Pelton: Blazers Project As 2014 Lottery Team

[Nikolokolus]

Don't you think it's maybe a tad bit early to make that declaration? Can we please wait till the season gets rolling a bit to try and determine the Blazers fate.

I guess anything can happen, but when I look at this roster it doesn't scream, "deep playoff run!" I think that's all Maxiep is saying.

 

[magnifier661]

It assumes we're a top-four team in the West. Who do we beat to get there? OKC? SAS? MEM? LAC? You will likely face one of those teams on the road. Man, I just don't see it.

I'm willing to give up a year of making the playoffs to get another asset. However, I recognize my viewpoint is a minority one.

I can see us beating any of those teams in a 7 game series.

 

[Draco]

That sounds like the Blazers of the late 70s to late 80s. We were on the high side of mediocre, and only because we had a HoF coach. Even he couldn't push the wet noodle of a roster we had up the hill, and that roster had some great players. However, we needed more.

The hard truth is most likely we won’t win a championship regardless of our course. There are 30 teams and with long-term dynasties in the NBA the chance of a non contender building a team and winning is way less than one out of 30. Yes of course the goal should be to win the title but there should also be secondary realistic goals because only focusing on winning a title isn’t realistic. I had by far my most fun seasons as a Blazers fan when we went to the finals in the early 90’s or the WCF’s in 1999 and 2000. If we hadn’t had those seasons when I was in 3rd grade I’m not sure I would’ve become much of a Blazer fan at all.

At some point we will need a lucky break to contend. If we tore apart the team and were somehow lucky enough to draft an MVP candidate we would still need another lucky break of adding a stud to pair with that player. But as soon as you draft an MVP the team is not going to be a celler dweller and unlikely to get a top5 pick. So usually those teams with an MVP end up like Cleveland or New Oreleans.

If the team tries to build incrementally at some point they will need to get lucky and have a player far surpass expectations. If Lillard takes the next step to a superstar we’d be there. If we get lucky in a trade or deep in the draft and a guy becomes an all-star out of no where we’d be right there. I’d much rather take this latter road since the path is enjoyable to watch, failures are not as terrible, it is a more fulfilling way to root for a team long term, and the Blazers already have a number of borderline all-stars.

 

[HailBlazers]

The hard truth is most likely we won’t win a championship regardless of our course. There are 30 teams and with long-term dynasties in the NBA the chance of a non contender building a team and winning is way less than one out of 30. Yes of course the goal should be to win the title but there should also be secondary realistic goals because only focusing on winning a title isn’t realistic. I had by far my most fun seasons as a Blazers fan when we went to the finals in the early 90’s or the WCF’s in 1999 and 2000. If we hadn’t had those seasons when I was in 3rd grade I’m not sure I would’ve become much of a Blazer fan at all.

At some point we will need a lucky break to contend. If we tore apart the team and were somehow lucky enough to draft an MVP candidate we would still need another lucky break of adding a stud to pair with that player. But as soon as you draft an MVP the team is not going to be a celler dweller and unlikely to get a top5 pick. So usually those teams with an MVP end up like Cleveland or New Oreleans.

If the team tries to build incrementally at some point they will need to get lucky and have a player far surpass expectations. If Lillard takes the next step to a superstar we’d be there. If we get lucky in a trade or deep in the draft and a guy becomes an all-star out of no where we’d be right there. I’d much rather take this latter road since the path is enjoyable to watch, failures are not as terrible, it is a more fulfilling way to root for a team long term, and the Blazers already have a number of borderline all-stars.

Well said, repped.

 

[PtldPlatypus]

I guess anything can happen, but when I look at this roster it doesn't scream, "deep playoff run!" I think that's all Maxiep is saying.

Maybe not this year. But if they're good enough to make the playoffs this year, why can't they be good enough to win a series (or two) next year?

 

[RR7]

We're stuck in the middle, which is the worst place to be. We're not bad enough to get a great player in the draft and not good enough to get to the second round.

By the way, you build a winning team by acquiring very good to great players. However, you also need to stay bad long enough to restock a roster that was this depleted.

You need to stay bad long enough, by building through the draft, through the lotto. We have 4 lotto picks from the past 2 seasons on our team. So there you go. Say what you will about what you think each piece can be, but we just restocked with 4 recent draft picks, in other words, building through the draft.

As for being stuck in the middle, I think in order to be stuck somewhere, you have to be a team with very little upward mobility. A team like Dallas the past 2 or so seasons, where everyone has pretty much hit their peak, there's no real upside, and nowhere really to go. You're not stuck when you have one of the youngest rosters in the league. Being stuck would imply that Lillard, Robinson, CJ, Leonard, Batum have all reached their peak, and this is as good as theyll ever be. That seems a little foolish to me. So maybe we're a one and done this season, but that hardly means it's more of the same the following season as guys improve.

 

[PapaG]

We already got incredibly lucky and drafted Oden..... but it blew up in our face.

So what if the team tanks by trading LMA for scrubs and picks, and then drafts another 'can't miss' guy who busts either by poor play or injury? The problem this time would be that only Lillard would be 'elite', instead of having a Roy and LMA to make the team a playoff contender for a few years.

 

[RR7]

So what if the team tanks by trading LMA for scrubs and picks, and then drafts another 'can't miss' guy who busts either by poor play or injury?

in 2 years we trade Lillard for picks and try again?

 

[BlazerBeav]

If rookie C.J. McCollum contributes immediately and Thomas Robinson plays like he did in Las Vegas Summer League -- where he was a terror on the glass -- Portland will return to the playoffs after a one-year absence.


http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/9504710/early-look-western-conference


http://www.blazersedge.com/2013/7/24/4553590/pelton-blazers-project-as-2014-lottery-team

[/INDENT]

Seriously, how can I get paid to write poorly researched blather like this? A one-year absence? Oh how I do wish.

 

[BrianFromWA]

in 2 years we trade Lillard for picks and try again?

6 years, when he's at the same point in his ability to walk away for nothing as LMA.

 

[BlazerDuckSeahawkFan94]

I wonder if there is a trade out there that actually can make us better right away that's realistic for Aldridge.

I wonder if trading Aldridge to the Thunder for Ibaka, Jones III, and picks could make us better. Our defense would be tremendously better but then we would need Batum and McCollum to be HUGE studs.

 

[RR7]

6 years, when he's at the same point in his ability to walk away for nothing as LMA.

why wait? Offers will be MUCH better if a team can control him for 6 more years than just 2, obviously.

 

[BrianFromWA]

In terms of my "shocked if it happens" value (listed first means I'm most shocked)

1. LMA plays the next two full years here without signing an extension
2. LMA signs an extension before the 2015 trade deadline and plays here through 2017 or 2018
3. LMA is traded in a trade involving just us and one other team (whenever it happens)
4. LMA is traded in a 3-or-more team deal next summer
5. LMA is traded in a 3-or-more team deal before Opening Night

 

[BrianFromWA]

why wait? Offers will be MUCH better if a team can control him for 6 more years than just 2, obviously.

You have that partially right, but I think that if you have a piece on a rookie deal that you think will work out then the return is diminished. It's not MUCH better, because it's impossible to get a piece that's under much more team control, at even a relative talent level.

Now, if someone overpays for that 6 years of talent? It'd have to be an overpay, but if you're MUCH is actually that much, then it should be looked at.

 

[maxiep]

I can see us beating any of those teams in a 7 game series.

Man, I wish I could go full Mags. I love your optimism. I wish I could share it.

 

[magnifier661]

Man, I wish I could go full Mags. I love your optimism. I wish I could share it.

You should try it. It's much better than being a cranky old man that gets pissy at anyone that disagrees with him.

PS not referring you as this man

 

[maxiep]

You should try it. It's much better than being a cranky old man that gets pissy at anyone that disagrees with him.

PS not referring you as this man

I still have an emotional hangover from losing Roy and Oden to injury.

 

[Boob-No-More]

We're stuck in the middle, which is the worst place to be.

No, the worst place to be "stuck" is in last place year, after year, after year. Sucking is no guarantee of future success. How many DECADES did the Clippers suck before they FINALLY became relevant? Those of you who want to suck just for a chance at a high lottery pick may want to ask Clipper fans, Minnesota fans, etc. what it's like to be in the lottery year, after year, after year, after year and never get a player good enough to even get you into the playoffs. Do you really want to go through 3 or 4 sub-20 win seasons in a row just for a chance that they might be right back where they are now four years down the road?

We have a very solid, very young core. LaMarcus just turned 28, is an established all-star and is still improving - and he's our oldest player that matters. We have a LOT of very young talent that will continue to improve. We aren't "stuck" anywhere. We also have a lot of very tradeable assets on very reasonable, short term contracts. I can't believe people want to blow up our team, trader our best player, hit rock bottom and start over yet again. Let's see what this team can do, watch them grow and improve.

Making the playoffs this year would be a huge step in the right direction, and I believe we will. Even if we get swept in the first round, it will be a valuable learning experience for our young players. Remember that 54-win Roy/Oden team? They had HCA and were completely blown out in game 1 by a veteran Houston team. All young teams are shell shocked the first time they reach the post season. It's a necessary part of growth. Let's focus on making the playoffs this year, getting that post season experience the only way you can and then shoot for advancing to round two next season as our young players are a year older, a year wiser, and year more experienced and a year better.

BNM

 

[PapaG]

In terms of my "shocked if it happens" value (listed first means I'm most shocked)

1. LMA plays the next two full years here without signing an extension
2. LMA signs an extension before the 2015 trade deadline and plays here through 2017 or 2018
3. LMA is traded in a trade involving just us and one other team (whenever it happens)
4. LMA is traded in a 3-or-more team deal next summer
5. LMA is traded in a 3-or-more team deal before Opening Night

Thanks for sharing your thoughts. I'd be shocked if LMA is traded before the season, which won't happen. Other than that, I assume any trade made by Olshey is to bring in a player/players to improve the team at present. He wasn't hired to tear down the franchise and rebuild it for four years. That's why I have to laugh at the "trade LMA" posters like you who are convinced that he needs to be moved right now. It's not going to happen.

The Blazers already had their "rebuild". It was when Wallace and Camby were traded, and Oden was waived. That was it. There is no way that Paul Allen is going to want to watch a 25-win team for a few years by panicking and trading LMA for a role player like Greg Monroe and some draft picks.

 

[PapaG]

No, the worst place to be "stuck" is in last place year, after year, after year. Sucking is no guarantee of future success. How many DECADES did the Clippers suck before they FINALLY became relevant? Those of you who want to suck just for a chance at a high lottery pick may want to ask Clipper fans, Minnesota fans, etc. what it's like to be in the lottery year, after year, after year, after year and never get a player good enough to even get you into the playoffs. Do you really want to go through 3 or 4 sub-20 win seasons in a row just for a chance that they might be right back where they are now four years down the road?

We have a very solid, very young core. LaMarcus just turned 28, is an established all-star and is still improving - and he's our oldest player that matters. We have a LOT of very young talent that will continue to improve. We aren't "stuck" anywhere. We also have a lot of very tradeable assets on very reasonable, short term contracts. I can't believe people want to blow up our team, trader our best player, hit rock bottom and start over yet again. Let's see what this team can do, watch them grow and improve.

Making the playoffs this year would be a huge step in the right direction, and I believe we will. Even if we get swept in the first round, it will be a valuable learning experience for our young players. Remember that 54-win Roy/Oden team? They had HCA and were completely blown out in game 1 by a veteran Houston team. All young teams are shell shocked the first time they reach the post season. It's a necessary part of growth. Let's focus on making the playoffs this year, getting that post season experience the only way you can and then shoot for advancing to round two next season as our young players are a year older, a year wiser, and year more experienced and a year better.

BNM

We rarely agree on things, but I rep this 100% My thoughts are well-reflected in your post. I'll add that I think Lillard can be an MVP-level player, and if he's not, then whatever happens with LMA won't matter, anyhow.

 

[PtldPlatypus]

There is no way that Paul Allen is going to want to watch a 25-win team for a few years by panicking and trading LMA for a role player like Greg Monroe and some draft picks.

 

[e_blazer]

No, the worst place to be "stuck" is in last place year, after year, after year. Sucking is no guarantee of future success. How many DECADES did the Clippers suck before they FINALLY became relevant? Those of you who want to suck just for a chance at a high lottery pick may want to ask Clipper fans, Minnesota fans, etc. what it's like to be in the lottery year, after year, after year, after year and never get a player good enough to even get you into the playoffs. Do you really want to go through 3 or 4 sub-20 win seasons in a row just for a chance that they might be right back where they are now four years down the road?

We have a very solid, very young core. LaMarcus just turned 28, is an established all-star and is still improving - and he's our oldest player that matters. We have a LOT of very young talent that will continue to improve. We aren't "stuck" anywhere. We also have a lot of very tradeable assets on very reasonable, short term contracts. I can't believe people want to blow up our team, trader our best player, hit rock bottom and start over yet again. Let's see what this team can do, watch them grow and improve.

Making the playoffs this year would be a huge step in the right direction, and I believe we will. Even if we get swept in the first round, it will be a valuable learning experience for our young players. Remember that 54-win Roy/Oden team? They had HCA and were completely blown out in game 1 by a veteran Houston team. All young teams are shell shocked the first time they reach the post season. It's a necessary part of growth. Let's focus on making the playoffs this year, getting that post season experience the only way you can and then shoot for advancing to round two next season as our young players are a year older, a year wiser, and year more experienced and a year better.

BNM

Preach it, brother, preach it.

 

[jlprk]

The hard truth is most likely we won’t win a championship regardless of our course. There are 30 teams and with long-term dynasties in the NBA the chance of a non contender building a team and winning is way less than one out of 30. Yes of course the goal should be to win the title but there should also be secondary realistic goals because only focusing on winning a title isn’t realistic. I had by far my most fun seasons as a Blazers fan when we went to the finals in the early 90’s or the WCF’s in 1999 and 2000. If we hadn’t had those seasons when I was in 3rd grade I’m not sure I would’ve become much of a Blazer fan at all.

At some point we will need a lucky break to contend. If we tore apart the team and were somehow lucky enough to draft an MVP candidate we would still need another lucky break of adding a stud to pair with that player. But as soon as you draft an MVP the team is not going to be a celler dweller and unlikely to get a top5 pick. So usually those teams with an MVP end up like Cleveland or New Oreleans.

If the team tries to build incrementally at some point they will need to get lucky and have a player far surpass expectations. If Lillard takes the next step to a superstar we’d be there. If we get lucky in a trade or deep in the draft and a guy becomes an all-star out of no where we’d be right there. I’d much rather take this latter road since the path is enjoyable to watch, failures are not as terrible, it is a more fulfilling way to root for a team long term, and the Blazers already have a number of borderline all-stars.

Remember when life was easy because our GM was Bob Whitsitt? Never, ever again let some religious newspaper like the Oregonian destroy our team because a couple of its stars are black militants.

 

[Masbee]

No, the worst place to be "stuck" is in last place year, after year, after year. Sucking is no guarantee of future success. How many DECADES did the Clippers suck before they FINALLY became relevant? Those of you who want to suck just for a chance at a high lottery pick may want to ask Clipper fans, Minnesota fans, etc. what it's like to be in the lottery year, after year, after year, after year and never get a player good enough to even get you into the playoffs. Do you really want to go through 3 or 4 sub-20 win seasons in a row just for a chance that they might be right back where they are now four years down the road?

We have a very solid, very young core. LaMarcus just turned 28, is an established all-star and is still improving - and he's our oldest player that matters. We have a LOT of very young talent that will continue to improve. We aren't "stuck" anywhere. We also have a lot of very tradeable assets on very reasonable, short term contracts. I can't believe people want to blow up our team, trader our best player, hit rock bottom and start over yet again. Let's see what this team can do, watch them grow and improve.

Making the playoffs this year would be a huge step in the right direction, and I believe we will. Even if we get swept in the first round, it will be a valuable learning experience for our young players. Remember that 54-win Roy/Oden team? They had HCA and were completely blown out in game 1 by a veteran Houston team. All young teams are shell shocked the first time they reach the post season. It's a necessary part of growth. Let's focus on making the playoffs this year, getting that post season experience the only way you can and then shoot for advancing to round two next season as our young players are a year older, a year wiser, and year more experienced and a year better.

BNM

There is a problem with this post.

You say "we have a very solid....core. LaMarcus".

Stop right there.

All of us who are bemoaning being stuck in the mediocre middle, and those who would welcome a plan for getting out of that rut are basing our thoughts on the presumed fact that LaMarcus has gone to management and demanded either: the team make significant improvement to the roster very soon, or be traded.

The team has NOT made significant improvement to the roster. The bench is improved. We have a legit pivot to start instead of a converted PF, which may or may not turn out to be an improvement. This year we have a modest improvement. That's it.

I think this team has a decent shot at being better than last year (before the year-end tank). But, there is also a better than negligible chance the team has a tough season. They happen. We were mostly injury free last season. And this roster has little margin for error. A solid turn-out by most key players or the team has little chance to battle for that coveted 8th slot.

I say it is not a given like you do, but let us assume a "good" season where we get the 8th or 7th slot. What do we get? The chance to be first round cannon fodder for a real team.

You make the claim, that a season like that is a steppingstone for future improvement and success and then leap to presume that LaMarcus would be thrilled to hitch his wagon to the team is such instance?

Why? They only avenue left for the team to improve is the MLE and trades. No major overhaul of the roster would be forthcoming. Why do you think LaMarcus would suddenly forget about playing for teams like Chicago and Houston?

Your "plan" of building around the young talented roster we have (LaMarcus, Lillard, Batum) is shot to hell if LaMarcus walks because the team is just assuming that Robin Lopez is going to convince LaMarcus that Portland is the place to be. We would have little to no cap space, no high picks, and just Lillard and Batum to build around.

If that happens, the team will face a brutal, and difficult multi-year rebuild.

 

[Boob-No-More]

There is a problem with this post.

You say "we have a very solid....core. LaMarcus".

Stop right there.

All of us who are bemoaning being stuck in the mediocre middle, and those who would welcome a plan for getting out of that rut are basing our thoughts on the presumed fact that LaMarcus has gone to management and demanded either: the team make significant improvement to the roster very soon, or be traded.

Perhaps you're the one who should stop right there. You're basing you're entire argument on the "presumed" fact that Aldridge has "demanded" a trade if the roster doesn't get better very soon. Please provide a quote attributed to Aldridge where he demands such action. If you can't, you're presumption become an assumption on your part with no facts to back it up.

In fact, according to Chris Haynes, who actually spoke with Aldridge, he hasn't even requested a trade, let alone demanded one:

Aldridge told CSNNW.com that he did not request a trade and we confirmed that as being fact. However, he's not opposed to one and he has no issue with returning if that be the case, a source close to All-Star revealed to CSNNW.com.

Yeah, I know the sky is falling. Everyone EXCEPT our best player is insisting he has demanded a trade.

The team has NOT made significant improvement to the roster. The bench is improved. We have a legit pivot to start instead of a converted PF, which may or may not turn out to be an improvement. This year we have a modest improvement. That's it.

I disagree strongly. Our two biggest weaknesses last year were our historically bad bench and lack of interior defense, Both of those weaknesses have been addressed.

Aldridge did request the Blazers acquire a legitimate NBA starting center who could bang in the paint for 20 - 25 minutes a game so Aldridge wouldn't have to constantly guard and be guarded by the other team's biggest player. They went out and got Robin Lopez who started all 82 games last season and is a legitimate 7-foot NBA starting center. Aldridge will now get to play next to someone even bigger than he is, and not a 6'9" power forward who doesn't play a lick of defense. That alone is a big improvement in both what Aldridge requested and what the team needs.

We added Thomas Robinson, Dorell Wright, Earl Watson and C.J. McCollum to the bench in place of Nolan Smith, Luke Babbitt, Jared Jefferies, Ronnie Price and 27 games of Eric Maynor (most of which happened after the Blazers were tanking).

You're lack of improvement scenario also neglects to include the improvement of our young players. Do you really believe ALL of LaMarcus Aldridge, Nic Batum, Wesley Matthews and Damian Lillard have reached their absolute peak and that NONE of them will be better this year. What about the rest of the bench? Was last season REALLY a career year for Meyers Leonard, Victor Claver, Joel Freeland and Will Barton, or will all of them be WORSE (or no better) than their rookie year this season?

I say it is not a given like you do, but let us assume a "good" season where we get the 8th or 7th slot. What do we get? The chance to be first round cannon fodder for a real team.

What we get is valuable post season experience for our young players. You have to MAKE the playoffs before you can hope to advance. Making the playoffs is progress and a step in the right direction.

Your "plan" of building around the young talented roster we have (LaMarcus, Lillard, Batum) is shot to hell if LaMarcus walks because the team is just assuming that Robin Lopez is going to convince LaMarcus that Portland is the place to be. We would have little to no cap space, no high picks, and just Lillard and Batum to build around.

No, my plan "assumes" that we addressed our biggest weaknesses (worst bench in the 67 year history of the NBA and complete lack of interior defense because we we playing a 6'9" power forward out of position at center), added some better veterans and better young players to our bench. It also assumes that not all of our players have peaked and some of them, 6 who were rookies last year, actually have room to improve. Better bench, legitimate starting center who plays defense, organic improvement of our young players and no tanking = a MUCH better record than last season.

But my real plan is to actually let this team play at least half a season together before panicking and trading our best player (who can't actually "walk" until after two more seasons). Seriously, getting deliberately worse to get better is a long and painful process. Hoping to luck out in the NBA lottery (not just getting a high pick, but then getting lucky that the guy you pick is a future first ballot Hall of Famer) isn't quite as bad as relying on winning the PowerBall jackpot as a retirement plan, but it's still a long shot.

So, rather than blow this team up before they play a single game together, I advocate letting them play some games and seeing how they jell together as a team, how much LaMarcus benefits from playing next to a legitimate NBA center, how much better our bench is and how much our young guys have improved before we blow the whole thing up and start over.

If we take the Chicken Little approach and trade Aldridge now, aren't we just dooming ourselves to at least four more years of lottery picks? And if we are, won't it then be Lillard's turn to demand the trade because he's tired of all the losing? Sounds a bit like lather, rinse, repeat to me. Deliberately sucking in the hope you get lucky only guarantees one thing - that you will suck for the immediate future. I'm tired of the losing, I'm tired of the only thing to look forward to in May is the NBA draft lottery. I want to root for a team that wins more games than it loses and I want to go to a playoff game and cheer for that team, regardless of the outcome. I don't want the new Blazers to be the old Clippers. I don't want to sacrifice wins now in the hope that after 3 or 4 more years of sucking we MIGHT be good enough to be right back where we are now.

BNM

 

[Masbee]

Perhaps you're the one who should stop right there. You're basing you're entire argument on the "presumed" fact that Aldridge has "demanded" a trade if the roster doesn't get better very soon. Please provide a quote attributed to Aldridge where he demands such action. If you can't, you're presumption become an assumption on your part with no facts to back it up.

That is why it is called speculation and opinion - all this board is really about.

No different than your speculation regarding the quality of the roster you are making claims about. Don't know why you are rudely calling me out.

 

[Boob-No-More]

That is why it is called speculation and opinion - all this board is really about.

No different than your speculation regarding the quality of the roster you are making claims about. Don't know why you are rudely calling me out.

Perhaps because you did the EXACT same thing. You called me out and told me there was a problem with my post and to "Stop right there" - as if your speculation and opinion is somehow more valid than mine. Your entire argument is based on the presumption that LaMarcus is dissatisfied with the team's moves and has demanded a trade. You said so yourself. I provided a quote that Aldridge hasn't even requested a trade, let alone demanded one. I wasn't trying to be rude, just pointing out what I perceive as flaws in your reasoning. You're certainly entitled to your opinion and I'm entitled to disagree. That's how this works.

BNM

 

[BlazerWookee]

I agree, but we won't get a draft pick any other way with our current roster. Unless we trade for one.

Eff draft picks. Play to win, let the ping-pong balls fall where they may.

 

[Draco]

Eff draft picks. Play to win, let the ping-pong balls fall where they may.

No doubt. Even if the team spends years sucking and finally gets lucky enough for a once in a decade prospect and an all-star they could get injured and unable to finish their rookie contracts.

I’d rather not intentionally suck for years. There are undiscovered all-stars available in trades, free agency and the back half of the draft every season. Go get a couple of those. Its not going to be easy, but no road to contending is.

 

[maxiep]

For the record, I'm not proposing that we play to lose, but that we put player development over victories this upcoming year. If it means we lose more games than we would otherwise, so be it. Put another way, I'd rather win 5-10 fewer games and have McCollum develop his game which will benefit us in future years than have Wes play heavy minutes at the expense of McCollum's development.