So Ben keeps putting up all these stathead predictions showing the Blazers with an incredibly bright future.  And yet even though I'm as much of a stathead as the next guy, I still find myself feeling like this team is doomed.

Much of that has to do with my weird belief that Oden's never going to deliver more than a fraction of what the stats show he's capable of.  Again, as a stathead, I've been trying to figure out why I'm so convinced of this notwithstanding the stats.  I mean, the numbers are very clear, and the numbers love Oden.

And then this article I read this morning just seemed to encapsulate so much of why I'm pessimistic about the big guy.  I haven't seen this Quick article linked yet, but I found it astonishing.  The lede pertains to the bad knee news that I'm pretty sure everyone around here has already heard much about - the patellar tendinitis, the missing opening day for sure, no confirmation of timeline blah blah cakes.

But I actually thought the other two things were even more jawdropping.

1) He "quit" drinking.  Not totally quit, but pretty much quit. 

2) He has turned some kind of corner in emotionally processing that Durant is better than him despite being chosen after him due to some concerted help from his mom.

Let's take these in order.

As Don Draper said, the minute you have to cut down on your drinking, you have a drinking problem.  When Roy is surprised and pleased to hear thirdhand that Oden's stopped drinking, that implies a couple of things.  (1) Roy and by extension the team was aware of and concerned with Oden's level of drinking, enough so that his "quitting" drinking is welcome news.  (2) Oden's drinking had gotten significant enough so that Oden quitting was news that spread around the clubhouse. 

When Bayless says you can tell he stopped drinking just by how much healthier and fitter he looks, that implies that he thinks the level of drinking was noticeably hampering his health and fitness.  Just astonishing to read in the mouth of the team mouthpiece without editorial comment, and I'm surprised how little of a fuss was made about this.

Perhaps not coincidentally, Oden also has made the decision to accept the fact he was the No. 1 overall pick in 2007, and in essence, to accept the fact that No. 2 pick Kevin Durant has blossomed into one of the NBA's best players. 

This is just an amazing statement.  You expect elite athletes to deal with the reality of being lapped by a guy you're competing with by getting their competitive juices flowing and resolving to do everything in their power to catch up in their performance, not take some kind of survivor's approach of trying to emotionally process that reality.

The fact that Quick describes this as a plus and as some kind of sign of Oden emotionally healing (the headline is "Greg Oden's mind appears to be mending quicker than the knee") makes me think (1) that's some incredibly low expectations we're revealing here, and (2) just how emotionally damaged and fragile is this guy?  I think we already all knew he didn't have that Jordan/Bird assassin mentality and that Durant did, but I thought when we drafted him that he could be a goofy underachiever that was still pretty great, like a poor man's Shaq.  This kind of thing makes me wonder if he'll ever be able to pull it together.

It's a classic boy-who-cried-wolf scenario.

There is nothing surprising or one-sided about the officiating so far.  Houston's had a strong defensive philosophy of contesting without fouling for years now.  They consider it a blown defensive stand when they give up free throws.  Our guys foul every time they think they're beat.  We consider it a blown defensive stand when we give up a dunk/layup, and since we're not good enough defensively to stay in prevent interior scoring without fouling, we end up fouling a lot.

Have there been some bad calls/non-calls?  Yes, but I've seen plenty of examples on both ends.

But making all this fuss now, when the officiating has been pretty fair according to pretty much any perspective other than total homers, yall lose all credibility when a horror show like the 2000 WCF or the 2002 WCF happens.  When we get royally screwed in the WCF against the Lakers in a couple of years because Bennett Salvatore lets Kobe live on the line but lets BRoy get mugged, yall are going to have zero credibility when yall rant and rave about it, since you're crying wolf this year.

is that this site is an echo chamber of uncritical cheerleaders.  Any criticism of the team, anyone pointing out that this is a good team, not a great team, and isn't ready to sit at the grownups table with the Cavs, Lakers and Celts gets shouted down.  Anyone pointing out the obvious, that Oden folds under pressure and Aldridge is as hard as wet tissue, that Trout will gun you into trouble as much as gun you out of trouble, that Blake is an ideal backup but a very unideal starter, that depth is a nice to have asset for regular season wins but not a recipe for titles, gets shouted down as apostates here.

Maybe now, when we talk about the things we need to do to be competitive for a title, like make some smart trades for vets who've faced adversity and playoff level intensity or to get tougher interior players or point out that Nate does some good things but may not be a championship level talent as a coach, you cheerleader types might try hearing us out instead of automatically dismissing us, eh?

When Nate was a player, he was a very good defender, got on the all-defense second teams a couple of times on the basis of his very quick hands.  He led the league in steals once and was often among the league leaders, very impressive considering that he generally played backup minutes for most of his career.

As a coach, Nate talks a lot about defense.  So what have his results looked like?

Defensive rating (points allowed per 100 possessions)

2000-01 Sonics - ranked 24th of 29 teams

2001-02 Sonics - 17 of 29

2002-03 Sonics - 17 of 29

2003-04 Sonics - 27 of 29

2004-05 Sonics - 27 of 29

2005-06 Blazers - 28 of 30

2006-07 Blazers - 26 of 30

2007-08 Blazers - 17 of 30

2008-09 Blazers - 28 of 30 so far

Not very good, with no teams above average, and many teams in the cellar.

So can we please stop being surprised at what a godawful mess our teams are on defense?  Twice is coincidence, three times is pattern, and nine times is dna, blueprint, determinism, whatever.

The reality is that Nate being a talented defensive player has nothing to do with being able to coach a lick of defense, any more than Isiah was able to coach brilliant ball control, unselfishness, and clutch scoring.

(stats from basketball-reference.com, natch).

I've been hearing a lot of folks, media included, saying we have to move up from 13 to get a good player.  Just for a little perspective, I thought I'd list the picks and draft positions for the top 5-10 players pretty much in order of quality from the 2001 to 2005 drafts.  It's 5-10 since I don't feel like ranking limited role players, and in some years (like 2002), there are only a few good players.

Disclaimer - I spent around 5 minutes putting this list together, so I might've missed a few.  Some folks might quibble with my rankings, like I recognize most would disagree with the order on the 2002 draft -- *shrug* what can I say, I hate bigs who can't or won't play defense, a common affliction to Yao, Boozer, and Amare.

So I think the point is pretty clear, right?  Sure, there's usually slightly better chance of success drafting in the top 5, especially in years like 2003 where there are a bunch of no-brainers at the top of the draft board.  But even then, there's no guarantees that high lottery picks outperform good picks from throughout the draft board.  This year, I think we're looking at a 2005 type of year, where there are maybe one or two sure things, then a bunch of maybes.

Who are those good picks throughout the board this year?  I have no idea, that's why they pay KP the big bucks, not me.  Although I'll venture my guess that Brandon Rush, Roy Hibbert, Courtney Lee, and CDR will all make teams regret passing on them.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?id=3417029

Just one short year ago, a lot of us (myself included) thought that the Bulls were headed for a 50 win season.  Instead, their team rampantly quit on Coach Skiles's weird, control freak ways, and the young promising players got nowhere despite obviously outplaying the more seasoned players starting ahead of them.

So they hire another control freak coach who refuses to play young players, and thought Popeye Jones at 42 or whatever was better than a young Branden Haywood?!  The guy so unbearable to his players that he's never lasted three years at any team, despite obviously being one of the smartest, driven, and prepared coaches?

Who's the genius there?  John Paxson or Jerry Reinsdorf?

in summer 2008.  Matters because we should be looking at players for these teams very carefully, there will be some nice pieces available in the market.  We've got the assets that rebuilding teams love -- expiring contracts, young players on their rookie contracts or inexpensive second contracts, and picks we're willing to deal (since we don't need to get any younger).

1) Mavericks are d-u-n dun.  Players of interest - Josh Howard, Brandon Bass.

2) Suns are probably getting blown up.  Players of interest - surprisingly, not many.  Not a big fan of Barbosa, hate Diaw despite that game 4.  Actually, maybe because of that game 4, he could and should play like that every game.

3) Denver has to make changes.  Players of interest - Linas Kleiza.  Love that guy's aggression, overall game, and he's obviously got a serious work ethic.

4) Chicago, maybe, if Paxson starts panicking.  Players of interest - Hinrich, Nocioni.  I think these guys are better than their current rep, they're taking way too much of the blame for how messed up that team was this year.  Love Noah too, and I think Tyrus could become something special, but it'd be pretty stupid of them to trade these guys away.

5) Pacers.  Still can't get over what's happened to this team since the Malice.  Players of interest -- obviously Granger.  I think Jermaine would be an interesting trade to get some vet presence, and some insurance for if Oden takes a while to get back to 100%, although he's got a pretty bad contract.

6) Charlotte - not getting blown up but I think Dudley could be had for peanuts.  If he keeps working on his physique, he could become a good two way player.  Tough as all hell, too, and we could use a toughness infusion.

Did I miss any?

I thought it'd be worthwhile since there's so much chatter about us picking up a veteran point guard via trade to list out who the likely candidates would be.

1st, let's assume that this has to be someone reasonably likely to be available.  In other words, no Chris Paul or Deron Williams.

2nd, must be a vet, and have gotten over their awkward turnover prone phase, since mistake-prone young point guards don't mix with Sarge.

3rd, this guard can't be too old -- it's going to take Oden at least a season or two to get adjusted to the league, and we don't want a declining or breaking down PG just as we're hitting on all our other cylinders.  I figure 27 is the max age.  Some pgs have long careers but most show their age at around 31 or 32.

So the list of all the guys I perceive as being substantial upgrades:

Jose Calderon
Devin Harris
Mo Williams
Kirk Hinrich

I have to say of that list, I am by far the biggest fan of Harris.  I want to surround Roy with good defenders at the 1 and the 3, and Harris is I think the best defender at the 1 in the league.

Am I missing anyone?  I don't like TJ Ford's injury history, I'm not crazy about Raymond Felton's game, and I definitely don't consider Udrih an upgrade over Steve Blake.

Dunno if folks were watching, but there was just a nice segment with Cheryl Miller interviewing Roy (about the success, about his desire to start a foundation to help kids with learning disabilities, about his playing style, and so forth).  Probably will be on nba.com within an hour or so, check it out when it's up.

Just out of curiosity.  I'm not much of a fan, but Morrison strikes me as someone who we could get for JJ and/or Joel.  I believe the Bobcats are still around 8 million under the cap, so we could even get a nice fat trade exception or cap relief out of this kind of deal.

It seems like Jordan's given up on the kid, with the offseason moves they've made (traded for Jrich, retained GW, signed Carroll to a long term, and drafted Dudley).  His trade value seems likely to go down the longer Jordan waits, with the playing time crunch for backup minutes.

So does he have any game?  Was his first season just rookie adjustment struggles especially with the burden of expectations of him adding a lot of punch to a tepid offense, or was it proof that the haters were right that he's just too unathletic to be in the NBA? EDIT TO ADD: I don't think I stressed this enough, but the only reason why I consider this seriously at all is that even if Ammo continues to disappoint, we can simply not pick up his option and enjoy our cap savings.

I saw this thread on RealGM that sort of knocked me for a loop.  Just a simple thread that listed our depth chart before the lottery 2006 and what our depth chart is looking like now.

Then:

Blake/Jack/Telfair
Dixon/Webster
Miles/Khryapa/Outlaw
Randolph/Skinner
Przybilla/Theo/Ha

Now:

Blake/Sergio/Jack/Green/(Koponen)
Roy/Webster/(Fernandez)
Jones/Outlaw/(Miles)
LMA/Frye/McRoberts/(Freeland)
Oden/Przybilla/LaFrentz

Now that is a roster makeover, my God.  Is it possible to praise Pritchard enough?

Interestingly, the only holdovers that are not on the trading block (Joel, Jack, Webster), are Trout and the reacquired Steve Blake.  Looks like KP really hated the Nash/Patterson years, there are hardly any remnants left.  It's like a Communist purge, like we're erasing all recorded memories of the terrible 2003-2006 era.

A fantastic vid of Miss Gossip of Fanhouse interviewing Oden here.  They address nicknames, the dance controversy, Chris Paul has a brief cameo, and Miss Gossip tries to get him to reveal secrets of the NBA big man.

By the way, I highly recommend all of Miss Gossip's work.  She is also responsible for revealing the eerie parallels between Grant Hill and Knut, channeled P Diddy's reactions to Draft Day suits, and has undertaken a close watch on NBA hairstyles.   link.