# OT: Don't you know who I am?? I'm Kevin Garnett!



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

KG holds no punches 



> Pssst: At an informal workout the other day at Target Center, after Timberwolves rookie Rick Rickert made a nifty move to slip past his boyhood idol, Kevin Garnett of the Wolves, to score a basket, Garnett responded, without warning, by punching Rickert in the jaw.
> 
> A cut required seven stitches to close, and Rickert also suffered a chipped tooth. The astonished 6-10 Rickert didn't retaliate against the 7-foot NBA most valuable player, who also had unkind words for the former Gophers player. Apparently, the rookie wasn't supposed to score on the MVP. Rickert received his stitches at University of Minnesota Hospital.
> 
> Because the incident involved the Wolves' franchise player, the incident seemingly will make it even more difficult for Rickert to make the Wolves' final roster


----------



## Fork (Jan 2, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Hap</b>!
> KG holds no punches


Wow. This better make some headlines.


----------



## Swoosh (May 2, 2003)

Don't ya love how it's a "Psst" blurb at the bottom of some tidbits...If a Blazer were involved, it would've been front page headline on ESPN.:no:


----------



## Playmaker0017 (Feb 13, 2004)

What a jerkoff!

There *HAS* to be more to the story than just this. 

KG may be competitive, but that's weak. Real weak. 

If that is truly the way KG is, then screw him. 

Play.


----------



## deanwoof (Mar 10, 2003)

and people wondered why KG didnt fight peeler last year. KG would have gave him an *** whooping!!


----------



## Blaze_Rocks (Aug 11, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>Playmaker0017</b>!
> What a jerkoff!
> 
> There *HAS* to be more to the story than just this.
> ...


:laugh: What did I tell you...


----------



## B_&_B (Feb 19, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>Swoosh</b>!
> Don't ya love how it's a "Psst" blurb at the bottom of some tidbits...If a Blazer were involved, it would've been front page headline on ESPN.:no:


No doubt... it's such BULL****

 just spell it out, masking is against site policy. and so on and so on and so on.


----------



## MAS RipCity (Feb 22, 2003)

man what a double standard. If ANY Blazer had done this, it would be the headlines of espn sportscenter and espn.com, but since it is KG....all it gets is a slap on the wrist. Man I used to like KG a lot, but what he did is such crap.


----------



## Target (Mar 17, 2004)

I'm sure it's the stress that drove KG to it. 

After all..


He's got the whole world in his hands.


----------



## MAS RipCity (Feb 22, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Target</b>!
> I'm sure it's the stress that drove KG to it.
> 
> After all..
> ...


:laugh: CLASSIC :laugh: 

POST OF THE DAY


----------



## Target (Mar 17, 2004)

It's not like it took a lot of thought. 

But thanks for the honor nonetheless.


----------



## trifecta (Oct 10, 2002)

My guess is that there is a little Blazer coloring going on here by the media. I think that there's more to the story than Garnett swinging at an insignificant someone just for scoring on him.


----------



## SheedSoNasty (Dec 31, 2002)

This is rediculous... what a friggin' jerk! I really hope that this gets out and people realize that it's not just the Blazers who have such incidents. What a primadonna (sp?)...


----------



## Target (Mar 17, 2004)

Maybe they are trying to drag him down to a level where it won't appear to be such a traveshamockery when Kobe Bryant; accused rapist is picked as MVP.


----------



## cimalee (Apr 17, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>MAS RipCity</b>!
> man what a double standard. If ANY Blazer had done this, it would be the headlines of espn sportscenter and espn.com, but since it is KG....all it gets is a slap on the wrist. Man I used to like KG a lot, but what he did is such crap.




Man this is so true if Zbo had done this yall would be all over it


----------



## 4-For-Snapper (Jan 1, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Target</b>!
> I'm sure it's the stress that drove KG to it.
> 
> After all..
> ...


What? Kevin Garnett is Jesus?


----------



## cimalee (Apr 17, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>4-For-Snapper</b>!
> 
> 
> What? Kevin Garnett is Jesus?





The media treats people like him Different Im such a hige Kg fan , but guys like him are such glass and blazer players are just bad people not model citizens lol , 

Everybody makes mistakes


----------



## STOMP (Jan 1, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>cimalee</b>!
> 
> Everybody makes mistakes


While most everybody makes mistakes, many players go through their whole careers without nasty incidents such as this one (reportedly). Others repeatedly slip up year after year... 

KG has always seemed to be a jerk to me though, and I've heard enough stories to guess that he probably is one of those alpha bleeps completely taken with himself and disrespectful of others. I don't want him over for dinner, but I do like to watch him ball.

STOMP


----------



## Webster's Dictionary (Feb 26, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>cimalee</b>!
> Man this is so true if Zbo had done this yall would be all over it


Um, wait, maybe I'm missing something, but Zach did punch a team mate, didn't he? And it was all over the news, wasn't it?


----------



## Sambonius (May 21, 2003)

Difference is the T Wolves fans aren't ready to trade KG because of this, you Blazer fans are wanting to trade Zach for similar incidents. Try backing up your team and players more and stop selling out your club.


----------



## Goldmember (May 24, 2003)

Amen.

I'm still willing to bet dollars to doughnuts that Ruben earned that punch.


----------



## STOMP (Jan 1, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Sambonius</b>!
> Difference is the T Wolves fans aren't ready to trade KG because of this, you Blazer fans are wanting to trade Zach for similar incidents. Try backing up your team and players more and stop selling out your club.


No actually thats not the difference Sam. I've always been willing to trade any player when it would potencially benefit the club. Zach's apparent lack of regard for the club's pledge to the fans as to player conduct may expediate matters for management, but it has little to do with me "selling him out."

If ZR didn't have a quality backup (who is due to leave if a role isn't there for him), I'd be less open to the team exploring trade options. I'd hope that no one on the team _has_ to go because of being a bad guy, but I don't pretend that I'm in position to condemn these guys as people (as some posters here do year after year). Conversely, I don't heep personal praise on a guy every time he lands on the police blotter or does something stupid (like some posters here do year after year). For the most part I leave the personal judgements to the people who know them and are in charge of the roster... which could use a serious tweek IMO.

KG is on a whole different level size and talent wise IMO. Getting back equal value for the league MVP (who is making about 20 mil per for the next 5 years) is a very different matter then trying to move the league's MIP (who is still on his rookie deal). KG may be a self absorbed jerk, but based on what I know of NBA players and athletes in general, thats the rule not the exception.

btw, how exactly is punching a teammate similar to recieving a DUII and the rest of ZR's rap sheet? I guess all these individual issues display poor judgement, but intoxicated drivers kill innocent people. Seems like a pretty loose use of the word _similar_ to me.

STOMP


----------



## Blaze_Rocks (Aug 11, 2004)

^^^:laugh: Pledge?


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Blaze_Rocks</b>!
> ^^^:laugh: Pledge?


The Timberwolves are going to institute a new 23 point pledge. It was going to be 25, but they owed the NBA a couple for the Joe Smith fiasco several years back.

Ed O.


----------



## cimalee (Apr 17, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Sambonius</b>!
> Difference is the T Wolves fans aren't ready to trade KG because of this, you Blazer fans are wanting to trade Zach for similar incidents. Try backing up your team and players more and stop selling out your club.




exactly


----------



## Playmaker0017 (Feb 13, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>cimalee</b>!
> exactly


There is ZERO similarity between the two players or their history or their behavior.

KG punched someone. That's it. For his entire life - that is the ONLY publicized bad thing KG has ever done on a negative note. On the plus side, he's the reigning MVP and probably the second best player in the league. He's a prolific scorer and a tremendous defensive player (not to mention he grabs a few rebounds). He makes those around him better. He also sells tickets and NBA merchandise wherever he goes ... home and away.

Randolph is a thug with a rap sheet. He whines and complains when he doesn't get the ball. He's terribly selfish. He doesn't play defense. He's punched someone, been involved with a shooting, tried to sell illegal firearms, etc. and so on. He has a decent amount of talent, but doesn't sell tickets or vast quanitites of NBA stuff. 

Yeah, no comparison.

Play.


----------



## Blaze_Rocks (Aug 11, 2004)

1st- Get off KG's nuts..

2nd- When Zach tried to sell those guns was he in the NBA? If he wasnt, how does that matter?

Just because no ones dug dirt up on KG doesnt mean he hasnt done any....

I've always thought Zach was wrong for punching Ruben but I forgave him and its over...Besides Ruben was lecturing Barkley about him getting pulled over like most vets would, and Zach got mad and punched him in the face..

KG on the other hand punched his own teamate for scoring on him?  This should be headline news in the sports world and believe me if it was a Blazer who did this, it would be.


----------



## Playmaker0017 (Feb 13, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>Blaze_Rocks</b>!
> 1st- Get off KG's nuts..


I'm not on them. But trying to compare Randolph and Garnett is an effort in complete futility.



> 2nd- When Zach tried to sell those guns was he in the NBA? If he wasnt, how does that matter?


Because it shows character and builds on his rap sheet. 

If I killed 3 people before I was working for my company ... don't you think it would impact their opinion of me and my future?



> Just because no ones dug dirt up on KG doesnt mean he hasnt done any....


Which is why I said PUBLICIZED.

Play.


----------



## SheedSoNasty (Dec 31, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Ed O</b>!
> 
> 
> The Timberwolves are going to institute a new 23 point pledge. It was going to be 25, but they owed the NBA a couple for the Joe Smith fiasco several years back.
> ...


:laugh:


----------



## SheedSoNasty (Dec 31, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Playmaker0017</b>!
> 
> KG punched someone. That's it. For his entire life - that is the ONLY publicized bad thing KG has ever done on a negative note.


It all depends on the degree of 'negativity' in which you are speaking of... Garnett has gotten into fights and swears every 3.5 seconds he's on the court... not necesarily positive things. Now, doesn't my statement sound a bit like I'm overeggagerating? (sp?) I see some similarities in both of our posts in that regard.


----------



## Sambonius (May 21, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>STOMP</b>!
> 
> 
> No actually thats not the difference Sam. I've always been willing to trade any player when it would potencially benefit the club. Zach's apparent lack of regard for the club's pledge to the fans as to player conduct may expediate matters for management, but it has little to do with me "selling him out."


It's selling out and quite premature to react the way most fans do to Zach's issues. He hasn't been charged. Blood is thicker than water, do you want Zach to completely sever his ties with his brother? Most fans assume that he knew his brother had a gun, instead of waiting for the facts immature fans jump the gun. I haven't seen any other fan base of any other team more sensitive than ours, it is sad. So called fans are quick to trade a player because of what they heard, when they don't even have the facts. 



> If ZR didn't have a quality backup (who is due to leave if a role isn't there for him), I'd be less open to the team exploring trade options. I'd hope that no one on the team _has_ to go because of being a bad guy, but I don't pretend that I'm in position to condemn these guys as people (as some posters here do year after year). Conversely, I don't heep personal praise on a guy every time he lands on the police blotter or does something stupid (like some posters here do year after year). For the most part I leave the personal judgements to the people who know them and are in charge of the roster... which could use a serious tweek IMO.


Good to hear, but trading the face of our franchise will hardly help our team, doesn't matter if you get the best shooter in the league. You saw what happened when we traded Rasheed, Clyde, Bill Walton. 



> KG is on a whole different level size and talent wise IMO. Getting back equal value for the league MVP (who is making about 20 mil per for the next 5 years) is a very different matter then trying to move the league's MIP (who is still on his rookie deal). KG may be a self absorbed jerk, but based on what I know of NBA players and athletes in general, thats the rule not the exception.


Well KG at the same age as Zach had quite similar numbers actually Stomp. I don't know if anyone knew to what magnititude KG was going to blow up, ala Shawn Kemp in his prime. Zach is 22 years old, puts up 20 and 10 in his first season starting and you want to do away with him? I don't know about you, but I watch basketball for the entertainment, not because I want to see the players on the Real World giving me a bio of themselves. What they want to do on their off-time is irrelevant, just as long as it doesn't effect their on-court play.



> btw, how exactly is punching a teammate similar to recieving a DUII and the rest of ZR's rap sheet? I guess all these individual issues display poor judgement, but intoxicated drivers kill innocent people. Seems like a pretty loose use of the word _similar_ to me.
> 
> STOMP


Well a lot of people don't realize that KG was involved in a shooting of some sort in his high school days, he almost had to do time in prison but he got off. Wrong place at the wrong time? Same can be said for Zach then, this was his brother, you can never sever ties with the family, doesn't matter how much u wanna throw money at the kid, it cannot and will not happen. Zach receiving a DUI? Well if we are talking about the one before he was 21, he was well under the legal limit and his 21st birthday was right around the corner. If you can go to war and get blown to ashes over some propaganda then I think you should be able to get yourself a drink. Dude wasn't even endangering anyone. You bring up that intoxicated drivers kill people, well he wasn't intoxicated. If you want to bring up the marijuana issue, well he was never found guilty again. Don't give me crap about Nash trying to hide it, every peice of media outlet both local and national will try and find as much dirt as they can on a Blazer, if he was really guilty of driving while high then it would have been out by now. KG has also gotten out of line many times on the court, he pushes, punches, and assaults people when he is on the court, but Rasheed getting a technical and the dude is destined to go to Hell? Blazer fans are hypocritical, I think it has something to do with the culture around them in Portland.


----------



## Sambonius (May 21, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Playmaker0017</b>!
> 
> KG punched someone. That's it. For his entire life - that is the ONLY publicized bad thing KG has ever done on a negative note.


Garnett was almost convicted of assault or attempted murder, I don't remember which one. It was straight out of his mouth on his bio on Fox Sports. He had to move out of the state because of the negativity surrounding the incident. Try searching the net a little bit and you may find it.


----------



## Playmaker0017 (Feb 13, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>Sambonius</b>!
> Garnett was almost convicted of assault or attempted murder, I don't remember which one. It was straight out of his mouth on his bio on Fox Sports. He had to move out of the state because of the negativity surrounding the incident. Try searching the net a little bit and you may find it.


IF that's a fact, then that's unfortunate. I really don't care much about Garnett.

But, I CAN say this - since then he has been next to squeaky clean then. The media LOVES to tear down heroes. They just love it. 

The thing is - with Garnett it was "wrong place, wrong time" when he was a kid. 

With Randolph it was said that he may have been the one with the gun. It may just be wrong place, wrong time ... but he's an adult now. When he was young, he PUT himself in the place of a gun dealer. 

Different circumstances all around.

Play.


----------



## Blaze_Rocks (Aug 11, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>Playmaker0017</b>!
> The media LOVES to tear down heroes. They just love it.


Thats funny, I've heard nothing but praise for KOBE.


----------



## Playmaker0017 (Feb 13, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>Blaze_Rocks</b>!
> Thats funny, I've heard nothing but praise for KOBE.


Which news network? 

I've seen tons of ripping into him. 

Play.


----------



## Blaze_Rocks (Aug 11, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>Playmaker0017</b>!
> With Randolph it was said that he may have been the one with the gun. It may just be wrong place, wrong time ... but he's an adult now. When he was young, he PUT himself in the place of a gun dealer.


Pure speculation...
 


Were you there? 

Blaze:rock:


----------



## Playmaker0017 (Feb 13, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>Blaze_Rocks</b>!
> Pure speculation...


What is pure speculation?

That many people, when interviewed, said Zach Randolph was the one shooting? No, that's a fact.

Or

That Zach Randolph put him in the place of an illegal arms salesperson? No, that's pretty much a stated fact as well. How does one become an illegal arms salesperson by accident? 



> Were you there?


I've never been to the moon, but I know it's there. It is called logical deduction. 

Play.


----------



## barfo (Jan 2, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Playmaker0017</b>!
> I've never been to the moon, but I know it's there. It is called logical deduction.
> 
> Play.


What about the rabbits?

barfo


----------



## Playmaker0017 (Feb 13, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>barfo</b>!
> 
> 
> What about the rabbits?
> ...


Plenty of rabbits.


----------



## Sambonius (May 21, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Playmaker0017</b>!
> 
> But, I CAN say this - since then he has been next to squeaky clean then. The media LOVES to tear down heroes. They just love it.


I think that's a bad generalization, Kobe you can say because well, he's a cocky dude and a lot of people just don't like him. I hear nothing about Jordan's mistress, and his marriage problems because of the mistress that almost made his wife divorce him. Same with Iverson, he supposedly kicked hi wife out the house naked, then went after her with a gun. The media chooses who they want to protect, and they protect MOST of the big names. They actually DID protect Kobe when it came to the rape allegations, they just take a few shots at him because of Shaq. 



> The thing is - with Garnett it was "wrong place, wrong time" when he was a kid.
> 
> With Randolph it was said that he may have been the one with the gun. It may just be wrong place, wrong time ... but he's an adult now. When he was young, he PUT himself in the place of a gun dealer.
> 
> ...


I honestly don't think anyone can judge Zach right now, being completely unbiased I think that we need to wait for the facts to come out. Roger is his brother, and we know that Zach came from the ghetto, now no matter how much money you want to throw at Zach, you just can't make him cut ties off with family members and we definetly can't expect him to do things differently when he grew up in the ghetto. That's his childhood, that's how people like that operate. It's hard to change and it is sad, but it isn't him. It's the debate of Nurture vs Nature, Nurture wins, and in this case it is evident by Zach's behaviors. The best thing the organization can do is surround him with good characters on the team. Keep him busy. We know Shareef or a Duncan never grew up in the same conditions, that is why we see them having no trouble living the NBA life style. 

Saying Zach is guilty because some said he had a gun is just foolish, obviously when you have this high profile of a name along with the incident there will always be contradicting reports. No reason to believe it all.


----------



## STOMP (Jan 1, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Sambonius</b>!
> 
> It's selling out and quite premature to react the way most fans do to Zach's issues. He hasn't been charged. Blood is thicker than water, do you want Zach to completely sever his ties with his brother? Most fans assume that he knew his brother had a gun, instead of waiting for the facts immature fans jump the gun. I haven't seen any other fan base of any other team more sensitive than ours, it is sad. So called fans are quick to trade a player because of what they heard, when they don't even have the facts.


Do you even bother to read what you respond to before going to the personal slams? I wrote... _I've always been willing to trade *any* player when it would potencially benefit the club._ Nothing is different with Zach before or after his latest scrape. While I do root for the players as individuals (even Damon :| ), I will always care much more about my favorite team and hope/trust that the moves they make are the right ones for the right reasons. I don't pretend to know what Zach is really like in practice or off the court, and I have no idea what he or any Blazer might fetch in a trade... but I am open to the possibility of management choosing to move him (or anyone) to improve the club.

Unlike you apparently, I don't feel Portland's fans are much different then most others. Like most markets, there are all kinds that root for the team from Chicken Littles to head in the sand types... from fanatics to casual water cooler types etc... I certainly don't think the hundred or so who frequent this board fairly represent the million or so who follow the club. We (@BBB.net) are just a few of the truely crazed IMO, though some of the wings of PTB Looney Tunes General are probably better represented here then others.



> ...trading the face of our franchise will hardly help our team, doesn't matter if you get the best shooter in the league. You saw what happened when we traded Rasheed, Clyde, Bill Walton.


This makes no sense at all IMO. Trading either Zach or SAR for a top 2 gunner/outside threat to spread the court and balance the offensive attack seems to be what most here have been pining for all offseason. How wouldn't the team benefit by adding a top outside threat to compliment a quality inside player like Zach or SAR?

Did you happen to see the Pistons win this year? They had a quality player at every starting position, but no superstar/franchise, or as you label it, face of the franchise types (though Big Ben's fro is on the cover of their press promos ). Certainly nobody who's on their squad is one of the dominant top 10 talents in the league statistically... yet they won it all convincingly. I'd looooooove to add a Paul Pierce, Ray Allen, or Michael Redd to this club and to see where the chips fall. 



> Well KG at the same age as Zach had quite similar numbers actually Stomp.


As "THEY" say, numbers don't tell half the story... maybe "THEY" are refering to the half of the game called defense? "THEY" also claim defense wins championships, which is the 50% of the game that Zach is subpar at by most every account. KG is, and has clearly been since just after he arrived in the league, an elite player on both ends of the court. While Zach at 22 surpassed KG at 22 by in scoring and rebounding stats, Garnett decisively outdid Zach in every other major stat, and the comparison of them on the not so statistically trackable half of the game is a landslide. 

I can't speak for everyone, but after seeing KG just a couple of moments during his rookie it was extremely apparent to me that he had skills and athletism that pretty much no other 7 footer did. Zach does not enjoy those sorts of physical advantages, but he does have a deft scoring touch and great hands. Unfortunately neither attributes hint at untapped defensive possibilities down the road.



> Zach receiving a DUI? Well if we are talking about the one before he was 21, he was well under the legal limit and his 21st birthday was right around the corner. If you can go to war and get blown to ashes over some propaganda then I think you should be able to get yourself a drink. Dude wasn't even endangering anyone. You bring up that intoxicated drivers kill people, well he wasn't intoxicated. If you want to bring up the marijuana issue, well he was never found guilty again. Don't give me crap about Nash trying to hide it, every peice of media outlet both local and national will try and find as much dirt as they can on a Blazer, if he was really guilty of driving while high then it would have been out by now.


You're refering to his MIP (not Most Improved Player but Minor in Possession). I'm referring to his charge of driving under the influence he recieved this very offseason. He hasn't been found guilty (or innocent) yet because this only recently happened and the case is still pending. 

I have only guesses where you're pulling this Nash hiding stuff out of... or the war rant. Idiots driving while intoxicated do endanger and kill random innocent civilians every day, and it's 100% preventable. I've lost several people to wasted losers behind the wheel and would really like to see laws significantly strengthened. 

I don't tune in to hoops for the off the court soap opera stuff, or dwell on it much, but I could certainly understand how a GM might factor it in when considering how he wants to assemble his club... especially in Portland where he has made public promises to do so. I'm not saying he should, but I'd understand why if he did.

STOMP


----------



## Sambonius (May 21, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>STOMP</b>!
> 
> 
> Do you even bother to read what you respond to before going to the personal slams? I wrote... _I've always been willing to trade *any* player when it would potencially benefit the club._ Nothing is different with Zach before or after his latest scrape. While I do root for the players as individuals (even Damon :| ), I will always care much more about my favorite team and hope/trust that the moves they make are the right ones for the right reasons. I don't pretend to know what Zach is really like in practice or off the court, and I have no idea what he or any Blazer might fetch in a trade... but I am open to the possibility of management choosing to move him (or anyone) to improve the club.


Apparently you don't read either. I wasn't talking about you specifically. 



> Unlike you apparently, I don't feel Portland's fans are much different then most others. Like most markets, there are all kinds that root for the team from Chicken Littles to head in the sand types... from fanatics to casual water cooler types etc... I certainly don't think the hundred or so who frequent this board fairly represent the million or so who follow the club. We (@BBB.net) are just a few of the truely crazed IMO, though some of the wings of PTB Looney Tunes General are probably better represented here then others.


You are right, I do think that the Portland Trail Blazers fan base is different than the typical team. 



> This makes no sense at all IMO. Trading either Zach or SAR for a top 2 gunner/outside threat to spread the court and balance the offensive attack seems to be what most here have been pining for all offseason. How wouldn't the team benefit by adding a top outside threat to compliment a quality inside player like Zach or SAR?


Yea it will improve you, but for how long? We traded Jermaine O'neal for Dale Davis. Yea, it was a good trade for us at the time now what? Trading Zach at 22 years old or so for an older guy who can't seem to play defense and hasn't shown the ability to take the game in his hands isn't wise. If we are talking about getting Kobe or T-Mac then your statement is a bit more conceivable, but as it is, no it isn't. 



> Did you happen to see the Pistons win this year? They had a quality player at every starting position, but no superstar/franchise, or as you label it, face of the franchise types (though Big Ben's fro is on the cover of their press promos ). Certainly nobody who's on their squad is one of the dominant top 10 talents in the league statistically... yet they won it all convincingly. I'd looooooove to add a Paul Pierce, Ray Allen, or Michael Redd to this club and to see where the chips fall.


You are on the outside looking in. The Pistons not only had quality players at every position but players WHO WORKED THEIR BUTTS OFF. IE Zach Randolph. 




> As "THEY" say, numbers don't tell half the story... maybe "THEY" are refering to the half of the game called defense? "THEY" also claim defense wins championships, which is the 50% of the game that Zach is subpar at by most every account. KG is, and has clearly been since just after he arrived in the league, an elite player on both ends of the court. While Zach at 22 surpassed KG at 22 by in scoring and rebounding stats, Garnett decisively outdid Zach in every other major stat, and the comparison of them on the not so statistically trackable half of the game is a landslide.


If KG wasn't 7 foot and didn't dunk the way he did, you wouldn't be saying what you are. 



> I can't speak for everyone, but after seeing KG just a couple of moments during his rookie it was extremely apparent to me that he had skills and athletism that pretty much no other 7 footer did. Zach does not enjoy those sorts of physical advantages, but he does have a deft scoring touch and great hands. Unfortunately neither attributes hint at untapped defensive possibilities down the road.


On offense I would rather have Zach Randolph, on defense I woudl rather have KG. Zach CAN and I think WILL become a more than decent defensive player. 



> You're refering to his MIP (not Most Improved Player but Minor in Possession). I'm referring to his charge of driving under the influence he recieved this very offseason. He hasn't been found guilty (or innocent) yet because this only recently happened and the case is still pending.
> 
> I have only guesses where you're pulling this Nash hiding stuff out of... or the war rant. Idiots driving while intoxicated do endanger and kill random innocent civilians every day, and it's 100% preventable. I've lost several people to wasted losers behind the wheel and would really like to see laws significantly strengthened.


Actually this incident isn't very recent IMO but whatever. You digging deeper about Zach's situation with the DUI doesn't really have any significance. He hasn't been found guilty, so hold your horses buddy.



> I don't tune in to hoops for the off the court soap opera stuff, or dwell on it much, but I could certainly understand how a GM might factor it in when considering how he wants to assemble his club... especially in Portland where he has made public promises to do so. I'm not saying he should, but I'd understand why if he did.
> 
> STOMP


Why don't we just sign a church choir? Perhape that would satisfy the fans. Though, I don't think we would win much. Getting guys who don't make headlines is great but I think everyone who has a big name has made mistakes. From Jordan to Magic, should the GM trade them if they were on his team?


----------



## STOMP (Jan 1, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Sambonius</b>!
> Apparently you don't read either. I wasn't talking about you specifically.


I can't imagine why I thought you were addressing me... though maybe it was because you quoted me throughout your post 



> Yea it will improve you, but for how long? We traded Jermaine O'neal for Dale Davis.


So? I wasn't aware that this situation is exactly the same as that one... is any? The 3 guys that I listed are guards in their 20's, not inside bangers... The guy who the rumors are hot and heavy with these days is Michael Redd, and he's almost 26. He shot *41%* from 3's last year, is athletic, and super smooth off the dribble with his jumper. I don't know if there is any legitamacy to those rumors, but if Nash doesn't feel Zach can keep his nose clean (he has the insight to know not guess like you and I), I think that would be a pretty good get for now and into the future.



> Trading Zach at 22 years old or so for an older guy who can't seem to play defense and hasn't shown the ability to take the game in his hands isn't wise. If we are talking about getting Kobe or T-Mac then your statement is a bit more conceivable, but as it is, no it isn't.


Zach just turned 23. He is the one who is maligned for his porous defense, not the 3 SGs I listed. I'm a huge proponent of building a team around D, but truely this starts with the bigs being able to shut down the paint IMO. What makes you think ZR's going to step it up down the line? I don't see that at all though I wish I did.



> You are on the outside looking in.


I've said as much repeatedly... you're not claiming any insider status are you? I claim that Nash is the insider who's in position to truely judge things.



> The Pistons not only had quality players at every position but players WHO WORKED THEIR BUTTS OFF. IE Zach Randolph.


I like Zach on the court quite a bit, I just recognize that there are other hard working players too... I happen to think SAR has been one throughout his career, he just doesn't have a role on the club with Zach entrenched. 



> If KG wasn't 7 foot and didn't dunk the way he did, you wouldn't be saying what you are.


If my Aunt had a :laugh: well, reality is what it is... He is 7 foot, he can handle and pass like a guard, and he is a 5 time ALL NBA Defensive player. Thats just the facts... sorry. 



> On offense I would rather have Zach Randolph, on defense I woudl rather have KG. Zach CAN and I think WILL become a more than decent defensive player.


We all have our opinions. Mine is that KG is a deserving MVP because he's a flat stud on both ends of the court. Zach is an offensive force and a defensive liability... thats why teams go at him so often... which is also why his +/- ratio is so unextrodinary. You'll have to dig here to find him on this charting because he tracks so low... you should be able to spot Garnett right off though.

http://www.82games.com/rolandratings0304.htm



> Actually this incident isn't very recent IMO but whatever. You digging deeper about Zach's situation with the DUI doesn't really have any significance. He hasn't been found guilty, so hold your horses buddy.


This is so stupid. I've clearly worded my posts to state he's neither guilty or innocent of the DUII charge from (I looked it up) 9 months to this day, but that Nash should be in prime to position to judge whats what with him. What qualifies as "recent" with you anyways? 



> Why don't we just sign a church choir? Perhape that would satisfy the fans. Though, I don't think we would win much. Getting guys who don't make headlines is great but I think everyone who has a big name has made mistakes. From Jordan to Magic, should the GM trade them if they were on his team?


More of the left field stuff you seem to specialize in. Who are you debating anyways? I'll play along. Would I be for the GM trading MJ? Well if he could get back better talent that improves the club, sure. I can easily dream up a package of players that would be better. For example... give me a prime time Hakeem and Larry Bird for Mike in a heartbeat. 

For the umpteenth time on the character issue... IMO us mere fans are in poor position to judge things on the personality end, but that doesn't make it unimportant. Though I recognize ZR's talent and like having him on the team, I could understand if Nash, through the insider view that he has, could have possibly seen things that cause him too much concern to want to build around the guy. That doesn't mean that I feel he's a bad guy, only that I'm open to the possibility that he might be. I also feel that trades offers could be such that it would be the right move to trade Zach (or anyone). Whether Zach is traded tomorrow or goes on to enjoy a HOF career in Red and Black, I'll still be a Blazer fan long after he's retired. 

Thats it for me here for a few days, I'll be out of the internet loop until Tues at least with my jobber in the mountains. Late.

STOMP


----------



## Sambonius (May 21, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>STOMP</b>!
> 
> 
> I can't imagine why I thought you were addressing me... though maybe it was because you quoted me throughout your post


Would you rather me not reply to your post that you made towards me? You quoted me first, I'm trying to be straight up with. I wasn't talking about you specifically but Blazer fans in general, try reading my post rather than skimming it.




> So? I wasn't aware that this situation is exactly the same as that one... is any? The 3 guys that I listed are guards in their 20's, not inside bangers... The guy who the rumors are hot and heavy with these days is Michael Redd, and he's almost 26. He shot *41%* from 3's last year, is athletic, and super smooth off the dribble with his jumper. I don't know if there is any legitamacy to those rumors, but if Nash doesn't feel Zach can keep his nose clean (he has the insight to know not guess like you and I), I think that would be a pretty good get for now and into the future.


Redd had one of the highest 3 point percentages in the league, just as Randolph had one of the highest field goal percentages. You bring up the pros of Redd is irrelevant, we know both players have pros and cons. You bringing up the fact that Randolph's defense is weak is also irrelevant considering Redd's defense is nothing to rave about. I will honestly be surprised if Randolph's defense isn't noticabely better this upcoming season.




> Zach just turned 23. He is the one who is maligned for his porous defense, not the 3 SGs I listed. I'm a huge proponent of building a team around D, but truely this starts with the bigs being able to shut down the paint IMO. What makes you think ZR's going to step it up down the line? I don't see that at all though I wish I did.


You bringing up the fact that Randolph's defense is weak is also irrelevant considering Redd's defense is nothing to rave about. I will honestly be surprised if Randolph's defense isn't noticabely better this upcoming season.
Also saying that you want your inside players to play defense is a good idea, though I think we can agree that you want your franchise player to play inside, not outside. Having a player like Zach Randolph on basketball playing skills is much more valuable than a player like Michael Redd, no matter the team's needs. 



> I've said as much repeatedly... you're not claiming any insider status are you? I claim that Nash is the insider who's in position to truely judge things.


Never did I claim to be an insider, but you bringing up Nash's perception is irrelevant since he hasn't stated there is something significantly wrong with Zach. So taking his position is in this whole issue is quite premature. 




> I like Zach on the court quite a bit, I just recognize that there are other hard working players too... I happen to think SAR has been one throughout his career, he just doesn't have a role on the club with Zach entrenched.


I've never heard anything about SAR working his butt off in the summer, instead I hear complaints about playing backup on a playoff contending team. Your point is dismissed. 




> If my Aunt had a :laugh: well, reality is what it is... He is 7 foot, he can handle and pass like a guard, and he is a 5 time ALL NBA Defensive player. Thats just the facts... sorry.


Stating KG is a top 5 defensive player of all time is NOT a fact, I don't know if anyone would agree with you that he's a top 5 defensive player. Stop passing opinions off as facts. 




> We all have our opinions. Mine is that KG is a deserving MVP because he's a flat stud on both ends of the court. Zach is an offensive force and a defensive liability... thats why teams go at him so often... which is also why his +/- ratio is so unextrodinary. You'll have to dig here to find him on this charting because he tracks so low... you should be able to spot Garnett right off though.


I don't think KG should have been MVP, I think he would be runner up but with the talent KG was surrounded with, he should have taken his team much farther than say a Tim Duncan. Duncan has less talent on his team than Garnett, yet they managed to to achieve the same thing last season. 



> This is so stupid. I've clearly worded my posts to state he's neither guilty or innocent of the DUII charge from (I looked it up) 9 months to this day, but that Nash should be in prime to position to judge whats what with him. What qualifies as "recent" with you anyways?


Nine month isn't considered recent in my book. Stating Nash is in the position to know if Zach would be more a positive or negative influence on the team is true, though he had made mistakes in his career, HUGE mistakes. GMs make mistakes, examples are Jermaine O'neal or Brian Grant. 




> More of the left field stuff you seem to specialize in. Who are you debating anyways? I'll play along. Would I be for the GM trading MJ? Well if he could get back better talent that improves the club, sure. I can easily dream up a package of players that would be better. For example... give me a prime time Hakeem and Larry Bird for Mike in a heartbeat.


What are you even saying? Blah, too many words not enough meaning. 




> For the umpteenth time on the character issue... IMO us mere fans are in poor position to judge things on the personality end, but that doesn't make it unimportant. Though I recognize ZR's talent and like having him on the team, I could understand if Nash, through the insider view that he has, could have possibly seen things that cause him too much concern to want to build around the guy. That doesn't mean that I feel he's a bad guy, only that I'm open to the possibility that he might be. I also feel that trades offers could be such that it would be the right move to trade Zach (or anyone). Whether Zach is traded tomorrow or goes on to enjoy a HOF career in Red and Black, I'll still be a Blazer fan long after he's retired.


Agreed, Blazer fans are in a poor position to judge, as am I, that is why I suggest we all wait for the facts. There is absolutely no point in saying we should trade him now like many Blazer fans are saying. The trades that I have heard so far have not lead me to believe that this team would be improved after trading Zach.


----------



## STOMP (Jan 1, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Sambonius</b>!
> Redd had one of the highest 3 point percentages in the league, just as Randolph had one of the highest field goal percentages. You bring up the pros of Redd is irrelevant, we know both players have pros and cons. You bringing up the fact that Randolph's defense is weak is also irrelevant considering Redd's defense is nothing to rave about. I will honestly be surprised if Randolph's defense isn't noticabely better this upcoming season.


I gave reasons why I place far greater value on interior D then perimeter, which you've apparently chosen to overlook. To restate my reasoning in a simpler way, I'd rather the defense give up jumpers then deep post up position and dunks. I also happen to think that Redd's D is fine while Randolph's is pretty horrible because of his lack of athletism, length, and anticipation. Again, I'd love to share your optimism here... why do you think that any of these things will change this year? Has he grown longer arms? Is he suddenly jumping higher? Has he hired Bobby Jones as a trainer to help his shortcomings? etc... 



> You bringing up the fact that Randolph's defense is weak is also irrelevant considering Redd's defense is nothing to rave about. I will honestly be surprised if Randolph's defense isn't noticabely better this upcoming season.


Nice double post. Try proof reading.



> Also saying that you want your inside players to play defense is a good idea, though I think we can agree that you want your franchise player to play inside, not outside. Having a player like Zach Randolph on basketball playing skills is much more valuable than a player like Michael Redd, no matter the team's needs.


I don't believe Zach is anywhere close to being a franchise player. I think the link I posted clearly showed how far he is from being a difference maker... of course you ignored that too. He's a quality starter IMO, but he can't D up, and plays his best off the ball cleaning up the offensive boards. IMO SAR brings the exact same skillset and is just entering his prime years. I've watched Rahim many times live dating back to his one year at Cal here in the Bay Area. With 7 years in the league as a starter prior to this last one sitting with Portland, it's not too hard for me to recall how he plays when he has an opprotunity.

From what I can decern from the jumbled mess that is your last quoted sentence, you're claiming that a post presence is more valuble/important then a top perimeter threat???  Doesn't it sort of undermine your point that the Bucks had the exact same record as Portland last season even though they have nobody better then Joe Smith for the low block? They also split the two games they played. I'd say that quality players at every position are equally important to a team's success, especially now that Zones are alloud. Elite teams have been built in many different ways. Dispite your claims, we do not agree on this point at all. 



> Never did I claim to be an insider, but you bringing up Nash's perception is irrelevant since he hasn't stated there is something significantly wrong with Zach. So taking his position is in this whole issue is quite premature.


 another jumbled mess that seems to veer way off track from things I've stated. I've always prefaced my statements about Nash possibly moving Zach on the grounds of character with words like IF, only leaving the door open as far as reasons he MIGHT choose to move him... I hope you can understand the possibility that it MIGHT be the right move to make based on things that he sees that we don't. Also IMO, it's Nash's job to explore the options that are out there for *ALL* his players pretty regularly. He'd be a fool to say that publicly as gossipy chicken little fans/press would cry up a storm, but that is part of every GM's job.



> I've never heard anything about SAR working his butt off in the summer, instead I hear complaints about playing backup on a playoff contending team. Your point is dismissed.


So if we don't read about something then it doesn't happen??? This is really your arguement? 



> Stating KG is a top 5 defensive player of all time is NOT a fact, I don't know if anyone would agree with you that he's a top 5 defensive player. Stop passing opinions off as facts.


Boy ya got me there... you saw the chance to come down hard with the indignation and you reached back and let me have it... except once again you've only proved your inability to understand plain english.

Here is my quote that apparently was beyond your ability to grasp... "He is 7 foot, he can handle and pass like a guard, _and he is a 5 time ALL NBA Defensive player._" 

At the end of each regular season, the NBA recognises the best Defensive and all around players with it's All NBA teams as voted on by the main members of the media that cover the league year round. It's a fact that KG has been named 1st team All-NBA Defense the last 5 years... 

http://www.nba.com/history/awards_defensiveteams.html 

Garnett was also named to the All-NBA 1st team for the 3rd strait year, this time as the only unanimous selection. btw, Michael Redd made the 3rd team. Zach garnered a few votes finishing well back, but good for him.

http://www.insidehoops.com/all-nba-teams-042504.shtml 



> I don't think KG should have been MVP, I think he would be runner up but with the talent KG was surrounded with, he should have taken his team much farther than say a Tim Duncan. Duncan has less talent on his team than Garnett, yet they managed to to achieve the same thing last season.


Since the MVP is based on what was achieved in the *regular season*, and Minnisota earned the #1 seed in the West while the Spurs were #3, I'd say yet again you are off base. Garnett only led the league in rebounding, was 2nd in scoring, and basically filled up the statsheet nightly averaging over 39 minutes and appearing in all 82 games.

http://www.nba.com/playerfile/kevin_garnett/

As a lifelong Wake fan, Timmy D is probably my favorite player in the league, but I can still recognise the accomplishments of others. BTW, I like the Spurs supporting cast more then the Wolves too, especially considering that Hudson, Wally, and Candi (3 of their starters/rotation players) missed large chunks of the season due to injuries. KG was magnificent though, and IMO was a very deserving recipiant of the honor. 



> Stating Nash is in the position to know if Zach would be more a positive or negative influence on the team is true, though he had made mistakes in his career, HUGE mistakes. GMs make mistakes, examples are Jermaine O'neal or Brian Grant.


Good point that GMs make mistakes, I never knew that  Sometimes the mistake is a bad signing, a bad trade, or a bad draft pick... sometimes the mistake is choosing not to act. You aren't implying that Nash had anything to do with Jermaine or Grant though are you??? 



> What are you even saying? Blah, too many words not enough meaning.


Just responding to your ridiculous wild tangent about Jordan and Magic being untradeable... not surprising that you couldn't follow along. You seem to dismiss or misconstrue most every thing else that debunks your silly ramblings.

STOMP


----------



## Oldmangrouch (Feb 11, 2003)

OK......how did a thread about KG being a jerk turn into another thread bashing Zach?


----------



## STOMP (Jan 1, 2003)

Is pointing out that he's nowhere close to the league's MVP really bashing? I'm just being realistic in the face of over the top homerism IMO. I'm glad he's on the team, which is why I've called him a quality starter... brilliant pick by TB IMO  

STOMP


----------



## Blaze_Rocks (Aug 11, 2004)

*^^^^UM>>> NO!*

You're a  please don't refer to another poster in this manner. Even in jest. ...Thats all there is to it.. Fans like you will never be satisfied...:yes:


----------



## STOMP (Jan 1, 2003)

Fans like me? I'm a lifelong hoops junkie who would like to see my favorite pro team improve. It's my opinion there are many ways to do this both with and without Zach. 

I'll never be satisfied? I hope not, and I hope Zach and Nash aren't either as both have a ways to go in their respective jobs. I believe the best people and teams continually seek to better themselves, and that being satisfied is equatable to stopping this quest. In my experience it's vitually impossible to stay the same, you're either improving or fading.

STOMP


----------



## Charlotte_______ (May 18, 2003)

Back to the topic, has KG said anything on this?


----------



## Blaze_Rocks (Aug 11, 2004)

"Hater" is an unacceptable term here?
:jawdrop: 





I'm sorry I had no idea.:angel:


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Blaze_Rocks</b>!
> "Hater" is an unacceptable term here?
> :jawdrop:
> 
> ...


yes, as in the guidelines:



> Harassment
> 
> Harassment occurs when a member insults, attacks, and/or denigrates another member at any time. For instance, the use of terms such as "idiot," "moron," "stupid," and like terms constitutes harassment. Harassment not only includes individuals but also can apply to insults against teams, players, and groups of BasketballBoards.net members. Repeated critical and sharply negative posts toward a team forum, team forum members, and/or a team's fan base as a whole can also constitute harassment.


----------

