Can we please stop saying that we're the "youngest team in the league"? We weren't before the trade deadline and we certainly are not now that we traded for Michael Ruffin. Unless, of course, the Warriors somehow managed to age more quickly than we did. The current roster average ages are around 25.17 years for the Blazers and 24.69 years for the Warriors, by my calculations. Taking Raef out, you get 24.63ish, but taking Raef and Martell out you get 24.81. My calculations might be a bit off, but they're close enough to convince me that we are not the youngest team in the league. It doesn't seem necessary for us to make stuff up in order to make our team's efforts look more impressive. We are very young and we're doing very well. We don't call ourselves the "best team in the NBA" and I don't think we should call ourselves the "youngest team in the NBA", either. Ed O.
But, I bet if you do the calculatrion on a per minute played basis the Blazers are younger than the Warriors. Not that it reall matters... BNM
Why take Martell out? He's actually been with the team since the beginning of the season. When's the last time Raef LaFrentz was even present with the team? Do the Warriors have any players on their roster that are off in another state and aren't actually present with the team? Sounds like when you compare players who are actually present between the two franchises, you see that the Blazers are younger. Seems like an odd thing to get bitchy about...
I totally agree that if we go by a per-minute basis, the Blazers are probably the youngest team in the league. If we go by "presence", then the Blazers are the youngest team in the league. But if we go by home court record, we get one "best record in the NBA" and if we go by road record we'll get another "best record in the NBA". Why not just go by "best overall record in the NBA" when we say "best record in the NBA"? And why not just look at the rosters when we say "youngest team in the NBA"? Ed O.
Because LaFrentz wasn't really a part of the team. Technically, Portland wasn't the youngest team in basketball, but for all intents and purposes they were. That may have changed with the swapping of Diogu for Ruffin, I don't know. But if Portland is the youngest when LaFrentz is not counted, I have no problem with the claim. It's not deceptive in the least, because it accurately conveys the fact that Portland has the youngest group of active players. The fact that the team still employs LaFrentz to sit at home until the end of the year strikes me as a mere technicality, not a meaningful issue. If there were an award for it, or money given out, or playoff seeding at stake, then we should go by the NBA's accounting. Since it's simply a descriptive point, not an accounting point, I think leaving out LaFrentz is perfectly valid. Not that it matters very much.
We are the youngest team in the league if you go by active roster. What we are accomplishing in spite of this is, to me, pretty extraordinary. To ignore this simple fact, is like ignoring an injury to a starter. It's a factor. When we lose in the first or second round it will be THE factor.
What would being the youngest team in the league mean for that team? Does it get extra wins or something? Meh
Are we the youngest by that measure? Have you done the math? I ask honestly. And are we talking about a cumulative track of who's been active and who's been inactive, or are you talking about the latest games? I'm not saying that our youth is not a factor, and I'm not saying that we're NOT young. Just that I question the accuracy of repeated assertions that we're THE youngest. It seems like spin to me. And unnecessary spin at that. Ed O.
Raef isn't a part of this team. And when we lose in the first round, the "experts" will say it was because of our youth and lack of experience.
He's on the roster. He's part of the team. Steve Francis is not on the roster. He is not part of the team. See the difference? Ed O.
Can we please stop saying that "we're" the youngest team in the league? I mean geez, Ed, when was the last time you put on an NBA jersey and went up against Ron Artest? By my calculations it's not "we" who are playing against the Rockets tonight. It's the collection of NBA players wearing a Portland jersey doing that. Sheesh. It's so annoying and unnecessary.
GOD made a post a few weeks ago on this, about how if you go by average age per minutes played that the Blazers have a much younger rotation than other young teams like the Warriors, Hawks, Bulls. http://sportstwo.com/forums/showthread.php?t=134211&highlight=average
By your definition. Raef LaFrentz and Steve Francis effectively play the same role for the Portland Trail Blazers, it really can't be disputed.
The voice of reason has finally snapped Steve Francis lives out of the state 24/7. Raef lives out of the state (in Iowa) 24/7. See the similarities?
I just wish they would stop talking about it at all. I don't really care one way or the other. I tire of the announcers and beat writers giving the team an out.
Nice try, but it won't stop us from spinning the truth to suit our needs. And we NEED to be the youngest team in the NBA. Thank you and good night.
We were called the Jailblazers long after we had turned our roster over... so I think we get a few years of calling us the youngest team. =) Of the players on the court... we are anyway.
