We aren't the only ones struggling lately.....

[THE HCP]

A lot of "quality" teams have been playing pretty bad lately....

Last 10 games

Philly 5-5

Clips 3-7

Dallas 2-8

Houston 4-6

Minny 5-5

Utah 4-6

I think this season's pace is catching up to a lot of teams.

 

[SnakeOiler]

Only thing struggling are the pussies on this board that think firing the coach or trading a pos player for a different pos player will make a difference. Blazers are what they are.

 

[Pinwheel1]

Denver is in the 6th spot with 19 losses. 7 other teams have 20-21 losses. May not be pretty, but it will be interesting.

 

[jlprk]

Only thing struggling are the pussies on this board that think firing the coach or trading a pos player for a different pos player will make a difference. Blazers are what they are.

Do you stack those really heavy big concrete bricks for a living?

 

[HailBlazers]

Do you stack those really heavy big concrete bricks for a living?

Did you go to school, to go to grad school, to go back to school, to teach kids about the real world?

 

[PapaG]

Only thing struggling are the pussies on this board that think firing the coach or trading a pos player for a different pos player will make a difference. Blazers are what they are.

Repped. Unless you're adding another All-Star, it is what it is. I suppose it makes people feel better to act like little babies over and over and over again about the coach, though.

 

[jlprk]

The most unchangeable guy is the owner, so the biggest babies of all are the ones who butt their heads against Paul Allen. You are on the right track to acknowledge your errors in such a healthy, public way.

 

[Mediocre Man]

Only thing struggling are the pussies on this board that think firing the coach or trading a pos player for a different pos player will make a difference. Blazers are what they are.

If they are what they are, which is a sub .500 team, why not change it? Why wouldn't fans want a better product? Why wouldn't fans want a coach that can get out of the first round of the playoffs?

How long should we stay status quo? Zags brought this up a while ago, and no one answered, but has there ever been a coach tenured with a team longer than Nate that has been unable to get out of the first round? Nate has a longer tenure with the Blazers than Rick Adelman for crying out loud?!?! The same Rick Adelman that took the Blazers to 3 western conference finals and two NBA finals

 

[oldmangrouch]

If they are what they are, which is a sub .500 team, why not change it? Why wouldn't fans want a better product? Why wouldn't fans want a coach that can get out of the first round of the playoffs?

How long should we stay status quo? Zags brought this up a while ago, and no one answered, but has there ever been a coach tenured with a team longer than Nate that has been unable to get out of the first round? Nate has a longer tenure with the Blazers than Rick Adelman for crying out loud?!?! The same Rick Adelman that took the Blazers to 3 western conference finals and two NBA finals

Because "real men" don't make changes! "Real men" never admit they didn't do it perfectly the first time! Only pussies admit mistakes!

"Real men" also don't go for that sissy toilet paper stuff - they use a cactus! And if you are a REAL "real man" you light that sucker on fire first!

 

[Mediocre Man]

Because "real men" don't make changes! "Real men" never admit they didn't do it perfectly the first time! Only pussies admit mistakes!

"Real men" also don't go for that sissy toilet paper stuff - they use a cactus! And if you are a REAL "real man" you light that sucker on fire first!

You sound like Ron Swanson. Haha

 

[e_blazer]

I see we're having another round of discussions about a trip to the lottery to make the Blazers competitive for a title run. I did a bit more looking at draft history. A couple of things surprised me. First, you have to go back to 1997 when the Spurs drafted Tim Duncan to find a team that had a top-5 pick that was eventually involved in winning a title with that team. Second, the only other team that had a top-5 pick during that 15-year time span that won a title was Dallas. They used a top-5 pick to get Devin Harris, but he wasn't on the team when they won the title last year. Harris was involved in the trade with the Nets that brought Jason Kidd to the Mavs, so I guess you can argue that he helped them get the talent they needed to eventually win a title. This year, if Miami or OKC wins the title, their trips to the top-5 of the lottery will pay off (OKC multiple times to get Durant, Westbrook & Hardin, and Miami getting Wade at No. 5 in 2003).

Going into the lottery is best if you've got a good team already and can luck into a top pick to get you the rarity of a superstar like Tim Duncan. Otherwise, you're looking at years of poor to mediocre teams before there may be an eventual payoff. Minnesota's been in the lottery every year since they traded Garnett. They've used their picks to take Derrick Williams (2), Wesley Johnson (4), Ricky Rubio (5), OJ Mayo (3) (traded for K. Love), Johnny Flynn (6), Corey Brewer (7), Randy Foye (7), and Rashad McCants (14). After seven straight years in the lottery, they've managed to work up to mediocre. Maybe they'll eventually get enough talent around Love to compete for a title, but I'd say they're still several years away.

Going the lottery route is no assurance of competing for an NBA title. The teams that have won in the past decade owe more to smart trades than they do to draft picks.

 

[Mediocre Man]

I see we're having another round of discussions about a trip to the lottery to make the Blazers competitive for a title run. I did a bit more looking at draft history. A couple of things surprised me. First, you have to go back to 1997 when the Spurs drafted Tim Duncan to find a team that had a top-5 pick that was eventually involved in winning a title with that team. Second, the only other team that had a top-5 pick during that 15-year time span that won a title was Dallas. They used a top-5 pick to get Devin Harris, but he wasn't on the team when they won the title last year. Harris was involved in the trade with the Nets that brought Jason Kidd to the Mavs, so I guess you can argue that he helped them get the talent they needed to eventually win a title. This year, if Miami or OKC wins the title, their trips to the top-5 of the lottery will pay off (OKC multiple times to get Durant, Westbrook & Hardin, and Miami getting Wade at No. 5 in 2003).

Going into the lottery is best if you've got a good team already and can luck into a top pick to get you the rarity of a superstar like Tim Duncan. Otherwise, you're looking at years of poor to mediocre teams before there may be an eventual payoff. Minnesota's been in the lottery every year since they traded Garnett. They've used their picks to take Derrick Williams (2), Wesley Johnson (4), Ricky Rubio (5), OJ Mayo (3) (traded for K. Love), Johnny Flynn (6), Corey Brewer (7), Randy Foye (7), and Rashad McCants (14). After seven straight years in the lottery, they've managed to work up to mediocre. Maybe they'll eventually get enough talent around Love to compete for a title, but I'd say they're still several years away.

Going the lottery route is no assurance of competing for an NBA title. The teams that have won in the past decade owe more to smart trades than they do to draft picks.

How about lottery picks that made it to the conference finals? Serious question, not trying to be an ass

 

[PapaG]

How about lottery picks that made it to the conference finals? Serious question, not trying to be an ass

Who cares about making the conference finals? Serious question. You still end your season in disappointment.

 

[Masbee]

A lot of "quality" teams have been playing pretty bad lately....

Last 10 games

Philly 5-5

Clips 3-7

Dallas 2-8

Houston 4-6

Minny 5-5

Utah 4-6

I think this season's pace is catching up to a lot of teams.

Philly surprised me this season. I never expected them to do as well as they had. Thus reverting to my pre-season "mean" of average has no impact.

Clips are interesting. The trade for Paul was huge of course. Getting Caron Butler was nice. And Chauncey Billups was even better. But, I never thought they had a chance in the playoffs. Not enough defense. Losing Billups was bigger than most realized. Griffen is super hyped. He is a nice young player, but he has a LONG way to go in his development. And he is a liability on defense. Not too surprised they have hit a rough patch.

Dallas is a surprise, but they started out bad and have never had any groove this season.

Houston, Minny and Utah I never expected much from pre-season, so why would 4-6 mean anything?

 

[e_blazer]

How about lottery picks that made it to the conference finals? Serious question, not trying to be an ass

There have been many teams that made it to the Conference Finals that had players who were lottery picks. Last year, the Bulls made the ECF with Rose, and the Thunder made the WCF with Durant, Westbrook & Hardin. Before that, the Magic made the ECF several times with D. Howard. The Cavs made the ECF with James in 2007.

 

[handiman]

First, you have to go back to 1997 when the Spurs drafted Tim Duncan to find a team that had a top-5 pick that was eventually involved in winning a title with that team ... This year, if Miami or OKC wins the title, their trips to the top-5 of the lottery will pay off (OKC multiple times to get Durant, Westbrook & Hardin, and Miami getting Wade at No. 5 in 2003).

Shouldn't Miami's title with Wade count toward that first stat?

 

[e_blazer]

Shouldn't Miami's title with Wade count toward that first stat?

Yeah, you're right. I overlooked that one. I'd say the trade that brought them Shaq was the major factor in that title, but still, you're correct.

 

[Mediocre Man]

Who cares about making the conference finals? Serious question. You still end your season in disappointment.

I am of the opinion, and I'm sure I am all but alone on this, that to be considered a serious contender, you need to have a team that gets to the conference finals. I think in most cases, anything can happen at that point.

 

[blue32]

I am of the opinion, and I'm sure I am all but alone on this, that to be considered a serious contender, you need to have a team that gets to the conference finals. I think in most cases, anything can happen at that point.

Agreed.

 

[jlprk]

I am of the opinion, and I'm sure I am all but alone on this, that to be considered a serious contender, you need to have a team that gets to the conference finals. I think in most cases, anything can happen at that point.

Disagree.

You're not alone on this.

 

[oldmangrouch]

Bump.

So, what about the next 10 games (starting with the Knicks and ending with the Clips).

I'll be semi-optimistic and say 3-7.

 

[magnifier661]

And what a bump it is grouch! Thanks for adding salt on my wounds!