This is the key quote here. For all of you that think it's foolish to go use key resources to go after a player that is young, what do you have to say about this. Is Pritchard wrong to entertain such a thought or are you?
Of all the noise we've heard lately, I'd say chances are we're heading closer to a Stephen Curry than a Steve Nash. I'm pretty relieved about this.
This is part of what worries me about how KP is building this team. I get what he's saying about the "age doesn't matter, if they're good, they're good." But history in terms of NBA playoff success suggests that age and experience do matter. Yes, Brandon, Joel and LaMarcus are experienced guys, but none of them have won a playoff series. That matters. Look at all of the recent NBA champions. None of them have grown organically with guys who have had no playoff success and then suddenly the light came on for them after several years of trying to figure it out. All of them have added key pieces that have taken them to the next level or already possessed those guys (so they were in a position of merely just needing to supplement experience with talent ... we're in the opposite boat). Even the Spurs, who you could make the closest argument to the "growing organically can bring you success" model (all of their key guys were drafted and developed by the Spurs), had a key ingredient that the Blazers don't have. When they won their first championship with Duncan, they had guys like David Robinson and Sean Elliott and Mario Elie who had been in absolute wars deep into the playoffs. Then by the time they supplemented their team with adding Tony Parker and Manu Ginobli through the draft, Duncan was that guy who had the playoff scars. I hope KP doesn't fall in love with this whole premise that he can just draft talented guys and eventually we'll be more talented than anyone else and win a championship that way. It doesn't work that way. Never has. You have got to have that guy who can vault everyone else to another level. Even if it is just for that one year. Because once Brandon and the other guys have been to ... say ... the conference finals, they'll have that mettle. And then we can supplement through the draft and through small additions in free agency and in trades. But I feel the only way we'll get to that point is by adding a key veteran difference-maker who can push everyone else to that level. -Pop
Found this interesting about Jerebko. Not too fascinated with him now. Definitely still on the radar though, just not as high up.
I don't think he's opposed to improving the team by trading for players with Playoff experience. But, that player has to be the right fit. If no one fits, but a younger player does, go with the youth. Experience is great, but not at the expense of talent/ability.
The best teams have a mix of both young and experienced. Right now all we have is young. KP talks about Blake and Pryz being the vets already on this team. But the difference between them and other veterans is that other veterans have been through the playoff battle. They have not. They have barely tasted it.
I think some of you may be misinterpreting the Blazers' and especially Paul Allen's intentions. The team's moves at the trade deadline were conservative and money saving ones. They could have used RLEC to bring in a big salaried player, but didn't. Looking forward, they have to sign guys like Roy and LMA to 8 figure contracts after next season and then Oden. Those three alone could eat up 3/4 of the salary cap. If the team is at the LT threshold after this coming season, they're going to be spending $10's of milliions in tax and they'll lose any disbursement that teams under the LT get paid out from those taxed. My expectations are they'd like to fill out the roster with later round 1st picks who don't command big salaries but don't hurt the team on the court. If they're trading, it'll be like contracts or to get a #19 for taking on Claxton's expiring deal.
I don't think that's a good way to construct a team, due to standard maxim that correlation does not imply causation. It may simply be that it is very hard to get so many good pieces in the draft. But Pritchard has. Maybe the odds of him landing so much talent via the draft was very low, but now that he has, the odds are no longer relevant. The main point is, you add players that make you better. You don't just blindly add "types" of players. If you can get a really good player in the draft, do it. If you can in free agency, do it. If it comes in trade, fine. Each decision should be made on its own merits, not how it jibes with "history." I would say the Chicago Bulls were built pretty organically with homegrown talent and then left to "figure it out" until the light came on. They drafted Jordan, Pippen (essentially...draft day swap, like Portland getting Roy), Grant, Armstrong. Paxson was already there and Cartwright was added, but that's not vastly different from Portland's Blake and Przybilla. The main talent was drafted and left to "figure it out."
Except for that Jordan Part you are right. It is not vastly different. Except for that all important "Jordan" piece...
I don't think the fact that Jordan was involved throws it into some other class. Jordan alone doesn't create championships. The Bulls had to build a great team, they weren't kings just because they drafted Jordan. And the way they built it was essentially through the draft. Sure, no one on the Blazers is Michael Jordan, but I don't think that invalidates the comparison. You can build a great team through homegrown talent. Pritchard shouldn't be looking to acquire older players simply because they are older. He should be looking to acquire the players that will best improve the team...whether they are rookies, young players or veterans.
OK ... I'll concede your point. If the Blazers end up with the greatest basketball player in the history of the world, then the organic growth thing can yield several championships. -Pop
LOL at Blake being mentioned in that story. The guy was embarrassed by a third tier at best PG in the playoffs. But I will agree with KP on this.....We need to get better, regardless of age. But he is fooling himself if he thinks more youth isn't going to set us back more years.
Already responded to. I don't think your point is very compelling, when you discard the Bulls and Spurs because of some exception in your mind. All you're saying, essentially, is that you can't build through the draft...unless you're an exception. That says nothing, really. If Oden pans out, the "exception" that invalidates the Blazers will be that they "just happened" to have two superstars in Oden and Roy and a third star in Aldridge. You can always create a "rule" that works if you throw out all examples of the rule failing through some post-hoc reasoning.
The closest thing was the Detroit Pistons. They were close, and then added Rasheed (for no loss in talent), who had the Conference Finals experience. But, I really don't know if it was Sheeds "Leadership" in putting them over the top, or if it was the fact that Sheed was a damn talented player that fit perfectly with Ben Wallace on the front line, that they were able to add for no loss of talent going out. And, the thing about the Pistons, was because the mostly grew organically, once they broke through, they had a very long and steady run.
By the way, I'm not advocating adding just any veteran. I think if you can get a Steve Nash, a Jason Kidd, a Tayshaun Prince, a Hedo Turkoglu (someone who fits a need and has that deep playoff experience), and it doesn't compromise your chemsitry or future financials, you do it. There has to be a balance between experience and talent. I would just like to see KP value experience a bit more in his player acquisitions. So far he hasn't shown that. Now ... granted, we haven't been in the position yet where we could supplement. But I think we're there now. We have our core guys. Now comes the part where you add the missing pieces to get you into the championship window. I don't really see any situation where we can draft those missing pieces without compromising 3-4 years of opportunity. I think we have the ingredients to compete for a championship next year if we add a talented veteran. I think our opportunity for doing that evaporates by next summer with the max contracts we're likely going to give Brandon and LaMarcus. We'll have zero cap flexibility next summer. Which is what makes our cap space now so important. -Pop
So we get the same team that couldn't beat a good western conference team on the road? The same team that couldn't guard anyone on the perimeter? The same team that shot few FT per game? Te same team that lost in the first round with HCA? Fuck I hope this is a smokescreen.
I'm not sure I'd argue that the Pistons grew organically. Outside of Tayshaun Prince, all of their major pieces for that title were acquired through free agency or trades (Hamilton, the Wallaces and Billups). -Pop
I really can't help but think he is thinking about Ramon Sessions when he talks about fit and age. Then moving up and having some fun by getting Hansbrough or Blair. Bayless might kill someone though if he is stuck behind Blake again.
Worst case scenario we get the same team but with added experience, the return of Martell Webster and most important - Oden regaining his explosiveness and stamina. One hope it is also the year where JB gets at least the backup PG minutes behind Blake. This is still the same team that is one errant whistle away from facing SAS in the first round (a team they did defeat on the road) - only better. The same team that took Houston to 6 games with no playoffs experience - and Houston took the eventual Champs to 7... I still hope we upgrade - but the situation is not that dire...
