Portland Trail Blazers Thread

Moderators: greenyellow, UOducksTK1

Post Reply
dthomas=ddixon
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 8214
Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2009 12:42 pm
Location: McMinnville, Oregon

Re: Portland Trail Blazers Thread

Post by dthomas=ddixon »

I'll be at the game Thursday. My in-laws purchased this package where we get to go to the shoot-around, be on the court for the announcements and the seats are 100 level. Preeeetty stoked ha.
Image
User avatar
UOducksTK1
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 37590
Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2009 11:28 pm
GM: Boston Celtics GM
Location: Portland, Oregon

Re: Portland Trail Blazers Thread

Post by UOducksTK1 »

Struggled to beat a Jazz team missing three of their top four scorers. We will get a better idea of the Blazers after Thursday.

Do Not Fear. Isaiah 41:13
oregontrack
All Pac-12
Posts: 5118
Joined: Thu Jan 14, 2010 6:23 pm

Re: Portland Trail Blazers Thread

Post by oregontrack »

i think we'll see a lot of games go down like how the utah opener did. portland isn't a very good defensive team, so i suspect we'll see a lot of back-and-forth and they'll try to hunker down and string together a few stops late. the clippers basically did this same thing to us in game two. they let us trade baskets for 3.5 quarters, then their superior team defense kicked in when it mattered.

i'd like to say we then executed this plan successfully against denver, but man. we were down 9 with 90 seconds left. if that was "the plan", we executed it by the skin of our teeth. might have gotten away with one there.

2-1. lillard is a beast.
ImageImageImageImageImage
User avatar
Phalanx
Senior
Posts: 3899
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 11:50 pm

Re: Portland Trail Blazers Thread

Post by Phalanx »

Feeling pretty negative about this team to start the year. I think management really messed up signing all of these guys to such huge contracts. I guess we'll see if they can turn any of them into a good trade, but otherwise, I think we're stuck with a team destined to lose in the first round of the playoffs every year.
oregontrack
All Pac-12
Posts: 5118
Joined: Thu Jan 14, 2010 6:23 pm

Re: Portland Trail Blazers Thread

Post by oregontrack »

i think that's legitimate criticism. any attempt to get to that "next level" will have to come by way of internal improvement, ie improved team defense. we'll see if this team can get there. most of this core will be together for the next 4 years.

i have reservations about the evan turner signing, as he can't space the floor and demands the ball to be effective, and we've already got ball handlers like lillard and mccollum. the plus side is that stotts can really experiment with turner in a point-forward role, and if there's anyone who can get that to work, it's stotts. i don't really even mind the crabbe signing anymore. he's good, he's effective, he plays well in this system. we'll never sign a big outside FA, might as well spend the money on our own.

i don't think we overpaid for anyone else.
ImageImageImageImageImage
User avatar
UOducksTK1
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 37590
Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2009 11:28 pm
GM: Boston Celtics GM
Location: Portland, Oregon

Re: Portland Trail Blazers Thread

Post by UOducksTK1 »

That comeback against the Nuggets though...

Do Not Fear. Isaiah 41:13
User avatar
Phalanx
Senior
Posts: 3899
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 11:50 pm

Re: Portland Trail Blazers Thread

Post by Phalanx »

oregontrack wrote:i think that's legitimate criticism. any attempt to get to that "next level" will have to come by way of internal improvement, ie improved team defense. we'll see if this team can get there. most of this core will be together for the next 4 years.

i have reservations about the evan turner signing, as he can't space the floor and demands the ball to be effective, and we've already got ball handlers like lillard and mccollum. the plus side is that stotts can really experiment with turner in a point-forward role, and if there's anyone who can get that to work, it's stotts. i don't really even mind the crabbe signing anymore. he's good, he's effective, he plays well in this system. we'll never sign a big outside FA, might as well spend the money on our own.

i don't think we overpaid for anyone else.
Aside from Aminu and Ed Davis and Ezeli if he can play, pretty much the rest of the team not on their rookie deals are overpaid. Lillard is the 6th highest paid player in the NBA! Totally insane for a guy that didn't even make the All-Star team last year. Allen Crabbe is 23rd highest; he makes more than Kawhi Leonard, Paul George, and Kyrie Irving. He will never sniff the All-Star game in his entire career. He doesn't even start. Evan Turner is 39th - also not a starter, but he makes more than Draymond Green.

You can't put together a winning team unless you can get at least some moderate salaries. The Blazers have none of those, they paid too much for pretty much every player on the team, and now they are stuck in luxury tax hell for the foreseeable future, and they are likely to have to let Plumlee go because there is no money to pay him.
User avatar
Duck07
All-American
Posts: 15952
Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2009 8:36 am
Location: Parts Unknown

Re: Portland Trail Blazers Thread

Post by Duck07 »

The NBA is full of stupid money right now. If you show potential doing one thing, you're going to make 40+ million easy.
Image
oregontrack
All Pac-12
Posts: 5118
Joined: Thu Jan 14, 2010 6:23 pm

Re: Portland Trail Blazers Thread

Post by oregontrack »

Duck07 nailed it. free agency got way out of hand last year. for everybody. "crabbe makes more money than ____" doesn't have a lot of weight behind it when there are a lot of superstars who signed extensions prior to the cap exploding. contracts and salaries are night and day pre and post summer 2016.

portland gave lillard a max extension last year (or the year prior, and it kicked in last year. i can't recall). if we didn't, someone else would be paying him big money right now. that's not "insane," he's the face of the franchise and one of the better players in the nba. using the all star game as a metric is laughable when he finished 2nd Team All NBA. he didn't make the all star team last year because fans are idiots and voted for kobe bryant. when the actual accolades came, lillard was well represented.

lillard and mccollum (under his new deal) are not overpaid. they're market value. i won't argue that evan turner is not overpaid, but i also understand portland cannot attract a decent free agent unless they massively overpay. crabbe is debatable; of course, portland did not set the market for crabbe. the nets did, and portland matched. whether or not you think crabbe is overpaid depends on what you think portland could do with that money if they didn't match the net's offer sheet.

plumlee might very well be a blazer next year. if he outplays our pocket book then so be it, good for him.
ImageImageImageImageImage
User avatar
Phalanx
Senior
Posts: 3899
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 11:50 pm

Re: Portland Trail Blazers Thread

Post by Phalanx »

oregontrack wrote:Duck07 nailed it. free agency got way out of hand last year. for everybody. "crabbe makes more money than ____" doesn't have a lot of weight behind it when there are a lot of superstars who signed extensions prior to the cap exploding. contracts and salaries are night and day pre and post summer 2016.

portland gave lillard a max extension last year (or the year prior, and it kicked in last year. i can't recall). if we didn't, someone else would be paying him big money right now. that's not "insane," he's the face of the franchise and one of the better players in the nba. using the all star game as a metric is laughable when he finished 2nd Team All NBA. he didn't make the all star team last year because fans are idiots and voted for kobe bryant. when the actual accolades came, lillard was well represented.

lillard and mccollum (under his new deal) are not overpaid. they're market value. i won't argue that evan turner is not overpaid, but i also understand portland cannot attract a decent free agent unless they massively overpay. crabbe is debatable; of course, portland did not set the market for crabbe. the nets did, and portland matched. whether or not you think crabbe is overpaid depends on what you think portland could do with that money if they didn't match the net's offer sheet.

plumlee might very well be a blazer next year. if he outplays our pocket book then so be it, good for him.
There are so many things wrong with this post, I'm not even sure where to begin. I guess I can sum up by saying this: We can argue all day about who is overpaid, etc. but in the end, it's all about results. A GM who can field a contender while staying under or around the cap did his job well. A GM whose team is only middling and getting paid like a bunch of superstars didn't do his job well. The Blazers fit into the latter category, and are now doomed to stay there for the next several years, thanks to some astonishingly bad negotiating.
oregontrack
All Pac-12
Posts: 5118
Joined: Thu Jan 14, 2010 6:23 pm

Re: Portland Trail Blazers Thread

Post by oregontrack »

i'd be interested in hearing what was "so wrong" with my post. brushing so many points under the rug seems like a disservice to civil interaction.

in response to your summary, i would merely say: what would you have portland do? portland will never make a big FA splash. stars do not want to play here. that leaves building through the draft, but you're on record balking at re-signing lillard, a young all-nba talent. so what is your plan? you seem opposed to everything, but you provide few answers.
ImageImageImageImageImage
User avatar
Phalanx
Senior
Posts: 3899
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 11:50 pm

Re: Portland Trail Blazers Thread

Post by Phalanx »

In each case, you look at contracts, and you see what players could have received on the market, and so you think they are not overpaid. First of all, some of those players were never even allowed to test the market; the Blazers were only bidding against themselves, and yet still chose to pay ridiculous sums. That is what happened with Lillard. In the NBA, they have this cool thing called 'restricted free agency', but the Blazers rarely actually use it. Second of all, just because some idiot in New Jersey or elsewhere was willing to pay, doesn't mean the Blazers have to match, if the player is replaceable. There aren't any players currently on the Blazers who aren't replaceable. That's why Lillard didn't make the All Star team, because there are quite a few quality point guards in the NBA. He is a good player, but his defense leaves a lot to be desired, and he will always be in the second-tier among point guards until that improves. I'm not saying don't re-sign him. I'm saying wait to see what he can get before just agreeing to the double-plus-ultra-max right out of the gate.

A few years ago, Olshey failed to re-sign Aldridge, so he let the rest of the starters go, and they all got huge contracts. Lopez, Matthews, and Batum are all being very well paid now. Olshey went out and found cheaper options, and the team ended up doing arguably better than if he had resigned them all minus Aldridge. The moral of the story is that unless you have someone with a unique skill that helps him defend/score consistently, a lot of players are replaceable.

So what would I have Portland do? I would have them test free agency more. If you run into a situation like Crabbe where he found a team desperate enough to pay that much, then you wish him well and wait to see what comes up instead. I fully admit that I might be missing that Crabbe will develop into a huge star in the next few years, but I don't think so. I think he will never come close to justifying that contract.

Meanwhile, I don't really think it is arguable that the Blazers are not a contender, but they are a luxury tax team. So to say they are overpaid as a team is not something that most observers would argue with.
oregontrack
All Pac-12
Posts: 5118
Joined: Thu Jan 14, 2010 6:23 pm

Re: Portland Trail Blazers Thread

Post by oregontrack »

Phalanx wrote:In each case, you look at contracts, and you see what players could have received on the market, and so you think they are not overpaid. First of all, some of those players were never even allowed to test the market; the Blazers were only bidding against themselves, and yet still chose to pay ridiculous sums. That is what happened with Lillard. In the NBA, they have this cool thing called 'restricted free agency', but the Blazers rarely actually use it.
you don't let your franchise star hit the market. i'm sorry, i'm a little taken aback by this. i've never met anyone who has questioned the blazers for locking up lillard long term.
Second of all, just because some idiot in New Jersey or elsewhere was willing to pay, doesn't mean the Blazers have to match, if the player is replaceable.


sure. and blazers seemed to waver on matching new jersey's offer sheet before deciding to do so. as i've said, it was a jarring amount of money for a role player, but i've since decided (as portland no doubt did at the time) that they wouldn't be able to sign anybody better with the money, so might as well take care of your own and continue to develop a young talent. you clearly don't think it was the right call. that's okay. unlike the decision to re-sign lillard to the max, the crabbe decision has proven to be pretty controversial.
There aren't any players currently on the Blazers who aren't replaceable. That's why Lillard didn't make the All Star team, because there are quite a few quality point guards in the NBA. He is a good player, but his defense leaves a lot to be desired, and he will always be in the second-tier among point guards until that improves. I'm not saying don't re-sign him. I'm saying wait to see what he can get before just agreeing to the double-plus-ultra-max right out of the gate.
again, lillard didn't make the all star team because A.) he's not curry, westbrook, or paul, and B.) it's partially a fan vote, and the fans wanted to see kobe bryant. he landed on the All NBA team, which is much more significant than an all star berth.

telling lillard "you aren't worth what we can afford to pay you, we'll let the market decide" is a GREAT way to alienate your star player, and tell any agents and players who might *ever* consider us that we're cheap bastards who don't take care of our own. nobody does this.
A few years ago, Olshey failed to re-sign Aldridge, so he let the rest of the starters go, and they all got huge contracts. Lopez, Matthews, and Batum are all being very well paid now. Olshey went out and found cheaper options, and the team ended up doing arguably better than if he had resigned them all and found a power forward to replace Aldridge. The moral of the story is that unless you have someone with a unique skill that helps him defend/score consistently, a lot of players are replaceable.
i agree with the notion that players are replaceable.
So what would I have Portland do? I would have them test free agency more. If you run into a situation like Crabbe where he found a team desperate enough to pay that much, then you wish him well and wait to see what comes up instead. I fully admit that I might be missing that Crabbe will develop into a huge star in the next few years, but I don't think so. I think he will never come close to justifying that contract.
which is a proven, time-tested failure. which is why they matched the offer sheet for crabbe. we DO test free agency. all the time. and we whiff, hardcore. every time.
Meanwhile, I don't really think it is arguable that the Blazers are not a contender, but they are a luxury tax team. So to say they are overpaid as a team is not something that most observers would argue with.
if the equation is luxury tax = contender, then fine. the blazers won't be contending this year. as a small market team who cannot, nor will they ever, sign a lucrative free agent, there is only one method to contend: luck the hell out in the draft and get yourself a few generational talents to build around (and win for awhile, then watch them bolt -- i see you there, oklahoma city). instead of putting on a fire sale and condemning the franchise and its fans to 20-win seasons and a permanent spot in the draft lottery for the foreseeable future, the powers that be chose to keep a fun, energetic collection of young talent together and watch it grow. are you a blazer fan? honest question. if you are, CHAMPIONSHIP OR BUST should never be your priority.

they may never be a true contender, but i have a hard time getting behind an annual tanking effort.
ImageImageImageImageImage
User avatar
Phenom
All Pac-12
Posts: 9920
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 12:49 am

Re: Portland Trail Blazers Thread

Post by Phenom »

I've been to two games this year and wow...the team is FULL of holes. Shitty free agency, BTW. They just signed a bunch of mediocre role players that don't fit.

And now they'll be mediocre for the next 3-4 years.
oregontrack
All Pac-12
Posts: 5118
Joined: Thu Jan 14, 2010 6:23 pm

Re: Portland Trail Blazers Thread

Post by oregontrack »

because i'm curious, who are these players they signed that don't fit? i'll spot you evan turner, as i've also mentioned in the past that i question his ability to fit into stott's offense.

what we're seeing this first week is a team where only a few guys have shown up to start the season. aminu has been awful. harkless has only shown up once. turner is still figuring out how to play in this offense, and has been decidedly mediocre. plumdog thinks he's a point guard and has totally forgotten how to rebound. when the only guys consistently scoring are 6'3 or shorter, you're going to play .500 ball.

once aminu and turner get it turned around we should see marked improvement. harkless seems to run hot/cold and we'll probably just have to live with that.
ImageImageImageImageImage
Post Reply