Remaining schedule strongly suggests Portland will miss the playoffs

[PapaG]

I can't think of a single small to mid-market team off the top of my head that muddled around in mediocrity and elevated themselves to a championship by just "hanging around" and then incrementally improving via a free agent signing or a trade. .

Dallas. Calling them a "major market" is a joke, if you've ever been to Dallas/FW. Football is king there. Then again, Cuban spent the money to be patient and finally surround his 33 year-old franchise player with enough talent to win a title. This was after years of being mediocre, with one Finals appearance thrown in years beforehand. Dirk hadn't had a PER over 24.6 for five years prior to the title, yet Cuban stuck with him.

 

[Boob-No-More]

Over-all, I see the sense of your argument, but let me play heretic's advocate for a moment.

The Blazers have 4 or 5 members of the rotation (Batum, Felton, Camby, Wallace and maybe Crawford) ready to hit the market. Keeping the current core together is going to be expensive and rob the team of any roster flexibility for years - all to maintain a team we all know isn't very good.

I don't advocate resigning all of those players. But, unless you can make a trade that significantly improves the team, either short term or preferably long term, I don't think blowing the team up mid-season when they are still in the race for a playoff spot is a good idea. Fight with everything you've got to make the playoffs and let Aldridge get some post season experience as the number 1 option and Batum as a potential number 2 or 3 option. Let Elliot Williams get a little post season experience and see how he responds.

Then after the season is over and all, or some, of the above become free agents, you decide who you want to keep and explore sign and trade options where possible and let the others walk. The only guy on your list I'd lock up long term is Batum. I don't want Felton back even if he's free. Camby, I'd make a 1 year offer with a second year team option. Wallace two, maybe three years max - if the price is right. This all assumes they can't get anything better for less, or equal money.

The point is, don't kill your chances to make the playoffs and waste a chance to get some valuable post season experience for the core of your future team. And then look to make moves during the off season.

If you were PA, would you open your wallet just to preserve a .500 team?

Nope, but that doesn't mean blowing things up in the middle of a playoff race. If there is a deadline deal that makes the team better, of course you do it. If not, be patient and make your moves in the off season when you will have more flexibility and there are more options available.

BNM

 

[Boob-No-More]

Dallas might qualify except that it's a destination city because of the size of the market, the weather, etc. and that changes the rules somewhat.

Definitely not. They couldn't even keep their own starting center after winning the championship. They lost Chandler to a true big market team - shitty weather and all.

Dallas has acquired most of the players surrounding Dirk with a large number of very aggressive trades. They tried a LOT of pieces until they finally found a combination that worked. Point being, they didn't spend years of sucking to build a championship team through high lottery picks.

I can't think of any team in recent memory that has. The only current team that comes close is OKC, and they haven't won a title yet, and it will be interesting to see what happens when all those young, high lottery picks all come off their rookie deals and want to be paid. Will they be able to keep that roster together long enough to win a title? It's yet to be seen.

The last team to truly build a championship team through the draft was probably the Bulls during their first 3-peat. Of course, drafting the GOAT was the biggest prize, but it wasn't until they also added Pippen and Grant that they become a contender. And, for the record, the Bulls made the playoffs every season Jordan played for them. They didn't tank to dip back into the lottery. Any lottery picks they had were obtained through trades, not through sucking. They learned to become champions through all the great post season experience against champions like the Celtics and Pistons.

The Spurs are a bit of a fluke. Their best player was injured and missed most of the season proceeding the Duncan lottery. They added Duncan and brought back a healthy David Robinson for their first title. Parker and Ginobili were late picks. They continued to retool and win titles without dropping back into the lottery.

Boston tried to tank for years and constantly missed out on the number 1 pick (Duncan, Oden - in hindsight, they dodged that bullet, but at the time they thought he was their next Bill Russell), but it wasn't until they gave up tanking and added pieces through trades that they won another title.

Cleveland sucked for years, won the Lebron lottery and still didn't win a title.

The Clippers had seemingly decades worth of high lottery picks and have no rings, not even close, to show for it.

Orlando won the Shaq lottery and the one one right after it and later the Dwight Howard lottery, and they have exactly zero rings to show for it.

Dipping into the lottery, even winning the lottery when a future first ballot Hall of Famer is available seems to have no correlation to winning titles. Multiple years in the lottery has a very strong negative correlation to winning titles.

A much more successful model is to gradually add better and better pieces through a series of very aggressive trades (or possibly free agency if your a destination market like Miami or Los Angeles). That's how Boston won, that's how the Lakers won by adding Pau, that's how the Heat won by adding Shaq, that's how the Pistons won and that's how Dallas won. Gradually upgrading your roster, while your best players improve and gain valuable post season experience seems to be the best model for winning titles.

OKC has a chance to reverse that trend, but it's yet to be seen if they can keep all their young lottery picks together long enough to win a ring.

BNM

 

[Nikolokolus]

Dallas. Calling them a "major market" is a joke, if you've ever been to Dallas/FW. Football is king there. Then again, Cuban spent the money to be patient and finally surround his 33 year-old franchise player with enough talent to win a title. This was after years of being mediocre, with one Finals appearance thrown in years beforehand. Dirk hadn't had a PER over 24.6 for five years prior to the title, yet Cuban stuck with him.

Not from a fan's perspective, but from the player's perspective it most certainly is. low taxes, endorsement opportunities, big spending owner, warm(er) weather during the season. It's not LA or New York, but the difference from a free agent's perspective is barely noticeable.

 

[Natebishop3]

I got burned out on this kind of basketball from the mid-to-late 90s. Watching us lose in the first round over, and over, and over. I don't' want to go back to that. I would rather tank and make a run at getting another Brandon Roy or a Kevin Durant. You guys realize that we could have Kevin Durant because of our losing record? We almost built a legit title contender through the draft. It was a sad twist of fate that Roy and Oden turned out to be so injury prone. I do not enjoy watching a mediocre basketball team.

 

[Boob-No-More]

Not from a fan's perspective, but from the player's perspective it most certainly is. low taxes, endorsement opportunities, big spending owner, warm(er) weather during the season. It's not LA or New York, but the difference from a free agent's perspective is barely noticeable.

Tyson Chandler disagrees.

BNM

 

[Minstrel]

We almost built a legit title contender through the draft. It was a sad twist of fate that Roy and Oden turned out to be so injury prone.

Yeah, but that's exceptionally rare. There was a reason that Pritchard (rightly or wrongly) was being called a genius...hitting home runs on two draft picks (Roy and Aldridge) is incredibly hard to do. And then to get the lucky stroke of a #1 pick in a draft with two phenoms. It was a perfect storm in terms of getting all that talent and, unfortunately, a perfect storm of misfortune that unraveled it.

You can't expect something like that to happen again. Trying to be bad to chase that kind of dream is likely to turn the Blazers into the Warriors or Cavs of 1995-2005.

 

[Nikolokolus]

Tyson Chandler disagrees.

BNM

I see that as a combination of two things: It's a symptom of the luxury tax rules that are set to kick in soon, where even Cuban recognizes just how brutal the new tax is going to be. And for a really old team, like the Mavs who are probably about a year or two from a roster overhaul (and for a team that has its eye on Dwight and D-Will) signing Chandler to a long term deal didn't make much sense.

 

[Boob-No-More]

I got burned out on this kind of basketball from the mid-to-late 90s. Watching us lose in the first round over, and over, and over. I don't' want to go back to that. I would rather tank and make a run at getting another Brandon Roy or a Kevin Durant. You guys realize that we could have Kevin Durant because of our losing record? We almost built a legit title contender through the draft. It was a sad twist of fate that Roy and Oden turned out to be so injury prone. I do not enjoy watching a mediocre basketball team.

But those late 1990s teams made the Western Conference finals twice and came within an epic 4th quarter collapse of winning it all - without dipping into the lottery once. I'd take that over five years in the lottery without a singe playoff series win to show for it. I'll take 8 years of first round exits and 2 WCF appearances over a 10 year stretch over 5 years of sucking and 5 first round exits. Even the one year when both Oden and Roy were healthy, they couldn't get out of the first round. Why? No playoff experience. They were totally shell shocked, lost Game 1, gave up HCA and lost to Houston.

I prefer winning basketball over losing basketball. Simple as that. I'd rather be above .500 and in the playoffs every year than five years of totally sucking, losing 3/4 of your games and still not advancing past the first round after all of that. Those late 1990s teams came a LOT closer to a title than the team that was built through the lottery.

BNM

 

[The Sebastian Express]

Tyson Chandler does not qualify as an example. Chandler accepted the Knicks offer because it was four years, 65 million to the Mavs offer of one year, 20 million. Considering Tyson's age and injury history this was a no brainer for financial security.

The Mavericks made a one year offer so they could maintain cap flexibility next year and go after Dwight and Deron. It is the same reason they did not make a long-term offer to Caron Butler.

 

[Boob-No-More]

I see that as a combination of two things: It's a symptom of the luxury tax rules that are set to kick in soon, where even Cuban recognizes just how brutal the new tax is going to be. And for a really old team, like the Mavs who are probably about a year or two from a roster overhaul (and for a team that has its eye on Dwight and D-Will) signing Chandler to a long term deal didn't make much sense.

That's a rather short sighted view to take as defending champions. Giving away Chandler for nothing basically cost them any chance at a repeat. If the goal is to win as many championships as possible, it would have made a lot more sense to pay Chandler what he wanted and have one, maybe two more serious title runs. Then if Chandler is overpaid for the last year or two of his deal, at least he eventually might become a valuable trading chip with a big expiring contract. As it is, Dallas got nothing for him now, lost any hope of a repeat and got nothing for the future.

I suspect Chandler also thought he was the piece New York was lacking to become a title contender. He would give that front line the rebounding and defense they lack. Who knows, now that they've found their PG, maybe they can contend when Amare' and Melo are healthy. I doubt it, as they'd have to get by Miami and/or Chicago. Still the Knicks are definitely better with Chandler than without him, and Dallas is worse.

BNM

 

[Boob-No-More]

Tyson Chandler does not qualify as an example. Chandler accepted the Knicks offer because it was four years, 65 million to the Mavs offer of one year, 20 million. Considering Tyson's age and injury history this was a no brainer for financial security.

The Mavericks made a one year offer so they could maintain cap flexibility next year and go after Dwight and Deron. It is the same reason they did not make a long-term offer to Caron Butler.

And what are the chances Dallas will get either Dwight or Deron? Pretty low, given that both seem to prefer NJ or LA over Dallas.

Chandler is only 29 and hasn't missed a game this season and is putting up the best numbers of his career - for the second year in a row. They gave up a very good center in his prime for the illusion of imaginary cap space. It cost them a chance to defend their title this season, and given the unlikely event they actually sign Deron or Dwight, any future chance at contending.

BNM

 

[mgb]

But those late 1990s teams made the Western Conference finals twice and came within an epic 4th quarter collapse of winning it all - without dipping into the lottery once. I'd take that over five years in the lottery without a singe playoff series win to show for it. I'll take 8 years of first round exits and 2 WCF appearances over a 10 year stretch over 5 years of sucking and 5 first round exits. Even the one year when both Oden and Roy were healthy, they couldn't get out of the first round. Why? No playoff experience. They were totally shell shocked, lost Game 1, gave up HCA and lost to Houston.

I prefer winning basketball over losing basketball. Simple as that. I'd rather be above .500 and in the playoffs every year than five years of totally sucking, losing 3/4 of your games and still not advancing past the first round after all of that. Those late 1990s teams came a LOT closer to a title than the team that was built through the lottery.

BNM

Both Roy and Oden were healthy for that playoff series?

 

[Boob-No-More]

Both Roy and Oden were healthy for that playoff series?

They sure were. That was the series when Ron Artest called Roy the best player he'd ever guarded. Oden was a foul prone 2nd year rookie who played 61 games that season and the entire first round series against Houston.

BNM

 

[Boob-No-More]

Drexler was a lottery pick (14th)

No he wasn't. Back then there were only 24 teams in the NBA and no draft lottery. The first NBA draft lottery was two years after Clyde was drafted. That was the famous bent corner lottery drawing that sent Patrick Ewing to the Knicks. When Clyde was drafted teams simply picked in the reverse order of their records.

BNM

 

[Rhal]

They sure were. That was the series when Ron Artest called Roy the best player he'd ever guarded. Oden was a foul prone 2nd year rookie who played 61 games that season and the entire first round series against Houston.

BNM

I wouldnt call Oden healthy that series. it takes most athletes two years two regain confidance and explosiveness back from MF surgery.
as for the rockets they were the only team i think beats us in round one that year. we were simply out coached and it was a very very close series with only game 1 being a blowout. Im still mad at nate for giving Bayless no burn when blake was getting lit up again and again by brooks while being useless on offense.

Sent from my LS670 using Tapatalk

 

[Brock]

with our sched.... and minny/denver on our asses....

lotto

 

[Rastapopoulos]

Here's a fun game: go back the past few years and pick the best player available at the time we made our pick. Do you get a winning team?

(Obviously taking Chris Paul and Kevin Durant would help, but that's cheating because that's when we "lucked" into the top 3. The Drexler and Whitsitt years didn't have lottery picks.)

 

[Mediocre Man]

Here's a fun game: go back the past few years and pick the best player available at the time we made our pick. Do you get a winning team?

Nope

 

[RR7]

Here's a fun game: go back the past few years and pick the best player available at the time we made our pick. Do you get a winning team?

(Obviously taking Chris Paul and Kevin Durant would help, but that's cheating because that's when we "lucked" into the top 3. The Drexler and Whitsitt years didn't have lottery picks.)

Somewhat difficult, since we then screw up trades that have happened, especially removing Bayless' pick, since he was traded indirectly for Wallace. But, all things being the same, but different picks, having Hibbert at C would be nice. Or ibaka as well. Taking DeAndre Jordan or Mario Chalmers in the 2nd, but we traded that pick for Batum, so maybe keeping Asik. At th least, it gives us the flexibility to move Camby elsewhere.

 

[Boob-No-More]

I wouldnt call Oden healthy that series. it takes most athletes two years two regain confidance and explosiveness back from MF surgery.
as for the rockets they were the only team i think beats us in round one that year. we were simply out coached and it was a very very close series with only game 1 being a blowout. Im still mad at nate for giving Bayless no burn when blake was getting lit up again and again by brooks while being useless on offense.

Sent from my LS670 using Tapatalk

That series was nearly 20 months after Oden's first micro fracture surgery. It was the healithiest he's been since he was drafted. He was limited to only 96 minutes in that series due to foul trouble - not his health. He had almost as many fouls (27) as points (30). That's 4.5 fouls in just 16 minutes per game.

BNM

 

[BBert]

I got burned out on this kind of basketball from the mid-to-late 90s. Watching us lose in the first round over, and over, and over. I don't' want to go back to that. I would rather tank and make a run at getting another Brandon Roy or a Kevin Durant. You guys realize that we could have Kevin Durant because of our losing record? We almost built a legit title contender through the draft. It was a sad twist of fate that Roy and Oden turned out to be so injury prone. I do not enjoy watching a mediocre basketball team.

We have a real chance to upgrade this team in the off season by having a good draft (which may include trades) and freeing up cap space for a couple of top free agents. Too bad I have no faith in our front office right now. And please god, don't let Nate McMillan decide who we draft.

 

[The Sebastian Express]

And what are the chances Dallas will get either Dwight or Deron? Pretty low, given that both seem to prefer NJ or LA over Dallas.

Chandler is only 29 and hasn't missed a game this season and is putting up the best numbers of his career - for the second year in a row. They gave up a very good center in his prime for the illusion of imaginary cap space. It cost them a chance to defend their title this season, and given the unlikely event they actually sign Deron or Dwight, any future chance at contending.

BNM

Deron wont stay in New Jersey unless Dwight goes there. There has been much talk Dwight prefers Los Angeles now over New Jersey.

Deron has not shied away from talking about his love for Dallas. Journalists have long talked about people from inside Deron's camp saying Deron to Dallas is almost a lock if Dwight does not come to New Jersey.


Cuban, from time to time, does know what he is doing.

 

[Boob-No-More]

No he wasn't. Back then there were only 24 teams in the NBA and no draft lottery. The first NBA draft lottery was two years after Clyde was drafted. That was the famous bent corner lottery drawing that sent Patrick Ewing to the Knicks. When Clyde was drafted teams simply picked in the reverse order of their records.

BNM

Technically, Sebastian Telfair, in 2004 was the Blazers first ever lottery pick. It was the first time in franchise history that the Blazers were in the draft lottery.

They also obtained the 8th pick in 1995 in a trade with Detroit. They used that pick on Shawn Respert, who they then traded to Milwaukee for the rights to Gary Trent and a future 1st round pick.

Sam Bowie was taken 2nd in the 1984 draft - the year before the first NBA draft lottery. Bowie was the last top 13 pick for the Blazers until Respert and Respert the last until Telfair. The Blazers made the playoffs 21 years in a row, made the finals twice and the Western Conference Finals three additional times, without dipping into the draft lottery once. They were a very competitive franchise for over two decades and the only top 13 pick they had between Bowie and Telfair was the Respert pick acquired via trade.

Still think tanking, "blowing it up" and dipping down into the lottery is the best blueprint to build a future contender? Ask Sebastian Telfair and Martell Webster, the Blazers first two lottery picks, how that worked out.

BNM

 

[XXPrimusXX]

No he wasn't. Back then there were only 24 teams in the NBA and no draft lottery. The first NBA draft lottery was two years after Clyde was drafted. That was the famous bent corner lottery drawing that sent Patrick Ewing to the Knicks. When Clyde was drafted teams simply picked in the reverse order of their records.

BNM

I know, I'm saying the equivalent of a lottery pick. Either way, it solidifies my argument. The Blazers created a championship-contending team without having to draft really high for 3-4 years.

 

[Boob-No-More]

Deron wont stay in New Jersey unless Dwight goes there. There has been much talk Dwight prefers Los Angeles now over New Jersey.

Deron has not shied away from talking about his love for Dallas. Journalists have long talked about people from inside Deron's camp saying Deron to Dallas is almost a lock if Dwight does not come to New Jersey.


Cuban, from time to time, does know what he is doing.

Maybe, maybe not. Only time will tell if Dallas gets either Dwight or Deron. I'd say the odds are small that they wil get either.

Chandler was a sure thing. His defense and rebounding was a huge part of their championship. They let him go and got nothing in return except the potential for future cap space. My point is, they could have been contenders and better suited to defend their title if they'd simply resigned Chandler. If the goal is to win titles, they gave up a chance at one this year, for the slim chance they may add Dwight or Deron at a time when Dirk is 35. When your superstar is 33 and you just won an NBA title, that's pretty much the definition of "win now".

BNM

 

[PapaG]

Technically, Sebastian Telfair, in 2004 was the Blazers first ever lottery pick. It was the first time in franchise history that the Blazers were in the draft lottery.

They also obtained the 8th pick in 1995 in a trade with Detroit. They used that pick on Shawn Respert, who they then traded to Milwaukee for the rights to Gary Trent and a future 1st round pick.

Sam Bowie was taken 2nd in the 1984 draft - the year before the first NBA draft lottery. Bowie was the last top 13 pick for the Blazers until Respert and Respert the last until Telfair. The Blazers made the playoffs 21 years in a row, made the finals twice and the Western Conference Finals three additional times, without dipping into the draft lottery once. They were a very competitive franchise for over two decades and the only top 13 pick they had between Bowie and Telfair was the Respert pick acquired via trade.

Still think tanking, "blowing it up" and dipping down into the lottery is the best blueprint to build a future contender? Ask Sebastian Telfair and Martell Webster, the Blazers first two lottery picks, how that worked out.

BNM

To add to the Bowie misery, the #1 pick in that draft was determined by a coin flip between Houston and Portland. Had the coin landed on the other side, Olajuwon becomes a Blazer, Jordan likely goes to Houston (they already had Ralph Sampson), and Chicago probably drafts Sam Bowie.

If anybody here ever gets the ability to time travel, please go back and change Portland's call from "tails" to "heads".

 

[Boob-No-More]

I know, I'm saying the equivalent of a lottery pick. Either way, it solidifies my argument. The Blazers created a championship-contending team without having to draft really high for 3-4 years.

But Drexler wasn't the equivalent of a lottery pick. He was a mid first round pick (14th of 24). That's the the equivalent of a 17th or 18th pick these days.

But you are right. The Blazers built two contending teams over a 20 year period without dipping into the lottery once.

BNM

 

[Boob-No-More]

Had the coin landed on the other side, Olajuwon becomes a Blazer, Jordan likely goes to Houston (they already had Ralph Sampson), and Chicago probably drafts Sam Bowie.

Actually, the Bulls probably would have taken Barkley, or maybe Sam Perkins. They weren't high on Bowie.

And, as much as the Blazers get beaten up for taking Bowie over Jordan, the Mavs could have had both Barkely and Stockon in that draft. Instead, they took Perkins at 4 and Terrence Stansbury at 15. Imagine how good Dallas could have been by adding Barkley and Stockton to a roster that already had Mark Aguirre, Rolando Blackman, Derek Harper and Dale Ellis - all 25 or younger.

BNM

 

[PapaG]

What's the risk though? If it's choosing between years of mediocrity and a string of first round exits (at best) or risking sucking for awhile to take a step beyond that mediocrity I don't see the downside -- basically I think watching mediocre and crappy teams gives me almost the same level of "enjoyment" except that with a crappy team there's usually a lot of young guys that you get to watch learn the NBA game and (hopefully) take steps to learning how to become winners.

I guess I have a question for some of you, that I've never been able to answer: Do some of you really take that much pride and enjoyment out of a "worst of the best" team or is it just a fear of having to watch a young and crappy team that makes people so resistant to rebuilding? Or maybe some of you guys really believe that we're really close?

As a fan I want the hope that eventually the team I root for will be able to compete for a title ... Right now, I see one route (rebuilding) being more likely to provide that chance while the others (holding the line, trading for Nash, etc.) don't seem that likely to get it done.

This thread is a pretty good read on where this community was 2 years ago.