News release

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/04/business/media/04nbc.html

and an opinion discussion

http://roomfordebate.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/12/08/should-consumers-fear-the-comcast-deal/

Blazers fans have much angst right now with all the injuires.  What better way to vent, than to unload some negativity in Comcast's direction.  I think the Blazers fan community may have some strong opinions about Comcast's word that a merger would be pro-consumer.  Honestly we should be flogging the FCC regarding this issue an not a NYtimes blog, but awareness of the forthcoming wrongs by this merger needs to be made.  Otherwise I would make this a fanhsot and not a fanpost.

The key quote:

Comcast has called the merger, which the Obama administration will have to approve, “pro-competitive, pro-consumer and strongly in the public interest,” and has said it is committed to free over-the-air TV and local programming.

How does this quote make you Blazerfans feel?  Let's make our voices heard otherwise the whole nation will be hurt by this merger.  Democracy begins by making the public's voice heard.  Contact to the FCC can be found from the following link

http://www.fcc.gov/contacts.html

In repsonse to the the poll regarding trades, I've taken the initiative to create the first daily trade post.  This post may be created daily for guys who like ot discuss trade ideas.  My hope is that this will be like the Daily Junk drawer.

Now I can see exceptions to using the daily trade posts to make new posts whaen an actual trade does happen.  Otherwise to help keep Blazersedge organized,  let's put alll trade speculation into one single daily post.  Those who love to dream like GMs can enjoy themselves, while those who wish to just revel in the success of the current team do not have to hear about the desires of others to give away their favorite players for a couple of second round picks an Jason Kidd.  That by the way is my contribution to the trade ideas, now the rest of you go to it.

Let's say we got the number 2 pick in the draft and Rose went with the first pick.  By the best player available (BPA) mantra, KP would select Beasley from Kansas. But would he really do that?  Apparently there are character concerns with Beasley (from reading Chad Ford's who goes #1 article).

I put forth to all of you who are bored and want new and meaniful (well, at least hopeful) Blazers talk and speculation.  Put out you're two cents worth. What would you do? Do you select Beasley #2 and then trade Frye or Aldridge.  Do you try and trade for a point guard upgrade? Can you package beasley to with another player and try to pry Rose fromt he team who selects first? Do you trade down and repeat the Nash mistake(need/Martlell over BPA/Paul).  It's a conudrum that has interesting possiblities and no sure-cut solution.

Does anybody know what happenned to the links to other blogs (basketball or other sports related).  Blazersdege always became my Blazers homebase because I could easily navigate to the other Blazers related sites easily with out all that silly typing. One click and poof I'm at truehoop without all the crap and automatic video than ESPN likes to bombard you with (which wouldn't be bad if it wasn't 90% ads).

So other readers voice your comments here so that maybe we can bring out/back features in this blog things that matter to us.  I believe the content will always be in good hands with Dave as our moderator.   Speak now, lest we be force into a predefined box. 

Over at Truehoop it was stated

"Charles F. Gardner of the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel: "The disconnect between Bucks owner Herb Kohl and general manager Larry Harris came to the surface at the trade deadline last month, when Kohl effectively vetoed a deal that would have sent Bobby Simmons, Dan Gadzuric and Charlie Bell to the New York Knicks for Zach Randolph and guard Fred Jones."

Man that really makes you appreciate what Pritchard got for Z-bo ande F. Jones: Frye, J. Jones and Francis's salary.

It seems everybody and their mother thinks the Blazer's  should be trading Zach and Jack.  I just don't see it.

A good team has a rotation, not just five starters.  That means about eight rotation players and then five or six guys to fill the hole if one of those eight goes down with an injury (and are content with that role). This is what makes successful teams.

Our eight would come from the group
jack, sergio, roy, martell, zach, aldridge, the #1 pick (I'm assuming Oden), outlaw and udoka (the latter two, if they are resigned).  Sure there is room to upgrade this group but it must be in a balanced way to make a successful team.

For the bigs, a 3-man rotation is ideal as the 4-5  spots offer 96 minutes total giving each player 32 minutes each.  That is good number to stick to over the long haul of the season.  I think it would be awesome to have a 3-man rotation with zach, aldridge, and oden...there would be no letting up of pressure in the second unit.  It also give versality in scoring (zach & aldridge) or defense(aldridge & oden) or both (zach & oden) for what ever the sitution in the game dictates.  Or backup bigs are then Joel and in a pinch Outlaw.

If we trade away Zach for a premier SF (sorry there is now way we trade an established 20&10 guy for a rookie, that's just stupid), then we need another big to complete the rotation unless you think Aldridge, Oden  and Pryz (or Raef) are a sufficient rotation.  Hey I like Joel, but I can't see him and Oden on the floor together. Therefore another PF will also be needed. Joel and Raef make great reserve in case of injury players.

For the backcourt players, you want five guys that are flexible so that different strengths are available with differing 3-man combos. I'd want Jack, Sergio, Roy, Outlaw and Udoka. I'd have  to leave Martell as the odd man out for injury relief  or sparse minutes in blowouts (with Blazers winning of course). Jones and Dickau would make up the remainder of the backup crew.

Notice it is safer to have 3 PGs, in case that one goes down you still have left to rotate. Jack is a very servicable PG after his 2nd season. He was about average among starting points.  Sure he came from a draft class with two premier points, but name that last good point in another draft class who is established.  PGs take longer than any other position to blossom (4 years on average). Jack is well ahead of the curve and only getting better. We'd be foolish to let him go even with Sergio.  I see the possibility of a great 3 guard rotation with Roy, Jack and Sergio.  

That leaves two rotation men for SF. It'd be better is one of those could play some minutes at SG.  Take you pick Outlaw for O or Udoka for D. Martell would have to spell these guys in case of injury as the backup until he establishes himself on the court.

This is what I beleive KP is going to try and build.  However due to the teams' young age it is not clear who are longterm keepers and who will be happy on the reserve crew (players either on the downside or up-and-coming side of their careers).  These are the roles that need to be filled.  The blazers biggest weakness is the 3.  If you trade away a mainstay like Jack or Zach to upgrade the 3, the drop at one or four should be bigger than the gain at the 3.

Sorry for the longwindedness, (that's why I love reading Dave'S Blog), but please for the love of god no more posts about trading Zach for a rookie 3 as an upgrade or Jack just so we can gamble on Conley.