SB Nation User Blog: jscot

Josh Howard Stupid Again

jscot — Wed, 17 Sep 2008 21:57:45 -0000

Josh Howard Stupid Again

Sorry, folks, this guy won't be our answer at SF.

Unrec this piece of Junk Drawer 9/10 (with poll)

jscot — Wed, 10 Sep 2008 09:26:53 -0000

Edit: I'm so wonderful, people keep my junk rec'd half an hour after it is out of date. That's right, people recommend not just my junk, but my obsolete junk. Thank you.

I have never started a junk drawer before. I asked once if I could, and nobody said yes or no, but other people started doing it. One guy told me that he thought only Dave should do it.

I just want to register the fact that I, yes, I, jscot, the future ruler of the world, asked that question before anyone else thought that anyone but Dave could start a junk drawer.

I'm really only doing this because I want the recs.

You're probably offended that I'm talking about myself so much in this, but remember, this is junk.

Poll

How much do you use the junk drawer?

The Dunk Heard Round the World

jscot — Tue, 26 Aug 2008 11:28:37 -0000

24th August 2008. Beijing. Rudy Fernandez of Spain stuns observers by lighting up a team of NBA All-Stars. With 22 points on 13 shots in only 17 minutes, Fernandez did not limit himself to scoring, adding some good defensive plays and some fine passing. Nor, despite going 5 for 9 from distance, was his scoring limited to outside shooting. In one stunning moment, Rudy slashed to the hoop, met the oncoming Dwight Howard, and posterized the All-Star center. That moment is now known as “The Dunk Heard Round the World”, and the fallout from that dunk goes on this week in NBA cities.

Scene: the offices of a very successful Western Conference team

The GM picks up the phone to find his owner on the line, raving about the gold medal game.

Owner: “Did you see that Rudy guy, his shooting and his dunk?”

GM: “Yes, sir, I did see that.”

Owner: “Could we get his rights from Portland? Can you imagine him in our backcourt with a premier PG, helping spread the court for our big men?”

GM: “I can’t imagine Portland letting him go now.”

Owner: “Too bad. Oh, well, he’d probably mess up our cap situation. We don’t want to pay too much luxury tax.”

GM: “Actually, he’s only a #24 pick, on rookie scale for the next four years. The cost would be very low.”

Owner: “That’s not fair, with all the money Paul Allen has.”

GM: “Actually, a year ago his rights could have been had for only $3 million. Allen put up the money, and there you go.”

Owner: “Only $3 million for the rights to a guy like that? Why did they sell to Portland, of all teams? Why didn’t we do that deal instead?”

GM: “We did do that deal, Mr. Sarver. We did do that deal.”

Scene: the practice complex of an NBA team in the Midwest

The GM walks into the locker room to find his newest acquisition on the floor, huddled into the fetal position, repeating the words over and over, “Now I know, now I know, now I know….”

The GM takes him by the shoulder, and shakes him. “Man, are you ok? Snap out of it! What’s wrong?”

The player looks up at him, and says, “Now I know, Mr. Bird. Now I know why Portland traded me away.”

Scene: the office of an NBA executive on the East Coast

The coach walks in. He says, “It was a great year, but if we are going to build on it and continue, we need depth. Our key guys are getting old, and we are so thin.’

The GM says, ‘We have no cap space. There just isn’t much we can do.’

The coach says, “Fernandez wouldn’t take much cap space. You saw what he can do. Imagine him coming off OUR bench.”

The GM responds, “But we can’t get him. Portland owns him, and they aren’t trading.”

The coach responds, “But Mr. Ainge, a year ago Phoenix would have gladly sold his rights to a struggling Eastern team, rather than a rising Western opponent. Why didn’t you buy him then?”

Crickets chirp.

Scene: the office of agent Sandee Westgate

The phone rings, and Westgate’s most famous client is on the line.

Player: “You saw Fernandez. You saw what he did.”

Westgate: “Yes, he’s got game.”

Player: “Portland’s stacked, they'll be stacked forever. If we’re lucky, we win it this year and then they dominate until long after I retire.”

Westgate: “Yeah. They’ve got cap space next year, too.”

Player: “That’s why I’m calling. I could opt out next year. I want championships. Lots of them. They’ve got cap space. Lots of it. I could be a free agent.”

Westgate: “They’ve got Roy AND Fernandez at the 2. It wouldn’t work.”

Player: “I can play the 3. Everyone knows I can. It will work. Call them.”

Westgate: “I can't talk to them until you are a free agent. You have to opt out first.”

Player: “Just feel them out.”

Westgate hears a click and a dead line, and mutters, “They don’t want your type in Portland, and I don’t blame them,” but dutifully dials Kevin Pritchard.

Westgate: “You know who I am.”

KP: “Of course.”

Westgate: “Now, it's delicate and confidential.”

KP: “Certainly, if that is what you want.”

Westgate: “It's just a possible scenario. Suppose I represented a superstar on a team to the south. Suppose he saw how your new guy played, and all the phenomenal young talent you have, and he wanted to win lots of championships. Now, he plays shooting guard, but really, he could play small forward. Suppose he told me he’d love to go play small forward on a championship team. Now, suppose he knew that you have lots of cap space next year, and he was thinking about opting out of his contract next year because of that. What would you think about that type of situation?”

After a long pause, KP says, “You asked this to be confidential, but this kind of conversation really would involve Nate, Tom Penn, and especially Mr. Allen. You don’t mind if I conference them in, do you?”

Westgate, rather surprised that this would even be considered: “Well, no, no, of course not.”

A couple of minutes later, the conference call is set up with all participants, and Westgate gives the same story. It is silent for a moment, and then Westgate hears, “Heh-heh,” and then another laugh, and then guffaws of laughter come down the phone line, louder and louder. Then, there is a click, and the line goes dead.

After a few minutes, Westgate picks up the phone.

“Hi, Kobe? They really appreciated the idea, I could hear it in their voices. But Paul Allen knows he’s going to have to give max contracts to 3 players, maybe even four counting Rudy, and he doesn’t want to take on another one. And they wouldn’t think of insulting you by offering less. Sorry.”

Scene: The home of Brandon Roy

The phone rings, and Brandon picks it up.

Roy: “Hi, coach, welcome home, and congratulations. What a great game.”

Nate: “Thanks, Brandon, it was great.”

Roy: “Coach, we need to talk. We’ve got to be able to get Rudy on the court.”

Nate: “I know, Brandon. He brought the ball up some, even against pressure. Perhaps he’ll play some point.”

Roy: “Coach, I can defend small forwards. I know I can.”

Nate: “We’ll do some of that, too, Brandon, I’m sure we will.”

Roy: “Coach, we’re going to be good. Really good. Really, really, really good.”

Nate: “Brandon, let’s not talk about that. Let’s just do it.”

Scene: NBA offices

David Stern's secretary walks into his office with a piece of paper. He says, "What's this?"

She responds, "Mr. Stern, it's a petition. Signed by 12 Western Conference owners."

He says, "What do they want this time?"

"Well, sir," she responds, "they are petitioning the EU to investigate the Portland Trailblazers, since they have several European players now. Basically, they're asking the EU Competition Commission to determine whether the Blazers have violated "Fair Trading Standards", and whether they are establishing an illegal talent monopoly." She pauses, and says, "They thought you would want to know."

Scene: somewhere in Idaho

The blogger sits in his pajamas in his mother’s basement, staring at the computer. Over and over, The Dunk Heard Round the World plays in front of him. Finally he snaps out of it, and goes back and reviews what he wrote just a few days before, comparing Rudy Fernandez and Jerryd Bayless.

“Jerryd is straight ahead at you. Rudy dips around.”

He flips back to the video, and watches Rudy dunk in Dwight Howard’s face. He mutters, “How am I going to spin my way out of this one? ‘Dips around’ vs. ‘straight ahead at you’? Was I an idiot to type that, or what?”

He reads on. “Jerryd likes to score off of the dribble. Rudy can catch and shoot.” He watches the video of Rudy driving for the dunk again, and then the between the legs, step back and pop move, and says to himself, “OK, OK, I didn’t say Rudy CAN’T score off the dribble, I just said that he CAN catch and shoot.” He wipes his brow, and mutters to himself, “I can't believe I wrote that, either.”

“Jerryd is aggressive. Rudy is sneaky. Jerryd will hit you hard. Rudy will annoy you until you hit him.” The blogger sighs, and looks at the dunk again. And again. And again. He sighs again, and says to himself, “Well, it was a clever line. Too clever." He watches the dunk again, shakes his head, and says, "Sneaky. Doesn't hit you hard." He grins, and says, "Howard did hit him, though, and he was probably annoyed. Oh, well."

Back to his blog. “Need some more offensive flow? You go with Rudy. Fourth quarter is here and the team isn’t getting to the cup aggressively enough? Hello Jerryd.” The blogger cringes, and watches The Dunk again. “Yeah, Rudy is not the guy to go aggressively enough to the cup. What am I going to do?”

Back to the text: “For now I don’t think Nate will have a lot of trouble figuring out which one to call in a given situation.” The blogger sighs, and says, “Well, that was probably true, anyway.”

He pauses, sits and looks at his computer. He goes back and plays the dunk again. And again. Finally, the inspiration comes.

“I’VE GOT IT!” he yells, waking up the household. His mom yells down the stairs, “You’re down there in your pajamas again in the middle of the night? Why don’t you go to bed?”

The blogger isn't listening. He has his solution. He's a blogger, after all. He’ll just change the subject. He'll post on Rudy’s absence in the first quarter, and start a controversy over whether all 12 players on the U.S. team are better than Rudy (an eminently debatable proposition, no one can call him a fool whichever side he takes). People will just forget.

Forget that he said a 19 year old would contribute more this year than a guy who can light up the Redeem Team. Forget the dumb things he said comparing the two of them. Forget it all. They’re all too excited about The Dunk Heard Round the World (and all the other shots heard round the world) to care that much, anyway.

Most of them, that is. There’s a few out there who will remember, and will throw it in his face. There’s always a few like that. He shrugs, types up his next blog, and posts it. Then, he watches the dunk several more times, with a big grin on his face. Now he can enjoy it. Over and over again.

Then, he gets dressed, and goes home to his wife and baby. This blogging in pajamas in Mom’s basement is a drag, but rules are rules.

What makes a good fan post?

jscot — Fri, 15 Aug 2008 07:11:03 -0000

Everybody needs to quit fretting about Brandon. Injuries happen, we've got good doctors and good depth.

I'd like to discuss something completely different -- what makes a good fan post? Many times, in the comments, people will say, "This was a really good post." Why?

I would suggest that any good fan post will have some of the following elements. No fan post will have all of them, but to be a good one, it will have some of these elements.

Factual analysis. Taking actual facts and presenting them in a way that sheds additional light on a situation. "Brandon Roy is the greatest, YAY!" is not factual analysis. It's fun to say, and there is nothing wrong with saying it, but it isn't what I'm talking about here. "Brandon's ability to penetrate and score against almost anyone provides a threat to which teams must respond, giving more opportunities for our shooters to knock down open shots." That's factual analysis. If you want to know what I mean, perhaps you could just read through some of jksnake99's posts.
Thinking outside the box. This is coming up with suggestions that haven't been discussed before, because they are so far removed from the way people have been thinking that it really is a new idea, but one which might have some merit. Josh Childress' agent apparently thought outside the box, negotiating a very high salary AND an opt out for Childress each year. Was his agent thinking about Portland's cap space for next year when he negotiated that opt out? That question is thinking outside the box, too -- I haven't noticed anyone talking about Childress and the Blazers since he signed, but I think it is more likely now than it was before.
Respect for your readers. Don't write in a way that conveys that you think you are better, smarter, or superior in any other way to your readers. The fact is, some of them are probably a lot smarter than you, know basketball better than you, have a better sense of humor than you, etc. Even I, the future ruler of the world, know I'm not the smartest person in the world, though when I rule the world, it might be dangerous to claim to be smarter. But that's off-topic (for now).
Humor. Everyone likes humor. One of the best kinds is self-deprecating humor, where you poke fun at yourself. You don't have to have it in a fan post, but if a fan post is a fun post, it helps.
Personality. This is a community of real people. A fan post that reveals a little bit of your personality is appealing, because people like to know each other to some extent. I won't give examples because there are too many.
Good grammar and spelling. No, these aren't necessary for a good fan post, but they help. Why? Because the purpose of a fan post is to communicate something, and the rules of grammar and spelling, while quite arbitrary, are established to assist communication and help remove barriers to efficient communication. When I visit the continent, I try to speak a little bit in the language of the people whose country I am visiting. Why? Because it is showing some respect to them by communicating in the terms that are familiar to them. Using good grammar and spelling, to the best of one's ability, shows that same respect.
Quality writing. This is NOT the same as grammar and spelling. This is organizing related thoughts into paragraphs (and not horribly long ones), organizing the paragraphs into an order so that there is a reasonable progression of thought through the fan post, etc. Read Dave's writing if you want to know what I'm discussing here. Read some of knickfan's posts.
Creative writing. This is using an unusual turn of phrase, or a creative way of expressing things. Mortimer comes up with some classics. Some of Dave's analogies are priceless. Most of us just can't come up with the kind of stuff that just rolls off their fingertips, these guys have a gift. But if you can find unusual and creative ways to express yourself, it really adds to the enjoyment of reading the fan post.
A good poll. If you can come up with a good poll related to your fan post that makes people think, and provides them with enough choices to fully express their opinion on the matter, that helps, too. I've provided an example.

That's my list. I'm sure it isn't complete. What else, to you, makes a good fan post? If there are really good suggestions in the comments, and they turn green, I might even bestir myself to edit this and add them to the main fanpost. If I'm not too lazy, that is, and if I like the person who wrote them enough.

A. Based on comments by 12sharks and Dave: Stimulates conversation. Something that will make the readers want to comment.

B. Based on a comment by KP Corleone: Use of effects such as numbers, bullet points, headings in bold font, etc. makes a fan post more enjoyable to read.

C. Based on a comment by KP Corleone: An effective title, snappy/succinct, that reasonable conveys what you are discussing. If it is creative, all the better.

Poll

Was this a good fan post?

Win Prediction Poll

jscot — Fri, 27 Jun 2008 18:10:56 -0000

OK, we've seen what KP has done (so far). This poll is based on the following assumptions:

1. No more major moves. Diogu and/or one of Sergio/Koponen may be traded, but the rotation is pretty much set for next season. If KP makes other significant moves, you have the right to change your prediction.

2. No major injuries. By this, I mean that no starter misses more than 10 games and no main rotation player misses more than 20 games.

Vote in the poll, and make precise predictions in the comments. Ties will be broken by the most accurate prediction of the number of playoff wins.

I predict 55 wins. I also predict that we will then go on to win two playoff series, and get two wins in the WCF, for a total of 10 playoff wins.

Poll

How many wins will the Trailblazers get in 2008-09?

Dumb Trade/Draft Predictions

jscot — Wed, 25 Jun 2008 06:39:39 -0000

OK, so maybe one or two people out there predicted we would buy the Hornets' pick. And any thinking person realizes that pick is now a prime candidate for inclusion in a trade.

This means that all trade predictions/rumors prior to this move are now highly suspect. We have a highly tradeable asset that will cost us little to include in a trade, and none of us knew about it. Probably not even KP knew it until a couple days ago, though he probably knew it was a possibility. If you tried to make a trade work by looking at the assets we have, we now have another one.

Somebody (I forget who) predicted we would get Augustin at 13 and trade him to Detroit for somebody or other, and they would include their pick so we could get Hickson. Won't happen, will it? Why? Because if we want Hickson, we'll pick him at #27. If that trade happens, it WON'T be in the form earlier suggested.

Any trade prediction you make is subject to being thrown completely out of kilter by a prior trade, and trades will fly fast in the next 36 hours. Save yourself the mental effort and enjoy the ride.

It's also a little silly to predict who we'll draft, since none of us have ANY CLUE as to which picks we'll have by draft time, or who will be drafting ahead of us. It's not like we're at #4, and we only have to predict what the three teams ahead of us will do. There are likely to be at least 3 trades involving teams currently ahead of us, which can significantly impact who is drafted.

Does KP know who he's going to draft? Only if he's already agreed a deal that hasn't been announced. Otherwise, he has a list of a bunch of players, somewhat ranked in order as to how much he wants them -- and with a pretty good idea of how much he is willing to give up to get them in a trade. And he probably has a list of about 50 veteran players that he'd like to get in a trade, if he could, and what he's willing to give up to get them.

Who is willing to deal with him? At what price? That's going to determine which of the 5 million possibilities will occur. Some of them will happen. But even KP can't predict today which ones will happen. One trade that he thinks might happen could lead to another that he didn't anticipate at all. There could be 5-6 player trades, 3 team trades, etc. Maybe we'll even buy another pick.

It's fun to talk about who we'd like to get. But to predict precise trades or draft picks right now is crazy stuff. I said so, so it must be true.

Therefore, here is my prediction for the next 36 hours: KP will do at least three things I didn't anticipate. Since I didn't anticipate the Hornets move, that will make four for this draft. That's about par for the course, four unanticipated moves.

---

Bonus thought for all you Chris Paul dreamers out there. Which team has an owner that is committed to winning? New Orleans or Portland. Think he'll notice? Or do you think he'll be told, "We needed money because we want to extend you with a max contract."

OT -- fallout from the championship

jscot — Tue, 24 Jun 2008 11:46:27 -0000

Why is this off-topic? It has everything to do with the Blazers and the NBA. It is off-topic because it isn't about trading Travis or Martell or Channing or Jarrett, and it isn't about who we will draft at #13 (which probably won't happen), or about supposed trades with other people that almost certainly won't happen in the form being reported, or any of that stuff.

Maybe someone already basically said what I'm about to say, but if so, I missed it, because I was doing something unmentionable called w@rk (sorry for swearing, Dave). This is my own special weird Blazer fan perspective on the result of the Finals.

I'm GLAD, GLAD, GLAD that Boston won. Why, you will ask? Especially all of you who, like me, hate the Celtics.

Very important reason #1. K*be lost. This is always good.

Very important reason #2. The L@kers, after obviously having blackmailed whoever pretends to be a GM in Memphis, are the greatest medium-term threat to our dynasty. They actually have enough talent that, on a given night, they might even BEAT us. But there is one indisputable fact -- that team is unstable, and liable to implosion. What (WHO?) will make it implode? We all know. What is liable to trigger implosion? How about getting close enough to victory to be able to taste it, and then being blown out so badly that you know your team just isn't good enough? How about having such a huge ego that, if you know your team isn't good enough, it must be someone else's fault, not yours? The results of the Finals were a huge push towards the edge of the cliff for one particular individual. Not just the results, but the way it happened. This is GOOD, VERY GOOD.

Very important reason #3. I have been concerned about the future. Specifically, after we win the next 15 championships in a row, where is the motivation to go on? Might it all become old hat? Kind of like hoping someone would actually threaten Lance Armstrong in the Tour de France. But now, the Celtics have stepped up and helped in this. By winning their 17th championship, all that changed. Because, of course, we have one now, and 15 more will give us 16. So this result has virtually guaranteed motivation to continue winning for at least two more years after the next 15. By the time we hit 17 championships in a row, and 18 total, surpassing Boston, I'll be old and decrepit, and probably won't care so much. Thank you, Celtics, for giving me something to look forward to as I'm slipping into old age.

OT -- Missing Blazer's Edge

jscot — Wed, 11 Jun 2008 08:54:32 -0000

So, work is killing me, and I never make it here these days. I get to scan through to catch the news every couple of days, but I never have any time for anything.

This is a drag, right? A real downer. I mean, I could be discussing L*kers v Celtics . Never mind, that's not so bad to miss. But, I could be discussing, say, Tim Don@ghy (I love that the spammers' screen grabbing software will pick up that email address). Well, ok, I don't want to discuss him, either.

I could read another 497 trade proposals while waiting for the draft, or 743 posts analyzing why we should draft guys that KP isn't going to draft. Hmmm.

OK, so maybe it isn't such a bad time to have to work so much. That way, I also don't have to read a lot about Hillary and Obama pretending the last 8 months was all a game that didn't matter (blech!).

Sigh.

It is too bad about missing all the Rudy conversation. That should have been good for a few snarky comments about Euros and people who live there. Oh, well. I'll have lots of opportunities over the next few years, especially when we bring Koponen over to run the point. Back to work. Again.

Poll

When is a good time to have to work a lot?

Remember the zone?

jscot — Thu, 29 May 2008 13:30:53 -0000

I do. I remember how we won a lot of games using a zone defense that teams struggled to break down.

It seems, however, that lots of us forget the zone from time to time.

1. "Greg Oden will be in foul trouble a lot his rookie year." How many times have we heard that? But a zone protects individual players from being targeted for foul trouble by the opposition to the same extent. I think the "foul-prone" argument is way over-blown, but if it becomes a problem, expect to see Nate use a zone quite a bit.

2. "Our bigs are going to be in foul trouble because quick PGs are going to get into the lane all the time and draw fouls." Ever hear that one? Remember the zone. It's hard to penetrate against a well-organized zone. You beat a zone by moving the ball and finding the open man. If quick PGs are penetrating at will, expect to see the zone.

3. "We need a super-quick defensive PG to keep quick PGs from running riot." Now, I would like us to have exactly that, a super-quick defensive PG, and I hardly care if he ever scores. But need? I remember the zone. Good team defense can help you with a quick PG who is going on a tear.

A zone has flaws. A good-shooting NBA team which is willing to patiently move the ball will find the open shot and punish you. You can't live by the zone forever. But it can help you solve some of the problems that people want to make major trades to solve, and some of the problems (like Oden fouling) that people are worried about.

Every team will have weaknesses. A good coach will find ways to minimize your weaknesses, and maximize your strengths. A zone is one of the tools at his disposal. The more strengths you have, the easier it is to hide your weaknesses.

This roster, as it stands now, will be a very, very good team. And Nate and his assistants will find both offensive and defensive schemes to take advantage of what we have.

If we make a trade to upgrade our defensive skills at the point, or acquire Calderon, who is perhaps even worse defensively than what we have now, Nate will adjust defensive schemes accordingly.

We don't HAVE to make a trade to address our weaknesses. It will be better if we can make a good trade that does. But remember the zone. We have coaches who can figure something out. We are not slaves to our weaknesses anymore. We have too many strengths on this team for that, now.

In future, other teams will be at least as concerned with counteracting/neutralizing our strengths as they will be with exploiting our weaknesses. We're that kind of team, now.

Poll

How many minutes will Greg Oden average per game in 2008-09?

Who would you build a team around?

jscot — Tue, 27 May 2008 15:14:50 -0000

http://nbcsports.msnbc.com/id/24586773/

Michael Ventre of MSNBC lists his players. Few surprises in his top 5 -- Kobe, Lebron, Chris Paul, Dwight Howard, Deron Williams. Any one of those guys would be a good starting point, for sure. Perhaps Deron Williams isn't quite at the same level as the other four at this point in time, but I'd be persuaded to take him if Utah waived him. I think he'd be good enough for us.

But then comes the interesting part, what he calls the "other players receiving votes". And the very first one he mentions in this category is....

Greg Oden.

His comment:

Yes, I know. He hasn’t played yet for the Portland Trail Blazers. But if he’s the kind of center everybody thought he’d be coming out of Ohio State, he’s definitely a player you would want to build around.

Other players in this category? Tony Parker, Carmelo Anthony, Chris Bosh, Dwayne Wade, Yao Ming, and....

Brandon Roy.

Smart, young, level-headed, gifted versatile guard who made a seamless transition to the NBA and still has lots of upside.

Out of his top 12 players to build a team around, only one team has two of them. And it isn't Pau and Kobe on the L*kers, or Paul and someone else on the Hornets. That's right, we are the only team that has two of his top 12 players to build around. And it's hard to find many teams whose third player is really a better option for the future than LMA.

It's a great, great time to be a Blazer fan.

Poll

SB Nation User Blog: jscot

Josh Howard Stupid Again

Josh Howard Stupid Again

Unrec this piece of Junk Drawer 9/10 (with poll)

How much do you use the junk drawer?

The Dunk Heard Round the World

What makes a good fan post?

Was this a good fan post?

Win Prediction Poll

How many wins will the Trailblazers get in 2008-09?

Dumb Trade/Draft Predictions

OT -- fallout from the championship

OT -- Missing Blazer's Edge

When is a good time to have to work a lot?

Remember the zone?

How many minutes will Greg Oden average per game in 2008-09?

Who would you build a team around?

Which of the following has the brightest future?