# Official anti-Brandon Roy petition



## RickRoss (May 24, 2006)

The only thing that could be more depressing than getting the #4 pick in the draft would be to use the pick on Brandon Roy. If he wasn't local, he wouldn't even be mentioned. I know there have been many threads on him already, but this is a critical time for our franchise and taking Roy would be a huge mistake. Us fans need to get our voice heard. There are so many reasons not to take him. Here is my list below:
1) We already have Martell Webster for our future sg. Drafting Roy will either stunt his growth as 
player, or if moved to sf, will make him small for his position instead of Martell being a big 6'7" sg.
2) He is undersized (listed at 6'5" 195lbs). It works for D.Wayde but Roy has nowhere near his 
athletisism.
3) He has a bad knee. Why take that kind of risk with the 4th pick. Our future is on the line.
4) Good all around player but not great at anything (limits his star potential). At his best, I see 
Derek Anderson. Definately not worthy of a 4th pick.
5) John Canzano wants us to draft him. The guy talks out his ***, and ain't no nba scout. 
6) At #4, much better prospect will be available (T.Thomas, R.Gay). If you guys see gay's video and 
compare his numbers as a sophmore to Vince Carters as a junior, you'll see why we should draft 
him. He has potential to be vince +2inches. And his d is amazing (1.6stls, 1.8blks in 28 min)

PLEASE SUPPORT THIS THREAD SO PORTLAND DOESN'T DRAFT BRANDON ROY. IT IS THE WORST POSSIBLE MOVE THE TEAM COULD MAKE!


----------



## It's_GO_Time (Oct 13, 2005)

RickRoss said:


> The only thing that could be more depressing than getting the #4 pick in the draft would be to use the pick on Brandon Roy. If he wasn't local, he wouldn't even be mentioned. I know there have been many threads on him already, but this is a critical time for our franchise and taking Roy would be a huge mistake. Us fans need to get our voice heard. There are so many reasons not to take him. Here is my list below:
> 1) We already have Martell Webster for our future sg. Drafting Roy will either stunt his growth as
> player, or if moved to sf, will make him small for his position instead of Martell being a big 6'7" sg.
> 2) He is undersized (listed at 6'5" 195lbs). It works for D.Wayde but Roy has nowhere near his
> ...



So are we suipporting a thread or signing a petition? And how exactly does this thread/petition make us fans heard? It's a critical time, inquiring minds want to know . . .


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

Kiss_My_Darius said:


> So are we suipporting a thread or signing a petition? And how exactly does this thread/petition make us fans heard? It's a critical time, inquiring minds want to know . . .


I think John Nash will make his decision based on this post.


----------



## RickRoss (May 24, 2006)

Just say you agree and voice your opinion why. If someone working for the Blazers happens to see this thread, and that many die hard fans dont support Roy, it might have an impact when they draft. If you don't support this thread, leave it alone, there are many other Roy threads to debate.


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

How many times can I vote? 

Hell no to Roy


----------



## CanJohno (Feb 11, 2005)

mediocre man said:


> How many times can I vote?
> 
> Hell no to Roy


 :yes:


----------



## Todd (Oct 8, 2003)

> there are many other Roy threads to debate.


All posted by you! How many more Roy threads do we need :spam:


----------



## Sambonius (May 21, 2003)

sign me up, give me Gay, Bargs, or Morrison in that order.


----------



## meru (Jul 2, 2003)

RickRoss said:


> The only thing that could be more depressing than getting the #4 pick in the draft would be to use the pick on Brandon Roy.


So, Nash could lose the 4th pick to a poker buddy in an ill-advised game, and you'd be relatively fine with that?



> If he wasn't local, he wouldn't even be mentioned.


Yeah, it's not like he was first-team All-American or anything.



> I know there have been many threads on him already, but this is a critical time for our franchise


Why in particular? I guess because it might be sold, but what player we take at #4 in a weak draft isn't likely to change that much. It's not like we're choosing between LeBron James, Dwyane Wade, Tim Duncan and Brandon Roy.



> and taking Roy would be a huge mistake.


What, like not taking Chris Paul? Pshaw.



> Us fans need to get our voice heard.


I guess us should start about seven million threads all squealing about Brandon Roy, then. 



> 1) We already have Martell Webster for our future sg. Drafting Roy will either stunt his growth as
> player, or if moved to sf, will make him small for his position instead of Martell being a big 6'7" sg.


Gee, y'know, I bet the GM never even thought of that. You know, the same GM that went out on a limb to draft Webster? Who can talk to the coaching staff, who might have a handle on whether or not Webster is better suited for SG or SF?

And who ever heard of playing two or more similar-sized players together - you know, like the Suns with Bell, Diaw and Marion, or the Nets with Jefferson and Carter, or the Bulls with Hinrich and Gordon, or the Mavs with Harris and Terry, or the Spurs with Ginobili and Bowen, or the Cavs with LeBron James, Flip Murray AND Larry Hughes... Nope, hardly ever happens.



> 2) He is undersized (listed at 6'5" 195lbs). It works for D.Wayde but Roy has nowhere near his
> athletisism.


How odd that he's listed at 6'6" and 215lbs elsewhere. Maybe you're talking about another Brandon Roy?



> 3) He has a bad knee. Why take that kind of risk with the 4th pick. Our future is on the line.


Apart from the alarmist stuff about our future, a bad knee would be a worry. Good thing you're here to alert the scouts about it, because I'm sure they wouldn't think to check into medical history or anything.



> 4) Good all around player but not great at anything (limits his star potential). At his best, I see
> Derek Anderson. Definately not worthy of a 4th pick.


Derek Anderson was very athletic in his day (windmill dunks a-plenty. You probably want to go with the Josh Childress analogy more.



> 5) John Canzano wants us to draft him. The guy talks out his ***, and ain't no nba scout.


Canzano is there to be ignored, not used as a basis for whom we should draft.



> 6) At #4, much better prospect will be available (T.Thomas, R.Gay). If you guys see gay's video and
> compare his numbers as a sophmore to Vince Carters as a junior, you'll see why we should draft
> him. He has potential to be vince +2inches. And his d is amazing (1.6stls, 1.8blks in 28 min)


If he can be bothered to put it together. "Potential" is great. We have plenty of that. I'm getting old , though, I prefer "actual".



> PLEASE SUPPORT THIS THREAD SO PORTLAND DOESN'T DRAFT BRANDON ROY. IT IS THE WORST POSSIBLE MOVE THE TEAM COULD MAKE!


I support this thread by adding to it with this post.


----------



## ThatBlazerGuy (May 1, 2003)

Rudy over Roy


----------



## neplife (May 9, 2006)

Gay, Thomas, Morrison>>>>>Roy


----------



## Backboard Cam (Apr 29, 2003)

RickRoss said:


> If someone working for the Blazers happens to see this thread, and that many die hard fans dont support Roy, it might have an impact when they draft.


Why not just try emailing John Nash?


----------



## AK-47 (Jul 7, 2005)

Roy will win ROY. Because ROY=ROY.


----------



## barfo (Jan 2, 2003)

AK-47 said:


> Roy will win ROY. Because ROY=ROY.


I guess we know how Rudy will end up, then.

barfo


----------



## barfo (Jan 2, 2003)

Backboard Cam said:


> Why not just try emailing John Nash?


That's awfully straightforward of you. I could go for putting a petition in a bottle and dropping it into the headwaters of the White Nile. If Nash happens to vacation in Egypt and goes down to the riverfront in search of drugs and prostitution, is left lying on the water's edge, beaten and robbed by locals, and then finds the bottle beneath his left arm, perhaps he'll read the message and remember it after he recovers. It's a sensible, conservative approach that has worked for me in the past. 

barfo


----------



## ljm (Jan 17, 2006)

Seriously, even if you don't like Roy... the DA comparison is not appropriate. Totally different type of player.


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

Backboard Cam said:


> Why not just try emailing John Nash?



Loser boy here as emailed Nash already. His answer to me was basically that everyone in the decision making process has a completly open mind about who to draft and not to read into what the local media is saying.


----------



## crandc (Sep 15, 2004)

mediocre man said:


> Loser boy here as emailed Nash already. His answer to me was basically that everyone in the decision making process has a completly open mind about who to draft and not to read into what the local media is saying.


In other words, Nash had the courtesy to reply to a fan's email. He saId that the team has not yet decided who to draft. He added that the local media has no special insight and that their opinion is just their opinion. So how does that make him "loser boy"? Seems like he was being not only polite but reasonable. 
If a team has a #1 pick in a year where there is an S. O'Neal, Duncan, LeBron James - a clear top pick - then that team may well say in advance who they will choose. A team with a #4 in a draft without a clear top pick would be really stupid to say, a month before the draft, prior to workouts or interviews, that they are ruling anyone in or out.

And I don't even see a petition, let alone an "official" one.
But in the spirit of barfo's note in a bottle, I can write a note on my napkin, toss it in the waste basket, maybe it will get to a landfill in Portland - no, wait a minute, I compost napkins. 
Hmm, maybe catch a pigeon and attach a note to its toe? And hope that Orlando doesn't think the pigeon is dinner and grab it from me?


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

crandc said:


> In other words, Nash had the courtesy to reply to a fan's email. He saId that the team has not yet decided who to draft. He added that the local media has no special insight and that their opinion is just their opinion. So how does that make him "loser boy"? Seems like he was being not only polite but reasonable.
> If a team has a #1 pick in a year where there is an S. O'Neal, Duncan, LeBron James - a clear top pick - then that team may well say in advance who they will choose. A team with a #4 in a draft without a clear top pick would be really stupid to say, a month before the draft, prior to workouts or interviews, that they are ruling anyone in or out.
> 
> And I don't even see a petition, let alone an "official" one.
> ...



LOL no I'm loser boy for emailing Nash.


----------



## crandc (Sep 15, 2004)

Sorry I misunderstood, mediocre man, but emailing Nash does not make you a loser boy anyway.


----------



## RedHot&Rolling (Jun 26, 2004)

RichRoss = Jason Quick in disguise :angel: 

Roy isn't a terrible pick, but probably not at #4 this year. He has good skills, maturity, 4 yrs of college experience - which I really value - and is a solid player. If we were able to trade down to #6 or #7 - he would be a nice pick for Portland. I like the idea of Telfair/Jack, Roy, Webster being our PG, SG, and SF. Sounds really solid starting next year.

If we stay at #4, one of Bargnani, Aldridge, Thomas, Morrison, Gay will be there. I think the leftover is the better pick at #4 than Roy.

No need for a petition drive, scouts know this stuff. Blazers have done a good job in drafting the past 3 years - I am not worried.


----------



## B_&_B (Feb 19, 2004)

I have faith in Nate's judge of talent. If Nate thinks this kid will flourish in his system, then I'd be fine with us drafting him. He's a great defender, plays hard, and can score. What's not to like?


----------



## e_blazer1 (Feb 3, 2004)

crandc said:


> Sorry I misunderstood, mediocre man, but emailing Nash does not make you a loser boy anyway.


Nope. 

You only get that title if you actually expect to get a meaningful response. :biggrin:


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

BEER&BASKETBALL said:


> I have faith in Nate's judge of talent. If Nate thinks this kid will flourish in his system, then I'd be fine with us drafting him. He's a great defender, plays hard, and can score. What's not to like?



depending on the work-outs, a lot. If someone has a lower peak in the long run, and your team is void of anyone who's really star material, I don't know if i'd be going for the guy who MIGHT be a decent role player, vs one who might be a potential all star.

especially when roy's had 1 year of decent play.


----------



## B_&_B (Feb 19, 2004)

SMiLE said:


> depending on the work-outs, a lot. If someone has a lower peak in the long run, and your team is void of anyone who's really star material, I don't know if i'd be going for the guy who MIGHT be a decent role player, vs one who might be a potential all star.
> 
> especially when roy's had 1 year of decent play.


True. I think the fact that Roy has spent more time in college than the other guys helps him also.


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

BEER&BASKETBALL said:


> True. I think the fact that Roy has spent more time in college than the other guys helps him also.


there is some truth to that, but at the same time, I think thats just talk by the team. If a better talent is a soph or jr (say gay or morrison) that 4th year in college isn't enough of a difference, especially given the distance between gay or morrison and roy, take him. This team can't afford to take a player who's "better all around". Especially if the "better all around" is worse offensively, and shooting wise.

I could understand if Morrison was a JJ redick type scorer (shot 10 three pointers a game, and basically had nothing else) or if Gay was just an athletic freak who relied only on dunks. But thats not true of either of those guys (especially morrison, who only took like 25% of his total shots as 3's). 

Will he (roy) be a bad player? I don't know, but I wouldn't take him over Morrison, Gay, Aldridge or even a trade.


----------



## It's_GO_Time (Oct 13, 2005)

This line of thought makes me wonder if the Blazers would have drafted Outlaw if he went to college. His basketball IQ would have been exposed and I'm guessing his value would have dropped.

Back to the topic . . . I like the ideas posters have about getting the message to Nash . . . my question is why are you wasting your time getting a message to an ex-NBA GM? I thought I was mean, but you all want to rub it in . . . let him live in peace. :biggrin:


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

e_blazer1 said:


> You only get that title if you actually expect to get a meaningful response. :biggrin:


Nash wasn't hired to give meaningful responses. Sometimes he WANTS to give a meanginful response but Paul Allen steps in and ruins it.

Of course, Nash has never proven himself capable of giving meaningful responses in his previous GMing gigs, either, but it's not his fault. 

Ed O.


----------



## e_blazer1 (Feb 3, 2004)

Ed O said:


> Nash wasn't hired to give meaningful responses. Sometimes he WANTS to give a meanginful response but Paul Allen steps in and ruins it.
> 
> Of course, Nash has never proven himself capable of giving meaningful responses in his previous GMing gigs, either, but it's not his fault.
> 
> Ed O.


Nash, or any other GM, wouldn't be doing his job if he did give a meaningful response to questions about the Blazers' draft plans or other potential personnel moves. Which is pretty much why I implied you'd have to be a goober to expect him to.

No disrespect intended, mediocreman. I'm sure you wouldn't be one to expect Nash to tip his hand.


----------



## B_&_B (Feb 19, 2004)

SMiLE said:


> Will he (roy) be a bad player? I don't know, but I wouldn't take him over Morrison, Gay, Aldridge or even a trade.


I dont think the Trail Blazers will either. I think they'll try to trade the #30 and #31 to move up to a spot where they can get Roy.


----------



## Oil Can (May 25, 2006)

Draft Brandon Roy...only if his name is Adam Morrison


----------



## sa1177 (Feb 18, 2005)

This one day I was bored at work so I started 27 threads about Brandon Roy....I felt so much better then.


----------



## BBert (Dec 30, 2004)

mediocre man said:


> How many times can I vote?


Well, this will be about the 5th time I've voted here about this since the lottery.

Harvey said Nate wants Roy because, among other things, he wants someone who can improve the team right away. Big whoop. On our team that's not saying much. 

I agree with SMiLE's take. We need a star. Not a player who will most likely be only good. We need the best player available. Or rather, the player who will be the best player in 2 or 3 years when our team starts to hit it's stride.

There is no way to know the future with certainty, but we can make projections. We can't afford to play safe. We need to draft the player with the most star potential. I don't care if that's another 2 year project. 

Tough cookies, Nate. You were hired to develop a team of young players. The number one priority is the future, not your immediate win record. Please stick to developing, and leave the drafting to the experts who scout these guys and watch thousands of hours of games and tape during the season.

Pritchard is committed to the future. I think the scouts and Pritchard (and even Nash) know what they are doing. 

The player the Blazers draft will have a combination of the most upside, the best fit for the team, and the best attitude. I don't know who they will draft. But based on the first of those criteria, I'm confident we won't use our no. 4 pick on Roy.


----------



## yakbladder (Sep 13, 2003)

First of all, Barfo, that Nile post is the funniest thing I've read in days. Yeah, I don't get out much.

Secondly, I think that much of this talk will all be settled depending upon how the workouts go. It will probably never be settled for another five years and even then there will be apologists (see: Luke Jackson).

Third, exactly how many threads does one individual need to get across a point? We get it. You don't like Roy. Swell. I'm now going to start 20 threads on how I think Morrison should shave his head and grow a fu-man-chu....


----------



## Fork (Jan 2, 2003)

I wouldn't worry too much about us drafting Roy with the #4 pick. I think we're going to try everything we can to get a 2nd pick in the 6-10 range. We'll pick up somebody like Rudy Gay with the #4 and get Roy, who should be available later, with the 2nd lottery pick.


----------



## BBert (Dec 30, 2004)

Fork said:


> I wouldn't worry too much about us drafting Roy with the #4 pick. I think we're going to try everything we can to get a 2nd pick in the 6-10 range. We'll pick up somebody like Rudy Gay with the #4 and get Roy, who should be available later, with the 2nd lottery pick.


Agreed. Pritchard certainly gave the impression he thinks he can get a good player by moving up. 

Who picks in the 6-12 range that might like to take Miles off our hands, I wonder? Or Travis (  )?


----------



## neplife (May 9, 2006)

^I've heard the T Wolves are interested in moving the #6 in a trade for some veteran players.


----------



## hoojacks (Aug 12, 2004)

barfo said:


> I guess we know how Rudy will end up, then.
> 
> barfo


WAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAH oh thanks, I now have cheerios on my keyboard.


But yeah, **** Brandon Roy.


----------



## Xericx (Oct 29, 2004)

Signing in! Just say No to Roy!


----------



## Iwatas (Aug 3, 2003)

No to Roy!

iWatas


----------



## Fork (Jan 2, 2003)

I wouldn't pick Roy at #4. But at #8-10, after we've wrapped up Rudy Gay with the 4th pick, I wouldn't mind adding Roy. Dude shot over 50% from the floor last year. That's very impressive for a guard. He actually reminds me a lot of Bonzi Wells with less numbskull in him.


----------



## Blazer Maven (Sep 27, 2005)

Fork said:


> I wouldn't pick Roy at #4. But at #8-10, after we've wrapped up Rudy Gay with the 4th pick, I wouldn't mind adding Roy. Dude shot over 50% from the floor last year. That's very impressive for a guard. He actually reminds me a lot of Bonzi Wells with less numbskull in him.


Haven't we already done the whole great athlete/average player thing already? Gay is simply another athletic tweener (3/4) that has proven NOTHING. He is strong and can jump, but has not proven the ability to match up against top level competition and is not aggressive or an intelligent player. I can't believe people are comparing Rudy Gay to Scottie Pippen. Gay is not a great ball handler, hasn't initiated the offense for UCONN and hasn't shown triple-double potential, which is what Pippen was all about.

The Blazers need a guy who has proven he can play the game. Roy has improved every year and was the unquestioned leader of his team. Roy, not Gay, is the one who fills up a stat sheet like Scottie, although at 6'5" rather than 6'8". That's what we need in Portland.

BTW, I don't see anyone taking the 30/31 and Miles to get us to 8-10.


----------



## RickRoss (May 24, 2006)

Why do some of you think Roy is such a safe pick, the dude had only one good year! What makes him a safer pick than other prospects. We don't need another sg. Nate said in the chat today that Martell is a true sg. Roy would stunt his growth. SAY NO TO BRANDON ROY! He is the worst possible pick at #4.


----------



## CanJohno (Feb 11, 2005)

My forecast:

ICE STORM!!!!1!!!11!!!11!


----------



## Utherhimo (Feb 20, 2005)

draft one of the top 4 which doesnt include roy


----------



## meru (Jul 2, 2003)

Bump. Just found this in the archives.


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

answer a: Roy would be a total waste of a pick!!!!

answer b: god I love being wrong.


----------



## Zybot (Jul 22, 2004)

I think the point of the thread was don't draft Roy at #4 - which was good advice -- or we wouldn't have been able to get Aldridge. God those quips by Barfo are priceless. Does someone save all of those so they can do a top 10 list? 

What's kind of funny about the 2006 draft is we all have encountered crazy trade guy who has some plan to entirely revamp the team with a completely unrealistic plan. Well that is kind of what went down in 2006. It makes me wonder. How did KP get his job? Was KP a crazy internet trade guy that Paul Allen found and made GM? I can make crazy trades too! Pick me! Pick me! :yay:


----------



## Utherhimo (Feb 20, 2005)

we didnt pick him 4th but how many people were wrong about how he can play lol tons!


----------



## BlazeTop (Jan 22, 2004)

Some of those anti-Roy people either no longer post or have new names. Take the lesson I learned TRUST PRITCHARD, he knows more than you do...


----------



## Diable (Apr 26, 2005)

If Charlotte wasn't run by a bunch of retards they would have taken him at three and all those people could have been happy on draft night....Any of you guys interested in our GM job?I think you'd fit right in


----------



## Utherhimo (Feb 20, 2005)

yeah i will do but ummmm we might make a few trades with portland if i am there


----------



## HispanicCausinPanic (Jul 2, 2005)

Yeah.....where is this RichRoss guy? I have a feeling that is really HAP!


----------

