Should the Blazers be adjusting their timeframe?

According to KP the Blazers are being built to contend in a couple years and right now are just trying to make the playoffs. But, With all the trade pieces the Blazers have now, and with how good the Blazers are at the moment, should the Blazers be looking to trade their pieces more for an immediate push rather than a future one?

This might actually be a good year to make a run. The Lakers have lost Bynum which makes them vulnerable. The Spurs are getting old. And all the other playoff teams in the West are just marginally better or worse than the Blazers. Next year, Bynum should be healthy again (actually this season by the playoffs, but still out of shape) making the Lakers much tougher. Chandler will be better healed making NO tougher. Basically, I'm just saying that this year might have a window where the Blazers can win it all if they throw away some of the thoughts of the future and concentrate on the NOW.

We know that KP is looking to trade RLEC, but most likely does not want to trade Rudy or Bayless because he sees them as important parts of the future Blazers. But, imagine what types of ready to go players the Blazers could get right now if they were willing to cash in most of their chips. RLEC, Outlaw, Bayless, Rudy, Webster, Batum.

Basically, KP makes the big three off limits, and then goes out and tries to get a team together to compete for a championship today. Two years from now, the Blazers might not be as good, but you never really know what the future holds.

 

We've had this problem before with time frames. I'm not against it...love to have "two starting lineups" again. Just don't give up too much I suppose....I'd still like that top tier PG.

 

Make the move that gives us the highest probability of the most amount of championships.

 

But what if there is a tradeoff? a 50% chance at a championship for one year only or, a 40% chance at a championship for each of two years, or a 30% chance at a championship for each of 5 years.

 

You try to win every year, but don't overleverage it. IMO, the mixing of old and vets in the extreme whitsett era didnt' really work all that well...because after the vets got old, the youth sucked and we had the jailblazers.

 

NO NO NO.

Our "Big Three" is not even close to being ready this year no matter who we add. Seriously are you willing to throw away the solid future for years to come for a "chance at a championship" this year?

Exactly, think Dynasty not lucky window. That's the whole idea to taking a Big man as the #1 Pick

 

Our window is opening if we make a great deal. Great teams hit that level and stick around in the conversation for years (Spurs, Lakers, Pistons).

This is not a zero sum game. We can contend both now AND over the next decade.

 

I disagree, the top 4 teams in the NBA are too good right now. Boston's Big Three > Anything we can put together this year.

 

Using our future resources (Bayless, Fernandez, etc.) and grabbing an elite level player nearing the end of his prime (i.e. V. Carter) would not be smart IMO. It wouldn't be likely that PDX would be able to put it all together this season and beat LA, San Antonio, Boston, or CLE. We're talking then about 2 seasons of high probability to win it all.

That's not good enough.

What is good enough is securing the same elite-level player without giving up a substantial future asset. It would be worth giving up a Bayless-type piece if we're getting back a great player entering or early on in his prime. In these cases we're not narrowing our championship window.

Even if we just stand pat I see our title chances higher than the former move above.

 

The Lakers are not vulnerable enough, the Spurs are not old enough and our key players don't have enough experience yet to contend for a title no matter what player we were able to trade for. Unless we are talking about a Jason Kidd in his prime type player, and none of those are available.

Frankly, the Lakers are not vulnerable at all. Bynum had only just started coming on strong when he went down. As long as Odom decides to show up, they will be very, very tough. The Spurs are doing what they do every year, which is cost for the first 2.5 to 3 months of the season then ramp up for playoffs. By the time the playoffs come around the Spurs will be in fine form. Their style of play and help defense more then covers for some guys lack of speed.

 

Having an outlook like that will keep this back since it's a self-fulfilling prophecy. If you don't make personnel moves like a contender you will always be a perennial also-ran.

 

Amen to that. We are a pretty damn good home team as it is. If we make a trade, who knows how far this squad can go.

 

The goal is not a run at the Title, it is to take the Title and hold it for an extended length of time.

The goal has not changed.

 

One adds to 130, the other to 150. I'll take the 150.

 

It is silly to stockpile assets and not use those assets - we've needed a 2-for-1, or better yet
a 3-for-1 trade for a year and a half now.

Players who don't get playing time don't "Bake," they "Frye."

 

Interesting question.

I'm more of a strike while the iron is hot type of guy, but you got to use some common sense and not wildly gamble all the potential.

It may be that Boston is too tough this year, but who will be the next Boston (team that aquires two all stars to fit around their exsisting one). If the Lakers fade, which I don't see, there is going to be Lebron's new 2010 team.

I think they should adjust thier time frame and push things up. Roy is young, but I wonder how that body is going to hold up over time. This team has too much youth and needs less youth and more vets to compliment Roy . . . if not in 9 days , then hopefully this summer.

Hell if it doesn't work maybe Blazers can go to plan B and be the next Boston.