Trade Damian Lillard!

[oldmangrouch]

I would hope the Blazers learned something from the Roy/Oden ordeal.

Keep Lillard as long as he is healthy.....but if he starts to break down, dump his ass ASAP.

 

[Rastapopoulos]

Okay youv used evans as an example multiple times but you have never even attempted to explain what happened with Evans so it leads me to believe you hardly ever watched him play and probably only looked at season stats and never did any research other then that otherwise he wouldn't be your go to example.
Evans came into the league as a PG/primary ball handler for the Kings and he put up great stats his rookie year. They then moved him off the ball and tried to play him at sg and without the ball constantly in his hands his stats declined. They then tried him at SF and again his stats declined, the Kings haven't figured out his actual position but he hasn't played PG consistantly since his rookie year. Evans decline is due in great part to management/coach not knowing were to play him.

And the fact that he's not that great. Turns out if you have the ball in your hands all the time it can make you look better than you are, but won't necessarily do your team much good. You seriously think that if he was as good as he was supposed to be after his rookie year that the franchise wouldn't be playing him at PG now?

 

[Rastapopoulos]

Where have all the people gone who used to cite PER as the ultimate stat? If you're still out there, why is Lillard's PER so pedestrian?

 

[illmatic99]

I can't wait to bump this thread next year after Dame makes the all star team.

 

[BlazerCaravan]

Where have all the people gone who used to cite PER as the ultimate stat? If you're still out there, why is Lillard's PER so pedestrian?

So is this entire thing to slag on Lillard or to slag on PER?

 

[The_Lillard_King]

I bet we could get a good draft pick(s) for Lillard. Trade Aldridge, trade Lillard don't use cap space this summer, tank during the year and 2014-2015 roster could have a lot of potential. Dare I say the team of the future.

 

[Rhal]

Where have all the people gone who used to cite PER as the ultimate stat? If you're still out there, why is Lillard's PER so pedestrian?

Because he is a damn ROOKIE who played the most minutes in the NBA and PER isn't the end all of stats, just look at Lebrons PER his rookie year 18.3. The Kings franchise doesn't know what the hell they are doing and they realized Evans wasn't a PG they wanted but instead of trading him to a team that would play him at the spot he produces at they tried to turn him into something else and it hasn't worked out. Its not that Evans isn't talented its that the Kings still haven't figured out how to use him.

 

[SnakeOiler]

This forum has been turning to shit lately with threads like this.

This place is really starting to suck.

Lately? Starting? This forum is full of blowhards with thousands of posts and nobody/nothing new. It blows

 

[KeepOnRollin]

So is this entire thing to slag on Lillard or to slag on PER?

The former.

 

[MickZagger]

Lately? Starting? This forum is full of blowhards with thousands of posts and nobody/nothing new. It blows

Yet, you keep coming back for more.

 

[PapaG]

Calm down, I'm not serious. Well, I sort of am.

Discuss.

I think this another worthless/waffling thread by one of a few posters who think every idea they have is brilliant. Discuss.

 

[PapaG]

OK--hypothetically, Lillard/Batum for CP3 (S&T)/Matt Barnes--yay or nay?

This shit gets so tiresome.

 

[PtldPlatypus]

This shit gets so tiresome.

So, you don't think there's any validity to the question of whether it is better to have a young developing potential star or a legitimate proven superstar?

Personally, I can see merit in either position, and I enjoy a good exchange of opinions and ideas. What is to be gained from your belittling of others? Why even visit a thread that is so "tiresome" and "worthless"?

 

[blazerboy30]

Rasta, I'll repost my challenge:

Pull up a list of players that had this level of rookie-year performance and let us know what percentage of those players should have been traded after those impressive rookies seasons. One data point in Tyreke, doesn't prove anything.

 

[BlazerCaravan]

Rasta, I'll repost my challenge:

Since I'm interested, regardless of whether it proves Rasta right or not, here's some source data:

http://bkref.com/tiny/xi6Sf

All NBA rookies from 1975 or later, 6-4 or shorter, eligible for MPG leaderboard, with a PER between 16 and 17.

 

[magnifier661]

Since I'm interested, regardless of whether it proves Rasta right or not, here's some source data:

http://bkref.com/tiny/xi6Sf

All NBA rookies from 1975 or later, 6-4 or shorter, eligible for MPG leaderboard, with a PER between 16 and 17.

That's a damn good list to be on.

 

[blazerboy30]

Since I'm interested, regardless of whether it proves Rasta right or not, here's some source data:

http://bkref.com/tiny/xi6Sf

All NBA rookies from 1975 or later, 6-4 or shorter, eligible for MPG leaderboard, with a PER between 16 and 17.

Out of curiosity, why the 6-4 or shorter filter?

 

[BlazerCaravan]

Out of curiosity, why the 6-4 or shorter filter?

Just wanted to remove as many "pure SG's" from the mix as possible. Feel free to remove that filter and just filter on guards.

 

[blazerboy30]

Just wanted to remove as many "pure SG's" from the mix as possible. Feel free to remove that filter and just filter on guards.

Here's another way to look at it using PER and WS:

Link

I would not have wanted to trade most of the players on that list after that kind of rookie performance.

 

[mook]

I don't think Rasta's basic point is really that unreasonable to consider. If we had a time machine, I'd gladly trade Sergio, Oden, Roy, Outlaw, Z-bo, Bonzi, Qyntel or Rudy after their rookie years. All those guys raised a ton of eyebrows around the league in their first season (Outlaw mostly on raw athleticism, but still....) We could have got a ton of value for those guys. I was right there with everybody else thinking they were untouchable, just like Lillard is untouchable now. The fact that we had so many damned promising rookies flame out since around 2000 is a cornerstone of why this team has been forever mired in sub-mediocrity. After so much failure, I think it's crazy to not at least consider dumping Lillard while he's hot.

The big difference for me, though, is sample size and personality. All but Roy showed glimmers of elite potential in limited minutes, and all but Roy and maybe Rudy showed a lack of maturity that would go on to haunt them in the coming years. Lillard logged an epic number of injury-free minutes this year, proving he could perform when the spotlight was on him. And he's the definition of maturity. Aldridge is really the only long-term success story we've had in the draft recently, and again he's got that same quality of not only talent but durability and maturity.

After so many flakes, this Blazer fan is hitching his wagon to Lillard and Aldridge. May not be Stockton and Malone in terms of talent/durability/character, but it's also definitely not Sergio and Z-Bo.

 

[blazerboy30]

I don't think Rasta's basic point is really that unreasonable to consider. If we had a time machine, I'd gladly trade Sergio, Oden, Roy, Outlaw, Z-bo, Bonzi, Qyntel or Rudy after their rookie years. All those guys raised a ton of eyebrows around the league in their first season (Outlaw mostly on raw athleticism, but still....) We could have got a ton of value for those guys. I was right there with everybody else thinking they were untouchable, just like Lillard is untouchable now. The fact that we had so many damned promising rookies flame out since around 2000 is a cornerstone of why this team has been forever mired in sub-mediocrity. After so much failure, I think it's crazy to not at least consider dumping Lillard while he's hot.

The big difference for me, though, is sample size and personality. All but Roy showed glimmers of elite potential in limited minutes, and all but Roy and maybe Rudy showed a lack of maturity that would go on to haunt them in the coming years. Lillard logged an epic number of injury-free minutes this year, proving he could perform when the spotlight was on him. And he's the definition of maturity. Aldridge is really the only long-term success story we've had in the draft recently, and again he's got that same quality of not only talent but durability and maturity.

After so many flakes, this Blazer fan is hitching his wagon to Lillard and Aldridge. May not be Stockton and Malone in terms of talent/durability/character, but it's also definitely not Sergio and Z-Bo.

Roy was the only player in your list of comparisons that actually produced in his rookie season. We aren't debating whether we should be looking at trading Leonard, who showed some glimpses of potential and athleticism in his rookie season like the rest of the players you're comparing.

There is a huge difference between a discussion about trading a rookie that showed glimpses of potential vs trading a rookie that actually PRODUCED at an elite level. That is why my question was asked: how many rookies that produced at Lillard's level would you have liked to trade after that season. The answer, it seems, is very few.

 

[BlazerCaravan]

I agree that, if phrased differently, Rasta's point could be considered. But he's acting like such a d-bag about it!

 

[Rhal]

I don't think Rasta's basic point is really that unreasonable to consider. If we had a time machine, I'd gladly trade Sergio, Oden, Roy, Outlaw, Z-bo, Bonzi, Qyntel or Rudy after their rookie years. All those guys raised a ton of eyebrows around the league in their first season (Outlaw mostly on raw athleticism, but still....) We could have got a ton of value for those guys. I was right there with everybody else thinking they were untouchable, just like Lillard is untouchable now. The fact that we had so many damned promising rookies flame out since around 2000 is a cornerstone of why this team has been forever mired in sub-mediocrity. After so much failure, I think it's crazy to not at least consider dumping Lillard while he's hot.

The big difference for me, though, is sample size and personality. All but Roy showed glimmers of elite potential in limited minutes, and all but Roy and maybe Rudy showed a lack of maturity that would go on to haunt them in the coming years. Lillard logged an epic number of injury-free minutes this year, proving he could perform when the spotlight was on him. And he's the definition of maturity. Aldridge is really the only long-term success story we've had in the draft recently, and again he's got that same quality of not only talent but durability and maturity.

After so many flakes, this Blazer fan is hitching his wagon to Lillard and Aldridge. May not be Stockton and Malone in terms of talent/durability/character, but it's also definitely not Sergio and Z-Bo.

The big difference is none of those players listed (because you left out Roy) raised nearly as many eyebrows or looked half as good as Lillard has. I have never been as impressed with a Blazers rookie as I have been with Lillard and there are few rookies in the last 10 years that have done as well as Lillard has. A player should never be "Untradeable" but if OKC/Miami doesn't come knocking on our door then you don't trade Lillard. These threads with "He is a rookie and he has peeked so trade him now" are pretty ridiculous because statistically rookies tend to get better after as their careers progress.

 

[BlazerCaravan]

Here's another way to look at it using PER and WS:

Link

I would not have wanted to trade most of the players on that list after that kind of rookie performance.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/w/willigu01.html I wonder... Gus was Seattle's starting PG when they went to the finals in 78, and won their championship in 79...

 

[mook]

The big difference is none of those players listed (because you left out Roy) raised nearly as many eyebrows or looked half as good as Lillard has. I have never been as impressed with a Blazers rookie as I have been with Lillard and there are few rookies in the last 10 years that have done as well as Lillard has.

Honestly, I think I was more infatuated with Oden (in spite of his injury he just had so much potential) after his rookie year than I am Lillard. And I like Lillard a lot.

 

[blazerboy30]

Honestly, I think I was more infatuated with Oden (in spite of his injury he just had so much potential) after his rookie year than I am Lillard. And I like Lillard a lot.

But again, that is talking about potential instead of actual, very high level production. The percentage of players that flamed out after having huge potential is much higher than the percentage of players that flamed out after elite production.

 

[mook]

But again, that is talking about potential instead of actual, very high level production. The percentage of players that flamed out after having huge potential is much higher than the percentage of players that flamed out after elite production.

Definitely.

 

[Rastapopoulos]

Thank you mook, for being reasonable and rational. Obviously your wife's influence.

 

[VanillaGorilla]

If we had a time machine, I'd gladly trade Sergio, Oden, Roy, Outlaw, Z-bo, Bonzi, Qyntel or Rudy after their rookie years. I was right there with everybody else thinking they were untouchable,

What...

That says more about you than anything else. You thought Rudy, Sergio and Qyntel were untouchable? I can hardly even believe that.

 

[Rastapopoulos]

The big difference is none of those players listed (because you left out Roy) raised nearly as many eyebrows or looked half as good as Lillard has.

Is "eyebrow raising" quantifiable? What merits an "eyebrow raise"? That makes me think of people like Jason Williams (the white one), who "raised more eyebrows" by far than Lillard. (Seriously: I think Lillard is the better player, but his top ten isn't that amazing, whereas J-Dub's rookie highlights include the epic elbow pass and making The Glove look silly.)

Here's what was amazing about Lillard's rookie year: his maturity and his value to the team. The fact that he led THE ENTIRE LEAGUE in minutes played is all kinds of amazing. But it has as much to do with his shitty backups as it does his (admittedly great) maturity. And it kind of devalues his per-game stats. Normally you expect rookies to improve in year two just by playing more minutes. If Lillard does that I'll be frankly worried.

And I think you're also forgetting how many "eyebrows" Damon Stoudamire raised. He was featured in Nike Ads alongside Jason Kidd and Gary Payton. (Remember the "fun patrol"?)

I have never been as impressed with a Blazers rookie as I have been with Lillard

Here's the thing: I sort of agree with you. One reason I won't be sorry if we DON'T use Lillard to land a superstar (besides the fact that it's always better to have players that are Blazers-from-the-start rather than borrowed glory players [Drexler > Pippen]) is that Lillard, in the first half of the season, at least, seemed to be at his best in the second half, and in stark contrast to Raymond Felton, I always felt like he could pull out a three when necessary.

BUT: I never felt like I was watching a true game-changer. I always felt that when I was watching Oden. He was like a force of gravity: the whole texture of the game changed when he came in. Meanwhile there were too many times when Lillard was outplayed by players like Mo Williams for me to be too amazed by him. His big games came against players like Steve Nash, who probably couldn't guard YOU at this point.

and there are few rookies in the last 10 years that have done as well as Lillard has.

By what measure? Minutes played? Yes. Defense, running the team, efficient scoring, leading his team to the playoffs? No.

A player should never be "Untradeable" but if OKC/Miami doesn't come knocking on our door then you don't trade Lillard. These threads with "He is a rookie and he has peeked so trade him now" are pretty ridiculous because statistically rookies tend to get better after as their careers progress.

Well, as I said, a lot of that is simply more minutes played. That ain't going to happen with Lillard. And with many rookies it's learning how to harness their athleticism and hone their skills. Lillard has already done an awful lot of skill-honing. He's more actual than potential. I worry that he might be like Brandon Jennings. Remember his 55 point game as a rookie? How many of those did he ever have again? And he was younger than Lillard.