The Remaining Schedule and the Drive for #5 (Column)

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in
Blazers Roy said:
I just thought about the funniest scenario for this season:

Blazers finish 7th and meet the Spurs, they lose 4-0 to the Spurs (of course), BUT LamarCooch gets a season ending injury because Mayers Damage kicked him really hard in the knee without even noticing (cue Leonard's clueless face\expression).

That would be the funniest thing ever, to see that the Blazers worked hard for 82 games just to get Lamarsha out of the playoffs, nothing more.


*Yea, i have a dark sense of humor. Really sorry if this offended the PC people.
Click to expand...
I don't believe in voodoo like karma, but if I did . . . o.O
 
riverman said:
Against Orlando Lamarcus choked in the endgame...Leonard bailed them out..I was checking the game thread and LA must have bricked 7-8 midrange jumpers in a row which kept Orlando right in the game..I'd love to see him do that in a playoff series with the Blazers
Click to expand...
Yeah, he owes us that much. ;)
 
Orion Bailey said:
Not winning it all doesn't mean you don't gain experience.

They had just lost to MJ and the Bulls the year before in the finals. How is that not experience? Then lose the first round to the nuggets the next season? They were experienced. Don't fool yourself. :)
Click to expand...

BIG difference between winning a title and not. Blazers came close twice but still didn't have that experience of what it took to win it and then the confidence going forward to bury pipsqueak #8 seeds. Indiana, Utah, New York, Seattle....this list goes on for teams since the 90's that came close but didn't win it. Blazers were no where near Detroit or Chicago in terms of title experience. And that carries over....and Seattle didn't have it.
 
In the words of then Knicks coach Pat Riley...until Michael Jordan retires we're all playing for second place
 
TBpup said:
BIG difference between winning a title and not. Blazers came close twice but still didn't have that experience of what it took to win it and then the confidence going forward to bury pipsqueak #8 seeds. Indiana, Utah, New York, Seattle....this list goes on for teams since the 90's that came close but didn't win it. Blazers were no where near Detroit or Chicago in terms of title experience. And that carries over....and Seattle didn't have it.
Click to expand...


So how do you get from getting to the finals and not winning to getting to the finals and winning?

There is no difference really. Your saying you don't get experience until you win, but you cant win until your experienced. Makes no sense.....

So how did GS win last year when the year before they were ousted and they have not won prior?

Your arguement has too many holes bro. Teams that make it to the finals and lose still gain major experience and can easily win it all the following year if basing it ON that experience.
 
Orion Bailey said:
So how do you get from getting to the finals and not winning to getting to the finals and winning?

There is no difference really. Your saying you don't get experience until you win, but you cant win until your experienced. Makes no sense.....

So how did GS win last year when the year before they were ousted and they have not won prior?

Your arguement has too many holes bro. Teams that make it to the finals and lose still gain major experience and can easily win it all the following year if basing it ON that experience.
Click to expand...
That's not even what TBPup is saying. He's saying teams with recent titles just don't get bounced in the first round.
 
Orion Bailey said:
So how do you get from getting to the finals and not winning to getting to the finals and winning?

There is no difference really. Your saying you don't get experience until you win, but you cant win until your experienced. Makes no sense.....

So how did GS win last year when the year before they were ousted and they have not won prior?

Your arguement has too many holes bro. Teams that make it to the finals and lose still gain major experience and can easily win it all the following year if basing it ON that experience.
Click to expand...

Easily? There are so many examples of that not being the case as listed above. Yes GS won it without having been to the Finals before but that is a rarity. As a Blazer fan, I'm sure you remember the Blazer winning their title having never been to the playoffs at all. Rare exception.

Also, I think you're misconstruing my use of 'experience'. Of course going to a title provides some experience but saying there is "no difference really' between winning a title experience and just going experience seems a bit naive and that is what I was saying was the difference between teams like GS and SA now and the Seattle team that was a #1 seed and got beat by a #8.

Having played on nationally ranked teams in a couple of sports, I can tell you how much more confident our teams were after winning at certain levels and how much more poised we were in following seasons then we had been before having that confidence of winning a Title. Any player in the league will tell you how different their confidence is after winning a title versus before and how it makes a difference going forward.
 
TBpup said:
Easily? There are so many examples of that not being the case as listed above. Yes GS won it without having been to the Finals before but that is a rarity. As a Blazer fan, I'm sure you remember the Blazer winning their title having never been to the playoffs at all. Rare exception.

Also, I think you're misconstruing my use of 'experience'. Of course going to a title provides some experience but saying there is "no difference really' between winning a title experience and just going experience seems a bit naive and that is what I was saying was the difference between teams like GS and SA now and the Seattle team that was a #1 seed and got beat by a #8.

Having played on nationally ranked teams in a couple of sports, I can tell you how much more confident our teams were after winning at certain levels and how much more poised we were in following seasons then we had been before having that confidence of winning a Title. Any player in the league will tell you how different their confidence is after winning a title versus before and how it makes a difference going forward.
Click to expand...

TBpup said:
Thank you...exactly right.
Click to expand...


Sorry guys, but debunked by the Spurs just last year. ;) Read above.
 
TBpup said:
Yes they were....were they a #1 seed? That's the original point I was making in your reference to the Sonics.
Click to expand...
Ahhh semantics though. SA has plenty of experience to not be a #1 seed and still win it all and it could be the same in reverse as well.

A team that just won CAN get ousted in the first round I believe, but we will have to agree to disagree, as there is no right answer.
 
Chris Craig said:
No matter who the Blazers play in the playoffs, and I think they will make it, the Blazers are a dangerous team to face...a scrappy young group with nothing to lose and everything to prove, they will give their all...and I wouldn't want to be the other team
Click to expand...
The Blazers against the Spurs in the playoffs? It will be a slaughter.

TLSF.jpg
That's the spirit!
 
Also, again the Spurs losing was an aberration. First they were not the #1 seed as I was referencing with the Sonics and second, they were playing a way tougher opponent than they should have been due to Portland being handed a higher seed despite being #6 in record. Always exceptions to the rule and if someone want so use those as a foundation for a theory, they are welcome to it I guess.
 
For that matter how many teams have even won and then were a number 1 seed the next season? Probably not much to even go off of in history.
 

Attachments

  • upload_2016-2-12_14-33-34.png
    upload_2016-2-12_14-33-34.png
    192.1 KB · Views: 4
TBpup said:
Also, again the Spurs losing was an aberration. First they were not the #1 seed as I was referencing with the Sonics and second, they were playing a way tougher opponent than they should have been due to Portland being handed a higher seed despite being #6 in record. Always exceptions to the rule and if someone want so use those as a foundation for a theory, they are welcome to it I guess.
Click to expand...

Opponents shouldn't matter if you have the experience though right?
Its all good. Differing opinions is all. :)
 
Orion Bailey said:
Ahhh semantics though. SA has plenty of experience to not be a #1 seed and still win it all and it could be the same in reverse as well.

A team that just won CAN get ousted in the first round I believe, but we will have to agree to disagree, as there is no right answer.
Click to expand...

Again, this all goes back to 'Seattle lost as a #1 seed'. My point was the Sonics weren't like The Spurs/Warriors who have been #1 seeds because they didn't have the experience of winning a title. And again, last year the Spurs weren't a#1 seed and had to play a team that they shouldn't have had to play in the first round....which the NBA summarily fixed.

Not sure how that is so unreasonable.
 
Orion Bailey said:
Ahhh semantics though. SA has plenty of experience to not be a #1 seed and still win it all and it could be the same in reverse as well.

A team that just won CAN get ousted in the first round I believe, but we will have to agree to disagree, as there is no right answer.
Click to expand...
It's not "semantics." There was a very narrow point TBpup made that you didn't grasp.
 
I recognized that no matter what seed the Blazers achieve this year, the other team will be viewed as the heavy favorite. Victory is never sweeter than when your opponent is viewed as unbeatable.

Chip and a chair.
 
Nikolokolus said:
It's not "semantics." There was a very narrow point TBpup made that you didn't grasp.
Click to expand...

I grasp it, I just disagree. I dont think that winning a ring the previous season and then getting a number 1 seed is much different than going to the finals the previous season and then getting a number 1 seed. I think both teams can lose in the first round and the team that won a championship the year before might even have a higher chance of going down due to overconfidence.

Not that I didnt grasp, I just disagree.. big difference.
 
Orion Bailey said:
I grasp it, I just disagree. I dont think that winning a ring the previous season and then getting a number 1 seed is much different than going to the finals the previous season and then getting a number 1 seed. I think both teams can lose in the first round and the team that won a championship the year before might even have a higher chance of going down due to overconfidence.

Not that I didnt grasp, I just disagree.. big difference.
Click to expand...

Actually, there are quite a few players who agree with you. The players who didn't win say there isn't much difference. The players who did win just smile and nod yes, there is a huge difference.
 
TBpup said:
Actually, there are quite a few players who agree with you. The players who didn't win say there isn't much difference. The players who did win just smile and nod yes, there is a huge difference.
Click to expand...

Well then if that's the case then majority is right right? And the majority of players in the league dont win each year, so I just won!!!! HAHA :)
 
TBpup said:
Again, this all goes back to 'Seattle lost as a #1 seed'. My point was the Sonics weren't like The Spurs/Warriors who have been #1 seeds because they didn't have the experience of winning a title. And again, last year the Spurs weren't a#1 seed and had to play a team that they shouldn't have had to play in the first round....which the NBA summarily fixed.

Not sure how that is so unreasonable.
Click to expand...

Heat lost in the first round in 2007 1 year after winning the title--but their opponent (Bulls) had 5 more wins than they did.
Mavericks haven't not lost in the first round since winning their title--but none of those teams were division winners.
Spurs also lost in the first round in 2008 as a 3 seed 1 year after winning a title, but that was to a 50-win Dallas team.

There are always differences from this year's scenario, but the point is that there are many examples of recent title winners losing in round 1. Of course it would be a longshot, of course it would be highly unlikely, of course if it happened it would be an exception to the rule; but that doesn't mean that the odds would be insurmountable, or that we should think that there's zero chance of pulling off the upset.

Yes one should learn from history, but one should not be a prisoner to it.
 
Orion Bailey said:
Well then if that's the case then majority is right right? And the majority of players in the league dont win each year, so I just won!!!! HAHA :)
Click to expand...

Classic. Aligning with losers makes one a winner. What is this country coming to...lol. Love the debate. :cheers:
 
PtldPlatypus said:
Heat lost in the first round in 2007 1 year after winning the title--but their opponent (Bulls) had 5 more wins than they did.
Mavericks haven't not lost in the first round since winning their title--but none of those teams were division winners.
Spurs also lost in the first round in 2008 as a 3 seed 1 year after winning a title, but that was to a 50-win Dallas team.

There are always differences from this year's scenario, but the point is that there are many examples of recent title winners losing in round 1. Of course it would be a longshot, of course it would be highly unlikely, of course if it happened it would be an exception to the rule; but that doesn't mean that the odds would be insurmountable, or that we should think that there's zero chance of pulling off the upset.

Yes one should learn from history, but one should not be a prisoner to it.
Click to expand...


Ahhh thank you, so much clearer than I. GREAT POINT!
 
Orion Bailey said:
Ahhh thank you, so much clearer than I. GREAT POINT!
Click to expand...

Yes...title winners but not Title winners who were the #1 seed vs a #1 see that hadn't won a title which was my point and has been all along sing you pointed out the Sonics/Nuggets example.

Enough CYA...lol.
 
TBpup said:
Classic. Aligning with losers makes one a winner. What is this country coming to...lol. Love the debate. :cheers:
Click to expand...

Me too. :)

Dammit, I thought I was a winner by losing.... how can I lose then to be a winner?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

e_blazer
  • Poll Poll
Blazers' Remaining Schedule
Replies
5
Views
298
Chris Craig
Chris Craig
TBpup
Upcoming Blazer Schedule
Replies
4
Views
188
Draco
Draco
B
Schedule (B2Bs), Record, and Rankings
Replies
13
Views
1K
riverman
riverman
BoBoBREWSKI
Playoff Race - Remaining Games
Replies
8
Views
972
Nikolokolus
Nikolokolus
H.C.
This time last year
Replies
19
Views
885
kjironman1
kjironman1

Users who are viewing this thread

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