I mean, they were 26-64 in that span without him. He essentially single handedly was the difference between a .288 record and a .500 record. If anything I think you should question the players around him more than anything. I agree it was time to move on though. I was actually saying it a couple seasons ago. I didn’t think giving him the super max was worth it.
Of course they aren’t but it is very interesting to me that we managed to win a game with two starting guards out, relying on our bench backcourt to deliver a win (even if it’s against a bad team… but then again we are a bad team too so I feel like it was an even match)
I notice that a lot of the responses are about Dame being the better player. That's a no brainer but that wasn't the question. The question was, are the Blazers a better team. I think an argument can be made that a team with an all around player like Brogden at the point could be a better team than a score first low defense player like Dame at the point. Of course there are a lot of variables at play with the Blazers as they're currently constructed but in the grand scheme of things I would opt for the former rather than the latter.
Give Dame the exact same talent and roster and we are better with him. And I LOVE Brogdon……but c’mon man.
Our bench back court is way better than our starting back court. The only reason Scoot is starting is because we drafted him at 3 and the team believes (hopefully correctly) that Scoot just needs experience to be the best PG on this roster and one of the best in the league. So we go from an undersized back court (and I don't know if people have been paying attention but those really don't work) to a huge back court who happen to be extremely fast too. Brogdon is probably our best all around guard. People could definitely make a case that Brogdon/Ant would be the best back court but Shaedon already defends both guard positions better than Ant and I don't think the offensive drop off evens out that difference on D.
It'll be interesting to see how the Bucks do this year with Dame surrounded by more talent. On paper they should be a top tiered team.
A more interesting question would be "Are the Blazers better with the team they have now, or what they would have had if Dame hadn't been traded?" What would the roster be with no trade? Who would have started with Scoot having been drafted? Last season, in Utah, the Blazers started a unit of Lillard, Sharpe, Thybulle, Watford and Nurkic. That group meshed very well and got a victory on the road. The ball movemenet was fantastic (Lillard had 12 assists) and the defense was good. Watford was able to play his role as ball-handler pushing the pace and making some nice passes and had 5 assists. Nurkic had 4 assists. That group ( I believe) only started one game together. The previous game the starters were Simons and Reddish instead of Watford and Sharpe. The following game was the beginning of Lillard's vacation. Who here in the forum would have started a lineup of Reddish and Simons instead of Watford and Sharpe with Lillard? Zero people? Billups started Sharpe only because Simons was unavailable. The WiLDCard that we have to think about is: Chauncey Billups. We can compare different rosters to each other, but would have no idea how the coach would use it. He might do something that makes no sense to anyone. NBA coaches seem to have a blueprint of what they want and many times tunnel vision to what seems obvious to outside observers.
We were a lottery team last year with Dame. We are a lottery team this year with Brogdon. We have way more future assets now than last year. And the future has a pathway now, which I didn’t see a pathway last year.
Your last point is a very different discussion in regards to roster building and roster management. When Brogdon leads us to the WCF with a marginal roster, I'll consider the idea that we're a better team with him vs Dame.
They were even worse when they held out the starters and were trying to tank? Not exactly surprising. But you can't question the players around Dame now.....and they have completely flipped in a big negative in terms of defense. Meanwhile, Portland has completely flipped for the positive on defense. (and brutal on offense) I agree that it was time. But the dramatic shifts for both teams in some areas can't be ignored.
Again, it's not a Dame vs Brogdon thing. The question was about the team. And that was a number of years ago Dame 'led' the team to beating a dysfunctional OKC team and a baby Nuggets team only to get swept by the Warriors.
If Dame had Ayton We will come down to earth on the d once we start playing high caliber teams. Plus seems to me Chaunceys teams as the season gets going the d drops off. Thats strictly my observation.....
The title of the thread literally ends with "Brogdon instead of Dame" so it kinda is a Dame vs Brogdon thing. If it wasn't, the title would be "Is the franchise moving in a better direction this year than they were two years ago" and those two specific players would be left off. You're also comparing different teams, with different coaching staffs, and different schemes, in 6 games when you attempt to compare if the team is better with Brogdon vs Dame. I'm willing to bet Brogdon does not lead this team, as their best player, to a playoff series win the entire time he's with Portland. The Blazers, the team, will not be better with Brodgon as their best player than they were with Dame as their best player. Nobody in their right mind could possibly disagree with this.
Dame played 830 games and 31,000 minutes for Portland Brogdon has played 6 games and 178 minutes as a Blazer dumb thread
I wouldn’t say the thread is dumb, I’d just say that the concept is dumb. But it’s probably one and the same. I just wanna make sure… It sounds like the OP is trying to say that Dame was part of the problem. It’s a shame cause we are 3-0 since Ants injury, and Nurkic is straight dogging it in PHX. Put Dame with Ayton, Sharpe, Scoot, etc… Just makes me wish we didn’t waste those last Years of Dame here with Nurk tbh. Denver was so sold on Jokic that they threw Nurk away to us and didn’t care that Mason never worked out. Skipped their way to a franchise first championship while we wished we had a center which would pair well with Dame. Just a shame we couldn’t see Dame with Ayton TBH
Dame hasn't been on a good rebounding team since his very early days. Without the Dame trade, we'd still have traded for Ayton (and possibly Camara, too!), and we would be MUCH better.
