Professional and College Basketball Forums banner

1 - 20 of 76 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,046 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
What a brilliant trade this is! When you realize that Wallace was going to walk away at the end of the year and leave us with nothing, John Nash has practically pulled off a miracle. He has:

1. Helped ensure that we make the playoffs this year by adding more depth at the center position, more shot blocking, and a great scoring small forward who will be backed up by Darius Miles.

2. Added 3 "character guys" to the team who will work hard and never take a night off. Portland will love these players!

3. Made the team younger by replacing Wallace with Rahim. (Not to mention that Rahim has a higher scoring and rebounding average than Wallace, and shoots better from the field)

4. Given us TREMENDOUS cap flexibility in the summer of 2005. We can keep Rahim and Ratliff or trade them, but it's up to us! Their salaries, along with Stoudamire's and Davis' and I believe Kemp's remaining money all comes off the books after next season.

In short, we get better without getting locked into any long-term contracts and without acquiring anybody with a rap sheet or a bad attitude. What a relief! And what a change from the Whitsitt regime. I salute John Nash and Steve Patterson for pulling off a great trade while sticking to their promise to the Portland fans.

Let the good times roll in Portland!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
651 Posts
If this team makes the playoffs, then I think Nash should be GM of the Year. Getting rid of bad eggs Bonzi, Jeff, and Sheed for better players with expiring contracts? Impressive!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
16,001 Posts
Whitsitt would have added better players, and the team probably would have improved.

Nash and Patterson have traded our best players for guys who aren't quite as good but are nice guys... length of contract-wise, these deals are actually inferior to Rasheed and Bonzi.

I'm not sure they've out-done Whitsitt, since Whitsitt built up a team that made to WC Finals, but they've had a different focus and if the team wins on the court then they've certainly done a good job with that focus since taking over.

Ed O.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,878 Posts
HH salaries

Kemps comes off the books this summer :wave: finally!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,656 Posts
I disagree. Whitsitt is the type of GM who would trade Patterson and Woods for Miles, or something to that effect. He was great in creating something out of nothing that summer. We ended up with Rider, Anderson, and another year in the playoffs.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
731 Posts
Talkhard, it's very nice to see praise from your pen (electronic). I agree that Nash is definitely to be praised.

I think in many ways BobW ran a very interesting experiment, and the rules did change significantly in the middle of his stint. However, the experiment did not ultimately maintain the franchise image/community support, which is truly the job of a GM/President. Let us hope that Nash can continue on this good roll!
 

·
Schilster Supreme
Joined
·
13,610 Posts
Hate to say it, but Walton's words rang true on Sunday.

He said it was a shame to see the city of Portland, who once was the proudest NBA city, have so little love for their team.

Blazer Mania had died, and Bob Whitsitt and the issues of Character are alot to blame for it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,046 Posts
Discussion Starter · #8 ·
"Blazer Mania had died, and Bob Whitsitt and the issues of Character are alot to blame for it."
Yes, and RASHEED WALLACE bears a lot of the blame himself. The guy is a punk almost by self-acknowledgement. I mean, who else says he doesn't care where he plays, as long as someone cuts the check? Who else rants about the NBA exploiting black players while making $17 million a year? Who else threatens the life of a referee after a game?

Good riddance to bad rubbish. May Wallace and Isaiah Rider and Bonzi Wells all rot in the land of NBA rejects and has-beens.
 

·
Banned member
Joined
·
28,452 Posts
Originally posted by <b>Schilly</b>!
Blazer Mania had died, and Bob Whitsitt and the issues of Character are alot to blame for it.
it's not dead, it just took a sabbatical.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
673 Posts
Yah, Ed O, I can't believe that Nash and Patterson haven't gotten us to the WCF yet either! I mean come on guys...do your job! Whitsitt surely would have put a championship banner up there in his first 8 months on the job! I mean, look at all those banners!

No comprende senior. What are YOU talking about, Ed? They haven't been here a season yet and some of you are bashing them in the middle of the rebuild with no knowledge of what their master plan is. Give us a break and have some patience.
 

·
Banned member
Joined
·
28,452 Posts
Originally posted by <b>Ed O</b>!
Whitsitt would have added better players, and the team probably would have improved.

Nash and Patterson have traded our best players for guys who aren't quite as good but are nice guys... length of contract-wise, these deals are actually inferior to Rasheed and Bonzi.
Trader Bob, in his first year in Portland, trader Clyde Drexler.

Clyde Drexler, even at that point of his career, was by far a better player than Rasheed Wallace is, was or ever will be.

How many years after TB came to Portland, did it take to go to the WCFs? 4-5?

and yet, we're supposed to give up on Nash and Patterson after not even 1 season?
I'm not sure they've out-done Whitsitt, since Whitsitt built up a team that made to WC Finals, but they've had a different focus and if the team wins on the court then they've certainly done a good job with that focus since taking over.

Ed O.
Trader Bob built a team that didn't make a lot of sense for the mid 90's (weren't good, 1st and out)..and then had one year where they were under the cap and signed Brian Grant.

Hey, that sounds like what 2005 might be..

and then he got greedy and stupid, and over did the experiement.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
16,001 Posts
Originally posted by <b>TP3</b>!
Yah, Ed O, I can't believe that Nash and Patterson haven't gotten us to the WCF yet either! I mean come on guys...do your job! Whitsitt surely would have put a championship banner up there in his first 8 months on the job! I mean, look at all those banners!

No comprende senior. What are YOU talking about, Ed? They haven't been here a season yet and some of you are bashing them in the middle of the rebuild with no knowledge of what their master plan is. Give us a break and have some patience.
Your sarcasm is so misplaced it's pathetic.

The thread name is "Nash outdoes Whitsitt". According to the criteria of winning basketball games, Nash and Patterson have NOT outdone Whitsitt. In terms of getting good players for bad players, they have NOT outdone Whitsitt.

Please point out where I criticized them for not winning games yet. In fact, I did not and specifically said that IF they do that, then their strategies wil have worked.

Ed O.
 

·
Player Salary Geek
Joined
·
4,380 Posts
Talkhard -

How can you possibly say that Nash has done a better job than Whitsitt at this point? Whitsitt inherited a team that barely made the playoffs, made changes in personnel and in a few years, the Blazers were in the WCF - and went back there again 2 years later.

Nash also inherited a team that barely made the playoffs. He has also made changes in personnel. Shouldn't we wait to see how it turns out before proclaiming him successful?

I understand that you hope he is successful. I hope the exact same thing. I'm a big fan and supporter of Nash - and have been on this board in the face of critical posts about him. I hope he DOES turn out to be more successful than Whitsitt. But even I know that there's no objective reason to say so today.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,046 Posts
Discussion Starter · #14 · (Edited)
SCBF: I'm not saying that Nash has done more for the Blazers than Whitsitt ever did. All I'm saying is that, with this particular trade, Nash has surpassed the typical Whitsitt deal. He got us some very good players who don't have any baggage, and will not hamstring us with long contracts. Whitsitt could always get you a good player, but the guy almost always (Steve Smith being one exception) came with a rap sheet or other character problems. It's more difficult to trade away a bad apple for two good apples, than to simply acquire a talented bad apple. So, in my opinion, Nash has pulled off a beauty of a deal, on several levels.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
16,001 Posts
Originally posted by <b>So Cal Blazer Fan</b>!

I understand that you hope he is successful. I hope the exact same thing. I'm a big fan and supporter of Nash - and have been on this board in the face of critical posts about him. I hope he DOES turn out to be more successful than Whitsitt. But even I know that there's no objective reason to say so today.
I agree with everything you're saying except, ironically enough, the last sentence... if the standard that one is judging the success/failure of a GM is based on "character" issues, then Nash and Patterson have done a better job so far. Rasheed, Bonzi and McInnis have all had numerous issues in their careers and they're all gone.

With that said, personally character is well down the list for me as far as GM success goes. Talent accumulation and (most importantly) success on the court are both above it, and the former seems like the new regime is doing worse than Whitsitt did and the latter is too premature to judge.

Ed O.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,183 Posts
this deal more than anything assures the Blazers of getting the latent fan base back on board. I believe there is a huge silent majority of portland residents that purposely tuned out the Blazers starting in 1996 or so and has grown steadily especially the last 3 years, not wanting to give money or time to what they percieved to be a low character, unworthy team regardless of wins and losses. I think this will correct that problem, and the Rose Garden will immediately see a significant increase in sales.

in commodities, when a market changes very quickly within a day we call it a "key reversal". This trade is a key reversal for Portlands future.
 

·
Player Salary Geek
Joined
·
4,380 Posts
Originally posted by <b>Talkhard</b>!
SCBF: I'm not saying that Nash has done more for the Blazers than Whitsitt ever did. All I'm saying is that, with this particular trade, Nash has surpassed the typical Whitsitt deal. He got us some very good players who don't have any baggage, and will not hamstring us with long contracts. Whitsitt could always get you a good player, but the guy almost always (Steve Smith being one exception) came with a rap sheet or other character problems. It's more difficult to trade away a bad apple for two good apples, than to simply acquire a talented bad apple. So, in my opinion, Nash has pulled off a beauty of a deal, on several levels.
Fair enough. I would still say, though, that it's way too early to judge this trade. After all, the new guys have yet to even play one game. We can hopefully all agree that the deal improves character (clearly). But actually the Blazers have a little less cap space in 2005 because of this trade - due to Dickau's contract - probably not a significant amount, but true nonetheless.

Finally, the biggest question yet to be answered is how the team will perform on the court with the new pieces. I'd wait at least until the end of the year before trying to evaluate the deal on that basis.

All I'm saying is that it's one thing to say that you like the prospects of this trade and you appreciate Nash as a GM. It's another to portray it as an undeniable success. We can't label it as "success" or as "failure" yet, IMO.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
936 Posts
Originally posted by <b>Ed O</b>!


I agree with everything you're saying except, ironically enough, the last sentence... if the standard that one is judging the success/failure of a GM is based on "character" issues, then Nash and Patterson have done a better job so far. Rasheed, Bonzi and McInnis have all had numerous issues in their careers and they're all gone.

With that said, personally character is well down the list for me as far as GM success goes. Talent accumulation and (most importantly) success on the court are both above it, and the former seems like the new regime is doing worse than Whitsitt did and the latter is too premature to judge.

Ed O.


Talent accumulation and success on the court are undeniably important points in gauging a GM's success, but giving a players character/professionalism equal weight while not severely sacrificing talent and chemistry is something only the best GM's have done. Championship teams are built around good talent, great chemistry, and strong character/professionalism. Yes, Whitsitt was an amazing deal maker. But he sacrificed 1/3 of the equation and hindsight has proved, at least to me, that strong character/professionalism is equally important to good talent and great chemistry. Without all three traits, teams just don't win championships.

So, in that respect, I DO think Nash has outdone Whitsitt. He's had a far more difficult job to do, and IMO, he's brought Portland closer to winning a Championship than they were before he was hired.
 
1 - 20 of 76 Posts
Top