There's the question on the front of Blazersedge posed to everyone who visits: "How Are You Feeling About the Trail Blazers?" Normally, I would consider this just a subjective number thrown out by a spur-of-the-moment gut feeling. But when it’s the offseason, during a lockout no less, I'm putting way more thought into things that I wouldn't otherwise (and perhaps shouldn't).

So now I've devised a system. Here are the considerations I take to establish how I feel about the Portland Trail Blazers. For each category, I’ll assign a certain number of points between 1-10: a low number meaning I feel terrible about it, a medium number meaning I feel pretty indifferent, and a high number meaning I feel excellent. To illustrate, I’ll even explain my August 3th vote of 47 pts.

Last Night – 20 points

What has happened most recently is the biggest driving factor, and I’m sure that is true for most people. If Brandon’s phenomenal “Game 4” happened last night, it would do a lot to overshadow, say, Greg Oden being injured. If this was the day you found out GO was going to miss all of the 10-11 season, then that would’ve overshadowed, say, Brandon’s Willis Reed game in last year’s playoffs against PHX. As it stands today, nothing happened last night. Really, the only things that have happened since the draft was GO getting the qualifying offer and the lockout started, neither of which were very surprising. I give it a 10. Not good. Not bad. Its as indifferent as I can get.

Last Month – 10

This addresses where it appears the Blazers are trending. During the season, this is largely predicated on the overall W-L for the last month. Today, this pretty much comes down to how you feel about what happened on draft day. Frankly, losing Rudy and Andre, and picking up Pot Belly and The Guy From Duke, feels like a wash to me - I don’t think we’ll be 5 games better or worse because of it. I give it a 5.

Last Year – 10

This references the battle-tested level of success over the course of a full NBA cycle. For the Blazers, the last (few) year(s) have been an emotional rollercoaster. You all know the storylines with the injuries, W-L record, playoff results, etc. Mostly because it feels like it could’ve been much worse, my feeling at the end was to give it a 6.

Upcoming Week – 10

This is in anticipation of the next game, draft, pre-season, etc. Since it is the off-season, I’m not expecting much. I know that summer-league is usually somewhere around here, though, so I’ll give it a 3.

Upcoming Year – 10

Anticipated level of success for the upcoming full NBA cycle. If it wasn’t for the lockout, I’d give it a 5, based on the first round elimination type success I’m thinking we might have to look forward to. With the lock out, the prospect of missing the whole year primes me to score it a zero. I’ll score it in between for 2 reasons: 1) There’s a good chance we won’t miss the entire season, and 2) I’m a season ticket holder and I’m looking forward to the team not charging me full price for pre-season games. I’ll settle on a 3.

Long-Term Prospects – 10

This addresses the odds for success, and at what level, beyond the current year. As of July 5th, 2011, I’m envisioning several more 41-50 win seasons followed by first round playoff losses. Obviously, it could be much worse, but 4 years ago I might’ve given this a 10. Today, I’ll give it a 4.

Front Office – 10

In this category, I’ll include my satisfaction with front office employees, management, and possible implications of the team’s financial status. This is a whole pot of love & hate. Love: acquiring Wes, Crash, Andre and Camby – we ended up needing all those guys more than anticipated. Hate: the last decade’s worth of draft results - other than 2006, is there a single draft you wouldn’t want to re-do? Love: Paul Allen’s Scrooge McDuck money pile. Hate: Paul Allen’s propensity to fire GMs on a whim. At the end of the day, I think there’s more good than bad, so I’ll give it a 6.

Young Players – 10

In this bucket, I assess the talent of our players that are still new to the league, and their potential ceiling for success. The best of the bunch would be Batum and Wesley Matthews, who promise to be good, but not All-Star level players. Then there’s everybody not named “Luke Babbitt”, who either hasn't managed to stand out or not played. Then there’s Luke Babbitt, who makes me angry just typing his name. This group gets a 3.

Coaching Staff – 10

This goes beyond just “how good are the coaches”, and touches on the level of trust they’ve earned from me, the semi-obsessed Blazer fan. The success achieved in the face of adversity over the last couple years goes a long way for me. As for results in the playoffs over the last three years, maybe we could’ve done better, but these Blazer teams weren’t going to the Finals no matter who the coach was. Ultimately, Nate and his crew get a 7.

Overall,

Last Night - 10

Last Month - 5

Last Year - 6

Upcoming Week - 3

Upcoming Year -3

Long-term Prospects - 4

Front Office - 6

Young Players - 3

Coaching Staff – 7

Total - 47

For many years, I bemoaned the absence of a "Blazer Bar" in Portland. Maybe some would say that every bar in Portland is a Blazer bar, yet somehow every venture I made into the streets of PDX to find the Holy Grail of Blazermania Gathering Spots came up just a little short. Every establishment was lacking somehow. You see, in my mind, to take the crown of "Supreme Blazer Bar", you need the following:

Continue reading this post »

I have seen dozens of posts and comments about the need to replace our broadcasting crew, and I say it’s a healthy debate. As you can tell from the title of this post, I am staunchly FOR the Mikes and particularly Mike Rice. To supplement my position, I present to you the following points in support of our broadcasting gladiator. I’m not positive this is enough to warrant an additional fanpost, but it seemed a little bulky to post as a comment - if I’m wrong, please have mercy on my soul. To reiterate that I don’t think he’s lost his edge in the slightest, these are all qualities I’ve seen him demonstrate in the current season.

Why I love Mike Rice:

- The fact that he struggles to pronounce the names of players on even his own team. My favorite is Nicolai Batum.

- Of course, it goes without saying that he doesn’t pronounce the names of players on other teams. More than that, though, he doesn’t seem to care, as though it is their fault for not pronouncing their own names the way that he says it.

- His use of courtside seats to heckle opposing players. He gave a great example of this on Sunday vs the Lakers, when Fisher was complaining about a foul call. The replay crew captured his reenactment of the foul for Fish’s benefit – I really can’t do it justice, but I enjoyed it IMMEASURABLY. Note that heckling the opposing players works out a lot better than referees (*cough* Steve Javie *cough*).

- His disdain for referees with high numbers. I have no idea where this comes from, but any referee with a number > 50 or so is clearly subject to even less regard that usual.

- His psychoanalyzing of certain players. When the Blazers are facing a headcase on another team, he’ll make flat-out declarations of what they’re going to do with the ball. For example, if JR Smith has the rock somewhere beyond the 3 pt line, being closely guarded by a defender, Rice will declare “He’ll shoot it” like Smith is about to jam a fork in an electrical outlet, or something else of that degree of stupidity. I have no idea how frequently he’s right on these predictions, but it seems at first blush like he’s not too terribly off.

- His shilling of “Rice’s Deals” is high comedy, like he’s never seen the objects before in his life before the graphic comes up on the air. Barrett asks him, “What do you have for us today, Mike?” and Rice’s internal monologue goes “oh shoot, I forgot to look in the bag”, before saying “Uh… it’s a jersey, er, a towel… oh! It’s a onesie! … *pause* … for babies!”

- His biases for and against players from certain colleges. For example, for whatever reason, he always has something to say about Syracuse players.

- His willingness to break down the most mundane facets of the game, such as positioning for a tip-off, way beyond the extent to which even an avid scholar of the game would stop caring. I jest, of course – this is one of his legitimate strengths, rather than one of his unintentional comedy strengths.

- The veiled references to strip clubs. How many times have you heard him refer to the wonderful “restaurants” that such-and-such player/referee is thinking about going to after the game?

- I love that he messes up routine bits, even though he does them every broadcast. I’m sure, like me, you’ve seen him get to the pivotal moment in a “Freeze Play” highlight and he yells “Now, PAUSE IT!”

- Ever since they canned the traveling sideline reporter for road games last year, Rice has to fill air time while Barrett scrambles from the scorer’s table to the player’s bench for the post-game interview. The success rate with which he pulls this off is less than 100%; sometimes listening to him talk to himself is as awkward - and as hilarious - as it sounds.

- Do you ever get the impression he would break Ronald McDonald’s arm for a free Big Mac coupon?

- One more legitimate source of praise: he does his homework. Listen close, and he’ll drop a statistics bomb every game. Like, “These guys are 4th in the NBA in free throws allowed. They’ll foul ya.”

Now I know some of the detractors out there will say “Thanks for making my argument for me”, but they’re just worked up over highfalutin nonsense like “professionalism” and “objectivity”. I, on the other hand, am for sheer unfiltered entertainment. I’m for grade AAA unintentional comedy. I’m for Mike Rice.

Mike Rice supporters UNITE to defend him of these groundless accusations of anything less than Nobel-worthy journalism! And, by all means, share your own favorite Mike-isms!

Is this the most injury prone group of athletes ever assembled? I'm guessing Rudy suffered the ol' "wind knocked out of him"  tonight (aka, broadcaster speak for getting hit in the junk), so his life-flight trip to the hospital (my made-up reason for why he couldn't go back in) is understandable to the women of Portland. OMSW hurt something (who knows what). Sean Marks (effectively our 6th string center after Camby, Oden, Prz, Pendy, and Oberto) fulfilled his Blazer center destiny of writhing in pain on the Rose Garden hardwood.

What strikes me more than anything, however, was the apparent apathy of fans in the Rose Garden tonight in response to these apparent injuries. It just doesn't seem like anybody is capable of being surprised by them anymore. So, my question is not rhetorical... this team is so injury prone that their injuries no longer cause the fans concern. Does this quality of the Blazers earn them a place in the fragility hall of fame?

Aaaannnddd a poll for good measure:

The year was 1988: long before YouTube and HDTV changed the way we watched the game, and long before the risk of concussions became a reason for changing the way we interpreted the game. Steve Largent was leveled by an illegal forearm-to-the-face hit by Bronco safety Mike Harden. You name the damage, it was there: broken facemask, dislodged teeth, unconsciousness... I was 7 and thought he was dead. Largent was always undersized and a bit of an underdog: went to college at Tulsa, drafted in the 4th round (and then before ever playing a game was traded to the Seahawks for an 8th round pick).  He always played bigger that he was, but at that moment, in the twilight of his career, lying motionless on the football field, it looked like it came to an early end.

Of course, as his fans all remember, that wasn’t the end. The season was blessed with another game against Denver, where Harden caught an interception and a gusting wind of karma. After missing several weeks, Largent was back on the field and made his own amends, uprooting Harden from the surface of the field. The hit was hard and clean and even forced a fumble, which Largent recovered.

I bring it up because I was thinking about the difference between being a fan of a team, and being somebody that loves the fan experience. Usually the two go hand in hand. I have no idea if the Seahawks went on to win or lose that game. Maybe a fan of the team, focused on wins and losses and the chance for an elusive title would. However, I’ll always remember my favorite player coming back from such staggering adversity to exact the kind of justice we all only dreamed about. Beyond the realm of sports, that one play encapsulated so much of what we love about human resilience. To me, it whispered about the ability to rise above one’s station and achieve things that we didn’t think we could. In his case, Largent always had guts. But in ANY circumstances where somebody beats the odds like that, and we as fans get to see it play out on the field of battle… well… it doesn’t get much better than that.

Counter to anyone’s imaginations , Greg is now the underdog. His adversity hasn’t come in the form of a small frame or obscurity, certainly. And to some extent, his adversity has become less about simply injuries. It’s become more about the continually growing dogpile of humiliation for falling short of enormous expectations. The latest news takes me back to seven years old, seeing the home-team hero down for the count, wondering if he was dead.

My conclusion is this: if Greg has the guts to come back, and wants to finish the fight of the NBA, then I want him back as a Blazer next year. Even as I type this, I wonder if I’m crazy for saying so, given how snake-bite we all are by this point. Maybe he gets hurt again, and maybe he weighs as a liability on our cap space and as a vacant roster spot, and maybe we ultimately lose a few games because of it. However, all of that is a dim flicker when compared against the prospect of seeing him overcome this adversity. As has been well chronicled by now, very few think he can. The core essence of my fanhood yearns to see him lay a clean hit on the ghosts and make something of himself as a player. And I want to be there to watch him do it, because, see…. It doesn’t get much better than that.

Go get ‘em, #52. I’m not giving up on you just yet.

There are several likely stories as to why Tom Penn was fired. Dave did a pretty good job of breaking down the scenarios the other day, except for one. After extensive conversation on the matter, we still don’t have an explanation that fits. Not to sound too much like a (Star Trek) Vulcan, but the process of elimination has to take us back to the one scenario Dave didn’t want to discuss – that Penn was fired for personal reasons. I hope you don’t mind if I now happily wander into the realm of gross speculation, but as an anonymous internet blabber, this is my right… nah, my duty.

Tom Penn slept with one of Paul Allen’s 19 year old girlfriends.

As a bazzilionaire bachelor, Paul Allen without any shadow of a doubt has a stable of beautiful girlfriends. He is also very sick, and can’t spend "quality time" with them like he used to. Now, we are looking at a situation where the nubile young ladies were feeling lonely – they also happen to run in the same circle as a particular Blazer front office hot shot. Now let’s say there was an office St. Patrick’s Day party. Bing badda boom – three Smithwick's and a shot of Bailey’s later, everybody is doing things they regret.

We also know as a matter of fact that Paul Allen, like any bazillionaire, has certain eccentricities and paranoias. Instead of building giant wooden airplanes and storing his pee in mason jars, he installs lojacks on all his employees and girlfriends. He knew that Tom Penn and Sheila (yeah, that’s her name) were getting busy before THEY did. That won’t fly, of course, and Penn got canned for his transgressions.

You might ask, what does this have to do with Kevin Pritchard? It’s all too simple. Penn and Pritchard go way back, and now Allen is weighing whether he should hold Pritchard accountable for his boy’s actions. Maybe KP knew all along what happened and didn’t do anything to stop it.

Infidelity was with 100% certainty Penn’s terminable offense. Since the episode is embarrassing for all involved, that’s why nobody wants to discuss details. KP’s offense was inaction, and explains why he is on the frying pan, but not yet into the fire. You might think that this doesn’t explain why they had that "press conference" the other day –there didn’t seem to be an identifiable purpose other than to make KP look uncomfortable. Therefore, I will conclude that that WAS the purpose: to make him suffer, one of the punishments for inaction set out by Mr. Allen in his jealous rage. In related news, Sheila had her allowance cut back to $2,000 a week.

My theory is as impeccable as the Pelican Brief, and I’m just as nervous that a Vulcan might show up at my office and get me canned for blowing this whole thing wide open. Donations for my Caribbean exile are now being accepted by my paypal account.

I felt physically ill following last night's throttling. It also left me worrying that the opposing team's fans' gloating is going to get the better of me at some point, and that I will do something that will get me uninvited back to the Rose Garden. In the midst of frustration, anger, and other negative emotions running high, I thought I would share something happier with the BE community. Allow me to present to you: The Blazer Dome!

After moving in to our home about a year ago, we were left with a small room that became the de facto junk room:

Obviously, the room was pretty small, ugly and not Blazer related in any way. Big problem. That all has changed, though - let me show you how...

That is an authentic Shareef Abdur Rahim shoe, the greatest conversation piece of all time.

Below is a close up of the old school logo I painted on the wall. I did this by printing out a blown up image of it from the web, and then creating a stencil from it out of poster board. It took 10 times longer than I thought it would, so my original plan for writing "Blazer Dome" next to it in the old school Blazer font probably wont happen unless I find some extra motivation :-) Such motivation, if it ever arrives, may get me to also create miniature banners of the retired jerseys and such that hang in the Rose Garden. I thought that would be DOPE, but we'll see!

It looks like a "man cave", I know, but the moniker didn't sound right because its above ground, and I thought "Blazer Dome" has a nice ring to it. Some of the man caves I see online can get really elaborate, but I would say this was mostly done on the cheap. As much as I would love to have the $1,000 leather Blazer recliner that was posted a couple days ago, a $50 red cover for an inherited futon left me very satisfied. The beer fridge is a craigslist find, and a couple of the wall coverings are just stadium handouts with cheap frames. Its still a work in progress ("what's with the lamp?"), but still the coolest thing I've ever done.

I am in no way even remotely a remodeling guru, so if I can do it, so can you! My one word of advice would be to steer any young children away while paint pans are out....

Usually when it comes to Blazer players, they have me at hello. Even when they don’t, I rarely find myself getting angry at or frustrated with guys on this team. There’s so much to love – a lot of heart, great charisma, talent, etc. Nobody has sent me on a roller coaster of opinion, that is, other than LaMarcus Aldridge (not even Travis Outlaw – I'll explain why).

This goes back to the draft when we picked him over Adam Morrison. My opinion of the choice was clearly clouded by my Gonzaga fanaticism, but I thought it was really disappointing at the time.  Now, I know I’m no basketball savant, but I’m not the only one that thought Morrison would be a good pro, and I had never even heard the name LaMarcus Aldridge over the din of “Draft the ‘Stache” and my own suckling from the national media’s Gonzaga hype teat.

However, I am a reasonable, wise and prudent man with an open mind. Therefore, I gave him precisely one game as an opportunity to redeem himself. My first chance to see him play in person was where I was to make my decision on him for all eternity. I remember this game very vividly for several reasons:

1) It was the day after Thanksgiving and brought my dad along (who lives out of town)
2) I got a chance to sit up very close with seats from my employer. I’m pretty sure Z-Bo could hear me cussing his name while he put a giant stamp on this game.
3) The SSOL Phoenix Suns absolutely wiped the floor with the Blazers. I have a hard time describing how thoroughly they dismantled the home team – it was like watching teams from different levels of competition (like High School vs College, NBA vs. D-League) and I’m not exaggerating. They could have won by 50 if they left their horses in for more than 5 minutes at a time.
4) It was, in retrospect, the worst game LaMarcus has ever had as a pro. I will start my description of his performance with this jewel from the box score:

Min: 2:34, Points: 0, Attempts: 0, Rebounds: 0, Assists: 0, Fouls: 3, and a +/- that would start with a “-“ and end in scientific notation.

I’m not sure if he touched the ball on offense, but on defense he did his best bad Greg Oden impression and fouled his man at EVERY opportunity. He then left the game with a bloody nose early in the second quarter and did not return.

His fate on my poo-poo list was sealed forever.

That was, until the following pre-season, when he revealed (and I opened my eyes to) the strengths of his game as we know it. That impossibly high release point. That preternatural accuracy on his turnaround. That crazy mix of height and quickness. He then went on to show remarkable consistency throughout the course of the season, doing his part in that magical December streak. The 180 was in full effect, and I punched my ticket on the L-Train. I bought a #12 jersey not only for myself but my 5 year old son. When watching games at home, we blow on his wooden train whistle when the L-Train makes a play. Let me reiterate: I am a big fan.

But I also have a gripe that is nagging more and more with each game, and is trying to give my bandwagon a flat tire. That is, his tendency to vanish in the 4th quarter, especially on offense. Jason Quick scathed him about it a couple weeks ago, but didn’t really give any enlightenment as to why.

To explain why this is a problem, let’s look at somebody on the other end of the spectrum: Travis Outlaw. The most common objection with Travis’ game seems to be his shot selection, but is also one of the things I love most about him. Even if it leads him to take bad shots sometimes, he betrays absolutely no fear of shouldering that burden. LaMarcus has the exact opposite problem and is, in my opinion, more detrimental – he is shooting 0% on shots he doesn’t take. Since he shoots close to 50% on shots he does attempt, this is a problem.

His teammates have done a lot to cover this weakness over the last two years. After all, when you have two dynamic and confident scoring options like Roy and Outlaw, you have to consider yourself blessed. Take those guys away, though, and LaMarcus’ apparent tendency desperation to pass is glaring. He simply does not want the ball in his hands.

I can think of a few possible reasons why:

- Teams are guarding him differently in crunch time (maybe… sometimes…that would be coaching problem as much as anything, though)
- He is fatigued (unlikely)
- He is unsure of his role (Probably the most unlikely cause. Really, his might be the most secure and well-defined role of any on the team.)
- He gets nervous and lacks confidence under pressure (plausible)
- There is a lack of trust between him, his coach and his teammates. (plausible)

If it is a matter of trust, I can say I’ve personally been there before, and it sucks. To explain, I was on a club soccer team where the coach was so irrational and hostile that even the most minor errors were cause enough for him to virulently scream at players during the game until he had a chance to bench them. Nobody wanted to endure his criticisms, and thus nobody wanted the ball. It is an extreme example, but if you’re worried about getting railed for messing up with the game when the pressure it on, it would explain the hesitation to take ANY chances. I would say this seems extremely unlikely, given how secure is his playing time, his status as the starting PF, as well as his contract extension…. except LMA never seems to get his number called.

Listening to the broadcast in the game against New Orleans, you’d think LaMarcus wasn’t even on the team for the last play. Mike and Mike guessed that the Blazers were drawing up a play for Rudy or Martell (though Nate eventually went with Jerryd), but I found myself thinking “why not LMA?” The dude is 6’11”, can get a nearly unblockable turnaround J off whenever he wants, is not a FT shooting liability, and has earned the franchise’s favor in the form of a massive multi-year contract. Why doesn’t LMA get the nod?

If the matter is trust or a lack of confidence, to me the solution is the same either way: draw up a play and tell him to shoot it no matter what. That shows trust, of course. It is also how you build confidence. People don’t get over fear of speaking in public by reciting lines in the mirror. They get over their fear with repetition. A missed buzzer beater against New Orleans in January means next to nothing if it results in LMA getting the reps needed to play with confidence in a tight playoff game two years down the line.

I know this isn’t a totally new issue, so I would love to get your thoughts.

T$

Last summer, the Blazers opted to keep Nate through 2011, but his contract is up after that. Realistically, given the turnaround over the last several years, they probably wanted to lock him up for longer. However, for those very same reasons, Nate was (reasonably) looking to use the team’s anticipated 2009-2010 success to create leverage with the Blazers and the open market.

Some things have changed a lot in the past six months. The Blazers are not on track for a 60 win season. Whatever fringe title contention chances they had are dead and buried. Nate is not in the early running for coach of the year. He doesn’t have 2 functioning ACLs. One thing has remained the same, though: he will likely still want to negotiate a new contract.

That leaves us with one problem: incentive. We are all too familiar with how this becomes a factor with players. A player will enter into his contract year and do what he can to “get paid”. The player’s incentive is to work particularly hard for one year, get as good of stats and personal accolades as he can, and parlay that into a big contract. Often times fans (and ownership) loath the aftermath of a player getting a big contract only to find he puts a stamp on the following season.

There is a similar, but much more subtle risk of mismatched priorities between a coach and the team. A team like the Blazers wants to maximize their chance of winning championships (and the corresponding revenue associated with that) in the next 5 years. This includes hiring whichever coach they feel is best suited to accomplishing that task.

On the other hand, a coach in Nate’s shoes is incentivized to WIN NOW. The benefits of successful seasons down the road are of secondary concern, since by that time he will have either already secured a lucrative extension or will have been replaced. And this is for good reason, the most likely path he has for gaining the faith of the team for the future (and thereby getting a nice extension) is by winning now.

There are costs to this, of course. To again contrast, in trying to earn a big contract a player could hurt his team by trying to increase his stats at the cost of team success. For a coach, a coach’s success = team’s success, right? Not necessarily…. the matter is that of short term, vs long-term success.

The analogy I would like to introduce is that of incentive compensation packages for business executives we read about in the news. Currently, the most notorious of these are for bankers. In this analogy, we can substitute stockholders for the team, and the banking executives as the coach. The stockholders want long-term success, and the most dominant metric for evaluating success is that of current earnings. Executive compensation is also commonly linked to current earnings. The problem that has been much discussed is that executives have been found to pursue short term gains to the benefit of their bonuses, even if it comes with grave long-term consequences. This could include, oh… I don’t know ….. let me see….  idiotic mortgage lending practices? *

How might a coach pursue short term success at the expense of the future? One obvious route is by benching promising young players in need of development in favor of aging veterans. I don’t want to name names, so let’s say we have decent point guard “X” on a short term contract. After his contract is up he will probably be on another team and certainly on the downside of his career. Let’s say we also have promising young point guard “Y” who might not be the better player right now, but could become so in a couple years if he gets the necessary playing time.

A coach could also play his best players an inordinate number of minutes. Let’s say we have star shooting guard “Z” who has a playing style that often finds him penetrating and taking hard fouls. If he were to play 42 minutes a game, the team would have a better shot at winning games in the near term, but in the course would endure extensive wear and tear on his body.

Perhaps you can think of other ways a coach’s incentives can be mismatched with a team’s interests? Feel free to comment. I don’t want to suggest that Nate’ coaching decisions are specifically or consciously influenced by his contract status. However, the incentive is there.

With this in mind, how might coaching contracts be modified to better align interests? Going back to Wall Street, Goldman Sachs recently announced that 2009 bonuses for some of its executives would come in the form of a special form of stock, rather than cash. This type of stock can’t be sold for five years, so if 2009 executive decisions cause the company’s value to tank in the next five years, their compensation will be impacted accordingly.** I’m not suggesting this exact arrangement is the best solution, but there is flexibility to get a bit creative with coaching contracts. ***

As it stands right now, from what I know most every coaching contract is in a one-size-fits all type mold. Correct me if I’m wrong, but aren’t the coaching contracts of title contenders, playoff contenders, and rebuilding projects all pretty much constructed the same way, in the X years for X $$$ mold, with performance incentives as an afterthought? For 2009-2010, Lakers ownership interest is almost exclusively in wining the title. Developing talent is not a priority. The Kings, on the other hand, are interested almost exclusively in developing talent and getting better for the future. The Cavs are interested almost exclusively in ensuring Lebron comes back. Why pay the coaches in the same manner? Right now, the Blazers are in a different spot… they aren’t solely developing talent this year, but they aren’t contending either. The coach should be given incentive to have this in mind to maximize our success in the future.

PS – If you feel inclined to vent some “Fire Nate” steam, fine, but why don’t you at least suggest somebody else while you’re at it? Personally, I can’t think of anybody else I’m all that excited about…. Byron Scott? No thanks. Rudy Tomjanovich? Yeah right….  I’m a bit skeptical of the coaching talent pool out there, but if there's somebody  you would enthusiastically hand the reins to for our championship window, I’m listening.

* (What’s worse is that not only has the government demonstrated that it will come to the bank’s rescue at great cost to taxpayers, so will a team buy out the burdensome contract of an underachieving coach, freeing him to earn another contract someplace else. This is, however, aside the point.)

** (Since the expense is also recognized over the course of the five years, instead of all in 2009, this type of arrangement is particularly of interest to a company needing to improve its current year bottom line…. Even if an NBA coach’s income was largely based on a “bonus”, from what I understand about the Blazers financial improvement this year, this would be of much greater interest to other teams.)

*** Creativity is not as much of an option for player contracts. For one, they are governed by a union agreement (collective bargaining agreement). Two, even without consideration of the CBA, players do (and should) consider long-term contracts as an insurance policy for injuries (among other factors outside of their control) and will specifically seek to keep their compensation largely independent of performance.

Inspired by a conversation at work, I present to you a reinterpretation of Coleridge's Kubla Khan (without the use of opiates, I might add). Did I mention that I am also foaming at the mouth for the season to start?

Continue reading this post »

Bill Simmon's wrote an article recently about his experience watching the US vs. Mexico match at Azteca stadium. It evolved a bit into his take on the state of US soccer as a whole, making the common observation that the best US athletes don't usually pursue soccer. This prompted a barroom discussion between myself and a friend last night about which active American athletes would have made sensational soccer players had they gone in that direction.

To those that feel inclined to debate whether soccer sucks or not, now would be a good time for you to return to the main page.

Some of my considerations:

Visible athletic ability - This is obvious, and the source of the debate.

Kinetic skills - The best example I can think of would be decathletes. Their speed, endurance and strength would never limit their ceiling for soccer, but they don't have much chance to demonstrate their ability to pass a ball accurately (or the ability to see the open man in the first place). Similarly, while I think NFL cornerbacks are some of the greatest athletes alive, they don't have to handle a ball much, and I feel that detracts from an argument that they'd make great soccer players.

..... On another level, some players are very skilled, but their exhibited skill sets are so narrow, it seems difficult to envision them doing more than just that one thing. NFL kickers, or baseball pitchers (think Mariano Rivera and his wicked cutter) come to mind. In soccer, while there is a place for, for example, set play specialists, you need to be able to do multiple things well. While a baseball player can make an incredible career out of doing one thing really well, they pretty much have to be both an All-Star hitter and Gold Glove fielder to make me consider them here.

Size - While Walter Jones (sad news, by the way) and Cecil Fielder are evidently very talented, I can't seriously picture them running up and down the field for 90 minutes. For this reason, lineman are pretty much universally excluded from consideration in my mind, as are the fatties in baseball. Some of this is conditioning, I know, so perhaps a linebacker or someone like that could play soccer - I'm not sure.

Height - NBA players look the most like footballers to me - they do lots of sprinting, are incredibly skilled, should be able to see plays develop, etc. However, some guys just seem too tall. Peter Crouch appears to sufficiently define this ceiling, so to be approaching 6'6" or taller, you'd have to really be something special.

By position, my dream team looks like:

Striker - Allen Iverson (If his skills were in any way transferable, he would have been all world spectacular - maybe one of the best strikers of all time)
Striker - Michael Vick (minus the psycho/headcase aspect)
Center Mid -  Jason Kidd
Center Mid - Chris Paul (him and J- Kidd are essentially playing the PG position of a soccer team here)
Outside Mid - Ken Griffey, Jr. (left handed, which would help playing on that side)
Outside Mid - Dwyane Wade (would win every corner kick or cross in the history of the universe)
Center back - Champ Bailey (was an all-American quality football player in multiple positions in college - offense, defense, and special teams)
Center back - Kobe Bryant (though I hate to admit it)
Outside back - Adrian Peterson (After soccer conditioning, who knows what he'd look like, but as of now would make Wayne Rooney look like a creampuff.)
Outside back - Evan Longoria
Goalie - Lebron James (could probably be a professional in ANY sport)

Sub - Nnamdi Asomugha
Sub - Jimmy Rollins (spark plug off the bench)
Sub - Brandon Roy (I picture him as being a great sub for the midfield. Everything he does is so well controlled - he is the sort of guy that could control the pace of play down the stretch.)

(Seriously, try to picture LeBron James at keeper for the US national team. I'm drooling at the thought of it. I think he could supplant Tim Howard after 6 months of training. Hell, while he's at it, he could just go ahead and be the best keeper in the history of the sport in one year.)

To bring it back to the NBA and the Blazers, how do you think NBA athletes could transfer their skills to soccer? Brandon Roy in particular? Are there any athletes you think I totally overrate or forgot about completely?

T$

Tues, 10/27 - Houston. Opening night. Four things that I expect to not affect this game: 1) Yao Ming 2) T-Mac 3) Ron Artest 4) the ghosts of playoffs past. I hate to put too much pressure on one early season game, but we REALLY should win this. I would HATE to undergo another let down like last year's opener in LA (or the game 1 playoff loss). We will also have the pleasure of welcoming Trevor Ariza back to the Rose Garden.

Wed, 11/25 - New Jersey
Fri, 11/27 – Memphis
I personally love going to home games around Thanksgiving. My family comes to town, and it always gives us something to do that doesn't involve getting up at 4 am to stand in line for a 10% discount on socks. However, the choice of opponents is leaving a little something to be desired. Apparently, the league couldn't schedule Sacramento on Thanksgiving Day to round out the NBA pu pu platter in Portland that week

Tues, 12/1 - Miami. D-Wade is the man. Last year, we smacked them by 40, though. Let the smacking resume.

Tues, 12/15 - Sacramento. Welcome home, Sergio. Our Spanish Armada t-shirts miss you.

Fri, 12/25 - Denver. For the third time in as many years, the Blazers will be hosting a game on Christmas Day. This time, it will be our division rivals, the tatooed toughies, the Birdman brethren, the Nuggets. After Portland looking positively pathetic when playing in Denver last year, it will be wise to hold serve at home if we expect to compete for the division title.

Fri, 1/8 - LAL
Sun, 1/10 - Cle
Portland hosts the two hottest tickets in the NBA on the same weekend. Given the time of year, I think this will be a serious litmus test as to where our team stands in the league. Losing both would be a serious downer. Winning both may be an omen for postseason success.

Thus, 2/4 - San Antonio. Another litmus test.

Sat. 2/6 - Lakers. The second game against the hated lake show. It is also on a Saturday night, which will allow some good all-day buildup. Bring your gin and haterade.

Tue, 2/9 - OKC. The zombie sonics make their first appearance in PDX. By this point in the season, Durant will have been selected for his first all-star game, and we should have an idea whether their team will be any good - I think they will be.

Fri, 2/19 - Boston. It is a Friday night game, and Celtics fans have a tendency to show up in force. We must be at least half as drunk as those Irish zealots to have a chance.

Sun, 3/14 - Toronto. According to the latest consumer reporting guide, Bosh appliances are made with inferior quality. Let us provide an in-home demonstration.

Thur, 3/25 -Dallas
Fri, 4/9 - Dallas
Last season, ze German was unstoppable, consistently taking advantage of our crappy defensive rotations and killing us with easy jumpers over the likes of Steve Blake, or whoever the mis-match du jour happened to bring. These two games will be in the meat of the playoff crunch, where we will very likely be jockeying for position with this very team. Ws will be critical here.

Wed, 4/14 - Golden State. This is the last game of the season. As we will have locked up a 68-win season and home court advantage throughout the playoffs, this will be a good opportunity to watch Bayless turn the ball over in person.

Of note, it appears as though there will be no afternoon games on Sundays. Maybe this is only of interest to a few, but it was a nice to take my young son to a game and not have him out super late. But then again, what might be of interest to ordinary families always seems of secondary concern for the league.

Happy Trail(blazer)s!!

T$

I've been reading since the end of the Portland series (be forewarned, I am an unapologetic Blazermaniac). I think the Dream Shake has been doing a pretty thorough job of covering the 2nd round match up. Props, to grungedave for the list of 10 reasons to hate LA - though I'm sad you limited it to only 10 (On this topic, I will point out that on the punchable scale, Scola is on at least the same level with Vujacic. Hate to be the one to tell you. I think it is their identical hair or something. Forgive me, I digress.) I also enjoyed the position by position breakdown. I have been thinking about these two teams, though, and there seems like some facet of this series that hasn't been covered much (maybe I missed it?).

LA has been bearing the burden of their unceremonious finals exit around all season. The general consensus seems to be that they lacked "toughness" against the Celtics, and just generally got outhustled and outworked. Now it just seems like LA is confused on what it means to be "tough". They have some bangers, for sure, and have demonstrated that they can be physical. Several posts have remarked on their physicality last night. But the Lakers still seem to be lacking the mental aspects of toughness. Focus, resiliance, Kaizen if you will.

From the get go, Houston certainly had the mental advantage over Portland in the last series. Player matchups aside, Portland's lack of experience relative to Houston seemed to be the overpoweringly cringe inducing, and ultimately decisive, factor. Despite not having a lot of recent success in winning in the postseason, Houston at least had lots of experience at least in playing there. Portland's postseason experience was effectively a big zero.

For all the talk of Houston's mental advantage over Portland, does it not seem to be an advantage over LA? Not playoff experience, of course, but something else. I don't think anybody could convince me that Houston is the more talented team. (You couldn't convince me of that against Portland, for that matter, but I'm a homer.)

Maybe we'll call the advantage toughness, for lack of a better term. In their series against Utah, LA repreatedly demonstrated the inability to finish games strongly. Their minds wandered. They take plays off. Their bench, while talented, seems confused about their roles. Bynum may still be getting his feet back under him. After crusing to the 1st seed, I don't know that they didn't sorta shelve a higher gear of urgency for playoff basketball - its been a while since they played against Boston or Cleveland.

Meanwhile, Houston plays with a strong TEAM mentality. Their role players are bristling with confidence. And after several disappointing postseaons, the urgency is simply becoming more acute, right?. Houston seems to really want it. On top of that, LA doesn't really seem like they feel threatened. There was lots of talk on BlazersEdge about how LA fans were less afraid of Houston than Portland.

I still have reservations that Houston could pull off the series W, but at this point, it doesn't seem out of the question. What are your thoughts on the psychological comparison?

Let me preface this by saying that I am a big Trout fan. Not the fish, but the man. I mean, I like the fish – good sport, good taste …. okay, stay on topic: I like Blazer Trout. With my Outlaw love out in the open, it saddens me to say that his future with the team may hang in the balance of tonight’s game. A poor performance could be fatal for his future.

I don’t want to get into specific details about what he does or doesn’t do, which we’ve covered ad nauseum on this site. It seems pretty evident though that the small forward position is exceptionally unresolved at this point. For opening day, 2009, we have:

- Nicolas Batum: 19. Young and defensive minded. Good nose for the game. You never see him try something he can’t do. PER = 12.92 Shoots 37% from 3 land.

- Travis Outlaw: 24. Offensive minded. Perhaps the most testicular fortitude on the team. PER = 15.15 Shoots 38% from downtown.

- Martell Webster: 22. Missed this season, so a bit harder to compare. Helps old ladies cross the street. Presumptive starter. PER = 11.97. Shoots 39% from 3 (97-08).

We know these guys pretty well by this point. They all shoot from downtown fairly well, are at least above average athletes, and are good character guys – all requisite for a Blazer SF. Also, none of them seem to have a knack for passing, show a great aptitude for finishing inside, or are particularly prolific rebounders. They each contribute. No question that each can play in the NBA.

This entire season has been a bit of a trial run for the team – to see what we have to work with. At their ages and experiences levels, we can’t definitively conclude on what we have. I think we might be getting an idea of what we don’t have, though.

Nic and Martell don’t currently appear to have what it takes to start for a championship contender. Maybe down the road, but not now. Nic is an undeveloped rookie. Martell is still only 22, and missed the whole season (still zero playoff experience, too).

Which brings me to Travis. After six seasons in the NBA, we can call him a veteran. Have we seen the bulk of what he brings to the table? You have to love his positive attitude. And his ability to gain altitude - he can get a shot off pretty much whenever he wants. But these playoffs seem to be his chance to demonstrate whether he can be that keystone SF for a contender, and he thus far has laid an egg.

I’m not saying he’s going to be gone this summer. I just mean that the ceiling for him with the team will get capped at coming off the bench. And if a promising trade proposition comes along, the hurdle for his inclusion gets drastically lowered.

I know not everyone will agree, but I for one really hope he stays with the team long term. I especially want to see him do well tonight. In any case, I hope this is a useful diversion from the officiating debates.

Thank you for getting confused with Raef LaFrentz, the person. I found this extremely humorous.

Thank you for exploding the number of possible trade scenarios getting tossed around involving the Blazers leading up to the trade deadline. According to many reliable experts, you were in greater demand by NBA GMs than Amare Stoudamire. This is an incredible accomplishment, given that you don’t play basketball.

In fact, I will personally bet 1 USD that you were the single most common factor in ESPN trade machine proposals for the 2008-2009 season. We are all proud of your fame and the internet blogging glory you brought us. Many hours of sleep were lost, many reputations were shredded by the spreading of false trade rumors, and the server capacity of BlazersEdge was stressed to a dangerous extent by nervous onlookers desperate for updates – none of this would have been possible without you.

Thank you for being a consolation to many of us who were hoping Darius Miles’ contract would be staying off the Blazers cap space. We were incredibly disappointed and embarrassed with how things unfolded with Darius’ contract. Realizing we still had you was a comfort to all.

Most of all, RLEC, we want to thank you for expiring. You were a horrible, bloated, cap-crushing contract for a player who didn’t suit up the entire year. We are glad that you are leaving like you promised you would.

(Best wishes to Raef, the person, and good luck in continuing his career.)

Continue reading this post »

In my personal view of life, two of the most beloved things I’ve found in all the universe include beer and the Blazers. In a hierarchy of priorities, they are somewhere below family and… well that’s about it, and not below family by all that much. In fact, if offered front row seats for a playoff game in exchange for my firstborn child, I would consider it long and hard (my lovely bride is boring holes in the back of my head as I write this). As comes natural to all people, keeping such passions isolated to one aspect of life seems a shame. Thus, we combine them in fun and creative ways!

The obvious and most common method for combining these two pursuits involves drinking beer while watching Blazer games. But what if there was another way? As much as I love drinking beer while watching the Blazers, it doesn’t hurt to consider ways to expand one’s horizons. Possibilities went through my head as I pondered this quandary...
     -   Blazer dunk tank. One toss of a softball could send a Blazer into a rich foamy tank of chocolate stout.
     -   Blazer flavored beer. Finished beer is filtered through game worn socks and sweatbands before bottling.
     -   Beer ad campaign starring Blazer players, past and present.
Of course, these concepts are (in order) totally unrealistic, disgusting and completely beyond my control. In fact, to drink and enjoy the sweat beer would surely be an indication of mental instability. As a more rational, but still pointless, objective I will attempt to answer the eternal question: if a Blazer was a beer, what beer would he be and why?

In order of appearance (in most games)-

LaMarcus Aldridge = IRA (Imperial Red Ale), by Double Mountain
Is this beer a red? An IPA? It has the malty body and color of a red ale, but the hop profile of an IPA. In short, it is multifaceted, yet balanced – much like LaMarcus. Number 12 has the ability to drain silky smooth mid-range jumpers over even tall defenders. At the same time, he has the quickness (and hops) to handle smaller matchups laterally and dominate in the post.

Steve Blake = Fat Tire, by New Belgium
If you have a friend that has drank nothing but fizzy yellow macrobrews all their life, this might be the beer that breaks their micro cherry. It is a gateway brew. It makes it possible for all the other beers of the world to succeed on a person’s palette. Similarly, Steve might not be the one that scores the points on a given possession, but he’s usually the one who successfully brings the ball up and facilitates success for others.

Greg Oden = your buddy’s homebrew
The emphasis here is on potential. You know what comprises these on a basic physical level – 7 feet of insane athleticism and strength / hops, barley, water. However, it is hard to tell what you’ll have when the product is complete. There is no guarantee from anybody as to what you’ll get when it comes time to experience this beer to its fullest. It could be delicious. It could be a total disaster. The only thing that is certain with that milky colored vat in the garage is that it bears hope for what might be.

Nicolas Batum = 2008 Domaine Drouhin Pinot Noir
Nicolas is French. It was going to be either wine or Perrier, but not beer. Batum is the Drouhin Pinot of basketball because his game is French born, but Oregon evolved. Also, it is immediately clear that both have all the elements needed to be absolutely stellar, except a little maturity. Having Nic on your team or this 2008 vintage wine in your cellar are both causes for excitement, but both will also be much better in a couple of years.

Brandon Roy = Adam, by Hair of the Dog
Perhaps the easier Blazer to use in ascribing anthro  blazerpomorphic qualities to a beer. This is a remarkably complex beer, one that even experienced connoisseurs cannot claim to completely understand. One thing that is very evident, though, is that it is extremely good. Adam is good in a way that transcends flavor, as though it somehow communicates moral and ethical goodness via taste buds. Similarly, B-Roy’s game somehow makes me feel better about the prospects for mankind. This beer doesn’t have a million dollar ad campaign, but the residents of Portland don’t need a national media outlet (ESPN/ Draft Magazine) to know it is worth their time to wait in line to taste the goods (at the Rose Garden/ dock sale).

Joel Przybilla = Sessions, by Full Sail
This beer is easy drinking and relatively one dimensional. As its name suggests, it is a sessions style lager. Beer Advocate says this about sessions style beers: "The purpose of a session beer is to allow a beer drinker to have multiple beers, within a reasonable time period or session, without overwhelming the senses or reaching inappropriate levels of intoxication. (Yes, you can drink and enjoy beer without getting drunk.)" Joel isn’t going to knock the opposition over on his own, but he’ll be there for you as long as you need him.

Travis Outlaw = Obsidian Stout, by Deschutes
Stouts, like Trout, seem to me to be rather divisive. People love them or hate them, with very few in between. Obsidian is relatively light-bodied for a stout, but has a flavorful finish. Likewise, a great of percentage of Trout’s shots will result in cheers about how it finishes rather than how it looks when it leaves his hand.

Rudy Fernandez = Hefeweizen, by Widmer
This comparison largely stems from the readily apparent appeal of both to women. I also like to think of the Widmer Hef as being the type of beer somebody might turn to late at night, saying to themselves "I’ve had a few. I should probably take it easy from here on out. Hmm… that Hef looks light and innocent enough. I’ll have one of those, please, Barkeep." Next thing the person knows, they’re bouncing off of walls and leaning on the jukebox for stability while dancing to Ricky Martin. Rudy might look like just a flashy yellow beer served with a wedge of fruit, but he ain’t no Coors Light. In such a way, Rudy is thoroughly capable of delivering the back breaking three to complete a monster comeback and break an opponent’s resolve.

Sergio Rodriguez = Scottish Ale, Fearless Brewing Company
This is more a commentary on the brewery than the beer, really. It has proven it can do one thing particularly well (Scottish Ale for Fearless, set the table on offense for Sergio), but hasn’t shown the consistency that would earn it the status of a top tier brewery (earn status as starter, in Sergio’s case). Maybe this brewery/ player has the ability to round out its game and truly establish itself, but I sort of wonder if the learning curve hasn’t run its course. Definitely the hardest player for me to pin down in beer form.

Channing Frye = PBR
Portlanders love this beer to a degree that is disproportionate to the beer’s degree of excellence. Same goes for Channing. The watchword for both is fun. We don’t drink PBR because it is winning any (additional) awards, we drink it because it is refreshing and light on the tongue. Similarly, we like Channing as much for his blogging as for his b-ball skills. In other words, which beer/Blazer is most likely to be spotted at Ground Kontrol?

Jerryd Bayless = Old Crustacean Barley Wine, by Rogue
One taste of it leaves the drinker saying to themselves, "Good Lord, calm down a bit! I love what you’re going for, but you don’t need to kick me in the teeth." This beer is intense, big bodied, and goes straight for the jugular each and every time. It doesn’t know how not to. You wouldn’t want an entire team of Jerryds, just as you probably wouldn’t want more than one serving of Old Crustacean at a time.

Personal note: A few years ago at a Super Bowl party, I drank one of those very large ceramic bottles of Old Crustacean by myself over the course of the first half. Let me emphasize that you should exercise great caution if thinking about having more than one serving at a time.

Michael Ruffin = The gift brought by your brother-in-law back from vacation
All that you know about this beer is a vague sense of where it came from, and that it didn’t cost you much.

Shavlik Randolph = Bowl of Pretzels
Shavlik isn’t the beer you drink. He’s the guy on the sidelines cheering you on, helping the team achieve its goal through encouragement.

Martell Webster = Kris Kringle, by McMenamins
This seasonal beer is done pouring for the year. Come back next fall for a taste.

Raef LaFrentz (and his expiring contract) = Knuckle Dragger, by Walking Man (let me explain…)
My wife was at PDX a while back and saw this guy get stopped by security. He was trying to bring a growler from Walking Man Brewery back to his home in Alaska, but regulations obviously disallowed any containers of liquid that size from being carried on. He had to make a decision – either pour it out, or reschedule the flight home. He went with secret option #3: attempt to drink the entire thing in the airport bathroom (can’t let Walking Man go to waste, right?). In short, it was for the best if he didn’t think about how much he paid for the beer, and how it made him feel after trying to make use of it. After all was said and done, the growler would have been of greater utility to somebody else, but he couldn’t stand to let it go for nothing.

Thanks for reading! This was the product of hours of debate with Mrs. T$, and I must give credit where it is due: she came up with most of the good ideas. Feel free to add to and give input. This thing isn’t laminated B-Edge lore by any measure.

Let my start by stressing that the collective mindset of Blazer fans has regained a tremendous amount of positivity in recent years. There is no arguing that the improvements made over the checkered crew of the recent past has done wonders to restore the confidence and interest of the fan base. Yet, we still hear grumblings. Denizens of BE subtly and not-so-subtly grouse about the shortcomings of the organization, because despite the improvements made in on-court personnel, the team continues to demonstrate an ignorance to the preferences of its customers and a complicit acquiescence of the status quo. Thus, I submit the following for review to the wizards behind the curtain at One Center Court.

This is not intended to be an Abe Simpson letter-to-the-editor bitchfest. This is not a condemnation of the intentions of the organization. This is a proposal. A scrutiny of the way things are in an attempt to make it better.  I will not pretend to understand the sticky intricacies of the business, or somehow pretend that this isn't a business first and foremost. Therefore, I will attempt to stay out of cable network negotiations or the assessment of player/coach performance. I will, however, try to present things from a fan's perspective. And if you think I'm just disappointed that I wasn't picked to join the Blazer's "fan advisory committee", then you are absolutely spot-on.

1)  Promotional Giveaways

A recent posting by Shenanigans revealed the catharsis that too many others have had: the free t-shirts are not even remotely Blazer related. They are 3 dollar scraps of white cotton with Toyota, Subway, and Wells Fargo logos – nothing more. Plus they are XL, so they wouldn't fit on hardly anybody even if they did want to wear them. Attention team personnel: these are going straight into the car wash rag bucket. Let me break everyone in on the news, though: it isn't just the t-shirts. Every giveaway at the Rose Garden is undesirable crap. I could go on for hours here, but let me share some personal favorites (again, not simply trying to bitch, but want to point out what's wrong):

The SUV blimp that floats around the inside of the arena, dropping envelopes? I've seen people literally knock over their neighbors for these things. You know what's in them? I've heard first hand that these are dregs of the old Entertainment books: 10% off coupons, buy one get the second half off coupons, etc.

I was in my seat earlier this season when the camera crew came walking up the steps and planted themselves at the end of the aisle. You know what that means! Somebody won something! Time to get excited! As it turns out, it was the woman in the seat right next to me that was the big winner. You know what she won? An O Phone, like Greg Oden has on the billboards, and two months of service. Pretty cool, right? Then she discovered that it only works with Cricket, and she doesn't want Cricket phone service (hardly anybody does!). And even if she did, the cost of opting out of her current contract cost more than the two months of service. So, you know what she really won? She got to star in a Cricket publicity stunt at the Rose Garden. The gift was of no value to her whatsoever.

Last season, the camera crew did the same thing, walking up the stairs and looming over my row. Everyone in the row was getting pretty pumped until we discovered that they were giving each of us a copy of the new "Now That's What I Call Music" CD. Here we are in Portland, Oregon – the adopted home of indie, and they're giving us "Now That's What I Call Music."

The Alaska Airlines First Class seats are kinda cool, but do they really have to wait until the second quarter to let somebody know that they get to move down?

The on-court contests are entertaining enough, I guess, but after watching somebody shoot 12 free throws, how can they just give him $20? I know for a fact that just to put a "Happy Birthday" message on the big screen costs $50. I can only imagine what an on-court marketing ploy costs a sponsor. Could they not afford to push the prize money into the triple digits? I don't expect a half court shot for $1M every game, but $20 just feels insulting.

Coming into this season, fans had two giveaways that they would ultimately reap any enjoyment out of: the bobbleheads, and the free chalupas (largely because its fun to root for the team to get to 100). Now, we just have the chalupas. The only positive aspect of most of the other in-game giveaways is that they are free for the fans, and cheap for the sponsors. Marketing team, I'm not going to do your job for you, but I can think of lots of things that would accomplish both of these and wouldn't be so disappointing for a fan to receive (and so quickly thrown away). I have the following suggestions, and encourage commenters to add their own:

-  Instead of the crappy coupons, drop envelopes from the blimp with Blazer-themed fortunes or horoscopes. No living person wouldn't get a kick from a picture of Jarryd Bayless in a big hat dealing tarot cards. Its not possible. Sponsors can stamp their logo on the back of the cards.

-  If sponsors aren't going to offer anything more than $20 or so, I'm inclined to say that they shouldn't offer any money at all. Make it a challenge of a person's fanhood, or manhood, or something. Personally, if I were offered the chance to go down onto court, I'm accepting the offer no matter what. A few bucks adds nothing to my willingness to participate, and it won't get me to try harder in the contest. If you challenge my Blazer fanhood, however, I will dominate.

-  What happened to the giveaways for the first X,000 fans? I accept that the team is selling out pretty much every game this season and that they don't need bobbleheads in order to attract fans. However, when there's bobbleheads I am at the arena early and excited, and spending money on dinner at Schonely's place. It is just a great thing to look forward to. I find myself wondering if I'm just asking for charity, but then I remember what I found when I did a Google search for "NBA giveaways". Does everybody else realize how frequently other teams give things out? Blazers, consider doing something. The Pistons gave away umbrellas to Wednesday night's game. If any team is handing out rain related accessories, how is it not Portland? It is embarrassing!

-  If sponsors can put their logo on a t-shirt, they can also put a pinwheel on there, too. Simple as that.

2)  The Volume

Maybe I'm having a "if it's too loud, you're too old" moment... but I'm only 27. Do we really need music (I'm not talking about cheers, but music) playing during half court sets? Does every timeout really need to be filled with enough noise that in order to talk to the person next to me I have to yell in their ear? Does the jumbotron really need to take command of ALL cheering activity? For example, at the Phoenix game, the chants (for Roy) of "MVP" were repeatedly crushed by the next message pumping through the loudspeaker, but this happens at every game. Please, Blazers, just turn it down a little bit. Yes, sometimes we will discover that the arena is quiet, but a big part of the fan experience can be found in contrasts (thank you William Blake). We have wins and losses. We lead and we trail. We (the fans) are sometimes loud and sometimes quiet. Nobody can keep it loud all the time, so when we try to maintain pretense I think it detracts from the moments when the noise is real and our own.

3)  The Jr. Blazer Dancers

The concept of the Jr. Blazer Dancers confuses me. The more, *ahem, mature NBA Dance teams obviously don't contribute to the game, but people have come to accept them as a part of the fan experience since they are barely clothed and in the top 1% of hotness. The Jr. Dancers are thankfully neither of these. I don't think many regular folks would normally give the sequin-clad 10 year olds a second glance. However, the juxtaposition of the dancing 10 year olds with those gyrating sex symbols (the varsity Blazer Dancers) personally makes me feel very awkward. Let me explain:

Men are naturally inclined and then conditioned to gawk at the Blazer Dancers when they come out onto the court. It's like Pavlov's bell. The music comes on, the dance troop runs out, and I start salivating. When the JR. Blazer Dancers come out, the same music starts playing, the same dance formations take shape, basically ringing Pavlov's bell. Then I look at the court and see that it is the 10 year olds. Let's be frank, here: everybody has heard (or uttered) remarks about how they are the ultimate pedophile's dream.

Look Blazers, this is just weird. Your target demographic is not interested in watching 10 year olds shake their stuff, and they get more than enough of it when they go to their kids' talent shows. In fact, you're only making them uncomfortable. My question then (since it is not evident to me), is why are they out there? They do not contribute to the game, and do not even remotely serve the same (saliva inducing) function as the regular Blazer Dancers. If they out there for their own benefit, as a chance to perform, then maybe we need to find something else for them to perform.

 4)  Blaze the Trail Cat

Blaze was born in 2002, when antipathy towards the team was approaching its utter zenith. The Blazers needed an ambassador to the community, and since the players at the time were utter failures at this, the front office invented an anthropomorphic cat. The current roster consists of human beings who are not utter failures as ambassadors. The logical conclusion is that we no longer need Blaze.

But before we release him back into the wild, let's examine whether he provides a meaningful improvement in the fan experience. My fabricated mental history of mascots is largely influenced by when Homer Simpson (sorry if I include too many Simpson references – I can't help it) starts to goof around at a minor league baseball game and basically makes himself a spectacle to such an extent that he becomes a second attraction. Mascots for baseball make sense, because there's a LOT of down time, and breaks in the action are frequently boring. At the other end of the spectrum, soccer teams rarely have them and for the opposite reason: there's almost no down time (even if the action, itself, if considered boring). Basketball is somewhere in the middle, in terms of breaks, and lots of professional teams have a mascot – I get that.

However, I have yet to find somebody who has an adequate understanding of why the Blazers have this particular mascot. We’ve covered this before, I know. He is a totally forgettable character with no discernable connection to the city or the team's theme. Portland has no mountain lions (and they aren't really a component of our cultural identity). The name of the team is the Trailblazers, not the Cats… nobody gets it. I could look past it if Blaze were something more unique (think Sasquatch or Moose), but Cats comprise half the mascots in the sporting world. Did they just get a used costume for free or something? Every time he steps out on the court, fans around me keep asking two questions: "Is he going to miss all of his trampoline dunks again?" and "Why do we have a cat?"

On the plus side, the mascot provides photo opportunities for kids, sprays silly string on opposing fans, and gives the person inside the outfit a dream job/hobby. I vote to keep a mascot, just not this one. Unless we can bring Channing off the bench in this role, I propose a Raccoon. Portland has plenty of Raccoons (I know this first hand, as I just evicted four from my attic), they have a reputation for being mischievous, and are cute. Case closed.

5)  Jersey Retirements

The most recent retirement (Bobby Gross) brought a great deal of scrutiny and incredulity, so it is a matter that the team has evidently not figured out a way to address on its own to the fans' satisfaction. Everybody has fondness for the Blazers who've had their jerseys retired, but the fact of the matter is that at the rate we're going, we're going to run out of numbers. Literally. I feel like a Greenpeace representative talking about the health of the oceans. "At the current rate of poaching, Blazer jerseys will be extinct by 2065."

This is another topic we’ve covered on BE, but let me tie it all together. The Blazers have been around less than 40 years, have won one championship and have retired 11 jerseys. ELEVEN. (And I had to look this up on wikipedia, since I couldn't even remember who all was included) The Sonics had a similar history and retired 6. I hate to make this comparison, but the L*kers have been in existence for more than 60 years, have won 14 titles and have only retired 7. The Heat, by the way, have only retired 2 (#13 for Dan Marino and #23 for Michael Jordan… which I still can’t believe).

The solution to preserve our natural jersey resources is to establish some kind of designation of honor that doesn't include retiring their jersey. Call it a Ring of Honor. A Circle of Trust. Whatever you want. I would personally like to propose "The Trail of Legends", and for every honoree selected, a giant wagon wheel is engraved and raised up to the rafters. Afterwards, if there is OVERWHELMING support for a player's number to be retired, then we can proceed down that path.

…

So there. That is the thrust of my manifesto. Know that I love going to see the Blazers in person, and am being the utmost sincere. I would also like your feedback. If it turns out there's a great deal of support for the tenants outlined above, or proposals for additional mandates, I would like to incorporate your input and submit this to the Blazer's office and whoever is chairing that "fan advisory committee." Perhaps it can be elevated from Manifesto to Jerry Maguire Mission Statement.