Portland can realistically be a contender next year

[mook]

I think so. And not with any kind of miracle trade where we swap Ruffin for LeBron. I mean with a couple of smart moves to upgrade us at starting PG and SF.

Note: this question isn't, "Will Portland win a title next year?" It's "Can it realistically be a contender next year."

By "contender," I mean one of the top 4 or so teams that people will peg as having a real shot at winning it all, much like the Spurs, Celtics, Cavs, Lakers and maybe Nuggets were for major parts of this season.

Poll is public.

 

[PtldPlatypus]

Unquestionably. We were a top-10 team all year, and in the top-5 in several power rankings nearing the end of the year. Even if we were to just stand pat, I'm quite certain we would improve over this year's performance. There is not a doubt in my mind that we can and should be a title contender next year.

 

[EPIC FAIL GILDERHUS]

Heck yeah, we were tied for the #2 spot in the West this year with 4 rookies and guys that would normally be backups starting(Blake and Batum), and if we could get a veteran at PG then we could sure make a run...

 

[mook]

Unquestionably. We were a top-10 team all year, and in the top-5 in several power rankings nearing the end of the year. Even if we were to just stand pat, I'm quite certain we would improve over this year's performance. There is not a doubt in my mind that we can and should be a title contender next year.

I disagree here. I'm coming back down to earth on Oden, and all else being equal I just don't see him developing enough in one year to make up for all the holes we have at PG and SF.

Roy, Aldridge and Fernandez should continue to progress, but I just don't see the current team as constructed winning much more than 55 games. Maybe everything really starts clicking in the final few months like it did with Denver this year, and pushes us into that category. But I just don't think so.

 

[Nikolokolus]

I said 'yes, with proper realistic moves" (although I'm not sure what is "proper" or "realisitic"). If this team can somehow add a hard nosed backup power forward, a difference maker at the point guard and/or a three who can give you some consistent production at both ends of the court (maybe Batum, maybe Webster?) then yes I think they can "contend" -- insofar as they are able to maybe get past the first or second round and be a threat to get into the Western Conference Finals.

Realistically I think "true contention" hinges on Greg's development as a 30+ minute a night guy with a legitimate back to the basket game ... I'm not so sure we're going to see that next year.

 

[Mediocre Man]

No. Plain and simple.

I think top 10 team again though barring injury

 

[Minstrel]

I posted this in another thread, but it's relevant here, so no point just repeating myself in different words:

This year, Portland was consistently #2 in point differential in the West, behind only the Lakers. Their record was no mirage, they were legitimately excellent.

I think perceptions are being skewed by their "poor" performance in the playoffs. They were clearly unprepared for playoff intensity and got bombed at home in game 1. Had that not happened, they'd have had a chance to win the series against a tough Houston team (a Houston team that won 2 of 4 games against LA without Yao). I think Portland underperformed in the playoffs, not overperformed during the season.

I think Portland was a legitimate 54 win team, and they should see a lot of net improvement from Oden, Aldridge, Batum, Rudy and Bayless. I don't know if that'll push them up to 60 wins (every marginal win at this point is difficult), but I think they'll be somewhere in the 55-60 win range and a much tougher out in the playoffs.

This is without moves from Pritchard. I do hope he makes a good, significant move (because he has resources to use, so he should maximize those), but without knowing what he'll do I can't factor that in.

To add to that, being in the 55-60 win range with more consistent play and better playoff poise would make them a contender. Not the top contender, but a team with a legitimate chance, if things went well, to win it all.

 

[Wheels]

I posted this in another thread, but it's relevant here, so no point just repeating myself in different words:

This year, Portland was consistently #2 in point differential in the West, behind only the Lakers. Their record was no mirage, they were legitimately excellent.

I think perceptions are being skewed by their "poor" performance in the playoffs. They were clearly unprepared for playoff intensity and got bombed at home in game 1. Had that not happened, they'd have had a chance to win the series against a tough Houston team (a Houston team that won 2 of 4 games against LA without Yao). I think Portland underperformed in the playoffs, not overperformed during the season.

I think Portland was a legitimate 54 win team, and they should see a lot of net improvement from Oden, Aldridge, Batum, Rudy and Bayless. I don't know if that'll push them up to 60 wins (every marginal win at this point is difficult), but I think they'll be somewhere in the 55-60 win range and a much tougher out in the playoffs.

This is without moves from Pritchard. I do hope he makes a good, significant move (because he has resources to use, so he should maximize those), but without knowing what he'll do I can't factor that in.

To add to that, being in the 55-60 win range with more consistent play and better playoff poise would make them a contender. Not the top contender, but a team with a legitimate chance, if things went well, to win it all.

damm you and your using logic!

 

[bbwSwish]

Top 10 team? Yes.

Better than the Lakers, Cavaliers, Magic, Nuggets, Celtics, and maybe Mavericks? No.

 

[Wheels]

Top 10 team? Yes.

Better than the Lakers, Cavaliers, Magic, Nuggets, Celtics, and maybe Mavericks? No.

recordwise they were as good as the Nuggets this year. Mavericks wont get better.. Blazers will.

 

[Hank The Dwarf]

its all in how you look at it..

to me there were 4 Title Contenders this year - Lakers, Nuggets, Cavs and Celtics.

When KG got hurt - that list shortened to 3 teams.

I don't see the Blazers being a real threat to win it all next year under any circumstances.

They could make a push to the WCF and that would be great - but that don't make you a legit contender.

 

[BlazerBeav]

Top 10 team? Yes.

Better than the Lakers, Cavaliers, Magic, Nuggets, Celtics, and maybe Mavericks? No.

Please. The Lakers and Cavaliers were consistently better, but none of the other teams you mentioned were. The Magic benefitted from playing in the weak eastern conference and only managed a split with Portland thanks to a prayer at the buzzer. The Mavericks were behind the Blazers all season and aren't getting any younger. The Nuggets were dead-even with Portland, record wise and head-to-head. Boston, well, we all knew they were overhyped and they're another team that isn't getting any younger.

 

[huevonkiller]

I think the Blazers will be contenders as is, they've got room for at least some of those players to grow, and they don't appear to have any glaring weaknesses. They have the ability to make some moves but as long as they can handle the extensions for their core that should be enough.

 

[BlazerWookee]

The Blazers would improve five to ten games next season WITHOUT A SINGLE PERSONNEL CHANGE INVOLVING ROTATION PLAYERS.

 

[hasoos]

I think the Blazers will be contenders as is, they've got room for at least some of those players to grow, and they don't appear to have any glaring weaknesses. They have the ability to make some moves but as long as they can handle the extensions for their core that should be enough.

They don't have any glaring weaknesses? The team hasn't had a decent PG on the team since Greg Anthony was here. That was almost a decade ago.

 

[oldmangrouch]

Can the team be a competitor with a few astute trades? Certainly. Will those trades happen? Who the heck knows!

Can we compete without making changes?

What happened in the play-offs wasn't some fluke.

 

[Nikolokolus]

The Blazers would improve five to ten games next season WITHOUT A SINGLE PERSONNEL CHANGE INVOLVING ROTATION PLAYERS.

No. 40ish to 50ish is probably an order of magnitude easier to get to then 50ish to 60

 

[andalusian]

Yes - but we need to solve our backup PG problem - either with an upgrade from within with JB replacing Sergio and solving our problem there or with getting another PG starter and slotting Blake into the backup spot.

I think that if we can get Miller for the cap and a 3-4 years contract - we should. If we can steal Sessions from the Bucks and let him and JB duke it out behind Blake - again.

And - we need someone better than Frye as our 4th big man - be it Freeland or via the draft/trade/FA - does not matter - but these are the two issues that really stand in our way.

As for Oden not improving enough - I would be shocked if he would not improve next year - we do not even need him to be more skilled offensively - we just need him to be on the court longer. If Oden can stay on the court 32 MPG next year vs. the 22 he did this year - with the same output - it will be a huge upgrade in our bigs - as much as we love Joel we have to understand that he is not the impact player Oden is. We won 60% of the time Oden was on the floor. We won 49% of the time Joel was. If all we can do is get 10 more minutes per game of the 60% win guy over the 49% win guy - we will upgrade a lot. If Oden actually also improves his skill and offensive prowess - look out.

 

[Ed O]

Will they contend? I think so. Will they be perceived as contenders? Perhaps not.

I think that, even now, the only teams that are clearly superior to the Blazers are the Lakers, Cavs and Celtics (when all of the C's are healthy).

The Blazers are on par, to me, with several teams, including the Magic and Nuggets and Rockets... and I don't anticipate Portland being worse next year nor those teams being significantly better.

Ed O.

 

[Masbee]

Top 10 team? Yes.

Better than the Lakers, Cavaliers, Magic, Nuggets, Celtics, and maybe Mavericks? No.

Mavericks?

The Blazers would have beat the Mavs this year in a 7 game series.

We also match up well against the Lakers and would have given them a run for their money, especially the way they have been flat so far in the playoffs.

Celtics, w/o Garnett, we win that series too.

 

[anonymous gambler]

Next year, the only teams I see being definitely better than us are Boston, Orlando and the Lakers. I think, even without additions, we'll improve enough to be the 4th or 5th best team.

 

[Run BJM]

I don't see the Blazers being a real threat to win it all next year under any circumstances.

In short, I agree.

The Blazers do have the capacity to improve a lot though. They did really well with a below-average starting PG and below average starting SF. Batum's gonna get better. They will in all likelihood improve at least one of those positions. Depending on Oden, Bayless, Fernandez, and Batum's production they could be really good. They'll likely come back better next season as I expect at least on fairly decent trade/FA acquisition to shore up a starting spot in addition to internal development. But I still don't see them being up there with LAL, Cleveland, Boston.

I think this year's playoffs will have been a good building block for them but they need more PO experience than that. I think they could definitely advance in the playoffs next season but they'll suffer bitter defeat once more (probably a few more seasons actually) but it'll help them in the long run.

Its not a coincidence that pretty much all of the recent NBA champs have been teams that are among the oldest in the league. Boston, Detroit, SA, LAL w/ Shaq and co., the Heat, etc. etc. You don't just build an uber talented team and expect them to pull out a championship in a few seasons. It takes a lot of experience and players who've been in a lot of big games.

 

[MARIS61]

As constructed we could have won this year, or at least contended.

Whoever coaches next year needs to get on board with KP's uptempo wishes and not abandon it in the playoffs.

 

[Toko]

No. In 2-3 years though, I think so.

 

[Nikolokolus]

As constructed we could have won this year, or at least contended.

Whoever coaches next year needs to get on board with KP's uptempo wishes and not abandon it in the playoffs.

You can't blame the soup on the cook when the buyer brought you substandard ingredients.

 

[huevonkiller]

They don't have any glaring weaknesses? The team hasn't had a decent PG on the team since Greg Anthony was here. That was almost a decade ago.

When you're used to Derek Fisher like I am, and you have such a solid cast aside from him I don't think that should keep you from being a major contender. And that isn't a "glaring" weakness, one that will prevent you from title contention in other words.

 

[DaRizzle]

Not as currently constructed...ask me again before the preseason starts

 

[Samuel]

what does "proper, realistic" even mean?

 

[DaRizzle]

what does "proper, realistic" even mean?

Read the OP...