Scalma
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- May 18, 2014
- Messages
- 23,631
- Likes
- 34,982
- Points
- 113
Chet Holmgren was asked who the best player in the NBA is and he said…
“Myself in two months”.
Lol
Love that confidence, thanks for sharing.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Chet Holmgren was asked who the best player in the NBA is and he said…
“Myself in two months”.
Lol
I think Dame is an amazing leader, but I also think maybe his ability to control the lockerroom might be a little overstated.
There was very clearly an issue with Roco. He had checked out on the team.
I just see a lot of comments about how Dame will change this guy or that guy. It came up with Simmons. It came up any time Randle was mentioned. I'm just not so sure. I think Dame is a great influence and a great leader, but Nurk has been pretty hot and cold. I'm just not sure how much Dame can impact these guys if they have a bad attitude already.
I think Dame is an amazing leader, but I also think maybe his ability to control the lockerroom might be a little overstated.
.
You may be right. He was listed as a PF by basketball reference for his first five years but I started checking game logs for the only season he played much. And the games he played most minutes, Drummond was not playing and Wood was definitely the tallest guy. And when Drummond did play, Wood's minutes were down, sometimes just enough to play C when Drummond was out it seems.He's also very clearly a center....
Nurkic had a problem with Stotts, and the rumor was RoCo had a problem with Billups. I think it's quite a stretch to diminish a decade of leadership because of a coaching/player issue. Nurkic came into Portland with a rep of being a malcontent and Dame was able to modify that attitude in a couple of weeks
Agree we could keep one or the other of Winslow/Little and deal Keon instead. I'd also re-sign Ingles, so that's more wing depth. And yes, a good MLE signing would be importantok, I see the direction you are headed. The one big question I have is are either or both of Randle and Woodcapable of stretch-4 defense; switching onto wings and doing a credible job? I haven't seen enough of either of them to know. Aminu & RoCo were, but both of the 'new' guys are much bigger
if I play that fantasy I'd really want to keep one of Little/Winslow for bench wing depth...even though both are injury magnets
how much would that team cost:
Damian Lillard $42,492,492
Josh Hart $12,960,000
Justise Winslow $4,097,561
Didi Louzada $1,876,222
Greg Brown III $1,563,518
Trendon Watford $1,563,518
Andrew Nicholson $2,844,429
Julius Randle $23,760,000
Jerami Grant $20,952,381
Christian Wood $14,317,459
about 126M for 9 players
that actually surprises me, assuming my math is right. That is only 4M over the projected salary cap; and 23-24M below the luxury tax threshold. Which means it's 29-30M below the apron. That's an important number because with that kind of margin the Blazers can consider using the full-MLE and even the BAE without any fear of the hard-cap. And they'd still have plenty of room for unbalanced trades
maybe this is the kind of flexibility Cronin was shooting for with his deadline moves? Couldn't be the case because we all know he's dumb as a rock
anyway, that an interesting team. I don't know who Portland would target with the full-MLE, but they are weak at wing.
You may be right. He was listed as a PF by basketball reference for his first five years but I started checking game logs for the only season he played much. And the games he played most minutes, Drummond was not playing and Wood was definitely the tallest guy. And when Drummond did play, Wood's minutes were down, sometimes just enough to play C when Drummond was out it seems.
I would be very happy with Murray, Sochan, or Daniels.
Personally I'd dismiss it with "he's never been on a team that was ever expected to be good." A roster like that deal would create would have high expectations, and I think people tend to shape up a bit when there's more on the line. And if I'm wrong about that, then it's only a one-year gamble.I'm not trying to diminish it. I'm just saying that if we're targeting guys who are a known issue in the lockerroom, we can't just dismiss it with "Dame will take care of it."
Damn, I thought it was awesome he said himself. LolThey selectively edited out the question.
It originally said "who you think will be the best player in the NBA named Chet will be?"
Contract:Just for the heck of it, looking at the stats again for Randle, Grant and Wood.
1. Three point shooting:
Randle: very inconsistent. last 4 years .344, .277, .411, .308
Grant Pretty consistent; averaged about .370 over last 4 years, although last two years down from first two.
Wood: last three years .386, .374, .390
2. Career efg%
Randle .503
Grant .512
Wood .581
3. career TRB%
Randle 16%
Grant 8.2%
Wood 16.9%
4. career ORtg DRtg
Randle 107 110
Grant 110 110
Wood 115 111
5. career OBPM DBPM
Randle 0.6 -0.3
Grant -0.6 0.1
Wood 2.2 -0.4
Just looking at stats, Wood's offensive stats far superior and defensive stats only a little bit worse.
i do too. i was kinda shocked to see Dame suddenly following him.Dame following Keegan - I hope there is something to this. We’ll definitely have to hop Indy and Detroit to land him though IMO.
Hopefully this Grant stuff will die down.
If the Daniels hype train keeps chugging, I don't think that's true.Dame following Keegan - I hope there is something to this. We’ll definitely have to hop Indy and Detroit to land him though IMO.
I don't think he climbs to 4, 5 or 6 unfortunately.If the Daniels hype train keeps chugging, I don't think that's true.
I don't think he climbs to 4, 5 or 6 unfortunately.
My current mock if everyone retains their picks:
1. Smith
2. Holmgren
3. Banchero
4. Sharpe
5. Ivey
6. Murray
Do they want to move him? Grant and Randle are both "on the outs" with their current teams (to varying degrees), so they could be available at a lower price point.If we have enough assets to get Randle, Wood and Grant; shouldn't we just go after Siakam instead?
i firmly believe Sharpe has a top 5 promise, and my guess is Sac.And just to add that it might not be Keegan who drops but it could be Sharpe who falls out of the top 6.
I think Sharpe is dropping as of now.And just to add that it might not be Keegan who drops but it could be Sharpe who falls out of the top 6.
Wood/Grant are nothing more than a continuation of the Neil Olshey model: mid-tier band-aids
i do too. i was kinda shocked to see Dame suddenly following him.
Murray is such a boring candidate but he also has historical advanced stats. my hesitation with him was always his high usage at Iowa (and how Luka Garza had similar ridiculous numbers the year prior), but Murray's game and strengths make so much sense for this team.
the guy is really mature. no-nonsense and humble.