Olshey interview with Jaynes

[BonesJones]

no way Chi does that IMO, Lopez is a plus asset that is expiring this yr, Meyers is a ball and chain who has two yrs left

It was under the assumption that they needed more space to offer Jabari. I explained that.

 

[Phatguysrule]

Steph is 30, Klay is 28, Draymond is 28.

Those three guys are part of the same window. Currently there is no third star to go with Dame and CJ's window. We can talk about longevity and having a game that ages well all we want, but right now there's a huge gap between where Dame and CJ are, and where our project players are.

That's what I'm talking about.

And where would they be if Steph or Klay left 5 years ago? Because that's what happened to us.

The stars aligned for them. That's awesome. They started doing things the right way, built the good culture, and good things happened.

We're in the middle of that process now.

 

[BonesJones]

And where would they be if Steph or Klay left 5 years ago? Because that's what happened to us.

The stars aligned for them. That's awesome. They started doing things the right way, built the good culture, and good things happened.

We're in the middle of that process now.

So is half the league.

 

[Phatguysrule]

So is half the league.

Correct. But half of the league didn't just take 3rd place in the west with the 2nd youngest team in the league.

 

[Natebishop3]

Correct. But half of the league didn't just take 3rd place in the west with the 2nd youngest team in the league.

It was fools gold man. It was by such a slim margin. We could have just as easily been out of the playoffs entirely if we had swung a couple games the other direction. We didn’t have injury issues like some of the other key teams. And we proved how shitty we were by getting swept out of the first round by the 6th seed. I wish people would stop bringing up getting 3rd seed line it’s some kind of validation.

 

[Phatguysrule]

It was fools gold man. It was by such a slim margin. We could have just as easily been out of the playoffs entirely if we had swung a couple games the other direction. We didn’t have injury issues like some of the other key teams. And we proved how shitty we were by getting swept out of the first round by the 6th seed. I wish people would stop bringing up getting 3rd seed line it’s some kind of validation.

Every team has injuries.
How long was that win streak?

Seriously though, that was a bad match up. We couldn't stop Davis... Honestly I think the Pelicans would have beaten anybody but the top 2 seeds, and soundly.

We also swept a team that made the second round. If seedings shake out differently we'd have been in the 2nd round.

And the year before we were swept by the Champs. And the year before we were in the second round.

We do need a third star. Unfortunately that guy left and we haven't found his replacement yet. Did you really want to go all in for Melo?

 

[BonesJones]

Correct. But half of the league didn't just take 3rd place in the west with the 2nd youngest team in the league.

"2nd youngest team" has no context. We were "2nd youngest" because of Papagiannis, Baldwin, Layman, Vonleh (till he got traded), Swanigan, etc... End of the bench guys that don't have much potential (outside of Baldwin, but still). It was also because of guys like Harkless, Shabazz, Nurkic... Guys that are young but close to or at their ceiling.

Papagiannis will never amount to anything, and it'd be better to have a veteran like Vince Carter in his spot... However, if that was the case we'd be something like 10th youngest, and then that wouldn't be a selling point anymore. So the "2nd youngest" narrative has no substance to me because most of our role players are in their prime, and aren't going to continually improve. Our roster doesn't have 2nd best a big gap in between current production and top end potential either.

"3rd place" also needs context, because we made the playoffs by a slim margin of 3 games, with good injury luck compared to our competitors.

When evaluating a team, you have to figure out how close they are to contention, and what will get them there, instead of looking at things simplistically without context. We're no better off than Washington, or New Orleans, or Denver, or Utah, or many other teams.

 

[BonesJones]

Every team has injuries.
How long was that win streak?

Seriously though, that was a bad match up. We couldn't stop Davis... Honestly I think the Pelicans would have beaten anybody but the top 2 seeds, and soundly.

We also swept a team that made the second round. If seedings shake out differently we'd have been in the 2nd round.

And the year before we were swept by the Champs. And the year before we were in the second round.

We do need a third star. Unfortunately that guy left and we haven't found his replacement yet. Did you really want to go all in for Melo?

That wasn't a bad matchup, that was bad gameplanning compounded by Stotts failing to adjust. A good team is able to adjust to many different styles of basketball. The narrative of "We're fine because we were the 3 seed but the 6th seed was just so good and such a match-up problem for us that it's okay we got swept" is contradictory.

"If seedings shake out differently".... The best teams beat whoever is in front of them. We're trying to compete with the best right? Then that's the standard we should be held to, not a standard of hoping for certain matchups to avoid getting swept with HCA.

"How long was the win streak"... I counter with this: What was our record excluding the win streak?

 

[CupWizier]

It was fools gold man. It was by such a slim margin. We could have just as easily been out of the playoffs entirely if we had swung a couple games the other direction. We didn’t have injury issues like some of the other key teams. And we proved how shitty we were by getting swept out of the first round by the 6th seed. I wish people would stop bringing up getting 3rd seed line it’s some kind of validation.

Only thing that was proven in the playoffs was that we had a poor series and still 3 of 4 games were extremely competitive. A few bounces and it could have gone much differently.

 

[CupWizier]

That wasn't a bad matchup, that was bad gameplanning compounded by Stotts failing to adjust. A good team is able to adjust to many different styles of basketball. The narrative of "We're fine because we were the 3 seed but the 6th seed was just so good and such a match-up problem for us that it's okay we got swept" is contradictory.

"If seedings shake out differently".... The best teams beat whoever is in front of them. We're trying to compete with the best right? Then that's the standard we should be held to, not a standard of hoping for certain matchups to avoid getting swept with HCA.

"How long was the win streak"... I counter with this: What was our record excluding the win streak?

What was any teams record without a win streak? That's a weak argument as it's a fact that we did have that long win streak. I always find it funny when people act like the win streak was an accident and shouldn't be counted.

 

[BonesJones]

What was any teams record without a win streak? That's a weak argument as it's a fact that we did have that long win streak. I always find it funny when people act like the win streak was an accident and shouldn't be counted.

It's not an accident, it's just funny how people will single out the win streak as some sort of separate entity, but they disagree when I view the other 69 games as a seperate entity, even though it's going along with their line of thinking. You can't separate the win streak without separating the rest of the season.

 

[CupWizier]

It's not an accident, it's just funny how people will single out the win streak as some sort of separate entity, but they disagree when I view the other 69 games as a seperate entity, even though it's going along with their line of thinking. You can't separate the win streak without separating the rest of the season.

I don't separate any of the games. They all count the same.

 

[BonesJones]

I don't separate any of the games. They all count the same.

Exactly my point. What if there was a loss or two in that stretch but they made them up elsewhere and still won 49 games? It wouldn't make a difference, but the conversation for some would be totally different.

 

[CupWizier]

Exactly my point. What if there was a loss or two in that stretch but they made them up elsewhere and still won 49 games? It wouldn't make a difference, but the conversation for some would be totally different.

I agree, from my memory of past posts it seems there are many more posters who tend to want to discount the win streak and act like it shouldn't be counted.

 

[Natebishop3]

Did you really want to go all in for Melo?

What do you mean by "all in?"

Would I have traded for him? Yes. I still believe that Melo would do well in Stotts system. He can't be much worse than Aldridge frankly. Would I have traded anything of real value for him? Probably not.

 

[BonesJones]

I agree, from my memory of past posts it seems there are many more posters who tend to want to discount the win streak and act like it shouldn't be counted.

I think it's them discountingnit as some sort of important entity, since you can spin the win streak and sample size without the win streak in any sort of way.

 

[Phatguysrule]

What do you mean by "all in?"

Would I have traded for him? Yes. I still believe that Melo would do well in Stotts system. He can't be much worse than Aldridge frankly. Would I have traded anything of real value for him? Probably not.

Aldridge played more defense in one game than Melo has played in his career. And I'm not a big Aldridge fan.

What package would you have offered for Melo that Olshey didn't?

 

[Natebishop3]

Aldridge played more defense in one game than Melo has played in his career. And I'm not a big Aldridge fan.

What package would you have offered for Melo that Olshey didn't?

The package didn't matter. How is that question relevant? Melo had a no-trade-clause. We could have offered Dame and it would not have mattered.

 

[Phatguysrule]

That wasn't a bad matchup, that was bad gameplanning compounded by Stotts failing to adjust. A good team is able to adjust to many different styles of basketball. The narrative of "We're fine because we were the 3 seed but the 6th seed was just so good and such a match-up problem for us that it's okay we got swept" is contradictory.

"If seedings shake out differently".... The best teams beat whoever is in front of them. We're trying to compete with the best right? Then that's the standard we should be held to, not a standard of hoping for certain matchups to avoid getting swept with HCA.

"How long was the win streak"... I counter with this: What was our record excluding the win streak?

They should have swept us in the regular season, and would have if Davis weren't injured in 2 games.

We had no answer to Davis. We aren't multidimensional because we are young and lack another star.

You don't take the 3 seed in the western conference with the 2nd youngest team in the league if you have a bad coach and no talent.

I don't generally expect the 2nd youngest team in the league to match up well with every team in the league. I'm kind of shocked that you do...

 

[Phatguysrule]

The package didn't matter. How is that question relevant? Melo had a no-trade-clause. We could have offered Dame and it would not have mattered.

Good point. What move are blaming Olshey for not making?

 

[Phatguysrule]

"2nd youngest team" has no context. We were "2nd youngest" because of Papagiannis, Baldwin, Layman, Vonleh (till he got traded), Swanigan, etc... End of the bench guys that don't have much potential (outside of Baldwin, but still). It was also because of guys like Harkless, Shabazz, Nurkic... Guys that are young but close to or at their ceiling.

Papagiannis will never amount to anything, and it'd be better to have a veteran like Vince Carter in his spot... However, if that was the case we'd be something like 10th youngest, and then that wouldn't be a selling point anymore. So the "2nd youngest" narrative has no substance to me because most of our role players are in their prime, and aren't going to continually improve. Our roster doesn't have 2nd best a big gap in between current production and top end potential either.

"3rd place" also needs context, because we made the playoffs by a slim margin of 3 games, with good injury luck compared to our competitors.

When evaluating a team, you have to figure out how close they are to contention, and what will get them there, instead of looking at things simplistically without context. We're no better off than Washington, or New Orleans, or Denver, or Utah, or many other teams.

Should we be better off than those teams? What advantages do you think we have?

 

[Phatguysrule]

That wasn't a bad matchup, that was bad gameplanning compounded by Stotts failing to adjust. A good team is able to adjust to many different styles of basketball. The narrative of "We're fine because we were the 3 seed but the 6th seed was just so good and such a match-up problem for us that it's okay we got swept" is contradictory.

"If seedings shake out differently".... The best teams beat whoever is in front of them. We're trying to compete with the best right? Then that's the standard we should be held to, not a standard of hoping for certain matchups to avoid getting swept with HCA.

"How long was the win streak"... I counter with this: What was our record excluding the win streak?

How many teams had a longer winning streak?

 

[BonesJones]

They should have swept us in the regular season, and would have if Davis weren't injured in 2 games.

We had no answer to Davis. We aren't multidimensional because we are young and lack another star.

You don't take the 3 seed in the western conference with the 2nd youngest team in the league if you have a bad coach and no talent.

I don't generally expect the 2nd youngest team in the league to match up well with every team in the league. I'm kind of shocked that you do...

You're correct, we aren't multi-dimensional, which is why the 3 seed was a fluke based off healthiness.

I already said those narratives lack proper context, yet you continue to use them repeatedly.

 

[Natebishop3]

Good point. What move are blaming Olshey for not making?

How far back do you want to go?

I said we should have traded Aldridge when the rumors about him wanting out first came out.

More recently, I thought we should have dealt those three draft picks for a veteran player and not drafted a 19 year old rookie and another shitty big that will most likely be out of the league in a couple more years.

I don't blame him for not getting Melo or PG13. You can't force someone to waive their no trade clause and it's not Neil's fault that Pritchard hates Paul. But I think he's clinging to the Dame/CJ pairing and I don't think it has a future. I think he keeps adding young projects instead of looking for guys that can contribute right away.

 

[Phatguysrule]

You're correct, we aren't multi-dimensional, which is why the 3 seed was a fluke based off healthiness.

I already said those narratives lack proper context, yet you continue to use them repeatedly.

They are facts. Regardless of context. Younger players don't get injured as much... But young teams don't usually find the kind of success we have over the last few years... We have talent. We have quality coaching. Or we wouldn't be making the playoffs every year.

 

[Gronk Brady]

They are facts. Regardless of context. Younger players don't get injured as much... But young teams don't usually find the kind of success we have fur the last few years... We have talent. We have quality coaching. Or we wouldn't be making the playoffs every year.

Over half the teams in the league makes the playoffs every year... it’s pointless if you can’t win games in the playoffs

 

[Phatguysrule]

How far back do you want to go?

I said we should have traded Aldridge when the rumors about him wanting out first came out.

And I agree with you. And I said it as soon as Aldridge decided not to accept a contract extension. In fact, I said it right after he killed Houston and we beat them in the 1st round. He should have been traded.

This was certainly a mistake on Olshey's part. But I think it takes a year or two for GMs to realize how much of a draw Portland isn't.

More recently, I thought we should have dealt those three draft picks for a veteran player and not drafted a 19 year old rookie and another shitty big that will most likely be out of the league in a couple more years.

Sure, and that's what he wanted to do. But hardly any of those deals were made by anybody. It just wasn't in the cards this year. If there are no deals you just go get the best talent you can.

I think he did pretty well...

I don't blame him for not getting Melo or PG13. You can't force someone to waive their no trade clause and it's not Neil's fault that Pritchard hates Paul. But I think he's clinging to the Dame/CJ pairing and I don't think it has a future. I think he keeps adding young projects instead of looking for guys that can contribute right away.

I think he'll trade CJ if it will make us better, but I don't think those opportunities come up often.

 

[Phatguysrule]

Over half the teams in the league makes the playoffs every year... it’s pointless if you can’t win games in the playoffs

We've lost to arguably the best team in history the last few seasons, except this season when we ran into the team we had the most trouble with during the regular season.

No team in the league would have had success in those circumstances.

 

[BonesJones]

They are facts. Regardless of context. Younger players don't get injured as much... But young teams don't usually find the kind of success we have fur the last few years... We have talent. We have quality coaching. Or we wouldn't be making the playoffs every year.

Yeah facts that be spun in any direction by avoiding context.

We have far from quality coaching. I'm not even gonna get started on that. I'm gonna avoid this argument. Have a nice day.

 

[Gronk Brady]

We've lost to arguably the best team in history the last few seasons, except this season when we ran into the team we had the most trouble with during the regular season.

No team in the league would have had success in those circumstances.

I can’t wait to hear your excuse next season... there is always something right?