Portland needs to add a go-to player

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in
kjironman1 said:
Sometimes i question the amount of common sense people put into their posts.
I don't have to research a damn thing. I watch the games. LMA is an impact player and yes the Spurs "GO TO" him quite a bit. Yes he does defer to Leonard as he also does Parker and Duncan, but as i said that has a whole lot to do with the people around him.
Try watching the next game and see who gets the first touch? 9 times out of 10 it is LaMarcus Aldridge. It's called the Eye test and people who rely on what they actually see have a tendency to be a little more accurate in my book.
Click to expand...

I can assure you I've watched a great deal of basketball this year of all teams, scouting them.

So now an 'impact' player and a go-player are the same thing?

Not true. When the game is on the line, who did the Spurs 'go to'?

Kawhi Leonard, because he is the go to guy - as their team readily admits, Mr. Eye Test.

LMA ain't a G2G and it's ok. Not everyone has that skillset. Very few post players due. They can't dribble to get their own shot and rely on others to get them the ball in their spots.

What's the saying - you can't shove a square peg in a round hole? That's what you do with LMA as your go to guy. That's why we never won (well, among many other things.)
 
ThugginPaulyGAllen said:
I can assure you I've watched a great deal of basketball this year of all teams, scouting them.

So now an 'impact' player and a go-player are the same thing?

Not true. When the game is on the line, who did the Spurs 'go to'?

Kawhi Leonard, because he is the go to guy - as their team readily admits, Mr. Eye Test.

LMA ain't a G2G and it's ok. Not everyone has that skillset. Very few post players due. They can't dribble to get their own shot and rely on others to get them the ball in their spots.

What's the saying - you can't shove a square peg in a round hole? That's what you do with LMA as your go to guy. That's why we never won (well, among many other things.)
Click to expand...

If that is the true sense of the word then there are only about 10-15 go to guys in the league and not even enough for one for every team.

I think the argument KJ and I are making, is each team has a go to guy. Whether he is a TRUE NBA go to go or not is irrelevant because said team only has X players and none of them are NBA go to guys. But the team still has a go to guy. Every team does. Whether they fit the true sense of the definition or not. Whether we were trying to put a square peg into a round hole or not, he was still our go to player.
You may be right about his situation with the Spurs now, but yes. LMA was our go to player.

There are many players in the league that don't fit this NBA "go to" definition, but are still their respective team's "go to" player.
 
ThugginPaulyGAllen said:
I can assure you I've watched a great deal of basketball this year of all teams, scouting them.

So now an 'impact' player and a go-player are the same thing?

Not true. When the game is on the line, who did the Spurs 'go to'?

Kawhi Leonard, because he is the go to guy - as their team readily admits, Mr. Eye Test.

LMA ain't a G2G and it's ok. Not everyone has that skillset. Very few post players due. They can't dribble to get their own shot and rely on others to get them the ball in their spots.

What's the saying - you can't shove a square peg in a round hole? That's what you do with LMA as your go to guy. That's why we never won (well, among many other things.)
Click to expand...
You seem to forget something....You are talking about the San Antonio Spurs. The Spurs have a second unit that would make the playoffs. Did you watch the game last night? I'm betting not. In the last 6 mins of the game LMA had 6 points 3 rebounds and a blocked shot. He got 4 of his points at the free throw line because the Spurs were running their offense through him and he drew the foul. He also commanded the double over and over again all night which he passed out of and created good shots for the offense. This happened again and again just like he used to do when he played here. If you do not double Aldridge he will burn you. Simple as that!
Now LMA got a double with 16 and 10 with a couple blocks and assists. Led the team in rebounding but of course you understand the entire Spurs team rebounds so that does not happen all the time. Leonard did if fact lead the team in scoring with 32 and was a huge factor in this and every game they play. Blocks, steals, rebounds, assists. Leonard is a great player no question. No body is taking anything away from him. The biggest point is so is Diaw/Duncan/ Parker/West/Green/Ginobili as well as LaMarcus Aldridge. Last night at the end of the game when the Spurs were behind they went to LaMarcus Aldridge over and over again. I don't care what you think a "Go To Guy" or an "Impact Guy" is. Last night when the game was on the line Greg Popovich went to LaMarcus Aldridge. Sorry but in this instance i'm taking exactly what i see and calling it Truth!
 
Orion Bailey said:
If that is the true sense of the word then there are only about 10-15 go to guys in the league and not even enough for one for every team.

I think the argument KJ and I are making, is each team has a go to guy. Whether he is a TRUE NBA go to go or not is irrelevant because said team only has X players and none of them are NBA go to guys. But the team still has a go to guy. Every team does. Whether they fit the true sense of the definition or not. Whether we were trying to put a square peg into a round hole or not, he was still our go to player.
You may be right about his situation with the Spurs now, but yes. LMA was our go to player.

There are many players in the league that don't fit this NBA "go to" definition, but are still their respective team's "go to" player.
Click to expand...
Exactly! Who is the Blazers "Go To Guy"? Lillard? CJ? would those players be the "Go To Guy" on the Thunder? Spurs? Warriors? Does that make then Not a "Go To Guy" because they would not be the GO TO GUY on the Cavaliers? This dude is whack thinking Aldridge is anything less?
I understand People don't like the decision he made but in the end Aldridge will not only get a championship or two but my bet is he will eventually end up in the HOF. Perennial All-Star and his numbers will command it. You add Championships and his probability rating will go up further. Right now he sits at 24 among active players and that is without a championship. Not to mention he sat his first 7 years here watching player after player get injured or quit on him.
http://www.basketball-reference.com/leaders/hof_prob.html
 
I think I mis-titled this thread. I don't necessarily think Portland needs a go-to player, but they need someone who is at least as good as Lillard and McCollum. Who can score as well as them and hopefully play better defense.
 
UKRAINEFAN said:
I think I mis-titled this thread. I don't necessarily think Portland needs a go-to player, but they need someone who is at least as good as Lillard and McCollum. Who can score as well as them and hopefully play better defense.
Click to expand...
You did just fine. Most everyone knows exactly what you meant. And whats more you are absolutely correct. This team does need another "Go To" or "Impact" player. Whatever you want to call it. This summer should tell us a lot about where they will be going.
 
UKRAINEFAN said:
I think I mis-titled this thread. I don't necessarily think Portland needs a go-to player, but they need someone who is at least as good as Lillard and McCollum. Who can score as well as them and hopefully play better defense.
Click to expand...
OK, OK. I think what I am really saying (and I think this is what Olshey is thinking also) is that we cannot just add more pieces, even starting material pieces. Golden State can do that, build around Curry and Thompson. But Lillard and McCollum are not as good as Curry and Thompson, especially on defense. We actually need to add someone better than either of those. Olshey did it once with Chris Paul and is probably hoping to do it again. Considering that, I would have my doubts about him adding a guy like Horford, because he is not asset that could be traded to a team willing to rebuild and he is not a great enough player to make us a title contender. The other question is, will there ever again be a situation where a dominant player like CP gets traded? I really have my doubts. And I really have my doubts about us having a good enough talent nucleus to be able to sign a free agent like Durant. Other than CP, all the dominant players in the league have been drafted, haven't they? I'm talking about in the last ten years. Is there someone I am missing? (I didn't really start this post being pessimistic, but I think I have talked myself into it.)
 
UKRAINEFAN said:
OK, OK. I think what I am really saying (and I think this is what Olshey is thinking also) is that we cannot just add more pieces, even starting material pieces. Golden State can do that, build around Curry and Thompson. But Lillard and McCollum are not as good as Curry and Thompson, especially on defense. We actually need to add someone better than either of those.
Click to expand...

I agree. Lillard is a good 3rd fiddle on a championship team, but we need to add 2 better players than him. Where have I heard this before?
 
Lamarcus is a go to player....when asked where he'd sign he said he was going to San Antonio...technically we could call him a went to player I guess
 
jlprk said:
I agree. Lillard is a good 3rd fiddle on a championship team, but we need to add 2 better players than him. Where have I heard this before?
Click to expand...

If we need a new Batman and Robin, does that make Dame Batgirl or Alfred?
 
jlprk said:
I agree. Lillard is a good 3rd fiddle on a championship team, but we need to add 2 better players than him. Where have I heard this before?
Click to expand...
Well, if it was you who said that once, I am surprised i don't remember it, because that is quite a bold statement. I seem to be implying that Lillard should be a 2nd fiddle, but you go one step further, calling him a third fiddle! This could be one of the most controversial statements ever made on this board!
 
UKRAINEFAN said:
Well, if it was you who said that once, I am surprised i don't remember it, because that is quite a bold statement. I seem to be implying that Lillard should be a 2nd fiddle, but you go one step further, calling him a third fiddle! This could be one of the most controversial statements ever made on this board!
Click to expand...

I believe it. Lillard is a Kyrie Irving, not a Chris Paul.
 
I'm at Denny's right now to get my paycheck. Where are you, at the golf course?
 
I've made 8 posts today so I'm here to get my $15.92.
 
I think Dame is good as our second man. We need a dominate post who is our first go to. Dame will be our secondary. Then we need a bench player as good as CJ. If we can do that somehow without giving up any of our players who get regular minutes, we are a contender.

Go balls out this off season to sign Derozan, knowing he is coming off the bench as our 6th man and will be a perennial contender for the award getting 30+ minutes. . Let Crabbe walk. Resign Meyers, IF the price is right. Resign Hendo, sold by Dame on the big picture. Save the rest of our money and enter next season with the goal of eventually getting DMC either at the trade deadline this year or in the off season. Both of these players have shown good chemistry with Dame when not in game mode. I think we can sign Derozan with Dame recruiting him with this long term plan and all that is left is finding the right package to get DMC.

So we enter next season looking like this...

Dame/Roberts
CJ/Derozan/Hendo
Harkless/Derozan/Hendo
Aminu/Vonleh/Harkless
Plums/Davis/Vonleh

End of bench would still be Alexander/PatC/Montero

Then near the trade deadline or following offseason, we go balls out for DMC. I think if they continue to fail, we can get him for Kaman/Plums/Hendo.

Lineup would then look like this:

Dame/Robert/PatC
CJ/Derozan/Montero
Aminu/Derozan/Harkless
Harkless/Leonard/Alexander
DMC/Davis/Leonard

Fill in the 13-15 with some young unknowns that NO is sooo good at finding.


Is that a contender? Depending on how players develop, some players may swap minutes/spots on that lineup. I think that is pretty versatile. Able to play small ball, big ball, running offense. half court offense. Would be solid defensively I think?


http://espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Reep
SI Roundtable: Who wins MIP?
2
Replies
40
Views
2K
Orion Bailey
Orion Bailey
e_blazer
Blazers at #11 in SI Power Rankings
Replies
21
Views
1K
Natebishop3
Natebishop3
e_blazer
SI Article on the Blazers
Replies
1
Views
230
CupWizier
CupWizier
KingSpeed
Damian Lillard, the NBA's Hottest Player
2 3
Replies
62
Views
4K
KeepOnRollin
KeepOnRollin
SlyPokerDog
The inside story of how Damian Lillard became the Blazers’ franchise player
2
Replies
38
Views
2K
dviss1
dviss1

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Back
Top