Neil speaks

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
There is a difference between a BW fan, and someone who refuses to spend their hard earned money on a product that is less than acceptable.
If Portland were to ever go into full tank mode, I would still be a Blazer fan and be happy if they won a game. Or as Riverman puts it a quarter.
But I wouldn't ever drop a penny on the franchise.
However I did drop 800$ in December on Blazer merch.
Would've never dropped a penny if they were in full tank mode. I don't care if they were gifts or not.
 
chzbrgr said:
It’s about more than just binary thinking. Yes we’re not elite now so we aren’t making win now decisions but there has to be a believable plan in place to get there that the fan base can get behind. Neil has fallen completely flat in that regard. His “plan” of overpaying for bad assets regardless has gotten us further from a title than it has helped. So regardless of time frame or likelihood of title contending he has not done a good job of rebuilding. He has done the opposite of what the successful rebuilding gms have done. He has saddled the team with tons of bad debt and dead money and he traded away young players without receiving assets in return.

The Neil believers on here really gotta start squaring that by almost any metric outside of a couple draft picks he has not done a great job.
Click to expand...
It's never been about binary thinking, Neil has always had a plan. He's said it several times, Get young talented players with upside, have
them improve so that they become "assets", make consolidation trade.

The plan is clear, but the PLAN DIDN'T WORK (that's on the player and on the coaching staff, I argue in another thread). So, the question is "what to do now?"
 
Wizard Mentor said:
It's never been about binary thinking, Neil has always had a plan. He's said it several times, Get young talented players with upside, have
them improve so that they become "assets", make consolidation trade.

The plan is clear, but the PLAN DIDN'T WORK (that's on the player and on the coaching staff, I argue in another thread). So, the question is "what to do now?"
Click to expand...
I say he made a bad bet, you say he made a bet that was supposed to work but didn’t because the players and coaches didn’t make the bet work out... seems to me like that is just making up excuses for him but what do I know
 
chzbrgr said:
I say he made a bad bet, you say he made a bet that was supposed to work but didn’t because the players and coaches didn’t make the bet work out... seems to me like that is just making up excuses for him but what do I know
Click to expand...
sigh. I agree that that's how it sounds to you.

What's your "success metric"?
 
AFully22 said:
The Olshey apologists are out strong today. I just can’t believe you can look at this roster, the moves made since 2014, the frustration from our franchise PG, the lack of any real direction or plan going forward and think “We’re on track”. It honestly baffles me.

Doesn’t matter though because I really think if Olshey doesn’t make some type of deal to obviously improve the team by draft day he’s gone.
Click to expand...

The "track" to build a contender is never straight forward. Has Olshey made some blunders, Yes. Is he completely off the rails? I don't believe so.

He has, as stated, two more years.
 
I've been pretty hard on Olshey, especially on his Summer of '16, but I actually have no issue with giving him two more years. I don't think he's covered himself in glory, but he also hasn't been the kind of train wreck that cries out for getting him out of the front office as fast as possible. Philosophically, giving a GM five years to rebuild a team after some of the foundations are cut away (Aldridge leaving, Matthews getting injured) is reasonable.
 
hoopsjock said:
If that is what you made of it then you are obviously not going to listen to anything he says. He specifically said he would make moves this summer but this year he got under the tax. There is nothing wrong with that if he follows through with that.
Click to expand...
Is finding a way to sign Derrick Rose to a max contract considered a move? Because that's right up Olsheys avenue.
 
Here is an article with the actual transcript (and a not bad analysis by Dave Decker). First thing you see is Olshey avoids the question about what is the plan for Blazers; either because he doesn't have a good one or he doesn't want to talk about it. Jaynes is quite chummy, doesn't press him on this.
Decker does point out, despite what Olshey says, that deals were possible: "At this trade deadline the Orlando Magic traded Elfrid Payton for a second-round pick. The Cleveland Cavaliers got Rodney Hood and George Hill for Iman Shumpert, Derrick Rose(who will be released immediately by the Utah Jazz), Jae Crowder, and a second-round pick. The Detroit Pistons got Jameer Nelson for Willie Reed. Deals weren’t just available, they were made."
Also pointed out that Olshey tries to claim as assets those trade exceptions that will never be used.
One thing absent is Olshey never talking about how horrid contracts make trades difficult.
One big take on the entire interview is what a bunch of softballs the supposedly tough guy Jaynes tossed up there. Was there not a press conference where maybe one guy would have the guts to ask a hard question?

https://www.blazersedge.com/2018/2/...ey-interview-noah-vonleh-salary-cap-contracts
 
Last edited:
blue9 said:
No. Because the only players on the roster anybody wants are the players we're unwilling (rightly!) to trade. This is an abysmal position to be in. If there were even 3 players outside of Dame/CJ/Nurk/Collins that had value, then you could argue that the financials are ideal. But that's not the case - we are almost entirely reliant on Nurk/Collins becoming All-Star-level talents in order for the team to improve.
Click to expand...

Most teams are in the same position. We have players we can trade. There were rumors we were going to trade Harmless to the Knicks in the offseason. In fact, the SF position is so weak in the league, a guy like Mo might have a lot more value than his performance demands.

We are better off with the players we have than the alternative of letting them walk. Thus paying up to the tax makes sense. NO did gamble on internal improvement of any one of the guys, but that didn't happen. I don't think it's anyone's fault but the players' and the coach's.
 
I don’t know how you can label anything that happened after losing 4/5 of your starting lineup as anything other than a rebuild.

Subsequently making the playoffs was a credit to Stotts and players/leaders like Dame.

And the rebuild is still progressing nicely. Nurkic and Collins aren’t done developing and compliment the backcourt. The only foundational piece that’s REALLY missing is a SF. Bench players can be added whenever.

The only difference is teams in Portland’s position don’t usually win as much as they do, and that’s gotten some fans confused as to where they actually are in the cycle.

That’s why I’m ok with what happened (or didn’t) at the deadline. The team has overachieved relative to their talent. Now they’re getting to that stage where the talent is catching up, and I expect them to make a jump next season to being a squad that can actually contend in the playoffs, rather than just participate.
 
Scalma said:
I don’t know how you can label anything that happened after losing 4/5 of your starting lineup as anything other than a rebuild.

Subsequently making the playoffs was a credit to Stotts and players/leaders like Dame.

And the rebuild is still progressing nicely. Nurkic and Collins aren’t done developing and compliment the backcourt. The only foundational piece that’s REALLY missing is a SF. Bench players can be added whenever.

The only difference is teams in Portland’s position don’t usually win as much as they do, and that’s gotten some fans confused as to where they actually are in the cycle.

That’s why I’m ok with what happened (or didn’t) at the deadline. The team has overachieved relative to their talent. Now they’re getting to that stage where the talent is catching up, and I expect them to make a jump next season to being a squad that can actually contend in the playoffs, rather than just participate.
Click to expand...

This is where I'm at too. It isn't ideal as a fan but realistic. If they don't make that jump next season though I'm going to join the other side.
 
Scalma said:
Wonder who he meant by "rental market." Probably Tyreke, Hezonja, or Belinelli.
Click to expand...
There were several players allegedly available (some of which you mentioned) but like many teams, would have needed cap space to re-sign them and the Blazers won't have any cap space.
 
CupWizier said:
There were several players allegedly available (some of which you mentioned) but like many teams, would have needed cap space to re-sign them and the Blazers won't have any cap space.
Click to expand...

Doubt that was a reason since Olshey literally said they looked at rental guys that “wouldn’t affect long term flexibility”
 
Denny Crane said:
We have players we can trade. There were rumors we were going to trade Harmless to the Knicks in the offseason. In fact, the SF position is so weak in the league, a guy like Mo might have a lot more value than his performance demands.
Click to expand...

We would need a GM with the talent to make a trade.

Denny Crane said:
We are better off with the players we have than the alternative of letting them walk.
Click to expand...

Olshey just let one walk 3 days ago. Planning ahead with a consolidation trade (e.g. Harkless, as you suggested) would have gotten something for Vonleh. But Olshey never trades unless forced by economics.
 
jlprk said:
We would need a GM with the talent to make a trade.
Click to expand...
We can't attract free agent GMs...we must develop them from within! Olshey hit a rookie wall like they all do...the game will slow down for him soon.
 
jlprk said:
We would need a GM with the talent to make a trade.



Olshey just let one walk 3 days ago. Planning ahead with a consolidation trade (e.g. Harkless, as you suggested) would have gotten something for Vonleh. But Olshey never trades unless forced by economics.
Click to expand...

Question for you: Do you think Olshey would make a trade "forced by economics" if he wasn't ordered to do so?
 
jlprk said:
We would need a GM with the talent to make a trade.



Olshey just let one walk 3 days ago. Planning ahead with a consolidation trade (e.g. Harkless, as you suggested) would have gotten something for Vonleh. But Olshey never trades unless forced by economics.
Click to expand...

He's made trades, and good ones. How'd we get Nurk?

Harkless was our starting SF. There aren't a whole lot of SFs in the league available who are better. A sad fact.

All indications we got from the news are that the Blazers were in the discussion to get Melo from the Knicks. The deal never looked that good for us, considering we'd have to take back an Evan Turner sized salary for a player who probably doesn't belong in the league anymore (at least not at anything above vet minimum).

Sometimes the deals you don't make are the best.
 
hoopsjock said:
Question for you: Do you think Olshey would make a trade "forced by economics" if he wasn't ordered to do so?
Click to expand...

Irrelevant. The question should be, would Olshey and Allen have gotten into financial hell if Olshey had had the brains to advise Allen that it was coming. That's why Allen employs Olshey.

I would guess that both owner and GM falsely thought that GM had the talent to sell the expensive assets he bought.

I know a guy just like Olshey whose hobby is auctions. His house is filled to the rafters with a couple thousand things he thinks are valuable. He loves to buy, but has no skill or motivation at selling.
 
Denny Crane said:
He's made trades, and good ones. How'd we get Nurk?

Harkless was our starting SF. There aren't a whole lot of SFs in the league available who are better. A sad fact.

All indications we got from the news are that the Blazers were in the discussion to get Melo from the Knicks. The deal never looked that good for us, considering we'd have to take back an Evan Turner sized salary for a player who probably doesn't belong in the league anymore (at least not at anything above vet minimum).

Sometimes the deals you don't make are the best.
Click to expand...

He has made practically no trades. Nurkic? Forced by economics again. Traded a starting center for a substitute center. Easy.
 
jlprk said:
Irrelevant. The question should be, would Olshey and Allen have gotten into financial hell if Olshey had had the brains to advise Allen that it was coming. That's why Allen employs Olshey.

I would guess that both owner and GM falsely thought that GM had the talent to sell the expensive assets he bought.

I know a guy just like Olshey whose hobby is auctions. His house is filled to the rafters with a couple thousand things he thinks are valuable. He loves to buy, but has no skill or motivation at selling.
Click to expand...


The problem is when you do sell you can end up with Gerald Henderson and Noah Vonleh. You don't know that selling is the right move.
 
jlprk said:
Those are the only 2. He's been here, what, 50 years? Seems like it.
Click to expand...

So any trade that benefits the team financially is dismissed as only for economic reasons no matter how it matters on the court? That is ridiculous.
 
jlprk said:
He has made practically no trades. Nurkic? Forced by economics again. Traded a starting center for a substitute center. Easy.
Click to expand...

Not forced by economics. He had the choice of making the trade or not. Or trading for other players who moved or were available (like Okafor).

Fitting pieces under the CBA requirements and being able to take advantage of opportunities is what he's done, consistently well.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top