These are the same damned arguments blazers fan have been saying for years when they "turn" on a player. Cycle will continue, it'll be Dame's turn in a few.
So what are you saying ...trade LMA for someone else who should not be the #1 guy? How does that make us better? This league is dominated by players who can do it all on offense. That means Guards and SF's. (And whatever position Lebron decides to play each night) Our # 1 offensive guy needs to be Lillard. But you don't trade LMA just to trade him.
You don't think Horford could score 5 points more a game if his team needed him to. Horford's % compared to Aldridge's makes up for the 5ppg any day. Horford's defense on his opponent does as well. Horford's Hawks teams have been more successful than Aldridge's Blazer team.
Yeah, because they've essentially had the same team for several years and allowed them to play together and build for a bit before people got trade crazy.
Eric Bledsoe's PER is MUCH higher than Lillard! Therefore, he is better, Lillard will never sniff the playoffs...let's do it! I have no idea what I'm talking about, I just want to make trades even if they make no sense! :MARIS61:
Lillard and Bledsoe are in the primes of their careers and the way Bledsoe's been playing I don't think it would crazy to think about a trade like that.
Don't get huffy and puffy about advanced stats. They aren't just some made up statistics. There's a reason Horford has a higher WS.
I do watch the games. Defense is a huge part of the game and Horford is one of the best bigs in the league on that side of the ball. 17ppg on top of it on a much higher FG%. On a better team. Both 2x all stars.
Don't get me wrong, Horford is great and all...but I don't think he can be the type of go-to player a LaMarcus Aldridge can be. I mean prove me wrong, but he's best as a complimentary role player...kind of in the mold of a nic batum of PFs. Does a lot of things good, but not good enough to be that marquee player.
Aldridge does win that darn eye contest with those sweet looking fadeaways. They do nothing for me though.
Who says Horford needs to be the go-to? Aldridge is the go-to on a bad team. Horford is a more all around #2 guy than Aldridge. The real question is finding that true #1. Maybe it can be Lillard? I hope so. Aldridge is a complimentary player as well.
No I don't trust my eye either. But PER should be such a small part of the equation we should barely mention it. Instead somehow it has become the message board's bible.
Aldridge would be a fine #2 if there was a better option but there isn't. Him and Lillard are fine, IMO....pick and pop works well if they used it a bit more. I mean, address some real problems on the team..this does barely anything. The change in team chemistry would be negligible. As far as "fit" goes, Aldridge isn't really fucking shit up or anything so why the need to change? Its change for the sake of change, not something with a well thought out plan. As for Lillard being that #1...yeah, you really don't trade your current #1 in his prime unless you get a real #1 back that will make a difference. this whole thought process is pretty stupid. You get horford, nothing is different....except you introduce somewhat of an unknown. I'm fine with LA's production here...see no need to change it. Like I said...get a starting center and fill the bench out and we'll be fine.
