This Blazers team...

[Minstrel]

...reminds me of the late-80s/early-90s Blazers teams. Incredibly deep in talent, lots of multi-talented players and scorers, and a great passing team.

The only difference is that this team got the young Arvydas Sabonis (so to speak).

 

[Crimson the Cat]

I see what you're sayin but this team is considerably deeper IMO

 

[The Professional Fan]

The only difference is that this team got the young Arvydas Sabonis (so to speak).

Which would have made all the difference in the world.....then.

Anyway......

This team is probably the deepest in the league, and I don't think that statement is coming from blind fandom. It's more than likely an accurate statement.

 

[Pinwheel1]

Lets keep it deep and not........"consolidate"

 

[KingSpeed]

Which would have made all the difference in the world.....then.

Anyway......

This team is probably the deepest in the league, and I don't think that statement is coming from blind fandom. It's more than likely an accurate statement.

We're, without question, the deepest team in the league.

 

[Shooter]

This team is probably the deepest in the league, and I don't think that statement is coming from blind fandom. It's more than likely an accurate statement.

We're so deep it's silly. Jerryd Bayless would already be playing major minutes for a lot of teams, and then of course we've got Martell Webster who hasn't played a second yet, and Batum who is going to keep getting better, and Oden who has barely scratched his potential.

Wow. This is going to be fun for years to come.

 

[DaRizzle]

We're, without question, the deepest team in the league.

Um...come again?

 

[STOMP]

Lets keep it deep and not........"consolidate"

I disagree for a few reasons. In the playoffs minutes get consolidated into the club's better players... it's better to have a better 5th guy then a sweet 11th & 12th man who are reduced to clapping. And if your 15th guy has the most desirable contract maybe ever... people tend to speculate. Portland is loaded with desirable players and assets.

I also doubt you can keep everyone happy. Guys hopefully do and say the right things, as thats part of being a professional. But professionals are generally out for money and respect, not feel good stories. They need to play to meet their goals. Maybe through juggling injuries and enjoying a winning vibe the club can avoid the obvious looming minutes crunch tension that comes with good players sitting throughout this season. But thats not a sure thing. Sell high buy low... if the value of your quality lessor players is likely going to fade due to inaction, doesn't it follow to sell now while their value is high?

The club is always in a state of flux. Embrace it

STOMP

 

[Minstrel]

I disagree for a few reasons. In the playoffs minutes get consolidated into the club's better players... it's better to have a better 5th guy then a sweet 11th & 12th man who are reduced to clapping. And if your 15th guy has the most desirable contract maybe ever... people tend to speculate. Portland is loaded with desirable players and assets.

I also doubt you can keep everyone happy. Guys hopefully do and say the right things, as thats part of being a professional. But professionals are generally out for money and respect, not feel good stories. They need to play to meet their goals. Maybe through juggling injuries and enjoying a winning vibe the club can avoid the obvious looming minutes crunch tension that comes with good players sitting throughout this season. But thats not a sure thing. Sell high buy low... if the value of your quality lessor players is likely going to fade due to inaction, doesn't it follow to sell now while their value is high?

The club is always in a state of flux. Embrace it

What he said.

 

[KingSpeed]

Um...come again?

Watch our games. Read our boxscores. Our bench scored 60 points in a game this season. We have depth at every single position and two of the best sixth men in the league in Rudy and Travis. The Lakers (and Celtics) are deep too. But not as deep as us.

Watch the game where we played the Bulls. Look what our bench did. We routed the Bulls by 42 because we always had great players in the game. Our "scrubs" aren't scrubs. The Lakers barely beat the Bulls. How many 42 point wins do the Lakers have this season?

 

[Tince]

I don't think the Celtics are deep, but the Lakers certainly are.

Ariza, Farmer, Odom, Sasha, and Walton are all very good NBA players.

6-12, I think we're better than the Lakers. However, 1-12, you'd have to give the Lakers serious consideration.

 

[KingSpeed]

I guess the Cs aren't as deep this year but I think last year, they were the deepest with PJ Brown and Posey there.

 

[Ed O]

What he said.

Absolutely. Nice work, STOMP.

Ed O.

 

[Ed O]

...reminds me of the late-80s/early-90s Blazers teams. Incredibly deep in talent, lots of multi-talented players and scorers, and a great passing team.

The only difference is that this team got the young Arvydas Sabonis (so to speak).

Well... I think that the strength of the Drexler teams was the starting five. "The best in the business" featured five guys that were potential mismatches for opponents.

The bench had its moments, including Uncle Cliffy. The team just wasn't that DEEP, though.

What it was? The five guys were mature. Buck Williams turned 30 his first season as a Blazer (89-90). Drexler was 27. Porter turned 27. Duck turned 25. Kersey was 26. Cliffy was 23, Drazen was 25, Danny Young was 27, Cooper was 33.

That's a core that is all entering their prime together.

Compare that to our team's ages... we're like six years away from reaching that level of physical maturity.

Not to put down your comparison at all. It's just interesting to compare and contrast.

Ed O.

 

[Minstrel]

Well... I think that the strength of the Drexler teams was the starting five. "The best in the business" featured five guys that were potential mismatches for opponents.

The bench had its moments, including Uncle Cliffy. The team just wasn't that DEEP, though.

What it was? The five guys were mature. Buck Williams turned 30 his first season as a Blazer (89-90). Drexler was 27. Porter turned 27. Duck turned 25. Kersey was 26. Cliffy was 23, Drazen was 25, Danny Young was 27, Cooper was 33.

That's a core that is all entering their prime together.

Compare that to our team's ages... we're like six years away from reaching that level of physical maturity.

Not to put down your comparison at all. It's just interesting to compare and contrast.

Hmm, well you know the team better. I wasn't a Portland fan then. My impression of those teams was that they kept bringing one good player after another off the bench. "Drexler and lots of good players." The nine players you mentioned plus Danny Ainge. Ten good players is pretty deep!

This team may be deeper depending on how much you think of players like Frye, Webster, Rodriguez and Bayless.

 

[Wheels]

Um...come again?

I just did.. while looking at that gif

 

[tlongII]

I disagree for a few reasons. In the playoffs minutes get consolidated into the club's better players... it's better to have a better 5th guy then a sweet 11th & 12th man who are reduced to clapping. And if your 15th guy has the most desirable contract maybe ever... people tend to speculate. Portland is loaded with desirable players and assets.

I also doubt you can keep everyone happy. Guys hopefully do and say the right things, as thats part of being a professional. But professionals are generally out for money and respect, not feel good stories. They need to play to meet their goals. Maybe through juggling injuries and enjoying a winning vibe the club can avoid the obvious looming minutes crunch tension that comes with good players sitting throughout this season. But thats not a sure thing. Sell high buy low... if the value of your quality lessor players is likely going to fade due to inaction, doesn't it follow to sell now while their value is high?

The club is always in a state of flux. Embrace it

STOMP

I think this is generally an accurate statement, but not this year. Our guys are young and embracing the team concept. It's true that most teams shorten their rotation in the playoffs, but that doesn't mean we have to. Teams that shorten their lineup have a few players that are clearly the best on their team and therefore get the most minutes. Our team isn't like that. We roll 11 deep, and there is basically no dropoff with any of the 11. Next year we'll probably need to consolidate, but not now.

 

[Pinwheel1]

I disagree for a few reasons. In the playoffs minutes get consolidated into the club's better players... it's better to have a better 5th guy then a sweet 11th & 12th man who are reduced to clapping. And if your 15th guy has the most desirable contract maybe ever... people tend to speculate. Portland is loaded with desirable players and assets.

I also doubt you can keep everyone happy. Guys hopefully do and say the right things, as thats part of being a professional. But professionals are generally out for money and respect, not feel good stories. They need to play to meet their goals. Maybe through juggling injuries and enjoying a winning vibe the club can avoid the obvious looming minutes crunch tension that comes with good players sitting throughout this season. But thats not a sure thing. Sell high buy low... if the value of your quality lessor players is likely going to fade due to inaction, doesn't it follow to sell now while their value is high?

The club is always in a state of flux. Embrace it

STOMP

Well I obviuosly disagree. Sure if KP can really steal a starter for our 7th, 11th, and 12th man you look at it. But you guys keep saying that our players will lose their trade value by not playing. 90% of GM's and scouts know more than us about our players. In some instances a player's value is higher by not playng because his flaws are exposed. It can go both ways.

But the bottom line is I have yet to hear a trade scenario that wasn't either a bad idea for us or just plain unrealistic. And even if a trade happens we will still ALWAYS have players that want to play so they can meet their goals. And that is a good thing because it means we have depth. Embrace it.

What ever KP does, just don't trade Drazen or Jermaine because they want more fucking minutes.

 

[Shooter]

In the playoffs minutes get consolidated into the club's better players... it's better to have a better 5th guy then a sweet 11th & 12th man who are reduced to clapping.

That's an oversimplification. We're not talking about the 11th and 12th guys, we're talking about our second unit, which is the 5 guys who back up our starters. Those are the guys who help carry you through a season, give the starters a rest when they need it, and keep the lead for you. One great 5th man can't do all of that. Not to mention the very real possibility of injuries during the year. Roy and Oden, in particular, have been a little injury prone, so it's great to have reliable guys on the bench to back them up. It's bench strength that gets you through the regular season and INTO the playoffs; without a deep bench, it's harder to endure the bumps and bruises of a long 82-game schedule.

I would point to the 2000 Blazers as a prime example of the value of a deep bench. Sure, we lost to the Lakers in the WCF, but that Blazer team was deep and loaded for bear. If we'd been able to avoid that collapse in the fourth quarter of Game 7, we would have gone on to a championship. And we would have done it with a very deep bench.

Finally, there is no reason why McMillan couldn't continue to play our bench during the playoffs. If you have a bench that you can rely on (and ours has not just kept leads, but extended them), then it can be an extra advantage in the playoffs, when you're going against teams that have to rely on their starters for more minutes. As their starters begin to wear down in the fourth quarter, ours will be fresher because they have been able to get some rest.

 

[STOMP]

I think this is generally an accurate statement, but not this year. Our guys are young and embracing the team concept. It's true that most teams shorten their rotation in the playoffs, but that doesn't mean we have to. Teams that shorten their lineup have a few players that are clearly the best on their team and therefore get the most minutes. Our team isn't like that. We roll 11 deep, and there is basically no dropoff with any of the 11. Next year we'll probably need to consolidate, but not now.

in a few weeks when Webster comes back, do you really think Channing will be embracing his DNP-CD to 5 MPG role in a contract year? Or what if Webster can't beat out Batum and Travis and is only getting scraps... do you think he's going to be a happy camper?

Whats wrong with having better players or some lousy team's 2009 #1 (maybe a shot at Rubio) and less of a minutes crunch today? Having too many good players is a good problem to have, but it is a problem. Ignore it and you run the risk of it becoming a real distraction.

STOMP

 

[STOMP]

Well I obviuosly disagree. Sure if KP can really steal a starter for our 7th, 11th, and 12th man you look at it.

if you feel this way, we don't disagree

STOMP

 

[Shooter]

in a few weeks when Webster comes back, do you really think Channing will be embracing his DNP-CD to 5 MPG role in a contract year? Or what if Webster can't beat out Batum and Travis and is only getting scraps... do you think he's going to be a happy camper?

Who cares? These guys get paid millions of dollars a year, and if that means a few of them have to share minutes with someone else, so be it. Besides, I've never seen a guy come off the bench and just run up and down the court without trying, just to show the coach that's mad about not enough playing time. You put a guy into a game that's been sitting on the bench and he's going to bust his butt to show you he "belongs" on the court. That's only a good thing.

Maybe I'm wrong, but it just seems crazy to "thin out" your bench in order to get one key player. I love a deep bench with lots of good players on it. It's a great insurance policy during the regular season, and an extra advantage in the playoffs.

 

[Ed O]

Who cares? These guys get paid millions of dollars a year, and if that means a few of them have to share minutes with someone else, so be it. Besides, I've never seen a guy come off the bench and just run up and down the court without trying, just to show the coach that's mad about not enough playing time. You put a guy into a game that's been sitting on the bench and he's going to bust his butt to show you he "belongs" on the court. That's only a good thing.

If he's not happy, he's not staying.

If he's not staying, why not trade him now as part of a deal for a better player?

Ed O.

 

[tlongII]

in a few weeks when Webster comes back, do you really think Channing will be embracing his DNP-CD to 5 MPG role in a contract year? Or what if Webster can't beat out Batum and Travis and is only getting scraps... do you think he's going to be a happy camper?

Whats wrong with having better players or some lousy team's 2009 #1 (maybe a shot at Rubio) and less of a minutes crunch today? Having too many good players is a good problem to have, but it is a problem. Ignore it and you run the risk of it becoming a real distraction.

STOMP

My position is that it is not a problem this year. I believe I explained why in my previous post. Channing is a team-first guy and no, I don't believe he will complain as his minutes are reduced. Winning is an excellent way to keep players happy.

 

[Ed O]

My position is that it is not a problem this year. I believe I explained why in my previous post. Channing is a team-first guy and no, I don't believe he will complain as his minutes are reduced. Winning is an excellent way to keep players happy.

Unfortunately for your position, this year isn't THAT important. In comparison to the next 5 years or so, this year is just a blip. A blip that precedes our core being near its physical prime.

This year, Frye and Webster and Bayless and everyone might be happy playing 7 minutes a game. Two years from now? No amount of winning will placate them if they're still at that playing time level.

Ed O.

 

[Shooter]

If he's not happy, he's not staying.

If he's not staying, why not trade him now as part of a deal for a better player?

Players want to win championships. If Channing Frye thinks he'll get one with the Blazers, he'll want to be here. If we win a championship and he still wants to leave, then we can think about a trade.

I say we leave things as they are right now, and see how deep we go into the playoffs. We're playing at a high level now, and we should get only better as Oden settles in.

I just don't get this mania for making trades. This team is clearly on the rise, and we've got all the ingredients we need to make a run at a championship. I think it could even happen this year.

 

[Pinwheel1]

in a few weeks when Webster comes back, do you really think Channing will be embracing his DNP-CD to 5 MPG role in a contract year? Or what if Webster can't beat out Batum and Travis and is only getting scraps... do you think he's going to be a happy camper?

Whats wrong with having better players or some lousy team's 2009 #1 (maybe a shot at Rubio) and less of a minutes crunch today? Having too many good players is a good problem to have, but it is a problem. Ignore it and you run the risk of it becoming a real distraction.

STOMP

I am still hesitant on being pro active in this situation because we hold all the cards. I want to make sure we make the right move. If some players are unhappy too bad. (Every good team has a few with a 12-15 man roster.)

I think we can afford to be patient. It sounds like your philosophy is a little more urgent based on losing trade value. But again if we can get the right guy then you do it. But it better be the right guy because we don't have to make a move.

 

[tlongII]

Unfortunately for your position, this year isn't THAT important. In comparison to the next 5 years or so, this year is just a blip. A blip that precedes our core being near its physical prime.

This year, Frye and Webster and Bayless and everyone might be happy playing 7 minutes a game. Two years from now? No amount of winning will placate them if they're still at that playing time level.

Ed O.

I disagree. This year is very important in my opinion. I guess I'm one of the few that actually believes we can win the title this year. We're the only team in the league that can match up with the Lakers.

 

[Shooter]

I disagree. This year is very important in my opinion. I guess I'm one of the few that actually believes we can win the title this year. We're the only team in the league that can match up with the Lakers.

I couldn't agree more. And to be quite honest, I think we have to grab a title as soon as we can. I love Oden, but I don't know how long he's going to last physically. He may have a long career, but he then again he may not. To build the team for "down the road" ignores the fact that we have a very good team right now and we should "seize the moment." Jabbar won a title in his rookie year with the Bucks, and I don't see why Oden couldn't do the same on a much deeper team.

 

[Ed O]

Players want to win championships. If Channing Frye thinks he'll get one with the Blazers, he'll want to be here. If we win a championship and he still wants to leave, then we can think about a trade.

I say we leave things as they are right now, and see how deep we go into the playoffs. We're playing at a high level now, and we should get only better as Oden settles in.

I just don't get this mania for making trades. This team is clearly on the rise, and we've got all the ingredients we need to make a run at a championship. I think it could even happen this year.

How did we get to where we are? Three ways:

1. Losing lots and lots of games
2. Making lots and lots of trades
3. Making good decisions on trades and draft picks

Presumably #1 is long gone. #3 should be the same.

Should we go to "make NO trades" on #2? I don't think so.

Waiting until a player isn't playing or until he wants out is the way that you make retarded deals like Wells for nothing.

Pritchard has been proactive his entire time in Portland and I'd expect that he is more closely aligned with those of us who believe in consolidation and proactivity than with those of you who don't want to break up this championship-level team this year.

Ed O.