The Blazers "Legitimately" In The NBA Finals

[HomerLovesKoolAid]

I can't believe I'm the only one who thinks the Blazers are going to win the championship next year.

:MARIS61:

 

[ABM]

So, if I've read some other posts correctly, the Blazers should just play their cards close to the vest this summer, then go after a FA(s) next summer when there's a seeming glut....a buyer's market? In that scenario, I wonder if Klay Thompson would be available?

 

[MickZagger]

So, if I've read some other posts correctly, the Blazers should just play their cards close to the vest this summer, then go after a FA(s) next summer when there's a seeming glut....a buyer's market? In that scenario, I wonder if Klay Thompson would be available?

He has family from here. His mom is a Vancouver native.

 

[VanillaGorilla]

He has family from here. His mom is a Vancouver native.

One of my friends played against him in a 5th grade tournament in L.O. or something.

 

[e_blazer]

To me, the whole question of NBA finals or bust is wrong. Right now, the Grizzlies and Pacers are playing in their respective conference finals. Neither one would have been remotely considered likely to do that, let alone make the NBA finals. Obviously, neither one has much chance of accomplishing the latter, but they're in the position where one injury to a major player on the opposing team would move it into a real possibility. The Blazers' first goal is to get into the category of the Pacers and Grizzlies, watch the contracts they give out, and be in a position to make the next level of legitimate contender when a chance arises to be a player in a future trade for a major player, the way the Heat and Clippers did and countless other teams before them. The Blazers can certainly rise to that level over the next two years with some sound moves starting this summer.

 

[jlprk]

We're already the champions, in my mind. In fact, next month in June, we're beating the Seattle Supersonics 4-0.

 

[ABM]

The Blazers' first goal is to get into the category of the Pacers and Grizzlies........The Blazers can certainly rise to that level over the next two years with some sound moves starting this summer.

I like your way of thinking. Here's to that happening!

 

[UKRAINEFAN]

If our posters are correct (80% saying need 3 years or more (never?) to make the finals); then what are the implications? It seems to me that Aldridge would need to be traded now. there is a good chance that if we are not very, very good within the next two years, he will leave. So he may have the most value right now.
Something else to be considered is that apparently the 2014 draft and free agent class will be a lot better. So if we traded Aldridge in an unbalanced trade for picks and possible a younger player; this could possibly help us roll into next summer in a good position. First, it would make us a weaker team; thereby allowing us to again keep our pick owed to Charlotte; we would have a lottery pick in a really good draft. Also we could lower our payroll; putting us in better position to go after free agent(s) in 2014. I know that some commentators have suggested we trade LA to Cleveland for the #1 plus more draft picks or younger players.

Now, if Olshey could somehow pull off a deal instead that somehow puts us into strong contention for a finals spot within a year or two, he should do that. But if he can't; shouldn't this be considered?

 

[e_blazer]

If our posters are correct (80% saying need 3 years or more (never?) to make the finals); then what are the implications? It seems to me that Aldridge would need to be traded now. there is a good chance that if we are not very, very good within the next two years, he will leave. So he may have the most value right now.
Something else to be considered is that apparently the 2014 draft and free agent class will be a lot better. So if we traded Aldridge in an unbalanced trade for picks and possible a younger player; this could possibly help us roll into next summer in a good position. First, it would make us a weaker team; thereby allowing us to again keep our pick owed to Charlotte; we would have a lottery pick in a really good draft. Also we could lower our payroll; putting us in better position to go after free agent(s) in 2014. I know that some commentators have suggested we trade LA to Cleveland for the #1 plus more draft picks or younger players.

Now, if Olshey could somehow pull off a deal instead that somehow puts us into strong contention for a finals spot within a year or two, he should do that. But if he can't; shouldn't this be considered?

No offense intended, UKRAINEFAN, but that's the line of thinking that kept the Clippers such an NBA powerhouse for so many decades. Keep trading away proven vets for unproven rookies and you're not going to get anywhere. For the Clippers to break out of their weenie ways, it took assembling enough proven players on the right contracts that when Chris Paul had finally had enough of New Orleans they had the assets to make a play for him. They wouldn't have had a shot if they'd continued their previous mode of a never ending parade of high draft picks passing through the organization. Sure, they needed the young talent in the form of Blake Griffin, but the deal doesn't get made without a very good Eric Gordon being available to be packaged in the deal. It's hard to say if Paul will stay or go, but he at least made the team relevant again.

Regarding the timeline, I've already said that the realistic goal for the next two years is to join the second tier teams like the Pacers and Grizzlies. From there, you look for a deal or a lucky break in the playoffs to get you to the Finals. As for LMA, I think that the hypothesis that he's going to leave if the Blazers aren't a Finals team in two years begs the question. Where's the logical support for that idea? If, as I suspect, Olshey can put the Blazers on the same footing as the Pacers and Grizzlies within two years, that means that the Blazers will be as good as, or better than 25 or so team in the league. How likely is it that one of the top 5 teams will have the cap space to make a play for his services in two years? Not very likely, IMHO. If they're that good, then they will already have 3-4 big contracts of their own. If it does look like there's a good chance the Blazers will lose LMA in two years, there's still the option of a deadline trade or a summer sign-and-trade to get value back for him. I am not saying that LMA is untouchable (none of our players are), but I am saying that he'd better bring back another established star of approximately equal value or else no deal, from my point of view.

 

[UKRAINEFAN]

No offense intended, UKRAINEFAN, but that's the line of thinking that kept the Clippers such an NBA powerhouse for so many decades. Keep trading away proven vets for unproven rookies and you're not going to get anywhere. For the Clippers to break out of their weenie ways, it took assembling enough proven players on the right contracts that when Chris Paul had finally had enough of New Orleans they had the assets to make a play for him. They wouldn't have had a shot if they'd continued their previous mode of a never ending parade of high draft picks passing through the organization. Sure, they needed the young talent in the form of Blake Griffin, but the deal doesn't get made without a very good Eric Gordon being available to be packaged in the deal. It's hard to say if Paul will stay or go, but he at least made the team relevant again.

Regarding the timeline, I've already said that the realistic goal for the next two years is to join the second tier teams like the Pacers and Grizzlies. From there, you look for a deal or a lucky break in the playoffs to get you to the Finals. As for LMA, I think that the hypothesis that he's going to leave if the Blazers aren't a Finals team in two years begs the question. Where's the logical support for that idea? If, as I suspect, Olshey can put the Blazers on the same footing as the Pacers and Grizzlies within two years, that means that the Blazers will be as good as, or better than 25 or so team in the league. How likely is it that one of the top 5 teams will have the cap space to make a play for his services in two years? Not very likely, IMHO. If they're that good, then they will already have 3-4 big contracts of their own. If it does look like there's a good chance the Blazers will lose LMA in two years, there's still the option of a deadline trade or a summer sign-and-trade to get value back for him. I am not saying that LMA is untouchable (none of our players are), but I am saying that he'd better bring back another established star of approximately equal value or else no deal, from my point of view.

No offense taken. I'm not strongly attached to this idea; it just occurred to me today that maybe the Blazers should be planning to somehow take advantage of the fact that the next draft and the next free agent class are expected to be a lot better than the upcoming ones. I don't really like the idea of being out of the playoffs for another year but I still think that unless Olshey can make a major improvement this offseason, that they should prepare for the next offseason by shedding salary and maybe thinking about keeping that draft pick. there may be several ways to do that; trading LMA would only be one.

 

[e_blazer]

No offense taken. I'm not strongly attached to this idea; it just occurred to me today that maybe the Blazers should be planning to somehow take advantage of the fact that the next draft and the next free agent class are expected to be a lot better than the upcoming ones. I don't really like the idea of being out of the playoffs for another year but I still think that unless Olshey can make a major improvement this offseason, that they should prepare for the next offseason by shedding salary and maybe thinking about keeping that draft pick. there may be several ways to do that; trading LMA would only be one.

If Olshey strikes out this summer then I think that's a conversation the Blazers will have to have. I'm optimistic it won't come to that.