# MB's blog: Joels in town/Oden info



## mgb (Jun 26, 2004)

From Barrett's blog:



> I have spoken with Przybilla, who's first question to me was "how is Greg feeling following his surgery?" Przybilla said he was heartbroken when he heard the news about Oden on Thursday. He also said he's arriving in the best shape of his career, having worked with a personal trainer in Milwaukee for the past two months. Joel is down to 244 pounds, and says he's under 9 percent body fat, which is as low as he has been as a professional. He'll join his teammates for workouts on Monday.


Raef lives across from Oden and visited him:



> This weekend I did run into Raef LaFrentz, who has been to Oden's house already for a visit. He lives across the street from Greg, and dropped by on Friday. He said Greg is in good spirits and had a bed moved into the living room, where he is resting and watching movies. By the end of the weekend, LaFrentz said he expected Oden would be visited by every member of the Trail Blazers, and I'll get more specifics on that early this week. As soon as Oden is up to it, I plan to get a one-on-one interview with him for this blog. I know you're all interested in hearing directly from him. I'm working on it, but also want to respect his space during this time.


On Oden's rehab:



> Oden's rehab will begin as soon as he's able to get on his feet. Blazers trainer Jay Jensen will be getting Greg into the pool at the team's practice facility, and they'll begin the road back. I'll keep you up to date on that. The doctors who worked on Greg's thumb injury last year have told Blazer executives that Oden "healed amazingly fast." We'll take you through every bit of the rehab.


I wonder how long it'll take him to get to his feet?

Quick update:



> You can mail cards and letters to the Trail Blazers front office. The address is One Center Court, suite 200, Portland, 27227. Just address your note to Greg and I promise you it'll get to him.


Come on guys and gals lets get a lot of cards to him! He can use the upper body workout.


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

> [/Przybilla said he was heartbroken when he heard the news about Oden on Thursday.QUOTE]
> 
> I can't help but think this is just Mike Barrett propoganda. Let's see, Joel goes from a bench warmer to rotation player. I have a feeling he's pretty happy about that.


----------



## mgb (Jun 26, 2004)

mediocre man said:


> > Przybilla said he was heartbroken when he heard the news about Oden on Thursday.
> 
> 
> I can't help but think this is just Mike Barrett propoganda. Let's see, Joel goes from a bench warmer to rotation player. I have a feeling he's pretty happy about that.


That's pretty cynical. I bet Joel was sincere. He's going to see mins anyway and probably isn't so petty he'd be happy someone would get injured. Of course he might be happy he's playing more, but it doesn't follow that he isn't heartbroken when he heard about Oden. After all he knows what it's like. Plus I bet he'd rather be a backup on a playoff team than a starter on a lotto team.


----------



## moldorf (Jun 29, 2007)

mediocre man said:


> > [/Przybilla said he was heartbroken when he heard the news about Oden on Thursday.QUOTE]
> >
> > I can't help but think this is just Mike Barrett propoganda. Let's see, Joel goes from a bench warmer to rotation player. I have a feeling he's pretty happy about that.
> 
> ...


----------



## crandc (Sep 15, 2004)

What is the consensus? Should I or should I not send Oden cookies? Or would brownies be better?


----------



## yakbladder (Sep 13, 2003)

crandc said:


> What is the consensus? Should I or should I not send Oden cookies? Or would brownies be better?


You can bake whatever you want - I doubt they get to him. Cookies from a fan? It must be poison.

But if you do send them, add in a little note telling him not to rush back. Just take it nice and easy...


----------



## mgb (Jun 26, 2004)

crandc said:


> What is the consensus? Should I or should I not send Oden cookies? Or would brownies be better?


Having taste your cookies I'd go with the cookies. They can always let BLaze test them first.

Plus they might think you included a special ingredient if you gave him brownies.


----------



## BBert (Dec 30, 2004)

crandc: If you send him something, just include in the note that I volunteer to be his official food taster. :drool:


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

moldorf said:


> mediocre man said:
> 
> 
> > maybe joel isn't petty and selfish, and actually cares about the wefare of his teammates.
> ...


----------



## It's_GO_Time (Oct 13, 2005)

crandc said:


> What is the consensus? Should I or should I not send Oden cookies? Or would brownies be better?



I vote for sending him somethng . . . just avoid peanut brittle . . . it might send the wrong message. :biggrin:


----------



## andalusian (Jun 29, 2006)

mediocre man said:


> You are correct. I had forgotten that the Blazers REALLY overpaid Joel when they were trying to reconnect with the community. He already has his security. That and the fact that with him playing more he is more likely to get hurt sooner in the season.


Given that there were a couple more teams that were willing to pay him the same - I am not sure that they overpaid him... it seems to be the market price for defensive big men. The fact that he had a couple of injuries does not change the fact that this is the way the game is played and this is the price to pay.

There is really no reason to have these snide remarks about Joel. He is what he is as far as health goes and he does work hard. This is not a Theo or Tim Thomas situation. The man is a hard worker and a quality individual. No one expected him to turn into Shaq or Tim Duncan in his production - and hopefully he will stay healthier this year and wear a cup where the sun does not shine.


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

andalusian said:


> Given that there were a couple more teams that were willing to pay him the same - I am not sure that they overpaid him... it seems to be the market price for defensive big men. The fact that he had a couple of injuries does not change the fact that this is the way the game is played and this is the price to pay.
> 
> There is really no reason to have these snide remarks about Joel. He is what he is as far as health goes and he does work hard. This is not a Theo or Tim Thomas situation. The man is a hard worker and a quality individual. No one expected him to turn into Shaq or Tim Duncan in his production - and hopefully he will stay healthier this year and wear a cup where the sun does not shine.




Incorrect. Joel took the most money. And the ONLY reason he is here and not Chicago is because they were able to sign Ben Wallace instead. Portland was Joel's second choice.


----------



## andalusian (Jun 29, 2006)

He took the most money available - but the offer was not exclusive to Portland. The Pistons were interested in him as well.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/07/05/s...tml?ex=1190174400&en=b661fa364a5dfb19&ei=5070



> The Pistons had been focusing on Joel Przybilla, a 26-year-old center. But yesterday, he decided to stay with the Portland Trail Blazers instead of joining a far more successful team in Detroit. Portland agreed to pay Przybilla $32 million over five years. "He's extremely loyal, and they gave him an opportunity two years ago when no one else did," Przybilla's agent, Bill Duffy, said in a telephone interview yesterday.


After they failed with him they (the Pistons) signed Nazr Mohammad for basically the same amount that Joel received. So if multiple teams were willing to pay this amount (the differences are small) - it seems to be market correct and he is not REALLY overpaid as you said.


----------



## Utherhimo (Feb 20, 2005)

besides GET WELL ODEN! GO BLAZERS!


----------



## YardApe (Mar 10, 2005)

Oden being hurt this way is a negative blast to anyone who loves hoops. He was to be the new guard of centers. Shaq is on the way out , Hakeem retired, Duncan's got another 3 years tops and Yao is just to soft to strike fear into anyone's heart. Wallace is an undersized center and KG really is a PF, so yes it sucks that Oden is injured.

Joel knows that Oden is the new guard and without him the team will suffer and they will! So I believe in his concern for Greg. I believe that most centers know the implications of these type of surgeries.


----------



## MARIS61 (Apr 28, 2003)

mediocre man said:


> > [/Przybilla said he was heartbroken when he heard the news about Oden on Thursday.QUOTE]
> >
> > I can't help but think this is just Mike Barrett propoganda. Let's see, Joel goes from a bench warmer to rotation player. I have a feeling he's pretty happy about that.
> 
> ...


----------



## mgb (Jun 26, 2004)

MARIS61 said:


> I don't see this increasing Joel's minutes at all, or his place in the rotation.
> 
> He figured to be the starter this year no matter what, as Oden learned the NBA game and how not to foul, and with Magloire gone we have no other centers to speak of.
> 
> I don't see using LaMarcus or Frye at center as a viable option against many teams. I'd consider Travis or Raef at C before either of those two.


I don't know about Travis, but Joel and Raef for sure. LMA before Outlaw. I think LMA will play C a lot more than he would have.

Edit to correct who was being quoted.


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

MARIS61 said:


> He figured to be the starter this year no matter what, as Oden learned the NBA game and how not to foul, and with Magloire gone we have no other centers to speak of.


You're kidding, right? You think that Joel would have started ahead of Oden?



> I don't see using LaMarcus or Frye at center as a viable option against many teams. I'd consider Travis or Raef at C before either of those two.


I'm not anything approaching a Frye fan, but using Outlaw at center ahead of him? That's just silly.

Ed O.


----------



## yuyuza1 (May 24, 2006)

MB said:


> The doctors who worked on Greg's thumb injury last year have told Blazer executives that Oden "healed amazingly fast." We'll take you through every bit of the rehab.


A thumb injury? huh?


----------



## sabas4mvp (Sep 23, 2002)

I'm sure Joel is concerned about Oden's health. Do you think he would rather start and average 35 minutes per game and be a lottery team for the rest of his career or come off the bench and average 20 and make it to the finals riding behind Oden's play.


----------



## BealzeeBob (Jan 6, 2003)

mediocre man said:


> Incorrect. Joel took the most money. And the ONLY reason he is here and not Chicago is because they were able to sign Ben Wallace instead. Portland was Joel's second choice.


Did Joel kick your dog, or what? Yeah, he took the most money to stay with the Blazers. He could have taken slightly less to play on one of two playoff teams. Your dislike of Joel and/or his contract doesn't change that it is market value. 

IMO, Joel is a quality guy that wanted to be here. He works hard, provides good defense, and is a good locker room guy. Do you still seriously think that we would be better off today, had the Blazers let him walk?

Do you have a link that he would have accepted the Bulls' offer, had they not signed Wallace?

If you're going to keep up this Joel bashing, seems fair that Joel fans, such as myself, should be able to continue to ask what the hell was up with your 'big trade'. Did you ever enlighten us about what your 'inside sources' told you would occur? Did any of the others that you e-mailed in advance share those e-mails? (That could have happened, and I just missed it, because I quit wading through the bull crap that was that entire thread LONG before it fell off the front page.)

Go Blazers


----------



## It's_GO_Time (Oct 13, 2005)

yuyuza1 said:


> A thumb injury? huh?



I missed that. Does anyone else know about the thumb injury, or are we really talking about the wrist injury?

Maybe that is why it healed so quick . . . it was never injured in the first place. :biggrin:


----------



## maxiep (May 7, 2003)

crandc said:


> What is the consensus? Should I or should I not send Oden cookies? Or would brownies be better?


crandc, you're too nice! The only caveat I would give is to send him something reasonably low in fat and calories. He's going to be sedentary for a few months and might put on some weight. Weight is the enemy when it comes to microfracture.


----------



## ryanjend22 (Jan 23, 2004)

crandc said:


> What is the consensus? Should I or should I not send Oden cookies? Or would brownies be better?


i wouldn't eat anything a fan sent me. and neither will he. too many crazies out here. save your groceries.


----------



## Samuel (Jan 1, 2003)

heartbroken... all the way to the bank!


----------



## Samuel (Jan 1, 2003)

BealzeeBob said:


> what? Yeah, he took the most money to stay with the Blazers. He could have taken slightly less to play on one of two playoff team


MM has a point, though. People, esp. MB, give Blake and Przybilla all this credit for putting the Blazers first when the Blazers actually offered the most money. You honestly can't say that a player is loyal for returning when said team outbids everyone. At that point it's, 'thanks for coming back, but we recognize you also did it for the money.' 

And MM isn't really faulting Prz for that either. When it comes to pro athletes, their bodies (and therefore, their careers) have limited shelf lives. Might as well make as much as you can before that last groin injury puts you down. I'd have done the same thing had I been in his shoes.


----------



## BlazerCaravan (Aug 12, 2004)

ryanjend22 said:


> i wouldn't eat anything a fan sent me. and neither will he. too many crazies out here. save your groceries.


Agreed.


----------



## dudleysghost (Mar 24, 2006)

Samuel said:


> MM has a point, though. People, esp. MB, give Blake and Przybilla all this credit for putting the Blazers first when the Blazers actually offered the most money.


It is a bit disingenuous to keep saying "most money" when he knows full well the actual difference was small. With the Blazers compared to the Pistons or Spurs, Joel got extra 2% escalators, so he makes a couple million more. That might sound like a lot, but isn't really when we're talking about a $30 million contract. Two championship level teams offered Joel the full MLE (although SA's offer had a team option on the last year), which was practically the same as Portland's offer, and Joel chose to stay in Portland.


----------



## Public Defender (May 5, 2003)

ryanjend22 said:


> i wouldn't eat anything a fan sent me. and neither will he. too many crazies out here. save your groceries.


This is sad, but probably true. 

crandc - You might contact the Blazers' organization - don't they know you already from your writing on the NBA? - and see if you can hand the cookies personally to a member of the Blazers' organization (so they have a personal connection to the originator), and then have that person get the baked goodies to Greg. I think it's a very nice thought, and I'd like to think there's a way around the somewhat justified paranoia out there, among celebrities.


----------



## Samuel (Jan 1, 2003)

dudleysghost said:


> It is a bit disingenuous to keep saying "most money" when he knows full well the actual difference was small. With the Blazers compared to the Pistons or Spurs, Joel got extra 2% escalators, so he makes a couple million more. That might sound like a lot, but isn't really when we're talking about a $30 million contract. Two championship level teams offered Joel the full MLE (although SA's offer had a team option on the last year), which was practically the same as Portland's offer, and Joel chose to stay in Portland.


I think that difference matters when you're talking about a player like Joel Przybilla. Zach? Rasheed? Someone with a little more staying power? Maybe not. But with Joel, I think it made a difference.


----------



## dudleysghost (Mar 24, 2006)

Samuel said:


> I think that difference matters when you're talking about a player like Joel Przybilla. Zach? Rasheed? Someone with a little more staying power? Maybe not. But with Joel, I think it made a difference.


I'm not sure what you are basing that on, but intuitively, you'd think that when a guy is making 8 figures, he stops worrying so much about a few percentage points.


----------



## maxiep (May 7, 2003)

dudleysghost said:


> I'm not sure what you are basing that on, but intuitively, you'd think that when a guy is making 8 figures, he stops worrying so much about a few percentage points.


When you're comparing offers on that level, what it also allows you to do is to bring other factors into account. Which organization do you like better? Where is your family the happiest? Do you like your teammates?

I wouldn't have blamed Joel a bit for choosing Chicago. His family spends the offseason in Door County and also still have their home in Brookfield (both in WI). He and his wife are both midwesterners. Chicago is Valhalla for people from that region. It's the fact he turned down Detroit and SA that impressed me, not that he chose to stay with us. The fact we were second on that list of four says a lot about him.


----------



## It's_GO_Time (Oct 13, 2005)

maxiep said:


> When you're comparing offers on that level, what it also allows you to do is to bring other factors into account. Which organization do you like better? Where is your family the happiest? Do you like your teammates?
> 
> I wouldn't have blamed Joel a bit for choosing Chicago. His family spends the offseason in Door County and also still have their home in Brookfield (both in WI). He and his wife are both midwesterners. Chicago is Valhalla for people from that region. It's the fact he turned down Detroit and SA that impressed me, not that he chose to stay with us. The fact we were second on that list of four says a lot about him.



Alright maxiep, I don't want to get into it with you (I'm pissing off enough posters on this board) but last time I swear I suggested what you are saying and you tore me a new ******* telling me it was all about the money for Joel and how nice that he could pretend that he choose Ptd out of loyality.

I would take the other side this time and tell you it was all about cash for Joel, but I forgot why . . . only that you were dogging me for suggesting what you just said above.

It's all good, but you rip me up last time for suggesting that . . . I can't let that go can I?


----------



## maxiep (May 7, 2003)

Kiss_My_Darius said:


> Alright maxiep, I don't want to get into it with you (I'm pissing off enough posters on this board) but last time I swear I suggested what you are saying and you tore me a new ******* telling me it was all about the money for Joel and how nice that he could pretend that he choose Ptd out of loyality.
> 
> I would take the other side this time and tell you it was all about cash for Joel, but I forgot why . . . only that you were dogging me for suggesting what you just said above.
> 
> It's all good, but you rip me up last time for suggesting that . . . I can't let that go can I?


Did I really rip into you? I must have been in a trolling or contrarian mood. Seriously, Joel is one of my favorite Blazers. I've always given him credit for turning down the likes of the Pistons and the Spurs.

If I did, please accept my apologies.


----------



## It's_GO_Time (Oct 13, 2005)

maxiep said:


> Did I really rip into you? I must have been in a trolling or contrarian mood. Seriously, Joel is one of my favorite Blazers. I've always given him credit for turning down the likes of the Pistons and the Spurs.
> 
> If I did, please accept my apologies.



Hey, what a pleasant surprise. I will take that in this day of age where everyone has to be right all the time.

We went at it pretty hard back then, good to see by gones on that one. And whatever was said about Joel last year during the signing . . . who cares.

Today (09/17/07), I like Joel, I still like the signing . . . but after a year, I think medicore man's skeptical view of Joel unfortunately has some merit.

Check PM


----------



## maxiep (May 7, 2003)

Kiss_My_Darius said:


> Hey, what a pleasant surprise. I will take that in this day of age where everyone has to be right all the time.
> 
> We went at it pretty hard back then, good to see by gones on that one. And whatever was said about Joel last year during the signing . . . who cares.
> 
> ...


KMD tried to be graceful by PMing me what I wrote, but I really was a jackhole on that one, so I deserve a public flogging. I have no idea why I was posting that way. I was totally psyched that Joel re-signed with us. The scary thing is, I still love the Joel signing. I really do think he'll be important for us this year.


----------



## BealzeeBob (Jan 6, 2003)

Samuel said:


> MM has a point, though. People, esp. MB, give Blake and Przybilla all this credit for putting the Blazers first when the Blazers actually offered the most money. You honestly can't say that a player is loyal for returning when said team outbids everyone. At that point it's, 'thanks for coming back, but we recognize you also did it for the money.'
> 
> And MM isn't really faulting Prz for that either. When it comes to pro athletes, their bodies (and therefore, their careers) have limited shelf lives. Might as well make as much as you can before that last groin injury puts you down. I'd have done the same thing had I been in his shoes.


I was answering two of MM's comments: 

First, that Prz could have played for either of two contenders for only slightly less pay. He may have gone for the biggest bucks, but if he didn't *want* to be in Portland, he wouldn't be.

Second, MM was chipping at Prz's contract earlier in the thread. Two playoff contenders offered all they could, and very nearly at the price the Blazers offered. SA is known for being frugal?/prudent about who they sign, yet they were in the running. How could two good teams have been interested in Joel at almost the same price we paid him, yet the Blazers "REALLY overpaid" him?

MM also noted that Joel would be gone if da Bulls hadn't signed Ben. If Joel's all about the money, MM must be pretty sure that the Bulls would offer at least the MLE, so there is another good team that probably doesn't think that the Blazers REALLY overpaid.

Go Blazers


----------



## crandc (Sep 15, 2004)

I can't hand cookies to anyone since I live out of state. But Mike Barrett has said he will be responsible for seeing any cards and letters sent to Greg get to him, so I figured I'd send him an email. He knows cookies I send won't be poisoned. Not diet food, but not poison.


----------



## e_blazer1 (Feb 3, 2004)

crandc said:


> I can't hand cookies to anyone since I live out of state. But Mike Barrett has said he will be responsible for seeing any cards and letters sent to Greg get to him, so I figured I'd send him an email. He knows cookies I send won't be poisoned. Not diet food, but not poison.


Well, they might cause a slow death, but what a way to go.


----------



## Masbee (Dec 31, 2002)

BealzeeBob said:


> MM also noted that Joel would be gone if da Bulls hadn't signed Ben. If Joel's all about the money, MM must be pretty sure that the Bulls would offer at least the MLE, so there is another good team that probably doesn't think that the Blazers REALLY overpaid.
> 
> Go Blazers


I guess it boils down to MM aserting that his opinion on Joel and his market worth last summer was more correct than that of three of the better run franchises in the NBA - all of whom wanted Joel and all of whom were offering roughly similar money.

So, the Blazers, seeing Chicago, Detroit and San Antonio set the market, and seeing they were all good to great teams, and seeing that Portland was a complete mess at that point in time, outbid (by a modest amount) the remaining suitors (after Chicago in a surprise got Big Ben), and kept Joel.

Seems to me, all the Blazers did, was pay the market rate. But, what do I know?

I do know that it can get boring complaining about big men getting overpaid in the NBA. Virtually ALL NBA players over 6'10" that don't trip over their own feet get "overpaid", unless they are all-stars earning those big bucks. There aren't nearly enough to go around. Yet every team needs 2 or 3. Supply (limited) and demand (high). 

Complaining about NBA Big men's salaries is like complaining about the rain. Oh, wait, nevermind. Go ahead. Complain. About the same stupid thing. Over and over and over again.


----------



## mgb (Jun 26, 2004)

Masbee said:


> I guess it boils down to MM aserting that his opinion on Joel and his market worth last summer was more correct than that of three of the better run franchises in the NBA - all of whom wanted Joel and all of whom were offering roughly similar money.
> 
> So, the Blazers, seeing Chicago, Detroit and San Antonio set the market, and seeing they were all good to great teams, and seeing that Portland was a complete mess at that point in time, outbid (by a modest amount) the remaining suitors (after Chicago in a surprise got Big Ben), and kept Joel.
> 
> ...


Why, oh, why have we gave up so much and got so little in return!?


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

Masbee said:


> I guess it boils down to MM aserting that his opinion on Joel and his market worth last summer was more correct than that of three of the better run franchises in the NBA - all of whom wanted Joel and all of whom were offering roughly similar money.
> 
> So, the Blazers, seeing Chicago, Detroit and San Antonio set the market, and seeing they were all good to great teams, and seeing that Portland was a complete mess at that point in time, outbid (by a modest amount) the remaining suitors (after Chicago in a surprise got Big Ben), and kept Joel.
> 
> ...




If you want to think that giving that much money to a player that has proven, and proved before the contract that he is injured far too much to ever earn that money then fine. I will always contend he will never earn it. 

As for every team "NEEDING" 2 or 3 I would say yes as long as they are skilled big men of that size. No NBA team (Except the Pistons) that has competed for the championship has done so with a player that does not need to be guarded on offense. There is no need whatsoever to pay a player that much money when that player doesn't help you get to the level of competing for a title.


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

mgb said:


> Why, oh, why have we gave up so much and got so little in return!?


Are you admitting, then, that we got too little for Zach?

Complaining about the weather? It rains. It's indisputable.

Complaining about big men being "overpaid". Big guys who are at least semi-skilled get paid too much for their production. It's indisputable.

Complaining about giving away Zach? That IS disputed... Claiming that the loss of Zach is going to cost us wins this year? That IS disputed.

Redundant truisms are different beasts, entirely, than redundant arguments.

Ed O.


----------



## mgb (Jun 26, 2004)

Ed O said:


> *Are you admitting, then, that we got too little for Zach?*
> 
> Complaining about the weather? It rains. It's indisputable.
> 
> ...


Find a post that I said otherwise. At least short term.


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

mgb said:


> Find a post that I said otherwise. At least short term.


Sorry to misrepresent your position, but complaining about a position that you evidently take, yourself, seems odd. Or do you think that everyone agrees with you and me that what we got back from Zach hurts us this year?

Ed O.


----------



## Draco (Jun 28, 2003)

mediocre man said:


> As for every team "NEEDING" 2 or 3 I would say yes as long as they are skilled big men of that size. *No NBA team (Except the Pistons) that has competed for the championship has done so with a player that does not need to be guarded on offense*. There is no need whatsoever to pay a player that much money when that player doesn't help you get to the level of competing for a title.


There have been plenty of title contenders with big men contributing in the rotation who were as inept as Joel.

Maybe signing Joel turned out to be a bad move; I was rather indifferent at the time. But there were multiple teams offering very similar dollars. It is not even close to an Adonal Foyle mistake where at the time of signing everyone knows the team got hosed. 

The Blazers have made many moves in the last few years that are far worse than re-signing Joel Pryzbilla.


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

Draco said:


> There have been plenty of title contenders with big men contributing in the rotation who were as inept as Joel.
> 
> Maybe signing Joel turned out to be a bad move; I was rather indifferent at the time. But there were multiple teams offering very similar dollars. It is not even close to an Adonal Foyle mistake where at the time of signing everyone knows the team got hosed.
> 
> The Blazers have made many moves in the last few years that are far worse than re-signing Joel Pryzbilla.




Who are these many teams?


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

mediocre man said:


> Who are these many teams?


Every Dallas Mavericks team. Lots of Jazz teams in the 1990s. Several Sonics teams in the 1990s. Longley and Cartwright weren't much better for the Bulls in the 1990s. The Pacers in 2003-04 won 61 games with Jeff Foster as their starting center... and MN the same year went with Kandi man and a 36 year-old Ervin Johnson.

How many more do you want? I'm sure there are more contenders with mediocre-to-poor offensive centers in the last 20 years.

And actually I just was focused on STARTERS that are as bad as Joel. If we widen the net to include big men coming off the bench? I'd say it's more of a question of which contenders have 3 or 4 big guys significantly better than Joel than which included one as bad or worse.

Ed O.


----------



## Foulzilla (Jan 11, 2005)

mediocre man said:


> Who are these many teams?


The Pistons with Ben Wallace. The Bulls with Dennis Rodman. The Pistons with Dennis Rodman. 

That's just the teams with actual titles. If you want to consider just generally successful teams today we could could include the Mavericks (Diop/Dampier)and the Bulls (Wallace again). I'm sure there are more from previous seasons, but I think this is enough to show it's doable.


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

I'm sorry I thought we were talking about recent teams. Dallas is the only one that comes close, and I'm sure if you ask anyone in Dallas they will all say how valuable Dampier has been to their title run. There is really no one in this decade that had a serious chance at winning that had someone like that. 


I don't fault Joel for taking the money at all. I also think he is a great person. I just don't think the Blazers should have wasted that money on a player who is injured as much as Joel is.


----------



## maxiep (May 7, 2003)

mediocre man said:


> I'm sorry I thought we were talking about recent teams. Dallas is the only one that comes close, and I'm sure if you ask anyone in Dallas they will all say how valuable Dampier has been to their title run. There is really no one in this decade that had a serious chance at winning that had someone like that.


Nesterovic? Oberto? Elson?

Whoever the Spurs put next to Duncan was easily at the same level as Joel.


----------



## PapaG (Oct 4, 2004)

Foulzilla said:


> The Pistons with Ben Wallace. The Bulls with Dennis Rodman. The Pistons with Dennis Rodman.


The Bulls with Rodman had Bill Wennington and Luc Longley at C. Both could hit the 12-15' shot from the baseline, a necessity in the triangle for a center.

The Pistons had Laimbeer and James Edwards. Both were also above average offensive players.

The Piston/Wallace reference is much closer to accurate.


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

maxiep said:


> Nesterovic? Oberto? Elson?
> 
> Whoever the Spurs put next to Duncan was easily at the same level as Joel.




Nesterovic has never played less than 70 games and is a much better offensive player than Joel, and about as good defensively

Elson is in the last year of a contract paying him 3 million per season 

Oberto has been in the league 2 years.


----------



## maxiep (May 7, 2003)

mediocre man said:


> Nesterovic has never played less than 70 games and is a much better offensive player than Joel, and about as good defensively


Are we watching the same games? Rasho is a defensive speed bump. Seriously, Zach Randolph is a better defender than Nesterovic. He was so bad, that the Spurs couldn't hide his defensive deficencies in the best team D in the league. If you can't hide using Bowen and Duncan, then you stink.



mediocre man said:


> Elson is in the last year of a contract paying him 3 million per season


Yep, and he's not nearly as good as Joel. 



mediocre man said:


> Oberto has been in the league 2 years.


Oberto is also 32 years old. My guess is he's no longer making leaps and bounds in his game over the summer.

MM, I know you don't like Joel or the fact we signed him, but doesn't it say anthing to you that two of the best organizations in the league (SA and DET) offered him the maximum they could to join their teams?


----------



## Foulzilla (Jan 11, 2005)

PapaG said:


> The Bulls with Rodman had Bill Wennington and Luc Longley at C. Both could hit the 12-15' shot from the baseline, a necessity in the triangle for a center.
> 
> The Pistons had Laimbeer and James Edwards. Both were also above average offensive players.
> 
> The Piston/Wallace reference is much closer to accurate.


This is true, but the discussion is regarding "title contenders with big men contributing in the rotation who were as inept as Joel." Generally big men is used to refer to both PF and C (otherwise one would just say "center"). Not every big man had to be inept, just one that contributed. Given that, I think all my examples were valid.


----------



## PapaG (Oct 4, 2004)

Foulzilla said:


> This is true, but the discussion is regarding "title contenders with big men contributing in the rotation who were as inept as Joel." Generally big men is used to refer to both PF and C (otherwise one would just say "center"). Not every big man had to be inept, just one that contributed. Given that, I think all my examples were valid.


Well that is fair, but I would argue that the defensive and rebounding presences of Rodman and Wallace far surpass anything that Joel has shown the ability to produce thus far in his career.

I say this as a fan who appreciates what Joel can bring to this team, BTW, so it's not coming from a Joel-hater.


----------



## Foulzilla (Jan 11, 2005)

I agree completely Papag, I think both are (well, were) way better then Joel. I was just refuting MM's contention that teams can't seriously compete with players of that type.


----------



## maxiep (May 7, 2003)

Foulzilla said:


> I agree completely Papag, I think both are (well, were) way better then Joel. I was just refuting MM's contention that teams can't seriously compete with players of that type.


You know what's heartening to me? It's the fact that with run of the mill big men, you can generally get close, but it's almost always the team with the dominant big man that wins the ring.

Next year, we're getting that dominant big man back.


----------



## It's_GO_Time (Oct 13, 2005)

mediocre man said:


> I don't fault Joel for taking the money at all. I also think he is a great person. *I just don't think the Blazers should have wasted that money on a player who is injured as much as Joel is*.


I hate you for this statement and can't wait for Joel to prove you wrong . . . . but for now I will conceed you had a point about Joel and how many games he would play a year.

Also, the Blazers matched what other teams were offering, but, to me, that doesn't mean Joel isn't overpaid. If Joel continues to produce like he did last year, I will agree with you that he is overpaid.

I still like Joel . . . which is why I hate you right now. :biggrin:


----------



## mgb (Jun 26, 2004)

Ed O said:


> Sorry to misrepresent your position, but complaining about a position that you evidently take, yourself, seems odd. Or do you think that everyone agrees with you and me that what we got back from Zach hurts us this year?
> 
> Ed O.


Well Zach is pretty recent, I wasn't referring to him. And it didn't have anything to do with if it was disputable or not, only that it's been complained about a lot in the past over and over.


----------



## HispanicCausinPanic (Jul 2, 2005)

It's hard to put a value on what a big man or any player has on a team. The Celtics might win 58 games this year and will have a scrub in the middle. He will not factor in any of the wins or be blamed for any of the losses. You throw a good enough team together it doesn't matter who's in the middle.


----------



## PapaG (Oct 4, 2004)

HispanicCausinPanic said:


> It's hard to put a value on what a big man or any player has on a team. *The Celtics might win 58 games this year and will have a scrub in the middle.* He will not factor in any of the wins or be blamed for any of the losses. You throw a good enough team together it doesn't matter who's in the middle.


The Celtics have a freak of nature on their roster who refuses to list that he is 7' tall.

Garnett is the best rebounder statistically in the NBA the past ten years. He does this out of a hybrid 4/5 position. Saying he is a "scrub" is disingenous IMO.


----------



## ryanjend22 (Jan 23, 2004)

HispanicCausinPanic said:


> It's hard to put a value on what a big man or any player has on a team. The Celtics might win 58 games this year and will have a scrub in the middle. He will not factor in any of the wins or be blamed for any of the losses. You throw a good enough team together it doesn't matter who's in the middle.


aside from the bill cartwright and ben wallace examples, i dissagree. from a title standpoint, you need a big man.

...unless you want to be like the suns. or countless other teams who sure do win alot despite never being able to close the deal.


----------



## HispanicCausinPanic (Jul 2, 2005)

PapaG said:


> The Celtics have a freak of nature on their roster who refuses to list that he is 7' tall.
> 
> Garnett is the best rebounder statistically in the NBA the past ten years. He does this out of a hybrid 4/5 position. Saying he is a "scrub" is disingenous IMO.


So you think I was calling KG a scrub? Wow! KG does not play the center position. He NEVER guards the opposing center. He is on the other team's small or power forward. I repeat........KG is not a center!


----------



## Utherhimo (Feb 20, 2005)

hey whatever happened to MB's tv schedule that was to be released on monday?


----------



## Blazer Ringbearer (Jan 28, 2003)

HispanicCausinPanic said:


> So you think I was calling KG a scrub? Wow! KG does not play the center position. He NEVER guards the opposing center. He is on the other team's small or power forward. I repeat........KG is not a center!


Not sure why it matters.

Regardless of whether he plays center or power forward, he's a big man and he's dominant.

So he's a dominant big man.

You don't need a stud at center AND power forward - one is enough for a solid frontcourt.


----------



## maxiep (May 7, 2003)

Utherhimo said:


> hey whatever happened to MB's tv schedule that was to be released on monday?


U, my guess is we haven't seen or heard about the TV schedule because it's being tweaked right now. I bet TNT and ESPN/ABC are trying to get out of as many Blazer games as possible. That means the Blazers will ask Comcast or KGW to pick them up.

Just my guess.


----------

