Below is copied/borrowed from Blazers Edge. Since we're so starved for anything Blazer related to discuss or argue about I thought I would re-post it here... Dave, Is LaMarcus Aldridge a franchise player? Short answer: Yes, but it depends which franchise. Aldridge is clearly the Blazers' franchise player at this point. He's the most talented player, the highest scorer, the focal point of the offense. He's also good at it. His scoring average rose almost 4 full points last year on 2.5 more shots per game. He shoots 50% overall from the field. His PER is a robust 21.5, ranking him 18th overall in the league. He's blossomed into what the Blazers needed in the absence of Brandon Roy and Greg Oden. There's nothing to fault him for there. But the question was whether Aldridge was "a" franchise player, not whether he's "our" franchise player. I'm assuming the indirect modifier implies "the kind of player who can take this franchise to great heights, making this incarnation of the Trail Blazers memorable and distinct". The answer to that is more muddled. Comparing Aldridge to past Portland franchise players I place him in the middle ground between Zach Randolph and Rasheed Wallace. At a similar age to Aldridge Randolph was a more prolific scorer, modified by the fact that he had a higher usage rate and was far less efficient offensively. Randolph was a better rebounder and has kept up his scoring average for a number of years after but Aldridge is clearly the better defender of the two and always will be. Were I building a team I'd take LaMarcus over Zach. Aldridge is far superior to a similarly-aged Wallace in the scoring department, again modified by LaMarcus' higher usage rate and number of shots per minute and game. In his entire career Rasheed never sniffed (or likely wanted) the 17.5 attempts Aldridge took last year. Wallace and Aldridge are similar in the rebounding department...not that this is a compliment. But Rasheed was as much superior to Aldridge defensively as Aldridge is superior to Randolph. Throw in Wallace's great court sense and ability to step up in the playoffs and he still outranks Aldridge. The concern for Portland fans: Randolph never took the Blazers anywhere and Wallace's success was predicated on fantastic teammates as much as his own play. We're not talking Drexler dominance here. Compared to current players we're nowhere near Kevin Garnett or Tim Duncan level production as they came into their prime years. THOSE are franchise players. Even now, after clearly the best season of his career, Aldridge is far closer to Kevin Martin than Kevin Durant...great player, love to have him, not going to be one of that small handful of guys who wills their team to elite status. Sometimes the equation gets oversimplified. Our team has a great player + Our team is going somewhere = Our team's best player is now (or soon will be) among the league elite. In truth both the current league and this team's history are populated with really good players who don't end up being that definitive All-Time Franchise Guy. LaMarcus Aldridge is the franchise player for this team. He would be the franchise player on several teams around the league. On a handful of others--maybe 8-10 depending on how you'd look at it--he'd be the second banana. The distinguishing line between the two sets is that the first group is full of mediocre-to-bad teams in need of a definitive franchise guy and the majority of the second group sits at the top of the league because they already have one. The Blazers aren't there yet. Aldridge may be the centerpiece to their master plan but, as it once was with Wallace, the team's ultimate success likely will depend on the players around him as much as upon LaMarcus himself. What say you? Is Aldridge overrated by Portland fans because the team needs him to be that good right now? Will LaMarcus become one of those transcendent superstars in the league? Is he already? Weigh in below. --Dave (blazersub@yahoo.com) http://www.blazersedge.com/2011/9/7/2410583/is-lamarcus-aldridge-overrated
Three different players. Rasheed used a pinkie nail of his talent, so we would only get a glimpse of what he could do. Randolph used every ounce of his, but only played 47 feet (other than defensive rebounds). Both were headcases. Aldridge seems to be the best of both worlds of those two, and he's getting better. He's also sane.
I dunno about overrated ... last year he finally delivered a season that we all hoped he might be capable of when he was drafted, but had also started to look increasingly unlikely based his body of work before that. The real test comes this (next?) year when he gets to try and replicate and/or improve upon what he did last year (or will he regress?). At this point I'd say he's "rated" but he's got to be able to show that last year wasn't just a fluke. We'll see I guess.
Overrated? Until he shows up consistently in the 4th quarter, he's just a shadow living off the good graces (passes) of others. Overpaid? Simple answer. Definitely yes.
Everyone acts as if he played like that all year long. He looked great for about a 6-8 week period around December and January, padded by inside passes from Andre Miller. Opponents caught on, those passes vanished, and so did Aldridge's performance. That's my memory. I looked it up. 11 of his top 12 games were between Dec. 17 to Feb. 23. So he looked great during 1/3 of the season. (During those 2 months, 28 games were played out of 82). http://www.hoopsstats.com/basketbal...s/lamarcus-aldridge/gamelog/11/25/350/1-1-eff (sorted by efficiency per game) Same result with GameScore. http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/a/aldrila01/gamelog/2011/ (click on the GameScore column)
He was the only really good player on a 48 win team. When your second and third best players are Miller and Wallace, you can only be so good. Kind of like the T-wolves when Spree and Cassel started falling apart. Garnett was still Garnett, but that team only won 44 games. Not saying Aldridge was nearly as good as a 28 year old Garnett. Just pointing out that teammates matter. Looking over those 2004-05 T-Wolves, there are some depressing similarities: Garnett/Aldridge Spree/Wallace Cassel/Miller Wally/Batum (promising young SF's just entering their prime) Kandi/Oden (ouch) HasselGriffin/Matthews Of course, basically the same team went to the WCF and won 58 games just the season before. Last year's 48 win Blazers were basically an average of those two Timberwolves seasons.
When there's something to talk about I'm down, but this summer was like looking for a drop of water in the Sahara around here.
Maybe the best post ever. It would have been the best for sure if you had said "Cause I'm a ballin' her"
MM I thought we were boys!!!!!?????? And I have at least 100 better posts since I've takin' my talents to S2!
