What constitutes being a "Fan"? A Jerry McGuire Moment........

[BrianFromWA]

My grandma's house was a block away...played many times in that park growing up.

What's the significance?

OT: How did they change the stonework in "Mr. Holland's Opus" to make it look like Kennedy High?

 

[Rodolfo]

Only you and I truly understand the beauty of this photo! I actually cried when I first saw this! Well done!

Thank you sir...I saw a lot of it too. I literally grew up across the street

Great way to get your childhood home in the paper eh? Hey were you an extra in Mr. Hollands Opus?

 

[Rodolfo]

They changed the windows

 

[THE HCP]

In the movie you see them actually hang the JFK sign over the Grant one. The significance is R and myself both went there! GHS baby!

 

[Rodolfo]

I was there during the last shot of the film(Dryfus in the Drivers Ed scene of the movie)...my first paycheck was $132 for being an extra and I wasn't even on camara!

 

[Nikolokolus]

But wouldn't you say that somehow between them Rudy and Webster and Travis should potentially have given us that?

I feel like I need to highlight this part because it's key. Platooning 2 or 3 players and saying, "Between X,Y and Z they duplicate what A gives you." is in point of fact not the same thing. If you are teammate of X,Y and Z and know that on any given night one of them could wildly fluctuate (sometimes they give you 20, others they give you 2) you aren't going to explicitly trust them to help you ... you may hope they can help you, but in the back of your mind you're not sure who your real wingman is, you're not sure that if you falter somebody will in fact step up and give you that lift you need. Think about this way, You are Brandon Roy, you're the play-maker and you have decide to try to score yourself or pass it off to your "safety valve." Let's say that's Travis, would you rather have the "Travis" that gives you a steady diet of 10 points per game +/- 3 pts. with a FG% of 43 +/- 5% or the Travis that gives you 10 points per game +/- 9 pts. with a FG% of 43 +/- 20%? That's difference between a youngin' and a veteran -- steadiness and consistency. It's like the difference between a reliable and somewhat boring toyota pickup truck and a tempermental Jaguar sports car, over 82+ games you want to make sure the goddamn thing is going to run and not be in the fucking shop 50% of the time.

As I said, Paul>Roy, but I don't see the difference between the two being that much, especially when you look at that Paul generally is attacking the whole game, where Roy is still on-and-off. The point that LMA only sometimes fills the role of safety valve is a good one, but I'm not sure it's due to "inexperience". Perhaps it is, and if he just plays through it for another 3 years or so it'll happen that he's a good safety valve. It seems that our SFs should be able to cover the 16ppg @ 40% 3.

Besides Paul playing at a level to put him in the discussion for MVP last season, Brandon isn't quite the initiator and catalyst that Paul is for his team (although he's a great initiator and play maker in his own right). As for the rest I think you answered your own question. Whether the inconsistency is due to age, inexperience or whatever, the fact of the matter is that Roy doesn't quite yet have his full time Robin to his batman.

So my projection of 58 wins is hurting (though I'm holding out hope for that 40-12 finish). Some may say that I had an overly optimistic view, and shouldn't let that get in the way of everyone else enjoying the team. So I ask...for those that picked 48 wins or whatever, do you just accept and embrace the poor play because you knew it'd be coming?

The frustrating thing for me isn't that I picked a wrong number. It's when people come on and say "what, like you're smarter than Nate?!" or "How much pro basketball have you played?". The frustration comes b/c even in my relative inexperience in the game I see problems AND relatively immediate solutions in our team, and I'm not alone. There are posters on here much smarter and more experienced in the game than me, and THEY see the same types of things. So it comes down to a couple of choices for me: post reasons why we're not good, or just keep thinking it'll get better with time. It gets better with time and coaching and effort.

Hey, I say predict whatever you want, it's all just for fun anyway. I'm not so emotionally invested in the 47 win prediction that I put up in the summer that I'll care if I'm off the mark, however, this doesn't mean that I'm "embracing" poor play because I saw it coming, it just means I'm not getting emotionally rocked by individual losses or individual bad performances (trends are a different story).

Criticism is fine in my book, the thing I object to is the (seemingly) constant string of negativity coming from people because they seem so impatient and intolerant of setbacks or failure. By all means people should talk about how this team can improve and areas that are concerning, but it sure would be "neat-o" if people would exercise just a little bit of perspective and restraint in their posts.

 

[BrianFromWA]

I feel like I need to highlight this part because it's key. Platooning 2 or 3 players and saying, "Between X,Y and Z they duplicate what A gives you." is in point of fact not the same thing. If you are teammate of X,Y and Z and know that on any given night one of them could wildly fluctuate (sometimes they give you 20, others they give you 2) you aren't going to explicitly trust them to help you ... you may hope they can help you, but in the back of your mind you're not sure who your real wingman is, you're not sure that if you falter somebody will in fact step up and give you that lift you need. Think about this way, You are Brandon Roy, you're the play-maker and you have decide to try to score yourself or pass it off to your "safety valve." Let's say that's Travis, would you rather have the "Travis" that gives you a steady diet of 10 points per game +/- 3 pts. with a FG% of 43 +/- 5% or the Travis that gives you 10 points per game +/- 9 pts. with a FG% of 43 +/- 20%? That's difference between a youngin' and a veteran -- steadiness and consistency. It's like the difference between a reliable and somewhat boring toyota pickup truck and a tempermental Jaguar sports car, over 82+ games you want to make sure the goddamn thing is going to run and not be in the fucking shop 50% of the time.

Helluva point. My contention was that, on any given night whoever Brandon throws the ball to averages about what Peja gives you. But I like your explanation better. That begs the question: is it just time that turns Travis/Rudy/Webster into Peja? How strong is the correlation between consistency and tenure?

Besides Paul playing at a level to put him in the discussion for MVP last season, Brandon isn't quite the initiator and catalyst that Paul is for his team (although he's a great initiator and play maker in his own right). As for the rest I think you answered your own question. Whether the inconsistency is due to age, inexperience or whatever, the fact of the matter is that Roy doesn't quite yet have his full time Robin to his batman.

I'm a little less willing to put it on "age" or "inexperience" instead of poor play. But I'll grant the bolded point. Again the question: is it just the time factor? In two years without doing anything differently LMA will be the Robin?

Hey, I say predict whatever you want, it's all just for fun anyway. I'm not so emotionally invested in the 47 win prediction that I put up in the summer that I'll care if I'm off the mark, however, this doesn't mean that I'm "embracing" poor play because I saw it coming, it just means I'm not getting emotionally rocked by individual losses or individual bad performances (trends are a different story).

Criticism is fine in my book, the thing I object to is the (seemingly) constant string of negativity coming from people because they seem so impatient and intolerant of setbacks or failure. By all means people should talk about how this team can improve and areas that are concerning, but it sure would be "neat-o" if people would exercise just a little bit of perspective and restraint in their posts.

I'm emotionally invested in the team, not a number. I've said multiple times that if we play well and just lose to BOS or LAL or CLE or whatever, that's ok. If we play like crap and win, I'm not going to praise the greatness of a team that played like crap. For my ticket and cable money, I want to see a product that puts forth effort and improvement. The problem is that I'm seeing trends I identified 2 years ago progressing even today.

And just b/c I'm curious and vain, am I one that needs "perspective and restraint"?

 

[oldmangrouch]

NIKOLOKOLUS, you raise 2 valid points.

First, restraint and perspective are good things.

Second, there is a difference between isolated mistakes and trends. Those of us who are getting upset see negative trends that need to be addressed. I don't want to speak for others, but I feel as if the problems are painfully obvious....and it makes me crazy that people pretend they aren't there, or that they will magically go away.

The Blazers are a soft team that doesn't defend the perimeter, doesn't always hustle, and constantly settles for jump-shots. "Letting the cake bake" has nothing to do with those issues - it is just a mindles non-sequitor.

 

[bodyman5001]

The Blazers are a soft team that doesn't defend the perimeter, doesn't always hustle, and constantly settles for jump-shots. "Letting the cake bake" has nothing to do with those issues - it is just a mindles non-sequitor.

I cut the rest of the post, but it was quite good too. However, the part I left is the most obvious issue.

People want to talk about getting experience, but how does experience fix these issues? Are they going to get embarrassed so many times that they figure this out as a collective? The entire identity of this team is out of whack.

I honestly don't want to have a jump shooting team mean this much to me. You are just setting yourself up for disappointment when you lose in the playoffs to an inferior team. Sure, I want good shooters who can hit shots when our offense needs help. That just shouldn't be priority number one IMO.

 

[Nikolokolus]

I'm emotionally invested in the team, not a number. I've said multiple times that if we play well and just lose to BOS or LAL or CLE or whatever, that's ok. If we play like crap and win, I'm not going to praise the greatness of a team that played like crap. For my ticket and cable money, I want to see a product that puts forth effort and improvement. The problem is that I'm seeing trends I identified 2 years ago progressing even today.

And just b/c I'm curious and vain, am I one that needs "perspective and restraint"?

I disagree that we haven't seen effort and improvement, this team is much better on offense than two or three years ago ... they are still very much a crappy team on defense, but to say there hasn't been substantial improvement in not only the talent level, but also the level of effort ignores the simple fact that this team is winning more than it is losing -- think about just how shitty they were in 2005-06 and compare that team to this squad. I do agree that this team still needs to get tougher and show a little more of a nasty streak (especially attacking the rim and playing aggressive perimeter defense) but then again I think KP has plans to rectify those deficiencies either before the deadline or during this summer's FA period; he didn't trade for Raef Lafrentz for nothing after all.

Just for the record I don't think all people around here post stuff that I can't read, Your posts while generally a little on the high expectations side have never struck me as the chicken little crap that I've read (the real offenders know who they are). The call for perspective and restraint is actually more about making this internet "community" a little more bearable; this place stops being much fun to discuss the Blazers when it's overrun with wave after wave of negativity and venom (however much it made me chuckle at the time, getting called a "daft cunt" by another poster over the weekend was a bit much).

NIKOLOKOLUS, you raise 2 valid points.

First, restraint and perspective are good things.

Second, there is a difference between isolated mistakes and trends. Those of us who are getting upset see negative trends that need to be addressed. I don't want to speak for others, but I feel as if the problems are painfully obvious....and it makes me crazy that people pretend they aren't there, or that they will magically go away.

The Blazers are a soft team that doesn't defend the perimeter, doesn't always hustle, and constantly settles for jump-shots. "Letting the cake bake" has nothing to do with those issues - it is just a mindles non-sequitor.

I agree they are soft, and yes they do lose focus on rotations and don't always put in the effort you'd like to see at the defensive end, and yes they do take an inordinate number of jump shots, but I see this partly as a product of the kinds of players KP has traded for and drafted ... but that doesn't mean this roster is set in stone.

ps. I hate the, "let the cake bake" mantra, it's right up there with the word "change" from the presidential campaign.

 

[LameR]

Whether the inconsistency is due to age, inexperience or whatever, the fact of the matter is that Roy doesn't quite yet have his full time Robin to his batman.

There's some great posts in this thread, especially by Nikolokolus and Brian toward the end. Lots of points raised, but I quoted this part because it lead me to ask myself if Rudy could at least step into that discussion down the line. Don't get me wrong, I'm hoping it's crowded between Aldridge, Rudy, and Oden, and I'm not saying Aldridge won't keep progressing, but I think Rudy's also got some major potential too. He's come in and done a lot more than I expected him to do in adjusting to the league. I think a Roy-Aldridge duo would probably work a bit better, but Roy-Rudy on the wing (or one at point at times) could be pretty deadly a few years down the road. I guess I'll redo my self-imposed question to this...Do you see Rudy's talent leading him to starting given the team probably consolidates over the next year or two? Or do you see him as filling the Manu role? Since we're also talking about utilizing potential, how do we maximize his?

Sorry if this was kind of hi-jacking, but I thought it was an interesting thing to think about, and at least somewhat related.

 

[Minstrel]

Do you see Rudy's talent leading him to starting given the team probably consolidates over the next year or two? Or do you see him as filling the Manu role? Since we're also talking about utilizing potential, how do we maximize his?

It may or may not be fair to Rudy, but I think he'd be a lethal option off the bench. I don't see him fitting well into the starting lineup, since I don't think he and Roy in the backcourt would be able to adequately deal with point guards, defensively, and neither is really well-suited to small forward. I still think that the future is a Bayless/Roy starting front court, with Rudy taking all the reserve guard minutes. A 36/30/30 split in minutes between Roy/Bayless/Rudy might be ideal. Of course, if one of Bayless or Rudy becomes a bonafide star, then that would have to be adjusted.

 

[DaRizzle]

Please DaRizzle...I would expect more from you than to blow something off as blind homerism instead of being lazy and condescending.

There were 3 players that played any time at all at C last year.
Tyson Chandler: 35mpg, 11.8 ppg, 11.7 rpg
Melvin Ely: 12mpg, 3.9ppg, 2.8 rpg (in both PF and C)
Hilton Armstrong: 15mpg, 4.6 ppg, 2.9 rpg

Totals: (b/c I don't want to have you call me out for blind homerism for not dissecting which roles were the "C" roles, I'm "averaging" Ely and Armstrongs minutes, since they're about the same at C. I'm assuming the extra 13mpg were split between a hybrid of both that got 4.3 ppg and 2.9 rpg in those 13 min)

48mpg, 16.1 ppg, 14.6 rpg.

Now let's look at our boys, shall we? Without the glare of blind homerism, here's what ESPN sees:

Joel: 23 mpg, 6.3 ppg. 8.2 rpg.
Greg: 22mpg, 7.6ppg. 7.2 rpg.

Total: 45mpg, 13.9ppg, 15.4 rpg. I won't even upscale it, I'll just leave it at 45 min.

So I can't use Joel and Greg to approximate what NO got from it's center core? I'm disappointed.

Alright, Im drunk right now but I MIGHT devilwinkhave been too harsh on you...I really dont want to look at numbers right now so I will get back to you tomorrow

Sigh, even me, DaRizzle, cant be perfect 100% of the time...

 

[UKRAINEFAN]

In general I don't have a problem with the extremes, in any society there are the people in the middle and the extremes. I agree with gotime, it's interesting. I thought there were some good insightful posts in this thread, especially from Ed O and Natebishop3.

Maybe HCP just misses Hap, who doesn't seem to post anymore, he doesn't have anyone to tease anymore. I know I always got a smile from watching those two go back and forth.

 

[gatorpops]

I cut the rest of the post, but it was quite good too. However, the part I left is the most obvious issue.

People want to talk about getting experience, but how does experience fix these issues? Are they going to get embarrassed so many times that they figure this out as a collective? The entire identity of this team is out of whack.

I honestly don't want to have a jump shooting team mean this much to me. You are just setting yourself up for disappointment when you lose in the playoffs to an inferior team. Sure, I want good shooters who can hit shots when our offense needs help. That just shouldn't be priority number one IMO.

I get real nervious when Outlaw starts to drive this year. I am sure it is because they have been telling him to get to the rim. His handle is so suspect that you are never sure of what yor are going to get. That however has caused the team some "growing" pains (i.e. cake baking) this year. This is some of the growing pains that the team is going through and is part of the reason for the coaching and the player criticism, IMO anyway.

g

 

[THE HCP]

I do miss HAP!