Who will be the Blazer's Dark Horse Producer?

[RoyToy]

Meyers Leonard might put up better numbers

But it will be because of 3's and not banging down in the paint

I want defense and rebounding out of my center. Leonard sucks at both.

 

[Blazinaway]

Meyers Leonard might put up better numbers

But it will be because of 3's and not banging down in the paint

I want defense and rebounding out of my center. Leonard sucks at both.

he certainly did last yr, IMO he "could" improve a lot this yr, give the kid a chance

 

[magnifier661]

Magszy, I think Leonard has a good chance to surprise, he's got a chitload of narural ability and if just some of the mental stuff starts to click he could make big strides, he's so young and I still have good vibes. Also I think practicing against a strong and good at D center like Lopez every day could help him a lot.

Well like I said. I would love to be proven wrong and have all you guys bash me all season. If Leonard becomes a starting caliber center; then we are in really good shape.

I just want to win baby!

 

[Rastapopoulos]

Why do we need someone to produce dark horses?

 

[magnifier661]

Why do we need someone to produce dark horses?

Would you rather it be white hooded horses?

 

[Blazinaway]

Well like I said. I would love to be proven wrong and have all you guys bash me all season. If Leonard becomes a starting caliber center; then we are in really good shape.

I just want to win baby!

starting caliber next yr? - no F'n way IMO, I'm not drunk yet! I'd just like him to improve and become a decent backup, if he pans out could be a starting C in 2-3 yrs from now

 

[Blazinaway]

Would you rather it be white hooded horses?

or Knights in White Satin
or wild horses
love both tunes

 

[BBert]

A dark horse is a little-known person or thing that emerges to prominence, especially in a competition of some sort, or a contestant that seems unlikely to succeed.

By definition, Robinson cannot be a 'dark horse'. He is not little known. He is not unlikely to succeed. The guy was the 5th overall pick in the 2012 NBA draft. Many projected he could go No. 2. Chad Ford and Bill Simmons were raving about him today. Many on this board, including me, have been expressing high expectations for him since the deal was announced. Next to C.J., he's the Blazers most exciting acquisition this summer.

Dark Horse candidates would be the guys various posters insist are garbage, or not expected to contribute much. Like Freeland, Claver, Barton, Crabbe, or the young Mr. Leonard.

Claver and Freeland have too many guys playing ahead of them. It could be Barton. He was a late second rounder, and didn't get much burn last year, but he was pretty unstoppable one-on-three at the end of last season in garbage games. He has supposedly improved. It could be Crabbe. He was a second round pick (and by definition not likely to succeed), and could very well be ready to score off the bench at this level. Or Leonard, because, even though he's still raw, unless we get another big, he's likely to get decent court time.

Since I haven't seen any of them play this year, it's a complete shot in the dark.

Leonard, since he'll get more minutes, he can score, and he'll improve his rebounding.

 

[PapaG]

By definition, Robinson cannot be a 'dark horse'.

I didn't pick Robinson, but I disagree in that he can't be a 'dark horse', considering he's on his third team in one year.

dark horse
Noun
1. A person about whom little is known, esp. someone whose abilities and potential for success are concealed: "a dark-horse candidate".
2. A competitor or candidate who has little chance of winning, or who wins against expectations.

Also, Crabbe was the Pac-12 Player of the Year. He isn't an unknown player at all.

 

[ABM]

Sure wish it coulda been Elliot Wiliiams. Pipe-dream, though. *sigh*

 

[Further]

or Knights in White Satin
or wild horses
love both tunes

I've been through the desert on a horse with no name, It felt good to be out of the rain.

 

[Further]

I didn't pick Robinson, but I disagree in that he can't be a 'dark horse', considering he's on his third team in one year.




Also, Crabbe was the Pac-12 Player of the Year. He isn't an unknown player at all.

Robinson -He may be on his third team but last year his per 36 stats were already a double double. 11.4/10.7, and that's on teams not trying to use him.



Crabbe- second round.

 

[Rastapopoulos]

Nobody is thinking Freeland, right? So doesn't that make him the darkest of horses?

 

[ABM]

Nobody is thinking Freeland, right? So doesn't that make him the darkest of horses?

Freeland would be classified as an albino horse.

 

[PapaG]

Robinson -He may be on his third team but last year his per 36 stats were already a double double. 11.4/10.7, and that's on teams not trying to use him.



Crabbe- second round.

I was just pointing out the semantics the the term "dark horse". I thought it was a stretch of BBert to try and invalidate those who picked Robinson, because he's bounced around the league already, and almost seems like a lost cause.

 

[PapaG]

Nobody is thinking Freeland, right? So doesn't that make him the darkest of horses?

Freeland was a first round pick. He's disqualified, apparently.

 

[BBert]

I didn't pick Robinson, but I disagree in that he can't be a 'dark horse', considering he's on his third team in one year.

Also, Crabbe was the Pac-12 Player of the Year. He isn't an unknown player at all.

It does appear two or more teams have given up on him, so that's fair if that's what you want to use as a yard stick. As for Crabbe, like Robinson, he wasn't unknown (but certainly less known). The fact he was overlooked until the second round says that at least several teams didn't see him as a first rounder. Second rounders statistically have little chance of success. I hope he proves them wrong, of course.

Still, Robinson was a top 5 lottery pick in a very good draft. The fact that one team screwed the pooch with him and the next team had to trade him for peanuts to make room for a future hall of famer doesn't diminish my expectations for him one bit. I expect him to come out with something to prove. So, in my mind, I was unable to consider him for this "honor".

 

[PapaG]

It does appear two or more teams have given up on him, so that's fair if that's what you want to use as a yard stick. As for Crabbe, like Robinson, he wasn't unknown (but certainly less known). The fact he was overlooked until the second round says that at least several teams didn't see him as a first rounder. Second rounders statistically have little chance of success. I hope he proves them wrong, of course.

Still, Robinson was a top 5 lottery pick in a very good draft. The fact that one team screwed the pooch with him and the next team had to trade him for peanuts to make room for a future hall of famer doesn't diminish my expectations for him one bit. I expect him to come out with something to prove. So, in my mind, I was unable to consider him for this "honor".

That's reasonable enough for me! Bottom line for me is I'm actually looking forward to watching some of these bench players. Wright is a solid 14-15 PER player, Robinson was underused, Crabbe can stroke it, and McCollum should be at the very least a solid NBA contributor.

 

[BigGameDamian]

I'm going to roll the dice and go with Joel Freeland.

 

[BBert]

Freeland was a first round pick. He's disqualified, apparently.

Ha, ha.

OTOH: Most here have already labeled Freeland garbage after a year of watching him on the court, so if he were to contribute in any significant way he'd qualify. I look at it like your first job out of college. Once you get your first job, in your next job interview nobody cares what you did in college, now that you have a track record.

 

[PapaG]

Ha, ha.

OTOH: Most here have already labeled Freeland garbage after a year of watching him on the court, so if he were to contribute in any significant way he'd qualify. I look at it like your first job out of college. Once you get your first job, in your next job interview nobody cares what you did in college, now that you have a track record.

Very true. It's why that first job out of college is so important, too.

 

[BBert]

Ha, ha.

OTOH: Most here have already labeled Freeland garbage after a year of watching him on the court, so if he were to contribute in any significant way he'd qualify. I look at it like your first job out of college. Once you get your first job, in your next job interview nobody cares what you did in college, now that you have a track record.

Just want to add that I get that the example I just gave for Freeland also could apply equally to TRob, considering he did not much in his first year, either.

But he still looked better than Freeland while he was doing it.

 

[BBert]

Very true. It's why that first job out of college is so important, too.

I just hope, as has been speculated, that TRob's first (two) jobs out of college were shit jobs. Now, this Blazers job, as primary backup to two-time All Star LaMarcus Aldridge, that's a plum job right there!

 

[ABM]

Very true. It's why that first job out of college is so important, too.

For those of us who never went to college (shoot, nor graduated from high school for that matter), it's the last job that's so important.

 

[magnifier661]

For those of us who never went to college (shoot, nor graduated from high school for that matter), it's the last job that's so important.

How did that work for Cleveland; when they signed kemp to 180 mil?

 

[ABM]

How did that work for Cleveland; when they signed kemp to 180 mil?

Uhm, I was speaking purely from the employee's perspective.

 

[jlprk]

Robinson failed in Sacramento because they expected a polished player and a shooter. He is neither. He plays gangbusters out of control. Do not tell him to shoot or you'll be sorry. He will have highlight plays each game until they get him to become elegant about a year from now when he learns manners.

Dark horse? Some will love him this year and some will hate him, like Hickson.

 

[magnifier661]

Uhm, I was speaking purely from the employee's perspective.

He is an employee

 

[PapaG]

For those of us who never went to college (shoot, nor graduated from high school for that matter), it's the last job that's so important.

I know plenty of successful people who didn't go to college. I was only following BBert's example, where when you're right out of college, your academic record and school seems to matter. 5 years later, nobody cares about your college years!

 

[ABM]

I know plenty of successful people who didn't go to college. I was only following BBert's example, where when you're right out of college, your academic record and school seems to matter. 5 years later, nobody cares about your college years!

My college years were wasted on me.....or something like that. <sigh>