yeah, just about. And Blake was pretty much done by that season I'm convinced Olshey didn't want to give Stotts a good backup PG option because that would have been competition for CJ's minutes
I kind of feel like Ace Ventura right now except instead of screaming, I keep screaming, "Ant is CJ!!!" I know they have differences in their games but for all intents and purposes they have very similar reasons why they're the same bad fit next to Dame.
What is really confusing is that this team has so much mediocre talent at the 2-4 positions. There is 1 true PG and 2 true C's. Most teams carry 3 of each because of the importance of those positions. Why not consolidate to acquire a better fit at starting SG/SF, a true backup PG and useable depth at center. Trading Ant could solve at least one of those needs and probably two. Now that GPIII is back, there is even more of a log jam and he doesn't really fill a need.
IMO, it hasn't been 30 years between Drexler and Dame to have a great player. Injuries robbed us from seeing what Oden could become, but 29 GM's believed he had generational talent. Similarly, what would Roy have been if he had had knees? Sadly, we either didn't get to see much of them, or were robbed of how good they could have been if healthy. Someone pointed out the PG's that had led their teams to championships in the last 40 years. Magic - an all-time great on a different level than Dame and almost anyone else to ever play the position. Steph - the greatest shooter in the NBA to this point, and Zeke, probably the closest comparison to Dame, but that makes one similar type guard in 40 years. Not exactly a blueprint for success. Add to that a similar type player who doesn't play defense (unlike what Thomas had next to him) and it breeds exactly what we have had for years. We either have to get 3 long, very good defenders who can also stretch the court, or we have to move Ant to get some size and defense next to Dame. That has been the case for some time, but we keep running out these teams led by 2 smaller guards who are best when they have the ball in their hands and don't play a tone of D. It is something that has never met with success that I can remember, and if it has, it was much more likely the exception that proves the rule. Hopefully Cronin can finally do something about this that changes the direction, makeup and identity of the team....because yet once again, it is NOT working.
I don’t think - think - that you and others don’t understand that there is more to it than just being the best player or a great player. Are there not different types of players? Since he’s the best Blazer maybe we haven’t had enough great players? Maybe Walton was? Do you think scoring, high volume, weak defending point guards is the way to go? Has that ever happened in the history of the NBA? So yeah they need to surround him with another superstar. They would have had to do it in one of these drafts over the last ten years. They aren’t winning a championship with him as their best player.
I personally don't think that putting scoring, high volume, weak defending small guards next to Dame is the way to go but it the way we have gone since Wes. I would just like to see what happens if we put a roster together that complements Dame. I don't know if you watched the game this afternoon but Dame is having a high level defensive season. He has to stop turning the ball over at the ridiculously high rate he has been but other than that, I personally think this is the best Dame has ever looked. Get the guy a roster around him that makes sense!
I can think of a scoring, high volume, weak defending PG who has done real well in the championship department the last 7-8 years. But he has been surrounded with the right talent, which is my point. I agree the Blazers are unlikely to win a championship in the next 5 years, even more unlikely if he's not on the roster either. In fact, they'll probably be worse. And let's be real, the Blazers probably aren't winning a championship in the next 15 years regardless of if Dame is no longer on the roster. I'm also not saying Dame is untradable, but getting rid of him for the sole reason that he has failed to lead the Blazers to the championship (like Clyde, Sheed, Pippen, Sabonis, Roy, Aldridge, etc). just makes no sense to me. Like every player on the roster, you trade him if the assets you get in return are of greater value. You don't trade him because he hasn't won a championship, IMO.
This is why I have lost a lot of my love for the NBA. It's like watching the WWE. What's the point? At least with the NFL you have no idea who's going to win the SuperBowl from year to year.
I get what you're saying, but comparing it to the WWE is a stretch for me. When did you start to love the NBA? I'm assuming there were dynasties then as well. Here are the number of different teams to win a title in each decade: 80's - 4 teams 90's - 5 teams 00's - 6 teams 10's - 7 teams
I'm convinced when a team's best player plays PG and arguably second best player also backs up that same position prioritizing a third player to play the teams strongest position is a stupid idea. Blazers were starting Mario Hezonja and Antony Tolliver at forward, but posters here wonder why the 3rd string PG wasn't a focus of the teams roster building???
Ah Hezonja and Tolliver...more classic Neil. I forgot about those two as and NBA fan should. I am hoping the team can just win every other game for the remainder of Dame's tenure. Then they can reboot. They cannot trade him and seriously which team would take Dame? Seriously? Who has assets but is just dying to take a 50mil a year guy? Nobody, maybe the Lakers. I keep reading how he would bring a haul but not seeing how that would work. Please just list a team that would take Dame in a heartbeat and give back multiple FRPs? Just one seriously. The only one I see is the Lakers. So Portland will have to playback the primary elements of this roster until he decides to throw in the towel. Ant could be traded.
I don't know what you mean by "prioritizing". Do you mean 1st on the priority list?...yeah, that's stupid but that's not what anybody was saying except maybe you as a counter-argument CJ was the backup PG by default and he was a worse, diluted version of Dame who failed to run the team's offense at any consistent level. His backup PG time is what got him the nickname of MeJ. (Napier and Curry were much more tiny SG's than PG's) Ant is the same type of backup PG as CJ, with less MeJ; at least he is to this point. Portland's backup PG this year is Winslow, not Ant (Blazers are 3-6 without Winslow). Hart is as much the backup PG as Ant, and both Hart & Winslow average more assists per possession than Ant Is a solid backup PG a luxury? maybe...generically. But the consistent and often disastrous ways the offense failed in the Dame/CJ years when Dame went to the bench suggested that adding a solid backup PG option might have been a idea worth trying (prioritizing?). Certainly a better idea than Olshey's idiot ideas of grossly overpaying Evan Turner or cheap-screwing Hezonja into quasi-PG roles at rotation positions that didn't threaten CJ's minutes
