Brogdon plays great defense and doesn't dominate the offense. He happily accepts a bench/starting role as the team needs. Dame plays horrible defense and dominates the offense. Blazers currently have the 9th ranked defense and Bucks are 27th. Last year the Blazers were the 27th ranked defense and the Bucks were 4th. Are the Blazers better with Brogdon instead of Dame?
Dame like many stars has faults about his game but what he does well offsets the negatives to some degree. He certainly has proven to be a clutch scorer and good teammate, but has also has been fortunate to be the number one scorer for years, on one team. His competitive fire and composure helped him overcome his defensive issues. The one area I always wanted to see him do more of was push other players/teammates and be more vocal when needed. I think he's in a good situation now and has a legit shot at winning a championship. He's a pretty humble guy, and won't have an issue being a secondary scorer to TGF. He did improve a lot in getting to the hoop, I recall when he really struggled in that area. His expertise for sure has been the ability to hit three's, even at crazy distances, and big shots. His persona has won him great admiration around the league, and that as well, offsets some of his d weakness.
I would argue that it is a lot more than just Dame vs. Brogdon even if we ignore the way too small sample size. It's the roster construction and fit with the system. Going from 2 undersized defensively challenged backcourt guards to 1 or less is a big deal, improving the mobile forwards that play defense from 1 (Grant) to multiple (Grant, Camara, Tisse) is an upgrade, going from a slow center playing a system that does not benefit his skills (Nurk) and a mobile backup that is not great defensively (Eubanks) to 2 mobile, good defenders in the center position is a huge upgrade.
This is a difficult question to answer. Maybe THIS team with THIS coach is better suited to Brogdon, but I'm pretty sure that if you substituted Brogdon for Dame on the Stotts-coached team that went to the WCF, it wouldn't do as well. I think Milwaukee's struggles have a lot more to do with the new coach than the new PG. Milwaukee should EITHER have fired their championship coach OR traded for Dame, but doing both is counterproductive. I think Griffin is (and should be) on a seat that's getting toastier by the day.
I do not think it is fair to just compare Dame Vs Brogdon. Portland got Ayton, Williams and Camara in the deal that are all making valuable contributions to the defensive success. I understand the OP though. If you put Dame on this roster minus Brogdon, yes, they would be better. But you can't, because the key defensive players arrived for Dame.
DEFENSE! The team is better balanced size wise allowing them to switch more effectively. With legit sized athletes at every spot (especially center) & having no obvious weakest link(s) makes them an improved unit defensively over last year. STOMP
Probably not....but the addition to defense by subtraction of Dame can't be entirely ignored. Dame's last 4 years in Portland: 137-173 a .442 winning percentage. Blazers in an incredibly small sample size after he has left: 3-3 a .500 winning percentage. I expect the Blazers to be much worse, but Dame's time was over here and his lack and sometimes complete lack of effort on defense would not have been a good influence or mentoring situation for this young group. Ant was exposed to years of it and subsequently was one of the worst defenders in the league. This year he is at least showing more effort. I don't think that is coincidence. The CBS article calls Dame 'flat out lazy' in many of his defensive excursions with the jogging up the court we saw for years in Portland on D but very few would call him out for it, and when they did, they were "Dame haters". Well, now it is one a bigger stage with tremendous talent around him and as of now, his defense is abysmal and his offense has declined tremendously. So maybe Portland is better off after all.....and certainly so in the long run. The effort is so much better with this group even if the execution is a huge work in progress.
The bolded section is too large of a difference to be ignored. Of course, it is very early, but with that talent in MIL, it is a MASSIVE decline, while Portland has markedly improved. Perhaps it is at least a legitimate questions that bears discussion.
Milwaukee has a different coach/scheme/roster. Portland has played 6 games, 3 of them against less than impressive offenses. To make this a Dame vs Brogdon comparison is a reach, at best.
Brogdan is a better pt guard or combo guard than Ant or Scoot...our defense has improved greatly since Brogdan has been running the offense. Who's this Dame guy you are speaking about?
I didn't once compare Dame vs Brogdon. I compared early team results (all that anyone can do so far.....react to what is) and how MIL was tremendously declined on D and how the Blazers have become much better. I also have pointed out how much worse the Blazers are on offense....so looking at it big picture. Dame was amazing on offense, but poor on defense and historically poor on defense in MIL so far, especially given who he has behind him to help.
Dame went 10-4 to start last season without nearly the Frontcourt defensive size & depth as this current Blazers roster. They even KO'd the world champ Nuggets in that opening season run. I'll revisit this topic after ~15 games
Fair. So completely mediocre. Great offensive run....but time to move on. It's just interesting that he is bringing the same D and more importantly, lack of effort on that end to a team that is in a championship window.
Agreed we have limited data because it's been 6 games. Weren't we a top 10 defense early in the season one or two times the last few years? Brogdon is better than Dame on defense. Dame is better than Brogdon on offense. Dame is better than Borgdon, period. I'm not sure any conclusion can be drawn team wise as its early, there are many other variables that have changed, and the teams goals are different this year than previous years.
