Exclusive The Kanter poll

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in

How do you feel about the Blazers making an offer to Kanter?

  • Excited!

    Votes: 64 77.1%

  • Sky is falling!

    Votes: 19 22.9%
  • Total voters
    83
jlprk said:
Your list shows 4-6 other young guys who everyone considered to be full of potential. Frye, Jack, Sergio, and Webster all had either 1 or 2 years of experience. Outlaw and Blake had 4.
Click to expand...

But what we know was that those players (as well as Oden and Rudy) showed little improvement from that '08 season, yet we still jumped to legitimacy and 54 wins the next year. The point is if that young group could go .500 and then improve from there, this young group could absolutely do the same.
 
The Blazers are NOT tanking. They are retooling. They can, because Olshey has set the table to make a retool possible.

Go Olshey!
 
BBert said:
The Blazers are NOT tanking. They are retooling. They can, because Olshey has set the table to make a retool possible.

Go Olshey!
Click to expand...

Olshey said he wasn't retooling, so I am calling it a recalibration, and feel strongly the forum should adopt this as well
 
Barnes would be nice as we need his skill set at SF. I am anxious to see Connaughton play. I have talked to a few college basketball "enthusiasts" who are not Blazer fans who think we have a steal with Pat. Could he be just as good as McLemore?

Plumlee is interesting. On one hand I don't think we want to move him or his great contract. However I think smart GM's also see his value and because of it and his small contract, he will be our trade bait. At first I thought who do we have that GS would give Barnes up for? Plumlee does fit their up- tempo system well.
 
Last edited:
Mediocre Man said:
Olshey said he wasn't retooling, so I am calling it a recalibration, and feel strongly the forum should adopt this as well
Click to expand...
:)

IIRC, he said it wasn't a 'rebuild', then he called it an 'emerging roster'.

Recalibration works for me, and I think that's pretty accurate.

:cheers:
 
Pinwheel1 said:
Barnes would be nice as we need his skill set at SF. I am anxious to see Connaughton play. I have talked to a few college basketball "enthusiasts" who are not Blazer fans who think we have a steal with Pat. Could he be just as good as McLemore?

Plumlee is interesting. On one hand I don't think we want to move him or his great contract. However I think smart GM's also see his value and because of it and his small contract, he will be our trade bait. At first I thought who do we have that GS would give Barnes up for? Plumlee does fit their up tempo system well.
Click to expand...
The GS scenario is a bit of an anomaly. They want to shed space and Barnes has become a bit of a 3rd wheel for them. I don't think they give him away, but I do believe they will give him at some sort of discount. It could be possible we may have to eat one of their negative contracts and an up and coming player. I would much rather keep Plumlee if we are getting Kanter only because Kanter's defense is pretty bad. We need to switch out if we need defense.
 
Uncle Ty said:
He was also the #2 overall draft pick. And by far a better prospect than any of our young players. And, he wasn't even our second best prospect on that team! Comparing the young talent on that group to this one is a joke.
Click to expand...

Barganani was first, Roy was 6th, many examples of players picked high that didn't amount to shit. Your response holds absolutely zero merit.

Aldridge was a project player. If you think he wasn't, then I got an igloo I need to sell you in Arizona for cheap.
 
Uncle Ty said:
How can you say that group showed little improvement and also point out that they had a significant jump in wins? So how did they improved so much yet also improved so little? Maybe it was more than expected, but with so much potential from that team it wasn't at all surprising that they improved.

You seriously are going to compare that group in term of young talents to this group?
Click to expand...

The individual players didn't show major improvements, but the team as a whole improved via chemistry and role-embracing. And yes, if we keep Kanter, I am absolutely comparing this group to that in term of young talent.
  • Dame is as talented as Roy.
  • Kanter is arguably more talented than Aldridge.
  • Leonard definitely has more potential than Frye.
  • I'd easily take CJ over Jack.
  • Crabbe compares to Webster, as Aminu does to Outlaw.
  • Frazier is probably as good now as Sergio was then.
  • Connaughton only lacks Rudy's passing skill, but has a lot more heart.
  • Plumlee vs McRoberts? Please.
  • And then we've got Vonleh, Davis, and cap space.
Yes, I see plenty of potential here, and would be thrilled if this ended up a .500 team this season.
 
magnifier661 said:
Barganani was first, Roy was 6th, many examples of players picked high that didn't amount to shit. Your response holds absolutely zero merit.

Aldridge was a project player. If you think he wasn't, then I got an igloo I need to sell you in Arizona for cheap.
Click to expand...

Aldridge wasn't a project player. He put up 15/9 as a sophomore and was Big 12 DPOY. The Bulls wanted Tyrus Thomas because they believed he had more upside (morons).
 
magnifier661 said:
The GS scenario is a bit of an anomaly. They want to shed space and Barnes has become a bit of a 3rd wheel for them. I don't think they give him away, but I do believe they will give him at some sort of discount. It could be possible we may have to eat one of their negative contracts and an up and coming player. I would much rather keep Plumlee if we are getting Kanter only because Kanter's defense is pretty bad. We need to switch out if we need defense.
Click to expand...

Yeah but their only two bad contracts left are Bogut , and Iguodala. if they get rid of Barnes that means they are keeping Iggy. And if they dump Bogut they will want a center in return.

I would love for them to take Kaman, but I bet they would want Plumlee. I agree though I want to keep him too, regardless if we get Kanter or not.
 
Pinwheel1 said:
Yeah but their only two bad contracts left are Bogut , and Iguodala. if they get rid of Barnes that means they are keeping Iggy. And if they dump Bogut they will want a center in return.

I would love for them to take Kaman, but I bet they would want Plumlee. I agree though I want to keep him too, regardless if we get Kanter or not.
Click to expand...
True...
 
I don't at all buy the comparison between LMA and Kanter.

LMA was a well rounded player when drafted. Kanter, so far, has just been a stats padder type. Sharif Abdul-Rahim reincarnated.
 
Denny Crane said:
I don't at all buy the comparison between LMA and Kanter.

LMA was a well rounded player when drafted. Kanter, so far, has just been a stats padder type. Sharif Abdul-Rahim reincarnated.
Click to expand...

Thats actually a really good comp, and now that i look at his stats, he only made the playoffs once? WTF?
 
LMA is going to be the new Richard Jefferson.
 
LMA is going to be a beast under Pop - and he was a much better prospect than Enes Kanter. He was a stick figure that already had a mid-range shot that you could not block but was able to run like a gazelle and had great lateral mobility to switching on defense. All you needed was for him to get stronger to be able to combat in the post. Kanter is a great post player but he is nowhere near as mobile as LMA was on defense and is not likely to ever be the shooter LMA is.

You can not play Kanter against a team that does small-ball well. LMA is very good in these cases. There is just no-way that Kanter is anywhere near the prospect LMA was. He is a good player and will likely develop to be better, but anyone that thinks he will ever be anything like what LMA became is deluding themselves.
 
It was scheduled to start 9:45; I don't know when it did; the Blazer press conference a day or two ago started 15 minutes late. I caught the last 5 minutes, starting about 10:13 PT. I don't know the question, but he was saying, "You know, I don't want to say anything bad about them." Was that the GM, Buford, next to him? If so, Buford joked, "Next question" when a reporter asked some question about how his decision was made. All I could catch was that Aldridge answered about how he talked to Olshey. He definitely mentioned Olshey. The reporters and Buford were almost giggly with ecstasy over getting him. It ended and he posed for pictures holding his new jersey.

He had absolutely no charisma or smiles. Same old Aldridge. He looked uncomfortable.
 
andalusian said:
LMA is going to be a beast under Pop - and he was a much better prospect than Enes Kanter. He was a stick figure that already had a mid-range shot that you could not block but was able to run like a gazelle and had great lateral mobility to switching on defense. All you needed was for him to get stronger to be able to combat in the post. Kanter is a great post player but he is nowhere near as mobile as LMA was on defense and is not likely to ever be the shooter LMA is.

You can not play Kanter against a team that does small-ball well. LMA is very good in these cases. There is just no-way that Kanter is anywhere near the prospect LMA was. He is a good player and will likely develop to be better, but anyone that thinks he will ever be anything like what LMA became is deluding themselves.
Click to expand...

One is also a center and one is a PF, who refuses to play center - under any circumstance.

Furthermore; Kanter was the #3 pick for a reason and, despite what you claim, LMA is not a "much better" prospect. http://search.draftexpress.com/profile/Enes-Kanter-5168/
Kanter is no slouch, either. His lane agility: 11.30. 3/4? 3.26. (source: http://www.nba.com/jazz/features/nba-draft-combine-primer)

Lamarcus' at the combine? 12.02 and 3.43. (source: http://www.oregonlive.com/blazers/i...lard_talks_defense_thomas_robinson_on_th.html)

So please tell me how LaMarcus runs like a Gazelle and Enes Kanter is not mobile.

Additionally, its easier to play small ball vs LMA because he shoots a majority of his shots from the perimeter, I.E. less need for a post defender in the game / true shot blocker. Kanter, on the other hand, will post the FUCK UP out of any midget guarding him and get BUCKETS. ALL. DAY. EVERY. DAY.

Draymond Green playing center could guard LMA a lot better than he could guard Enes Kanter, you can take that to the bank.

Who is deluding themselves now? Research goes a long way before forming an opinion.
 
Damn! I wish I'd seen the whole thing. Is this Buford?

 
23 year old huge center who has shown some nice offensive move and can be a beast on the boards. Sure he makes Lillard look like an all D first teamer. Its not a bad sign because as long as he doesnt completely suck he will be an easily tradeable contract next season.
 
jlprk said:
It was scheduled to start 9:45; I don't know when it did; the Blazer press conference a day or two ago started 15 minutes late. I caught the last 5 minutes, starting about 10:13 PT. I don't know the question, but he was saying, "You know, I don't want to say anything bad about them." Was that the GM, Buford, next to him? If so, Buford joked, "Next question" when a reporter asked some question about how his decision was made. All I could catch was that Aldridge answered about how he talked to Olshey. He definitely mentioned Olshey. The reporters and Buford were almost giggly with ecstasy over getting him. It ended and he posed for pictures holding his new jersey.

He had absolutely no charisma or smiles. Same old Aldridge. He looked uncomfortable.
Click to expand...
I agree, he looked nervous and unsure of himself. Talked about losing sleep over it all repeatedly and didn't really have a solid answer for his decision. He did mention being in the history books in Portland and his roots here. Maybe a clear case of second guessing himself. Seemed happy for Pop to direct his answer by not selling him on anything but simply telling him what he should do. I think it came down to him saying, you come here and Tim will sign for 2 years and I'll coach for 5 more
 
Rhal said:
23 year old huge center who has shown some nice offensive move and can be a beast on the boards. Sure he makes Lillard look like an all D first teamer. Its not a bad sign because as long as he doesnt completely suck he will be an easily tradeable contract next season.
Click to expand...
Kanter gets a lot of offensive rebounds..and converts them at a high clip or passes well out of traffic. He's a beast on offense in the paint
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

HailBlazers
Game Thread Official Kanter Vs. Adams
2 3
Replies
83
Views
6K
HailBlazers
HailBlazers
Mediocre Man
Blazers would have landed Kanter
2 3
Replies
70
Views
4K
jlprk
jlprk
wizenheimer
Kanter & Wyden: A Love Story
Replies
0
Views
92
wizenheimer
wizenheimer
Ed O
  • Poll Poll
Millsap: the Poll
Replies
28
Views
2K
LittleAlex
L
e_blazer
  • Poll Poll
Quick's Poll - 1
Replies
3
Views
422
Samuel
Samuel

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Back
Top