KP Interview Today

[Crimson the Cat]

Would you dump all of your draft picks and just look to add veterans? Kevin Pritchard... "It is a possibility. But what's the fun in that? The draft is supposed to be fun. It's supposed to be exciting. We've got a great owner that allows us to be aggressive in the draft. But if there's not a guy there that fits us. It's all about fit now. In the past we were aggressive to go get those guys, the franchise builders. We feel like we have a lot of those now. Right now it's really about the fit. If we can find those guys [in the draft] we'll go after them hard."

Is it time now to add a veteran... "For me personally it's about bringing in the right people. With Brandon, LaMarcus, Joel, Blake they bring us veteran leadership now. It's not so critical that we have that guy who is a veteran leader. We have a two year all star, a budding all star in LaMarcus, Przybilla and Blake have been around. I'm not so sure that's exactly what we need right now."

Does the team need to get older? "We added four rookies last year. If I added 4 rookies this year I think Nate will kill me... If they're good, who cares what age they are? And there are always sleepers in the draft. In the 20s you can get a guy that can help you. Nicolas came in last year and helped us... Rudy the year before. Sergio the year before. I'm not opposed to drafting."

http://www.blazersedge.com/2009/6/16/911479/tuesday-draft-workout-report

I love this time of year!

 

[Crimson the Cat]

Right now it's really about the fit. If we can find those guys [in the draft] we'll go after them hard."

This is the key quote here. For all of you that think it's foolish to go use key resources to go after a player that is young, what do you have to say about this. Is Pritchard wrong to entertain such a thought or are you?

 

[Crimson the Cat]

Of all the noise we've heard lately, I'd say chances are we're heading closer to a Stephen Curry than a Steve Nash.

I'm pretty relieved about this.

 

[SodaPopinski]

This is part of what worries me about how KP is building this team. I get what he's saying about the "age doesn't matter, if they're good, they're good." But history in terms of NBA playoff success suggests that age and experience do matter. Yes, Brandon, Joel and LaMarcus are experienced guys, but none of them have won a playoff series. That matters.

Look at all of the recent NBA champions. None of them have grown organically with guys who have had no playoff success and then suddenly the light came on for them after several years of trying to figure it out. All of them have added key pieces that have taken them to the next level or already possessed those guys (so they were in a position of merely just needing to supplement experience with talent ... we're in the opposite boat).

Even the Spurs, who you could make the closest argument to the "growing organically can bring you success" model (all of their key guys were drafted and developed by the Spurs), had a key ingredient that the Blazers don't have. When they won their first championship with Duncan, they had guys like David Robinson and Sean Elliott and Mario Elie who had been in absolute wars deep into the playoffs. Then by the time they supplemented their team with adding Tony Parker and Manu Ginobli through the draft, Duncan was that guy who had the playoff scars.

I hope KP doesn't fall in love with this whole premise that he can just draft talented guys and eventually we'll be more talented than anyone else and win a championship that way. It doesn't work that way. Never has. You have got to have that guy who can vault everyone else to another level. Even if it is just for that one year. Because once Brandon and the other guys have been to ... say ... the conference finals, they'll have that mettle. And then we can supplement through the draft and through small additions in free agency and in trades. But I feel the only way we'll get to that point is by adding a key veteran difference-maker who can push everyone else to that level.

-Pop

 

[Crimson the Cat]

Found this interesting about Jerebko. Not too fascinated with him now. Definitely still on the radar though, just not as high up.

Pictured above, Jonas Jerebko (6'8" and 231, Forward, Sweden) was the most impressive physically today, with great size and carrying strength in his frame that you don't generally expect to see from European prospects. Unfortunately, I'm not sure he understands the rules of basketball -- the leather sphere is actually supposed to be thrown through the metal ring that hangs above the ground -- because he shot something like 15 percent or so uncontested during the media open session.

Was he nervous? Was he simply displaying the form that led him to shoot 31.4 percent from 3 point land for his career?

Buchanan said, "we like his versatility on the defensive end, we think he can guard multiple positions... he's never been asked to be that offensive go-to guy, good athlete, definitely an NBA player." I asked KP if Jerebko shot the ball better during Eurocamp. KP was noncommital and, honestly, it seemed like he couldn't remember. You can't really blame him. Currently Jerebko is seen as a late 1st or early 2nd round selection. I'm not sure he's a fit. If you're picking between international small forward prospects, I think you stick with Casspi.

(Sidenote: this guy must dunk A LOT because his career field goal percentage is an astonishing 59.6% while his 3 point percentage is roughly 1/2 that)

 

[Crimson the Cat]

This is part of what worries me about how KP is building this team. I get what he's saying about the "age doesn't matter, if they're good, they're good." But history in terms of NBA playoff success suggests that age and experience do matter. Yes, Brandon, Joel and LaMarcus are experienced guys, but none of them have won a playoff series. That matters.

Look at all of the recent NBA champions. None of them have grown organically with guys who have had no playoff success and then suddenly the light came on for them after several years of trying to figure it out. All of them have added key pieces that have taken them to the next level or already possessed those guys (so they were in a position of merely just needing to supplement experience with talent ... we're in the opposite boat).

Even the Spurs, who you could make the closest argument to the "growing organically can bring you success" model (all of their key guys were drafted and developed by the Spurs), had a key ingredient that the Blazers don't have. When they won their first championship with Duncan, they had guys like David Robinson and Sean Elliott and Mario Elie who had been in absolute wars deep into the playoffs. Then by the time they supplemented their team with adding Tony Parker and Manu Ginobli through the draft, Duncan was that guy who had the playoff scars.

I hope KP doesn't fall in love with this whole premise that he can just draft talented guys and eventually we'll be more talented than anyone else and win a championship that way. It doesn't work that way. Never has. You have got to have that guy who can vault everyone else to another level. Even if it is just for that one year. Because once Brandon and the other guys have been to ... say ... the conference finals, they'll have that mettle. And then we can supplement through the draft and through small additions in free agency and in trades. But I feel the only way we'll get to that point is by adding a key veteran difference-maker who can push everyone else to that level.

-Pop

I don't think he's opposed to improving the team by trading for players with Playoff experience. But, that player has to be the right fit. If no one fits, but a younger player does, go with the youth. Experience is great, but not at the expense of talent/ability.

 

[hasoos]

The best teams have a mix of both young and experienced. Right now all we have is young. KP talks about Blake and Pryz being the vets already on this team. But the difference between them and other veterans is that other veterans have been through the playoff battle. They have not. They have barely tasted it.

 

[Denny Crane]

I think some of you may be misinterpreting the Blazers' and especially Paul Allen's intentions. The team's moves at the trade deadline were conservative and money saving ones. They could have used RLEC to bring in a big salaried player, but didn't. Looking forward, they have to sign guys like Roy and LMA to 8 figure contracts after next season and then Oden. Those three alone could eat up 3/4 of the salary cap. If the team is at the LT threshold after this coming season, they're going to be spending $10's of milliions in tax and they'll lose any disbursement that teams under the LT get paid out from those taxed.

My expectations are they'd like to fill out the roster with later round 1st picks who don't command big salaries but don't hurt the team on the court. If they're trading, it'll be like contracts or to get a #19 for taking on Claxton's expiring deal.

 

[Minstrel]

This is part of what worries me about how KP is building this team. I get what he's saying about the "age doesn't matter, if they're good, they're good." But history in terms of NBA playoff success suggests that age and experience do matter. Yes, Brandon, Joel and LaMarcus are experienced guys, but none of them have won a playoff series. That matters.

I don't think that's a good way to construct a team, due to standard maxim that correlation does not imply causation. It may simply be that it is very hard to get so many good pieces in the draft. But Pritchard has. Maybe the odds of him landing so much talent via the draft was very low, but now that he has, the odds are no longer relevant.

The main point is, you add players that make you better. You don't just blindly add "types" of players. If you can get a really good player in the draft, do it. If you can in free agency, do it. If it comes in trade, fine. Each decision should be made on its own merits, not how it jibes with "history."

Look at all of the recent NBA champions. None of them have grown organically with guys who have had no playoff success and then suddenly the light came on for them after several years of trying to figure it out. All of them have added key pieces that have taken them to the next level or already possessed those guys (so they were in a position of merely just needing to supplement experience with talent ... we're in the opposite boat).

I would say the Chicago Bulls were built pretty organically with homegrown talent and then left to "figure it out" until the light came on. They drafted Jordan, Pippen (essentially...draft day swap, like Portland getting Roy), Grant, Armstrong. Paxson was already there and Cartwright was added, but that's not vastly different from Portland's Blake and Przybilla. The main talent was drafted and left to "figure it out."

 

[hasoos]

I would say the Chicago Bulls were built pretty organically with homegrown talent and then left to "figure it out" until the light came on. They drafted Jordan, Pippen (essentially...draft day swap, like Portland getting Roy), Grant, Armstrong. Paxson was already there and Cartwright was added, but that's not vastly different from Portland's Blake and Przybilla. The main talent was drafted and left to "figure it out."

Except for that Jordan Part you are right. It is not vastly different. Except for that all important "Jordan" piece...

 

[Minstrel]

Except for that Jordan Part you are right. It is not vastly different. Except for that all important "Jordan" piece...

I don't think the fact that Jordan was involved throws it into some other class. Jordan alone doesn't create championships. The Bulls had to build a great team, they weren't kings just because they drafted Jordan. And the way they built it was essentially through the draft.

Sure, no one on the Blazers is Michael Jordan, but I don't think that invalidates the comparison. You can build a great team through homegrown talent. Pritchard shouldn't be looking to acquire older players simply because they are older. He should be looking to acquire the players that will best improve the team...whether they are rookies, young players or veterans.

 

[SodaPopinski]

OK ... I'll concede your point. If the Blazers end up with the greatest basketball player in the history of the world, then the organic growth thing can yield several championships.

-Pop

 

[Mediocre Man]

LOL at Blake being mentioned in that story. The guy was embarrassed by a third tier at best PG in the playoffs.


But I will agree with KP on this.....We need to get better, regardless of age. But he is fooling himself if he thinks more youth isn't going to set us back more years.

 

[Minstrel]

OK ... I'll concede your point. If the Blazers end up with the greatest basketball player in the history of the world, then the organic growth thing can yield several championships.

Already responded to. I don't think your point is very compelling, when you discard the Bulls and Spurs because of some exception in your mind. All you're saying, essentially, is that you can't build through the draft...unless you're an exception. That says nothing, really. If Oden pans out, the "exception" that invalidates the Blazers will be that they "just happened" to have two superstars in Oden and Roy and a third star in Aldridge.

You can always create a "rule" that works if you throw out all examples of the rule failing through some post-hoc reasoning.

 

[Masbee]

This is part of what worries me about how KP is building this team. I get what he's saying about the "age doesn't matter, if they're good, they're good." But history in terms of NBA playoff success suggests that age and experience do matter. Yes, Brandon, Joel and LaMarcus are experienced guys, but none of them have won a playoff series. That matters.

Look at all of the recent NBA champions. None of them have grown organically with guys who have had no playoff success and then suddenly the light came on for them after several years of trying to figure it out. -Pop

The closest thing was the Detroit Pistons.

They were close, and then added Rasheed (for no loss in talent), who had the Conference Finals experience.

But, I really don't know if it was Sheeds "Leadership" in putting them over the top, or if it was the fact that Sheed was a damn talented player that fit perfectly with Ben Wallace on the front line, that they were able to add for no loss of talent going out.

And, the thing about the Pistons, was because the mostly grew organically, once they broke through, they had a very long and steady run.

 

[SodaPopinski]

By the way, I'm not advocating adding just any veteran. I think if you can get a Steve Nash, a Jason Kidd, a Tayshaun Prince, a Hedo Turkoglu (someone who fits a need and has that deep playoff experience), and it doesn't compromise your chemsitry or future financials, you do it.

There has to be a balance between experience and talent. I would just like to see KP value experience a bit more in his player acquisitions. So far he hasn't shown that. Now ... granted, we haven't been in the position yet where we could supplement. But I think we're there now. We have our core guys. Now comes the part where you add the missing pieces to get you into the championship window. I don't really see any situation where we can draft those missing pieces without compromising 3-4 years of opportunity. I think we have the ingredients to compete for a championship next year if we add a talented veteran. I think our opportunity for doing that evaporates by next summer with the max contracts we're likely going to give Brandon and LaMarcus. We'll have zero cap flexibility next summer. Which is what makes our cap space now so important.

-Pop

 

[Mediocre Man]

So we get the same team that couldn't beat a good western conference team on the road? The same team that couldn't guard anyone on the perimeter? The same team that shot few FT per game? Te same team that lost in the first round with HCA?


Fuck I hope this is a smokescreen.

 

[SodaPopinski]

The closest thing was the Detroit Pistons.

They were close, and then added Rasheed (for no loss in talent), who had the Conference Finals experience.

But, I really don't know if it was Sheeds "Leadership" in putting them over the top, or if it was the fact that Sheed was a damn talented player that fit perfectly with Ben Wallace on the front line, that they were able to add for no loss of talent going out.

And, the thing about the Pistons, was because the mostly grew organically, once they broke through, they had a very long and steady run.

I'm not sure I'd argue that the Pistons grew organically. Outside of Tayshaun Prince, all of their major pieces for that title were acquired through free agency or trades (Hamilton, the Wallaces and Billups).

-Pop

 

[Mediocre Man]

I really can't help but think he is thinking about Ramon Sessions when he talks about fit and age. Then moving up and having some fun by getting Hansbrough or Blair. Bayless might kill someone though if he is stuck behind Blake again.

 

[andalusian]

So we get the same team that couldn't beat a good western conference team on the road? The same team that couldn't guard anyone on the perimeter? The same team that shot few FT per game? Te same team that lost in the first round with HCA?

Fuck I hope this is a smokescreen.

Worst case scenario we get the same team but with added experience, the return of Martell Webster and most important - Oden regaining his explosiveness and stamina. One hope it is also the year where JB gets at least the backup PG minutes behind Blake.

This is still the same team that is one errant whistle away from facing SAS in the first round (a team they did defeat on the road) - only better. The same team that took Houston to 6 games with no playoffs experience - and Houston took the eventual Champs to 7...

I still hope we upgrade - but the situation is not that dire...

 

[Nikolokolus]

I think some of you may be misinterpreting the Blazers' and especially Paul Allen's intentions. The team's moves at the trade deadline were conservative and money saving ones. They could have used RLEC to bring in a big salaried player, but didn't. Looking forward, they have to sign guys like Roy and LMA to 8 figure contracts after next season and then Oden. Those three alone could eat up 3/4 of the salary cap. If the team is at the LT threshold after this coming season, they're going to be spending $10's of milliions in tax and they'll lose any disbursement that teams under the LT get paid out from those taxed.

My expectations are they'd like to fill out the roster with later round 1st picks who don't command big salaries but don't hurt the team on the court. If they're trading, it'll be like contracts or to get a #19 for taking on Claxton's expiring deal.

I think you make a good point -- a very astute point even. It's a poorly kept secret that PA's other ventures (charter cable, etc.) have been hemorrhaging money and with the recent downturn in the economy he's probably lost a third of his net worth in the past year. I think it's possible the team will look to add at least one free agent or do a lopsided trade that brings somebody making slightly more than the MLE, but I'm increasingly of the opinion that the team is going to do the best that it can to operate at or near the luxury line, and more importantly operate at or near 'in the black.'

It also goes without saying that you don't want to be saddled with tons of overpaid players even if you can afford them, because it makes it tougher to do deals and maneuver when you have to.

 

[STOMP]

I think some of you may be misinterpreting the Blazers' and especially Paul Allen's intentions. The team's moves at the trade deadline were conservative and money saving ones. They could have used RLEC to bring in a big salaried player, but didn't.

what were the players available to them and what was the cost besides RLEC? Throwing out vague stuff like this and then drawing conclusions about management's approach seems pretty shaky

STOMP

 

[Mediocre Man]

what were the players available to them and what was the cost besides RLEC? Throwing out vague stuff like this and then drawing conclusions about management's approach seems pretty shaky

STOMP

Many, many, many reports have come out from several different media people saying Portland could have had Richard Jefferson, Vince Carter, Gerald Wallace, and Andre Miller. Portland chose not to for different reasons in all of them.

 

[hasoos]

The closest thing was the Detroit Pistons.

They were close, and then added Rasheed (for no loss in talent), who had the Conference Finals experience.

But, I really don't know if it was Sheeds "Leadership" in putting them over the top, or if it was the fact that Sheed was a damn talented player that fit perfectly with Ben Wallace on the front line, that they were able to add for no loss of talent going out.

And, the thing about the Pistons, was because the mostly grew organically, once they broke through, they had a very long and steady run.

Hmmmm. Most of the starting 5 was traded for though, so how organically grown is that? Wallace was part of the Grant Hill trade. Hamilton was picked up from the Wizards.

 

[Tortimer]

I think some of you may be misinterpreting the Blazers' and especially Paul Allen's intentions. The team's moves at the trade deadline were conservative and money saving ones. They could have used RLEC to bring in a big salaried player, but didn't. Looking forward, they have to sign guys like Roy and LMA to 8 figure contracts after next season and then Oden. Those three alone could eat up 3/4 of the salary cap. If the team is at the LT threshold after this coming season, they're going to be spending $10's of milliions in tax and they'll lose any disbursement that teams under the LT get paid out from those taxed.

My expectations are they'd like to fill out the roster with later round 1st picks who don't command big salaries but don't hurt the team on the court. If they're trading, it'll be like contracts or to get a #19 for taking on Claxton's expiring deal.

I think there is some truth to what your saying but I also think your wrong about PA and his spending. I think PA is very hungry to win a championship and will spend what ever it would take if it was the right fit. If the right player/players became available and KP and PA thought they would make us title contenders right now PA when go way over the LT. He will be very careful though because he already did that in the jailblazer years and it didn't work.

 

[STOMP]

Many, many, many reports have come out from several different media people saying Portland could have had Richard Jefferson, Vince Carter, Gerald Wallace, and Andre Miller. Portland chose not to for different reasons in all of them.

Unconfirmed rumors/speculations equal reports in your world I guess, but I refer you back to my question... what was the cost beside RLEC? Not being willing to throw in Batum doesn't necessarily equate Paul Allen tightening up his wallet.

STOMP

 

[Tortimer]

Many, many, many reports have come out from several different media people saying Portland could have had Richard Jefferson, Vince Carter, Gerald Wallace, and Andre Miller. Portland chose not to for different reasons in all of them.

I don't believe all those reports and I believe KP was never interested in VC with his bad contract and age. I do think Miller and maybe Wallace were something the Blazers were after and just fell through. I think Wallace is a question mark for me with his injury history. From what I read the Bucks just wanted way to much for Jefferson. I'm sure KP was trying to make a trade but the right player wasn't available.

 

[Masbee]

Hmmmm. Most of the starting 5 was traded for though, so how organically grown is that? Wallace was part of the Grant Hill trade. Hamilton was picked up from the Wizards.

Yeah, right. If by organically, you mean primarily through the draft. I thought the line was deep playoff experience / or not. Sorry.

 

[Denny Crane]

what were the players available to them and what was the cost besides RLEC? Throwing out vague stuff like this and then drawing conclusions about management's approach seems pretty shaky

STOMP

The players who were moved are a matter of public record. Look at what Brad Miller and John Salmons did for the Bulls - I'd think Salmons would have instantly been your starting SF and solved those problems for at least a couple more years, and Miller is no worse than putting off the EXPIRING part of RLEC for a season (plus he can actually still play halfway decently). Sacto would have done it in a heartbeat. They bought out Gooden and they're looking for a sucker to take Nocioni and their draft pick.

That's one example, Billups was basically moved for a big expiring deal... There were a lot of key players rumored available, including Amare.

 

[rocketeer]

But I will agree with KP on this.....We need to get better, regardless of age. But he is fooling himself if he thinks more youth isn't going to set us back more years.

i think you're fooling yourself if you think acquiring a young player somehow sets back the blazers. as long as the player is an improvement of what the blazers have, age is irrelevant, the player will make the team better.