Crimson the Cat
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Sep 24, 2008
- Messages
- 2,196
- Likes
- 38
- Points
- 48
I would not be opposed to adding Nate Robinson to the team. We would be better, whether he's a starter or reserve.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I'm not sure I get your point. Wallace was two years older, and played 50% more minutes per game. Exactly how do you compare these numbers and what do they show? The only clear thing I see is that Wallace goes to he line a lot more, but shoots much poorer percentages from 3pt and FT, and turns the ball over a lot more.
I have to say ... and maybe it's because this management team is much more secretive than previous ones ... but our local media literally has zero inside information about this team. They piggy-back on rumors from national writers or writers from other markets or they do pure speculation that anyone on this forum could do.
It's really quite pathetic, and it makes me think that they really aren't working very hard at The O, The Fan, KGW, KATU, KOIN, The Columbian and The Trib.
Obviously there is some info out there to be had. Ric Bucher, Adrian Wanfeioanfieanpfvneapvah from Yahoo!, Henry Abbott, etc. All of those dudes have scooped local media in just the past week.
C'mon guys! Do your homework!
My point is that Nic is almost two years ahead of where Wallace was, and I expect in another two years will be the better of the two.
It's not about helping Houston it's about finding a willing trade partner. Without Yao, and especially without Battier (In this scenario he is now our guy) Houston isn't a threat.But why help Houston?
He's a nice role player, but I think Przybilla is just too much to lose for just a player like Battier. The Blazers lose too much size.
It's not about helping Houston it's about finding a willing trade partner. Without Yao, and especially without Battier (In this scenario he is now our guy) Houston isn't a threat.
I wouldn't trade Joel unless we had secured at least a near starter quality PF if not a great backup PF/C or outright C. LMA contrary to popular belief is more then just an adequate backup center he is actually quite good. The reason we got killed the last two years when he played center is because he had Frye or Outlaw as his partner in the post. Frye and Outlaw make LMA look like Moses Malone in terms of rebounding. If LMA had a real PF like Lee/Millsap/Landry/Bass/Haslem or even Chuck Hayes, then we could get away with LMA being our primary back up at center. I think adding Battier for three years is worth it. Joel is a luxury a wonderful luxury but you have to consider trading him if we pick up another quality big especially a PF/C or pure C.
How did you know I was Jason Quick? I tried so hard to actually make sense and entertain reasonable ideas...I guess my endless array of trade possibilities without even the slightest documentation is what gave me away. Well, since I've been outted I will just have to go work on my next piece trashing Greg Oden.Quick is what you get if you take one of the posters here who love to build hypothetical trades and give him/her a media outlet.
I think a lot of teams would kill to have LMA as their starting center let alone a back up. Thanks for the propsactually decent points on why we got killed when LMA went to the 5

Do you really expect nic to average 16pts, 7reb, 3ast, 2stl and a block per game?
I am a little sad because that makes Miller plan F. That can't be a good omen.
I agree. 1) It's either sad because I think Miller should have been a solid Plan B or C at worst or 2) it's sad that KP seems to be very committed to addressing the small forward position first so he doesn't have to make the hard decision to trade Steve Blake (that's my opinion anyway).
If Andre Miller is the best we can do from not trading RLEC I'm going to be pissed!
KP, you're better than this!
If Andre Miller is the best we can do from not trading RLEC I'm going to be pissed!
KP, you're better than this!
I'm not sure KP is better than this?
He hasn't really shown that he is all that great at anything but judging talent. I don't mean this as a slam against KP, but more of an observation.

I'm not sure KP is better than this?
He hasn't really shown that he is all that great at anything but judging talent. I don't mean this as a slam against KP, but more of an observation.
I agree. 1) It's either sad because I think Miller should have been a solid Plan B or C at worst or 2) it's sad that KP seems to be very committed to addressing the small forward position first so he doesn't have to make the hard decision to trade Steve Blake (that's my opinion anyway).
I'm not sure KP is better than this?
He hasn't really shown that he is all that great at anything but judging talent. I don't mean this as a slam against KP, but more of an observation.
I believe it isn't necessarily his ability to close out a trade, but it is overall philosophy of having the owner, GM, and coach all on the same page when assembling a roster. I really believe that Nate has had too much input on which players to go after and which ones to keep.
Stop with this. At some point, Kevin Pritchard has to be held responsible for much of this. Trying to make Nate take most of the blame is just stupid.
Well it is part of the philosophy, so I'm not trying to deflect blame from Pritchard. It's his philosophy, so he has to take responsibility. I'm just pointing out that this isn't a 1 man show like it was back with Bob Whittsit. Kevin is a big believer of chemistry within the entire organization.
At some point Kevin does need to override McMillan if Paul Allen is giving him the green light and go with his gut if he feels that he has a chance to get a major talent upgrade.
How are you even sure Nate has a big say in the talent we acquire anyways? I'm sure he has some input, but it probably isn't as much as some people think.
