Injury Excuse Propaganda

So if we have Dame/CJ still but our record is as poor as it is, perhaps they aren't as good as we think they are? That may be sacrilage, but we still have our 'Top 1 or 2 backcourts' in the NBA and are being beat by teams that have a big fat nothing.

For 4 years it's been my opinion that Dame/CJ together don't work for being a true contender. Now we are seeing what they bring without Super Nurk and people all over the rest of the roster trying to pick up for them on the defensive end. I just don't believe you can hide BOTH on the defensive end. One of them? (Dame) You can get away with like the Warriors hide Curry. But two average or below defenders who are undersized? I just don't see where that works historically and it certainly hasn't worked in a contender manner in this version.

Very good offensively but at times, at the expense of their own teammates. Dame is fine because he passes the ball. CJ has shown he will pass....when he is playing and Dame is out due to injury....but they both don't do that when playing together. It almost seems like it becomes a competition of 'who is going to get theirs'.

 

So this year is the norm and the past 6 or 7 years of Lillard and McCollum together was an anomaly?

 

No anomaly. Not sure where they have reached contender status in any of those years. And this year, like in years past, they show well on the offensive end. It's not all bad....but it has yet to come close to contender status either. Being continually swept out of the Playoffs seems evidence to that.

 

Goals for a season

1) make the playoffs

2) Achieve the best record possible and work to secure home court

3) Win the first round of a series

4) Advance to the Conference finals

5) Make the finals

6) win the championship

During the Stotts/Lillard/ McCollum years we have achieved 4 of the 6 goals. Sure we all want a championship but we have been better than a lot of teams over that time period. Bottom line, only one team accomplishes all 6 goals in a season and it always takes a bit of luck to do that.

 

Totally fair... Have you been able to come up with one team that had a comparable amount of injuries and talent on their roster that had success for an entire season? I really tried to come up with one, but was unable to. I'm guessing it has happened, but the process of trying to find just one example being so difficult seems to indicate it's pretty rare.

 

I think last year was the anomaly and every other year was the norm... a mediocre team that has maxed out potential of a Dame/CJ pairing.

 

I've been seeing basically this same point being made by multiple posters and I think that the logic behind it is flawed for two reasons. The first is that it's only considering the offensive side of the game. While Dame and CJ are certainly the Blazers two best offensive players, they're far from being top notch defenders. The Blazers lost two good defenders in Aminu and Harkless who used to cover up a lot of the guards' perimeter defensive deficiencies. Bazemore is okay, but Carmelo is never going to get out to the three point shooters the way Chief did. How many open threes are opponents getting this year? It seems like every game the opponent is putting up season highs for three point percentage. The second flaw in the thinking is that while it's true that the Blazers are still starting a credible team, the injuries have sucked the depth out of the bench. Most games the bench is getting outscored by the opponent's bench by enough to account for the margin of the loss. The last point I'd make is that there's value in consistency in the NBA. Last year, the Blazers were able to play the same group of starters most of the season. This year because of injuries to multiple starters, the Blazers have never had time to develop the cohesive team play that is dependent on developing chemistry by playing together.

 

If defense and depth matter so much, then why commit over 70% of salary cap to 2 players who are basically one way players. Why extend CJ 30-35 mil per year instead of trading him for more balanced roster? You are making excuses for players that are getting paid like they should produce more than 5 games under .500 almost half way thru the season.

 

I'm not making excuses for anyone. It's just a plain fact that Dame and CJ have size deficiencies that put them at a disadvantage defensively. It's not unusual for top offensive players to have shortcomings on the defensive end of the court. GMs have to decide if their offensive prowess is worth the mediocre defense and, if so, how to best design the roster to cover for those shortcomings. Olshey decided that Dame and CJ were worth their big contracts. His roster decisions for this season seem to have been based upon two notions: 1) that the Blazers would be a high scoring team with Hood replacing Mo's mediocre scoring, and 2) that Collin's and Whiteside would provide the interior defensive presence that would make up for the Blazers' perimeter deficiencies. Injuries wiped out both of those plans. You can argue that his plan wasn't sound, but with the early injuries to Collins and Hood, we don't have much to base an analysis on.

 

Neil talked championship with Nurk injury known...

- Collins and Hood
+ Melo

does not excuse going from title contender to 5 games under .500 at almost halfway point of season.

 

Well, obviously, you have your mind made up. I'm not going to waste time trying to change it.

 

Injuries are part of the game... it’s naive to expect entire roster healthy all year. If your big money players are healthy, you should still produce at a respectable level. Even without Nurk, Zach, and Hood, Blazers remaining roster is way over the salary cap... with Dame and CJ healthy and 120+ mil payroll still healthy, the way they are playing is unacceptable IMO.

 

In addition the inability of keeping the same cohesiveness and being able to keep a consistent rotation this year effects a team defensively more than offense, but even offensively it can be a challenge when the rotations change every few games. This year we came in with many new players and it should have been apparent there could be an adjustment period but nobody expected it to continually change from game to game. Plus, sometimes things just don't always work the same thus the saying "you still have to play the game" and even if we trotted out the same lineup as last year it doesn't guarantee the same results. Lots of people came in with high expectations after last year and now some are butt hurt over it. All you can do is continue to work and hopefully turn things around as you can't change the past results.

 

Did you ever play sports and where and what level?

 

Are you under the impression that salaries play basketball?

 

No, but as a fan who has to pay ridiculous prices to attend games, Neil should be accountable for how he allocates salary. Highest payroll in NBA, with Dame, CJ, Whiteside, and Melo healthy and you think fans should accept 5 games under .500

 

What do you suggest? Continually whining and crying about it in a sports forum? Do you think that accomplishes anything? I suggest you start a movement and picket the Moda Center. That'll show them right? lol

By the way, you never answered my question above as to your playing sports.

 

What is the point of a sports forum in your opinion? For everyone to hold hands and sing Kumbaya? Do you want people silenced if they don’t have something nice to say about the team even if it’s the truth?

 

I didn't say that the Blazers' current record was acceptable, just that it's understandable. I don't think that the Blazers management, coaching staff or players would say that they find their current record acceptable. They're going to do their best to put together enough wins to make the playoffs. Olshey, I'm pretty certain, has plans to bolster the roster through a trade. Several of the injured players will be back this season, hopefully in time to make the playoffs entertaining. I'm going to root for all of that to happen. I don't get your apparent anger at a situation that was beyond anyone's reasonable expectation of happening, but to each their own.