They all stink - Allen, Vulcan, Steve Patterson, John Nash. This train wreck has enough **** to spread around on all parties, and still have some leftover for many of the players, the Oregonian and Ron Tonkin.Stevenson said:First, a mea culpa: Generally speaking, Mixim was right insofar as this team goes. It is indeed a train wreck. For the most part, you were right and many of us were wrong Mixim/tradetheo.
But here's where he was wrong: It isn't John Nash's fault. Clearly, if you read the accounts, he has his hands tied by Paul Allen. The trade of Miles and Theo for Hardaway was a no-brainer. And you gotta like Nash's draft picks, Webster especially.
So lets lay the blame where it belongs, upon the Accidental Zillionaire, the man wo can't make a smart business decision if his life depended upon it, the billionaire forced to file BK, Paul Allen.
Pete and Repeat were in a boat....Pete fell out, who was left...?Masbee said:They all stink - Allen, Vulcan, Steve Patterson, John Nash. This train wreck has enough **** to spread around on all parties, and still have some leftover for many of the players, the Oregonian and Ron Tonkin.
As for the draft picks - there are DOZENS of threads debating the Nash picks. There is NOT a consensus regarding any sort of love for them.
Ever heard of Chris Paul?
easy answer: Easy, Mr Repeat was. but whats that got to do with the post?sa1177 said:Pete and Repeat where in a boat....Pete fell out, who was left...?
I just wonder how many times it has to be repeated before some are willing to conceed that maybe Nash hasn't done the best job drafting.sa1177 said:Pete and Repeat where in a boat....Pete fell out, who was left...?
It's got everything to do with the post...need I find all the "Chris Paul" posts made in the last 6 months. I bet there are 10+ :biggrin:SMiLE said:easy answer: Easy, Mr Repeat was. but whats that got to do with the post?
long answer: well, are they the only ones in the boat? what about the crew?
longer answer: where are they in the boat?
it was a typographical error comment that I made. You meant Pete and Repeat WERE in a boat.sa1177 said:It's got everything to do with the post...need I find all the "Chris Paul" posts made in the last 6 months. I bet there are 10+ :biggrin:
probably as many tmies as it has to be repeated before some are willing to admit that it takes time before we can judge things completely.Kiss_My_Darius said:I just wonder how many times it has to be repeated before some are willing to conceed that maybe Nash hasn't done the best job drafting.
I just wonder how many times it has to be stated that Webster is only 18-19 and like most HS players will take a couple years to develop into a NBA star.Kiss_My_Darius said:I just wonder how many times it has to be repeated before some are willing to conceed that maybe Nash hasn't done the best job drafting.
Ahh it's Monday AM...or it was when I posted that, cut me some slack. :biggrin:SMiLE said:it was a typographical error comment that I made. You meant Pete and Repeat WERE in a boat.
You said where in a boat.
Like, where are you, vs were are you.
sa1177 said:I just wonder how many times it has to be stated that Webster is only 18-19 and like most HS players will take a couple years to develop into a NBA star.
At the same time I'll concede Nash may have not done the greatest job.
just because I agree doesn't mean we need to dicuss for the upteenth time. Repete is definetly still the only one in the boat. :biggrin:Kiss_My_Darius said:Well I guess Repeat can be safely kicked out of your boat. :biggrin:
sa1177 said:just because I agree doesn't mean we need to dicuss for the upteenth time. Repete is definetly still the only one in the boat. :biggrin:
Those who connect us not drafting Chris Paul directly to us drafting Telfair are just silly...there are just to many other factors to figure in.Kiss_My_Darius said:Repeat needs to stay in the boat of those who claim Nash has helped the team. Chris Paul comes up because of the argument that Nash is a good evaluator of talent and drafts well.
I get your argument that Webster needs time to develop so we don't know if Nash draft's well. But I disagree and think the more realistic analysis (now and in the future) is that Paul was a missed opportunity and Telfair was picked too high.
Some need years to figure this out and others can make this prediction after watching a season. Call it a gift :biggrin:
I must be silly, because that appears to be the primary explanation that the Blazers traded down and away from the conventional pick of Paul at that spot. Of course there was the infamous "workout" in Portland. But I would hope that the draft pick was not based on that workout.sa1177 said:Those who connect us not drafting Chris Paul directly to us drafting Telfair are just silly...there are just to many other factors to figure in.
the team felt they needed a SG far more than they needed a PG (which was/is true). The team felt that Webster could end up being as good of a pick for the team as Paul could've been (as in, they got Webster+ telfair (or jack) which they felt would be better than Paul + a SG they wouldnt' then be able to draft).Kiss_My_Darius said:I must be silly, because that appears to be the primary explanation that the Blazers traded down and away from the conventional pick of Paul at that spot. Of course there was the infamous "workout" in Portland. But I would hope that the draft pick was not based on that workout.
So asking this seriously (after the funny boat talk) what other factors led to us shying away from Paul?
SG was and is a much weaker position for this team then PG is.Kiss_My_Darius said:I must be silly, because that appears to be the primary explanation that the Blazers traded down and away from the conventional pick of Paul at that spot. Of course there was the infamous "workout" in Portland. But I would hope that the draft pick was not based on that workout.
So asking this seriously (after the funny boat talk) what other factors led to us shying away from Paul?
