Yeah, the roster is worse...which kind of defeats your own original statement. You have a healthy Roy on the Blazers (as Nate did for 2 of the 3 years he was coach) and a bench that doesn't suffer from a major case of the "crappy benchitus", and I bet they'd make the playoffs with Stotts as coach.
Do you have "54 wins Never forget" tattooed on your arm? I don't think I've ever seen someone reference one mediocre season so often. We're not talking about a year that the Blazers went deep into the post season, we're talking about a team that was middle of the pack, got smashed in the first round, and looked completely unprepared to play against a team with a worse record. Ah yes, that season is one that will go down in the history books. When was the parade? I must have missed it. It was right to fire him because he wasn't that good. He had two All-Star talents on his team, one that was arguably a top 10 player, and he couldn't get out of the first round. I'd say that's pretty damn bad. The team wasn't winning because of Nate, they were winning in spite of him. This whole thread is a joke. It's a handful of posters throwing a tantrum because there are actual rumors that Aldridge might be on the table, which would validate some of the posters who were discussing trades involving Aldridge months ago. We didn't make up these rumors. They are out there and they are being discussed. This isn't The Voice. We can't vote him off. We have no bearing on the situation at all, but this is a basketball forum and we are discussing the Blazers. Get over it.
No, the actual facts support my statement. The franchise is in worse shape since Nate was fired, and now we have multiple posters on this board advocating getting rid of the team's All-Star big for draft picks and a JJ Hickson clone.
Haha. "Actual rumors" As if the 'LMA Wants Out' thread isn't a joke, with a joke source. Now, you're advocating the team trade LMA for role players and draft picks. If you were the GM, this would be a 15-win team in no-time, and you'd be bitching about trading Lillard because he doesn't play defense.
Yeah, but look at Nate's first year in Portland. How many wins did he get? Wasn't it less than what Mo got the year before? Oh yeah, it was. in fact, it wasn't until Nate finished his 3rd season in Portland to get a better winning % than Mo's worst year in Portland. I guess firing Mo was a bad idea.
how does rumors of aldridge possibly being traded "validate" those that wanted to trade him months ago?
OK, well, Nate didn't inherit an All-Star player and a RotY, like Stotts did. Still wondering how firing Nate was a great play, though. Is Stotts a big improvement? I'm not seeing it.
Yeah, but even in Nate's 2nd year, when Roy was the ROY, his record was worse than Maurice Cheeks. Nate also had a better bench than Stotts did. Are you just being difficult because you've had a bad day or something? It's odd that someone would actually argue in favor of Nate as a good coach.
The claim was that the Blazers were right to fire Nate. I've yet to see the record reflect this "fact", and the same people who wanted "ASSCLOWN" gone are now wanting the team's best player traded for draft picks and prospects. Not having a bad day at all. Just wondering why some people can't appreciate what they have in a team to follow without becoming assholes about it when somebody calls them out on their patterns.
He had lost the team, showed no growth in his coaching, or ability to change. His offense was simple (at best), and his defense was horribly overrated. His teams underperformed big time.
Do you seriously think we're talking about trading him for the joy of trading him? 1. Brian and I have both said that we think he leaves in two years. 2. This team has a ton of holes, and trading Aldridge would fill a lot of those holes. This summer there are a lot of power forwards available in free agency. Maybe they're not as good as Aldridge, but we could fill multiple holes while also finding someone that is decent at his position. You make this so personal. It's not like I've said I don't like him as a person. I've said he's arguably the best power forward in the game. Now Bucher has come out that Aldridge is a name that's being mentioned around the league, there have been rumors about a Cavs/Blazers trade for weeks, and now other reports are surfacing. Where there's smoke, there's fire. He's being mentioned in rumors, so we're discussing those rumors. Why are you so upset about this?
"Brian" just compared Tristan Thompson to LMA as equals. That's about the dumbest thing I've heard on these board since the people who supported hiring Rich Cho, and saying he was the next Sam Presti, while Larry Miller literally had to go on interviews with Cho after his hiring. \
You don't need to lie, PapaG. I compared them. With facts. If your analysis of that comparison is that they're equals, then that's your opinion. In fact, I said that 4 years of Jefferson PLUS 7 years of Thompson PLUS 9 years of Oladipo was better than 22 months of LMA. If you think you can refute that, by all means. Or you can start another troll thread. Either way.
You presented them as near equals, and said your were reconsidering your "75%" argument. I think you're in cuckoo land, B. That's just me, though.
I am reconsidering the 75% argument. I had thought that the drop-off from LMA to Thompson would be noticeable, but there was still probably some room to grow, and the #1 and #19 were more than enough to make up for that lack--especially if LMA is not here after 2014-15. Now, when I see what LMA was at 21 vs. what TT was at 21, or what they both did in their sophomore year, I'm reconsidering if I wasn't being too harsh on Thompson's upside. Maybe it is only JJ Hickson's, and he's reached it. But maybe it isn't. All this was in reference to someone saying that there are zero (even potential) all-stars in the Jefferson/Oladipo/Waiters/Thompson group. I could very well be in cuckoo land. But I'm presenting facts and comparisons, not emotion-driven hyperbole. ("Zero potential for All-Stars!" "Trade Lillard Now!" "Scrubs and draft picks")
oh gawd. McMillan is a struggling to find an Assistant job in the league.... The freakin' Pistons would rather have Mo!
If Lillard wants out, it is going to take a long time before he has any power to force the team to trade him. Not for sure page two had anything to do with the thread title and wanted to make sure page three had atleast one post about it.
Trading away the best player on your team and the best player in the trade in order to "fill holes" on your existing team is a terrible strategy for success. Typically, teams in the NBA win because they have 2 of the best 3 players on the court, not because they had decent talent spread across multiple positions. The "trade your best player in order to fill holes" would be like the Spurs trading Duncan because they don't have a solid backup PG and PF (or center, depending on which you consider Duncan), and trading Duncan would fill those holes. When you have a player that is consistently one of the top 2 players on the court, you don't trade him to try to "fill holes".
