# Still interested in Gerald Green?



## SodaPopinski (Aug 10, 2004)

Sounds like he refuses to work out for us if we make him play against anyone in one-on-one or two-on-two drills.

Is that the kind of guy we want on our team? Someone who shies away from competition?

-Pop


----------



## Blazer Ringbearer (Jan 28, 2003)

It's a bit of a turnoff, but not a complete one.

I'll give him a little bit of the benefit of the doubt in that this advice is probably coming from his agent, who is scared of his top high school prospect looking bad against seasoned college players. 

Green himself just graduated HS, so it would make sense that he's deferring this type of decision making to his agent... remember that interview he gave a while back where he didn't even know what he was doing for workouts - just said his dad was handling all of it and he was just lifting and playing ball?

He seems like a good kid with his head on straight from everything I have read so far - it's just sort of the nature of the business I guess, like it or not. 

His agent ($$$) probably realizes ($$$) that there is a lot of risk ($$$) in throwing Green ($$$) to the wolves and will do whatever he can ($$$) to minimize that risk ($$$).


----------



## BBert (Dec 30, 2004)

Definitely not, in my book. However, it is his agent that doesn't want him to compete. Green is on record as saying he is just working out hard and doing what his dad and agent tell him, like a good soldier.

I'd still like for him to come in and compete though.


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

BTW I wouldn't worry a ton about that issue. Deron Williams is doing the same thing. They said on courtside that a lot of agents are handling their clients that way now. I don't think it says anything about Gerald himself, since it is an agent imposed thing.

Ohh Yeah, it's not a Blazers thing, they are telling all teams that.


----------



## cimalee (Apr 17, 2003)

Iam still interested in him hes the only player and big If Marvin williams mores to 3 with the upside .

I could see if we needed a pg but we dont so its a simple greens the guy


----------



## ABM (Dec 30, 2002)

Hmmmmm....



> "I'm frustrated today because it seems like a number of players at the top are unwilling to showcase themselves, saying they don't want to work out one-on-one or two-on-two," Nash said. "But that makes it hard for me, because if they don't want to compete for the third pick in the draft, then it's hard for me to envision them competing 82 times a season."
> 
> Nash said he views Green's demand for a solo workout as a "sign of weakness and a lack of confidence."
> 
> ...


----------



## Kmurph (May 7, 2003)

So let me get this straight...The agent doesn't want Green to work out b\c if he looks bad, he could drop a few spots and cost himself millions?

Really? What wonderful logic...

How about the fact that if he DOES NOT workout it could cost him millions, did his agent ever think of that?

...and it still make him appear as if he is afraid to compete....


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

Kmurph said:


> So let me get this straight...The agent doesn't want Green to work out b\c if he looks bad, he could drop a few spots and cost himself millions?
> 
> Really? What wonderful logic...
> 
> ...


Except supposedly the other teams (4-6) are willing to let him come in and workout, -the 1 on 1 2 on 2 scenario. The difference $$ wise from 3-6 or 7 isn't that much, about $200,000 per drop in place, but spread out over 3-4 years it could be a big enough difference, plus there is bit of bragging rights to the #3 pick. 

from Larry **** for 2004/2005 just an example



> 3 $2,798,600 $3,008,500 $3,218,400
> 4 $2,523,200 $2,712,400 $2,901,600
> 5 $2,284,900 $2,456,200 $2,627,600
> 6 $2.075,300 $2,231,000 $2,386,600
> 7 $1,894,500 $2,036,600 $2,178,700


----------



## Blazer Ringbearer (Jan 28, 2003)

Kmurph said:


> How about the fact that if he DOES NOT workout it could cost him millions, did his agent ever think of that?
> 
> ...and it still make him appear as if he is afraid to compete....


He's going to workout - just on his terms. Don't expect any team besides the Blazers to turn him away (if they even do in the end) for not competing. 

By working out on his own, he gets to highlight all of his strengths (athleticism,shooting) and mask all of his weaknesses (strength,defense,intensity?).

If he worked out with lower rated prospects and didn't measure up, he would assuredly lose millions. Unless GM's around the league take Nash's approach, this is the SAFE thing to do... but who wants a player who is afraid to fail?


----------



## STOMP (Jan 1, 2003)

Seems that Nash is playing hardball with some of the player's agents, which is a game of chicken that I suspect he might not win very often. For the agents, the draft is all about getting their client to the right situation so as to be able to capitalize on the much bigger dollars available outside and after the rookie deal runs out. In sizing up the Blazer situation agents are looking at a bad team in a smaller market with limited endorsement potencial and a history of being lampooned by the national media. The extra scratch of being the #3 pick is nothing compared to the other dollars they could tap into.

When I read posters comments saying "screw this guy who won't work out for us the way our GM wants," I think, why should they? This is a players league (IMO) where the talent holds the power in the supply and demand dynamic. It would be nice for me (as a Blazer fan) if Nash held the hammer to dictate terms, but he doesn't.

STOMP


----------



## dkap (May 13, 2003)

While I don't think Nash is wrong in his sentiment, I do believe he is taking the wrong path *yet again* with player relations. He's made very few positive statements in that regard during his time here.

Dan


----------



## hasoos (Jan 3, 2003)

No I am not still interested in Green. I think that type of attitude bites, and it more or less shows he doesn't want to play here. I am more interested in Martell Webster anyhow.


----------



## GOD (Jun 22, 2003)

I think that this is just a way for Nash to signal to all the other GM's that the blazers are not picking green, and that if they are interested in nabbing Paul or Deron, they better make a trade with the blazers because their guy will not last. I still think that Nash wants Green, but that this is a great way to turn up the heat and get a good trade.


----------



## Spoolie Gee (Feb 3, 2005)

This is a smart move by Nash. No reason to paint ourselves into a corner with one player. If we show more interest in someone like Webster it will increase our leverage with a team like the Bobcats who can't just take Green and assume we have to deal with them.


----------



## Scout226 (Sep 17, 2003)

Then Paul isn't our guy either. He didn't go up against any competition. I heard Devon wanted to go up against him, but in the same article, they said players only like to go up against better prospects.. That means it doesn't happen very much since the top prospect doesn't like to work out with lower ones. It's all pretty sad if you ask me.

That's why I like Telfair even more. He wasn't afraid of going against anyone and was up for any challenge.


----------



## Spoolie Gee (Feb 3, 2005)

Scout226 said:


> Then Paul isn't our guy either. He didn't go up against any competition. I heard Devon wanted to go up against him, but in the same article, they said players only like to go up against better prospects.. That means it doesn't happen very much since the top prospect doesn't like to work out with lower ones. It's all pretty sad if you ask me.
> 
> That's why I like Telfair even more. He wasn't afraid of going against anyone and was up for any challenge.


 
Paul played in college though.


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

Scout226 said:


> That's why I like Telfair even more. He wasn't afraid of going against anyone and was up for any challenge.


He was considered by some teams to be a borderline first round pick... he had nothing to lose by playing against players with more experience who were projected to go higher.

I've let me thoughts on the issue be known in another thread, but this doesn't impact whether I want Green to be a Blazer or not... and while I am critical of Nash for trying to establish a different set of rules for the Blazers than every other team requires, I agree it's possible this is just a smokescreen and/or a way to indicate to other teams that we WON'T pass on one of the PGs, so you better trade up with us to get Paul.

Ed O.


----------



## Scout226 (Sep 17, 2003)

Here is an email reply from Nash. I asked him about Green not wanting to compete, if he's be worked out, PP not wanting to report to Portland if traded, if it's all tactics by agents/players, etc.. Here's his response:



> Gerald Green and Chris Paul have refused to compete against other draft eligible players in a one on one or two on two setting. If we agree to allow that then the other players like Deron Williams will balk also. So at this point Gerald Green's workout is off.
> With regard to veterans that are rumored to be traded, it is often a tactic to say that you won't report to discourage the team making the acquisition. Reality is that not reporting results in not getting paid. Jimmy Jackson forfeited some money this year when traded to New Orleans before getting dealt to Phoenix, but I don't think any player would forfeit 35 M dollars. It really has nothing to do with Portland but maybe a reluctance to leave Boston or a reluctance to join a rebuilding team.


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

What if the Blazers threw a Halloween party and nobody would come because they had to wear costumes?

I understand the Blazers' desire to see players competing head-to-head, but if all of the "top 5" refuse to do so (Bogut, Williams, Paul, Williams, Green), what is Portland going to do? Work out inferior prospects exclusively?

Maybe Nash is right, and the players' agents will blink first, but I doubt that the Blazers have that kind of influence.

Ed O.


----------



## Scout226 (Sep 17, 2003)

Ed O said:


> What if the Blazers threw a Halloween party and nobody would come because they had to wear costumes?
> 
> I understand the Blazers' desire to see players competing head-to-head, but if all of the "top 5" refuse to do so (Bogut, Williams, Paul, Williams, Green), what is Portland going to do? Work out inferior prospects exclusively?
> 
> ...



I'd love for all the owners to get together and not work any of them out unless they do compete. I guess do something. Or, make it where the 1st year contracts aren't gauranteed. I mean, these draftees can have bogus measuremtents thrown out there and only do the skills they are good at by themselves. 

Maybe we draft a bust this year, everyone piles up on Nash, and he gets fired. I wouldn't hold it against him to much because they have limited exposure to these players.

I don't know.. Frustrating..


----------



## truth (Jul 16, 2002)

Nash is performing his job and that is all you can ask...The @#$#@ing kid is a high school senior....

He doesnt want to go head to head ?????Its the NBA..No Boys Allowed..Why does this conversation even exist??????????/


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

truth said:


> Nash is performing his job and that is all you can ask...The @#$#@ing kid is a high school senior....
> 
> He doesnt want to go head to head ?????Its the NBA..No Boys Allowed..Why does this conversation even exist??????????/


Bogut and Williams and Paul and Williams are refusing to go head-to-head, as well. Are they "boys", as well?

Ed O.


----------



## truth (Jul 16, 2002)

Ed O said:


> Bogut and Williams and Paul and Williams are refusing to go head-to-head, as well. Are they "boys", as well?
> 
> Ed O.


Ed,most definetly....Its horsedung.....And yes they will get drafted,but its just a terrible lack of character.Its flat out disrespectful..

But lets not bring morality into the NBA...

The truth is someone will draft them,and good luck to them.I could understand it if it was the Lakers at 10...But the number 3 pick in the draft?? A 6' 170 lb point guard?? A 6'3" pg with questionable athletic skills??A high school kid???

Ed its flat out wrong..........


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

truth said:


> The truth is someone will draft them,and good luck to them.I could understand it if it was the Lakers at 10...But the number 3 pick in the draft?? A 6' 170 lb point guard?? A 6'3" pg with questionable athletic skills??A high school kid???
> 
> Ed its flat out wrong..........


Wrong for what? Wrong for whom?

The players aren't being paid by the NBA yet. They don't owe the NBA or teams anything. They, and their agents, are working to maximize their future, which predominantly means getting drafted as highly as possible (but can of course factor in things like which team drafts them).

The Blazers are going to have to (a) take an potentially inferior player that they've seen work out as they'd like, (b) trade down out of their spot, and/or (c) draft a player that refused to work out as the Blazers wanted them to.

If it's anything more than a smokescreen, this seems like a peculiar position for Nash and the Blazers to pursue.

Ed o.


----------



## Spoolie Gee (Feb 3, 2005)

Ed O said:


> Bogut and Williams and Paul and Williams are refusing to go head-to-head, as well. Are they "boys", as well?
> 
> Ed O.


 
But Ed, wouldn't you agree that it's much more important to see Green compete against other prospects then Williams, Paul and Bogut since those guys have already played against each other before? I mean look at Paul, he played against Deron Williams and Felton several times last year. All we have to do is go back and watch the tapes to see how he did against them head to head. With Green you don't have that same luxury. The best players we've seen play against is in some HS all-star games where nothing is on the line.

I agree with you that this is probably just a smokescreen but I think its the right thing to do, driving down Green's value can only help the Blazers.


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

Spoolie Gee said:


> But Ed, wouldn't you agree that it's much more important to see Green compete against other prospects then Williams, Paul and Bogut since those guys have already played against each other before? I mean look at Paul, he played against Deron Williams and Felton several times last year. All we have to do is go back and watch the tapes to see how he did against them head to head. With Green you don't have that same luxury. The best players we've seen play against is in some HS all-star games where nothing is on the line.


Important for the Blazers? Maybe. But that's not really Green's problem.

The Blazers presumably have a ton of tape on Gerald and he's made the offer of coming to work out for them. The Blazers are seemingly unwilling to let him come unless they get to dictate the terms of the workout.

Which is their option, but if they are the only team that refuses to work players out because of this then they're putting themselves at a disadvantage.

Ed O.


----------



## Kmurph (May 7, 2003)

Well IMO one of if not THE biggest factors to look for in players, has to do with their head and heart...at this level, almost all of them have the requisite talent, but it is the drive and intelligence that makes the difference....

Unlike Williams or Bogut or even Paul, Green is a real risky and borderline high lottery pick...HE more than any of the players listed above, needs to prove he deserves to be talked about in the same conversation...

Bowing out of a "controlled" request to do so, speaks negatively on both accounts IMO...

Your telling me, he couldn't have negotiated something with POR? A 1 on 1 workout instead of 2 on 2? Or vice versa? Or requesting what player would be acceptible to work out? It still would be chickenbleep, but not as much as it is considered now...

I would think any player with confidence and competitive desire, would want to PROOVE he deserves to be considered as a top 3 pick...


----------



## truth (Jul 16, 2002)

Ed O said:


> Wrong for what? Wrong for whom?
> 
> The players aren't being paid by the NBA yet. They don't owe the NBA or teams anything. They, and their agents, are working to maximize their future, which predominantly means getting drafted as highly as possible (but can of course factor in things like which team drafts them).
> Ed o.


Ed,I mean its morally wrong...Its a question of respect..Its against the whole spirit of the draft process..

And what do you mean they dont owe the NBA or teams anything...They are soon to be PROFESSIONAL athletes.Act like one.You think Bird,Jordan,Magic would pull this crap??

Your support confuses me..maximise their future???By not scrimmaging?Do you advocate sitting out if you are under contract but want to renegotiate??That may maximise their future as well...Are you advocating what Boozer did to Gund and the cavaliers??

A team is potentially looking to invest Millions of dollars in a player and you dont think the team should have the right to see what the player brings to the table??A high school player???

And no question the player has the right to do as he wishes.But that doesnt make it the "right" thing to do.........


----------



## Spoolie Gee (Feb 3, 2005)

Ed O said:


> Important for the Blazers? Maybe. But that's not really Green's problem.
> 
> 
> Ed O.


 
But it is Green's problem if no other team in the top 6 will draft him which seems likely right now. If Green doesn't care if he goes #7 or lower and thinks a bad workout could push him even lower then that then he's making the right choice. It's defiantly a gamble for both sides.


----------



## STOMP (Jan 1, 2003)

Kmurph said:


> I would think any player with confidence and competitive desire, would want to PROOVE he deserves to be considered as a top 3 pick...


I think you're probably right that the competitor in them would make them want to prove themselves worthy of being a top pick, but the budding businessman in them could have them persuing a different course leading up to the draft. If he limits his exposure, Green is almost assured of going in the lotto... if he works out for all maybe he moves up into the top 3 picks or maybe he struggles and drops like a stone. 

Though it doesn't benefit our particular team's interest, I can understand why Green (and other top prospects) is following his agents advice.

STOMP


----------



## STOMP (Jan 1, 2003)

truth said:


> And what do you mean they dont owe the NBA or teams anything...They are soon to be PROFESSIONAL athletes.Act like one.You think Bird,Jordan,Magic would pull this crap??


Remind me of how Bird went to the franchise of his choice again? I don't recall the Trailblazers getting a private workout with Larry the year they drafted Mychal Thompson.

STOMP


----------



## truth (Jul 16, 2002)

> Though it doesn't benefit our particular team's interest, I can understand why Green (and other top prospects) is following his agents advice.


The problem is it sets a verrrry bad precedent..So today a misguided/selfish high school kid decides he doesnt need to show his goods to the team that may draft him at 3..

Whats it gonna be like when he gets drafted and doesnt see eye to eye with the coach??Whats he gonna be like when he feels he is worth more than the contract he signed...

Did Lebron pull this nonsense??Did Melo??or did they bring their A game


----------



## Scinos (Jun 10, 2003)

I'm completely with Ed on this one. 

I think people are looking at this as a sign that Green doesn't want to compete, and that he doesn't have a good attitude. But, it doesn't say anything about Green's character. 

The agents don't want to put their client in a position where they'll show any weaknesses. *It's a reality of the draft process*. If you look at the workouts that go on... 

- Martynas did a workout with lots of shooting involved to show off his stroke. He's not going to workout 1 on 1 against a physical post player, or his lack of strength would show up. 

- Joey Graham showed off his physical strength in 1 on 1 drills. That's what he wants teams to notice. 

- Bynum did drills that show off his athleticism around the hoop. He's not going to go 2 on 2, where he has to show skills he hasn't developed.


Every prospect wants to show off their strengths, and they don't want to do things that show weaknesses. Sure, it would be really nice for teams if they could workout anyone they wanted, in any setting they desired. But in reality, the only players that will go through with that are those with nothing to lose, like borderline first round picks and college seniors. Guys like Green who are projected in the top 10, their agents aren't going to risk it.


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

truth said:


> Ed,I mean its morally wrong...Its a question of respect..Its against the whole spirit of the draft process..


I thought that you said not to bring morality to the argument. If you are going to argue something is "morally wrong", I can't disagree with you, especially not in this forum.



> And what do you mean they dont owe the NBA or teams anything...They are soon to be PROFESSIONAL athletes.Act like one.You think Bird,Jordan,Magic would pull this crap??


Bird didn't even come out until a year after he was drafted. You don't think the Celtics could have used him?

And I think that your logic is flawed because it's so circular. It's "morally wrong" so they're "pulling crap". 

I don't think morals or ethics have anything to do with this, and I don't think they're pulling anything. They're taking calculated risks just like teams do when they select players.



> Your support confuses me..maximise their future???By not scrimmaging?Do you advocate sitting out if you are under contract but want to renegotiate??That may maximise their future as well...Are you advocating what Boozer did to Gund and the cavaliers??


Boozer was made a free agent, so I have no problem with what he did. If the Cavs were going to rely on an illegal (under the terms of the NBA collective bargaining agreement) agreement to sign a guy to an under-market value contract, then they deserved to have a player lie to them. I have little sympathy for cheaters.

As for whether I advocate a player sitting out: it depends. They are in the NBA for themselves and their family. How they should act in regards to contracts is a complicated question.



> A team is potentially looking to invest Millions of dollars in a player and you dont think the team should have the right to see what the player brings to the table??A high school player???


They have no "rights" whatsoever when it comes to a player leading up to the draft. If they don't like what they see--or if they don't see enough--they can simply not draft him.



> And no question the player has the right to do as he wishes.But that doesnt make it the "right" thing to do.........


I don't know what the "right" thing to do is. That's up to the collectively bargained rules and the individual and his representation.

Ed O.


----------



## truth (Jul 16, 2002)

Scinos said:


> I'm completely with Ed on this one.
> 
> 
> The agents don't want to put their client in a position where they'll show any weaknesses. *It's a reality of the draft process*. If you look at the workouts that go on...
> ...


In theory,you points are good,but in reality lets take a look...Martynas did what he wanted in his workouts and did nothing to dispel the rumors or notions that he isnt ready physically..Result?? Hes dropping out..

You are wrong about Joey grahm.He competed in every drill workout that were supposedly hi weakness...he showed a much better stroke than anticipated,showed suprising ball handling skills and of course showed he is a freak of nature.He didnt back down or shy away from any drills workout tjhat couls have potentially hurt his draft status.Result...Hes moving up..

Bynum held private workouts and showed off his "athleticism" and flat shot..Every scout who was thwre said the same thing.Hes got the tools,needs much work and should have competed to see his on court game..End result...he will be lucky to be top 30....

Your theory on Green not risking it is verrrry flawed..hes a high school kid,that is only looking at being number 3 because you guys had the fortune of moving up in the draft...It was greens slot to lose,and he is doing everything possible to move down.And its gonna work :clap:


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

Spoolie Gee said:


> But it is Green's problem if no other team in the top 6 will draft him which seems likely right now. If Green doesn't care if he goes #7 or lower and thinks a bad workout could push him even lower then that then he's making the right choice. It's defiantly a gamble for both sides.


Most definitely a gamble. I'm not sure that it's even a GOOD gamble for Green. But it's one that Green and his family and representation should be able to make, IMO, without people questioning his character.

That's part of what this board is for, I guess, but I won't do it.

Ed O.


----------



## B_&_B (Feb 19, 2004)

Simple answer to this thread:

Yes, I'm still interested in G.Green... and yes, I am also disappointed with the decision of his agent in regards to our request for him to work out against other players.


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

IMO a player who is afraid to workout is a player that is afraid of being corrected in there placement in the draft.....it shows that they can't back up all highly regarded publicity that they have been getting and are afraid of getting exposed and not being as good as people are led to believe....to me its a sign of weakness, whether its imposed by their agent or not...


----------



## truth (Jul 16, 2002)

All i know is if i had the goods like Green supposedly does,I would ask Nash when and where,and dunk on everybodys noggin....

Its not like a high level secret that hes a high schooler with POTENTIAL..Nobody is expecting him to be a lockdown defender...

This could possibly be the DUMBEST advice an agent ever gave..aside from Joe Smith not signing that wopper of a contract with Golden state..

Does anyone see the logic in what green is doing??It can only hurt,not help...


----------



## Spoolie Gee (Feb 3, 2005)

Ed O said:


> Most definitely a gamble. I'm not sure that it's even a GOOD gamble for Green. But it's one that Green and his family and representation should be able to make, IMO, without people questioning his character.
> 
> That's part of what this board is for, I guess, but I won't do it.
> 
> Ed O.


Yea I see no reason to question his character. This is probably advise from his agent.


----------



## PorterIn2004 (Jan 1, 2003)

I realize this is a long shot but, what if one (or more) of these guys manage to get hurt in a workout? Yes it's hugely unlikely but hardly impossible. They're in a position to be risking millions of dollars, particularly if they're basically a lock for the top five or so. Put me down with Ed, Scinos and company.


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

If Green starts refusing to work out IN ANY MANNER with Portland or play here if drafted, thats when I'll start worrying. Till that point, this is just posturing and smoke screening.


----------



## STOMP (Jan 1, 2003)

truth said:


> Does anyone see the logic in what green is doing??


Yes! Many posters have explained it to you in multiple posts across multiple threads... I'm not sure how you could have missed it. GG, like Bird and many other top prospects since, has (through his agent) decided to limited his exposure to better serve his interests. 

btw...your other examples of supposive stand up prospects...Labron skipped all the pre-draft festivities and never worked out for anyone other the Cavs, and Melo never worked out for anyone outside of the top 3. Those were their calculated risks, GG is taking his. You and Nash may not like it, but you two are not in a position to dictate terms. Sorry.

STOMP


----------



## PorterIn2004 (Jan 1, 2003)

Well said, Stomp! :greatjob:


----------



## Scinos (Jun 10, 2003)

truth said:


> All i know is if i had the goods like Green supposedly does,I would ask Nash when and where,and dunk on everybodys noggin....
> 
> Its not like a high level secret that hes a high schooler with POTENTIAL..Nobody is expecting him to be a lockdown defender...
> 
> ...



In this particular workout setting though (2 on 2), he can't really help his cause. 

Green can jump out of the gym and shoot the ball well. He wants to show that to teams in workouts, because it's what makes him a top 6 pick right now. The Blazers might just take him at #3 because of this ability. By working out 2 on 2, I think he's only going to put doubt in a GM's mind. 

Best case scenario, he has a really great performance in the workout and he solidifies himself at #3. 

However, what if gets pushed around a bit by stronger players ? that brings up questions about his underdeveloped body. What if he doesn't pass well, or make good decisions ? It raises doubt about his feel for the game. The Blazers decide he's not the right guy and don't take him at #3. 

So what is there to gain for Green...the #3 pick ? Nope...The Blazers might take him there even if he doesn't do the 2 on 2 workout. What is there to lose ? The #3 pick if he has a bad workout, maybe more if rumours get out to other teams. The payoff doesn't justify the risk in this situation, IMO.


----------



## Bookworm (Feb 23, 2005)

STOMP said:


> Yes! Many posters have explained it to you in multiple posts across multiple threads... I'm not sure how you could have missed it. GG, like Bird and many other top prospects since, has (through his agent) decided to limited his exposure to better serve his interests.
> 
> btw...your other examples of supposive stand up prospects...Labron skipped all the pre-draft festivities and never worked out for anyone other the Cavs, and Melo never worked out for anyone outside of the top 3. Those were their calculated risks, GG is taking his. You and Nash may not like it, but you two are not in a position to dictate terms. Sorry.
> 
> STOMP



GG is not Labron....GG did move up because we moved up...
Wright/webster have moved up by talent...We can tell GG that
if he won't work out we won't pick him at 3.. That will cost him
some money and I would rather chance my pick on 2 people
who have really moved up the mocks by working out and competing..
namely wright/webster..

we do have the pick and we can dictate that if you want a shot
at 3 you have to compete


----------



## Spoolie Gee (Feb 3, 2005)

Scinos said:


> In this particular workout setting though (2 on 2), he can't really help his cause.


Yes it can help his cause. It can solidify his spot in the top 5. By not working out there's an increased chance he'll slip to #7 or lower because no other team in the top 6 will take him other then Portland.



> By working out 2 on 2, he's only going to put doubt in a GM's mind.


By not working out he IS putting doubt into our GM's mind. 



> However, what if gets pushed around a bit by stronger players ? that brings up questions about his underdeveloped body. What if he doesn't pass well, or make good decisions ? It raises doubt about his feel for the game. The Blazers decide he's not the right guy and don't take him at #3.


So instead he'll just chose to go at #7 and not risk it. That's a calculated move on his part that I can understand. But I really think by not working out he's throwing away any chance of going at #3.



> So what is there to gain for Green...the #3 pick ? Nope...The Blazers might take him there even if he doesn't do the 2 on 2 workout. What is there to lose ? The #3 pick if he has a bad workout, maybe more if rumours get out to other teams. The payoff doesn't justify the risk in this situation, IMO.


 
No, the #3 pick is exactly what he could gain. There's no reason for him to think Portland will draft him at #3 without a workout against other players. There's other options out there for Portland, but not too many options for Green if he wants to be a top 5 pick.


----------



## PorterIn2004 (Jan 1, 2003)

Bookworm said:


> we do have the pick and we can dictate that if you want a shot
> at 3 you have to compete


You're right there and, as Ed's already pointed out, teams picked behind us might get all sorts of excited about the Blazers deciding to play hardball here.

I'm fine with Green and the others doing whatever they think is best for them, even if I think I might do it differently. And, I want the Blazers to do what they think will best for the team, be it drafting Green, Wright, or Webster (at whatever spot in the draft), trading the pick for a veteran, or whatever else. Regardless, I'm not going to be offended that some of these guys are making the decisions they think are best for them.


----------



## Scinos (Jun 10, 2003)

Spoolie Gee said:


> Yes it can help his cause. It can solidify his spot in the top 5. By not working out there's an increased chance he'll slip to #7 or lower because no other team in the top 6 will take him other then Portland.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I guess we just disagree on this. If he doesn't do the 2 on 2 workout, I think he still has a chance at going 3rd. Unless Nash just won't take players who don't workout in a competitive setting. That seems silly IMO, since predraft workouts are only part of the scouting process. I'm sure the Blazers have analyzed tapes of his high school game, watched the practices for the HS all-star games and talked to his coaches etc. So they'll already be familiar with his strengths and weaknesses. 

The way I see it, if he has a great workout, he goes at 3. If he has a bad workout, he doesn't go at 3. If he has an average workout, then his stock doesn't go anywhere. If Gerald (or his agent) thinks there is a greater probability that he will do average or poorly in a 2 on 2 setting, then they are better off turning it down, like they have done.


----------



## STOMP (Jan 1, 2003)

Bookworm said:


> GG is not Labron....GG did move up because we moved up...
> Wright/webster have moved up by talent...We can tell GG that
> if he won't work out we won't pick him at 3.. That will cost him
> some money and I would rather chance my pick on 2 people
> ...


I'd rather that Nash draft the best talent available and not let draft jockying blur his vision of who that is. 



> we do have the pick and we can dictate that if you want a shot
> at 3 you have to compete


sure, and obviously GG is possibly putting all the glory of going #3 instead of #5 (or whatever) and a few bucks in the short term at risk by not submitting to Nash's workout desires... then again Nash may draft him regardless. As it's been previously pointed out going #3 instead of #5 or even #10 isn't nearly as big of a deal from the prospects perspective (or bottom line) as going to a positive situation. Much (much!) bigger dollars are potencially available in the second and third contracts... going to a bad team turning over their roster may not help this cause. Also Portland isn't exactly a top market to rake in the endorsement dollars from either. As a Blazer fan it's not like I like all the facts, but nonetheless...

STOMP


----------



## Spoolie Gee (Feb 3, 2005)

Scinos said:


> I guess we just disagree on this. If he doesn't do the 2 on 2 workout, I think he still has a chance at going 3rd.


 
Yep we'll just have to agree to disagree because I honestly think there's nearly zero chance we take him at #3 now. That's not to say we won't end up with him on draft day but it'll probably be from trading down. 



> That seems silly IMO, since predraft workouts are only part of the scouting process. I'm sure the Blazers have analyzed tapes of his high school game, watched the practices for the HS all-star games and talked to his coaches etc. So they'll already be familiar with his strengths and weaknesses.


True, workouts are just a small part of the scouting process but the key to what you said was High School. All they've seen of him is against HS competition. Green isnt such a can't miss prospect that going up against better competition wont expose other weaknesses. The #3 pick is a huge investment for Portland and if Nash doesn't do his due diligence to get the most out of it he has no business being a GM.


----------



## Bookworm (Feb 23, 2005)

PorterIn2004 said:


> You're right there and, as Ed's already pointed out, teams picked behind us might get all sorts of excited about the Blazers deciding to play hardball here.
> 
> I'm fine with Green and the others doing whatever they think is best for them, even if I think I might do it differently. And, I want the Blazers to do what they think will best for the team, be it drafting Green, Wright, or Webster (at whatever spot in the draft), trading the pick for a veteran, or whatever else. Regardless, I'm not going to be offended that some of these guys are making the decisions they think are best for them.



I aslo would like the Blazers to do what they think is best...

That is, this problem...If Green had a couple of yrs of college or
some NCAA tournament exp.. then maybe it would be easier
to determine his ability against quality opponets...Bogut has 
Olympic exp and NCAA.. Paul and both Williams have lots of
tape and NCAA tournament exp... Green has what? Won't work
out so you can Judge him yourself....How can you spend that
high of a pick on an unproven commodity that is there soley based
on you being there.... That to me is not a smart way to do
bussiness

I wouldn't mind Taking D williams at 3 and having him compete
with Telfair. Have Outlaw and monia at the 2 stay HEALTHY and
we should win 10-12 more this yr


----------



## truth (Jul 16, 2002)

> Yes! Many posters have explained it to you in multiple posts across multiple threads... I'm not sure how you could have missed it. GG, like Bird and many other top prospects since, has (through his agent) decided to limited his exposure to better serve his interests.


Sorry stomper..you and your allies logic is hugely flawed....

lets review....

Question....What has green done on the court to have moved up from 5-8 in the draft to the #3????

Answer...Not a dam thing...He was merely the beneficiary of the blazers good fortune....And it could possibly make him millions...

Question..What is the absolute highest you could see Green getting drafted???

Answer..#3 pick...

Who has the #3 pick and who is the GM???

Question.....Portland and nash....

Does it not make sense to you that since there is no UPSIDE to Green not complying,why in the world would you do something so boneheaded???

No matter what he does,especially if he refuses to "compete",he simply will not move higher...In fact if portland trades the 3 for the 5 and 13,there is a good chance he could go 7..in Toronto

So nash and Portland hold all the cards as they are the highest bidder...Team Green has no leverage whatsoever....All they can do is drop in the draft by 
this unwillingness to comply to a reasonable request...

I assume you think dropping in the draft is serving his best interest..I find that odd


----------



## e_blazer1 (Feb 3, 2004)

Here's a thought: Maybe Nash isn't really all that interested in Green anyway and so is using this as an opportunity to make a statement about this growing practice of only working out if you figure you have nothing to lose. I know one thing, if somebody is asking me for a job, he'd better be willing to show me he can do the work. Last I checked, even big Hollywood stars are sometimes called upon to read for a part and show that they're the best person for the role. The Blazers have every right to ask to see Green perform against other players to see if he fits their specific needs. If he isn't willing to show his skills, particularly since he's never played at even the college level, I'm perfectly comfortable in seeing the Blazers look elsewhere.


----------



## truth (Jul 16, 2002)

e_blazer1 said:


> Here's a thought: Maybe Nash isn't really all that interested in Green anyway and so is using this as an opportunity to make a statement about this growing practice of only working out if you figure you have nothing to lose. I know one thing, if somebody is asking me for a job, he'd better be willing to show me he can do the work. Last I checked, even big Hollywood stars are sometimes called upon to read for a part and show that they're the best person for the role. The Blazers have every right to ask to see Green perform against other players to see if he fits their specific needs. If he isn't willing to show his skills, particularly since he's never played at even the college level, I'm perfectly comfortable in seeing the Blazers look elsewhere.


nice post....the NBA has become bizzaro world...A high school kid being advised not to perform for the ONLY team that will make him a top 3 pick .If thats sound advice,we better get ready for a very long lockout


----------



## CelticPagan (Aug 23, 2004)

I'm not sure how sending the message, "I'm too sacred to compete" can be a good thing for a prospect. "Oh I'll work out for you, but I don't want to play anyone." That sense a message that they aren't the kind of competitor you want on your team.


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

truth said:


> Does it not make sense to you that since there is no UPSIDE to Green not complying,why in the world would you do something so boneheaded???


You keep asking the same question and, maybe because you disagree with them or maybe because you don't understand them, you keep ignoring the answers.

Ed O.


----------



## truth (Jul 16, 2002)

Ed O said:


> You keep asking the same question and, maybe because you disagree with them or maybe because you don't understand them, you keep ignoring the answers.
> 
> Ed O.


I can assure you its not a comprehension problem.....

I think its you who may be having a small problem digesting what is transpiring..


You dont try to dictate terms when you have no leverage.Portland is as good as it gets for green...Milwaukee is not taking him,nor is Atlanta...He can only jeopardise his draft position with this approach,in no way can he enhance it.If you can not see that,you will more than likely see it a lot clearer on draft night.

All risk,no reward...plain and simple...


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

truth said:


> All risk,no reward...plain and simple...


It's amazing that you've cut to the truth so assuredly, and yet all of the top prospects in the draft this year aren't taking your advice.

And all of the teams, except the Trail Blazers, don't seem to have a problem with it, either.

Very weird.

Ed O.


----------



## truth (Jul 16, 2002)

Ed,GG stepped in **** the moment Portland had the good fortune of moving up in the draft....Not because of phenomenol workouts,pure luck...Being a high schooler,he is in a much different position than the others...

Portland may have been offered the 5 + the 13 for the number 3....What lunatic agent tells a high school kid that could go 3,not to workout???He has nowhere to go but down.# 3 is as good as it can possibly get.

And guess what,if there was ever some doubt as to what to do,GG just made the choice alot easier....Ed,the kid is playing against high schoolers!!!!!!!!!Someone should remind him hes not 6'9" 250 and the next Michael Jordan,Magic rolled into one..

The irony of it all is Your team may just be lucky enough to trade the pick and still get GG lower at 5 plus the 13.....

We can go on forever...The one thing I am 100% certain of,this action will not help his draft position.You have to admit that


----------



## ebott (Jan 7, 2003)

I'd like say that I don't want Green any more. I was all crazy over his action before this. But now I'm kind of MEH on him.

At this point in the draft 1-5 there is plenty of talent available. If you've got one of the top 5 picks in the draft and you end up with a bust it means you didn't do your homework. So what teams should really do is put as many resources as they can into making sure they don't end up with a guy that looks real good but ends up sucking.

A big part of that is seeing players in as close to real game action as you possibly can. Maybe we pass on Green and he becomes another Tracy McGrady or Kobe and we feel bad about it. But I'd rather do that than pick a guy that won't let me put him through the paces knowing full well that he might be a total bust.

If you've got a top 5 pick it means you suck. Which means your odds of ending up with a top 5 pick next year and the year after are also pretty good. You need to do what ever you can with these high picks to suck less. If it means picking a guy that doesn't have as much potential but is more of a sure thing to make it in the league, guys like Deron Williams or Antoine Wright, you should do it. 

I firmly believe that bad teams can improve via the draft if they do their homework. But a lot of teams don't. They go for the flashy guy with super star potential or they pick a guy because they think they'd fit into the crappy lineup they've got. 

Right now I'm loving the idea of trading down with Utah or Toronto to get Antoine Wright. But if Green was still available I'd have trouble avoiding the stupid thing. I'd still wanna take him but I'd trade down knowing full well that someone else in front of us might take a chance on Green and if he's gone before we pick I'd be ok with that.


----------



## Public Defender (May 5, 2003)

Is there any rule against the Blazers working Green out in a three-on-three? Sure, the more players on the court, the harder it is to tell who's good at what, but at least it gives some sense of what a player is capable of. 

The thing that would worry me as a GM is that this situation could get worse. Players who consider themselves athletic phenoms and dunkers could refuse to take shots from outside of ten feet. Players who say they're shooting guards, rather than point guards, could refuse to take part in passing drills. Players coming back from lower body injuries could refuse any activity that might result in an aggravation of the injury.


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

Seems like Greens true colors are coming out....Is he afraid of competition?....I don't blame the guy for not wanting to get exposed by another player who is possibly better than him, but its hard to say if I was in his shoes if I would be a coward and stay at home, instead of workout against another player with the possibility of exposing his weaknesses and losing ground on the draft depth charts...As Nash has eluded to before, high school level defense isn't even close in comparison with the NBA, which mean the good numbers that he put up (even in that all-star game, which had NO defense) could be a misrepresentation of how good his offensive game actually is...

I don't know about you, but when I see a player who declines to show what kind of game he has in a workout isn't someone that I want to take a gamble on with my #3 pick...and it could be a major mistake just because that player or his agent want that extra couple million....

Is this really the player that the organization wants to make one of their biggest decisions on?


----------



## Bookworm (Feb 23, 2005)

Public Defender said:


> Is there any rule against the Blazers working Green out in a three-on-three? Sure, the more players on the court, the harder it is to tell who's good at what, but at least it gives some sense of what a player is capable of.
> 
> The thing that would worry me as a GM is that this situation could get worse. Players who consider themselves athletic phenoms and dunkers could refuse to take shots from outside of ten feet. Players who say they're shooting guards, rather than point guards, could refuse to take part in passing drills. Players coming back from lower body injuries could refuse any activity that might result in an aggravation of the injury.



You can't play more than 2 on 2, and the teams can't have
NBA players on them, only draft eligeble people


----------



## Scout226 (Sep 17, 2003)

> Seems like Greens true colors are coming out....Is he afraid of competition?....I don't blame the guy for not wanting to get exposed by another player who is possibly better than him, but its hard to say if I was in his shoes if I would be a coward and stay at home, instead of workout against another player with the possibility of exposing his weaknesses and losing ground on the draft depth charts...As Nash has eluded to before, high school level defense isn't even close in comparison with the NBA, which mean the good numbers that he put up (even in that all-star game, which had NO defense) could be a misrepresentation of how good his offensive game actually is...
> 
> I don't know about you, but when I see a player who declines to show what kind of game he has in a workout isn't someone that I want to take a gamble on with my #3 pick...and it could be a major mistake just because that player or his agent want that extra couple million....
> 
> Is this really the player that the organization wants to make one of their biggest decisions on?



I think it's just best to say you don't like that guy and that's why the Blazers shouldn't draft him. If not working out in a competitive workout is a hit against Green, then it should be a hit against Marvin Williams and Bogut. They won't work out with the Blazers at all, so if they're available, they should pass on them. Heck, Paul didn't want to work out for Portland either, and he surely didn't workout against other competition. 

If Greens' agent thinks #3 is the highest he can go, which in reality that would be true, then why play against competition and hurt that, when it's an unwritten rule that top picks don't do that?

So, it's not Greens' "True Colors" coming out. It's his agent or dad calling all the shots.


----------



## Public Defender (May 5, 2003)

Bookworm said:


> You can't play more than 2 on 2, and the teams can't have
> NBA players on them, only draft eligeble people


So there is a rule! Thanks, Bookworm. I wondered...


----------



## Reep (Jun 4, 2003)

I was disappointed that Green wouldn't work out with others. However, I understand the business side of it and wouldn't hold it against him. I think everyone is overreacting to this. For me, I just put it down as a question mark in his profile. If someone else showed as much individual workout potential and did work out with others and looked good, then I would pick them. But I wouldn't give Green too much of a demerit based on him likely following his agents advice.


----------



## RedHot&Rolling (Jun 26, 2004)

Reep said:


> I was disappointed that Green wouldn't work out with others. However, I understand the business side of it and wouldn't hold it against him. I think everyone is overreacting to this. For me, I just put it down as a question mark in his profile. If someone else showed as much individual workout potential and did work out with others and looked good, then I would pick them. But I wouldn't give Green too much of a demerit based on him likely following his agents advice.


Good points Reep.

Same for me. Don't overreact. Wait it out. I think this increases our possibility to trade down for lower pick. Let someone else do the reaching.


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

Reep said:


> I was disappointed that Green wouldn't work out with others. However, I understand the business side of it and wouldn't hold it against him. I think everyone is overreacting to this. For me, I just put it down as a question mark in his profile. If someone else showed as much individual workout potential and did work out with others and looked good, then I would pick them. But I wouldn't give Green too much of a demerit based on him likely following his agents advice.



this is a case of people who dislike Green, just want to come up with other reasons to dislike Green. It's the same with Telfair "he's too short. we should draft a real PG" or Nash "he didn't hire Phil Jackson, that jerk!". In most cases, the argument against the person is limited at best. As in, they look at the end result, w/out looking at the possible logical and realistic reasons. 

Either that, or they just let their dislike of certain people cloud their judgement, and they pass it off as tho they're smarter than the rest of us.
They aren't. infact, I'd say they're not even as smart as the rest of us.


----------



## truth (Jul 16, 2002)

> If Greens' agent thinks #3 is the highest he can go, which in reality that would be true, then why play against competition and hurt that, when it's an unwritten rule that top picks don't do that?


The first point of contention; is Green is a top pick?Is Green really a top 5 pick,or is it reasonable to say that had Portland not moved up,Green would not have moved up.....There is one reason he is now a top 3 pick,and it has nothing to do with anything he has shown in the last month

It appears that Nash has made it perfectly clear that he likes Green,but would like to see a bit more as he has only competed against high school comp..

You have it backwards and it is out there in black and white.It is unknown that if Green scrimmages for Portland he will hurt his chances.He may solidify them or he he may hurt them..On the other hand,if he doesnt play against competition,there is a 100% chance he hurt his chances....

Why leave it up to chance???Why not place your fate in your own hands...There is NO upside to not competing....Its greens slot to Lose....not win..there is a difference.Portland is well aware of his deficiencies.Maybe they want to just see what type of competitor he is,what hes made of and how he reacts in adverse situations......

in a perverse way,not competing is answering some of those questions.....


----------



## e_blazer1 (Feb 3, 2004)

Hap said:


> this is a case of people who dislike Green, just want to come up with other reasons to dislike Green. It's the same with Telfair "he's too short. we should draft a real PG" or Nash "he didn't hire Phil Jackson, that jerk!". In most cases, the argument against the person is limited at best. As in, they look at the end result, w/out looking at the possible logical and realistic reasons.
> 
> Either that, or they just let their dislike of certain people cloud their judgement, and they pass it off as tho they're smarter than the rest of us.
> They aren't. infact, I'd say they're not even as smart as the rest of us.


This is the first time the Blazers have had a top-3 pick since Mychal Thompson. I don't think it's a matter of liking or disliking Green. It's a case of some of us wanting to make sure the Blazers to make the best move for the franchise's future. Sure, Green has a lot to lose if he comes out and plays against competition and doesn't show well. The Blazers also have a heck of a lot to lose if they pick an untested player with a top draft pick and end up with a guy whose game might be more hype than reality. As a Blazer fan, I'm going with the team on this one. If Green's worth a top-3 pick, he needs to show it.


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

e_blazer1 said:


> This is the first time the Blazers have had a top-3 pick since Mychal Thompson. I don't think it's a matter of liking or disliking Green. It's a case of some of us wanting to make sure the Blazers to make the best move for the franchise's future. Sure, Green has a lot to lose if he comes out and plays against competition and doesn't show well. The Blazers also have a heck of a lot to lose if they pick an untested player with a top draft pick and end up with a guy whose game might be more hype than reality. As a Blazer fan, I'm going with the team on this one. If Green's worth a top-3 pick, he needs to show it.



wasn't necessarily talking about that group of people who aren't gung ho about getting Green. They used logic.


----------



## BBert (Dec 30, 2004)

It seems a bit surreal to me that some would single out and pick on Green for taking the same strategy that so many other lottery players are taking, and especially so since it is Green's agent making the tactical decision, not Green. He is a young kid who is smart enough to rely on the wisdom of his hired representative. I have a hard time holding that against him.


----------



## truth (Jul 16, 2002)

Blazer Bert said:


> It seems a bit surreal to me that some would single out and pick on Green for taking the same strategy that so many other lottery players are taking, and especially so since it is Green's agent making the tactical decision, not Green. He is a young kid who is smart enough to rely on the wisdom of his hired representative. I have a hard time holding that against him.


you are 100% right,but unfotunately in life,you are often judged by the company you keep


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

> If not working out in a competitive workout is a hit against Green, then it should be a hit against Marvin Williams and Bogut. They won't work out with the Blazers at all, so if they're available, they should pass on them. Heck, Paul didn't want to work out for Portland either, and he surely didn't workout against other competition.


Why?, we have seen through college games and NCAA tournament games played at the highest of the collegiate level what these players can do and GM's have as well....We really have an idea what Green can do other than a couple of high school all-star games in which he scored a lot of points on lousy defense...The kid has something to prove, because without Portland picking him at #3 theres a good chance that he can fall down to #7 even......


----------



## truth (Jul 16, 2002)

Hap said:


> this is a case of people who dislike Green, just want to come up with other reasons to dislike Green. It's the same with Telfair "he's too short. we should draft a real PG" or Nash "he didn't hire Phil Jackson, that jerk!". In most cases, the argument against the person is limited at best. As in, they look at the end result, w/out looking at the possible logical and realistic reasons.
> 
> Either that, or they just let their dislike of certain people cloud their judgement, and they pass it off as tho they're smarter than the rest of us.
> They aren't. infact, I'd say they're not even as smart as the rest of us.


WRONG WRONG WRONG!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I like Green.ALOT..As a knick fan,i would grab him at eight...But i would still want him to compete against his peers

as a GM you have an obligation to the owner,the team and the fans.You are paid to make educated,informed prudent decisions...


----------



## STOMP (Jan 1, 2003)

truth said:


> Sorry stomper..you and your allies logic is hugely flawed....


My allies? I know no one on this board personally... if I am in agreement with others it's because we see an issue the same way. Burying your head in the sand ignoring simple explainations by multiple posters to ask "does anyone understand GG's logic?" doesn't reflect well on you... nor does bringing up examples of past players as "professionals" when those same players have done the same sort of limiting of their exposure in prior drafts. It makes it seem like you're randomly guessing at examples that might support the theories you're floating and then cutting bait when it turns out they don't.



> Question....What has green done on the court to have moved up from 5-8 in the draft to the #3????
> 
> Answer...Not a dam thing...He was merely the beneficiary of the blazers good fortune....And it could possibly make him millions...


Hugely flawed logic alert! Green has not moved up to #3 except in the pretend drafts... personally I try not to confuse reality with speculations by web geeks guessing at what teams might actually do. I do enjoy reading that stuff, but...

Second Green wouldn't make millions more going #3 rather then #5 (or whatever), he'd make a few hundred grand more. Compared to what he's likely to make over the bulk of his Pro ball career (salary and potencial endorsements), thats only a tiny fraction.



> Does it not make sense to you that since there is no UPSIDE to Green not complying,why in the world would you do something so boneheaded???
> 
> No matter what he does,especially if he refuses to "compete",he simply will not move higher...In fact if portland trades the 3 for the 5 and 13,there is a good chance he could go 7..in Toronto
> 
> ...


See above and multiple posts across multiple threads prior... I'd imagine that Green would like to go #3, but as long as he goes in the general area where he's projected (the lotto) to a good situation, I bet it's mission accomplished and he's happy with his entry into the league. I'm not sure why you think that going #3 is such a huge bonus for his interests, but whatever... you've proven (to me) you won't let simple logic get in the way your theories. I have no problem with you choosing to live in your own little world of make believe.

STOMP


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

truth said:


> WRONG WRONG WRONG!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


not talking about YOU YOU YOU!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## Reep (Jun 4, 2003)

Hap said:


> not talking about YOU YOU YOU!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


 :rofl:


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

Reep said:


> :rofl:


I felt like a blues brother when I did that.


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

Hap said:


> I felt like a blues brother when I did that.




Jake, Elwood, or one of the knockoff cousins in part II


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

mediocre man said:


> Jake, Elwood, or one of the knockoff cousins in part II



as it is with Beau and Luke Duke, Coy and Vance don't count.


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

Hap said:


> as it is with Beau and Luke Duke, Coy and Vance don't count.




I knew there was a reason I respected you. A few more answers like that and maybe I'll remember what it was.


----------



## truth (Jul 16, 2002)

Hap said:


> not talking about YOU YOU YOU!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


my apologies apologies apologies


----------



## truth (Jul 16, 2002)

STOMP said:


> Hugely flawed logic alert! Green has not moved up to #3 except in the pretend drafts... personally I try not to confuse reality with speculations by web geeks guessing at what teams might actually do. I do enjoy reading that stuff, but...
> 
> Second Green wouldn't make millions more going #3 rather then #5 (or whatever), he'd make a few hundred grand more. Compared to what he's likely to make over the bulk of his Pro ball career (salary and potencial endorsements), thats only a tiny fraction.
> 
> ...


I see you need a little help..Your logic may not be flawed but you are DEAD WRONG in the value of where you are drafted..

Pick 1st Year 2nd Year 3rd Year 4th Opt 5th Qualifying 
1 $3,483,100 $3,744,300 $4,005,600 26.1% 30.0% 
2 $3,116,400 $3,350,100 $3,583,800 26.2% 30.5% 
3 $2,798,600 $3,008,500 $3,218,400 26.4% 31.2% 
4 $2,523,200 $2,712,400 $2,901,600 26.5% 31.9% 
5 $2,284,900 $2,456,200 $2,627,600 26.7% 32.6% 
6 $2.075,300 $2,231,000 $2,386,600 26.8% 33.4% 
7 $1,894,500 $2,036,600 $2,178,700 27.0% 34.1% 
8 $1,735,600 $1,865,800 $1,996,000 27.2% 34.8% 

As the expression goes,you do the math.Green is giving up MILLIONS if he drops to 7.In fact the difference between 3 and 7 including the 4th year is 44%.
You also can not make the assumption that the first 4 years may be a small part of his comp.It may be,but lets say he is a bust.13 million sounds alot better than 9....


----------



## STOMP (Jan 1, 2003)

truth said:


> I see you need a little help..Your logic may not be flawed but you are DEAD WRONG in the value of where you are drafted..
> 
> Pick 1st Year 2nd Year 3rd Year 4th Opt 5th Qualifying
> 1 $3,483,100 $3,744,300 $4,005,600 26.1% 30.0%
> ...


Why go with #7 when I said #5 and most every indication we have from chatty GMs is thats the lowest he'll drop? I guess he could struggle in the workouts you feel he should do and drop, and it does help distort the numbers a little more, but it seems like a pretty transparent debate tactic to me. 

Doing the math comparing #3 to #5, the first 3 years (before a player can potencially opt out and possibly land a max type deal) add up to 9 mil to 7.4 mil respectively. In my reality based world 1.6 mil does not equate millions... so much for me being dead wrong. That's not small change by any means (even after taxes), but it does pale in comparison to what he could potencially make in future contracts and endorsements. He could potencially lose a lot more then 1.6 mil in rookie deal earnings if he were to struggle in the workouts designed to explore his weaknesses and the word got around though.



> You also can not make the assumption that the first 4 years may be a small part of his comp.It may be,but lets say he is a bust.!3 million sounds alot better than 9....


Sure bleep happens, maybe he gets badly injured, gets the yips on his jumper, or ??? that could happen no matter where he's drafted. Chances are like most top prospects he'll do very well over time... geez whats the average NBA contract up to these days... 5 mil per? I'm not sure what that has to do with him following his agents advice to protect his nearly assured lotto slot. Portland may still draft him #3 regardless of whether Nash is truely behind his recent public statements, or maybe he drops a slot or two... thats the gamble to team GG's limited exposure approach to the draft. Looking at the big picture it seems like the best strategy IMO... maybe thats why so many other top prospects have done (and are doing) the same thing?

STOMP


----------

