[GrandpaBlaze]

I know all are encouraged by what we've seen from the Blazers thus far this year - it shows in the predictions.

Think to yourself, what are the odds of the Blazers beating the Bulls? The Bulls are talented and they have more experience. However, if I was to go by the predictions, the Bulls have only a 23% (actually 22.9%) chance of winning the game.

I hope its true.

Not bashing, just thinking that as fans and most of us being homers to a degree, it is a good thing that we exhibit such confidence in our Blazers. I hope they continue to earn that confidence.

Gramps...

 

[chula vista blazer]

I think another way to look at it is most people (77%) think the Blazers will probably win, some (23 %) think they will probably lose- but if you asked the people that picked the Blazers to win what odds they would bet on, they would probably give you less than 3 to 1 odds.

In other words, I don't think the majority of the posters that picked the Blazers to win would tell you they have a 77% chance of winning- just that it's more likely than not.

Anyway, that's my take on it.

 

[mgb]

Aren't fans by definition homers? I mean if this was for cash you might see different betting especially if you could lose money, but hey we beat the spread against the Pistions didn't we? Nothing against the prizes, I think it's great what you have lined up.

We also have seen enough to be a little more optimistic then when the season started. I wonder if as many would have pick the Blazers over Chicago if it was the first game of the season? I know I would have but I will never concede anything, we have a chance every game we play!

 

[Ed O]

Fans are NOT, by definition, homers. They are, by definition, interested in the team but they need not be biased when analyzing their team's chances.

I can understand the optimism, though. Nash and Co. have beaten down the expectations to such a low point that if we get blown out "only" 20% of the time while beating two of the worst teams in the NBA at home many of us see it as progress.

Ed O.

 

[Dan]

Fans are NOT, by definition, homers. They are, by definition, interested in the team but they need not be biased when analyzing their team's chances.

I can understand the optimism, though. Nash and Co. have beaten down the expectations to such a low point that if we get blown out "only" 20% of the time while beating two of the worst teams in the NBA at home many of us see it as progress.

Ed O.

but the knicks beating the Kings doesn't mean anything about the kings... :angel:

 

[Talkhard]

Fans are NOT, by definition, homers.

Yes, they are. The word "fan" is short for "fanatic." By definition a fan is someone who is crazy about his team and hopelessly enthralled with them. He may not believe they are going to win every night, but he prays and hopes that they will, and he roots for them like a madman!

Nash and Co. have beaten down the expectations to such a low point that if we get blown out "only" 20% of the time while beating two of the worst teams in the NBA at home many of us see it as progress.

My god, you are unbelievable. It's NOT the fact that we won 2 games, it's the fact that we are playing better than expected and we almost knocked off two of the better teams in the league in Minnesota and Detroit. There is much reason to be excited about this team, and only someone as hopelessly myopic and pessimistic as yourself could fail to see that.

 

[ShuHanGuanYu]

Fans are NOT, by definition, homers. They are, by definition, interested in the team but they need not be biased when analyzing their team's chances.

I can understand the optimism, though. Nash and Co. have beaten down the expectations to such a low point that if we get blown out "only" 20% of the time while beating two of the worst teams in the NBA at home many of us see it as progress.

Ed O.

How can you not be excited? Sure, wins are not going to come in bunches. But with the resurgence of Zach Randolph and Darius Miles averaging 21 per game, along with the fact that eventually Martell will be able to ball, these alone would have me excited as a Portland fan.

 

[Ed O]

but the knicks beating the Kings doesn't mean anything about the kings... :angel:

If someone is arguing that the Kings are off to a great start, then surely that would be something we can discuss. But since I don't think that many are more optimistic about the Kings now than they were at the beginning of the year, I don't think it has anything to do with anything we're discussing here.

Ed O.

 

[Ed O]

How can you not be excited? Sure, wins are not going to come in bunches. But with the resurgence of Zach Randolph and Darius Miles averaging 21 per game, along with the fact that eventually Martell will be able to ball, these alone would have me excited as a Portland fan.

There's a difference between being excited for the future and thinking that the team is going to win now. This thread, as I understand it, is about fans believing that the Blazers are capable of winning now. We've got people starting threads about the playoffs this year.

I'm not particularly enthusiastic about the future of this team, but it's a heck of a lot better than the outlook for the rest of this season IMO.

Ed O.

 

[Ed O]

Yes, they are. The word "fan" is short for "fanatic." By definition a fan is someone who is crazy about his team and hopelessly enthralled with them. He may not believe they are going to win every night, but he prays and hopes that they will, and he roots for them like a madman!

I believe that a fan follows his team religiously and takes pride in knowing a lot about what is happening with the team. There's no inherent optimism and certainly no unquestioned optimism.

Look at fans in Philly with the Eagles... they boo and they have incredibly high expectations. But they CARE, and it's their INTEREST, not their OPTIMISM, that defines them as fans.

Rooting for a team to win and thinking that the team is playing well are independent to me.

My god, you are unbelievable. It's NOT the fact that we won 2 games, it's the fact that we are playing better than expected and we almost knocked off two of the better teams in the league in Minnesota and Detroit. There is much reason to be excited about this team, and only someone as hopelessly myopic and pessimistic as yourself could fail to see that.

Minnesota is one of the "better teams in the league"?

HA!

With opinions like that, it's really no surprise that you call me "unbelievable".

I don't know who on earth expected the Blazers to get blown out every game... I am very pessimistic about the team's chances and I certainly didn't. They've only won one game that anyone thought they'd lose, and they were utterly embarrassed in Denver.

They've played Detroit tough, which is a feather in their cap and maybe a "good loss", but they only beat Atlanta because of a lucky call and Atlanta was without their best player, so that can just as easily be considered a "bad win". If you're into that sort of thing.

I'm into wins and losses, and Portland hasn't done anything that's impressed me on that front. It doesn't mean that they won't--in fact, I'm sure that at times I will be impressed--but it doesn't mean that an occasional bright spot in a dismal season negates the rest of the dismal season for me.

Ed O.

 

[Dan]

If someone is arguing that the Kings are off to a great start, then surely that would be something we can discuss. But since I don't think that many are more optimistic about the Kings now than they were at the beginning of the year, I don't think it has anything to do with anything we're discussing here.

Ed O.

it's the implied notion that the kings start doesn't signify how bad they'll be, (as in, they'll be better, their start is a fluke) and the blazers start doesn't signify that they might be better than you think (as in, they'll still suck, their start is a fluke).

It's like you just can make up excuses for other teams, but refuse to make them up for Portland.

 

[MARIS61]

I'm definitely a homer but I'm somewhat disappointed so far in the games we've played.

Detroit was the first good game we played and we lost.

The Knicks completely laid down for us and I drew no enthusiasm from our win there.

Nate is performing as I expected but several team members are still only half on board effort-wise and we are wasting valuable time playing scrubs at the SG spot when we should be playing Webster there.

At this rate he'll need 2 years to get acclimated to the league if he only plays 8 MPG.

 

[The Professional Fan]

I'm into wins and losses, and Portland hasn't done anything that's impressed me on that front. It doesn't mean that they won't--in fact, I'm sure that at times I will be impressed--but it doesn't mean that an occasional bright spot in a dismal season negates the rest of the dismal season for me.

Ed O.

Portland's already had a "dismal" season? 5 games in? Interesting......

 

[BlazerCaravan]

I guess we're allowed to generalize the season one way but not the other. Okay. That's cool. Whatever.

 

[Dan]

we should go on what will be, and not what was.

 

[It's_GO_Time]

I can understand the optimism, though. Nash and Co. have beaten down the expectations to such a low point that if we get blown out "only" 20% of the time while beating two of the worst teams in the NBA at home many of us see it as progress.
Ed O.

So by "Co." do you mean "Ed. O?"

Don't get me wrong, I like your posts. But you tend to beat down posters expectations of the team. In fact, given your analysis of the team preseason, don't you feel a little optomistic that they are playing than expected (again your expectations were pretty low). I know I do.

 

[Backboard Cam]

Think to yourself, what are the odds of the Blazers beating the Bulls? The Bulls are talented and they have more experience. However, if I was to go by the predictions, the Bulls have only a 23% (actually 22.9%) chance of winning the game.

The Bulls look to post a rare victory on the West Coast when they face the Portland Trail Blazers at the Rose Garden.

Every year in the middle of November, the circus comes to Chicago's United Center and the Bulls go on an early West Coast trip. Since the 2000-01 season, the Bulls are 1-32 on those trips, including Monday's 100-82 loss to the Golden State Warriors...

And Deng & Nocioni might both start, the Bulls get smaller but it creates some matchup problems... Blazers doing great at home... 4 days off... Nat's getting agitated... a lot to consider.

I'm thinking the Blazers fight hard to win another home game.

 

[Dan]

im expecting this game to be more like what most of the season will be like.

 

[mgb]

im expecting this game to be more like what most of the season will be like.

Hmm, I don't know. I expect these next two games to be more like the season is going to be like. They might come out flat against da bulls, but then I expect them to come out strong against the warriors. Now if they should win both I'd be shock and expecting at least 3 wins on the road!

 

[Dan]

Hmm, I don't know. I expect these next two games to be more like the season is going to be like. They might come out flat against da bulls, but then I expect them to come out strong against the warriors. Now if they should win both I'd be shock and expecting at least 3 wins on the road!

I should add that I don't think they'll win tonites game or friday, and that the "rest of the season" will be fans complaining and jumping too conclusions waaaay too soon.