"KP testing the market on Miller's worth?"

The ONLY thing that makes KP missing so badly on this pick was the fact that 28 other teams fucked up to.

It doesn't make it ok but misery loves company.

I like Donte and all, but Blair is just the type of back up 4 Portland needed.

Besides Portland could have had both.

 

That movement was insane.

I remember after watching Morison quit and cry when the Zags lost to Duke in the tournament thinking to myself the dude was going to be a bust.

I was really hoping the team would get either Brandon or LMA in the draft. I damn near shit myself when they got both guys.

I had no clue how good those dudes would turn out. I just had a feeling about them.

Almost exactly the opposite of the feeling I get when I think about this years first round draft pick, Victor Claver. I hope I am wrong, but that dude has wasted pick written all over him.

 

Sometimes, yes, but the I think what e_blazer is saying is that the way the message is delivered is sometimes downright arrogant. Not necessarily the message itself.

It's not "I think we should play person X and go with lineup A."

It's "F'n Nate and F'n KP are so stupid. I knew from before he was even born that person X was made for a fast-break team. Damnt these people are stupid. We're just going to lose every single game here on out because they refuse to go use person X in lineup A." followed by the ever-amusing instance as soon as ONE single play in a game bears them out "I knew I was right! Those idiots! Fire Nate! Fire KP! Paul Allen better do as I say or the team will go down in flames! I was right!"

...or something of that likeness. You get the drift. It's just called a little bit of general respect. But I guess that's hard to muster for arm-chair coaches. It's hard to have a discussion when people are shouting their unwavering opinions in your face unwilling to budge an iota that they may be wrong and guaranteeing they know more than at least the last two sets of Blazers mgmt.

I could make an argument here that you're just cherry picking. Let's take all the supposed "solid conclusions" that are drawn by Blazer board posters over the last..let's say ten years..and match them up against reality and see what the results are. Realizing that with the width and breadth of stupid opinions here (mine sometimes included) you'll probably come up with a fairly long list of wrong "conclusions". Therefore, knowing the board to be wrong - and let's just pull a number out of thin air - say 80% of the time, wouldn't it be arrogant to present your solution as an absolute, obvious theory?

 

Well, I know I'm wrong only 76.2% of the time, so I feel entitled to say the Nate McMillan sucks dong.

Nate McMillan sucks dong.

 

Thanks, Yak, you pretty much nailed it.

I'm going to have to hire you as my personal translator.

 

Absolutely ... Are they? Will they? Doesn't look like it to me.

Maybe I'm just resigned at this point (having already passed through the stages of 'disbelief', 'anger', 'bargaining', and 'grief') I don't see much evidence that A) KP is willing to abandon Nate or Nate's system, B) That Nate is willing to stop calling almost every play, and C) That Brandon's resistance to playing alongside him is going to soften.

I don't even really expect KP to get great value for him, but if he can get decent value (a good veteran wing defender, or a 'goodish' defensive minded point guard) by combining him with a few superfluous offensive minded guys then I'd at least accept it at this point. I just think there's too much inertia set against Andre at this point for this move to succeed.

 

Oh hush up child.

You young folks and your new-fangled notions about "common sense" and such like. Where do you get such ideas? I blame all those Muslim/Commies in the public schools.

 

You know what, most of the people on this forum have been watching basketball for a long time. A very long time. A very very long time. What, in your opinion, does or does not qualify them as an "expert"? What makes them any different from a Jason Quick or a Dwight Jaynes? I've been in the locker room. I've been to practice. It doesn't make these guys smarter. It gives them some insight, but it's not like it qualifies them as basketball geniuses.

We watch the games. We can call a spade a spade. The fact that Blake has started every game this season is absolutely ludicrous. Nate has deserved every bit of criticism he has received this season. Are we experts? Maybe not, but we're not stupid. As this whole Blake/Miller saga has dragged on, our voices have become louder and louder.

 

If you were only wrong 76.2% of the time I'd write letters every month asking Paul Allen to hire you as GM.

KP is wrong 76.3% of the time.

 

It's funny though, we don't see a lot of "In KP We Trust" anymore.

 

So pretty much e_blazer just says "Hey, it's not the message, it's how the message is delivered." and you go on to rag on him because you apparently feel personally slighted...and then you compare yourself to Quick and Jaynes? Bwahahahahaha...bwaha...ha...Sorry..but that's probably the worst examples to use.

He's just saying (again, sorry for speaking for you e) that some people present their ideas as infallible and since you are neither the Pope or aware of 100% of the information that cannot be correct. But that doesn't seem to stop people from presenting those ideas as infallible.

Perhaps we should just all take papal names? I've always wondered about Pope Innocent..I'm curious why he chose that name...

 

Given that I've been watching the Blazers for going on 40 years now, I guess by your standards I must be ready to run the team.

If you'll go back and take a closer look at what I actually said in my post, Nate, you'll see that I never said anything about Quick, Jaynes or any other reporter. My peeve has to do with the supposition that just watching the games on TV equates to a better understanding of how to run the team than KP and Nate have.

Loud voices don't alway equate to a correct assessment of situations. I've no problem with you or anybody else thinking that Blake doesn't deserve to start. Nate's had his reasons for sticking with him and that's his choice as coach. He liked the chemistry that Blake and Roy had last season. He thought Miller would fit with a running game for the second unit. Due to the fact that Steve's been in a real slump all season and injuries have taken a toll on some of our most atheletic players, that hasn't worked out too well. Apparently, based upon Quick's reports, he's now decided to go another direction and start Miller. Great. Do you really think that's going to fix everything that's a problem for this team? Think the second unit might have a bit of a problem without balanced scoring? There's a hell of a lot more involved than who starts the game.

 

This wont help our defense but he hasn't meshed well with Triano. A good half-court PG that can shoot, a rich man's Steve Blake.

Andre Miller for Jose Calderon, anyone?

 

I didn't say I was personally slighted, and it's not directed entirely at E. I'm just tired of people using the "we are not professionals so we can't possibly know as much as them" argument. I think it is a slight on the knowledge of the people who post on this board. Our posters are not idiots. I would say the overall basketball IQ on this forum is pretty exceptional. Most of the time people aren't making posts that simply say "Blake shouldn't start because he sux". They are usually well thought out and have well supported arguments.

All I'm saying is, I've been around the "professionals" and they aren't what they're cracked up to be. Maurice Cheeks is a perfect example.

 

While the general basketball knowledge around here is pretty high for a basketball forum, do you really think that it matches up with guys who have played the game at that level and coached for a number of years? Beyond that, what's lacking around here is any inside knowledge of what goes on with the team. Watching games, reading articles on the team, and maybe getting to go to a practice or two can't equate to talking to the players one on one, having access to game film broken down by professional assistants analyzing every aspect of the game, having knowledge about players' health from team trainers and physicians, being directly involved in running and observing every practice session and game... etc.

None of this is to say that Nate and KP aren't above making making mistakes and don't have their weaknesses. There are some valid criticisms voiced here. All I'm saying is that absent the inside information that Nate and KP have, it seems to me that we shouldn't automatically jump to the conclusion that they're imbeciles when they don't follow the advice that we're so ready to offer around here. Perhaps, just maybe, they know a few things we don't.

 

And again, not to belabor the point but I don't think that is entirely his point. I think it's more of a message delivery point vs the message being delivered. And modifying that message delivery based upon the knowledge that as an individual none of us are really as smart as we'd like to think (about anything) other, than of course, mook who is only wrong approximately 72% of the time.

 

I have no problem stating that there isn't a single poster on this board, or on the internet for that matter, that knows as much about the team as Nate, KP, or the players. Perhaps I'm reading eblazer's initial post incorrectly, but I got out of it that disagreeing with some people's opinions here elicits outright mocking and derision by the people I not-as-eloquently term the "experts". Congrats to you for blogging about the team. Congrats to you for posting about how stupid you think Outlaw and Przy are in terms of intelligence. Congrats to you for posting that you want the team to fail so you can be "right" about McMillan.

I don't see how any of that makes your opinions any more valid than a person who disagrees with you. And Nate, I'm personally calling you out because you replied to eblazer's post, which tells me you feel he was speaking to you (regardless of if he was or was not). These boards used to be about an exchange of ideas. Now, it's about mocking posters who you (generic, not you specifically) don't agree with for daring to have a differing opinion.

At times, I wonder if some posters here enjoy even a second of a game, or if they are rooting for "their guys" to succeed and for the BLANKYS of the team to fail.

 

I would love for you to show me a single time that I have questioned Joel Przybilla's intelligence. Joel isn't a dumb guy. I have no idea where you got that.

You're right. I have said Outlaw is less than sharp. Spend more than ten minutes talking to the guy and you get back to me with your opinion.

Oh, and I didn't "blog" about the team. Thanks.

 

It is certainly easy to get that feeling around here, isn't it.

I have never been a "starting Miller is the saviour to this team or will save the season" . . . but if Miller starts tomorrow, I will be leading the cheers at the RG (thanks mgb) if Miller is leading the way.

To me, Blazers winning is far more improtant than anything that is said on this board.