# Last year conquered, 3 wins needed to beat 2005....



## rx2web (Jul 27, 2004)

[x][ ][ ][ ][ ]

[ ][ ][ ][ ][ ]

[ ][ ][ ][ ][ ]

[ ][ ][ ][ ][ ]

[ ][ ]

1 down 21 to go.

Go Blazers!


----------



## Nightfly (Sep 24, 2002)

*Re: 22 games needed to better last year....*

I'm predicting a 82-0 season.

1 down, 81 to go!


----------



## hasoos (Jan 3, 2003)

*Re: 22 games needed to better last year....*

:clown:


Nightfly said:


> I'm predicting a 82-0 season.
> 
> 1 down, 81 to go!


Glass half full, half empty, it matters not when it is electric Kool Aid inside Nightfly! :clown:


----------



## rx2web (Jul 27, 2004)

*Re: 22 games needed to better last year....*

[x][x][ ][ ][ ]

[ ][ ][ ][ ][ ]

[ ][ ][ ][ ][ ]

[ ][ ][ ][ ][ ]

[ ][ ]

Great win against Min last night. Damn I love watching these no quit Blazers. If this hussle is any indication of how we are going to play every night, we are going to easily beat 22 games.

2 down 20 to go.


----------



## rx2web (Jul 27, 2004)

*Re: 22 games needed to better last year....*

[x][x][x][ ][ ]

[ ][ ][ ][ ][ ]

[ ][ ][ ][ ][ ]

[ ][ ][ ][ ][ ]

[ ][ ]

3-2....Keep it up Blazers!

At the rate of every other game being a win....we will hit 22 wins, Jan 26th @ Houston.

And we would be at .500...


----------



## rx2web (Jul 27, 2004)

*Re: 22 games needed to better last year....*

[x][x][x][x][ ]

[ ][ ][ ][ ][ ]

[ ][ ][ ][ ][ ]

[ ][ ][ ][ ][ ]

[ ][ ]


Are you Freakin kidding me? a 27 point come back? Zach with ANOTHER 30+ point game? who the hell are these blazers? Don't they know they are supposed to suck?


----------



## rx2web (Jul 27, 2004)

*Re: 22 games needed to better last year....*

[x][x][x][x][x]

[ ][ ][ ][ ][ ]

[ ][ ][ ][ ][ ]

[ ][ ][ ][ ][ ]

[ ][ ]

Five down... 1/4 of the way there already!!!


----------



## dwood615 (Jul 20, 2004)

*Re: 22 games needed to better last year....*

how many did we win in all of november last year??

i think it was 4


----------



## wastro (Dec 19, 2004)

*Re: 22 games needed to better last year....*



dwood615 said:


> how many did we win in all of november last year??
> 
> i think it was 4


The Blazers were 5-9 in November last season.


----------



## wastro (Dec 19, 2004)

*Re: 22 games needed to better last year....*

Allow me to revive this thread. :biggrin: 

[x][x][x][x][x]

[x][ ][ ][ ][ ]

[ ][ ][ ][ ][ ]

[ ][ ][ ][ ][ ]

[ ][ ]


----------



## rx2web (Jul 27, 2004)

*Re: 22 games needed to better last year....*

I was just coming to do this. Thanks for the update. Way to go blazers! 6 wins in the pocket.


----------



## Samuel (Jan 1, 2003)

*Re: 22 games needed to better last year....*

Current Record: 6-7

It was December 9th last year when Portland won their 6th game. They are 6 games ahead of where they were last year.

Interestingly, they are 1 game _behind_ of where they were in 2004-05 and 2 games behind where they were in 03-04.

*Pace:* 37 wins.


----------



## gambitnut (Jan 4, 2003)

*Re: 22 games needed to better last year....*

[x][x][x][x][x]

[x][x][ ][ ][ ]

[ ][ ][ ][ ][ ]

[ ][ ][ ][ ][ ]

[ ][ ]

7 down, 15 to go.


----------



## Samuel (Jan 1, 2003)

*Re: 22 games needed to better last year....*

Current Record: 7-12

Through 19 games last year, Portland was 6-13. 06-07 is 1 game ahead of 05-06.

05-06 didn't win their 8th game until Game 26.

The 04-05 Blazers were 10-9 at this point.

*Pace:* 30 wins.


----------



## rx2web (Jul 27, 2004)

*Re: 22 games needed to better last year....*

[x][x][x][x][x]

[x][x][x][ ][ ]

[ ][ ][ ][ ][ ]

[ ][ ][ ][ ][ ]

[ ][ ]

8 down. Lets keep them coming. Keep up the hard work!


----------



## Samuel (Jan 1, 2003)

*Re: 22 games needed to better last year....*

*Historical Standings Through 22 games: *
_(unique player to help jog your memory)_

2001 (Perdue): 14-8
2002 (Kerr): 11-11
2003 (Daniels): 11-11
2004 (Cook): 11-11
2005 (NVE): 11-11
*2007 (Magloire): 8-14*
2006 (Blake): 6-16

The 2006 Blazers didn't get their 8th win until Game 26. 

If Portland can go 7-10 in their next 17 games, they can catch up to the 2004-2005 Blazers who were 15-24 at that point.

*Pace:* 29 wins.


----------



## rx2web (Jul 27, 2004)

*Re: 22 games needed to better last year....*

[x][x][x][x][x]

[x][x][x][x][ ]

[ ][ ][ ][ ][ ]

[ ][ ][ ][ ][ ]

[ ][ ]

9 down, Memphis on Wednesday and Possibly Brandon Roy back on Friday. It's good to fel the excitement.


----------



## Samuel (Jan 1, 2003)

*Re: 22 games needed to better last year....*

Historical Standings:
(After Game 23)

2001 (Perdue): 15-8
2002 (Kerr): 12-11
2003 (Daniels): 12-11
2004 (Cook): 12-11
2005 (NVE): 12-11
*2007 (Magloire): 9-14*
2006 (Blake): 7-16

The 2006 Blazers didn't get their 9th win until Game 27.

If Portland can go 6-10 in their next 16 games, they can catch up to the 2004-2005 Blazers who were 15-24 at that point.

*Pace:* 32 wins.


----------



## MARIS61 (Apr 28, 2003)

*Re: 22 games needed to better last year....*

There are 3 levels of NBA basketball.

Champions, Playoff teams, and losers.

We have to get back into the playoffs to better last year, IMO.

If you're not in the playoffs, your few wins aren't even worth the time it takes to tally them.


----------



## Samuel (Jan 1, 2003)

*Re: 22 games needed to better last year....*



MARIS61 said:


> There are 3 levels of NBA basketball.
> 
> Champions, Playoff teams, and losers.
> 
> ...


Well, New Orleans won 20 more games than the year before last season (18-->38) and they didn't make the playoffs. Yet it was enough of an improvement that the GM started adding pieces to the puzzle.

If the Blazers can win 35+ with a healthy Roy as part of the nucleus, I think our GMs will start thinking about the playoffs next year and get some veteran help.


----------



## rx2web (Jul 27, 2004)

*Re: 22 games needed to better last year....*

[x][x][x][x][x]

[x][x][x][x][x]

[ ][ ][ ][ ][ ]

[ ][ ][ ][ ][ ]

[ ][ ]

Half way there. 4-2 on the longest road trip of the year. Can we play all out games on the road in the east? Half way to the win total of last year in the first month and a half of play. that's Grrrrrreat!


----------



## Samuel (Jan 1, 2003)

*Re: 22 games needed to better last year....*

Historical Standings:
(After Game 24)

2001 (Perdue): 16-8
2003 (Daniels): 13-11
2002 (Kerr): 12-12
2004 (Cook): 12-12
2005 (NVE): 12-12
*2007 (Magloire): 10-14*
2006 (Blake): 7-17

The 2006 Blazers didn't get their 10th win until Game 28 (12/28).

If Portland can go 5-10 in their next 15 games, they can catch up to the 2004-2005 Blazers who were 15-24 at that point.

*Pace:* 34 wins.


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

*Re: 22 games needed to better last year....*



Samuel said:


> Historical Standings:
> (After Game 24)
> 
> 2001 (Perdue): 16-8
> ...


I probably missed it, but whats the significance of the players you mentioned?


----------



## LameR (Jan 4, 2004)

*Re: 22 games needed to better last year....*

Cool thread. I love the comparisons. Thanks Sam.


----------



## Samuel (Jan 1, 2003)

*Re: 22 games needed to better last year....*



Hap said:


> I probably missed it, but whats the significance of the players you mentioned?


Players that only played for portland that year. Helps me remember which team was which.


----------



## wastro (Dec 19, 2004)

*Re: 22 games needed to better last year....*

I keep thinking "we're only about two weeks ahead of last year's pace" and get a little depressed before remembering that, barring some freak injuries or whatever, this team won't lose of its final 21 games this season.

I'd REALLY like to see the team run off at least 28 wins so they eclipse the Cheeks/Pritchard squad.


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

*Re: 22 games needed to better last year....*

strickland wasn't 2002, he was 2000-2001 (actually, just 2001)


----------



## Samuel (Jan 1, 2003)

*Re: 22 games needed to better last year....*



Hap said:


> strickland wasn't 2002, he was 2000-2001 (actually, just 2001)


duly noted.


----------



## Samuel (Jan 1, 2003)

*Re: 22 games needed to better last year....*

[x][x][x][x][x]

[x][x][x][x][x]

[x][ ][ ][ ][ ]

[ ][ ][ ][ ][ ]

[ ][ ]

11th win, and we're over halfway there (not even a 3rd of the way through the season).


----------



## Samuel (Jan 1, 2003)

*Re: 22 games needed to better last year....*

Historical Standings:
(After Game 25)

2001 (Perdue): 17-8
2003 (Daniels): 14-11
2002 (Kerr): 13-12
2004 (Cook): 12-13
2005 (NVE): 13-12
*2007 (Magloire): 11-14*
2006 (Blake): 7-18

The 2006 Blazers didn't get their 11th win until Game 35 (1/11/05).

If Portland can win their next two games, they can catch up to the 2004-2005 Blazers who were 13-14 at that point.

*Pace:* 36 wins.


----------



## gambitnut (Jan 4, 2003)

*Re: 22 games needed to better last year....*

[x][x][x][x][x]

[x][x][x][x][x]

[x][x][ ][ ][ ]

[ ][ ][ ][ ][ ]

[ ][ ]

Twelve!


----------



## Blazers2121 (Oct 5, 2006)

*Re: 22 games needed to better last year....*

12-14. Update this baby. 

Btw, who's NVE?


----------



## barfo (Jan 2, 2003)

*Re: 22 games needed to better last year....*



Blazers2121 said:


> 12-14. Update this baby.
> 
> Btw, who's NVE?


I think that would be Nick Van Exel. 

barfo


----------



## wastro (Dec 19, 2004)

*Re: 22 games needed to better last year....*

Today is December 20th.

Last season, Portland didn't win #12 until January 13th.

Even if they falter later on this season (it happens with young teams), this team has turned a corner in a big way.


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

*Re: 22 games needed to better last year....*



wastro said:


> Today is December 20th.
> 
> Last season, Portland didn't win #12 until January 13th.
> 
> Even if they falter later on this season (it happens with young teams), this team has turned a corner in a big way.



I'm not sure they will "falter". Brandon Roy is simply really good. He is easily the best rookie this season, and with him and Zach the Blazers should be fairly consistant.


----------



## Samuel (Jan 1, 2003)

*Re: 22 games needed to better last year....*

Historical Standings:
(After Game 26)

2001 (Perdue): 17-9
2003 (Daniels): 15-11
2002 (Kerr): 13-13
2004 (Cook): 13-13
2005 (NVE): 13-13
*2007 (Magloire): 12-14*
2006 (Blake): 8-18

The 2006 Blazers didn't get their 12th win until Game 36 (1/13/05).

If Portland can win their next game, they can catch up to the 2004-05 Blazers and the 2001-02 Blazers, who were both 13-14 at that point.

*Pace:* 37 wins.


----------



## wastro (Dec 19, 2004)

*Re: 22 games needed to better last year....*



mediocre man said:


> I'm not sure they will "falter". Brandon Roy is simply really good. He is easily the best rookie this season, and with him and Zach the Blazers should be fairly consistant.


They SHOULD be consistent, but let's face it ... young, inexperienced teams rarely play consistently throughout the season. I would love for nothing more than to see Portland get into the playoffs, but they're young, and in spite of having a couple of pieces, they just aren't there yet. They need to play together more, grow up and get more experience. 

With a couple of small moves (I'm not even suggesting another summer overhaul), this team is a playoff team. They're getting there, but they aren't there yet.


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

*Re: 22 games needed to better last year....*



wastro said:


> They SHOULD be consistent, but let's face it ... young, inexperienced teams rarely play consistently throughout the season. I would love for nothing more than to see Portland get into the playoffs, but they're young, and in spite of having a couple of pieces, they just aren't there yet. They need to play together more, grow up and get more experience.
> 
> With a couple of small moves (I'm not even suggesting another summer overhaul), this team is a playoff team. They're getting there, but they aren't there yet.



There's no way in hell this team makes the playoffs. I just don't think they will falter. They'll probably finish around 35ish wins....Barring injury of course


----------



## wastro (Dec 19, 2004)

*Re: 22 games needed to better last year....*



mediocre man said:


> There's no way in hell this team makes the playoffs. I just don't think they will falter. They'll probably finish around 35ish wins....Barring injury of course


Fair enough, we'll meet halfway on that one.

Either way, I'm just giddy about the five-game win streak. :yay:


----------



## MAS RipCity (Feb 22, 2003)

*Re: 22 games needed to better last year....*

why is magloire bolded on that list of teams along with kerr and cook?


----------



## Samuel (Jan 1, 2003)

*Re: 22 games needed to better last year....*



MAS RipCity said:


> why is magloire bolded on that list of teams along with kerr and cook?


Those are players that were unique to that year.


----------



## MAS RipCity (Feb 22, 2003)

*Re: 22 games needed to better last year....*

oh


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

*Re: 22 games needed to better last year....*



mediocre man said:


> There's no way in hell this team makes the playoffs. I just don't think they will falter. They'll probably finish around 35ish wins....Barring injury of course


For some reason, I don't remember you always being this pessimistic.


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

*Re: 22 games needed to better last year....*



zagsfan20 said:


> For some reason, I don't remember you always being this pessimistic.




I consider myself a realist with a slight 1/2 empty mindset. I don't think anyone who is rational and unbias about the situation should think the Blazers have a realistic chance at making the playoffs.


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

*Re: 22 games needed to better last year....*



mediocre man said:


> I consider myself a realist with a slight 1/2 empty mindset. I don't think anyone who is rational and unbias about the situation should think the Blazers have a realistic chance at making the playoffs.


I'm not talking about the playoffs thing, I don't think we'll make it. Its everything.


----------



## Samuel (Jan 1, 2003)

*Re: 22 games needed to better last year....*

[x][x][x][x][x]

[x][x][x][x][x]

[x][x][x][ ][ ]

[ ][ ][ ][ ][ ]

[ ][ ]

13 wins


----------



## Samuel (Jan 1, 2003)

*Re: 22 games needed to better last year....*

Historical Standings:
(After Game 29)

2001 (Perdue): 19-10
2003 (Daniels): 18-11
2004 (Cook): 15-14
2005 (NVE): 14-15
*2007 (Magloire): 13-16*
2002 (Kerr): 13-16
2006 (Blake): 10-19

The 2006 Blazers didn't get their 13th win until Game 37 (1/15/05).

*Pace:* 36 wins.


----------



## hroz (Mar 4, 2006)

*Re: 22 games needed to better last year....*

Come on guys head up the last spot(and maybe two depending how long Yao's out) is open for anyone to grab it.

GSW will tire out at the end of the season plus you guys have to make it so Randolph can challenge for MVP.

My prediction is 41 wins to sneak in.(though it will be very tight everyone except maybe Memphis are in the race.)


----------



## GOD (Jun 22, 2003)

*Re: 22 games needed to better last year....*

I miss this thread but I think we won't be seeing much more of it this year. The Blazers really are one of the worst teams in the NBA.


----------



## Samuel (Jan 1, 2003)

*Re: 22 games needed to better last year....*

[x][x][x][x][x]

[x][x][x][x][x]

[x][x][x][x][ ]

[ ][ ][ ][ ][ ]

[ ][ ]

14 wins


----------



## Samuel (Jan 1, 2003)

*Re: 22 games needed to better last year....*

Historical Standings:
(After Game 34)

2001 (Perdue): 24-10
2003 (Daniels): 21-13
2004 (Cook): 16-18
2005 (NVE): 15-19
2002 (Kerr): 15-19
*2007 (Magloire): 14-20*
2006 (Blake): 10-24

The 2006 Blazers didn't get their 13th win until Game 38 (1/18/05).

*Pace:* 33 wins.


----------



## ryanjend22 (Jan 23, 2004)

*Re: 22 games needed to better last year....*

chea chea chea chea!


----------



## Samuel (Jan 1, 2003)

*Re: 22 games needed to better last year....*

Portland is only 1 game ahead of where they were last year (13-24).

Interesting...


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

*Re: 22 games needed to better last year....*



Samuel said:


> Portland is only 1 game ahead of where they were last year (13-24).
> 
> Interesting...




Why? Nate's still the coach, and Zach is still the main focal point on offense. We are better but younger at most possitions. So really what did you all think?


----------



## Samuel (Jan 1, 2003)

*Re: 22 games needed to better last year....*



mediocre man said:


> Why?


11 games ago things looked a lot different. 

That's interesting. I wasn't expecting playoffs, and I wasn't even expecting that much of an improvement on last season, when all was said and done, but there was a moment there when the team was a few games out of .500.


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

*Re: 22 games needed to better last year....*

The reason:

We played a lot of average teams with out their best player and we squeaked wins out.


----------



## gambitnut (Jan 4, 2003)

*Re: 22 games needed to better last year....*

[x][x][x][x][x]

[x][x][x][x][x]

[x][x][x][x][x]

[ ][ ][ ][ ][ ]

[ ][ ]

15 wins


----------



## wastro (Dec 19, 2004)

*Re: 22 games needed to better last year....*



Samuel said:


> Portland is only 1 game ahead of where they were last year (13-24).
> 
> Interesting...


Portland also finished 7-37 last year.If they play in the second half like they did in the first half, they'll eclipse the win total. Right now, they're on pace to win about 32 games -- 11 games better than last season.


----------



## wastro (Dec 19, 2004)

*Re: 22 games needed to better last year....*

Didn't see this updated after the Cavs game.

[x][x][x][x][x]

[x][x][x][x][x]

[x][x][x][x][x]

[x][ ][ ][ ][ ]

[ ][ ]

16 wins

On pace for about 33 wins (32.8, to be exact).


----------



## rx2web (Jul 27, 2004)

*Re: 22 games needed to better last year....*

[x][x][x][x][x]

[x][x][x][x][x]

[x][x][x][x][x]

[x][x][ ][ ][ ]

[ ][ ]

Wow, 17 wins so far. 5 more to better our record from last year. 4 more to tie it. To think, if we were as bad as we were last year, we would only get 4 more wins from this point out the rest of the season. That's just depressing, and that's just not something I see happening to this years team.

Rock on Blazers! Way to Go Roy.


----------



## Utherhimo (Feb 20, 2005)

*Re: 22 games needed to better last year....*

yeah its shocking really


----------



## gambitnut (Jan 4, 2003)

*Re: 22 games needed to better last year....*

[x][x][x][x][x]

[x][x][x][x][x]

[x][x][x][x][x]

[x][x][x][ ][ ]

[ ][ ]

18 wins!


----------



## Samuel (Jan 1, 2003)

*Re: 22 games needed to better last year....*

Historical Standings:
(After Game 43)

2001 (Perdue): 30-13
2003 (Daniels): 28-15
2002 (Kerr): 23-20
2004 (Cook): 19-24
*2007 (Magloire): 18-25*
2005 (NVE): 17-26
2006 (Blake): 16-27

The 2006 Blazers didn't get their 18th win until Game 50 (2/13/06).
The 2005 Blazers didn't get their 18th win until Game 44 (2/02/05).

To catch up to the 2004 Blazers, the 2007 Blazers must win 3 straight games or 7 of their next 11 games.

*Current Pace:* 34 wins.


----------



## Utherhimo (Feb 20, 2005)

*Re: 22 games needed to better last year....*

well houston thinks we are a powder puff team...


----------



## southnc (Dec 15, 2005)

*Re: 22 games needed to better last year....*

Last year's team was decimated with injuries and trades that sent away strong contributors, such as Patterson. I mean, at one point, wasn't HA! starting at center??? Can't win that many games that way. :biggrin: 

Regardless, this year's team is much better overall. With the exception of the Blake / Skinner / HA for Magloire trade and resigning Joel, the rest of the off-season transactions where terrific and drastically improved the team.


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

*Re: 22 games needed to better last year....*

trading patterson was a positive, not a negative.


----------



## Blazers2121 (Oct 5, 2006)

*Re: 4 games needed to better last year....*

Houston without Yao. I like our chances...even with T-mac.


----------



## The Professional Fan (Nov 5, 2003)

*Re: 4 games needed to better last year....*

3 more. I like our chances.


----------



## Blazers2121 (Oct 5, 2006)

*Re: 4 games needed to better last year....*

[x][x][x][x][x]

[x][x][x][x][x]

[x][x][x][x][x]

[x][x][x][x][ ]

[ ][ ]

19 wins!


----------



## wastro (Dec 19, 2004)

*Re: 3 games needed to better last year....*

Holy cow it's January 27, and we're only 3 wins away from last year's SEASON TOTAL. That is just ridiculous to comprehend.


----------



## barfo (Jan 2, 2003)

*Re: 3 games needed to better last year....*



wastro said:


> Holy cow it's January 27, and we're only 3 wins away from last year's SEASON TOTAL. That is just ridiculous to comprehend.


Well, we did suck last year. But still, it is pleasing to be ahead of that now.

barfo


----------



## ehizzy3 (Jun 12, 2006)

*Re: 3 games needed to better last year....*

man im so torn, i love to win but durant, durant, durant, durant, durant

i hope we get around 30 wins


----------



## wastro (Dec 19, 2004)

*Re: 3 games needed to better last year....*



rose garden pimp said:


> man im so torn, i love to win but durant, durant, durant, durant, durant
> 
> i hope we get around 30 wins


I'm in the same boat as you. I think Durant would make us a playoff team, no question about it.

Before we all look at the possibility of a 35-win season, we still have games against Golden State, Phoenix, Chicago, Miami, Detroit, Dallas, San Antonio and Denver. So it's not like we're going into the easiest part of our schedule or anything. In fact, it gets much tougher from here on out. 

So ... don't give up on Durant yet, but go Blazers! Umm ... hmmm ... you know, I don't know how to react, either. :biggrin:


----------



## ehizzy3 (Jun 12, 2006)

*Re: 3 games needed to better last year....*



wastro said:


> I'm in the same boat as you. I think Durant would make us a playoff team, no question about it.
> 
> Before we all look at the possibility of a 35-win season, we still have games against Golden State, Phoenix, Chicago, Miami, Detroit, Dallas, San Antonio and Denver. So it's not like we're going into the easiest part of our schedule or anything. In fact, it gets much tougher from here on out.
> 
> So ... don't give up on Durant yet, but go Blazers! Umm ... hmmm ... you know, I don't know how to react, either. :biggrin:


its tough...we all wanna win but i want that chance with durant....i would feel bad for ime though


----------



## wastro (Dec 19, 2004)

*Re: 3 games needed to better last year....*



rose garden pimp said:


> its tough...we all wanna win but i want that chance with durant....i would feel bad for ime though


I think Ime would make a quality back-up on this team.


----------



## ehizzy3 (Jun 12, 2006)

*Re: 3 games needed to better last year....*



wastro said:


> I think Ime would make a quality back-up on this team.


then what about webster? dixon would have to be shipped out....and then you still got outlaw who everyone has forgotten


----------



## wastro (Dec 19, 2004)

*Re: 3 games needed to better last year....*



rose garden pimp said:


> then what about webster? dixon would have to be shipped out....and then you still got outlaw who everyone has forgotten


Good points.

At first, I thought "Well, Outlaw could slide over to backup power forward," but we have LaMarcus there. Maybe LaMarcus plays some center minutes?

Then I thought, "maybe Martell is a back-up SG right now." Makes sense until you realize Dixon would need minutes.

I don't know what to think now!


----------



## ehizzy3 (Jun 12, 2006)

*Re: 3 games needed to better last year....*

aldridge could play center minuetes

but then what about raef???kiddin

if we got rid of dixon somehow then all would be good, if we got durant


----------



## Samuel (Jan 1, 2003)

*Re: 3 games needed to better last year....*

Historical Standings:
(After Game 45)

2001 (Perdue): 32-13
2003 (Daniels): 29-16
2002 (Kerr): 24-21
2004 (Cook): 21-24
*2007 (Magloire): 19-26*
2005 (NVE): 19-26
2006 (Blake): 17-28

The 2006 Blazers didn't get their 19th win until Game 57 (3/01/06).

To catch up to the 2004 Blazers, the 2007 Blazers must win 5 of their next 7 games.

*Current Pace:* 34 wins.


----------



## Blazers2121 (Oct 5, 2006)

*Re: 3 games needed to better last year....*

[x][x][x][x][x]

[x][x][x][x][x]

[x][x][x][x][x]

[x][x][x][x][x]

[ ][ ]

2 more wins to surpass last year's win record (21)!


----------



## Samuel (Jan 1, 2003)

*Re: 3 games needed to better last year....*

Historical Standings:
(After Game 47)

2001 (Perdue): 33-14
2003 (Daniels): 31-16
2002 (Kerr): 25-22
2004 (Cook): 22-25
*2007 (Magloire): 20-27*
2005 (NVE): 20-27
2006 (Blake): 17-30

The 2006 Blazers didn't get their 20th win until Game 62 (3/12/06).

To catch up to the 2004 Blazers, the 2007 Blazers must win 4 of their next 5 games.

*Current Pace:* 34 wins.


----------



## barfo (Jan 2, 2003)

*Re: 3 games needed to better last year....*

[x][x][x][x][x]

[x][x][x][x][x]

[x][x][x][x][x]

[x][x][x][x][x]

[x][ ]

1 more win to surpass last year's win record (21)!

barfo


----------



## Samuel (Jan 1, 2003)

*Re: 1 game needed to better last year....*

Historical Standings:
(After Game 51)

2001 (Perdue): 36-15
2003 (Daniels): 33-18
2002 (Kerr): 27-24
2004 (Cook): 24-27
*2007 (Magloire): 21-30*
2005 (NVE): 21-30
2006 (Blake): 18-33

The 2006 Blazers didn't get their 21st win until Game 74 (4/05/06).

To catch up to the 2004 Blazers, the 2007 Blazers must win 8 of their next 10 games.

*Current Pace:* 33 wins.


----------



## rx2web (Jul 27, 2004)

*Re: 1 game needed to better last year....*

It's nice to see those [x] boxes fill up on this thread. I remember starting it and feeling at the time both confident we would do it but also felt it was daunting. Here we are at the 50 game mark 20-30, now 21-30 and we are just cruising right along. I love it. I'm sorry but there is NO way this team goes on a 31 game losing streak. While this means we probably wont have the top pick of the draft and a "guarenteed" star. I like where our franchise is going and I love watching these new blazers!

Get well soon Sergio.


----------



## Samuel (Jan 1, 2003)

*Re: 1 game needed to better last year....*



rx2web said:


> It's nice to see those [x] boxes fill up on this thread. I remember starting it and feeling at the time both confident we would do it but also felt it was daunting. Here we are at the 50 game mark 20-30, now 21-30 and we are just cruising right along. I love it. I'm sorry but there is NO way this team goes on a 31 game losing streak. While this means we probably wont have the top pick of the draft and a "guarenteed" star. I like where our franchise is going and I love watching these new blazers!
> 
> Get well soon Sergio.


Here's another funny item:
Boston, Memphis, Philly, Charlotte

Two of those teams won't get Durant or Oden. And after those guys, can you really say anyone in this draft is better than Roy/Aldridge/Sergio? This draft is certainly one of the deepest in years, but if Roy/Sergio/Aldridge were in this draft, knowing what we know, they'd certainly be in that second tier.

And we got 3 of them.

Pritchard did so much work in the last draft that all he needs to do now is draft well, add another vet, and re-sign Outlaw (and Udoka). The rest is up to Nate helping the team grow together.

It's nice to know that a hands off strategy might be the best strategy.


----------



## ryanjend22 (Jan 23, 2004)

*Re: 1 game needed to better last year....*



Samuel said:


> Here's another funny item:
> Boston, Memphis, Philly, Charlotte
> 
> Two of those teams won't get Durant or Oden. And after those guys, can you really say anyone in this draft is better than Roy/Aldridge/Sergio? This draft is certainly one of the deepest in years, but if Roy/Sergio/Aldridge were in this draft, knowing what we know, they'd certainly be in that second tier.
> ...


...yes sir.

that "i hope we lose tonight (but in a close one!) so we can get oden" crap was getting rediculous.


----------



## Freshtown (May 24, 2004)

*Re: 1 game needed to better last year....*



Samuel said:


> Here's another funny item:
> Boston, Memphis, Philly, Charlotte
> 
> Two of those teams won't get Durant or Oden. And after those guys, can you really say anyone in this draft is better than Roy/Aldridge/Sergio? This draft is certainly one of the deepest in years, but if Roy/Sergio/Aldridge were in this draft, knowing what we know, they'd certainly be in that second tier.
> ...




Um. I don't know about you, but I'd certainly take Joakim Noah, Al Horford, Hasheem Thabeet, and Brendan Wright over Lamarcus Aldridge. Roy is great, but lets be honest here. This draft is stacked with future all-stars.


----------



## Samuel (Jan 1, 2003)

*Re: 1 game needed to better last year....*



Freshtown said:


> Um. I don't know about you, but I'd certainly take Joakim Noah, Al Horford, Hasheem Thabeet, and Brendan Wright over Lamarcus Aldridge. Roy is great, but lets be honest here. This draft is stacked with future all-stars.


Out of that list, the only guy you can make a case for is Brendan Wright.

I think the very top tier of last year's draft (Roy, Aldridge) are about as good as the second tier of players in this year's draft. Read around about what the GM's have been saying, and you'll hear similarly.

When Noah was still in the running last year, it wasn't even certain that he'd go #1 over Aldridge. If Aldridge stayed in for his junior year, I suspect he'd be mentioned in the same breath as those you mentioned.


----------



## MAS RipCity (Feb 22, 2003)

*Re: 1 game needed to better last year....*

Roy is going to be a superstar in this league..we got the best player out of last years draft, and if you think he'd be 2nd tier in thsi draft, you're crazy. Roy has that "it" factor about his game. He's a rookie who is clutch. 
Also, to say you'd take Noah and Horford over LMA...crazy. The only one close to him is Brandan Wright, both have similar skill sets and body builds. Wright is the player I hope we end up with.
There is no one like Sergio in this draft either. Sorry, but out side of maybe 5 guys, I'm just not a big fan of the 07 variety.


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

*Re: 1 game needed to better last year....*



Freshtown said:


> Um. I don't know about you, but I'd certainly take Joakim Noah, Al Horford, Hasheem Thabeet, and Brendan Wright over Lamarcus Aldridge. Roy is great, but lets be honest here. This draft is stacked with future all-stars.


Hasheem Thabeet? Give me a break.


----------



## Freshtown (May 24, 2004)

*Re: 1 game needed to better last year....*



zagsfan20 said:


> Hasheem Thabeet? Give me a break.


Thabeet = Dikembe Mutombo. 7'3 centers with the kind of strength and explosiveness he has don't come along a lot. In a league with a lack of dominant post men, Thabeet is going to be a star.


----------



## Samuel (Jan 1, 2003)

*Re: 1 game needed to better last year....*



Freshtown said:


> Thabeet = Dikembe Mutombo. 7'3 centers with the kind of strength and explosiveness he has don't come along a lot. In a league with a lack of dominant post men, Thabeet is going to be a star.


Exactly. He, Saer Sene and Dasagna Diop will dominate the league for years.

Thabeet's Game Log

Draftexpress: Strike while the iron is cold?



draftexpress said:


> Compared to Tyrus Thomas, and billed as "an athletic Mutombo" by a preseason article written by Andy Katz, Thabeet has been blocking shots at a nice rate, but everything else about him so far has been a massive disappointment. He's cracked double-digits in the scoring column just five times this season thus far--against Fairfield, Albany, Pepperdine, Coppin State and St. John's--and has used his massive 7-3 frame to pull down 10 rebounds just four times, again against the weakest competition UConn has faced. Defensively, beyond his shot-blocking, Thabeet has been lit up by every (even marginal) NBA prospect he's gone up against...


Sure, he could project like you think he will. But as a prospect, Aldridge wasn't looked at with the nearly the same hesitancy. The guys who perform well in the tournament will climb up... maybe above Thabeet.


----------



## rx2web (Jul 27, 2004)

*Re: 1 game needed to better last year....*

[x][x][x][x][x]

[x][x][x][x][x]

[x][x][x][x][x]

[x][x][x][x][x]

[x][x]

22 wins. We have officially bettered last years win total. Against one of the highest scoring teams in the NBA, holding Gilbert Arenas to 9 points. So much for his bragart attitude that he was going to score 50. I hope that a reporter goes after him and his comments after this one.

We can officially end this thread. Way to go blazers. 2-0 road trip.


----------



## Samuel (Jan 1, 2003)

*Re: 1 game needed to better last year....*

[x][x][x][x][x]

[x][x][x][x][x]

[x][x][x][x][x]

[x][x][x][x][x]

[x][x][ ][ ][ ]

[ ][ ][ ]

22 wins. 6 games needed to better 2005.


----------



## Samuel (Jan 1, 2003)

*Re: Last year conquered, 5 wins needed to beat 2005....*

Historical Standings:
(After Game 52)

2001 (Perdue): 37-15
2003 (Daniels): 34-18
2002 (Kerr): 28-24
2004 (Cook): 24-28
*2007 (Magloire): 22-30*
2005 (NVE): 21-31
2006 (Blake): 18-34

To catch up to the 2004 Blazers, the 2007 Blazers must win 7 of their next 9 games.

*Current Pace:* 34 wins.


----------



## yuyuza1 (May 24, 2006)

*Re: Last year conquered, 5 wins needed to beat 2005....*

Way to keep this going. We have to get 28 to better the record from '04-'05, though, so 6 not 5.


----------



## gambitnut (Jan 4, 2003)

*Re: Last year conquered, 5 wins needed to beat 2005....*

[x][x][x][x][x]

[x][x][x][x][x]

[x][x][x][x][x]

[x][x][x][x][x]

[x][x][x][ ][ ]

[ ][ ][ ]



yuyuza1 said:


> Way to keep this going. We have to get 28 to better the record from '04-'05, though, so 6 not 5.


Now it really is five more wins.


----------



## Samuel (Jan 1, 2003)

*Re: Last year conquered, 5 wins needed to beat 2005....*

Historical Standings:
(After Game 55)

2001 (Perdue): 38-17
2003 (Daniels): 35-20
2002 (Kerr): 31-24
2004 (Cook): 27-28
*2007 (Magloire): 23-32*
2005 (NVE): 22-33
2006 (Blake): 18-37

To catch up to the 2004 Blazers, the 2007 Blazers must win 12 of their next 15 games.

*Current Pace:* 34 wins.


----------



## crandc (Sep 15, 2004)

*Re: Last year conquered, 5 wins needed to beat 2005....*

Talk about your double standard! Today's San Francisco _Chronicle_had a banner headline in the sports section that the Knicks had topped last year's win total. When Portland did the same it was not even mentioned. 

I had not realized the team was so close to 2005, thanks, Gambitnut! Not bad considering the team has a terrible coach, a lousy GM, the worst owner in sports, a crappy power forward, a sucky center, a dreadful point guard, a 2nd year player who regressed, drafted the wrong person, plays the wrong guys, needs to tank the season, but should win 50 if they had a good coach (all the above have been said here ad nauseum).


----------



## gambitnut (Jan 4, 2003)

*Re: Last year conquered, 5 wins needed to beat 2005....*

[x][x][x][x][x]

[x][x][x][x][x]

[x][x][x][x][x]

[x][x][x][x][x]

[x][x][x][x][ ]

[ ][ ][ ]

Four more wins. Even better, Memphis, Seattle, Charlotte and Sacramento are our next four games.


----------



## Samuel (Jan 1, 2003)

*Re: Last year conquered, 4 wins needed to beat 2005....*

Historical Standings:
(After Game 56)

2001 (Perdue): 38-18
2003 (Daniels): 36-20
2002 (Kerr): 32-24
2004 (Cook): 28-28
*2007 (Magloire): 24-32*
2005 (NVE): 22-34
2006 (Blake): 18-38

To catch up to the 2004 Blazers, the 2007 Blazers must win 11 of their next 14 games.

*Current Pace:* 35 wins.


----------



## gambitnut (Jan 4, 2003)

*Re: Last year conquered, 5 wins needed to beat 2005....*



gambitnut said:


> Four more wins. Even better, Memphis, Seattle, Charlotte and Sacramento are our next four games.


We lost the first two of those games, but we got the Charlotte game. Just three more to beat 2005.

[x][x][x][x][x]

[x][x][x][x][x]

[x][x][x][x][x]

[x][x][x][x][x]

[x][x][x][x][x]

[ ][ ][ ]


----------



## Samuel (Jan 1, 2003)

Historical Standings:
(After Game 59)

2001 (Perdue): 41-18
2003 (Daniels): 39-20
2002 (Kerr): 35-24
2004 (Cook): 29-30
*2007 (Magloire): 25-34*
2005 (NVE): 22-37
2006 (Blake): 19-40

To catch up to the 2004 Blazers, the 2007 Blazers must win their next 9 games.

*Current Pace:* 34 wins.


----------



## rx2web (Jul 27, 2004)

*Re: Last year conquered, 3 wins needed to beat 2004....*

[x][x][x][x][x]

[x][x][x][x][x]

[x][x][x][x][x]

[x][x][x][x][x]

[x][x][x][x][x]

[x][x][ ][ ][ ]

Another win, this one against the wizards and the Agent who is 0/2 in predicting 50 point games for himself.


----------



## Samuel (Jan 1, 2003)

Historical Standings:
(After Game 67)

2001 (Perdue): 43-24
2003 (Daniels): 43-24
2002 (Kerr): 41-26
2004 (Cook): 34-33
*2007 (Magloire): 27-40*
2005 (NVE): 20-47
2006 (Blake): 20-47

*Current Pace:* 33 wins.


----------



## rx2web (Jul 27, 2004)

Down goes NY in NY and we get win #28. Every win greater then last seasons 21 is a bonus. I feel better and better about getting into the 30+ win range for this year. If we can get to 31 wins we will have had a +10 game increase over last year. Right on. Not to mention they have played a bazillion times better then they did last year. Really looked like a team much of the year.

[x][x][x][x][x]

[x][x][x][x][x]

[x][x][x][x][x]

[x][x][x][x][x]

[x][x][x][x][x]

[x][x][x][ ][ ]


----------



## The Sebastian Express (Mar 3, 2005)

I'm pretty sure Portland finished the 2004-2005 NBA season at 27-55, which means we passed that win total tonight, no?

ESPN.com - NBA - NBA Overall Standings 2004-2005


----------



## wastro (Dec 19, 2004)

The Sebastian Express said:


> I'm pretty sure Portland finished the 2004-2005 NBA season at 27-55, which means we passed that win total tonight, no?
> 
> ESPN.com - NBA - NBA Overall Standings 2004-2005


Yep!

The team is now 2-0 since Quick said they've mailed it in for the season. Hmm ....


----------



## Samuel (Jan 1, 2003)

Historical Standings:
(After Game 68)

2001 (Perdue): 44-24
2003 (Daniels): 44-24
2002 (Kerr): 42-26
2004 (Cook): 34-34
*2007 (Magloire): 28-40*
2005 (NVE): 24-44
2006 (Blake): 20-48

*Current Pace:* 33 wins.


----------



## rx2web (Jul 27, 2004)

[x][x][x][x][x]

[x][x][x][x][x]

[x][x][x][x][x]

[x][x][x][x][x]

[x][x][x][x][x]

[x][x][x][x][ ]

[ ]

Who would have thought that we would have run off 3 wins in a row? Granted, we have headed east and everyone from the west seems to find wins easier in the east. It really makes me wonder. If we were in the other conference playing the way we have this year where would we be in the standings? How many of these games that we lost to the west, would we have won if they were against the east? Might we be at or near the top of the easts standings?

29 wins. Lets get to 31!!!! Two more to go!!


----------



## rx2web (Jul 27, 2004)

*2 wins needed to get to 31!!*

This is just a title thread change post.


----------



## gambitnut (Jan 4, 2003)

Yeah, it is time to pick a new title.


----------

