KP says turned down Amare

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Masbee

-- Rookie of the Year
Joined
Sep 17, 2008
Messages
2,856
Likes
97
Points
48
What!

We turned down a deal for Amare?

Wonder what the last Suns offer was?

That's not to say Pritchard didn't have some trying moments. He admitted he thought long and hard on some propoed deals -- none more so than a swap that would have brought Phoenix forward Amare Stoudemire to Portland -- but in the end, he said the Blazers' culture and core talent were too important.
"We were close, really close," Pritchard said of a deal with Phoenix. "But we didn't bite."

http://blog.oregonlive.com/behindblazersbeat/2009/02/young_and_restless_for_the_pla.html
 
Get out your shovels--the B.S. is piling up! The idea that the Blazers turned down Amare Stoudamire to protect their "culture" is ridiculous. Pritchard just couldn't get him for free, so he gave up. I'm really getting tired of Pritchard's lies. This guy has got to learn that he can tell the truth; it's not necessary to keep "spinning" all the way to the grave.
 
Get out your shovels--the B.S. is piling up! The idea that the Blazers turned down Amare Stoudamire to protect their "culture" is ridiculous. Pritchard just couldn't get him for free, so he gave up. I'm really getting tired of Pritchard's lies. This guy has got to learn that he can tell the truth; it's not necessary to keep "spinning" all the way to the grave.


Why do you hate your own team?
 
Get out your shovels--the B.S. is piling up! The idea that the Blazers turned down Amare Stoudamire to protect their "culture" is ridiculous. Pritchard just couldn't get him for free, so he gave up. I'm really getting tired of Pritchard's lies. This guy has got to learn that he can tell the truth; it's not necessary to keep "spinning" all the way to the grave.

"but in the end, he said the Blazers' culture and core talent were too important."

it appears that you missed a couple of words. that would seem to indicate to me that aldridge would have been in the deal and he didn't want to trade him.
 
Why do you hate your own team?
I guess you're new here. I'm a diehard Blazer fan who loves the team; I'm just getting tired of Pritchard's constant distortions of the truth. Can you see the difference?
 
I didn't see Amare get traded, thus meaning Pritchard didn't want to give up what it would take to get Amare...just like every other GM in the NBA that was interested.

Pritchard iz da worst GM!
 
Kerr was interviewed during the game vs. Boston and he said he never came close to trading Amare, he just listened to some offers.
 
I'm thinking that KP didn't want to part with LMA in a deal for Stoudemire, which if fine, but it would have been a very scary front court for atleast next year since Stoudemire is out for the season.
 
"but in the end, he said the Blazers' culture and core talent were too important."

it appears that you missed a couple of words. that would seem to indicate to me that aldridge would have been in the deal and he didn't want to trade him.
He mentioned "culture," which means he thought Stoudamire might have been a negative influence or would have somehow disrupted what the Blazers have going. I seriusly doubt that was the real reason--the real reason was that Phoenix wanted someone that he was unwilling to give up. It may have been Aldridge, but we don't know.
 
Kerr was interviewed during the game vs. Boston and he said he never came close to trading Amare, he just listened to some offers.
what was he supposed to say? "we tried really hard to trade amare but no one wanted him so i guess we'll have to keep him"?
 
He mentioned "culture," which means he thought Stoudamire might have been a negative influence or would have somehow disrupted what the Blazers have going. I seriusly doubt that was the real reason--the real reason was that Phoenix wanted someone that he was unwilling to give up. It may have been Aldridge, but we don't know.
he mentioned culture and core talent. amare not fitting in with the culture made it not worth it to give up the core talent even though amare might be better than the core talent. at least that's how i read it. really not a big deal and really not some huge unexpected amount of spin.
 
somebody misses John "Genius" Nash and the way he used to play all his cards face up for everyone to see. What a sly fox that dude was ;)

STOMP
 
I didn't see Amare get traded, thus meaning Pritchard didn't want to give up what it would take to get Amare...just like every other GM in the NBA that was interested.
Exactly. It had nothing to do with Pritchard "protecting" our culture, and everything to do with who he had to give up.
 
what was he supposed to say? "we tried really hard to trade amare but no one wanted him so i guess we'll have to keep him"?
right. Of course every NBA GM is spinning... thats just a given for the job.

STOMP
 
Sorry if I hurt your feelings, just passing along what he said.
sorry if i hurt your feelings, just letting you know that what he said(like any gm) likely didn't accurately explain what happened.
 
Exactly. It had nothing to do with Pritchard "protecting" our culture, and everything to do with who he had to give up.


Na, I think riding ourselves of the young core would change our culture as well. Therefore I think KP was straight up.
 
I guess you're new here. I'm a diehard Blazer fan who loves the team; I'm just getting tired of Pritchard's constant distortions of the truth. Can you see the difference?


Yes I am new here and have already sussed you out. All you do is moan about this team, the players, the GM, everything.

Distortions of the truth? Whats the truth? Hoops.com trade rumors?
 
I seriusly doubt that was the real reason--the real reason was that Phoenix wanted someone that he was unwilling to give up. It may have been Aldridge, but we don't know.



you're calling Pritchard a liar and you admittedly don't even know what the truth is.

Awesome.
 
Last edited:
The lie here is from Quick.

Nowhere does KP mention ANY player's name.

Suns probably offered Shaq for Roy, LaMarcus and Greg, along with Raef.
 
Exactly. It had nothing to do with Pritchard "protecting" our culture, and everything to do with who he had to give up.

So you don't think Amare's attitude had anything to do with the factors surrounding a deal? It all factors in the end. Was it the deal breaker? Probably not, but if he didn't consider that Amare's been a selfish baby in the past, then KP wasn't doing his due diligence.
 
He mentioned "culture," which means he thought Stoudamire might have been a negative influence or would have somehow disrupted what the Blazers have going. I seriusly doubt that was the real reason--the real reason was that Phoenix wanted someone that he was unwilling to give up. It may have been Aldridge, but we don't know.

If any player's attitude could have a detrimental effect on a team, it would be Stoudemire. You managed to pick the worst statement upon which to take your weirdly moralistic stand. Amare Stoudemire is one of the easiest players about whom to believe that disruptive attitude would be a factor.

He said "culture and core talent." He didn't want to give up a top Blazers player for a player who might be a bit better but also might be disruptive.

But your constant war on "Pritchard lies" is just strange. He's a GM, which means part of his job is marketing, spin and disinformation. There isn't a GM (or politician) who doesn't use all those tools. Calling them liars (for that) makes just as much sense as saying a basketball player who uses a head fake is a liar. Some people's jobs involve misdirection.
 
If the Blazers turned down a trade for Amare that didn't involve B-Roy or Greg Oden, this would have to go down as a massive blunder for Kevin Pritchard.

For example, you know Outlaw/Webster weren't going anywhere in the trade. Same with Blake and Pryzbrilla.

Realistically, the most Phoenix was asking, had to be something like LaMarcus Aldridge, Rudy Fernandez, Jerryd Bayless, and Raef Lafrentz for Amare Stoudemire, Jason Richardson, Louis Amudson, and Matt Barnes.

Yeah, that's a lot to give up talent wise, but you're still left with:

PG-Steve Blake/Sergio Rodriguez
SG-Brandon Roy/Jason Richardson
SF-Jason Richardson/Travis Outlaw/Nicolas Batum
PF-Amare Stoudemire/Michael Ruffin
C- Greg Oden/Joel Pryzbrilla

If you can pair Brandon Roy and Amare Stoudemire, while having a role playing point guard, some fill ins at small forward, and two defensive centers, I think you have to take that shot.

And I'd imagine Phoenix asked for a lot less than the package I posted.
 
The lie here is from Quick.

Nowhere does KP mention ANY player's name.

Suns probably offered Shaq for Roy, LaMarcus and Greg, along with Raef.


What are you talking about? Were you sitting in on the interview Jason conducted with him?
 
If the Blazers turned down a trade for Amare that didn't involve B-Roy or Greg Oden, this would have to go down as a massive blunder for Kevin Pritchard.

For example, you know Outlaw/Webster weren't going anywhere in the trade. Same with Blake and Pryzbrilla.

Realistically, the most Phoenix was asking, had to be something like LaMarcus Aldridge, Rudy Fernandez, Jerryd Bayless, and Raef Lafrentz for Amare Stoudemire, Jason Richardson, Louis Amudson, and Matt Barnes.

Yeah, that's a lot to give up talent wise, but you're still left with:

PG-Steve Blake/Sergio Rodriguez
SG-Brandon Roy/Jason Richardson
SF-Jason Richardson/Travis Outlaw/Nicolas Batum
PF-Amare Stoudemire/Michael Ruffin
C- Greg Oden/Joel Pryzbrilla

If you can pair Brandon Roy and Amare Stoudemire, while having a role playing point guard, some fill ins at small forward, and two defensive centers, I think you have to take that shot.

And I'd imagine Phoenix asked for a lot less than the package I posted.

Where do you come up with this shit? Show me one place where that deal was ever considered except in your own mind.
 
The Blazers culture is the sum of the current players on the roster. Any changes would change that culture.

If the deal was LMA for Amare, KP may have seen losing LMA as a real hit to the culture the team has built over the past couple of seasons and not worth messing with. Regardless of whether Aldridge isn't quite as good as Amare.
 
If the Blazers turned down a trade for Amare that didn't involve B-Roy or Greg Oden, this would have to go down as a massive blunder for Kevin Pritchard.
wrong

For example, you know Outlaw/Webster weren't going anywhere in the trade. Same with Blake and Pryzbrilla.
blake and joel, correct. outlaw or webster was in every trade rumor

Realistically, the most Phoenix was asking, had to be something like LaMarcus Aldridge, Rudy Fernandez, Jerryd Bayless, and Raef Lafrentz for Amare Stoudemire, Jason Richardson, Louis Amudson, and Matt Barnes.
blazers would be incredibly dumb to give up that much and there was no indication that anything of the sort was talked about.

Yeah, that's a lot to give up talent wise, but you're still left with:

PG-Steve Blake/Sergio Rodriguez
SG-Brandon Roy/Jason Richardson
SF-Jason Richardson/Travis Outlaw/Nicolas Batum
PF-Amare Stoudemire/Michael Ruffin
C- Greg Oden/Joel Pryzbrilla
a team that plays even less defense than the current team. great.

If you can pair Brandon Roy and Amare Stoudemire, while having a role playing point guard, some fill ins at small forward, and two defensive centers, I think you have to take that shot.
i don't.

And I'd imagine Phoenix asked for a lot less than the package I posted.
you imagine a lot of things. i thought amare was a done deal to be in chicago?
 
The Blazers culture is the sum of the current players on the roster. Any changes would change that culture.

If the deal was LMA for Amare, KP may have seen losing LMA as a real hit to the culture the team has built over the past couple of seasons and not worth messing with. Regardless of whether Aldridge isn't quite as good as Amare.

Once they start getting those extensions, and see what the other guys are making, the culture will change.
 
you're calling Pritchard a liar and you admittedly don't even know what the truth is.

Awesome.

Kerr and KP are contradicting each other - one or both is definitely distorting the truth. Why do you think
it was KP who was telling the truth?
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top