# Blazers still "working on" Noah



## Talkhard (May 13, 2003)

According to Canzano in today's Oregonian, the Blazers are still "working" on getting Noah to declare for the draft. For whatever it's worth, here's the quote:



> Indeed, a source at One Center Court said last week that Noah is the player the Trail Blazers would really like to select in the first round of June's draft.
> 
> But that's only a dream since Noah plans to stay in school. Right?
> 
> Said the source: "We're working on that."


http://www.oregonlive.com/sports/or....ssf?/base/sports/1146203750171120.xml&coll=7

My question is, if Portland is indeed "working on that," doesn't this alert the NBA of possible tampering and expose the Blazers to a possible investigation for illegalities? I'd like to get Noah, too, but it seems to me the Blazers are skating on thin ice here.


----------



## Trader Ed (Jun 17, 2002)

watch them screw up an loose our #1 pick


----------



## B_&_B (Feb 19, 2004)

While the Trail Blazers may in fact want Noah to declare, I really doubt anyone in the know at "One Center Court" would tell Canzano any details like that. Common sense should tell all of us that the Trail Blazers want Noah to declare, because if he does it makes their pick MUCH more valueable. Canzano's source is probably the janitor who comes in at 10:00pm to clean the cubicles.


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

Talkhard said:


> According to Canzano in today's Oregonian, the Blazers are still "working" on getting Noah to declare for the draft. For whatever it's worth, here's the quote:
> 
> 
> My question is, if Portland is indeed "working on that," doesn't this alert the NBA of possible tampering and expose the Blazers to a possible investigation for illegalities? I'd like to get Noah, too, but it seems to me the Blazers are skating on thin ice here.


thats why Canzano is doing it.

Oh, not because it's ACTUALLY happening, but because since he knows that if it WERE happening and he wrote about it, the NBA would be on that like white on rice. But since it's not happening (plus, what kind of pull would the team have with nike?) he can make it up, and when it doesn't happen (he doesn't declare) he can say that "see? Not even Noah wanted to come here. Now lets get Brandon Roy!"

If this is true, which it ain't, the NBA would be able to find out the details..because the NBA, unlike moronic pile of cess pool leftovers, actually has a clue.

AT BEST, it might be people telling Noah that if he comes out he can get a shoe deal, and cess pool for brains is trying to act like it is Portland who is telling him that.

He apparently doesn't understand how harsh the NBA comes down on that sorta stuff. Hell, he might understand it, but he knows that most fans who read his crap don't go out of their way to find out info on their own.

notice he basically said the telfair stuff was bunk? About how Telfair was coming out anyways? 

he's just trying to create a new controversey, thats all this is.

The team isn't going to risk the potential fine and loss of picks (you don't think the NBA would think twice about us losing a pick next year?) over Joakim Freaking Noah.

for gods sake.


----------



## BBert (Dec 30, 2004)

Talkhard said:


> My question is, if Portland is indeed "working on that," doesn't this alert the NBA of possible tampering and expose the Blazers to a possible investigation for illegalities?


That would be an early Christmas for Canzano, for sure. Surely that is why he is trumpeting his latest conspiracy theory. Even if it's complete fiction, it gives him something negative and underhanded to write about the Blazers.


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

Telling friends, family and anyone that will listen that if availible the team would select him isn't tampering


"We would like a ceetain player in the draft, but can't comment on players that haven't commited yet" says they want to draft Noah, but isn't tampering.


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

Is it tomorrow at midnight? Is that the magic declaration date?


----------



## Talkhard (May 13, 2003)

mediocre man said:


> Telling friends, family and anyone that will listen that if availible the team would select him isn't tampering


I don't know the exact wording of the rule, but if Portland is talking to Noah's friends and family about drafting him, isn't that still a violation of the no-tampering law? 

To use a different example, if a defense lawyer makes a $1 million payment to a judge's wife, isn't that still considered an effort to buy off the judge himself? He may not have bought off the judge directly, but by buying off the wife he accomplished the same goal, and broke the law.


----------



## It's_GO_Time (Oct 13, 2005)

I wouldn't be suprised if NBA teams walked the line when it comes to the tampering rules. In fact I would want and expect an organization in a very compeitive industry to take the aggressive approach when it comes to improving their postion while staying within the rules. If the Blazers have assessed that Noah would be the best for the team, I hope they are being as aggressive as possible while staying within the rules to get him to declare.

It would be naive to think that organizations don't push the limit trying to stay in step with the competition. It happens at all levels from samll businesses to multi billlion dollar corporations. You interpret the rules and do everything up to the point of crossing over . . . and as we have seen in the NBA ands companies like Eron and worldcom, sometimes companies go past the line taking huge risks to stay ahead.


----------



## It's_GO_Time (Oct 13, 2005)

Talkhard said:


> I don't know the exact wording of the rule, but if Portland is talking to Noah's friends and family about drafting him, isn't that still a violation of the no-tampering law?
> 
> To use a different example, if a defense lawyer makes a $1 million payment to a judge's wife, isn't that still considered an effort to buy off the judge himself? He may not have bought off the judge directly, but by buying off the wife he accomplished the same goal, and broke the law.


 Well then is it a violation to tell the media that the person we would draft with the first pick hasn't decalred. Or the Blazer organization first need is a 6-11 young athletic type player who can run the floor, hit the outside shot and block (or whatever Noah's game is) Or the Blazers are interested in college players that have proved themselves under pressure and been able to lead their team deep into the tourney

The point is there has to be ways to get the message out without violating the rules.


----------



## Talkhard (May 13, 2003)

Kiss_My_Darius said:


> Well then is it a violation to tell the media that the person we would draft with the first pick hasn't decalred. Or the Blazer organization first need is a 6-11 young athletic type player who can run the floor, hit the outside shot and block (or whatever Noah's game is) Or the Blazers are interested in college players that have proved themselves under pressure and been able to lead their team deep into the tourney
> 
> The point is there has to be ways to get the message out without violating the rules.


Agreed. And all the ways you mention above are probably safe ways to do that. I doubt that talking to friends and family of the player, however, would pass the no-smell test.


----------



## sa1177 (Feb 18, 2005)

This is all garbage IMO....the team isn't stupid enough to go anywhere near tampering and Noah isn't nearly good enough to take that type of risk on anyway. 

Canzano blowing smoke...that's all this is. Such a easy way to do it to because he can never be proven wrong.


----------



## B_&_B (Feb 19, 2004)

If anyone is "tampering" with Noah to go pro, my guess is that it would be Nike. The Gators sport Nike shoes/uni's, so they already have a relationship with him. No doubt that they'd like one of the top picks to be a Nike guy.


----------



## It's_GO_Time (Oct 13, 2005)

BEER&BASKETBALL said:


> If anyone is "tampering" with Noah to go pro, my guess is that it would be Nike. The Gators sport Nike shoes/uni's, so they already have a relationship with him. No doubt that they'd like one of the top picks to be a Nike guy.


 Even better, get Nike to do the dirty work . . . assuming the Blazers even want Noah.


----------



## Kmurph (May 7, 2003)

I completely agree with the Smiley man...

This is complete garbage and PURE speculation on Canzano's part.....

I can't believe that ANYONE would really think the Blazers, at this juncture, would be telling ANYONE whom they are focusing in on...

Who is his source...the janitor?


----------



## BBert (Dec 30, 2004)

The Blazers would not only lose this year's lottery pick, but probably next year's lottery pick too. That would be like the league busting both our knee caps. No way the Blazers risk that.


----------



## sa1177 (Feb 18, 2005)

Kmurph said:


> I completely agree with the Smiley man...
> 
> This is complete garbage and PURE speculation on Canzano's part.....
> 
> ...


Quite funny that you mention that...when I was at the RG there was a maintenance/conversion guy who was fired for talking with the media. I can't remember what he told them.


----------



## Paxil (Jan 1, 2003)

We don't even know what pick we have. Sheesh. Also... the Blazers expressing interest would likely scare him enough to stay out of the draft. Just kidding.... but seriously... the Blazers ARE 'working on it', but probably not in the way people are thinking. By saying they are 'working on it' to Canzano, the information gets out there that we are interested. That is all they want and Canzano took the bait and ran. Noah knows we have a top pick, and we are interested. Enough said. Taking it further than that and saying there are secret deals going on etc... is a bit much.


----------



## It's_GO_Time (Oct 13, 2005)

Paxil said:


> We don't even know what pick we have. Sheesh. Also... the Blazers expressing interest would likely scare him enough to stay out of the draft. Just kidding.... but seriously... the Blazers ARE 'working on it', but probably not in the way people are thinking. By saying they are 'working on it' to Canzano, the information gets out there that we are interested. That is all they want and Canzano took the bait and ran. Noah knows we have a top pick, and we are interested. Enough said. Taking it further than that and saying there are secret deals going on etc... is a bit much.


 Good point. The Blazers may have achieved their desired message by using Canzano. There has to be hundreds of ways to get the message out without violating the tampering rule.


----------



## B_&_B (Feb 19, 2004)

Paxil said:


> We don't even know what pick we have. Sheesh. Also... the Blazers expressing interest would likely scare him enough to stay out of the draft. Just kidding.... but seriously... the Blazers ARE 'working on it', but probably not in the way people are thinking. By saying they are 'working on it' to Canzano, the information gets out there that we are interested. That is all they want and Canzano took the bait and ran. Noah knows we have a top pick, and we are interested. Enough said. Taking it further than that and saying there are secret deals going on etc... is a bit much.


BINGO! We have a winner!


----------



## hasoos (Jan 3, 2003)

Actually it is quite common for the team with the #1 pick to say who they are going after right away. They just usually don't start doing it until they have actually secured the #1 pick in the lotto.


----------



## ODiggity (Feb 23, 2005)

Hey, Noah's a New York City guy, and he played Rucker Park, and ZBo and Sebastian both play Rucker Park in the summer, maybe those two know him and the Blazers are working through them?


----------



## Talkhard (May 13, 2003)

I hate to mention this, guys, but we could end up with the fourth pick in the draft. We have the best odds of getting No. 1, but the odds can easily be beaten. 

It would be a shame if the worst team in the league only got the fourth pick, but it could happen. Brace yourselves for the possibility.


----------



## It's_GO_Time (Oct 13, 2005)

Maybe the Blazers should download the form to declare eligibility for the NBA draft, fill it out for Noah, forge his signature and submit it to the NBA. That should do the trick. :biggrin:


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

Kiss_My_Darius said:


> Maybe the Blazers should download the form to declare eligibility for the NBA draft, fill it out for Noah, forge his signature and submit it to the NBA. That should do the trick. :biggrin:


don't put it past canzano to bring that up.


----------



## ebott (Jan 7, 2003)

I'd like to see what rule it is that the Blazers would be breaking by convincing Noah to declare for the draft. Is there such a rule or are we just assuming there is?

We're not tampering with another team's player. We're not getting any kind of unfair advantage as far as being able to draft a certain player.

Maybe we'd be violating NCAA rules by basically promissing money to a player. But I'm not sure there even is an NBA rule that we'd be violating.


----------



## It's_GO_Time (Oct 13, 2005)

ebott said:


> I'd like to see what rule it is that the Blazers would be breaking by convincing Noah to declare for the draft. Is there such a rule or are we just assuming there is?
> 
> We're not tampering with another team's player. We're not getting any kind of unfair advantage as far as being able to draft a certain player.
> 
> Maybe we'd be violating NCAA rules by basically promissing money to a player. But I'm not sure there even is an NBA rule that we'd be violating.


 I think the idea of a "rule" was brought up by Canzano quoting Nash (in the article posted on this thread).


----------



## It's_GO_Time (Oct 13, 2005)

SMiLE said:


> don't put it past canzano to bring that up.


 I guess if he put "rumor has it", he can print it. But he wouldn't do that . . .


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

ebott said:


> I'd like to see what rule it is that the Blazers would be breaking by convincing Noah to declare for the draft. Is there such a rule or are we just assuming there is?
> 
> We're not tampering with another team's player. We're not getting any kind of unfair advantage as far as being able to draft a certain player.
> 
> Maybe we'd be violating NCAA rules by basically promissing money to a player. But I'm not sure there even is an NBA rule that we'd be violating.


as I understood it, they're not allowed to talk to, talk about, or influence said player to come out (see: Portland getting dinged back 84 for whatever it was they did).

Once he's declared they can talk to him, talk about him, etc. Just not till.

And if he's not declared by tomorrow, they can't comment on him, talk about him, or talk to him.


----------



## hasoos (Jan 3, 2003)

Actually I just looked up the tampering rules, they are mostly set up for recruiting players or employees of other teams. The other tampering is for players NOT ELIGIBLE for the NBA draft. Noah is eligible, and they can talk to him as much as they want. They cannot work him out, they cannot do anything which involves money, but they can talk to him if they wish. The last time somebody was punished for this was the year Lebron came out, George Karl talked to him and allowed him to attend a Nuggets workout before he was in the draft. He was fined and suspended for a game.


----------



## Reep (Jun 4, 2003)

Talkhard said:


> I hate to mention this, guys, but we could end up with the fourth pick in the draft. We have the best odds of getting No. 1, but the odds can easily be beaten.
> 
> It would be a shame if the worst team in the league only got the fourth pick, but it could happen. Brace yourselves for the possibility.


I don't know if that is a big problem in this draft. One of Thomas, Aldridge, Morrison or Bargnani will be available. After that it drops off, but I wouldn't be unhappy with any of those four. It would be nice to have our first pick of the four, but with my limited information, they all look like they could help. After that you get into the Roy, Gay area. I think the worst case is if Charlotte ended up with the 6th pick. That would take them from 3 to 6 which is very different in this draft.


----------



## Paxil (Jan 1, 2003)

I agree with SMiLE. Didn't George Karl get busted for watching his son play with someone who was considering entering the draft or something like that?


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

hasoos said:


> Actually I just looked up the tampering rules, they are mostly set up for recruiting players or employees of other teams. The other tampering is for players NOT ELIGIBLE for the NBA draft. Noah is eligible, and they can talk to him as much as they want.



eligible = declared.

he did not declare.



> They cannot work him out, they cannot do anything which involves money, but they can talk to him if they wish. The last time somebody was punished for this was the year Lebron came out, George Karl talked to him and allowed him to attend a Nuggets workout before he was in the draft. He was fined and suspended for a game.


----------



## BBert (Dec 30, 2004)

Talkhard said:


> I hate to mention this, guys, but we could end up with the fourth pick in the draft. We have the best odds of getting No. 1, but the odds can easily be beaten.


Especially when our "best odds" are only 1-in-4 (25%). Those aren't great, or even good, odds.

Our odds of getting a top 2 pick are still less than 50% (46.5% I believe). Meaning, we probably won't even get a top 2 pick.

We have a good chance at a top 3 pick (64.3% odds), but maybe not. Still far from a sure thing.

In fact, our odds of getting the no. 4 pick (36%) are greater than our odds of getting the no. 1 pick (25%).

I think you are right TH. It's great fun to speculate and all, but we'd better brace ourselves for the very real possibility (36% chance) of the no. 4 pick.

Morrison, here we come!


----------



## barfo (Jan 2, 2003)

Talkhard said:


> To use a different example, if a defense lawyer makes a $1 million payment to a judge's wife, isn't that still considered an effort to buy off the judge himself? He may not have bought off the judge directly, but by buying off the wife he accomplished the same goal, and broke the law.


Not necessarily. She provided services in return for the $1 million, and they keep separate bank accounts. In fact, their marriage has been on the rocks for years, ever since the trip to Betty Ford. And you really have to take into account the incident with the pony.

barfo


----------



## hasoos (Jan 3, 2003)

SMiLE said:


> eligible = declared.
> 
> he did not declare.



I think you are talking about two different things. Eligibility is totally different then declared. A blatant example that many players considering NBA draft entry will consult with various teams scouts to determine if they are ready and where they would go in the draft if they entered. It happens all the time. Some players go through their coach for that communication, others do not.


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

hasoos said:


> I think you are talking about two different things. Eligibility is totally different then declared. A blatant example that many players considering NBA draft entry will consult with various teams scouts to determine if they are ready and where they would go in the draft if they entered. It happens all the time. Some players go through their coach for that communication, others do not.


the implication here is that the team is trying to entice him to declare by basically bribing him. What Canzano is implying they're doing, they can't do.


----------



## hasoos (Jan 3, 2003)

How is it bribing him when you are merely telling him what choice you would make. There is no contract signed for money yet, nothing is exchanging hands.


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

hasoos said:


> How is it bribing him when you are merely telling him what choice you would make. There is no contract signed for money yet, nothing is exchanging hands.


because canzano is implying that the team is trying to have Nike make him an offer SO he will declare.


----------



## hasoos (Jan 3, 2003)

Ok so just think about what you just said. Canzano. Enough said. :clown:


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

hasoos said:


> Ok so just think about what you just said. Canzano. Enough said. :clown:


I believe I did


----------



## Backboard Cam (Apr 29, 2003)

I've heard other sports writers say that before the draft they don't believe ANYTHING a team's front office says. Telling a local writer who the team is hoping to draft is like showing your poker hand to everyone before the flop. If anything, if you think you have strong cards you make the other players think you have something else.

Anyone who actually knows anything isn't going to tell Canzano something important, and since his quote says "*we're* working on it" I'll assume that the quote didn't come from a janitor. 

Canzano's source probably just forgot to mention that the team is also working on a lot of other things.


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

here's the words from John Nash himself (which I know people will discount, etc)



> We can't talk about him in the media nor can we talk to him or his people
> prior to the NBA officially announcing that he is in the draft.


----------



## Backboard Cam (Apr 29, 2003)

Your point?


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

Backboard Cam said:


> Your point?


wasn't meant to be in response of yours, I forgot to edit out your post.


----------



## Paxil (Jan 1, 2003)

Yeah... but now the NBA will bust us for talking about who we can't talk about because isn't that really talking about them? =)


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

Talkhard said:


> I don't know the exact wording of the rule, but if Portland is talking to Noah's friends and family about drafting him, isn't that still a violation of the no-tampering law?
> 
> To use a different example, if a defense lawyer makes a $1 million payment to a judge's wife, isn't that still considered an effort to buy off the judge himself? He may not have bought off the judge directly, but by buying off the wife he accomplished the same goal, and broke the law.


Even contact with an agent (which he doesn't have) would be considering tampering, let alone friends and family who are more in tune with his decision...

Canzano is an idiot, this isn't anything new...


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

mediocre man said:


> Telling friends, family and anyone that will listen that if availible the team would select him isn't tampering
> 
> 
> "We would like a ceetain player in the draft, but can't comment on players that haven't commited yet" says they want to draft Noah, but isn't tampering.


Contacting those people WOULD be considered tampering...

I think some of you under-estimate the rules the league has about tampering, of all commissioners in all of sports, David Stern takes these kinds of things the most serious...


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

Kiss_My_Darius said:


> Well then is it a violation to tell the media that the person we would draft with the first pick hasn't decalred. Or the Blazer organization first need is a 6-11 young athletic type player who can run the floor, hit the outside shot and block (or whatever Noah's game is) Or the Blazers are interested in college players that have proved themselves under pressure and been able to lead their team deep into the tourney
> 
> The point is there has to be ways to get the message out without violating the rules.


The Blazers haven't done that though, so its not really an issue...


----------



## It's_GO_Time (Oct 13, 2005)

zagsfan20 said:


> The Blazers haven't done that though, so its not really an issue...


Isn't that what this thread is all about? Didn't Canzano just write today that the Blazers are working on Noah? So I think the Blazers have just told the media they are intersted in drafting Noah . . . in fact much much more strongly than the examples I suggested.


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

Has anyone ever thought about it this way....

If the Blazers actually are talking to Noah's people (which they aren't) and we gaurantee we draft him in order and that he would get endorsements (which they aren't)...May 23rd rolls around and we end up with say the 3rd overall pick and say the Bobcats get the #1 or #2 pick and take Noah...Well, he's pissed because not only did he not get the endorsement deal that he wanted (if that was actually a serious interest of his) and he gets stuck playing in Charlotte where he hates it...So he goes out and reports the situation to the league and the Blazers lose their draft picks for the next couple years (which can happen and has happened before) and we lose any chance in getting one of the top picks in next years "stacked draft"...


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

Kiss_My_Darius said:


> Isn't that what this thread is all about? Didn't Canzano just write today that the Blazers are working on Noah? So I think in fact the Blazers have just told the media they are intersted in drafting Noah . . . in fact much much more strongly than the examples I suggested.


thats still considered tampering then.

people seem to be confusing how when a player declare (sans agent) for the draft (and it's after April 29th) they find out if there is interest, and think that it's the same as whats happening now.

When a player declares (without an agent), and it's after April 29th, TEAMS CAN TALK TO THEM, and they can still withdrawl. What is happening now, isn't that.

He hasn't declared. He isn't elligible (infact, they can't talk to ANY players yet)...

That is what that pathetic piece of toe jam mixed with zit juice is trying to imply the team is doing currently..which they can't.

And it's not the first time he's implied the team did somethinmg they can't do (and at the risk of what would happen if "caught", wouldn't do). 

They are not allowed to talk to, talk about, or even try to talk to a family member/agent/friend/whatever _unless they've declared and the NBA has them on the list_ of players eligible for the draft.

Do you guys HONESTLY think that the team would try to circumvent this for Joakim ****ing Noah?? For gods sake people..consider the soruce.


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

Kiss_My_Darius said:


> Isn't that what this thread is all about? Didn't Canzano just write today that the Blazers are working on Noah? So I think in fact the Blazers have just told the media they are intersted in drafting Noah . . . in fact much much more strongly than the examples I suggested.


He said he heard from a "source" at One Center Court that they were interested, in his column he even says he emailed Nash, and Nash said it was crap (as well as I have emailed Nash too)...

I guarantee the "source" with Blazers is his buddy Jason Quick, who purely speculated about it in a chat last week and now Canzano is running with it to try and stir some controversy...

BTW, Canzano also called Andy Katz about the endorsement thing and Katz said that he's never heard of anything like that ever happening...But Canzano still thinks its a real possibility, which leads me to believe that Canzano is trying his hardest to make a story out of nothing...


----------



## It's_GO_Time (Oct 13, 2005)

SMiLE said:


> thats still considered tampering then.
> 
> people seem to be confusing how when a player declare (sans agent) for the draft (and it's after April 29th) they find out if there is interest, and think that it's the same as whats happening now.
> 
> ...


Well then shouldn't we applaud Canzano for getting out the message without putting the Blazer organization at risk?


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

Let me remind some of you that Joakim Noah averaged 14 and 7 during the season...

and this tournament performance that the media is trying to trumpet out as great was a 15 and 9 overall average during the tournament...The media made him into a big deal because they were trying to make an interesting story out of an otherwise boring and bracket-busting tournament that many casual college basketball fans had lost interest in long before the final four...


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

Kiss_My_Darius said:


> Well then shouldn't we applaud Canzano for getting out the message without putting the Blazer organization at risk?


Shoud we applaud me when I go up to GW Bush and ask him if he was "going to stop beating your wife?"

it's making something out of nothing.

Come on, be honest here. Do you really thinkt hat if this was even true, the NBA wouldn't be on this?

And do you really _really_ believe this guy anymore? He has shown time and time again, his gross lack of knowledge when it comes to the CBA..his gross lack of understanding of how trades work, and the fact he likes saying things just to piss off people, and then follow it up with "Man, I worry about you. And yo know what I mean"?

seriously, if you believe him in this case, you're a gullable moron who deserves to be mocked.


----------



## It's_GO_Time (Oct 13, 2005)

SMiLE said:


> Shoud we applaud me when I go up to GW Bush and ask him if he was "going to stop beating your wife?"
> 
> it's making something out of nothing.
> 
> ...


Always a pleasure chating with you. Putting aside the insults you throw if a poster doesn't see it your way . . . what harm is thre in Canzano writing that the Blazers want Noah. If it encourages Noah to declare, whether the Blazers want or don't want Noah, with a top 4 pick it helps them.

I am not a fan of Canzano but do not the strong feelings you do about him. So each article I choose to read, I don't just consider the writer but also what he says and how he backs up his arguments.

In this case he is saying the Blazers are intersted in Noah (which others have said they have heard the same thing) and that the Blazers are "working on it" which could mean anything. It just doesn't offend me as much as you.

Personally I think your dislike for hime is a bit unjust and over-reactionary, but I won't go so far as to say that any person who disregards anything he writes is a closed-minded egotist who deserves to be ignored. That would be wrong and mean spirited. :biggrin:


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

ebott said:


> I'd like to see what rule it is that the Blazers would be breaking by convincing Noah to declare for the draft. Is there such a rule or are we just assuming there is?
> 
> We're not tampering with another team's player. We're not getting any kind of unfair advantage as far as being able to draft a certain player.
> 
> Maybe we'd be violating NCAA rules by basically promissing money to a player. But I'm not sure there even is an NBA rule that we'd be violating.


Yes, it is very serious business especially when the NCAA is involved...


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

hasoos said:


> Actually I just looked up the tampering rules, they are mostly set up for recruiting players or employees of other teams. The other tampering is for players NOT ELIGIBLE for the NBA draft. Noah is eligible, and they can talk to him as much as they want. They cannot work him out, they cannot do anything which involves money, but they can talk to him if they wish. The last time somebody was punished for this was the year Lebron came out, George Karl talked to him and allowed him to attend a Nuggets workout before he was in the draft. He was fined and suspended for a game.


A.) Lebron wasn't in the NCAA, which makes a major difference...

B.) George Karl wasn't a coach of the Nuggets when Lebron was in the draft, Karl became head coach of the Nuggets last year....

C.) There is different kinds of tampering rules, both Miles Brand and David Stern work together to insure that teams don't tamper with players and those that do are in major trouble with the league...Thats part of the reason why you don't ever see it happening, teams don't want to risk the penalties that will happen if they do....And unlike what Canzano and many of you think its not something to just be bluffed at...


----------



## It's_GO_Time (Oct 13, 2005)

zagsfan20 said:


> Let me remind some of you that Joakim Noah averaged 14 and 7 during the season...
> 
> and this tournament performance that the media is trying to trumpet out as great was a 15 and 9 overall average during the tournament...The media made him into a big deal because they were trying to make an interesting story out of an otherwise boring and bracket-busting tournament that many casual college basketball fans had lost interest in long before the final four...


 I think you are ignoring the fact he led his team to a championship. If they didn't make it to the final four, I don't think Noah would be getting this press. But there is something to be said for someone who can produce like that on the biggest college basketball stage.


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

Kiss_My_Darius said:


> Always a pleasure chating with you. Putting aside the insults you throw if a poster doesn't see it your way . . .


it's not "seeing it my way", it's seeing it through logic and not being gullable.



> what harm is thre in Canzano writing that the Blazers want Noah. If it encourages Noah to declare, whether the Blazers want or don't want Noah, with a top 4 pick it helps them.


because he's not saying that the Blazers want Noah, but that the Blazers are *trying to get Noah* to declare.

Do you see the difference?

because it's huge. one is an opinion, one is an accusation of circumvention of the CBA and improper actions by the guys he calls the "three amigos".



> I am not a fan of Canzano but do not the strong feelings you do about him. So each article I choose to read, I don't just consider the writer but also what he says and how he backs up his arguments.


oh well, I don't listen to GW Bush and go "well, he backed up his arguments _this_ time..

fool me once, shame on you. fool me 15 other times, and Im gonna start wondering why I still read your articles.



> In this case he is saying the Blazers are intersted in Noah (which others have said they have heard the same thing) and that the Blazers are "working on it" which could mean anything. It just doesn't offend me as much as you.


he's also said that the team is trying to get nike to get involved too. This is just him planting a seed.



> Personally I think your dislike for hime is a bit unjust and over-reactionary, but I won't go so far as to say that any person who disregards anything he writes is a closed-minded egotist who deserves to be ignored. That would be wrong and mean spirited. :biggrin:


considering his track record, I think my stance is justified.

His first article in the Oregonian was saying that Erikson SHOULD leave..not that he would, or whatever..but that he SHOULD.

He says things to stir the pot, to get a reaction. Thats all this is, because you have people discussing it on here..and oh my gosh, it's the day for his lame *** radio show, right?

coincidences galore..

if you make up an accusation, and have proof of it, thats one thing. but if you make up several over a long period of time and have very few of them actually turn out to be accurate (or even true)...well, those who keep believing you deserve what they get.


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

Kiss_My_Darius said:


> Always a pleasure chating with you. Putting aside the insults you throw if a poster doesn't see it your way . . . what harm is thre in Canzano writing that the Blazers want Noah. If it encourages Noah to declare, whether the Blazers want or don't want Noah, with a top 4 pick it helps them.
> 
> I am not a fan of Canzano but do not the strong feelings you do about him. So each article I choose to read, I don't just consider the writer but also what he says and how he backs up his arguments.
> 
> ...



:rotf: 

I feel sorry for those of you that believe _everything_ the media has to say even though 80% of that column (which are pure speculation anyways) was conjecture and given Canzano's past and the history of the Oregonian sports section it should make it even more laughable...

but I guess you're the types that Canzano targets with is columns...


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

Kiss_My_Darius said:


> I think you are ignoring the fact he led his team to a championship. If they didn't make it to the final four, I don't think Noah would be getting this press. But there is something to be said for someone who can produce like that on the biggest college basketball stage.


When you average 15 and 9 you don't lead your team to the National Championshop...

That team had 3 future NBA players (Horford, Brewer, Green) on it besides Noah....and a solid 3 point specialist in Lee Humphrey...

and how did he "produce like that" on the national stage? He averaged 15 and 9....Nothing phenomenal by any means...He was just the figurehead behind it because much of the national press had already invested a lot of interest into him before they reached the final four and because they were looking for something to spotlight in an otherwise boring Final Four...


----------



## It's_GO_Time (Oct 13, 2005)

SMiLE said:


> if you make up an accusation, and have proof of it, thats one thing. but if you make up several over a long period of time and have very few of them actually turn out to be accurate (or even true)...well, those who keep believing you deserve what they get.


 I don't even know where to start with all that. I'll just leave it at I guess I deserve what I get . . .


----------



## It's_GO_Time (Oct 13, 2005)

zagsfan20 said:


> When you average 15 and 9 you don't lead your team to the National Championshop...
> 
> That team had 3 future NBA players (Horford, Brewer, Green) on it besides Noah....and a solid 3 point specialist in Lee Humphrey...
> 
> and how did he "produce like that" on the national stage? He averaged 15 and 9....Nothing phenomenal by any means...He was just the figurehead behind it because much of the national press had already invested a lot of interest into him before they reached the final four and because they were looking for something to spotlight in an otherwise boring Final Four...


 Boring for you. If Morrison didn't choke one of those final two or three shots and they made it past UCLA, then it wouldn't have been boring to you, but would have been boring to many others. To a large viewing portion of the country, they enjoyed seeing UCLA in the final four. Personally I enjoyed the Noah storyline and it wasn't a boring final four to many.

You don't have to knock other players to pump up Morisson. The way Noah put himself on the map during the tourney (few knew about Noah before) was admirable and a nice human interest story.


----------



## SheedSoNasty (Dec 31, 2002)

It's so funny to see the Morrison vs. The World war. It's like any mention of any player possibly involved in the draft this year causes an automatic response in certain posters. I love the die-hardedness.


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

Kiss_My_Darius said:


> Boring for you. If Morrison didn't choke one of those final two or three shots and they made it past UCLA, then it wouldn't have been boring to you, but would have been boring to many others. To a large viewing portion of the country, they enjoyed seeing UCLA in the final four. Personally I enjoyed the Noah storyline and it wasn't a boring final four to many.
> 
> You don't have to knock other players to pump up Morisson. The way Noah put himself on the map during the tourney (few knew about Noah before) was admirable and a nice human interest story.


What does it have anything to do with Morrison?...

One extra pass and they would have won the game...and Morrison scored his part against the best defensive team in the country...but I still don't know how this comes back to Morrison...

I've given plenty of college players credit, but Noah is not one of them...He's simply not that good...

It was a boring tournament and most people who's brackets turned to crap (the casual NCAA fan) so quickly were turned off...

I understand from you buying into Canzano's crap that, that kind of stuff sales to you...but lets look at reality man, he didn't carry his team, he averaged decent numbers in the tournament but nothing overly impressive by any means and he was a product of overpimping by the media...Which happens every tournament to a different player, who often times doesn't deserve it...

I know its kind of got to be bitter feeling when you've been shot down on your claims during this thread, but there's no reason you should feel the need to bring Morrison into the picture...


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

SheedSoNasty said:


> It's so funny to see the Morrison vs. The World war. It's like any mention of any player possibly involved in the draft this year causes an automatic response in certain posters. I love the die-hardedness.


No, its funnier to see when people are ignorant to John Canzano's garb.


----------



## It's_GO_Time (Oct 13, 2005)

zagsfan20 said:


> What does it have anything to do with Morrison?...
> 
> One extra pass and they would have won the game...and Morrison scored his part against the best defensive team in the country...but I still don't know how this comes back to Morrison...
> 
> ...


OK champ, your response to this thread has nothing to do with Morrison. Also, Morrison did score his part . . .except when it counted. Mr. Do No Wrong had two (or was it three) shots to ice the game . . . and missed. He is a scorer right . . . or is that only when the game isn't on the line?

I don't know much about Noah or if he is that good, but my hat is off to him and the Florida team for nutting it up during the tourney. Outside of the 7th game of an NBA championship, I don't know if there is any other basketball stage where the pressure is greater. Anyone who can perform under those conditons should be applauded.

I'm not sure what claims I've been knocked down on in this thread, but if you are refering to Smile and his side kick (you . . . don't forget to clear out your PM or should I make and lock a thread about that) . . . well I'm not suprised that once again there has been a "failure to communicate." Maybe it is all me, but my gullable, no logic, moronic, get what I deserve self thinks it is more a comibantion of both writers (and the side kick)


----------



## sa1177 (Feb 18, 2005)

Kiss_My_Darius said:


> OK champ, your response to this thread has nothing to do with Morrison. Also, Morrison did score his part . . .except when it counted. Mr. Do No Wrong had two (or was it three) shots to ice the game . . . and missed. He is a scorer right . . . or is that only when the game isn't on the line?
> 
> I don't know much about Noah or if he is that good, but my hat is off to him and the Florida team for nutting it up during the tourney. Outside of the 7th game of an NBA championship, I don't know if there is any other basketball stage where the pressure is greater. Anyone who can perform under those conditons should be applauded.
> 
> I'm not sure what claims I've been knocked down on in this thread, *but if you are refering to Smile and his side kick (you . . . don't forget to clear out your PM or should I make and lock a thread about that) . * . . well I'm not suprised that once again there has been a "failure to communicate." Maybe it is all me, but my gullable, no logic, moronic, get what I deserve self thinks it is more a comibantion of both writers (and the side kick)


Ahh let's revisit the "Hap and his cronies are trying to take over the BBB.net Blazer board" theory again.


----------



## chromekilla (Aug 21, 2005)

Kiss_My_Darius said:


> OK champ, your response to this thread has nothing to do with Morrison. Also, Morrison did score his part . . .except when it counted. Mr. Do No Wrong had two (or was it three) shots to ice the game . . . and missed. He is a scorer right . . . or is that only when the game isn't on the line?
> 
> I don't know much about Noah or if he is that good, but my hat is off to him and the Florida team for nutting it up during the tourney. Outside of the 7th game of an NBA championship, I don't know if there is any other basketball stage where the pressure is greater. Anyone who can perform under those conditons should be applauded.
> 
> I'm not sure what claims I've been knocked down on in this thread, but if you are refering to Smile and his side kick (you . . . don't forget to clear out your PM or should I make and lock a thread about that) . . . well I'm not suprised that once again there has been a "failure to communicate." Maybe it is all me, but my gullable, no logic, moronic, get what I deserve self thinks it is more a comibantion of both writers (and the side kick)


  :sigh:


----------



## It's_GO_Time (Oct 13, 2005)

sa1177 said:


> Ahh let's revisit the "Hap and his cronies are trying to take over the BBB.net Blazer board" theory again.


 I'm not sure how my comment about smile and side kick is relevant to your comment, but I do apprecaite your input.


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

> OK champ, your response to this thread has nothing to do with Morrison. Also, Morrison did score his part . . .except when it counted. Mr. Do No Wrong had two (or was it three) shots to ice the game . . . and missed. He is a scorer right . . . or is that only when the game isn't on the line?


OK buddy, he missed two shots to ice the game...Thats all good and dandy, I bet Larry Bird, Michael Jordan, or any other great player has missed a shot to ice a game in their careers...But if it wasn't for Morrison they wouldn't of even been within a minute from going to the Elite 8...Did you not see his game winning shots throughout the course of the year, or his single handedly bringing his team back in his game against Xavier?...Or are you just ignorant to that as well and want to be all misguided and think that Morrison wasn't clutch cause he didn't make a couple shots at the end of the game against the best (statistically) defensive team in the nation, not mentioning that one more pass by J.P. Batista and the game would have been over and there wouldn't be any talk of this...

BTW, one of Lebron James biggest knocks this year is that he hasn't hit any game winning shots up until recently...Would you not want Lebron James on your team just because he "chocked" and didn't make the game winning shot or shots in the clutch?...



> *I don't know much about Noah or if he is that good*, but my hat is off to him and the Florida team for nutting it up during the tourney. Outside of the 7th game of an NBA championship, I don't know if there is any other basketball stage where the pressure is greater. *Anyone who can perform under those conditons should be applauded.*


Then why do you keep arguing to death that he _carried_ his team to the National title?...is it because the media trumpeted it out and thats what you saw on Sportcenter?...

Who can perform under those conditions?...I can think of many that can and could of, and I have no doubt that there was several other players who could of had 16 pts and 9 boards in that final game..



> I'm not sure what claims I've been knocked down on in this thread, but if you are refering to Smile and his side kick (you . . . don't forget to clear out your PM or should I make and lock a thread about that) . . . well I'm not suprised that once again there has been a "failure to communicate." Maybe it is all me, but my gullable, no logic, moronic, get what I deserve self thinks it is more a comibantion of both writers (and the side kick)


issues?


----------



## hasoos (Jan 3, 2003)

Blah blah blah blah Morrison yada yada yada Morrison......

The game isn't all about offensive statistics.


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

hasoos said:


> Blah blah blah blah Morrison yada yada yada Morrison......
> 
> The game isn't all about offensive statistics.


When your team scores 100 points only 9 times in an 82 game season, I think that team needs a little bit of offense...

And Morrison isn't necessarily a downgrade from the defense we currently get out of our SF's...

People like to beat to death this defense thing...


----------



## QRICH (Feb 2, 2004)

Chill! We can pick up this argument up _next year_...When Noah actually does come out.


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

QRICH said:


> Chill! We can pick up this argument up _next year_...When Noah actually does come out.


True, True...

He's not going to come out. So this is kind of a moot point...


----------



## It's_GO_Time (Oct 13, 2005)

zagsfan20 said:


> OK buddy, he missed two shots to ice the game...Thats all good and dandy, I bet Larry Bird, Michael Jordan, or any other great player has missed a shot to ice a game in their careers...But if it wasn't for Morrison they wouldn't of even been within a minute from going to the Elite 8...Did you not see his game winning shots throughout the course of the year, or his single handedly bringing his team back in his game against Xavier?...Or are you just ignorant to that as well and want to be all misguided and think that Morrison wasn't clutch cause he didn't make a couple shots at the end of the game against the best (statistically) defensive team in the nation, not mentioning that one more pass by J.P. Batista and the game would have been over and there wouldn't be any talk of this...
> 
> BTW, one of Lebron James biggest knocks this year is that he hasn't hit any game winning shots up until recently...Would you not want Lebron James on your team just because he "chocked" and didn't make the game winning shot or shots in the clutch?...
> 
> ...


You know what, you're right. Those were harsh comments about Morrison. I don't know about his game winning shots but he has proved that he was an elite college player (regardless of how he does in the pros). The comments were made out of frustration that I think you fail to give any other college player any credit and I think sometimes you try to knock them down to build up Morrison. But the shots on Morrison weren't fair and for all I know he is a clutch player.

I didn't know I argued to death that Noah carried the team, but I do think he carried them both physically and emotionally in the tourney. Again that could be wrong as I only watched three of his games in the tourney. I don't think I am the only one with that thought this because there are rumors that after his tournmey performace he is a top three if not a top pick.

As for the issues thing, you have taken occasional shots on me ever since I commented on your racist comments about "mexican looking gangstas". So yea, I'm having issues with you. I haven't gone back and read the thread, but my impression is that I wasn't the one orginally throwing out the insults . . . but given that I have had strange vibes with you maybe I did throw the first punch. 

I do think you got some wierd thing going on with smile. You guys sometimes sound alike, you have certainly sold him on Morrison and come on, who else gets thier own private locked thread?

Anyways, it is obvious that smile and I can't have a discussion without insults being thrown out (as I said, maybe my fault) and I'm sorry if that is what is has come down to with us . . . but I don't think it is all me.

And finally, with regard to this thread, I don't see the harm if Canzano makes it know that the Blazers want Noah or implies that the Blazers are working on it . . . as long as no rules have been broken that can hurt the Blazers. And if it any way effects Noah declaring then Canzano actually helped the Blazers.


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

> As for the issues thing, you have taken occasional shots on me ever since I commented on your racist comments about "mexican looking gangstas". So yea, I'm having issues with you. I haven't gone back and read the thread, but my impression is that I wasn't the one orginally throwing out the insults . . . but given that I have had strange vibes with you maybe I did throw the first punch.


When have I insulted you since that thread?....

I don't hold a grudge against any posters...Its a message board, not middle school.

and I didn't think I was even insulting you in that thread...I made a comment that I felt was true, that a good portion of the fans _I see_ at the games are like that...

Kind of like the Raiders and most other southern California team (i realize the raiders are now in Oakland)...

I wasn't trying to degrade them, just making an observation...



> I do think you got some wierd thing going on with smile. You guys sometimes sound alike, you have certainly sold him on Morrison and come on, who else gets thier own private locked thread?


Someone agrees with me about Morrison, local media and certain Blazer prospects and the management that doesn't mean something "weird is going on"...


----------



## hasoos (Jan 3, 2003)

zagsfan20 said:


> When your team scores 100 points only 9 times in an 82 game season, I think that team needs a little bit of offense...
> 
> And Morrison isn't necessarily a downgrade from the defense we currently get out of our SF's...
> 
> People like to beat to death this defense thing...



Yes but I have posted more then enough times to show that rebounding is actually the problem, not scoring. Portland shoots a little under 45% from the field. Portland is a little below average in turnovers. The problem is not offensive efficiency. The problem is the extra 10 posessions we are giving teams per game, and not giving the Blazers to score. You up the posessions, you up your scoring. You lower their posessions, you lower their scoring. You spend more time with them exerting energy to guard your team, not the other way around. That way you have energy to finish the game, and when those plays come along like this season, where the Blazers gave up offensive rebound after offensive rebound until it flat out broke them, do not happen anymore. 

Now that being said, you can always go the route where you draft Morrison, but then the rest of the picks and free agency better go to rebuilding the front line to take care of the rebounding issue. IMO the league has shown over the last few years that the big guys dictate the game and win the championships, not the smaller players, so I personally would draft big. 

Name the last team to be lead to the championship by a small forward? That would be Boston, before a lot of the prototype big men that are in the game now, even existed.


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

hasoos said:


> Yes but I have posted more then enough times to show that rebounding is actually the problem, not scoring. Portland shoots a little under 45% from the field. Portland is a little below average in turnovers. The problem is not offensive efficiency. The problem is the extra 10 posessions we are giving teams per game, and not giving the Blazers to score. You up the posessions, you up your scoring. You lower their posessions, you lower their scoring. You spend more time with them exerting energy to guard your team, not the other way around. That way you have energy to finish the game, and when those plays come along like this season, where the Blazers gave up offensive rebound after offensive rebound until it flat out broke them, do not happen anymore.
> 
> Now that being said, you can always go the route where you draft Morrison, but then the rest of the picks and free agency better go to rebuilding the front line to take care of the rebounding issue. IMO the league has shown over the last few years that the big guys dictate the game and win the championships, not the smaller players, so I personally would draft big.
> 
> Name the last team to be lead to the championship by a small forward? That would be Boston, before a lot of the prototype big men that are in the game now, even existed.



With a healthy Pryzbilla, Ratliff and Zach I have no reason to doubt that those numbers would be just a little bit higher than they were...


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

Kiss_My_Darius said:


> *don't forget to clear out your PM or should I make and lock a thread about that) . . . *


so...what exactly was a mod supposed to do who's trying to send him a PM? send it telepathally?

and the reason it was closed was because it wasn't meant for anyone else, and didn't need to have people tacking on posts.


----------



## It's_GO_Time (Oct 13, 2005)

zagsfan20 said:


> When have I insulted you since that thread?....
> 
> I don't hold a grudge against any posters...Its a message board, not middle school.
> 
> ...


I don't have the time or capabilites to go back show what I'm talking about. But whatever, maybe you haven't insulted me or even if you have I'm a big boy and can handle it. If you don't think we have had a wierd vibe since the laker fan thread, then obviously it is just me. I do remember one time you jumping into (at the time) hap and my debate telling me to stop always trying to debate hap or something like that. But again whatever. 

I wouldn't be suprised if all this was either my oversensitivity to that one theread (so maybe that is my issue but I have good personal reason why that bothered me) or just grouping you together with smile and feeeling on the defensive every time you respond to my post.

I'll end again with whatever. Let's battle or maybe even agree in some future thread. As for this thread, I'll stick to the Canzano didn't piss me off with this article.

Peace


----------



## SheedSoNasty (Dec 31, 2002)

zagsfan20 said:


> No, its funnier to see when people are ignorant to John Canzano's garb.


No. It's not.


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

SheedSoNasty said:


> No. It's not.


Yeah it is...


----------

