Jan 7, 2003)

mook said:


> lol. I was thinking the same thing.
> 
> you and I and a few others have such a fundamentally different view of the Blazers and competitive sports. it's nice and all to read about character guys, but its kind of an afterthought. it's like buying a really great beer and then worrying about what kind of coaster the bartender puts it on, or if the bartender beats his dog.
> 
> ...


I basically agree in that the most important thing for me is how the team does on the court or how well I think the team will do on the court in the future based on the overall talent of the squad.

But the thing that the pro-character side is starting to make me lean towards is the idea that if you build a team with character in mind you're more likely to have more success than if you don't. 

Using your analogy: Sure, what I really care about is getting a good pour of beer. But if the bartender is an ******* and he's hungover cause he was drunk last night it's likely that he won't put in the attention to detail I want him to and it could have a negative effect on the quality of the glass of beer I get. But if I've got a bartender that is a good guy that genuinely cares about his job I'm more likely to get consistently good pours of beer.

And really that's not a great analogy. Cause there's no talent factor.

I had no problem rooting for guys like Sheed, Bonzi, Zach, Damon, etc. But because of their attitudes and off the court behavior I never really felt like they were any sort of building blocks for long term success. 

We got lucky as hell with snagging Greg Oden. So it's easy to say that character is important since we've got a good guy with super-star level talent. But even if we wouldn't have gotten him and we just had Brandon and Aldridge as our main building blocks I would still say that Pritchard's pro-character plan is better than a purely talent driven one.


----------



## GOD (Jun 22, 2003)

Hap said:


> You sure seem to have an odd way to look at things. I don't think it's the same (beer, vs a team). I really doubt you invest time and money at a beer fan forum, or watch beer on TV, or get excited when the beer you like wins a game or has a chance to win a championship. And I really doubt you get excited when the beer you like wins the "beer lotto" and gets sole use of the hops needed.


You do realize who you are talking to, right?


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

ABM said:


> On a different note, I had posted this in the Vick thread:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


And let me tell you, you don't think the Charger fans are laughing right now? They'd do that trade over every day of the week and thrice on sunday...and the Falcons would undo that trade every day of the week and thrice on sunday too.


----------



## BlazerCaravan (Aug 12, 2004)

If I knew *for sure* that the bartender beat his dog, I would not buy beer from that bartender. There's plenty of bars out there, and that bartender won't be at my favorite bar forever. When he's gone, I'll come back.

I think that's the opinion of a lot of Blazer fans who became disenfranchised by years of negative press (which went too far) of activities by Blazers (that went too far).


----------



## SheedSoNasty (Dec 31, 2002)

Tortimer said:


> I just watched a couple old Blazer (Drexler/Buck/Porter/Kersey) games on NBATV in the last week or so. I forgot how much I loved that team and I know most people liked Drexler best but for me it was the other three Porter/Buck/Kersey. I really liked Drexler but loved the other big 3. All 3 of them were great character guys(so was Drexler), hustled and just made you root that much harder for that Blazer team.


I truly believe that we're on the cusp of brining back those days.

With Roy, Aldridge, Oden and ???, we'll have a great foursome that will lead us deep into the post-season some day.

It's just a matter of time before ??? becomes Jarrett Jack, Martell Webster, Sergio Rodriguez, or whoever.


----------



## SheedSoNasty (Dec 31, 2002)

While on the subject, is anyone else going to the brew fest this weekend?


----------



## Tortimer (Jun 4, 2007)

SheedSoNasty said:


> I truly believe that we're on the cusp of brining back those days.
> 
> With Roy, Aldridge, Oden and ???, we'll have a great foursome that will lead us deep into the post-season some day.
> 
> It's just a matter of time before ??? becomes Jarrett Jack, Martell Webster, Sergio Rodriguez, or whoever.


I think your right. I haven't been this excited for the season to start for a long long time.


----------



## mgb (Jun 26, 2004)

From the same blog.



> Pritchard echoed those same thoughts in his answers to the press, and said "in a tight spot late in a game, there's no one I'd rather have running our offense than Blake."


That sure isn't a ringing endorsement of Jack.


----------



## mook (Dec 31, 2002)

Blazer Ringbearer said:


> I would just say that if this dog fighting thing did blow up and Zach was somehow implicated and charged, then Kevin trading him when he did would look very smart.
> 
> At that point, it's not just "trouble" and bad press, it would be potential jail time in the worst case and the best case would be a severe drop in Zach's potential trade value.
> 
> ...



no argument there. I agree with a lot of ebott wrote too. I realize that what I value in a basketball team isn't the same as everyone else, as much as I'd like to change everyone else. 

"bad character" has a definite influence on a player's trade value. so I'd prefer not to have those issues on the team because I'd rather be able to trade my players at any time for full value. 

plus, "character guys" do sell more tickets (although I think it gets overstated). the more money Paul Allen makes on his team, the more likely he'll invest in better players. 

like I said, though, I view this team quite a bit differently from many of the posters here and the fans in Portland.


----------



## mook (Dec 31, 2002)

Hap said:


> You sure seem to have an odd way to look at things. I don't think it's the same (beer, vs a team). I really doubt you invest time and money at a beer fan forum, or watch beer on TV, or get excited when the beer you like wins a game or has a chance to win a championship. And I really doubt you get excited when the beer you like wins the "beer lotto" and gets sole use of the hops needed.


I like watching the very best players on the planet compete at the very highest levels. it's competition that feeds my interest, not personalities. I want to see the best offensive player on the planet, Kobe Bryant, go up against a great defensive team like San Antonio just to see what happens. 

does knowing that Kobe Bryant is a jerk and was once charged with rape really matter much to me? not really. 

I frequent this board because I like speculating on what the Blazers will do to make themselves more competitive. I rarely even click on threads talking about Roy's latest PR feel-good story. 

watching/analysing intense competition is my "beer" in this analogy. 

that you and many others choose to package morality storylines into your "beer" is certainly your prerogative. 

you shouldn't be surprised, though, that I find it odd that you do just as much as you probably find me odd that I don't.


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

where did I package morality storlines into my "beer"? I said it was an odd analogy, because I doubt many people put in as much emotion and time wasted in beer as they do in sports teams.


----------



## TallBottom (May 24, 2006)

I hate to say it but:
sometimes a beer is just a beer
and basketball is just a game.
I do enjoy both ( a lot) but it was all that other stuff that made it hard to enjoy. Now this goodsie two shoes feel good stuff will get old if the product on the court isn't there, just happen to think we'll be able to put an enjoyable team on the floor with our current bunch as it's heart.


----------



## Anonymous Gambler (May 29, 2006)

No one is talking channing frye in this thread!! I, for one, am excited to see if Pritchard has found a gem here.


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

Hap said:


> where did I package morality storlines into my "beer"? I said it was an odd analogy, because I doubt many people put in as much emotion and time wasted in beer as they do in sports teams.


did you mean "beer" as in "basketball"? I don't package morality into it, anymore than I do anything else. I didn't want Rasheed, Bonzi, Damon or Zach gone for any different reason than I wanted DA gone. They were no longer worth keeping on the court for what they were going to bring the team to.


----------



## Blazer Ringbearer (Jan 28, 2003)

mook said:


> "bad character" has a definite influence on a player's trade value. so I'd prefer not to have those issues on the team because I'd rather be able to trade my players at any time for full value.


In certain cases, "bad character" can have a definite, noticeable effect on the team's chances.

Even if a player never sees jail time or criminal charges, off court incidents can lead to long suspensions. On court incidents can lead to getting thrown out of the game or suspension. If your best players aren't allowed to suit up, that obviously is a negative.

Even if a player never misses any time due to their transgressions (can't remember if Kobe was suspended), fighting a serious legal battle (criminal, civil, or just the court of public opinion) is probably incredibly distracting for that player and for the team as a whole.

This is a lot more touchy-feely, but I think it's a very real effect.

The Lakers were never able to come together the year Kobe was on trial despite adding Payton and Malone... not evidence, but just saying. On pure talent, they seemed like a lock.

The Blazers when they were very talented but full of "bad character" seemed to always underachieve. If talent is all that is important, why did those teams repeatedly fall short of expectations? 

Were the expectations too high? Perhaps, or perhaps there is something beyond pure ability and luck that can have a serious effect on the result of a game.


----------



## It's_GO_Time (Oct 13, 2005)

BlazerCaravan said:


> If I knew *for sure* that the bartender beat his dog, I would not buy beer from that bartender. There's plenty of bars out there, and that bartender won't be at my favorite bar forever. When he's gone, I'll come back.
> 
> I think that's the opinion of a lot of Blazer fans who became disenfranchised by years of negative press (which went too far) of activities by Blazers (that went too far).



What if he served the best beer in the county . . . would you stop buying beer from him?

This situation reminds me of the soup nazi . . . he (or his character) was a jerk, but made some great soup.


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

Kiss_My_Darius said:


> What if he served the best beer in the county . . . would you stop buying beer from him?
> 
> This situation reminds me of the soup nazi . . . he (or his character) was a jerk, but made some great soup.




But it wasn't the best soup in the country. It wasn't even one of the best soups in the west.

The soup was over priced and gave the city of Portland a really bad reputaion


----------



## It's_GO_Time (Oct 13, 2005)

mediocre man said:


> But it wasn't the best soup in the country. It wasn't even one of the best soups in the west.
> 
> The soup was over priced and gave the city of Portland a really bad reputaion



If the soup wasn't good, I wouldn't buy it.

If the soup was overpriced and/or gave Ptd a bad reputation, I probably would still buy it . . . and eat it in my office with the door closed. :biggrin:


----------



## yakbladder (Sep 13, 2003)

All I've been able to tell from this thread is that Channing Frye might like beer. Or else Carol Channing. Not sure.


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

Kiss_My_Darius said:


> If the soup wasn't good, I wouldn't buy it.
> 
> If the soup was overpriced and/or gave Ptd a bad reputation, I probably would still buy it . . . and eat it in my office with the door closed. :biggrin:




That's what the problem has been. The restaraunt selling the soup would rather have you eat in the restaraunt than eat it at home.


----------



## B_&_B (Feb 19, 2004)

SheedSoNasty said:


> While on the subject, is anyone else going to the brew fest this weekend?


:cheers: 

I never miss it!

:cheers:


----------



## B_&_B (Feb 19, 2004)

A buddy in the media said he heard that Frye's press conference will be tomorrow during Nate's basketball camp, just like Blake's was yesterday.


----------



## Gunner (Sep 16, 2005)

As much as I hate to change the subject back to the subject.

"Yeah, I know I'm already coming in as the bench warmer behind Oden and Aldridge, but we haven't gotten to fall camp. I told Greg and LaMarcus I have a few things and elbows up my sleeve."

Try the veal.


----------



## SheedSoNasty (Dec 31, 2002)

Does anyone agree with me that Frye looks like he's 14 years old?


----------



## Oldmangrouch (Feb 11, 2003)

mediocre man said:


> But it wasn't the best soup in the country. It wasn't even one of the best soups in the west.
> 
> The soup was over priced and gave the city of Portland a really bad reputaion


Anybody who would base their opinion of a community on a bowl of soup, or a basketball player, is too damn stupid to worry about!


----------



## e_blazer1 (Feb 3, 2004)

SheedSoNasty said:


> Does anyone agree with me that Frye looks like he's 14 years old?


If we put him on the court with Oden, their apparent ages should average out about right.


----------



## ProZach (Oct 13, 2005)

mook said:


> it's like buying a really great beer and then worrying about what kind of coaster the bartender puts it on, or if the bartender beats his dog.
> 
> I don't care about the coaster, nor the bartender's personal life.
> 
> just give me a good beer. that's all.


Mmmmm, beer. 

Sure, there are a lot of factors that go into buying beer. Cost is one, but as a Blazer fan, I have a great, rich buddy who buys me all the beer I want, so let's forget the price... How it tastes? That's important, but at the end of the day will the beer get you piss-drunk? That’s the _real _question... Results, baby, results. 

But I do care about character (taste) for several reasons.

1) A huge portion of Portland evidently cares, so therefore I care. I want the Blazers to be the team the whole state can get behind once again, with sellout crowds, etc. So in order for that to happen, at least in the short-term, we need very good character guys. So in keeping with the analogy: The city is a hot chick and I’m that sleazy guy that wants to get her drunk on her drink of choice, character.

2) The national media: I’m just sick of the bad image everyone else has of the franchise. We don't need choir-boys, but as bad as our image has been, the only way to get rid of that rep is through pretty drastic measures. The last two years have been just that. We sobered up. We’ve been mixing virgin cocktails (no wins), but man, they’re tasty. 

3) While we don’t need choir-boys, I don’t tolerate animal abuse, and I have no interest in rooting for thug-nation. Analogy: In the past our character-beer has tasted so God awful that even if you’re a highly motivated fan and drink a bunch down, your stomach is so *ed that you end the night by throwing up on your girl-friend and taking a taxi home at 4 in the A.M. I'm not even going to talk about the next morning, except to say that Advil is my friend. Being a fan shouldn't be a choir.

4) And fourth, it is undisputable that good character helps team chemistry, and team chemistry helps the performance on the court. It equals wins. Back to the analogy (don’t stop me I’m having too much fun): The better the beer tastes, the easier it is to drink, and the faster I get drunk. Works for me.





P.S. - I like Frye.


----------



## STOMP (Jan 1, 2003)

Anonymous Gambler said:


> No one is talking channing frye in this thread!! I, for one, am excited to see if Pritchard has found a gem here.


I, for two, though I'll stick my neck out further and say that I'm expecting a gem/quality rotation player. I think he's going to fit in very well with this group of bigs and should earn the 3rd most minutes (20-25 or so) behind the obvious starters. I've read a lot about Frye's supposive lack of desire and poor D, but thats not what I expect. 

We shall see once the real games begin.

STOMP


----------



## HispanicCausinPanic (Jul 2, 2005)

Sorry, I don't know if I can root for a Wildcat! Go Dux! It's hard for me somtimes to even listen to Barrett because he's a Beaver!


----------



## c_note (Jan 30, 2007)

mediocre man said:


> I view it as a meal.
> 
> Zach was a fast food meal. Easy, quick, did the job, but wasn't really all that good for you
> 
> Adding piece by piece like KP is doing now will get us a much better meal in the long run, even though it might take more time to make.


Uhh, what job is it do you think he did? Helped the team lose? He didn't "help" anything, someone had to take all the shots.

I think a better interpretation of this analogy would be...Easy, quick, but a few minutes later it just comes right back up. Then the whole situation (scoring, then letting the other team score) wasn't even worth the trouble. :clap:


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

c_note said:


> Uhh, what job is it do you think he did? Helped the team lose? He didn't "help" anything, someone had to take all the shots.
> 
> I think a better interpretation of this analogy would be...Easy, quick, but a few minutes later it just comes right back up. Then the whole situation (scoring, then letting the other team score) wasn't even worth the trouble. :clap:




No one on this board hates Zach more than I do, but Zach did what he was told to do, and that was score. Nate ran the offense through him, and Zach delivered as best as he could. 

It's not the cows fault that he ends up in McDonalds instead of Ruth's Chris.


----------



## Foulzilla (Jan 11, 2005)

STOMP said:


> I, for two, though I'll stick my neck out further and say that I'm expecting a gem/quality rotation player. I think he's going to fit in very well with this group of bigs and should earn the 3rd most minutes (20-25 or so) behind the obvious starters. I've read a lot about Frye's supposive lack of desire and poor D, but thats not what I expect.
> 
> We shall see once the real games begin.
> 
> STOMP


I actually agree. I think he'll be an excellent first-off the bench big man. He showed a lot his rookie year and I have a hard time believing he peaked then. Anyone can have a bad year. I certainly am not expecting him to be great, but a good 6th/7th man.


----------



## andalusian (Jun 29, 2006)

Foulzilla said:


> Anyone can have a bad year.


Especially when your coach is suspect... which Isiah is. He was a great player, a pretty good talent evaluator and a sub-par coach, IMHO. Let's not go down the GM route however.


----------



## Samuel (Jan 1, 2003)

#44.


----------



## Samuel (Jan 1, 2003)




----------



## PapaG (Oct 4, 2004)

mediocre man said:


> No one on this board hates Zach more than I do, but Zach did what he was told to do, and that was score. Nate ran the offense through him, and Zach delivered as best as he could.
> 
> *It's not the cows fault that he ends up in McDonalds instead of Ruth's Chris*.


Actually it sort of is the cow's fault based on their genetics and upbringing.

Zach is destined for Red Robin at best. :biggrin:


----------



## Samuel (Jan 1, 2003)




----------



## Samuel (Jan 1, 2003)

He looks young enough to be Oden's kid.
<img src= "http://cache.gettyimages.com/xc/75724521.jpg?v=1&c=NewsMaker&k=2&d=17A4AD9FDB9CF1938462E5B9217336851397113D3692B760 " />


----------



## Samuel (Jan 1, 2003)

<img src="http://cache.gettyimages.com/xc/75724656.jpg?v=1&c=NewsMaker&k=2&d=17A4AD9FDB9CF1938462E5B921733685450042D978A6121B " />


----------



## PapaG (Oct 4, 2004)

Samuel said:


>


Brian Grant's number. Hopefully Frye can play with the same intensity.


----------



## Rip City Reign (Jul 1, 2007)

mediocre man said:


> No one on this board hates Zach more than I do, but Zach did what he was told to do, and that was score. Nate ran the offense through him, and Zach delivered as best as he could.


Zach needs a defensive stud behind him to be effective, which IMO, is why Theo got paid so much, because when healthy, he covered Zach's weaknesses.

Moreover, Zach/Curry will be a absolute disaster in NYC, neither one wants to play defense nor has the athleticism necessary if the desire was there.

Frye has the tools to be an effective defender, and I recommend the 5min+ YouTube feature on Frye. He shows he can attack the basket and run the floor, which will suit him well subbing for Aldridge on the 2nd unit.


----------



## SodaPopinski (Aug 10, 2004)

Samuel said:


> He looks young enough to be Oden's kid.


:lol: 

-Pop


----------



## Utherhimo (Feb 20, 2005)

he looks like a natural blazer 

he had a great interview on the fan him roy oden aldridge great interviews!

I remember wanting and feeling he might be a blazer but i didnt think this soon!


----------



## HispanicCausinPanic (Jul 2, 2005)

He is very well spoken. He sounded great on Courtside. What a difference 2 years makes. I believe the vibe in the lockeroom will be very positive this season. Loses will tend to wear that down, but we seem to now have some players with a great foundation on the court, and off. Wow, I sounded like Dr. Phil right there. I guess if you guys have any sensitive subjects you want to talk to me about....HAP....B&B.....you can PM me.


----------



## mgb (Jun 26, 2004)

It really pisses me off that every week I forget to listen to courtside!


----------



## TLo (Dec 27, 2006)

Frye looks like he has really hit the weights since his rookie year. He was way skinny when he played for Arizona. I'm looking forward to seeing him on the court with our other guys. We could play some stretches with Frye, Aldridge, and Oden. That's a BIG team!


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

I'm still not at all excited about the acquisition of Frye. He's a poor rebounder, bad defensively, and has no post game offensively to speak of.

Is he well-spoken? Sure. Is he a decent bench prospect? Yes.

Will he help us win many games? I doubt it.

Ed O.


----------



## Rip City Reign (Jul 1, 2007)

Ed O said:


> I'm still not at all excited about the acquisition of Frye. He's a poor rebounder, bad defensively, and has no post game offensively to speak of.
> 
> Is he well-spoken? Sure. Is he a decent bench prospect? Yes.
> 
> ...


Frye is not that bad of a rebounder and should improve after hitting the weights. 

His defense is average not bad, and should improve since he won't need to defend two post players (his man and Curry's). He can block shots and get out and run. 

His post moves are raw, but effective, and he can shoot the hook with both hands. He is effective at the line and can fill in for both Oden and Aldridge.

He is a good fit and contrary to the assertions of Bill Simmons, doesn't suck.


----------



## gatorpops (Dec 17, 2004)

Ed O said:


> I'm still not at all excited about the acquisition of Frye. He's a poor rebounder, bad defensively, and has no post game offensively to speak of.
> 
> Is he well-spoken? Sure. Is he a decent bench prospect? Yes.
> 
> ...


Come on Ed, you don't think Frye is able to handle stecond string players???? 

I think he may very well dominate in that context. That is called depth.

Wouldn't that lead to more wins? 


gatorpops


----------



## B_&_B (Feb 19, 2004)

Audio from the press conference:

http://blog.oregonlive.com/blazers/

As someone else said, he is VERY well spoken and seems like a good guy. Both of our new additions (Frye and J.Jones) seem like great character guys.


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

Rip City Reign said:


> Frye is not that bad of a rebounder and should improve after hitting the weights.
> 
> His defense is average not bad, and should improve since he won't need to defend two post players (his man and Curry's). He can block shots and get out and run.
> 
> ...


It is possible that he will suddenly toughen up and suddenly become a decent rebounder and suddenly decide to start doing more on offense than shooting jumpers... but I find it highly unlikely. I think that projection is MUCH more a function of Rose Garden-colored glasses than reality.

Ed O.


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

gatorpops said:


> Come on Ed, you don't think Frye is able to handle stecond string players????
> 
> I think he may very well dominate in that context. That is called depth.
> 
> Wouldn't that lead to more wins?


I don't see him dominating summer league, let alone second string players.

As for depth: he's an inferior player to Aldridge, who could be the backup 4/5 if we hadn't traded Zach.

Ed O.


----------



## Samuel (Jan 1, 2003)

I think Frye will improve his per 40 numbers playing against backups. He started 59 times for a team marginally better than our team last season. Even in the west playing against superior competition, he should be able to gain some confidence. I think his pick-and-pop style would also suit Sergio, and his outside game will compliment Przybilla.

I agree with Ed, though, that he has several holes in his game that he sorely needs to work on. Post play, strength, finishing, and most importantly, getting to the line. The guy got to the charity stripe only 1.5 times a game last season, down from 3.5 per game in 05-06. Part of me thinks that he could return to those 05-06 numbers, but players don't often rebound from regression years in limited minutes.


----------



## Rip City Reign (Jul 1, 2007)

Ed O said:


> I don't see him dominating summer league, let alone second string players.
> 
> As for depth: he's an inferior player to Aldridge, who could be the backup 4/5 if we hadn't traded Zach.
> 
> Ed O.


Frye is very similar to Aldridge in all respects. Frye is a bit quicker than Lamarcus but Aldridge is a better defender. At the very least, Frye is a significant upgrade from Outlaw at backup PF.

The kid was "untouchable" last year when the Knicks were angling for KG, now he's a Blazer and suddenly he's crap.

I'd rather have Frye/Aldridge at the PF than last year's combo of Randolph/Outlaw.


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

Rip City Reign said:


> The kid was "untouchable" last year when the Knicks were angling for KG, now he's a Blazer and suddenly he's crap.


I thought it was a joke that Frye was ever considered "untouchable", and I posted so at the time, iirc. Further, I don't think that he's crap now... I think he's still a decent prospect, and he should be better than he was last year (when he was TERRIBLE) but I don't think that he's a very good player now and I don't think he's ever likely to become very good.



> I'd rather have Frye/Aldridge at the PF than last year's combo of Randolph/Outlaw.


I'm not sure that I'd prefer our new rotation to Zach and Outlaw. But that's just opinion, right?

Logically, Randolph/Outlaw only existed towards the end of the year when Aldridge had moved into the starting lineup at the 5... we didn't go into the season with that as the power forward rotation. And further, that's not the choice we'd have had to make if we hadn't traded Zach for Frye. It would be Oden/Zach/Aldridge or Oden/Aldridge/Frye... and to ME, the previous trio is clearly superior to the latter.

Ed O.


----------



## Resume (Jul 17, 2007)

Its funny how this thread has nothing to do with Frye and all the energy is pointed at how terrible the beer analogy was.

Frye is awesome and I am very glad he is on our team. What pick was he in what draft?


----------



## ebott (Jan 7, 2003)

mgb said:


> It really pisses me off that every week I forget to listen to courtside!


Yeah, that's a bummer.  I've got an oldy moldy tape deck and a bunch of one hour a side tapes that I use to record it. But it sucks, cause I inevitably forget to turn the tape over at 7 and miss a goodly chunk of the second hour.

I asked Mike Barret about the pod casting and he said that he's been urging them to pod cast the whole show for a while now. But KXL doesn't have the hard drive space to accommodate them. I urge everyone that wants to be able to podcast courtside to send feed back to General Manager, Tim McNamara and Sports Director, Jay Allen telling them that they need to buy more hard drives.

http://www.kxl.com/feedback.aspx

I've come to a conclusion as to how I really feel about the whole character bit. Character and it's relation to the Blazers to me is some what like lyrics to a song. 

I generally like or dislike songs based on the music,not the lyrics. But there are situations in which I like a song but then I pay attention to the lyrics and it makes me dislike the song. 

It's the same way with the Blazers and character guys. Guys with good character are not going to make me like the team more. But guys with bad character do have the potential to make me like the team less.


On Channing Frye:

I basically agree with Ed in that I don't expect much from Channing. He's a mediocre big man that doesn't do any of the rough and tumble things you want a mediocre big man to do. I'm sure he'll get us 8 points and 4 rebounds with a block or two a game in his 15-20 minutes off the bench. But he's not gonna win us any games and I pretty much expect that we'll let him go his merry way in 2009 rather than trying to bring him back and eating some of our valuable cap space.

Kind of on that topic, I just took a look at our upcoming 2009 salary and if we decide to totally go for it and just renounce everybody (Frye, Webster, Jack, Blake and Outlaw) we'll only have 35 mil on the books. I don't know how wild I am about only have a team of Oden, Aldridge, Przybilla, Miles, Roy, Sergio, Rudy and an assortment of second rounders and trying to use our 25 mil of cap space to bring in a serious difference maker AND fill out the rest of the team. But it's kind of a cool idea.


----------



## Samuel (Jan 1, 2003)

ebott said:


> I don't know how wild I am about only have a team of Oden, Aldridge, Przybilla, Miles, Roy, Sergio, Rudy and an assortment of second rounders and trying to use our 25 mil of cap space to bring in a serious difference maker AND fill out the rest of the team. But it's kind of a cool idea.


That's an 8-man rotation right there, if you include the player we'd end up getting. We could then use our 2m exception and our MLE to grab some savvy vets that wanted a title shot. That's 10 men. Fill out the roster with a couple of unsigned FAs (a Udoka-type) and some 2nd rounders.

Maybe the team chemistry would take a hit that year, but the top of the rotation would be so good that it'd make up for the little amount of time that those bench guys would play.


----------



## STOMP (Jan 1, 2003)

ebott said:


> Kind of on that topic, I just took a look at our upcoming 2009 salary and if we decide to totally go for it and just renounce everybody (Frye, Webster, Jack, Blake and Outlaw) we'll only have 35 mil on the books. I don't know how wild I am about only have a team of Oden, Aldridge, Przybilla, Miles, Roy, Sergio, Rudy and an assortment of second rounders and trying to use our 25 mil of cap space to bring in a serious difference maker AND fill out the rest of the team. But it's kind of a cool idea.


adding on to what Samuel's point, don't forget to add in the 2008 & 2009 1st rounders... or the 2008 & 2009 Suns 1st round picks 

:clown: 

STOMP


----------



## It's_GO_Time (Oct 13, 2005)

Did I hear the radio correct today (1080):

They are going to try Frye at the SF position?


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

Kiss_My_Darius said:


> Did I hear the radio correct today (1080):
> 
> They are going to try Frye at the SF position?




KP has said he thinks Aldridge Oden and Frye can play together in certain spots against certain line ups. Frye mentioned that as long as the defense was tight it wouldn't be a problem......in lay terms, I will get beat off the dribble a lot, but if Oden and Aldridge are behind me it should work.


----------



## STOMP (Jan 1, 2003)

Kiss_My_Darius said:


> Did I hear the radio correct today (1080):
> 
> They are going to try Frye at the SF position?


I doubt it. I saw a youtube link of Frye post trade where he was focusing his training on getting stronger/bigger for inside battles... I don't recall the exact weight he claimed he planned on playing at, but I remember it struck me as a surprisingly high number... 260lbs???

STOMP


----------



## PapaG (Oct 4, 2004)

Ed O said:


> *I'm still not at all excited about the acquisition of Frye. *He's a poor rebounder, bad defensively, and has no post game offensively to speak of.
> 
> Is he well-spoken? Sure. Is he a decent bench prospect? Yes.
> 
> ...


Gee, really? :lol:


----------

