# Words of Hope



## ProudBFan (Apr 29, 2003)

From my continued exchange with Nash:



> *PBF:*
> Any words of hope for us Blazers fans?





> *Nash:*
> Sebastain Telfair, Viktor Krhyapa, Sergie Monia and Seung Jin Ha. Keep the faith.




PBF


----------



## Trader Ed (Jun 17, 2002)

sounds like a publishers clearinghouse statement to me 

but I do have hope


----------



## ABM (Dec 30, 2002)

Dear John:

What is your plan to rid the team of DA for _value_??


----------



## SodaPopinski (Aug 10, 2004)

Good God. Nice to know our GM can't even spell the names of the players he tells us to have so much faith in.

Ugh.

:no:

-Pop


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

What other team in the NBA pins its hopes on a late lottery pick, two late first rounders, and a second rounder? All rookies, no less, with no NBA starts between them in over half of their first season?

I hope that they each turn out to befine players, but that Nash has to point to those guys as words of hope is a pretty big indicator of his failings on other fronts.

Ed O.


----------



## ABM (Dec 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>SodaPopinski</b>!
> Good God. Nice to know our GM can't even spell the names of the players he tells us to have so much faith in.
> 
> Ugh.
> ...


(To the tune of Tommy James' MONY MONY....)

Monia! Monia!


----------



## B_&_B (Feb 19, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>SodaPopinski</b>!
> Good God. Nice to know our GM can't even spell the names of the players he tells us to have so much faith in.
> 
> Ugh.
> ...


Give me a break! Are you telling me you've never made a typing error?


----------



## RedHot&Rolling (Jun 26, 2004)

*Exchange with Nash*

I also had an email exchange with Mr. Nash:

I asked: "What benefit, other than financial, is there for the Blazers team building, if we stand pat and allow contracts to expire at the end of the season? 

It seems to me that this would greatly hamper your ability to change the team in a positive way as we would only be able to sign minimum contact players and one MLE player for next season (assuming no major changes to the CBA).

Please help to understand managements thinking with regard to building this team forward - with allowing contracts to expire."

Mr. Nash replied: "Your thinking is valid but when you can't get a quality player it is better to take no player than one who is not productive with a bad contract."

So it seems that ONE POSSIBLE plan for the team is to draft and sign NEW players to the team and let them mature, grow, develop as Blazers.

Basically, we won't trade unless it improves the team both on the court and in the balance sheet.


----------



## mixum (Mar 19, 2003)

*thank you ED-O*

BTW...you are my favorite poster on this board cause you dont live in a damn fanatsy world like some and tell it like it is.

the fact that Nash said this....makes me furious and very sad about our future.
It also tells me he lost faith in the 3 guys that are putting us over the cap in Zach, miles, and theo. How in the hell can this loser think that those 4 players will give us hope? Ya know what i hope...we trade them before people realize they BLOW and get proven players.

How many friggin more times are the blazers gonna draft a player and then throw out their favorite word at us..... POTENTIAL, I hate that damn word cause nobody lives up to it! Nash realizes he has messed up by resigning zach+miles and now all that hes got left is hope for guys who have average talent at best and arent stars! WOOOOOOOOO way to go Nash...NICE JOB PAL!!! Can we give you a 10 year extension? He4y Vince Carter sucks, so does Mobley...we got DA...NICE JOB!

So the silver lining in this is at least that moron will be fired in a few months!


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>SodaPopinski</b>!
> Good God. Nice to know our GM can't even spell the names of the players he tells us to have so much faith in.
> 
> Ugh.
> ...


so who's name did he misspell?


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Ed O</b>!
> What other team in the NBA pins its hopes on a late lottery pick, two late first rounders, and a second rounder? All rookies, no less, with no NBA starts between them in over half of their first season?


for christs sake ed, get a grip.


----------



## ABM (Dec 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Hap</b>!
> 
> 
> so who's name did he misspell?


Monya's.


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

*Re: thank you ED-O*



> Originally posted by <b>mixum</b>!
> BTW...you are my favorite poster on this board cause you dont live in a damn fanatsy world like some and tell it like it is.


said the mad hatter to the cheshire cat...



> the fact that Nash said this....makes me furious and very sad about our future.
> It also tells me he lost faith in the 3 guys that are putting us over the cap in Zach, miles, and theo. How in the hell can this loser think that those 4 players will give us hope?


maybe what he's saying (and I think people with an ounce of sense understood him to say) is that the guys he mentioned are going to play a bigger role in the team next year. 

As in "hey, the guys we have actually are going to make a difference next year, numbskull".

but the worst thing is, Nash didn't deny that the team is being sold and moved!!!!!!!!!!!!



> Ya know what i hope...we trade them before people realize they BLOW and get proven players.


says you. Let's see...who would I trust more.

John Nash, Maurice Cheeks, the coaching staff, and scouts of several teams..

or some fan who hyperboles at the drop of the hat, refuses to look at facts, and doesn't seem to accept anything outside of his own personal belief system..



> How many friggin more times are the blazers gonna draft a player and then throw out their favorite word at us..... POTENTIAL, I hate that damn word cause nobody lives up to it! Nash realizes he has messed up by resigning zach+miles and now all that hes got left is hope for guys who have average talent at best and arent stars! WOOOOOOOOO way to go Nash...NICE JOB PAL!!! Can we give you a 10 year extension? He4y Vince Carter sucks, so does Mobley...we got DA...NICE JOB!


thanks for proving my point.



> So the silver lining in this is at least that moron will be fired in a few months!


----------



## RedHot&Rolling (Jun 26, 2004)

Let the spelling errors go folks. Its not easy to type into Blackberries with your thumbs!!

Stick to the topic.


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>ABM</b>!
> 
> 
> Monya's.


oh wow, i guess the fact he misspelled sergei's name must prove something.

if anything, it proves that he has someone typing the emails for him, and he just dictates them to someone.


----------



## SodaPopinski (Aug 10, 2004)

Spelling/grammar errors:

(1) *Sebastain* Telfair

(2) Viktor *Krhyapa*

(3) *Sergie* Monia

(4) Seung Jin Ha (Should be Ha Seung Jin - this is akin to calling Yao Ming "Ming Yao"

Yes, I am nitpicking. Just pointing out the irony that Nash spelled these guys' names wrong at the same time he was telling us to have faith that they will turn the franchise around.

-Pop


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>SodaPopinski</b>!
> Spelling/grammar errors:
> 
> (1) *Sebastain* Telfair
> ...


you are being nitpicky, but I do see the funny nature of what you were saying. 

At least he didn't sign his name "Jonh Nash"


----------



## ProudBFan (Apr 29, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>SodaPopinski</b>!
> Good God. Nice to know our GM can't even spell the names of the players he tells us to have so much faith in.
> 
> Ugh.
> ...


Have you ever tried typing on one of those Blackberry pagers, Pop? That's what he sends/receives his e-mail from.

PBF


----------



## ProudBFan (Apr 29, 2003)

Pop = Canzano



PBF


----------



## yangsta (May 14, 2003)

> Nash:
> Sebastain Telfair, Viktor Krhyapa, Sergie Monia and Seung Jin Ha. Keep the faith.


Three seasons ago : Zach Randolph,Qyntel Woods, Bonzi Wells. Keep the faith.


----------



## ABM (Dec 30, 2002)

*Re: Re: Words of Hope*



> Originally posted by <b>yangsta</b>!
> 
> 
> Three seasons ago : Zach Randolph,Qyntel Woods, Bonzi Wells. Keep the faith.


That was Whitsitt's mantra.


----------



## B_&_B (Feb 19, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>ProudBFan</b>!
> 
> 
> Have you ever tried typing on one of those Blackberry pagers, Pop? That's what he sends/receives his e-mail from.
> ...


good point! its not easy.


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

Getting back on point, I think it's odd that he didn't mention Miles, Outlaw, Randolph, Joel, Theo, or Patterson. I'm also thankful that he didn't mention Damon, NVE, SAR, or Mo.


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>mediocre man</b>!
> Getting back on point, I think it's odd that he didn't mention Miles, Outlaw, Randolph, Joel, Theo, or Patterson. I'm also thankful that he didn't mention Damon, NVE, SAR, or Mo.


I think it's because we already know what those guys can do, because they get minutes. Since Telfair, Viktor, Ha (and especially) Ha don't get minutes, he's probably thinking along the lines of a baseball team.

you know, "our farm system is strong, don't worry."


----------



## HOWIE (Dec 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Hap</b>!
> 
> 
> oh wow, i guess the fact he misspelled sergei's name must prove something.
> ...


That is what I have been thinking Hop, not many people that work as GM's have the time to answer fans back during the month of February.


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Hap</b>!
> 
> for christs sake ed, get a grip.


(a) Get a grip on what? Do you think it's typical to point to four guys who weren't highly drafted and haven't done anything in the NBA as the reasons to have hope? It's just ridiculous.

(b) What kind of post was that out of you, anyway? Absolutely lacking in any sort of disagreement except to point to some sort of emotional imbalance or extreme bias. If you can answer my question by noting some other teams that are relying on 4 guys of that caliber, please do so. If you think that Nash is justified in pointing to those four guys as the future hope of the franchise, then say that. Do not tell me to "get a grip".

Ed O.


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>mediocre man</b>!
> Getting back on point, I think it's odd that he didn't mention Miles, Outlaw, Randolph, Joel, Theo, or Patterson.


Absolutely. This is why I find it disappointing and a bit pathetic... Nash seems to be saying, "Ignore the shoddy product that we've got on the floor, including the guys that I've committed lots of money to in the long term... focus on the four guys that no one knows much about!"

Of course, if these four guys don't work out, he can always point to another draft class as the "hope", I guess. Assuming he still has a job with the Blazers.

Ed O.


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Ed O</b>!
> 
> 
> (a) Get a grip on what? Do you think it's typical to point to four guys who weren't highly drafted and haven't done anything in the NBA as the reasons to have hope? It's just ridiculous.
> ...


supposed to be a smiley face at the end of it, but I didn't put it there. I figured it would've been obvious enough, but turns out it wasn't.



> If you can answer my question by noting some other teams that are relying on 4 guys of that caliber, please do so. If you think that Nash is justified in pointing to those four guys as the future hope of the franchise, then say that. Do not tell me to "get a grip".
> 
> Ed O.


as in "woah there bucko, don't be talking crazy now".


----------



## NateBishop3 (Jul 22, 2003)

Actually it IS Seung Jin Ha... That's why Ha is on the back of his jersey.

And I've seen Monia/Monya spelled both ways. I'm not sure which is accurate. I would think Nash would know though.


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>NateBishop3</b>!
> Actually it IS Seung Jin Ha... That's why Ha is on the back of his jersey.
> 
> And I've seen Monia/Monya spelled both ways. I'm not sure which is accurate. I would think Nash would know though.


Ha and Monia and Viktor have their names spelled in an entirely different alphabet... I don't think that a slight spelling inconsistency is that big of a deal myself.

Ed O.


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Hap</b>!
> 
> supposed to be a smiley face at the end of it, but I didn't put it there. I figured it would've been obvious enough, but turns out it wasn't.


Understood. The Internet is confusing sometimes.

Ed O.


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

I think the whole thing feeds more intp my theory of the trading block player basically being the starting 5.


----------



## RedHot&Rolling (Jun 26, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>Schilly</b>!
> I think the whole thing feeds more intp my theory of the trading block player basically being the starting 5.


What does this mean??

I don't follow you.


----------



## B_&_B (Feb 19, 2004)

If you think about it, its pretty funny that a email response of no real substance (listed a few names) has gotten so many of your panties all twisted.


----------



## ProudBFan (Apr 29, 2003)

mediocre picked up on a good point - he didn't mention Zach, Miles, Ratliff, or other current key contributors.

PBF


----------



## e_blazer1 (Feb 3, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>ProudBFan</b>!
> mediocre picked up on a good point - he didn't mention Zach, Miles, Ratliff, or other current key contributors.


Probably because of the context of the question. Those guys are all playing major roles now and, thus, are more of a known quantity. You asked Nash about having hope for the future and he referred to our youngest players whom, I assume at least, he sees as having big upside for the near future.


----------



## NateBishop3 (Jul 22, 2003)

I noticed that as well... thought it was interesting....


----------



## BBert (Dec 30, 2004)

RE: Seung Jin Ha v. Ha Seung Jin

I believe that in Chinese the family name goes first. So in Chinese it would be Ha Seung Jin. If we want to americanize it for local custom, it would be Seung Jin Ha. Either way, Ha is on the back of the jersey.

Not that any of this matters.


----------



## ProudBFan (Apr 29, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Blazer Bert</b>!
> RE: Seung Jin Ha v. Ha Seung Jin
> 
> I believe that in Chinese the family name goes first. So in Chinese it would be Ha Seung Jin. If we want to americanize it for local custom, it would be Seung Jin Ha. Either way, Ha is on the back of the jersey.
> ...


Yes, it does. Thanks!

PBF


----------



## hoojacks (Aug 12, 2004)

Well, It doesn't matter much, because Ha is Korean. 

But that fad seems to be in all sports. Ichiro's first name on his jersy for the M's, Yao's first name on his jersy, Wang Zhuzhu's first name... the list goes on, including Ha.


----------



## BBert (Dec 30, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>TradeShareefNow</b>!
> Well, It doesn't matter much, because Ha is Korean.


Boy is my face red. :banghead: 

I knew that of course. That's what I get for trying to work and check this site at the same time. Sloppy.

I know nothing about Korean, except the characters are pretty.


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>RedHot&Rolling</b>!
> 
> 
> What does this mean??
> ...


Here, from another thread



> Interesting note for yous'
> 
> The closer the dealine gets the less Viktor, and Outlaw get le PT.
> 
> ...


----------



## Blazer Ringbearer (Jan 28, 2003)

Let's not read too much into this brief email.

Nash is a busy dude, especially right now. He probably spent all of .5 seconds thinking about what to write and 5 seconds writing it...

Cheers


----------



## MARIS61 (Apr 28, 2003)

*Re: Re: thank you ED-O*



> Originally posted by <b>Hap</b>!
> Let's see...who would I trust more.
> 
> John Nash, Maurice Cheeks, the coaching staff, and scouts of several teams..
> ...


6 of one, half dozen of the other.

And there are NO hidden attacks on your masculinity in this post Hap, no matter what you may read into it.


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

*Re: Re: Re: thank you ED-O*



> Originally posted by <b>MARIS61</b>!
> 
> 
> 6 of one, half dozen of the other.
> ...


[ Red Neck guy "Tig" from montana that was on American Hot Rod ]

Let's step outside! I challenge you to go outside! 

[ / Red Neck guy "Tig" from montana that was on American Hot Rod ]


----------



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

I think it's pretty cool that Nash even takes the time to respond to the fans like that. 

I don't have a problem with what he said. I mean, I dont think he meant we should pin ALL our hope on those rookies. Besides, what did we want him to list, our current starting lineup? 

-Mr. Chuck Taylor

P.S. The perfect response for me would have been him saying that we are looking into moving Zach for Pierce or Redd, then resigning SAR. Also, we are going to can Cheeks and get Flip in here ASAP


----------



## SheedSoNasty (Dec 31, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Mr. Chuck Taylor</b>!
> P.S. The perfect response for me would have been him saying that we are looking into moving Zach for Pierce or Redd, then resigning SAR. Also, we are going to can Cheeks and get Flip in here ASAP


:yes:


----------



## hasoos (Jan 3, 2003)

*Really?*



> Originally posted by <b>Ed O</b>!
> What other team in the NBA pins its hopes on a late lottery pick, two late first rounders, and a second rounder? All rookies, no less, with no NBA starts between them in over half of their first season?
> 
> I hope that they each turn out to befine players, but that Nash has to point to those guys as words of hope is a pretty big indicator of his failings on other fronts.
> ...


Well if that is the case, what is Chicago, who is on the rise after a few years in the sewer, posting its hopes on. Hmmm

Kirk Hinrich 1st round draft pick, 2nd year player.
Chris Duhon 2nd round draft pick, Rookie.
Luol Deng. Rookie.
Ben Gordon. Rookie.
Tyson Chandler and Eddie Curry-High school draft picks.

To top it all off they are playing much better then when they had guys like Jamaal Crawford and Jalen Rose on the team. Some of those rookies are playing better then Crawford ever has in his career, and it's their first year.

The real problem is that Portland has too many players which are "Project" players at once. Project players are good when you have a set roster and a team that is challenging for a title, and no playing time. They are not so good when you need somebody with another level of play to keep your team competitive.


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

*Re: Really?*



> Originally posted by <b>hasoos</b>!
> 
> 
> Well if that is the case, what is Chicago, who is on the rise after a few years in the sewer, posting its hopes on. Hmmm


Interesting comparison, but I don't think that the players Nash listed hold a candle to the Bulls' future.



> Kirk Hinrich 1st round draft pick, 2nd year player.


Lottery pick (#7 overall).



> Chris Duhon 2nd round draft pick, Rookie.


They weren't pinning their hopes on him coming into the season, and he's showed a lot more than Telfair, Monia, Victor or Ha to date. I think that Telfair is clearly the better prospect, but if Telfair's our #1 hope and Duhon's the Bulls' #6 hope, then that doesn't really matter.



> Luol Deng. Rookie.


Lottery pick (#7 overall).



> Ben Gordon. Rookie.


Lottery pick (#3 overall).



> Tyson Chandler and Eddie Curry-High school draft picks.


Lottery pick (#2 overall). And lottery pick (#4 overall).

There's a REASON that guys get drafted high in the draft: because they're almost without exception excellent prospects.

The Bulls have been stockpiling mid-to-high lottery picks for years now, and it seems that their players are starting to grow up.

The players that Nash pointed to were all selected lower in the draft than every Bull you list with the exception of Duhon.

Ed O.


----------



## Oldmangrouch (Feb 11, 2003)

*Re: Re: Re: Re: thank you ED-O*



> Originally posted by <b>Hap</b>!
> 
> 
> [ Red Neck guy "Tig" from montana that was on American Hot Rod ]
> ...


In these here parts pilgrim, a *real* man uses indoor plumbing!


----------



## Sambonius (May 21, 2003)

*Re: Re: Really?*



> Originally posted by <b>Ed O</b>!
> 
> 
> Interesting comparison, but I don't think that the players Nash listed hold a candle to the Bulls' future.


Listed? Maybe, but as far as our young core goes, I am just as intrigued by ours as theirs. Telfair is a bigger and better prospect than Hinrich and Duhon but we can talk about prospects and potential all day, it comes down to court play. 



> They weren't pinning their hopes on him coming into the season, and he's showed a lot more than Telfair, Monia, Victor or Ha to date. I think that Telfair is clearly the better prospect, but if Telfair's our #1 hope and Duhon's the Bulls' #6 hope, then that doesn't really matter.


I don't know if you're joking or being sarcastic or what but no, clearly Duhon has NOT shown more than Telfair this year. Despite Telfair playing 15 minutes a game less than Duhon he averages only 0.6 points less and has IDENTICAL field goal percentage. Telfair shoots free throws at a higher percentage. He also has a significantly higher free throw attempted per game than Duhon, despite playing 15 minutes less. Sure Telfair averages less rebounds and assists but that is to be expected at the minutes given. Comparing the two is like comparing Darko Milicic to Jake Voskuh, it's a pretty ridiculous comparison. Duhon was lucky to even be drafted and most people realize that. 



> There's a REASON that guys get drafted high in the draft: because they're almost without exception excellent prospects.


True, but just because Telfair or Randolph were drafted at a certain position one year, doesn't mean they wouldn't be drafted earlier or later the next. Strong or poor draft classes can make player movements fluctuate. I personally wouldn't suggest what Chicago has done with their rebuilding process as a way for the Blazers to about, it's not working despite Chicago playing well as of late. 



> The Bulls have been stockpiling mid-to-high lottery picks for years now, and it seems that their players are starting to grow up.


Chandler has bust written all over him, Curry is similar to Zach Randolph but with less talent and poor rebounding ability. I like Chandler, but he clearly wasn't worthy of a #2 pick, and just because he was a former #2 pick it doesn't mean he is better or worse than former #1 pick, or even a former 15th pick. If you asked Chicago for Chandler or Curry for Randolph, they would be all over it. Of course the chances of landing a star player increases when you have a high pick, but Chicago isn't exactly the best example of this considering Chandler can't get off the bench and Curry is lucky to grab 5 rebounds in a game. If we want to worry about numbers all day then we should trade Randolph for Kwame Brown, or Telfair for Jonathan Bender. 



> The players that Nash pointed to were all selected lower in the draft than every Bull you list with the exception of Duhon.


How is that relevant? I am more excited by J.R. Smith than Josh Childress. I am also more excited with Sebastian Telfair than Hinrich, Gordon, or Livingston.


----------



## hasoos (Jan 3, 2003)

*While I agree*

That several of the players were higher draft picks (which is supposed to give you a better chance of them working out as NBA quality players), we all know the draft is still an educated crap shoot at best, you can get a star in the second round if your a shrewd evaluator of talent and fortunate that somebody you value drops that far. 

The point I am trying to make is, the NBA in my mind is at a turning point. Young players can play in this league, and if you even think about it, where would the league be for excitement if it weren't for players such as Lebron, Carmello, Amare Stoudemire, Dwayne Wade, and the Chicago players, I often wonder where the league would be right now. Now that being said, that is why I am so angry when Cheeks refuses to give young players some playing time. Zach couldn't get into a game until that fateful playoff series against Dallas, and the injection of him into the lineup almost won Portland that series. Yet here we are, 2 seasons later, and Cheeks still does not learn from his experience. Sebastien shows flashes. Outlaw has shown that sometimes his pure athletic ability can make some plays that nobody else on the team can make, able to grab a quarter off the top of the back board. If he fouls out in a few minutes, fine. He will learn and come back for more. 

When it gets to the point that you are 7 wins and 13 losses in your last 20 games with your "veterans" in, its time to look at some options. Especially when your two guards you are starting will most likely not even be with the franchise next year. What exactly is Cheeks thinking? That these two guys will lead Portland to the playoffs and a championship? These two guards will lead the Blazers straight to basketball hell, if anything. 

Is there anybody out there who is deluded into thinking that those two guards will lead the franchise anywhere? Anybody with thought's running through their head like "You know, Nick and Damon are gonna lead this team places." If you do, you need to get a subscription to NBA league pass and watch some other teams. It blow your mind once you watch some other teams out there about how bad this one is made up, players and coaching alike.


----------



## rosecoleredbackboards (Feb 16, 2005)

*MR nash is a public relations guy at heart*

He sent you a wonderfully constructed "were makeing our decisions deal whith it"
I knew i liked him but his responses are so incourgeing

im going to one center court now
buy me a suite, get me a front row
to this disater 
front office hacks and clowns running the buisness end
"Priceless":laugh:


----------



## CanJohno (Feb 11, 2005)

*In the voice of Ernest P. Worrell* 

EwwWwwWwWwWwwWwwWwwW!!!

I smell troll.











http://www.ernestfunclub.com/


----------



## Perfection (May 10, 2004)

As for starting Damon and NVE, we could still be seeing a situation where Mo is getting his marionette strings pulled by PatterNash to play and exhibit Damon and NVE. I figure, the more that Damon and NVE play, especially without the scoring options of Miles/Randolph, the better they may be showcased for a potential trade. I, like many others, doubt that a trade actually happens (especially considering we don't want to take on crappy contracts). However, until the trade deadline is officially passed Damon, SAR and NVE and their expiring contracts can still be considered value, and thus the players need to come off as playing really good in order to raise their stock. Eh it's late.

I guess, overall, I'm trying to suggest that we might very well see the younger players take over again once the trade deadline is passed and we can offiically call this season a bust. I think that Outlaw and Telfair and co. will see more minutes at that point, as it is fairly obvious that Damon/NVE (at least one...potentially both) will not be with the team next year. 

So...wait it out a little more. I can understand the idea of trying to inflate Damon/NVE's value by playing them more. Despite the fact that I think that it isn't fooling anyone, it is still worth a shot if PatterNash thinks that they could land a good player or draft pick. 

Anyways, hope that changes to the Blazers rotation occur in the near future.

My 2 cents.


----------



## STOMP (Jan 1, 2003)

*Re: Re: Re: Really?*



> Originally posted by <b>Sambonius</b>!
> 
> Listed? Maybe, but as far as our young core goes, I am just as intrigued by ours as theirs.


I can only hope you're joking. Their young core is kicking butt in the league, while Portland's is sitting on theirs.



> Telfair is a bigger and better prospect than Hinrich and Duhon but we can talk about prospects and potential all day, it comes down to court play.


 bigger? ST is much smaller then both of those two, and Hinrich has moved well past propect status IMO. He's the leader of a winning team.



> Duhon was lucky to even be drafted and most people realize that.


since most mocks had him going end of the 1st start of the 2nd, and the Trailblazers had him in for workouts twice, I think you're amazingly off base with your assessments of what _most people_ think. 



> I personally wouldn't suggest what Chicago has done with their rebuilding process as a way for the Blazers to about, *it's not working despite Chicago playing well as of late.*


Interesting logic. Dispite playing an exciting brand of winning ball led by their young talent featuring a balanced attack and solid D, somehow you can see through all that bleep and declare "it's not working." 



> Of course the chances of landing a star player increases when you have a high pick, but Chicago isn't exactly the best example of this considering Chandler can't get off the bench and Curry is lucky to grab 5 rebounds in a game.


If Chandler can't get off the bench, how is he averaging 27 minutes a game?

If Curry is lucky to grab 5 rebounds in a game, how is he averaging 5.6? I guess he's lucky every night eh?

In general, unbelievable post Sam.

STOMP


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

I think Telfair is a bigger player compared to Kirk H, in the sense that he'll probably end up better.

BTW, for those who didn't know, Kirk is shooting 39% from the floor. Not exactly that high of a bar.

I think it's odd to not be at least interested in how the "yonugin's" might end up being. I don't tink they're just going to go with them alone (I think another "prospect" will be added before the deadline).


----------



## STOMP (Jan 1, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Hap</b>!
> I think Telfair is a bigger player compared to Kirk H, in the sense that he'll probably end up better.
> 
> BTW, for those who didn't know, Kirk is shooting 39% from the floor. Not exactly that high of a bar.


arguing just for the sake of it yet again Hap? It's a stretch to equate bigger meaning better especially when the poster differenciated between the two concepts in the original post...



> Telfair is a bigger *and* better prospect than Hinrich


39% may not be all that great but its better then 35% (ST's %). Kirk is also averaging 1.5 stls and 7 assists w/a 3-1 assist to TO average. He brings good size and athletism to the point which comes in handy when the inevitable switches on D happen. Most importantly (IMO), he's the minutes leader on a club that is winning games. 

http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/players/3710


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

*Re: Re: Re: Re: Really?*



> Originally posted by <b>STOMP</b>!
> 
> In general, unbelievable post Sam.


No doubt. I wonder if he's even watched any Chicago Bulls basketball at all this year.

Ed O.


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>STOMP</b>!
> 
> 
> arguing just for the sake of it yet again Hap? It's a stretch to equate bigger meaning better especially when the poster differenciated between the two concepts in the original post...


actually, no I wasn't arguing for the sake of it "yet again". I was actually just making a comment, not trying to counter what you or anyone else said. I said what I said based on what I wanted to say. I was equating "bigger" with better, with the criteria set forth in the end of the sentance. 

So you can get off the "wah, hap's a meany. he's arguing with me" soap box.


(stuff deleted that really doesn't have anything to do with what I said).


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>STOMP</b>!
> 
> 39% may not be all that great but its better then 35% (ST's %). Kirk is also averaging 1.5 stls and 7 assists w/a 3-1 assist to TO average. He brings good size and athletism to the point which comes in handy when the inevitable switches on D happen. Most importantly (IMO), he's the minutes leader on a club that is winning games.


Kirk is also one of the Older of the Key players on the team. On top of that he was a 4 year college player who has the expierience of making it to the big game with Kansas.

On top of that he was an addition to a team that had already hit rock bottom and the young players were ready to start "Figuring it out" Add to the fact that he really is the only PG on the team outside of Jannero Pargo.

There are a lot of reasons Kirks numbers are better and a lot of reason he get's more PT. Just the Fact alon that he doesn't have 2 veteran PGs with 20+ Years betweent them and are decent enough players....


----------



## STOMP (Jan 1, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Schilly</b>!
> 
> Kirk is also one of the Older of the Key players on the team. On top of that he was a 4 year college player who has the expierience of making it to the big game with Kansas.
> 
> ...


How isn't Chris Duhon a PG?

In all your reasoning you've left out your speculations on how and why the Bulls are winning games. Facts being what they are, the Bulls are winning and Kirk is by far their minutes leader... go figure. 

STOMP


----------



## Kmurph (May 7, 2003)

I hate to bring down the "words of hope", but here is the response I recieved from Nash regarding the trade deadline....



> If we could acquire quality players at or entering their prime years or if we could get some picks we would but it seems everyone is trying to accomplish the same thing.


----------



## STOMP (Jan 1, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Hap</b>!
> So you can get off the "wah, hap's a meany. he's arguing with me" soap box.


I don't think you're mean... I just think you like to argue just for the sake of it. You've acknowledged that you do this... sorry for pointing out that you're doing it _yet again_. 



> I was actually just making a comment, not trying to counter what you or anyone else said.


I don't think you're making much sense. The basis of my comments was that Swiss cheese whistling in the wind post of Sam's. You then quote my response and "commented" using the same words... and thats supposed to stand alone in some separate comment world? 

Sorry for being confused.

STOMP


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>STOMP</b>!
> 
> I don't think you're mean... I just think you like to argue just for the sake of it. You've acknowledged that you do this... sorry for pointing out that you're doing it _yet again_.


um..nope. wasn't arguing. Just stating an opinion. And before anyone (not you personally) goes off on me for saying that, it actually isn't the same.



> I don't think you're making much sense. The basis of my comments was that Swiss cheese whistling in the wind post of Sam's. You then quote my response and "comment" using the same words??? how do you think that reads?


didn't actually quote yours. All I said was that I think Telfair will be a "bigger" player *compared to Kirk H, in the sense that he'll probably end up better.*

As in the "he's a bigger star" and not "he's bigger (taller) than X".


----------



## Sambonius (May 21, 2003)

*Re: Re: Re: Re: Really?*



> Originally posted by <b>STOMP</b>!
> 
> 
> I can only hope you're joking. Their young core is kicking butt in the league, while Portland's is sitting on theirs.


Yeah, and how many consecutive years have they had a losing record? If you and the rest of the boarding is complaining about how we won't make the playoffs for the second straight year, how are you going to take what the Bulls have been through? How many coaching changes have they made? How many years of torment has that organization given to the fans? 




> bigger? ST is much smaller then both of those two, and Hinrich has moved well past propect status IMO. He's the leader of a winning team.


Bigger, as in potential filled, he has bigger potential. I hope you didn't seriously think I meant bigger as in taller, or else someone would have to question your intelligence. Hinrich doesn't have all star ability, he's a nice solid player, nothing more, nothing less. He doesn't have the ability that Telfair has in nearly all aspects of the game. 




> since most mocks had him going end of the 1st start of the 2nd, and the Trailblazers had him in for workouts twice, I think you're amazingly off base with your assessments of what _most people_ think.


Not really, you see how many minutes Duhon has been getting and I don't think you can say he's putting up better numbers than Telfair despite 15 minutes more per game. 




> Interesting logic. Dispite playing an exciting brand of winning ball led by their young talent featuring a balanced attack and solid D, somehow you can see through all that bleep and declare "it's not working."


It's working now, but how many guys are playing for contracts? Eddy Curry, Chandler, etc. I guess Stoudamire is "working" to you? After how many years are they just working, and for how long will they be working? 




> If Chandler can't get off the bench, how is he averaging 27 minutes a game?


He has the reluctance by his coach to even put him in, Chandler gets hurt so frequent that it's not even abnormal. 



> If Curry is lucky to grab 5 rebounds in a game, how is he averaging 5.6? I guess he's lucky every night eh?


And those are good rebounding numbers from your starting center? Give me a break. You played yourself with most of your responses, stay away from NBA TV and get a book.


----------



## Sambonius (May 21, 2003)

*Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Really?*



> Originally posted by <b>Ed O</b>!
> 
> 
> No doubt. I wonder if he's even watched any Chicago Bulls basketball at all this year.
> ...


Way to respond to my post, I'm still waiting on you to defend your "Duhon has played better than Telfair" response. I wonder if you've watched any Bulls games at all this year. Duhon better than Telfair? I think Duhon himself would laugh at that.


----------



## Sambonius (May 21, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Hap</b>!
> 
> As in the "he's a bigger star" and not "he's bigger (taller) than X".


I feel so sorry for you that you even have to explain what "bigger" meant to Stomp. lol


----------



## STOMP (Jan 1, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Hap</b>!
> 
> didn't actually quote yours. All I said was that I think Telfair will be a "bigger" player *compared to Kirk H, in the sense that he'll probably end up better.*
> 
> As in the "he's a bigger star" and not "he's bigger (taller) than X".


ok fair enough, you just used the same language in the post directly following mine... I'm sure you can understand how a reader would get confused and think that you were responding... right? 

IMO being a "star" is about gaudy stats and connecting with the masses more then actual productivity IMO. In that sense, Sebastian may already be a bigger "star" then Kirk. He's the good looking NYNY kid with the high profile endorsement contract based on his HS accomplishments, raw speed, and flashy play. KH looks sort of goofy with big ears, and he's been pretty dry in all the interviews I've seen. But it wasn't style, cover boy looks, blinding speed, or popular appeal that earned Chauncey Billups MVP of the championship this past year. It was being a good all around player able to help his team in a variety of ways. I think Kirk is in that sort of mold... just for fun, what % would you guess Billups shot last season?

http://www.nba.com/playerfile/chauncey_billups/?nav=page

We'll see how these two develope down the road, but lets just say as good as I see Hienrich as and becoming, I hope you're right about Telfair. The big question marks for me are whether he can add a jumper and if he can stay healthy driving the lane. It's too early to really judge him IMO.

STOMP


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>STOMP</b>!
> 
> 
> ok fair enough, you just used the same language in the post directly following mine... I'm sure you can understand how a reader would get confused and think that you were responding... right?


yep. but if Im gonna argue or discuss something with someone, I quote them, so they know who the hell I'm talking to. 



> just for fun, what % would you guess Billups shot last season?
> 
> http://www.nba.com/playerfile/chauncey_billups/?nav=page


pretty crappy, which is why I don't understand he was made into a "star".


----------



## ProudBFan (Apr 29, 2003)

Has this thread played itself out? I mean, we're quite a bit off-topic now...

PBF


----------



## STOMP (Jan 1, 2003)

*Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Really?*



> Originally posted by <b>Sambonius</b>!
> 
> If you and the rest of the boarding is complaining about how we won't make the playoffs for the second straight year, how are you going to take what the Bulls have been through? How many coaching changes have they made? How many years of torment has that organization given to the fans?


Nice english... it matches your logic. What relevance does fans complaining have to do with the team winning? I'm not sure who/what you're putting out there as I haven't complained much about the team. I don't call for the owner to sell, or the coach or the GM to be fired. I'm mostly interested in potencial trades and other moves that would improve the club... just like always (regardless of their record).

In general your responses are so scattershot they're not just all over the map, they've fallen off of it. 

my statement...


> since most mocks had him going end of the 1st start of the 2nd, and the Trailblazers had him in for workouts twice, I think you're amazingly off base with your assessments of what most people think.


Sam's response...


> Not really, you see how many minutes Duhon has been getting and I don't think you can say he's putting up better numbers than Telfair despite 15 minutes more per game.


A trend is forming! How does your response have anything to do with whether Duhon was "lucky to have been drafted at all"?



> You played yourself with most of your responses, stay away from NBA TV and get a book.


:laugh: thanks for that... instead of a book, I'm going for a run - later.

STOMP


----------



## Kmurph (May 7, 2003)

All I know is that based upon reports from the Blazer practice facility at the time...Telfair took it to Duhon in the one and one portion of the workout.

Telfair was 18 at the time, Duhon was almost 24....

and Hinrich is a pretty good player...better than I thought he would be. I think Telfair could\will be better, but until he gets the opportunity to play more and show what he can do, we won't really know...Hinrich BTW is also 24 and has had the benefit of playing a lot of minutes over the last two years....something again...that Telfair has not had the opportunity to do.


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Kmurph</b>!
> All I know is that based upon reports from the Blazer practice facility at the time...Telfair took it to Duhon in the one and one portion of the workout.
> 
> Telfair was 18 at the time, Duhon was almost 24....


Duhon's only 22 now. He won't be 23 until August, so he was probably only 21 when he worked out for the Blazers.

Pretty important difference between age 21 and age 23.

Ed O.


----------



## Kmurph (May 7, 2003)

Is there?

The guy is still 3 years older than Telfair.....and couldn't even outplay a kid straight out of HS. 

Duhon will be lucky if he can make a career out of being a scrub...err...journeyman player.


----------



## B_&_B (Feb 19, 2004)

*Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Really?*



> Originally posted by <b>STOMP</b>!
> 
> 
> Nice english...
> ...


As you said... NICE ENGLISH!


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Kmurph</b>!
> Is there?


Yes. You saying that he was almost 24 was just as inaccurate as saying that he was still a teenager during hte workout.

Ed O.


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

*Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Really?*



> Originally posted by <b>Sambonius</b>!
> 
> Way to respond to my post, I'm still waiting on you to defend your "Duhon has played better than Telfair" response. I wonder if you've watched any Bulls games at all this year. Duhon better than Telfair? I think Duhon himself would laugh at that.


Who said he "has played better"? If you put something in quotes, it should be what is actually written, not what you think was meant.

I said this: "They weren't pinning their hopes on him coming into the season, and he's showed a lot more than Telfair, Monia, Victor or Ha to date."

Duhon has averaged triple the number of rebounds a game, triple the number of assists per game, and over three times as many steals per game.

Part of this production is because of more minutes... he's getting over twice as many a game. But he's on a team that's off to a significantly better start than Portland is, and him being a regular starter shows he's contributing to a winner.

All of these, to me, indicate that he's showed more this season that Sebastian has. I freely admit Telfair's a better prospect, but when comparing the relative roles each player has in the hope for their franchise, that's comparing apples and oranges.

Ed O.


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

> All of these, to me, indicate that he's showed more this season that Sebastian has. I freely admit Telfair's a better prospect, but when comparing the relative roles each player has in the hope for their franchise, that's comparing apples and oranges.


Duhon also has 4 years of tutelage from a hall of fame coach, while Sebastian is 3 years younger, a half season in the league and playing sparingly for the worst coach in the league....


----------



## Kmurph (May 7, 2003)

Misreading his birthdate, doesn't diminish the point Ed. Telfair outplayed a much older Duhon, who had the luxury of 4 years at Duke.

Telfair is a better prospect and a better player at this point than Duhon is...and if he was playing the same minutes as Duhon was, it wouldn't even be in question.

and Telfair not getting minutes has ntohing to do with his ability and everything to do with Mo's blind devotion to NVE and Damon, all the more reason to can his *** in the offseason.


----------



## Sambonius (May 21, 2003)

*Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Really?*



> Originally posted by <b>Ed O</b>!
> 
> 
> Who said he "has played better"? If you put something in quotes, it should be what is actually written, not what you think was meant.


You're right, I shouldn't have put it in quotes, but you did imply he played better this season. 



> Duhon has averaged triple the number of rebounds a game, triple the number of assists per game, and over three times as many steals per game.


He's averaging 15 minutes more than Telfair but only manages to earn .6 points per game more and shoots the same percentage as a kid who is 3 or 4 years younger and never went to college? He's shown more? Telfair also shows he gets to the free throw line more often than Duhon despite playing 15 minutes less. 



> Part of this production is because of more minutes... he's getting over twice as many a game. But he's on a team that's off to a significantly better start than Portland is, and him being a regular starter shows he's contributing to a winner.


Don't you think you're crowning Chicago a winner a little too soon? It wasn't up until recently they hit their stride and have played really well together, but how long will that last? I'm not going to pretend to know but I don't think saying Chicago is a winner is legitimate quite yet. They were about to have a fire sale up until a couple months ago, they wanted to trade Curry, Chandler, and even Gordon at one point. 



> All of these, to me, indicate that he's showed more this season that Sebastian has. I freely admit Telfair's a better prospect, but when comparing the relative roles each player has in the hope for their franchise, that's comparing apples and oranges.


I just don't see how Duhon has shown more than Telfair. If anything they have played equally well but taking into account Telfair is 3 or 4 years younger and Duhon went to school for 4 years, it makes no difference.


----------



## Sambonius (May 21, 2003)

*Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Really?*



> Originally posted by <b>STOMP</b>!
> 
> What relevance does fans complaining have to do with the team winning?


Is this a trick question? It has a lot of relevance, if it didn't then the Blazers wouldn't have traded away a couple of their best players in Rasheed and Bonzi and would likely be in the Playoff run. How is it not relevant? If the fans get intense enough, the team will be forced to take a different direction, regardless if they are winning or not. 



> I'm not sure who/what you're putting out there as I haven't complained much about the team. I don't call for the owner to sell, or the coach or the GM to be fired. I'm mostly interested in potencial trades and other moves that would improve the club... just like always (regardless of their record).


I didn't mean you directly, I meant that MOST Blazer fans complain if a player on our roster scratches his butt, picks his nose, or gets a speeding ticket the media and a majority of the fans cry in an outrage to now trade the guy who did any of the above. Darius Miles is a good example. 



> A trend is forming! How does your response have anything to do with whether Duhon was "lucky to have been drafted at all"?


Scott Skiles said himself before pre-season, it would be difficult for Duhon to make the team due to the redundant amount of point guards they had on the roster at the time. Most expected Duhon to be drafted in the second round but few expected him to play in the NBA this year. I meant that he is lucky to be in the NBA, not drafted.

By the way, its 4th quarter with 2 minutes left and Eddy Curry only has 2 rebounds, congrats.


----------



## Sambonius (May 21, 2003)

*Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Really?*



> Originally posted by <b>STOMP</b>!
> 
> 
> Nice english...
> potencial


And you're the guy who's going to correct MY English? Jesus.


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

*Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Really?*



> Originally posted by <b>Sambonius</b>!
> 
> I just don't see how Duhon has shown more than Telfair. If anything they have played equally well but taking into account Telfair is 3 or 4 years younger and Duhon went to school for 4 years, it makes no difference.


It does make a difference.

If we both pay taxes at the same rate, but you make 10 times as much money as me, that means you pay more taxes, right? In absolute terms, I mean.

It's similar with Duhon and Telfair. Chris has had more chances to play (he makes more money) and even though they may have similar production levels per minute (tax rates) he still has showed more than Telfair (paid more taxes in absolute terms).

It might come down to how one defines "showing" something in the NBA. A few games of brilliant play is perhaps more impressive than a season of mediocrity, but I don't see Sebastian being impressive enough in his limited time to make up for the dramatic difference in overall production (although I DO count it towards which player I consider to be the better prospect).

Ed O.


----------



## STOMP (Jan 1, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Sambonius</b>!
> 
> And you're the guy who's going to correct MY English? Jesus.


my spelling sucks no doubt... I've always been a bit dyslexic, so I google words as I'm hammering out a post. 

Wading through your grammer is an uphill task. Add in the non sequitors and left field references, and you're a real tough poster to get a handle as to the gist of your meaning. I suggest proof reading. 

Being told to "go read a book" by someone who struggles to communicate was a pretty funny one though.

STOMP


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

are we done now? 8)


----------



## STOMP (Jan 1, 2003)

*Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Really?*



> Originally posted by <b>Sambonius</b>!
> 
> Is this a trick question? It has a lot of relevance, if it didn't then the Blazers wouldn't have traded away a couple of their best players in Rasheed and Bonzi and would likely be in the Playoff run. How is it not relevant? If the fans get intense enough, the team will be forced to take a different direction, regardless if they are winning or not.


Ahhh remember the intensity of the anti-Blazer rally a few years back at the height of fan discontent? Literally 4 fans gathered together to whine as one about the team. The team was winning so the seats were still filled despite the daily columns of tears from the O. They were upset because Sheed and Co wouldn't talk to them, while the players in question felt that the O was out to print gossipy bleep... recent events seem to suggest the more things change the more they stay the same. 

There will always be some fans to complain about the coach, the players, the GM, the price of the beer, etcetera... I've yet to see a fanbase not support a winner at the gate or conversely support a loser. If you really think fan discontent was the single driving factor that drove Wells and Wallace out of town, good for you 



> I didn't mean you directly, I meant that MOST Blazer fans complain if a player on our roster scratches his butt, picks his nose, or gets a speeding ticket the media and a majority of the fans cry in an outrage to now trade the guy who did any of the above.


If you didn't mean me then why directly accuse me? Your statement...

_"If you and the rest of the boarding is complaining about how we won't make the playoffs for the second straight year, how are you going to take what the Bulls have been through?_

...like I said before, it's tough to understand your meaning sometimes.



> I meant that he is lucky to be in the NBA, not drafted.


Then why say... 

_"Duhon was lucky to even be drafted and most people realize that."_

... seriously, you're expecting a lot of those who read your posts. Say what you mean, mean what you say, and please proof read before posting.



> By the way, its 4th quarter with 2 minutes left and Eddy Curry only has 2 rebounds, congrats.


Congrats on what? I don't root for or against him. I'd just appreciate it if you'd make an effort to make sense.

STOMP


----------



## Sambonius (May 21, 2003)

*Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Really?*



> Originally posted by <b>Ed O</b>!
> 
> 
> It does make a difference.
> ...


How much either make is irrelevant to me right now, both make a relatively small amount of money for either to be a burden on an organization. We drafted Telfair for the future, if he made 3 times more money than Duhon he would be considered more valuable still. Why? Because of his age, potential, and other assorted skills. Duhon has showed more than what most people were expecting from him, no he won't be the player Telfair ever becomes but he'll probably go down as a pretty nice 2nd or 3rd string player.


----------



## Sambonius (May 21, 2003)

*Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Really?*



> Originally posted by <b>STOMP</b>!
> 
> There will always be some fans to complain about the coach, the players, the GM, the price of the beer, etcetera... I've yet to see a fanbase not support a winner at the gate or conversely support a loser. If you really think fan discontent was the single driving factor that drove Wells and Wallace out of town, good for you


Well it depends on what you consider a winner. The Blazers were a playoff team when they dismantled it with Wallace and Wells. I don't know if that is enough winning for you but no team has had the number of "trouble makers" that the Blazers had at one point in the past. Not that I care, I come to watch basketball. It was the Blazer fans who are responsible for the exile of Rasheed Wallace. 




> If you didn't mean me then why directly accuse me? Your statement...


Because you seem like most every other Blazer fan, not to offend you, but it's not like I put an effort into remembering what you like and dislike as a Blazer fan. 



> ...like I said before, it's tough to understand your meaning sometimes.


I don't doubt that. 




> Then why say...
> 
> _"Duhon was lucky to even be drafted and most people realize that."_
> 
> ... seriously, you're expecting a lot of those who read your posts. Say what you mean, mean what you say, and please proof read before posting.


I don't have enough time in the day to proof read, sorry. I will admit my mistakes when I make them but people shouldn't take what anyone says so literal, especially on the net. Duhon by the way was in none of the first round mocks that I had seen, most had him going in the late 2nd round or not even drafted. 



> Congrats on what? I don't root for or against him. I'd just appreciate it if you'd make an effort to make sense.


I said he's lucky to be getting 5 rebounds a game, he barely grazes that mark. I guess I'm the definition of wrong. He IS lucky to be getting 5 rebounds a game, despite his average. Just like Amare is lucky to get 8 despite his average.


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

*Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Really?*



> Originally posted by <b>Sambonius</b>!
> 
> How much either make is irrelevant to me right now, both make a relatively small amount of money for either to be a burden on an organization. We drafted Telfair for the future, if he made 3 times more money than Duhon he would be considered more valuable still. Why? Because of his age, potential, and other assorted skills.


I suggest you re-read my post if you want to comment on it, because you missed my point entirely.

My comments about income were not about Duhon and Telfair. They were an alternate expression of relative and absolute contributions.



> Duhon has showed more than what most people were expecting from him, no he won't be the player Telfair ever becomes but he'll probably go down as a pretty nice 2nd or 3rd string player.


You're arguing potential for some reason. We don't disagree about who's the better prospect (although it's silly to argue that Duhon "probably [will] go down as a pretty nice 2nd or 3rd string player" considering he's already the starter on a pretty good team at the age of 22).

So if we're not arguing potential, what are we talking about? What the two have done so far this season. Duhon has clearly contributed more to the Bulls than Telfair has to the Blazers.

Look at last night's games for an example.

Duhon: 29 minutes, 4-7 from the field, 12 points, 8 assists
Telfair: 12 minutes, 1-3 from the field, 3 points, 1 assist

Obviously a single night doesn't prove anything, but it's a microcosm for the season... your argument that Cheeks sucks and it's his fault Telfair isn't doing more might be valid (although that's pretty poor production for playing a quarter of the game), but the fact of the matter is that Duhon is on the court, contributing to a winning team, and Telfair's sitting on the bench of a loser.

Duhon has done more than Sebastian this year.

Ed O.


----------



## Kmurph (May 7, 2003)

Well let's trade for Chris Duhon then!!!!!

 

Kind of reminds me of something.......Jermaine.......Dale......


Somehow I think if POR offered Telfair for Duhon, CHI would have the paperwork signed and faxed to the league office within 10 minutes.....

But hey, Duhon's better.....


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Kmurph</b>!
> 
> But hey, Duhon's better.....


Have you not read my posts in this thread, or are you incapable of keeping multiple aspects of an argument straight?

My position is consistent and clear. In no way am I suggesting what you're rolling your virtual eyes at.

Ed O.


----------



## STOMP (Jan 1, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Sambonius</b>!
> 
> Because you seem like most every other Blazer fan, not to offend you, but it's not like I put an effort into remembering what you like and dislike as a Blazer fan.


So on one hand you have an impression that I'm like every other Blazer fan and on the other you have no impression of where I stand on anything... makes perfect sense that from there you'd accuse me of random positions that I don't hold.



> I will admit my mistakes when I make them but people shouldn't take what anyone says so literal, especially on the net


If posters don't take the time to communicate their points clearly, there is little reason to bother at all... the next step is to just mash the keyboard with your palm.



> Duhon by the way was in none of the first round mocks that I had seen, most had him going in the late 2nd round or not even drafted.


If you check in on the two most commonly sited mocks nbadraft.net and draftcity.com, you'd have seen Duhon at times listed in the 1st... one nbadraft.net mock had him going to the Blazers at 22, which we discussed right here on bbb.net. I never saw him falling out of the mock drafts altogether... here's nbadraft.net's final 2004 mock... http://nbadraft.net/index.asp?content=mock2004

STOMP


----------



## Kmurph (May 7, 2003)

> Have you not read my posts in this thread, or are you incapable of keeping multiple aspects of an argument straight?


Perfectly capable...Are you?



> My position is consistent and clear. In no way am I suggesting what you're rolling your virtual eyes at.


Then why do you keep harping about Duhon being better this year, as if that makes a difference? Duhon is playing a lot more minutes for CHI than Telfair is for POR, thus his production is better. It is not Telfair's fault (nor should it lessen him in comparison to Duhon) that Mo has been suckered by NVE and Damon into practically giving them all of the available minutes..

I don't see your point here Ed....Duhon's numbers are better so therefrore he is better this year? Scoreboard baby!

I don't think that is wholly indicitive of the value of each player THIS year, as in my previous post I stated and I firmly believe that if POR offered Telfair straight up for Duhon today, CHI would GLADLY make that deal. 

Duhon putting up better stats is mainly due to minutes IMO and not him being a better player now than Telfair. Give Telfair those same minutes and I think his numbers would be equal too or better than Duhon, with a couple of fantastic "ooh & aah" plays thrown in there.

Telfair is a better prospect, of that we are agreed, and a better player NOW than Duhon is IMO. He just isn't getting the opportunity to prove it, and that is solely on his coach. There is a reason why Duhon was a 2nd round pick and Telfair was a lottery pick Ed. 

You can say a lot of that has to do with potential, but when several POR players, coaches and mgmt (not to mention opposing coaches and GM's)...have all said the kid could play now...then I have to put the blame on Mo for not playing him. If he WAS playing more, I firmly believe he would put up better "stats" than Duhon, and at three years younger and newly removed from HS (as opposed to 4 years at Duke), that would speak LOUDLY about his worth as a player and his worth\value NOW in comparison to Duhon.

So it isn't just as simply put as .."His stats are better...therefore he is better"

and you darn well know that :grinning:


----------



## Sambonius (May 21, 2003)

*Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Really?*



> Originally posted by <b>Ed O</b>!
> 
> Obviously a single night doesn't prove anything,


You're right, it doesn't. So why bring it up at all? You seem to ignore the season averages of both players. Telfair has shown more in his minutes than Duhon has shown. Duhon gets pretty solid minutes to show what he can do, and his numbers are no more than less than average. Duhon shoots a very poor percentage for any player in the league. Telfair has the percentage but one could argue he gets inconsistant minutes and that effects his shooting %, which imo does.


----------



## Sambonius (May 21, 2003)

Looking at the numbers, I still don't see how anyone can say Duhon has played better this season when taking into account Telfair plays 15 less minutes, it's pretty bogus.


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

*Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Really?*



> Originally posted by <b>Sambonius</b>!
> 
> You're right, it doesn't. So why bring it up at all?


Because of basic logic.

The mere fact that something isn't the sole determinor of something else doesn't mean that it's without value.

Duhon outplayed Telfair last night, the latest peice in a season-long puzzle where he's done more than Sebastian.

Ed o.


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Kmurph</b>!
> 
> Perfectly capable...Are you?


Absolutely. That's why I'm capable of discussing the point at hand, rather than eye-rolling at straw men.



> Then why do you keep harping about Duhon being better this year, as if that makes a difference?


Because I made the assertion that he's showed more than Telfair this year, and Sambonius is for some reason trying to disprove that by merely stating that he hasn't produced because he hasn't got minutes, but minutes are critical to this argument.

Getting to the heart of WHY I pointed out Duhon is having a better year: look back to my original response to the Bulls comparison. Comparing Duhon (who's, at best, the sixth-best prospect on the Bulls) to Telfair (who's the best prospect listed by Nash in his alleged email), I think that's fair to point out that Duhon is producing NOW on a winning team.. while Telfair is rotting on the bench of a loser.

Nash pointed to unknown commodities either because he thinks that the guys he drafted just happen to be the best prospects for the team's improvement, or because he's pointing to guys that haven't played and therefore can't be dismissed as strong reasons to hope. I think it's definitely the latter, and I find that disappointing for the team's future.



> So it isn't just as simply put as .."His stats are better...therefore he is better"
> 
> and you darn well know that :grinning:


Again: I haven't said that he's better than Telfair. Lines like that are the reason I asked if you'd read my posts. Maybe you're mixing up false positions that Sambonius is attributing to me with my actual ones?

Ed O.


----------



## Sambonius (May 21, 2003)

So DUHON is having a better season than Telfair because his team is winning more than ours? Don't you mean the Bulls are having a better season than Telfair? I don't see how a team winning is of any relevance. I guess you can say Manu Ginobilli has played a better season than Tracy McGrady.


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Sambonius</b>!
> So DUHON is having a better season than Telfair because his team is winning more than ours?


No. Again, though, a simple test of logic should tell you that a single factor not being entirely responsible for something else doesn't mean it's no factor at all.



> Don't you mean the Bulls are having a better season than Telfair?


Why would I compare a team to a player? That's silly.



> I don't see how a team winning is of any relevance.


You not seeing something doesn't mean that it doesn't exist. A lot in this thread seems to be flying right over your head. I'll try to give an example (and NOTE: I'm not saying that Sebastian is a power forward just because I use two 4's in the following).

Is Tim Duncan better than Zach Randolph because he's taller? No.

Does Duncan's height help Tim Duncan be better than Zach? Yes.

Duhon is producing more this season than Telfair. That contributes to him having a better season than Sebastian. He's also doing so on a winning team, which is another factor in my book, and reduces any claims that (a) Duhon is getting inflated numbers on an inferior team, or (b) Telfair is getting fewer minutes because of being on a superior team.

Ed O.


----------



## Sambonius (May 21, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Ed O</b>!
> 
> Why would I compare a team to a player? That's silly.


That's the whole point. You continue to say Duhon is on a winning team so that makes his play better than Telfair season, which is as ridiculous as me saying the Bulls are having a better season than Telfair. Get it? If you're going to continue to say Duhon is having a better season because he's on a winning team then you might as well go ahead and say the Bulls are having a better season than Telfair. 




> Duhon is producing more this season than Telfair. That contributes to him having a better season than Sebastian. He's also doing so on a winning team, which is another factor in my book, and reduces any claims that (a) Duhon is getting inflated numbers on an inferior team, or (b) Telfair is getting fewer minutes because of being on a superior team.


You continue to say this over and over and over again, but you haven't backed your claim any. You pointed to rebounding and assists but you don't even defend the field goal percentage, points per game, and so on. When anyone is comparing Duhon to Telfair or Telfair to Duhon they should take notice that Duhon averages .6 points per game more, shoots the identical field goal percentage, and gets to the free throw line LESS, all while playing 15 minutes more.


----------



## mook (Dec 31, 2002)

Sambonius and Kmurph are blurring two things together: Duhon having a better year, and Duhon being a better player. these are seperate issues. 

for example, Brian Grant had a great season several years ago that surpassed what Rasheed Wallace was doing. but nobody in their right mind thinks Grant is the better player. 

Ed is isolating the two and focusing just on Duhon having a good year and not really saying anything about which guy is the better player down the road. 

i think it's pretty clear Duhon is having a better season. it's all about winning games, and Duhon is getting more chances to have a big impact than Telfair, and he's apparently taking advantage of those chances. 

Telfair will probably be the better player down the road, though. he just needs a chance to shine.


----------



## Sambonius (May 21, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>theWanker</b>!
> Sambonius and Kmurph are blurring two things together: Duhon having a better year, and Duhon being a better player. these are seperate issues.


I'm not blurring things together, I just disagree with Duhon having a better season. Look at the numbers.


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Sambonius</b>!
> 
> Look at the numbers.


We already have. To break them down a different way, Duhon leads in almost every category.

Games: 49 - 39
Starts: 40 - 0
Minutes: 1183 - 412
eFG%: .422 - .355
Rebounds: 118 - 36
Assists: 235-62
Steals: 46 - 9
TO: 79 - 47
Points: 246 - 165

So Duhon is leading in every significant statistical category except turnovers.

What else does the man have to do to have a better season than Telfair in your opinion?

Ed O.


----------

