Yeah, yeah. But for all intents and purposes "never" fits the bill. Maybe Durant will prove me wrong next summer, but it's not bloody likely.
Fairly unlikely we can get PG or KD, but fairly, pretty unlikely is stil lFAR from never. You've heard the phrase never say never right?
Really? MIL and BOS are young teams that won 40 games last season. MIL got Monroe - not exactly a #1 option on offense. NOP won 45 games last season. Who'd they sign (I really don't know)? My NBA history isn't good enough to know all the young 40-win teams, but I suspect that a lot exist and that NONE of them signed marquee free agents. If one of your main arguments is based on semantics it's not a good argument. I don't find anything funny about saying that no marquee free agent will ever sign with us until we're on the cusp of contention. Just because entropy exists doesn't mean it's likely that we'll sign a marquee free agent as a middling team. Just provide one example - in any sport - of a marquee free agent signing with a mediocre team in a small market US town.
The year before LeBron went back to CLE they had a 33-49 record. Of course that is a special case but it is a case none the less. I think CLE is small market. Not as small as POR but in the bottom half of markets.
Two things with those teams. First, The whole league thought Milwaukie getting Monroe was a good grab for what they needed and what not. Portland went after him as our number 1. He didn't go to NY. He didn't go to LA. If anything Monroe is supporting the fact that us as a small market can get some decent signings. I am not sure what their cap space is like either. There is also money involved and maybe NO didn't have enough to lure? Also, even with a potential future MVP, most have said and believe that NO still needs more to compete. They are basically where we are, but our stud has two more years experience. I also think our team will play much better team ball than NO. I think that will help lure the top tier. We aren't a bunch of individuals looking for their own. we are a team concept like the Spurs. The model of the NBA. We will have to agree to disagree. Except if we keep disagreeing then Sly said the site gets more hits and the Blazers love it. Wanna take this outside???!!!
Well done! There is the exception to the rule! But as you pointed out, it's a special case. Maybe someday we'll have a native son who'll do the same for us. But it's not Kevin Love!
This isn't about "decent signings". I thought this conversation started because of the comment about still needing a #1 option to pair with Dame? I had ruled out Free Agency as an option, which left us with Draft or Trade. You seemed to be making the argument that we can sign our #1 option as a Free Agent, and I'm saying that it won't happen until we're already in contention for a championship. We can sign "decent" free agents, but that doesn't get us anywhere.
Actually San Antonio is a small market and as was mentioned, so is Milwaukee. Both got big free agents to sign. San Antonio did build a dynasty through the draft and D league but Portland could be a destination for many reasons beyond the marketplace. I think Neil Olshey is better connected than some folks may think
And SAS is in championship contention (continuously) which is why they attract Free Agents. As I've said - once we make it to the WCF we'll attract 'em. Until then we'll attract role players looking for a paycheck and playing time (Aminu / Davis / Blake / Kaman/ 'Dre / Turkogluuuohwait). Which is essentially what MIL got in Monroe.
Nash signed with the Suns instead of resigning with Dallas. Dikembe left the Nuggets to sign with the Hawks. In the NFL Reggie White left the Eagles to sign with small market Green Bay in the 1990's. Also in the 90's Greg Maddux left the Cubs to sign with the Braves. So it is admittedly rare but it does happen.
The only one I have knowledge of was Nash/Suns and that was a financial move - Cuban didn't want to pay him as much as PHX was offering. Next summer we won't be in a position where we can outbid other teams for a marquee free agent. Still, appreciate the examples! You've got sports knowledge! I still don't think any of these examples make it likely that we'll sign a marquee Free Agent until we're on the cusp of contention, and if I were a betting man I'd stake my house on it NOT happening next summer.
This would be ideal, but things are rarely that black-and-white. Case-in-point is; Stotts' team option, on his contract, has not been picked up. So, as it stands, he is in a contract year. If you believe short term failure is the answer for long term success - then tanking/developing essentially creates a conflict between the coach and team. I can't see Terry being OK with piling up losses for the benefit of players long term, or for a higher draft pick, when his current, or future livelihood will rely on those numbers.
Okay, wait a minute. Kinda getting to be a double standard here. Which is it? You cant be a championship contender until you get a near MVP caliber player, but you cant make the WCF without one? ANY WFC team is a championship contender, so it cant go both ways... Holes in your argument. Agreed. Not Love. But the decent signings make the team go from 8-10 to playoffs. This then attracts the top tier BECAUSE we are still so young with so much upside. Donjt get me wrong. I get what your saying and I think I would agree 99% of the time, but I think we have that unique 1% team this year.
That's not a double standard, you're talking about two different things here. The arguments can be summed up like this. 1. You need a near-MVP level player to push your team to title contention (and some good complimentary players). 2. If you want to attract a top-tier free agent to a small market you need to be a title contender already. So how do you get that MVP caliber player before being able to attract a high caliber free agent? Well you do it through the draft or trades. This reminds me of the kind of things people were saying right after we drafted Roy, Aldridge and Oden. Try to remember back to that year after we finally got back to the playoffs against Houston (before Roy's knees dissolved). Remember Hedo? As for this year's incarnation being "unique," aside from "because they are my favorite team" what sets this squad apart from a bunch of other young mediocre teams with big dreams?
What sets us apart is how we are already playing like a team and we have that #2 already here with a probably three coming out of the potentials like CJ, Leonard and Vonleh. Again (said several times by several people) our team is full of lotto picks already. Is NO? is Milwaukee? Is Minnesota? Who do they have to support their best player? We have 8 lotto picks. Lotto picks that either had injuries or better players ahead of them, so they didn't get the minutes to develop and prove themselves. With this team, they will. Now if they don't end up playing like lotto picks after getting a fair shake here then thats one story, but everyone is writing us off as mediocrity like we have a bunch of afflalos or something. This teams roster as it stands has a MUCH higher percentage of being better 1-3 years from now than any other mediocre team in the league from what I see. Again, if CJ and Meyers and Crabbe make that jump this year, I think that and Dame is enough for a Paul George to say, you know what? I fit in age wise, the organization is top notch and know what they are doing for the long term and they have assets if the current roster doesn't pan out (speaking of guys like Vonleh, Harkless, etc.). We might be in the best situation of any team in the league for a top tier who wants to build a legacy of a decade long stretch of winning basketball.
Exactly. And I believe that's what I put forth in my numbered list that started off this whole debate about whether we can sign a marquee free agent or not. We will have to utilize trades/draft to get us to the WCF, and at that point we MIGHT be able to use free agency to put us over the top. I'm done discussing this - it's clear Orion thinks we're special and that all the marquee players will see how special we are and nothing is going to change his mind. Just as nothing will change my mind that we WON'T sign a marquee free agent until we're a legit contender.
This is year 4 for Lillard. He hasnt hit his ceiling yet and the first three years are a good indicator Lillard is at least a good to great player. There are a lot of things he needs to work on, his facilitating and D are two of the big things that come to mind. If we assume Lillard never gets better at either of those then his ceiling is almost where he is at and he will never be in the conversation for top 5 pg or top 20 player. His 3p shooting is brought up a lot but you dont drop 6% in shooting from 3 for 4 months without having a very nagging injury, I expect a return towards normal, right around 38%. Maybe 40% if he stops those long distance 3s that arent a great shot. This year we will see if Lillard can improve his game and take the next step to a superstar or if he is more a Billups type player. Personally I dont think we have seen the best of Lillard, that is yet to come.
But his 3 point shooting even sucks now.. Personally everything about Lillard is really good except of course defense but its a little overblown how bad he is on defense. To me his 3 point shooting is the only thing thats really extremely overrated
