It's ok to have hope but you have to be realistic. We can't even beat the Jazz and they didn't even have their main guys like we did. And we still got beat.
This isn't directly directed @ you but more of a general post to the subject theme.
To be realistic you also have to be realistic with the Blazers.
What is the Blazers record without Aldridge this year? I don't know the answer...
But I do know the Blazers have lost to the Celtics/Grizz/Dubs/Jazz. At least four losses.
What is the Thunders record w/o Durant and with Westbrick? I know with Durant+Westbrick they were 17-10.
Does anyone really think the Thunder would be fighting for the 8th seed w/ Durant on the court?
Point of these statements are... teams are better w/ their best players on the court...
Aldridge despite what many used to say about him as been the Blazers best player sense the 2010 season.
Do I think the Blazers should have beat the Jazz? yes.
Is the sky falling because we lost to them without the guy the Blazers offense is designed around? No.
People really should look at the positives when the best player on the team is resting... Not just the wrong negatives.
People have been saying Lillard has been playing like shit and questioning if he is overrated...
28 points, 12-22FG, 3-8 from three.
5 rebounds, 5 assists, 3 turnovers, 2 steals. When Aldridge is back and if Lillard plays that well... Highly doubt the Blazers lose many games.
Honestly if you want to look @ the defense... Look directly @ Nards.
Trevor Booker(who?) lit him up and there was nothing Nards did to stop it.
Without him getting 19 points in the first quarter(previous career high was 17 for a GAME)....
The Blazers blow the Jazz out.
Last game vs the Jazz the Blazers had Aldridge on Booker(for stretches)... He certainly didn't drop 19 in the first quarter vs Aldridge... Nor did he get 36 with Aldridge guarding him...
I don't take much away from last night other than Nards isn't ready defensively to be an asset in the playoffs.