# Announcement Tomorrow



## ProudBFan (Apr 29, 2003)

Looks like Patterson really is the man. KGW is reporting that he's on his way up here today for an announcement tomorrow.

http://www.kgw.com/sports/stories/kgw_061703_sports_blazers_president.119d995.html

PBF


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

Very interesting.....I would immagine that the Blazers will name a GM in short order as well.

Didn't JRob say it wouldn't surprise him if the new GM was someone who hadn't been mentioned yet?


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Schilly</b>!
> Very interesting.....I would immagine that the Blazers will name a GM in short order as well.
> 
> Didn't JRob say it wouldn't surprise him if the new GM was someone who hadn't been mentioned yet?


well, Hap hasn't been mentioned yet....


----------



## ProudBFan (Apr 29, 2003)

Hard to believe the new GM will be someone who hasn't been mentioned yet... because pretty much everyone (except HAP) has been mentioned at some point!

PBF


----------



## yangsta (May 14, 2003)

could they be possibly hiring him as GM/ President? to replace whitsitt on both?


----------



## Trader Ed (Jun 17, 2002)

Patterson's name was mentioned a few weeks ago.... and I belive it was talked about in our Erin Hubert Thread too.

It is hardly new news...

He will be president with previous GM experience... a good hire if indeed you hire someone like Stefanski or John Hammonds as Gm who have not been a GM before. Its a bit of extra double coverage, and a shoulder to lean on and ask questions to.

This could be a very good team of execs.


----------



## Gym Rat (Dec 30, 2002)

Come on guys.... don't you remember all of the rumors and speculation about Gym Rat flying into Seattle to meet with Bert, Paul and the boys? Gym Rat for GM!


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>yangsta</b>!
> could they be possibly hiring him as GM/ President? to replace whitsitt on both?


while he might be qualified, I doubt they're going to fill both spots with 1 person, after telling us they were going to hire 2 seperate people.


----------



## ABM (Dec 30, 2002)

Question: Might Patterson play a big role in (finally) bringing MLB to PDX?


----------



## Trader Ed (Jun 17, 2002)

Breaking news :wave:

according to my sources (Always wanted to say that!). the radio :rofl:

News conference is now scheduled at 11:30am Wednesday

Patterson is expected to be announced as President


----------



## Gym Rat (Dec 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>ABM</b>!
> Question: Might Patterson play a big role in (finally) bringing MLB to PDX?


NOPE... conflict of interest!


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>ABM</b>!
> Question: Might Patterson play a big role in (finally) bringing MLB to PDX?


how?


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

Fromer Indiana Pacers GM David Kahn is already on board.

OT: BTW did anyone notice on SC last night they were talking about NFL moving to LA and it showed the 4 Llargest cities without NFL. LA was first, then Portland was like 100,000 peopl smaller than the 2nd who I can't remember.


----------



## ABM (Dec 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Hap</b>!
> 
> 
> how?


Gee, Hap....how would I know? Geez!


----------



## Swoosh (May 2, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Schilly</b>!
> Fromer Indiana Pacers GM David Kahn is already on board.
> 
> OT: BTW did anyone notice on SC last night they were talking about NFL moving to LA and it showed the 4 Llargest cities without NFL. LA was first, then Portland was like 100,000 peopl smaller than the 2nd who I can't remember.


LA was first with 16M people in the metro area...Second was San Juan, PR with 2.5M...we were third at 2.4M, and Sacramento was fourth at 1.8M.

I guess I never really considered San Juan as a US city, but there they were...second on the list, just ahead of Portland.


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

OK... so let's think about the timing here.

Putting aside the GM spot, was there anything keeping the Blazers from hiring Patterson before this? I can't think of anything... the NFL draft was over a month ago and I don't know how active he had to be for the Texans in the offseason.

So it seems like it HAD to be the GM spot holding it up... right? Like waiting for the Nets to lose to the Spurs? 

That, as much as anything, seems to indicate that Stefanski really is the guy for the Nets.

The question will then be: when will it happen? If Stefanski's the head scout for the Nets, will he stick around for another 9 days or so and run the draft for them, knowing that he'll be leaving right after? And, unlike Whitsitt who knows he's JUST leaving, he'll know that he's going to another team...

Guess we'll wait and see.

Ed O.


----------



## ABM (Dec 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Gym Rat</b>!
> 
> 
> NOPE... conflict of interest!


How? I'm _cornfused._

Didn't T-Bob have his fingers in, both, the Blazers and Seahawks pies?


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Swoosh</b>!
> 
> 
> LA was first with 16M people in the metro area...Second was San Juan, PR with 2.5M...we were third at 2.4M, and Sacramento was fourth at 1.8M.
> ...


That's why I didn't remember it..it wasn't a viable location to consider.


----------



## Swoosh (May 2, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>ABM</b>!
> 
> 
> How? I'm _cornfused._
> ...


Yes, but T-Bob works for Allen, who owns both the Blazers and Seahawks...I believe he has stated that he is not interested in baseball, so I doubt the new GM will have anything to do with helping the cause to bring MLB to PDX.


----------



## Gym Rat (Dec 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>ABM</b>!
> 
> 
> How? I'm _cornfused._
> ...


Seattle and Portland don't compete for ticket sales....and then you have corporate sponsors... etc. Hockey and Hoops would be a good deal for Portland.... because of the arena. Baseball and basketball are competition in Portland.


----------



## Public Defender (May 5, 2003)

Patterson sounds perfectly well qualified. He built an excellent Rockets' squad in the early '90s, and a team that really got the city behind it. The Texans are already better than some folks thought (the fact that they beat the Cowboys sure put a lot of smiles on Houston residents). With the money he has to work with in Portland, I could see him building a real winner. And what's more, with his experience and confidence, I don't see him taking any pointers from Whitsitt, nor does he need to. 

So, is he the president or GM?


----------



## Kmurph (May 7, 2003)

God post Ed, it will be interesting to see how this all works out. I too, think Stefanski is the guy. I gotta believe that he will be introduced by the end of this week, you sure would like to have the guy before the draft. But with the draft 9 days away, it sure makes it interesting. Also NJ picks RIGHT before POR at #22, so he may know who they are going to pick, but would POR interfere?, if they knew they wanted Perkins (or whoever) for example, and NJ was slotted to take him at #22. Yikes, what a dilemma if Stefanski is on board.


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

The timing could actually be a coincidence.

Maybe it's amatter of they were weighing their options on Pres and already have the GM in mind, but just wanted to wait and have one press conference.


----------



## antibody (Apr 4, 2003)

I just hope something happens soon so the team can get on with it. The draft is coming up quick and where is Portland's leadership?...shouldn't be too far behind.


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Schilly</b>!
> The timing could actually be a coincidence.
> 
> Maybe it's amatter of they were weighing their options on Pres and already have the GM in mind, but just wanted to wait and have one press conference.


nah, it's all just a big ploy to get us to think they're doing something.


----------



## ProudBFan (Apr 29, 2003)

Ed, I might be dismissing something obvious, but the timing could also just be a coincidence. Stefanski sounds like a winner, but look at Patterson's qualifications; He's a team builder. In other words, he seems more suited for the GM role than the Prez role (IMO, anyway)...

MAYBE he's really going to be the GM and Erin Hubert will get the Prez gig?

PBF


----------



## Trader Ed (Jun 17, 2002)

Good call.. maybe? we shall see tomorrow.


----------



## loyalty4life (Sep 17, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Gym Rat</b>!
> 
> 
> Baseball and basketball are competition in Portland.


How so? I'm not trying to argue, but these two sports are played in different parts of the year. Also, I'd imagine it'd be somewhat difficult for an NHL and an NBA team to share an arena when both sports are played at the same part of the year. Just my two cents, I guess.


----------



## Gym Rat (Dec 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Loyalty4Life</b>!
> 
> 
> How so? I'm not trying to argue, but these two sports are played in different parts of the year. Also, I'd imagine it'd be somewhat difficult for an NHL and an NBA team to share an arena when both sports are played at the same part of the year. Just my two cents, I guess.


Almost every NHL team that is also in an NBA city shares the arena. Heck, the Staples Center has two NBA teams and an NHL team.

People only have so many dollars they are willing to spend on extra activities... like season tickets for games, etc. etc.

Baseball would dilute the dollars people currently spend on basketball games. 

It would also eat up some of the sponsorship revenue. Say Fred Meyer has a $500,000 advertising budget. Do you think that budget is going to increase because baseball comes to town? Nope. Now, Fred Meyer has one pro sports team in town to support add baseball and that 500K is probably going to get split between the two.


----------



## FB (Dec 31, 2002)

Not to mention the local economy is pretty weak right now....I know I sure don't have much spare "fun" money.

Guess that analysis is up to the people that have the actual numbers and knowledge though....


----------



## loyalty4life (Sep 17, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Gym Rat</b>!
> 
> 
> Almost every NHL team that is also in an NBA city shares the arena. Heck, the Staples Center has two NBA teams and an NHL team.
> ...


All good points. I forgot about the Staples Center... Thanks for the info.


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Gym Rat</b>!
> 
> 
> Almost every NHL team that is also in an NBA city shares the arena. Heck, the Staples Center has two NBA teams and an NHL team.
> ...


so..they wouldn't have to compete with NHL for advertising dollars?


----------



## Gym Rat (Dec 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Hap</b>!
> 
> 
> so..they wouldn't have to compete with NHL for advertising dollars?


But that gets offset by the use of the arena...


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>FB</b>!
> Not to mention the local economy is pretty weak right now....I know I sure don't have much spare "fun" money.
> 
> Guess that analysis is up to the people that have the actual numbers and knowledge though....


baseball is actually the cheapest of the 3 major sports to go to..and also, you want the team to move now, because it's at it's cheapest, and it's (here's the kicker) not gonna cost you a dime.


----------



## talman (Dec 31, 2002)

Sounds like we have a new President! My take (which probably isn't unique) is that whoever's coming in for the GM position will be someone with little to no experience as GM and seeing as Patterson has been there/done that, he could act as a "mentor" and have final say on deals recommended by GM.


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Gym Rat</b>!
> 
> 
> But that gets offset by the use of the arena...


well, since Paul Allen ain't buying the baseball team, I just say he'll have to suck up and accept that another team might come here (I know thats not the issue) and steal some of his precious ad $$. Maybe that will make him want to compete better, and fight for those $$.

how come phoenix can survive with 4 teams (including FREAKING hockey? Hockey in the desert? wth?)? How come Denver can? 

How come Portland (Blazers) can't?

I seriously doubt that Portland fans are going to stop going to Blazer games because we got the Expos. Thats a poor argument against getting a team. The fans would stop going to the games if the team really really started to suck beano.


----------



## Gym Rat (Dec 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>talman</b>!
> Sounds like we have a new President! My take (which probably isn't unique) is that whoever's coming in for the GM position will be someone with little to no experience as GM and seeing as Patterson has been there/done that, he could act as a "mentor" and have final say on deals recommended by GM.


Agreed!


----------



## FB (Dec 31, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Hap</b>!
> 
> 
> baseball is actually the cheapest of the 3 major sports to go to..and also, you want the team to move now, because it's at it's cheapest, and it's (here's the kicker) not gonna cost you a dime.


Oh, I know....don't think I'm arguing the logic behind it, because I'd love to see MLB here in Portland. I'm just saying I personally would probably have to choose one team's games to attend (unless things change soon), and I imagine a lot of people are in the same boat. 

There are tons of arguments for both sides, and a lot of them make sense. Personally, I think it would all work out just fine if a team came to town.

Back on topic....interesting news! Nice to see some things falling into place before the draft....although it seems a bit late for him/them to have much of an impact on decisions made before then.


----------



## Gym Rat (Dec 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Hap</b>!
> well, since Paul Allen ain't buying the baseball team, I just say he'll have to suck up and accept that another team might come here (I know thats not the issue) and steal some of his precious ad $$. Maybe that will make him want to compete better, and fight for those $$.
> 
> how come phoenix can survive with 4 teams (including FREAKING hockey? Hockey in the desert? wth?)? How come Denver can?
> ...


I don't think there is any issue with Paul Allen accepting another team coming to town. But why would he send his newly appointed President out to assist with acquiring a baseball team that would have a negative economic impact on his own team? (which is how this thread got so OT, someone suggested the new Pres might help MLB get to PDX)

Heck, I hope MLB comes to Portland. I hope the city can support two teams. But the economy isn't the greatest right now.. so I wonder if that can be achived.


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>FB</b>!
> 
> 
> Oh, I know....don't think I'm arguing the logic behind it, because I'd love to see MLB here in Portland. I'm just saying I personally would probably have to choose one team's games to attend (unless things change soon), and I imagine a lot of people are in the same boat.


yah, but by that thinking, we'll never do anything. This isn't just for this year, or the next 2 years. This is for the next 30 or 40+ years! If we're still in an economic down-fall as we are now in 30-40 years, then I could see this argument holding water. 

I'm (right now) not able to afford to go to either Blazers or MLB games, but thats no reason not to have them come to Portland. There are almost 2.5 million people in the metro area. Baseball fans and basketball fans do not necessarily intermix here anyway.


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Gym Rat</b>!
> 
> 
> I don't think there is any issue with Paul Allen accepting another team coming to town. But why would he send his newly appointed President out to assist with acquiring a baseball team that would have a negative economic impact on his own team? (which is how this thread got so OT, someone suggested the new Pres might help MLB get to PDX)


oh, I know that wasn't the issue.


> Heck, I hope MLB comes to Portland. I hope the city can support two teams. But the economy isn't the greatest right now.. so I wonder if that can be achived.


outside of the last MAYBE 10 years, when the hell has Portlands economy (and Oregons) been any good?

When the blazers came to Portland (albeit prices were much cheaper) Portland wasn't exactly a boom town. Nor was it for most of the 80's..Infact, iirc, one of the negatives against Portland getting the Blazers WAS the poor economy and our supposed inability to support a pro team.


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

This is ABM's fault...he asked.


----------



## Trader Ed (Jun 17, 2002)

:topic:


----------



## Gym Rat (Dec 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Trader Bob</b>!
> :topic:


Leave it to a moderator to get us off topic!!!

ABM - :naughty:


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Gym Rat</b>!
> 
> 
> Leave it to a moderator to get us off topic!!!
> ...


jeez ABM...thats 2 strikes against you mister!!


----------



## HOWIE (Dec 30, 2002)

Breaking News!

Um yeah, like no one saw this coming!

*Ed Stefanski* is going to be the new GM of the Portland Trailblazers! Rasheed better have U-Haul on speed dial as I think his days are numbered. I bet that Stefanski is on board before the draft and will help Patterson a great deal. Things are starting to look rosie!


----------



## HOWIE (Dec 30, 2002)

No so Breaking News! 

Several league sources said that even if Stefanski is offered the Blazers' GM job, it won't change the status of Portland head coach Maurice Cheeks. The Blazers have refused to grant Cheeks permission to speak with the Sixers for their vacant head coaching job and won't change their position even if Stefanski is selected as their GM, the sources said.

Film at 11! 

Good news for Cheeks!


----------



## Reep (Jun 4, 2003)

Is it just me, or does Patterson look like cross between Russel Crow and Robin Leach?


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>HOWIE</b>!
> Breaking News!


Do you actually have a new source of news, Howie, or are you re-stating stuff from earlier today? Just curious...

Ed O.


----------



## FB (Dec 31, 2002)

Yeah, I'm curious as to your source as well. I just looked around and haven't seen it yet.


----------



## Trader Ed (Jun 17, 2002)

Alright Howie :naughty: ... spill it .. where is your source for Stefanski?

other than Peter Vescey... hmmmmmm

we are holding our breath...


----------



## Trader Ed (Jun 17, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>HOWIE</b>!
> Several league sources said ...



Philly.com or the NY Times does not count....


----------



## talman (Dec 31, 2002)

Methinks Howie is joking around and trying to be the first to "scoop" this. 


Howie???????????


----------



## HOWIE (Dec 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Ed O</b>!
> 
> 
> Do you actually have a new source of news, Howie, or are you re-stating stuff from earlier today? Just curious...
> ...


Nah, just stuff from earlier today. My system was down and I wasn't able to log in. Of all days for something like that to happen huh? I just wanted to get in on the fun. :angel:


----------



## Trader Ed (Jun 17, 2002)

4 hours to go!

Will Steve Patterson be the only announcement?

only time will tell...


----------



## HOWIE (Dec 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Trader Bob</b>!
> 4 hours to go!
> 
> Will Steve Patterson be the only announcement?
> ...


Do you think that it is too soon to announce that *Ed Stefanski* is going to be named GM? It might take away from Patterson's introduction, but it would be cool if they came in together.

Ed Stefanski just makes sense to me to be GM with the hire of Patterson. They would be an upgrade over Whitsitt, wouldn't they? :yes:


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>HOWIE</b>!
> 
> Ed Stefanski just makes sense to me to be GM with the hire of Patterson. They would be an upgrade over Whitsitt, wouldn't they? :yes:


No. Whitsitt has more experience running an NBA team than both of them put together, and he didn't have to ride his Dad's coattails to get his first gig.

I think it'll be a nice team, but I'd prefer Whitsitt.

Ed O.


----------



## Trader Ed (Jun 17, 2002)

Whitsitt was very good at his job. He was creative with trades, and could sell a deal. You can not fault his teams. They won. He put them in a position to win it all. They just could not take it that last little step. Sometimes its just plain luck. Or injury free!

I think Patterson may be a great hire if for nothing else, his GM experience can help groom the new guy. Thus putting less pressure to get an experienced GM on board. That is why I believe Cooper, Stefanski, Hammonds are apparently being courted. The only one I recall really being officially interviewed is Wallace and Krause. The others I think have been contacted, but it has not been reported the depth of their contact or an official interview.

Please feel free correct me if I am mistaken. They must have, but I do not recall Coooper or Stefanski or Hammands being interviewed yet.

Buck Williams? Clyde?


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Trader Bob</b>!
> 
> Please feel free correct me if I am mistaken. They must have, but I do not recall Coooper or Stefanski or Hammands being interviewed yet.
> 
> Buck Williams? Clyde?


hey, like I said, my inside source says the "unmentioned" guy is non other than Buck Williams.

He's a fan favorite, was the head of the players union, and is an upstanding guy. Him and his wife Mimi loved Portland, and wanted to come back at any chance.


----------



## antibody (Apr 4, 2003)

So true about Buck Williams...class act and very well respected.


----------



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

If Stefanski is the new GM, I wouldn't think the Blazers would want both job announcements swept into the same news cycle. For that reason alone, they'd wait a couple of days. Regardless, I believe that Patterson wants some say over the hire, and he hasn't been engaged in any of the process yet. I think that's partly why we haven't heard about interviews with the lesser qualified but more likely candidates (Stefanski, Hammond, Cooper). That being said, I think the GM search will be completed rather swiftly. Patterson sounds like a great hire.


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Qyntel's Shadow</b>!
> If Stefanski is the new GM, I wouldn't think the Blazers would want both job announcements swept into the same news cycle. For that reason alone, they'd wait a couple of days. Regardless, I believe that Patterson wants some say over the hire, and he hasn't been engaged in any of the process yet. I think that's partly why we haven't heard about interviews with the lesser qualified but more likely candidates (Stefanski, Hammond, Cooper). That being said, I think the GM search will be completed rather swiftly. Patterson sounds like a great hire.


Good point... maybe the Blazers have reduced the field to about 5 guys that they like (Stafanski, Cooper, Hammond, Wallace, maybe even Krause) and will let Patterson have some say in the final decision-making.

It would make sense for him to be as comfortable as possible with a guy he's going to be overlapping in terms of responsibilities and image in so many ways...

Ed O.


----------



## Trader Ed (Jun 17, 2002)

So Hap...


What is Buck Williams doing these days? or should I say, has been doing?

We have not heard of him for ages.


----------



## Oldmangrouch (Feb 11, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Ed O</b>!
> 
> 
> No. Whitsitt has more experience running an NBA team than both of them put together, and he didn't have to ride his Dad's coattails to get his first gig.
> ...


Let me play Devil's advocate here Ed.

Whitsitt has experience and some valuable skills......but he has been wearing too many different hats. President, GM. whatever his title with the Seahawks, his role in Allen's flirtations with the NHL, etc. Patterson will be focused on the Blazers.

As for the new GM, I have no problem with the team hiring a talented assistant. Every GM, good and bad, got their first break somewhere. Is there an element of risk? Certainly. OTOH, a talented first-timer will bring a fresh perspective and a higher level of energy to the job.

Like Sheed, I wouldn't want Whitsit fired just for the sake of getting rid of him........but if the team hires the right people this could well be an upgrade!


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Oldmangrouch</b>!
> 
> Like Sheed, I wouldn't want Whitsit fired just for the sake of getting rid of him........but if the team hires the right people this could well be an upgrade!


COULD be an upgrade... no doubt. And, truth be told, I find a Patterson/Stefanski team a pretty darn good bit o' hiring.

I don't think they're an immediate upgrade, but I suppose that over time they could be better because they're each only wearing one hat. And I'd LOVE to be wrong about them not being an immediate upgrade!

Ed O.


----------



## Masbee (Dec 31, 2002)

More on this issue:

http://espn.go.com/nfl/news/2003/0617/1569242.html



> Tuesday, June 17
> 
> Report: Texans senior VP jumps to Portland
> 
> ...


----------

