# Grade the Blazers draft



## alext42083 (Nov 7, 2003)

How would you grade the Blazers' draft tonight?

*BLAZERS DRAFT RECAP
*
*STARTED WITH *
First round
No. 13
No. 27
Second round
No. 33
No. 36
No. 55

*TRADES*
1. Blazers trade No. 13 (Brandon Rush), Jarrett Jack and Josh McRoberts to Indiana for Jerryd Bayless and Ike Diogu
2. Blazers trade No. 27 (Darrell Arthur) and No. 33 (Joey Dorsey) for Nicholas Batum
3. Blazers trade No. 36 (Omer Asik) to Chicago for three second-rounders
4. Blazers trade No. 55 (Mike Taylor) to the LA Clippers for a future second-rounder

*WHAT WE END WITH*
Jerryd Bayless
Ike Diogu
Nicholas Batum
Four future second-round draft picks


----------



## Balian (Apr 11, 2008)

Probably an A or A+. We got the point guard + 1 we were targeting. In other words, our #1 realistic target was Westbrook but ended with a point guard above that.


----------



## Five5even (Jun 15, 2007)

KP said at the Conference he thinks we got the 4th best player in the draft. Im assuming that is Jerryd Bayless. And my guess is that he thinks Rose, Beasley, and Mayo are the only players ahead of Bayless.


----------



## B-Roy (Feb 12, 2008)

A- or B+

It would be an A or an A+ if not for that stupid Batum trade at the end. He just screams bust to me, and Arthur is a better prospect imo. Plus, we could have took DeAndre Jordan at 33. 

And I'm still nervous because the Bayless trade hasn't been approved yet. Cmon NBA, APPROVE IT NAO!


----------



## MAS RipCity (Feb 22, 2003)

A. I had Bayless 5th on my combo guard list behind Rose, Westbrook, Gordon, and Mayo..but the value was rediculous at 11 and we consolidated a bit too. We got Batum who I would have been okay with at 13 and we didn't stash any more Euros.
I do wish we would have taken DeAndre Jordan though...worth the risk.


----------



## whatsmyname (Jul 6, 2007)

according to M.B
we did it again
http://mikebarrettsblog.blogspot.com/2008/06/blazers-get-their-man-again.html


----------



## alext42083 (Nov 7, 2003)

I'll give an A. We got the second-best point guard in the draft, we didn't give up any of our key future pieces, we got Batum who everyone kept raving about on this board, and we got four future second-rounders that could be used as assets again.

Pritchard did it again.


----------



## alext42083 (Nov 7, 2003)

whatsmyname said:


> according to M.B
> we did it again
> http://mikebarrettsblog.blogspot.com/2008/06/blazers-get-their-man-again.html


Loved the story how the team played up Westbrook and Augustin, to get their man in Bayless who we never even worked out.

It's possible other teams value the workouts more than what the players did during the college season. We had the homework done way before the workouts began, and targeted Bayless who was rated fourth on a lot of draft boards.
Genius.


----------



## NateBishop3 (Jul 22, 2003)

Ed O. brought up a good point, and I had to think about it before I agreed.

It was never a choice of Arthur or Batum. Houston coveted Arthur and they could have taken him at 25 and never looked back. We convinced them to take Batum for us and agreed to take Arthur for them. San Antonio was going to draft Batum at 26. If Houston had not made the pick for us we wouldn't have had Arthur OR Batum. Another savvy move by KP.

KP Pritch-slaps the Spurs!


----------



## Darkwebs (May 23, 2006)

NateBishop3 said:


> Ed O. brought up a good point, and I had to think about it before I agreed.
> 
> It was never a choice of Arthur or Batum. Houston coveted Arthur and they could have taken him at 25 and never looked back. We convinced them to take Batum for us and agreed to take Arthur for them. San Antonio was going to draft Batum at 26. If Houston had not made the pick for us we wouldn't have had Arthur OR Batum. Another savvy move by KP.
> 
> KP Pritch-slaps the Spurs!


Do we know this for sure though?


----------



## Boob-No-More (Apr 24, 2006)

I'm going to withhold my grade until the trades are finalized. I've heard conflicting reports on what we're giving up in the Batum trade. If we end up keeping Arthur AND getting Batum, the grade will be higher. As it is, I like that we turned Jarrett Jack and the 13th pick into Jarryd Bayless. That's getting good value out of the 13th pick and that alone earns Pritchard a passing grade. I have no problem with them trading for Batum, I just want to see what he cost before I issue a grade.

BNM


----------



## B-Roy (Feb 12, 2008)

Darkwebs said:


> Do we know this for sure though?


Nate is wrong though. They don't need a PF. Houston wanted *Donte Greene*. They took Batum to screw over the Spurs, Portland took the opportunity to take Batum by trading Arthur. Houston then traded Arthur for Donte Greene (From Memphis) and a future second rounder. So in essence, Houston Pritch-slapped us.


----------



## B-Roy (Feb 12, 2008)

Boob-No-More said:


> I'm going to withhold my grade until the trades are finalized. I've heard conflicting reports on what we're giving up in the Batum trade. If we end up keeping Arthur AND getting Batum, the grade will be higher. As it is, I like that we turned Jarrett Jack and the 13th pick into Jarryd Bayless. That's getting good value out of the 13th pick and that alone earns Pritchard a passing grade. I have no problem with them trading for Batum, I just want to see what he cost before I issue a grade.
> 
> BNM


Dorsey and Arthur for Batum is already approved. Houston then traded Arthur for Greene and a second rounder. Houston got the better part of the deal. And Batum is already a Blazer, there's a photo in Barrett's blog.


----------



## alext42083 (Nov 7, 2003)

The war room at work:


----------



## alext42083 (Nov 7, 2003)

And KP just getting done pritch-slapping Indiana..


----------



## Perfection (May 10, 2004)

B-Roy said:


> A- or B+
> 
> It would be an A or an A+ if not for that stupid Batum trade at the end. He just screams bust to me, and Arthur is a better prospect imo. Plus, we could have took DeAndre Jordan at 33.
> 
> And I'm still nervous because the Bayless trade hasn't been approved yet. Cmon NBA, APPROVE IT NAO!


I agree. I was high on Batum, but compared to Arthur...I mean he was a potential lottery pick who slipped way down. We would have been logjammed, but I'd rather have him, he's likely more valuable. But we'll see what happens. I'm not the expert.


----------



## alext42083 (Nov 7, 2003)

And the rest..


----------



## Boob-No-More (Apr 24, 2006)

NateBishop3 said:


> Ed O. brought up a good point, and I had to think about it before I agreed.
> 
> It was never a choice of Arthur or Batum. Houston coveted Arthur and they could have taken him at 25 and never looked back. We convinced them to take Batum for us and agreed to take Arthur for them. San Antonio was going to draft Batum at 26. If Houston had not made the pick for us we wouldn't have had Arthur OR Batum. Another savvy move by KP.
> 
> KP Pritch-slaps the Spurs!


Yes, good point. If true, I do find it a bit funny that Pritchard was able to convince Houston to help him screw San Antonio when he basically screwed Houston out of Brandon Roy on draft day just two years ago. Of course, since San Antonio is a division rival, I'm sure Houston was eager to do anything they could to screw them over, but still, I'm glad Pritchard once again saw a way to get what he wanted and made it happen.

Of course, it will be a few years before we know if Batum was worth the effort, but San Antonio has an outstanding record of targeting young international players who pan out down the road. So, if they wanted Batum, and Pritchard did, too, the kid must have serious potential.

BNM


----------



## Darkwebs (May 23, 2006)

B-Roy said:


> Nate is wrong though. They don't need a PF. Houston wanted *Donte Greene*. They took Batum to screw over the Spurs, Portland took the opportunity to take Batum by trading Arthur. Houston then traded Arthur for Donte Greene (From Memphis) and a future second rounder. So in essence, Houston Pritch-slapped us.


I see. This sounds logical.

But I think it's more like Houston Pritch-slapped the Spurs. Why would they want to screw the Spurs when it was us that stole Roy from their grasp 2 years ago? Plus, the Spurs gave them Scola for nothing. Well, either way, we got the guy we targeted when we bought the Hornets' pick. Pritchard is pretty good at the draft, it seems.


----------



## Darkwebs (May 23, 2006)

B-Roy said:


> Dorsey and Arthur for Batum is already approved. Houston then traded Arthur for Greene and a second rounder. Houston got the better part of the deal. *And Batum is already a Blazer, there's a photo in Barrett's blog.*


I believe that's Bayless in the photo.


----------



## Boob-No-More (Apr 24, 2006)

B-Roy said:


> Dorsey and Arthur for Batum is already approved. Houston then traded Arthur for Greene and a second rounder. Houston got the better part of the deal. And Batum is already a Blazer, there's a photo in Barrett's blog.


Thanks for the update. Hard to keep up.

Still, if it's true that Houston wanted Arthur and San Antonio wanted Batum, there was no way for us to get - and keep - Arthur. If we don't work the trade with Houston, they simply take Arthur at 25, San Antonio takes Batum at 26 and we end up with neither Arthur nor Batum.

I wonder who was next on Pritchard's list.

BNM


----------



## B-Roy (Feb 12, 2008)

Darkwebs said:


> I believe that's Bayless in the photo.


http://www.nba.com/blazers/news/Trail_Blazers_busy_again_on_dr-276212-1218.html

Sorry, it's this link. ^ I don't like Batum, but that is one snazzy photo. His eyes remind me of the Rock's.


----------



## Boob-No-More (Apr 24, 2006)

B-Roy said:


> Nate is wrong though. They don't need a PF. Houston wanted *Donte Greene*. They took Batum to screw over the Spurs, Portland took the opportunity to take Batum by trading Arthur. Houston then traded Arthur for Donte Greene (From Memphis) and a future second rounder. So in essence, Houston Pritch-slapped us.


How so? We ended up with the guy we wanted, who would have gone to San Antonio if we didn't pre-arrange the trade with Houston. Pritchard ended up getting the guy he wanted and all it cost was $3M of Paul Allen's money and Omar Asik.

BNM


----------



## alext42083 (Nov 7, 2003)

that's pretty interesting stuff about Houston, SA, Batum and Arthur, if true. While other teams are just giving up at the end of the first round, we're treating it as if it's still the lottery right until the end. I love it..


----------



## wastro (Dec 19, 2004)

One thing that might influence the draft (and up the grade from a "B" to an "A" in my book) is that, if Bayless doesn't fit in as the Blazers' point guard for whatever reason, he'll have more value on the market than Jack did. Considering how little we really gave up, that's a valuable thing to have.


----------



## B-Roy (Feb 12, 2008)

Boob-No-More said:


> Thanks for the update. Hard to keep up.
> 
> Still, if it's true that Houston wanted Arthur and San Antonio wanted Batum, there was no way for us to get - and keep - Arthur. If we don't work the trade with Houston, they simply take Arthur at 25, San Antonio takes Batum at 26 and we end up with neither Arthur nor Batum.
> 
> ...


They didn't want Arthur though. They wanted a SF, and the best available was Batum/Green. They wheeled and dealed and ended up with Green/Dorsey/Future second, which is better than just Batum. (Who may or may not be better than Greene.) They had to choose Batum at 25, because if they didn't, SA would scoop him up.


----------



## Hephaestus (Jun 16, 2007)

Five5even said:


> ...KP said at the Conference he thinks we got the 4th best player in the draft. Im assuming that is Jerryd Bayless....


No. Pritchard was talking about the dog he acquired.


----------



## B-Roy (Feb 12, 2008)

Boob-No-More said:


> How so? We ended up with the guy we wanted, who would have gone to San Antonio if we didn't pre-arrange the trade with Houston. Pritchard ended up getting the guy he wanted and all it cost was $3M of Paul Allen's money and Omar Asik.
> 
> BNM


Joey Dorsey, not Omar. Houston ended up with the better deal imo, but if Batum turns out great, whatever, I just don't see it.


----------



## #10 (Jul 23, 2004)

Who the hell likes Jack and Rush more than Bayless?


----------



## Boob-No-More (Apr 24, 2006)

B-Roy said:


> They didn't want Arthur though. They wanted a SF, and the best available was Batum/Green. They wheeled and dealed and ended up with Green/Dorsey/Future second, which is better than just Batum. (Who may or may not be better than Greene.) They had to choose Batum at 25, because if they didn't, SA would scoop him up.


Well, since Houston had the higher pick, they were in the drivers seat. With Yao and T-Mac they are in a win-now mode. So, someone as young and raw as Batum is of no use to them. Greene is still pretty raw, but ptobably closer to contributing than Batum. Dorsey is basically about as advanced as he's going to get. He'll never be a great (or even good) scorer, but he'll give them solid defense and rebounding off the bench from day 1.

Both the Blazers and Spurs wanted Batum to stash overseas and hope he develops into the player he has the potential to become. Different teams, different needs. In the end both Houston, who had the higher pick, and the Blazers ended up with what they wanted. The Spurs are the only ones who lost out on getting what they wanted here.

BNM


----------



## NateBishop3 (Jul 22, 2003)

Boob-No-More said:


> Well, since Houston had the higher pick, they were in the drivers seat. With Yao and T-Mac they are in a win-now mode. So, someone as young and raw as Batum is of no use to them. Greene is still pretty raw, but ptobably closer to contributing than Batum. Dorsey is basically about as advanced as he's going to get. He'll never be a great (or even good) scorer, but he'll give them solid defense and rebounding off the bench from day 1.
> 
> Both the Blazers and Spurs wanted Batum to stash overseas and hope he develops into the player he has the potential to become. Different teams, different needs. In the end both Houston, who had the higher pick, and the Blazers ended up with what they wanted. The Spurs are the only ones who lost out on getting what they wanted here.
> 
> BNM


Well said BNM.


----------



## LameR (Jan 4, 2004)

I voted B only because I don't know how Batum will turn out. Getting rid of Jack for Bayless basically was awesome. I'd actually do a B+ or an A- but I didn't really want to choose the highest option.


----------



## B-Roy (Feb 12, 2008)

I REALLY don't see Batum getting stashed. He has stated multiple times that he wants to play now.


----------



## BLAZER PROPHET (Jan 3, 2003)

I was very impressed. Considering what we started with, where we ended up and what players were exchanged, KP did a solid job.

We got a very athletic, albeit undersized, SG that we can experiment with at PG is we can't use him to get Augustin (95.5 reports he's still the #1 guy on KP's radar), so that's good either way. We have a couple of euros to hide for a few years with essentially worthless picks anyway, so it may turn out to be good. We exchanged two players who would have had very limited PT for one who will DNP most of the season, so we cleared a space on the bench. And we still have Raef's contract to write off after next season. 

Yep, a good job. I grade it a B.


----------



## Boob-No-More (Apr 24, 2006)

B-Roy said:


> Joey Dorsey, not Omar.


Right. My bad. Too many picks and too many trades to keep track of. Dorsey is a solid banger with good defense and rebounding but NO offensive game and almost zero upside. He'll contribute defense, rebounding and an occasional hard foul off the bench in Houston right away. In Portland, with Oden, Aldridge, Przybilla, Frye and possibly Diogu all in front of him, he wouldn't have gotten any PT - even if he'd made the team. Its not like we have any spare roster spots for our second round picks anyway. 

BNM


----------



## PDXshelbyGT (May 24, 2007)

Darkwebs said:


> I see. This sounds logical.
> 
> But I think it's more like Houston Pritch-slapped the Spurs. Why would they want to screw the Spurs when it was us that stole Roy from their grasp 2 years ago? Plus, the Spurs gave them Scola for nothing. Well, either way, we got the guy we targeted when we bought the Hornets' pick. Pritchard is pretty good at the draft, it seems.


That was good!

"Houston Pritch-Slapped the Spurs" makes sense!


----------



## alext42083 (Nov 7, 2003)

Bill Simmons thoughts during the draft.. pretty hilarious..



> 5:46: Portland lucks into Brandon Rush at No. 13. Unbelievable. Perfect role player for the Blazers. They're like the anti-Hornets -- now that they know how to spend Paul Allen's money, they're unstoppable. Within about two more years, they'll be acting like one of those obnoxious Monopoly competitors who has more money and property than everyone else, giggles every time you land on their hotels and says things like, "Here's $200, will you roll the dice for me?" You can't blame them, but at the same time, you want to punch them in the face. That's where we're headed.


Later after the trade for Bayless was announced...



> 6:14: Our first draft-night deal: Jerryd Bayless and Ike Diogu for Brandon Rush, Josh McRoberts and Jarrett Jack. (Look, I can't blaspheme Larry Legend -- it's just not in me -- so we'll have to rely on this e-mail that came 15 minutes later from Jay in Indy: "A lifelong Pacers fan, I just watched Larry Bird give away a miracle pick at 11 for Brandon Rush and a bag of peanuts. Was there ever a moment in your life when you lost complete and utter hope of your favorite team doing anything with a shred of competence? Is there some place I can go to get help?") Damn the Blazers. Damn them to hell. They are working the rest of the league like a speedbag. Meanwhile, Katz scores an interview with a rattled Rush, who forgot to take off his Blazers hat and has a "Man, this sucks, I was excited to play video games with Greg Oden" look on his face. Weirdest moment of the night that didn't involve a Lopez brother.


link: http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=simmons/080626


----------



## DrewFix (Feb 9, 2004)

KP pulled a Kansas City Shuffle.
(like in Lucky Nuber Slevin)
I give this one an A.


----------



## Kmurph (May 7, 2003)

I don't know how this draft doesn't deserve an "A"....

Heck, just getting Bayless for Jack & McRoberts...deserves an "A".....seriously...the guy was a legit top 5 prospect...unbelievable...

I like the Batum deal as well...it is likely that down the road, one of Webster\Outlaw will be dealt...and hopefuly Batum will be ready to step in....Fran Fraschilla said his upside is that of Rudy Gay....If he gets anywhere close to that it is a flipping steal...He was a legit lottery prospect last year....

and he got 4 more 2nd round picks as well...lol.....


----------



## PorterIn2004 (Jan 1, 2003)

B-Roy said:


> I REALLY don't see Batum getting stashed. He has stated multiple times that he wants to play now.


I'm not yet convinced he's got much say in the matter. That said, I think bringing him over may make sense. He could be the 3rd SF behind Webster and Outlaw, spend some time in the NBDL, and then be handy to call up should a hole open up due to trade, injury, or the like.


----------



## Ukrainefan (Aug 1, 2003)

I gave an A and I think this was KP's best work ever as far as accomplishing what he wanted to do under difficult conditions. When he drafted Roy and Aldrige he only had to figure out the first 6 or 7 picks. And he didn't really need to put out any red herrings. This time he had to calculate the first 11 picks and also manipulate and confuse the other gm's in order to get whom I think he rated as the 2nd or 3rd best point guard prospect in the draft. We didn't end up with a pg too short or one not athletic enough. Only time will tell if Bayless becomes a great player, but at this time getting him looks brilliant.

As for Batum, again KP does what he says, he did what was necessary to get the guy he wanted. I don't know if he went to Houston first or if they called him first, but if they hadn't called, I'm sure he would have since he knew San Antonio wanted Batum. Of course Houston got the better of the deal, they had the higher pick! As a side note I don't think it is correct to view Houston as putting the screws to San Antonio; they only did what any good team would do, maximized their assets. They got the guy they wanted in Donte Greene and also picked up Joey Dorsey and a next year 2nd round pick. 
but we also got what we wanted and it was the only way we could do it. So we were both winners on that deal.

As far as not keeping Omar Asik; the guy has said he is not interested in the NBA, so it's not just waiting 5 years for a guy who is not that young, it's also the strong possibility he will never come here. To get three future picks for him is a great trade.


----------



## PorterIn2004 (Jan 1, 2003)

Also, I initially (and prematurely, it turns out) voted "B" in the poll. I voted before reading MB's account -- presuming it's true that Pritchard and company had Bayless targeted all along (which seems perfectly reasonable in hindsight) they played it _beautifully_, down to McMillan "privately" telling Quick how excited he was by Augustin.

I'm impressed all over again with Pritchard, who seems to go into each draft with a different M.O. and now is basically done working the draft, moving on to non-draft trading and dealing with free agents. I've been skeptical about free agents having interest in Portland, mostly because of the lack of free agent interest during the Drexler era, but I think I'm done questioning Pritchard's ability to get done what he says he's gonna get done. You go, KP!


----------



## World B. Free (Mar 28, 2008)

A+

There isn't much more that could have happened to make this draft better for Portland.


----------



## STOMP (Jan 1, 2003)

three strait *A* grades from me. They addressed their only position needs/questions with young stud talents. 

STOMP


----------



## yodurk (Sep 4, 2002)

From a Bulls fan, just wanted to say congrats on a great pickup. I thought Bayless was good enough to go #4 in this draft. Pairing him up with a playmaking 2-guard in Brandon Roy is highway robbery.

Bayless/Roy/Aldridge/Oden

Wow, what a core. Glad the Bulls aren't your division! 

Might I recommend signing Chris Duhon to fill your backup PG role? He's basically everything that Bayless isn't (true PG who can run the show, play defense) so that gives some great balance.


----------



## SheedSoNasty (Dec 31, 2002)

I LOVE the fact that we ended up with Bayless and even got Diogu, who could turn into something one day. However, I was kinda excited to see Dorsey and Arthur. But if management truly sees something in Batum, then I trust their judgment. It's not like they know more about basketball than me or anything like that.


----------



## B-Roy (Feb 12, 2008)

If Batum wants to play in the NBA (He does), Don't we have to offer him a contract?


----------



## nikolokolus (Jan 29, 2008)

yodurk said:


> From a Bulls fan, just wanted to say congrats on a great pickup. I thought Bayless was good enough to go #4 in this draft. Pairing him up with a playmaking 2-guard in Brandon Roy is highway robbery.
> 
> Bayless/Roy/Aldridge/Oden
> 
> ...


Thanks for the compliments, but we really don't need Duhon as a backup PG, we've already got Steve Blake who will likely start for the foreseeable future (first half of the year at least) and when Bayless is ready to assume a more prominent role we've got a 28-29 year old veteran who isn't splashy, takes care of the ball very well, hits the outside shot, defends decently, but just isn't very good at driving in the lane or finishing.


----------



## blazermaniaisback (Jun 7, 2007)

ESPN gave us an A-





> Round 1: Jerryd Bayless (11), Nicolas Batum (25)
> 
> Round 2: None
> 
> ...


----------



## drexlersdad (Jun 3, 2006)

jarrett jack/13/pa's $$$/3 2nds/McScruberts

gets turned into

Bayless/Diogu/Batum/4 2nds

we win


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

B-Roy said:


> If Batum wants to play in the NBA (He does), Don't we have to offer him a contract?


This is unclear. It's clear that IF a contract is offered, it must be offered at the rookie scale. It's unclear if the team MUST offer a contract or renounce the player.

Ed O.


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

I voted "A". Too bad it's not a public poll so we could see who gave those silly "D" grades.

Ed O.


----------



## It's_GO_Time (Oct 13, 2005)

Ed O said:


> This is unclear. It's clear that IF a contract is offered, it must be offered at the rookie scale. It's unclear if the team MUST offer a contract or renounce the player.
> 
> Ed O.


That would suck. You enter the draft, get picked in the first round and the organization tells you to go find a job for a year, we aren't ready for you.

Can they do that?


----------



## alext42083 (Nov 7, 2003)

Ed O said:


> I voted "A". Too bad it's not a public poll so we could see who gave those silly "D" grades.
> 
> Ed O.


I kind of regretted that after making the thread, realized I didn't turn on that feature.. maybe the mods can do it?


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

"A" grade from me. Third straight "A" draft. This is the depth chart yielded from those three drafts:

PG: Jerryd Bayless, Sergio Rodriguez
SG: Brandon Roy, Rudy Fernandez
SF: Nicholas Batum
PF: LaMarcus Aldridge, Ike Diogu
C: Greg Oden

I'll admit, there's a bit of fudging there, as Jarret Jack was involved in getting Bayless/Diogu, and Jack wasn't a Pritchard draftee, but his value is so low I'm comfortable with ignoring it.

In any case, that is an insane amount of talent from three drafts. It's an entire core, even if Rodriguez doesn't turn out to contribute much.

Edit: Also, Telfair was used to get Roy. That's more messy, since it's hard to say his value was "low" when it netted the seventh pick. Ah well...the general idea is the same.


----------

