Blazers lose tiebreaker, picking 10th

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Pinwheel1 said:
I was responding to this:

"Rebuild towards what? We can’t sign a star. We probably can’t trade for one. Our best chance has always been to draft one."

The point was that the 2000 team, which IMO was the best team in the NBA team that year, was for the most part, included players we traded for. So I disagree that our best chance has always been to draft a star.
Click to expand...
Gotcha, and you may be right. But I would say drafting has certainly been our best chance since the salary cap curbed Paul Allen's free spending ways.

And even before that, though. Most of the guys you'd call our "best player" have been guys we drafted.

Drafted Walton, Drexler, Dame, Roy, etc
 
andalusian said:
I think they tanked by playing the young guys and letting the vets rehab as much as possible. That's the extent of how they tanked.
Click to expand...
Agree..time to put butts back in the seats and at the same time watch salaries. The amount a top 2-3 make compared to 8-10 is significant. Maybe for a Flagg it's worth it, but you can draft solid players 8-10 range at much less much less rookie scale.
 
I think the Blazers drafted Duck? Did trade for Buck. Porter was late first round.
 
andalusian said:
As shown above by players not playing by salary (5th in the league) - the Blazers definitely tanked. They just didn't blatantly tank by playing scrubs instead of the young guys they build around.
Click to expand...
Starting Ayton, Grant and Ant when available is not tanking. It’s negligence on the Conductors part, but not tanking
 
Last edited:
blazerkor said:
Maybe it lies in the third word of that second line "scrubs". The idea that the minutes Ayton was getting would've gone to Clingan and the minutes Clingan was getting would've gone to Reath, probably would have had us winning less early on. Same can be said for taking Ant and Jerami out of the rotation. I don't know if any of that is realistic. I also don't know if giving our young really good players that much more usage that early in the season would have translated to even more wins down the stretch and turned guys we currently see as scrubs into viable bench rotation players.

The fact is we are where we are, we can hope (with good cause) that our front office will make a trade or more and possibly a pick or even more that will make sense because they've been doing well with the actions they have taken.

The only worry I have is that they won't take enough action and we might still see anyone, two or all three of Ant, Jerami and Deandre starting at the beginning of next season, again. Fingers crossed that we get the moves that give our team the best shot to contend on the most expedient but realistic timeline.
Click to expand...

Anyone who thinks we would just not play Ayton to start the season is not being realistic.
 
SharpeScooterShooter said:
Anyone who thinks we would just not play Ayton to start the season is not being realistic.
Click to expand...
Like I said, I don't know if any of that is realistic. Just what I thought @Phatguysrule was getting at. In hindsight I'm sure many of us would have just preferred that none of Ayton, Simons or Grant were on the roster and that they'd been traded for guys we could waive, made sense to sit, youth that fit in or whatever. Like I said, that's not our reality, none of this really matters because the season played out the way it did.

Was it wise for us to play those vets at the beginning of the season... yeah it probably was since we hadn't traded them. I had far less of a problem with that decision than I did with not full on tanking after the deadline but that along with what sounds like a vetoed trade or two were calls that seemingly were made by Kolde who I don't think has a lot of fans in this forum anyway. Regardless, what's done is done and I really do hope that we see some moves made this off season and a roster that makes sense and takes the next step which would be to make the playoffs... while handing the reigns over to the young core.
 
blazerkor said:
Like I said, I don't know if any of that is realistic. Just what I thought @Phatguysrule was getting at. In hindsight I'm sure many of us would have just preferred that none of Ayton, Simons or Grant were on the roster and that they'd been traded for guys we could waive, made sense to sit, youth that fit in or whatever. Like I said, that's not our reality, none of this really matters because the season played out the way it did.

Was it wise for us to play those vets at the beginning of the season... yeah it probably was since we hadn't traded them. I had far less of a problem with that decision than I did with not full on tanking after the deadline but that along with what sounds like a vetoed trade or two were calls that seemingly were made by Kolde who I don't think has a lot of fans in this forum anyway. Regardless, what's done is done and I really do hope that we see some moves made this off season and a roster that makes sense and takes the next step which would be to make the playoffs... while handing the reigns over to the young core.
Click to expand...

I agree and not moving them this summer is another topic of discussion. With them on the roster, there is no way they wouldn't be played, so to say we should have played scrubs is not being realistic regarding how the season went, with the roster we had.
Or at least I knew the moment we entered the season with the roster we had the vets would get minutes.
But I agree with you mostly on it is what it is. Im excited and hopeful. I see alot of promise in the current roster(as long as we move Ant and Grant this summer), already.
 
Everything Beagle said:
Dude 20 out of 30 teams every year are in purgatory, it’s where most teams are. Being in a place that is neither heaven nor hell is just being normal. In fact you can just call it that. We’re a normal team right now.
Click to expand...

It’s like it’s just so easy to not be normal in this scenario though!
Why cant we just be not normal!
This team and management sucks!!!

Green Beans….
 
Everything Beagle said:
Dude 20 out of 30 teams every year are in purgatory, it’s where most teams are. Being in a place that is neither heaven nor hell is just being normal. In fact you can just call it that. We’re a normal team right now.
Click to expand...
Bingo...so right on
Every year at least 15 teams are 500 or below and really every year there are only 3-5 legit contenders. So, it's a league where 2/3 of the league is in purgatory, and of the other ten may be 3-5 legit contenders and the rest mediocre at best.
 
Hoopguru said:
Bingo...so right on
Every year at least 15 teams are 500 or below and really every year there are only 3-5 legit contenders. So, it's a league where 2/3 of the league is in purgatory, and of the other ten may be 3-5 legit contenders and the rest mediocre at best.
Click to expand...
Being 500 or below and loaded with young talent and future extra draft picks is not purgatory.

That was OKC in 22-23.

That's not the situation we're in.
 
Phatguysrule said:
Being 500 or below and loaded with young talent and future extra draft picks is not purgatory.

That was OKC in 22-23.

That's not the situation we're in.
Click to expand...
Sorry but every year 1/2 the league is 500 or below. And if you make the offs and dont advance past first round thats mediocre. There have been teams loaded with young talent and never get to the Conference finals. I looked back a couple years ago and 13 teams of the 30 have won the whole thing in the last 50 years. Some multiple times. It's a league of mediocrity. Wasn't talking about Blazers. WE wot be mediocre tell we hit at least 500. lol
The league was marketed & built around playoff basketball thats why they increased the amount of teams years back. NBA is FANtastic...remember that...
 
Hoopguru said:
Sorry but every year 1/2 the league is 500 or below. And if you make the offs and dont advance past first round thats mediocre. There have been teams loaded with young talent and never get to the Conference finals. I looked back a couple years ago and 13 teams of the 30 have won the whole thing in the last 50 years. Some multiple times. It's a league of mediocrity. Wasn't talking about Blazers. WE wot be mediocre tell we hit at least 500. lol
The league was marketed & built around playoff basketball thats why they increased the amount of teams years back. NBA is FANtastic...remember that...
Click to expand...
But the discussion was purgatory. Just being middle of the pack doesn't mean you're in purgatory. If you have excess talent or opportunity to add talent you may well be in a great place regardless of your record.
 
Phatguysrule said:
But the discussion was purgatory. Just being middle of the pack doesn't mean you're in purgatory. If you have excess talent or opportunity to add talent you may well be in a great place regardless of your record.
Click to expand...
I agreed with EB that 2/3rds of the teams are in a state of purgatory every year. Neither good enough to advance far, or bad enough to hit the lotto. The teams making up 2/3 certainly can change year to year but many stay in the category for a long long time.
 
Hoopguru said:
I agreed with EB that 2/3rds of the teams are in a state of purgatory every year. Neither good enough to advance far, or bad enough to hit the lotto. The teams making up 2/3 certainly can change year to year but many stay in the category for a long long time.
Click to expand...
The ones who stay are the ones who refuse to admit they don't have enough.

The ones who don't are the ones who understand how to build or the ones who have advantages other teams do not.

Unfortunately we don't have any advantages yet, or prospects to gain advantages...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top