We Have No Plan

[BLAZER PROPHET]

If I understand Cho, there are currently no plans on trade ideas to improve the team.

If so, then how in the world did we end up with 5 SG's??? Especially in that we took a second round pick from Utah and grossly overpaid him to do what the team already felt Williams can do.

Well, here's hoping Cho can clean this mess up created by Al Davis II and Vulvan.

 

[Ed O]

If I understand Cho, there are currently no plans on trade ideas to improve the team.

Link?

Ed O.

 

[Nikolokolus]

Apparently you don't understand Cho? He's on the record saying that this team is 2 or 3 moves away from being a legit title contender. I'd say standing pat is probably the furthest thing from his mind.

 

[BLAZER PROPHET]

I understand that. But he stated in one of his news conferences that he came here knowing we are a couple of players away, but having no current plans from either he or the team in place. I understand him not coming here with plans, but what was the team doing obtaining matthews, our 5th SG, without a plan of their own on how to straighten out our roster situation? That's whack.

 

[SlyPokerDog]

Cho and I have many plans.

http://www.picpaste.com/Sly_and_Cho.jpg

 

[blazerboy30]

Apparently you don't understand Cho? He's on the record saying that this team is 2 or 3 moves away from being a legit title contender. I'd say standing pat is probably the furthest thing from his mind.

See there is your problem. Cho thinks this team is 2 or 3 moves away from being a contender. But you're assuming he wants this team to be a contender. I never heard him say that.

 

[THE HCP]

Where's TradeBob when we need him!

 

[EL PRESIDENTE]

via BlazersBanter: Cho: "In any organization, the GM has got to run stuff by the owner. I've always been in an organization where ... we always (did)."

 

[Nikolokolus]

I understand that. But he stated in one of his news conferences that he came here knowing we are a couple of players away, but having no current plans from either he or the team in place. I understand him not coming here with plans, but what was the team doing obtaining matthews, our 5th SG, without a plan of their own on how to straighten out our roster situation? That's whack.

Matthews replaces Martell's contributions and with Rudy almost certainly gone he soaks up his minutes as well. That leaves 3 rookies added to the roster who probably won't be expected to contribute except in the most dire circumstances. But really, it means Cho is playing cards with a lot of chips on his side of the table. He's got moveable pieces in Jerryd, Miller, Przybilla, Rudy, Williams, Johnson, Babbitt, Dante, Pendergraph, Koponen, Freeland and Claver ...

 

[Nikolokolus]

See there is your problem. Cho thinks this team is 2 or 3 moves away from being a contender. But you're assuming he wants this team to be a contender. I never heard him say that.

Good point.

 

[craigehlo]

If I understand Cho, there are currently no plans on trade ideas to improve the team.

Actually in the Mike Barrett interview with Paul Allen, Allen said he and Cho discussed trades to improve the team when he was in Helsinki. I think his ideas on that front were a big part of what he got the gig.

 

[BLAZER PROPHET]

Matthews replaces Martell's contributions and with Rudy almost certainly gone he soaks up his minutes as well. That leaves 3 rookies added to the roster who probably won't be expected to contribute except in the most dire circumstances. But really, it means Cho is playing cards with a lot of chips on his side of the table. He's got moveable pieces in Jerryd, Miller, Przybilla, Rudy, Williams, Johnson, Babbitt, Dante, Pendergraph, Koponen, Freeland and Claver ...

But how can Rudy be "almost gone" when Al Davis, II and Vulcan clearly had no plan? Now, maybe they felt the GM they would eventually hire would straighten things out, but there is no such thing as a guaranteed trade in the NBA. Bottom line is that they added a 5th SG with no tangible idea of how to even out the roster.

 

[BLAZER PROPHET]

Actually in the Mike Barrett interview with Paul Allen, Allen said he and Cho discussed trades to improve the team when he was in Helsinki. I think his ideas on that front were a big part of what he got the gig.

Well, I missed that. It makes me feel a bit better, but only a bit. If a team is going to obtain a 5th SG (or a 5th player at any position), they should have a deal already in place to properly trim the roster and improve the team. Not a bunch of "maybe" talk. It's just very irresponsible and gives further insight to the disfunctional management we have- IMHO.

 

[Sug]

If I understand Cho, there are currently no plans on trade ideas to improve the team.

If so, then how in the world did we end up with 5 SG's??? Especially in that we took a second round pick from Utah and grossly overpaid him to do what the team already felt Williams can do.

Well, here's hoping Cho can clean this mess up created by Al Davis II and Vulvan.

You don't understand him.

 

[Ed O]

But how can Rudy be "almost gone" when Al Davis, II and Vulcan clearly had no plan? Now, maybe they felt the GM they would eventually hire would straighten things out, but there is no such thing as a guaranteed trade in the NBA. Bottom line is that they added a 5th SG with no tangible idea of how to even out the roster.

That's the bottom line of how you see things, perhaps. Not necessarily how they are.

Matthews will probably be the backup small forward, in addition to playing some shooting guard. Bayless will probably be the backup point guard, in addition to playing some shooting guard. Rudy is a SG, Williams is a SG, and Roy is a SG. That is presumably where you came up with the five SGs complaint.

In any case, why is it a problem to have five good shooting guards? Would we be better off having three good ones and two crappy ones?

Ed O.

 

[BLAZER PROPHET]

You don't understand him.

That's what my wife and ABM tell me all the time.

 

[SlyPokerDog]

You don't understand him.

I feel that I do from the 2 brief moments that I got to touch him yesterday.

(and brief as in short amount of time, not that I actually touched his briefs. I gotta always stay one step ahead of you pervs.)

 

[PHXBlazer1]

Maybe we should give it a little time. I don't know, like, more than 24 hours?

 

[Nikolokolus]

But how can Rudy be "almost gone" when Al Davis, II and Vulcan clearly had no plan? Now, maybe they felt the GM they would eventually hire would straighten things out, but there is no such thing as a guaranteed trade in the NBA. Bottom line is that they added a 5th SG with no tangible idea of how to even out the roster.

I mean Rudy wants out, Jason Quick even reported today that he asked for a trade before last year's deadline, the team tried to move him on draft night and Rudy (supposedly?) is asking for his release so he can go back to Spain. If anything adding a shooting guard who can hit a three and play solid wing defense sounds like a contingency at worst and a plan for the future at best -- it means they aren't beholden to Rudy showing up for training camp, they are no longer in need of his services and have somebody to plug into the roster at the backup 2 and 3 spots.

It's not like it's going to be as difficult as soliving differential equations or proving string theory while drunk on fifteen beers to make moves to balance the roster. You seem to be over-thinking this.

 

[craigehlo]

Cho will have a plan in place. The Blazer addressed one issue, perimeter D, with the Matthew's signing already. After seeing JRich kill the Blazers in the 1st round, it was a solid move IMHO. That move also had the side effect of answering the question of what to do with Rudy and Bayless. Both will likely get moved at some point in the season.

I think it's pretty obvious the PG spot is the glaring question for the franchise.

 

[BLAZER PROPHET]

That's the bottom line of how you see things, perhaps. Not necessarily how they are.

Matthews will probably be the backup small forward, in addition to playing some shooting guard. Bayless will probably be the backup point guard, in addition to playing some shooting guard. Rudy is a SG, Williams is a SG, and Roy is a SG. That is presumably where you came up with the five SGs complaint.

In any case, why is it a problem to have five good shooting guards? Would we be better off having three good ones and two crappy ones?

Ed O.

I have 3 problems with this, Ed:

1) I disagree with your first point out of hand. It's clear team management were selecting free agents and mudding up the roster with no clear plan in place to deal with it.

2) I see your point about playing players out of their natural position, but that usually hurts a team and not helps it. Yes, there are exceptions, but building a team via playing players out of position is, IMHO, both short sighted and stupid.

3) What good is it to have 5 good PG's (not that we do) when only one can play at SG at a time and the 'rotation' is two players deep? Are we planning for 3 injuries? Well, maybe.

4) Is it really wise to commit 5 players on a 15 man roster to just one position? I can see 4, but not 5.

 

[BLAZER PROPHET]

I mean Rudy wants out, Jason Quick even reported today that he asked for a trade before last year's deadline, the team tried to move him on draft night and Rudy (supposedly?) is asking for his release so he can go back to Spain. If anything adding a shooting guard who can hit a three and play solid wing defense sounds like a contingency at worst and a plan for the future at best -- it means they aren't beholden to Rudy showing up for training camp, they are no longer in need of his services and have somebody to plug into the roster at the backup 2 and 3 spots.

It's not like it's going to be as difficult as soliving differential equations or proving string theory while drunk on fifteen beers to make moves to balance the roster. You seem to be over-thinking this.

And Rudy is still here. See what I mean?

 

[BLAZER PROPHET]

Cho will have a plan in place. The Blazer addressed one issue, perimeter D, with the Matthew's signing already. After seeing JRich kill the Blazers in the 1st round, it was a solid move IMHO. That move also had the side effect of answering the question of what to do with Rudy and Bayless. Both will likely get moved at some point in the season.

I think it's pretty obvious the PG spot is the glaring question for the franchise.

Good post.

 

[Ed O]

I have 3 problems with this, Ed:

You had four, it appears

1) I disagree with your first point out of hand. It's clear team management were selecting free agents and mudding up the roster with no clear plan in place to deal with it.

Is that your conclusion or your hypothesis? It seems like your mind is made up, irrespective of the evidence.

2) I see your point about playing players out of their natural position, but that usually hurts a team and not helps it. Yes, there are exceptions, but building a team via playing players out of position is, IMHO, both short sighted and stupid.

Matthews played the small forward spot in college. Bayless has been a PG for much of his life. I'm not sure that they ARE playing out of position.

3) What good is it to have 5 good PG's (not that we do) when only one can play at SG at a time and the 'rotation' is two players deep? Are we planning for 3 injuries? Well, maybe.

Planning for injury is good. I'd much rather have more good players than fewer.

SG and SF have a lot of overlap in terms of swingmen who can play both effectively. PG is a more isolated position where there aren't many who can do both well.

4) Is it really wise to commit 5 players on a 15 man roster to just one position? I can see 4, but not 5.

As I said: Bayless is a PG. Matthews very well might be a SF. That leaves us with 3 SGs on the roster. If you give "half credit" as SG to each of the two guys, then that's four. If Rudy holds out/leaves/whatever, then that's 3.

I don't see a huge problem with this, and I don't think, even if there is no specific consolidation trade coming, that "accumulating the best talent possible" is not a plan.

Ed O.

 

[Nikolokolus]

And Rudy is still here. See what I mean?

"Here?" Where is "here" exactly? The season doesn't start until the end of October; by my count they've got a good solid 3 months to find him a new home before they even have to worry about a rotation. Worst case scenario he rots on the bench and pouts his ass off.

 

[Cake]

I understand that. But he stated in one of his news conferences that he came here knowing we are a couple of players away, but having no current plans from either he or the team in place. I understand him not coming here with plans, but what was the team doing obtaining matthews, our 5th SG, without a plan of their own on how to straighten out our roster situation? That's whack.

WTF is he supposed to do?

Q: So, Rich, now that you've been GM for 15 minutes, what's the first thing you're going to do?

A: Well, I'm going to explore a trade of Nicolas Batum for Chris Paul, which I heard was a rumor. I know this is because I was checking out the OregonLive message board and a guy named Mixum was saying that I'd be an idiot if I didn't do this. Then...you know, I've never liked Jerryd Bayless. He sucks! So I'll trade his ass too. And what's up with that punk-ass Rudy Fernandez? It's like that dude doesn't even want to be here. Gone. Lamarcus Aldridge plays a little like a 6th grade girl. I'd trade him too if I get a chance but his contract sucks so I doubt that'll happen. And I saw an MRI of Brandon Roy's knees. Ouch! Can you say arthritis? I know I can! So he's gone too. Okay...next question?

Just because he didn't SAY what he has in mind doesn't mean he has nothing in mind. Absence of proof is not proof of absence.

 

[mgb]

1) I disagree with your first point out of hand. It's clear team management were selecting free agents and mudding up the roster with no clear plan in place to deal with it.

Have you been sitting in on team meetings??

 

[mgb]

Wesley's signing has just been official today and you expected a few mins later another trade to take place? You have no idea what the time table for any plans the Blazers have let alone know if they have one or not in the first place.

 

[hasoos]

I have 3 problems with this, Ed:

1) I disagree with your first point out of hand. It's clear team management were selecting free agents and mudding up the roster with no clear plan in place to deal with it.

2) I see your point about playing players out of their natural position, but that usually hurts a team and not helps it. Yes, there are exceptions, but building a team via playing players out of position is, IMHO, both short sighted and stupid.

3) What good is it to have 5 good PG's (not that we do) when only one can play at SG at a time and the 'rotation' is two players deep? Are we planning for 3 injuries? Well, maybe.

4) Is it really wise to commit 5 players on a 15 man roster to just one position? I can see 4, but not 5.

At the same time, is it worth freaking out about the SG situation, when 2 of them most people couldn't give a fuck if they are happy or not? I don't know how to explain this, but I really don't give a shit if Rudy is happy sitting as the 15th guy on the bench. Then to top it off it's not very often a rookie gets playing time under Nate anyhow. They have to be as good as somebody named Brandon ROy for that to happen. Mathews is an upgrade to Rudy and Martell both. So I am supposed to be upset that a player(s) I don't give a shit about don't get playing time?

 

[Masbee]

Matthews replaces Martell's contributions and with Rudy almost certainly gone he soaks up his minutes as well. That leaves 3 rookies added to the roster who probably won't be expected to contribute except in the most dire circumstances. But really, it means Cho is playing cards with a lot of chips on his side of the table. He's got moveable pieces in Jerryd, Miller, Przybilla, Rudy, Williams, Johnson, Babbitt, Dante, Pendergraph, Koponen, Freeland and Claver ...

Hmmm. A few quarters. A few nickles. Lotsa pennies.

Maybe we can parlay all that change into a Benjamin!!!