Minutes! Minutes! Minutes!

[magnifier661]

Okay not that I'm a big fan of your star players having to play big minutes, but having Roy and Aldridge averaging those big minutes is really good for their games. They look so much more comfortable on the floor now. Even the role players look more comfortable with them playing big minutes. I like the shorter rotation. I would really like KP to figure out some deals that would help. Keep the rotation to 9 man, with quality role players, and have the rest as "just in case" type players.

Keep the rotation tight and players learn to play with each other so much easier. They learn their "Sweet Spots" and where they will be when you drive in the lane. Also, it builds more confidence in the coach and WHO IS THE MAN in the 4th. Remember the 4th Quarter "Melt Down" in 2000? Well a lot of that had to do with the question of "who is going to score"?

 

[Nikolokolus]

Just about every successful coach in the league rolls with an 8 or 9 man rotation.

Ideally, you probably don't want to be playing Roy and Aldridge 42 minutes a night (especially Roy) because there's a pretty good chance they get completely worn down by the end of the season. For now it's not much of an issue, because there are so few healthy, game ready people, but by the end of the season -- actually more like at the deadline -- KP is going to NEED to finally make a few consolidation moves. One way or anther I don't see Rudy being happy with table scraps, nor Bayless, nor Miller, nor Batum, nor Travis (you get the drift). How much confidence do I have in Pritchard at this point that he will in fact make a major consolidation move in mid-season? Not a whole lot, but hope springs eternal.

 

[hasoos]

I think it is important to have a tight rotation so that all players involved are used to playing with each other, rather than the exact opposite. But it is also important that our stars do not get beat down by playing too much.

 

[LameR]

It's funny to me that we're talking about consolidation moves while we still barely have enough players to play. At some point it's going to happen though.

 

[hasoos]

It's funny to me that we're talking about consolidation moves while we still barely have enough players to play. At some point it's going to happen though.

No I think you are correct. There are people who hard on KP to make a trade every day, when the facts are it is nearly impossible to trade players who are hurt. Not that it's hard enough for a GM to make a mid season trade, and its super heard when you have somebody like KP that doesn't like to pull mid season trades. I just don't think it's going to happen.

 

[Pinwheel1]

Just about every successful coach in the league rolls with an 8 or 9 man rotation.

Ideally, you probably don't want to be playing Roy and Aldridge 42 minutes a night (especially Roy) because there's a pretty good chance they get completely worn down by the end of the season. For now it's not much of an issue, because there are so few healthy, game ready people, but by the end of the season -- actually more like at the deadline -- KP is going to NEED to finally make a few consolidation moves. One way or anther I don't see Rudy being happy with table scraps, nor Bayless, nor Miller, nor Batum, nor Travis (you get the drift). How much confidence do I have in Pritchard at this point that he will in fact make a major consolidation move in mid-season? Not a whole lot, but hope springs eternal.

Travis is a non issue, as his spot at back up PF is perfect for him. He is pretty much out for the season anyway.

When is Batum due back? Regardless, when he does he will eventually be the starting SF (IMO)

If things work out next year the three guard rotation will be Bayless, Rudy, and Brandon.

So why make a major consolidation in mid season (Unless some moron will let us screw him with players we don't care about) You can't really trade injured players so we have very little choice. But either way we are fine for next year's minutes.

 

[Nikolokolus]

Travis is a non issue, as his spot at back up PF is perfect for him. He is pretty much out for the season anyway.

When is Batum due back? Regardless, when he does he will eventually be the starting SF (IMO)

If things work out next year the three guard rotation will be Bayless, Rudy, and Brandon.

So why make a major consolidation in mid season (Unless some moron will let us screw him with players we don't care about) You can't really trade injured players so we have very little choice. But either way we are fine for next year's minutes.

It is a non-issue now. I'm just saying the injuries are mostly masking what has been a looming 'problem' (or at least a critical decision) for awhile now.

 

[BlazerWookee]

Good for their games, bad for their durability.

My philosophy is "every extra minute Brandon or Lamarcus is on the bench and we don't lose ground on the scoreboard is worth 1/2 of a late-season clutch time point."

 

[The_Lillard_King]

I'm pretty sure I remember Nate addressing Roy's minutes and saying he was going to try to play him less per game (not wear him out). Of course that was before the injuries and the real possibility this team might not make it to the playoffs.

I hope at some point Nate can really give Roy some meaningful time off (when the seeding are set late in the season). . . but right now we need wins, which means we need Roy in the game.

 

[KingSpeed]

I don't understand the idea of making "consolidation" trades. We have to suit up 12. Are people simply saying that they want players 10-12 to completely suck? This season proves that we need all 12 people to be good.

 

[The_Lillard_King]

I don't understand the idea of making "consolidation" trades. We have to suit up 12. Are people simply saying that they want players 10-12 to completely suck? This season proves that we need all 12 people to be good.

Let's just go with Rudy. When he comes back in a month, what happens to Bayless minutes? I think either Bayless or Miller's minutes go down leaving a sitauation where someone isn't happy and talking about wanting to be traded.

Then Batum comes back cutting into Webster and Rudy minutes, again leading to grumbling.

Better to have 8-9 talented guys and 4 guys on the bench who are there for practice, support and occasional help in a game. That way Nate doesn't always feel pressure to get some talented player minutes he deserves.

I would like to see a package of 2-3 of our talented players for one really talented player. But yes short term, that package of Blazer players would have to include an injured player (or two) . . . and I don't think teams trade for injured players.

 

[Draco]

I don't understand the idea of making "consolidation" trades. We have to suit up 12. Are people simply saying that they want players 10-12 to completely suck? This season proves that we need all 12 people to be good.

Yes I would rather have players 10-12 completely suck if it meant we improved a starter on the team.

 

[Minstrel]

I don't understand the idea of making "consolidation" trades. We have to suit up 12. Are people simply saying that they want players 10-12 to completely suck?.

Yes. The vast majority of a team's production comes from it's top 3-4 players. Depth of role-players is nice, especially during the long season, but in the playoffs, it's about your best players. Rotations shorten.

It's the same in baseball...a starting pitching rotation that goes 5 deep with good pitchers is nice during the regular season, but wasted in the playoffs, when teams shorten their rotation and go with 3-4 starters.

In basketball, the starters play bigger minutes and the best 3-4 reserves sop up most of the remaining minutes. Your "10-12 guys" are essentially useless.

 

[Public Defender]

Assuming everyone comes back healthy and stays healthy, I agree, the Blazers need to thin the roster - but only slightly.

The Blazers ought to jettison Steve Blake and Martell Webster for a serviceable backup SF and a draft pick. Otherwise, the Blazers have a perfectly good rotation:

starters: Miller - Roy - Batum - Aldridge - Oden
reserves: Bayless - Fernandez - (SF?) - Outlaw - Przybilla

Rookies Pendergraph, Cunningham, and Mills need to prove they belong here still - and those aren't bad players to have on the bench. Juwan Howard is actually a pretty good player to have at the end of the bench - he can play spot minutes in case of injury or foul trouble, but he's mostly around to be a quasi-coach for the young bigs.

 

[Nikolokolus]

I don't understand the idea of making "consolidation" trades. We have to suit up 12. Are people simply saying that they want players 10-12 to completely suck? This season proves that we need all 12 people to be good.

Not now genius. But eventually guys are going to start filtering back into the lineup (around the trade deadline for guys like Nic and Travis) and having a boat load of guys on the shelf doesn't change the need for some crystalization of the roster.

 

[Pinwheel1]

I am sorry I was under the impression from this board that our players 10-12 already suck. So on those rare occasions that we have a full roster, tell me again why we care if the bottom third bitches about playing time? And if they do suck who exactly wants them for a solid rotation player? If they don't suck then why not keep them in case there is an injury. (Or rather a shit load of injuries)

IMO there is only a few guys who would bitch. Three of which will be getting their minutes. (Bayless, Rudy and Batum) The 4th guys I see the potential of bitching (and this is a guess) is Miller. But again it is all a moot point because we are not healthy.

 

[Minstrel]

My ideal "consolidation trade" would be to trade some assortment of the following pieces for a relatively proven good, young point guard: Bayless, Fernandez, Miller, Blake, Outlaw, Webster, possibly Przybilla.

You would then have a starting lineup of Acquisition/Roy/Batum/Aldridge/Oden. That would be championship-caliber. Fill out the bench with MLE signings and draft picks. Pritchard is quite good at working the draft, which is part of why the team has so many useful players (when healthy, not right at the moment). I don't doubt that he can fill in around that kind of nucleus. The only thing Pritchard has yet to prove in my eyes is that he can cull a roster overflowing with solid but not game-changing players and find one more impact player.

 

[Nikolokolus]

My ideal "consolidation trade" would be to trade some assortment of the following pieces for a relatively proven good, young point guard: Bayless, Fernandez, Miller, Blake, Outlaw, Webster, possibly Przybilla.

You would then have a starting lineup of Acquisition/Roy/Batum/Aldridge/Oden. That would be championship-caliber. Fill out the bench with MLE signings and draft picks. Pritchard is quite good at working the draft, which is part of why the team has so many useful players (when healthy, not right at the moment). I don't doubt that he can fill in around that kind of nucleus. The only thing Pritchard has yet to prove in my eyes is that he can cull a roster overflowing with solid but not game-changing players and find one more impact player.

I liken this to having too much mortar and not enough bricks.

When you take the injuries out of the equation, you get the feeling that the team is shy a foundational piece. Roy is a stud, LMA looks like he probably has leveled off at a sub-allstar level, Oden was starting to show flashes of real dominance, but it's hard to count on what he can give you going forward -- after that there are some really nice "potential" players in Batum and Bayless, some "talented but not necessarily talented in the right way" players in Travis and Rudy, a veteran point guard who is not a long term solution and who has fit rather badly so far in Miller and a whole lot of question marks everywhere else (minus Joel).

I'm not saying I know who KP should target, and I wouldn't even say it has to be an established all-star, but with teams like the Wiz, Warriors, Bulls and other struggling but with some nice players I hope he's looking to pick off a player or two with either enormous upside or an established high level of production.

 

[rocketeer]

I am sorry I was under the impression from this board that our players 10-12 already suck. So on those rare occasions that we have a full roster, tell me again why we care if the bottom third bitches about playing time? And if they do suck who exactly wants them for a solid rotation player? If they don't suck then why not keep them in case there is an injury. (Or rather a shit load of injuries)

IMO there is only a few guys who would bitch. Three of which will be getting their minutes. (Bayless, Rudy and Batum) The 4th guys I see the potential of bitching (and this is a guess) is Miller. But again it is all a moot point because we are not healthy.

i don't understand that either.

i mean basically everyone here has decided they want either blake or miller benched, so why is it a huge deal if one of those guys sees no minutes?

 

[magnifier661]

No I think you are correct. There are people who hard on KP to make a trade every day, when the facts are it is nearly impossible to trade players who are hurt. Not that it's hard enough for a GM to make a mid season trade, and its super heard when you have somebody like KP that doesn't like to pull mid season trades. I just don't think it's going to happen.

Bingo! I think KP is answering the phone. Hell maybe he's even making a few calls. Regardless, we just don't know what happens behind closed doors, or blackberries. I suspect KP would and try to pull the trigger if a good offer presents itself. I think the injuries are the big suspect. Why would a GM trade a healthy player for an injured one? Especially one that may not even play this season.

Most deals made "mid-season" are from teams that need that "little tweak". If we don't have active players to give, then it's more a deal on the future (next season) than NOW, like most need mid season. Unfortunately for us, we need that "NOW" deal and we just don't have the players that we probably want to give up for a role player.

 

[magnifier661]

It's not that we want the other players to suck, but more importantly, have the 8-9 man team the best 8-9 man team on the planet. Then you use "role players" to be used for specific engagements. For example: Have a three point shooter during time out last second plays. Have a defensive bruiser (enforcer), that comes in to bring in 6 hard fouls. Have a perimeter defender (Heat killer) when a player is really shooting "lights out" when they normally are average. Have a slashing guard, when the team is playing the perimeter hard. Well you get the idea. It's important to have role players, but it's more important to have a crazy good starting 5 and 2-3 crazy good players coming off the bench. The rest are just there for roles.