Zach Lowe on the Blazers now

[Minstrel]

It's a bigger piece about free agency winners and losers (I won't spoil what the Blazers were listed as), but this the main Blazers-related piece:

What a sad story. This team coalesced into something special, and boom, 80 percent of the starting lineup is gone. I’ve seen some people wonder if Portland might win 35 or 40 games next year. The Blazers are going to be bad. Like, really bad. This is now a full-on rebuilding job, and they’ve started it well after paying the ultimate price for dancing with Aldridge until the very end. They made two nice trades around the draft, snagged Ed Davis on a solid contract, and made a semi-defensible bet signing Al-Farouq Aminu to a four-year deal. If you’re going to wager on uncertain upside, make sure you sign the guy for long enough that you actually reap the upside.

There was some snickering over Portland lavishing a five-year mega-max onto Damian Lillard, but that’s a no-brainer, despite his awful defense. Lillard slumped from deep last year, but a point guard who can nail 3s off the dribble is a foundational player in a pick-and-roll league. Lillard’s extension kicks in for the 2016-17 season, so it isn’t among the new deals that will look like bargains once the cap jumps to $90 million that season. But every rebuild needs a tentpole, and the extension takes Lillard through his prime. Signing it now and putting a huge cap number on the books for 2016-17 doesn’t crimp Portland’s flexibility, since they’ll have plenty of cap space anyway.

Rebuilding brings another bonus: Portland flipped Denver a first-round pick in the Arron Afflalo deal, but the Nuggets only get it if it falls outside the lottery in 2016 or 2017; after that, it morphs into a second-round pick. Denver shopped that pick ahead of the draft, per several league sources, but couldn’t find any takers, in part because teams expected the Blazers to sink upon Aldridge’s (likely) departure. Portland will probably keep that pick, and it’s set to carry more cap room into next season than anyone — space it could use to facilitate a trade or snag an asset from a team in need of tax relief.

The Blazers were second-tier contenders. If everything broke right, they might have made the Finals. First-tier contenders don’t need as much luck, which is why most second-tier teams rarely survive three playoff series — at least not in the West. Re-signing Aldridge might have trapped the Blazers in second-tier status — even with a cap boom that would have offered rare flexibility for a pseudo-contender. Watching a 50-win team is much more fun than watching a lottery crew, but at least the Blazers get to take a moonshot now.

Link

 

[e_blazer]

You know what, I'd a whole lot rather be a second-tier contender than a rebuild team. I think it's a lot more likely that there would be another unhappy Chris Paul-type player that you could work a deal with using guys like Wes and/or Batum to upgrade to contending status than it is to dumpster dive into the lottery in hopes that you'll snag a future All-Star vs. a bust and then wait 3-4 years until he knows his backside from a hole in the ground. That said, we are where we are. Hello, dumpster.

 

[blue9]

I'll take a lotto team over a second-tier team, thank you! The middle ground sucks.

 

[Denny Crane]

Considering the Blazers will go into next summer with the most cap space of all the teams, this bit in the article is also of interest:

Psst. Have you looked at next season’s free-agency class? Kevin Durant is the headliner, but it’s thin at the top after him. Among this season’s starry free agents, only Wade opted for a one-year deal that would plop him back into free agency for Year 1 of the cap extravaganza.3 Lillard and Anthony Davis, the two game-changers among next year’s potential restricted free agents, locked in deals a year early.

There are still some big names, including Al Horford, Mike Conley, Joakim Noah, and perhaps Dwight Howard,4 but next summer’s class lost star power when Kevin Love, Aldridge, and others chose security over higher-risk, higher-reward short-term deals. There will be more star-level salary slots next summer under the $90 million cap than star free agents.

That is very good news for Jeff Green, Luol Deng, Eric Gordon, Nic Batum, Wilson Chandler, Danilo Gallinari, DeMar DeRozan, Chandler Parsons, and other third-banana types. These guys are going to get paid. DeRozan and Parsons hold player options for 2016-17, and the best intel is that both will opt out to secure longer-term deals based on the higher cap.

 

[illmatic99]

You know what, I'd a whole lot rather be a second-tier contender than a rebuild team. I think it's a lot more likely that there would be another unhappy Chris Paul-type player that you could work a deal with using guys like Wes and/or Batum to upgrade to contending status than it is to dumpster dive into the lottery in hopes that you'll snag a future All-Star vs. a bust and then wait 3-4 years until he knows his backside from a hole in the ground. That said, we are where we are. Hello, dumpster.

Look at what GS did, and what HOU is doing. These teams never bottomed out.

 

[jwhoops11]

I'll take a lotto team over a second-tier team, thank you! The middle ground sucks.

But will you spend your money to go to games? I won't and I've been a full STH or partial since 2006. I've been through rebuilds and watching a young and exciting team lose 20-25 home games a year Is not an enjoyable experience.

I'd pay for a second tier team one player away. I'm not paying this season for the heartache of watching this.

I'm sure that's seen as "not a true fan". Truth is, now that I'm older and have more disposable money, I choose to do things that make me happy. I lived through the .500 teams that made the playoffs in the early 80's. Those were more like third tier teams but the MC rocked and it was a good experience.

Rebuilds are not enjoyable.

 

[SlyPokerDog]

I read the title and thought the Blazers must be getting desperate if they just signed Zach Lowe to the roster.

 

[Denny Crane]

But will you spend your money to go to games? I won't and I've been a full STH or partial since 2006. I've been through rebuilds and watching a young and exciting team lose 20-25 home games a year Is not an enjoyable experience.

I'd pay for a second tier team one player away. I'm not paying this season for the heartache of watching this.

I'm sure that's seen as "not a true fan". Truth is, now that I'm older and have more disposable money, I choose to do things that make me happy. I lived through the .500 teams that made the playoffs in the early 80's. Those were more like third tier teams but the MC rocked and it was a good experience.

Rebuilds are not enjoyable.

My advice would be to give it a year and see if Neil can't do a near complete rebuild by next season. It's worth taking a one year hit to build a winner, no?

 

[jwhoops11]

My advice would be to give it a year and see if Neil can't do a near complete rebuild by next season. It's worth taking a one year hit to build a winner, no?

I will for sure, and truth is season ticket prices will drop in the next few seasons. The problem is, most of these guys are further away than one year. This feels like another 3 year rebuild and your fringe fans will lose interest again. It becomes disheartening to lose that positive energy the franchise can bring to the city.

I'll obviously always be a fan, it's in my blood. But with all games being available via TV for me (sorry to those who can't see all them) I'm just not going to spend my money at The Moda.

 

[Minstrel]

My advice would be to give it a year and see if Neil can't do a near complete rebuild by next season. It's worth taking a one year hit to build a winner, no?

Yes, a one-year hit to rebuild a winner is fine and always the idealized version of this. Then you have franchises like the Cavaliers after the Price/Daughtery teams, the Warriors in the '90s and '00s, the Clippers in the '90s and '00s who basically wandered in the desert for years and years when trying to rebuild. Yes, some of that is on bad management, but there are also some concrete problems: terrible, tanking teams are the opposite of destination franchises for free agents and finding franchise-changing superstars with lottery picks is really, really hard unless you pick #1 when a Tim Duncan or LeBron James is available, which is very rare.

 

[Denny Crane]

Yes, a one-year hit to rebuild a winner is fine and always the idealized version of this. Then you have franchises like the Cavaliers after the Price/Daughtery teams, the Warriors in the '90s and '00s, the Clippers in the '90s and '00s who basically wandered in the desert for years and years when trying to rebuild. Yes, some of that is on bad management, but there are also some concrete problems: terrible, tanking teams are the opposite of destination franchises for free agents and finding franchise-changing superstars with lottery picks is really, really hard unless you pick #1 when a Tim Duncan or LeBron James is available, which is very rare.

I like to think the Blazers have a first rate GM and one of the very best owners in the league. I'm not sure you can say that about teams that have tanked and taken a long time to rebuild.

The Lakers have rebuilt several times, as have the Celtics and Spurs. Memphis used to be Pau Gasol's team, now it's Marc Gasol's (rebuilt).

 

[BlazerBeav]

Look at what GS did, and what HOU is doing. These teams never bottomed out.

GS has rarely ever been anything BUT bottomed out.

 

[Minstrel]

I like to think the Blazers have a first rate GM and one of the very best owners in the league. I'm not sure you can say that about teams that have tanked and taken a long time to rebuild.

The Lakers have rebuilt several times, as have the Celtics and Spurs. Memphis used to be Pau Gasol's team, now it's Marc Gasol's (rebuilt).

As I said, bad management is definitely partially to blame, which I don't consider a problem in Portland. But the other problems I highlighted are largely irrespective of how smart your front office. Certainly, one could argue that my second point about finding franchise superstars is related to how good your GM is, but I actually think that it isn't. Good front offices will nail more draft picks overall than bad ones, but I think finding the true superstars (outside of the obvious ones, like Duncan and James) is mostly luck.

The Lakers have proven that they're always a top free agent choice, the Blazers will never have that kind of allure. The Celtics really have only managed one clearly successful rebuild, in my opinion (since we're arguing about whether it's better to tank or be a "second-tier contender," success can only be defined as a top-tier contender). And the Spurs have been rather freakish but even then instructive: outside of the original tank job that got them Duncan, they've never tanked to rebuild...they continue building the best teams they can and try (successfully) to find new players to add in. The Spurs of the past decade are pretty much the best argument for not tearing down but trying to consistently build from what you have.

 

[PtldPlatypus]

The problem is, most of these guys are further away than one year. This feels like another 3 year rebuild and your fringe fans will lose interest again.

Vonleh and Connaughton are the only guys on the roster that are further than one year away, IMO. CJ and Leonard were already being heralded as our prospective 6/7th men for this season, Henderson's a veteran (as is Kaman, of course), and Aminu, Davis, and Plumlee have already shown that they can contribute on their former teams.

 

[Denny Crane]

As I said, bad management is definitely partially to blame, which I don't consider a problem in Portland. But the other problems I highlighted are largely irrespective of how smart your front office. Certainly, one could argue that my second point about finding franchise superstars is related to how good your GM is, but I actually think that it isn't. Good front offices will nail more draft picks overall than bad ones, but I think finding the true superstars (outside of the obvious ones, like Duncan and James) is mostly luck.

The Lakers have proven that they're always a top free agent choice, the Blazers will never have that kind of allure. The Celtics really have only managed one clearly successful rebuild, in my opinion (since we're arguing about whether it's better to tank or be a "second-tier contender," success can only be defined as a top-tier contender). And the Spurs have been rather freakish but even then instructive: outside of the original tank job that got them Duncan, they've never tanked to rebuild...they continue building the best teams they can and try (successfully) to find new players to add in. The Spurs of the past decade are pretty much the best argument for not tearing down but trying to consistently build from what you have.

The Celtics have rebuilt at least 3 times. Russell era, Cowens era, Bird era, Garnett era.


I don't see why Boston would be more of a popular destination for FAs than Portland. In fact, I don't remember them signing any FAs. They acquired their big 3 for the last championship by draft, trade, and trade. After being pretty bad.

 

[illmatic99]

GS has rarely ever been anything BUT bottomed out.

From the last time they made their playoff run in 2008 with Baron Davis, they had one down year to get Curry, one development year for Steph and the crew, and bounced right back. They weren't like Philly or Minny.

 

[Minstrel]

The Celtics have rebuilt at least 3 times.

Over what timeframe are you talking about? Since the 1980s, they've only built one top-tier contender, the Garnett/Pierce/Allen/Rondo nucleus. And that is also interesting to look at: that came after a failed attempt to tank for Oden or Durant. They rebuilt with two big trades, around their holdover star, and nailed a late first round pick (Rondo was technically also a trade, but a draft day deal).

 

[jwhoops11]

Vonleh and Connaughton are the only guys on the roster that are further than one year away, IMO. CJ and Leonard were already being heralded as our prospective 6/7th men for this season, Henderson's a veteran (as is Kaman, of course), and Aminu, Davis, and Plumlee have already shown that they can contribute on their former teams.

You may be right, and I hope you are. Im pretty old school, I don't look at analytics to view a players worth. I'll still use the outdated "eyeball test", and feel comfortable with it.

I like Henderson, but he won't be here when this team starts making its playoff runs.

Aminu to me is what he is at this point. While young still and obviously a good defender, he's destined to be a role player and not that second or third star a team needs.

The same can be said for Ed Davis as well.

Rookies are hit and miss, I hope we hit on the kid from Notre Dame.

Here's the thing. Can you honestly look at Meyers and in your gut say he's a difference maker? Great shooter and improving, but he has zero feel for the game. You just don't learn that, it's not an acquired skill. You can teach a kid to shoot, but being in the correct spots at the correct time is just one of those inate things. I don't believe he'll ever have that.

I like CJ. He's going to be a player in this league, and probably our best hope for a third reliable semi-star.

Question becomes, where does that 2nd star come from, to help relieve pressure from Damian? This is the issue I'm concerned with.

 

[illmatic99]

Here's the thing. Can you honestly look at Meyers and in your gut say he's a difference maker? Great shooter and improving, but he has zero feel for the game. You just don't learn that, it's not an acquired skill. You can teach a kid to shoot, but being in the correct spots at the correct time is just one of those inate things. I don't believe he'll ever have that.

You must have missed him in March and April last season. He's not just a shooter, but he's also get terrific touch around the hoop, great hands, and extremely athletic. I did a complete 180 on Meyers over the last year, and often catch myself defending him these days. The guy is a baller, and the mental aspects of the game are coming with more PT. You can clearly see the game slowing down for him.

I like CJ. He's going to be a player in this league, and probably our best hope for a third reliable semi-star.

A lot of the same things I am excited about for Meyers apply to CJ as well. Both these guys will top 15 ppg next year in my estimation if the roster stays mostly intact. The problem next year, and for the near future will be on the defensive end.

I don't think you should be as concerned with completely bottoming out as the article intimates. If our team is mostly healthy, I don't see us winning fewer than 35 games. For a year or two, I can probably digest that if we come out of it as contenders after.

 

[PtldPlatypus]

You may be right, and I hope you are. Im pretty old school, I don't look at analytics to view a players worth. I'll still use the outdated "eyeball test", and feel comfortable with it.

I like Henderson, but he won't be here when this team starts making its playoff runs.

Aminu to me is what he is at this point. While young still and obviously a good defender, he's destined to be a role player and not that second or third star a team needs.

The same can be said for Ed Davis as well.

Rookies are hit and miss, I hope we hit on the kid from Notre Dame.

Here's the thing. Can you honestly look at Meyers and in your gut say he's a difference maker? Great shooter and improving, but he has zero feel for the game. You just don't learn that, it's not an acquired skill. You can teach a kid to shoot, but being in the correct spots at the correct time is just one of those inate things. I don't believe he'll ever have that.

I like CJ. He's going to be a player in this league, and probably our best hope for a third reliable semi-star.

Question becomes, where does that 2nd star come from, to help relieve pressure from Damian? This is the issue I'm concerned with.

Not having a 2nd star is completely different than everyone being 2-3 years away. Based on this post, you could be suggesting that signing Kanter and trading for Derozan would put us right back in the mix again.

For the record, no, I don't see Leonard as an all-star-caliber player; I see him as a 2nd or 3rd big, either alongside a low-post threat or bringing quick scoring off the bench.

 

[blue9]

Here's the thing. Can you honestly look at Meyers and in your gut say he's a difference maker? Great shooter and improving, but he has zero feel for the game.

Totally disagree. He grew up playing PG, so he's still learning how to play C - the opposite end of the spectrum. But I think he has a better feel for the game than LMA as evidenced by his ability to tear down a rebound, turn up-court and immediately fire an outlet pass to a guard. He also knows to keep the ball moving on offense - if he's not shooting off the catch he takes a quick look at all the options and makes a quick pass. He's starting to develop a couple decent moves around the basket, and has a great soft touch. In the MEM series we saw him fake the 3 to send his defender flying past him, then he put the ball on the floor and took it to the basket...before having the ball slip out of his hands and off his knee. And his defense has really come a long way - at least his man/defense. If he can learn team-defense (and I think he can...maybe with a new coach who knows how to teach it?) then he's a complete player. So yeah, I think he has a pretty good feel for the game - he's just trying to learn a position that's least like the position he use to play.

Beyond that, regarding the roster, stars, etc, I would really like to see us build a team in the mold of Larry Brown's Pistons. The players we have today remind me of that sort of team - no standouts, but a bunch of guys who can do a little of everything and a defensive specialist. I think we'll need a new coach to implement the right system, but I think that's going to be our best bet.

 

[B-Roy]

Even after he's gone, you still take pot shots at LMA in just about every post you make. Can you let it go?

 

[jwhoops11]

Trading for Kanter and Derozan gets us way closer to the playoffs than Aminu and Vonleh will the next few seasons.

Dame is the Alpha of that roster and you fit above average talent around him. In fact adding Kanter and Derozan (I understand the defensive liabilities here) gets us a younger roster similar to what we just lost. Aminu then becomes way more valuable as the wing defender that team needs.

Not a perfect roster, but one I'd feel way more confident in the ability to turn into a consistent winner.

 

[illmatic99]

Feel for the game:

 

[blue9]

Even after he's gone, you still take pot shots at LMA in just about every post you make. Can you let it go?

In time...
But for now:

 

[jwhoops11]

Feel for the game:

Looks great in the highlight for sure. All of those created by other players. I'd need to see passing out of a double team, weak side defense and consistent rebounding not predicated all on his athletic ability.

Here's the thing. He may put up stats as a role player but what happens when he hits 35 minutes a night as option 2 on offense? His game is a lot to do with athleticism. We all know your legs go after playing big minutes... And big minutes every night. At that point, body positioning for a tough 4th quarter rebound becomes way tougher when you aren't jumping over people anymore.

Lopez was tremendous with that sort of thing. He'll be missed in that way, along with his rim protection.

 

[illmatic99]

Here's the thing. He may put up stats as a role player but what happens when he hits 35 minutes a night as option 2 on offense? His game is a lot to do with athleticism. We all know your legs go after playing big minutes... And big minutes every night. At that point, body positioning for a tough 4th quarter rebound becomes way tougher when you aren't jumping over people anymore.

Only way to find out is if we give him that shot, no? He's certainly earned it after that playoff series.

 

[Minstrel]

Meyers Leonard looks like he has the skillset to be a solid NBAer. My only issue with him is that he has a rather slow release. He has a Danny Ferry-like set shot. He's not going to be going around screens and firing up quick shots too often, unless he retools his shooting motion. He's going to be need to be stationary and wide open. That still has value, but limits his ceiling a bit.

 

[Denny Crane]

Over what timeframe are you talking about? Since the 1980s, they've only built one top-tier contender, the Garnett/Pierce/Allen/Rondo nucleus. And that is also interesting to look at: that came after a failed attempt to tank for Oden or Durant. They rebuilt with two big trades, around their holdover star, and nailed a late first round pick (Rondo was technically also a trade, but a draft day deal).

They also lost Len Bias, who would have been a franchise player.

But you nailed the formula that works even for the Blazers:

1) Holdover star (Lillard)
2) Big trades (have cap space and expiring contract)
3) Draft picks.

 

[Schilly]

Look at what GS did, and what HOU is doing. These teams never bottomed out.

Golden State
08/09 29 and 53
09/10 26 and 56 (Curry's Rookie Season)
10/11 36 and 46 (Klays Rookie Season)
11/12 23 and 43 (.348 pct Lockout season)
12/13 47 and 35
13/14 51 and 31
14/15 67 and 15

They didn't "bottom out" but they sucked for several years.