Dame all but demanding vet roster (3 Viewers)

[Mediocre Man]

Almost certainly. Of course, we almost certainly wouldn't have won without him either...

We’ve never been serious title contenders. I don’t consider that “winning”. That’s not on Dame either

 

[Phatguysrule]

We’ve never been serious title contenders. I don’t consider that “winning”. That’s not on Dame either

We've won more with Dame than without him. Since the year 2000 we've been a more serious title threat with Dame than we have been without him.

Any lack of success has been the direct result of a poorly constructed roster or injuries.

 

[AngryFan]

We've won more with Dame than without him. Since the year 2000 we've been a more serious title threat with Dame than we have been without him.

Any lack of success has been the direct result of a poorly constructed roster or injuries.

No we haven't. Having zero chance is exactly the same as having zero chance.

 

[STOMP]

We’ve never been serious title contenders. I don’t consider that “winning”. That’s not on Dame either

not during Dame's time PDX hasn't.

I am harboring a small flicker of optimism for 2024-5 if they play their cards right

STOMP

 

[Phatguysrule]

No we haven't. Having zero chance is exactly the same as having zero chance.

Please find one reputable odds maker that has given the Blazers zero chance every year of Dame's career.

You do that and I'll stand corrected.

 

[e_blazer]

not during Dame's time PDX hasn't.

I am harboring a small flicker of optimism for 2024-5 if they play their cards right

STOMP

Me too. I still say that the most likely outcome of either a reload around Dame or a total rebuild is a team that wins a series or two, but doesn’t win a title. It’s just damned difficult to win a title, particularly if you don’t have one of the top 2 or 3 guys in the league at either PF or C. That said, I think that Cronin can add talent this summer that will make the Blazers a solid playoff team, and then tweak it a bit the following summer to truly compete.

 

[Natebishop3]

We've won more with Dame than without him. Since the year 2000 we've been a more serious title threat with Dame than we have been without him.

Any lack of success has been the direct result of a poorly constructed roster or injuries.

You either ARE a title threat, or you are not.

We have not been a title threat while Dame has been a Blazer. We haven't been a title threat since 99-00.

I know this because we have been absolutely dismantled any time we went up against an actual contender.

2013-2014 - lost 4-1 to the Champion Spurs in the Semis.
2014-2015 - lost 4-1 to the (lol) Grizzlies in the first round.
2015-2016 - lost 4-1 to the Warriors in the Semis.
2016-2017 - lost 4-0 to the Champion Warriors in the first round.
2017-2018 - lost 4-0 to the (lol) Pelicans in the first round.
2018-2019 - lost 4-0 to the Warriors in the WCF.
2019-2020 - lost 4-1 to the Champion Lakers in the first round.
2020-2021 - lost 4-2 to the Nuggets in the first round.

We got obliterated in every series but the Nuggets, and that team was missing Murray and a few other key people. We were NEVER a contender with Dame. Not once. That's not his fault, but that's the reality of it.

 

[Fairly-Hard]

You either ARE a title threat, or you are not.

We have not been a title threat while Dame has been a Blazer. We haven't been a title threat since 99-00.

I know this because we have been absolutely dismantled any time we went up against an actual contender.

2013-2014 - lost 4-1 to the Champion Spurs in the Semis.
2014-2015 - lost 4-1 to the (lol) Grizzlies in the first round.
2015-2016 - lost 4-1 to the Warriors in the Semis.
2016-2017 - lost 4-0 to the Champion Warriors in the first round.
2017-2018 - lost 4-0 to the (lol) Pelicans in the first round.
2018-2019 - lost 4-0 to the Warriors in the WCF.
2019-2020 - lost 4-1 to the Champion Lakers in the first round.
2020-2021 - lost 4-2 to the Nuggets in the first round.

We got obliterated in every series but the Nuggets, and that team was missing Murray and a few other key people. We were NEVER a contender with Dame. Not once. That's not his fault, but that's the reality of it.

Disagree. 2014-15 before Mathews went down that team was close. I also happen to feel that was the deciding factor for Aldridge leaving so I believe that team could have contended for more than one year.

 

[Natebishop3]

Disagree. 2014-15 before Mathews went down that team was close. I also happen to feel that was the deciding factor for Aldridge leaving so I believe that team could have contended for more than one year.

I don't think there was a chance in hell that LMA came back under any circumstances. I think his mind was made up about leaving several years before, and one of (if not THE) biggest mistakes Neil made while he was GM was not trading LMA.

 

[Phatguysrule]

Disagree. 2014-15 before Mathews went down that team was close. I also happen to feel that was the deciding factor for Aldridge leaving so I believe that team could have contended for more than one year.

You either ARE a title threat, or you are not.

We have not been a title threat while Dame has been a Blazer. We haven't been a title threat since 99-00.

I know this because we have been absolutely dismantled any time we went up against an actual contender.

2013-2014 - lost 4-1 to the Champion Spurs in the Semis.
2014-2015 - lost 4-1 to the (lol) Grizzlies in the first round.
2015-2016 - lost 4-1 to the Warriors in the Semis.
2016-2017 - lost 4-0 to the Champion Warriors in the first round.
2017-2018 - lost 4-0 to the (lol) Pelicans in the first round.
2018-2019 - lost 4-0 to the Warriors in the WCF.
2019-2020 - lost 4-1 to the Champion Lakers in the first round.
2020-2021 - lost 4-2 to the Nuggets in the first round.

We got obliterated in every series but the Nuggets, and that team was missing Murray and a few other key people. We were NEVER a contender with Dame. Not once. That's not his fault, but that's the reality of it.

First, injuries happen, and that could have seen us get a favorable matchup in the WCF and Finals. They play the games for a reason.

Second, we were a contender with Aldridge. Injuries and Aldridge's ego derailed that.

Further, making this argument in this thread is just arguing semantics. We have always been better with Dame than without him. We have never (to my knowledge) had the opportunity to trade him for anything that would have made us better. The organization failed Dame (and us) by keeping CJ too long and failing to put talent and size around Dame.

I feel like the failure this season will be failing to get one of the great coaches who were available.

 

[Natebishop3]

Second, we were a contender with Aldridge. Injuries and Aldridge's ego derailed that.

We weren't. We were dismantled by the Spurs and Grizzlies with Aldridge. Maybe if LMA had stuck around until Dame reached his peak, but then you have to wonder.... would Dame have reached his peak with LMA still on the team?

Further, making this argument in this thread is just arguing semantics. We have always been better with Dame than without him.

This is irrelevant. Being good is subjective. The problem is we have never been good enough.

We have never (to my knowledge) had the opportunity to trade him for anything that would have made us better. The organization failed Dame (and us) by keeping CJ too long and failing to put talent and size around Dame.

I feel like the failure this season will be failing to get one of the great coaches who were available.

It never made sense to trade Dame until the last year or so, when it became clear that this team would never achieve contending status while Dame is still in his prime.

 

[Phatguysrule]

We weren't. We were dismantled by the Spurs and Grizzlies with Aldridge. Maybe if LMA had stuck around until Dame reached his peak, but then you have to wonder.... would Dame have reached his peak with LMA still on the team?

We lost to the Grizzlies because Aldridge quit as soon as Matthews went down. We were a contender until that point. Problem was, we weren't deep enough to overcome that injury, and Aldridge turned out to be a piece of shit quitter.

This is irrelevant. Being good is subjective. The problem is we have never been good enough.

The whole conversation is irrelevant. We were good enough until Matthews went down. We had a non-zero chance every other season.

It never made sense to trade Dame until the last year or so, when it became clear that this team would never achieve contending status while Dame is still in his prime.

It has never made sense to trade Dame if the goal was to win.

 

[Natebishop3]

We lost to the Grizzlies because Aldridge quit as soon as Matthews went down. We were a contender until that point. Problem was, we weren't deep enough to overcome that injury, and Aldridge turned out to be a piece of shit quitter.


The whole conversation is irrelevant. We were good enough until Matthews went down. We had a non-zero chance every other season.


It has never made sense to trade Dame if the goal was to win.

I don't think you can legitimately claim that the team was a contender if LMA was that mentally fragile. Do you think that team could have honestly stacked up against the Warriors or the Cavs? And that's what a true contender is. A team that can go blow for blow with the best teams in the league. The Warriors crushed everyone that year.

 

[AngryFan]

Please find one reputable odds maker that has given the Blazers zero chance every year of Dame's career.

You do that and I'll stand corrected.

Silly argument. There is no such thing as "zero chance" with odds makers. The Pistons this year were +50000. That doesn't mean they actually had a chance. Not once in Dame's career have we ever actually had a chance. You know that and that's why you trot out this silly argument in the first place.

 

[Fairly-Hard]

I don't think there was a chance in hell that LMA came back under any circumstances. I think his mind was made up about leaving several years before, and one of (if not THE) biggest mistakes Neil made while he was GM was not trading LMA.

Well I guess we disagree on that also but I certainly can’t say you are wrong.
I seem to remember watching him change after that injury and I really felt that it was the deciding factor. Just seems like if that team stays healthy and they get to the WCF or better that he would have stayed.

 

[Phatguysrule]

I don't think you can legitimately claim that the team was a contender if LMA was that mentally fragile. Do you think that team could have honestly stacked up against the Warriors or the Cavs? And that's what a true contender is. A team that can go blow for blow with the best teams in the league. The Warriors crushed everyone that year.

Yeah. As long as we had players to keep Aldridge pumped up he would have been fine. If we had another Matthews behind him he would have kept playing. He always quit as soon as it could be blamed on something else. Don't give him a reason and Portland was a contender.

The problem was, we should have traded him before or during that season. But we were certainly a legit contender that season.

Again, unless you just want to argue semantics. Which I'm not interested in doing.

 

[Fairly-Hard]

The thing with Aldridge is he had already been through the injury to a teammate thing a few times. First Oden and all that hype. Then watching BRoy go down a slow decline. Then Wes gets the Achilles injury which 8 years ago was much more questionable than today.
I just think he felt snake bit at that point.

 

[Phatguysrule]

Silly argument. There is no such thing as "zero chance" with odds makers. The Pistons this year were +50000. That doesn't mean they actually had a chance. Not once in Dame's career have we ever actually had a chance. You know that and that's why you trot out this silly argument in the first place.

That's the point. That's what I said in my original post. Dame gave us our best shot since 2000. Never, at any point could we have traded Dame and increased those odds.

I'm not interested in being a perpetual lotto team because we blow it up every year we can no longer sell the baking cake theory. Been there, done that.

 

[Natebishop3]

Yeah. As long as we had players to keep Aldridge pumped up he would have been fine. If we had another Matthews behind him he would have kept playing. He always quit as soon as it could be blamed on something else. Don't give him a reason and Portland was a contender.

The problem was, we should have traded him before or during that season. But we were certainly a legit contender that season.

Again, unless you just want to argue semantics. Which I'm not interested in doing.

The thing with Aldridge is he had already been through the injury to a teammate thing a few times. First Oden and all that hype. Then watching BRoy go down a slow decline. Then Wes gets the Achilles injury which 8 years ago was much more questionable than today.
I just think he felt snake bit at that point.

Honestly I just disagree with you guys. I think LMA had checked out because he knew he wasn't going to be coming back that summer. He had made up his mind. I don't think Wes mattered in the least. I think LMA played us. Dude was a diva from day one.

 

[AngryFan]

That's the point. That's what I said in my original post. Dame gave us our best shot since 2000. Never, at any point could we have traded Dame and increased those odds.

I'm not interested in being a perpetual lotto team because we blow it up every year we can no longer sell the baking cake theory. Been there, done that.

And I responded by saying in none of those seasons did they ever actually have a chance. You knew exactly what I meant but immediately tried to make it a semantic argument. Then a couple posts later you proclaim you don't want to argue semantics. Grow up.

 

[Natebishop3]

I'm not interested in being a perpetual lotto team because we blow it up every year we can no longer sell the baking cake theory. Been there, done that.

Honestly... I'd rather be a lotto team than a perpetual first round exit team. When you're a perpetual first round exist team, you're just good enough to never get a good draft pick, but not nearly good enough to actually contend.

If you're in the lotto, you have a chance to draft a generational talent, and it's those generational talents who win championships.

LeBron - drafted 1st overall
Duncan - drafted 1st overall
Shaq - drafted 1st overall
Jordan - drafted 3rd overall
Hakeem - drafted 1st overall
Durant- drafted 2nd overall
Curry - drafted 7th overall

With the exception of a few teams, most of the champs had one of those guys on their teams in the last 30 years. You have to be in the lottery to have a chance. Maybe Wemby is one of these guys. I have my doubts, but some people seem to think he's going to be generational.

So how do you get a player of that caliber? Those guys aren't signing here. We aren't trading for them. So we would need to draft them.

 

[Phatguysrule]

Honestly... I'd rather be a lotto team than a perpetual first round exit team. When you're a perpetual first round exist team, you're just good enough to never get a good draft pick, but not nearly good enough to actually contend.

If you're in the lotto, you have a chance to draft a generational talent, and it's those generational talents who win championships.

LeBron - drafted 1st overall
Duncan - drafted 1st overall
Shaq - drafted 1st overall
Jordan - drafted 3rd overall
Hakeem - drafted 1st overall
Durant- drafted 2nd overall
Curry - drafted 7th overall

With the exception of a few teams, most of the champs had one of those guys on their teams in the last 30 years. You have to be in the lottery to have a chance. Maybe Wemby is one of these guys. I have my doubts, but some people seem to think he's going to be generational.

So how do you get a player of that caliber? Those guys aren't signing here. We aren't trading for them. So we would need to draft them.

We've had opportunities to get guys who could help us better contend throughout Dame's career. That's how you do it if you're in Portland. We could have drafted Jokic. We could have drafted Giannis. We could have drafted Donovan Mitchell and later traded him (and countless other drafts we could have done better). We could have traded CJ sooner... There are a lot of opportunities for us to improve. Our management just hasn't ever been committed to improving that way. And I'd much rather make the first round and have a couple of deep runs over 10 years than miss the playoffs every year.

You make sure you have the best talent scouts, the best coaching, the best developmental team, and the most hospitable and healthy atmosphere for the players. We can do all of that here. Our ownership simply chooses not to make those things the priority that would be required to be a championship caliber team.

 

[wizenheimer]

Honestly... I'd rather be a lotto team than a perpetual first round exit team. When you're a perpetual first round exist team, you're just good enough to never get a good draft pick, but not nearly good enough to actually contend.

I agree with that and I've said so many times before

the difference is I don't blame Dame at all, in any way, for the level of mediocrity the Blazers have languished in under Olshey. Roster construction was not Dame's job no matter how many time people try to blame him for Olshey decisions

Portland never once tried to build a contender around Dame. I'd like to see them try just one time (without completely mortgaging the future). To be sure, the odds are against it but they sure the fuck aren't 100% against it as some absolutists keep claiming

I actually think there are some paths forward where Portland can add a good veteran or two, AND keep the 3rd pick(or --->6) and almost all of their future picks. And build from there. I want to see Portland try to add win-now pieces that are at a higher level or make more sense than RoCo or Nance...and add another lottery talent. It's a tough needle to thread, for sure, but at least give it a shot

if it fails and Dame asks out, then yeah, tear shit down and go for those really high lottery odds for a few years that come with being a shitty team

 

[Fairly-Hard]

He had made up his mind. I don't think Wes mattered in the least.

On this I also disagree. I was at that game. I watched his face change in the minutes they were taking Wes off the floor.
That was a 51 win team. After that injury they went 10-11 and finished the season on a 4 game losing streak.
Aldridge didn't even dress down 2 of the last 4 games.
I truly feel he was done after March 5th but up to that point he could have made the decision to stay if the team played well.
However it was though we will never know for sure.

 

[TBpup]

We haven't had cap space since 2016 and won't this summer.

We have a small trade exception from GP2 but thats it; and totally unrelated to any "flexiblity" gained from the Clippers trade.

Which is why I used the words "potential". The likely won't, but possibly could.
And I was agreeing there was not the flexibility that was claimed.

 

[Fairly-Hard]

By the way. Please understand the reason Damian Lillard listed his house in West Linn for sale. It’s because his other house is ready.

 

[Tince]

By the way. Please understand the reason Damian Lillard listed his house in West Linn for sale. It’s because his other house is ready.

 

[wizenheimer]

I'm sick of fact-based reality

 

[Fairly-Hard]

I'm sick of fact-based reality

 

[blazerfan11]

By the way. Please understand the reason Damian Lillard listed his house in West Linn for sale. It’s because his other house is ready.

His other house in Boston?