For those that think we suck...

[BigGameDamian]

Its time to break our boys down once and for all...I personally am tired of all the thoughts that we suck because we don't currently have the line up of last year or a list of all stars on our roster.

Our Roster with regards to draft placement:

Miller.................5th pick,2000
Kaman..............6th pick, 2003
Henderson......12th pcik, 2009
Aminu..............8th pick, 2010
Davis...............13th pick, 2010
Lillard...............6th pick, 2012
Leonard...........11th pick, 2012
Harkless..........15th pick, 2012
McCollum.......10th pick, 2013
Plumlee..........22nd pick, 2013
Crabbe.............31st pick, 2013
Pressey..........Undrafted, 2013
Frazier...........Undrafted, 2013
Vonleh..............9th pick, 2014
Connaughton...41st pick, 2015



Two glaring things come to mind so far. Our future consists of no one who has been in the league more than 6 years. We have 10 guys that were drafted top 20 and 6 guys 10th or better.
Now lets compare this to a few of last years playoff teams... say, GS, LAClippers, SA, Cleveland (four teams that are in contention for next year as well).

SA

Ginobili..................57th, 1999
Parker....................28th, 2001
Diaw.......................21st, 2003
Bonner..................45th, 2003
Belinelli..................18th,2007
Splitter..................28th, 2007
Anderson...............30th, 2014
Daye.......................15th, 2009
Ayres.......................31st,2009
D.Green................46th, 2009
Mills......................55th, 2009
Williams.......Undrafted, 2010
Leonard..................15th, 2011
Joseph...................29th, 2011
Baynes..........Undrafted, 2013
J.Green..... ...Undrafted, 2015


GS

Barbosa................28th, 2003
Livingston...............4th, 2004
Iguodala..................9th, 2004
Bogut.......................1st, 2005
Lee.........................30th, 2005
Rush......................13th, 2008
Speights.................16th, 2008
Curry..................... 7th, 2009
Thompson...............11th, 2011
Barnes.....................7th, 2012
Ezeli......................30th, 2012
Green.....................35th, 2012
Kuzmic..................52nd, 2012
Holiday.........Undrafted, 2013
Mcadoo.........Undrafted, 2015

LAC

Crawford.........8th,2000
Turkoglu.......16th, 2000
Barnes..........48th, 2002
Jones............20th, 2003
Paul................4th, 2005
Redick...........11th, 2006
Hawes..........10th, 2007
Davis............36th, 2007
Jordan.........36th, 2008
Griffin.............1st, 2009
Hudson.........59th, 2009
Udoh...............6th, 2010
Hamilton.......26th, 2011
Rivers............10th, 2012
Wilcox............28th,2014

Cleveland

Marion..............................9th, 1999
Miller...............................5th, 2000
Haywood........................20th, 2001
James...............................1st, 2003
Perkins............................27th, 2003
Jones.............................49th, 2003
Smith...............................18th, 2004
Varejao...........................30th, 2004
Amundson............Undrafted, 2007
Love.................................5th, 2008
Price...............................52nd, 2009
Mozgov..................Undrafted, 2010
Kirk.......................Undrafted, 2010
Irving..................................1st, 2011
Thompson..........................4th, 2011
Shumpert..........................17th, 2011
Waiters..............................4th, 2012
Dellavedova...........Undrafted, 2013
Harris..............................33rd,2014
Cherry....................Undrafted, 2014


Hmmm. Seems so far, other than the years of experience, we are right about par with the draft position average. Cleveland has the most top 5 drafts, but also the most undrafted players on their roster.

Now to say we don't have experience.. sure. true. But how do you get experience? You play. I see many of the players on our roster are right at the point of turning the corner if they are to do so. New rosters, everyone competing, this lineup is primed for this type of team and environment. I wouldn't be surprised if 1-15 makes huge strides in training camp and preseason alone.

By the way, when I was putting this together (I didn't have the time to get that deep), I noticed another glaring item. Most of the players on the other teams, didn't do much their first year or two in the league. stats were mostly in single digit ppg, minutes played and number of games a season were also very inconsistent.
Much like our roster. The only thing we are missing is a couple of star names, but when analyzing some of these numbers, this sure seems to be the year for several of our guys to be able to break out.

At any rate I think I have cleared two things up.....

1st, this team CLEARLY doesn't suck and wont be a bottom four lotto pick, but is CLEARLY an unknown.

2nd, There is no real reason to try to tank this season to try to get a lotto pick when our lineup is very similiar to the top tier teams when it comes to draft positions of respective rosters.
What is one more top ten draft pick going to do for this lineup? Another unknown? Meh...

42
48
55

amount of wins over the next 3 years.

Although if this was the Lakers roster they would suck, Bad!

 

[magnifier661]

< 30 wins

Our bet was on 28 wins biatch

 

[Orion Bailey]

I think whether we suck or not depends on how each individual defines "suck".
If it's purely based on W/L as compared to previous Blazers seasons, then yeah, we're gonna suck - especially if you're comparing this year's W/L to last year's W/L.
If it's based on league-wide W/L then we'll suck less than the first scenario, but still moderately suck.
If your definition has some basis in future growth then the team doesn't suck at all - it is actually in a better position than we were in last season, and much better off than had we brought back all of our Free Agents on new contracts.

Unless the team is right on the cusp of a Championship I prefer to look at it with an eye towards the future, so I definitely fall into the 3rd category definition. I don't care so much about W/L record, but want to see individual development and the foundation of a strong system. If we fail at those two things my opinion will slide towards the "suck" end of the scale.

THIS!!! ME TOO. Seems people think about the next game and that's it. How about the next season, the next decade? Not sucking in my viewpoint.

IMO this team as currently constructed does NOT have huge upside as in WCF contender - not even close, and I am assuming some of these guys improve. We need another top 8 draft pick that pans out, a top FA or top level guy acquired in a trade and a couple of the guys we now have to get very good. It can happen in a few years, but gotta have some luck

I never said this is a WFC contender currently slated. I think we have many guys on the roster with POTENTIAL huge upsides, but I have also stated many times we need to make a deadline trade and then pick up a thirds star in the off season. We now have the assets and cap space to do so and I don't think that is sucking.

Our bet was on 28 wins biatch

I know, first its a 20 win team, then 28, then 30.
Tlong, by tip off you will be saying we might win 40 games! LOL

 

[0-Our!]

< 30 wins

When this isn't true (which IS/WILL be fact)... what will you say then? Will it be: "oh, lol! I guess I was wrong. I love our guys! Go Blazers!"

<82 wins book THAT!

 

[blue9]

having a legendary coach bring his winning system to a team and fail...it's really not that difficult of a comparison

Winning system? You mean having the two best players in the league on his roster?

 

[riverman]

Phil's system is predicated on superstars (preferably a guard that is the best scorer in the league) to run the triangle. Pop's system can be used with any group of players, which is why he is still able to compete when he rests his players during the season. If Phil sat Jordan and Pippen, the bulls would lose every game. If Phil sat Kobe and Shaq, they would lose every game. Pops has sat Ginobli, Duncan and Parker and still won games vs quality opponents.

Game... Set... Match...

CHECKMATE

Pops actually doesn't win all those games when he sits his starters and Phil has Melo...a pretty prolific scorer now. I like the Spurs and their system better than the triangle but that wasn't my point....you double faulted on your second serve so I win by default while you're treated for exhaustion on the sidelines ..the point you are avoiding at the cost of your argument is that a winning system that's translated to championships doesn't always win..like I said..it's not difficult to understand

 

[BlazerCaravan]

< 30 wins

I think 32 wins is the top of our bell curve... anywhere from 22-40 is possible.

 

[riverman]

I think 32 wins is the top of our bell curve... anywhere from 22-40 is possible.

43

 

[BlazerCaravan]

43

I'm hoping for something like that as well; I do love me some over-achieving youngsters.

 

[riverman]

Winning system? You mean having the two best players in the league on his roster?

I'd argue that the Spurs have had a few of the best players in the league for over a decade

 

[blue9]

IMO this team as currently constructed does NOT have huge upside as in WCF contender - not even close, and I am assuming some of these guys improve. We need another top 8 draft pick that pans out, a top FA or top level guy acquired in a trade and a couple of the guys we now have to get very good. It can happen in a few years, but gotta have some luck

Nobody is saying that THIS roster will make the WCF in 3 years. This roster won't exist past this season. There WILL be trades to propel the team forward. But first we need the individuals on this team to improve. That's the entire philosophy behind this build:

1 - Get a lot of young, cheap players with a lot of upside. [check]
2 - Develop said players. [in process]
3 - Use the young, cheap, more fully-developed players to (a) win more games, and/or (b) capitalize on their trade value to obtain a big-time player. [3 months - 3 years from now].

 

[magnifier661]

Pops actually doesn't win all those games when he sits his starters and Phil has Melo...a pretty prolific scorer now. I like the Spurs and their system better than the triangle but that wasn't my point....you double faulted on your second serve so I win by default while you're treated for exhaustion on the sidelines ..the point you are avoiding at the cost of your argument is that a winning system that's translated to championships doesn't always win..like I said..it's not difficult to understand

In case you haven't noticed, this is "We suck", not "We will never win a title" thread. And with that, my argument about Pop's system is absolutely valid and your Phil system is completely not valid. For one, Phil isn't even coaching in NY, two, Phil has never been a +.500 team without 2 of the best players in the league. 3, the fact you are arguing "titles" instead of "not sucking" explains how far off you are in this debate.

 

[blue9]

I'd argue that the Spurs have had a few of the best players in the league for over a decade

I suspect that you think Duncan dominates the ball more than he does. Yes, Duncan is still the best big in the game - but he's not playing like Jordan/Pippen/Kobe/Shaq, he's been a role player for the last handful of years. Ditto for Parker/Ginobli. The Spurs are much more similar to Larry Brown's Pistons team than any of Phil's teams.

 

[riverman]

In case you haven't noticed, this is "We suck", not "We will never win a title" thread. And with that, my argument about Pop's system is absolutely valid and your Phil system is completely not valid. For one, Phil isn't even coaching in NY, two, Phil has never been a +.500 team without 2 of the best players in the league. 3, the fact you are arguing "titles" instead of "not sucking" explains how far off you are in this debate.

now that's a post propped up by tissue...my opinion about this topic is as valid as any and offering that opion was not based on debating it but like I said..you're baiting my opinion mags..it's ok to disagree without playing king on the mountain

 

[riverman]

I suspect that you think Duncan dominates the ball more than he does. Yes, Duncan is still the best big in the game - but he's not playing like Jordan/Pippen/Kobe/Shaq, he's been a role player for the last handful of years. Ditto for Parker/Ginobli. The Spurs are much more similar to Larry Brown's Pistons team than any of Phil's teams.

The Spurs have had HOF players under Pops. Folks are forgetting David Robinson, Dennis Rodman, Bruce Bowen..lots of great players that have passed through there. I don't like Phil Jackson but his record stands and was very successful for a long time. If I chose one, it's the Spurs all day but this has nothing to do with my original point that a winning system doesn'tguarantee wins. Larry Brown's system failed after he left Detroit too

 

[riverman]

Thread topic answer..it's impossible to say what we'll be like. It's like saying a band will be great before they've ever practiced, recorded or gigged together. I'm optimistic though. Again..43 wins....after 20 games I'll reassess the situation.

 

[riverman]

In case you haven't noticed, this is "We suck", not "We will never win a title" thread. And with that, my argument about Pop's system is absolutely valid and your Phil system is completely not valid. For one, Phil isn't even coaching in NY, two, Phil has never been a +.500 team without 2 of the best players in the league. 3, the fact you are arguing "titles" instead of "not sucking" explains how far off you are in this debate.

We'll never win a title? Whose posts are you quoting mags because I never touched that subject here

 

[0-Our!]

I think 32 wins is the top of our bell curve... anywhere from 22-40 is possible.

ANYTHING's possible but I think 32 is our floor & unfortunately 37 (this may seem negative but I think it's realistic & I don't see it being that bad bc if we win 37, we'll only be better the following seasons w/ or w/o additional moves!) I feel is our ceiling (most likely IMO). I VERY much hope I'm wrong & we win ~43 (our team's capable but I don't think this likely in season 1)! THIS would of course exceed my expectations & I WOULD consider this season a success. Although all this is said assuming all the guys starting camp are the ones finishing the season. W/ Neil, it doesn't feel like he's done; IF he makes a deal(s) before the end of this season... I think THEN very easily we could hit or get a lot closer to 43!

 

[magnifier661]

We'll never win a title? Whose posts are you quoting mags because I never touched that subject here

Actually you have. You brought up Phil Jackson, then made comments about Pops requiring stars to win in SAS. Phil has never had a "winning season" without his stars, Pops has proven his system can have a winning season without playing his stars.

If you want to believe that Phil Jackson can coach a team to a winning record without his superstars, then have at it. Arguing Pops requires stars to have a winning season is fucking laughable

 

[Nikolokolus]

27.5 wins. That's the over-under I have floating around in my head.

If they gel quickly and somebody in the front-court shows they can be a reliable weapon on offense, to take some of the heat off of Damian, and if they somehow learn to play cohesive defense, despite their youth, then I could see that number climbing up to 33.5, but that's not the way I'd bet if I were talking to a sport-book in Vegas.

 

[magnifier661]

27.5 wins. That's the over-under I have floating around in my head.

If they gel quickly and somebody in the front-court shows they can be a reliable weapon on offense, to take some of the heat off of Damian, and if they somehow learn to play cohesive defense, despite their youth, then I could see that number climbing up to 33.5, but that's not the way I'd bet if I were talking to a sport-book in Vegas.

Pretty much the safest bet in this thread. RESPECT

 

[riverman]

Actually you have. You brought up Phil Jackson, then made comments about Pops requiring stars to win in SAS. Phil has never had a "winning season" without his stars, Pops has proven his system can have a winning season without playing his stars.

If you want to believe that Phil Jackson can coach a team to a winning record without his superstars, then have at it. Arguing Pops requires stars to have a winning season is fucking laughable

maybe but FACT...Pops has never coached a team like we have now to a winning record...the topic was system. I think you vastly underrate the Spurs roster over their winning streaks. I love Pops system. Stotts has achieved 2 great successful seasons with his system as well. One could say the Blazers didn't rely on superstars to achieve 105 wins in two seasons...saying Phil's triangle was not a winning system is also laughable...he had superstars because they wanted to win and until recently, they did. Again, my point was that a winning system doesn't always bring the hardware unless you have the roster to support it.

 

[riverman]

Actually you have. You brought up Phil Jackson, then made comments about Pops requiring stars to win in SAS. Phil has never had a "winning season" without his stars, Pops has proven his system can have a winning season without playing his stars.

If you want to believe that Phil Jackson can coach a team to a winning record without his superstars, then have at it. Arguing Pops requires stars to have a winning season is fucking laughable

I also didn't say Pops required stars to win but the fact is he had stars while winning with his system. These things aren't mutually exclusive

 

[blue9]

The Spurs have had HOF players under Pops. Folks are forgetting David Robinson, Dennis Rodman, Bruce Bowen..lots of great players that have passed through there. I don't like Phil Jackson but his record stands and was very successful for a long time. If I chose one, it's the Spurs all day but this has nothing to do with my original point that a winning system doesn'tguarantee wins. Larry Brown's system failed after he left Detroit too

Comparing Rodman (who also played with Jordan. And Kobe?) and Bowen to Duncan/Robinson/Jordan/Pippen/Kobe/Shaq? Uh huh. There's no doubt that Pops has had some tremendous talent - but his teams have never been dependent on that talent the way Phil was dependent on his (even greater) talent. Pops has won by surrounding his talent with low-level scrubs, while Phil surrounded the two best players in the league with fairly deep rosters (at least in LA).

I also don't get your point about DET failing after Larry left. Yeah, after Larry left DET sucked. That's because they weren't coached by Larry, they were coached by Flip "Sucky" Saunders! Same team (essentially), different coach - it proves that Larry was a great coach with a great system and that Flip sucks as a coach.

Pops = System
Larry = System
Sloan = System
Phil = coat-tails

 

[Orion Bailey]

Comparing Rodman (who also played with Jordan. And Kobe?) and Bowen to Duncan/Robinson/Jordan/Pippen/Kobe/Shaq? Uh huh. There's no doubt that Pops has had some tremendous talent - but his teams have never been dependent on that talent the way Phil was dependent on his (even greater) talent. Pops has won by surrounding his talent with low-level scrubs, while Phil surrounded the two best players in the league with fairly deep rosters (at least in LA).

I also don't get your point about DET failing after Larry left. Yeah, after Larry left DET sucked. That's because they weren't coached by Larry, they were coached by Flip "Sucky" Saunders! Same team (essentially), different coach - it proves that Larry was a great coach with a great system and that Flip sucks as a coach.

Pops = System
Larry = System
Sloan = System
Phil = coat-tails

He didn't say that. He said Larry browns system failed after Detroit. Not Detroit failed after he left. I believe what he means is Larry moved on and couldn't do the same thing he did in Detroit.

 

[blue9]

He didn't say that. He said Larry browns system failed after Detroit. Not Detroit failed after he left. I believe what he means is Larry moved on and couldn't do the same thing he did in Detroit.

I still don't think that's much of an argument (the first part). Saying Larry's system didn't work after he left is BS - it wasn't Larry's system anymore, it was Flip's best impersonation of Larry. And because Flip sucks it didn't work.
It took the right roster for Larry's system to work, but it wasn't dependent on having the best players in the league like "Phil's system".

 

[Blazinaway]

Nobody is saying that THIS roster will make the WCF in 3 years. This roster won't exist past this season. There WILL be trades to propel the team forward. But first we need the individuals on this team to improve. That's the entire philosophy behind this build:

1 - Get a lot of young, cheap players with a lot of upside. [check]
2 - Develop said players. [in process]
3 - Use the young, cheap, more fully-developed players to (a) win more games, and/or (b) capitalize on their trade value to obtain a big-time player. [3 months - 3 years from now].

I fully agree, just seemed a few guys were getting over excited about THIS current roster

 

[Orion Bailey]

I still don't think that's much of an argument (the first part). Saying Larry's system didn't work after he left is BS - it wasn't Larry's system anymore, it was Flip's best impersonation of Larry. And because Flip sucks it didn't work.
It took the right roster for Larry's system to work, but it wasn't dependent on having the best players in the league like "Phil's system".

I don't think your getting it. He means the plan moved on with Larry, but Larry didn't continue to win.
Didn't work with the Knicks
Didn't work with the Bobcats.
Im not arguing either way, just thinking your misunderstanding him. This has nothing to do with Detroit after Larry left. More about Larry's system not working in other places without a solid roster.

 

[Hobbesarable]

27.5 wins. That's the over-under I have floating around in my head.

If they gel quickly and somebody in the front-court shows they can be a reliable weapon on offense, to take some of the heat off of Damian, and if they somehow learn to play cohesive defense, despite their youth, then I could see that number climbing up to 33.5, but that's not the way I'd bet if I were talking to a sport-book in Vegas.

Yeah, I'm thinking we'll have near 33 wins.

 

[Orion Bailey]

I fully agree, just seemed a few guys were getting over excited about THIS current roster

I don't think anyone is super excited about this current roster, other than it provides room for us to go several ways as the year progresses and we see the glaring holes. The key is the definition of suck, or opinions of the definition.
However, I do believe this roster has more potential to be better even this year, than many are projecting. I will bring more numbers tonight to shut all you naysayers up.