And yet, trading our best player is somehow going to make us better? ALL these teams kept their best players and drafted and traded well.
I'm not sure I understand what that is supposed to mean? You said SA, Denver and Utah didn't get bad before they got good, and I showed you that you were mistaken. How they got bad to begin with is not the issue.
we've been bad the last 2 seasons. Don't see anything about a team totally having to bottom out and ditch everyone to be good. We dipped back into the lotto, got Lillard, wish we got someone better but Leonard, but so be it, and have another pick coming this season. Doesn't have to be a 6 year stay.
No I am saying that we don't need to be bad before good. We have the players that can make us good. The analogy would be Utah trading Deron Williams for only draft picks and young up and coming player. SAS trading Robinson before injury, thinking he will eventually bolt.
So you actually propose that we injure LMA for the season so we can keep him and get a high draft pick, instead of trading him for a draft pick.
Dumb comment. Just fucking foolish if you really believe that's what I said. Also fucking foolish if you want to waste my time by stating it. I guess any way you want to look at it, it is the absolute most ridiculous comment today. Great job, you are a fucking loser
This is how some people deal with denial. It's the same shit we had to deal with the year prior to Roy leaving us. Some people refuse to see the big picture. We've seen the forum go to war over Roy, over McMillan, and now Aldridge. Funny how those of us who wanted Roy and Nate gone were right.....
The team hasn't made the playoffs since Nate left, and now people like you want to trade the team's All-Star for scrubs and a draft pick, which means another year of no playoffs. Exactly how were you "right" about Nate leaving? Seems to me the team is much worse now. I think you're the one in denial.
Well, they've had 1 full season after Nate "left". And if Nate was so great, why isn't he currently coaching?
I have no idea why Nate isn't coaching, but the team is worse since he left. That's a provable fact. Plus, Nate made $5m this year for being on NBATV a few times a week because of his Blazers' contract.
It's not worse than the 54-win team Nate had and coached to the playoffs. Again, though, how does this mean that it was "right" to fire Nate?
