# Telfair to Boston?



## RickRoss (May 24, 2006)

http://www.insidehoops.com/nba_rumors.shtml


----------



## cimalee (Apr 17, 2003)

the blazers are stupid if they deal telfair already


----------



## GOD (Jun 22, 2003)

cimalee said:


> the blazers are stupid if they deal telfair already


It all depends on what they get in return.


----------



## cimalee (Apr 17, 2003)

thylo said:


> It all depends on what they get in return.


agreed but what do they have , I like Jefferson but id rather keep telfair


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

Telfair for #7 if Roy,Morrison or Aldridge is still there. Mark it down.


----------



## m_que01 (Jun 25, 2003)

mediocre man said:


> Telfair for #7 if Roy,Morrison or Aldridge is still there. Mark it down.


Now that I think about it, that's not a bad idea if the Celtics will take a similar package with Telfair in it. If we pick Roy at #4 and nix the atlanta and houston trade which will mean Williams will likely get picked at #5 by Atlanta or they'll have to work out a deal with someone else to trade down. There is a really good chance Thomas, Morrison or Gay could drop to #7 if that was the case.


----------



## MAS RipCity (Feb 22, 2003)

I think i'll cry if we deal Bassy...no joke. Give them Jack for E#7 or whatever, we gotta keep Bassy.


----------



## Verro (Jul 4, 2005)

I really think this is Telfair's breakout year and we'd regret trading him, but depending on who is there at #7 it could be tempting.


----------



## Blazer Freak (Jul 11, 2004)

I would be soooo pissed if we deal Telfair..


----------



## Todd (Oct 8, 2003)

Deal him! We don't need another another Outlaw clogging up the bench.


----------



## GOD (Jun 22, 2003)

Verro said:


> I really think this is Telfair's breakout year and we'd regret trading him, but depending on who is there at #7 it could be tempting.


If trading him meant that we could get aldridge with the 4th and Morrison/Roy with the 7th then I would trade Telfair. That would leave us with

PG: Jack, Blake
SG: Webster, Dixon
SF: Miles, Morrison
PF: Randolph, Aldridge, Skinner
C: Joel, Theo, Aldridge

We would still have Miles, #31, #32, Skinner to trade for a quality SF to backup and teach Morrison.

Or, 
PG: Jack, Roy, Blake
SG: Webster, Roy, Dixon
SF: Miles, Webster
PF: Randolph, Aldridge, Skinner
C: Joel, Theo, Aldridge


I think that both of those teams look better balanced then the team would with Telfair and without Roy/Morrison


----------



## wastro (Dec 19, 2004)

It's way too soon to give up on Telfair, but ... I don't want the same thing to happen with Telfair as it did with Outlaw (high value entering the season, doesn't have a good year, all of a sudden doesn't have much value at all).

If one of the "big six" players were still there at 7, I wouldn't be totally opposed to deal. Depends on how that pick would fill the team's needs, though.


----------



## ProZach (Oct 13, 2005)

It's way to soon to give up on Telfair.. Period... No 'buts'...

This league is becoming a guard oriented league, and with the rules that don't allow for much contact out top, speed rules. And we all know Telfair has speed.


----------



## Reep (Jun 4, 2003)

Sign me up for #7. If Telfair could be exchanged for #7 that would be about as good as you can expect. One of Gay, Thomas, Aldridge, Bargnani, Sh. Williams, Morrison or Roy will be available at 7 (Also O'Bryant). I would take any of those over Telfair.

I know Parker has had success, but I'd rather have Jack. A lot of reports about who is tradeable sounds like the Blazers may agree.


----------



## Utherhimo (Feb 20, 2005)

bargnani and morrison


----------



## southnc (Dec 15, 2005)

Man, IF the Blazers could get BOTH Morrison :guitar: and Aldridge; for a speedy, yet undersized PG who has yet to show that much: !! wow !! - what a deal!! :clap: 

I'm sure Blake & Jack can easily hold the fort in the PG role.

I know some prefer Roy (including Nate) verses Aldridge, but that would create more problems for our remaining PGs and Webster. Both Dixon and Webster will work hard to solidify the SG position. 

This would be a great team. Although, I would still prefer to move Miles, if possible.


----------



## Tince (Jul 11, 2004)

We picked Telfair 13th, he hasn't proven to be great or bad so trading him for the 7th pick doesn't sound too terrible to me. I certainly wouldn't lose any sleep over it considering him or Jack will be gone in a couple years anyway.

To me, Jack in the type of PG you find on a championship team. Telfair's the type of PG you see on sportscenter.


----------



## Peaceman (Jan 15, 2003)

I like Telfair, but he hasn't shown he is our top PG yet. I would have liked to hear he was going to spend the summer working on his jump shot instead of going back to street ball. If you can get one of the top six players for him, I would make the move in a second. If we keep him, I'll be happy also. If the coaching staff see a lot of potential in him, I hope we keep him, but based on the little I have seen on the top 6 draft picks, I like Aldridge, Gay or Bargnani potential better.


----------



## Ruff Draft (Nov 21, 2004)

Tince said:


> We picked Telfair 13th, he hasn't proven to be great or bad so trading him for the 7th pick doesn't sound too terrible to me. I certainly wouldn't lose any sleep over it considering him or Jack will be gone in a couple years anyway.
> 
> *To me, Jack in the type of PG you find on a championship team. Telfair's the type of PG you see on sportscenter.*


I couldn't have said it better myself. Repped.


----------



## Reep (Jun 4, 2003)

Tince said:


> To me, Jack in the type of PG you find on a championship team. Telfair's the type of PG you see on sportscenter.


It hurts because it's true.


----------



## GOD (Jun 22, 2003)

So many people say it's too soon to give up on player X, but just because you trade a player does not mean that you have given up on him. It just means that you have established a value for the player and a team offered that value or better. For example, would the Heat be giving up on Wade if they traded him for Lebron, Nash, and Duncan. No, it would just mean that Wades value was less then Lebron, Nash and Duncan together. 

I like Telfair and think he is going to be a pretty good player in the league. I also think that Roy and Morrison will be good players in the league. However, I just5 think that Roy and Morrison will be a better. i don't believe any of them will be stars.


----------



## chromekilla (Aug 21, 2005)

The only way i would deal bassy would be we trade bassy miles theo 30 31 to bos for gerald green ryan gomes 7 and raef lafrentz.Otherwise not gonna happen.


----------



## ProZach (Oct 13, 2005)

Tince said:


> To me, Jack in the type of PG you find on a championship team. Telfair's the type of PG you see on sportscenter.



Well, ESPN is God, so that's clearly more important. 

But I can't really argue with you on that one, except to say that while Telfair hasn't yet proven himself, neither has Jack. Just because he's the type of player that resembles championship PG's, doesn't mean he's one himself. And I gotta tell you, Tony Parker resembles Telfair more than Jack, IMO. 

I don't want to get rid of either one for at least another year. Get rid of Blake. I'm pretty certain he's not a championship PG.


----------



## Sambonius (May 21, 2003)

Telfair > Jack thus far. Even Telfair's defense was on par with Jack's and Jack's ball handling is down right scary in clutch situations. The team ALWAYS runs better with Telfair on the floor rather than Jack.


----------



## Blazer Freak (Jul 11, 2004)

Sambonius said:


> Telfair > Jack thus far. Even Telfair's defense was on par with Jack's and Jack's ball handling is down right scary in clutch situations. The team ALWAYS runs better with Telfair on the floor rather than Jack.


:yes: And I've made that TP/Telfair comparison before. Look at Parkers first 3 year stats and look at Telfair's. Not to mention Telfair is 2-3 years younger.


----------



## Reep (Jun 4, 2003)

Sambonius said:


> The team *ALWAYS * runs better with Telfair on the floor rather than Jack.


Hmmm. [...resisting urge . . . to . . . start this . . . again . . .]

This is still a rumor, but if Telfair does get traded, I hope we can end the talk about how much better the team runs with Telfair. Same can be said if Jack is traded. If Portland trades either one, that will tell us who the coach and management think does a better job. Only time will tell.

[ah, I made it]

P.S. I THINK BLAKE WILL BECOME THE NEXT STEVE NASH IF GIVEN TIME. [now we can keep this thread going for days].


----------



## Blazer Freak (Jul 11, 2004)

Reep said:


> Hmmm. [...resisting urge . . . to . . . start this . . . again . . .]
> 
> This is still a rumor, but if Telfair does get traded, I hope we can end the talk about how much better the team runs with Telfair. Same can be said if Jack is traded. If Portland trades either one, that will tell us who the coach and management think does a better job. Only time will tell.
> 
> [ah, I made it]


:laugh: I don't think Jack is a bad PG at all, but Telfair is just as good, even not better than Jack and he is two years older. It just doesn't make sense to say Jack is better than Telfair...


----------



## cimalee (Apr 17, 2003)

Reep said:


> P.S. I THINK BLAKE WILL BECOME THE NEXT STEVE NASH IF GIVEN TIME. [now we can keep this thread going for days].


I hope youre joking about that


----------



## Reep (Jun 4, 2003)

Blazer Freak said:


> :laugh: I don't think Jack is a bad PG at all, but Telfair is just as good, even not better than Jack and he is two years older. It just doesn't make sense to say Jack is better than Telfair...


I really wouldn't be against keeping both for a bit longer. Jack and Telfair are very different guards with different strengths. I think the above statement that Telfair is a better defender is a stretch. Telfair is younger, but Jack had a bumb wheel all year (hence could be better than he showed). I just think it is a mistake to keep both, if you can get good value for either. If you could get #7 for either one, you take it and run. Even either one plus 30 and 31 for #7 would be nice. But, if you can't get good value, then just wait and see what happens. Blazers are in a good position here because they don't really have to do any deal.


----------



## Reep (Jun 4, 2003)

cimalee said:


> I hope youre joking about that


 :yes:


----------



## hasoos (Jan 3, 2003)

mediocre man said:


> Telfair for #7 if Roy,Morrison or Aldridge is still there. Mark it down.



None of them will be there. Mark it down. :clown:


----------



## Blazer Freak (Jul 11, 2004)

Reep said:


> I really wouldn't be against keeping both for a bit longer. Jack and Telfair are very different guards with different strengths. I think the above statement that Telfair is a better defender is a stretch. Telfair is younger, but Jack had a bumb wheel all year (hence could be better than he showed). I just think it is a mistake to keep both, if you can get good value for either. If you could get #7 for either one, you take it and run. Even either one plus 30 and 31 for #7 would be nice. But, if you can't get good value, then just wait and see what happens. Blazers are in a good position here because they don't really have to do any deal.


Good point about the ankle, but Telfair also had a injured wrist that didn't fully heal till about the last month of the season so he would have done much better finishing and such. 

It's a moot point, as we don't see what the Blazer's O sees. I also think it'd be best to keep them both as they are a good match for each other with the others weakness is the other's strength. Blake IMO is the one that needs to go to clear up time just for Jack at the backup 1 and a few min. at the 2, giving him about 20 mpg, and Telfair 35.


----------



## cimalee (Apr 17, 2003)

I like jack hes solid but telefiar is gonna be a star watch , blazers management are so impatient


----------



## southnc (Dec 15, 2005)

Sambonius said:


> Telfair > Jack thus far. Even Telfair's defense was on par with Jack's and Jack's ball handling is down right scary in clutch situations. The team ALWAYS runs better with Telfair on the floor rather than Jack.


 Hmmm...?

Considering Jack had a valid excuse (not fully healed injury), I do not think Telfair is that much better than Jack. And, Jack was just in his rookie year. Telfair in his 2nd, and Blake in just his 3rd. Jack played the best defense, IMO.

And, Blake handles the ball better than both of them and most of the other PGs in the NBA: #3 in Assist / TO ratio (closest for Portland was Telfair at #37). Blake was also the #16 best 3pt shooter (closest for Portland was Dixon at #46).

I do believe all three will continue to improve. It's just a matter of what fits best for the team.


----------



## Todd (Oct 8, 2003)

cimalee said:


> I like jack hes solid but telefiar is gonna be a star watch , blazers management are so impatient



Telfair won't be a star, watch! Another product of the hype machine that will never be anything more then a average player with a few flashes here and there.


----------



## Blazer Freak (Jul 11, 2004)

southnc said:


> Hmmm...?
> 
> Considering Jack had a valid excuse (not fully healed injury), I do not think Telfair is that much better than Jack. And, Jack was just in his rookie year. Telfair in his 2nd, and Blake in just his 3rd. Jack played the best defense, IMO.
> 
> ...


Jack was 22 and Blake was 26 while Telfair was 20. 

Blake is the weakest link, he has the least left in the tank, and should be the first to go.


----------



## Blazer Freak (Jul 11, 2004)

Todd said:


> Telfair won't be a star, watch! Another product of the hype machine that will never be anything more then a average player with a few flashes here and there.


And you have what against Telfair? Jumping from HS to the pros? I'm guessing goodie 4 year student Blake will be the next Nash, huh?


----------



## Sambonius (May 21, 2003)

southnc said:


> Hmmm...?
> 
> Considering Jack had a valid excuse (not fully healed injury), I do not think Telfair is that much better than Jack. And, Jack was just in his rookie year. Telfair in his 2nd, and Blake in just his 3rd. Jack played the best defense, IMO.


Telfair has ZERO college experience and out played Jack last year. Was the ankle completely? Maybe. Have you seen Jack play in the NBA 100% healthy? No, you haven't. You can't assume Jack would do this and do that so much better if he was healthy since you have no basis to go off. Next year will be a complete question mark for Jack. You don't know what to expect. 



> And, Blake handles the ball better than both of them and most of the other PGs in the NBA: #3 in Assist / TO ratio (closest for Portland was Telfair at #37). Blake was also the #16 best 3pt shooter (closest for Portland was Dixon at #46).


Blake is of no relevance and the reason why his assist to turnover ratio was so good was because he never created. He hovered around the perimeter and never penetrated and never created. Easy to not turn over the ball when you're passing the ball to the wing or your boy Juan.


----------



## Todd (Oct 8, 2003)

Blazer Freak said:


> And you have what against Telfair? Jumping from HS to the pros? I'm guessing goodie 4 year student Blake will be the next Nash, huh?


Nope, he hasn't done anything to make me think he is the second coming of anything. Please tell me why we should keep him? What has he done that is so great that we can never trade him? Everyone one always says Outlaw was going to break out, did I miss something!


----------



## ProZach (Oct 13, 2005)

Todd said:


> Nope, he hasn't done anything to make me think he is the second coming of anything. Please tell me why we should keep him? What has he done that is so great that we can never trade him? Everyone one always says Outlaw was going to break out, did I miss something!



What has anyone on this team ever done? That's not the point. The point is what can they do in the future. Comparing Outlaw to Telfair is pretty thin. Expectations for Outlaw weren't nearly as high for the majority of fans. And what had J. O'neal done when we traded him??? The argument can go either way, because every player is different. I've seen enough from Telfair that I believe he could be great. If my memory serves me correctly, he just turned legal drinking age this month. Maybe holding on to him for another year isn't asking a whole lot... The impatience of some of you astounds me.


----------



## Blazer Freak (Jul 11, 2004)

Todd said:


> Nope, he hasn't done anything to make me think he is the second coming of anything. Please tell me why we should keep him? What has he done that is so great that we can never trade him? Everyone one always says Outlaw was going to break out, did I miss something!


Telfair's shown more than Jack or Blake since becoming a Blazer. 

I have a question, are you even a Blazer fan? I see you in every thread insulting them. I'm just wondering if you are a Blazer fan, or just in here to bait some of us. 

You sound like one of those stupid people who write to the Oregonian and make a fool of themselves with how they don't know jack ****.


----------



## chromekilla (Aug 21, 2005)

What about keeping all 3 blake is a poor mans steve nash.


----------



## Blazer Freak (Jul 11, 2004)

chromekilla said:


> What about keeping all 3 blake is a poor mans steve nash.


:laugh: You have to be kidding me. The only thing that they have in common is being white. Blake doesnt make his teammates better, and he can't be a scoring force.

Blake isn't close to even being a poor mans Steve Nash.


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

Blazer Freak said:


> I have a question, are you even a Blazer fan? I see you in every thread insulting them. I'm just wondering if you are a Blazer fan, or just in here to bait some of us.


Ah, yes. The second element in the double sanctuary of people that don't know how to reason.

#1: What did Telfair ever do to you? 

and

#2: Are you even a Blazers fan?

Believe it or not, it's entirely possible for a Blazers fan to hold no personal grudge towards Telfair and still question whether he's that good of a prospect.

It's insulting when people have to wonder if something's wrong with another poster personally just because they disagree with them.

We've been accusing people of trolling on this board FAR too often since Whitsitt was replaced, in my opinion. The blind optimism that some posters have showed towards the team and some players is admirable at some level, but the flak that those of us who are are NOT blinded by optimism have had to endure (even as our predictions and comments have proven to be much more accurate than the homers') is not.

As to whether we should trade Telfair: I don't think that we should trade ANY Blazer just to be rid of him, but we need to get better prospects and better players. I am not willing to give up on Telfair just yet, but acquiring the #7 pick for him would seem to be fair value and I wouldn't be opposed to such a deal.

Ed O.


----------



## PorterIn2004 (Jan 1, 2003)

Todd said:


> Deal him! We don't need another another Outlaw clogging up the bench.


Er... what? Telfair's been playing big minutes almost since he joined the team, where as Outlaw can't seem to stay in the game. Besides, there needs to be _some_body on the bench. With even just ten man rotation, it makes sense to have two pure PGs (Telfair and Blake) and a 1/2 guard (Jack). Besides that, next year the team's in the same position with Blake that they are now with Joel... if next year Blake plays even as well as he did this last year, he's likely to be signing elsewhere. And, while I'm not close to thinking Telfair's the second coming, I think there are compelling arguments that he might be the best PG on the roster.


----------



## Reep (Jun 4, 2003)

Ed O said:


> Believe it or not, it's entirely possible for a Blazers fan to hold no personal grudge towards Telfair and still question whether he's that good of a prospect.
> ...
> As to whether we should trade Telfair: I don't think that we should trade ANY Blazer just to be rid of him, but we need to get better prospects and better players. I am not willing to give up on Telfair just yet, but acquiring the #7 pick for him would seem to be fair value and I wouldn't be opposed to such a deal.
> 
> Ed O.


Nicely stated Ed.


----------



## PorterIn2004 (Jan 1, 2003)

Ed O said:


> As to whether we should trade Telfair: I don't think that we should trade ANY Blazer just to be rid of him, but we need to get better prospects and better players. I am not willing to give up on Telfair just yet, but acquiring the #7 pick for him would seem to be fair value and I wouldn't be opposed to such a deal.
> 
> Ed O.


Absolutely. I think Telfair might well be the best PG on the team and perhaps the third or fourth best player on the team and, _if_ any of the "Big Six" are still there at seven, I'd part with Telfair or nearly any other player on the roster.


----------



## HispanicCausinPanic (Jul 2, 2005)

We can't give up on Bassy. He's got court vision, toughness, and a leadership quality that you just can't teach. Remember how young he is. He would have just finished up his sophmore season. We've got to give him more time. Some of you guys are masters of stats. I would love to see how bassy's stats compare to a 23 and 24 year old Terry Porter.


----------



## MAS RipCity (Feb 22, 2003)

nicely said hcp.....kid is only 20 years old. We need to give him a few more years before we can pass judgement on him. Do what we did with miles. We gave him his shot and we now know he is worthless. Bassy has heart, leadership, charisma, court vision, and SPEED...his j is in the process so give him time. We are the worst team in the L...we got all the time in the world..WE CANT GET ANY WORSE.....so here's an idea...Actually give our young players quantity and quality playing time so they can all mesh and develop as a team.


----------



## Fork (Jan 2, 2003)

HispanicCausinPanic said:


> We can't give up on Bassy. He's got court vision, toughness, and a leadership quality that you just can't teach. Remember how young he is. He would have just finished up his sophmore season. We've got to give him more time. Some of you guys are masters of stats. I would love to see how bassy's stats compare to a 23 and 24 year old Terry Porter.


Well, by the age of 24, TP averaged 15 pts, 10 assists, along with with 2 steals and 4.5 rebounds in about 36 minutes per game. Of course, Telfair isn't quite that old, but...TP was pretty damn good.


----------



## yakbladder (Sep 13, 2003)

Jack is two years older than Telfair. Big whoop. Telfair has had one more year of pro experience. He'd better damn well be better.

I like Jack better, personally, but I can't see trading Telfair for a pick right now. Not unless it's part of a large package to land a superstar.


----------



## MAS RipCity (Feb 22, 2003)

Fork said:


> Well, by the age of 24, TP averaged 15 pts, 10 assists, along with with 2 steals and 4.5 rebounds in about 36 minutes per game. Of course, Telfair isn't quite that old, but...TP was pretty damn good.


thats 4 years away from now(bass is 20...to 24)....thats like a whole tenure at a college. A lot of maturation can come about in thsoe 4 years, and if bassy isn't putitng up numbers like that by at least 23, then he most likely never will(unless he is never getting quality pt)


----------



## BBert (Dec 30, 2004)

Of our three current point guards, my no. 1 is Telfair. I'd still like to keep Telfair and Jack for next year if possible. Of the two, I'd rather trade Jack. 

If we get Aldridge at no. 4, and Gay is still on the board at no. 7, and Boston wants to trade that pick for Telfair, I guess I could live with a Telfair for Gay trade, if that's what the Blazers decide to do. However, there are a couple other of the 'top 6' that I would not trade Telfair for.


----------



## ebott (Jan 7, 2003)

Forget about whether it's Telfair or Jack. The point is that we'd be trading a young talented point guard for the 7th pick in a 6 player draft. I'm not optimistic about getting someone good at #7. My one hope was that Atlanta would take Sheldon Williams at #5. But now with the Atlanta/Houston rumor I'm very pessimistic. Because of that I wouldn't do the deal straight up. 

But if it were something like Telfair and Miles for LaFrentz and #7 I'd strongly consider it. As crappy as LaFrentz's contract is he is a useful big man.


----------



## Verro (Jul 4, 2005)

Telfair improved by lightyears from the begining of the season to the end, next year he'll breakout. 

With prep draftees you just need a little more patience.

It'd be a shame if Minnesota and Seattle had given up on their highschool draftees after 2 seasons...

Tracy McGrady

Year Ag Tm Lg G MP FG FGA 3P 3PA FT FTA ORB DRB TRB AST STL BLK TO PF PTS
1998 18 TOR NBA 64 18.4 2.8 6.2 0.2 0.6 1.2 1.7 1.6 2.6 4.2 1.5 0.8 1.0 1.0 1.3 7.0
1999 19 TOR NBA 49 22.6 3.4 7.9 0.2 0.7 2.3 3.2 2.4 3.2 5.7 2.3 1.1 1.3 1.6 1.9 9.3
2000 20 TOR NBA 79 31.2 5.8 12.9 0.2 0.8 3.5 5.0 2.4 4.0 6.3 3.3 1.1 1.9 2.0 2.5 15.4


Rashard Lewis:

Year Ag Tm Lg G MP FG FGA 3P 3PA FT FTA ORB DRB TRB AST STL BLK TO PF PTS
1999 19 SEA NBA 20 7.3 1.0 2.6 0.1 0.3 0.4 0.7 0.7 0.6 1.3 0.2 0.4 0.1 1.0 1.0 2.4
2000 20 SEA NBA 82 19.2 3.4 6.9 0.5 1.5 1.0 1.5 1.5 2.5 4.1 0.9 0.8 0.4 1.0 2.0 8.2
2001 21 SEA NBA 78 34.9 5.5 11.4 1.6 3.7 2.3 2.7 1.8 5.1 6.9 1.6 1.2 0.6 1.7 2.4 14.8


Sebastian Telfair:

Year Ag Tm Lg G MP FG FGA 3P 3PA FT FTA ORB DRB TRB AST STL BLK TO PF PTS
2005 19 POR NBA 68 19.6 2.5 6.3 0.3 1.0 1.5 2.0 0.1 1.4 1.5 3.3 0.5 0.1 1.8 1.8 6.8
2006 20 POR NBA 68 24.2 3.4 8.5 0.8 2.4 1.9 2.6 0.3 1.5 1.8 3.6 1.0 0.1 1.7 2.5 9.5


----------



## BBert (Dec 30, 2004)

I'm with you, Verro. From reading the boards, I get the feeling I value Telfair more than most Blazers fans. The kid came right out of high school. With Nate, he had to learn an entirely new way to play from what he'd done his whole life. He's done great, IMO. His attitude and leadership have been great, IMO. If given the starting job, on a team where everyone is giving effort every night, and sharing the ball, the kid will break out this year. Seriously.


----------



## stupendous (Feb 17, 2003)

MAS RipCity said:


> I think i'll cry if we deal Bassy...no joke. Give them Jack for E#7 or whatever, we gotta keep Bassy.


I FULLY AGREE!


----------



## Tince (Jul 11, 2004)

Blazer Bert said:


> I'm with you, Verro. From reading the boards, I get the feeling I value Telfair more than most Blazers fans. The kid came right out of high school. With Nate, he had to learn an entirely new way to play from what he'd done his whole life. He's done great, IMO. His attitude and leadership have been great, IMO. If given the starting job, on a team where everyone is giving effort every night, and sharing the ball, the kid will break out this year. Seriously.


 I think most people here think Telfair has a chance to break out within the near future, I know I certainly do. However, a lot of us think players like Brandon Roy, Rudy Gay, Adam Morrison, ect. will break out within the next couple years as well. 

To me, Jack is a very very solid PG, and like Telfair, we haven't seen a lot of what this kid might be able to do. It's possible a trade like this would blow up in our face, but I think it's just as likely it will be considered a steal five years down the road. 

Either way, I'd be surprised if this trade happens, so I won't worry about it too much.


----------



## Buckethead (Jun 13, 2006)

The Celtics are looking for a veteran leader to pair up with PP for thieir pick. No way Telfair's stock is worth a top 10 pick in this years draft (although we should jump at any offer like that). 

Telfair is barely 6 feet tall, averages less than 4 assist per game and shoots under 40%. He's the poster child for high school phenoms that just can't make the adjustment to the size and speed of the pro game.


----------



## Kmurph (May 7, 2003)

> Considering Jack had a valid excuse (not fully healed injury), I do not think Telfair is that much better than Jack. And, Jack was just in his rookie year. Telfair in his 2nd, and Blake in just his 3rd


b.s. and Telfair is 3 years younger then Jack and had as good or better statistical year...and oh BTW played hurt as well...You have to do better than those lame excuses...



> Telfair won't be a star, watch! Another product of the hype machine that will never be anything more then a average player with a few flashes here and there.


That sounds more like a description of Jarret Jack...Jack doesn't have 1/2 the skills Telfair has....



> Well, by the age of 24, TP averaged 15 pts, 10 assists, along with with 2 steals and 4.5 rebounds in about 36 minutes per game. Of course, Telfair isn't quite that old, but...TP was pretty damn good.



Well then Jack better be averaging that next year when he is 24 then huh? I mean...many here CLAIM he is the next Terry Porter and all....

How much do you want to bet he doesn't even come CLOSE to that?



> As to whether we should trade Telfair: I don't think that we should trade ANY Blazer just to be rid of him, but we need to get better prospects and better players. I am not willing to give up on Telfair just yet, but acquiring the #7 pick for him would seem to be fair value and I wouldn't be opposed to such a deal.


Is it fair value though? You want to know what is funny? That BOS would give up the #7 for Telfair...I think maybe they might know a good player when they see one...Maybe there just aren't "better" prospects at #7 than Telfair, ever thought of that?



> Telfair is barely 6 feet tall, averages less than 4 assist per game and shoots under 40%. He's the poster child for high school phenoms that just can't make the adjustment to the size and speed of the pro game.


That is garbage....Yeah all prep to pro prospects make the All-Star game in their 2nd year...and Telfair can't adjust to the speed of the game? Is that a joke? No one can stop him on offense when he drives...and with the no touch rule being enforced more...he will be getting to the line, scoring and setting up teamates with even greater frequency...You don't know what you are talking about....


----------



## tobybennett (Jun 12, 2003)

I think Telfair has that "drive" to be the best. I think this kid will continue to improve and with such a bad team, there is no need to deal him now. Just let him play and develop and improve.


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

Kmurph said:


> Is it fair value though? You want to know what is funny? That BOS would give up the #7 for Telfair...I think maybe they might know a good player when they see one...Maybe there just aren't "better" prospects at #7 than Telfair, ever thought of that?


Duh... gee... I never thought about that, Kmurph! I have an unfortunate habit of relying on others to think for me, and sometimes it gets me into trouble.  

As I stated in a previous post, the #7 pick in this year's draft WOULD be fair value in my opinion. We would be in a position to draft one of the big 6 or a player like Foye/Brewer/SWilliams/O'Bryant/Simmons... each of whom are at least the prospect that Telfair is, IMO, and in some cases (actually, the entire big 6) I think superior prospects.

If your definition for "fair value" is whether another team will NOT give up something for our player, then no trade will ever be consummated for fair value.

The Celtics might value Telfair differently than the Blazers for a variety of reasons... Boston might be better at evaluating talent, or they might be worse; Portland might look at our roster and think that Gay or Aldridge or Thomas or Bargnani or Morrison or Roy would be a better fit than Telfair, so they'd be willing to take back a slightly inferior prospect in the hopes of balancing the roster; or the value might be EXACTLY right, and neither of the teams would be midjudging anything.

Ed O.


----------



## Kmurph (May 7, 2003)

> Duh... gee... I never thought about that, Kmurph! I have an unfortunate habit of relying on others to think for me, and sometimes it gets me into trouble


Maybe you do....that is too bad



> We would be in a position to draft one of the big 6 or a player like Foye/Brewer/SWilliams/O'Bryant/Simmons... each of whom are at least the prospect that Telfair is, IMO, and in some cases (actually, the entire big 6) I think superior prospects.


I find those assumptions on your part highly debatable...but after all you are the expert...right?  ...See I can do that too...whooptefreakindo



> The Celtics might value Telfair differently than the Blazers for a variety of reasons... Boston might be better at evaluating talent, or they might be worse; Portland might look at our roster and think that Gay or Aldridge or Thomas or Bargnani or Morrison or Roy would be a better fit than Telfair, so they'd be willing to take back a slightly inferior prospect in the hopes of balancing the roster; or the value might be EXACTLY right, and neither of the teams would be midjudging anything.


Whatever...it is still stupid to trade a 20yr old PG after only 2 years removed from H.S.


----------



## ProZach (Oct 13, 2005)

Buckethead said:


> The Celtics are looking for a veteran leader to pair up with PP for thieir pick. No way Telfair's stock is worth a top 10 pick in this years draft (although we should jump at any offer like that).
> 
> Telfair is barely 6 feet tall, averages less than 4 assist per game and shoots under 40%. He's the poster child for high school phenoms that just can't make the adjustment to the size and speed of the pro game.


:banghead: 

I don't even know where to start, so here's my reaction from reading your post. Let's pretend I'm #20 and you are the one with the hat.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iAY0aLtScus&search=baseball manager 

..I may have overreacted.


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

Ahhhhh the monthly point guard debate...

I'm at odds about who I think we should keep...I like Jack's style as a tough bruising point guard who isn't flashy and gets the job done...But, on the other hand I like Telfair's leadership ability and I think that he has a ton of room for improvement...

Its kinda funny that Boston reportedly wants Telfair. They must have been impressed with his decision making skills when he was back there last year and brought a handgun into Logan Airport. :biggrin:


----------



## barfo (Jan 2, 2003)

zagsfan20 said:


> Ahhhhh the monthly point guard debate...
> 
> I'm at odds about who I think we should keep...


[monthly comment]Keep 'em all. Problem solved.[/monthly comment]

barfo


----------



## Blazed (May 24, 2006)

If Tyrus Thomas falls I make that trade without blinking an eye.

But it's too far fetched a dream to see the Blazers end up with Morrison/Thomas or Gay/Thomas. Right?


----------



## BlayZa (Dec 31, 2002)

if boston was offering the #7 id be very suprised that we'd pass on it.


----------



## LameR (Jan 4, 2004)

chromekilla said:


> What about keeping all 3 blake is a poor mans steve nash.


There are so many things wrong with that statement....

1. NO!
2. Steve Nash can shoot, is a leader, and helps others play better (doesn't make them better, but makes it easier).
3. NO!
4. If we keep "Nash II", Telfair and Jack get fewer minutes, limiting their production and development (development being the main thing we're waiting to shake out).
5. There are already debates about which PG to keep as the future of the franchise. Blake isn't one of the two options.
6. NOOOOOOO!


----------



## soonerterp (Nov 13, 2005)

LameR said:


> There are so many things wrong with that statement....
> 
> 1. NO!
> 2. Steve Nash can shoot, is a leader, and helps others play better (doesn't make them better, but makes it easier).
> ...


I shouldn't dignify your comments with any response, BUT:

The ONLY thing Blake and Nash have in common is that they can shoot (Blake is a decent 3pt shooter), and they are leaders. That's it.

It also behooves me to point out that any improvement seen from Telfair and Jack this season had a little bit to do with Blake pushing them -- one of the things he was supposed to do.

I'm not touching the rest of this with a ten foot pole.


----------



## Buckethead (Jun 13, 2006)

ProZach said:


> ..I may have overreacted.


Just relax my myopic Telfair dreamer friend. I was once under the spell of Telfair's potential as well. But once you get some perspective on his game and watch with a critical eye, you'll realize that the stats don't lie. 

Telfair just doesn't have a nice shot even when wide open. Watch the Synergy Sports scouting video on him from game to game and he's unable to keep defenses honest with his suspect jumper, or can't score with his speed to the hoop because of his size. He's too much of a liability on defense and hasn't shown enough of a year-to-year improvement in his game to warrant all this conjecture that he'll ever be anything but a career bench player.


----------



## hasoos (Jan 3, 2003)

chromekilla said:


> What about keeping all 3 blake is a poor mans steve nash.


More like a poor mans Steve Alford. :biggrin:


----------



## Blazer Freak (Jul 11, 2004)

Ed O said:


> Ah, yes. The second element in the double sanctuary of people that don't know how to reason.
> 
> #1: What did Telfair ever do to you?
> 
> ...


I'm just wondering what he has against Telfair, because if you read his posts he only comments about Telfair or how the Blazers are a horrible team, that's why I asked those questions.

Go and look at his last few posts, and all he does is trash the Blazers, doesn't say one good thing. I wouldn't mind it if he was positive everyonce and a while, but he just takes shots at them everyshot he gets.


----------



## Blazer Freak (Jul 11, 2004)

Buckethead said:


> Just relax my myopic Telfair dreamer friend. I was once under the spell of Telfair's potential as well. But once you get some perspective on his game and watch with a critical eye, you'll realize that the stats don't lie.
> 
> Telfair just doesn't have a nice shot even when wide open. Watch the Synergy Sports scouting video on him from game to game and he's unable to keep defenses honest with his suspect jumper, or can't score with his speed to the hoop because of his size. He's too much of a liability on defense and hasn't shown enough of a year-to-year improvement in his game to warrant all this conjecture that he'll ever be anything but a career bench player.


At the age of 21? Come on. I might be a Telfair homer, but putting the homerism aside, don't you think it's unrealistic to say a player will be nothing more than a bench player because he hasn't improved enough by the time he is 21?


----------



## ebott (Jan 7, 2003)

Kmurph said:


> *Whatever*...it is still stupid to trade a 20yr old PG after only 2 years removed from H.S.


Why you don't seem to understand that it depends on what you'd get in return is beyond me. What if some sort of draft day miracle happened and we were able to get Adam Morrison, Rudy Gay or Brandon Roy at #7. Most people consider them to be better prospects than Telfair. Is it still a stupid idea?

More dramatically, what if Telfair was traded in a larger package to get an all-star? Then would it still be stupid?

Eventually there is some point at which a trade offer is so good you have to admit that you would trade Telfair. Maybe for you it's nothing short of Dwane Wade or Dirk Nowitzki. But for a lot of us that point is any of the top 6 guys in this draft.


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

ebott said:


> Why you don't seem to understand that it depends on what you'd get in return is beyond me. What if some sort of draft day miracle happened and we were able to get Adam Morrison, Rudy Gay or Brandon Roy at #7. Most people consider them to be better prospects than Telfair. Is it still a stupid idea?
> 
> More dramatically, what if Telfair was traded in a larger package to get an all-star? Then would it still be stupid?
> 
> Eventually there is some point at which a trade offer is so good you have to admit that you would trade Telfair. Maybe for you it's nothing short of Dwane Wade or Dirk Nowitzki. But for a lot of us that point is any of the top 6 guys in this draft.



As much as I love Telfair, and think he'll be a very good player someday I believe if a draft day mirracle happend and Portland selected Aldridge at #4 and Morrison, Gay or Roy was there at #7 then Portland should trade to get them. The team would be better in the long run with those two instead of one of them and Telfair. Jack will be a very good pg in this league and adding a player like Morrison, Gay or Roy would be a coo along with Aldridge


----------



## Kmurph (May 7, 2003)

> Why you don't seem to understand that it depends on what you'd get in return is beyond me. What if some sort of draft day miracle happened and we were able to get Adam Morrison, Rudy Gay or Brandon Roy at #7. Most people consider them to be better prospects than Telfair. Is it still a stupid idea?


Yeah that big shiny new toy in the window sure looks better than the one you got at home doesn't it? This sort of crap happens every year....potential picks always seem to look so much better than what you already have on your roster....it happens to everybody....nevermind that Telfair is only 21yrs old and younger than most of the guys POR would be drafting....



> More dramatically, what if Telfair was traded in a larger package to get an all-star? Then would it still be stupid?


Did I say it would be? I think not....

It depends on the "All-Star" now doesn't it?


----------



## Trader Ed (Jun 17, 2002)

Blazer Freak said:


> I'm just wondering what he has against Telfair, because if you read his posts he only comments about Telfair or how the Blazers are a horrible team, that's why I asked those questions..


The Blazer ARE a horrible team. But you need to make improvements when you move players.. not just dump them. We are about at the bottom of the barrell. it does not get much worse than last year.

Hopefully they can make some package deals that will help. Like is said in the posts... if you can get Aldridge or Bargnani... then trade Telfair for the #7 pick... and say Morrison or Gay are available.. I think you do it. Jack and Blake will probably do just fine as PG's

Then you still have Miles, Randolph and Dixon for possible other deals.


----------



## Todd (Oct 8, 2003)

Blazer Freak said:


> I'm just wondering what he has against Telfair, because if you read his posts he only comments about Telfair or how the Blazers are a horrible team, that's why I asked those questions.
> 
> Go and look at his last few posts, and all he does is trash the Blazers, doesn't say one good thing. I wouldn't mind it if he was positive everyonce and a while, but he just takes shots at them everyshot he gets.


Ummm...we suck, and if we have to trade someone who "I" feel really isn't going to take this team any farther, go for it.

I would love more then anything to see the Blazers get out of this hole, but the current roster isn't going to cut it!


----------



## ChadWick (Jun 26, 2006)

If they do deal Telfair that sucks...Hes gonna be better than Stephon Marbury if nothing bad happens to him. Marbury even said himself. :curse:


----------



## chromekilla (Aug 21, 2005)

If this was in next years draft i could see it happening but not this draft.


----------



## e_blazer1 (Feb 3, 2004)

Blazers8 said:


> If they do deal Telfair that sucks...Hes gonna be better than Stephon Marbury if nothing bad happens to him. Marbury even said himself. :curse:


Boy, and look at the number of teams Marbury has made into contenders.


----------



## BlazerFanFoLife (Jul 17, 2003)

if telfair was in this draft he would be a top 3 pick hands down. Thus he is better than anyone we can get at #7. I would take Telfair over anyone except for the Italien or Aldridge. Everyone else is worse imho.


----------



## Reep (Jun 4, 2003)

BlazerFanFoLife said:


> if telfair was in this draft he would be a top 3 pick hands down. Thus he is better than anyone we can get at #7. I would take Telfair over anyone except for the Italien or Aldridge. Everyone else is worse imho.


You would really rather have Telfair than Morrison? Rather have Telfair than Rudy Gay? Interesting.


----------



## BlayZa (Dec 31, 2002)

Telfair picked in the top 3? whoa now....

I think you'd be hard pressed to find any basketball 'expert' who would agree with you on that , just a few rosecolor-glassed Blazer fans.

He might make it into the top 15....


----------



## gambitnut (Jan 4, 2003)

BlayZa said:


> Telfair picked in the top 3? whoa now....
> 
> I think you'd be hard pressed to find any basketball 'expert' who would agree with you on that , just a few rosecolor-glassed Blazer fans.
> 
> He might make it into the top 15....


He went 13th in a draft that was definitely stronger IMO.


----------



## cimalee (Apr 17, 2003)

again if portalnd does this i will hate them and i love my team very much , jack or blake are not better than sebastian


----------



## Buckethead (Jun 13, 2006)

BlazerFanFoLife said:


> if telfair was in this draft he would be a top 3 pick hands down. Thus he is better than anyone we can get at #7. I would take Telfair over anyone except for the Italien or Aldridge. Everyone else is worse imho.


Whoa there. Everyone on ESPN TV and print (who aren't rabid Blazer fans on these forums) were discussing how one-sided the trade was for Portland. 

Whether you like Telfair or not, we can't have him and Jack flourish on this team while splitting the minutes in half. One has to go, and the team has made it clear that Jack is the future. Management promised him he wouldn't be traded last week and his teammates voted him to the Blazer 1st team at the end of the season.


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

Buckethead said:


> Whoa there. Everyone on ESPN TV and print (who aren't rabid Blazer fans on these forums) were discussing how one-sided the trade was for Portland.


Almost every mainstream source called Jermaine O'Neal for Dale Davis a steal for Portland, as well. Mainstream media has plenty of systemic blind spots, and giving up swiftly on any highly-touted young player who doesn't perform immediately is one of them. The media thrives on quickly-moving story arcs, and counseling or exercising patience is not on their list of priorities.


----------



## barfo (Jan 2, 2003)

Buckethead said:


> Whether you like Telfair or not, we can't have him and Jack flourish on this team while splitting the minutes in half.


Don't see why not. 24 minutes per game is enough to flourish.



> One has to go, and the team has made it clear that Jack is the future.


I don't agree that they have made that clear, and I don't agree one has to go.



> Management promised him he wouldn't be traded last week


Means nothing - they'll trade him if and when they feel like it. 



> and his teammates voted him to the Blazer 1st team at the end of the season.


Means nothing - player's votes don't decide playing time.

barfo


----------



## soonerterp (Nov 13, 2005)

I'm going to jump off Barfo's remarks (because when I quote them they don't look right) to mention the following:

If Blake is the PG that apparently has no future with the Blazers ...

1. What was he doing observing the Big Workout a week or so ago (Morrison, Gay, etc.)? He has coaching ambitions one day sure, but was he the ONLY current Blazers player there? Interesting that they'd allow him to observe, frankly.

2. Maybe some critics would call it brownnosing or something, but staying around Portland all summer to train, etc., practically (per the Blazers blog) "living" at the practice facility ... does this sound like somebody who doesn't like his situation and maybe wants out? Or does this sound like somebody who's wasting his time because he's just gonna get traded out anyway?

3. Per Barrett's blog when I checked it yesterday, apparently Blake's going to join Webster at the Draft party that's going to be broadcast on KXL and kxl.com? Does this sound like someone who has no future with the Trail Blazers? Martell is untouchable. Blake not quite so.

I don't know and I no longer have much of an opinion about a possible deal between Portland and Boston ... except to say this could be the usual front office smokescreen and misinformation?

Blake is always to be commended for his work ethic and his attitude (and I certainly don't consider his behavior as being a brownnoser), those should be assets to the Blazers (or ANY team for that matter) ... it seems like mixed signals designed to throw the other teams, and all us observers and fans off.

Just a thought.


----------



## 2k (Dec 30, 2005)

Reep said:


> You would really rather have Telfair than Morrison? Rather have Telfair than Rudy Gay? Interesting.


Its likely that you can get one of thoise chaps and keep Telfair.

I am usally a good judge of NBA talent but all three of those guys are tough to dicern. With this draft its BPA and other then Andrea Bargnani I dont see an obvious pick.


----------



## Webster's Dictionary (Feb 26, 2004)

Todd said:


> Nope, he hasn't done anything to make me think he is the second coming of anything. Please tell me why we should keep him? What has he done that is so great that we can never trade him? Everyone one always says Outlaw was going to break out, did I miss something!


Now I certainly wouldn't say that we should never trade him for anything but Lebron James or Dwane Wade, but for a draft pick? I mean, if you think Telfair hasn't done anything to establish himself, fine. I dissagree and think he has shown some solid skills and improvement, but hey, great minds don't always think alike. What I can't understand is why everyone is so sure that this player that we draft isn't going to be a bust. I mean, looking at some of the top players and a their worst case scenario:

Bargnani - He could fail to adapt to the NBA, ala Darko
Aldridge - Seems to play such an outside and soft game, could be the next Kandi Man
Gay - Has the physical tools, but might not have the drive and desire. Could be a Tim Thomas or Darius Miles.
Morrison - Has the heart, and scoring ability, but defense has always been critized. If as bad as advertised, he could give up more points than he scores. His style of offense may not adapt well to the NBA, anyway.
Thomas - Wants to play as an undersized power forward. Can a small guy who plays big cut it with that small of body and have to try and change into a small forward. He may just get banged around and forever be a tweener.
Roy - An all around solid player in college. Nothing too special. He might never be more than a role player in the league.

These all seem like logical situations to me. Now certainly they won't all turn out like this, but history tells us that a couple of them probably will. I'm not willing to give up on a player that I truley believe that, from what I've seen so far, will be a good, starting quality PG in this league, for a draft pick that might be great, or might be terrible, or might be somewhere in the middle.


----------



## mgb (Jun 26, 2004)

If this goes down it's obvious because Nate is convinced that Telfair can't play the type of game he wants to play and would rather draft a play that he thinks can play his type of game. That's really not a slap on Telfair's talent as much as it is just saying he's not a good fit for this team.


----------



## Buckethead (Jun 13, 2006)

barfo said:


> Don't see why not. 24 minutes per game is enough to flourish.


Telfair himself isn't happy with the current situation, saying someone has to go in the 3-headed guard lineup. Ask Billups, Wade, Chris Paul, Tony Parker or Steve Nash is they would be happy playing 24 mins a game. They wouldn't be too enthused about spending 1/2 the game on the bench I'd guess.

It's time to commit to either Telfair or Jack and have Blake come off the bench. I'm partial to Jack because of his size, ability to finish at the rim and defense. But even if it's Telfair, we need a clearly definded floor general running things at the point for about 34 mins per game.


----------



## crandc (Sep 15, 2004)

As for Telfair, the issue is not just 24 minutes a game, it is that he is in his 2nd year out of hs and in his first year did not play much for half a season. He is behind the curve, but that does not mean he can't catch up and surpass everyone else.
As for Blake, I think his actions (and we are all pretending to be mind readers) are consistent with a player who is basically a reserve in the NBA and knows that his future will depend on him being seen as a team player, a leader, a good guy in the community, a person who accepts his role, etc. Whether that future is in Portland or elsewhere. If the Blazers decide not to keep Blake, I think that GM's in other cities will look at the way he played AND the way he behaved. They would most likely figure that his play is that of a role player but his behavior is exemplary. 
Or in blunter terms, a marginal talent can't afford the screw-ups a superstar can get away with.


----------



## MARIS61 (Apr 28, 2003)

cimalee said:


> the blazers are stupid if they deal telfair already


They're stupid anyway you look at it.

The combined IQ in their front office at present time barely reaches double-digits.


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

crandc said:


> Or in blunter terms, a marginal talent can't afford the screw-ups a superstar can get away with.


Totally true. I love to be able to agree with crandc!



Ed O.


----------

