Far too much...... ....in here. IMO, an NBA team has to log at least 10 games before solid analysis can/should be made on their place in the proverbial pecking order (no chicken little pun intended.)
There's simply no middle ground for some posters on here - either we're screwed or we're about to go undefeated.
Of course there's middle ground. I guess just not for those who see an 88-game-long trend from last year continuing into this year with little sign of change.
Hey if Nate can choose his opening night starters based on last year, I can be critical of Nate based on last year and the year before and the year before. And before people start squawking that he won 54 games last year... Doc Rivers won a title the year before that. Winnig a lot doesn't automatically make you an untouchable coach.
Doc Rivers also had KG, Paul Pierce and Ray Allen. McMillan has overachieved given our talent level. He's made some critical errors (overreliance on Travis Outlaw in the playoffs last year), and I don't think he's untouchable, but he's certainly nowhere near the hot seat, nor should he be.
It a Blazer forum board . . . of course you are going to get passionate Blazer fans posting thier emotional opinions about the team. Not just during pre-season, but after the draft, during summer, during free agent moves and during any other NBA news that comes out. If we all waited until 10-20 games to give our opinion about the Blazers this year . . . it would be a pretty boring board, IMO. On the flip side, are posters who are predicting a division title or going far into the playoffs or winning 60 games also chicken littles?
I'd sure love to know the context of that particular statement. I mean, if he said something to the effect of... "Currently, I'm going into this thing (season) with the mindset that I'm penciling in last season's starters...................that is, until/unless somebody(ies) unseats any one or more of them." ....I'd be perfectly fine with, and expect, that.
Clearly not - for one, we did win a share of the division title last season, so there's clearly precedent. Further, as evidenced by all of the ESPN picks, the experts would agree with those of us who see good things ahead. The panic crowd is just not being rational.
2 problems. First, Nate called off the competition 2 weeks too early, and without any apparent regard for what was actually happening. Second, KP has shown a reluctance to make in-season course corrections. People are understandably concerned that the flaws we see now will not be addressed down the road.
What because folks have watched their team play like ass and struggle against bad teams, they are not logical? When exactly was the last time getting your ass kicked by the Clippers and Utah multiple times a good sign? What is logical about watching that, and then thinking your team will do great? Part of the signs of a good team is that they prepare properly. This team has shown no signs of that so far.
I don't think agreeing with media sources should be the determining factor on who is being rationale. In fact the Oregonian is reporting this team fails in chemistry . . . so are the posters who are concerned with the Blazers now being rationale because it is validated by the Oregonian. On top of that, many in the national media have labeled Oden a bust . . . so are people who say he isn't a bust being rationale? My point is everyone has an opinion and basing it off of pre-season, or acquistions, or past performance seems alright to me . . . regardless if the opinion conforms with the majority opinion put out by the media.
The first step toward the middle ground is to stop believing Pritchard's claim that this team has any more depth than average. This change would tear off the shackles that prevent improvement through trades. I laugh at the homerism of those who have said for a couple of years that we are the deepest team in the league. We need a GM who believes in constant improvement, not in stagnation. These infant, undeveloped players haven't shown anything, and never will unless they go to a team which can give them minutes. Under a different coach, some of the players would go up and some down. Roy wouldn't look as good, not allowed to hog the ball, while Aldridge, forced to stay inside, would become tougher and more respected.
IMO, up until this coming season, the cake has been in the baking mode. However, me thinks KP is smart enough to know that - currently - some pruning might be required at some point prior to the TD.
