# My contempt for Nash grows....



## KingSpeed (Oct 30, 2003)

Webster is bumped to NBDL? Wow.... So that's how bad of a draft pick we got.

We had the NUMBER THREE draft pick and we wound up with Jack at the 20-somethingth pick and some dude who needs to go to the NBDL for minutes??

I know I harped on this before, but now it's really really hitting home.

Nash truly sucks.

Chris Paul continues to dominate and we wound up getting a guy who is not good enough to get NBA minutes on a Blazer team that doesn't have any elite or semi-elite guards (except for Dixon MAYBE). Why can't he get minutes in the NBA? The league he declared himself eligible for!! He's down playing against scrubs? Wouldn't it be more valuable for him to be practicing and traveling with an NBA team and playing against NBA level competition?? Of course not. Because he's not that good.

We have Rasheed Wallace. We trade him for terrible center and give him a huge contract.

We essentially had Chris Paul but traded him for an NBDL player.

Nice.

Man..... I know, I know.... people say I must be patient.

Oh I'll be patient. I'm patiently waiting for Nash to let go. The Blazers won't win the championship until we have a GM with a winning vision.

It's not that Nash got unlucky. He made flat out bad decisions. It is to no one's surprise that Paul is good.

Man.....

Go Blazers. Watch Bones.


----------



## blue32 (Jan 13, 2006)

dude, webster and monia wont be there for long. it was more of a chance to get them some game practise.


----------



## wastro (Dec 19, 2004)

Man, I'm glad you brought up arguments that we haven't heard before. Good stuff. :boohoo:


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

So Eric, how's life living high on the hog? Remember you agree'd to let me be part of your possee if and when you became famous. purely platonic, remember...

you like being on TV more than stage or the silver screen?

You should see if you can send us little messages..well, obviously we're low on the list of who you'd send messages to (as I'm sure family, loved ones  and other people rank much higher than we do)..

I stil think you should see if you can make them make you a Blazer fan.


----------



## BlazerFanFoLife (Jul 17, 2003)

dude eric tell me when your on leno conan or whatever other late night talk show, i'll most definatly watch it before i fall asleep. Chris Paul=Damon Stod. Martell=Taller Ray Allen.


----------



## RipCity9 (Jan 30, 2004)

I can understand your frustration, it's not like we're on a 4-game winning streak or anything.


----------



## It's_GO_Time (Oct 13, 2005)

BlazerFanFoLife said:


> Martell=Taller Ray Allen.


I was thinking more along the lines of Martell=Better Michael Jordan


----------



## SolidGuy3 (Apr 23, 2005)

Kiss_My_Darius said:


> I was thinking more along the lines of Martell=Better Michael Jordan


Martell = Tracy Murray


----------



## Utherhimo (Feb 20, 2005)

tell me so i can fall asleep


----------



## It's_GO_Time (Oct 13, 2005)

SolidGuy3 said:


> Martell = Tracy Murray


What, you don't like my comparison to Micahel Jordan? Just wait a few years and well see.


----------



## chris_in_pdx (Jul 11, 2004)

Webster is barely 18 years old. Fer God's sake, lay off the kid. You want him to be a superstar right out of the gate, it isn't going to happen. Didn't happen with Kobe, didn't happen with MJ. Give the kid a break, and let him become the player he's going to become without you all destroying him before he has a chance.


----------



## SolidGuy3 (Apr 23, 2005)

chris_in_pdx said:


> Webster is barely 18 years old. Fer God's sake, lay off the kid. You want him to be a superstar right out of the gate, it isn't going to happen. Didn't happen with Kobe, didn't happen with MJ. Give the kid a break, and let him become the player he's going to become without you all destroying him before he has a chance.


The thing with Webster is that I don't see alot of potential in his game. In my opinion, if he wasn't picked by the Blazers we would have dropped maybe even to the 20s because some teams had Green ranked higher than Webster. Did Webster decide to enter the draft because he was promised to be picked in the lottery by the Blazers?


----------



## Fork (Jan 2, 2003)

NathanLane said:


> Webster is bumped to NBDL? Wow.... So that's how bad of a draft pick we got.
> 
> We had the NUMBER THREE draft pick and we wound up with Jack at the 20-somethingth pick and some dude who needs to go to the NBDL for minutes??
> 
> ...


Broken record.

And BTW, Bones sucks.


----------



## It's_GO_Time (Oct 13, 2005)

chris_in_pdx said:


> Webster is barely 18 years old. Fer God's sake, lay off the kid. You want him to be a superstar right out of the gate, it isn't going to happen. Didn't happen with Kobe, didn't happen with MJ. Give the kid a break, and let him become the player he's going to become without you all destroying him before he has a chance.


Do you think any of us have any impact on Webster's game much less have the ability to destroy him? Martel will be become the player he is going to become regardless of what we say on this board.


----------



## deanwoof (Mar 10, 2003)

Fork said:


> Broken record.
> 
> And BTW, Bones sucks.


Hahaha hilarious. I've never watched Bones but if it's getting good reviews, gets picked up for the second part of the season, and is now following American Idol, it can't really suck that bad can it?


----------



## Peaceman (Jan 15, 2003)

I believe Nash hasn't done a good job, BUT the Webster pick is way to early to give up on. If this kid can shoot the lights out and bring that into the NBA game, we will be very fortuate. Shooter are harder to find then good big men. I have been critical of Nash, but I like our last two picks. If Webster doesn't pan out and at least play a roll in next years rotation, i'll worry a bit. I really think Jack will be a decent player in this league, so be patient.


----------



## CanJohno (Feb 11, 2005)

Fork said:


> Broken record.
> 
> And BTW, Bones sucks.


Agreed!!! :cheers:


----------



## SolidGuy3 (Apr 23, 2005)

Peaceman said:


> I believe Nash hasn't done a good job, BUT the Webster pick is way to early to give up on. If this kid can shoot the lights out and bring that into the NBA game, we will be very fortuate. Shooter are harder to find then good big men. I have been critical of Nash, but I like our last two picks. If Webster doesn't pan out and at least play a roll in next years rotation, i'll worry a bit. I really think Jack will be a decent player in this league, so be patient.


From what I have seen of Webster, he has below average athletism. I don't ever see him as a starter in this league. The best case for him would be to become another Tracy Murray.


----------



## BlayZa (Dec 31, 2002)

i just wish we would draft someone NBA ready... paul was/is NBA ready - webster isnt. If we get a high pick next draft i hope - HOPE - we draft someone who can actually help us.


----------



## OntheRocks (Jun 15, 2005)

SolidGuy3 said:


> From what I have seen of Webster, he has below average athletism.


After watching his pre-draft video highlights against the likes of speedy Nate Robinson and Mccants a half dozen times, I'd have to disagree with you on this one. He's not Outlaw by any means, but I would def. say he's at least average.



SolidGuy3 said:


> I don't ever see him as a starter in this league. The best case for him would be to become another Tracy Murray.


Considering the fact that he has the ABILITY to shoot the lights out, there is absolutely no way you can say that a 6'7" - 210 - SG / SF doesn't have a chance to become an outstanding player.

Webster IMO clearly has a chance to develop into a Starter, he has a perfect NBA body he just needs some experience and confidence. The kid JUST turned 19 for petesake.


----------



## Utherhimo (Feb 20, 2005)

yup when he throws it up hard it goes in and he has good mechanics already, nice stroke on the ball and pretty good hops.


----------



## tlong (Jan 6, 2003)

Nash is incompetent. This fact has been evident for some time now.


Sincerely,

Al Jefferson


----------



## ebott (Jan 7, 2003)

I understand the need to rant against Nash. But don't take it out on Martell Webster. The kid is right out of highschool. And in a few years when he's exactly like Michael Jordan in every way except that he doesn't do that dumb tongue thing and he's got a better jump shot you'll come around.

In 3 years everyone will see that the following is true

Telfair + Jack + Webster >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Paul + Jefferson


----------



## RedHot&Rolling (Jun 26, 2004)

ebott said:


> In 3 years everyone will see that the following is true
> 
> Telfair + Jack + Webster >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Paul + Jefferson


We all (except those that abandon our board for brighter lights) have to hope this is true. Unfortunately, its too early to tell.


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

tlong said:


> Nash is incompetent. This fact has been evident for some time now.
> 
> 
> Sincerely,
> ...


what exactly has jefferson done that shows he was any better a pick than telfair?


----------



## ABM (Dec 30, 2002)

tlong said:


> Nash is incompetent. This fact has been evident for some time now.
> 
> 
> Sincerely,
> ...


Not only did big Al refuse to come back for a second look, he also failed the psychology tests the team gave him.

Go figure.


----------



## tlong (Jan 6, 2003)

Min FG 3PT FT OR DR TR A F ST TO BS PTS
A. Jefferson 26:45 8-13 0-1 2-3 3 5 8 1 4 0 0 2 18 

Not too bad in his last game.


----------



## tlong (Jan 6, 2003)

ABM said:


> Not only did big Al refuse to come back for a second look, he also failed the psychology tests the team gave him.
> 
> Go figure.


We should throw those stupid psychology tests in the garbage.


----------



## RPCity (Aug 29, 2005)

Hap said:


> what exactly has jefferson done that shows he was any better a pick than telfair?



He's proven that he's 6'10, 250. 

_Clearly_ that's all anybody should need to look at......


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

tlong said:


> Min FG 3PT FT OR DR TR A F ST TO BS PTS
> A. Jefferson 26:45 8-13 0-1 2-3 3 5 8 1 4 0 0 2 18
> 
> Not too bad in his last game.


true, that wasn't a bad game. but, he's just as streaky, and just as inconsistent as Telfair. His stats are just as laudable (altho obviously has a better shooting %, altho so does Joel, and I don't think of any of us think he's a better overall shooter than sebastian) as telfairs, and can be used as proof he's valid of his location in the draft. 

Maybe you should move on from Jefferson. I get why people complain about Paul, he IS putting up #'s that are impressive. But the Jefferson tag-line hasn't been shown to be one to stroll out yet.


----------



## Kmurph (May 7, 2003)

The comparisons 3-4 years from now should be

Telfair to Jefferson

and

Webster, Jack and DET #30 pick to Chris Paul

Chris Paul looks good, but as I said before so did Damon Stoudamire in his 1st year.

Damon as a rookie: 19ppg 9.3 apg 4.0 rpg 1.4 spg 2.4 to/g 42% FG% 39% 3pt FG%

Paul as a rookie: 16.1 ppg 7.2 apg 5.7rpg 2.2 spg 2.1 to/g 43% FG% 30% 3pt FG%

Good for NO\OKC that Paul is playing well, hopefully he CONTINUES to perform well for them. Time will tell if 3 is better than 1.


----------



## azsun18 (Aug 12, 2004)

Thats pretty cool how you just happened to pick Al Jeffersons best game of the year. You didnt mention that he was in single digits the previous 5 games before that. I guess we can just pick telfairs game when he got 21 points and say that Telfair will without a doubt have a better career then Jefferson. Not trying to diss you too much, but both Telfair and AJ are both young players trying to learn how to play in the NBA.


----------



## Kmurph (May 7, 2003)

tlong....

Your annual whining about Jefferson is about as pathetic as your attempt to prop up Jefferson as better than Telfair based on 1 decent game he had ...

Let's compare the two shall we?

Jefferson is averaging 8ppg and 4.8 rpg
Telfair is averaging 10ppg and 3.9 apg

Jefferson's top 5 games this year

21 (12/10)
18 (1/18)
17 (1/6)
16 (12/7)
13 (twice)

Telfair's top 5 games this year

27 (11/20)
21 (1/13)
20 (TWICE 11/25 & 11/18)
19 (12/4)
18 (11/5)


----------



## Blazer Maven (Sep 27, 2005)

RPCity said:


> He's proven that he's 6'10, 250.
> 
> _Clearly_ that's all anybody should need to look at......



Yinka Dare= All NBA


----------



## tlong (Jan 6, 2003)

Kmurph said:


> tlong....
> 
> Your annual whining about Jefferson is about as pathetic as your attempt to prop up Jefferson as better than Telfair based on 1 decent game he had ...
> 
> ...



Why stop there? Why not look at per 48 minutes stats for both players? (The following are rankings for sophomore players)

Big Al is 6th among sophomore players for points per 48 minutes. Telfair is 19th.
Big Al is 10th among sophomores for rebounds per 48 minutes. Telfair is 39th.
Big Al is 8th for FG percentage. Telfair is 44th.
Big Al is 6th in blocked shots. Telfair is 43rd.
Big Al is 15th in the efficiency rating. Telfair is 21st.


----------



## Masbee (Dec 31, 2002)

Kmurph said:


> The comparisons 3-4 years from now should be
> 
> Telfair to Jefferson
> 
> ...


Pull out the 2006 Det 1st rounder.

We lost the 2005 #35. They are roughly a wash.


----------



## RPCity (Aug 29, 2005)

tlong said:


> Why stop there? Why not look at per 48 minutes stats for both players? (The following are rankings for sophomore players)
> 
> Big Al is 6th among sophomore players for points per 48 minutes. Telfair is 19th.
> Big Al is 10th among sophomores for rebounds per 48 minutes. Telfair is 39th.
> ...



Holy crap!!! You're telling me that the 6'10 power forward is a better shotblocker and rebounder then our 6'0 point guard???? And that he shoots a higher percentage!?!?

No way!!! What a horrible pick! How did we pass up this guy!


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

tlong said:


> Why stop there? Why not look at per 48 minutes stats for both players? (The following are rankings for sophomore players)
> 
> Big Al is 6th among sophomore players for points per 48 minutes. Telfair is 19th.
> Big Al is 10th among sophomores for rebounds per 48 minutes. Telfair is 39th.
> ...


per 48 is a deceptive stat. I'm not sure why you're comparing rebounds per 48 with a Pg. I guess we could say that Assists cancel out rebounds in this arguement.

Telfair is at 7 assists per 48, and Jefferson is at 1.6 

I'd also say that three point shooting cancels out blocks too. 40% to 0%.

And I don't know if I'd say that the difference between 15th and 21st is really that impressive, considering Jefferson is 9-10 inches taller and plays mostly in the paint. I'd hope someone who's that all is more efficient, they're closer to the hoop.


----------



## tlong (Jan 6, 2003)

RPCity said:


> Holy crap!!! You're telling me that the 6'10 power forward is a better shotblocker and rebounder then our 6'0 point guard???? And that he shoots a higher percentage!?!?
> 
> No way!!! What a horrible pick! How did we pass up this guy!



Actually what I'm telling you is that a 6-10, 265 lb power forward straight from high school is a *much better * pick than a 5-11, 165 lb point guard straight from high school.


----------



## Backboard Cam (Apr 29, 2003)

Eric Millegan said:


> My contempt for Nash grows....
> 
> Go Blazers. Watch Bones.


Don't you have a blog for this crap? 

Guys, Eric doesn't even read this board any more. He posts these rants, and expects this board to look forward to them- at 3 pages already, It might be working. This is a forum, not Eric's nba blog.

I see this as self-promotion, since I don't care what he thinks about the Blazers- I already know that he hates anyone who doesn't hate management, he told us that in his last press release.

ERIC- STAY AWAY. Keep this in your blog where it belongs. If people want to know what you think, they know where to go.


----------



## Aly (Jan 26, 2003)

Eric ! Bones is a good show hope it survives, Post when ever you can.


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

From the Boston Globe yesterday:



> Most nights, Al Jefferson hasn't been on the floor for those crucial minutes. He was averaging just over 17 minutes a game because of his defensive struggles, even as chants of ''Play the kids" grow more insistent. Someday Jefferson might be a 20-and-10 guy, but at the moment he's a young player with enormous potential who isn't consistent enough to earn major minutes. Rivers remains steadfast in his resolve not to hand Big Al time without justification.
> 
> He's right.
> 
> ...


http://www.boston.com/sports/basket...ndy_man_wouldnt_leave_the_right_taste/?page=2

Now, just find-and-replace Al Jefferson's name with Sebastian Telfair's and Doc Rivers' name with Nate McMillan's and we have some sports copy for the Portland papers.

Telfair hasn't been disappointing, he's showing the typical prep-to-pro struggles and growth curve. Tracy McGrady was in Darrell Walker's doghouse in Toronto and couldn't buy playing time.


----------



## B_&_B (Feb 19, 2004)

Fork said:


> Broken record.
> 
> And BTW, Bones sucks.


I agree! ZZZZZZZZZ


----------



## STOMP (Jan 1, 2003)

Kmurph said:


> Chris Paul looks good, but as I said before so did Damon Stoudamire in his 1st year.
> 
> Damon as a rookie: 19ppg 9.3 apg 4.0 rpg 1.4 spg 2.4 to/g 42% FG% 39% 3pt FG%
> 
> ...


It seems you're making this comparison to degrade CP. It's extremely rare that a player regresses statistically through his career like Damon did. Anyways, here's a couple other relevant things to throw in your comparison. 

*barefoot height* 
CP 5'11.75 
Damon ??? well he's listed at 5'10 so 5'8.5 would be the standard markup. I'm 5'10, and I've stood next to him... 2.25" is a pretty significant size difference IMO

*Hornets 2005-6 record* 19-19
*Raptors 1995-6 record* 21-61

Basically its a big stretch of comparison and a poor one to be making over and over and over as if it proves anything. Though their career stats don't match up very well, the guy I might compare Paul to is another former Oregon PG, Terrell Brandon.

STOMP


----------



## Kmurph (May 7, 2003)

> Why stop there? Why not look at per 48 minutes stats for both players? (The following are rankings for sophomore players)
> 
> Big Al is 6th among sophomore players for points per 48 minutes. Telfair is 19th.
> Big Al is 10th among sophomores for rebounds per 48 minutes. Telfair is 39th.
> ...


Why? Oh...I don't know...Maybe b\c Per 48min stats are crap?...I can't believe you or any other person here would place much stock in them...

As for the rest...could you reach a little more? A 6'10 power forward SHOULD post a higher FG % than 6'0 PG...that doesn't help your point at all..amongst sophmores? Are you kidding me? Is the % weigh better in Jefferson's favor if you count only weekend games? What about Sunday afternoon starts?

Rebounds and blocked shots? You are seriously reaching here, but what else is new...



> Pull out the 2006 Det 1st rounder.
> 
> We lost the 2005 #35. They are roughly a wash


No they are not. POR used that pick (#27 if I recall) and their own 2nd rounder to get Jack, w\o the 27th pick that deal NEVER happens...that pick came from Utah as did DET 06' pick.

The DET pick, even if it is the last pick in the 1st round does matter and definitely counts when adding things up, b\c IF POR does do something similiar this next year, and uses that pick and their own 2nd rounder to move up, that pick will represent 90% of the value on such a pick exchange...again, gotten from Utah...



> It seems you're making this comparison to degrade CP. It's extremely rare that a player regresses statistically through his career like Damon did. Anyways, here's a couple other relevant things to throw in your comparison.
> 
> Basically its a big stretch of comparison and a poor one to be making over and over and over as if it proves anything


It is an absolutely valid comparison...Damon put up great stats as a rookie and never played appreciably better IMO,...to conclude that after a 1/2 season that A) Paul will get much better B) that POR made a mistake taking Paul over Webster/Jack and Det pick and C) That Paul will be better than Telfair is absolutely asinine... THAT cannot be proven as fact until 2-3 years down the road at the earliest...

The only thing that has merit is that he is playing well now...as for the future, that is undecided..

I get that you and tlong and a few others here don't like Telfair, many of you never have, but for some of you to spread bs and opinionated projections as fact is pure garbage....


----------



## Masbee (Dec 31, 2002)

Kmurph said:


> No they are not. POR used that pick (#27 if I recall) and their own 2nd rounder to get Jack, w\o the 27th pick that deal NEVER happens...that pick came from Utah as did DET 06' pick.
> 
> The DET pick, even if it is the last pick in the 1st round does matter and definitely counts when adding things up, b\c IF POR does do something similiar this next year, and uses that pick and their own 2nd rounder to move up, that pick will represent 90% of the value on such a pick exchange...again, gotten from Utah...


I a sick already of trying to explain this. This is my 3rd post on this. If you don't get or refuse to get it - realize you willfully choose not to understand.

If you insist on continuing to say something that is untrue - namely that we traded the #3 (presumably and possibly Chris Paul) - and only the #3, for what turned out to be Webster, Jack and the Detroit 06 1st, you lose credibility, with me anyway. And you are spreading misinformation on this board. Stop it already.

Tell me again where is the player on Portland's roster that we got with our own 2005 #35 pick?

As an example, in 2004, we drafted Ha in the second round with our own 2nd round pick. Where is our Ha for 2005?

For those reading this who are confused and need a recap.

Portland had #3 & #35. Traded #3 for #6 & #27 & 06 1st.

Now had #6, #27, #35 & 06 1st. Traded #27 & #35 for #22.

Now had #6, #22 & 06 1st.

Thus #3 & #35 was traded for #6, #22 & 06 1st or likely:

Chris Paul & ?? (say Ricky Sanchez who was on the radar on this board prior to the draft) for:

Martell Webster, Jarrett Jack and the last pick in the 1st round of the 2006 draft (which looks to be shallow).


----------



## tlong (Jan 6, 2003)

Kmurph said:


> Why? Oh...I don't know...Maybe b\c Per 48min stats are crap?...I can't believe you or any other person here would place much stock in them...
> 
> As for the rest...could you reach a little more? A 6'10 power forward SHOULD post a higher FG % than 6'0 PG...that doesn't help your point at all..amongst sophmores? Are you kidding me? Is the % weigh better in Jefferson's favor if you count only weekend games? What about Sunday afternoon starts?
> 
> Rebounds and blocked shots? You are seriously reaching here, but what else is new...



*Earth to Kmurph. Come in Kmurph.*

Per 48min stats certainly are not crap when comparing these two players. That is the only way you can normalize the stats in order to provide a valid comparison. Of course I listed FG%, Rebs, and BS's as it helps my point of view more. However, I also listed efficiency which should not matter. You notice Jefferson was 15th and Telfair was 21st. I listed rankings among sophomores only so the population would not be so large. It makes it easier to compare.


----------



## Kmurph (May 7, 2003)

> If you insist on continuing to say something that is untrue - namely that we traded the #3 (presumably and possibly Chris Paul) - and only the #3, for what turned out to be Webster, Jack and the Detroit 06 1st, you lose credibility, with me anyway.


I don't recall ever saying (INSISTING !!!!) that...Did you even read the post you quoted from me? Sorry dude..it is YOU who CLEARY does not get it...

getting Jack WOULD NOT HAVE likely happened w\o the 27th pick....How many other ways do I have to state it?

#3 was traded for #6, #27 and DET 06' pick....

POR used that #27 and their own #35 to move up to #22 to get Jack...again w\o the #27 THEY DO NOT GET JACK....literally

You don't seriously think Denver would have swapped POR the #22 for the #35 now do you? The fact that POR used their own 2nd in order to get the 22nd pick is inconsequential to the FACT that w\o the #27 (acquired from UTA) they NEVER WOULD HAVE BEEN ABLE TO MAKE THE DEAL IN THE FIRST PLACE...damm, it isn't rocket science...figure it out...let it stew in your melon for a minute..

and you STILL still haven't answered why the DET 06' pick should not factor in comparisons to Paul and what POR got AND WAS ABLE TO FURTHER ACQUIRE from trading that pick.

and sorry...but saying a late 1st and 2nd round pick are EQUAL in value is weak sauce...seriously...Some years the gap may be smaller than others but it is still more valuable of a pick...


----------



## Kmurph (May 7, 2003)

tlong...

I think it is you and anyone else who thinks per 48min are a meaningful statistic that needs to come back to earth....

Per 48min is one of the MOST decieving statistics there is...and it holds LITTLE weight to me and should to anyone with 1/2 a brain...

I am sure we could scour the NBA benches for several players whose Per 48 stats look fantastic...but it holds (and should hold) little actually merit as an indicator to a players actual statistics if they were indeed given those minutes.....

Those numbers rarely add up like they suggest they do...but I would hope that you already knew that....

I can't state it any more clearly...using Jefferson's rpg and bspg as an arguement to why he is better than Telfair is beyond laughable.....


----------



## Masbee (Dec 31, 2002)

Kmurph said:


> and you STILL still haven't answered why the DET 06' pick should not factor in comparisons to Paul and what POR got AND WAS ABLE TO FURTHER ACQUIRE from trading that pick.
> 
> and sorry...but saying a late 1st and 2nd round pick are EQUAL in value is weak sauce...seriously...Some years the gap may be smaller than others but it is still more valuable of a pick...


You can either say Paul for Webster and Jack, which the deal essentially boils down to, or you can be more precise - and wordy.

What you cannot do is LIE and say we traded Paul for Webster, Jack AND a future pick.

As for your comparison of the picks, actually the pick we gave up is MORE valuable than the one we are going to get. #35 with a NON guaranteed contract in a deep draft, now in time, Versus:
the #30, in a shallow draft on a guaranteed contract, one year later.

Let THAT stew in your brain as I put you on my ignore list.


----------



## tlong (Jan 6, 2003)

Kmurph said:


> tlong...
> 
> I think it is you and anyone else who thinks per 48min are a meaningful statistic that needs to come back to earth....
> 
> ...


You are crazy dude. You *have to * project the stats out to per 48 mins to make a comparison. That is the only way to do it. It does not necessarily reflect what the player would do if he were actually given those minutes, but it does guage their effectiveness on the court. Why wouldn't you use Jefferson's rpg and bspg to argue his superiority? He's a *freaking power forward!*


----------



## handclap problematic (Nov 6, 2003)

Masbee... I get your point, but I don't necissarily agree with it. 
I would rather have the 30th pick in this year's draft than 35th in the last. First of all, it is 5 places higher... and secondly, I am tired of all the talk about weak drafts. Every single year people complain about the draft calling it weak, or lopsided...or anything else. Last year was considered a weak draft as well. I remember tons of Blazers fans here talking about how weak it was. Heck, in the year with Lebron, Wade and Mello, people called it weak. People said there are 3 or 4 good picks and after that it is weak. There are aways good players coming up, and this year is no different. Tell the Spurs that they can't select a good player with the 30th pick..... Tell them. They will laugh.

Prunetang


----------



## Masbee (Dec 31, 2002)

Prunetang said:


> Masbee... I get your point, but I don't necissarily agree with it.
> I would rather have the 30th pick in this year's draft than 35th in the last. First of all, it is 5 places higher... and secondly, I am tired of all the talk about weak drafts. Every single year people complain about the draft calling it weak, or lopsided...or anything else. Last year was considered a weak draft as well. I remember tons of Blazers fans here talking about how weak it was. Heck, in the year with Lebron, Wade and Mello, people called it weak. People said there are 3 or 4 good picks and after that it is weak. There are aways good players coming up, and this year is no different. Tell the Spurs that they can't select a good player with the 30th pick..... Tell them. They will laugh.
> 
> Prunetang


Weak vs Strong drafts are not the same thing as Deep vs Shallow drafts.

Last year was considered a relatively weak draft, but deep. 2006 was predicted to be a relatively weak, but shallow.

I don't know who called the LeBron draft "weak". I never heard that. I heard "top heavy" or "shallow", not weak. And that label was basically true. Outside of the Lotto, there wasn't much to be had as it turned out.


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

> Tell the Spurs that they can't select a good player with the 30th pick..... Tell them. They will laugh.


Yea really, where would San Antonio be without Ginobili and Parker?.....

You can get good picks late in the draft, look at Michael Redd and Gilbert Arenas....


----------



## Kmurph (May 7, 2003)

What Masbee? You can't be proven wrong, so you have to go grade school and give me the old "talk to the hand"?

tsk tsk...How childish, I expect better from you....

The fact remains POR has Det pick this year and they were able to parlay the 27th pick with the use of their own 2nd to get Jack...Both DIRECTLY as a result of the trade with UTA..ie..passing up on Paul...quit ignoring the obvious and acting like a baby...

How you can predict that the 35th pick last year will be more valuable than DET pick this year is truly astonishing...considering the draft hasn't even been held yet....Yu should be handicapping in Vegas...

tlong - 

No...no..you don't HAVE TO project stats out to per 48min to make a valid comparison that is just plain silly...sorry not buying that crap


Wow, well what a surprise then...A 6'10 PF averages more rpg and bspg than a 6'0 PG...There is a real newsflash...OTOH Telfair averages more assists, steals and has a better 3pt FG%...I guess scoreboard goes to me then...Who would have thought a PG could be better in those categories than a PF?


----------



## Utherhimo (Feb 20, 2005)

lets see what are some of the players that can be found around the 30 mark!

28. Marcus Vinicius 6-9 190 SF Brazil 1984 
29. Hilton Armstrong 6-11 235 PF/C UConn Sr.
30. Marco Killingsworth 6-7 268 PF Ind. Sr.
31. Damir Markota 6-10 225 SF Cro.1985
32. Hassan Adams 6-4 201 SF Arizona Sr

at least 2 of them good be kept over seas and two are pf or pf/c! not too bad!

hhhmmm what would the 30th and 35th picks in the draft be worth? 17th? 30th 35th and cash for the second chicago pick? or do we trade the 5th pick and the 35th or 30th for the 2nd or 3rd pick? 

2/3 and the 35th get Bargnani or aldridge whoever is left and draft a international player that can stay over seas for a while but then agian having 3 pfs wouldnt be bad either. 

i find the draft the most exciting part of the season lol sad i know!


----------

