# And now, with the 1st pick, the Portland Trailblazers...



## PorterIn2004 (Jan 1, 2003)

...get it wrong, somehow or other.

Honestly, it seems to me that, if the Blazers pick Aldridge, Morrison actually _will_ become the next Bird. On the other hand, if they pick Morrison, Aldridge will almost certainly become the next Bosh. Regardless, whomever the Blazers pick, said pick seems to me almost certain to be the next Miles, Outlaw, or Bowie.

So maybe they trade the pick? Not so fast... Let's say they package it with Zach, Miles, or Theo, cash, and other players and/or picks to get someone like KG, Pierce or some other big name. Then they've either got a star refusing to show up or who shows up and gets some sort of career-ending injury, or some such.

At this point, I'm nearly ready to hope the balls bounce such that Portland ends up outside of the top three, just so we're not crushed. It's not even a lack of faith in Nash and company (though they hardly are inspiring confidence for me, either). It's more that it just seems like Murphy (and Allen's new spending policies) are determined to have his (their) way with us. I normally think of myself as even a glass 1/4 full kinda guy and, at some point the glass is just simply empty..... :sad:


----------



## sa1177 (Feb 18, 2005)

Geeesh talk about a "Doom and Gloom" post.


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

If Aldridge passes the Pritchard test....which I hear includes the heart of a player then you draft him. He is 6'11" ish and seems to have a nice all around game. If the guy brings it then go for it. 

If Noah comes out please disregard the above statement.


----------



## PorterIn2004 (Jan 1, 2003)

sa1177 said:


> Geeesh talk about a "Doom and Gloom" post.


Yeah, sorry. I guess I posted it hoping someone could find some ray of sunshine for me. And yes, I know that Webster has started looking better, that Outlaw and Khryapa might yet turn into valuable players, that Telfair's been shooting better of late, etc. And, the team is, rightfully I think, sitting at the _bottom_ of the ESPN "Power" rankings, there's no sign that Allen's going to snap out of his haze, remember he's got lots of money, and right this listing galleon nor does it seem likely that he'll be able to sell any time soon. It feels like the team's become the Portland Clippers. How many years will it be before the team's even back to .500? I'm not trying to bait anyone here, I'm really asking and very much hoping that folks'll chime in with some tangible pieces of hope.


----------



## sa1177 (Feb 18, 2005)

The hope lies in Allen selling the team and the Blazer's beginning a new era under new ownership.


----------



## PorterIn2004 (Jan 1, 2003)

sa1177 said:


> The hope lies in Allen selling the team and the Blazer's beginning a new era under new ownership.


Agreed, though that seems like such a slim hope at this point, given the situation with the Rose Garden, that the future seems pretty brutal to me.


----------



## ProudBFan (Apr 29, 2003)

The paranoia expressed in the original post is understandable, given the Blazers' track record of (not) picking a winner. Bowie over Jordan. Telfair over Paul (Paul does have the early lead, but who knows how it will turn out in the long run).

From what I can tell, Paul Allen has traditionally played a very large role in our draft picks. I'm hoping that his interest level in the team is at an all-time low when the draft rolls around this time, and that he'll let the people who know the game of basketball do the picking. Pritchard and Nate could pick a winner, IMO. Maybe even Nash, if Allen isn't doing his thinking for him.

PBF


----------



## mgb (Jun 26, 2004)

sa1177 said:


> Geeesh talk about a "Doom and Gloom" post.


Ya, but don't you sometimes get the same feeling?


----------



## sa1177 (Feb 18, 2005)

mgb said:


> Ya, but don't you sometimes get the same feeling?


Yes I am sure we all do...and for good reason.


----------



## Utherhimo (Feb 20, 2005)

allen will sell. ANTG! Its all Vulcan't's.

I think that the rep points are way too high they need to lower than this is getting silly.

there are 5 players that could help the blazers bargnani, morrison, noah, tyrus, aldridge any one of those will be very good for our team.


----------



## STUCKEY! (Aug 31, 2005)

Utherhimo said:


> allen will sell. ANTG! Its all Vulcan't's.
> 
> I think that the rep points are way too high they need to lower than this is getting* silly*.
> 
> there are 5 players that could help the blazers bargnani, morrison, noah, tyrus, aldridge any one of those will be very good for our team.


 :biggrin:


----------



## Reep (Jun 4, 2003)

[To get back on track]

. . . select LaMarcus Aldridge. I think he will show more in the workouts than he was able to playing for the horns. I expect his height will be decent with a long wing span. However, if he measures short, it could all change. Aldridge is a save pick, and should at least provide solid help at a key position.

I think Tyrus Thomas is too much of a project (risk). Even with his athletic ability, he still has a 'tweener build and not much of an offensive game (except dunking).

I don't see them taking Morrison first. Second or third maybe, but not first. Someone on ESPN asked the telling question the other day, "who is the best white american player in the NBA." You have to think a while don't you. That is why Morrison will not go first.


----------



## Blazer Freak (Jul 11, 2004)

Reep said:


> [To get back on track]
> 
> . . . select LaMarcus Aldridge. I think he will show more in the workouts than he was able to playing for the horns. I expect his height will be decent with a long wing span. However, if he measures short, it could all change. Aldridge is a save pick, and should at least provide solid help at a key position.
> 
> ...


I think a major part will be his workouts, because LaMarcus didn't really get to show his game at Texas because their guards to not pass the ball well into the post, and sometimes don't even pass the ball at all. In workouts, it will be all him, and IMO I think he'll shine.


----------



## Reep (Jun 4, 2003)

Blazer Freak said:


> I think a major part will be his workouts, because LaMarcus didn't really get to show his game at Texas because *their guards to not pass the ball well into the post,* and sometimes don't even pass the ball at all. In workouts, it will be all him, and IMO I think he'll shine.


But then again, some of the Portland guards don't pass the ball all that well into the post either. So maybe it would be a perfect fit.


----------



## Blazer Freak (Jul 11, 2004)

Reep said:


> But then again, some of the Portland guards don't pass the ball all that well into the post either. So maybe it would be a perfect fit.


I think Jack is probably the weakest at doing this. But just watching a Texas game, their PG's do not give up the ball at all, and plays are rarely called for LaMarcus so he has to go get it himself. Telfair and Blake, IMO are above average at getting the ball to the posts.


----------



## ThatBlazerGuy (May 1, 2003)

With Morrison, alot of it comes down to his workouts against other prospective SG/SF's. I have no doubt that athletic guys like Rodney Carney will eat Morrison alive in 1-on-1 drills, and that will hurt his stock and IMO push him out of the top 3. 

Aldridge comes down to measurements, wingspan and heart. I think he will come out to a legit 6'11, and show off his tremendous wingspan. His passion is the only thing that makes anyone question whether or not he is the best player in this years draft. 

Tryus Thomas I simply dont want. I could care less for another athletic freak that really is unrefined. He is a monster shotblocker and a good rebounder, but his jumper is worse than Joakim and he will never be a SF.


----------



## meru (Jul 2, 2003)

Reep said:


> "who is the best white american player in the NBA." You have to think a while don't you.


Give up. What's the answer?


----------



## meru (Jul 2, 2003)

ThatBlazerGuy said:


> With Morrison, alot of it comes down to his workouts against other prospective SG/SF's. I have no doubt that athletic guys like Rodney Carney will eat Morrison alive in 1-on-1 drills, and that will hurt his stock and IMO push him out of the top 3.


Possibly, but wouldn't that be incredibly short-sighted? Since the rule changes, the NBA is lot more like the college game, with much fewer isolations. Besides which, if I remember from last year, it tends to be a lot more 2-on-2 than 1-on-1, and I'm sure Morrison can do okay in those situations.

Workouts are of limited use because you're not allowed to have the prospective draftees go against actual NBA players. And if you can't see what you're getting from the many many hours of film of Morrison in college, how will that much more help?



> Aldridge comes down to measurements, wingspan and heart. I think he will come out to a legit 6'11, and show off his tremendous wingspan. His passion is the only thing that makes anyone question whether or not he is the best player in this years draft.


Again, how can you "measure" "heart"? The knock on him is that he gets up for one game and not the next. I'm sure he can be energetic for one workout.



> Tryus Thomas I simply dont want. I could care less for another athletic freak that really is unrefined. He is a monster shotblocker and a good rebounder, but his jumper is worse than Joakim and he will never be a SF.


Depends what he measures as. If he's 6'9" and 215, then he's the same height as McDyess and just 5lbs lighter (and a year younger) than McDyess when he was drafted. Buck Williams was 6'8" and 220, and he battled Karl Malone to a standstill on a regular basis. Besides, Tyrus Thomas just shot up like a weed - I think he's going to fill out a little, don't you?

By the way, "athletic freak" "unrefined" and "monster shotblocker and good rebounder" described Amare Stoudemire.

I'll take an incredibly intense Thomas over a lackadaisical Aldridge anytime.


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

ThatBlazerGuy said:


> With Morrison, alot of it comes down to his workouts against other prospective SG/SF's. I have no doubt that athletic guys like Rodney Carney will eat Morrison alive in 1-on-1 drills, and that will hurt his stock and IMO push him out of the top 3.


or not. While he might not be able to play defense to keep with those guys, they also have to keep up with his offensive game too. it's not all about 1 on 1 drills anyways. 


because the game is played 5 on 5...



> Aldridge comes down to measurements, wingspan and heart. I think he will come out to a legit 6'11, and show off his tremendous wingspan. His passion is the only thing that makes anyone question whether or not he is the best player in this years draft.
> 
> Tryus Thomas I simply dont want. I could care less for another athletic freak that really is unrefined. He is a monster shotblocker and a good rebounder, but his jumper is worse than Joakim and he will never be a SF.


I think we'll have to wait to see where we pick, and who is available before it's worth saying player is good or bad, or whatever.


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

I like Aldridge. I don't think that questioning his heart is the right thing to do with him. To me when I watch more than anything I see a player that let's the game come to him, something that is usually considered an attribute in that he isn't disrupting the flow of the game. He's not the aggressive energetic player that a guy like Morrison is. His court demeanor reminds of another guy who put up similar numbers as a sophmore...Tim Duncan. Remember back when Tim came in the league everyone questioned wether he had the fire to be a superstar? 

I think Aldridge will be better in the NBA, where the tempo suits a big man better, than he was college.


----------



## ThatBlazerGuy (May 1, 2003)

Ya, LaMarcus does seem to be one of those guys who will do better in the NBA than in College.


----------



## Masbee (Dec 31, 2002)

Reep said:


> [To get back on track]
> Someone on ESPN asked the telling question the other day, "who is the best white american player in the NBA." You have to think a while don't you. That is why Morrison will not go first.


Brad Miller? Probably.

Then maybe Wally Z, eeesh or Kirk Hinrich? Troy Murphy? Wow. Slim pickins.

And that did take a while. My first thought was, "easy, Steve Na...., oops, Canada hasn't been invaded, yet".


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

Masbee said:


> Brad Miller? Probably.
> 
> Then maybe Wally Z, eeesh or Kirk Hinrich? Troy Murphy? Wow. Slim pickins.
> 
> And that did take a while. My first thought was, "easy, Steve Na...., oops, Canada hasn't been invaded, yet".


Current, sure, but then there's good ole Larry.


----------



## Masbee (Dec 31, 2002)

Schilly said:


> Current, sure, but then there's good ole Larry.


Who said anything about all-time?


----------



## Blazer Freak (Jul 11, 2004)

Masbee said:


> Who said anything about all-time?


Don't forget Steve Blake.


----------



## deanwoof (Mar 10, 2003)

Is Morrison just going to be another Wally Sczcerbiak? 

6'8"ish, plays(ed) with heart, can shoot it anywhere easily and quicky, can create own shot (sort of), can't defend a chair, come from small colleges, and the most obvious they have brown hair?


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

deanwoof said:


> Is Morrison just going to be another Wally Sczcerbiak?
> 
> 6'8"ish, plays(ed) with heart, can shoot it anywhere easily and quicky, can create own shot (sort of), can't defend a chair, come from small colleges, and the most obvious they have brown hair?


did wally really play with the same tenacity as Morrison? (I ask not because I'm trying to make a point, but because I don't seem to recall that being a positive aspect to Wallys game)

I think he'd be more like Reggie Miller than Wally Skerbiack.


----------



## deanwoof (Mar 10, 2003)

That's why I said played. Early in his NBA career he was always screaming and shouting. 

And his tournament play with Miami he was definately playing with his mouth open and shouting, much like Noah and Morrison this year. 

But lately? No. He's been pretty quiet. I think it's due to when KG *****-slapped him


----------



## Kmurph (May 7, 2003)

> With Morrison, alot of it comes down to his workouts against other prospective SG/SF's. I have no doubt that athletic guys like Rodney Carney will eat Morrison alive in 1-on-1 drills, and that will hurt his stock and IMO push him out of the top 3.


Where is ZagsFan to refute this? :lol:

You do realize that Morrison torched Carney for 34pts in a head to head matchup this year, don't you? I think Morrison will prove the exact opposite should he choose to do 1v1 matchups...I think he will prove that he is more athletic than some give him credit for and a very crafty offensive player....

I think he just needs to show that he can play some mediocre defense when pressed into it...



> To me when I watch more than anything I see a player that let's the game come to him, something that is usually considered an attribute in that he isn't disrupting the flow of the game.


I disagree Schilly, he went 2-14 vs LSU and the athleticism of Thomas and the muscle of Glen Davis completely took him out of the game...he was a complete non-factor, and for a guy who is considered to be a #1 pick, I think he has had a few too many of such performances....

Just for reference...

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncb/player/profile?playerId=22514

I am not saying he won't be a decent pro, b\c he probably will be...but the chances of him being Chris Bosh in terms of impact are very slim IMO...I still maintain he will have a Joe Smith impact...very nondescript...


----------



## mgb (Jun 26, 2004)

Reep said:


> I don't see them taking Morrison first. Second or third maybe, but not first. Someone on ESPN asked the telling question the other day, "who is the best white american player in the NBA." You have to think a while don't you. That is why Morrison will not go first.


Who was the best Chinese player before Yao? Would have been a stupid reason for not picking Yao.


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

mediocre man said:


> *If Aldridge passes the Pritchard test....which I hear includes the heart of a player then you draft him.* He is 6'11" ish and seems to have a nice all around game. If the guy brings it then go for it.
> 
> If Noah comes out please disregard the above statement.


Well then he's automatically off the list.


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

> With Morrison, alot of it comes down to his workouts against other prospective SG/SF's. I have no doubt that athletic guys like Rodney Carney will eat Morrison alive in 1-on-1 drills, and that will hurt his stock and IMO push him out of the top 3.


Since playing someone 1 on 1 really matters....

and like 1 on 1 is really an indication of anything?...Believe it or not, but I was once at the Multnomah Athletic Club in downtown Portland about 2 summers ago and I saw Derek Raivio beat Damon Stoudamire in a game of 1 on 1...Does that make Derek better than Stoudamire?...No. It means that a certain player was hot and the other was not, and the other player wasn't able to use his creativity and other facets of the game, which they are able to utilize in an actual game...

and thirdly, do you really think athleticism is what makes players good at 1 on 1?....


----------



## Tince (Jul 11, 2004)

zagsfan20 said:


> Since playing someone 1 on 1 really matters....


In the NBA, 1 on 1 does mean something.


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

zagsfan20 said:


> Well then he's automatically off the list.




You certainly won't get an argument from me about the differences between Morrison;s heart and Aldridges. What I will say though is that Aldridge is a lot better this year than last. His coach, teammates, scouts and opposing players all say he is more firey this year than last. 

If he scores high enough on the Pritchard test you have to take him. his college numbers and frame say he will be a good NBA player. C/PF of the future....immediate future


----------



## RedHot&Rolling (Jun 26, 2004)

Hmmmm?

6' 11" 245lbs

vs.

6' 8" 220lbs

I think I'd rather have height - if all else is equal.


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

RedHot&Rolling said:


> Hmmmm?
> 
> 6' 11" 245lbs
> 
> ...


if they were the same player, sure. But they aren't, so all things aren't equal.


----------



## RedHot&Rolling (Jun 26, 2004)

If our Blazers have a chance at any of Aldridge 6'11", Morrison 6'8", or Noah 6'11" - who would you take??

I'd take Noah. Noah has fire in the belly, as does Morrison. Noah has skill for his position, as do the other two. Noah has frontcourt height and can play both PF and C, as does Aldridge.

If I'm GM for the day and all three are on the board - Noah and I are getting in the ark together. Morrison is great, but a SF, with limited defensive ability. Aldridge is unconvincing, dominate one night disappears the next. We have enough of that mind-set already on the team.

I always defer to height when I can't decide. Noah gets my bid. I hope he declares.

If left to choose between Aldridge and Morrison - I don't know yet. One would be a valuable shooter/scorer on offense, the other gives us a chance at a prospective center someday. I'm still up in the air.


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

RedHot&Rolling said:


> If our Blazers have a chance at any of Aldridge 6'11", Morrison 6'8", or Noah 6'11" - who would you take??
> 
> I'd take Noah. Noah has fire in the belly, as does Morrison. Noah has skill for his position, as do the other two. Noah has frontcourt height and can play both PF and C, as does Aldridge.
> 
> ...



How about this scenereo. 6'8" great college player on the offensive end, or 6'9" great college player on the defensive end. The 6"8" player is about as developed as he will get, as where the 6"9" player is known to be raw, and might show improvement. 

Morrison or Thomas? 


I agree with you by the way. If Aldridge shows some toughness and a mean streak at all in workouts then you draft size.


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

RedHot&Rolling said:


> If our Blazers have a chance at any of Aldridge 6'11", Morrison 6'8", or Noah 6'11" - who would you take??


Morrison. Noah and Thomas are far less refined which is what the team needs.


> I'd take Noah. Noah has fire in the belly, as does Morrison. Noah has skill for his position, as do the other two. Noah has frontcourt height and can play both PF and C, as does Aldridge.
> 
> If I'm GM for the day and all three are on the board - Noah and I are getting in the ark together. Morrison is great, but a SF, with limited defensive ability. Aldridge is unconvincing, dominate one night disappears the next. We have enough of that mind-set already on the team.


Noah also dissapeared in games too, you know.



> I always defer to height when I can't decide. Noah gets my bid. I hope he declares.


thats not always the best way to go, considering would you have passed up on Dwyane Wade if Darko was there at the spot?

would you have passed up on Paul for Bogut, because Bogut is "taller"?

you take who you think is the best, regardless of their height (and what fans think is the best).



> If left to choose between Aldridge and Morrison - I don't know yet. One would be a valuable shooter/scorer on offense, the other gives us a chance at a prospective center someday. I'm still up in the air.


The team needs to upgrade it's SF most of all, as there's no young guy who is in the wings for starting, who's argubably enough better to even worry about making him the future. 

I'd rather have a guy who's so-so on defense but stellar on offense, than one who's so-so on offense and good to stellar on defense. Especially with this ****-can of a team.

Darius is not going to be here next year, and Travis still hasn't shown he's anything more than a backup at this point. If you pass up a guy who could contribute now, for a guy who might not for a couple years AND is at a position were we already have an anchor of a player (zach), I'm not sure thats too wise.

This team needs scoring, and someone who can create his own shot out of nothing (and make it). Zach can't, Darius can't..Webster isn't there (and who knows if he can be) and Telfair can bot can't.

Noah can't take over games offensively, which is what we need, nor can Thomas.

Morrison (at least in college) can. Doesn't necessarily mean it'll translate to the pro's, but the same is true of Thomas or Noah's defensive game-set.


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

mediocre man said:


> How about this scenereo. 6'8" great college player on the offensive end, or 6'9" great college player on the defensive end. The 6"8" player is about as developed as he will get, as where the 6"9" player is known to be raw, and might show improvement.
> 
> Morrison or Thomas?


how come Morrison is "about as developed as he wil get"?


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

SMiLE said:


> Morrison. Noah and Thomas are far less refined which is what the team needs.
> 
> 
> Noah also dissapeared in games too, you know.
> ...



I'm not sure I agree with you about SF being the poosition we need to upgrade most. Although we have no real player in our system that you point to and say "there he is" but I think Viktor Khryapa might be able to turn himself into a Bruce Bowen type of a player. Strong defensive skills, able to play some offense to keep the defense honest and will bust his *** all the time. This can also be said of him as a PF too I guess. I think with Theo and Joel's injuries and Zach's defensive and black hole liabilities drafting big is more of a concern. It's not like Morrison is clearly the better prospect. if he was then sure, draft him. He has some question marks like the rest of them do. that's why I think you go after size.....as far as the Blazerd are concerned.....

To answer your next question I'm sure. If Morrison is as hard of a worker as we all think he is, then why would he get any better defensively. He is a proven scorer who has played basketball his whole life. Thomas, another supposed hard worker, is a very good defender that is still learning the game. 


It's in no way a knock against Morrison. The guy is an amazing player that if he did end up in Portland would make me happy. I just think the team needs to look at size instead.



OT did you watch American Idol last night Smile? I can only assume that Freddy was rolling over in his grave.

Understatement of the year was when the two members of Queen said that "Freddy is a hard act to follow" when referring to a contestant


----------



## Stepping Razor (Apr 24, 2004)

Does anyone else think Aldridge has Michael Olowokandi written all over him? He's got good size, good hands, good offensive moves... and he just doesn't seem to care too much. 

I really hope we don't end up with this guy.

Give me Bargnani, Morrison, or Thomas, please. (Actually, I'd love to see the Blazers make some kind of trade where they can get both Bargnani and Morrison. Not quite sure how to swing that. Maybe something involving Z-Bo to the Bulls?)

Stepping Razor


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

mediocre man said:


> I'm not sure I agree with you about SF being the poosition we need to upgrade most. Although we have no real player in our system that you point to and say "there he is" but I think Viktor Khryapa might be able to turn himself into a Bruce Bowen type of a player. Strong defensive skills, able to play some offense to keep the defense honest and will bust his *** all the time. This can also be said of him as a PF too I guess. I think with Theo and Joel's injuries and Zach's defensive and black hole liabilities drafting big is more of a concern. It's not like Morrison is clearly the better prospect. if he was then sure, draft him. He has some question marks like the rest of them do. that's why I think you go after size.....as far as the Blazerd are concerned.....


I'd much rather pick a small forward who can score buckets, than one who's defensive minded. Especially since the Spurs can get away with that since they have Duncan, Parker and Gino. We don't.



> To answer your next question I'm sure. If Morrison is as hard of a worker as we all think he is, then why would he get any better defensively. He is a proven scorer who has played basketball his whole life. Thomas, another supposed hard worker, is a very good defender that is still learning the game.


what kind of logic is that? Because one person is a hard worker, why would he get better at defense..but since one player is a harder worker, and still learning the game, he will get better??



> It's in no way a knock against Morrison. The guy is an amazing player that if he did end up in Portland would make me happy. I just think the team needs to look at size instead.


the team needs scoring, you can pick up size easily with later picks.



> OT did you watch American Idol last night Smile? I can only assume that Freddy was rolling over in his grave.


You totally set that up for a joke, didn't you? (for those who don't know, Freddie was gay)

Queen must've been paid a handsome chunk of change to put up with that.



> Understatement of the year was when the two members of Queen said that "Freddy is a hard act to follow" when referring to a contestant


amen.


----------



## hasoos (Jan 3, 2003)

Kmurph said:


> Where is ZagsFan to refute this? :lol:
> 
> You do realize that Morrison torched Carney for 34pts in a head to head matchup this year, don't you? I think Morrison will prove the exact opposite should he choose to do 1v1 matchups...I think he will prove that he is more athletic than some give him credit for and a very crafty offensive player....
> 
> ...


I think you are hasty to judge. You to remember that these guys play each other once in the tournament, and may have never faced a player built or with the playing style he faced that night, and sometimes some guys just need to figure out how to adjust their game against certain opponents. Glenn Davis, while a wide body, is no different then what guys like Jahidi White or Danny Fortson were in college. They give trouble to other players for the most part until they get figured out for what they are: Overweight guys playing the middle using their body as leverage. Once a player figures out how to deal with them, they are just another 2nd string chump in the NBA who end up resorting to using hard fouls once they can't hang with the athletic crowd. 

Now that being said, I think you also need to take a look at his numbers through out the season. He scored darn near 15 point and 9 boards a game in college. Those numbers are similar to what Patrick Ewing did his senior year, and Hakeem Olajuan got his last year in school. I am not saying he will become them, but what I am saying is he compares well overall against other guys that successfully jumped into the NBA.

Last but not least, there are not a lot of players in the NCAA tournament that look good on the game they get knocked out of the tournament on.


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

SMiLE said:


> I'd much rather pick a small forward who can score buckets, than one who's defensive minded. Especially since the Spurs can get away with that since they have Duncan, Parker and Gino. We don't.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



First. You said the team can easily pick up size with the later pick...You mean like Ha?

Second. Morrison has played basketball a lot longer than Thomas. If he doesn't know how or won't play defense by now then why would you think he will start after he's making millions of dolars a year. Thomas is still learning the game and has improved every year offensively. Again, it's not a knock against Morrison, just my opinion. That whole bad hapit theory pitching coaches use. 

Lastly. I was not joking about Freddy rolling over....although that's humorous. Freddy was gay, diesd of aids, and is still the best male pop, rock and roll singer I can think of. Operetic trained and all. I was disapointed to see they got Paul Rodgers to replace him. the guy they should have targeted was George Michael. He has a lot of similarities in his voice that Freddy does.


----------



## Tince (Jul 11, 2004)

Stepping Razor said:


> Does anyone else think Aldridge has Michael Olowokandi written all over him? He's got good size, good hands, good offensive moves... and he just doesn't seem to care too much.
> 
> Stepping Razor


The Kandi Man had one real move coming out of college, a right-handed hook. It was still obvious Kandi has little basketball experience, but his natural talents made people think he would get way better. Aldridge has a handful of post moves already, and has way better footwork than the Kandi Man has now.


----------



## ThatBlazerGuy (May 1, 2003)

Not to mention LaMarcus has a jumper that Kandi would die for. His form is better than nearly any big man currently in the NBA


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

mediocre man said:


> First. You said the team can easily pick up size with the later pick...You mean like Ha?


Ha wasn't a first round pick, or the 1st pick in the 2nd round (as most likely thats our lot this year).

There will be decent big men, altho not a plethora, available at 30 and 31 (or wherever our 2nd pick is).



> Second. Morrison has played basketball a lot longer than Thomas. If he doesn't know how or won't play defense by now then why would you think he will start after he's making millions of dolars a year. Thomas is still learning the game and has improved every year offensively. Again, it's not a knock against Morrison, just my opinion. That whole bad hapit theory pitching coaches use.


This was my theory on him last year: If he doesn't know how to or won't shoot 3 pointers at a good clip, why would he start doing so once he's made millions?

Hm, I guess he improved his game.

Btw, why would Thomas improve every year once he's made millions?

Why would one improve and not the other? I'm not sure I buy that he'll just be content with his game as is, just because he's made millions (anymore than anyone else in this draft I mean). 

Why? He's improved a ton from last year to this year (and improved on defense, but obviously he'll need to improve more). 

he could've been a pick last year but wanted to improve his game (in college). I don't think those are signs of someone who'll just stay the same now just because he gets money. 



> Lastly. I was not joking about Freddy rolling over....although that's humorous. Freddy was gay, diesd of aids, and is still the best male pop, rock and roll singer I can think of. Operetic trained and all. I was disapointed to see they got Paul Rodgers to replace him. the guy they should have targeted was George Michael. He has a lot of similarities in his voice that Freddy does.


Freddie kicked ***, and I challenge anyone to find a show-man (in music) that could control 150,000 people better than he could. The crowds were puddy in his hands, and he knew it. He had that something extra that a lot of 'stars' today don't have, won't ever have, and don't know HOW to have. 

simple answer, you can't find anyone who would, and won't ever find anyone who will.


----------



## Stepping Razor (Apr 24, 2004)

Tince said:


> The Kandi Man had one real move coming out of college, a right-handed hook. It was still obvious Kandi has little basketball experience, but his natural talents made people think he would get way better. Aldridge has a handful of post moves already, and has way better footwork than the Kandi Man has now.


I don't know about that...

Olowokandi was a much more dominant offensive force in college than Aldridge is. His last season at Pacific he averaged 22 points and 11 boards, and shot 61% from the floor. (Aldridge averages 15 and 9, shooting 57%.) Olowokandi wasn't drafted on potential; he was drafted on performance. His hook was his best move but he also had an effective drop step and decent footwork. He had (and has) all the tools; he just doesn't have the mentality to make himself a dominant player on the next level. 

Considering Aldridge's wealth of physical tools and skills, his spotty production at the college level has to raise questions about whether or not he's going to have the same problems. I mean, the guy's statistical production in college is basically identical to Matt Haryasz's, who we could get in the second round. 

Stepping Razor


----------



## Kmurph (May 7, 2003)

Fair enough Hasoos...and you may be right, he may turn out to be a fine pro...and yes, he may figure out how to play against more athletic and more physical players...he better, b\c those are exactly the type of players he will see in the NBA on a nightly basis....

He certainly wasn't utilized by the guards at Texas as much as he probably should have been....but having said all that, I really think Morrison will be a much more dynamic player..

Yeah POR needs size...EVERY team can always use more size, yes they are last in rebounding, but IMO you can't win, if you can't outscore your opponents...

Yes, more rebounds would help some, but the bottom line is POR id dead last in scoring at 88.8ppg, the top team (PHX) is at 108.3ppg, that is 20ppg differential, I disagree that you can make a majority of that up with better rebounding...

POR has a -4.2 differential in rebounding...Phoenix is at -4.4...NY is at +3.1...POR needs to rebound better, but I don't think it is the "crucial" factor in the teams abyssmal play...

I would like to see POR take Morrison...obviously

Pick apart Morrison's game all you want, but IMO he out of ANY OTHER PLAYER in this draft has the best potential to be an All-Star\Franchise caliber player...AT WORST I see a Wally Sczerbiak type of player, and given his NW ties, his fiery demeanor and uncanny offensive abilites..I think he is the clear choice for POR... 

IMO the reason for the teams poor play, lies in part to defense, rebounding and scoring, but I think it is the abscence of some key "intangibles" that lies more to the root of the cause....

*POR lacks leadership* - Miles...Zach...Have absolutely ZERO in this department, in fact you could argue they are both poster children for how NOT to act\react as a player...I feel for the other players on this team, it is easy to see why Pryzbilla is so frustrated, and he is normally a quiet guy...I think Telfair/Jack, even Webster WANT to lead, but at their young ages, and with many of the "vets" specifically the key ones tuning them out, they are left to fend on their own...it is a sad state...this team is rudderless...Get rid of Zach and Miles and a leader...or several...will emerge, and the character of this team will jump significantly...Morrison will only help to further strengthen this IMO... 

*POR lacks competitive spirit*....Blaming the youth of this team for its current woes is clearly missing the bigger picture...a majority of the blame for POR pathetic performance falls squarely on the shoulders of its "so called" best players and veterans...Zach & Miles specifically have not come close to living up to their expectations....Blake, Dixon, Theo and Pryzbilla simply are not talented enough...decent players, decent "cogs" in the wheel, but expecting more from them is unrealistic... 

and the lack of "competitive effort\spirit\fire" is a DIRECT result of that being VOID in the teams two "allegedly" best players....The young guys play hard...it is too bad that some of the vets don't do the same.... 

Aldridge has been questioned over his "effort\intensity" as well...That isn't even an issue with Morrison...I was there at monday's game vs DEN and saw firsthand how badly Telfair & Webster wanted to win that game...by adding Morrison to that mix you encourage and strenghten that type of atmosphere...the type of atmosphere EVERY fan wants to see their team display on a nightly basis....


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

if we ever get to pick teams, I pick Kmurph as my first pick.


----------



## yakbladder (Sep 13, 2003)

I think most GMs would tell you to draft size when there is some quality involved because the big guys are hard to find.

That being said, I'll be surprised if we don't trade the pick.


----------



## Blazer Maven (Sep 27, 2005)

The answer to the Aldridge/Adam debate is simple: Draft neither one.

Brandon Roy should be the pick. He will step right in at the 2, make Webster a better player at the 3, feed Zach in the post and provide defense and leadership.

Roy has nearly all the positives of Morrison without the negatives on defense. He is proven and ready.


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

Blazer Maven said:


> The answer to the Aldridge/Adam debate is simple: Draft neither one.
> 
> Brandon Roy should be the pick. He will step right in at the 2, make Webster a better player at the 3, feed Zach in the post and provide defense and leadership.
> 
> Roy has nearly all the positives of Morrison without the negatives on defense. He is proven and ready.


Roy would be a good pick (altho he doesn't have nearly the offensive game or abilities) but not where we're picking.

How is Roy "proven and ready" anymore than any of the other guys are?


----------



## hasoos (Jan 3, 2003)

Stepping Razor said:


> I don't know about that...
> 
> Olowokandi was a much more dominant offensive force in college than Aldridge is. His last season at Pacific he averaged 22 points and 11 boards, and shot 61% from the floor. (Aldridge averages 15 and 9, shooting 57%.) Olowokandi wasn't drafted on potential; he was drafted on performance. His hook was his best move but he also had an effective drop step and decent footwork. He had (and has) all the tools; he just doesn't have the mentality to make himself a dominant player on the next level.
> 
> ...


Yes and Michael O played in that powerhouse division in college...those 22 points mean so much. :biggrin:


----------



## crandc (Sep 15, 2004)

Well, shoot, hasoos, if this Jeter kid is better than Telfair based on what he did in a small college...


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

hasoos said:


> Yes and Michael O played in that powerhouse division in college...those 22 points mean so much. :biggrin:


Bill Russell played in a powerhouse division too....


----------



## Stepping Razor (Apr 24, 2004)

hasoos said:


> Yes and Michael O played in that powerhouse division in college...those 22 points mean so much. :biggrin:


Sure, no one is ever going to confuse UoP for Duke, or even Gonzaga. But it's still D1 college basketball. And on such a weak team opposing defenses presumably keyed on stopping him more than they would on a balanced team like Texas.

Anyways, I stick to my contention that Aldridge's combination of incredible ability and mediocre production spells trouble -- especially on a team like the Blazers, which, as others have pointed out, is lacking fire, heart, and leadership. Aldridge would probably be great on a team like Detroit, where the vets understand how to play the game and would push his *** to excel. Who on the Blazers is going to do that? I think we need someone more self-motivated, and able to motivate others.

I don't think it's a bad idea to go for a big man, but I'd much rather have Bargnani or Thomas.

Stepping Razor


----------



## hasoos (Jan 3, 2003)

zagsfan20 said:


> Bill Russell played in a powerhouse division too....



And there are only how many years between then and now? There is a big difference between Bill Russels times powerhouses and now. Maybe we should compare powerhouses in the 50's to now, and act like it means something too. :biggrin:


----------



## Kmurph (May 7, 2003)

> That being said, I'll be surprised if we don't trade the pick.


For whom? The only players I have seen mentioned as possibilities either are the fantasyland variety (KG), not worthy of trading a #1\top 3 pick for (Maggete) or too old\not interested in coming here (Pierce)...


----------



## sa1177 (Feb 18, 2005)

Kmurph said:


> For whom? The only players I have seen mentioned as possibilities either are the fantasyland variety (KG), not worthy of trading a #1\top 3 pick for (Maggete) or too old\not interested in coming here (Pierce)...


KG not worthy of trading a number #1 pick?? The guy is 29 and averaging 22pts, 13 rbds, 1.5 blks. If we could trade ZBo and the pick for him it would be a steal. He has 5-7 good years left in him and isn't injury prone.


----------



## Reep (Jun 4, 2003)

sa1177 said:


> KG not worthy of trading a number #1 pick?? The guy is 29 and averaging 22pts, 13 rbds, 1.5 blks. If we could trade ZBo and the pick for him it would be a steal. He has 5-7 good years left in him and isn't injury prone.



:yes: I agree


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

sa1177 said:


> KG not worthy of trading a number #1 pick?? The guy is 29 and averaging 22pts, 13 rbds, 1.5 blks. If we could trade ZBo and the pick for him it would be a steal. He has 5-7 good years left in him and isn't injury prone.


re-read what kmurph wrote, and notice the comma.


----------



## sa1177 (Feb 18, 2005)

SMiLE said:


> re-read what kmurph wrote, and notice the comma.


DOH! duly noted I'll cross him off my "crazy person" list.


----------



## Blazer Maven (Sep 27, 2005)

SMiLE said:


> Roy would be a good pick (altho he doesn't have nearly the offensive game or abilities) but not where we're picking.
> 
> How is Roy "proven and ready" anymore than any of the other guys are?


Why not Roy?

Roy has played four years in against better competition than the others. Roy may not be the flat out shooter that Adam is, but he can create better for himself and others, can play defense at the NBA level.

When you see how Brandon Roy plays the game, with a smooth intensity, while always in the right position, it is easy to see a seamless transition for him to the NBA. The Blazers need a "sure thing" out of this draft and Brandon Roy is just that.


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

Blazer Maven said:


> Why not Roy?
> 
> Roy has played four years in against better competition than the others. Roy may not be the flat out shooter that Adam is, but he can create better for himself and others, can play defense at the NBA level.


Im not sure if he played against "better competition" than Morrison really. Their SOS (strength of schedule) is about the same.



> When you see how Brandon Roy plays the game, with a smooth intensity, while always in the right position, it is easy to see a seamless transition for him to the NBA. The Blazers need a "sure thing" out of this draft and Brandon Roy is just that.


He's no more of that than Morrison is, and he's not a top 3 pick.


----------



## Blazer Maven (Sep 27, 2005)

SMiLE said:


> Im not sure if he played against "better competition" than Morrison really. Their SOS (strength of schedule) is about the same.
> 
> 
> 
> He's no more of that than Morrison is, and he's not a top 3 pick.


What is the definition of a "top 3 pick" ? If it means taking a chance on the next:

Dirk/Skita: Bargnani
O'Neal/Olowokandi: Aldridge
Bird/Sczerbiak (minus rebounding): Morrison
KMart/??: Tyrus Thomas

I guess I would rather take the guy who has the best all around (proven) talent in college basketball: Brandon Roy. So, he's not Kobe, but he might be Ginobili and is a serious upgrade without any negatives.

The above guys are all crapshoots, you might end up striking it rich, you might end up with fool's gold. 

Roy gives the Blazers the best chance to improve immediately. The other guys will either take time to develop, or require additional pieces to be successful. (eg. Morrison's incompatibility with Zach on defense).


----------



## Kmurph (May 7, 2003)

I was just listening to a replay of courtside, specifically the interview with Pritchard...and the following comments struck me as significant

"Losing is hard...it takes a lot of courage to stay the course and understand what we are about"

"We are going to make a great pick this year and someone that Nate feels comfortable with and fits with what were doing moving forward"

"It is going to be a good draft and we need to make a great decison"

Regarding Telfair

"The best thing about Sebastian.....he is a leader....he gets knocked down and he is going to get back up....he is the one guy on the team who can get his shot anytime he wants it"

On Nate's "guys"

"Nate wants toughness...he wants unselfishness, he wants guys who are willing to prepare at a very deep level...and we will be able to find that"

http://www.nba.com/media/blazers/41106_pritchard.mp3


----------



## chromekilla (Aug 21, 2005)

With the 1st pick in the 2006-2007 nba draft the portland trail blazers select greg oden f-c Ohio state buckeyes.


----------



## chromekilla (Aug 21, 2005)

sa1177 said:


> KG not worthy of trading a number #1 pick?? The guy is 29 and averaging 22pts, 13 rbds, 1.5 blks. If we could trade ZBo and the pick for him it would be a steal. He has 5-7 good years left in him and isn't injury prone.


I concur.


----------



## Kmurph (May 7, 2003)

ANY speculation on POR getting KG from Minnesota is "fantasyland" material...

he isn't coming here...acknowledge it and accept it...

KG wants to win a title...at 30yrs old, I find it inconceivable that he would want to come here and be happy if he was dealt here against his wishes....Same goes for Pierce.....


----------



## sa1177 (Feb 18, 2005)

Kmurph said:


> ANY speculation on POR getting KG from Minnesota is "fantasyland" material...
> 
> he isn't coming here...acknowledge it and accept it...
> 
> KG wants to win a title...at 30yrs old, I find it inconceivable that he would want to come here and be happy if he was dealt here against his wishes....Same goes for Pierce.....


Probably true but it depends on how bad either wants out of their current situation. Minny is at the point where they need to tear their team down and rebuild...at least Portland has already started this process. I agree it's unlikely but you never know.


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

Blazer Maven said:


> What is the definition of a "top 3 pick" ? If it means taking a chance on the next:
> 
> Dirk/Skita: Bargnani
> O'Neal/Olowokandi: Aldridge
> ...


Roy provides it all, but it's like saying Rolondo Blackman provided stuff Drexler didn't.


----------



## Blazer Maven (Sep 27, 2005)

SMiLE said:


> Roy provides it all, but it's like saying Rolondo Blackman provided stuff Drexler didn't.


It's more like saying Rolondo Blackman provided stuff Kiki Vandeweghe didn't.

I wish there was a Drexler in this draft, but there isn't.


----------



## Tince (Jul 11, 2004)

Stepping Razor said:


> I don't know about that...
> 
> Olowokandi was a much more dominant offensive force in college than Aldridge is. His last season at Pacific he averaged 22 points and 11 boards, and shot 61% from the floor. (Aldridge averages 15 and 9, shooting 57%.) Olowokandi wasn't drafted on potential; he was drafted on performance. His hook was his best move but he also had an effective drop step and decent footwork. He had (and has) all the tools; he just doesn't have the mentality to make himself a dominant player on the next level.
> 
> Stepping Razor


First off, you're comparing Kandi's junior year numbers with Aldridges sophomore year numbers (I'll get back to that in a second). Despite comparing numbers from different stages in their college careers, Aldridge is playing the BigXII, while Kandi was playing in the WAC I believe. Either way, the competition in the BigXII, especially with big men is going to be much higher in a major conference. 

You also say Kandi wasn't picked based on his potential, but there's no doubt he was. A lot of the talk about Kandi was that he'd only been playing organized basketball for a few years and had so much upside. There are a couple players every year that average 20/10 in a mid-major conference, but it's rare that any of them get picked 1st overall, so obviously potential was playing a huge factor.

Since you wanted to compare stats, let's talk both guys sophomore year stats, and we'll even disregard the competition debate...

Kandi - 10.9ppg / 6.6rpg / 0.4apg / 1.7 blks / 0.4stls / 59% FG / 33% FT
Aldridge - 15.0ppg / 9.2rpg / 0.5apg / 2.0 blks / 1.4stls / 57% FG / 65% FT

So not only does Aldridge have more moves, a better outside shot, but he produced better in college against better competition.


----------



## Utherhimo (Feb 20, 2005)

bargnani is 6'11 and 240


----------



## ThatBlazerGuy (May 1, 2003)

Lets not forget LaMarcus faces much tougher competition.


----------



## Utherhimo (Feb 20, 2005)

than bargnani? men vs young men? 

bargnani plays in two league one is the second best in the world the other is a very good league, he is only 5 pounds off of what aldridge wieghs.


----------



## Blazer Freak (Jul 11, 2004)

Utherhimo said:


> than bargnani? men vs young men?
> 
> bargnani plays in two league one is the second best in the world the other is a very good league, he is only 5 pounds off of what aldridge wieghs.


College is better than any Euro league. I don't know where you get "the 2nd best league in the world from". Bargnani just isn't someone we should draft. We don't need another project. We need good players now, Aldridge, Tyrus, Morrison are all those, and don't have to worry about them getting used to American culture as well as the language.


----------



## Blazer Freak (Jul 11, 2004)

Blazer Maven said:


> It's more like saying Rolondo Blackman provided stuff Kiki Vandeweghe didn't.
> 
> I wish there was a Drexler in this draft, but there isn't.


You don't take Brandon Roy with the #1 pick, your crazy if you think that. If your saying trade down, thats better, but why when we have Webster at the 2 and the Top 5 has some good young bigmen in it?


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

Blazer Freak said:


> College is better than any Euro league. I don't know where you get "the 2nd best league in the world from". Bargnani just isn't someone we should draft. We don't need another project. We need good players now, Aldridge, Tyrus, Morrison are all those, and don't have to worry about them getting used to American culture as well as the language.


I disagree, the Euro league he plays in is more talented than NCAA, that and Thomas is probably a bigger project than Bargnani, as Bargnani's skills are much more refined.


----------



## chromekilla (Aug 21, 2005)

Blazer Freak said:


> College is better than any Euro league. I don't know where you get "the 2nd best league in the world from". Bargnani just isn't someone we should draft. We don't need another project. We need good players now, Aldridge, Tyrus, Morrison are all those, and don't have to worry about them getting used to American culture as well as the language.


We really need to go big after taking guards in the last 2 drafts.


----------



## Blazer Freak (Jul 11, 2004)

Schilly said:


> I disagree, the Euro league he plays in is more talented than NCAA, that and Thomas is probably a bigger project than Bargnani, as Bargnani's skills are much more refined.


Haha true, but still, I have much more confidence in LaMarcus and Morrison than Andrea. Plus, isn't Andrea more of a PF then a C/SF? 

IMO, LaMarcus would be the perfect pick for us, because he allows us flexibilty at C, so we can either get rid of Joel and save money, or get rid of Theo and maybe resign Joel and have a solid backup till LaMarcus is ready to start. This is probably like the 5th time I've said this, but if you look at the 2007 draft, you are gonna see some good SF's at the top of that draft, Kevin Durant, Shawne Williams, Julian Wright, some real good players and would fit this team much better IMO. Webster and a vet in the Lenard-mold, IMO is going to be good enough, if the rest of our team is decent shooters in the future when we are making a playoff push. Not to mention if we drafted Durant, who has great range, we would be set for the next 10 years.


----------



## Blazer Freak (Jul 11, 2004)

Zidane said:


> We really need to go big after taking guards in the last 2 drafts.


Exactly why we should target LaMarcus.


----------



## ThatBlazerGuy (May 1, 2003)

> than bargnani? men vs young men?
> 
> bargnani plays in two league one is the second best in the world the other is a very good league, he is only 5 pounds off of what aldridge wieghs.



No, I was saying that in regards to Michael Olowankandi. I agree, Andrea faces tougher competition than the NCAA. 



> We really need to go big after taking guards in the last 2 drafts.


Exactly. Chances are Joel is going to leave. Theo is broken down and will miss time next season. Skinner is barley average, not a starter. Zach is basically our only decent big man. We need a big.


----------



## BlazerCaravan (Aug 12, 2004)

ThatBlazerGuy said:


> Exactly. Chances are Joel is going to leave. Theo is broken down and will miss time next season. Skinner is barley average, not a starter. Zach is basically our only decent big man. We need a big.


Best player available, regardless of position. Trade for bigs. I'm not drafting Sam freaking Bowie again!


----------



## Blazer Maven (Sep 27, 2005)

BlazerCaravan said:


> Best player available, regardless of position. Trade for bigs. I'm not drafting Sam freaking Bowie again!


Exactly. This draft is a crapshoot.

There isn't a drop dead sure thing big man available. LaMarcus appears to lack heart, Bargnani lacks fluency in the language and the country, Tyrus Thomas has heart, but is more of a PF.

Morrison might be Bird, more likely a Kiki Vandeweghe.

Brandon Roy is the best player available, but will Blazer Management see that?


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

To get a different perspective from non West coast radio, news guys and fans

Here in Houston it goes like this

1. Noah if he declares
2. Gay most NBA ready even though he doesn't seem to like basketball
3a. Morrison if your team needs scoring
3b. Aldridge if your team needs a center of the future
4. Thomas 
5. Bargnani
6. Carney
7. Roy


They all prdict that the Blazers will draft Morrison first only because he is local......Unless Noah comes out


----------



## Utherhimo (Feb 20, 2005)

aldridge = bowie 

there is another international who's stock is on the rise: 
Saer Sene 7-0 235 C Senegal 1986 http://draftexpress.com/viewarticle.php?a=1263

but if Bargnani comes over and has killer work outs that will move him into the first pick

gay is miles redux who needs to go back to school


----------



## ryanjend22 (Jan 23, 2004)

cant believe we got the worst NBA record.


never thought id see this day.


look at the positive tho i guess, hope we get a deal for that #1 picc.

i dont want anyone this year, trade it.


----------



## Blazer Freak (Jul 11, 2004)

Utherhimo said:


> aldridge = bowie
> 
> there is another international who's stock is on the rise:
> Saer Sene 7-0 235 C Senegal 1986 http://draftexpress.com/viewarticle.php?a=1263
> ...


Bargnani is Tskitzvili. 

I've read reports that LaMarcus has no heart, and read reports that he has a good-great work ethic and would add on the extra muscle with no problem. We'll have to see what Pritchard and the drafting machine say.


----------



## Utherhimo (Feb 20, 2005)

if bargs is tskitzvili aldridge is sam bowie


----------



## Blazer Freak (Jul 11, 2004)

Utherhimo said:


> if bargs is tskitzvili aldridge is sam bowie


I was just showing how stupid that logic is.


----------



## MAS RipCity (Feb 22, 2003)

No MAS Aldridge. He is'nt very athletic and is soft, not to mention his history of injury problems. I still say Thomas or Adam, and give Noah a look to if he declares,which he would be dumb not to. We really do need more bigs though, defensive ones to. I just htink Thomas is gonna be like Amare...damn.


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

MAS RipCity said:


> No MAS Aldridge. He is'nt very athletic and is soft, not to mention his history of injury problems. I still say Thomas or Adam, and give Noah a look to if he declares,which he would be dumb not to. We really do need more bigs though, defensive ones to. I just htink Thomas is gonna be like Amare...damn.



I am in no way an Aldridge pimp. However explain his "history of injury problems" please. He had a hip injury I know of, but that's it.

For me it's all about Noah or Thomas. If they aren't available then it's Aldridge or Morrison depending on what the team does with the rest of it's roster. 

I think all oif them will be difference makers in the league for a long time.


----------



## MAS RipCity (Feb 22, 2003)

IIRC LA has had back problems too....bad sign for a big.


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

Some of the things in this thread just make me shake my head...

1.) Brandon Roy is not the best player in this draft...He was dang good in the Pac-10 this year but with his size 6'5" realistically will get measured at maybe 6'4", he won't be able to get away with the chippy points that he scores around the basket in the NBA...

2.) Comparing LaMarcus Aldridge's numbers to Ewing and Olajawon is dumb...guys like Othella Harrington were putting up similar #'s to those guys at his sophmore year and Troy Murphy and Rodney Rodgers were averaging better #'s during their sophmore years..I understand you aren't saying that they will be as good as Hakeem and Ewing, but even the assertion to compare #'s like that is absurd because players play in totally different predicaments and there is a lot of factors to consider...

btw, Olowakandi played in the Big West conference...


----------



## Tince (Jul 11, 2004)

zagsfan20 said:


> 2.) Comparing LaMarcus Aldridge's numbers to Ewing and Olajawon is dumb...


Comparing college numbers don't really make much sense in the first place. But comparing Aldridge's numbers and/or game to the Kandi Man is equal as dumb as comparing him to Ewing.

You could take most any player in the draft and find a college comparison to a player who turned our great and turned out to be a bust. 




> btw, Olowakandi played in the Big West conference...


Thank you, I knew it was something odd but didn't want to take the time to look it up. You know your west coast college conferences!!! :cheers:


----------



## QRICH (Feb 2, 2004)

Adam or bust. LaMarcus is a nice thought, but he had a few hip injuries and a back injury. This is what kept him from coming straight to the NBA from HS. He's tall, somewhat athletic and long, but he doesn't have a mean streak in him. I see Channing Frye, which is a good thing..but worth a top-2 pick? I don't think so. Maybe I'm wrong and he blows up next year, but my gut feeling is he'll be a Juwan Howard type of PF. 

Adam is what this team needs, leadership and a shooter.


----------



## Utherhimo (Feb 20, 2005)

well said qrich i would rather not get aldridge and wait to get a different pf some other time, be it trade, draft day trade, picking at our two other picks, next draft or free agency.


----------



## mgb (Jun 26, 2004)

QRICH said:


> Adam or bust. LaMarcus is a nice thought, but he had a few hip injuries and a back injury. This is what kept him from coming straight to the NBA from HS. He's tall, somewhat athletic and long, but he doesn't have a mean streak in him. I see Channing Frye, which is a good thing..but worth a top-2 pick? I don't think so. Maybe I'm wrong and he blows up next year, but my gut feeling is he'll be a Juwan Howard type of PF.
> 
> Adam is what this team needs, leadership and a shooter.


Duncan doesn't have a mean streak in him either.

Reading on draftnet today I think we will draft Alridge, but they didn't mention anything about injuries. I don't like that at all. Bring backs memories of Bowie and us passing up Jordan.


----------



## Utherhimo (Feb 20, 2005)

yup mgd thats what i thought about when i learned about his history of injuries a few monthes ago. 

it makes me wonder why kevin went to scout bargnani himself


----------



## RedHot&Rolling (Jun 26, 2004)

1. Noah (if declares)
2. Morrison (if declares)
3. Aldridge (if declares)

You can all see that we can't possible solve this until later this month when all the declared's have declared. Too many "if's" at this point.


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

RedHot&Rolling said:


> 1. Noah (if declares)
> 2. Morrison (if declares)
> 3. Aldridge (if declares)
> 
> You can all see that we can't possible solve this until later this month when all the declared's have declared. Too many "if's" at this point.


You forgot Thomas.....(If declares)


----------

