# Travis Outlaw promised at #23?



## RoseCity (Sep 27, 2002)

That's the rumor, he will sign with an agent as early as today. He was in Portland last week, and again yesterday... Some sources indicate Outlaw will go to the Blazers.

Thoughts?


----------



## Fork (Jan 2, 2003)

Guarantees in the NBA draft are absurd. There are zero guarantees. Who says we won't trade the pick? Or that somebody else won't pick him before us. I don't buy any draft rumors until they happen.


----------



## The Enigma (May 10, 2003)

Outlaw to Portland, put a _fork_ in it. 

:yes: (I couldn’t resist)


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Fork</b>!
> Guarantees in the NBA draft are absurd. There are zero guarantees. Who says we won't trade the pick? Or that somebody else won't pick him before us. I don't buy any draft rumors until they happen.


Well, guarantees DO happen. Kedrick Brown was guaranteed to be selected by Boston, and he stopped working out for other teams.

Casey Jacobson was promised last year by Phoenix, which is the reason he showed up in NY for the draft last year in spite of not being thought of as a first rounder.

With this said, while it DOES seem possible Portland promised Outlaw they'd pick him, I find it hard to believe because it seems too obvious.

Ed O.


----------



## Sambonius (May 21, 2003)

I really hope this guy, another athletic player that can't do much but dunk isn't what we need. Get me Zarko, Diaw, or Barbosa.


----------



## Siouxperior (Jan 15, 2003)

Sambonis, tell me a little about Zarko? We'd be lucky to get Barbosa, who reminds a lot of people of a Gilbert Arenas. I don't know too much about Outlaw, only that he has crazy up's.


----------



## Sambonius (May 21, 2003)

http://nbadraft.net/profiles/zarkocabarkapa.htm

Strengths : A versatile Power Forward with sensational fundamentals. Can also play either in C or cause headaches when used at SF. Very intelligent with great understanding of the game. Has a wingspan of a 7'1" man. He's a great talent with a good work ethic. Showed great improvement over the last 3 years. Has gained a bunch of experience that has resulted in maturity and given birth to leadership skills. Has tremendous ball-handling skills combined with quickness, great reflexes and court sense. Creates his own shots using his point-guard-like ball-handling skills, has a nice, hard to block, jump-shot with a quick release. Penetrates smoothly into the paint from both sides either finishing with a lay-up or finding the open man with an assist, even when faced with a double team. Great agility that causes problems against bigger bodies. He outruns his opponents. Very impressive in the open court, goes with great energy to the basket. He's not afraid of "traffic" in the paint. Puts up high percentages in shooting. He can shoot facing the basket, he can post up against smaller bodies, and can kill opponents with a long range shot... Defensively he is close to solid. He is keen on stealing balls and grabbing offensive rebounds for garbage points. 

Weaknesses : Classic Yugoslavian basketball body... Has to put on 25 pounds so to gain more space in the paint. Needs to work on his upper body to handle the strength of NBA players. He's not an overpowering rebounder nor a shot blocker. His hook shot needs polish.


Strengths: When facing the basket, he shows an assortment of perimeter skills ... For a player his size, he is extremely mobile showing the ability to run the floor with ease ... Wonderful set shooter who when given enough time, can drain the three point shot with regularity ... Possesses good movement without the ball which enables him to set-up for open jumpers ... When he does drive to the basket he is a dangerous set-up man for low post scorers to get easy looks ... Versatile player who can create mismatches with his ability to shoot the ball ... Shows excellent ball handling skills which allow him to bring the ball up or create fast break opportunities ... Has enough dribbling skills to drive past defenders ...Shows above average court vision for his size ... When his feet are set he has the ability to make the mid-range jumper ... Unselfish player who sees double teams well and reacts quickly ... Possess a solid work ethic that should continue to develop his potential ...Has the physical tools to be a competent defender such as long arms and decently quick hands ... 

Weaknesses: Defensively he lacks many of the basic skills such as anticipation and intensity ... Needs to improve on gaining lateral quickness defensively as quick players can trouble him ... Would greatly benefit by adding more weight and strength to his upper body ... While he has great height he is not much of a rebounder due in part to him often being out of position and lacking body strength ... Settles too often for shooting from the outside instead of driving to the basket ... Back to the basket skills are still in their developmental stages ... Ball protection should be worked on as he has a tendency to be turnover prone ... Not a big fan of physical contact ... Can become frustrated when contact occurs ... Doesn't always use his height to his advantage when played by smaller defenders ... Not a very efficient shooter off the dribble which could be due to the fact that he doesn't get good separation from his defenders ... Although, with improved foot speed he could greatly improve in this aspect ... 


Id love to stick this guy at SF and Randolph at PF in a few years. Id be truely stoked if Blazers were able to this draft this guy, this is my 2nd pick if Barbosa isn't available, but he might go even before Barbosa so I dunno.


----------



## Sambonius (May 21, 2003)

Go to the link look at his %. They are absurd! He shoots at such a high %, look at his FG% and 3 point % and his free throw % is also real solid. This guy can flat out shoot, and at 6-11 he may be a poor man's Nowitzki. This guy is gonna be really really good for a long time.


----------



## Siouxperior (Jan 15, 2003)

14.6 ppg 4.6 rpg. Not too impressive, but he does shoot a high %. I read on one of those rumor sites, that PHX have 'promissed' to take him at #19.


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

Well, Zarko SHOULD have pretty good numbers in Europe. He's 23 years old (older than ZR and over 3 years older than Outlaw).

He might be a good pick. I don't know. Just wanted to point out that he's older than most of the prospects we've been talking about, and older than most International players are when they enter the NBA...

Ed O.


----------



## Sambonius (May 21, 2003)

Yea but I think thats young compared to the other players overseas and usually the young players really don't play, check Gasol and Pavel.


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Sambonius</b>!
> Yea but I think thats young compared to the other players overseas and usually the young players really don't play, check Gasol and Pavel.


I hear you, but Pavel is almost 4 years younger than Zarko, and Gasol was more than a year younger (he's less than a year older than Zarko, and he's been in the NBA for two years now). 

Ed O.


----------



## MAS RipCity (Feb 22, 2003)

SIGN ME UP for Outlaw! I like the idea of taking High Schoolers. Look how JO turned out. We have so much time for Outlaw to develop its not even funny because of our depth. Crazy Ups, very athletic......he could turn into a miniture Keon Clark!


----------



## Sambonius (May 21, 2003)

Yea my point is that younger players overseas don't get much time to play, Gasol, Pavel, and from what I remember Darko didnt either. Young players period don't play much overseas.


----------



## ebott (Jan 7, 2003)

*pshhhhh*

That's simply foolish. There is no way the Blazers are guaranteeing anyone they're going to draft them. There are a dozen different ways that somebody could slip down to 23. If Barbosa is available are you going to tell me that the Blazers are going to uphold their agreement with Outlaw? No, you're not and that's why the Blazers wouldn't make any such promisses.

At 10, like Boston had that year, I can see it cause you've only got 9 other teams in front of you. But at 23 it's crazy talk.


----------



## RoseCity (Sep 27, 2002)

*Follow up...*

Here is the follow up to my post on Outlaw...
http://collegebasketballnews.theinsiders.com/2/116795.html


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

New information/rumor about this. Chad Ford in ESPNInsider this morning wrote that "Several league sources told Insider that the Blazers promised Outlaw they'd take him with the No. 23 pick."

This doesn't really get us closer to knowing if it's true, but the rumor certainly seems to have legs.

The other two rumored guarantees: Boston taking Marcus Banks with one of their picks and Zarko Cabarkapa at No. 17 to the Suns (although that's "taken a hit" because Zarko's coming back to the States to work out some more after having to rush back to Serbia after working out for the Suns and Lakers).

Interesting speculation, but just that at this point. As I've said before, the Outlaw-to-Portland guarantee just seems too obvious.

Ed O.


----------



## Oldmangrouch (Feb 11, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Ed O</b>!
> New information/rumor about this. Chad Ford in ESPNInsider this morning wrote that "Several league sources told Insider that the Blazers promised Outlaw they'd take him with the No. 23 pick."
> 
> This doesn't really get us closer to knowing if it's true, but the rumor certainly seems to have legs.
> ...


Agreed. InsideHoops is reporting that Perkins has reversed course again and will be staying in the draft. You can bet a rumor will now start flying that some team has made him a "guarantee" about being a 1st round pick also.

On a related note, some folks are now reporting that Zarko will stay in the draft this year, but not actually come over until 04. I wonder how legit that story is, and if it will have an impact on how early he is taken?


----------



## Fork (Jan 2, 2003)

Again, this guarantee is ridiculous. How can we guarantee a guy we're going to draft him when... 

WE HAVE NO GM. 

So who's making this 'guarantee'?


----------



## Kmurph (May 7, 2003)

First off Whitsitt is still in charge, but as of today I am sure they would consult with Pattersen and when the new GM comes aboard, will consult with him as well. I excpect that Pattersen, the new GM and Mo to some extent will have the final say or at least a consensus in WHO POR drafts. That being said, it is Warkentein who basically has headed the draft for POR, he provides Bob (or did, now I suspect he will to Pattersen\New GM (maybe it is himself?)) information on prospects and Bob would make the final call. He will most likely do the same this year and let Pattersen\New GM or a general consensus make the call again this year.

They may believe that Outlaw is the BEST prospect avaialable at #23, and who's to argue with them or their history? Maybe they don't like Barbosa? or West? Crapercabka? as MUCH as they like Outlaw's potential? Who's to say, we are not privy to their draft board. I personally find Outlaw to be intriguing, he is very young & very athletic, has good defensive skills, some perimiter and inside game, is probably still growing at 6'9, what is not to like? A group of Outlaw, Zebo and Q could be pretty good 2-4 years down the road (ooh imagine Gasol in there). I wouldn't mind Outlaw, I like his selection a lot more than others I have heard at #23.

Ah, the draft speculation heats up

Is Outlaw a "lock" at #23
or is 
Perkins a "lock" at #23
or maybe it will be
West, whom Warkentein has metnioned
or Z.Pachulia
whom POR is supposedly high on

The real answer?

Won't be known until June 26th

Gotta love the draft :laugh: :yes:


----------



## Reep (Jun 4, 2003)

kmurph, I think you are right on the relationship between the past and future administration. And I think that combination will do just fine in the draft.

As to Outlaw, I like the idea of bringing in some young potential, but I get really concerned that this guy is another Darius Miles or Dermarr Johnson--a tall slim athlete who can dunk just fine, but can't shoot or flow in the offense. I guess I'd be okay with taking a chance on him at 23, but you can only have so many of those on your bench at one time. Personally, I'd rather see us take a chance on a potential center (but not and overweight high schooler :chee or an aggresive Euro shooter.

:basket:


----------



## MixMatched (May 1, 2003)

*Tipping my hat to you, Kmurph*

Very well said. Being from the SEC region, I have tried to keep up with what's happening with Outlaw. 

I would not be surprised if he grows another 1-2 inches. I can not wait to see how his body develops over the next year!!! (Outlaw's father is a huge man) Travis is an awesome athlete. Very exciting to watch.


----------



## Siouxperior (Jan 15, 2003)

> Promises, Promises
> 
> 
> Speaking of those elusive promises, the rumor mill went into high alert Wednesday when high school star Travis Outlaw decided to keep his name in the draft.
> ...


----------



## Paxil (Jan 1, 2003)

I have a hard time thinking anyone from Portland would promise anything with the Pres and GM changing... unless it came from Allen. Allen seem to really want Q. Woods last year... so who knows.


----------



## blazerfan4life (Dec 31, 2002)

unless OUTLAW can play CENTER...(which he can't)..we don't need him...we need someone 7'0 or taller to play center...will
someone like that fall to number 23 i hope so


----------



## ThatBlazerGuy (May 1, 2003)

Well, NBADraft.net has Barbosa falling to 25, so if we pass on him i will officially go insane. Also, if Zarko or Sofo are avaliable, i gope we take them over Outlaw. 

Anyways, i really do not see how Outlaw fills a team need. He is tall and can dunk. But we need a PG, shooter and C. Outlaw is none of those things. But the Blazers alwasy draft talent or potential talent over need, so i would not be suprised if we took him. 

But dont listen to me. I was mad that the blazers drafted Zach over Haywood 2 years ago. LOL!!


----------



## Siouxperior (Jan 15, 2003)

There are only a few 7'0 players in this draft, and in a League desperate for true centers..any 7'0 that drops to #23 will be a stiff. Travis Outlaw could turn out to be a steal. Last year, Carmelo Anthony was considering coming out straight from HS...and by many mocks he was a mid-to-late 1st rounder...and now look at him! #3 pick in the draft.


----------



## MAS RipCity (Feb 22, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>ThatBlazerGuy</b>!
> Well, NBADraft.net has Barbosa falling to 25, so if we pass on him i will officially go insane. Also, if Zarko or Sofo are avaliable, i gope we take them over Outlaw.
> 
> Anyways, i really do not see how Outlaw fills a team need. He is tall and can dunk. But we need a PG, shooter and C. Outlaw is none of those things. But the Blazers alwasy draft talent or potential talent over need, so i would not be suprised if we took him.
> ...


Barbosa is slipping heavily,scouts don't think he is equipped to run an NBA offense. I want Outlaw.


----------



## PorterIn2004 (Jan 1, 2003)

Blazer fans should be the last fans talking about drafting for need; remember Sam Bowie? And who knows, maybe Q is already tied in with a package that's going to be headed out on draft day. A bunch of people seem to think we're not going to make moves because we "don't have a GM." We *do* still have a GM, arguably one of the best, as well as a fully competent staff around him. The new GM will simply begin dealing with whatever players are on the roster, be it the current crew plus a draft pick or a team that features a few new faces. The organization has direction, vision, and, at least to some degree, chances to move forward based on the interest and willingness of other teams to make deals. If this GM search continues to drag on amid other teams starting to make deals, if we're not dealing I sure hope it's because there really aren't any strong enough offers rather than that Allen and crew have decided to sit on their hands.


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

A freak athletically coming out of high school is a gamble that late in the first round is one I would be willing to take. Woods looks to be a guy who can play teh SG and seems to have a very nice touch from outside. Outlaw is that freakish slasher that if he were to develope a decent midrange jumper due to pro coaching, he could be an awesome addition.

Barbos or Sofoklis both are aloso young young gambles, but each possess a skill that may be more beneficial to Portland. BTW IMHO we could still be looking at Pavel dropping as far as us.


----------



## ThatBlazerGuy (May 1, 2003)

Why?

Ok, i may be wrong to think in terms of need and not talent, but where would he play. A future lineup of Woods at SG and Outlaw at SF leaves us with ABSOLUTLEY no shooting. Both have far to com in terms of shooting outside 10 feet. 

Maby i would be more content with him if we could land Kyle Korver at #54. 

But if Barbosa, Zarko, Sofo or Pavlovic are avaliable and we take Outlaw i will be angry and confused.


----------



## SLAM (Jan 1, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>ThatBlazerGuy</b>!
> 
> Anyways, i really do not see how Outlaw fills a team need. He is tall and can dunk. But we need a PG, shooter and C. Outlaw is none of those things. But the Blazers alwasy draft talent or potential talent over need, so i would not be suprised if we took him.


The needs that you listed are immediate needs, not needs that will be met by the 23rd pick in the draft. Portland should continue to draft for the best talent, regardless of position, and use free agency and trades to fill the present needs of the team. We're not a bottom-feeder team, we're a constant playoff contender. We can always have talent developing on the bench while we continue to compete at a high level. That's a luxury that Portland has, unlike the lotto teams that draft for need and start a green rookie and land back in the lotto the next year. Nabbing talented rookies like Bonzi (thru trade) and Zach, despite being loaded at those positions, has worked out very well in my opinion. If Outlaw is the most talented guy at 23, take him.


----------



## PorterIn2004 (Jan 1, 2003)

Just for the record, Woods was 3 of 9 on threes this year, shot 50% from the floor, and struggled at a 7 of 20 clip from the line. I've heard rumors that he's shown clear three point range in practice and that Cheeks hasn't felt the need to reel him in in that regard, though I've gotta think there's concern about his free throws.


----------



## ThatBlazerGuy (May 1, 2003)

Well, if Q imprves his J, im all for Outlaw. 

I have a feeling Q will get 20+ minutes this year(Ruben is good as gone, and AD isnt gonna resign)

I also hope if we draft Outlaw we can get him 15-20 minutes a game. 



But dont fall in love with this kid yet. This draft is EXTREMLEY unpredictible after the 1st 3 picks, and a lotto pick may fall to us)Much like Q did last year)


----------



## Fork (Jan 2, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>PorterIn2004</b>!
> A bunch of people seem to think we're not going to make moves because we "don't have a GM." We *do* still have a GM, arguably one of the best, as well as a fully competent staff around him. The new GM will simply begin dealing with whatever players are on the roster, be it the current crew plus a draft pick or a team that features a few new faces.


Making a trade just before hiring our new GM would be the Blazer's biggest mistake yet. That would pretty much be saying: You're our new GM, but our old GM just made your first move for you because we trust his vision more than yours. How do you like it? 

Sure, if we don't hire somebody before the draft, then a draft pick must be made. In that case, maube we would pick Outlaw. Fine. When that situation arises, you can all post about how right you were. But to say that there is a 'guarantee' that we'll pick so and so, that's just not true. We could hire a GM tomorrow. That's why there are no guarantees.


----------



## Qyntel's Shadow (Dec 31, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>PorterIn2004</b>!
> ...I've heard rumors that he's shown clear three point range in practice...


I watched him go shot for shot with Rasheed in their 3 point game during shootaround last year. Rasheed won on the final location (far corner), but Qyntel was tied or ahead throughout the other locations. He needs more time, I hope he's taking his Summer seriously.


----------



## Peaceman (Jan 15, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Fork</b>!
> 
> 
> Making a trade just before hiring our new GM would be the Blazer's biggest mistake yet. That would pretty much be saying: You're our new GM, but our old GM just made your first move for you because we trust his vision more than yours. How do you like it?
> ...



Whitsett and Wartentein have been working on the draft. Now PAtterson can take the ideas, offers and make final decisions. If Whitsett setup a Sheed trade, or moving up, Patterson will get the credit or blasted for his first move. What a possible PR boon if Sheed and PAtterson go on draft night in good trades.


----------



## PorterIn2004 (Jan 1, 2003)

One thing I don't quite understand yet is why a team would ever be tempted to guarantee a player anything in the draft. I suppose it's a nice thing for the player to have -- the peace of mind about location and all in advance such that housing and what not could be worked out in advance. However, I don't see what the team really gains unless it's saving their player the "wear and tear" of a few more workouts. Is it that, if the player refuses other workouts those teams are then more likely to skip over the player? Is it about doing your new young star a favor (I can see Darko with his bags under his arms now...)? It seems to me that, unless the player pulls a Francis, Bryant, or Elway, there's not much the player can do except say thank you, in that if someone "steals" the player he can't easily decline.

From the teams' perspective, in a draft like this one, I could see guarantees being made to the top three or four if the teams in question were all really certain about what was happening above them. By slots five or six though it seems like guys might already be "slipping through." It just seems a crazy idea. For that matter, what if prior to the draft James were to get seriously injured, perhaps such that he might never play again. That could/would change everything aaaalllll the way down the line. It just makes no sense to me. If someone wants to take a shot at explaining this to me I'd love to hear more perspectives on it.


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>PorterIn2004</b>!
> One thing I don't quite understand yet is why a team would ever be tempted to guarantee a player anything in the draft.


It's because (a) they want to make sure the player stays in the draft, and (b) they want the player to stop working out, so that the player doesn't work his way up the draft board.

I'm not sure it makes a LOT of sense to do it, but it's done occasionally so some teams must think it's worth it...

Ed O.


----------



## RoseCity (Sep 27, 2002)

I predicted it a full week before the draft... Ahhh, the joys of being right.


----------



## jackiejackal (Nov 7, 2002)

*English from Hawaii*

was available..
he is known for his shooting..
and a great guy to boot...why not him??

I just don't get it..
all these one trick ponies we get..
and hardly any of them are pure shooters.
just "athletic"..THAT'S NOT WHAT WINS CHAMPIONSHIPS.

actually I would have taken back Ritchie Frahm also.

another real nice kid...
a shooter to boot.

Portland would have won the title in 2000 with decent shooting
by even one player...
one stinkin shooter..


----------



## Siouxperior (Jan 15, 2003)

*Re: English from Hawaii*



> Originally posted by <b>jackiejackal</b>!
> was available..
> he is known for his shooting..
> and a great guy to boot...why not him??
> ...


We could still get English. He wasn't drafted, so we could sign him, and try him out on our SPL team.


----------



## Trader Ed (Jun 17, 2002)

Just to set the record straight...

In an interview yesterday, on 910 the fan.... Travis was asked if he was promised to be taken by Portland if he was available.

Travis answer was "NO, they did not"

Just an FYI


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Trader Bob</b>!
> Just to set the record straight...
> 
> In an interview yesterday, on 910 the fan.... Travis was asked if he was promised to be taken by Portland if he was available.
> ...


Well, he also said that he not only didn't work out for the Blazers but didn't work out for ANY teams.

I find that a bit suspicious, so it's possible Outlaw is either confused or lying to the media already 

Ed O.


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

*Re: English from Hawaii*



> Originally posted by <b>jackiejackal</b>!
> was available..
> he is known for his shooting..
> and a great guy to boot...why not him??
> ...


Funny that you point out two players that you ESPECIALLY want that no team in the NBA seems to want too badly.

It's possible that you're right and the whole NBA is wrong, but I somehow doubt it.

Ed O.


----------



## jackiejackal (Nov 7, 2002)

*Aleksandar Pavlovic*

This guy is listed as "able to shoot the lights out"..
he was selected by Utah. After Portland picked.

who promised Outlaw????

I just don't get it.


----------



## jackiejackal (Nov 7, 2002)

*But Ed.. that's how diluted the league is*

These two guys are decent people also..
why not them ??

they wouldn't be as good as Outlaw???

that was my point.

as far as them not being recognized..
please !
they are every bit as good as half the NBA.

THAT'S HOW BAD THE SHOOTING IS..

When I went back and re read your statement ed,
I realized you didn't understand what my point was.

I didn't mean I would choose these guys if they were my ONLY choices,I am using both of them as examples because they fit the bill on WHAT'S AVAILABLE..
Of course there are BETTER players,but Portland could sign either one of these guys for a decent price,I would assume.

Is that any more palatable for you??


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

*Re: Aleksandar Pavlovic*



> Originally posted by <b>jackiejackal</b>!
> This guy is listed as "able to shoot the lights out"..
> he was selected by Utah. After Portland picked.


Did LeBron go after Outlaw, too, jackie?

Ed O.


----------



## jackiejackal (Nov 7, 2002)

*what??????????*

Don't understand you Ed..
or is it just your incredible wit??


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

*Re: But Ed.. that's how diluted the league is*



> Originally posted by <b>jackiejackal</b>!
> These two guys are decent people also..
> why not them ??


Because they're not as good at basketball as the players the Blazers already have... is that a good reason?



> they wouldn't be as good as Outlaw???


They would be sitting on the bench just like Outlaw, so in that sense they'd be just as good. They're both like 4 + years older, without half of the physical size or tools that Outlaw has, so while 3 years from now all three players MIGHT have the same value (none, because Travis didn't develop), Outlaw has a chance to be a seriously good player... which neither English nor, particularly, Frahm, have.



> that was my point.


I'm not surprised to hear that.



> as far as them not being recognized..
> please !
> they are every bit as good as half the NBA.
> 
> THAT'S HOW BAD THE SHOOTING IS..


Again, though: why do you know better than all of the NBA who's better than the players already there? Is every single decision maker in the NBA incompetent? Maybe they have significant enough holes in their game that their one trick (shooting) doesn't mitigate the rest of their weaknesses.



> When I went back and re read your statement ed,
> I realized you didn't understand what my point was.
> 
> I didn't mean I would choose these guys if they were my ONLY choices,I am using both of them as examples because they fit the bill on WHAT'S AVAILABLE..
> ...


Not really. Neither of them are good enough to get off the bench, so Outlaw's a better choice IMO because of his potential.

Ed O.


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

*Re: what??????????*



> Originally posted by <b>jackiejackal</b>!
> Don't understand you Ed..
> or is it just your incredible wit??


Not my incredible wit. Just the facts, ma'am.

I'll explain.

Cleveland picked #1. Cleveland picked LeBron James.

Utah picked #19. Utah picked Aleksandar Pavlovic.

Portland picked #23. Portland picked Travis Outlaw.

Since you were asserting that Pavlovic was picked after Outlaw, I was wondering if you would extend it to saying James was picked after Outlaw, too. After all, that would show that Travis was an even dumber decision, so you might want to do it.

Ed O.


----------



## jackiejackal (Nov 7, 2002)

*Ed..*

I have never said I "know better than anyone else".

I am just a fan,as you are.

Why are so sarcastic,nitpicking/etc. with me??

I have had people private email me to tell me how you hound certain people.
I see this for myself.

You are such a stickler for things that don't agree with you.

Who made you such an expert??

and why do you have to be so critical???


----------



## jackiejackal (Nov 7, 2002)

*just your way of saying something*

seems so unpleasant..
that's all.

If I was in error about Utah,I just read that on a site and got to thinking about it..
I should not have followed an incorrect statement.

[bowing down to Mr. Ed]


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

*Re: Ed..*



> Originally posted by <b>jackiejackal</b>!
> I have never said I "know better than anyone else".


It seems that you were, since you were saying that two guys that have never been drafted are as good as half of the NBA.

And using that opinion as a criticism of Portland's pick.



> I am just a fan,as you are.
> 
> Why are so sarcastic,nitpicking/etc. with me??


I don't like it when people don't get the facts straight to support their rantings.



> I have had people private email me to tell me how you hound certain people.
> I see this for myself.


OK.



> You are such a stickler for things that don't agree with you.


I can disagree with people and understand that not everyone agrees about things... that's cool. But when someone posts something like the Blazers messed up by passing on Aleksandar Pavlovic with the #23 pick in the draft, I'm going to say something.

So I guess inaccuracies don't agree with me, and I AM a stickler for those sometimes...



> Who made you such an expert??


Al Gore, right after he invented the internet.



> and why do you have to be so critical???


It's in my contract.

Ed O.


----------



## barfo (Jan 2, 2003)

*Re: just your way of saying something*



> Originally posted by <b>jackiejackal</b>!
> seems so unpleasant..
> that's all.
> 
> ...


A horse is a horse,
of course, of course,
And no one loses an argument with a horse
of course
unless that horse
of course of course
is the famous Mr. Ed!

barfo


----------



## blazerfan4life (Dec 31, 2002)

*jackie and ed*

go to your seperate corners:laugh:


----------



## Siouxperior (Jan 15, 2003)

I'm with Ed O on this one. At pick #23 you can get a 

A. Journeymen (most likely)
B. Potential star

Bob Whitsitt chose wisely imo. Who ever we picked wasn't going to get P/T anyways, So why not get a HS star, and groom him into something special?


----------



## Masbee (Dec 31, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Siouxperior</b>!
> I'm with Ed O on this one. At pick #23 you can get a
> 
> A. Journeymen (most likely)
> ...


Close. When drafting out of the lottery, it is actually like this.

A. Out of NBA after 5 years - most likely
B. Journeyman - good possibility
C. Quality NBA Starter - low possibility
D. Star - very remote

A loaded team like the Blazers is wise to draft players that have the most potential for C or D, as they really have little to lose. If they aim low (for the journeyman) as many teams do, because they want a more polished player who can contribute right away, the tradeoff is lack of potential (or of much potential - a player that is more polished, skilled and/or proven isn't available outside of the lottery). Those players, even if they stick in the NBA, have very little chance of beating one of Portland's main rotation players out of a job. Well if that's all Portland wanted, they would do better to bring in FA veterans - those journeymen - at minimum salary, who are proven, established players, more likely to deliver what the GM and coach was looking for than a rookie, where half fail entirely.

Nope, the Blazers are conceptually doing it right. Though you could argue with their specific picks, by claiming there were players with better potential left on the board when they picked - as some are saying with Barbosa and Lampe.

http://www.hoopsworld.com/article_4202.shtml

This guy was kind enough to do an analysis of 89-98 drafts to illustrate the above concepts. From picks 16 to 30 during this period, only one half of the picks stuck in the NBA after their 5th season. And if it weren't for guaranteed contracts, many of them would be run out much sooner.

If this is true, why don't more teams go for the "potential"? Different teams have different needs. Some would rather go for a more mature player so they know what they are getting, then take a gamble on a high flyer. Some teams draft for holes in their roster. Some teams know if they hit the jackpot and score a starter out of a "project", they won't be able to afford to keep them when the rookie contract ends. The Gilbert Arenas problem. Some teams have had bad luck identifying potential, so knowing themselves, avoid reaching too far with their projections.


----------

