"(Bleep) that guy, he's walking around rubbing everyone's nose in the deals he's made and even with all those lottery players his team is still not in the playoffs. There was a line of guys in the league waiting to sign D. Miles if Memphis didn't."
An anonymous Western GM discussing Kevin Pritchard, quoted by John Canzano of The Oregonian (via TSB)
about 3 years ago
Tom Ziller
147 comments
0 recs |
Email
PrintComments
He had it coming...
To be honest he has the easiest GM post in the league. What other owner is willing to pay money for picks/buyouts at the rate Allen has; which nullifies the struggle most GM’s have, which is compromising talent with the salary cap. This would be akin to Brian Cashman complaining about someone else bidding on a free agent.
There now I've met the 75 word count. -pookeyguru
This is a really good point. How hard is it to assemble picks and talent when you have so much more cash to throw around. Would we still bow down to Pritchard if they hadn’t bought out Stevie Franchise?
by misterbrister on Jan 12, 2009 11:40 AM PST up reply actions
He's done a nice job.
And he’s undefeated in the playoffs…
SACTOWN ROYALTY - Try our thick creamy shakes!
by section214 on Jan 12, 2009 11:42 AM PST up reply actions 1 recs
Right on Section and so is King''s head coach Kenny Natt
"We are in the business of kicking butt and business is very, very good." - Charles Barkley
Don't knock it too much
The Mavs & Kings both have owners who are willing to go over the cap in order to win, and the Knicks are routinely over the cap (just to name 3), so money isn’t a factor there either.
It’s not just about the money, although it’s easier in Portland than, say, Phoenix or LAC. Besides, he’s not the first guy to have multiple lottery picks, and he’s done more than most other GMs have in his position.
What I’m more interested in is the idea that KP is doing a little too much running off at the mouth . . . that’s something that could really be pointed to as a problem.
We were willing to go over the cap when we were a championship calibur team,
but how many moves have we made since our fall from grace that added salary to our roster. If you don’t remember mike bibby was a cap casualty; we weren’t doing it for the talent we were getting back we moved him to avoid going to luxury range. Also K9 has been a dead man walking since Adelman left and yet no buyout; I thought we were a team that was willing to spend money to better our team, yet we let arguably the most overpaid NBA (I use the term loosely) player sit and cash out on our bench for 3 years.
The Knicks would’ve been my first choice, however, that team was run into the ground by Thomas.
There now I've met the 75 word count. -pookeyguru
Now we're picking nits
I mentioned both the Kings and the Mavs as teams willing to spend “in order to win”. The Kings aren’t winning, and therefore the rules have changed. I even tried to separate them more by listing the Knicks separately, instead of with them. It was also not an all-inclusive list (i.e. “just to name 3”).
All I was getting at was the it’s not like one can simply throw money at a team and make them a winner, and KP’s work thus far cannot be labeled as such.
Just remember, Portland isn’t the only team in the L with an owner willing to spend money.
Paul Allen isn't also the only Billionaire owner in the L either
Michael Heisley (owns the Grizz), Mark Cuban, the Maloofs also a billion plus in asset’s. Those are just 3 off the top of my head.
No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. It's simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get tangled, you tango on
I imagine the Maloof's have a sizeable debt load as well.
Any idea if their net worth is actually in the billions?
Nope don't care either
Does it really matter?
No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. It's simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get tangled, you tango on
also
Apparently team execs know the expression “Pritch-slap”.
Someone over in BlazersEdge is very happy right now.
Donte? Donte'! Donté?!?!
'spect da 'xtra E'
Hmm...
Either someone is getting really jealous of what Pritchard pulled off, or Pritchard is making a mistake by alienating the very people he’s going to have to make deals with by being arrogant.
Either way, I doubt that’s a Geoff Petrie quote. It didn’t contain anything about oodling chickens pointing at the moon while watching grass grow in the shade.
by Scirocco on Jan 12, 2009 11:21 AM PST reply actions 2 recs
Just read the article
Sounds like the guy really is being ostentatious about his body of work. KP’s done a wonderful job, but a little class wouldn’t hurt anyone.
John Canzano is a hack
The guy should write for the National Enquirer or People. He’s the primary reason Darius Miles was so maligned around Portland after constant articles bemoaning his “love of the lifestyle” and penchant for strip clubs (as if any of that really matters).
Believe me, JC is whipping up a storm out of nothing here … not to say that Pritchard hasn’t rubbed people wrong, but I’m pretty sure he only hit up people who were going to slag on the Blazers.
I much prefer Wendell Maxey’s (sane) even-handed take at hoopsworld on this very subject:
by nikolokolus on Jan 12, 2009 10:20 PM PST up reply actions
This is kinda like what Petrie ran into a few years ago
And really similar to Billy Beane as well. It takes two teams to trade, and you can only fleece so many teams before everyone else figures it out and starts to resent you for it.
Billy Beane- my thoughts exactly.
Although he didn’t right Money Ball, Billy allowed Michael Lewis the access required to create what could have been a career killer. At the end of the day, the Blaers still have cash, they still have talented players to trade and I’m sure Pritchard will be able to rehabilitate his name. Then again, if you draft well, sign good extensions and make smart FA moves, who needs the other 29 teams.
Hot dogs, get your hot dogs.
Look at all my typos- sorry peeps.
Write- not “right”.
Blazers- not “Blazers”.
Hot dogs, get your hot dogs.
The Devil - not "Pritchard"
if you’re going to correct them, correct them all.
Donte? Donte'! Donté?!?!
'spect da 'xtra E'
The Point is for all the Pritchard is God folks
Is that this is the first real adversity he’s faced,
the first bit of bad luck -
- and he blames it on other teams trying sabotage him, HIM! How dare they! If this screws things up it will be someone else’s fault – of course.
They say it won’t matter, but I’ll bet his days of ‘gimmies’ are over as far as other GMs go. They be harder with him.
"You keep on using that word
I do not think it mean what you think it means"
Wait...
Did I miss something in the original story?
"The Portland Trail Blazers will take all necessary steps to safeguard its rights, including, without limitation, litigation,’’ wrote Blazers president Larry Miller in an e-mail addressed late Thursday night to all NBA team presidents and general managers.
Emphasis mine.
KP didn’t issue the memo/e-mail, Larry Miller did. I’m not trying to deny any participation on KP’s part, but your comment reads like revisionist history in which KP sent out the memo himself.
This is the same kind of thing that happened with people claiming that Moneyball as written by Billy Beane, and I think we can all agree that it got way out of hand.
Feel free to slam KP, just make sure you’re accurate about it, or your points will seem empty.
Point taken on specifics
But KP wasn’t in on it then? No organization puts something like that out unless all the execs are on board do they?
Larry Miller giving cover for Pritchard, which apparently didn’t work as far as other GMs go, is a supposition that I may possibly be wrong on – but my gut tells me I’m not.
"You keep on using that word
I do not think it mean what you think it means"
by lietothegirls on Jan 12, 2009 1:21 PM PST up reply actions
Again
I didn’t say that he wasn’t in on it.
His job would obviously be easier if the Miles contract wasn’t on the books, but that doesn’t mean that he instigated the threat of LEGAL ACTION against other teams.
You may be entirely correct, but as you stated you’re simply going off of your “gut”.
My take is that the entire Blazers Organization looks bad here, and I’m not really willing to place all of the blame on any one person.
Isn't the effect the same?
The fact that Lmiller signed it may get the backs of other team presidents (who we rarely hear from) up as well. Any deal with the Blazers may interest, more than usual, more executives on other teams than usual. Not in a good way.
"You keep on using that word
I do not think it mean what you think it means"
by lietothegirls on Jan 12, 2009 1:39 PM PST up reply actions
Perhaps...
The effect may be the same in terms of teams dealing with PDX in general, but you’re painting KP as the main villain who “blames it on other teams trying sabotage him” and has others “giving cover” for him.
You’re making a good point about the way that Portland looks in this situation, but I just feel that your point is getting buried under unsubstantiated Pritch-slapping (to turn the phrase around).
by smgmatt on Jan 12, 2009 2:07 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
Rec'd for 'Pritch-slapping'
"You keep on using that word
I do not think it mean what you think it means"
by lietothegirls on Jan 12, 2009 2:34 PM PST up reply actions
I believe there was an interview
Where KP noted that everyone in management was on board with the letter. Could just be damage control though.
Are we gonna live together? Together are we gonna live?
There was
but it didn’t read like Pritchard, it read like Miller and lawyers. I’m sure Pritchard was consulted and I’m sure they agreed to hold a united front on it, but it wasn’t his letter or his idea. Not his style.
I wouldn’t put much weight in what Canzano writes. When he cites the people he is quoting by name so someone can actually fact check him, then I’ll be sure he’s not making up quotes or twisting things.
I know you can put admiration in bags, because admiration is real, and tominhawaii says that everything that is real is measurable.
Seemed like Steve Patterson's style to be truthful
If there is anybody who needs a style labeled. And, Pritchard, will take the hit, even though he probably never thought it was wise.
No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. It's simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get tangled, you tango on
Two issues
Legal and PR.
KP would probably have a good sense that, if released, it would be rough PR.
Legally, it was probably the right move, especially after the news that came out today. They are laying the groundwork for an appeal against Miles’ salary going back on their books, and while the PR of what they are doing looks shaky, legally I think they’ve strengthened themselves with these moves.
So I’m not sure I would say KP “never thought it was wise.” He may well have seen the legal point even if he didn’t like the potential PR consequences.
I know you can put admiration in bags, because admiration is real, and tominhawaii says that everything that is real is measurable.
That's true js
I’m not going to argue that point, but I also believe this could have been done through back channels.
The bottom line js, and I’ve made this clear on Bedge as well as StR, is that this is a legal gray area, and because of what the NBA does, as well as the resolution that comes with the 2011 salary cap, is what will resolve this issue.
No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. It's simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get tangled, you tango on
We know they talked to Stern
before sending that email. They may have tried back channels and been blocked.
I know you can put admiration in bags, because admiration is real, and tominhawaii says that everything that is real is measurable.
I'm so exhausted
from the billions of news reports, fanposts, and comments on this never-ending tale that I can barely type… so I’ll just say KP is the opposite of arrogant, I hate the fan-created term Pritchslap, success breeds jealousy, and John Canzano’s reputation with many Blazer fans is “lower than the scum that pond scum scrape off their feet ”).
Brace yourselves for when other BEdgers discover that you folks are discussing this…
Pardon?
Brace yourselves for when other BEdgers discover that you folks are discussing this…
That’s not how it works, Holmes.
He just means
there’s likely to be a whole bunch of them coming and commenting if anyone links over there.
I know you can put admiration in bags, because admiration is real, and tominhawaii says that everything that is real is measurable.
I'm braced!
The wait for our impending BE-smackdown will be excruciating I’m sure.
Are we gonna live together? Together are we gonna live?
I'm quaking!!!
What wrath have we brought down on ourselves?!!!!!
"You keep on using that word
I do not think it mean what you think it means"
by lietothegirls on Jan 12, 2009 1:07 PM PST up reply actions
In defense...
we are discussing a quote from an “anonymous Western GM” who makes a claim about Pritchard. I don’t even know what the guy looks like but he has made some pretty solid moves. Lucking into the first pick aside (which may or may not prove to be lucky), finding a way to get Aldridge and Roy on your club and moving Randolph with his giant contract took some skills. I think a lot of fans around here are more annoyed that Pritchard has a billionaire owner who pays for first round picks while our GM has billionaire owners who won’t.
Oh yeah, are you like a five year old tattle tail or what? Please, whatever you do, don’t tell the other BEdgers about us, we’ll give you some cyber candy.
Hot dogs, get your hot dogs.
LOL okay okay
I can see how my previous comment might have sounded like I was pronouncing The Curse of a Thousand BEdgers. Nothing so hostile; just that posts and comments on Blazers Edge have numbered literally into the thousands on this one issue and have spilled into other team blogs (ask Grizzly fan). I think you guys know we’re a pretty civilized crew for the most part.
Jjham15, I will take the cyber candy, thanks.
Smgmatt, you’re right, KP himself said that the decision to announce the threat was jointly agreed-to by the entire Blazer management team. KP is part of that team, but he did not make the decision by himself. (To the extent that folks think he was responsible, I wonder how/if that affects his chance to be Exec of the Year…)
Lietothegirls, KP has not blamed anyone for anything. The letter simply stated that the Blazers might litigate if a team picked-up Miles and played him in two games only for the purpose of sticking it to the Blazers. It’s hard to see how to prove that and harder to see how that was a good PR move, but there may be more going on there than we know.
Rbiegler, you may think it makes more sense to wait until the Blazers at least make the playoffs before lionizing KP, but you’ve forgotten how bad we were for several years before he took the reins and how embarrassing the Jail Blazer regime was to Blazer fans, Portlanders, and the league. KP has turned things around way faster than anyone expected and we stand a good chance at making the playoffs this season. Blazer fans are excited about the team again — small wonder we appreciate KP so much. Remember how it was for all of us (me too, Kings are my #2 NBA team and I live an hour from Sac) when Geoff Petrie put together the 1999-2004 Kings?
Dalt99 and vfettke, c’mon, you don’t think Chris Mullin would have said that about KP, do you?
by MiledAnimal on Jan 12, 2009 2:11 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
Agreed
And I’m really not into that whole “at least make the playoffs first” business to be honest. Portland as a playoff threat isn’t an issue of if but when. And the when is this year. And even if it wasn’t turning the culture around, in the way that it’s been turned around, as efficiently as it’s been turned around, is certainly accolade worthy. You can’t not look at the seismic shift Portland has made in the past few years contextually. Pritchard has been huge for you.
They aren't in the playoffs yet.
This season is very much still up in the air. Oden may not be the stud they hoped (he may as well) or he may never stay healthy.
Such is life when evaluating players.
"You keep on using that word
I do not think it mean what you think it means"
by lietothegirls on Jan 12, 2009 3:40 PM PST up reply actions
It was a dumb move
bound to anger others and accomplishing nothing.
It sounded like a self righteous ‘I dare you’ (everyone pretty much agrees with that, even the Oregonian) with a burden of proof Portland could NEVER have met.
and the blaming others was admittedly a prediction into the near future when thier hands aren’t as free as they’d hoped.
I doubt it was Mullin, not his style.
"You keep on using that word
I do not think it mean what you think it means"
by lietothegirls on Jan 12, 2009 2:43 PM PST up reply actions
Western GMs
So which of these guys said it?
Donnie Nelson – possibly if he’s anything like pops
Mark Warkentien – who?
Chris Mullin – didn’t say it was him, said it was possible
Daryl Morey – probably more worried about the health of his team
Mike Dunleavy – has that “don’t give a shit” attitude due to still not being fired
Mitch Kupchak – doubtful
Chris Wallace – also doubtful unless he was talking about his own team to throw people off his scent
Kevin McHale – as if he knows what the fuck is going on anyway
Jeff Bower – nope
Sam Presti – possibly trying to help his owners’ relinquish their douche bag crown
Steve Kerr – eh
Kevin Pritchard – potentially got confused while talking about himself in the third person
Geoff Petrie – no big words, no metaphors, no way
RC Buford – Pritchard’s his bitch already
Kevin O’Connor – Mormons don’t say fuck
www.mancancook.net
by vfettke on Jan 12, 2009 4:30 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
I think it might have been Dunleavy
Lots of Blazer ties on that list with Dunleavy, Kerr (former Blazer player), Petrie and Presti/Buford (both worked with Pritchard in San Antonio). Maybe Pritchard burned a bridge with one of those guys at some point?
Boomshakalaka
That's not a bad guess, snake.
The Blazers dropped Dunleavy when it got to the point that either he or Rasheed had to go, as I recall. That must have been a bitter pill even for a veteran coach like Dunleavy to swallow. He probably wouldn’t need any personal reason against KP to dislike him other than that KP works for the Blazers.
Say what you will about McHale
Kevin McHale – as if he knows what the fuck is going on anyway
Eight straight playoff appearances and a club headed in the right direction with five straight wins. He was 19-12 in his previous stint as an interim coach as well.
Somebody around here told me eight straight playiff appearances is the sign of a good GM, I can’t remember who though. Oh, yeah, it was everyone.
"The basis for winning an NBA title is having a superstar in his prime. Not an all-star, or a bunch of all-stars, but a superstar."
by coolcatreportdotcom on Jan 12, 2009 8:29 PM PST up reply actions
Eight straight playoff appearances
but only got out of the first round once. Not only that, but once they were able to get out of the first round, he was unable to keep that team together and everything blew up.
I don’t think you want to compare Petrie and McHale because if you were to add all other aspects of being a GM is clear who would come out on top.
You're probably right
and I wasn’t comparing McHale to Petrie or anyone else; I was just saying that he is more accomplished than folks let on.
Although, now that you mention it, the part about being “unable to keep that team together and everything blew up” does sound kind of familar.
Teams grow old, players move on. He made the decision to blow it up, which everyone is now rationalizing is a great thing for the Kings, but is not so great when some other teams do it. I guess time will tell.
"The basis for winning an NBA title is having a superstar in his prime. Not an all-star, or a bunch of all-stars, but a superstar."
by coolcatreportdotcom on Jan 12, 2009 11:22 PM PST up reply actions
that wasn't a "blow up the team" thing
That was a “I couldn’t retain my guys, when I had to.” The Webber trade wasn’t a blow-it-up thing. The Peja trade wasn’t a blow-it-up thing. Only when an Artest led team with an aging Bibby and Brad fail to make playoffs (or even remain competitive) did the cries for blowing it up sound.
McHale, for his many successes, was not very good at getting (Joe Smith) or keeping (Sprewell) his free agents.
Donte? Donte'! Donté?!?!
'spect da 'xtra E'
I was probably unclear
But when I said “he made the decision to blow it up,” I was talking about McHale blowing it up, not Petrie.
"The basis for winning an NBA title is having a superstar in his prime. Not an all-star, or a bunch of all-stars, but a superstar."
by coolcatreportdotcom on Jan 13, 2009 8:26 PM PST up reply actions
So which Western GM could it be?
Who has the attitude to blatantly say “Fuck that guy?”
I like the work KP has done. He’s set up a really nice team over there for the next several years. However, this whole “we’ll sue you if you sign Darius Miles” has him bordering on douche bag territory. I don’t think he’s a bad guy, or arrogant, by any means. However, who’s really dumb enough to make this sort of unfounded threat?
www.mancancook.net
I've said it before and I'll say it again...
I’ve always felt people lionized Pritchard prematurely. I’m not saying he hasn’t made some smart personnel moves and has a unique eye for talent, but it isn’t exactly like lucking into the #1 pick was by design. And I still personally think the team would have been better off last year keeping Rush.
And in regards to success breeding jealousy this incarnation of the Blazers hasn’t exactly lit the world on fire. They’re good to be sure, but draft in the lottery five years in a row and you’d have to hope you’d be good. It may be a little early to break out the anointing oils, unless New Orleans and Portland swapped franchises and I was uninformed.
by rbiegler on Jan 12, 2009 1:22 PM PST reply actions 1 recs
Somewhat agree
But I think they are well on track to be a top-flight team. They aren’t lighting the world on fire, sure, but they are progressing nicely for having so many young pieces.
Are we gonna live together? Together are we gonna live?
by otis29 on Jan 12, 2009 1:39 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
I would rather be them than us right now
I wouldn’t have said that four years ago – I hope that I can say it again in soon.
SACTOWN ROYALTY - Try our thick creamy shakes!
You hope you can say it again soon?
I hope we won’t be able to say that anymore soon, and then not again for a long long time.
;p
Ball movement ... is like jogging for most people: They do it occasionally, and it makes them happy. Then they go back to not doing it. - Henry Abbott
by Kfan in Korea on Jan 12, 2009 5:20 PM PST up reply actions
It won't be long
You’ve hit the bottom, and are on your way back up. Might not see it this year, but the foundation is there.
I know you can put admiration in bags, because admiration is real, and tominhawaii says that everything that is real is measurable.
No question
I couldn’t agree more. I just meant that if there was resentment on our end wouldn’t it be geared more toward the Lakers, who are our theoretical rivals? Or the Mavericks, who have stayed relevant longer with more or less the same nucleus? I never held any real animosity or consequent jealousy toward Portland.
Its about climbing up from the depths
We see a mirror of where we’d be if we’d started a year or two earlier.
But I have no resentment, a little envy . . . .
"You keep on using that word
I do not think it mean what you think it means"
by lietothegirls on Jan 12, 2009 2:47 PM PST up reply actions
I don't resent the Celtics for their 17 titles
nor the Lakers for their 14. What I really hate about the Lakers is that they’ve only had five losing seasons in their existence. Maybe Isiah will buy them someday…
Rec'd
Though I think they’re now a force to be reckoned with.
"You keep on using that word
I do not think it mean what you think it means"
Without a doubt
The Blazers are the best team not to win a playoff game over the past ten years (rough guess there – I did not look it up).
I think that it is fair to say that they are an up and coming team and a possible force in the future (I love Brandon Roy’s game), but they have been prematurely annointed as the next great thing. Time (and only time) will tell.
Pritchard deserves credit to this point, but not the pedestal that some have placed him upon.
SACTOWN ROYALTY - Try our thick creamy shakes!
We were in the playoffs in 03
"When I have the ball, I experiment." #5
by Sabonis4Ever on Jan 13, 2009 5:12 AM PST up reply actions
I think he meant a team's strenght on hype
Not the last time the Blazers made the playoffs. (Houston set a record for wins by a playoff team with 45 in 2001 for anyone who cares though.)
No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. It's simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get tangled, you tango on
By a non playoff team^
No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. It's simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get tangled, you tango on
Correct with 48 wins
Thanks for the correction.
No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. It's simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get tangled, you tango on
Pritchard has done a good job
Acquiring Roy, Aldridge, and Fernandez and getting the Knicks to take Zbo off our hands. The orginization came off as a bunch of babies from the Miles situation, but my guess is that it came from above KP (ie Paul Allen).
There is no question that we Blazers fans have gone way overboard with our love of Kevin Pritchard and the “pritch-slap” thing is amazingly stupid.
Boomshakalaka
by jksnake99 on Jan 12, 2009 3:24 PM PST reply actions 2 recs
Go back to the 2008 draft threads here.
There was a lot of man love here for Prichard. I’d say we were jealous of him. There were many comments at the time along the lines of “I wish our GM was as proactive/aggressive as Portland’s.” By any standard he has done a good job of turning the toxic culture in Portland around as well as dumping some really bad contracts.
The team hasn’t won anything yet but then nobody except for the most rabid Portland homer thought they would compete for the championship this year. They are a young and improving team who have been to the valley (probably where we are now) and who are starting to climb towards the peak. Because of their youth and talent they appear to be a good to elite team that should be competative for years to come.
So yeah, Prichard desrves major props for what he has done so far, but as Section mentioned at the top of the thread, he’s the best young GM never to have won a playoff game (yet). Will the Miles Lawsuit Threat hurt his ability to make trades in the future? No. NO. Heck NO! With the exception of the Ainge/McHale KG trade as far as I can see, most GM’s in the league aren’t in the habit of doing favors for each other. Prichard’s ability to make trades in the league will be limited to the cards he has to play and the needs of the other GMs around the league.
If you would like to see a good analysis of the Portland situation go here: http://blogs.mercurynews.com/warriors/2009/01/11/jealousy-warriors-100-blazers-113/
This was written by Adam Laurison who does an excellent job as the dub’s fan blogger for the San Jose Merc news. He also does an excellent job of comparing the Warriors and Portland organizations that does have many correlations to our current situation. He makes an excellent case that the Miles salary situation won’t impact Prichard’s plan for the Blazers much.
The Blazers are again going to be one of our major competitors and hopefully we are 2-3 years behind them in our climb towards renewed relevance and respectability. At the end of this season Pritchard’s ill advised emial is not going to be as important to the Blazer’s future as a boil on his ass.
"We are in the business of kicking butt and business is very, very good." - Charles Barkley
Yeah I remember being absolutely shocked when Pritchard jumped in front of us for Bayless.
However, JT has turned out to be the better player.
There now I've met the 75 word count. -pookeyguru
Its a bit early to make that conclusion isn't it?
Considering Bayless has played a grand total of 135 minutes?
Boomshakalaka
yep
Too soon, but if JT starts making those buckets in close, one or two of which he seems to miss every game, and he will, a talented big is always worth more than a talented little guy, unless that guy turns in CP3 or something close (possible I suppose).
JT has got a motor, desire and athleticism, thats most of the battle with big guys.
"You keep on using that word
I do not think it mean what you think it means"
by lietothegirls on Jan 12, 2009 4:37 PM PST up reply actions
JT's a player for sure
I disagree that a talented big is always more valuable than a talented little— I don’t buy that conventional wisdom. Is Tyrus Thomas more valuable than Derrick Rose? Both are talented high draft picks.
There’s no question Thompson is better than Bayless right now— not even close. Its way too early to compare them though, especially since Thompson is 3 years older.
Boomshakalaka
Fail
Is Tyrus Thomas more valuable than Derrick Rose? Both are talented high draft picks.
That’s a terrible example, because he already gave the exception that fits your example:
…a talented big is always worth more than a talented little guy, unless that guy turns in CP3 or something close…
Emphasis mine, and I believe that D-Rose fits into the “or something close” category with little (no pun intended) to no argument.
fair enough
It was indeed a bad example. I still don’t buy the conventional wisdom that a good big is always more valuable than a good small. All things being equal— sure, take the big, but only if all things are equal. Just my opinion. It may turn Bayless never gets to Thompson’s level, even without the “big>little” logic, we just don’t know yet.
Boomshakalaka
Agreed
It’s definitely too early to tell.
In my opinion there is more inherent value to a big (“you can’t teach size”), but I agree that sometimes it’s taken too literally, and is sometimes flat out wrong.
Truth
"You keep on using that word
I do not think it mean what you think it means"
by lietothegirls on Jan 12, 2009 5:51 PM PST up reply actions
but Bayless looks wretched so far
23% shooting, 1 to 1 TO/Asts
may not hold, but you can see why he isn’t getting minutes.
"You keep on using that word
I do not think it mean what you think it means"
by lietothegirls on Jan 12, 2009 5:55 PM PST up reply actions
He's done okay recently though
Lemme see what I can find out about what he’s done recently.
No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. It's simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get tangled, you tango on
Mmmm
One game vs Detroit in 17 mins he got 8 pts, and 2 ast’s and 2 stl’s. I think that is the game Dave and Casey Haldahl were talking about on the podcast last week.
But his shooting hasn’t been good that is for sure.
No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. It's simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get tangled, you tango on
Thank god for Free throws in that one
4 for 4, he can hit those. He’s been hopeless from NBA 3 range…
Its not over for him yet, but its hard to see a team selling out for him right now.
I heard Portland people saying somehere recently that PG is still thier weak point(?) so i guess they’re not sold or encouraged either.
"You keep on using that word
I do not think it mean what you think it means"
by lietothegirls on Jan 12, 2009 6:09 PM PST up reply actions
Bayless played tremendous D on Stuckey in that one
and led a comeback.
He had another very strong brief run tonight against the Bulls. lietothegirls is correct that Bayless has been awful shooting the ball thus far (not just 3s— everywhere) but he was a good shooter in college, so I expect his numbers to improve.
Boomshakalaka
really?
See Quincy Douby……
Some guys just never do, and not from lack of trying on QDs part.
But Bayless has time still.
"You keep on using that word
I do not think it mean what you think it means"
by lietothegirls on Jan 13, 2009 9:20 AM PST up reply actions
Nothing close to Bobby Brown so far.
"You keep on using that word
I do not think it mean what you think it means"
by lietothegirls on Jan 13, 2009 10:17 AM PST up reply actions
Its still early...
I just don’t see how Bayless will ever get an opportunity unless the injury bug hits the Blazers hard.
There now I've met the 75 word count. -pookeyguru
Agreed
He’s probably more of a franchise asset to make in a trade. Especially at this point.
No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. It's simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get tangled, you tango on
Portland's team weakness is its defense
The PG spot is a big part of that. If Bayless is to be a long term key guy for Portland, its as the starting PG— he’s the Blazers best hope for someone who can stay in front of the Chris Paul’s of the world. As for offense, there is no doubt that Bayless is best penetrating and scoring, rather than distributing. That potentially makes him a great fit with Roy, though, because Roy is an excellent distributor. Many Blazer fans still see a future where in crunch time Bayless is the 1 on D and the 2 on O, with Roy playing the point. Time will tell whether that happens. For now, Rudy Fernandez and Steve Blake are both more trustworthy options for Roy’s crunch time backcourt partner.
Minutes will indeed be hard to come by for Bayless in the immediate future, but don’t discount the possibility of a trade (everyone on the roster other than Oden, Roy, Aldridge and probobly Fernandez and Przybilla are definitely candidates to be moved)
Boomshakalaka
Except for PG's
There are just as much inherent value in them as well. Big Men and PG’s always have gone top 3 in the draft. There’s a reason for that. They have more value than swing positions.
No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. It's simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get tangled, you tango on
Look above
His numbers reeeally stink so far
"You keep on using that word
I do not think it mean what you think it means"
by lietothegirls on Jan 12, 2009 5:56 PM PST up reply actions
ooops, you replied to that
I just looked on yahoo, not very good still, 1 decent game in there somewhere.
http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/players/4473/gamelog;ylt=AuGoCY1wuvtELR4nQVlbyjWPaB4
"You keep on using that word
I do not think it mean what you think it means"
by lietothegirls on Jan 12, 2009 5:59 PM PST up reply actions
Fair to say
that I wouldn’t mind if Kevin Pritchard came here…especially if he brought Paul Allen’s money with him.
SACTOWN ROYALTY - Try our thick creamy shakes!
Geoff Petrie is a terrific GM.
If you look at what he’s done over the years with what he’s had to work with, I’ve had no complaints about his decisions. Typical fan response to a Petrie draft pick is “Huh?!” Two years later he looks like a genius.
As a Blazers fan
I’ve always had a super soft spot for Petrie and was kind of pissed off when he left in the first go around only to be replaced by the incomparable asshat (Trader) Bob Whittsitt … then again I’ve liked the Kings for a long time too and rooted/root for them when they aren’t matched up against my Blazers. I loved the Doug Christie teams and having Rick Adelman made it easy.
Here’s to hoping Petrie gets everything turned around sooner rather than later and some epic battles can ensue in a few years … it would be much nicer to have a a main rival in the western conference that I don’t hate, but have a grudging respect for — pretty much the opposite of how I feel about the Sanctimonious Jazz and the hated L*kers.
by nikolokolus on Jan 12, 2009 10:47 PM PST up reply actions
Can't say I really care about any of this
It’s all just shit talking, like everything else with this deal has been. A bunch of sneering going on. Enjoy Blazer haters.
No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. It's simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get tangled, you tango on
Seems you do care
If you get that upset about it.
Are we gonna live together? Together are we gonna live?
I think Pookey gets upset about a lot of things Otis...
many of which he cares little about.
Hot dogs, get your hot dogs.
It may just be his curmudgeon-like nature shining through
:)
Are we gonna live together? Together are we gonna live?
Then I hope he doesn't
click here because several folks at Golden State of Mind are a lot nastier than anyone in this thread.
Wouldn't expect anything less from those folks
No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. It's simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get tangled, you tango on
Me neither
They have a lot to be miserable over
by misterbrister on Jan 12, 2009 6:40 PM PST up reply actions
To both of you
I’ve run my course with this, culminating with calling the dumb Celtics blog fan “the Mexican who was too dumb to do anything but park his car on a lawn.” (I think he was more offended by calling him a Mexican than the 2nd part though. You figure out whether I was really serious with that remark.)
However, with that being said, I got a difficult math problem to figure out. And I’m not upset. It’s just old already.
No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. It's simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get tangled, you tango on
With that having been said though
The aftermath of all this is interesting, and the legal ramifications/salary cap rule changes pending medical retirment is also worth following. Just not with the bitter jealousy that is following Pritchard & the Blazers. Is he cocky? Yes. Will time prove him right? Yes. So, that’s where I stand. Also, I didn’t become a Kings fan to be jealous of other franchises because of the quality luck they’ve received. Demz da breakz of da gamez folkz.
No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. It's simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get tangled, you tango on
Nun uh
The answer is 42!
No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. It's simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get tangled, you tango on
Math problem?
Attempt to claim Darius on waivers
plus
NBA blocking that move based on “intent”
plus
Email threatening to sue if other teams play Darius with bad “intent”
equals
Groundwork for appeal based on the fact that the NBA does indeed make rulings based on “intent”.
I suspect this one still has some interesting twists before it is done. And that Portland may even win an appeal and make even more people dislike them in the process.
Don’t forget that it is in the Players’ Association’s interest that Portland wins that appeal, too, because more cap space means a bigger contract for someone.
I know you can put admiration in bags, because admiration is real, and tominhawaii says that everything that is real is measurable.
Not sure I agree
Don’t forget that it is in the Players’ Association’s interest that Portland wins that appeal, too, because more cap space means a bigger contract for someone.
This could be true, but the argument could just as easily be made that it’s in the NBAPA’s best interest that Portland loses the appeal, because it would make it easier for players to attempt comebacks after medical retirements (if they win, would teams take the chance signing medically retired players?).
Since Miles gets the money from his original contract anyway, any comeback attempt will allow him to “double dip”, as well as earn more money after his original contract expires if he continues to play.
I’m not saying either is fact, but I think there’s a valid argument for both sides.
if they win, would teams take the chance signing medically retired players
This implies tha if Portland wins the appeal teams won’t sign medically retired players because they won’t be able to screw over the team that retired them. A team will still hire a medically retired player if he can help them.
www.mancancook.net
Hmm
Perhaps I misunderstood the previous comment, or more to the point the “appeal” being referenced.
I was making a point that it would be a problem if the result of the appeal contained any negative affect for Memphis, and I should have made that clear.
My bad.
My bad
I wasn’t clear.
I highly doubt Portland will directly target Memphis, unless they have some smoking gun as to malicious intent.
I expect Portland to appeal to have Miles’ salary off their books for cap purposes, and I think they’ve been laying the groundwork for that over this last week.
And the PA would be supportive of that. They want teams to have cap space. As things stand with this situation, no team will ever go the medical retirement route again, because you have to waive the player, and that means any team can offer the guy some money to play a few exhibition games, and mess up your cap space and screw up your insurance payments for him.
You would be better off just keeping him, collecting insurance, and then you have an expiring contract which may be of some value.
If Miles’ salary goes back on Portland’s books, it is unlikely that any more players will be medically retired unless the guy can hardly walk.
I know you can put admiration in bags, because admiration is real, and tominhawaii says that everything that is real is measurable.
Nonsense
no offense, but thats ‘homer’ talk.
"You keep on using that word
I do not think it mean what you think it means"
by lietothegirls on Jan 13, 2009 12:22 PM PST up reply actions
No offense at all
but what is homer talk?
1. The idea that Portland is laying groundwork for an appeal to have Miles’s salary come off their cap? I don’t know why you think that’s homer talk. Of course they are doing that. If Miles only plays 10-11 games, they will appeal, you can book it.
2. The idea that Portland probably won’t go after Memphis unless there’s a smoking gun? That’s not homer talk.
3. The idea that the Players Association would support an appeal by Portland? Why wouldn’t the players want Portland to have more cap space? It almost certainly means more money for at least one free agent this summer, and the PA is supposed to be wanting more money for players. Why wouldn’t the PA support that? That’s homer talk?
4. The idea that this situation basically kills the medical retirement provision of the CBA, because the team can get screwed over by any other team? How is that homer talk? Why should the Knicks do a medical retirement with Cuttino Mobley, if he might decide it is worth the risk to play a few minutes with another team to rack up several thousand pounds and in the process screw them over? To do a medical retirement, you have to waive the guy, which means any other team can stick it to you.
I know you can put admiration in bags, because admiration is real, and tominhawaii says that everything that is real is measurable.
"Mmm, Donuts!"
Homer talk.
SACTOWN ROYALTY - Try our thick creamy shakes!
by section214 on Jan 13, 2009 1:19 PM PST up reply actions 2 recs
Items 3 and 4
Item1, they can lay the groundwork all they want.
Item 2 They have absolutely no grounds for – and couldn’t ever prove convincingly to anyone reasonably that there was intent to harm as the primary motive.
Item 3 that the PA would back them. If a player medically retires and is no longer counted against the cap, another player can get that money as you said, but this is the exception, not the rule. In most cases the result would be the desired one for the PA. This is also an issue where you think Portland’s needs are so important that everything should change.
Item 4 that its possible to mess with the CBA over an isolated issue for one team (Portland) because thier bad luck is so important. The other ramifications of destroying the med retirement provision are too serious for other teams – as this is an isolated incident.
"You keep on using that word
I do not think it mean what you think it means"
by lietothegirls on Jan 13, 2009 2:12 PM PST up reply actions
On item 1
I’d point out my fanshot where the article referenced states that during the whole med. retirement process, D Miles said he would try to play again if he was ever able.
He has also repeatedly expressed regret that his return might hurt Portland cap-wise.
This is just bad luck – and it too shall pass.
"You keep on using that word
I do not think it mean what you think it means"
by lietothegirls on Jan 13, 2009 2:23 PM PST up reply actions
OK
I’ll go through this point by point.
1. So they can lay the groundwork. We’re agreed. The fact that I said that is what I think they are doing is not homer talk.
2. I don’t know if they have grounds or not, but I agree with everything else you said. Unless there is a smoking gun, they won’t go after Memphis. We’re agreed. If I’m a Blazer homer on that point, so are you.
3 & 4. Sorry, we’re having communication breakdown. Let me try to do it another way:
A. Medical retirement requires you to waive the player.
B. If you waive the player, any other team can pick him up, play him scrub minutes for ten games, and you are screwed.
C. If you are screwed, the insurance stops reimbursing you for his salary, so you have that as well as the cap hit.
Alternatively, you would be better off to:
A. Keep him on the roster.
B. Keep collecting insurance.
C. Have his expiring contract in his last year as a trading chip.
Which means that in any case (think Cuttino Mobley and Darius Miles) where a player is medically retired because of risk (heart or knee) rather than total incapacity, teams will be very unlikely to go this route.
That’s not “homer talk.” That’s analysis of the situation. If it’s flawed, please point out the specific flaws.
If Cuttino or someone like him were medically retired, he could decide to make a few grand stepping on the court for another team that wanted to screw his old team.
The intent of medical retirement was to free a team from being penalized when a player has a “career-ending injury” (undefined). The teams want that because it allows a team to recover from such things, and the PA wants that because it allows players to make more money on the free agent market.
The intent of the 10 games provision was to keep a team from retiring their player and then re-signing him to a lower contract to circumvent the cap.
The obvious solution is to interpret the rule consistent with the intent — the ten games provision should only apply if the player comes back with his original team.
I know you can put admiration in bags, because admiration is real, and tominhawaii says that everything that is real is measurable.
This make no sense
The intent of the 10 games provision was to keep a team from retiring their player and then re-signing him to a lower contract to circumvent the cap.
What player would agree to a medical retirement so that they could resign at a lower rate?
I believe the rule is in place so that teams don’t medically retire a player to gain cap relief while he rehabs from a difficult procedure.
Ball movement ... is like jogging for most people: They do it occasionally, and it makes them happy. Then they go back to not doing it. - Henry Abbott
by Kfan in Korea on Jan 14, 2009 5:06 AM PST up reply actions
Seriously?
You can’t see why a player would take a medical retirement, which entitles them to their entire salary, and then get more money via a smaller second contract, which would most likely also improve the talent on the team they played for (by using the previous salary cap dollars to sign another player)?
You really don’t see that?
If your employer told you that they’d pay you an additional minimum wage salary on top of what you already make, because the income tax implications would allow them to buy all new equipment for you to work on, and it was LEGAL . . . would you turn it down?
Said it better than I could have
I know you can put admiration in bags, because admiration is real, and tominhawaii says that everything that is real is measurable.
Well that's just stupid
If he reenters the league, how is it in any way fair to allow the team to keep the cap relief.
If he isn’t medically retired then there should be no medical retirement cap relief. It’s so simple.
Ball movement ... is like jogging for most people: They do it occasionally, and it makes them happy. Then they go back to not doing it. - Henry Abbott
by Kfan in Korea on Jan 14, 2009 1:15 PM PST up reply actions
Well...
That’s why they made the rule.
I think the question is whether 10 games, the current measuring stick for becoming “un-medically retired”(?), is enough to put their original contract back on the cap.
The argument AGAINST 10 games, essentially, is that it costs almost nothing for other teams to put that original money back on another team’s cap simply by playing someone in the preseason and on a couple of 10-day contracts.
Jscot’s position is that the intent of the rule was for exactly the situation I described, in which a team medically retires a player for cap relief and then brings them back at a discount, freeing up space under the salary cap for other uses.
The argument FOR 10 games, essentially, is that the player is playing and thus not unfit to play in the L.
From this point of view, If Miles gets action in 10 or more games, then his salary should go back on Portland’s salary cap because he met the requirements to become “un-medically retired” (if that’s even an actual phrase).
My take is that it should probably be somewhere in between these extremes, and I wouldn’t be against some tweaking to the rule. Off the top of my head: the games played requirement could be increased, minutes played could be used instead of games, or perhaps even a sliding scale in which the cap money is added back on depending on different requirements (e.g. 20% for every 10 games). The last idea would add the salary back on depending on the success of the comeback, and while I don’t know if that’s a good idea or a potentially dangerous one, I found it interesting to think about.
I understand that
I just don’t think the intent of the rule is to keep teams from paying their players twice. I think the intent of the rule is to keep teams from dumping a bad contract or otherwise abusing what is supposed to be relief from a tragedy(career ending injury or death).
The idea that Cleveland medically retiring LeBron and then bringing him back at league minimum 3 days later being the biggest fear of abuse is silly.
It’s much more likely that Portland would not want to wait 2 years for a player with a bad contract to try and make his way back and abuse the provision by trying to get cap relief when it was clear from the beginning that Miles intended to play again.
If there were no 10 day rule, do you think K9 would’ve pushed for a medical retirement sometime in the last couple of years, so he could have a chance to play for another team? Could’ve found one of those medical marijuana docs and bingo everyone’s happy, except the insurance company.
That’s why I think Jscot’s idea about having the 10 games with the retiring team only makes no sense.
As for changing that requirement like what you suggested? I think the low requirement prevents teams from overusing the provision. “Only apply for the cap relief if you’re pretty sure you deserve it.”
Again, I don’t see the problem. Seems pretty simple to me.
Ball movement ... is like jogging for most people: They do it occasionally, and it makes them happy. Then they go back to not doing it. - Henry Abbott
by Kfan in Korea on Jan 14, 2009 4:15 PM PST up reply actions
Fair enough
I think that’s a perfectly reasonable position.
This whole situation reminds me a little bit of the “Tuck Rule” in the NFL. After the Snow Game/Tuck Rule Game (depending on your view), there was a lot of talk about how the League was going to change the “Tuck Rule” in the off-season.
Guess what; they didn’t change it!
Sometimes you’re the bird, and sometimes you’re the worm.
Perhaps this is just one of those cases.
Didn't address my MAIN point
That as this is an exception to the norm – sorry it affects your team! -
Its just bad luck.
Life, and league rules, will go on as usual.
"You keep on using that word
I do not think it mean what you think it means"
by lietothegirls on Jan 14, 2009 12:31 PM PST up reply actions
Step away from the current situation a sec
“If Miles’ salary goes back on Portland’s books, it is unlikely that any more players will be medically retired unless the guy can hardly walk.”
Isn’t this really the intent of the rule? Teams are supposed to face the consequences of signing players to contracts. There is a loophole for avoiding the salary cap consequences, but the intent of the rule is clearly for it to be used very, very rarely.
The more you guys work the trade machine, the happier I am GP is our GM.
You're talking
like this is a systemic problem – not an isolated incident where a player was indeed able to come back. I think it will be treated by the league as just that…..
"You keep on using that word
I do not think it mean what you think it means"
by lietothegirls on Jan 13, 2009 2:17 PM PST up reply actions
Should it apply
to people like Cuttino Mobley?
I know you can put admiration in bags, because admiration is real, and tominhawaii says that everything that is real is measurable.
Or Shareef Abdur Rahim?
No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. It's simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get tangled, you tango on
It should apply to everyone
if you unretire your salary cap relief unretires too. I don’t understand why there is a problem with the current rule. Makes total sense to me.
Ball movement ... is like jogging for most people: They do it occasionally, and it makes them happy. Then they go back to not doing it. - Henry Abbott
by Kfan in Korea on Jan 14, 2009 4:58 AM PST up reply actions
Not to me it don't
And I’m going to leave it at that.
No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. It's simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get tangled, you tango on
Agreed
If the League wants to change the specifics, that’s up to them . . . but everyone involved knew the rules (or should have) when they went through the Medical Retirement process.
There was always a risk, however small, that Miles could attempt a comeback and his salary would count against the PDX Salary Cap again.
Problems
Portland would have had HUGE liability if they played Darius. The doctors said he was at very high risk of severe injury. They couldn’t play him, and they couldn’t force him to sign a liability waiver, because he was under contract.
Other teams could tell him, “Yes, we’ll sign you, but you have to sign a waiver to protect us if you get hurt.” It would be a condition of his new contract — but not one Portland could force under his old contract.
So Portland couldn’t play him. They really had few options.
And I suppose there was always a risk, but I’m not sure Portland could have anticipated that A) other teams would be willing to play a guy with no cartilage in his knee B) the league would rule that preseason games count towards the ten (the CBA doesn’t say that) and C) other teams would apparently start planning to screw them.
If Miles actually gets a guaranteed contract and plays throughout the rest of the season, a lot of this becomes moot. Portland can’t and wouldn’t claim that the team who signed him only did it to mess with their cap situation.
Most Blazers fans will probably be pretty cool with it. Darius made some enemies in Portland, but lots of fans still liked him, and most of the opposition was stirred up by that very hack, Canzano, who is trying to manufacture Pritchard hatred. Canzano is hated a lot more in Portland than Darius ever was, I would guess.
On the other hand, if Memphis lets him go after one or two more games and no one picks him up, it’s going to be hot.
In either case, Portland will probably try to appeal to the league on their cap situation, and if Darius only plays one or two more, they might even take it to court if an appeal doesn’t succeed. It’s a lot of money.
I can’t really assess how good their chances would be in court, but probably worse than most Portland fans think and better than most other fans think.
Thanks for the discussion, guys, but I think I’ll drop out now.
I know you can put admiration in bags, because admiration is real, and tominhawaii says that everything that is real is measurable.
You say the CBA doesn't say the 10 game rule
It is mentioned in Larry Coon’s FAQ. (I’m not lawyerly enough to read the CBA and understand it.)
No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. It's simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get tangled, you tango on
He's edited that, I'd bet
since this came out.
The CBA just says ten NBA games, period.
I know you can put admiration in bags, because admiration is real, and tominhawaii says that everything that is real is measurable.
He might have edited it over the summer
But it’s clearly in there.
No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. It's simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get tangled, you tango on
You make a LOT of good points
All I was saying was the the rules were in place, and if Darius plays exactly 10 games then the letter of the rule states that his contract will count against Portland’s salary cap, and they knew that when they went through the Medical Retirement process.
If this particular situation causes a rule change, I don’t really have any problem with that.
As a side note, Memphis would be crazy to not give Miles at least another 10-day contract, and got his games played a couple over 10 . . . even if their intentions were noble. There’s too much involved for them not to cover themselves, just in case.
Thanks for contributing, I think you really helped to drive this conversation to a more interesting place than it would have otherwise, and I hope you contribute here in the future.
You should read his schedule piece on Bedge
That wuz sumthin else.
No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. It's simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get tangled, you tango on
Thanks
I like it here, and drop in from time to time but don’t usually comment.
I think you are right about what Memphis will do. Either Darius has played his last game for them, or he’ll play several more.
“Intent” vs. “Letter” can get very interesting. There was no letter of the rule preventing Portland from picking up Darius off of waivers, but it was blocked because of “intent”.
That was an “intentional” move indeed on Portland’s part, to establish the precedent that “intent” matters.
I know you can put admiration in bags, because admiration is real, and tominhawaii says that everything that is real is measurable.
In smgmatt's post
its the however small that is the important point.
Its not like this is happening every day or every year, in fact
I can only remember once in recent memory somewhere….
"You keep on using that word
I do not think it mean what you think it means"
by lietothegirls on Jan 14, 2009 12:49 PM PST up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
