At the start of this season, I think that KP and Nate made it very clear that this year was about evaluation. The fact that we can even mutter the word "playoffs" with a straight face is a testament to the growth of this whole organization. AS much as our youngs progressed this year I think the one who may have grown the most might be Nate McMillon.
This year he started with a fantastic relationship with the GM and that has led to him "letting go" of the reigns. I cant remember one player calling him Sarge this year.
Anyways, My original point is that as much as we have lived and loved the effort and development of these young players, i cant shake the feeling that we may see numerous players gone.
Here are the list I wouldnt be surprised to see go:
Travis - He is NOT a Nate guy. Nate and KP value basketball IQ WAY over physical ability......but I know a few Gm's that dont.
Martell - see above description
Channing - lacking in IQ AND physical ability.
Jack - sure It's nice to have a guy who knows how to attack the rim, but wouldnt you like one who can play well in all facets of the game?
Sergio - Man, I personally love him as a player and cant wait to see him on a non Nate coached team. Throw him to the free and easy Don Nelson.
Alright, I know that Im gonna catch a ton of flack for this but....
阿尔德里奇,我爱这个家伙但end of the day If KP thinks he can lure an proven NBA vet-leader, who has a few miles left on the odometer, to this up and coming team.......he'll pull the trigger. I think that nate would loke to have a big man who can really pass out of the double team. One that see's the floor like a point guard. There are so may teams that may need to change directions and if this year is any indication of the testicular fortitude of GM's then you have to be ready at any time.
So, I write this with the feeling that as much as I truly love these players and the hard work they've put in as Blazers.........I trust KP and I believe that he has a 2-4 year goal of winning it all.
do you really think it's gonna be with the guys we have and through the draft?
non-attachment here we come.
Loading comments...