Skal to the Blazers!!

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in
PCmor7 said:
Skal at least has some projectability. Early into his college career, he was considered a likely lottery pick. He just hasn't put it together.

Not saying he'll put it all together in Portland. Just that he has much more upside than Caleb and he's still really, really young.
Click to expand...

So was Cliff Alexander, Qyntel Woods, Bayless, Shavlik Randolph.... did you vomit yet or shall I continue?
 
When he had first arrived, Labissière spoke little English and required a French interpreter in all of his classes. After three to four months, he didn't need the help and became fluent.
 
BLAZINGGIANTS said:
So was Cliff Alexander, Qyntel Woods, Bayless, Shavlik Randolph.... did you vomit yet or shall I continue?
Click to expand...

If you’re actually bothered by this move maybe step back from the ledge and relax a bit.
 
Wizard Mentor said:
"As I said, I like the trades in a vacuum, but those trades were not what the team desperately needs.
Click to expand...

I dunno, man. In a vacuum, these dudes would be tiny. Not sure how well they’d handle the NBA-size basketball and opponents.

I’m glad these trades happened outside of a vacuum, IMO.
 
SwissBlazer said:
You really think that ? Like REALLY ?
Click to expand...

If he honestly believes Turner/Harkless/Leonard will have more trade value in 12 months because they are expiring contracts, then he is obviously out of touch with the facts.
 
Hoopguru said:
Irony!
Click to expand...

Didn't you ask me once what my concrete goals for Olshey were? (it was one of my bad nights, so I am a little fuzzy on the details, sorry!)

Anyway, I just (albeit somewhat grumpily) outlined 2 of them. First, I believe it is unrealistic to wait for a "blockbuster" that gets us from here to a title in one move. Making more modest moves that get a victory in a play-off series is (IMHO) a realistic and worthwhile goal. Second, he needed to get the team far enough under the lux tax threshold that the team had some flexibility in the off-season.

If you can show me where the Swanigan for Skal trade serves either of those bench-marks, I will cheerfully admit I was wrong. :cheers:
 
oldmangrouch said:
Didn't you ask me once what my concrete goals for Olshey were? (it was one of my bad nights, so I am a little fuzzy on the details, sorry!)

Anyway, I just (albeit somewhat grumpily) outlined 2 of them. First, I believe it is unrealistic to wait for a "blockbuster" that gets us from here to a title in one move. Making more modest moves that get a victory in a play-off series is (IMHO) a realistic and worthwhile goal. Second, he needed to get the team far enough under the lux tax threshold that the team had some flexibility in the off-season.

If you can show me where the Swanigan for Skal trade serves either of those bench-marks, I will cheerfully admit I was wrong. :cheers:
Click to expand...
It's Skal that has to show you that really ..he's raw but has real game..I watched a lot of film on him before the game tonight and he's quick as any 7 ft player I can think of...maybe AD quick and Skal is a serious shot blocker since high school...he needed a change of scenery and frankly...so did Biggie.
 
I always liked Skal and i don't understand why the Kings gave up on him. Maybe his game has many holes regarding D or effort but he is damn talented on offense.
 
I have a feeling he will get a few outings for 8-12 minutes and will not remain with the team beyond this Summer.
 
GDiama said:
I always liked Skal and i don't understand why the Kings gave up on him. Maybe his game has many holes regarding D or effort but he is damn talented on offense.
Click to expand...

Kings have WCS, Bagley and Giles as their young guys to develop. All are considerably better than him, he would not be getting any minutes.

No idea why they took Swanigan though. That is baffling, they would be better off with a second round pick or whatever.
 
oldmangrouch said:
If he honestly believes Turner/Harkless/Leonard will have more trade value in 12 months because they are expiring contracts, then he is obviously out of touch with the facts.
Click to expand...

My question was not this. Do you REALLLY think that NO is not aware of expirings next year and never saw that list?
 
Sarni said:
I have a feeling he will get a few outings for 8-12 minutes and will not remain with the team beyond this Summer.
Click to expand...
I heavily disagree. Hes a cost-controlled asset for next year that has the potential to be a solid 3rd/4th big at $2.5M. He has more value than Baldwin or Swanigan ever had.
 
Skal was taken for the future not for this year. But if comes and out shine Leonard or Zach in practice you don't know if he doesn't take there minutes. Skal offensely pretty skill especially around the mid range. He also got nice jump hook and show he can hit the 3. The last 2 season before this one he was average 8 point a game for the Kings and the little more than Zach and more then Leonard.
 
oldmangrouch said:
Didn't you ask me once what my concrete goals for Olshey were? (it was one of my bad nights, so I am a little fuzzy on the details, sorry!)

Anyway, I just (albeit somewhat grumpily) outlined 2 of them. First, I believe it is unrealistic to wait for a "blockbuster" that gets us from here to a title in one move. Making more modest moves that get a victory in a play-off series is (IMHO) a realistic and worthwhile goal. Second, he needed to get the team far enough under the lux tax threshold that the team had some flexibility in the off-season.

If you can show me where the Swanigan for Skal trade serves either of those bench-marks, I will cheerfully admit I was wrong. :cheers:
Click to expand...
I think Skal could be a guy much like McGee is by coming in and being factor defensively and in the paint with some offense.
When I hear any GM say we have targeted a guy, to me it usually means they are wanting to address an area for improvement because someone else isn't filling the need.
Im hoping Biggie does well in Sac Town and that both Rod & Skal can help address areas of weakness?
 
Last edited:
Skal will get his chance next season. I don't see him getting any kind of meaningful minutes this year. But who knows :dunno:

:cheers:
 
SwissBlazer said:
My question was not this. Do you REALLLY think that NO is not aware of expirings next year and never saw that list?
Click to expand...

The key word in my response was "honestly". What I REALLY think is that he is a lazy, sleazy con artist.
 
Do we know what number he's going to wear for us? He wore 3 as a rookie, and 7 the past couple years. Anyone going to have an issue if he <GASP!!> wears Brandon Roy's number?
 
Hoopguru said:
what did you think of John Nash & Patterson?
Click to expand...

Frankly, I thought Nash was an empty suit brought in to be a fall guy during a rough period in franchise history. He did do one thing pretty well, and that was interact with fans. I actually felt bad for him - like Mo Cheeks he seemed to be a nice guy who was in over his head.

Patterson was a mixed bag. I've been told that he was actually knowledgable, but it seemed like he was easily distracted by disputes and controversy. With all the nonsense Canzano and Quick were spewing about the franchise at that time, it was tough to get a clear picture!
 
oldmangrouch said:
Frankly, I thought Nash was an empty suit brought in to be a fall guy during a rough period in franchise history. He did do one thing pretty well, and that was interact with fans. I actually felt bad for him - like Mo Cheeks he seemed to be a nice guy who was in over his head.

Patterson was a mixed bag. I've been told that he was actually knowledgable, but it seemed like he was easily distracted by disputes and controversy. With all the nonsense Canzano and Quick were spewing about the franchise at that time, it was tough to get a clear picture!
Click to expand...
I guess you could say they both helped in getting rid of the Jail Blazer era.
 
oldmangrouch said:
Frankly, I thought Nash was an empty suit brought in to be a fall guy during a rough period in franchise history. He did do one thing pretty well, and that was interact with fans. I actually felt bad for him - like Mo Cheeks he seemed to be a nice guy who was in over his head.

Patterson was a mixed bag. I've been told that he was actually knowledgable, but it seemed like he was easily distracted by disputes and controversy. With all the nonsense Canzano and Quick were spewing about the franchise at that time, it was tough to get a clear picture!
Click to expand...

All criticism should be against reporters, not Patterson or Nash who tried to follow dictates from the local media which earned only more contempt from the hysterical media.
 
BLAZINGGIANTS said:
So was Cliff Alexander, Qyntel Woods, Bayless, Shavlik Randolph.... did you vomit yet or shall I continue?
Click to expand...

Please continue. I don't mind you intentionally missing the point if you don't.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)

Featured content

Back
Top