# Worst part is....we havent even hit rock bottom!



## mixum (Mar 19, 2003)

It was so sad listening to courtside trying to get Blazer fans excited about charles smith. Is that what John Nash has you all expecting...our SG vacancy filled by Smith.....cmon on, how can anyone blazer fan accept this joke. I mean how can we not get 1 real SG in here all offseason?

But you guys go right ahead and keep supporting Nash who at this point is telling us that Charles Smith is the big SG signing for the season. SICKNING

Whats really sad is some Blazer fans feel like this team will win 25 games. I will tell ya this....i bet every other team in the NBA are circling the blazer games on their calender....if any of teh starting 5 need a night off....they can play their 3rd stringers vs charles smith and the boys. :boohoo:


----------



## CatchNRelease (Jan 2, 2003)

I've got to agree with ya, Mixum. Extra picks, big expiring/non-guaranteed contracts and decent talent to use as chips, and we get Dixon and Smith?:nonono:

I'm still a little more optimistic about the wins than you are, but if this is the roster they're going with, I sure could be wrong.

Go Blazers


----------



## Nightfly (Sep 24, 2002)

Sure would be nice to post about the Blazers here every once in a while.


----------



## RedHot&Rolling (Jun 26, 2004)

Mixum - I don't like reading what you write. However, you are wrong again. 

We hit "rock bottom" 3 days - 22 hours - 42 minutes - 34 seconds ago. We haven't played a game yet this season - and our record will be awful this coming season - but we have _past_ rock bottom and are now solidly heading back up. 

Many will not have noticed (as you have) that we plunged to such depths.


----------



## tradetheo (Feb 24, 2005)

i totally agree. we let rahim go for nothing along with van exel. those were our 2 best chips, and we get nothing. our hopes are now on dixon, who is smaller then telfair weight wise, and charles smith. not to mention we have no backup at pf with zach coming off of knee surgery, but have like 5 small forwards who are all unproven except ruben, and he is always our last option to put in the game for some reason. i just dont see what direction we are going in that has so many people excited. i mean flashy moves are nice, but when you get beat by 20 and lose 60 games in the process, it doesn't have that same effect on me.


----------



## mook (Dec 31, 2002)

man, when the mixum threads start sounding reasonable you know the Blazers are in the toilette.


----------



## barfo (Jan 2, 2003)

Damn, I hate it when i write up some stupid reply, post it, and then realize I misread the post I was replying to. 

Nothing to see here, posts die every day, just move along. 

Hey, stop taking pictures!

barfo


----------



## Kmurph (May 7, 2003)

Yeah keep crying.....

Seriously this woe is me as a Blazer fan routine is getting ridiculous. We are where we are...I suggest some of you deal with it, instead of whining about it.


Let's see what happens this year instead of predicting doom and gloom....If your so damm sure Mixum that POR will win 25 games or less, then put your money where your misguided mouth is...bet it, but don't come whining here and expecting moral support..

Nash could have done better IMO, but he didn't do all that bad either...either way this is the team we have, and you know what? It isn't that bad IMO...I am actually excited to watch them play...moreso than watching Damon, DA, NVE and SAR get their butts whipped on a nightly basis...at least this present team is young, what was our veteran laden team's excuse? Bad coaching? whatever...


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

Kmurph said:


> Nash could have done better IMO, but he didn't do all that bad either...either way this is the team we have, and you know what? It isn't that bad IMO...I am actually excited to watch them play...moreso than watching Damon, DA, NVE and SAR get their butts whipped on a nightly basis...at least this present team is young, what was our veteran laden team's excuse? Bad coaching? whatever...


So you're saying that this team is more interesting than last year's lousy version? Hardly a ringing endorsement.

As for even last year's team getting it's butts whipped on a regular basis: they really didn't, until the team pulled the plug. They were certainly on the wrong side of mediocre, but I don't think this team has a _prayer_ of starting the season at 14-14 like last year's did and I find it highly unlikely that it will have 20 wins by the all-star break (at least by the all-star break in 2006).

Ed O.


----------



## BlayZa (Dec 31, 2002)

im actually with mixum on this one , its been less than spectacular considering the pieces we had to broker some deals. 

next season will be mostly doom and gloom , i know we have a talented base of young players that could turn out to be pretty decent but its that one word that has haunted us for so long, 'potential'. its hard to stay 100% positiive about a maybe.


----------



## ebott (Jan 7, 2003)

RedHot&Rolling said:


> Mixum - I don't like reading what you write. However, you are wrong again.
> 
> We hit "rock bottom" 3 days - 22 hours - 42 minutes - 34 seconds ago.


Word!

We got nowhere to go but up from here. That is unless we do like the Celtics, get the number 2 pick in the draft and he dies. I guess there's always room for pesimism.


----------



## Mr. Chuck Taylor (Aug 2, 2004)

I agree as well. Not using SAR or NVE as trade bait was too bad. However I also believe that passing on Chris Paul was a terrible mistake. Then again I also think passing on Al Jefferson was a terrible mistake. 

The silver lining in all of this...we should have a decent shot at landing Oden in '07 link


----------



## GrandpaBlaze (Jul 11, 2004)

Yah, I've also stated that I expect a fairly pathetic team this next year.

Sure, we didn't get anything for SAR, NVE, Damon, etc. However, unlike Trader Bob, neither are we saddled with downside playing bloated contracts. I can just imagine under Whitsett we'd have Michael Finley; he'd have traded SAR, Damon and NVE to get a player who has been good in his career and who can still contribute but who would put a huge financial burden on the franchise and would have crippled our flexibility for several more years.

Before you get me for that, I realize that Nash has also done that to a degree giving Theo a longer and larger than appropriate contract. Some debate the Zach contract but the wisdom of that is yet unknown. If Zach never comes back to form after the knee injury, then it wasn't a good deal. However, there is no denying Zach is a very talented player and if he comes back to 20-10 form, I won't begrudge that contract. Miles, again, too early to tell. Under Cheeks, an obvious bad decision. However, he was unsure of his standing, etc. He showed flashes last year and hopefully, under Nate he will be consistently good, frequently very good, and regularly great.

Are we bottom yet? I dunno, I am slightly more optimistic than Mixum (who doesn't think we'll get 25 wins), I think we'll manage 25, but not expecting much more.

I expect Nate will make a much better team of the young guys than we saw at the end of last year but that doesn't guarantee much more by way of wins. We were so outclassed at the end of last year that it will take dramatic improvement to make a significant improvement in the record. If we only manage to be "much better", we'll probably lose nearly as many games, they'll just be closer losses.

My hopes for the year:

The young "Gym Rats" show significant improvement from being gym rats
Zach comes back strong from the injury
Zach learns how to play with the rest of the team and is not such a "black hole"
Darius gets motivated and becomes a consistently good player
If Darius doesn't get consistently good, we manage to somehow move him (not real hopeful on this one)
Outlaw continues to improve at a very good pace
We are pleased with some combination of Martel, the Ruskies, Jack, Dixon & Smith (a little far-fetched to think we'll be happy with them all)

Have we hit bottom yet? We can only hope. If too many of the above items are not fulfilled, we are hit by further injuries, etc., we may be looking at an even more realistic shot at getting #1 in next years lottery.

Of course, if all come to pass (mind you, the two about Miles are mutually exclusive), we may surprise and find ourselves low in the lottery.

Gramps...


----------



## RoseCity (Sep 27, 2002)

Charles Smith was the top non-nba pro 2 guard in the world last year, from what many in Europe have stated. He had injury problems his first stint with us, those appear to be in the rear view. While I enjoy being overly optimistic at times, Smith could really suprise people. He is long, athletic enough, and a hard worker. What more can you ask for, at that price?

Nash is doing the right thing, IMO. Who was avalible, that we could have had, who makes our team a playoff contender? Don't give me NVE crap, he wasn't worth much or else Nash would have at least gotten a pick for the guy. While not the popular opinion here, most analysts pinpointed it, no teams was willing to give up picks or prospects for NVE's contract. Nash is taking a slow and calculated approach, from my viewpoint. That is awesome considering Trader Bob's habits.


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

Mixum,

Its obvious you don't like the Blazers by your constant negative criticism of the teams management and players..So I'm wondering why your still a fan of the team if every thing they do you hate?....Pick another team to be a fan of.....


----------



## el_Diablo (May 15, 2003)

mixum is right, by the way. if you guys think that the current blazer roster is better than last year's roster, you are clearly fooling yourselves. but since the plan is not to win now as playoffs are a pipedream in any case, who cares? I'd rather watch up and coming youngsters rather than tired stoudamires, van exels and andersons collect paychecks, even if it means less wins.

although I'm still a bit disappointed that nash managed to get nothing for all those contracts...


----------



## GrandpaBlaze (Jul 11, 2004)

> Its obvious you don't like the Blazers by your constant negative criticism of the teams management and players


Actually, it is easy to be a fan and to be highly critical of the moves of management and of the players.

I was asked many times in the height of the JailBlazer years why I continued to be a Blazer fan. I explained that I had been a lifelong fan and although I didn't like either management or most of the players, they were still my team.

I believe we will field a pretty weak team this year but that does not mean that I am unhappy. On the contrary, I am pleased with most of the moves made by current management. Sure, I wish we had received some compensation for our departing veterans but not at the expense which it seems may have been the cost (and therefore we got nothing rather than taking a "wooden-nickel".

I am optimistic about the long-term future of this team. I just don't believe the short-term looks very good.

Gramps...


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

Its not very fan like to constantly bash and never praise or have some kind of a positive outlook on the team...

His hide and seek style of posting negative things is also an obvious dead give away that he's not truly a Blazers fan and just someone who gets his jollies off of ruffling feathers...


----------



## el_Diablo (May 15, 2003)

zagsfan20 said:


> Its not very fan like to constantly bash and never praise or have some kind of a positive outlook on the team...
> 
> His hide and seek style of posting negative things is also an obvious dead give away that he's not truly a Blazers fan and just someone who gets his jollies off of ruffling feathers...


what's the definition of a fan anyway?


----------



## Nightfly (Sep 24, 2002)

*Hey guys, let's focus on the topic at hand, which is NOT mixum's status as a fan.

Thanks.*


----------



## Scout226 (Sep 17, 2003)

I'm very optimistic about the team. I appologize to everyone who predicts doom and gloom, but I don't see it. Is this years team better than last? If ZBO is healthy(a big IF), I bet we do end up with a better record than last year. 

For me, I can't wait to see something new. Damon and the gang wasn't new. We all knew what would happen before the season started. As Gramps stated, I heard the "How can you be a fan of the JailBlazers?" question as well. Most NBA fans I met couldn't stand the Blazers. Now, people I meet don't really have a dislike for the Blazers and are intrigued by some of the young guys. The real shocker is, most of the negative talk just comes from within now.


----------



## STOMP (Jan 1, 2003)

Scout226 said:


> We all knew what would happen before the season started.


Actually if you do a little digging into threads from last year about this time, you'll find quite a few posters who were quite sure the team would win up to 50 games. I recall being labled a pessimist for predicting only 38 wins... I recall Ed O being called other names for predicting even less. I recall arguments about how Nick was a huge upgrade talentwise from Dale...how he'd shore up the backcourt. How Theo was a healthy stud who'd make a huge difference in the middle... how Zach and SAR could blend their talents into an effective frontcourt that could post up anyone. I actually recall being in the minority of those here who predicted a losing season. 

I think it's understandable that fans tend to be optimistic about their team in the offseason, but lets not sugarcoat our history.

STOMP


----------



## B_&_B (Feb 19, 2004)

HearToTemptYou said:


> *Hey guys, let's focus on the topic at hand, which is NOT mixum's status as a fan.
> 
> Thanks.*


Can we discuss the fact that mixum always starts these ridiculous threads and very rarely responds to them?

HTTY - nice avatar!


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

BEER&BASKETBALL said:


> Can we discuss the fact that mixum always starts these ridiculous threads and very rarely responds to them?


Yes, I'm SURE that's what he meant when he said not to discuss mixum.

As for this thread being ridiculous: it's easy to think that the team is very bad and likely to get worse before it gets any better. The premise is entirely legitimate, even if reasonable people can disagree about it.

Mere negativity doesn't make a thread ridiculous any more than pure optimism does.

Ed O.


----------



## B_&_B (Feb 19, 2004)

Ed O said:


> Yes, I'm SURE that's what he meant when he said not to discuss mixum.
> 
> As for this thread being ridiculous: it's easy to think that the team is very bad and likely to get worse before it gets any better. The premise is entirely legitimate, even if reasonable people can disagree about it.
> 
> ...


I think you know what I ment by the term "ridiculous", but feel free to "spin" it to fit your arguement anytime. He's got the right to post his opinion, but to blow things out of proportion like he does all the time without responding shouldnt be acceptable.


----------



## Reep (Jun 4, 2003)

BEER&BASKETBALL said:


> I think you know what I ment by the term "ridiculous", but feel free to "spin" it to fit your arguement anytime. He's got the right to post his opinion, but to blow things out of proportion like he does all the time without responding shouldnt be acceptable.


I agree, but isn't that what the "ignore" option is for. I used to get very upset every time a certain poster would post junk like this (actually, exactly like this) and so I marked that poster to be ignored. Now I don't have to worry about it because I know that the ignored poster never has anything useful to say, so why waste time reading it. My life if much better and more peaceful.


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

BEER&BASKETBALL said:


> I think you know what I ment by the term "ridiculous", but feel free to "spin" it to fit your arguement anytime.


Actually, I'm not spinning anything. You insulted both the poster and the underlying premise by calling it ridiculous.



> He's got the right to post his opinion, but to blow things out of proportion like he does all the time without responding shouldnt be acceptable.


You can have your own definition of acceptable, but what you think doesn't really matter. The terms of service are pretty clear as far as what's unacceptable, and starting a thread and then not responding is not in and of itself a bad thing.

As Reep said: if you don't like a poster, ignore her/him. If you have a question about how far you can bend the terms of service, PM a moderator. I'm sick of anything that mixum posts getting derailed by people that don't like what he has to say.


----------



## YardApe (Mar 10, 2005)

Well let's see what we do have:

Joel could be the next version of Bill Lambeer
Telfair has been called the best passing PG since Pistol Pete
Zach was a double/double guy for an entire year and MIP
Darius if focused could get ya 28 or more a night

Jack as a backup gives you instant defense and size at the PG
Webster could be the tallest 2 guard in the league and can knock down an outside shot
Theo is a great shot blocker
We don't know what Monia can do yet

Top all of that off with a defensive minded coach who seems to know how to run set plays and I think we are improved.

This team will have a much better attitude and for once have some direction!


Last year Damon, Nick, SAR and DA mailed their play in. DA and Damon were problems in the locker room. Nick could have given a rip and SAR was not happy playing behind Zach and Darius. 

Even if you don't like Dixon, Smith, Martel, Jack and Monia as players they wont be cancers in the locker room and they'll work their butts off cause the Blazers gave them a chance. 

DA, Damon, Nick, SAR, Sheed, Bonzi all thought they were doing the Blazers a favor. 

I don't think you'll see that with these kids.


----------



## B_&_B (Feb 19, 2004)

YardApe said:


> Well let's see what we do have:
> 
> Joel could be the next version of Bill Lambeer
> Telfair has been called the best passing PG since Pistol Pete
> ...


Outlaw and Khryapa too!


----------



## mixum (Mar 19, 2003)

First off, I want the Blazers to win as much as anyone on this board, however I think john Nash is the worse Gm in the NBA today and he has no creative skills when it comes t trading and like to watch piece fall into place rather then being aggresive and making others follow his lead.


Also I will say it again, the current roster is as bout as bad as a roster that ive ever seen in the NBA. Half our team wouldnt even make it on solid rosters. I also am so tired hearing about our future.....LET ME SEE TELFAIR, OUTLAW, AND WEBSTER DO SOMETHING VS GOOD PLAYERS...LETS JUSt sAY I WONT HOLD MY BREATH. Zach isnt coming back for a while so you all better realize that. The trainer danced around that question on courtside which means.....not for a long time. Also we have no money to sign anyone, no less Joel, so i just dont see where the future is so great. I think alot of fans want to believe in this franchise so bad...they are hoping for anything and want these kids to be something there not(stars) and never will be stars!

Believe me I want this team to win but right now its laughable and that is thanks to Fat Nash. Please dont come on here nad tell me this team will be better then last year. Id take Damon a billion times over Smith/Dixon/Webstser! That should say alot considering Damon blows.

you want the silver lining......without a shadow of a doubt...we will have a top 2 pick next year unless the lottery screws us.....I cant think of a team who will win less games then the bLazers! Mike Rice BTW should be fired for pumping up Charles Smith last night.....pleeeaaaaaasssse!


----------



## Blazer Ringbearer (Jan 28, 2003)

To me, all signs points point to a worse team than last year, except one...

Coach Nate McMillan vs. Coach Mo Cheeks.

I'm all about hope, and I am hoping that this makes even half of the difference that I think it could...

I understand where all of the negative thoughts are coming from though... it's not even necessarily pessimism as the team has clearly gotten worse on paper. The only factors that could overcome the losses in talent would be:

Health
Player Development
Coaching
Team play


----------



## YardApe (Mar 10, 2005)

If you take the Patriots position by position they are not a top five team in the NFL. There are certainly better QB's with bigger arms and faster feet then Brady. Big name offensive and defensive players don't play for the Pats. The Sapps, Williams, TO's, Vicks, Keyshawns aren't there, so how do the Pats win?

Team concept, great coach, good management, no big egos! 

I'm not saying the Blazers are on the Pats level yet by any means, but you've got to start with something manageable and build a concept with in it! Something the whole team believes in. The Blazers are raw putty now. Nate has his first chance in coaching to be an artist. This is an exciting time to get in on the ground floor of a team that we can be proud of. 

To cut these players up and call them no good and say they can't compete when none of us have seen them play together sucks in my opinion. Nate hasn't really even started his job yet and many on this board are saying this season is a wash. 

These are young kids, who are trying to fit in to a new city and make an impact. Give them a break and be supportive. Would you want to play for a city that's got fans like Mixum and others who have already said you're not talented enough to be on this level?

Take your own careers for a second and ask yourself this? Would you want to be hired for a new job and show up the first day to hear the entire company ranking on your lack of skill before you've even found your desk? 

That's what this board is doing right now. You think our young players don't read hoop boards?


----------



## Scout226 (Sep 17, 2003)

STOMP said:


> Actually if you do a little digging into threads from last year about this time, you'll find quite a few posters who were quite sure the team would win up to 50 games. I recall being labled a pessimist for predicting only 38 wins... I recall Ed O being called other names for predicting even less. I recall arguments about how Nick was a huge upgrade talentwise from Dale...how he'd shore up the backcourt. How Theo was a healthy stud who'd make a huge difference in the middle... how Zach and SAR could blend their talents into an effective frontcourt that could post up anyone. I actually recall being in the minority of those here who predicted a losing season.
> 
> I think it's understandable that fans tend to be optimistic about their team in the offseason, but lets not sugarcoat our history.
> 
> STOMP


I wasn't really pertaining to the win record of the team. What I meant, without elaborating, is how we would be disappointed again. For me, I was optimistic going into the last season. But I also knew we had no SG, Damon, and uncertainties with SAR and Zach. I guess with the first two, no SG and Damon, I didn't expect the best of things. Maybe a decent record, but I knew we wouldn't go far. Our current history showed that. 

So, I wasn't trying to sugar coat anything.


----------



## mook (Dec 31, 2002)

I have to agree with BR about coaching. I have harped on Damon and Cheeks for a long times, so I'm excited to see what we can do with a complete overhaul in how the team is run with Telfair and McMillan. I'm expecting a big upgrade in this department. 

however, as this level of intelligence (hopefully) rises, it's offset by the lack of experience and veteran leadership overall. Ratliff will be the one player we have over 30. 

I'm hoping for the best (the 8th seed) but I certainly won't be surprised to see us with a #3 pick again in the lottery.


----------



## mixum (Mar 19, 2003)

whatever you wanna tell yourselfs.

We suck and a big reason is our GM.


----------



## mixum (Mar 19, 2003)

playoffs.....you are kidding right?


dude, this team is the worst team in the NBA besides the bobcats.....we wmight not win 10 games let own even compete for the 8th spot! :brokenhea 



ARE U KIDDING ME?


----------



## STOMP (Jan 1, 2003)

YardApe said:


> That's what this board is doing right now. You think our young players don't read hoop boards?


I feel it's pretty funny that someone would seriously consider (for more then a moment) that anything that gets written here has any effect on what eventually transpires. In the unlikely chance that Sebastian (ect...) read this and other boards, why should negative comments do anything but motivate him? I'm sure most players have heard doubters questioning their games all their lives... maybe when someone trashes them and says _you can't do this or that_ it only serves to up their motivation??? Thats definitely how it is for me... I love it when people publically doubt me because I know that will only increase my ability to focus.

STOMP


----------



## GrandpaBlaze (Jul 11, 2004)

> We suck and a big reason is our GM.


We do not "suck". There is a varied debate about how many wins we will get, but I believe most believe we are ready to start getting better.

Yeah, we don't have much by way of veteran leadership but we also have lost some of the me-first, I-don't-really-care, I-can't-coach-my-way-out-of-a-one-walled-bedroom problems that have plagued the Blazers the past couple years.

I believe the young guys will play with consistent heart and effort. I also believe they are relatively talented; how talented exactly remains to be seen. However, a huge lack of experience by so many on the team will lead to quite a few losses. 

I expect the team to improve over the course of the year.

As to our GM, I actually think he has done a very good job of assembling a core of talented, promising young players. As fans, we bemoaned the loss of Jermaine O'Neal who has become a star. We let talent languish on the bench behind veterans. I applaud Nash for not bringing in garbage just because it can be had and it has experience. Garbage is garbage regardless of whether it is experienced garbage or not. In many cases, old garbage is even worse than new garbage. The garbage may take many forms; unreasonable contract, un-necessary body (perhaps thus impeding the development of people with actual talent), locker room cancers and so forth.

No we haven't obtained a "quality" SG but we have some promising youngsters and as we aren't really expecting to win much for a couple years anyway, why in the world would any self-respecting SG want to come here? By the time we are ready to compete, there is a good chance they would be over-the-hill, etc.

Let the kids play and we can, hopefully, grow and adjust as the season progresses.

Gramps...


----------



## Masbee (Dec 31, 2002)

STOMP said:


> Actually if you do a little digging into threads from last year about this time, you'll find quite a few posters who were quite sure the team would win up to 50 games. I recall being labled a pessimist for predicting only 38 wins... I recall Ed O being called other names for predicting even less. I recall arguments about how Nick was a huge upgrade talentwise from Dale...how he'd shore up the backcourt. How Theo was a healthy stud who'd make a huge difference in the middle... how Zach and SAR could blend their talents into an effective frontcourt that could post up anyone. I actually recall being in the minority of those here who predicted a losing season.
> 
> I think it's understandable that fans tend to be optimistic about their team in the offseason, but lets not sugarcoat our history.
> 
> STOMP


In all fairness to those who predicted more wins that what the team accomplished, none of those predictions included the team's designated franchise player - Zach - missing a large part of the season (first in importance among a raft of injuries, more than most teams suffered - Nick, DA, Zach, SAR, Theo) , nor could those predictions have anticipated the team pulling the plug after the playoffs became a longshot.


----------



## Utherhimo (Feb 20, 2005)

dixon is much better than da and cheaper too!

mixum has an unfounded hate for nash, anything nash does is evil and bad, mixum must have loved whitless, no matter the positives Maxum will refuse to see it.

if something could of been had that would have helped the blazers with sar, nve or da Nash would have done it but the fish werent baiting so nash cut the pay pay roll instead, Nash saved the team 12.8 million by cutting the dead I-quit nve and got da the oh-my-******-hurts-I-cant-play-today da off the team.

Who would you rather have dixon and smith or da? 
smith can play the 1 and 2.

nve = crap had only one good game the whole season but was better than stale davis
da = crap
dixon = starting 2 right now
smith = main back up for telfair and back up behind dixon, who ripped it up in europe.


----------



## SheedSoNasty (Dec 31, 2002)

Nothin' to see here.


----------



## e_blazer1 (Feb 3, 2004)

I'd be glad to hit "rock bottom", but Mixum's going to have to tone up those gluts a bit if he wants them to be considered rock hard. :biggrin: 


j/k, mixum. You're my favorite comedic relief on this board.


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

I full anticipate a season at least as good azs last season and while that isn't the most appealing comparison, I can deal with where the team is now as I am on board with where they are going. Things I look at.

Balance: The team is fairly well balanced inside to out, or at least the pieces are ther to be. Yes they are young, but I am willing to wait a year or 2 for those pieces to start to realize themselves. We have speed, passing, shooting, athleticism, inside and outside presenc, and a few guys with just flat out rock solid fundamentals.

Health: Not having DA and hoping he may come back healthy may enable the team to have a better plan as for rotation. The team was also 1 game under .500 with Zach for the season, which IIRC accounted for more than half the teams total wins. Bifg factor there.

Coach: agian the team wasn't too far off the .500 pace when Cheeks was released, and an actual game plan was sacrificed for the sake of experience.Nate will not be a "get the guys lrearning PT" coach like Pritchard was. 

Experience: Ok now you can laugh at this, but the fact is the main cog players, Zach, Joel, Darius and Sebastian are all a year more experienced than last year, with Telfair and Joel having gotten very meaningful minutes. 

Lack of experience: Let's face it old dogs can't lean new tricks, and we had an old dog ball hog in the backcourt dominating the ball. Sometimes less experience is better than stubborn experience.

Now While I don't expect much more than what we got last year I do anticipate the season being more tolerable than last year as I doubt we end the season at 3w 24l or whatever sorry number we put up without a legit coach and Zach.

When your down the only way you can go is up, but that's only if you can focus on getting up rather than what got you down.


----------



## Oldmangrouch (Feb 11, 2003)

As I have said many times in the past, Nash is the definition of mediocre. He is below average at making trades, but deserves credit for the young players he has added.

As for the team hitting bottom.......news flash: that happened last season! The only issue is when/if they show clear improvement. 

On the plus side, we have a better coach, the youngsters got some experience, and we would be hard pressed for the injury problems to get any worse.

As for the lack of "veteran leadership".......phooey! Let's plug the holes in the roof, before we worry about the big-screen TV. The short-term, marginal benefit of a Brian Grant type vet is not worth losing sleep over. Not where the team currently is in the rebuilding cycle.


----------



## Kmurph (May 7, 2003)

> we wmight not win 10 games let own even compete for the 8th spot!


I want a bet on that you loudmouth..right here, right now...10 games...back it up Mixum..

Worst team in the NBA? I don't think so...

I don't have delusions of POR making the playoffs next year, and POR will struggle mightily at times, but I'd rather struggle with young guys with the HOPE that they get better than a bunch of overpriced veterans who were NOT going to lead this team anywhere....

and for ANYONE to act like POR would have been better off with Damon, NVE, SAR & DA on the team is BEYOND asinine.

Let the young kids play...let's see what they do, how or IF they improve...THEN you can blast Nash for being the worst GM in NBA history (talk about a dumb comment in and of itself)...and you better not be pulling that b.s. out 1/2 way into this season either...

I think that outside of Pryzbilla, Nash has proved weak when it comes to trades...he certainly doesn't deserve an "A" for his work.....I think he has drafted well...albeit extremely young AND risky...time will tell...But those of you who want to complain...complain and complain some more...do the rest of us a favor...SHUT THE HELL UP...take a vacation or something....This is getting incredibly old...The team is what it is...deal with it, and if you can't stand it so much, then don't watch...believe me, you won't be missed by the rest of us...

I thought this was a "FAN" board not a board filled with a bunch of flippin crybabies...and "I told you so types"...what a pathetic display from a supposed "diehard" group...

You don't have to like everything the team has done...I sure as heck haven't...but at sopme point you better look up and face the reality of what\where this team is now...If you can't then maybe you aren't really the "fan" you thought you were...


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

Just for kickers how would this work as a bet....Mixum pays $10 for every game over 10 that the team wins....Other better pays $10 for every win short of 20 for the year....That way if the team wins 15 then they break even


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

mixum said:


> playoffs.....you are kidding right?
> 
> 
> dude, this team is the worst team in the NBA besides the bobcats.....we wmight not win 10 games let own even compete for the 8th spot! :brokenhea
> ...


Mixum, 

Quit being such a cyberbully! Your going to make me cry with your negativity...


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

YardApe said:


> If you take the Patriots position by position they are not a top five team in the NFL. There are certainly better QB's with bigger arms and faster feet then Brady. Big name offensive and defensive players don't play for the Pats. The Sapps, Williams, TO's, Vicks, Keyshawns aren't there, so how do the Pats win?


By having one of the most top-to-bottom talented rosters in the NFL, including incredible depth. The point is not _how_ the talent is distributed (in superstars like the Eagles or across the board fairly evenly like the Patriots)...the point is that the most talented teams are generally among the best, with bonus points to good team cosntruction to best leverage that talent.

The current Blazers aren't close to having one of the most talented roster in the league, so comparisons to the Patriots make no sense. The Patriots aren't some untalented team who makes good with hustle and moxie.


----------



## GrandpaBlaze (Jul 11, 2004)

> The current Blazers aren't close to having one of the most talented roster in the league, so comparisons to the Patriots make no sense


Actually there is reasonable grounds for comparison. The Patriots' talent is largely homegrown. They have acquired a very large portion of their talent through good evaluation of talent and good drafting.

Portland doesn't have the greatest top-to-bottom talent in the NBA...yet, but they are, like the Patriots, concentrating on growing their own talent.

You have to admit that while not the most talented people in the league, Telfair, Webster and Outlaw all have very good prospects of being maybe not the best at their position, but very good players. Zach is still young and widely recognized as very talented at his position. Darius Miles is also very talented but needs consistency.

No, we are not the most talented team in the league, but, I believe, we are the most talented young team in the league and have something good to look forward to in the future.

Gramps...


----------



## CanJohno (Feb 11, 2005)

Kmurph said:


> I want a bet on that you loudmouth..right here, right now...10 games...back it up Mixum..
> 
> Worst team in the NBA? I don't think so...
> 
> ...


Due to the lack of having anything to add, I'm reduced to "Smilies": 

:usa: :jam: :wordyo: :rock: :greatjob: :woot: :clap: :usa:

I'd add some "Rep Points" if I knew how! :cheers:


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

GrandpaBlaze said:


> Actually there is reasonable grounds for comparison. The Patriots' talent is largely homegrown. They have acquired a very large portion of their talent through good evaluation of talent and good drafting.


A lot of teams, throughout sports, have a lot of homegrown talent. That doesn't make them all good comparisons to the Patriots.

Secondly, the Patriots have picked up plenty of free agents to replace their many defections. Including impact free agents, like Ty Law, Rodney Harrison and Corey Dillon.

The impressive thing about the Patriots isn't to do with "home-growing," but rather their unerring talent evaluation, illustrated by their tremendous roster.

Portland has no impressive roster to suggest that they also evaluate talent so amazingly well. I'd say the Spurs are the best example of that kind of evaluation (in finding Parker, Ginobili, Udrih).



> Portland doesn't have the greatest top-to-bottom talent in the NBA...yet, but they are, like the Patriots, concentrating on growing their own talent.


As explained above, I wouldn't say the Patriots are "concentrating" on growing their own talent. They're concentrating on collecting as much talent that will not break their budget as they can, whether from the draft or free agency.



> No, we are not the most talented team in the league, but, I believe, we are the most talented young team in the league and have something good to look forward to in the future.


They have some good and interesting prospects, but so do many other teams. The Clippers, the Hawks, the Warriors...those are just a few teams that can claim good and interesting young players. Those are also teams who haven't gone anywhere in over a decade. There's a great danger of joining their ranks, of having interesting young prospects before they flame out and the team drafts a new set.

And I'd say the Bulls easily win the prize for most talented young team. The Blazers don't even approach them in terms of current success and young depth.


----------



## barfo (Jan 2, 2003)

I'm really looking forward to cheering for the Blazers this year. It is going to be an interesting year with a lot of new faces. The Blazers are really going to suck, hardly ever win, and I really am going to miss some of the talented players we gave away over the last few years. I think Nash is no damn good at making trades. I think Nash is really quite good at spotting talent, and our draft picks look like they have a great future. The front office has destroyed the team and it won't be good for years to come. I'm looking forward to opening night. The losses are really going to suck, but the win(s), if we happen to get lucky enough to catch a bad team on a bad night, will be that much the sweeter.

barfo


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

Kmurph said:


> I thought this was a "FAN" board not a board filled with a bunch of flippin crybabies...and "I told you so types"...what a pathetic display from a supposed "diehard" group...
> 
> You don't have to like everything the team has done...I sure as heck haven't...but at sopme point you better look up and face the reality of what\where this team is now...If you can't then maybe you aren't really the "fan" you thought you were...


Are you kidding me? We're supposed to stop caring because our team sucks?

Or are we simply supposed to realign our priorities because the team sucks?

Either way, it's a bad idea to me and it would spoil the whole point of rooting for a professional team.

Ed O.


----------



## Blazer Freak (Jul 11, 2004)

I think that we could have a solid team next year. Most likely 30 wins, 35 at max. Telfair in the last month of the season put up 12/6. As a rookie. With Nate as the coach, having a set offense, and having a whole offseason to workout, work on his game and with teammates, Telfair putting up 15/7-type stats is what we will most likely get out of him. 


Nate McMillian.
Having a set offense and a coach who focuses on defense.
An offseason of working together with teammates and improving.
The adressing of some needs.

Those are some of the reasons the Blazers will be improved. While Charles Smith, Juan Dixon, and Martell Webster, are not All-Stars, they are cheap, young, and address needs of the team. They can all shoot good (Dixon is the worst shooter of the 3) and not only is that something that the Blazers need, these 3 players all having good character and don't have personalities that will clash with other players. 

I think some fans are really underrating Nate's impact on this team. Cheeks didn't have an offense to run, it was just do what ever works. And he never had a defensive game plan if a team didn't have a star like KG or Shaq. With Nate, we have a good coach who will make an offense to our teams strengths and he will improve our defense 10-fold.


----------



## e_blazer1 (Feb 3, 2004)

Ed O said:


> Are you kidding me? We're supposed to stop caring because our team sucks?
> 
> Or are we simply supposed to realign our priorities because the team sucks?
> 
> ...


I believe the point is that, whether we like it or not (and believe me, we all get it that you don't like it, Ed), Sheed, Bonzi, DA, SAR, Damon, & NVE are all out of here with nothing in return. Management decided, for probably multiple reasons, to not make trades that would most likely have brought in mid-level veterans, but instead to develop the young guys. We now will have to wait through a couple of tough years while that program is carried out. There's nothing any of us can do to change those facts, so what's the purpose of continually complaining about what's clearly in the Blazers' rearview mirror?


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

e_blazer1 said:


> I believe the point is that, whether we like it or not (and believe me, we all get it that you don't like it, Ed), Sheed, Bonzi, DA, SAR, Damon, & NVE are all out of here with nothing in return. Management decided, for probably multiple reasons, to not make trades that would most likely have brought in mid-level veterans, but instead to develop the young guys. We now will have to wait through a couple of tough years while that program is carried out. There's nothing any of us can do to change those facts, so what's the purpose of continually complaining about what's clearly in the Blazers' rearview mirror?


What's the shelf life of criticism in your eyes? NVE has been gone, what, a week? SAR has been gone, what, a week?

And how long have people been defending Nash by saying, "Just wait and see!"? Since the first week or so, actually, and I know because I was one of the people who was saying it.

This isn't a situation where people are constantly harping on Rasheed being gone. Or Bonzi. Or any player in particular. It's a situation where the Blazers are one of the worst teams in the NBA and are probably going to be worse this year.

There's no justified outrage there? Or understandable angst?

The current management promised us a three-pronged approach: fiscal responsibility, character, and remaining competitive. Now that they failed at competitiveness they simply are going to a two-pronged approach... and we're supposed to remain quiet? Or to *praise* the team for "improving" when there's been no evidence of it on the court?

It's anyone's prerogative to be complacent in the face of this team's rapid descent (or, looking at it differently, to be patient in the face of the team's current trials), but I don't think it's anyone's place to tell those of us who care about the team winning what we should be feeling or what mental outlook we should be taking.

Ed O.


----------



## kaydow (Apr 6, 2004)

Minstrel said:


> A lot of teams, throughout sports, have a lot of homegrown talent. That doesn't make them all good comparisons to the Patriots.
> 
> Secondly, the Patriots have picked up plenty of free agents to replace their many defections. Including impact free agents, like Ty Law, Rodney Harrison and Corey Dillon.
> 
> The impressive thing about the Patriots isn't to do with "home-growing," but rather their unerring talent evaluation, illustrated by their tremendous roster


The Pats evaluate character as well. Charlie Weis was on the DP Show a couple of weeks ago and talked about how extensive it is. He said they have an allotment of "borderline" guys they take chances on. He used Dillon as an example--he says you can't have a locker room full of C. Dillon's, but mix 2 or 3 in with Brady & co., and it can work. They also look at intelligence. Their schemes are so complex, and the success of a given play often relies on the read or discipline of the players. He said they would rather have a better than average/intelligent athlete than an athletic freak who isn't bright. Makes sense to me. How many times do you see a defensive end who runs a 4.4, bench presses a Buick, who can pass rush like nobody's business . . . but overruns run plays and can't make adjustments. Let's face it, the NBA will never be as complex. But you can't argue with the model the Pats have set for acquiring personel. The Blazers have done a decent job of drafting/signing likable guys who don't appear to be boneheads recently--you just can't compare them to what the Pats have done.


----------



## e_blazer1 (Feb 3, 2004)

Ed O said:


> What's the shelf life of criticism in your eyes? NVE has been gone, what, a week? SAR has been gone, what, a week?
> 
> And how long have people been defending Nash by saying, "Just wait and see!"? Since the first week or so, actually, and I know because I was one of the people who was saying it.
> 
> ...


If you've read any of my posts over the past year, you'll recall that I've always been against the Blazers taking the path that they have now chosen. I believe that once a team goes to the bottom of the NBA, it can take a long, long time to rebuild around youth. Chicago's been playing this game since MJ left and they're just now reaching respectability. Who knows how long it will be before they actually are in a position to challenge for a title again. The Clips have been doing the continual rebuild for their entire history and show no signs of climbing out of lottery land. It would have been my preference by far if the Blazers had chosen a more moderate approach of keeping the team respectable by bringing in some vets.

That said, I guess the difference between our stances is that I hold open the remote possibility that John Nash, Steve Patterson, Kevin Pritchard and Nate McMillan know more about what they're doing in building an NBA team than I do. Perhaps they see a level of potential in the core of young players they've assembled that they believe warrants drastic measures and total committment to developing that talent as quickly as possible. Perhaps they see a team 2-3 years down the road that will be a lot more exciting than what they would get if they played vets now and held back the development of the youth. Am I looking forward to watching the Blazers get their tails whipped more often than not next year? Of course not, but if it results in a better team in the long run then so be it. If, on the other hand, 2-3 years down the road we're still stuck in lottery land, I'll be among those calling for Nash's head on a pike.



> It's anyone's prerogative to be complacent in the face of this team's rapid descent (or, looking at it differently, to be patient in the face of the team's current trials), but I don't think it's anyone's place to tell those of us who care about the team winning what we should be feeling or what mental outlook we should be taking.
> 
> Ed O.


Of course, it's your prerogative to yell and complain for as long as you like. Personally, I think you've more than made your point by now, but perhaps there may be a couple of people on the board who've missed it in one of the dozens of other similar posts.


----------



## BIG Q (Jul 8, 2005)

Ed O said:


> It's anyone's prerogative to be complacent in the face of this team's rapid descent (or, looking at it differently, to be patient in the face of the team's current trials), but I don't think it's anyone's place to tell those of us who care about the team winning what we should be feeling or what mental outlook we should be taking.
> 
> Ed O.


And also vice versa. Why are the Blazer fans on this board that agree with the youth movement always being bombarded by the vocal minority with assertions that we are unrealistic? That we should agree with you in your belief that Nash is a liar, a fraud , the worst GM ever or any other rant that you empart? Why can we not chat amongst ourselves with our rose colored glasses, sipping Kool-Aid, without having to put up with a certain posters attack? Your right to disagree with us does not negate our right to disagree with you. You, and several other posters are certainly within your rights to feel what ever you want about the Blazers, and to have whatever outlook on the team you wish.

The fundamental aspect to fandom is in knowing that there is always next season. We get to sit at our computers and chat with fellow fans about whatever the topics of the day are. It is a very essential tool for those of us that are not home in Oregon amongst our peeps. I come here to get the scoops and perspectives that are diverse and are far reaching.

We know that we started the youth movement a year too late. We know that the contracts of Zach, Theo and Miles are not in line with the new vision for this team. We know that Nash was pimping his "assets" all the while knowing that they were crap and couln't return squat. We know that our youth has not "proven" anything, just demonstrated real promise. The kind of promise that makes me jump into my H2 and drive up to Vegas and catch 3 summer league games that do not mean jack squat except to a fan that wanted to see the young guys on display. We know that wins can be hard to come by, but the team will not be the worst ever. 

But we are fans that want to look at the positives while recognizing the short comings and looking for improvement. Mixum can complain about no SG. Nash got some. Not Ray or Paul, but a couple that can hold down the spot for a while, pushing our SG of the future to work for his spot and PT. We do not need those guys to eat up cap space, stunt the growth of the youngsters, all the while being disgruntled at being in Portland because there is too much youth. How about we develop our own Paul Pierce, just like Boston did? How about we see if Joel is gonna have a great season and be worth a larger contract?

You can disagree all you want. But if you do not recognize the fact that the majority of posters here feel as I do, then you are mistaken. You can try to convice us we are dumb, sheepel or whatever else. But that just opens up our right to debate you on your views. That is all. Nash is not the devil. He is following his orders. He is toeing the company line just like any good GM. I look forward to the rest of the off season, the start of the new season, the trade deadline and seeing the ultimate improvement of a young team. :cheers:


----------



## Blazer Freak (Jul 11, 2004)

We also need to realize people we made the playoffs 22 years in a row. Every team has a couple down years, and they go right back up to the top. The difference between us and the Bulls is that we already have a coach, and we have made good draft picks. It wasn't until the last 2-3 when Paxson started drafting and getting players from winning teams and knew how to win. They also were hinging(sp?) their hopes on 2 HSers that were hyped way to much.


----------



## barfo (Jan 2, 2003)

Blazer Freak said:


> We also need to realize people we made the playoffs 22 years in a row. Every team has a couple down years, and they go right back up to the top. The difference between us and the Bulls is that we already have a coach, and we have made good draft picks. It wasn't until the last 2-3 when Paxson started drafting and getting players from winning teams and knew how to win. They also were hinging(sp?) their hopes on 2 HSers that were hyped way to much.


That's not very encouraging... we have a coach? We've had one for a month or two now. Did Chicago never have a coach? They were depending on 2 high school players? Hmm, how many do HSers do we have? Could it be... 4?

barfo


----------



## Blazer Freak (Jul 11, 2004)

barfo said:


> That's not very encouraging... we have a coach? We've had one for a month or two now. Did Chicago never have a coach? They were depending on 2 high school players? Hmm, how many do HSers do we have? Could it be... 4?
> 
> barfo


:laugh: Sorry! What I meant was that Chicago, I believe, switched coaches 2-3 times while trying to believe. I highly doubt we will fire Nate, so we have stability there. And what I meant by the HSer comment was that they were building around 2 RAW RAW HSers, they didn't have a lot of older good players like the Zach's, Rubens, they just didn't have veterans, and every team needs atleast 2-3. We on the other hand have Zach, Przybilla, Darius, and then Outlaw who has developed very nicely in his first two seasons, Telfair who did a fine job starting at PG as a teenager, and Webster, who can already do one thing very well that most HSers have to work on to be a success in this league. I really don't think a Bulls-Blazers comparison is realisitic.


----------



## myELFboy (Jun 28, 2005)

> I think some fans are really underrating Nate's impact on this team. Cheeks didn't have an offense to run, it was just do what ever works. And he never had a defensive game plan if a team didn't have a star like KG or Shaq. With Nate, we have a good coach who will make an offense to our teams strengths and he will improve our defense 10-fold.


um, wanted to add that the Sonics were pretty much dead until the GP/Desmond Mason trade. Ray came in & added life to the team---they went 17-12 after that trade happened. before that they were 22-30. I am one that believes that players are more important than coaches. For example, when Vladimir went down this past season, the team went 8-10, winning close games against below .500 teams. Even the greatest coach can't carry a team to victories when key players go down. Larry Brown is special in that he can transform crappy teams into playoff teams(he has his work cut out for him in NY though). Nate has a good reputation around the league, & he is heavy in playing team basketball, which should help a young team. He would also cuss out the team @ halftime when the team was playing ****ty. BUT he also had Ray Allen leading the team on the court, before the game in a huddle, after the game in a huddle, & he reached out to teammates outside of basketball too. The Sonics weren't that young last year though---the youngest player was Robert Swift 19, yet he never was part of the rotation. Luke & nick both played in college 3+ years, Vladimir is 24, Damien Wilkens was a rookie but he played 4 yrs college & is 25 or 26. the oldest player was AD, 30.


It took Nate a while until he figured out how to run the Sonics the way it was built to be ran---the bigs are all defensive/boards oriented, while the SF's & G's are offensive & fastbreak oriented, mainly with transition 3's & depending on the bigs setting solid screens for open jumpshots. 

Portland is built differently than Seattle is, so it will be interesting to see if he uses the same concept with the Blazers or not. I have a feeling the Blazers will beat up on the Sonics though, because Nate knows all the Sonics plays.


----------



## STOMP (Jan 1, 2003)

BIG Q said:


> Why are the Blazer fans on this board that agree with the youth movement always being bombarded by the vocal minority with assertions that we are unrealistic?





> Why can we not chat amongst ourselves with our rose colored glasses, sipping Kool-Aid, without having to put up with a Mixum attack? Your right to disagree with us does not negate our right to disagree with you.


I think it's pretty presumptuous for you to claim that your opinion is in the majority when many of this board's regular posters lay low in the offseason, and you have a whole month of perspective on whats what here. You're free to take issue with any opinion expressed here, but the personal attacks you've been making lately are not OK by the boards rules. 

Personally I enjoy following the offseason moves and possibilities and trying to figure out what sort of team the GM is putting together. Weighing in with my 2 cents on each of those moves be it positive, negative, or :whoknows: has no effect on whether I'll be cheering on the players during the season.

Maybe you should start your own board. I checked and basketballhomersboard.net is available. You can set up the rules any way you'd like.

STOMP


----------



## BIG Q (Jul 8, 2005)

I have not attacked anyone. I just agree with this youth movement since they tried things your way and all they got was mediocrity. Stating my support for the direction of this team is not an attack. And you bet, I am a Blazers homer. They are my team. Always have been, always will be. I will not be jumping onto the Suns bandwagon just because I live here.

Since the crux of your dismay with Nash and Patterson is the fact they have not gotten anything for SAR, DA, Damon and NVE, go ahead and propose some sample trades and we will discuss them. I would love to finally be able to do this.


----------



## Scout226 (Sep 17, 2003)

STOMP said:


> Maybe you should start your own board. I checked and basketballhomersboard.net is available. You can set up the rules any way you'd like.


Dude, I'm all over that url. I just picked it up. I also got NashSupportersDrinkKoolAid.com, SheedSucks.com, ForBlazerFansWhoAreAlwaysRight.com, and MixumForPres.com...


----------

