So: are we going to be TOO good?

[Nikolokolus]

Since when was Houston a destination city? It wasn't until Harden became a super-star.

I tend to agree that Portland is never going to sign a superstar, but I don't think it's out of the realm of possibility to sign a really good player. Hell, Greg Monroe almost picked us this past off-season but instead chose Milwaukee who is ironically in a very similar position as the Blazers - just further along in the process.

Low state taxes, a place where a lot of players make their off-season home, etc.

 

[B-Roy]

I'm in rebuilding mode, wins and losses don't mean much to me. I usually base success on how I see our guys developing. If we win games and our guys look great, all the better. If we lose and our guys are showing encouraging signs of growth, that's fine too. I'm not going to be "angry" either way.

I think that is where most of us are at as well.

If we suck enough to get a top 5 pick, it's likely because the guys that we have were not good enough. There will be more to evaluate in that situation but I don't think that particular situation is an enviable one.

 

[Nikolokolus]

Blah... Meh... Answer the question please. Substantiate your opinion. Validate yours and debunk mine please...

Curry = MVP
Lillard = Not MVP

Do you need more?

 

[B-Roy]

Low state taxes, a place where a lot of players make their off-season home, etc.

And how many good free agents did they sign before Harden?

 

[Orion Bailey]

Low state taxes, a place where a lot of players make their off-season home, etc.

Actually, I have to agree with this. Houston has nailed many top tier free agents prior to Harden. Clyde being one of them (yes I know he is from Texas). I think Otis Thorpe was added via trade? Houston has had a pretty good long history for players.

 

[Tunchi]

Here's the thing. I don't think Damian is good enough. He's a definite notch below Curry and while I think he's "very good" he's not "great" (and probably never will be).

Totally agree with you. Ive said this before and I'll say it again I love Dame and all but coming in after a couple seasons, I thought his shooting was going to be pretty automatic feeling like Curry, or Durant. A guy who it felt like every shot was going to be good, cause they all look good. But his jump shot has regressed. I think he’ll be a streaky shooter his whole career. Hoping I’m wrong. I’d love a 40% season from 3. But I’m now to the point where I cringe often when he pulls up to shoot from midrange on out.

 

[B-Roy]

Actually, I have to agree with this. Houston has nailed many top tier free agents prior to Harden. Clyde being one of them (yes I know he is from Texas). I think Otis Thorpe was added via trade? Houston has had a pretty good long history for players.

Clyde was traded, and has ties in Houston.

 

[Natebishop3]

I think that is where most of us are at as well.

If we suck enough to get a top 5 pick, it's likely because the guys that we have were not good enough. There will be more to evaluate in that situation but I don't think that particular situation is an enviable one.

One thing that I'm really paying attention to this season is Dame. Does he step up and become a superstar? Does he continue to struggle with his shot? I think this will be a make-or-break year for Dame as well. We fine out if he's a legit superstar, or if he's just an All-Star that needs to be second fiddle. He has definitely shown great leadership, and I'm happy about that, but he has to perform on the court. That doesn't necessarily mean I want him to average 30 per game. I just want him to play well, keep his teammates involved, be a leader, and in that process if he can average 25ish, that would be awesome.

 

[Natebishop3]

Actually, I have to agree with this. Houston has nailed many top tier free agents prior to Harden. Clyde being one of them (yes I know he is from Texas). I think Otis Thorpe was added via trade? Houston has had a pretty good long history for players.

Ummmmm we traded Clyde to Houston.

 

[Orion Bailey]

Curry = MVP
Lillard = Not MVP

Do you need more?

NBA - 5 man on the court team, 12 man active roster, 15 man roster.

Tennis, Bowling, Golf - one man team, 1 man active roster, 1 man roster.

One guy isn't the end all for a teams success or failure and your very mention of GS via Curry proves that. What was Curry's numbers the year before last? Im at work so I cant take the time to look it up, but I think they were close to the same as last year and if so, why didn't GS win back to backs then?

Basketball=TEAM ball. Something the NBA has kinda lost touch with until last years champs. I see potential for great TEAM ball with this roster making us very difficult to stop and or predict.


Um yeah, you need to say ALOT more. So Dam isn't Curry, so were fucked? lmao. Come on. Need more than that. Dame doesn't need to be Curry because we aren't Golden State!

 

[Nikolokolus]

Totally agree with you. Ive said this before and I'll say it again I love Dame and all but coming in after a couple seasons, I thought his shooting was going to be pretty automatic feeling like Curry, or Durant. A guy who it felt like every shot was going to be good, cause they all look good. But his jump shot has regressed. I think he’ll be a streaky shooter his whole career. Hoping I’m wrong. I’d love a 40% season from 3. But I’m now to the point where I cringe often when he pulls up to shoot from midrange on out.

I'm not really talking about his shooting slump last year (I think health was a factor) it's his fairly poor defense. I'm not saying he doesn't try and that he might not get marginally better with time, but it's a pretty major flaw in his game and is the one thing that holds him back from being considered the elite of the elite (which is the rarefied air Curry occupies).

 

[Orion Bailey]

Oh also, isn't Curry 2-3 years further into the league?

 

[B-Roy]

One thing that I'm really paying attention to this season is Dame. Does he step up and become a superstar? Does he continue to struggle with his shot? I think this will be a make-or-break year for Dame as well. We fine out if he's a legit superstar, or if he's just an All-Star that needs to be second fiddle. He has definitely shown great leadership, and I'm happy about that, but he has to perform on the court. That doesn't necessarily mean I want him to average 30 per game. I just want him to play well, keep his teammates involved, be a leader, and in that process if he can average 25ish, that would be awesome.

The "I'll believe it when I see it" stuff from a lot of people is all good and dandy, but if you have no confidence at all in this group of players, I guess there's not much anyone can say to change your mind.

The Golden State example that was brought up earlier was pretty good though, did you really see Green or Thompson as stars before it happened? Did anyone really see Curry winning MVP after all those ankle injuries? Chances are the same people that don't see anything in our current players would have believed Curry couldn't stay healthy if they were Warrior fans.

 

[Natebishop3]

I'm not really talking about his shooting slump last year (I think health was a factor) it's his fairly poor defense. I'm not saying he doesn't try and that he might not get marginally better with time, but it's a pretty major flaw in his game and is the one thing that holds him back from being considered the elite of the elite (which is the rarefied air Curry occupies).

Is Curry really that good at defense? He seems to get burned as well.

 

[Nikolokolus]

NBA - 5 man on the court team, 12 man active roster, 15 man roster.

Tennis, Bowling, Golf - one man team, 1 man active roster, 1 man roster.

One guy isn't the end all for a teams success or failure and your very mention of GS via Curry proves that. What was Curry's numbers the year before last? Im at work so I cant take the time to look it up, but I think they were close to the same as last year and if so, why didn't GS win back to backs then?

Basketball=TEAM ball. Something the NBA has kinda lost touch with until last years champs. I see potential for great TEAM ball with this roster making us very difficult to stop and or predict.


Um yeah, you need to say ALOT more. So Dam isn't Curry, so were fucked? lmao. Come on. Need more than that. Dame doesn't need to be Curry because we aren't Golden State!

Those are your words not mine. I said Damian is a notch below Curry, those are the facts. Golden State has a very good team surrounding Curry too, but the fact remains he is an MVP and bends the court and without him being that good there's no way Golden State wins a title.

 

[Natebishop3]

The "I'll believe it when I see it" stuff from a lot of people is all good and dandy, but if you have no confidence at all in this group of players, I guess there's not much anyone can say to change your mind.

The Golden State example that was brought up earlier was pretty good though, did you really see Green or Thompson as stars before it happened? Did anyone really see Curry winning MVP after all those ankle injuries? Chances are the same people that don't see anything in our current players would have believed Curry couldn't stay healthy if they were Warrior fans.

Did you mean to quote me on this? I'm not seeing the correlation to what I said.

 

[Nikolokolus]

Is Curry really that good at defense? He seems to get burned as well.

I don't think he's elite, but the numbers here don't look too bad http://www.82games.com/1415/14GSW1.HTM

 

[PtldPlatypus]

And that is the key. Dame is the linchpin for everything that we're trying to accomplish. If he, as Nik suggests, is not good enough to lead a team to a title, then none of it really matters. If he basically becomes Kemba Walker, then we're doomed. If he returns to Kyrie Irving level (+), then we're going to be "too good" this year.

 

[B-Roy]

Did you mean to quote me on this? I'm not seeing the correlation to what I said.

Nik mostly I suppose.

Curry = MVP
Damian = Not-MVP

Well duh, it's not like players ever improve.

 

[Nikolokolus]

Nik mostly I suppose.

Curry = MVP
Damian = Not-MVP

Well duh, it's not like players ever improve.

I was trying to provide the simplest case I could to satisfy Orion's demand for evidence (that he said I wasn't providing for my claim).

 

[Orion Bailey]

Those are your words not mine. I said Damian is a notch below Curry, those are the facts. Golden State has a very good team surrounding Curry too, but the fact remains he is an MVP and bends the court and without him being that good there's no way Golden State wins a title.

You skated the tough questions though.. Again, wasn't he that good the year before but they didn't win? Wasn't it the step up of play from the guys around him that took them from a one and done to a ring? Not trying to diminish Currys impact, but your insistence that he was the end all is ludicrous, Nikiloklus.

If that's the case for one player being the end all then LBJ should have a ring for every year he has played....

 

[Orion Bailey]

I was trying to provide the simplest case I could to satisfy Orion's demand for evidence (that he said I wasn't providing for my claim).

And you failed miserably.

The question had nothing even to do with Curry. It had to do with a lottery pick and what would one more really do to improve this team compared go all of the ones we already have?

 

[B-Roy]

I think I should specify...I don't think Nik is wrong when he says he doesn't have a ton of confidence in our guys. Factually speaking, yeah, they haven't shown much yet.

I just think it's kind of sad for your fandom if you don't harbor a single ounce of positivity for ANY of these players. Chances are, at least one of two of them are going to prove themselves to be starter-caliber players in this league, even if we're being un-optimistic.

 

[Natebishop3]

I think I should specify...I don't think Nik is wrong when he says he doesn't have a ton of confidence in our guys. Factually speaking, yeah, they haven't shown much yet.

I just think it's kind of sad for your fandom if you don't harbor a single ounce of positivity for ANY of these players. Chances are, at least one of two of them are going to prove themselves to be starter-caliber players in this league, even if we're being un-optimistic.

I'm probably too optimistic. I see a lot of potential on this roster.

 

[Nikolokolus]

You skated the tough questions though.. Again, wasn't he that good the year before but they didn't win? Wasn't it the step up of play from the guys around him that took them from a one and done to a ring? Not trying to diminish Currys impact, but your insistence that he was the end all is ludicrous, Nikiloklus.

If that's the case for one player being the end all then LBJ should have a ring for every year he has played....

What tough question? I've got 5 or 6 people responding to what I wrote. In any case he did have a significan jump in performance: http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/c/curryst01.html
Going from 24 PER (good all-star numbers) to 28 PER (MVP level production) probably helped tip the scales. As for Lebron, he's usually had horrendously poor teams around him so I'm not sure what your point is?

So let me state this as clearly and succinctly as I can. In order to win a ring a team almost always needs 1 MVP level player and another All-Star level player (preferably two) and the ability to play defense to win it all. Take out one of those components and the road to a title becomes either impossible or incredibly unlikely.

 

[Nikolokolus]

And you failed miserably.

The question had nothing even to do with Curry. It had to do with a lottery pick and what would one more really do to improve this team compared go all of the ones we already have?

I answered your question directly. Ask better questions if you want a different answer.

 

[Orion Bailey]

I'm probably too optimistic. I see a lot of potential on this roster.

Im with ya. I think a lot of us are. I know Kingspeed is too. Isnt that saying something though? If that many of us are starting to see potential? I think most of the pessimists are still looking at these guys numbers from previous years.

New team, potentially new life...

 

[Natebishop3]

Im with ya. I think a lot of us are. I know Kingspeed is too. Isnt that saying something though? If that many of us are starting to see potential? I think most of the pessimists are still looking at these guys numbers from previous years.

New team, potentially new life...

I wasn't really sure what to expect from guys like Harkless, Aminu, and Davis, but I like what I've seen so far.

 

[PtldPlatypus]

What tough question? I've got 5 or 6 people responding to what I wrote. In any case he did have a significan jump in performance: http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/c/curryst01.html
Going from 24 PER (good all-star numbers) to 28 PER (MVP level production) probably helped tip the scales. As for Lebron, he's usually had horrendously poor teams around him so I'm not sure what your point is?

So let me state this as clearly and succinctly as I can. In order to win a ring a team almost always needs 1 MVP level player and another All-Star level player (preferably two) and the ability to play defense to win it all. Take out one of those components and the road to a title becomes either impossible or incredibly unlikely.

So, we need Dame to elevate his game to MVP-caliber, we need at least one, maybe two players on the roster to develop to all-star level (maybe CJ, Leonard, Vonleh, Harkless), and we need to play good defense. Those basic parameters all seem attainable to me, without adding a top-5 pick. Likely? No. But the confluence of circumstances that lead to titles are generally unlikely, regardless.

 

[Orion Bailey]

What tough question? I've got 5 or 6 people responding to what I wrote. In any case he did have a significan jump in performance: http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/c/curryst01.html
Going from 24 PER (good all-star numbers) to 28 PER (MVP level production) probably helped tip the scales. As for Lebron, he's usually had horrendously poor teams around him so I'm not sure what your point is?

So let me state this as clearly and succinctly as I can. In order to win a ring a team almost always needs 1 MVP level player and another All-Star level player (preferably two) and the ability to play defense to win it all. Take out one of those components and the road to a title becomes either impossible or incredibly unlikely.

This is true in times past. the game is changing though and GS is proof of that.

I answered your question directly. Ask better questions if you want a different answer.

Hmmm you did? When did I... NM, quotes are the easiest. Lets start again... Here is my question you answered so directly....

"What is one more lottery pick going to do to help this team, other than be a potential trade offering in the offseason?
I mean with how many we already have, what is one more really going to do? Especially when he will more than likely be a few years younger than the core we are trying to build around Dame?

Why aren't people embracing the guys we have and wanting them to develop? Another lotto pick means another guy to develop, taking coaching time away from who we already have.

If we make the lottery then this means our team is a lot worse than we/I thought and most of our new acquisitions have not panned out and our other guys didn't take the next step we were hoping for. If we miss the lottery and are in contention for the 8th spot, NORMALLY that's a dead zone, but with this young roster full of upside? Id much rather just miss the playoffs this year, than be a lotto pick. Im pretty sure anyone with long term thoughts on this team will see the reasoning behind my opinion... I hope. "

How you think comparing Dame to Curry is answering this is confusing me. I must need to go back to school or something.