# Anbody hear about sheed press conference ???



## cimalee (Apr 17, 2003)

I have been reading other blazers forums and people are saying sheed is suppose to have a press conference vowing to change his ways . Could anybody with information provide a link


----------



## Trader Ed (Jun 17, 2002)

Maybe he is going to change his position in interviews to....

"Both teams DID play hard..." :rofl:

or maybe he realizes its a contract year :whoknows:


----------



## ABM (Dec 30, 2002)

Sheed's gonna declare that he's actually a schizo, but he's literally beside himself about it. :buddies: :krazy:


----------



## barfo (Jan 2, 2003)

I guess if he's going to toe the line, he'll announce that henceforth he will now speak at length to reporters, but will no longer speak to his teammates, so as to not be a bad influence on them. 

If he does that, then the blazers are champions for sure. Yep.

barfo


----------



## cimalee (Apr 17, 2003)

well im rooting for sheed people always seem to complain about something , he calmed down and stop getting techs , he shoots to many 3s people will always complain.


----------



## shyFX325 (Jul 28, 2002)

if he can take the same step this year as he did last year it would mean alot. everyone needs to realize he slowly is becoming more cool-headed. you just cant stop being an ******* cold turkey.


----------



## Draco (Jun 28, 2003)

That would be really wierd if he had a press conference to say that but it would show he's trying to change.


----------



## Backboard Cam (Apr 29, 2003)

Both personalities tried hard. :curse: :wlift:


----------



## KIDBLAZE (Jul 8, 2003)

> well im rooting for sheed people always seem to complain about something , he calmed down and stop getting techs , he shoots to many 3s people will always complain


Yeah I think the rest of the fans would be more happier if we had a powerforward that had no shot, and our team could never reach the playoffs. Boy oh Boy that would make every blazers fans day huh:laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:


----------



## Peaceman (Jan 15, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>cimalee</b>!
> well im rooting for sheed people always seem to complain about something , he calmed down and stop getting techs , he shoots to many 3s people will always complain.


He doesn't get T's because he isn't forced to play inside. If Cheeks makes sheed play center for major minutes, not take 3's, and bang inside he will run his tech total way up.


----------



## The Enigma (May 10, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Peaceman</b>!
> He doesn't get T's because he isn't forced to play inside. If Cheeks makes sheed play center for major minutes, not take 3's, and bang inside he will run his tech total way up.


Your ability to tell the future is just incredible.

What else can you do?
Can you read my mind and retrieve the combination for the _new_ lock on my gym locker? I just can't seem to remember it.


----------



## Draco (Jun 28, 2003)

Sheed got less techs cause of Mo and cause he said he was gonna work on it. It doesn't have to do with him playing inside or not. He had incidents where he'd get techs in previous years but he didn't get 'em last year because he didn't argue as much.


----------



## FeloniusThunk (Jan 1, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Peaceman</b>!
> 
> 
> He doesn't get T's because he isn't forced to play inside. If Cheeks makes sheed play center for major minutes, not take 3's, and bang inside he will run his tech total way up.


Ah, so he only gets fewer technicals because he's lazy. Well done.


----------



## ebott (Jan 7, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>cimalee</b>!
> I have been reading other blazers forums and people are saying sheed is suppose to have a press conference vowing to change his ways . Could anybody with information provide a link


Thus far it looks like the answer to your question is no. I certainly haven't heard anything about Sheed having a press conference. Anybody?


----------



## Backboard Cam (Apr 29, 2003)

Whether true or not, it's an interesting rumor. I wonder how it started?

I'm positive Kersey will have an influence on Wallace, but I don't expect a damn news conference. Just play har' and be nice.


----------



## STOMP (Jan 1, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>cimalee</b>!
> well im rooting for sheed people always seem to complain about something...


...like how some always whined about Portland making too many trades and having too deep a bench under TB, and now the very same folks are upset that there hasn't been a trade and the rotation only goes 8-9 deep? I guess that complaining is just the M.O. for some fans.

STOMP


----------



## NateBishop3 (Jul 22, 2003)

I think when they whined about too many trades, they wanted to let our core players develop some chemistry. Now, I don't know about the rest of you, but I want to break up the core. I want Sheed, Bonzi, and Damon gone. That's why I am angered by our lack of movement.


----------



## KIDBLAZE (Jul 8, 2003)

> Originally posted by Natebishop3
> I want Sheed, Bonzi, and Damon gone.


Den' I guess you want the Lottery too huh. Cause dat whats gonna happen if we trade Sheed and Bonzi.


----------



## Peaceman (Jan 15, 2003)

The problem I see with most of the post here is that you guys think everyone who doesn't like Sheed is alway aniti-Blazer. I accept Sheed for how he is just like you guys see all the good qualities he has. I think he is unprofessional, not good for this team, and I don't expect him to change. At around 29 years old, Sheed is Sheed. I don't think one day he will dominate consistantly, or he will like the refs better. I do think he has lazy work habits since Cheeks started coaching him. He takes more threes, he doesn't roll to the basket on pick and rolls almost ever, and doesn't post up inside consistantly. He did three years ago, and is T's were much higher when he didn't get the calls banging inside. I do see his good qualities also. He is a great defensive player (top 5 PF on defense), has a awesome post up game when he does, and a beautiful shot. IMO, I would rather see us get some value for him instead of letting him walk at the end of the season. Portland isn't going to pay him big money and lose there cap flexability in 2005.


----------



## ebott (Jan 7, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>KIDBLAZE</b>!
> 
> Den' I guess you want the Lottery too huh. Cause dat whats gonna happen if we trade Sheed and Bonzi.


I'm sorry I didn't quite get that. Could you possibly repeat it in english?


----------



## lakerman83 (Aug 26, 2003)

Who cared what Sheed has to say. He's only gonna play hard this year to either keep his spot in Portland for bigger money next year or to put an up to his persona so other teams will be interested in next years summer free agents. I have a feeling he'll be testing the market out and may find an exit from Portland. But then again if he walks there are other players to possibly gain in next years free agent market.


----------



## Kmurph (May 7, 2003)

Your not alone Peaceman....

Everyone here is pretty much a hard core Blazer fan, however being a fan and being a homer are two seperate things entirely. There seems to be a LOT more homers in here than fans. It is one thing to be positive, but if you can't look at our present situation for what it is, a mess & see that some serious changes need to be made, then you are a homer. When I see posts of Sheed is only worth the like of KG, Duncan, McGrady etc.... I just shake my head :no: . Sheed has had SIX years here to prove himself, and after SIX years we are STILL talking about him turning a corner. That in and of itself should tell you that Sheed IS NOT GOING TO CHANGE. He has had his run here, Mgmt has given him enough time, it is time for him to go.


----------



## STOMP (Jan 1, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Kmurph</b>!
> It is one thing to be positive, but if you can't look at our present situation for what it is, a mess & see that some serious changes need to be made, then you are a homer.


...and what are you if you can't disagree with folks without calling them names? Obviously a great many Blazer posters think your view is equally wrong Kmurph, why you can't deal with that in a cival manner says a lot about who you are IMO. There is a whole lot of grey area that the average fan is in no way capable of judging accurately. Finances and being able to find trades that fit into the longterm plans may figure into why dealings have been held up too. I am sure if Wallace was truely the cancer that some here continually post he is, that management would have found a way to part company by now... but he's still here. 

I truely wonder what will be posted if he is resigned after this year...

STOMP


----------



## magnifier (Jul 2, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Peaceman</b>!
> 
> 
> He doesn't get T's because he isn't forced to play inside. If Cheeks makes sheed play center for major minutes, not take 3's, and bang inside he will run his tech total way up.


I disagree... When Sheed plays down low and gets fouled, he pleads his case and when the ref tells him thats enough, he looks to the other end of the court and shakes his head. 2 of his T's last year were for nothing, and that was why Sheed decide to accosted the ref after the game.

Anyways, Sheed should keep his T's to about 18 a season, which is something like Barkley and Payton. You don't cost your team the game, but you make a good point to the officials.


----------



## STOMP (Jan 1, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>magnifier</b>!
> Anyways, Sheed should keep his T's to about 18 a season...


why should he get more T's? He only had 12 last year... the trend has him going down with his outbursts. I thought he did very well in dealing with and talking to the officials last season even when he clearly missed out on deserved calls. 

STOMP


----------



## Kmurph (May 7, 2003)

Who is calling names Stomp? I don't recall labeling anyone specifically here? How am I not being civil?

I'm just calling it like I see it. If you cannot look at your own team in a realistic light, then you are a homer, plain and simple. Stating that Qyntel is a future T-Mac, or Sheed is a top 5 talent are homer statements, no if, ands or buts about it. 

I am perfectly fine with people disagreeing with me, I think keeping Sheed is a big mistake and I have repeatedly, and will continue to say so. If we go in with this same team we will have another repeat of the last few years or worse IMO. Then what will most of the people here say? Give them ANOTHER year? :sigh:


----------



## magnifier (Jul 2, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>STOMP</b>!
> 
> 
> why should he get more T's? He only had 12 last year... the trend has him going down with his outbursts. I thought he did very well in dealing with and talking to the officials last season even when he clearly missed out on deserved calls.
> ...


I can live with 18 techs a season. I know that he did very well last season with his techs only being 12. That is great, but I think he lost some of that desire that made him an animal down low. I wouldn't think that you tell Wallace to get more techs, but you let him plead his case harder, which would result in a little more techs in a season. Remember, he likes it when both teams play har' man.


----------



## STOMP (Jan 1, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Kmurph</b>!
> Who is calling names Stomp? I don't recall labeling anyone specifically here? How am I not being civil?
> 
> I'm just calling it like I see it. If you cannot look at your own team in a realistic light, then you are a homer, plain and simple.


Faulty logic there... yes if you can't look at your fav team realisticly then you are a "homer," but not wanting to run Wallace out of town immediately doesn't necessarily equate to that. That is just your pot-stirring opinion and should be noted as such with an IMO. I disagree completely that your viewpoint is the "realistic" one, as I find it to be filled with presumptions, personal bias, and doesn't take into account the many important off the court issues (finances ect...) that a GM must factor in. If anything, with what I know about Portland's goals and personel, I find your view to be unrealistic. Thats JMHO. I can certainly understand why you would emotionally feel that way (wanting Sheed gone), and respect it as a legitimate view, but I don't feel the need to lump everyone who disagrees with me under a demeaning label. I would also openly welcome a trade of Wallace that upgrades the talent base of the team now and into the future. Would that make me a homer (IYO) too?

STOMP


----------



## STOMP (Jan 1, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Kmurph</b>!
> If we go in with this same team we will have another repeat of the last few years or worse IMO. Then what will most of the people here say? Give them ANOTHER year? :sigh:


I hope we have more luck avoiding the injury bug one of these years... last post season was especially tough on that front and sadly ended the Blazer careers of Sabas and PIP. If only everyone could peak at the right time for once...

STOMP


----------



## Kmurph (May 7, 2003)

Well there we are in agreement. I certainly do not think that we should trade Sheed at any cost, & of course there are a myriad of factors involved in dealing a player like Sheed (or any player for that matter). However, in the long run, I cannot see any great benefit of having Sheed on this team. He is going to be 30yrs old, this team is no where near to competing for a title in the next 2-3 years (and that is the ultimate goal is it not?), he will be an unrestricted FA next year, able to leave w\o any compensation, he will want a max contract (and is he really worth the $17mil he is getting now?). And yeah I think he is one of the cancers on this team. Former players & Blazer insiders have both alluded to and blatantly stated that. So yes, after six years of watching his antics and listening\reading what people closer to the orginization than I or anyone else here have to say, I will take their word for it.


----------



## mook (Dec 31, 2002)

it's going to be relatively easy to line up Rasheed with a new contract. how many teams really want to spend more than $10 mil to line up a guy with his reputation? 

he's not holding the team back, but he's also not going to carry the team on his back. he is what he is, a second banana. 

my biggest worry with Rasheed is that Paul Allen has developed a habit of not spending a little to retain big talent. it made sense to not pay up for Pippen and AD, but I am concerned there is a trend forming here.


----------



## STOMP (Jan 1, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Kmurph</b>!
> And yeah I think he is one of the cancers on this team. Former players & Blazer insiders have both alluded to and blatantly stated that. So yes, after six years of watching his antics and listening\reading what people closer to the orginization than I or anyone else here have to say, I will take their word for it.


If by insiders you mean bitter reporters who you can directly correlate positive spin articles and interviews granted, I've read those... Over the years throughout sports I've seen other players become demonized once they stop granting interviews, and so I take it with a grain of salt now that it's happened with Wallace. I really don't care what cliches he and others might recite on a day to day basis, so it's no skin off my back that he doesn't like to play that game. I like Barry Bonds too, at least I'm consistent eh?

I've never ever read about a former Blazer blatently accusing Sheed of anything close to being a "cancer," and I've heard many of them go on record with just the opposite. Maybe (in my complimentry cases) they were just full of it kissing up as guys rarely say anything critical of one another in this league. Your claim that someone has bad mouthed him publicly is a revelation to me... please elaborate. Who? What? 

STOMP


----------



## Kmurph (May 7, 2003)

Scottie Pippen, Derek Anderson, Steve Jones, Mike Rice, Brian Wheeler... No bitter reporters here. Some have been more outspoken (Pippen, Rice & Jones) than others, but each has bluntly stated or overtly alluded to Sheed being the main problem with this team.


----------



## STOMP (Jan 1, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Kmurph</b>!
> ...but each has bluntly stated or overtly alluded to Sheed being the main problem with this team.


I want the direct quotes from players (PIP, DA, whomever...) where they call him a "cancer" or something close to being "the main problem with this team"... and none of that "overtly alluded to" bleep, you claim they called him out. 

I feel you are stretching the truth here to fit your rant... prove me wrong.

STOMP


----------



## BLAZER PROPHET (Jan 3, 2003)

Kmurph, I don't recall seeing any articles from those you list as being openly adverse to Rasheed. I have read some that quote Mo and other players reflecting very good things about him. Perhaps you listen to KFXX too much where they are on an anti-Rasheed crusade for ignoring them. It wouldn't be the first time that station, and in particular the Big Show (a couple of real "talents" on that show). 

As to Rasheed, I have no big problems with him. He just wants to play and be left alone. While I think he should open up more to the media..., it's really his business and his alone. 

Also, I'd like to see how it works with him at SF and go from there. He may not be the best front line player in the NBA, but he's a darn good one and not easily replaced.


----------



## Kmurph (May 7, 2003)

Of course the old prove it to me in quotes routine. 

First off, I cannot recall any of the people I mentioned blatantly stating "Sheed is a cancer", and based upon their positions within the Blazer orginization (as a commentator or player) I would not expect them to, either. However, each has had sound bytes or quotes attributed to them, infering that the majority of POR problems lie squarely on the shoulders of Sheed. I think Pippen was the most outspoken regarding Sheed, but on Courtside, both Jones, Rice and Wheeler have stated at different times & overtly hinted at POR problems centering around Sheed and his erratic behavior. I don't have the time, or the inclination to track comments down, for every person on this board who says "prove it". It's there, it has been out there numerous times, you just need to be listening & the fact that you do not seem to think that any of these people have said such a thing, tells me that you are not paying close enough attention, or that you just have chosen NOT to listen to it. No disrespect intended here Stomp, just disagreement.


----------



## HOWIE (Dec 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>cimalee</b>!
> I have been reading other blazers forums and people are saying sheed is suppose to have a press conference vowing to change his ways . Could anybody with information provide a link


Is it going to be the famous "I have something special for you" Speech for a few seasons back?


----------



## STOMP (Jan 1, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Kmurph</b>!
> And yeah I think he is one of the cancers on this team. Former players & Blazer insiders have both alluded to and blatantly stated that.





> I cannot recall any of the people I mentioned blatantly stating "Sheed is a cancer", and based upon their positions within the Blazer orginization (as a commentator or player) I would not expect them to, either.


So I'm confused, or more accurately, you are... and rapidly backpeddling as well. The old- I'm too busy to prove the things I'm saying (ie. making up) routine, so I'll just claim you weren't paying attention and send you on a wild goose chase looking up quotes that I fudged. Sorry it's not going to work as I'm sure those quotes ("Wallace is a cancer/bad teammate") from his teammates past and present, do not exist. If they did, they would have been presented in the face of pro-Wallace arguements time and again, not to mention that I would have stumbled across them in the 320+ days a year I check in and read anything and everything on my fav team. Somehow I suspect bombshells like the ones you're claiming detonated without my noticing would have been brought to my attention and wouldn't have escaped my ability to recall. 

Just come clean and admit it that you were lying/exagerating... or of course you could prove me wrong. 



> It's there, it has been out there numerous times, you just need to be listening & the fact that you do not seem to think that any of these people have said such a thing, tells me that you are not paying close enough attention, or that you just have chosen NOT to listen to it. No disrespect intended here Stomp, just disagreement.


No disrespect???  I'm just like those 3 respected monkeys with their hands over their eyes, ears, and mouth, chosing what I'm paying attention to. What a load.

STOMP


----------



## STOMP (Jan 1, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Kmurph</b>!
> Well there we are in agreement. I certainly do not think that we should trade Sheed at any cost, & of course there are a myriad of factors involved in dealing a player like Sheed (or any player for that matter). However, in the long run, I cannot see any great benefit of having Sheed on this team. He is going to be 30yrs old, this team is no where near to competing for a title in the next 2-3 years (and that is the ultimate goal is it not?), he will be an unrestricted FA next year, able to leave w\o any compensation, he will want a max contract (and is he really worth the $17mil he is getting now?).


I've responded to the bits I disagree with and wanted to point to our common ground as well  The title is the goal, though it is nice to have that playoff streak going too. I believe there is something to be said for a club with a winning tradition and never want to see Portland purposely dip into the doldrums of losing for an outside shot at a dominant player. Their scouts have turned up some pretty darn good players outside of the lottery, and I would much rather keep banking on their talents. 

Wallace wanting a max contract doesn't mean 17+ mil a year IMO, as players are only worth what the market bares. Unless he is willing to go to a rebuilding situation much more daunting then Portland's in terms of getting wins (and who knows if Denver or Utah would offer him one), I don't think he'll have many options. The market has gone significantly down since he last signed thanks to the current CBA, and I think the more realistic figures he'll be looking at are somewhere between 10-15 per depending on what sort of season he has. 

Saying he'll be 30 next season doesn't quite have the dire implications it used to. Prime time for NBA players has been commonly thought to be between 28-32, but with new training techniques, better nutrition and equiptment, prime time is being expanded throughout sports. Just look at Barry Bonds and Jerry Rice dominating in their late 30's and early 40's. Wallace has avoided major injuries that might put early wear and tear on his body as well. 

So IMO at least, the window for Portland to succeed with Wallace extends past the 2-3 years you project before Portland is capable of gathering the pieces to compete again. If they choose to resign him at a lesser rate, I'll trust in the new guys judgement that they are weighing the alternatives and are making the best call as far as the long term interest of the club, as they are truely the ones in the know of whats what. If they choose to go another route (S&T or ???), I'll also hope that they are making the best call and probably not judge things right off. Either way, I'll be here reading up and discussing things/feeding my Bball Jones on a daily basis.

STOMP


----------



## Kmurph (May 7, 2003)

Give me a break Stomp....

Do I really have to search, find, extrapolate sound bites from Courtside archives (Is there such a thing?), scan & search KGW sports archives (Not to mention sign up on their site to even TRY and do so in the first place), research Oregonian archives (Shall I go to the library?), to find the necessary quotes to satisf what you are requesting? Do I get credit for this? That is way more involved than I would prefer to get. I know what I hear\read, you may not choose to believe it, so be it. 
I am not backtracking at all, it has been stated by these guys, maybe not in the exact words you specified, but the point is the same. Haven't you listened to Pippen in interviews? When he is asked about Sheed? I mean it was blatantly obvious, WHOM he was refering to, does he have to spell it out for everyone? Haven't you heard Steve Jones on Courtside, when it comes to discussions about Sheed? He may like his talent, but he scoffs at any notion that he will EVER change and has all but lobbied for POR to basically start over by divesting itself of Sheed. And heck, Mike Rice at the beginning of summer basically SAID point blank that Sheed was the BIGGEST problem in the locker room. If there is a place for courtside archives let me know, but I am not going to spend all this time looking for quotes and sound bites just to show someone who would find excuses not to believe it anyway. So what is the point? 

We disagree about Sheed, you (and many others in here) believe that Sheed is just fine and should remain, and that he will lead us to a title sometime in the future, or that life w\o him would be too horrible to bear. I think the sooner he is gone the better, and all this talk of "ooh, we might become like CLE or DEN" is pure garbage. This team can be rebuilt, sans Sheed, w\o having to toil in lotto hell for years, it just takes a mgmt team that A) recognizes talent B) has a long term plan in place & C) has the GUTS to see it through. I think we have A & B, not sure about C.


----------



## antibody (Apr 4, 2003)

I'm not sure what the best way to go is with Sheed. However, I don't think it's wise or smart to get rid of him just to dump him. This has been discussed many times here. I think it's stupid to dump him for basically nothing. Most of the trades out there were horrible. People jump on him for this and that all of the time. I get tired of people saying Sheed this and Sheed that. Yes, he has made mistakes but who hasn't on the face of the planet? The problems in Portland don't just point to Sheed...that's a joke if you think so. The problems in Portland point to management and to some of the players.


----------



## Blazer Ringbearer (Jan 28, 2003)

KMurph, give us all a break...

You claim that these people have "blatantly" stated things that nobody else seems to remember and then scoff at the idea of actually having to back it up? Whatever... you're not the only person who pays close attention to everything Blazer around here, pretty much all of us read everything that we can get our hands on...

Just because many of us disagree with you doesn't mean that you get to call us all homers. That's lame.


----------



## Masbee (Dec 31, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Kmurph</b>!
> Give me a break Stomp....
> 
> Do I really have to search, find, extrapolate sound bites from Courtside archives...


ummm, yeah, you do.

Like Stomp, I really don't recall what you claim to be a common theme among Blazer insiders.

I haven't heard it. So when was it said? I would like to know.

Going by memory only, just like you are, I do recall Scottie Pippen being quoted as saying the Blazers would only go as far as Rasheed Wallace would take them.

I do recall lots of Blazers "insiders" complaining about Sheed's temper and behavior toward the officials, as being detrimental to the team.

I do recall lots of opinions from some Blazer "insiders" that the Blazer's are making a mistake if they think Rasheed is the player you hitch your wagon to.

But, I sure as heck don't recall any Blazer "insider" coming out, even after they have left the Blazer organization, when it was safe to speak out and saying that Rasheed Wallace is the "main problem with the team".

Maybe you get confused. Wanting a player with talent to reach their full potential, and being frustrated that they don't, is not the same as being the "main problem". Wanting a player to stop shooting themselves and the team in the foot with outbursts, is not the same as being the "main problem". Recognizing the truth that it is very, very difficult to win a championship without a SuperStar player on a team, noting that the Blazers have none, even in Rasheed, is not the same as being the "main problem".

Either you inferred too much IMO - and all in an anti-Sheed direction - from those types of comments - or please give a real quote.


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

Tom me Rasheed is not the problem, but the center of the problem. The problem is the organization, teammates, coaches and fans all expect him to be a 25-10 guy and an All-Star. Why shouldn't we expect it the tools are all there, he has the height athleticism, touch, interior presence...but puts up 18 and 7.

The problem lies in the expectations of Sheed. He obviously is the most talented player on the team, bet refuses to carry the torch. Not Sheeds fault, everyone else expects him to be something other than Rasheed Wallace.


----------



## Kmurph (May 7, 2003)

Um... Well I am not gonna :laugh: 

Seriously, I will send a point blank question to Courtside next monday. Asking them, in their opinion, If Sheed is the MAIN problem with the team. Or heck maybe I will call. Let's see what they say.

As for "proving it", I will, if I have time, research all of the frickin Courtside archives (If I even can) and whatever else I can find. But don't hold your breath.

Ringbearer - 

Disagreeing with me doesn't make you a homer (I thought I said that already?). Seeing nothing but a rosy picture here in POR, makes you a homer, comparing Sheed or Q ( they seem to be the most commonly referenced) to other Star players and basing unrealistic lofty expectations upon those assumptuions, make you a homer.


----------



## STOMP (Jan 1, 2003)

I didn't specify the exact words of "cancer," you did. You said it was "blatant" so it shouldn't be hard to find (if it exists). 

No I don't listen to courtside. I don't think it's a big secret that I live in California outside of radio range, it says so right next to every post I make. I've made it perfectly clear that I don't care what reporters say though, as I feel that they (as part of a broadcasting company) are often biased towards guys who grant them interviews, that includes Rice and Snapper. I wanted the dirt you promised existed coming from the mouth of his teammates past and present, as I feel that would be much more credible.

No I don't believe Sheed is fine. I don't know what he's like as my knowledge of him is limited to what I see him doing on the court. I don't pretend to know someone I don't know, and only have access to through soundbites. Unless I become aware of a player beating his wife, playing deadbeat dad, ect... I feel it's a massive waste of time to think you actually have access inside a player's head to the point where you can cast judgement on them. Didn't Kobe definitively prove that? OJ? Kirby Puckett too? How many examples where the media created image of a player turns out to be dead wrong do sport fans need before they wise up? I put much more stock into what players say and how they act towards one another. In those regards, Sheed seems to be generally well regarded as he has friends throughout the league. But yes, I'm waiting for you to enlighten me or come clean. Sorry no breaks.

STOMP


----------



## MercyKersey (Jul 22, 2003)

Since murph is having troubles finding qoutes about Rasheed i went through the trouble myself and this is what i found..


"Rasheed was a joy to coach, and I was impressed by his knowledge of the game. If anything, he could be too unshelfish. -- Dean Smith


Brian Grant getting interviewed by the Miami Herald's Dan Lebatard: The question was who has the most expensive and least expensive wardrobes in the NBA...Brian says "Alonzo Mourning has to have one of the most expensive. I've never seen him in the same suit. Rasheed Wallace has to have the least expensive. I've seen him at suit-and-tie functions in sweatsuits. That's just Rasheed. He never changes, and I mean that in a positive way."

"Rasheed Wallace has been well-behaved all season" --Peter John Carlesimo


Sheed for Pres


----------



## STOMP (Jan 1, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Kmurph</b>!
> It is one thing to be positive, but if you can't look at our present situation for what it is, a mess & see that some serious changes need to be made, then you are a homer.





> Originally posted by <b>Blazer Ringbearer</b>!
> Just because many of us disagree with you doesn't mean that you get to call us all homers. That's lame.





> Originally posted by <b>Kmurph</b>!
> Disagreeing with me doesn't make you a homer (I thought I said that already?). Seeing nothing but a rosy picture here in POR, makes you a homer


There is a big difference between seeing nothing but a rosy picture here in POR, and feeling that the present situation is a mess and that serious changes need to be made. IMO, those are two separate schools of thought. One seems to say the team needs an immediate overhaul, while the other recognises that all isn't right but holds out hope that with some fine tuning things could get clicking again. I feel by holding together this team a bit longer, contracts of the players (ie Damon) will line up with other team's needs better, and we could add the necessary piece(s) without ripping up Portland's talented core. That 15.7 million chip (Damon's deal) coming off the cap is going to start looking pretty sweet to some GM with an owner looking at a 31.4 million bill (with the lux tax) breathing down his neck. Paul Allen is still well above and beyond the richest owner in the league, and I bet he'll keep the dollar figures up there, just not obscenely at the absolute top. Kemp's numbers alone coming off after this season takes the Blazers below the top group of spenders. Maybe by following this logic, the wise thing for Portland to do this year is to give Damon every chance to run the club, profiling him and putting his name in as good of a light as possible to make it easier for another team to absorb the PR hit of trading for a stoner... I hate having Damon on the club at all, but that may be the right call for the long term.

Add the right player(s), not necessarily stars, and I feel this team is capable of being right back in the mix. I don't think thats a lunatic fringe Blazer homer view, maybe it's optimistic and hoping for the best... but I truely feel there is lots to be optimistic about as a Blazer fan. They played some good ball at the end of last year and I thought they showed growth and potencial throughout the season. It's a bummer that we can't debate whether this club has championship potencial as it's currently made up, it doesn't. But IMO, they aren't that far off from having a team with a shot.

Sorry about the late edit- just expanding

STOMP


----------

