Blazers are starting to get it right . . .

[Guest_Randy]

They definately have the right coach to deal with players -- I bet Patterson HATED seeing McMillan coming to Portland!!!

From ESPN.com

PORTLAND -- The Portland Trail Blazers placed high-strung forward Ruben Patterson on the inactive list Monday for his behavior toward coach Nate McMillan.

Patterson, who has garnered the nickname "Captain Chaos," has had a history of off-the-court problems. He also was suspended for the first five games of the 2001-2002 season following a charge of attempted rape.

His latest problems stem from an incident on the court. During the third and fourth quarter of Sunday's 103-92 loss to the New York Knicks, Patterson unleashed an expletive-filled tirade toward McMillan about his playing time.

The Blazers, who opened a seven-game road trip Sunday, took quick action with the reserve forward, who is averaging 7.0 points while playing just over 19 minutes in eight games this season.

"Ruben Patterson has been placed on the inactive list and sent home to Portland for the rest of this road trip for his behavior both on and off the court," Blazers general manager John Nash said in a statement.

"We will not tolerate this type of behavior from any player. We will continue to demand a higher level of professionalism and personal responsibility from all our players or we will continue to take appropriate action."

[westkoast]

Good move by the organization.  Dumb move by Ruben.  You complain about playing time when you are a player who can come on the floor and put the team on your back.  Ruben is not and never will be that kind of player.

[ziggy]

His latest problems stem from an incident on the court. During the third and fourth quarter of Sunday's 103-92 loss to the New York Knicks, Patterson unleashed an expletive-filled tirade toward McMillan about his playing time.

[/QUOTE] [/quote]
 Memo to Ruben

When you are averaging
.360 FG% (5 for your last 20)
.606 FT
a whopping 1 defensive board / game (6-0 Sebastian Telfair is averaging 2)
4.4 turnovers per 48 minutes
don't complain about your minutes.  You are lucky you are playing at all.

The silver lining in all this is now Victor Khyrapa will now get a chance to play PF.  Don't know if he can handle it, but he can't be any worse than the worst backup PF in the league, one Ruben Patterson.

[Guest_Randy]

Ruben Patterson has about as much chance playing PF in the NBA as I do bodying up Shaq in the paint.  He's a small forward -- and he has ALWAYS made his bread and butter on hustle plays -- and these days he isn't even hustling.

Oh, and by-the-way, Zig -- good luck this week.  I don't really think that you need the extra game advantages but I won't complain because I have had those advantages the first two weeks.  I think you've got a pretty good squad -- it's just going to be tough to overcome Joey V (although I DO have to say that I like Ted's line-up -- I thought Bosh was a bad pickup but he has been a pretty good fantasy pick so far -- and Camby?  What's up with this guy -- he is outplaying TD, KG and everyone else in the league lately -- makes me want to  :puke:  -- not that he's playing so well, just that he's not on my team!!   ).

[ziggy]

Ruben Patterson has about as much chance playing PF in the NBA as I do bodying up Shaq in the paint.  He's a small forward -- and he has ALWAYS made his bread and butter on hustle plays -- and these days he isn't even hustling.

Oh, and by-the-way, Zig -- good luck this week.  I don't really think that you need the extra game advantages but I won't complain because I have had those advantages the first two weeks.  I think you've got a pretty good squad -- it's just going to be tough to overcome Joey V (although I DO have to say that I like Ted's line-up -- I thought Bosh was a bad pickup but he has been a pretty good fantasy pick so far -- and Camby?  What's up with this guy -- he is outplaying TD, KG and everyone else in the league lately -- makes me want to  :puke:  -- not that he's playing so well, just that he's not on my team!!   ).

re: Ruben
I don't understand why they feel he can play PF.  I think it is just desperation because they have no one else, and also because they have better options at SF than Ruben.  He wants out, and we would love to make his wish a reality, but don't know what we would have to take back to make it work.

re: Fantasy
Good luck to you as well.  I have 17 games with my big 6, so no real advantage for me there.  Very interesting trade you just finalized with Ted.  I have to admit, I am surprised with how well Okur has played all year.  He has been fabulous this year, and I would say at this pace he is the easy choice for most improved.  JJ has been fine, but that Atlanta situation is real messed up.  Smith, Childress, and Williams have all had very poor starts, with Smith creating some problems.  Right now I would say this could be a good deal for you.  

[Skandery]

Scoring Last 5 games:

Okur: 12, 5, 29, 13, 16

Johnson: 24, 17, 12, 18, 21

Okur is averaging 1 point higher per game than Johnson but its been bolstered by two 30 point explosions, I think those performances and the trend shown above make Johnson a more consistent scoring threat.  Okur's still apt to getting benched by Sloan for defensive effort as evidenced by his recent 21 minute game.  And he's shooting threes at a ridiculous 50% (1.4/2., how long is that going to last??  Especially when you take into account the Jazz are without Boozer and Kirilenko.  You have to wonder what Okur's rebounds and points go down to after they come back (if ever??), especially since he doesn't really give you much in the way of assists, steals, or blocks.

Johnson is averaging an eye-popping 42.4 mpg last 5 games and 39.8 mpg for the season.  He's going to see playing time rain or shine.  He is averaging 18.7 ppg but I expect that to go up since I doubt he'll end the year at 27% from 3 point land and 67% at the line.  He'll creep back up to his career averages of 37% (perhaps 35% since he's the focus of the team) 3P% and 75% from the line and end the season over 20 ppg.  The 4-something rebounds and assists will be very nice at the 2-spot, also.

To me Johnson is a legitamate fantasy keeper whereas Okur is fantasy starter because of Center-status and could be reduced to great fantasy bench player if his numbers take a dive with the eventual return of Boozer's 17 and 9.  With Yahoo's recent addition of Center status to Jermaine O'Neal I don't think Randy was under the gun to pull this deal off.  And I think Ted has made a strong roster even stonger.              

[Guest_Randy]

Skander,

But you are missing the point of why I needed Okur -- because I'm not holding my weight in rebounding.  Currently, the ONLY strong rebouder I have is Jermaine.  I really thought that Thomas would do well with the Suns but with Amare going down -- Kurt's rebounds have been down (how the heck does that work, anyway?).  I REALLY need some rebounding help -- my weakest position is the Center position.  SAR's rebounding is also down and Al Harrington doesn't often grab a ton of boards these days.  I really needed a Center who would give me great boards and decent scoring.  Gaining Okur helped me in a stat I wanted to grow in -- rebounds.  JJ MIGHT be a fantasy keeper but I certainly don't think he is at this point.

And when Boozer comes back, I see the Jazz sitting Ostertag, not Okur.  

And which position is harder to fill?  SG or C?

[Skandery]

And which position is harder to fill? SG or C?

I agree Center is much harder to fill than SG, but not on your team.

               Your SG's
                -------------
              Cuttino Mobley
               Matt Harpring
               Salim Stoudamire


              Your C's
        ------------------------
            Jermaine O'Neal
             Mehmet Okur
             Kurt Thomas
             Brendan Haywood
             Chris Mihm
             Channing Frye

You now have six Centers and only three shooting guards.  And I consider only Mobley a legitemate fantasy SG with Harpring gimpy and Stoudamire so young (essentially FA fodder).  Worst than even your SG position is your PG position where you have Iverson backed up by Salim Stoudamire.  With JJ starting games at point, its only a matter of time before Yahoo will give him PG status, then he'd be (PG, SG, SF), an awesome combination.  

I still believe its flawed logic to sacrifice talented players to potentially boost your team in ONE category.  Luke Ridnour shoots in the 90s FT%, Stephon Marbury shoots in the 50s FT%.  My team as a whole is FAR and away the WORST FT shooting team in our league.  That doesn't mean I'm going to trade Marbury to Ziggy for Ridnour straight up.  Even though Luke might potentially help me in my weakest category, I'd be giving up a top tier talent (once he gets his head out of his ass).  Not to liken that deal to yours, but the philosophy is the same.  

Then again you have a much better fantasy track record, so its a possibility I don't know what I'm talking about??

[Joe Vancil]

And I disagree with Skander.

I wrote a really nice post earlier explaining in detail the reasons why, and I must have hit a wrong key, because I lost it!

Here's the synopsis:

While Ted's move is good for the long term - specifically next year, since JJ's a keeper and MO isn't, I like the move for Randy because:

1)  There's more talent on the wire out there at 2/3 than at 5.  Expect Haywood and/or Mihm to be gone in favor of that talent soon.

2)  Randy is getting into categories that he needs to win in order to win the league.  He's acquiring a player who will allow him to overtake some of the managers who are in close competition with him.

3)  In getting into the categories he needs to compete with the teams that look to be in the elite, he's giving up categories that he is significantly behind many of these folks in.  In other words, he's conceding some battles he was probably going to lose anyway.

4)  Utah has the potential to be playing for something in the last week of the season.  Atlanta doesn't.  Therefore, if Randy's player gets injured, Okur is more likely to be rushed back to play than Joe Johnson.

5)  Every once in a while, a player has a "once in a lifetime" year - like Drew Gooden or Bobby Simmons last year.  Okur looks to be having that year.  A team can ride that kind of year (like I did with Rafer Alston, Drew Gooden, Quentin Richardson, and Steve Nash last year).

I think Randy got the better of the deal, although it's a fair deal either way.  And, to be honest, it may be a deal that helps both clubs.  And in that case, the big winner is Randy - because getting Okur helps Randy's team against Ted more than getting Johnson helps Ted's team against Randy - if the early season numbers are any indication.

[Guest_Randy]

This trade was ALL about helping two clubs -- not just comparing players.  Which player is better?  It's not about that at all for me -- or for Ted (if it was, he would have just kept Okur which he WANTED to do).

There are more players available at the SG position than the Center position -- and right now, my biggest need is a big man who can rebound and score points.  Those guys are pretty rare and Okur is putting up much better numbers than SAR, at this point -- esp. in the rebounding category.  Besides Jermaine, I have Mihm, Haywood, Thomas, and Frye.  I will probably drop Mihm as he is not only erratic but can't seem to block a shot for his life!  I think Frye has tremendous potential and I will hang on to Thomas to see if his numbers return to what they have for years.  Most of these guys have tremendous flexibility at PF/C and that gives me a LOT more flexibility for what I need.

I gave up 3 pointers a LONG time ago -- I think I can have a shot at 3pt% but this allows me to compete in rebounding (something I was struggling to do).  

I started looking at GM's who:
  1)  Had quality big men
  2)  Needed a quality SG

When I first sent it to Ted, he offered me Curry -- I told him I wouldn't consider Curry but any of the three other big men (he wasn't going to give up Camby or Bosh) -- he had Q Richardson who isn't getting the points and minutes in NY that Ted expected.  MOST nights, one of these big men were ending up sitting the bench anyway!  By trading, it fills his need of a legit scoring SG and fills my need of a big man who can score and rebound.

It's not about who is better -- it's about what we both needed.

[Skandery]

1) There's more talent on the wire out there at 2/3 than at 5. Expect Haywood and/or Mihm to be gone in favor of that talent soon.

Okur's upgrade over Thomas/Mihm/Haywood < Waiver player downgrade over Johnson IMO.

2) Randy is getting into categories that he needs to win in order to win the league. He's acquiring a player who will allow him to overtake some of the managers who are in close competition with him.

At the cost of Roster Depth!?  Well I guess he's more flexible (w/ waiver wire) now?

3) In getting into the categories he needs to compete with the teams that look to be in the elite, he's giving up categories that he is significantly behind many of these folks in. In other words, he's conceding some battles he was probably going to lose anyway.

I'll never understand the "concession" of a category or worst plural categories;  not even when one is talking about Turnovers.  

4) Utah has the potential to be playing for something in the last week of the season. Atlanta doesn't. Therefore, if Randy's player gets injured, Okur is more likely to be rushed back to play than Joe Johnson.

Agreed here.  

5) Every once in a while, a player has a "once in a lifetime" year - like Drew Gooden or Bobby Simmons last year. Okur looks to be having that year. A team can ride that kind of year (like I did with Rafer Alston, Drew Gooden, Quentin Richardson, and Steve Nash last year).

I think its too early in the year to tell, especially with all the mitigating circumstances.  If you remember, Boozer looked ready to have his career year at the start of last year.

I don't know?  Joe and Randy always have strong fantasy teams, Ziggy what do you think??  I definitely see where Ted is coming from (I would've jumped on this deal), but is this deal worth it to Randy?

 


 

[Guest_Randy]

Ziggy did make mention of this trade earlier in the thread:

re: Fantasy
Good luck to you as well. I have 17 games with my big 6, so no real advantage for me there. Very interesting trade you just finalized with Ted. I have to admit, I am surprised with how well Okur has played all year. He has been fabulous this year, and I would say at this pace he is the easy choice for most improved. JJ has been fine, but that Atlanta situation is real messed up. Smith, Childress, and Williams have all had very poor starts, with Smith creating some problems. Right now I would say this could be a good deal for you.

Again, I like the trade -- I think it will accomplish what I wanted it to.  I don't think I will lose scoring longterm (unless the Hawks do something like trading Al Harrington to the Bulls -- but I'm not sure that alone will change things for JJ that much) by getting Okur and, honestly, I'm willing to lose a little scoring to gain some rebounding.  

Only time will tell if it turns out good for me or not!

[Joe Vancil]

Skander,

On conceding a category:

I have Duncan, Gasol, Krstic, Rashard Lewis, and Shane Battier - SpursX3 has Nazr Mohammad, Oberto, Lorenzen Wright, and Tyson Chandler.  At his utility spot, he can try to win blocks by playing Nazr, or he can try to take - for example -  Assists by playing Mo Pete as his extra player.  Which does he play on Monday?  He says, "Okay, I'm going to let you have blocks...I'm going to play my players who do other things.  Otherwise, he plays Nazi instead of Mo Pete, trying to win blocks, and in doing so, he loses STEALS, which he could have won.  On Thursday, he picks up Ray Felton instead of Adonal Foyle.  In essence, he says, "You win this one, but I'm going to challenge you in something I'm closer to you in."

See, I believe in playing Jamal Crawford - ON OCCASION - in front of (for example) Delonte West.  Let's say I know Derek's team doesn't get that many blocks - say, not enough to offset Duncan and Gasol, but DOES shoot a number of 3-pointers.  Do I play West - try to get that extra block or two, or do I play Crawford?  (I play Crawford - he'll get more 3's, although West is, in my estimation, a better player.)

That's where I think your strategy falls down.  If you consider West the better player, and you're forced to choose between Crawford and West, you choose West, always.  I don't.  I want to win those close categories.  I'd rather win assists 101-100 and rebounds 190-188 than to win assists 125-100 and lose rebounds 188-187.  I try to "manage" which categories I'll win and which ones I'll lose - because, although if I go 6-5 every week, I'm the champion, if I go 10-1 in a few of those weeks, I don't have to play the first round of the playoffs.

By the way - nice pick-up of Collison.

[Skandery]

See, I believe in playing Jamal Crawford - ON OCCASION - in front of (for example) Delonte West. Let's say I know Derek's team doesn't get that many blocks - say, not enough to offset Duncan and Gasol, but DOES shoot a number of 3-pointers. Do I play West - try to get that extra block or two, or do I play Crawford? (I play Crawford - he'll get more 3's, although West is, in my estimation, a better player.)

That's EXACTLY my point, Joe.  You would play Crawford to try and win 3s knowing you've got blocks locked up.  You aren't conceding a category your team is potentially weak in (3s).  You are doing your best to win EVERY CATEGORY.  In essence you want to go 11-0 EVERY single week.  The unwise play would be to play you're Delonte West and MAKE SURE to win your strong 6 (Blks being 1 of them).  I agree 100%, only I hold the same standard not only in choosing players to start day in and day out but ALSO the players I trade away and for.  

You see just because I'm the weakest FT shooting team in the league, doesn't mean I go into a week saying to myself, "Well might as well give up on FT%, I'm definitely going to lose."  Here is the logic I don't understand:

To solidify my strong category of Steals, I'll trade Gilbert Arenas (a good free throw shooter who won't really help my godawful team in FT% but DOESN'T get many steals) for Smush Parker (who averages over 2 steals a game).  Now that I'm gangbusters in Steals, I now have the flexibility to go after my weak categories--that I've just made a heck of a lot weaker through the trade.

Another example that is parallel to this philosophy is the trade for need, with no consequence of the difference in talent.  The one position my team needs is C, it needs it BADLY.  Nenad Krstic would be the exact type of player a team like mine needs to fill this badly needed gap.  Marbury on the other  hand is extraneous, he is a (PG only) which locks my UTIL spot on the days when he and Arenas both have games.  Does that mean I'm going to beat Joe's door down trading Marbury for Krstic, knowing Krstic is exactly who I need and Marbury is exactly who I don't need.  NO!!!!  Marbury is a top tier fantasy talent and the only way he leaves my team is for another top tier fantasy talent.  

But by this logic of filling your roster needs and solidifying weak and/or strong categories, this trade would be acceptable.        


     

[Joe Vancil]

Skander,

But consider Randy's case.  He's not the elite rebounding team - he's behind Ted and me, and tied with Ziggy and LTTK.

By the way the numbers stack up, in a close match, Randy figures to win (in order of dominance) the following categories:  Points, FTM, Steals, Assists, Blocks, and either FG% or Rebounds.  And as the current league is shaking out, he's looking to do that against Ted, me, Ziggy, LTTK, and you when it comes playoff time.  But how does he do?

Against me, Randy wins FG%, FTM, Points, Assists, and Steals - but loses blocks and Rebounds.  Randy's not going to touch me in FT% (1st to 9th), 3M (5th to 9th), 3% (6th to 10th).  So he needs to pick up one of the other three categories I lead in:  Rebounds (2nd to 4th), Blocks (1st to tied for 3rd), or turnovers (10th to 12th).  The trade of Okur for Johnson helps him in 2 of those 3.

Against Ted, Randy loses FG% (2nd to 4th), FT% (2nd to 9th), 3M (8th to 9th), 3% (tied 7th to 10th), Rebounds (1st to tied for 3rd), blocks (2nd to tied for 3rd), and turnovers (tied for 7th to 12th).  Randy needs to take 2 of those categories.  Strenthening his "big" core means he gains in rebounds and hopefully blocks and FG%.

Against Ziggy, the numbers really look close:
Ziggy       Category      Randy
9th               FG%           4th
5th               FTM            1st
T-4th            FT%           9th
6th               3M             9th
T-4th            3%            10th
7th               Pts            1st
T-3rd            Reb           T-3rd
1st                Ast           2nd
T-1st             Stl            T-1st
8th                Blk           T-3rd
11th              TO            12th

That's 5-4-2 in favor of Ziggy.  But if Randy can break the tie in rebounds, that's 5-5-1, with Randy winning the tie-breaker.

Randy has a 7-3-1 advantage over you.  The trade doesn't really change anything.

Against LTTK, Randy loses FG% (1st to 4th), FT% (8th to 9th), and turnovers (T-7th to 12th), but is in a dog-fight with LTTK for Rebounds (both in that 3-way tie for 3rd with Ziggy).  Randy strengthens his position - AGAIN - with that trade.


While I grant you, you try to win every week 11-0, the simple fact is that there's a lot of parity in this league, which means even if the top team plays the bottom team, 11-0 is an incredible feat.

And while Randy would love to add FT%, 3M, and 3% without giving up anything in any other category, the simple fact is that no one is going to give Randy help in all of his categories without getting some sort of help of their own.  Randy is trying to make his weaknesses weaker, while making something which isn't a strength into something that *IS*.