Who cares? These guys get paid millions of dollars a year, and if that means a few of them have to share minutes with someone else, so be it. Besides, I've never seen a guy come off the bench and just run up and down the court without trying, just to show the coach that's mad about not enough playing time. You put a guy into a game that's been sitting on the bench and he's going to bust his butt to show you he "belongs" on the court. That's only a good thing. Maybe I'm wrong, but it just seems crazy to "thin out" your bench in order to get one key player. I love a deep bench with lots of good players on it. It's a great insurance policy during the regular season, and an extra advantage in the playoffs.
If he's not happy, he's not staying. If he's not staying, why not trade him now as part of a deal for a better player? Ed O.
My position is that it is not a problem this year. I believe I explained why in my previous post. Channing is a team-first guy and no, I don't believe he will complain as his minutes are reduced. Winning is an excellent way to keep players happy.
Unfortunately for your position, this year isn't THAT important. In comparison to the next 5 years or so, this year is just a blip. A blip that precedes our core being near its physical prime. This year, Frye and Webster and Bayless and everyone might be happy playing 7 minutes a game. Two years from now? No amount of winning will placate them if they're still at that playing time level. Ed O.
Players want to win championships. If Channing Frye thinks he'll get one with the Blazers, he'll want to be here. If we win a championship and he still wants to leave, then we can think about a trade. I say we leave things as they are right now, and see how deep we go into the playoffs. We're playing at a high level now, and we should get only better as Oden settles in. I just don't get this mania for making trades. This team is clearly on the rise, and we've got all the ingredients we need to make a run at a championship. I think it could even happen this year.
I am still hesitant on being pro active in this situation because we hold all the cards. I want to make sure we make the right move. If some players are unhappy too bad. (Every good team has a few with a 12-15 man roster.) I think we can afford to be patient. It sounds like your philosophy is a little more urgent based on losing trade value. But again if we can get the right guy then you do it. But it better be the right guy because we don't have to make a move.
I disagree. This year is very important in my opinion. I guess I'm one of the few that actually believes we can win the title this year. We're the only team in the league that can match up with the Lakers.
I couldn't agree more. And to be quite honest, I think we have to grab a title as soon as we can. I love Oden, but I don't know how long he's going to last physically. He may have a long career, but he then again he may not. To build the team for "down the road" ignores the fact that we have a very good team right now and we should "seize the moment." Jabbar won a title in his rookie year with the Bucks, and I don't see why Oden couldn't do the same on a much deeper team.
How did we get to where we are? Three ways: 1. Losing lots and lots of games 2. Making lots and lots of trades 3. Making good decisions on trades and draft picks Presumably #1 is long gone. #3 should be the same. Should we go to "make NO trades" on #2? I don't think so. Waiting until a player isn't playing or until he wants out is the way that you make retarded deals like Wells for nothing. Pritchard has been proactive his entire time in Portland and I'd expect that he is more closely aligned with those of us who believe in consolidation and proactivity than with those of you who don't want to break up this championship-level team this year. Ed O.
I don't think so. I've heard KP say just before the season that all we need to do is "let the cake bake" now. I think that is the right strategy to have at this time. We have all the pieces we need on the team. The only thing it lacks is experience. Experience only comes over time.
I think that KP has always indicated that he believes in the Spurs model of team construction: Three stars that you build around with solid supporting players. The unusual thing about the Blazers is that they may well already have their core of three stars in place and simply have to wait for them to mature into championship contenders. In the mean time, they've got a multitude of other young players that have potential to be impact players. The questions, IMO, are: 1. Is our core of Oden, Roy and Aldridge good enough or should we be looking to upgrade it by trading one or more of them in a package for a proven superstar? 2. Can you really develop all of the young talent on the roster to its maximum potential when minutes are spread so thinly? 3. While the multitude of players approach is good for the grind of the regular season, it doesn't work as well in the playoffs when contenders typically shorten their rotations. Who gets left out of the playoff rotation in the current second unit? 4. Is their a GM in the league who wouldn't want to have KP's "problems" with too much talent?
Not to be pedantic, but...... Jabbar did NOT win the title as a rook. The Bucks were a deep, young team - but they fell short. They won the title in Kareem's 2nd season by trading for Oscar Robertson. Kareem didn't have GO's health concerns, but the Bucks still moved agressively to improve.
The point of all those Pritchard trades was to build a good team. We now have a good team. Mission accomplished. Does that mean we'll never make another trade? Of course not. But to keep endlessly tinkering with a team when you don't need to is a recipe for a disaster. Let's be thankful for the great core group of players we have and let them get used to playing with each other. This is a team that is going to get better very fast. It's going to be very scary come playoff time. That's exactly the way we want it.
Yep. Been saying/thinking similar stuff for while through all the "bake the cake" era. Haven't change my mind yet. We are only a few games into the season and we already have Bayless and Diogu stewing on the bench about his lack of opportunity, Sergio making trade demands, and if we stay healthy it will only get much, much worse as Oden plays more minutes and Webster comes back. Doing a trade for Devin Harris (for example) would have slashed our depth at the bottom of the bench, but relieved a lot of the pressure building this season for minutes. If KP can't find a trade he likes soon, depending on team health, he may have to make an interim trade (player for pick, player for injured player with useful contract) type deal, just to keep the peace.
Every GM in the league would like to have KP's problem. Which is exactly why KP shouldn't be trying to solve this "problem."
You can be proactive and still not make a significant deal. For instance, making the decision to NOT make a move so that an increased role is made for Sergio, Rudy, Martell, Nic, and Travis is being proactive, just not in the way we all envision. I believe Steve Blake, Brandon Roy, Martell Webster, Lamarcus Aldridge, and Joel Przybilla all could and possibly should play less minutes. Brandon, Joel, and LA so that they're not wasted by the time we get to the Playoffs. A rotation of: Steve Blake 20 /Sergio Rodriguez 28 Brandon Roy 24 / Rudy Fernandez 24 Nic Batum 18 / Martell Webster 18 / Brandon Roy 6 / Travis Outlaw 6 Lamarcus Aldridge 32 / Travis Outlaw 16 Greg Oden 28 / Joel Przybilla 18 / Lamarcus Aldridge 2 ... would have our veterans rested come April. Our best players would receive increased minutes in the Playoffs.
... if Pritch and Nate decide that a move is to be made, and if the perfect players aren't attainable, I hope they decide to move young talent for more young talent. I don't want to see the likes of a James Jones at this point being brought it. I want more draft picks or more unproven talent instead.
The other thing we may be overlooking is the communication style that Pritch has is one that's very convincing. None of know really what's be said behind the scenes. We do know it's working. Sergio's the perfect example. Problem surfaces. Problem solved, apparently. Maybe KP acknowledged that Nate hadn't given Sergio a long enough leash in the past. But then also explained that it was up to Sergio to give Nate a reason to stick with him by playing Nate's way as well. I would imagine KP explained that the Blazers feel he's a very special player. That they've invested a lot of time and resources into making him a part of the team. They're not going to give him up unless they bring back an equally special player. If he wants to start for this team, or have the opportunity to start for another team via a trade, then it's also on him to perform. End of story. This puts it back on Sergio. Either way Portland wins by gaining an even better PG or by trading for a more substantial player. Personally, I think Sergio wants to be here. I'm betting the team does too.
