Brian Berger: Interesting Inside Info about KP

Here's the 2010-11 Blazer theme: "We take the 'fun' out of 'dysfunctional'."

 

The curse of Greg Oden.

The climate would be A LOT different with KP and Paul Allen if Oden stayed healthy.

 

Fair enough. My thought experiment was actually meant for talking with someone who hadn't seen the game and didn't have access to video (like in a bar), but let's make it easier. If someone who was at the 1910 World Series, in 1950 claimed that the Cubs won the Series, I doubt he'd be disputed by anyone who was there. Because no one would particularly care. The "Hey, no one's disputing me, that's good evidence that I'm right" is simply not a great standard. Even more people were claiming KP did the deals around 2006 and no one disputed it. Why, if it was patently untrue?

I didn't misunderstand anything. You just keep disqualifying more and more facts because they're inconvenient to your case. Somehow, trading Randolph and for Camby are "significant moves," yet trading for Bayless and Batum are not significant, despite no real difference in difficulty. You're not being even remotely consistent.

I'm disputing your premise of removing it from consideration. Therefore, it's of little importance to me that you're "removing it from consideration." If I accepted your premise as a good starting point, then yes, I should play by your rules. If I say that my premise is that Outlaw was the best player on the 2008-09 Blazers team, but I'm disqualifying Roy, Aldridge, Oden, Przybilla, Rudy, Blake, Webster and Bayless from consideration because I believe they were all on steroids...I think most people would simply disagree with my premise (which disqualifies all those players) rather than agreeing with me, under my premise.

"And your starting point guard?" Yes, Sebastian Telfair was great. That was quite an asset KP gave up.

I, of course, never said the Blazers were as good as the Lakers, I said I'd rather have the Roy and Aldridge draft day than the Pau Gasol deal. The championships won have something to do with the other players on the roster. Which you know, but you're ignoring because (again) you're not a fan of things inconvenient to your desired narrative.

Because they're rare. How many teams in the NBA have done such things in the past 4 years? And how many teams have done them multiple times in the past 4 years?

And now that I think about it, what makes the 2006 draft trades so fiendishly complex? The Aldridge and second half of the Roy deals resemble the Bayless and Batum deals quite a bit. "Pick our guy with your superior pick and we'll trade you our lesser pick and toss in something to sweeten it." The first half of the Roy deal resembles rather exactly the Sergio Rodriguez deal...a disappointing young point guard for a pick. The major difference was that there was a sucker in 2006 willing to give up a high draft pick. But that doesn't change the complexity. So this is an honest question, not snark: Why are you holding up the 2006 deals as highly complicated deals?

You're really misunderstanding me. I'm not saying his track record is "more than enough evidence to discount Patterson's claims." I'm saying that using the remaining track record to arbitrate who "probably" did the deals is not logical. I believe that KP did the 2006 deals because it was widely reported so at the time and Patterson coming along years later to say differently, when KP is fired, seems more opportunistic than revelatory. I'm not using KP's post-2006 draft track record to say Patterson didn't do it and KP did. I'm not using his post-2006 draft track record for anything along those lines. My opinion is that his record, as the main decision-maker, begins with the 2006 draft and that his record from that point on is as good as anyone else's.

If evidence that KP didn't do those deals comes along that I find compelling, I'll re-evaluate what I think of KP's record. As I said, Patterson's current claims don't meet that standard. Your "Does KP's record post-2006 draft retroactively predict making the 2006 draft deals?" line of inquiry is even less compelling to me.

 

How about this:

The way Portland drafted before and after KP's involvement is as different as night and day.
Patterson doesn't have a track record of doing much of anything during the draft.
Further, his draft picks were bad to horrific (Telfair, Webster, etc...).


If Patterson had done well in the draft prior to KP's involvement I would be more willing to see things his way.
But he didn't so I don't.

 

Kleiza was a decent player.

 

Steve Patterson was GM of this team for 1 year. That year was 2006-2007, and that happened to be the year that we landed Brandon and Aldridge.

It would be like Saying the Larry Miller is great at drafting because he was President when KP was GM.

With Patterson as GM, the Blazers drafted well.

 

Here are a couple of links to add to the debate. I am lifting them from a couple of other posters from another Blazers board;

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?id=2463998

http://mikebarrettsblog.blogspot.com/2007_03_01_archive.html

Lets see how this helps shape the debate as to who infact conducted the 2006 draft. And again, why are McHale/Ainge willing "Pritch slap" victims if in fact they were "Patterson slapped?"

 

Barrett is too pro Blazers to take anything he says seriously, and I'm not sure Hollinger really knows.

 

It was from barrett in 2007 when Pritchard was named GM

Barrett might be a homer, but he isn't the kind to make stuff up. He isn't going to put word into Paul Allen's mouth, that is for sure.

Who is Berger again?

 

MB is a company guy.

For example: Multiple media outlets said Claver's workout was very disappointing. MB raved about the workout.

 

If it were just an opinion, that might be true. Are you saying he made up that Paul Allen quote to Pritchard ("This is your draft")?

 

I think I'll side with Barrett getting his info from Paul Allen himself than Steve Patterson coming out from under a rock after KP was fired,

 

Exactly.

 

I believe you MM thanks for the straight dope.

As a side note in which i am in NO way including Mediocore Man, a couple of folks on this forum are approaching ignore status.

 

LOLZ!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

Um, yeah, thanks for the warning!

 

Well then, even worse. He had absolutely zero experiance so we have nothing to base our judgements on.

However, after Patterson is kicked to the curb Portland continues to draft in almost the same manner as the one KP supposedly ran (2006) for years afterwards.

The only thing we can look at is what facts we have.
The only facts we have is how the Blazers drafted pre-KP as compared to post-KP.
There is a significant difference between the two.
A difference that is consistent during KP's entire tenure.

That's all I have to go on. So outside of video evidence showing Patterson making all the right calls I am going to have to assume the dude is completely full of shit and try to salvage a deservedly poor reputation. All of the evidence points to Patterson being completely irrelevant with regards to Portland's drafting actions.

Note this says nothing about it being all because of KP.
It may very well be that Born and Bauchannon deserve as much or more praise as KP does.

 

WREPPED!

 

Here's the transcript: http://www.blazersedge.com/2010/6/28/1541435/transcript-sports-business-radios#storyjump

 

Reading the comments below the transcript, it's nice to see that the the KP character assassination media tour is finally working.