# I'm Having a Durant Day!



## ROYisR.O.Y. (Apr 1, 2007)

is this a bad thing? i dont know what it is but ever since i got on my computer all ive been thinking about is Durants passion and scoring ability. is it just because everyone is finding the flaws in Odens game now that he is committed to the draft? everyone talks about how great of a fit durant is here and now the only scenerios i can think of for the offseason involve durant. anyone else having this problem, why cant the draft be sooner...


----------



## kaydow (Apr 6, 2004)

ROYisR.O.Y. said:


> is this a bad thing? i dont know what it is but ever since i got on my computer all ive been thinking about is Durants passion and scoring ability. is it just because everyone is finding the flaws in Odens game now that he is committed to the draft? everyone talks about how great of a fit durant is here and now the only scenerios i can think of for the offseason involve durant. anyone else having this problem, why cant the draft be sooner...


You're not the only one. Look at how many threads there are about these two guys. I have to admit, there are a FEW things about Oden that may be warning signals. I've heard a lot recently that if there's a knock on him it's that he doesn't always play with passion (by the way, I've watched him play a ton and I haven't noticed that) Also, that he's happy to be going to a smaller marked to avoid big pressure. That's good in a way . . . I mean you don't want somebody who's just out for personal glory, but you don't want a scared pattycake either. I'm not implying that's what Oden is, it just sounds a little funny. I still want Oden, but I'm completely confident KP will make the right choice either way. Completely confident. The guy is just nails. If Oden has some sort of personality flaw (which I doubt), KP will find it with all of the test and interviews they do, and he'll pick Durrant. I'm just sold on KP right now.


----------



## ROYisR.O.Y. (Apr 1, 2007)

yea i think that its a good thing that ive been thinking about durant because now i just realize that there is no worst case scenerio. gotta love that


----------



## sa1177 (Feb 18, 2005)

There are lots of Durant type players out there....

How many dominant centers are out there?

Duncan, Amare, Yao, Howard....?????


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

Our most flexible scenario IMO is to draft Oden. Here is why. Zach is probably the most tradable asset on the Blazers. If we take Durant we would have to be thinking of Aldridge as a 5 which he really isn't unless it's an up-tempo team which it really can't be with Zach. Then theres the whole Zach and Durant having to share the ball and what about Roy?

On the Flip side if we take ODen, the Aldridge and Oden are locked up as twin Towers at 6'11" and 7'0", both of whom are athletic enough toplay more up-tempo, but also strong enough to slow it down more. Zach then can be parlayed into a SF that would fit our system. Richard Jefferson or Rashard Lewis hopefully. You would have less conflict about touches. 

I know people love Zach, but this team is much much better to have Oden and Aldridge at the 4/5 and getting a for Zach.


----------



## Kmurph (May 7, 2003)

and I don't think Amare or Howard even count....


Carmelo, McGrady, Nowitzki, Garnett


fabulous players all...and not a NBA title among them.....

Shaq, Hakeem, Duncan, Robinson...ALL have rings....

Sure a lot of things factor into the equation...but I don't think this is a coincidence...


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

Ohh yeah how about this....

How many perennial All-Star SF's retired without a ring?
How many perennial All-Star C's retired without a ring?


----------



## craigehlo (Feb 24, 2005)

Kmurph said:


> Carmelo, McGrady, Nowitzki, Garnett
> 
> 
> fabulous players all...and not a NBA title among them.....


Exactly. 

Durant is a great college scorer and has a lot of heart. So did Adam Morrison.


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

Schilly said:


> Our most flexible scenario IMO is to draft Oden. Here is why. Zach is probably the most tradable asset on the Blazers. If we take Durant we would have to be thinking of Aldridge as a 5 which he really isn't unless it's an up-tempo team which it really can't be with Zach. Then theres the whole Zach and Durant having to share the ball and what about Roy?
> 
> On the Flip side if we take ODen, the Aldridge and Oden are locked up as twin Towers at 6'11" and 7'0", both of whom are athletic enough toplay more up-tempo, but also strong enough to slow it down more. Zach then can be parlayed into a SF that would fit our system. Richard Jefferson or Rashard Lewis hopefully. You would have less conflict about touches.
> 
> I know people love Zach, but this team is much much better to have Oden and Aldridge at the 4/5 and getting a for Zach.


I don't know what word you left out there at the end... "getting a for Zach".

I agree, definitely, that Oden gives us more flexibility to move Zach... or Aldridge, I guess (although I can't see a situation where that would make sense). Most of those of us who "love" Zach aren't afraid to see him get traded, but want to make sure we're not getting rid of him because he's "blocking" Aldridge or because of his perceived negatives.

Long-term, Aldridge and Oden would be ridiculous. Will be ridiculous. But there's no reason to sacrifice today to rush that along, and giving Zach away for less than fair value would be a bad move.

As to the original thread's question: part of the fun of sports is the uncertainty. I don't think that it's insane to go back-and-forth between Oden and Durant. I think that passing on Oden would be a big mistake, but Durant might be the best big mistake in history... 

Ed O.


----------



## Sambonius (May 21, 2003)

If you're looking about marketability, Durant will have more of that as smaller players have always had that over big men but if you're looking at making the TEAM a success, Oden is your guy without a doubt.


----------



## Peaceman (Jan 15, 2003)

I love watching Durant play. He scores with such ease, but I remember thinking the same think watching Glen Robinson in College. The guy averaged I think he scored over 30 points a game in college and never became a major impact guy in the NBA. I'm hoping Durant isn't the same, but I am definately hoping we draft Oden.


----------



## TeDinero (Jun 27, 2005)

Just becuase Oden is a center doesn't mean he equals a ring. He lacks the qualities of a dominating center; he's not a leader and doesn't demand the ball in the paint. How can someone campare Durant to Morrison? Morrison was pure scorer with heart, while Durant does everything while having a passion for the game. I don't understand how the majority can say that they would pass on a player compared to KG, T Mac and Nowitzki that is 18 and is the only freshman to win player of the year. SOOO versatile, with height, athleticism and a passion to win.

I'm not sure who to pick, KP has a big decisoin in front of himself.


----------



## BuckW4GM (Nov 2, 2005)

TeDinero said:


> Just becuase Oden is a center doesn't mean he equals a ring. He lacks the qualities of a dominating center; he's not a leader and doesn't demand the ball in the paint.


you're right. just because oden is a center it doesn't guarantee a ring. how about because he's a future HoF center? would that more likely qualifies him for rings?

Oden lacks the qualities of a dominating center? you're on your own there...


----------



## craigehlo (Feb 24, 2005)

Peaceman said:


> I love watching Durant play. He scores with such ease, but I remember thinking the same think watching Glen Robinson in College. The guy averaged I think he scored over 30 points a game in college and never became a major impact guy in the NBA. I'm hoping Durant isn't the same, but I am definately hoping we draft Oden.


Durant is much more of a risk for that reason. Adam Morrison lead the NCAA in scoring last season and had a hell of a time trying to get that jumpshot going against NBA defensive players. 

Durant's not going to be next Morrison or Danny Manning, but Oden's skills translate right away. His combination of size/speed, hops, dunks and blocks make him an immediately a top 3 or 4 center in the NBA. I seriously doubt Durant becomes a top 5 SF in the NBA as a rookie.


----------



## Peaceman (Jan 15, 2003)

TeDinero said:


> Just becuase Oden is a center doesn't mean he equals a ring. He lacks the qualities of a dominating center; he's not a leader and doesn't demand the ball in the paint. How can someone campare Durant to Morrison? Morrison was pure scorer with heart, while Durant does everything while having a passion for the game. I don't understand how the majority can say that they would pass on a player compared to KG, T Mac and Nowitzki that is 18 and is the only freshman to win player of the year. SOOO versatile, with height, athleticism and a passion to win.
> 
> I'm not sure who to pick, KP has a big decisoin in front of himself.


Playing with passion doesn't always equal wins. I love Durant, but I can't figure out if he will be a great player or a great scorer. Plenty of player have been great scorers and not great players. Lloyd B Free, George Gervin, Vince Carter, etc. Just because Oden doesn't show a lot of emotion, doesn't mean he doesn't have the ability to be great. Look at Duncan. How about Jabbar? 
The fact there isn't many good centers is a better reason to choose Oden. There are many players who can match up with Durant, how many match up well with a athletic center? Less than a SF.


----------



## ThereIsNoTry (Oct 23, 2005)

Even though Odens personality isn't electrifying, his game is. Everytime he has a chance to dunk it, he throws it hard and tries to rip the backboard off. Everytime he has a chance to block he either snags it, or throws it into the stands. Adding a powerful, athletic center to the paint improves interior and exterior defense, while Durant doesn't effect a teams defense as directly as Oden.


----------



## ProZach (Oct 13, 2005)

craigehlo said:


> Exactly.
> 
> Durant is a great college scorer and has a lot of heart. So did Adam Morrison.



Woah, there Nelly. Slow down. Durant is 18 (i believe) and waaay better than Morrison will ever be. 



sa1177 said:


> There are lots of Durant type players out there....
> 
> How many dominant centers are out there?
> 
> Duncan, Amare, Yao, Howard....?????


Again, slow down. I think Durant is going to be a VERY special player, and so I disagree there's "lots of Durant type players". There might be two.

As far as the arguement that a dominant center is the only path to a ring - that's usually true, but not always. MJ has six rings, name his centers.. And yes, I think Durant has a chance to be ultimately compared to MJ and Kobe.

Still, I'm like a lot of you, I've been flip-flopping on the two players on an hourly basis. 

I don't want another Sam Bowie, and the fact Oden was hurt during his one and only year of college worries me. Believe it or not, I think Durant is less of a risk at this point.


----------



## BuckW4GM (Nov 2, 2005)

please, just stop with the bowie nonsense. if you are going to bring some irrelevent historical event to use as evidence of some sort, then hakeem is the comparison. hakeem was considered a franchise center, just like oden is now. bowie wasn't nearly as highly touted. so please stop with that ****.

and about oden's injury, it was a broken wrist. no torn tendons, ligaments, or back problems. it was a broken wrist. if anyone is an injury risk, it would be durant. the guy is build like a stick. 6'10" and weighing 190lbs!!!!!


----------



## wizmentor (Nov 10, 2005)

After giving it some thought, no way we pick Durant #1.
We either
1) Draft Oden
2) Trade down with Seattle


----------



## craigehlo (Feb 24, 2005)

ProZach said:


> Woah, there Nelly. Slow down. Durant is 18 (i believe) and waaay better than Morrison will ever be.


Oden is obviously already better than Morrison will ever be, nobody is comparing talent levels. It's about prolific NCAA scorers not necessarily being able to be anywhere near as dominant in the pros.


----------



## c_note (Jan 30, 2007)

Schilly said:


> On the Flip side if we take ODen, the Aldridge and Oden are locked up as twin Towers at 6'11" and 7'0", both of whom are athletic enough toplay more up-tempo, but also strong enough to slow it down more. Zach then can be parlayed into a SF that would fit our system. Richard Jefferson or Rashard Lewis hopefully. You would have less conflict about touches.
> 
> I know people love Zach, but this team is much much better to have Oden and Aldridge at the 4/5 and getting a for Zach.


NM I read your post wrong.


----------



## MAS RipCity (Feb 22, 2003)

"I'm having an Oden day"...


----------



## ProZach (Oct 13, 2005)

BuckW4GM said:


> please, just stop with the bowie nonsense... bowie wasn't nearly as highly touted. so please stop with that ****.
> 
> and about oden's injury, it was a broken wrist. no torn tendons, ligaments, or back problems. it was a broken wrist. if anyone is an injury risk, it would be durant. the guy is build like a stick. 6'10" and weighing 190lbs!!!!!


Yeesh, I'm just saying, some people are prone to injuries more than others, just ask Theo Ratliff. Nobody said he was Sam Bowie or that his wrist injury will even be relevant during his professional career. I'm not trying to attack your man, mmmkay?..

I think both will be amazing at the professional level and it's amazing we even get to have this discussion.

It's now 9:30 and I've switched back to wanting Oden anyways.


----------



## RW#30 (Jan 1, 2003)

TeDinero said:


> Just becuase Oden is a center doesn't mean he equals a ring. He lacks the qualities of a dominating center;.


Did you watced the tournament?
Finals
Name Min FG 3Pt FT Off Reb Ast TO Stl Blk PF Pts 
G. Oden 38 10-15 0-0 5-8 4 12 1 2 1 4 4 25 

against GT
G. Oden 20 6-11 0-0 1-4 3 9 0 2 1 1 4 13 

vs.Memphis 
G. Oden 24 7-8 0-0 3-6 2 9 0 1 0 1 4 17 

I call that domination. Against 3 quality teams with 6 -7 players going in the top 12-15 picks.



TeDinero said:


> he's not a leader and doesn't demand the ball in the paint.


He was in foul trouble and took his team to the finals. When was the last time you saw OSU in the Finals in March?



TeDinero said:


> I don't understand how the majority can say that they would pass on a player compared to KG, T Mac and Nowitzki that is 18 and is the only freshman to win player of the year. SOOO versatile, with height, athleticism and a passion to win.
> 
> 
> > Picked #4th,#16th and #9th. How many rings do they have? Odds are in Oden's favor. He is not an Olowakandi or Pervis Ellison type of #1 pick. Even if Durant turns out better it is harder to get a good center. Look it Houston and replace Yao with an average guy. Houston would have a hard time makeing the playoff.
> ...


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

TeDinero said:


> he's not a leader


Based on what? An age 19 season as a college freshman? Beyond that, I'm not sure how much of a Patton players like Shaq, Wilt and Abdul-Jabbar were.



> and doesn't demand the ball in the paint.


He's not experienced in establishing position. That's true, but hardly major. Once he established position, he definitely called for the ball and either scored it or forced the defense to collapse and hit the open man.

As for Oden vs. Durant: I think Durant will be special, but a dominant big man, which I believe Oden easily projects to be, is the biggest factor in winning championships.


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

ProZach said:


> Yeesh, I'm just saying, some people are prone to injuries more than others, just ask Theo Ratliff. Nobody said he was Sam Bowie or that his wrist injury will even be relevant during his professional career. I'm not trying to attack your man, mmmkay?..


You implied his broken wrist was relevant to consider. A cleanly broken bone isn't a re-injury risk. While torn tendons and muscles are forever weakened, bones often knit back stronger. It might be a different thing if it were a foot and his weight were causing it, but a wrist is completely flukish.

I don't think Oden is any more of an injury risk than Durant.


----------



## ProZach (Oct 13, 2005)

Minstrel said:


> You implied his broken wrist was relevant to consider. A cleanly broken bone isn't a re-injury risk. While torn tendons and muscles are forever weakened, bones often knit back stronger. It might be a different thing if it were a foot and his weight were causing it, but a wrist is completely flukish.
> 
> I don't think Oden is any more of an injury risk than Durant.



Wow, you still want to argue about this? Let's just say it's as relevent as someone saying, "Durant is a great college scorer and has a lot of heart. So did Adam Morrison." To me, I see an implication there as well.


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

I'm not understanding why people need to slag on Durant. 

Durant can be everything that everyone thinks he is, and Oden would STILL be a better pick, IMO.

Ed O.


----------



## Draco (Jun 28, 2003)

If we let Seattle get Oden we'd have to go through them for a chamionship the next 15 years.

What team are you more scared of, Seattle with Durant or Seattle with Oden? 

Come on people, doesn't that make it blatently obvious who we should pick.


----------



## Bwatcher (Dec 31, 2002)

An excellent way to think about it Draco. While it is not exactly a match, think about Seattle now with both Allen and Lewis.... fine, fine shooters, and Lewis can slash as well. Are teams afraid of the Sonics? 

For my part, it is much more fun to watch great defense, because it is mostly spontaneous and surprising. It is fun watching jump shots go in, but it happens all the time. Great shot blocking, like the kind Bill Russell used to do, is just so rare (no, you don't knock it into the stands, you block it more softly so your team can get it and start a fast break). Do the background checks, find out as much as you can about unusual medical conditions for both guys, but unless something turns up, please please don't try to fill some imaginary inside straight by predicting the next Jordan. Take the choice the basketball gods are placing before the city ... the name has a d and two vowels, but they aren't "u" and "a".


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

ProZach said:


> Wow, you still want to argue about this?


Don't make a point if you're going to get huffy when people contradict it.



> Let's just say it's as relevent as someone saying, "Durant is a great college scorer and has a lot of heart. So did Adam Morrison." To me, I see an implication there as well.


That's a weak point, as well. I didn't make it, though.


----------



## ProZach (Oct 13, 2005)

Minstrel said:


> Don't make a point if you're going to get huffy when people contradict it.


There's a difference between contradicting what I actually said and contradicting what you THOUGHT I was IMPLYING.


----------



## sa1177 (Feb 18, 2005)

ProZach said:


> There's a difference between contradicting what I actually said and contradicting what you THOUGHT I was IMPLYING.


Either way your wrong...so might as well cease the arguing.


----------



## ProZach (Oct 13, 2005)

sa1177 said:


> Either way your wrong...so might as well cease the arguing.



Fact: Oden played one season of college ball.

Fact: Oden broke a bone during that season.

Fact: Bowie also broke bones. He played in college longer, so he injured himself more. And it didn't stop in the pros.

Tell me how that comparison is wrong? It has nothing to do with talent, potential, the way they play the game, whether Oden will consistently be injured, or anything more than they both got injured during college. That's it. 

It's like comparing a square and a triangle and me saying they both have straight edges. Does that mean they're the same? Does that mean they even resemble each other? 

I don't why everyone is so paranoid. Obviously he'll undergo a lot of tests so it's a mute point. As of now, it just worries me that his only season was spent being injured, that's all. Did I mention that I'd still take him with the 1st pick???? Oh yeah, I did.


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

ProZach said:


> There's a difference between contradicting what I actually said and contradicting what you THOUGHT I was IMPLYING.





> As of now, it just worries me that his only season was spent being injured, that's all.


Why would it "worry you" if you're not saying it might lead to more injuries? Are you worried that Oden is traumatized from his year of injury? Worried that he's forgotten how to use that hand, permanently?

It doesn't appear I was wrong in drawing that implication from what you said. You just _implied_ it again.

Anyway, you clearly don't want to discuss your implication, even though you just re-stated it, so we can drop it. I've said my piece about how unlikely that Oden's hand injury will be significant in the future.


----------



## BenDavis503 (Apr 11, 2007)

sa1177 said:


> There are lots of Durant type players out there....
> 
> How many dominant centers are out there?
> 
> Duncan, Amare, Yao, Howard....?????



Thank you.


----------



## ProZach (Oct 13, 2005)

BenDavis503 said:


> Thank you.


Yes, thank him for that completely speculative and unsubstantiated opinion on the guys talent. 

As for the dominant centers he mentioned, Duncan and Amare are PF's who sometimes play center, and Yao and Howard have never gotten anywhere in the playoffs. 

Btw, the two teams that will probably meet in the finals have Chris Webber and Fabricio Oberto as their starting centers. 

I'm just saying.


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

ProZach said:


> Btw, the two teams that will probably meet in the finals have Chris Webber and Fabricio Oberto as their starting centers.


The Spurs also have Tim Duncan. They're not the best example of how unimportant big men are to winning.

The Pistons also have Rasheed Wallace. They're not the best example of how unimportant big men are to winning.


----------



## ProZach (Oct 13, 2005)

Minstrel said:


> The Spurs also have Tim Duncan. They're not the best example of how unimportant big men are to winning.
> 
> The Pistons also have Rasheed Wallace. They're not the best example of how unimportant big men are to winning.



Yeah, your talking about PFs dude, you know, like Aldridge and Zach...


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

ProZach said:


> Yeah, your talking about PFs dude, you know, like Aldridge and Zach...


Regardless of what they're called, they function as the centers on their teams, offensively and defensively. They both function as the defensive presence in the middle and they both function as the post presence on offense (Duncan more than Wallace). Just as Oden would.

Aldridge could do that, too. But Oden is expected to be far better. And most of the recent championships have gone to dominant big men, like Shaq and Duncan. Aldridge doesn't project to be anywhere near that level.


----------



## ProZach (Oct 13, 2005)

Minstrel said:


> Regardless of what they're called, they function as the centers on their teams, offensively and defensively. They both function as the defensive presence in the middle and they both function as the post presence on offense (Duncan more than Wallace). Just as Oden would.
> 
> Aldridge could do that, too. But Oden is expected to be far better. And most of the recent championships have gone to dominant big men, like Shaq and Duncan. Aldridge doesn't project to be anywhere near that level.


Your right it's not a question of what they're called, it's their function on the team. The leauge is trending towards small-ball (Phoenix, GS) where PF's take over the functions of centers. Thanks for making my point. 

Which tandem would you rather have in two years? - Aldridge/Zach - Sheed/Webber - Duncan/Oberto? 

If we can turn Zach into a good small forward this off-season (Lewis, Jefferson, Marion) then the draft choice is even more of a no-brainer than it is now. But whoever our center is, they'll need a good supporting cast (or a great sidekick), just like every other center who's ever won a championship.


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

ProZach said:


> Your right it's not a question of what they're called, it's their function on the team. The leauge is trending towards small-ball (Phoenix, GS) where PF's take over the functions of centers. Thanks for making my point.


Duncan is "small-ball," because he's "a PF taking over the functions of a center?" Hilarious.

And until "Phoenix, GS" start winning titles consistently, your claim that the league is trending towards "small-ball" has little merit.

We have four non-small-ball teams in the two conference finals. Quite a take-over.


----------



## ProZach (Oct 13, 2005)

Minstrel said:


> Duncan is "small-ball," because he's "a PF taking over the functions of a center?" Hilarious.
> 
> And until "Phoenix, GS" start winning titles consistently, your claim that the league is trending towards "small-ball" has little merit.
> 
> We have four non-small-ball teams in the two conference finals. Quite a take-over.



Which tandem would you rather have in two years? - Aldridge/Zach - Sheed/Webber - Duncan/Oberto? 

Duncan is not small-ball himself, but he is a PF playing center, who happens to also have a big stiff playing center along side him.. Whether you want to admit it or not, it's true that the leauge is trending towards small-ball and numerous swing-men on the court. Look around, how many true centers are out there that really change the game? 




Minstrel said:


> We have four non-small-ball teams in the two conference finals. Quite a take-over.


Yeah, great thought-out argument, buddy. Memhet Okur is the best center left of the four, and he likes to sit outside and shoot threes. Actually, he should be a PF as well. So, yeah, big dominant centers are really takin' over. You showed me, again..

You probably missed it the first two times I typed it so again:

Which tandem would you rather have in two years? - Aldridge/Zach - Sheed/Webber - Duncan/Oberto?


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

ProZach said:


> Duncan is not small-ball himself, but he is a PF playing center


Because a Hall of Fame player happened to be at center on the team he was drafted by. He was expected to be a center when he entered the league.



> Whether you want to admit it or not, it's true that the leauge is trending towards small-ball and numerous swing-men on the court. Look around, how many true centers are out there that really change the game?


Poor logic. Teams aren't turning down prime Shaquille O'Neals to use smaller, lesser centers. There just aren't many of those types of centers. Every team would _love_ to have a center-type like Tim Duncan, Shaquille O'Neal, David Robinson or what Greg Oden is supposed to be.



> Yeah, great thought-out argument, buddy.


Sorry that reality doesn't fit your desired theory.



> Memhet Okur is the best center left of the four, and he likes to sit outside and shoot threes. Actually, he should be a PF as well. So, yeah, big dominant centers are really takin' over.


Utah is not a "small-ball" team. They used their major size advantage to knock out one of your small-ball champions, the Warriors. The very non-small-ball Spurs crushed the life out of your other small-ball champion, the Suns.

I didn't say "big dominant centers are taking over"...there will never be enough of them to be on most teams. There never have been and never will be. The rare ones that emerge tend to dominate the league though.


----------



## ProZach (Oct 13, 2005)

Minstrel said:


> Because a Hall of Fame player happened to be at center on the team he was drafted by. He was expected to be a center when he entered the league.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Three times, I wrote the question three times!! Still nothing.

I guess we'll both just ignore each other then. You started it.


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

ProZach said:


> Three times, I wrote the question three times!! Still nothing.


If you have a point, make it. I don't play games, sorry.



> I guess we'll both just ignore each other then. You started it.


Good way to avoid having to defend your poor arguments.


----------



## ProZach (Oct 13, 2005)

Minstrel said:


> If you have a point, make it. I don't play games, sorry.
> 
> 
> 
> Good way to avoid having to defend your poor arguments.



Wow you got a real problem with me or something? I just like arguing, I didn't know you were so mad at me personally. Hell, I don't even want us to draft Durant... as I've said... But it's no fun if we all agree. And yes, of course my arguements are poor, that's what happens when you're wrong.

BTW, it was a simple question and answer. Not a game. I guess you only like to pick and choose what to answer. So I will too. And that means nothing that you write, until you can loosen up and quit taking yourself so seriously, on a message board of all places.

Peace.


----------



## hogey11 (Aug 30, 2002)

This is what I don't understand:

For all the arguing that people do about centers bringing home championships, look at every instance of it (except Hakeem/Houston).

They all have epic guards. Bird, Magic, Isaiah/dumars, jordan/pippen, Kobe Bryant, Ginobili/Elliot (to a degree). The argument only doesn't work with Duncan and with Olaujuwon, but it also doesn't work opposite to Isaiah/Joe Dumars and Michael Jordan, so it really evens out if you ask me.

Championships come when a great center is paired with a great guard. You have Aldridge, you can now pick up Durant. Roy is the perfect piece remaining in the big 3.


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

ProZach said:


> Wow you got a real problem with me or something? I just like arguing, I didn't know you were so mad at me personally.


I have nothing against you personally. You're the one who's been huffy ever since I pointed out that Oden really has no more injury risk than anyone else. Don't project your angst onto me. 

If I think an argument is a bad one, and the other person is acting confrontational, I'm not shy about pointing out the weakness of the argument. It really has nothing at all to do with you, personally. Anyone who acted as you are I'd treat the same.


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

hogey11 said:


> This is what I don't understand:
> 
> For all the arguing that people do about centers bringing home championships, look at every instance of it (except Hakeem/Houston).
> 
> They all have epic guards. Bird, Magic, Isaiah/dumars, jordan/pippen, Kobe Bryant, Ginobili/Elliot (to a degree). The argument only doesn't work with Duncan and with Olaujuwon, but it also doesn't work opposite to Isaiah/Joe Dumars and Michael Jordan, so it really evens out if you ask me.


The idea is that the great center is a lot harder to come by than the great guard. There are a lot of great guards in the league, especially now. However, there's a major dearth of great big men.

So while you often need both, the center is the rarer commodity. If you needed both plutonium and steel to create a nuclear bomb, would you say that both are equally valuable?


----------



## furious styles (Mar 31, 2006)

Draco said:


> If we let Seattle get Oden we'd have to go through them for a chamionship the next 15 years.
> 
> What team are you more scared of, Seattle with Durant or Seattle with Oden?
> 
> Come on people, doesn't that make it blatently obvious who we should pick.



oden Vs hibbert obvious, Oden vs durent not so obvious,at any rate i would pick oden over durant. that may change tommorrow.


----------



## Mr. Chuck Taylor (Aug 2, 2004)

Minstrel said:


> The idea is that the great center is a lot harder to come by than the great guard. There are a lot of great guards in the league, especially now. However, there's a major dearth of great big men.
> 
> So while you often need both, the center is the rarer commodity. If you needed both plutonium and steel to create a nuclear bomb, would you say that both are equally valuable?


Great argument. Not to mention that we already have the star guard in Roy. Not to say that Aldridge won't be a star big man, but he is a PF and is more a Bosh type star than a game changing Robinson/Russell type star as Oden is projected to be. Besides, I'd rather have an excess of star big guys than an excess of star swingmen.


----------



## Oldmangrouch (Feb 11, 2003)

A couple of comments:

First, the fans of a team that has struggled thru the physical travails of Walton, Bowie, Steve Johnson, Sabonis, and Theo have earned the right to worry about injury history. I am 99% certain Oden passes any physical with flying colors - but I am still adamant that the physical be conducted! :biggrin: 

Second, what sets Durant apart from most great college scorers is the quality of his motor. If you have ever watched him play, the fire in his belly is obvious. That fire is what separates a Michael Jordan from a David Thompson or Vince Carter. If that comparison is too extreme - how about what separates Shawn Marion from Darius Miles. That is why people can't help but be excited by him.

Put it in these terms - the Cavs may have been right to take LeBron at #1, but that doesn't mean Wade didn't turn out to be a special player as well! :clap2:


----------



## hogey11 (Aug 30, 2002)

Minstrel said:


> The idea is that the great center is a lot harder to come by than the great guard. There are a lot of great guards in the league, especially now. However, there's a major dearth of great big men.
> 
> So while you often need both, the center is the rarer commodity. If you needed both plutonium and steel to create a nuclear bomb, would you say that both are equally valuable?


Fair enough. I understand that. However, championships won on the shoulders of a lone big man only make up 5 of the last 26 (Duncan(3), Olajuwon(2)), while guard-heavy teams have taken 9 of the last 26 (Jordan/Pippen(6), Isaiah/Dumars(2), 2004 Pistons(1)). In all the other championships, you could argue that the guard player was as great, and as important, to the championships that were won as the big man. Who's the greater player of the following teams: Kareem or Magic? Bird, McHale, Cowens? Shaq and Kobe/Wade (too early to sum up their careers)? Moses Malone or Dr. J?

In many of these cases, in my opinion, the guard player was the leader, the better player, and ultimately, the one i'd rather have on my team.

I realize the rarity of centers in today's day and age (and mad props on the analogy, as i loved it ), but in today's NBA, rule changes et al, I think you go with the elite guard, especially as the NBA presumably opens up the game even more! 

(face it, we're desensitized to entertainment. its gonna be full-contact 4-on-4 basketball in the NBA by the time i'm 50, i gather) 

I'm just not very sure that a great big man is ESSENTIAL to a championship. True, 17 of the last 26 championships won have featured a great big man, but not all of them were Shaq/Hakeem/Duncan/Kareem. Some were Kevin McHale, some were Bill Laimbeer, some were Luc Longley, one was Ben Wallace. To me, its the elite guard that wins the championships, and its the big center that puts it all together. In the "New NBA", Aldridge has a chance to be a great player, defensively and as a second/third option on defense. Add Durant to Roy, allow them to grow together, and you have a CRAZY big 3 in 5 years time. If Durant pans out, you have Pippen and Jordan all over again (switched positions tho), but also a stud big man to go with them. Start casting those rings now boys.

I'm not saying a stud center is a bad idea, and like all, I think Oden will be a great player. What I'm saying is that more than anything else, you want the competitor of the two, and right now, I think Durant might be it.


----------



## Carbo04 (Apr 15, 2005)

RW#30 said:


> Picked #4th,#16th and #9th. How many rings do they have? Odds are in Oden's favor. He is not an Olowakandi or Pervis Ellison type of #1 pick. Even if Durant turns out better it is harder to get a good center. Look it Houston and replace Yao with an average guy. Houston would have a hard time makeing the playoff.


Actually Houston has shown quite a few times that they play better when McGrady is fully in charge and Yao isn't playing.


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

hogey11 said:


> They all have epic guards. Bird, Magic, Isaiah/dumars, jordan/pippen, Kobe Bryant, Ginobili/Elliot (to a degree). The argument only doesn't work with Duncan and with Olaujuwon, but it also doesn't work opposite to Isaiah/Joe Dumars and Michael Jordan, so it really evens out if you ask me.


Bird wasn't a guard. I've seen you claim that a few times now and I just wanted to make sure you knew that.

Ed O.


----------



## hogey11 (Aug 30, 2002)

Ed O said:


> Bird wasn't a guard. I've seen you claim that a few times now and I just wanted to make sure you knew that.
> 
> Ed O.


True enough. He was a forward. I only say guard because he played more like a guard than a center, and I didn't want to complicate things with 3 different positions when guards and forwards are more similar compared to the center position (especially these days...)

btw, i just read this in the durant article on oregonlive:



> Oden is the center with talent who comes along only so often. Entering the draft, Oden has been compared to Patrick Ewing coming out of Georgetown or Hakeem Olajuwon out of Houston.
> 
> It's hard to compare Durant to anyone. It's more telling to compare him to the nondescript young player he was before years of tireless work.
> 
> "There's nowhere inside the lines he can't play -- he scored just about every way possible you can score," Barnes said. "He's unique, I'm telling you."


Believe me, I have no idea who to pick. There's just something telling me Durant's gonna be nuts.


----------



## cokeplease (Jun 3, 2006)

hogey11 said:


> True enough. He was a forward. I only say guard because he played more like a guard than a center, and I didn't want to complicate things with 3 different positions when guards and forwards are more similar compared to the center position (especially these days...)
> 
> btw, i just read this in the durant article on oregonlive:
> 
> ...


Whats the point of having an Offensive powerhouse if we have no interior defense? I still say we take Oden. If Oden turns out to be a flop then at least KP did what everyone wanted him to do.

Oden is too rare to pass up. I mean, if we take durant i wont be mad, but im just wondering how we will be in the frontcourt defensively. Resigning Mag doesnt sound to appealing, but it might be our only option because of quality Centers out on the market.


----------



## ROYisR.O.Y. (Apr 1, 2007)

well...im back after a few days of my internet being down(stupid technology). it is interesting to see where this topic has gone. after a few days of thinking im back in the oden camp and am here to stay. Durant has amazing skills but when he ditches the NW oden will be winning championships


----------



## Ukrainefan (Aug 1, 2003)

It seems to me that the injury question is a legitimate one to pursue. If I was GM I would want to study the entire history of the NBA to see if players that had a broken bone injury were more likely to have a 2nd or third similar injury. I would want to know more about how he incurred this wrist break, was it some extraordinary circumstance that put tremendous pressure on the bone, or not? I believe there are also tests that can be run to measure bone density, I would certainly want to do that. If I was assured that he has no more risk than any other player of a similar injury in the future, then it seems Oden should be the pick.
I guess the only scenario I can see of picking Durant is if we had somehow arranged to make a deal to acquire Amare Stoudamire. Pritchard has said that he is pursuing more than one major free agent, but it's difficult to envision how we would have the resources to acquire both a Rashard Lewis and Amare Stoudamire, so that seems highly unlikely. (My guess is that he is considering Steve Blake a big name free agent, which seems a stretch but maybe he is hoping Blake will be flattered.)


----------



## Ukrainefan (Aug 1, 2003)

Is Pritchard leaning towards Durant?

http://www.portlandtribune.com/sports/story.php?story_id=118038535471843600
Pritchard says:
"But Durant has something special. He’s a basketball genetic freak. He loves the game. He’s determined to be one of the best players ever.”

And I think that kind of desire is really important to Pritchard; does he see that in Oden?

Is it also possible that the pick may depend on whether a deal is in place at the time of the draft to trade Randolph:

“I’d like to see what it would look like to have Zach alongside one of those two players,” Pritchard says. “You’d have an offensive team with Durant and Zach, and maybe Oden and Zach could coexist and help each other. You’d get the best of both worlds with those guys.”

Sounds like he is a lot more enthusiastic about Durant playing with Zach than Oden playing with Zach. But maybe it's all some kind of smokescreen...


----------



## kaydow (Apr 6, 2004)

Ukrainefan said:


> Is Pritchard leaning towards Durant?
> 
> http://www.portlandtribune.com/sports/story.php?story_id=118038535471843600
> Pritchard says:
> ...


Well he's got me scratching my head. I don't know if he's leaning towards Durrant, or that he just wants people to think he is. He's a really smart guy and he's giving people just enough to read between the lines. It sounds like he's leaning towards Durrant, but is may just be a ploy. On the other hand, he may just think Durrant is the better pick. I have NO IDEA.


----------



## Ukrainefan (Aug 1, 2003)

I agree, Kaydow, that this is a real headscratcher in general as to what Pritchard is up to. At one time it seemed he was going hard after Garnett or Lewis in some kind of trade that requires moving Randolph. Now lately I hear the Randolph thing is on the backburner. I think lucking into the #1 pick has changed things; now we don't need to trade for a franchise player; we already have one. Now Randolph can be a role player, where he may be more effective. Possibly a decision has been reached that we now have our nucleus and will let them play a year together and then try to add complementary pieces with trades or MLE next year. Or if Zach doesn't fit, then make a bigger trade. Maybe that's what he is talking about when he talks about seeing Oden or Durant play together with Zach. Of course this is all just total speculation based on the few clues we are getting.


----------



## number1pick (May 24, 2007)

Oden is the man for Portland IF they trade Randolph. I don't know most people's opinion about him but LaMarcus Aldridge is for real. He is going to be a similar player to Chris Bosh, you can almost count on it. Also, he's already a pretty decent shot blocker able, at least in college, to block shots with either hand and offensively he showed the ability to go either way and finish with either hand. I didn't get a chance to watch the Blazers much last year, so I don't know how well he did, but I saw some of his stats in box scores and after he came back from injury toward the end of the year he was starting to show flashes of what he was gonna be able to do.
A simple plan for the Blazers:
-Draft Oden
-Trade Randolph for picks/expiring contracts
-Use the pick from Randolph on another big if available
-sign Gerald Wallace
-get Sergio Rodriguez as many minutes as possible, I've heard this kid could be really good.

I say all this being a HUGE Durant fan. This kid is going to be a special player. He hasn't even turned 19 yet, he's still growing and he's an NBA-ready OFFENSIVE game. Defensively he needs to improve but he's shown flashes of being a great shot blocker, and has shown that he can play some lockdown defense, if only for a short time, although it will get better in the NBA w/ strength and conditioning coaches and coaching on defense.


----------

