# Today's workout (Quick was peaking)



## Reep (Jun 4, 2003)

*Today's workout (Quick was peeking)*

Eric at O-Live posted the following on their board:



> [Quick] says he was peering through a window and was able to see a lot of today's workout (media wasn't allowed into the gym). He'll have an update in his blog within the next hour or so...teaser: he mentioned gay outplayed morrison by a wide margin...


OOOOHHHHHH. This could be juicy. If true, what does it mean?

If true, I'm guessing that the pick will be Gay, Bargnani or Aldridge.

Sorry Zagsfan & Oilcan (is this the same person?)


----------



## chromekilla (Aug 21, 2005)

Thats funny quick is a peeping tom.


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

chromekilla said:


> Thats funny quick is a peeping tom.




Actually he's a peeping Jason. 

I would think that Quick will sing the praises of Morrison just like all the GM's have that he has worked out for. If however Gay was serious it could have been a lot of fun to watch......Oh yeah Roy was there too being steady if not great at anything.


----------



## Reep (Jun 4, 2003)

There are a lot of people questioning whether Jason should give out this confidential information--and how it might hurt the Blazers' chance of getting who they want. Charlotte would be the problem. I doubt Charlotte will take much from this workout. Likely, they would work Gay and Morrison out themselves and draw their own conclusion. I'm not convinved Gay is the answer, so if Gay looks better out of this, then Portland should get one of Bargnani, Aldridge or Morrison--any of which I would be happy with.

I doubt this will help the Oregonian/Blazer relationship though.


----------



## It's_GO_Time (Oct 13, 2005)

Reep said:


> Eric at O-Live posted the following on their board:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 Thanks for the update . . . I was itching for any info


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

Reep said:


> There are a lot of people questioning whether Jason should give out this confidential information--and how it might hurt the Blazers' chance of getting who they want. Charlotte would be the problem. I doubt Charlotte will take much from this workout. Likely, they would work Gay and Morrison out themselves and draw their own conclusion. I'm not convinved Gay is the answer, so if Gay looks better out of this, then Portland should get one of Bargnani, Aldridge or Morrison--any of which I would be happy with.
> 
> I doubt this will help the Oregonian/Blazer relationship though.



All he would be doing is saying who looked good to him. Not who the Blazers were talking to or about. There is absolutely nothing wrong with Jason Quick saying a certain player had a great workout or not.


----------



## ebott (Jan 7, 2003)

Kiss_My_Darius said:


> Thanks for the update . . . I was itching for any info


Me too. Even if it does have a chance of negatively impacting the Blazers by showing our hand to other teams. It's two weeks until the draft. I've gotta have some kind of blazer related news to keep me going until then.


----------



## BBert (Dec 30, 2004)

I'm glad it turns out that Quick was actually peeking and not peaking. This thread had me worried. :biggrin: 

Gay probably goes to Charlotte anyway. Unfortunately. It looks more and more like we'll be picking among Morrison, Gay and either Aldridge or Bargnani?


----------



## Reep (Jun 4, 2003)

Quick peaked a long time ago.

Here it is:

link

Doesn't sound like Gay schooled Ammo. Ammo had a sub-par day, and it should be no surprise that 1on1 or 2on2 that Gay could drive on Adam. I'm not sure how well that translates into 5on5. No commentary on Gay's outside shot, which I would have liked to have heard. Didn't sound like there were any surprises. If that is true, then maybe Blazers decide not to trade up and just take whichever of Morrison, Gay, Aldridge, Bargnani or Roy that slips to them.


----------



## BBert (Dec 30, 2004)

Reep said:


> Quick peaked a long time ago.
> 
> Here it is:
> 
> link


Thanks for keeping us up to date Reep! :clap: 

RUDY! RUDY! RUDY! RUDY!


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

Cool this confirms that we should draft Brandon Roy. He is an average player that can't finish at the rim and wears number 3....hmmm I'm thinking of someone, but can't put my finger on who it is.


----------



## BBert (Dec 30, 2004)

Blazer Bert said:


> Gay probably goes to Charlotte anyway. Unfortunately. It looks more and more like we'll be picking among Morrison, Gay and either Aldridge or Bargnani?


Edit: Oops, meant to say Morrison, *Roy* and either Aldridge or Bargnani?

For the G/Fs, I like Rudy (but I'll be fine with Morrison).


----------



## mgb (Jun 26, 2004)

Not to surprising Morrison had a better workout at the first workout than the second considering who he went against at both workouts. Not just who but the type of player. A taller slower player compare to a quicker smaller player. Gay is exactly the type of player Morrison is going to have problems with in the NBA. I'm not saying we shouldn't draft Morrison but the results are not to surprising.


----------



## Reep (Jun 4, 2003)

mediocre man said:


> Cool this confirms that we should draft Brandon Roy. He is an average player that can't finish at the rim and wears number 3....hmmm I'm thinking of someone, but can't put my finger on who it is.


Your just afraid if they draft Roy that in looking for a nickname for him, they will steal yours.

"Brandon Roy, Mediocre Man, able to leap . . . into the air, faster than . . . Seung-Jin Ha, passes better than . . . Zach Randolph, more powerful than . . . Juan Dixon. He's Mediocre Man."


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

mgb said:


> Not to surprising Morrison had a better workout at the first workout than the second considering who he went against at both workouts. Not just who but the type of player. A taller slower player compare to a quicker smaller player. Gay is exactly the type of player Morrison is going to have problems with in the NBA. I'm not saying we shouldn't draft Morrison but the results are not to surprising.




This might come as a surprise to some of you, but before the donuts and adult beverages I was quite the slightly above average high school basketball player back in the 80's. Now in drills one on one or two on two I wasn't nearly as effective as I was in 5 on 5 or even 4 on 4 games. The reason is because shooters like myself back in the day can move around a lot more to get looks when there are more people. 


Just food for thought.


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

Reep said:


> Your just afraid if they draft Roy that in looking for a nickname for him, they will steal yours.
> 
> "Brandon Roy, Mediocre Man, able to leap . . . into the air, faster than . . . Zach Randolph, more powerful than . . . Juan Dixon. He's Mediocre Man."



Don't make me patent that name damnit!!!!


----------



## Oil Can (May 25, 2006)

If Portland has scouted Morrison 30 times. They already know what he can and cannot do. Besides, they have seen him go up against both Gay and Roy already.

If they watched him 30 times, it is reasonable to think that 2 of those games were UConn and UDub. 

If anything, today raises my confidence that PORtland WIll get Morrison. This probably drives Gay up the charts to Charlotte.


----------



## Oil Can (May 25, 2006)

Brandon Roy is a combo guard.

A combo of Danny Young/Howard Eisley/Eric Snow


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

Oil Can said:


> If Portland has scouted Morrison 30 times. They already know what he can and cannot do. Besides, they have seen him go up against both Gay and Roy already.
> 
> If they watched him 30 times, it is reasonable to think that 2 of those games were UConn and UDub.
> 
> If anything, today raises my confidence that PORtland WIll get Morrison. This probably drives Gay up the charts to Charlotte.



I would assume the workout in Charlotte did that as well. 


If Gay plays with heart he is the no brainer pick of the year. He's Darius Miles with heart and a brain.... That would be a great player


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

Oil Can said:


> Brandon Roy is a combo guard.
> 
> A combo of Danny Young/Howard Eisley/Eric Snow



I'm not sure he's that quick


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

Oil Can said:


> Brandon Roy is a combo guard.
> 
> A combo of Danny Young/Howard Eisley/Eric Snow


Wow. First the "2000 fans a game" comment and now this.

Absolutely ridiculous.

Ed O.


----------



## Oil Can (May 25, 2006)

I said this in "half-jest".


----------



## Reep (Jun 4, 2003)

Ed O said:


> Wow. First the "2000 fans a game" comment and now this.
> 
> Absolutely ridiculous.
> 
> Ed O.


But very consistent.

Roy didn't seem to impress Quick, but I guess he was really watching the Morrison/Gay matchup.


----------



## mgb (Jun 26, 2004)

mediocre man said:


> This might come as a surprise to some of you, but before the donuts and adult beverages I was quite the slightly above average high school basketball player back in the 80's. Now in drills one on one or two on two I wasn't nearly as effective as I was in 5 on 5 or even 4 on 4 games. The reason is because shooters like myself back in the day can move around a lot more to get looks when there are more people.
> 
> 
> Just food for thought.


Why should this come as a surprise to me? I was talking about one on one workouts here and why Morrison looked better at one than the other. I didn't say anything about Morrison not doing better in a 5 on 5, just that Gay is the type of player he'd have the most problem with in the NBA. As I said that doesn't mean we shouldn't take Morrison. I'd still take him.


----------



## Blazer Maven (Sep 27, 2005)

That settles it!

Rudy Gay is the pick!! 
















If the NBA changes its format to 2 on 2.

Of course Gay looks better in 2 on 2, none of those other pesky 6 players getting in the way. 

Morrison is more effective with the offense designed around him, allowing him to run off screens, etc. 

Roy is more effective reading a defense and getting the ball to open teammates or scoring himself. No, Roy did not embarrass himself as some had projected/dreamed, and the decision remains wide open.

For what it's worth I see:

Toronto- Aldridge
Chicago- Bargnani
Charlotte- Morrison
Portland- Roy


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

Jason Quick is a good talent evaluator peeking in through the blinds.


----------



## yakbladder (Sep 13, 2003)

Great, so we're supposed to discount these workouts because they're only 1 on 1 or 2 on 2...hrm..ok.

Why is it if something makes the player you want look bad you (and I mean the general "you") tend to just discredit it right away. Why is it so hard for people to have an open mind?

IF Quick can be taken at his word for his observations, Morrison's stock took a hit today. How much remains to be seen, but geez, just accept it and move on. Maybe at the next one his stock will skyrocket. As I recall, Webster had a great workout with us, but that didn't translate to incredible workouts everywhere - it happens.

It sounds like, again according to Quick, the big "winner" today was Gay.


----------



## It's_GO_Time (Oct 13, 2005)

What I like best in all that is Nate saying he has seen lots of tape and saw nothing new at the workouts. I was always concerned last year that the Blazers choose Webster maily because of his great workout. (Nash has been quoted saying something to that effect) 

That just doesn't sit right with me. Most of these players are capable of a great day and being in the zone on any given workout (see Morrison's workout here v. Charlotte). It is the how they perform in games and in practice on a daily basis that I believe gives the best indication of what you get with each player.


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

yakbladder said:


> Great, so we're supposed to discount these workouts because they're only 1 on 1 or 2 on 2...hrm..ok.
> 
> Why is it if something makes the player you want look bad you (and I mean the general "you") tend to just discredit it right away. Why is it so hard for people to have an open mind?
> 
> ...


Because he saw it peaking through blinds...

If McMillan or one of the blazer brass say the workout was bad I'll accept it...

But, I don't generally take a hack beat writers words for gospel especially when he was been full of agenda's before and he was "peaking through the blinds".


----------



## BBert (Dec 30, 2004)

Blazer Maven said:


> For what it's worth I see:
> 
> Toronto- Aldridge
> Chicago- Bargnani
> ...


I'm thinking:

Toronto - Aldridge
Chicago - Thomas
Charlotte - Gay
Portland - Morrison (but I'm still leaning Bargnani as my personal preference)

Of course, this conjecture is subject to change at any moment.


----------



## ThatBlazerGuy (May 1, 2003)

Its funny the lengths ZagsFan will go through to protect Morrison. Regardless of Quick peeking through the blinds, he has a much better perspective than any of us and voiced what he believed happened.


----------



## Reep (Jun 4, 2003)

Blazer Bert said:


> I'm thinking:
> 
> Toronto - Aldridge
> Chicago - Thomas
> ...


There does seem to be a lot of talk about Thomas going to Chicago, although I'm not sure why. I hope that is the case. I would be very happy to choose between Bargnani and Morrison. I'm still not clear as to why Charlotte wants Gay when they have Wallace--same goes for Morrison. All three are clear SFs to me.


----------



## Oil Can (May 25, 2006)

I don't think it can be disputed that Rudy Gay is a better athlete. He is a better athlete than anyone in the draft. 

I have also been told that Travis Outlaw is one of the best athletes in the league. He sits pretty near the end of the bench in my recollection.

DISCLAIMER: I am NOT comparing Gay to Outlaw.

Gay's athleticism has never ever been in question. 

Trust me, as McMillan said (in a round about way) they didn't learn anything new. 

Again-they scouted Morrison 30 times. They know what he is/isn't capable of.


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

ThatBlazerGuy said:


> Its funny the lengths ZagsFan will go through to protect Morrison. Regardless of Quick peeking through the blinds, he has a much better perspective than any of us and voiced what he believed happened.


I'm not protecting anything, I'm just not believing what Jason Quick has to say until someone else who wasn't peaking through the blinds says something about it...


----------



## wizmentor (Nov 10, 2005)

Blazer Bert said:


> I'm glad it turns out that Quick was actually peeking and not peaking. This thread had me worried. :biggrin:


Could've been doing both, he was watching Gay :biggrin: 



Blazer Bert said:


> Gay probably goes to Charlotte anyway. Unfortunately. It looks more and more like we'll be picking among Morrison, Gay and either Aldridge or Bargnani?


I'll be happy if we get Morrison, but I rate Gay higher. He has a better all-around game. If we start
Morrison along with Zach, Telfair, and Webster, we would have the worst defense in the league.


----------



## Utherhimo (Feb 20, 2005)

reading the segment on the workouts , gay looked like the uber freak he is, morrison had a rough workout but he was going agianst an uber freak, not one thing about adams and roy snore!

quick was least impressed with adams but roy was no gem either, quick must have not seen that many good plays from them since roy was barely mentioned.

the one that stock took a hit was roy I just dont see how portland needs a player like him that cant finish at the rim.

draft board for portland:
1. bargnani 
2. morrison/gay
4. aldridge
5. roy


----------



## mgb (Jun 26, 2004)

zagsfan20 said:


> Because he saw it peaking through blinds...
> 
> If McMillan or one of the blazer brass say the workout was bad I'll accept it...
> 
> But, I don't generally take a hack beat writers words for gospel especially when he was been full of agenda's before and he was "peaking through the blinds".


Well if Morrison was 4 of 10 from 3 point line then he was off. Maybe his poor showing against Gay threw him off.


----------



## BBert (Dec 30, 2004)

Reep said:


> I'm still not clear as to why Charlotte wants Gay when they have Wallace--same goes for Morrison. All three are clear SFs to me.


Would Portland have any interest in Wallace?


----------



## Utherhimo (Feb 20, 2005)

and we dont move up


----------



## ebott (Jan 7, 2003)

I like what I'm hearing. Gives me hope that Morrison might be there at 4. I expect the draft to go like this..

1. Bargnani (The NBA rigged the lottery to give the Raptors the top pick so they could draft him)
2. Aldridge
3. Rudy Gay
4. Morrison

The more I hear about Rudy doing well in workouts the happier I am. All along my worry with Rudy wasn't about his ability. It was about his effort. In a dozen workouts spread over a few weeks I'm not surprised that he's doing well. But over a 82 game season he'll be lax. 

But Morrison will bring consistant effort for the entire season. That's what I'm lookin for.


----------



## BBert (Dec 30, 2004)

wizmentor said:


> If we start Morrison along with Zach, Telfair, and Webster, we would have the worst defense in the league.


I've focused a lot on the one-two outside punch of Martell and Morrison on offense, and how that would open things up for Telfair and Zach to operate, but the defensive picture you paint here is pretty dismal, particularly if we lose Joel and Theo spends his usual amount of time on IR. Ouch.


----------



## sa1177 (Feb 18, 2005)

What a load of garbage...this is just Quick trying to attract readers. The guy doesn't know **** about evaluating a player in this type of workout scenario.


----------



## BBert (Dec 30, 2004)

In his defense (did I just type that?) Quick made a good effort to express the fact that his opinions were just that and should not be taken as if he were a professional talent evaluator. I appreciated his humility. And I'm glad he posted, and posted early.


----------



## mgb (Jun 26, 2004)

Listening to the Fan on 1080 they were really impressed by Morrison. They didn't see the 1-1 or 2-2 but said he was by far the best shooter and even though all the players looked tired he looked the same as when he first step on the court. 

Thought it was cool Morrison went out and sign autographs afterwards. He ask to do it too which is neat from what I heard.

They also said he got off a lot more shots in the same amount of time than anyone.


----------



## ebott (Jan 7, 2003)

sa1177 said:


> What a load of garbage...this is just Quick trying to attract readers. The guy doesn't know **** about evaluating a player in this type of workout scenario.


You're missing the point. The point is that he got us something. Anything is better than nothing.


----------



## yakbladder (Sep 13, 2003)

Oil Can said:


> I don't think it can be disputed that Rudy Gay is a better athlete. He is a better athlete than anyone in the draft.
> 
> I have also been told that Travis Outlaw is one of the best athletes in the league. He sits pretty near the end of the bench in my recollection.
> 
> ...


If you aren't comparing Gay to Outlaw, then why even bring it up? You know, I know a guy, Ron Santo, who has diabetes. And from my recollection, he's had both legs amputated below the knees as a result of diabetes. But of course, I'm not meaning to imply that Morrison will have any problems with diabetes. I just tell the story "because".

Outlaw isn't at the end of the bench (or the middle, or the beginning, or whatever random dice throw they do before games to determine his position) because of his athleticisim. It's because of his apparent lack of game intelligence.


----------



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

Morrison backers say that since the blazers have seen him 30 times then today's workout doesn't matter that much. I believe that SHOULD be the case, but remember it is widely believed that Portland choose Martell last year largely because of his great workout. It would be interesting to know how much of an impact something like this truly has. My gut tells me that with Portland, workouts mean more than they should.


----------



## mgb (Jun 26, 2004)

Listening to the Fan I'm starting to question Quicks article. He said Morrison was 4 of 10 from the three point line but they said after being disappointed at hitting 6 of 10 he hit 9 of 10 from the three point line and then looked over at the other players as if to say ya match that or something like that.


----------



## PapaG (Oct 4, 2004)

zagsfan20 said:


> I'm not protecting anything, I'm just not believing what Jason Quick has to say until someone else who wasn't peaking through the blinds says something about it...


You are going to get a more accurate take from an objective person like Quick than you will from anyone affiliated with the organization.

I am beginning to think Morrison could be a bust in the NBA. Maybe Roy is a better pick.


----------



## Anonymous Gambler (May 29, 2006)

The Stache is exposed!!!! Yippee Cay Yee!!!!!

I hope this means were are not drafting Morrison.

Given the Darius Miles comparisons made by the Oregonian, it means a lot that Quick still stated that Rudy Gay was the best at the workout.

I will modify my draft list as follows:

1) Aldridge
2) Barganini
3) Gay
4) Roy
31) The Stache!


----------



## sa1177 (Feb 18, 2005)

ebott said:


> You're missing the point. The point is that he got us something. Anything is better than nothing.


All he "got us" IMO is a bunch of you reading his garbage blog on O'live....I am really not trying to sway the arguement either way I just sincerely feel that Quick doesn't know ****.


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

papag said:


> You are going to get a more accurate take from an objective person like Quick than you will from anyone affiliated with the organization.
> 
> I am beginning to think Morrison could be a bust in the NBA. Maybe Roy is a better pick.


Tune into The Fan, they were there and have a much different recollection of what happened at the workouts than what Quick is saying...

and are you really dense enought to believe that Morrison will be a bust because of what Quick says he saw peaking through the blinds?


----------



## sa1177 (Feb 18, 2005)

This is hilarious...people here continually bash Quick and his stories yet now when he comes up with some garbage speculative piece of info. all of a sudden he is credible?


----------



## BBert (Dec 30, 2004)

Mr. Chuck Taylor said:


> Morrison backers say that since the blazers have seen him 30 times then today's workout doesn't matter that much. I believe that SHOULD be the case, but remember it is widely believed that Portland choose Martell last year largely because of his great workout. It would be interesting to know how much of an impact something like this truly has. My gut tells me that with Portland, workouts mean more than they should.


In Martel's case it's possible the workout carried more weight because the games they scouted were against high school competition, and they wanted to see him play against talented adults. This year they've seen Morrison and the others they are interested in numerous times against other top notch college competition, so I think the body of data should be stronger and the weight of the workouts less than it was in deciding on Martell. Maybe.


----------



## It's_GO_Time (Oct 13, 2005)

zagsfan20 said:


> Tune into The Fan, they were there and have a much different recollection of what happened at the workouts than what Quick is saying...
> 
> and are you really dense enought to believe that Morrison will be a bust because of what Quick says he saw peaking through the blinds?



So were all dense for listening to Quick . . . but "quick" turn to the fan and listen to what they say about Morrison, because they know what they are talking about.


----------



## PapaG (Oct 4, 2004)

zagsfan20 said:


> Tune into The Fan, they were there and have a much different recollection of what happened at the workouts than what Quick is saying...
> 
> and are you really dense enought to believe that Morrison will be a bust because of what Quick says he saw peaking through the blinds?


First off, calling me "dense" is against this board's TOS I believe. Let's leave the personal attacks out of this.

By 'bust', I mean that Morrison may not be a player that can elevate a bad team as its best player. I can see him being a 20 ppg player on a bad team with no problem. I can't see him being a 20 ppg on a contender, however. I see him as a 12 ppg offensive lift off of the bench for a really good team. He is a defensive liability who lacks basic lateral footspeed. I am not criticizing him as a person; this is just how I see him as a potential NBA player. He is NOT Larry Bird. He's actually much closer to Keith Van Horn if you look at their college careers and physical skills.

And again, I am not "dense". I have a different opinion, that's all. :wave:


----------



## It's_GO_Time (Oct 13, 2005)

sa1177 said:


> This is hilarious...people here continually bash Quick and his stories yet now when he comes up with some garbage speculative piece of info. all of a sudden he is credible?


 It's a piece of information to put with all the other information (like articles from website hacks). Nothing more or less and I think most posters get that.

Just because you don't consider anything Quick says doesn't mean other have to do the same thing.


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

Kiss_My_Darius said:


> So were all dense for listening to Quick . . . but "quick" turn to the fan and listen to what they say about Morrison, because they know what they are talking about.


A.) I never said all.

B.) I never said to tune into The Fan because their credible, but isn't kind of funny that two different outlets have two different accounts of what happened?


----------



## Verro (Jul 4, 2005)

Oil Can said:


> I don't think it can be disputed that Rudy Gay is a better athlete. He is a better athlete than anyone in the draft.
> 
> I have also been told that Travis Outlaw is one of the best athletes in the league. He sits pretty near the end of the bench in my recollection.


Outlaw is definitely not one of the best athletes in the league, he can jump high and that's it, otherwise he's fairly slow and uncoordinated (I know a strange combination). Gay has leaping ability as well as quickness and great agility around the hoop.


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

papag said:


> First off, calling me "dense" is against this board's TOS I believe. Let's leave the personal attacks out of this.
> 
> By 'bust', I mean that Morrison may not be a player that can elevate a bad team as its best player. I can see him being a 20 ppg player on a bad team with no problem. I can't see him being a 20 ppg on a contender, however. I see him as a 12 ppg offensive lift off of the bench for a really good team. He is a defensive liability who lacks basic lateral footspeed. I am not criticizing him as a person; this is just how I see him as a potential NBA player. He is NOT Larry Bird. He's actually much closer to Keith Van Horn if you look at their college careers and physical skills.
> 
> And again, I am not "dense". I have a different opinion, that's all. :wave:


did I offend you with dense? Thats nothing compared to a lot thats said around here.

and if Jason Quick's peaking through the blinds has that much swaying power with you, than that says a lot to begin with.


----------



## It's_GO_Time (Oct 13, 2005)

zagsfan20 said:


> A.) B.) I never said to tune into The Fan because their credible, but isn't kind of funny that two different outlets have two different accounts of what happened?


 I don't know how much I trust Quick (more than others here) but the Fan has been pimping draft the stashe heavily the past week. Those guys wouldn't have the balls to say anything else at this point other than Morrison is the pick.

Again, what the fan says (they are saying Morrison was the man) is one more piece of information to process.

On the topic of the Fan, I thought Roy gave a great interview. I predict the guy is going to help whatever team drafts him.


----------



## yakbladder (Sep 13, 2003)

sa1177 said:


> This is hilarious...people here continually bash Quick and his stories yet now when he comes up with some garbage speculative piece of info. all of a sudden he is credible?



Uhh...well, usually Quick says "I heard this and this and this" as opposed to "I watched this with my own two eyes and this person made X # of shots". If you want to get technical, he did have a subjective read of Gay v Morrison (though it's not really subjective to say that Gay blew by Morrison once and Morrison did have a stop on Gay). Of course, I haven't been really critical of Quick, so it's all sort of moot.


----------



## PapaG (Oct 4, 2004)

zagsfan20 said:


> did I offend you with dense? Thats nothing compared to a lot thats said around here.
> 
> and if Jason Quick's peaking through the blinds has that much swaying power with you, than that says a lot to begin with.


I am admittedly a Rudy Gay fan. He will be a star in the NBA; Morrison will be a solid role player. Quick's objective take on their relative athleticism reinforces this to me. Gay is off the charts but already has a decent shot; Morrison is getting the "he's more athletic than you would think" remarks that smack of desperation.

As for your, your screen name says a lot about your own personal bias in this debate. 

Drink some more 'Stache-Aid. What will the excuses be when he falls short of being Larry Bird?


----------



## Blazer Maven (Sep 27, 2005)

Kiss_My_Darius said:


> I don't know how much I trust Quick (more than others here) but the Fan has been pimping draft the stashe heavily the past week. Those guys wouldn't have the balls to say anything else at this point other than Morrison is the pick.
> 
> Again, what the fan says (they are saying Morrison was the man) is one more piece of information to process.
> 
> On the topic of the Fan, I thought Roy gave a great interview. I predict the guy is going to help whatever team drafts him.


Roy will indeed help whatever team drafts him. His skill set is what Portland needs.


----------



## Fork (Jan 2, 2003)

zagsfan20 said:


> Tune into The Fan, they were there and have a much different recollection of what happened at the workouts than what Quick is saying...


To be fair, they weren't peeking through the blinds. Quick may be wrong, but he has different information than the guys at The Fan do, it would seem.


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

papag said:


> I am admittedly a Rudy Gay fan. He will be a star in the NBA; Morrison will be a solid role player. Quick's objective take on their relative athleticism reinforces this to me. Gay is off the charts but already has a decent shot; Morrison is getting the "he's more athletic than you would think" remarks that smack of desperation.
> 
> As for your, your screen name says a lot about your own personal bias in this debate.
> 
> Drink some more 'Stache-Aid. What will the excuses be when he falls short of being Larry Bird?


The "more athletic than you would think" remarks?...I've never even heard/read anything like that...

I could care less whether he's a good athlete or not....He's a good basketball that gives 100% on the court all the time and is a proven winner.....Rudy Gay is a drifter who puts forth as much effort to show that he cares a slight bit and then he uses his athleticism to make a nice dunk and everyone says oh wow this kid is the next Scottie Pippen.


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

papag said:


> Drink some more 'Stache-Aid. What will the excuses be when he falls short of being Larry Bird?


He's already a couple inches short of Larry Bird.

Ed O.


----------



## Fork (Jan 2, 2003)

Ed O said:


> He's already a couple inches short of Larry Bird.
> 
> Ed O.


And he's short about 8 rebounds and 9 assists per game.


----------



## Reep (Jun 4, 2003)

Strategy question: If you were Gay, I mean Rudy Gay, and you knew you could blow by Morrison any time you wanted for a dunk, would you do it, or would you take more of a chance and shoot some jumpers over him to show more of your game?

I'm wondering which Rudy did.


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

Reep said:


> Strategy question: If you were Gay, I mean Rudy Gay, and you knew you could blow by Morrison any time you wanted for a dunk, would you do it, or would you take more of a chance and shoot some jumpers over him to show more of your game?


Dunk. Every time.

It would make Morrison's defense look worse and my aggressiveness look better. I could prove I could shoot jumpers in an empty gym.

Ed O.


----------



## hasoos (Jan 3, 2003)

Dunk. Getting to the line is a much higher percentage chance by attacking the rim then by shooting a jumper. Teams that attack the rim also win because the refs favor the more aggressive team.


----------



## Reep (Jun 4, 2003)

Fork said:


> And he's short about 8 rebounds and 9 assists per game.


That may be overstating it a bit (3.5 assists difference in college, rebounding was 9 delta), but the concept is true. I always thought Morrison's nickname should be 1/3-bird.


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

Reep said:


> Strategy question: If you were Gay, I mean Rudy Gay, and you knew you could blow by Morrison any time you wanted for a dunk, would you do it, or would you take more of a chance and shoot some jumpers over him to show more of your game?
> 
> I'm wondering which Rudy did.


Thats the difference between a workout and a game...In a game you have a center waiting down there to swat shots in a workout you don't....

And I'm sure that Morrison was taking it to the hoop ans scoring just as easily against Gay....


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

Reep said:


> That may be overstating it a bit (3.5 assists difference in college, rebounding was 9 delta), but the concept is true. I always thought Morrison's nickname should be 1/3-bird.


Bird was more of a post player in college...

and its not his fault that he has to be compared to one of the (if not the) greatest players of all-time.

Rudy Gay or any of the other prospects don't have the massive expectations that Morrison has.


----------



## It's_GO_Time (Oct 13, 2005)

zagsfan20 said:


> And I'm sure that Morrison was taking it to the hoop ans scoring just as easily against Gay....


The most striking facet of the workout was Gay's ability to drive past Morrison. Twice this resulted in thunderous dunks by Gay. Morrison also had his shot blocked multiple times by Gay.
-JQ

Dude, you defend Morrison without even reading the article? I'm not saying believe everything Quick says, but the title of the thread is about Quick's observations . . . I figure you would at least read his comments if your going to post on this thread.


----------



## ProZach (Oct 13, 2005)

zagsfan20 said:


> I'm not protecting anything, I'm just not believing what Jason Quick has to say...



Based on who wrote that, that might be the funniest thing I've ever read on this board... Now I've heard it all. :kissmy:


----------



## mgb (Jun 26, 2004)

Ed O said:


> Dunk. Every time.
> 
> It would make Morrison's defense look worse and my aggressiveness look better. I could prove I could shoot jumpers in an empty gym.
> 
> Ed O.


I agree, take it to the basket if you can, but making a shot when someone is in your face is a lot different than making a shot shooting alone.


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

mgb said:


> I agree, take it to the basket if you can, but making a shot when someone is in your face is a lot different than making a shot shooting alone.


There's an insane amount of tape on Rudy Gay shooting jumpers with people in his face. I don't think that a few minutes of a workout is going to change an opinion of a guy's shooting ability.

Ed O.


----------



## mgb (Jun 26, 2004)

Ed O said:


> There's an insane amount of tape on Rudy Gay shooting jumpers with people in his face. I don't think that a few minutes of a workout is going to change an opinion of a guy's shooting ability.
> 
> Ed O.


When I was watching the video at Yahoo I notice how most of Gay's jumpers were uncontested compared to Morrison's. Of course that might have been because Gay could get separation while Morrison couldn't or because of Morrison's poor shot selection. I do like Morrison's ability to hit shots when he is taking such a tough shot though because many times when it's at the end of a game and you need a basket that's how it's going to be.

On another note, there isn't any video of Gay beating his man and taking it to the basket? He did mention people seem to think he couldn't do it so maybe there isn't.


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

mgb said:


> On another note, there isn't any video of Gay beating his man and taking it to the basket? He did mention people seem to think he couldn't do it so maybe there isn't.


The two main knocks on Gay seem to be his aggressiveness and his handle. By driving and dunking on people in workouts, he's addressing both of those things while making whomever's defending him look bad.

Ed O.


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

Ed O said:


> The two main knocks on Gay seem to be his aggressiveness and his handle. By driving and dunking on people in workouts, he's addressing both of those things while making whomever's defending him look bad.
> 
> Ed O.


Yea, in a workout, which isn't indicative of what will happen in a real 5 on 5 game.


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

zagsfan20 said:


> Yea, in a workout, which isn't indicative of what will happen in a real 5 on 5 game.


Bull****.

Why do they even DO workouts, if nothing matters?

You're grasping at straws so much it's pathetic.

Ed O.


----------



## baler (Jul 16, 2003)

Ed O said:


> Bull****.
> 
> Why do they even DO workouts, if nothing matters?
> 
> ...


You sure are testy today. So are you saying that it is just as easy to drive and dunk in a 5 on 5 match up than it is when it's 2 on 2? Now that's BS. You may not come out and say it but you are just as partial to Rudy Gay as Zags is to Morrison. So we get it...you really don't care for Morrisons game. Fine. But that does not mean that Gay is saying and doing the right things only because he has to and because it is his financial future on the line. If he tends to drift in games and not give it his all 100% of the time then I would not be interested in the least. Let's just keep Miles if thats the case. You like Miles too, right? A kid that hits tough shots, can create of the dribble, and most of all has the passion EVERY night is what this team needs, not another athletic freak that dunks.......sometimes.


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

baler said:


> You sure are testy today. So are you saying that it is just as easy to drive and dunk in a 5 on 5 match up than it is when it's 2 on 2? Now that's BS.


Straw man. And strike one.

I didn't say ANYTHING was "as easy". Re-read my posts.



> You may not come out and say it but you are just as partial to Rudy Gay as Zags is to Morrison.


Strike two. I don't care one way or the other about Gay. Look at all my posts about Roy and explain how that has anything to do with Rudy Gay.



> So we get it...you really don't care for Morrisons game. Fine.


OK. You're right there. Morrison's offense is good. Or, rather, his SCORING is good. The rest of his game is not strong even at the NCAA level. He's small and skinny and I don't feel he's a great NBA prospect.

At the fourth spot, I could definitely live with us taking him. But he's not my first choice and if we give up value to move up to take him it's going to be a mistake.



> But that does not mean that Gay is saying and doing the right things only because he has to and because it is his financial future on the line.


Who's talking about what he's saying?

And who's to say that Morrison isn't doing and saying the right things just because HIS financial future is on the line? Morrison, after all, has acknowledged that with his diabetes that his career might be shorter, so it seems that he's more motivated to put up a false front if anyone is.



> If he tends to drift in games and not give it his all 100% of the time then I would not be interested in the least.


Then you are foolish. Players don't need to give 100% all the time to be effective, and merely giving 100% all of the time doesn't guarantee success.



> Let's just keep Miles if thats the case. You like Miles too, right?


Until Miles is traded, we ARE keeping him. Miles is our second-best player, although that's more of a statement about the sorry job Nash did in "rebuilding" this team than in Miles's capabilities.



> A kid that hits tough shots, can create of the dribble, and most of all has the passion EVERY night is what this team needs, not another athletic freak that dunks.......sometimes.


Passion every night doesn't win in the NBA. It simply doesn't. Talent and execution do.

Ed O.


----------



## LameR (Jan 4, 2004)

It sure is great reading the same argument repeated for six pages of thread.


----------



## BBert (Dec 30, 2004)

sa1177 said:


> All he "got us" IMO is a bunch of you reading his garbage blog on O'live....I am really not trying to sway the arguement either way I just sincerely feel that Quick doesn't know ****.


I tend to agree that Quick isn't the most astute and knowledgable basketball observer. However, do the clowns at the Fan, who do seem to have a vested interest in 'the stache' at this point, know ****? I frankly trust them less.


----------



## Kmurph (May 7, 2003)

Let's calm down people...it is just one workout...and IMO it didn't tell us anything we already didn't know....

Rudy Gay is going to be a good NBA player...PARTICULARLY if he shows the drive and effort he showed today...He has great size @ 6'8 and a fantastic wingspan @ 7'3 and he is very young still...

If Gay couldn't drive by Morrison he ought to just head to europe....I mean this shouldn't be a surprise to anyone, now should it?

It sounds like Morrison shot was a little off today...but I didn't read anything that showed he was going to struggle in the NBA....Gay would be a tough defensive matchup for any player...

But then again the question with Gay was never about talent...it was about consistent effort....He certainly had something to prore today and I am glad to see that he stepped up and apparently did just that...

I have always rated Morrison and Gay at #1 and #2...this workout hasn't changed that a bit....As long as POR gets one of those two guys...I am happy.


----------



## BBert (Dec 30, 2004)

zagsfan20 said:


> Bird was more of a post player in college...
> 
> and its not his fault that he has to be compared to one of the (if not the) greatest players of all-time.


It's not? Haven't I read him talking about how he's patterned his game, and even his look, after Bird? 



> Last summer in Spokane, Morrison was watching a replay of an old Boston Celtics game featuring Bird.
> 
> "We were watching the game, and I said if I could grow a mustache, I would," Morrison said. "My friend said I wouldn't, and finally I was able to grow one. From there, it grew into its own entity I think, and it's own cult following in Spokane."
> 
> ...


It sounds to me like he enjoys playing up the comparison, rather than playing it down.


----------



## ThePrideOfClyde (Mar 28, 2006)

LameR said:


> It sure is great reading the same argument repeated for six pages of thread.


lol. No doubt.


----------



## Utherhimo (Feb 20, 2005)

some people are going to far and taking this stuff a bit too seriously like just cus they like a player they have to defend him to the end, just realize as wefight and bicker there are soldier half way around the world trying to make it threw thier 4+ tour in iraq. 

As long as we dont end up with roy at number 4 all will be good and hope the best for whoever the blazers pick, at this point I cant personally back anyone player. I want the player that will help the blazers to regain its pride as long as its not roy, I feel he is a waste for a 4th.

can we all step back, breath and relax a bit? just remember the fact we get to get excited/worried about a draft pick in the nba is a luxury and means nothing in the real world. 

peace be with you (all) and remember not to take basketball and the nba so seriously.

thank you


----------



## wastro (Dec 19, 2004)

Utherhimo said:


> some people are going to far and taking this stuff a bit too seriously like just cus they like a player they have to defend him to the end, just realize as wefight and bicker there are soldier half way around the world trying to make it threw thier 4+ tour in iraq.
> 
> As long as we dont end up with roy at number 4 all will be good and hope the best for whoever the blazers pick, at this point I cant personally back anyone player. I want the player that will help the blazers to regain its pride as long as its not roy, I feel he is a waste for a 4th.
> 
> ...


If things don't change that much over the next two weeks, you might get worked up and bitter after Portland picks Roy with the fourth pick. Not trying to be rude, just saying that Portland's real likely to pick Roy; he'll be available and he's one of the most all-around 'NBA-ready' players in the draft.


----------



## sa1177 (Feb 18, 2005)

Blazer Bert said:


> I tend to agree that Quick isn't the most astute and knowledgable basketball observer. However, do the clowns at the Fan, who do seem to have a vested interest in 'the stache' at this point, know ****? I frankly trust them less.


oh quite true...if I ever said anything to give their jargon any type of credence I certainly didn't intend to...Ian and the "Big Suck" are just as worthles as JQ IMO.


----------



## Tince (Jul 11, 2004)

My two cents after reading about today's workout:

1) The knock on Brandon Roy is that he couldn't finish at the rim, but I've watched enough of his games to know he's a very good finisher. Adams and Gay are both very good defenders and probably had something to do with Roy looking below par in that category. I still wouldn't be upset with Roy as our #4 pick, but he certainly isn't #1 on my draft board.

2) Morrison didn't shoot well in drills, not a concern of mine. We all know this kid can shoot, and his release point will allow him to get shots off a score in this league. As far as him getting burned by Gay, not a big surprise to me either, we all know his defense is below average. He's a hard worker and has a high basketball IQ, so I'm sure he'll improve over the years. 

3) Rudy Gay driving past Morrison and dunking is nice, but not that great. I saw flashes where Gay looked very comfortable dribbling the ball, and I just hope these workouts put these Travis Outlaw comparisons to bed. Outlaw still could only take one or two dribbles before Morrison would steal in from him. Gay's shot is the big concern, but is just as likely to improve as Morrison's defense. Between Gay and Telfair, one of them would have to be able to extended defenses, or one of them will have to go. 

I'm big on players who can play both ends of the floor, I always have been. It's the reason I like Jack in the long-run over Telfair. It's the reason I won't be that dissapointed if we lose Joel. Lastly, it's the reason Rudy Gay continues to stay at #1 on my draft board. 

1. Rudy Gay
2. Adam Morrison
3. Lamarcus Aldridge
4. Brandon Ro


----------



## Oldmangrouch (Feb 11, 2003)

Personally, I am not rooting for any particular player - I just want the team to take TBPA. 

Sadly, I am becoming convinced that that won't happen. Drafting Roy means passing on 2 players from the group of Aldridge/Gay/Morrison/Thomas/Bargnani.......all of whom will likely be better than Roy in 2-3 years.

Honestly, I am more depressed about the future of the team now than I was during the season. The draft should be an occasion for hope!


----------



## maxiep (May 7, 2003)

*Re: Today's workout (Quick was peeking)*

To me, it didn't really sound like there were any surprises. Morrison could shoot, Gay was athletic and explosive, Roy had an unspectacular all-around game and Adams was along for the ride.


----------



## Utherhimo (Feb 20, 2005)

*Re: Today's workout (Quick was peeking)*

i dont think the team is very high on roy but its a smokescreen cus they want one of the following: aldridge bargnani gay or morrison all 4 i believe are already BETTER than roy!

If we draft roy we better be trading him!


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

Oldmangrouch said:


> Personally, I am not rooting for any particular player - I just want the team to take TBPA.
> 
> Sadly, I am becoming convinced that that won't happen. Drafting Roy means passing on 2 players from the group of Aldridge/Gay/Morrison/Thomas/Bargnani.......all of whom will likely be better than Roy in 2-3 years.
> 
> Honestly, I am more depressed about the future of the team now than I was during the season. The draft should be an occasion for hope!




I think that Roy will surprise you, but I feel your pain.

This time next year, heading into a strong draft with a high lottery pick, we should be feeling a bit better, if it's any consolation 

Ed O.


----------



## Oil Can (May 25, 2006)

yakbladder said:


> If you aren't comparing Gay to Outlaw, then why even bring it up? You know, I know a guy, Ron Santo, who has diabetes. And from my recollection, he's had both legs amputated below the knees as a result of diabetes. But of course, I'm not meaning to imply that Morrison will have any problems with diabetes. I just tell the story "because".
> 
> Outlaw isn't at the end of the bench (or the middle, or the beginning, or whatever random dice throw they do before games to determine his position) because of his athleticisim. It's because of his apparent lack of game intelligence.



Why do I bring it up? I thought it was obvious-but here goes. My point is, athleticism is important in a league of athletes, but some of the best athletes sit at the end of the bench. I like Travis Outlaw and wish him well and wish he would do better. Don't fall in love with an athlete just because he is an athlete. 

Gay is a phenom. He could be a star in this league. I hope we don't take him though.

Diabetes is a dangerous affliction that can lead to amputations in later life from loss of circulation.


----------



## Entity (Feb 21, 2005)

I don't think the coaches and scouts are looking for how players are finishing anyway. Anyone can have a bad night. I think they're looking for how they start, what their tendencies are, how well they follow fundamentals, what their basketball IQ is, do they make good decisions, do they listen, are they teachable, are they talented, are they motivated, do they have heart. I don't think they have any illusions about the differences between 2 on 2 and 5 on 5. I think they're envisioning plays in their mind, and how well that player would fit into those plans.

The knock on Morrison is that he's one dimensional. There are players in the NBA like that, with low steals/assists/rebounds totals and high scoring averages. The question is, is he Michael Redd or Steve Kerr? Gay is said to be freakishly athletic, but lackadaisical. I've seen his vids. When he's on, he's a monster. But I've seen Darius throw up 47 points. So is he Vince Carter or Darius Miles? Roy apparently doesn't stand out. He might never make the all-star team. But it doesn't mean he's going to be a liability. He'll probably play 15 years as a third or fourth option in a starting lineup.

The Trail Blazers are supposedly looking to grab the "best player" available. But what Steve Patterson says on lottery night when he's not prepared for his "fourth pick speech" doesn't necessarily mean the Blazers aren't singing a different tune now. They need someone to play some serious minutes, and they need those minutes to count. They have enough developmental players. They need ten players who can be on the floor and make a difference at a competative level for 20-40 minutes. This might be a cosmetic interest, but they need to put people in the stands. Whether or not that's important to you or me, it _is_ important to them, and they will be looking for someone Portland can get behind. They don't want to give in to blowing the top off their draft day secret. But don't be surprised on June 29 if there's a big add campaign from many sources around the city to put our hopes on this kid. The Blazers have many other needs to tend to, but on Draft Night, these are probably going to be the things they think about.


----------



## Kmurph (May 7, 2003)

Grouch\Ed - 

Let's save that sentiment until AFTER the draft....

If that does end up being the case I'll be right there with you...but I maintain hope that POR will end up with one of Morrison\Gay\Bargnani


----------



## B_&_B (Feb 19, 2004)

Sorry if this has already been posted, but a short video of Morrison from the workout is available on:

http://www.nba.com/blazers/news/draftcentral.html


If I was Quick's neighbor, I'd now be worried he's peaking thru my windows and watching my wife undress. I wonder how often Quick peaked in on his love kitten, Damon Stoudamire, back in the day. 


The national media has now picked up on Quicks info. Colin Cowherd just said on his national show that "reports are that Rudy Gay dominated Adam Morrison in Portland yesterday... Gay blocked several of his shots and dunked on him a few times". Gay is on Colin's show now and pretty much said that he did do well against Morrison.


----------



## Reep (Jun 4, 2003)

BEER&BASKETBALL said:


> Sorry if this has already been posted, but a short video of Morrison from the workout is available on:
> 
> http://www.nba.com/blazers/news/draftcentral.html
> .


I posted this in its own thread for discussion. Gay's video is out too.


----------



## BBert (Dec 30, 2004)

Let's say for a moment that the Blazers cutting off media access to the workouts wasn't so much due to the breach of protocol, and possible future leaks, but because they felt Quick's report will make it harder for them to get their player at no. 4. 

Based on what Quick reported, it is now being picked up nationally (Cowherd, et al.) and reported that Gay "dominated" Morrison and Roy was mediocre. Couldn't it be argued then that it doesn't make sense that Portland is targeting Roy? 

Some have argued for a while that the Blazers may be promoting Roy as a smoke screen. He's even moved up in some mocks. A report by Quick that Roy was mediocre certainly wouldn't hurt the Blazers plans if Roy is in their plans. But it might if they can't sucker some other team into picking Roy ahead of us (unlikely, IMO).

The same goes if the Blazers wanted Morrison over Gay. The only way Quick's report harms the Blazers is if the Blazers want Gay and this makes it more likely that some other team will take him before the Blazers can.

I'm not saying I think the Blazers have already decided who they want, and that it's Gay. They are probably still considering Gay/Morrison/Roy at that spot. They are probably worried that IF they ultimately decide on Gay or Morrison, such a leak of a private workout might make it less likely that player is still available. But I think their reaction makes it much less likely that they are leaning toward Roy over the other two.


----------



## Kmurph (May 7, 2003)

I agree that it would be much more intersting if POR was doing this b\c a smokescreen was blown or they were trying to create one...but that is more than likely just not the case....


I think this move has its roots more in general dislike b\t POR mgmt (specifically PAtteresen) and the Oregonian (Specifically Canzano and Quick in this case) and Quick's little spy reporting gave Patteresen all the leverage he needed to smack him down a notch and he took it....

I think it is petty on POR part...Pattersen would have been better off to express his dissapointment that Quick did that publically and then have a private talk with Quick...

At least that is what I would have done....but I don't know, maybe he already has?


----------



## B_&_B (Feb 19, 2004)

sorry in advance if this has already been posted:

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?id=2486249


----------



## sa1177 (Feb 18, 2005)

BEER&BASKETBALL said:


> sorry in advance if this has already been posted:
> 
> http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?id=2486249


Nice typo in the last line...



> Morrison, Gay and Troy are widely expected to be taken early in the first round.


----------



## mgb (Jun 26, 2004)

BEER&BASKETBALL said:


> sorry in advance if this has already been posted:
> 
> http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?id=2486249


Just one question, who's Troy?


----------



## Oil Can (May 25, 2006)

Blazers will not allow reporters anymore becuase of Quick.


----------



## mgb (Jun 26, 2004)

sa1177 said:


> Nice typo in the last line...


You beat me to it.


----------



## Boob-No-More (Apr 24, 2006)

sa1177 said:


> oh quite true...if I ever said anything to give their jargon any type of credence I certainly didn't intend to...Ian and the "Big Suck" are just as worthles as JQ IMO.


Since when do 30 fans equal a mandate? Moron and Big Suck have been pimping Morrison for weeks, every stinking night. They have a web site, a song and free t-shirts and they can still only get 30 people to show up for their "Draft the 'Stache" rally. How pathetic is that?

And then the Oregonian picks up on it and runs a story that the Blazers management isn't sure who to pick, but the fans' (all 30 of them) clear choice is Morrison. Or maybe they, meant 1080 The Fan's clear choice is Morrison. Seriously, if they had spent weeks of promoting Rudy Gay with a "Gay Pride" campaign, complete with web site and theme song (and maybe a parade), or a "Roy for ROY" campaign, don't you think they could have gotten 30 fans to come out for the free t-shirts, too.

30 fans, pfft, big deal. It's not like that's gonna help ticket sales (especially since most of the 30 looked to be under age and/or unemployed). Nothing against Morrison, but if there was really a ground swell of support for drafting him, with weeks of constant promotion, I would have expected a lot more than 30 people to show up for his big rally. Either people really don't care, or more likely, they don't take anything Moron and Big Suck say seriously.

BNM


----------



## Oil Can (May 25, 2006)

Boob-No-More said:


> Either people really don't care, or more likely, they don't take anything Moron and Big Suck say seriously.



Wow, I guess you don't like the Big Show? I am a highly biased Zags fan, so of course I see it differently. Ian Furness just stated yesterday forthe first tiem that he hopes the pick is Morrison. 

Gavin Dawson and Isaac Ropp are the guys pimping Morrison. 

30 people is not a huge crowd. What kind of numbers do you expect on a rainy Thursday in Tualatin at 11 am? 

I actually commend KFXX for how far they have come as a station.


----------



## It's_GO_Time (Oct 13, 2005)

Boob-No-More said:


> Since when do 30 fans equal a mandate? Moron and Big Suck have been pimping Morrison for weeks, every stinking night. They have a web site, a song and free t-shirts and they can still only get 30 people to show up for their "Draft the 'Stache" rally. How pathetic is that?
> 
> And then the Oregonian picks up on it and runs a story that the Blazers management isn't sure who to pick, but the fans' (all 30 of them) clear choice is Morrison. Or maybe they, meant 1080 The Fan's clear choice is Morrison. Seriously, if they had spent weeks of promoting Rudy Gay with a "Gay Pride" campaign, complete with web site and theme song (and maybe a parade), or a "Roy for ROY" campaign, don't you think they could have gotten 30 fans to come out for the free t-shirts, too.
> 
> ...


Enjoyed the take. 

What kills me is the Fan has been promoting this so hard and taken such a definite postion that they have no choice at this point but to continue to hype up Morrison no matter what they believe.

Have you listened to how they characterized the workout and the rally. Morrison can do no wrong in their eyes.

I'm not anti-Morrison in any way, but I feel I can't get an honest take from the Fan. This "do anything it takes to get Morrison because the public demands Morrison and will reject any other pick" take just isn't supported by facts.


----------



## ProudBFan (Apr 29, 2003)

Quick... peeking... Gay...

Hmmm.....

PBF


----------

