Blazers don't need another "star"

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in
This thread sounds like a weed smoke circle.

"Dude, dude!! if Anthony Davis and Ed Davis has the SAME last name, doesn't it mean that Ed Davis should be like at least 50% AS GOOD as Anthony Davis??"

-"Whoaaaaaaaa, DUDE!."

"Then why do we even NEEED another Davis on our team?? you know what are the chances of having like another Connaughton on our team?? SHOULD BE LIKE, A MILLION TO ONE!".
 
KingAlbertoJrSpeed said:
He hasn't transformed shit. His team could play just as awfully without him.
Click to expand...

Blame the GM. That team is so crappily put together that you can't blame him. The only thing you can blame on Anthony Davis is the fact that he's been injured. Other than that he's been a double double with three blocks waiting to happen.
 
Sinobas said:
I think Barnes probably benefits a lot from the talent around him, in terms of the open shots he gets. I'd rather pay Crabbe than Barnes.
Click to expand...

I am coming to that conclusion as well. I watched him pretty closely last night and he had one of his better offensive games. Especially with a couple of post up baskets. But I sure would not describe him as a lock down defender. I would say both Aminu and Crabbe are both better in that regard.

So if you are comparing him to Crabbe I would give the advantage to AC from the 3pt range, his runner (Which is really hard to block) and his D.

Apparently Barnes has improved his mid range game this year (per the announcer) so I will call that a draw for now, and give the advantage to Barnes finishing at the rim. (Because of his great hops)

But I really think we all discard how long Crabbe is. He has the same wingspan as Barnes and has a longer standing reach (By 2 ")
I am starting to think Crabbe can be our SF for the near future. Anyone we draft will not be ready for 3 years. With Aminu backing him up, I think they could make a good tandem. (Or Harkless for those who favor Mo over Aminu)

Re-sign Henderson to be our BU SG.

But as I said in another thread we will have plenty of time to further evaluate Barnes as the Warriors will be on TV into June.
 
blue9 said:
And this is why you don't build a team around a PF - PFs can't carry teams.
Click to expand...

Exactly. It's much easier to gameplan around stopping a post player than a player that can handle the ball.

I will say however that a team with McCollum, Lillard AND a post player like Monroe would be damn near unstoppable...at least offensively.
 
blue9 said:
And this is why you don't build a team around a PF - PFs can't carry teams.
Click to expand...

Duncan and Dirk won recent titles.

You can build a contending team with the best player at any position. There are no absolutes. Limiting a franchises options, trying to force very small specific criteria, having a closed mind are more damning strategies than having a teams best player at one specific position.

Its a game with 5 player on the court at a time and at least 8 playing significant minutes. There is no one exact blueprint that has to be followed. Creativity, ingenuity, embracing core competencies, zigging while other teams are zagging has lead to more success than attempting to replicate historical rosters.
 
Scalma said:
That's convenient. His team hasn't won more than 45 games since he's been in the league. He's never been in the top 10 in defensive rating, and neither has his team. How exactly is this guy a transformational player? What has he transformed?
Click to expand...

Can you name the last power forward/big man that, by himself, elevated a team to relevance?

Boogie hasn't been able to do it.
Aldridge couldn't do shit without Dame.
Duncan had Robinson and then Parker/Manu and now Kawhi.
Dirk had Nash/Finley and then Kidd/Marion.
Bosh, at his peak in Toronto, had the Raptors at 40-42.
Griffin has CP3.
Love was never good enough to get the TWolves into the playoffs.

So who would be an example of a big man, in recent memory, that could elevate his team by himself?

LeBron is a once-in-a-generation talent. That's like saying Barkley wasn't a star because he wasn't as good as Jordan.
 
The only way the OP's premise is true is if Noah Vonleh has some heretofore unseen leap in production that puts him in the all-star conversation . . . like a 500% leap in production. I'll wager the odds of that being possible are somewhere south of 10%.

It's certainly surprising that this team is better than most predicted, but that doesn't mean they have an unlimited ceiling. Just "letting it ride" and swapping out the middle of the roster for the next two or three years might make this a reliable second or third tier playoff team, but actually competing for titles with Damian and CJ as the backbone seems like a long shot at best -- Primarily because of their defensive shortcomings.

I would have thought by now more of you would be tired of the team getting stuck in the "pretty good" phase, with no hope of sniffing a title? But I get it, no one really wants to suffer through the pain of a rebuild and most are unwilling to endure unless there's some kind of guarantee. I'm different I guess? I'd take ten lottery seasons in a row if I thought it would give this organization just a 25% chance at a title.
 
Natebishop3 said:
Can you name the last power forward/big man that, by himself, elevated a team to relevance?

Boogie hasn't been able to do it.
Aldridge couldn't do shit without Dame.
Duncan had Robinson and then Parker/Manu and now Kawhi.
Dirk had Nash/Finley and then Kidd/Marion.
Bosh, at his peak in Toronto, had the Raptors at 40-42.
Griffin has CP3.
Love was never good enough to get the TWolves into the playoffs.

So who would be an example of a big man, in recent memory, that could elevate his team by himself?

LeBron is a once-in-a-generation talent. That's like saying Barkley wasn't a star because he wasn't as good as Jordan.
Click to expand...

Thanks for proving my point. If you gave me a franchise today I'm not picking any of those guys first. Dirk might be the exception. He carried the Mavs. Kidd was a role player by that time. Marion was always one.
 
Scalma said:
Thanks for proving my point. If you gave me a franchise today I'm not picking any of those guys first. Dirk might be the exception. He carried the Mavs. Kidd was a role player by that time. Marion was always one.
Click to expand...

I would take Duncan, for sure, but calling guys like Drummond and Davis "role players" is a little absurd. There's a pretty wide gap between "transformational player" and "role player." You can be a star in the league and not even be one of the top 10 players. That's why there's stars and then there's superstars. Dame seems to be on the cusp of being a superstar. Davis seems to have taken a step backwards. He was definitely right on that superstar line last year.
 
Natebishop3 said:
I would take Duncan, for sure, but calling guys like Drummond and Davis "role players" is a little absurd. There's a pretty wide gap between "transformational player" and "role player." You can be a star in the league and not even be one of the top 10 players. That's why there's stars and then there's superstars. Dame seems to be on the cusp of being a superstar. Davis seems to have taken a step backwards. He was definitely right on that superstar line last year.
Click to expand...

I don't mean to diminish post players importance just by calling them role players. They are important too. I'm just saying that they're not the most important part of a team in todays NBA.
 
Scalma said:
I don't mean to diminish post players importance just by calling them role players. They are important too. I'm just saying that they're not the most important part of a team in todays NBA.
Click to expand...

That's because of rules changes. Removing hand checking was a pretty major advantage for guards and wings.

Also, the league is crazy about three pointers right now.
 
Nikolokolus said:
The only way the OP's premise is true is if Noah Vonleh has some heretofore unseen leap in production that puts him in the all-star conversation . . . like a 500% leap in production. I'll wager the odds of that being possible are somewhere south of 10%.

It's certainly surprising that this team is better than most predicted, but that doesn't mean they have an unlimited ceiling. Just "letting it ride" and swapping out the middle of the roster for the next two or three years might make this a reliable second or third tier playoff team, but actually competing for titles with Damian and CJ as the backbone seems like a long shot at best -- Primarily because of their defensive shortcomings.

I would have thought by now more of you would be tired of the team getting stuck in the "pretty good" phase, with no hope of sniffing a title? But I get it, no one really wants to suffer through the pain of a rebuild and most are unwilling to endure unless there's some kind of guarantee. I'm different I guess? I'd take ten lottery seasons in a row if I thought it would give this organization just a 25% chance at a title.
Click to expand...

Nailed it
 
Nikolokolus said:
The only way the OP's premise is true is if Noah Vonleh has some heretofore unseen leap in production that puts him in the all-star conversation . . . like a 500% leap in production. I'll wager the odds of that being possible are somewhere south of 10%.
Click to expand...

Not to harp on this, because what you are saying is not completely wrong, but it's not like the lottery is a better option. If Vonleh only ever has less than a 10% chance of being in the all-star conversation, what does that say about any other top 10 pick....... every year? That is not exactly making me want to suffer through a lot of bad seasons. Especially watching this year's crop of 18 year olds.
 
Pinwheel1 said:
Not to harp on this, because what you are saying is not completely wrong, but it's not like the lottery is a better option. If Vonleh only has less than a 10% chance of being in the all-star conversation, what does that say about any other top 10 pick....... every year. That is not exactly making me want to suffer through a lot of bad seasons. Especially watching this year's crop of 18 year olds.
Click to expand...
But I'm guessing that's not really the hit rate for high lottery picks. I don't have the time to look it up, but I'm guessing that top 10 picks have a higher average than that of panning out (Vonleh was 9th), but that's why I said I'd take ten years in the lottery for that hypothetical 25% chance.
 
And let's not discount Olshey's ability to identify the right players to draft. Someone posted an article a while back that illustrated that Olshey has a much better track record with drafting than the average GM.
 
Nikolokolus said:
But I'm guessing that's not really the hit rate for high lottery picks. I don't have the time to look it up, but I'm guessing that top 10 picks have a higher average than that of panning out (Vonleh was 9th), but that's why I said I'd take ten years in the lottery for that hypothetical 25% chance.
Click to expand...

Didn't you hear? We're a desirable location. We don't need to draft stars. We can sign them!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

SlyPokerDog
Notice TRAIL BLAZERS ANNOUNCE MULTI-YEAR PARTNERSHIP EXTENSION WITH ADIDAS
Replies
6
Views
380
THE HCP
THE HCP
OSUBlazerfan
Zombie Summer of 2016 NBA Free Agency
8 9 10
Replies
271
Views
21K
Minstrel
Minstrel
C
The Blazers DON'T need veterans!
Replies
7
Views
971
BenDavis503x
BenDavis503x
Scalma
Quick on the Blazers summer
2 3
Replies
67
Views
4K
ABM
ABM
blazerfan11
Player wish-list: one player you want in a trade for Dame?
2 3 4
Replies
92
Views
5K
PDXFonz
PDXFonz

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Back
Top