Stephen A. Smith says we're a piece away from winning it all

To echo what has already been said, I think the Blazers need to add a consistent sixth man scorer, and another starting quality 4/5 big to the roster, to be a real playoff contender.

Freeland as a third big man is OK, but as the fourth big, he'd be a luxury. CJ might be our "consistent sixth man scorer", but he's only a rookie, and you can't bank on him just yet. Hopefully CJ blossoms, and the blazers add a big in the Summer with the mid level exception. TRob is too raw at this point so I don't expect him to be that big the team needs any time soon.

Who knows, maybe Olshey can get what the team needs at the trade deadline, without messing with the starting lineup. I wouldn't touch the starters right now unless it is for an obvious upgrade though.

One more thing, I hope that the "consistent sixth man" will be able to get to the basket and draw fouls at a high rate which is one thing the Blazers are lacking right now.

 

"As shown on that last shot by Monta..." 21 feet from the rim, when LA is playing center, and any basket wins the game. Talk about jumping the shark. Someone make Nate a new snowball. His has gotten so big it rolled down the hill, created an avalanche, and destroyed a village.

 

We saw it repeatedly when Dame's man would go baseline and LA would just watch the guy go past him. All he needed to do was close on the ball and affect the shot, but he didn't even try.

 

And you determined he didn't try, being charged with defending a 15x15 ft area, with 1.9 seconds on the clock, because he didn't make it out 21 ft from the hoop? This is the worst situation one could use to assert LA is bad at help defense. I couldn't sell this argument to a blind man, let alone get anyone to take it for free.

 

When does it become Dame's responsibility to stop the opposing ball handler from getting to the baseline?

 

There IS a strategy to funnel your man to your help defense, but it doesn't work if the help defense doesn't.... well... help?

 

And had the Blazers won, this thread would not have been made.

 

A thread about Stephen A. Smith thinking we're a piece away from a championship would not have been made?

 

Reaching for straws if we are reacting to something Stephen A Smith said.

 

Actually we are reacting to something Stephen A. didn't say. The piece that is missing that Mr A. was referring to is what we are talking about. Do you disagree that the Blazers need to add 1 piece to be a contender?

 

Stephen A. Smith is about as knowledgeable as a piece of tin foil, when it comes to knowing what a team needs. I wouldn't trust him, even if he says we are for real.

 

It's not like anyone is throwing a parade because Stephen A. thinks we're close to being legit championship contenders.

I posted it because it's an interesting take. Nothing more.

 

I agree with Nate. I think the good news is not that the national network nattering ninnies know about what they are talking, because in reality they care not, as evidenced by nattering Skip Bayless' idiotic "analysis". The only good news is that the team is successful enough to warrant national network news notice. The bad news is, how are we going to get this 'one piece' of which Mr. Cheese Doodle and other assorted posters speak? I'd settle for a better sixth man at the guard position. Paging CJ?

 

I should have said argument, not thread. You've made a barrage of critical arguments in several threads since losing to Dallas, so my bad for getting mixed up.

 

The argument about Aldridge's help defense? I think a lot of people were annoyed by it in the game thread. To my knowledge, this is the only other place I've brought it up.

 

I certainly am not. I don't think Smith's point was entirely baseless, whether he thought of it on his own or red it from someone else's notes. Bayless, however, was out of his element talking about the Blazer losing streak to end the season, and his infatuated with OKC is embursin'.

 

So you agree your argument, that it was LA's lack of help defense that allowed Monta to hit that game winner, is absurd?

 

Not calling you out. I'm calling Steven out. He jumps in and thinks he knows everything when he knows shit. Appreciate the link Nate.

 

True, but you agree he made a compelling argument right?

 

I know. lol I didn't think that at all, was just expounding on my posts on the topic.