How much stock do you put in "veteran leadership?"

With the signing of Miller and Howard I have to wonder how much their "veteran leadership" will positively affect the Blazers. What does it mean? It's something we've been "lacking" for years, so the pundits say. And I would agree to some degree, especially game #1 vs the Rockets in the playoffs last year.

With Miller, Howard, and now Roy to some extent providing "veteran leadership," are we set? Can we put that "weakness" to bed? And how many more wins do we think this leadership can deliver? Or are games won the true measurable? Perhaps the measurable is how many more BIG games won?

 

I'd put a fair amount of stock in it ... as long as those veterans still have some game left; which I'm sure Miller does and think Juwan might (in limited stretches at least). Every team needs guys on the floor who know how to make defensive rotations and how to anticipate and communicate that to their teammates. Plus, as we saw what can happen last year in the playoffs, a squad full of rookie scale contracts and post-season virgins can struggle to adapt to the change in physicality of the game.

Miller and Howard coming onto the team are not the same as adding Raef and other semi-retired pros.

EDIT: I just wanted to add one more thing. There probably aren't a whole lot more regular season wins to be added -- 54 wins is the mark of a very good playoff team and getting to sixty from that point is whole other animal than getting from 40 to 50. What you hope is that their presence adds wins where it counts and that means in the post-season. Regular season records mean fuck all, except for seeding purposes.

 

"Big" games and the play-offs. That is where it will show up.

 

I think it's overrated unless they are making a significant impact on the floor which Andre will be. Juwan, not so much.

Does Juwan make us tougher?

 

Juwan doesn't make us tougher. I suspect he gives us a warm body during practice, or someone to get in there when Greg is down with 5 fouls and Nate insists on taking Joel out...

 

Agree which brings me to this point.

Kevin Pritchard stated right after the blazers were ousted out of the playoffs that there was one area that he wanted to improve on the team. Toughness. I don't know, is this team tougher now than what they were in late April?

I don't feel they are.

 

Well, I feel like he tried to address toughness, but toughness' address unfortunately stayed in Utah.

At this point I think he's hoping that Greg will eat his wheaties and Nic will blow up. Both of which I'm praying for every night.

 

I think he in a sense has settled and you are right that he is hoping some of these other guys will step up and be men.

I don't know, I personally felt you could have taken some of this talent, thinned it out and brought in some one with a lil more toughness. And then again, maybe not. I'm not Kp and trying to structure and negotiate deals.

 

Amen to thinning out the talent.

If he would have traded Outlaw and someone else for some toughness at the 4, that would have been a much better option than signing Howard and letting Outlaw, Martell and Nic battle it out for SF minutes.

That is, of course, dependent upon there being a good trade out there.

 

absolutely none.

i'll take better players over more experienced players every time.

 

Let's face it, Outlaw is not a power forward. There is no "power" in his game.

 

I think they need the outside influence. The players are good, but they are still young and they need some pointers. I think a lot of that gets passed down, and for the last couple of seasons there hasn't been much opportunity for that. I'm not terribly bothered either way about the Howard signing, but I think there are definitely some ways both him and Miller will impact these players in practice and in the locker room.

 

"More toughness" seems to be interpreted in this thread as adding brawniness at backup PF. I don't think that's the only way to add toughness.

Portland definitely got tougher at the PG position. The weakest, softest player on the team (Sergio) is gone. Our starting PG, who basically just camps at the three point line and launches threes, is almost certainly moving to the bench. In his place we've added a PG who (get this) LOVES to post up people. You know, shove smaller guards around, bully them. He also loves drawing contact and driving down the middle. He WILL finish in traffic. He will force you to foul him. He will rebound better than any PG we've had in a long time. And he will show up in the playoffs and put up nice numbers if other guys start to choke. He's a proven veteran point guard, and he may be quiet and a little slow and he can't hit a three, but he most definitely is tough.

We're going to have a point guard who loves to post up and rebound, Brandon Roy, and two huge physical centers. I'm really not that worried about toughness.

Truth is that Houston was tougher than us, but they were probably the toughest team in the playoffs (although certainly not the most talented). But we could've beat them if we'd just got some offensive production out of Outlaw. Or we'd had Miller on our team.

 

Odd comment coming from a Rocket's fan.

McGrady
Artest
Battier

Which of those 3 has the least talent? Which is the most valuable to the team? *HINT* It's the same guy.

"Veteran Leadership" implies more than just "experience".......and Battier is the kind of veteran leader any smart coach loves to have. Hell - if you don't appreciate him, send him our way!

 

healthy tmac was much more valuable to the rockets than battier.

"veteran leadership" is something that is incredibly overrated. roy is the blazers' leader. unless the blazers acquire a player better than roy(and there are only 5 or 6 of those in the league), roy is going to remain the blazers' leader. bring in veteran leaders isn't important. adding more talent(that fits with the team) is important.

 

Look at an experienced player like Derek Fisher did for the Lakers though. He hit the big shots to put the Magic away in Game 4. And I think some of that was because he'd been there before. It was his fifth Finals (and he hit clutch shots in the playoffs for Utah too) and he was probably more comfortable than some of the players on the Magic.

 

for the playoffs he shot under 40% and under 30% from 3. he showed up in the finals but his "veteran leadership" wasn't doing shit until then.

 

a lot.

 

A ton. Maybe not so much on a game by game situation, but more as a whole season type of thing. Veteran leadership can help right a team quicker if they get into a funk, help a team pace itself for the bigger picture, and help show some of our younger guys little tricks with the refs.

 

This. Well said.