I was thinking about this last night. If you go position by position, I'm not sure they still aren't at least equal to us. Westbrook > Lillard Oladipo < McCollum Roberson < Turner Kanter > Whoever Adams > Plumlee Benches are pretty even
Chemistry needs to be factored in as well. Not sure if OKC's will be good or bad. But with Westbrook you never know. How far in to the game will he wait until he tells Donovan to get Kanter out of the game?
Nah. Those kind of comparisons never work out because they don't consider the range of things that a guy may be good or weak at. Westbrook > Lillard? He's more athletic and able to put up a triple-double pretty much whenever he wants, but a better leader and guy who makes his teammates better? Hardly. Kanter has the advantage over most PFs at the offensive end due to his size, but he's not mobile enough or committed enough on the defensive end to really work at the PF spot. And, overall, I think that there are team intangibles that outweigh a position-by-position comparison. The Blazers overachieved in good part because they were such a solid TEAM. Don't get me wrong I think OKC still is going to be a threat, but I like the Blazers' odds at finishing ahead of them.
You're right, we are better across the board. Westbrook can only hope to be as good as Dame is. Kanter's 13/8 in 21 minutes is completely sub par to all of our PF's How dare I say something remotely negative about the Blazers. It's on me, I know better
No, he's actually just a good shooter from anywhere. That's more than you are admitting. But it's the truth.
As soon as he nuts up and plays below the three point line I'll be able to see that 101st in the league in true shooting %
Well, you seem to read whatever you want into a post and come up with the same old crap every time. I think that Westbook is a helluva player, but that he doesn't make his teammates better. I think that Kanter is too big and slow to play the PF spot. These opinions seem to press your homer alert button. Whoopee.
The 2014-2015 Thunder were without Durant for part of the season. They had the same roster as next years with Ibaka, without Oladipo. That team won 45 games. I would argue that 2014-2015 Ibaka is better than Oladipo. I would be surprised in OKC is better than Portland in the upcoming year. They are going to miss Durant for all of the year (not just parts of it), Ibaka was better than Oladipo by a significant measure - so whatever improvements happend with Adams/Kanter are not likely to overcome the Durant/Ibaka loss imho. I am guessing low-40 wins for them next year.
Okc is going to deal westbrook for deangelo russell or marcus smart, jae crowder and picks etc. After they do something like that they will be worse than us definitively. The twolves are the team that scare the crap out of me. They could take a strangehold of the division as soon as this year for the next 5 years.
I follow baseball, sometimes good hitters have off-seasons. Sometimes good pitchers have off-seasons. I follow basketball too, sometimes good shooters have off-seasons. I think he has shown throughout his career that he has the shooting touch of a good shooter from the three-point line inward. No, I don't suddenly believe Leonard has Rick Ankieled and lost all that ability forever. I think his contract negotiations probably factored into his performance along with the expectations from the previous season. I think part of growing as a player is being able to compartmentalize between playing on the court and the business/expectations off the court. If Leonard can negotiate this, I think his good shooting performance will return and you will be lead to understand why I say that he's a good shooter from anywhere.
I'm sure the Blazers can probably enjoy a modest improvement overall from incremental improvements from some of their players, but regressions happen all the time and so does plateauing and it's inevitable some of our guys are going to have that happen. The real problem is that as guys get into their mid to late twenties (where most of these players are) they are more or less refining their game vs. improving by leaps and bounds -- overall this team is pretty close to its ceiling and that probably isn't going to get them where they need to be. Sure some will say Vonleh and Leonard could still massively improve, but do most of you really believe that's going to happen? I have a tiny bit of hope about Noah, but I'd put the odds of him becoming a 20+ PER player and the third star this team desperately needs somewhere south of 2%. The real trouble is that even if the Blazers do enjoy incremental improvement, I see a lot of teams that could be nipping at their heels (like the T-Wolves) in very short order -- teams with a lot more room for growth and potential for growth.
I'd argue that Dame is a better 4th qtr player than Westbrook though..Westbrook doesn't make the best choices at the end of games...Dame loves the endgame
4th youngest roster in the league last season, just got younger and now we're too old to get better from natural development? Did I really just have to type that to point it out?
Man I would love to see Stotts implement a system where that is the only time Damian dominates the ball. Perhaps also as a change up in the second quarter.
Counting solely on internal development is like that kid in high school who dumps a shit ton of money into his parents car trying to make it cool. Fancy tires and wheels, tinted windows, stereo, loud exhaust, still a shit car.
Sorry, you seem to have forgotten that you're dealing with a hopeless homer here. What exactly is that sea of numbers supposed to mean? If Westbrook and Harden are supposed to be #1 and #2 in the NBA at making their teammates better, I'm going to want the bean counters to reconsider their math.
Crappy metaphor, Sly. It's more like planting a garden, watering it every day, weeds and all, and expecting to get a gourmet salad out of it. You have to be willing to pull the weeds, prune the plants, and, at the end, add the right finishing touches and dressing.
