Someone recently floated the claim that the U.S. could create a second squad for the Olympics, not including the usual suspects from 2008, and still win gold. Let's assume the 2012 Olympics roster will look like this:

1: Paul, Westbrook, Williams
2: Bryant, Wade
3: James, Durant, Anthony
4: Griffin, Love
5: Chandler, Davis

If you had to build ANOTHER team capable of winning a gold medal but can't choose from any of the guys above, who ya got? Remember you can only choose 12 players.

Assume a player's refusal to play isn't an issue. But for the sake of reason, let's disclude anyone 34 years of age or older. Otherwise we'll be throwing guys like Tim Duncan & Ray Allen into the mix who probably wouldn't participate anyway. Disclude injured players who likely wouldn't be ready such as Aldridge as well. Remember that some American players have elected to play for another country such as Joakim Noah and the French national team.

My second team looks like this. What does yours look like?

1: Rondo, Irving, Wall
2: J. Johnson, Harden
3: Igoudala, Granger, Gay
4: J. Smith, Stoudemire
5: Bynum, Hibbert

Tough list to create. Tougher than I thought! I really wanted to inclue Jason Terry over John Wall but Terry is 34 and I'm sticking to my rules. Same with Kidd. I'd rather have him over Wall as well. I also had Bosh down initially but added Hibbert at the last moment. I've really enjoyed watching him blossom this postseason. Terrific defender.

Every now and then I'll wander over to another team's SB Nation blog to read their game preview. Last week I was over on Peachtree Hoops reading about the Atlanta Hawks. They mentioned Willie Green as a solid pickup for them in the offseason. As a fan of the NBA in general, I was surprised to hear of a player being referred to as a "solid free agent pickup" when I knew next to nothing about him. Off to ESPN.com I went to do a little research! What I found prompted me to spend some time compiling the list you see below. Here's how it works.

I reviewed the rosters of every single team in the NBA. If I didn't recognize a name or knew little about him, I documented his team, salary and years of experience. The results were very interesting. There are dozens and dozens of players (not just rookies & sophmores) who I'm unfamiliar with. Discuss the guys below. Should I know more about these players or do you agree that they've been bad enough over the last few years to warrant completely overlooking them?

Note: To make the list as relevant (and short) as possible I purposely left out rookies & sophmores. I forgive myself for not knowing who some of those guys are. I only included players with two years of experience or more. Also note that blank cells for certain teams (like the Celtics) simply means they don't have anyone on their roster who I don't know with two or more seasons of NBA experience.

Enjoy!

Closure.

For the fans and for himself, I'm wondering what Rip City would think of a Lou Gehrig-style moment for Brandon. No, he isn't going to die. Yes, I know it's probably too soon. But I think it would be remarkable for Roy and the city. Gehrig was adored by many and even in his mid 30s, still had more to give back to baseball. Think about how insane and special the Rose Garden would be if Brandon came out before game one and delivered a speech similar to Gehrig's.

"Fans, for the past two weeks you have been reading about the bad break I got. Yet today I consider myself the luckiest man on the face of this earth. I have been in ballparks [arenas] for seventeen years [five years] and have never received anything but kindness and encouragement from you fans.”

I know you can't manufacture moments like that. Impromptu, emotional speeches need to come from the heart. But man I wish Brandon could muster the courage to do something along these lines. It would absolutely floor his teammates and inspire a level of competitiveness in them for the season that you just can't match. And the fans. Wow. Can you even imagine 20,000 people fighting back tears as he stood on the pinwheel and offered up his own Lou Gehrig speech? I can't.

I’m curious. If the owners get what they want in a new CBA (increased BRI), can the fans expect a break on ticket prices going forward? With a better business model, you intend to help out the middle class worker who wants to see a handful of games/year and buy his kid an Aldridge jersey, right? Thanks in advance! As one of the richest men in the world, we know you'll do the right thing.

- The Fans

Kenneth Faried seemed like an appealing prospect at first glance. I was certainly sold on him prior to the #21 pick. (I still think he's a great value, but read on.) When the Blazers took Smith instead, I was as surprised as the rest of you. But after a slow day at work and some time to reflect, I honestly believe Smith to be the better pick. And I might understand why the Blazers decided to pass on him afterall. Let me explain.
 
Faried is pretty small (6'8", 225lbs) for an NBA power forward. The diehards all knew this. People also tend to forget that he played in the Ohio Valley Conference. And even though Morehead were a tournament team with Faried there, he matched up regularly with some pretty mediocre guys from both a talent and size standpoint by NBA standards. DeJuan Blair, someone who many compare Faried's game to, is 270lbs. To offer some additional perspective, Wesley Matthews, a SG/SF, is 220lbs. How will Faried's rebounding numbers translate to the NBA game? Many are claiming that if Blair had success, Faried will too. Trouble is, Blair is a LOT heavier AND played for Pittsburgh, a college team in the ultra-competitive Big East. The saying in college basketball is, "If you can win the Big East, you can win the NCAA Tournament." So Blair had a lot more experience against better competition right out of the gate. He knew how to use his weight to hold off taller power forwards. Will Ken be able to do the same at a shooting-guard-esque 225lbs?
 
Furthermore, Faried has almost no offensive game. His back to the basket skills are totally raw. His shooting touch (hovered around 60% from the FT line) is virtually non-existent. I'm sure someone will train him to improve this missing aspect of his game, but do YOU want to be the team that develops that? Are the Blazers a team who want a player with a gaping hole in his game at this point? Is that consistent with their drafting philosphy? Are the team focused on "winning now", or developing a guy who at #21, needs to have SOME kind of impact offensively on the roster?

I think they went with the bigger perceived need; a backup PG who can run the offense without the ADD (turnovers) Mills has. Love ya Mills, but you're kind of unreliable. Nolan Smith played four years under one of the best college basketball coaches on planet Earth for one of the most respected college basketball programs on Earth. He is a combo guard, but helped lead Duke to an NCAA championship last year as a PG for most of that season. At nearly 6'4", if he does end up playing PG for the Blazers, he's quite large for that position. Smith is an all-around player and a proven winner. The only weakness to his game really is a lack of explosiveness. He won't kill you like a Westbrook can. That said, I think so many were surprised at this pick because Smith lacks sex appeal from a basketball perspective. He isn't a sexy player. You aren't going to see him dunk on anyone's head or crush you from downtown. He's just a solid player overall who will lead the Blazer's second unit with a ceiling higher than Mills'.
 
I'll be very curious to see how McMillan handles Patty, Armon & Nolan at training camp. For the first time in a while, the question will genuinely be, who will Nate go with on a rotation-basis as his backup PG? Will Mills still be with the club? Should Johnson buy some more suits so he looks good at the end of the bench?

Late Edit: Do you think Nate McMillan and Mike Krzyzewski (as fellow Olympic coaches) spoke recently and perhaps Nate's input was considerable as part of the final war room decision? Hmmm.

Let's assume our Blazers make the playoffs. As April approaches and this conversation becomes more and more valid, I figured I'd just ask it now with only eight games left in the season. We know LaMarcus is Nate's #1 guy. Who should the Blazers turn to after that? Think back to 2008 when the team dynamic was clearly Roy #1 and LaMarcus #2. Well, who is #2 now? The answer (if there is one) isn't as obvious as we might think. Vote and discuss! Good conversation.

I thought it would be interesting to go back and review the results from my Mythbusters poll, post-trade deadline. How do these questions look now as we near the playoffs? Good basketball discussion!

Original poll posted on 8/3/2010. Total votes tallied: 92

http://www.blazersedge.com/2010/7/30/1597639/mythbusters-portland-trail-blazers

27% Agreed, 49% Disagreed, 24% Undecided

The Blazers just signed him to a new 2 year contract extension. Boring halfcourt offense and all that? Unoriginal? If he isn't a championship coach, at the very least Nate is in the upper echelon of his peers and Rich Cho knows it. Hell, even Adrian Wojnarowski chimed in late last year, mentioning Pat Riley should consider McMillan for Miami's inevitable head coaching vacancy this summer. I think he's a terrific leader myself. How many coaches pride themselves on defense? Who could have adapted the roster better than he has given injuries? Nate will likely assistant coach team USA in the 2012 Summer Olympics, making it his third trip. Cream of the crop.

2. Based on last season's performance, Aldridge isn't worth his new contract.

25% Agreed, 68% Disagreed, 7% Undecided

Well, if he wasn't, he sure as hell is this season right? Great investment. Easy question now.

3. Paul Allen "jumped the shark" as an owner for firing KP the way he did.

22% Agreed, 55% Disagreed, 23% Undecided

Don't let success go to your head. That's the moral of the story right? How many times have we heard "team effort" from Rich Cho and his staff these days? Another easy question to answer with enough time to reflect. Allen did the right thing. Though the process was poor, the team haven't missed a beat and that's all we care about right? Gerald Wallace will help the Blazers finally push through the first round. If not this season, next for sure.

4. Roy can play with any PG in the league, even if it were an All Star.

77% Agreed, 12% Disagreed, 11% Undecided

I have to think Devin Harris was Rich Cho's first choice this offseason. Roy's recent knee troubles are slowly moving him down the "option" list for Portland. I mean really, is Brandon even a #2 right now? 3, 4, 5? He just needs more time. Let him adapt his game right? Here's a fantastic NEW question for Blazer fans. Will Roy or Wallace (provided there is no substantial lockout period) be more important to the team next season? Run with that one.

5. Oden's body won't allow him to dominate the way we hoped he could.

23% Agreed, 42% Disagreed, 35% Undecided

The verdict is still out. All of us hope this isn't true, myself included. But 82 games in 4 seasons? I tend to think that even "good" big men are rare in the NBA these days. Oden could certainly come back and be good, but I just can't allow myself to think he will ever be great. I could accept good. Come back, give us even 15-8 and block a couple of shots. Clog the middle. Create some havoc with your size. Those are my projections for Greg if he does return.

6A. The Blazers should keep looking for a solution at starting PG.

79% Agreed, 18% Disagreed, 3% Undecided

I think if we ran this poll question again, the number of disagreeds would go up quite a bit. Andre Miller is very capable right now. Adding Wallace to the mix, given the assets traded for him, certainly increases Miller's value. Can he keep it up? Andre turns 35 this month. The oldest guards in the NBA are 37 right now. Verdict is still out, but Miller's reputation of taking care of his body helped him stay here for now. I like him, but I still thought if the Blazers could have snagged Devin Harris, they should have.

6B. Bayless is not a starting PG in this league. Not now. Not ever.

44% Agreed, 41% Disagreed, 15% Undecided

Jerryd averaged 4.5 points and 2.5 assists playing limited minutes behind Chris Paul in New Orleans. His numbers have risen since a further trade to the Raptors. He's up to 7.6 and 3.5 as I write this, but Bayless is still a backup to Jose Calderon, a 3rd tier starting PG in this league. My take on him is the same as it has been. Jerryd can "give you a few things" here and there, but he's not a starter. Unless his team sustains injuries to their backcourt, I really think he will ride the 18-25 MPG wave for most of his career.

7. Fans are too high on Batum and the Blazers front office may be too.

31% Agreed, 53% Disagreed, 16% Undecided

Gerald Wallace will end up starting at the 3 for this team sooner or later. Prediction time! As the season closes, Nate McMillan will realize his "big" lineup needs to be Miller, Matthews (..or Roy), Wallace, Aldridge, Camby. If you play the Lakers, those guys start. That said, I think Rich Cho's position that Batum is basically untouchable is right on target. Apples and oranges, but I see Nic playing a similar role in the future as Terry does for the Mavericks. Meaning, even though the two play completely different positions, they are both incredibly important to their team in terms of MPG and the contributions they make with that time. Batum doesn't need to start in the same way Terry doesn't need to either.

8. The Blazers need a superstar to win a title. Roy is not a superstar. He's a #2.

16% Agreed, 78% Disagreed, 6% Undecided

What do you guys think? It's crystal clear to me that the team belongs to LaMarcus Aldridge now. It's not on loan to him from Brandon either. I actually think it would be toxic for the Blazers if Roy tried to assert himself as the #1 option this season at all. And if I'm being honest, I don't think you could ever call him a superstar again either. A star yes. But on the same level as Dwyane Wade, Joe Johnson, etc? Not so much. Not unless he can manage 36-38 MPG again and do it without missing too many games/year. Very curious to hear what all of yout think.

9. We've seen the last of Przybilla on the floor [active] in a Blazers jersey.

41% Agreed, 33% Disagreed, 26% Undecided

Well, we were all wrong and right now. He did come back, but Joel was an asset which was just too valuable in the end not to trade. Makes me sad. Przybilla's best years in red & black were exactly what Portland loves from it's players; hard work and guts. Like some fans I agree that, if his knees hold up, he may end up back in Portland as he closes out his career at some point. That would be really terrific.

10. The new CBA will hurt the Blazers chances at landing top tier talent.

23% Agreed, 16% Disagreed, 61% Undecided

Verdict is still out. I have no idea either and don't think we'll know much until this summer.

Long before I ever joined Blazersedge, I wrote for a film lover's forum called Xixax.com. Wonderful website by the way, if you're hardcore about movies. One of the more common debates we had over there had to do with movie critics and specifically, why so many Americans refuse to pay attention to them. Those who refuse claim reviews are purely subjective. We commonly heard things like, "I never read reviews before I go see a movie. How would a critic know what I would like?" That last statement is partially true. Obviously movies are a subjective experience, but they also have form to them. They are structured in a very specific way, to provoke a reaction from the audience.

The basic structure of filmmaking has changed little since the 70s. New technology changes the way you shoot things, but generally speaking, the "three act" structure has remained intact for decades. If you think a movie is bad, do you usually attribute it to the actors? To the director? To the special effects? Of course not. It's never "just one thing" right? Trouble is, most Americans don't even realize why they hated a specific movie. Try something sometime. When someone tells you they disliked a movie, ask them why. Don't let the person off the hook easy either. Make them explain in detail why they thought it was bad. You will find that, if you ask these probing questions, a discussion of form arises. Form is something you can study over time. If you're a movie critic, who watches dozens of movies a WEEK, it just gets easier and easier to point out flaws in the structure itself.

Sports writers aren't that different. I constantly hear people berate Bill Simmons on this website for his opinions. I hear "who cares what he thinks" a lot. But sports writers study form too. Basketball has structure to it, just like movies do. You can analyze a team by looking at it's front office all the way down to the players themselves. And, like a good movie critic, someone like Simmons has seen THOUSANDS of games. Far more than most of us will likely see in an entire lifetime. It's easy to blow him off and say everything he says is purely subjective, but that's just not true. In most cases he is writing based on an educated analysis of structure. It just so happens that he tries to be entertaining about it at the same time. When I hear fans say they "don't care about him", I think most of those folks don't relate to his humor. It's as simple as that. His facts and even asssertions are mostly dead on.

Why did I bother writing this?

It bothers me that many fans disregard writers without offering a reasonable explanation why. We can all sit around a table and pick apart Simmons for his assertions, but they are educated assertions. He knows more about basketball than 98% of the folks who visit this website. You can hate on him for his sharp sense of humor. I know many fans don't relate to it. But calling him out as an "idiot" (as I've heard before) is pretty silly. Simmons is anything but an idiot. I would ask that, if you disagree with something, explain why. Don't just say "who cares" and move on. Blowing someone off is lazy. All it says is that his assertions don't give you a warm, fuzzy feeling inside. Furthermore, he writes to attract readers. If he was so bad at it, why would he be one of the biggest, most popular sports writers in the entire country? The only thing he lacks is tact. Oregonians pride themselves on being tactful people. So you think he's rude. That's fine. But his assertions remain valid whether you feel good about them or not.

What do you guys think? This was just my opinion of course. But I'm passionate about it.

"Minds are like parachutes. They only function when they are open."
- James Dewar

This is a bit from an ESPN.com Insider only article today. I thought the data and their observations were spot on and I'm a huge Batum fan. What do the rest of you think? Does the data and Nic's recent struggles convince you that Matthews really is a better option as this team's starting SF? Do you need more time to know for sure?

Continue reading this post »

I'm leaving Wade, Bryant and Roy out of this. Of course anyone would prefer them. That said, look at the shooting guards below. I know certain players work better in different systems. I know some of these guys are a little older, etc. But let's just assume you threw Matthews into this mix of starting shooting guards across the league. Which of these players on an apple-apple basis would you prefer over Matthews? I really wouldn't prefer many of them. I'll post my own list later. Fire away!

Full list: http://espn.go.com/nba/depth

(Arenas, Iguodala and Ellis as SGs seems dubious to me but ok. Let's not consider them true SGs for this.)

Alright, 92 of you responded. THANK YOU. Results and more after the jump. Sorry about the font sizes if you're picky about that stuff. I am so stoked about this upcoming Blazers season. See you all at Fan Fest! Enjoy!

Continue reading this post »

I'm watching the latest episode of Mythbusters last night when it hits me. As fans, don't we make a lot of statements about our beloved Blazers which are subject to debate or could be flat out wrong? I know I do! Some of the statements below are subjective and thus have no right or wrong answer really. I figured I would post this and take the pulse of Blazer nation. We won't do the whole "busted" or "confirmed" thing like they do. I'm just curious to see how all of you feel about the following statements. 
 
Agree
Disagree
Undecided (..and explain a little)
 
Choose one of those and if enough people respond, I will tally the results and see what we come up with. I do some statistical stuff in Excel where I work. I thought it would be really interesting to see a visual representation of fan opinions. I guess in a way this is like ten fanposts (well, more like 10.5) with a poll attached to each. Feel free to explain your answers if you'd like but I'm really just looking for agreement, disagreement or an undecided on each # below. Bear in mind these are not my statements. I don't necessarily agree or disagree with any of them. I just thought they were a good collection of stuff I've heard fans say before.

Continue reading this post »