Mark Warkentien An Option For....

[RR7]

How do you not buy the matchups argument? If the #s 6, 7, and 8 seeds in the playoffs this season all have identical records, one could argue they are comparable teams. Now, if the #6 seed beats Dallas, and say we lost to the Lakers, even after we beat Dallas this season, we are a worse team, because we got stuck playing the harder team?

 

[The_Lillard_King]

I'm just killing time on a conference call, but are you saying that matchups don't have an impact on playoff success?

You just quoted my post that says match ups matter.

I'm not in the camp that will explain Denver and Ptd being equal teams and that the only reason one was a conference title playoff team and the other was a first round loss was soley because of matchups. I think Denver was the better team last year and that is why theyplayed better thatn the Blazers and advanced. The match ups helped, but Denver played much better in the playoffs because they were a better team.

Again, I understand that posters think because they had an equivalent record, they were equivalent teams. That the way the teams played in the playoffs and the success each team experienced or didn't experience was because of the playoff match ups.

I get that take . . . it's wrong, but I get it.

 

[RR7]

It's wrong? So 7 games(first round) shows much mroe than 82 games does, when each team faces the same matchups? Ok.

 

[hasoos]

I'm just killing time on a conference call, but are you saying that matchups don't have an impact on playoff success?

No, he is just saying that rationalizing that Portland is as good as Denver because the Nugz got a better playoff draw is flawed logic. The facts are Denver is better than Portland.

 

[RR7]

No, he is just saying that rationalizing that Portland is as good as Denver because the Nugz got a better playoff draw is flawed logic. The facts are Denver is better than Portland.

No, it's rationalizing they are as good because they had the exact same record. After 82 games. They were as good. Who eventually got further is based off of matchups.

 

[BGrantFan]

No, he is just saying that rationalizing that Portland is as good as Denver because the Nugz got a better playoff draw is flawed logic. The facts are Denver is better than Portland.

There is no doubt about that this year. It's a fact.

I guess I still don't see the point, though. Go back 4 years and see where both teams were at, then look at who was GM of the Blazers during that period.

 

[craigehlo]

No, it's rationalizing they are as good because they had the exact same record. After 82 games. They were as good. Who eventually got further is based off of matchups.

Based of matchups? The Nuggs were able to play something resembling defense, that's why they got further than the Blazers.

 

[The_Lillard_King]

How do you not buy the matchups argument? If the #s 6, 7, and 8 seeds in the playoffs this season all have identical records, one could argue they are comparable teams. Now, if the #6 seed beats Dallas, and say we lost to the Lakers, even after we beat Dallas this season, we are a worse team, because we got stuck playing the harder team?

Man RR7, you just want to twist up everything I say to prove your point. let's just use the facts we have rather than all these hypos.

Last Year: Blazers first round loss to Houston. Denver wins two playoff series and then loses to Lakers in Western Confernece finals.

Some say equal team but Denver more successful in playoffs because of matchups. I don't agree and think Denver was the better team and proved it in the playoffs. What is the big deal?

In fact I've said I'm reconsidering everything . . . but you refuse to acknowledges that maybe, jsut maybe, the fact Denver had success in the playoffs and were arguably a couple of wins away from a championship shows they were the better team last year.

And what about this year? last year it was matchups, this year it is injuries, next year it will be teams are equal but Blazers have Vulcan (you know it's coming)

 

[RR7]

Yes, based off of matchups. They played a worse team than the Blazers did, and thus had an easier opportunity to get past the first round. Is that really that difficult to understand?

 

[anonymous gambler]

I think Pritchard has done a great job with this team and would prefer not to gamble on someone else. Is Denver a better team? Right now they are. But, at full health, I'd say the Blazers are both better and have more upside.

 

[The_Lillard_King]

Yes, based off of matchups. They played a worse team than the Blazers did, and thus had an easier opportunity to get past the first round. Is that really that difficult to understand?

It's not difficult to understand. Is it difficult to understand that Denver played better in the playoffs than the Blazers did? Is it all because of match ups or possibly was Denver the better team?

You seem to think all I care about is playoffs wins. Let's put playoff wins and regular season wins aside . . . who do you think played better in the playoffs and do you think it was all because of match ups?

 

[RR7]

Man RR7, you just want to twist up everything I say to prove your point. let's just use the facts we have rather than all these hypos.

Last Year: Blazers first round loss to Houston. Denver wins two playoff series and then loses to Lakers in Western Confernece finals.

Some say equal team but Denver more successful in playoffs because of matchups. I don't agree and think Denver was the better team and proved it in the playoffs. What is the big deal?

In fact I've said I'm reconsidering everything . . . but you refuse to acknowledges that maybe, jsut maybe, the fact Denver had success in the playoffs and were arguably a couple of wins away from a championship shows they were the better team last year.

And what about this year? last year it was matchups, this year it is injuries, next year it will be teams are equal but Blazers have Vulcan (you know it's coming)

The initial discussion related to who built a better team. Which roster was better, etc. I can't see how a small level of success can change the answer. You say this season, Denver is better. If Carmelo Anthony broke his hand right now, and they lost every game, we'd finish ahead of them, and then be the better constructed team? Carmelo is still on their team. But just hurt. We finish better, but does that mean their team is worse, and thus Warkenstein has done a worse job?

 

[RR7]

You seem to think all I care about is playoffs wins. Let's put playoff wins and regular season wins aside . . . who do you think played better in the playoffs and do you think it was all because of match ups?

I think that you think it's all about playoff wins because that is what you are discussing. Yes, I feel Denver did better in the playoffs in large part due to who they were playing. Did the Lakers get better from round 2-3 when they went from Houston to Denver? Or were they the same team, facing different competition?

Do you thi9nk if Carmelo was covered off and on by Artest and Battier for 6 or 7 games, he would have the same success as he did playing against NO and matching up against, who, Peja? Yeah. Matchups didn't have anything to do with that level of success.

 

[The_Lillard_King]

I think that you think it's all about playoff wins because that is what you are discussing. Yes, I feel Denver did better in the playoffs in large part due to who they were playing. Did the Lakers get better from round 2-3 when they went from Houston to Denver? Or were they the same team, facing different competition?

Do you thi9nk if Carmelo was covered off and on by Artest and Battier for 6 or 7 games, he would have the same success as he did playing against NO and matching up against, who, Peja? Yeah. Matchups didn't have anything to do with that level of success.

You are just Mr. hypothetical man. Yes I think Denver would have beat Houston, but why argue over something we will never know.

I'll say it again. Match ups matter, but is not the only explanation for why Denver played better than the Blazers in the playoffs. Denver played better in part because of match ups and in part because they were the better team in the playoffs.

I understand you don't agree, but do you at least understand my position so you quit trying to restate a differnt way.

 

[Minstrel]

I'll say it again. Match ups matter, but is not the only explanation for why Denver played better than the Blazers in the playoffs.

I don't think Denver did play better. They played about as well as Portland but against an easier team. Therefore, they advanced and Portland did not.

 

[The_Lillard_King]

I don't think Denver did play better. They played about as well as Portland but against an easier team. Therefore, they advanced and Portland did not.

Thanks for getting to the issue. I get that you (and RR7) think it was the match ups that allowed Denver to go to the Western Confrence finals. I think Denver was a better team than the Blazers and that is why they advanced so much futher than the Blazers.

We just see it differently.

 

[The_Lillard_King]

Personally I would love to see a Denver Ptd match up in the first round. Wouldn't that be fitting to resolve this issue.

Although my first choice is against Utah . . ., which shows how much I think of regular season match ups.

 

[RR7]

Personally I would love to see a Denver Ptd match up in the first round. Wouldn't that be fitting to resolve this issue.

Very fitting. Especially if Nene sits out the series.

 

[BGrantFan]

Very fitting. Especially if Nene sits out the series.

Nene and Chris Anderson.

 

[The_Lillard_King]

Very fitting. Especially if Nene sits out the series.

Even better (although I guess a trade for Dalembert would be more equal).

But I would love to see how Ptd can stand up to a division rival like Denver in teh playoffs. If Ptd pulls out a series win, Iwill happily come on here and say I was wrong, Ptd is a better team than Denver.

Meaning KP hs assembled a better team than MW. Heck I might think that now . . . but I am a little concerned KP has had control for 4 years (?) and it doesn't look like this team can win a playoff series yet.

 

[The_Lillard_King]

Nene and Chris Anderson.

Martin is hurt and apprently will be gimpy for the playoffs.

 

[BGrantFan]

Martin is hurt and apprently will be gimpy for the playoffs.

Gimpy =/ out for season.

 

[The_Lillard_King]

Gimpy =/ out for season.

Yea, i kow that out for the season kills.

Figure the odds (the way i calculate it) are with the Blazers next year that Oden doesn't go down for the season. The way I figure out the odds is that first season, out for the season; second season, not out for the season; third season out for the season; . . . so fourth year, not out for the season. It's a pattern.

See I can be a Blazer optomist.

 

[BGrantFan]

Yea, i kow that out for the season kills.

Figure the odds (the way i calculate it) are with the Blazers next year that Oden doesn't go down for the season. The way I figure out the odds is that first season, out for the season; second season, not out for the season; third season out for the season; . . . so fourth year, not out for the season. It's a pattern.

See I can be a Blazer optomist.

If Oden goes out next year, then I will truly believe in some sort of Blazer Big Man Curse. Walton went down early with injuries, Bowie ... 'nuff said, Sabonis was a shell of his prime self by the time he hit Portland, and now Greg Oden?

I may have to start going to church or something.

 

[oldmangrouch]

Very fitting. Especially if Nene sits out the series.

Nene and Chris Anderson.

So, if Nene and Anderson were hurt, while Oden and Pryz were healthy, and the Blazers had a better record than Denver, you would argue that Denver is just as good as Portland?

Right.

 

[BGrantFan]

So, if Nene and Anderson were hurt, while Oden and Pryz were healthy, and the Blazers had a better record than Denver, you would argue that Denver is just as good as Portland?

Right.

I'm not arguing anything other than Denver and Portland were equally good last season. I already posted that Denver is better than Portland this season. You seemingly made up an argument out of thin air. Why?

 

[MickZagger]

The way Vulcan runs things and how easily it supposedly is to get on PA's bad side. What decent GM would want to come to Portland if KP is let go. PA needs to realize that Vulcan does more harm than good.

 

[BGrantFan]

The way Vulcan runs things and how easily it supposedly is to get on PA's bad side. What decent GM would want to come to Portland if KP is let go. PA needs to realize that Vulcan does more harm than good.

I now understand why Nate wanted a year-to-year contract. He'll get another opportunity in the NBA; he may as well keep his flexibility when the Vulcans turn on him.

 

[oldmangrouch]

I'm not arguing anything other than Denver and Portland were equally good last season. I already posted that Denver is better than Portland this season. You seemingly made up an argument out of thin air. Why?

Fair enough. You are only arguing about last season. Other people in this thread are claiming the Blazers are just as good as Denver *this* season.

I picked the wrong message to quote.

 

[MickZagger]

I now understand why Nate wanted a year-to-year contract. He'll get another opportunity in the NBA; he may as well keep his flexibility when the Vulcans turn on him.

Yeah, that is kind of funny now that I think about it.

Now back to the topic at hand, who was better last year, the Blazers or the Nuggets.