This year's team reminds me a lot of the 98-99 team (strike shortened year). They came from out of nowhere to go 35-15 (started something like 27-5) and they went to the Western Conference finals. The second round of the playoffs against Utah was incredible, especially the matchup between B. Grant and K. Malone. I think the 98-99 Blazers were deeper, but the current starting 5 may have been better. Stoudamire = Lilliard Rider < Matthews Williams < Batum Grant < Aldridge Sabonis > Lopez Anthony = Williams Jackson > McCollum (need to see him play in reg. season, but Jackson was very good coming in off the bench) Augmon = Wright (different roles) Wallace > Robson Cato = Freeland The 98-99 team lost some games at the end of the season that dropped them in the conference standings, but they still had a great season. Hopefully the current team can go as far if not further than the 98-99 team.
Wallace started that year at SF. I've made several mentions about the 1998-99 squad at pre-season. They remind me of that too, expect our bench now is much weaker than the bench then. What we have that's better now is Dame and Aldridge are proven clutch players. We really didn't have that type of clutch player back then. BTW... Dame is better than Damon, not equal to.
Great Dame is better than lil dame Sheed started at SF, and while an ass is better than Batum Anthony >>>>>> Mo Williams Jackson >>>>>> McCollum Augmon is better than Wright
It's not about being right or wrong. It's about being incomplete until the sample size is larger. I mean shit man, you argue that this team may not be great until the all-star break. So do you pick and choose how you play the "wait and see" card?
Saying Jackson is better than CJ without having a sample size to justify it. Then on another thread, you said you won't believe in the Blazers until the Allstar break because the sample size is too small. That is "picking and choosing" the "wait and see" card.
That is a terrible argument! Okay, since you want to use this card... Then your "tank for picks" means absolutely shit. None of those players ever scored a point in the NBA. With that way of thinking, you should be agreeing with most of us that say you build a team with established veterans.
Other than the fact that they are both teams that caught everyone off guard, I really don't see the comparison. Dame is much better than Damon Stoudamire. Rider might have been the better talent, but I'd take Wes over Rider any day of the week. His attitude, effort, and defense make him much more valuable. Williams was a one-dimensional three point threat, and Batum is much more vital to our team. Sheed and LA might be comparable in terms of talent, but the way that LA is currently playing would make him the better of the two. Sheed was a better defender though. Sabonis was damn good, but he was so old at that point. Robin is only 25 or 26. I consider them a wash. The bench isn't close though. Anthony was so much better than Mo Williams. Jackson was huge off the bench for that team. I wish we had someone of his caliber this year. Augmon was a good defender, but I consider him and Wright a wash. Sheed was definitely better than anyone we have coming off the bench right now. The funny thing is that I see some of Brian Grant in Thomas Robinson. He's got a ways to go, but I can see it.
Jim Jackson once scored 50 in an NBA contest and averaged 25.7 for a season. Until CJ does anything remotely like that: Jim Jackson > CJ McCollum. Jim Jackson was also a better defender than CJ will probably ever be. CJ is a horrible defender. He was one in college (Lehigh) and he will be one in the NBA for the foreseeable future.
Wallace came off the bench at the start of the season. Williams started at the start of the season. Wallace volunteered to come off the bench, but as the playoffs approached, Dunleavy moved Wallace into the starting lineup. I think you need to go back and take a look at what Stoudamire did that year. While I really like Lillard, Stoudamire was also very good and had the same type of attitude that Lillard has now - wants the last shot. I think the big difference is that with that team, the bench had to be better due to the short window for so many games (3 games in 3 nights for example). With our current bench, they need them, but not as much due to a longer season with more breaks. The 98-99 team didn't have injuries either, so hopefully this team won't as well.
I guess you and I can have this conversation in a couple years. And lets talk about the Jackson that played for the Blazers, not when he was the #1 option in Dallas.
Yeah, I really wish we had a JJ on this team. He was money. I just don't see the Damon comparison. The numbers aren't even close, and Damon was a couple years older at that point. Dame is currently averaging 20 ppg, 5.7 assists, 3.5 rebounds, 39% FG and 40.5% from three Damon in that season averaged 12.6 ppg, 6.2 assists, 3.3 rebounds, 39% FG and 31% from three. The real separation is in the advanced stats. Dame has a 19 PER, Stoudamire only had a 14.7 PER. It's interesting though, because Dame has much more impressive offensive advanced stats, but Stoudamire did have pretty good defensive advanced stats.
How can you guys claim that Matthews is better than Rider? Rider was playin all-star level (and i know matthews is playing closer to that now). Rider had an 18 PER during those playoffs.
