# Rose City Report



## Siouxperior (Jan 15, 2003)

Link 




> The Blazers have quite a dilemma on their hands. Here they have two veteran point guards, two guys that will probably lead this team to the playoffs. Between Damon Stoudamire and Nick Van Exel, Portland is pretty much set at point guard. Then came a fly in the ointment... A wrench in the works... And WHAT a wrench. Nobody expected Sebastian Telfair to be this good, this fast. Yes, it's only the preseason, but then again it's so much more than that._
> 
> From the moment this kid enters the game everyone is on the edge of their seat. What will he do next? Will THIS play be the one that Bassy amazes us with feats of greatness? As so many people have put it over the past couple weeks, Telfair has "it". If only you knew... If only you could see him in the locker room and in practice. This is no rookie. He's from the school of LeBron James. The way he carries himself around his teammates and the media is nothing short of amazing. If you didn't know better you'd SWEAR he had been in the league at least five years._
> 
> It's not ego, it's not arrogance... It's confidence. Confidence that he will be a great point guard. Every great point guard has had it. Isiah Thomas, Magic Johnson, Gary Payton... These guys were leaders. Talkers. They took command the second they came onto the court. Telfair has it too. How else can you explain his immediate rapport with his teammates? They don't even think of him as a rookie. It's weird. This is a guy who can get away with telling Travis Outlaw, "Shut up Rookie..." (jokingly of course)





> *If you think SeaBass has "it" now, wait till you see what he can REALLY do...*


Can't wait to see SeaBass get consistant PT!! Nice job on the article Nate.


----------



## Sambonius (May 21, 2003)

I think the Blazers need to work on moving either Damon or Nick out of town, this kid is of a rare breed, I believe he can play a good solid 20-30 minutes a game, no exaggeration. Give him his time now, don't stunt his growth.


----------



## mixum (Mar 19, 2003)

*SEABASS...LMAO*

If these rose city guys really think that seabass will contribute....now i think less of their reports! Why did i read that quote above!


----------



## Siouxperior (Jan 15, 2003)

*Re: SEABASS...LMAO*



> Originally posted by <b>mixum</b>!
> If these rose city guys really think that seabass will contribute....now i think less of their reports! Why did i read that quote above!


And I can see why you are a "2-star" poster. You're up there with the BigAmare's of the bbb.net message board.


----------



## mixum (Mar 19, 2003)

*No I just say what you dont wanna hear but are really thinking!*

thast why i have 2 stars...people dont like to hear the truth but rather hide it by buying into crap like Seabass will see meaningful minutes at PG!

Honestly the only way ''seabass'' plays is if van exel or damon gets hurt...otherwise he wont play unless we are up by 20 with 5 minutesz left!

if theres any position battle.....its at SF....not PG lol!


lets see we are upp by 2 points...who would i rather have damon, van exel or seabass?

Well at least rose city took my advice...definetly entertaining!


----------



## Playmaker0017 (Feb 13, 2004)

I'm with Mixum on this one - there is no question that Telfair is NOT ready to play a big role yet.

In preseason he's done okay. But, nothing spectacular. Wait until the pressures on and the clock is winding down ... 

Give him a year or two to develop. 

Play.


----------



## mixum (Mar 19, 2003)

*T H A N K Y O U!!!*

wow signs of intelligent life after all!


----------



## CrGiants (Dec 4, 2003)

So, mixum, not picking on you, but just so I am getting this straight....

You want the RCR to be more entertaining and have more trade ideas, no matter how much BS they are....

While you give the truth and nothing but the truth...?


----------



## mixum (Mar 19, 2003)

*rumors are fun and adds spice*

nonsense such as seabassy being in a battle with damon and van exel is just plain nonsense!


----------



## NateBishop3 (Jul 22, 2003)

Just out of curiousity, but where did you see "Seabass in a battle with Nick and Damon"...? I never said Telfair should start. I never said Telfair should see significant minutes. I DID say that the Blazers should make an effort to find SOME time for this kid. He needs to play. 

My point is, this kid won't take 3-4 years to be good. He's ready to contribute now. That doesn't mean he should have the ball with the clock running down. 

Did you even read the article Mixum or are you just guessing what it was about?


----------



## HOWIE (Dec 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>NateBishop3</b>!
> Just out of curiousity, but where did you see "Seabass in a battle with Nick and Damon"...? I never said Telfair should start. I never said Telfair should see significant minutes. I DID say that the Blazers should make an effort to find SOME time for this kid. He needs to play.
> 
> My point is, this kid won't take 3-4 years to be good. He's ready to contribute now. That doesn't mean he should have the ball with the clock running down.
> ...


I agree 110%. While Telfair isn't ready to lead this team yet, I think that he can play some minutes and help the team. I know that it is the preseason, but he looked good the other night and it isn't like he hasn't played NBA players during the summer the last few years. I don't see it taking that long of a time to get this guy ready to take over as the floor general.

Now I didn't say start him now, but I could see him getting good minutes as the season progresses. He is going to be good and has talent already, I say test it this season as much as possible.


----------



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

While I don't believe that Bassy is ready for big minutes just yet, I'm certainly not opposed to his getting some legit PT and a chance to grow quickly. How many times has POR had a great player *cough*Jermaine*cough* who would have put up big numbers if they would have just gotten the chance to play. This kid is our best shot yet.


----------



## BBALLSCIENCES (Oct 16, 2004)

The article is right on, I've been proclaiming this since he was drafted. He is better than both of the pg's ahead of him. He will make them sit.


----------



## MARIS61 (Apr 28, 2003)

Unless NVE goes down injured, ST will sit and learn.

Pretty passes are a start, but defense is a necessity, not an afterthought, at the PG position.


----------



## gambitnut (Jan 4, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>MARIS61</b>!
> Unless NVE goes down injured, ST will sit and learn.
> 
> Pretty passes are a start, but defense is a necessity, not an afterthought, at the PG position.


Since when do Damon and NVE play great defense?


----------



## BlazerMania (Apr 5, 2004)

I've seen a few of his high school games, and he really stood out. I'm looking forward to seeing him play some minutes at NBA level. He commits a lot of turnovers with his occasional 'over-passing', but I like him!


----------



## tlong (Jan 6, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>NateBishop3</b>!
> Just out of curiousity, but where did you see "Seabass in a battle with Nick and Damon"...? I never said Telfair should start. I never said Telfair should see significant minutes. I DID say that the Blazers should make an effort to find SOME time for this kid. He needs to play.
> 
> My point is, this kid won't take 3-4 years to be good. He's ready to contribute now. That doesn't mean he should have the ball with the clock running down.
> ...


The following quote certainly appears to suggest there is a competition between the 3 at PG...



> The Blazers have quite a dilemma on their hands. Here they have two veteran point guards, two guys that will probably lead this team to the playoffs. Between Damon Stoudamire and Nick Van Exel, Portland is pretty much set at point guard. Then came a fly in the ointment... A wrench in the works... And WHAT a wrench. Nobody expected Sebastian Telfair to be this good, this fast. Yes, it's only the preseason, but then again it's so much more than that._


I think you are exaggerating Telfair's performance so far in the preseason.


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>tlong</b>!
> 
> I think you are exaggerating Telfair's performance so far in the preseason.


yah Nathan, you forgot to mention he's short...was a horrible pick, and that the team should've taken Al Jefferson!


----------



## NateBishop3 (Jul 22, 2003)

That first paragraph only immplies that now the Blazers need to find some playing time for Telfair. Before it was cut and dry. Damon and Nick. Nowhere does it say Telfair should start, or even be the primary backup. And I'll stand by that. I think Telfair SHOULD see some playing time.


----------



## tlong (Jan 6, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>NateBishop3</b>!
> That first paragraph only immplies that now the Blazers need to find some playing time for Telfair. Before it was cut and dry. Damon and Nick. Nowhere does it say Telfair should start, or even be the primary backup. And I'll stand by that. I think Telfair SHOULD see some playing time.


I am only stating my interpretation of what you wrote. I can only guess at what you meant to imply.

Hap, are you a charter member of the SeaBass Fan Club? Do you have his poster in your bedroom?

:grinning:


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>tlong</b>!
> Hap, are you a charter member of the SeaBass Fan Club? Do you have his poster in your bedroom?
> 
> :grinning:


actually no. I just like people to use logic and rationale in their arguments against something. You fail to do so in your posts regarding Telfair.


----------



## tlong (Jan 6, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Hap</b>!
> 
> 
> actually no. I just like people to use logic and rationale in their arguments against something. You fail to do so in your posts regarding Telfair.


Riiiiiiiiiiiiight.


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>tlong</b>!
> 
> 
> Riiiiiiiiiiiiight.


adding extra I's to a word doesn't change the fact you fill your tirades against telfair..oops, I mean, the blazers picking telfair with faulty reasonin.


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

*Re: SEABASS...LMAO*



> Originally posted by <b>mixum</b>!
> If these rose city guys really think that seabass will contribute....now i think less of their reports! Why did i read that quote above!


hey mixum...did RCR kick your dog or something? you seem to have an intense hatred for the guys who do it.


----------



## tlong (Jan 6, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Hap</b>!
> 
> 
> adding extra I's to a word doesn't change the fact you fill your tirades against telfair..oops, I mean, the blazers picking telfair with faulty reasonin.


That is a bunch of *BALONEY!* You are welcome to point out the fault in my reasoning any time you wish. To this date I have yet to see you do so effectively.


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>tlong</b>!
> 
> 
> That is a bunch of *BALONEY!* You are welcome to point out the fault in my reasoning any time you wish. To this date I have yet to see you do so effectively.


let's see..here

and here and here and here again another gem 

see this 

these aren't all the same type of fallacies, but you basically show that you think he's short, and thats the main reason why it was a bad pick. Or you think that the team could've taken someone at a position they didn't need, at the 13th pick, and then taken Telfair at the 22nd or 23rd. 

We all get it. YOu don't like the pick. You think he's short and that basically means he'll be a bad pick at 13. He could average 20 points, and 10 assists and you'd still ***** about him being "5'10" and 5'11". 

Those are lame reasons to dislike his game, or think he was a bad pick.


----------



## B_&_B (Feb 19, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>Hap</b>!
> 
> 
> actually no. I just like people to use logic and rationale in their arguments against something. You fail to do so in your posts regarding Telfair.


Well said HAP!


----------



## alext42083 (Nov 7, 2003)

If you can play, then you can play. It doesn't matter how tall Telfair is.

This guy has that rare ability to see the floor as well as anyone and make that special pass. Sure it'd be great if he was a 6'4" PG, but I'd rather have a guy who can play whos 5'11" than a 6'4" PG who can't play worth a lick. See uh.. Rick Brunson.. haha. sorry Rick, you were uh.. alright here in Portland..

The only problem he'd be facing on defense is if the opposing PG's post him up. And really. there aren't a lot of those in the league. Who is a PG out west that posts up? Ridnour? Nash? Bibby? Arroyo? Parker? Terry? No.

Telfair will be good.


----------



## Kmurph (May 7, 2003)

Nate - 

Don't let some uninformed fans opinions get you down. You were right on with your article. Telfair SHOULD play some minutes in a backup role. He has shown to date that he can handle NBA play. HE still has A LOT to learn, and definite weaknesses (outside shooting...foul shooting...what is up with that?) in his his game, however, he IS a positive presence out on the court. 

I was at the Charlote game, and Telfair was FAR more effective than a certain ex-Blazer named Omar Cook, who saw a fair portion of minutes in a back-up role last year. 

I think that Nash was hoping that Telfair would quickly show he was ready to contribute some at the NBA level, but was also realistic enough not to be surprised if he didn't. Well IMO, to date he has shown that he can contribute. Now I don't think this means he will see much time in a b\u role, but I think that if Telfair keeps performing and making things happen with the time he does get, he will make POR mgmt decision easier to trade a NVE (in particular) or a Damon at the trade deadline. Either way, it bodes well for the future of the franchise.


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>tlong</b>!
> 
> 
> That is a bunch of *BALONEY!* You are welcome to point out the fault in my reasoning any time you wish. To this date I have yet to see you do so effectively.


Isn't it spelled Bolgna?


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Schilly</b>!
> 
> Isn't it spelled Bolgna?


actually, it's spelled bolOgna...

nestles makes the very best...bologna....


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

DOH!! I left a letter out.


----------



## jackiejackal (Nov 7, 2002)

To those who continue to pick on Telfair for his height :

If you had the chance to sign Earl Boykins,would you?
If you had the chance to sign Spud Webb,would you?


----------



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

> Originally posted by <b>jackiejackal</b>!
> To those who continue to pick on Telfair for his height :
> 
> If you had the chance to sign Earl Boykins,would you?
> If you had the chance to sign Spud Webb,would you?


Exactly. The Blazers would have one of the best benches in the NBA with Earl. Size isn't always a big factor. (Freudian slip?)


----------



## SheedSoNasty (Dec 31, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>4-For-Snapper</b>!
> 
> 
> Exactly. The Blazers would have one of the best benches in the NBA with Earl. Size isn't always a big factor. (Freudian slip?)


:whofarted


----------



## tlong (Jan 6, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Hap</b>!
> 
> 
> let's see..here
> ...


So that is your example of faulty reasoning by me???

The facts are that he *is* short, he *is* straight out of high school, and he *is* the 13th pick in the draft. Why in heck shouldn't I criticize the Blazers for those reasons??? Your argument lacks coherence.


----------



## tlong (Jan 6, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Schilly</b>!
> 
> Isn't it spelled Bolgna?


Actually it's bologna....but it wouldn't convey the appropriate pronunciation if I used it that way.


----------



## Trader Ed (Jun 17, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>jackiejackal</b>!
> To those who continue to pick on Telfair for his height :
> 
> If you had the chance to sign Earl Boykins,would you?
> If you had the chance to sign Spud Webb,would you?



Probably not Jackie, unless I was desperately needing a guard. They were effective but not what I woudl want long term... but I would sign Isaih Thomas which Telfair is compared to by some

witnessing the 1990 finals still stings... 14+ years later


----------



## tlong (Jan 6, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>jackiejackal</b>!
> To those who continue to pick on Telfair for his height :
> 
> If you had the chance to sign Earl Boykins,would you?
> If you had the chance to sign Spud Webb,would you?


No and no.


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>tlong</b>!
> 
> 
> Actually it's bologna....but it wouldn't convey the appropriate pronunciation if I used it that way.


sing along with me if you know the tune. 

My bologna has a first name....It's t-l-o-n-g. My bologna has a second name it's M-i-x-u-m. Oh I love to read them everyday, and if you ask me while I'll saaaaaaaaaaayyyyyyyyyyyyy. That that tlong mixum has a way with b-o-l-o-g-n-a.


----------



## tlong (Jan 6, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>mediocre man</b>!
> 
> 
> sing along with me if you know the tune.
> ...


Thank you. Thank you very much.


----------



## Scout226 (Sep 17, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>tlong</b>!
> 
> 
> So that is your example of faulty reasoning by me???
> ...


So, if the Blazers selected Al Jeffereson(your pick) then everything would have been peechy?

If the Blazers selected Jefferson instead of Telfair, I guess we could argue, he *is* tall, he *is* straight out of high school, and he *is* the 13th pick. And for those reason we critisize the Blazers??? Are those good reason?

Going by your reasoning, you have facts, but no substance. Telfair could be the next Kidd, but he's to short so he must suck.

I guess *all* kids selected out of HS and are picked high in the draft are bad picks.. :no:


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>mediocre man</b>!
> 
> 
> sing along with me if you know the tune.
> ...


HHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHA


:|


----------



## tlong (Jan 6, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Scout226</b>!
> 
> 
> So, if the Blazers selected Al Jeffereson(your pick) then everything would have been peechy?
> ...


My argument is that if they had selected Jefferson at #13 they still could have picked Telfair at #22. That would have made everyone happy, wouldn't it? Of course I can't prove that Telfair would have been available at #22, but I believe he would have. The Blazers strategy during that draft was mystifying.


----------



## Scout226 (Sep 17, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>tlong</b>!
> My argument is that if they had selected Jefferson at #13 they still could have picked Telfair at #22. That would have made everyone happy, wouldn't it? Of course I can't prove that Telfair would have been available at #22, but I believe he would have. The Blazers strategy during that draft was mystifying.


I know you've stated this before, but until you can PROVE Telfair would have been available at the 22nd pick, then it's just a hunch on your part, and it doesn't hold any facts.

So, dreaming of Jefferson at #13 and Telfair at #22 is just a pipe dream. The draft is over and it's time to stop criticizing a player because of his height, or what school he came out of, or where he was picked. 2 out of 3 of those items players have NO control over.


----------



## Kmurph (May 7, 2003)

Hey tlong, I don't know a Blazer fan who WOULD NOT have wanted to get Telfair and a Jefferson, or Snyder, or JR Smith. But I think the difference is, that to me (and to Nash apparently), Telfair was the #1 priority to get, to you and others, he was not. 

We can argue all day over whether or not Telfair would have been there in the 20's for POR, I do not believe he would have been. But the more important point IMO, is whether or not he should have been the #1 priority for POR. It is obvious that for Nash, Telfair was the #1 priority, and THAT is why he took him at #13. IF POR was unsure, and they have since stated that they were, that Telfair would be there later, then they made the right choice by taking him, as he was their #1 target. 

Now you can blast the way POR ranked the players in the draft all you want, and ultimately that will be determined by how he (and other players drafted that day) perform on the court. But I think blaming Nash's strategy is pretty weak. No one here knows what teams b\t POR #13 pick and their picks in the 20's would have done, if POR selected another player instead of Telfair. Nash went with his #1 target at #13, instead of trying to get greedy and get another player and risk losing their #1 target. I cannot blame them for that. You obviously can.

BTW, Telfair is about 5'11-6'0, I think it is a pretty WEAK arguement, that if he were another 2" taller, it would make him a better pick\player. How he PLAYS is really all that matters, this downgrading him b\c of 2" or so is pretty ridiculous IMO. He isn't SUPER short (like err...Damon is @ 5'8), he is slightly undersized compared to average, but a players SIZE is not indicitive of his value on the court, not as indicitive as like...oh...his actual PLAY on the court. What a concept. Who knew that the way a player actually PLAYS\AFFECTS a game would be a better\proper gauge of his worth as a player?


----------



## RG (Jan 1, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>MARIS61</b>!
> 
> 
> Pretty passes are a start, but defense is a necessity, not an afterthought, at the PG position.


Ummm, The Blazers start Damon. :sigh:


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>tlong</b>!
> 
> 
> So that is your example of faulty reasoning by me???
> ...


those are all YOUR arguments.

Those are lame reasons to constantly disparage a guy, and always use fallacious reasons for why you think he's a bad pick.


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Kmurph</b>!
> Hey tlong, I don't know a Blazer fan who WOULD NOT have wanted to get Telfair and a Jefferson, or Snyder, or JR Smith. But I think the difference is, that to me (and to Nash apparently), Telfair was the #1 priority to get, to you and others, he was not.
> 
> We can argue all day over whether or not Telfair would have been there in the 20's for POR, I do not believe he would have been. But the more important point IMO, is whether or not he should have been the #1 priority for POR. It is obvious that for Nash, Telfair was the #1 priority, and THAT is why he took him at #13. IF POR was unsure, and they have since stated that they were, that Telfair would be there later, then they made the right choice by taking him, as he was their #1 target.
> ...


what krmurph said!


----------



## Trader Ed (Jun 17, 2002)

we have talked about this a fair amount... and I think one of the teams between #14 and #22 was Denver, who had interest in Telfair. I seem to recall Kiki mentioning his interest in him at #20

So what would we have done with Randolph, Rahim and Jefferson at the PF spot and possibly no Telfair at the PG spot.. ??? :banghead:

too many PF already... and Outlaw still growing he may still end up being a PF



I will take a shorter version of Isaih Thomas instead of a 3rd PF


----------



## STOMP (Jan 1, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Trader Bob</b>!
> 
> I will take a shorter version of Isaih Thomas instead of a 3rd PF


I'm pretty much for always selecting the guy who the GM projects as having the biggest upside. IMO drafting for need is only a good idea if the GM rates the prospects at about the same level. 

btw I've stood near both Isiah and ST, and if anything ST is a scooch taller. 

STOMP


----------



## jackiejackal (Nov 7, 2002)

To the guys who said no to both Spud Webb and Earl Boykins,
you don't watch much basketball,do you??

And the guy who put in the funny little face..don't know what you meant by it..
You are not aware of the skills these guys have and had apparently..
It's a shame..
you missed some pretty darn good games.


Either guy would have made a teriffic Blazer.
Professionally and personally.


----------



## STOMP (Jan 1, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>jackiejackal</b>!
> To the guys who said no to both Spud Webb and Earl Boykins,
> you don't watch much basketball,do you??
> 
> ...


I've read that little Earl, while undoubtably fun to watch, wasn't very popular amoung his GS teammates, and is having similar problems getting along in Denver. Supposively his teammates regard him as a ball hog. 

I would have been fine with offering Spud a contract/role as a backup. He was a good energy guy IMO.

btw, pretty classy the way you lashed out at those who merely disagreed with you... 

STOMP


----------



## PorterIn2004 (Jan 1, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Hap</b>!
> 
> 
> what krmurph said!


What Hap said -- nicely put, Krmurph.


----------

