# A++ Draft Grade



## Boob-No-More (Apr 24, 2006)

OK, I'm tired of the whining and negativity. I rate yesterday's draft an A++. It's easily the best draft day the Blazers have had in over 20 years, and could eventually prove to be the best draft day in team history.

I know a few people are upset that we traded their favorite player (Telfair) or neglected to draft their personal favorite (Morrison), but I've never been one put my like or dislike of a certain player above my love of the team. I'll break it down in more detail in separate posts, but in short, as a result of yesterday's actions, the Blazers are a much better as a *team* than they were before the draft. They got better on both offense and defense, and are better both short term and long term. I can't believe people are upset about this.

BNM


----------



## Boob-No-More (Apr 24, 2006)

*The Top Two Picks - Aldridge and Roy*

With these two picks, the Blazer got the best post player and the most NBA-ready guard in the draft. After getting screwed by the ping-pong balls, they still managed to get *TWO* of the best five players in the draft. I expect both Aldridge and Roy to make first team all-rookie and at least one of them (likely Roy) to be in the running for rookie of the year.

Both of these players have more developed games than anybody the Blazers have drafted in recent memory. Aldridge has some good well-developed post moves and Roy has no glaring weaknesses in his game (since when does being good at everything make someone mediocre?). Both players are way above average on both offesne and defense. In short, they are both multi-talented players that will make significant contributions to the team as rookies. While neither may never reach superstar status (I don't think anyone from this draft will), they will both be very solid, far above average starters for 10+ years. You're lucky to get one such player in a typical draft. In this so-called weak draft, the Blazers got two.

Both players are also versatile. Aldridge will be able to play both the 4 and 5 and Roy can play the 1, 2 and even give spot minuts at the 3. This allows them to fit in well with their teammates and allows the coach to match-up/create mismatches as he sees fit. They can play "small ball" with a three guard line-up of Jack, Roy and Webster with Zach at the 4 and Aldridge at the 5, or they can go big with Joel/Aldridge/Miles (or his replacement)/Webster/Roy.

They got two very, very good, versatile players who will instantly make the Blazers better at both ends of the court.

BNM


----------



## chromekilla (Aug 21, 2005)

a++ is impossible.Atleast going by current standards.Just like f--- is not a real equation.Same as 1000% because based on current math 100% is the highest percentage anyone can have.Not being a stikler but if we had aperfect draft then a+ should be the best.If we would of drafted gay we would have a+ by me but next year is loaded with sf pf c.


----------



## It's_GO_Time (Oct 13, 2005)

chromekilla said:


> a++ is impossible.Atleast going by current standards.Just like f--- is not a real equation.Same as 1000% because based on current math 100% is the highest percentage anyone can have.Not being a stikler but if we had aperfect draft then a+ should be the best.If we would of drafted gay we would have a+ by me but next year is loaded with sf pf c.


 You went from absolutely hating everything about the draft to giving an A+ (the highest percentage anyone can have) if they drafted Gay instead of Roy?????


----------



## chromekilla (Aug 21, 2005)

Exactly iwanted gay and la if we got them it was a+.Since we got roy its about b.


----------



## yakbladder (Sep 13, 2003)

chromekilla said:


> a++ is impossible.Atleast going by current standards.Just like f--- is not a real equation.Same as 1000% because based on current math 100% is the highest percentage anyone can have.Not being a stikler but if we had aperfect draft then a+ should be the best.If we would of drafted gay we would have a+ by me but next year is loaded with sf pf c.


Well if you want to be a stickler, stickler is spelled s-t-i-c-k-l-e-r. Also, there is a space between "a" and "perfect". In your first sentence, the letter "a" should be capitalized unless a++ is the technical specification or a proper noun that is typically spelled in that fashion. Finally, "would of" should actually be "would've".

But I think you get the point... :biggrin:


----------



## Boob-No-More (Apr 24, 2006)

*The Later Picks - Sergio Rodriguez and Joel Freeland + a BUNCH of Future 2nd Round Picks*

OK, getting two of the top five players in the draft was amazing, but what Pritchard did here was brilliant and shows he really understands the way the NBA works and what is best for the team long term. By buying Sergio Rodriguez from the Suns, it also shows Paul Allen, in spite of the team being up for sale (supposedly), is still willing to spend his money for the long term benefit of the franchise.

So, what's so brilliant about getting a couple unproven Euros and a bunch of second rounders. Simple - the two Euros are young and have tremendous upside, but need more time to develop. That makes them the perfect choices for late 1st round picks. They can continue to develop their games playing in Europe and cost the Blazers absolutely NOTHING (no money, no roster spots, nothing against the salary cap) while they do so. 

So, why not take a couple young US players and send them to the NBDL for two years? Simple, if you do so, those players get guaranteed contracts, count against the cap, and perhaps even more importantly count against your 15-man roster even if they spend the entire two years playing in the D-league. The Blazers are already tight on roster space. Drafting a couple US kids late in the first round would have meant garanteed contracts, which count against the cap and mean you're going to have to cut someone else to make room on the roster - and whoever you cut will continue to count against the cap for the remainder of their contract (just like Derek Anderson and Shawn Kemp do/did).

Pritchard's genius here is that he realized the TRUE NBA minor league is Europe, not the D-league. By using Europe as your farm system, you get to draft young players who will get plenty of playing time and a chance to develop into something of value - either for your team down the road or as future trade assets. If they don't develop, you've lost nothing. You don't end up shelling out millions for someone who will never make your team, you don't tie up roster spots for youngsters who are playing elsewhere and they don't count against your cap while they are developing their games. This is exactly the way major league baseball teams use their minor league farm teams. I personally believe this is the way the NBDL should be used, but under the current rules (garanteed multi-year contracts for all 1st round picks and NBDL players count against your big league club roster) it's impossible to do so. I think this hurts young US kids who enter the draft before they are ready, but that's the way it's currently set-up. 

I think both Rodriguez and Freeland could eventually develop into excellent NBA players. If they do, you got a couple late first round steals. If they don't, it cost you *NOTHING*. No risk, possible big reward. I like it.

Stock piling second rounders also makes sense as they don't get guarateed contracts. If someone you have your eye on is available in the second round of a future draft, you take a chance on them, have them play in the summer league and training camp. If they stick, great, if they don't no big deal. Also, if you see someone late in the first round of a future draft you like, you can often package a pair of second rounders to move up into the 20s. Again, you limit your exposure to garanteed contracts and only move up when there is someone you really want - or that you can stash in Europe for a couple years.

Pritchard's moves here are insignificant in the short term (but better than getting stuck with another guarateed contract that takes up roster space and counts against the cap), but bode well for the future. I like what he did here and am pleasantly surprised Paul Allen opened the wallet to allow him to do so.

BNM


----------



## J_Bird (Mar 18, 2005)

:clap: I agree with BNM completely.


----------



## It's_GO_Time (Oct 13, 2005)

chromekilla said:


> Exactly iwanted gay and la if we got them it was a+.Since we got roy its about b.



"I had to step away from the computer and go outside for a few minutes.I was utterly speechless after we selected aldridge i was like uhhhhhh wtf is going on i thought we wanted morrison.I went from utter confusion to shock to angry rip someones head off to shock then calm.Kinda weird that i had so much into it." 
-chromekilla

You have me confused. All day yesterday you were pissed about the Blazers moves and dogging them all over this board (which didn't bother me personally). But now you are saying that the only thing that bothers you is they didn't get Gay and if they did you would have given them an A+.

So did you like the Blazers draft day or not like the Blazers draft day . . . or are you still trying to figure it out and can't pick a side . . . not that there is anything wrong with that. :biggrin:


----------



## Boob-No-More (Apr 24, 2006)

*The BIG Picture*

What I liked best is that the Blazers went into this draft with a plan and did whatever it took to make it happen. With the ownership of the team in limbo and no permanent GM on board, I was worried they'd be overly passive and well, cheap. With six trades, getting two of the top five players in the draft, and two young potential-laden Euros, they certainly put those fears to rest. One idiot draft analyst (don't remeber which one) made the comment that becuase Portland made so many trades it's obvious they have no idea what they want. In fact, the opposite is true. They knew exactly what they wanted and made those trades to make sure it happened. Pritchard was a man on a mission. He wanted both Aldridge and Roy and got them both. Amazing. Way to go for the brass ring. I like this proactive strategy much better than just sitting back and hoping something good falls in your lap.

Now, about what they gave up - Telfair and Morrison. I know some fans of these players are upset, and I understand that. So, I'm not going to type up a long laundry list of these players shortcomings and tell you they will never be any good. I actually like both of these players and wish them the best. Howeever, I'm 100% confident that this team, with Alderidge and Roy, will win more games and be better at both ends of the court, both short term and long term than one with Telfair and Morrison. I think Aldridge and Roy are both more complete players and fit better with the rest of our roster. We desparately needed help up front and got the best post player in the draft. Brandon Roy is ready to step right in and contribute as a rookie. I suspect he will be in the running for rookie of the year. Morrison will likely also be a top ROY candidate. I expect Morrison will score more, but Roy will be a decent scorer (double digits as a rookie) will get more rebounds, more assists and play better defense - and let's face it this team was terrible on defense last year - especially on the perimeter. With Aldridge and Roy, defense went from a weakness to a strength. With Morrison and Telfair, defense would have gotten even worse.

In any case, I hope those giving the Blazers an F grade on this draft will eventually come around and see that the moves that were made were for the good of the team - even if it meant losing your favorite player. I'm just happy my favorite *team* got a whole lot better than it was before this draft.

BNM


----------



## chromekilla (Aug 21, 2005)

Yesterday i was mostly pissed off at the telfair trade and not getting morrison.Today i cooled off a bit and decided that i couldn't change who my team drafts and i should just live with it.Last night is really when i started to accept it.I looked who the knicks drafted and said thank god we dont have isiah as our gm.Aldridge and gay would of been better but roy and la is stil better then balkman.


----------



## FeloniusThunk (Jan 1, 2003)

chromekilla said:


> a++ is impossible.Atleast going by current standards.Just like f--- is not a real equation.Same as 1000% because based on current math 100% is the highest percentage anyone can have.Not being a stikler but if we had aperfect draft then a+ should be the best.If we would of drafted gay we would have a+ by me but next year is loaded with sf pf c.


Sure it's possible:

public string QuitePossible(){
int a=0;
while (a<1000) a++;
return a.ToString() + "%";
}

See? "a++" and 1000% are clearly QuitePossible. Easy.


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

I always try and evaluate what we did do, not what we didn't do.


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

FeloniusThunk said:


> Sure it's possible:
> 
> public string QuitePossible(){
> int a=0;
> ...


Yes!

Ed O.


----------



## West44 (Jun 29, 2005)

FeloniusThunk said:


> Sure it's possible:
> 
> public string QuitePossible(){
> int a=0;
> ...


public string QuitePossible(){
int a=1000;
//int a=0;
//while (a<1000) a++;
return a.ToString() + "%";
}

a++ may have been "QuitePossible" but was wholly unnecessary in this case. Since we're being "s t i c k l e r s". ;-)


----------



## Anonymous Gambler (May 29, 2006)

Boob-No-More said:


> *The BIG Picture*
> 
> What I liked best is that the Blazers went into this draft with a plan and did whatever it took to make it happen. With the ownership of the team in limbo and no permanent GM on board, I was worried they'd be overly passive and well, cheap. With six trades, getting two of the top five players in the draft, and two young potential-laden Euros, they certainly put those fears to rest. One idiot draft analyst (don't remeber which one) made the comment that becuase Portland made so many trades it's obvious they have no idea what they want. In fact, the opposite is true. They knew exactly what they wanted and made those trades to make sure it happened. Pritchard was a man on a mission. He wanted both Aldridge and Roy and got them both. Amazing. Way to go for the brass ring. I like this proactive strategy much better than just sitting back and hoping something good falls in your lap.
> 
> ...



Great posts- you are definitly no longer a Boob!! :biggrin:


----------



## PorterIn2004 (Jan 1, 2003)

Just as a foot note, part of HQ's thinking might have been to build on the relationship between Webster and Roy. They've been friends for a long while, apparently, and it's said that both work really hard. 

That said, Roy's a much more complete player and is likely to really push Webster to work on his whole game, particularly defense, and Roy'll be ready to lead by example. And, if they can get a new culture going, it seems like guys such as Jack, Blake, Dixon, Joel (if he's around), and Aldridge will buy in right away, hopefully drawing in guys the rest of the team.

I know that's a lot to put on Roy and I know that it _looks_ like they could've had both Roy and Morrison, but if they've already decided that they need to Zach, for example, or if they've decided they like the Suns' model of basically playing without a pure 5, I can see them deciding that they couldn't pass up Aldridge.


----------



## crandc (Sep 15, 2004)

chromekilla said:


> Same as 1000% because based on current math 100% is the highest percentage anyone can have.


Not true. For example if one person has $100 and the other $150, then the second person has 150% of the wealth of the first.


----------



## ABM (Dec 30, 2002)

yakbladder said:


> Finally, "would of" should actually be "would've".


Actually, it should have been "would have"..........of course, in which case the contraction would remain "would've".


----------



## Kmurph (May 7, 2003)

One problem I see developing is that Rodriguez wants to come play in the NBA this year....he doesn't want to play in europe another year....


----------



## Buck Williams (May 16, 2004)

Wow this is the post of the year for BNM 

Defanatly a Rep up


----------



## mgb (Jun 26, 2004)

Kmurph said:


> One problem I see developing is that Rodriguez wants to come play in the NBA this year....he doesn't want to play in europe another year....


Can he be in the developmental league without being on our team? I mean if he played in Europe he wouldn't officially be on the team but we'd still own his rights, correct?


----------



## mook (Dec 31, 2002)

> Pritchard's genius here is that he realized the TRUE NBA minor league is Europe, not the D-league. By using Europe as your farm system, you get to draft young players who will get plenty of playing time and a chance to develop into something of value - either for your team down the road or as future trade assets.


Outstanding point here. Portland has done a nice job of this in the past with Nedzad and Ha, and should get credit for doing so again. Hopefully Rodriguez can live with playing in Europe another year, despite recent reports to the contrary.


----------



## Utherhimo (Feb 20, 2005)

unless we trade blake with miles then we can bring in spanish chocolate love that nickname!

btw kevin said that freeland suppose to come in at 6'9 and ended up being 6'11.5" wow and he has some good moves. 

english should have tons of good players since its a soccer nation the NBA should spnoser a league there. 2 teams in london, one in manchester, burmingham, cardiff!


----------



## Storyteller (Dec 31, 2002)

The Blazers aren't stupid - why would they pick up a 4th PG if he weren't going to stay overseas for at least another year?


----------



## PorterIn2004 (Jan 1, 2003)

Storyteller said:


> The Blazers aren't stupid - why would they pick up a 4th PG if he weren't going to stay overseas for at least another year?


Maybe they're already planning on dealing Blake and/or Dickau? Or perhaps they were just going with the "best player available" model, figuring someone's gonna be moved over the next year or so regardless -- in the meanwhile maybe they actually let 'em fight it out to see who gets to be the 3rd guard? For example, while Dickau's probably more NBA ready than Rodriguez, perhaps Rodriguez is enough better a ball-handler and that's what Nate most wants from a 3rd PG?


----------



## Utherhimo (Feb 20, 2005)

xus they might be trading one of the pgs?!?!


----------



## mook (Dec 31, 2002)

Storyteller said:


> The Blazers aren't stupid - why would they pick up a 4th PG if he weren't going to stay overseas for at least another year?


could be they just saw a great value and decided they'd figure out how to make him fit later. 

with Aldridge and Roy, they clearly had a plan. but when you start getting to the end of the first round, you kind of just have to go with whatever value you can nab. 

I'd much rather draft a decent player and have no idea how to use him, than a vastly inferior player who has a clearly defined role (sucking).


----------



## Boob-No-More (Apr 24, 2006)

Boob-No-More said:


> *The BIG Picture*One idiot draft analyst (don't remeber which one) made the comment that becuase Portland made so many trades it's obvious they have no idea what they want. In fact, the opposite is true. They knew exactly what they wanted and made those trades to make sure it happened.


OK, here's the quote I ws looking for:

Nick Prevenas at nbadraft.net writes:

_"Portland made a mind-boggling six trades during the draft telecast, proving once and for all that they honestly have no idea what direction they are heading."
_

Way to do your homework idiot. Portland new *EXACTLY* what they wanted and got it. They had a plan and executed it to perfection.

Of course, it's always easier to just put down the Blazers than to actually try to understand what they did and why they did it. Evidently comprehending numbers greater than five boggle the simple minds of professional "journalists" like Nick Prevenas.

BNM


----------



## Boob-No-More (Apr 24, 2006)

Kmurph said:


> One problem I see developing is that Rodriguez wants to come play in the NBA this year....he doesn't want to play in europe another year....


Tough. He's not ready for the NBA, yet. No way, no how. Doesn't matter who drafted him or what he wants, he'll be playing in Europe for anoher year or two. He just turned 20 two weeks ago and needs to continue to develop his game before he's ready for the NBA.

After a year or two (if not sooner), Dickau will be gone, possibly Blake, too. By then, the Blazers will also have a better idea how Webster, Roy and Jack all fit together. Will Martell become a 3 with Roy starting at 2 and Jack at the point? Or will Roy start at 1, Webster at 2 and Jack backing up both guard spots? No one knows yet, but we will after they've played togther for a season or two. Depending on how it all pans out, they will know where Rodriguez fits in - or if he doesn't, they'lll know what to look for in a trade.

BNM


----------



## Boob-No-More (Apr 24, 2006)

mgb said:


> Can he be in the developmental league without being on our team?


Nope, if he's in the D-league he counts against our 15 man roster and our salary cap. That's why picking young Euros and keeping them in Europe for a year or two makes so much more sense.



mgb said:


> I mean if he played in Europe he wouldn't officially be on the team but we'd still own his rights, correct?


Yes. Again, this is why the Euroleagues make a better development league than the NBA's so-called D-league. They need to change that in the next CBA. Make the D-league a TRUE minor league farm system for developing young, underexperienced players. I thought that's what it was supposed to be. Under the current rules, developing players in Europe is a MUCH better option.

BNM


----------



## TROITEIRO3 (Jul 18, 2004)

Kmurph said:


> One problem I see developing is that Rodriguez wants to come play in the NBA this year....he doesn't want to play in europe another year....














> SERGIO JUGARÁ EN LOS BLAZERS DE MARTÍN, PETROVIC Y SABONIS
> 
> ....Con el 11.
> La tensión volaba del Madison Square Garden a Madrid, donde Sergio resoplaba viendo cómo los bases seguían sin entrar en escena. Y al borde de las cuatro, empezó el goteo. Douby, Rondo, Lowry, Brown, Farmar y... nuestro Sergio. Tocaba respirar, recibir los besos de la familia y las llamadas de los amigos: Gasol, Garbajosa, Bueno, Iturbe, Rudy...
> ...


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

He thinks he's going to have minutes in Portland?

Hrm... we'll see about that.

Ed O.


----------



## crandc (Sep 15, 2004)

But he has a ready made theme song. Spanish Chocolate, from the Nutcracker Suite.

A ready made promo, video of Rodriguez with the music playing in the background and Blazer Dancers in a flamenco.


----------



## mgb (Jun 26, 2004)

Boob-No-More said:


> Nope, if he's in the D-league he counts against our 15 man roster and our salary cap. That's why picking young Euros and keeping them in Europe for a year or two makes so much more sense.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Thanks for the info BNM! In my book you never were a Boob!


----------



## Masbee (Dec 31, 2002)

Ed O said:


> He thinks he's going to have minutes in Portland?
> 
> Hrm... we'll see about that.
> 
> Ed O.


According to Kerry Eggers, no minutes for Spanish Chocolate.



> Rodriguez, who has visa issues, will stay in Spain for at least another year. Freeland, a raw talent, will remain in Europe for a year or two of seasoning.


http://www.portlandtribune.com/archview.cgi?id=36053


----------



## Boob-No-More (Apr 24, 2006)

Since we're BUMPING the 2006 draft threads, I'd thought I'd give my 2006 Draft Grade thread a bump as well. It's fun to read these old threads, and it gives us something to do between now and the game on Christmas. That really was one of the greatest days in the history of the Portland Trailblazers - as was the 2007 Draft Lottery. 

Hard to believe I was still a noob (as opposed to a boob) around here back then. It hasn't really been that long ago, but I was one of the last holdouts from the old ESPN board to make the switch to this board.

BNM


----------



## Miksaid (Mar 21, 2005)

chromekilla said:


> a++ is impossible.Atleast going by current standards.Just like f--- is not a real equation.Same as 1000% because based on current math 100% is the highest percentage anyone can have.Not being a stikler but if we had aperfect draft then a+ should be the best.If we would of drafted gay we would have a+ by me but next year is loaded with sf pf c.


HAHAHHAHHAHAH. Best post ever. Who is this guy?


----------

