Zombie Fire Olshey

[illmatic99]

It's arguable that even if Layman is better than Crabbe right now (which I'm not claiming), it would be detrimental to the team as a whole to elevate Layman ahead of Crabbe before having an opportunity to gain value from that asset.

Personally, I wouldn't be surprised if in the alternate universe in which Layman had been playing Crabbe's minutes from day 1, his development would be such that he would presently be producing better and more consistently than Crabbe is at present.

Sidebar:

 

[TBpup]

Let's hope he hits more than 9 of 27 shots like in Quarterman's game.

 

[Denny Crane]

Sidebar:

Zing!

 

[Denny Crane]

It's arguable that even if Layman is better than Crabbe right now (which I'm not claiming), it would be detrimental to the team as a whole to elevate Layman ahead of Crabbe before having an opportunity to gain value from that asset.

Personally, I wouldn't be surprised if in the alternate universe in which Layman had been playing Crabbe's minutes from day 1, his development would be such that he would presently be producing better and more consistently than Crabbe is at present.

The coach doesn't agree with you. If Layman, or any other player were outplaying guys in the rotation, they'd earn a spot.

Ths team wasn't supposed to be sub .500, let alone so far under. I don't agree the idea should have been to tank from the start, or even tank at all. The object is to win, not to accumulate draft picks.

 

[oldfisherman]

Good NBA players have used the D-league to help their development. Whiteside comes to mind.

 

[Orion Bailey]

Plumlee will be offered $20 million per year this summer. You guys have just never seen what I see in him. The only improvement his next coach needs to teach him is to dunk instead of finessing those bobbling layups. That will convert all of his missed shots into made shots for a FG% of 100%.

Wow. I just looked it up. I can't believe that he shoots 4.3 for 8.1 attempts (.534). It seems like he tries a lot more than 8.1. You don't think that dunking would make those 3.8 misses?

http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/p/plumlma01.html

He really confuses me. It always seems like he could throw down a nasty dunk, while drawing a foul, and then he try's to lay it in....

He dunks all the time. He calls them reverse layups....

 

[jlprk]

If NO had let Crabbe walk, who would be getting his ~30 minutes right now?

Layman? He's not beating out Crabbe now, nor was he so good NO would let Crabbe walk.
Aaron Brooks off the scrap heap? Name names you're sure we could get.

Evan Turner. He'd get starter's minutes without starting, which is the minimum we all expected when we signed him to the giant contract.

 

[Denny Crane]

Evan Turner. He'd get starter's minutes without starting, which is the minimum we all expected when we signed him to the giant contract.

He's alread getting ~26. You think he can play 60 minutes a night?

 

[PtldPlatypus]

The coach doesn't agree with you. If Layman, or any other player were outplaying guys in the rotation, they'd earn a spot.

Ths team wasn't supposed to be sub .500, let alone so far under. I don't agree the idea should have been to tank from the start, or even tank at all. The object is to win, not to accumulate draft picks.

Who said anything about tanking?

Re your first sentence: I find it hard to believe that you can't agree that upon occasion, certain players are given playing time based partially on their contract status rather than solely based on merit. However, I never said that Layman is outplaying anyone. I said that it's arguable that with the same amount of PT this year, Layman might conceivably be better now than Crabbe is. It's an unknown hypothetical, so there's obviously no way to prove it one way or the other, but it's certainly not out of the realm of possibility.

 

[jlprk]

He's alread getting ~26. You think he can play 60 minutes a night?

Back in my day, if you couldn't watch the full hour, you had to hand the remote to your little brother.

 

[Denny Crane]

Who said anything about tanking?

Re your first sentence: I find it hard to believe that you can't agree that upon occasion, certain players are given playing time based partially on their contract status rather than solely based on merit. However, I never said that Layman is outplaying anyone. I said that it's arguable that with the same amount of PT this year, Layman might conceivably be better now than Crabbe is. It's an unknown hypothetical, so there's obviously no way to prove it one way or the other, but it's certainly not out of the realm of possibility.

My position is we should play our best players to try and win. If that's Layman, fine. But it clearly isn't.

I don't see why Stotts would risk his job by playing guys who won't help us win. He did a little by playing Vonleh last year, even starting. But very limited minutes, and ultimately not when we were in the playoffs chase.

Last year at Christmas, we were 12-20, I do believe.

Crabbe is shooting .427 from 3pt, Layman .227.

 

[GDiama]

Barton and CJ were not getting minutes and seems like it was a big mistake. Maybe it will be the same with Layman. We ll never be sure until he gets these mins.

 

[PtldPlatypus]

My position is we should play our best players to try and win. If that's Layman, fine. But it clearly isn't.

I don't see why Stotts would risk his job by playing guys who won't help us win. He did a little by playing Vonleh last year, even starting. But very limited minutes, and ultimately not when we were in the playoffs chase.

Last year at Christmas, we were 12-20, I do believe.

Crabbe is shooting .427 from 3pt, Layman .227.

You don't try to discuss the same thing that the person to whom you're replying is discussing, so I (much like tester) am also not going to waste my time replying any further.

 

[jlprk]

Denny learned how to win threads by reading my posts.

 

[Denny Crane]

You don't try to discuss the same thing that the person to whom you're replying is discussing, so I (much like tester) am also not going to waste my time replying any further.

I directly addressed what you wrote.

Stotts started Vonleh last year. Not due to his salary, or even merit . We had a much worse record at Christmas than we did at the end, after benching him. How is this not replying to, "I find it hard to believe that you can't agree that upon occasion, certain players are given playing time based partially on their contract status rather than solely based on merit." ?

I am drawing the parallel between Vonleh last year and your suggestion we play Layman more this year, and from game 1.

Reply or not, but don't make it out I didn't give you a direct and honest response.

 

[PtldPlatypus]

I am drawing the parallel between Vonleh last year and your suggestion we play Layman more this year, and from game 1.

Reply or not, but don't make it out I didn't give you a direct and honest response.

I never made this suggestion, therefore your entire response is invalid.

Your posts are the very definition of the strawman, but I should expect nothing less.

 

[Denny Crane]

I never made this suggestion, therefore your entire response is invalid.

I must be misreading you saying it's conceivable he might get Crabbe's ~30 minutes/game, and that we might be better off.

I said that it's arguable that with the same amount of PT this year, Layman might conceivably be better now than Crabbe is. It's an unknown hypothetical, so there's obviously no way to prove it one way or the other, but it's certainly not out of the realm of possibility.​

It's conceivable, sure. Likely? I don't think so. The evidence is how well the same idea worked with Vonleh last season.

The guy was 47th pick, a 2nd rounder. Not a bad flyer at that spot, but a 30MPG guy this year? Unless he's showing it in practice (we don't see that), he's not getting PT.

My observation is that 2nd rounders can develop into contributing players or even stars. The stars show it right away and earn minutes. The others develop by getting increased minutes over several seasons - see Crabbe. At least Crabbe shot .400 from 3pt as a rookie, a precursor of things to come. His minutes: 7/game, 13, 26, now 29.

Layman is shooting.227 from 3, the worst PER on the team, lowest TS%, poor DRtg, etc. If he showed he's good at any one thing that helps win games, please explain it to me.

If he were CJ, a highly regarded 1st round pick, acclaimed to be another Lillard, there might be a good case for big minutes right away. CJ was kind of buried behind Wes, who was a proven 2-way player with good size for a SG. He also missed a lot of games due to injury. He showed on the court, and in practice, he is more than good enough to start.

NO was willing to dump the starters and hand the starting spot to CJ, with the expectation he'd rise to it. I don't imagine a scenario where he's going to hand the job to Layman in a similar manner.

That's my analysis.

 

[Minstrel]

Out of curiosity, Denny, since I've been out of the loop and all, when did you become a Portland fan? And why?

Did you decide that since it was the biggest S2 community, the market had decided?

 

[jlprk]

I must be misreading you saying it's conceivable he might get Crabbe's ~30 minutes/game, and that we might be better off.

I said that it's arguable that with the same amount of PT this year, Layman might conceivably be better now than Crabbe is. It's an unknown hypothetical, so there's obviously no way to prove it one way or the other, but it's certainly not out of the realm of possibility.​

It's conceivable, sure. Likely? I don't think so. The evidence is how well the same idea worked with Vonleh last season.

The guy was 47th pick, a 2nd rounder. Not a bad flyer at that spot, but a 30MPG guy this year? Unless he's showing it in practice (we don't see that), he's not getting PT.

My observation is that 2nd rounders can develop into contributing players or even stars. The stars show it right away and earn minutes. The others develop by getting increased minutes over several seasons - see Crabbe. At least Crabbe shot .400 from 3pt as a rookie, a precursor of things to come. His minutes: 7/game, 13, 26, now 29.

Layman is shooting.227 from 3, the worst PER on the team, lowest TS%, poor DRtg, etc. If he showed he's good at any one thing that helps win games, please explain it to me.

If he were CJ, a highly regarded 1st round pick, acclaimed to be another Lillard, there might be a good case for big minutes right away. CJ was kind of buried behind Wes, who was a proven 2-way player with good size for a SG. He also missed a lot of games due to injury. He showed on the court, and in practice, he is more than good enough to start.

NO was willing to dump the starters and hand the starting spot to CJ, with the expectation he'd rise to it. I don't imagine a scenario where he's going to hand the job to Layman in a similar manner.

That's my analysis.

All this writing simply says that in general, in the absence of specificities of what has actually happened, the rule of thumb is that Crabbe would have helped the team this year more than Layman would have.

But in this particular case, Crabbe hasn't helped. Well, I'll grant you that instead of being only about the 2nd-worst NBA team with Crabbe, we might have been worst with Layman. But since there's so little room downward to get worse, giving Layman the experience would have provided additional wins in future seasons.

Platypus is speaking to this particular case, while you're speaking for all eternity like the God of the forum, which of course you are.

 

[Denny Crane]

Out of curiosity, Denny, since I've been out of the loop and all, when did you become a Portland fan? And why?

Did you decide that since it was the biggest S2 community, the market had decided?

No.

I couldn't stand the Bulls owner and management anymore. No real commitment to winning, it was about being good enough to fill the seats and make money. Firing Thibs and badmouthing him on the way out was the last straw.

The Blazers are the opposite. Great owner, awesome management, players who are obviously good people, and they want to win.

Like it or not, with 20-20 hindsight, a move like trading for Aflallo is something the Bulls never would consider. Adding a quality player at a position of need to a contending team. That's trying to win. If the team tries to win, but fails, it's all in good faith.

I'm no fair weather fan. I made my allegiance right as LMA and the others left.

 

[Denny Crane]

All this writing simply says that in general, in the absence of specificities of what has actually happened, the rule of thumb is that Crabbe would have helped the team this year more than Layman would have.

But in this particular case, Crabbe hasn't helped. Well, I'll grant you that instead of being only about the 2nd-worst NBA team with Crabbe, we might have been worst with Layman. But since there's so little room downward to get worse, giving Layman the experience would have provided additional wins in future seasons.

Platypus is speaking to this particular case, while you're speaking for all eternity like the God of the forum, which of course you are.

We are 9th seed, not worst in the league.

I hope I act like any other poster around here.

 

[jlprk]

Again, you generalize...to the whole season, not the last month or 2. Sweeping platitudes are useful in law and for cleaning sweat from NBA floors.

 

[oldfisherman]

Like it or not, with 20-20 hindsight, a move like trading for Aflallo is something the Bulls never would consider. Adding a quality player at a position of need to a contending team. That's trying to win. If the team tries to win, but fails, it's all in good faith.

If he were CJ, a highly regarded 1st round pick, acclaimed to be another Lillard, there might be a good case for big minutes right away. CJ was kind of buried behind Wes, who was a proven 2-way player with good size for a SG. He also missed a lot of games due to injury. He showed on the court, and in practice, he is more than good enough to start.

Ref the Afflalo trade.
Barton developed into the best player in that deal. But, he never really got the chance to develop in Portland. Sound familiar?
Oh, to make this trade worse, Olshey stuffed a first round pick into the panties of Denver's GM, which still leaves Olshey's fingers all stinky.

If we had not traded for Afflalo, and after Wes got hurt, both Barton and CJ would have got more mpg and developed faster.

Plus, If Olshey had faith that CJ could be a good starter as you suggest in your post. Olshey would not have traded for Afflalo. CJ was playing just OK that season, but there were a lot of questions about his game. CJ needed more mpg to develop. Sound familiar?

 

[Denny Crane]

Aflallo was a seasoned veteran added to a veteran team. No way you want to take the risk with an unproven player.

Yes, they traded some future for win now, but win now is awesome and win someday isn't so much.

Afflalo is much bigger than CJ, and could sub for Wes or Batum.

CJ didn't blossom until a couple years later. He hadn't even been healthy for a full season.

 

[oldfisherman]

CJ didn't blossom until a couple years later. He hadn't even been healthy for a full season.

No, CJ blossomed at the end of the season we had Afflalo. CJ had and incredible playoff series. And started the next season when his production more than tripled.

And Afflalo was a 25 game rental.

 

[UKRAINEFAN]

experience would have provided additional wins in future seasons.

Oh, so this is where this went. I was gonna say that I con't think Blazer management understands this concept. They seem to always go for the win today.

 

[Denny Crane]

No, CJ blossomed at the end of the season we had Afflalo. CJ had and incredible playoff series. And started the next season when his production more than tripled.

And Afflalo was a 25 game rental.

Sounds like trading the future for win now.

And 20-20 hindsight.

There was no point in keeping Afflalo after the decision to let the starters go was made - LMA left for SA.

 

[PtldPlatypus]

FWIW, Kerry Eggers on 1080 right now, suggesting that Olshey isn't going to be around much longer, owing to the ideas that he's not really a Portland guy and that this is essentially his second failed rebuild in a 5-year span.

 

[Kaydow]

Aflallo was a seasoned veteran added to a veteran team. No way you want to take the risk with an unproven player.

Yes, they traded some future for win now, but win now is awesome and win someday isn't so much.

Afflalo is much bigger than CJ, and could sub for Wes or Batum.

CJ didn't blossom until a couple years later. He hadn't even been healthy for a full season.

Agree with this. Plus there was extra motivation with LA about to become UFA to show him the organization was "all in". The AA trade was a bust in hind sight, but after a 30-8 start that year the buzz was "make the WCF". Had they not made a move after Wes went down, & just rolled with CJ it would have been the equivalent of waving the white flag. Sucks that it went down like that, but I don't fault Olshey for trying to salvage the season (while attempting to score points with our star FA to be)

 

[Minstrel]

The Afflalo trade was a bad one even at the time, in a vacuum. In other words, even with just what we knew at the time, it was a bad trade looking purely at the basketball aspects. Afflalo was, even then, a declining veteran, especially on defense. Outside of a "bounce back" (which turned out to be a dead-cat bounce) season in Orlando the year before, his offensive numbers were on the downward slope. His time in Denver before the trade only confirmed that the final Orlando season was flukish. And Olshey probably even knew that--he was trading for a reserve (Matthews got hurt after the Afflalo trade, if I recall correctly) and gave up a lot for a reserve.

Of course, then you can toss in "trying to capitalize on buzz" and "showing Aldridge they were committed" to increase his chances of re-signing and people can decide if that outweighed what an overpay it was in trade assets.

To me, it doesn't. I don't think Afflalo was a big enough name to excite most fans and, anyway, the team shouldn't be making bad decisions just to excite fans. Also, winning was always going to be what kept Aldridge around (if anything was) and Afflalo just wasn't much of a needle-mover.