Quick: Olshey admits mistake by not acquiring any NBA players for bench

Yeah ... I guess? I'm a little more lenient on big men because I know it can take them awhile to adjust to the NBA. Barton is a second round pick so I don't expect much from him and for whatever reason when I watch Claver and I just don't see an NBA player. Who knows, maybe they all take a step forward next season, maybe none of them. We'll see.

 

Only keepers are Meyers and Freeland. That's being generous.

There's a 1000 better Barton's out there u can put on ur bench.

Nolan Smith couldn't play in YMCA leagues.

 

I think you may be confusing the 2012 draft with previous years where we either had a lame duck GM, no GM or an interim GM. In 2012 we actually had a real, honest-to-god GM whose future employment depended on a successful draft. Do you really think Olshey is dumb enough to risk his job based on what Chad Buchanan (who brought us Nolan Smith over Kenneth Faried, among other colossal draft day fuck ups) and the rest of the Blazers "brain trust" had to say?

No he's not. Hibbert has a TRB% of 16.2. LaMarcus has a TRB% of 13.3.

Another strawman. I never said a bench isn't important. Even if your starters all play 40 MPG (none of ours do) and none of your starters ever miss a game (other than Lillard, all of ours have), you still need a bench to keep you in the game until your starters return. Unfortunately, we don't have that. So, in an effort to win as many games as possible, Stotts relies on our starters more than average. But, since none of our starters seem to be suffering any ill effects, I don't see why you think he's burning them out.

Depends on the player. Ever since his second season, Aldridge has played big minutes. He played MORE minutes under Nate when we had a MUCH better bench. So, how is Stotts burning him out by playing him less minutes than Nate did? Batum and Lillard are both young and playing big minutes is actually HELPING them, both short term and long term. They are developing faster by playing more.

Which is why I said, "I'd be much more worried about the 34-year old Kobe Bryant, in his 17th NBA season averaging more MPG than the 27-year old LaMarcus Aldridge in his 7th season." Yet, 34-year old Kobe is leading the league in scoring. Not exactly what I'd call burned out. Again, it depends on the player.

BNM

 

They both make their teams better. Would the Blazers be 20-20 without Aldridge? No. Would the Pacers be 25-16 without Hibbert? No.

I don't see any inconsistency in my position.

The real question is, would the Blazers be better with Hibbert than they are without him. There is no way to know for sure, but given how weak our interior defense is, and what a good interior defender Hibbert is, I contend our record would be better than 20-20 if we had Hibbert as our starting center.

BNM

 

I know we tend to think basketball players should play balls out every moment they are on the court, but we know that's not reality. I think it's not so much the minutes our starters play, which don't look too bad, but the fact that our bench performs so badly, that our starters are desperately playing balls out to keep even or catch up so often. The bench puts a lot of pressure on them and I do think it wears them out. Still, I think Olshey knew how bad our bench was and that developing the starters and playing for the lottery was the plan. Of course, he didn't tell me that so I'm basically speculating out my ear.

 

We can't wait four years with Aldridge in his prime NOW. We have to be significantly improved next year and a serious contender in two years.

 

No arguing with that.

 

I can live with that.

I just don't think getting a slightly less suckish bench right now and getting bounced in the first round, and losing this year's lotto pick, gets us closer to that timeline. If (big if) we can have a successful off-season, there will also be plenty of better bench players available than what we have now, and I actually think your timeline is very realistic. This year though, even if we make it, we will be pathetic playoff fodder.

 

Agreed, unless a deadline deal that makes us a contender now, and doesn't mortgage the future comes along (and let's face it, that's not gonna happen). I'm fine with staying pat until the summer when we will have lots of cap space and perhaps another lottery pick. Who knows, with all that cap space, in addition to free agent signings, we also have the possibility of working a sign-and-trade, or an unbalanced trade, or maybe moving up in the draft by taking back a decent player with a big contract. Think about it, if a team wants to dump salary, they may be willing to swap draft picks to get rid of a productive, but overpaid player in exchange for some cap/luxury tax relief. Given the amount of cap space we will have, and the amount of money Paul Allen has, that may be a good move. Worst case, we get a guy who is overpaid for a year or two, but instantly makes our bench better - and a high lottery pick.

And besides, we may very well squeak into the playoffs as the 8th seed without making any moves. I actually see this as a win:win situation. If we make the playoffs, great. Even if we get swept in the first round, it's a good learning experience for our young players. All young players have first time playoff butterflies. Might as well get them out of the way now and not wait until we actually have the talent to win a first round series. Plus, I think making the playoffs keeps LaMarcus Aldridge happy for another year. If we miss the playoffs, we get a lottery pick, which depending on the pick (and if we trade up) may give us another starter, or at least strengthen our bench. Either way, we go into the summer of 2013 in much better shape than the summer of 2012.

BNM

 

Not at all, but that stat speaks volume about the impact for each

 

If you take all of the stats into consideration, the upgrade from Hickson to Pekovic is not a big one, let alone huge. Especially when you consider that Pekovic is 3 years older and will have to be paid more than Hickson.

 

I don't know man. I think he would be perfect. I think hickson has advantage because of all the attention Aldridge gets down low. Also; we are terrible on the defensive end. And even though hibbert is only giving them 10-8; he's still much better defensively 2.9 blocks; and stopping the other teams center.

Also hibbert actually has a low post game and sets great picks. Those picks would help Lillard do so much more.

 

Hibbert: I wanted him then. I want him now. I rarely get what I want.

 

The only real disaster moves I can imagine this year would be adding just enough bench fodder with bad contracts to get us to an 8th seed, or just missing the playoffs with a 13th or 14th draft spot. If this current squad can get into the playoffs and take some lumps and they keep their salary flexibility I don't think that's as favorable as getting a top ten pick, but I can live with it.

That said, I don't really think this team looks very playoff worthy. I suspect we'll see the Lakers barely get in, Houston probably has a shot if they can turn around their current slide and Utah could get in too.

 

Recall reading that Lillard was an Olshey pick.

Found the article:
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/20...ian-lillard-portland-trail-blazers/index.html

 

You have somewhat of a point; but these heavy minutes can be hard on the players we really want to keep. We need help to take some of the heavy minutes away from our starters. We could see injuries due to fatigue.

 

Not giving Olshey credit for drafting Lillard is stupid if you ask me.

 

Is this (literally) the worst bench in NBA history?

 

I wouldn't doubt it. Aren't we averaging only 10ppg? Our starters need to score at least 85 points in order to win games. If two have an off night; we are dead.