|
posted By Bill Ingram, 16 January 2008 10:05:45 AM
I don't know, Joel. I think I take Horford over Yi. Sure, Yi brings marketing power, but he's a big part of why the Bucks are about to start breaking things up. He's a ways from being a consistent contributor.
posted By Xericx, 16 January 2008 11:35:21 AM
Portland is 18 out of their last 20. I doubt the future coming of Tracy McGrady would have improved their record significantly. Martell Webster, Outlaw and James Jones seem to be doing good and Roy and Aldridge are providing the scoring punch. We need rebounding and interior defense...which Oden will provide.
posted By Ben Pruett, 16 January 2008 11:58:27 AM
It's not bad but theres no way Oden doesn't go top 7 even with the injury. Big men with his talents don't come around everyday.
posted By Jeff, 16 January 2008 12:15:32 PM
Crazy -- Oden would still be top 3 no matter what.
posted By Joel Brigham, 16 January 2008 12:37:15 PM
Just to clarify--I left Oden completely out of the discussion. I know he'd be #2 if not #1, but for the sake of the piece I just looked at what people have done THIS season.
In response to Xericx, if Portland takes KD instead of Oden, the whole team is different. They don't, for example, trade Zach Randolph, so they don't have Frye and they probably don't trade for James Jones. I'd take Durant and Randolph in the starting lineup over Webster/Outlaw and Oden any day of the week! That's why I still think KD was the better pick.
And Bill, think about how much money is invested in 6'10" young bigs for Seattle. Would adding another one to rot on the bench or fight for minutes be the smart move when Yi could come in and get tons of minutes right away? Horford may be the better pro now, but considering our alternate universe, Yi is the better pick for Seattle...
posted By Xericx, 16 January 2008 1:11:21 PM
I'm a big Randolph fan and this was a conundrum, but even weighing the pros and cons of it all, I still would have taken Oden...I'd gamble for this kind of prospect. The problem with having ZBO and LMA together in a starting lineup is that neither of them are particularly good defensively.
It would be a different team for sure....
posted By PrnStr910, 16 January 2008 1:17:33 PM
"I'd take Durant and Randolph in the starting lineup over Webster/Outlaw and Oden any day of the week!" That's the craziest thing I have heard in a long time. The next time Zach Randolph plays D, will be the first time in his career and you would take two perimeter players over a defensively dominant, legit 7 footer, a sharpshooter and an athletic wing that can score and defend 4 positions. Durant will be a great player someday, but the Blazers didn't need another scorer to take 25 shots a game and shoot 37%.If Durant had gone there, the coach would have been under pressure to play and feature Durant and they would not be winning like they are. As good as the Blazers are now, they will be scary once they get a defensive force in the middle.
posted By Matt, 16 January 2008 1:58:01 PM
So you're saying that if we drafted Durant we'd have to keep Randolph? Thanks, but no thanks. Look at the Blazers this year, and look at the Knicks, specifically how Randolph has NOT fit in. We'll bring Oden in next year (not to mention Rudy Fernandez) and be just fine, thank you very much.
posted By frank, 16 January 2008 3:53:05 PM
Yi over Horford and Conley
I dont think so.
Seattle is pathetic at the PG and Horford is a machine.
posted By Joel Brigham, 16 January 2008 4:07:04 PM
You know, Conley to the Sonics actually would be a nice fit. They are pretty abismal at PG, and Conley would solve that problem. I guess I was thinking of Yi and Al Horford as consensus 2 and 3, when Conley definitely should've been in the discussion... good call!
posted By Xericx, 16 January 2008 4:22:40 PM
Yeah, but you've got to remember this is a great PG draft in 2008...Sonics figured they would be bad....now they can posibly get a Mayo or Rose!
posted By Logic from Montreal, 16 January 2008 6:22:38 PM
I don't disagree with picking Durant first what with the whole Oden thing, but I can tell you this: the Blazers would not have as good a record as they do with Durant on the team. They'd be sacrificing chemistry for Durant's learning curve (his shot selection would kill them some nights), and they wouldn't have developed the roles that have them playing playing better than the sum of their parts right now. I'm just saying... Durant is good, and he's gonna be great at SOME point, but he isn't all that just yet. Right now, only Seattle or Minnesota could handle losing games while Durant keeps adjusting to the pros, simply coz they're in shambles anyway, they're expected to lose.
posted By lakerkid90, 16 January 2008 6:59:57 PM
do u see what martell webster and travis outlaw are doing this year why would they need a small foreward?? and another player that can be a superstar like brandon roy?? would you rether have webster and outlaw playing small foreward or pryzbilla and lafrentz playing center?? imagine blake at PG, roy at SG, webster at SF, aldridge at PF, and oden at C and jack, frye, outlaw, and jones comming off the bench?? look at their record now and look at seattles with durant, durant is rookie of the year without a question but oden and durant would b like shaq and kobe, shaq would lead a team to a championship juss like oden will. and zach randolph isnt doing bad its eddy curry thats don horrible this year.
posted By quang, 17 January 2008 12:31:26 AM
Daequan Cook over Oden? Youre an idiot
posted By bato, 17 January 2008 6:12:27 AM
thank god sean williams got kicked out of boston or else jersey wouldnt have him =]
posted By eazy, 17 January 2008 4:55:30 PM
wow. u was debating whether or not to even dignify this fool with a response so i'll make it short. have u watched outlaw or webster or jones? blazers need a big man, and oden is faster, stronger and can jump higher than durant. we;ll see the east in the finals next year
posted By Kyle, 18 January 2008 4:06:09 PM
Wait, just a sec! Durant was the best pick then and now? Both of those statements are incorrect. The Blazers are in first place in the NW Division, and the only glaring weakness they have is rebounding and interior defense. They are a team that is built perfectly for a guy like Oden, who will of course be back next season.
The Sonics lost Rashard Lewis and needed a small forward far more than the Blazers. How's that working out for them so far?
Please write this article again in two years when the Blazers are in the Finals and the Sonics are in the lottery, and tell me that Durant was a better choice.
posted By PC, 18 January 2008 4:19:51 PM
Do you know they posed the question of how good would Portland be if they drafted Durant during a recent episode of ESPN Coast to Coast? Every pundit and former player agreed that drafting Durant would have made the Blazers WORSE this year, because of what his game is vs. how the team plays in Portland. Perhaps you know something they do not? I have no beef with you saying Durant may be the better individual player, I think his fantasy stats throughout his career will be tremendous and dwarf Oden’s, but stating the team that didn’t pick him would be better right now, without accounting for factors outside of points scored (game plans, chemistry, ball distribution, shot selection, defense) is pretty ignorant writing.
posted By Blazermark, 18 January 2008 4:38:03 PM
We would never take Durrant. We can get a shooter any where. We love our BIG MAN!
posted By Houston @ MVN, 18 January 2008 5:44:07 PM
I think the Durant #1 thing here is just lazy on your part man - and comes from you wanting to insert the "I told you so" message. Its easy for someone in the media to try and say something like "Durant is the superstar Portland needed," but the fact is that Roy and Aldridge are both superstars in the making. And getting rid of Stat-Bo is just as important as any player the Blazers could have added in this draft. As a lifelong Blazer fan, I would have changed a single thing - and that's nothing against Kevin Durant (who wouldn't have been a chemistry problem, the Blazers just didn't need a top SF as much as people thought they did).
posted By Houston @ MVN, 18 January 2008 5:47:13 PM
Also unsurprising that you're trying to argue the Blazers screwed up given you and your Bulls fan-base must still be smarting from that incredibly short-sighted trade of Ty Thomas/Vik Khyrapa for LaMarcus Aldridge. Mistakes like that can mess with your perception of reality.
posted By Cody, 18 January 2008 5:50:40 PM
Joel is either trying to grab some attention, hasn't watched the Blazers play all year or knows nothing about basketball. Durant is a great talent, but where you are wrong is saying Portland needs a SF. Webster/Outlaw/Jones are great complimentary players to the Blazers superstars in Roy and Aldridge. Durant jacking up 6-26 with 1 rebound and 1 assist in an Overtime loss last game would put a big time cramp in this teams style. Besides I personally feel that Oden will start next year stronger than he's ever been and with a chip on his shoulder. Not to mention 10 boards and 3 blocks per game, exactly what the Blazers need most. 5 years from now when Portland is wearing multiple rings it will be nice to tell you "I told you so"
posted By Joof, 19 January 2008 4:46:00 PM
You'd rather have Zach Randolf and Durant then Webster and Oden? Randolf is absolutely terrible, especially when you put team play into the mix. He doesn't play defense, passing among the last options on his list of things to do, right after turnover and attempt extremely low percentage shot.
I'd rather run four guys out on the court then have Randolf play.
posted By Ryan Macc, 21 January 2008 4:38:53 PM
Jamario Moon, anybody?
posted By Scott LaRock, 30 January 2008 6:47:23 PM
The only thing wrong with the Z-bo deal was that the Blazers should have gotten David Lee in return instead of Frye. There's no way Portland regrets taking Oden over Durant. Franchise big men don't come along that often. Blazer fans, please don't get ahead of yourselves with the multiple ring predictions just yet. Let's let the team grow together and see what happens.
|
