Quick: Olshey admits mistake by not acquiring any NBA players for bench

[BlazerBeav]

http://www.oregonlive.com/blazers/i...sider_gm_neil_olshey_wishes_he_would_hav.html

 

[Haakzilla]

...I was thinking this very same thing:

"To not throw the baby out with the bath water because of a real successful first half of the season,’’ Olshey said.

 

[Mediocre Man]

It wasn't a mistake at all

 

[Nikolokolus]

After missing on Hibbert, I thought rounding out the bench with nobodies and "never-wases" was exactly the right thing to do moving forward. He needed a chance to evaluate this roster up close and personal and tying yourself down with a bunch of cap constraining middling contracts is not where you want to be when you are in evaluation mode.

If the goal is just to get to the playoffs, then yes Olshey fucked up. If the goal is to position yourself for a possible chance at a title then Olshey at least has taken the first baby steps.

EDIT: the thread title is a little bit misleading. Olshey doesn't really admit to making a mistake with his spending, just his underestimation of the starters.

 

[julius]

He misjudged on Hibbert (IMHO) and now admitted he misjudged on the talent on the team...what exactly did he do so great with the Blazers?

You really can't credit him for the draft either

 

[ABM]

...what exactly did he do so great with the Blazers?

What is squat? He ain't done it.

 

[BBert]

Olshey's PR job at the moment is to placate the masses until the off season when he can look for ways to improve the team beyond a few meaningless immediate wins. We fans want to win every game. His job is to make good long-term (which in the NBA is what 4 years?) decisions for the health of the franchise.

To put it in a way you guys might understand: Most fans would spend every dime they have today on the lap dance in front of them. I wiser man would forego a lap dance today, and save up for a happy ending tomorrow.

And I am quite happy how last year's draft turned out.

 

[Boob-No-More]

Man, people on this board are harsh and fickle.

Yeah, our bench sucks big time. We knew it would coming into the season. We have FIVE rookies (and Nolan Smith) on our roster and most on this board, and most "experts" in the media, predicted the Blazers would be damn lucky to win 30 games this season. And now, Olshey is being "blamed" for this team winning more games than expected. That's bullshit.

What has he done?

He played David Kahn like a fiddle on the Nicolas Batum situation. While many here thought we overpaid to keep Batum, turns out Olshey got us a bargain - and one whose cost goes DOWN the next three seasons. And remember, Olshey did this with one hand tied behind his back because his predecessor (the same one who also drafted Nolan Smith) chose not to extend Batum and left him as a restricted free agent. Big win for Olshey.

He drafted Damian Lillard, the best rookie PG in Blazers history and the best rookie PG in the NBA since Chris Paul (who was passed over in favor of Martell Webster by another of Olshey's predecessors). Not sure why he doesn't deserve credit for that. Others may have recommended Lillard, but ultimately, it was Olshey's job on the line when he took a chance on a kid from a small school in a weak conference with a high lottery pick. Big win for Olshey.

He resigned J.J. Hickson and he got him cheap. Yeah, I know that in spite of his impressive individual stats and being a double:double machine, Hickson "barely makes the team better when he's on the floor". Yeah, well without him, we'd be stuck with a raw, injured rookie, another rookie and Jared Jefferies splitting minutes at center. If you read the linked article, you'd know that during the 2:37 last night when Joel Freeland replaced Hickson, the Bucks went on a 17-0 run. That's right, Freeland was -17 in just over two and a half minutes. Imagine how bad the team would be if Joel Freeland was our starting center for the entire season. So, yeah Hickson barely makes the team better, but without him the team would be a LOT worse. The fact that he holds his own, while playing out of position, against other centers is a GOOD thing, not a bad thing. After missing out on Roy Hibbert, resigning Hickson, and getting him cheap was the right move. And what else was he supposed to do with Hibbert? He was prepared to offer him the max allowable, but Indiana could, and did, offer him more. Win Olshey.

In spite of the weak bench and a rookie PG, this team has won enough games and shown enough potential to keep LaMarcus Aldridge happy in Portland. We no longer hear rumblings about Aldridge being unhappy, about his prime being wasted, or demanding a trade before his contract is up. Win Olshey.

While landing Sasha Pavlovic and Jared Jefferies wasn't a big deal, in the process Olshey saved the team money, improved future flexibility and acquired additional assets. Not a huge win, but still a win for Olshey.

So, all you fickle fucks that thought this team would be lucky to win 30 games, what more exactly should Olshey have done? What should he have done (that was actually feasible) that would make the team better now without mortgaging the future for a one and done trip to the first round?

And, last I checked the last team Olshey assembled is doing pretty damn good. You know, the team from Los Angeles that's 32-9 and in first place, not the other one that's 5 games under .500 in spite of having four future Hall of Famers on the roster. Before giving up on Olshey and his vision, we may just want to give him more than half a season at the helm. The team is already better than expected, and he will have a lot more flexibility to make moves this coming summer. I think Olshey has done great so far, but the real test is how well this team performs next season and the three of four after that.

BNM

 

[Sinobas]

I can't believe Joel Freeland still has 2yrs/6mil left on a guaranteed contract. We should look to package him with Hickson for an expiring contract and a decent backup PG. Then use our cap space on Pekovic.

 

[julius]

Man, people on this board are harsh and fickle.

What has he done?

He drafted Damian Lillard, the best rookie PG in Blazers history and the best rookie PG in the NBA since Chris Paul (who was passed over in favor of Martell Webster by another of Olshey's predecessors). Not sure why he doesn't deserve credit for that. Others may have recommended Lillard, but ultimately, it was Olshey's job on the line when he took a chance on a kid from a small school in a weak conference with a high lottery pick. Big win for Olshey.

Not so sure he had as much to do with drafting Lillard as you think. He was hired on the 4th, and the draft was the 28th. I'm not sure he really had as much to do with that draft, in just over 3 weeks, as to be a deciding factor.

And what else was he supposed to do with Hibbert? He was prepared to offer him the max allowable, but Indiana could, and did, offer him more. Win Olshey.

Yes, he 'conned' them into resigning Hibbert, but he also was willing to pay him that much money. And Hibbert has been a HUGE disappointment. And I'm not sure being on the Blazers would've changed that.

So, all you fickle fucks that thought this team would be lucky to win 30 games, what more exactly should Olshey have done? What should he have done (that was actually feasible) that would make the team better now without mortgaging the future for a one and done trip to the first round?

well, I didn't think they should be lucky to win 30 games (I don't remember making a prediction). But I think burning out players because they didn't want to "mortgage" the future isn't the same as just getting a decent bench.

And, last I checked the last team Olshey assembled is doing pretty damn good. You know, the team from Los Angeles that's 32-9 and in first place, not the other one that's 5 games under .500 in spite of having four future Hall of Famers on the roster. Before giving up on Olshey and his vision, we may just want to give him more than half a season at the helm. The team is already better than expected, and he will have a lot more flexibility to make moves this coming summer. I think Olshey has done great so far, but the real test is how well this team performs next season and the three of four after that.

BNM

I don't much care what he did in LA, I'm not a clippers fan. I care what he did this year. He didn't give the team even one decent bench player. ONE bench player who actually doesn't suck the life out of the game wouldn't have mortgaged the future at all.

 

[santeesioux]

I can't believe Joel Freeland still has 2yrs/6mil left on a guaranteed contract. We should look to package him with Hickson for an expiring contract and a decent backup PG. Then use our cap space on Pekovic.

I really can't believe Freeland has been as bad as he has been. I never expected him to be that great, but at least a decent bench player.

 

[Boob-No-More]

I can't believe Joel Freeland still has 2yrs/6mil left on a guaranteed contract. We should look to package him with Hickson for an expiring contract and a decent backup PG. Then use our cap space on Pekovic.

Is Pek really the answer? Is he worth a max, or near max deal? Or is he just a bigger, more expensive version of J.J. Hickson? In terms of stats, the two are very similar, especially in advanced stats. When I watch them play, Pek is definitely a more polished offensive player with some good low post moves. Hickson is more of a hustle/energy guy that gets most of his points off broken plays and offensive rebounds. Hickson is a much better rebounder. The reason Minnesota supposedly won't match offers for Pek is the same reason many on this board want to trade Hickson - for all of his positive contributions on the offensive end, he gives up nearly as much on the defensive end.

Let's look at their stats (all stats from basketball-reference.com). First on court/off court:

Hickson:
On Court ORtg = +2.0
Opponent ORtg = +1.4
Net ORtg = +0.6

So it's true, the Blazers are barely better with Hickson on the court, but he does make a net positive contribution. He's holding his own against other starting centers.

Pekovic:
On Court ORtg = +6.5
Opponent ORtg = +5.0
Net ORtg = +1.5

So, the stats confirm what the eye sees. Pek is a better offensive player than Hickson, but if anything, he's an even worse defender. Still he is +1.5 and that's a bit better than Hickson's +0.6.

Now, let's look at some per game and per 36 minutes stats:

Hickson; 12.3 ppg, 11.0 rpg in 29.3 mpg
Pekovic: 16.0 ppg, 8.6 rpg in 31.2 mpg

And per 36 minutes:
Hickson; 15.1 pts/36, 13.5 reb/36
Pekovic: 18.5 pts/36, 9.9 reb/36

So again, the stats confirm what the eye sees. Pek is a better offensive player, but Hickson is a better rebounder.

So, what about advanced stats.

Hickson:
PER = 20.1
WS/48 = .158

Pekovic:
PER = 19.9
WS/48 = .155

You probably could not find two players in the league with such closely matched advanced stats.

But, here's the kicker, Hickson is 24 and Pek is 27. Pek will probably also cost a LOT more. So, do we dump Hickson and go after Pek with all our cap space? Or do we keep the younger, cheaper Hickson (who seems to fit in well with his teammates) and use the cap space elsewhere? If so, where?

BNM

 

[Mediocre Man]

He misjudged on Hibbert (IMHO) and now admitted he misjudged on the talent on the team...what exactly did he do so great with the Blazers?

You really can't credit him for the draft either

Not sure how he misjudged on Hibbert. He would be perfect for our team

 

[Mediocre Man]

Is Pek really the answer? Is he worth a max, or near max deal? Or is he just a bigger, more expensive version of J.J. Hickson? In terms of stats, the two are very similar, especially in advanced stats. When I watch them play, Pek is definitely a more polished offensive player with some good low post moves. Hickson is more of a hustle/energy guy that gets most of his points off broken plays and offensive rebounds. Hickson is a much better rebounder. The reason Minnesota supposedly won't match offers for Pek is the same reason many on this board want to trade Hickson - for all of his positive contributions on the offensive end, he gives up nearly as much on the defensive end.

Let's look at their stats (all stats from basketball-reference.com). First on court/off court:

Hickson:
On Court ORtg = +2.0
Opponent ORtg = +1.4
Net ORtg = +0.6

So it's true, the Blazers are barely better with Hickson on the court, but he does make a net positive contribution. He's holding his own against other starting centers.

Pekovic:
On Court ORtg = +6.5
Opponent ORtg = +5.0
Net ORtg = +1.5

So, the stats confirm what the eye sees. Pek is a better offensive player than Hickson, but if anything, he's an even worse defender. Still he is +1.5 and that's a bit better than Hickson's +0.6.

Now, let's look at some per game and per 36 minutes stats:

Hickson; 12.3 ppg, 11.0 rpg in 29.3 mpg
Pekovic: 16.0 ppg, 8.6 rpg in 31.2 mpg

And per 36 minutes:
Hickson; 15.1 pts/36, 13.5 reb/36
Pekovic: 18.5 pts/36, 9.9 reb/36

So again, the stats confirm what the eye sees. Pek is a better offensive player, but Hickson is a better rebounder.

So, what about advanced stats.

Hickson:
PER = 20.1
WS/48 = .158

Pekovic:
PER = 19.9
WS/48 = .155

You probably could not find two players in the league with such closely matched advanced stats.

But, here's the kicker, Hickson is 24 and Pek is 27. Pek will probably also cost a LOT more. So, do we dump Hickson and go after Pek with all our cap space? Or do we keep the younger, cheaper Hickson (who seems to fit in well with his teammates) and use the cap space elsewhere? If so, where?

BNM

Per 48 minutes, Hickson is a +1 at PF and a -.3 at center vs his opponent, while Pekovic is a +6.8 at center

The upgrade is huge

 

[VanillaGorilla]

Per 48 minutes, Hickson is a +1 at PF and a -.3 at center vs his opponent, while Pekovic is a +6.8 at center

The upgrade is huge

Do you just ignore all the other stats?

 

[julius]

Not sure how he misjudged on Hibbert. He would be perfect for our team

he's not worth an almost max salary at 10 points and 8 rebounds a game.

 

[Boob-No-More]

Not so sure he had as much to do with drafting Lillard as you think. He was hired on the 4th, and the draft was the 28th. I'm not sure he really had as much to do with that draft, in just over 3 weeks, as to be a deciding factor.

And Lillard didn't workout for the Blazers until June 15th. Olshey was present for that, and all other, pre-draft workouts. Not sure why you think he wasn't a deciding factor - especially when it's his job that's on the line if the blazers fuck up the draft.

Yes, he 'conned' them into resigning Hibbert, but he also was willing to pay him that much money. And Hibbert has been a HUGE disappointment. And I'm not sure being on the Blazers would've changed that.

Hibbert's number are down offensively, but his defense has been DPOY good and one of the biggest reasons Indiana is the best defensive team in the league, in first place in their division and currently the 3rd seed in the Eastern Conference. Ask Indiana fans if they are hugely disappointed with how things have worked out for them.

While Hibbert's offense still isn't great, it's been steadily improving after a slow start.

And, with four other starters averaging over 15 ppg, do the Blazers really need a great offensive center? Or, is a defensive stopper in the middle what this team needs? Isn't points in the paint allowed the biggest problem with an undersized J.J. Hickson as our starting center? Wouldn't the 7'2" 278 pound Hibbert solve that problem better than just about any player in the entire league? Don't get me wrong, I love Hickson, his energy and his effort, but I'd much rather have him as my back-up PF than my starting C.

This is why I thought at the time, and still do, that Roy Hibbert would be a great fit on the Blazers. His interior defense would address one of this team's biggest weaknesses and would make him a good fit next to LaMarcus Aldridge. Our front line would be huge and long and so much better defensively.

well, I didn't think they should be lucky to win 30 games (I don't remember making a prediction). But I think burning out players because they didn't want to "mortgage" the future isn't the same as just getting a decent bench.

Who's burning out players???? Aldridge has ALWAYS played big minutes. He played 2 MPG more two years ago under Nate than he is under Stotts this season. Practicably everyone on this forum, me included, has spent the previous two seasons bitching about how Nate needs to play Batum more, and now that he's getting more minutes, Stotts is burning him out? He doesn't look burnt out to me. Yes, he is still inconsistent, but he is thriving and playing at near all-star level under Stotts.

These are young men who are professional athletes. They thrive playing significant minutes. Kevin Durant is averaging more MPG than anyone on the Blazers roster. Is Scott Brroks burning him out? I'd be much more worried about the 34-year old Kobe Bryant, in his 17th NBA season averaging more MPG than the 27-year old LaMarcus Aldridge in his 7th season. Durant, Bryant, James Harden, LeBron James, and Steph Curry (fragile ankles and all) are all playing more MPG than LaMarcus Aldridge - and none of them look burned out. In fact, they all seem to be thriving. Harden is having a break out year. Kobe is leading the league in scoring at 34. LeBron just set a record for most consecutive games scoring 20+ points. So, why are those guys thriving, but our guys are being burned out? Yeah, our bench sucks and is costing us wins, but it's not hurting our starters long term. If anything, it's helping young guys like Batum and Lillard develop faster and building chemistry among the guys who are going to be the core of this team for the next several seasons.

BNM

 

[VanillaGorilla]

BNM is on a roll today

 

[Boob-No-More]

he's not worth an almost max salary at 10 points and 8 rebounds a game.

Defense is half the game and Roy Hibbert is the best defensive big man in the entire NBA right now. His team is in 1st place, 9 games over .500 and 3rd seed in the East. If that's "hugely disappointing" where do I sign up? I'd like to get me some of that disappointment.

BNM

 

[cdub503]

I think he under estimated the starters and over estimated the bench players. Who really would have known that freeland would be doing this poorly. (I personally think he is still getting used to the pace just like a normal rookie) and who knew that Nolan was gonna blow balls too this year, then there's the promising Elliot Williams. Who I think would have made a great sixth man if not a starter. Anyways I think it's just growing pains and we will get better bench and or starters in this years draft/free agent run. My two cents at least

 

[Nikolokolus]

Is the new conventional wisdom really going to be "Lillard wasn't really Olshey's pick?" Here's a thought, maybe as GM of the Clippers, Olshey had been scouting college players all year and really liked the kid? Nah, that makes too much sense. This was Buchanan's pick, 'cause he's always shown great acumen when it comes to college talent.

 

[julius]

Defense is half the game and Roy Hibbert is the best defensive big man in the entire NBA right now. His team is in 1st place, 9 games over .500 and 3rd seed in the East. If that's "hugely disappointing" where do I sign up? I'd like to get me some of that disappointment.

BNM

So Roy Hibbert is the main reason they're 9 games over .500?

does that mean that LaMarcus is a so-so PF because the Blazers are .500?

 

[Nikolokolus]

I think he under estimated the starters and over estimated the bench players. Who really would have known that freeland would be doing this poorly. (I personally think he is still getting used to the pace just like a normal rookie) and who knew that Nolan was gonna blow balls too this year, then there's the promising Elliot Williams. Who I think would have made a great sixth man if not a starter. Anyways I think it's just growing pains and we will get better bench and or starters in this years draft/free agent run. My two cents at least

I think you're half right. He probably didn't expect his starters to be this good (especially Lillard and Batum) but you're kidding yourself if he didn't know this bench was scoured from the dregs of the league. After he failed to get the guy he wanted in free agency (Hibbert) he built the rest of this team to go after a high lotto pick.

 

[Nikolokolus]

So Roy Hibbert is the main reason they're 9 games over .500?

does that mean that LaMarcus is a so-so PF because the Blazers are .500?

The Pacers just have more talent than the Blazers; there's only so much Aldridge can do when there's no man in the middle and the backups are as awful as they are. As for the Pacers, they are one of the league's premier defensive teams -- Hibbert is a huge part of that defense. Put him on the Blazers and suddenly they look a helluva lot more formidable, even with Hibbert's offensive struggles this season.

 

[VanillaGorilla]

Whenever there's a thread starting with "Quick:" I think it's an instruction.

"Quick! -- Get to the chopper!"

 

[oldmangrouch]

Defense is half the game and Roy Hibbert is the best defensive big man in the entire NBA right now. His team is in 1st place, 9 games over .500 and 3rd seed in the East. If that's "hugely disappointing" where do I sign up? I'd like to get me some of that disappointment.

BNM

Correction: best defensive big man who rebounds like a SF.

As I said in another thread - I would rather have Joel P in his prime than Hibbert - and it wouldn't cost $12+ a year.

 

[julius]

And Lillard didn't workout for the Blazers until June 15th. Olshey was present for that, and all other, pre-draft workouts. Not sure why you think he wasn't a deciding factor - especially when it's his job that's on the line if the blazers fuck up the draft.

I think he might've said he was in favor of him, but that's awful lot of clout in less than a month.

Hibbert's number are down offensively, but his defense has been DPOY good and one of the biggest reasons Indiana is the best defensive team in the league, in first place in their division and currently the 3rd seed in the Eastern Conference. Ask Indiana fans if they are hugely disappointed with how things have worked out for them.

We gripe about LaMarcus' rebound #'s, this guys is worse.

Who's burning out players???? Aldridge has ALWAYS played big minutes. He played 2 MPG more two years ago under Nate than he is under Stotts this season. Practicably everyone on this forum, me included, has spent the previous two seasons bitching about how Nate needs to play Batum more, and now that he's getting more minutes, Stotts is burning him out? He doesn't look burnt out to me. Yes, he is still inconsistent, but he is thriving and playing at near all-star level under Stotts.

there's a difference between playing minutes, and having to play more minutes because your bench sucks or gets you down.

why do teams want benches if it's not apparently important?

These are young men who are professional athletes. They thrive playing significant minutes. Kevin Durant is averaging more MPG than anyone on the Blazers roster. Is Scott Brroks burning him out? I'd be much more worried about the 34-year old Kobe Bryant, in his 17th NBA season averaging more MPG than the 27-year old LaMarcus Aldridge in his 7th season. Durant, Bryant, James Harden, LeBron James, and Steph Curry (fragile ankles and all) are all playing more MPG than LaMarcus Aldridge - and none of them look burned out.

really, you don't see a connection between players playing huge minutes and burning out? Or that having bench players helps keep starters going?

And a HUGE reason why Kobe is playing so many minutes is BECAUSE their teams bench sucks shit.

In fact, they all seem to be thriving. Harden is having a break out year. Kobe is leading the league in scoring at 34. LeBron just set a record for most consecutive games scoring 20+ points. So, why are those guys thriving, but our guys are being burned out? Yeah, our bench sucks and is costing us wins, but it's not hurting our starters long term. If anything, it's helping young guys like Batum and Lillard develop faster and building chemistry among the guys who are going to be the core of this team for the next several seasons.

BNM

I think you're making good points, although I think you're making kingspeed type points.

The Thunder have 3 players averaging over 30 minutes, but only one over 37.
39.5, 36.1 and 32.3

Portland, conversely, has 3 players averaging over 38 minutes a night, a 4th averaging 35 and the 5th averaging just under 30.

 

[Boob-No-More]

So Roy Hibbert is the main reason they're 9 games over .500?

does that mean that LaMarcus is a so-so PF because the Blazers are .500?

Strawman. What does one have to do with the other????

BNM

 

[VanillaGorilla]

I think he might've said he was in favor of him, but that's awful lot of clout in less than a month.

Olshey drafted Lillard. It is that simple. What are you talking about?

 

[Carlito]

Regardless of the countless excuses u still always have a few quality bench players. That's a horrific job on the GM. I would fire him for that. Lillard was the obvious pick that even chad b could have made. Meyers looks average at best. As for hibbert everyone knew they would match.

So what has Neil done again except throwing our playoff chances and starters under a bus?