Are we looking better without Lillard?

[BonesJones]

I don't necessarily disagree with that, but if the coach is the problem, it wouldn't really explain the team playing better (and faster?) without Dame. I doubt Stotts is telling them to slow down when Dame is out there.

The team is inconsistent. They team played well without him and is playing bad with him because the team is inconsistent. Stotts is at fault for that.

Stotts needs to get them playing with faster pace in general. Playing with pace is extremely important in The NBA unless you have a halfcourt offense with many threats and good ball movement. We so neither.

 

[handiman]

The team is inconsistent. They team played well without him and is playing bad with him because the team is inconsistent. Stotts is at fault for that.

You can't just dismiss a personnel pattern on the basis of inconsistency of the whole.

 

[BonesJones]

You can't just dismiss a personnel pattern on the basis of inconsistency of the whole.

What? The whole team is inconsistent, yes?

They played good in maybe 2 games without Damian. That's not a pattern.

 

[DameLill379]

What? The whole team is inconsistent, yes?

They played good in maybe 2 games without Damian. That's not a pattern.

Just about this^

They stepped up in 2-3 games and it’s honestly just because CJ McCullom got hot and put up about 30+ complimented by Napier’s emergence. I think Harkless and Aminu put up 15 once or twice and that was the main reason. The Spurs didn’t play Tony Parker, Danny Green or Kawhi Leonard and we beat them only by 1 point. Peopel call that getting better without Damian Lillard? We beat a middle of the pack OKC team, bottom 5 Chicago Bulls team, 76ers by only 4, and a young Lakers team by 3...scraping by bottom feeding team/middle of the pack teams without Lillard really doesn’t “WOW” me. Sorry. Guys are talking on here like we were blowing teams out without Lillard lol. What? Nonsense man...

 

[BrunoSOC]

He's shooting 34% for 3. Thats trash. He's taken so many bad shots so far this year.

 

[DameLill379]

He's shooting 34% for 3. Thats trash. He's taken so many bad shots so far this year.

So has everyone else..this statement doesn’t correlate directly from our W-L record. We haven’t convincingly beat anyone without Lillard for this claim to be made lol

 

[Blazinaway]

That's the sort of thing that needs looking into, and the sort of thing that never will as long as people bury their heads in the sand.

We have plenty of talent, as evidenced by being an above .500 team whenever our borderline all-star is out. We need to figure out how to make that talent be more cohesive.

I really do not think we have "plenty of talent" to be anything more than a treadmill team, and given our salary cap situation we are in a box and appear stuck unless there is a decision to blow it up, I don't disagree about Stotts, time for a change there as well IMO

 

[dviss1]

This thread =

 

[handiman]

What? The whole team is inconsistent, yes?

They played good in maybe 2 games without Damian. That's not a pattern.

Again, you're looking at only this year and ignoring the pattern of the past 3 or 4.

I really do not think we have "plenty of talent" to be anything more than a treadmill team, and given our salary cap situation we are in a box and appear stuck unless there is a decision to blow it up, I don't disagree about Stotts, time for a change there as well IMO

A treadmill team sans its borderline all-star should be a lot better than .500 with said player in the mix. We have enough talent to be competitive without Lillard, so why are we the definition of average with him?

 

[roroyo]

We've been talking a lot if Lillard and CJ should or can play together. And now I think we've got even bigger problem. Can anyone in this team play with Lillard. And it's not about Lillard, it's about how this team was built. Can any other player play on his level? It's not about talent. I'm talking about sense of urgency, commitment, being professional bball player, being hungry.

So who we got?

I mean, I see huge difference in commitment in Lillard and Harkless. It's obvious that Lillard would NEVER go for 500 bonus, because he is on different level of playing basketball for this team.

Do Blazers have any guys ready for playing for Championship with sense of urgency Lillard have? Or do we just have a team of young millionaires, happy with what they have and not being professional enough? I'm not saying everyone apart of Lillard is like that, it wouldn't be fair, but sometimes it's like Stotts is just not the rite man for kindergarten. Kids just don't listen to him

My first post here was about veterans and I still think thats our biggest problem. Someone told me, that 1977 Champs were so young too. Well, people were different those days I would say, or maybe those guys were special.

So my assumption is this: Is this team better w/o Lillard? Hell no. Is this team happier without him? Maybe. They can just relax and play. Most of them are here for money anyway.

 

[PtldPlatypus]

Listening to Colin Cowherd (and Chris Broussard) today talking about how much the different the Lakers look when Lonzo Ball is with the team vs when he's out injured. They gushed over how Lonzo doesn't really have highlight games, and doesn't really have any highlight plays, but somehow simply makes his teammates look better (when he's healthy, which seems increasingly uncommon these days). They concluded that his teammates play with more energy when he's out there with them, knowing that he will consistently get them the ball where they need it when they're open--something they can't count on when anyone else is running the team.

Listening to that conversation, it was pretty much impossible for me to not mentally contrast that with a lot of the commentary in this thread about Lillard, in which it is intimated that his teammates essentially do the opposite. Yes, I understand that "if players play worse/with less energy when Dame is on the floor, then that is on those players," but if there is in fact any validity to these suggestions, at what point is it on Dame to recognize the effect his play and style might have on his teammates, and potentially adjust slightly in order to elevate the team as a whole?

 

[illmatic99]

Dame needs a breakout game in the worst way. He's been shooting like shit from 3 since he got back. He's better than a 34% shooter-- I have no confidence in his WIDE OPEN looks anymore. It's no longer his shot selection that is bringing his %s down-- he simply can't hit an outside shot.

A nice lil 40 point no turnover game toinght would set a lot of this convo right.

 

[Denny Crane]

The team has turned to shit since trading Plums.

 

[handiman]

The team has turned to shit since trading Plums.

You mean since Nurk broke his leg.

 

[BonesJones]

Again, you're looking at only this year and ignoring the pattern of the past 3 or 4.



A treadmill team sans its borderline all-star should be a lot better than .500 with said player in the mix. We have enough talent to be competitive without Lillard, so why are we the definition of average with him?

Other years we played naff Kings teams, or a Cavs team that threw the game because they wanted Blatt fired... etc.

 

[tlongII]

Dame needs a breakout game in the worst way. He's been shooting like shit from 3 since he got back. He's better than a 34% shooter-- I have no confidence in his WIDE OPEN looks anymore. It's no longer his shot selection that is bringing his %s down-- he simply can't hit an outside shot.

A nice lil 40 point no turnover game toinght would set a lot of this convo right.

In my opinion where Dame needs to improve is reducing his turnovers. He has been turning the ball over WAY too much!

 

[illmatic99]

A nice lil 40 point no turnover game toinght would set a lot of this convo right.

I'll take 31-7-5 with only 1 turnover and at least 50% shooting from everywhere in a comfy win.

 

[Orion Bailey]

Bump

 

[stampedehero]

I'm trying to be chill, but constant threads like this are annoying and dumb. SIGH.

Mod's...... It's obvious......Lock This. Too much love for Dame!

 

[kjironman1]

You have to admit reading this is fucking hilarious. What is even funnier is some of these guys will actually try to rationalize their responses.

Everyone knows Noah Vonleh was holding this team back!

 

[TBpup]

No

 

[SIeepwalker]

 

[BonesJones]

It may not be Dame's fault, but at some point, the team has to ask why they win at a higher rate when he's out?

Lol

 

[handiman]

Lol

Yes, Dame is carrying the team lately, but that doesn't disprove that the winning percentage has been better when he's out.

The real question is, why did the team morale improve so markedly? That's the gist of the question of this thread. Whatever addressed it is the important answer.

 

[Boob-No-More]

Yes, Dame is carrying the team lately, but that doesn't disprove that the winning percentage has been better when he's out.

Still desperately clinging to your small sample size argument.

The real question is, why did the team morale improve so markedly? That's the gist of the question of this thread. Whatever addressed it is the important answer.

Simple, leaders lead, and Damian Lillard is one of the best leaders in the NBA. Which makes the original question in the subject line of this thread, and your stance on the issue, look even more ridiculous now than two months ago.

BNM

 

[SlyPokerDog]

Yes, we would be much better at tanking without Lillard.

 

[Lukee]

This is the GOAT thread

 

[Natebishop3]

I'm safe. My post only said that anyone should be available for the right price..... and right now my right price would probably be Giannis or Anthony Davis.

 

[SportsAndWhine]

Shabazz playing pretty well and our team as a team play very hard. Everybody scores and everybody was involved. I think Lillard is not 100% because he's trick shots and miss a lot of open 3s. He's #FG% are trash right now. I don't know, I really joke in wrong, but it's gonna be a very tough game against the wolves, and since Dame's back is gonna 3 in a row...

YeeeeaaaaahhhhhhhNO.

 

[BBert]

Times 100