I remember watching CJ's confidence explode in the Memphis series last season and he instantly became something I wasn't sure he was. And it was all propelled by confidence. I expect the same thing to happen with Vonleh. Just needs the time to gain that confidence and I echo a previous post that said the coaching staff is masterfully managing his minutes and where his minutes are placed. Just enough to develop confidence, but not lose confidence. That will pay off big time.
Given that nobody had us being better than 29th in the league...it's a few hundred percentage better than all the so called experts predicted...I'm starting to think you're not a big Stotts fan Stren
This... This is why I get so frustrated at those that think we are losers if we make the playoffs....Its a bit concerning that so many people value experience so little... NBA players are all elite and most teams can beat most teams on any given night. What makes the winner vs the loser? 1 Confidence 2 coaching/game planning 3 talent I list talent third because at this level, they are all talented and more often than not, what matters more is not the talent, but how it is used within the system. Patience young Blazer fans, think long term. Think experience. Think growth through becoming as one over time. We are fine. People should quit their whinin'.
I thought he was ready for an increase, and I still think he could stand to be bumped up a bit. But he looked a bit rattled at times during that Kings game yesterday. I'm looking forward to getting another look at that.
Imma break it down for you. You've got it ass backward; talent is king in the NBA. The only teams that seem to be there right at the end every year are the one's with a guy in the MVP conversation and at least another All-star caliber player (or if you happen to be the Spurs, with three future Hall-of-famers supporting Kahwi Leonard). The recipe you list works far better for a sport like football. And while it's true "any given night" a team might win, that's regular season thinking and doesn't wash in a playoff series - sure, you might steal a game in that kind of a situation, but the more talented team wins 95% of the time in the playoffs. If history is any guide then we're not fine. This team has real limitations and holes that time and experience can't fix. My guess is that if they stood pat (relatively speaking) with this crew its maximum ceiling in two to three years is probably 45 wins and a quick first round exit. And for the record, pointing out these sorts of things is not "whining" as you put it. Complaining about what other people post is whining.
If this squad, as presently assembled, had started the season with the competence it has demonstrated over the past month, we would be on pace for 45 wins this season. If you don't believe there is further room for growth, then I don't know what to tell you.
Very true. I've mentioned it several times in several threads. The 15-game stretch between 2/27 - 3/24 will tell us more about this team and these players than we've learned at any point to date. Personally, I would be thrilled if they're even able to win 6 of those games. Anything better than that, and I'll be even more optimistic about this team's future than I am now. Any less...well, you probably won't have to worry about not having a draft pick this summer.
That is a very tough stretch. Given that the Blazers have only beaten 5 teams all season with a >.500 record and all of those wins are at home, that stretch would seem to be problematic.
I disagree with you Nik. As he said, all these guys are extremely talented. Any one of them could destroy the average joe. I like to use Martell Webster as an example. The guy was extremely talented. He had a really sweet stroke. He had the size and he could get his shot off against anyone. The problem was mental. I don't know if that's a coaching issue or if it's just something that you're born with, but he would show flashes of amazing talent and then he would drop off. I feel like a lot of these guys have the ability, but they're held back by some other factor, be it confidence, drive, or maybe intelligence. Sure there's only so many lebrons or durants but a guy like CJ clearly worked his ass off to get where he is. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I think 45 is too low but I get your point. I think a Vonleh/Davis combo can possibly fill the PF role. (With time and experience) I think a CJ, Crabbe, and Henderson combination is good at SG. (Although keeping Hendo will be tough because of his lack of minutes) I think a Dame/ CJ combo is good at PG (We need one more role player there though) I think Plumlee can be part of a center combo. We need one more big center who can protect the rim, not a star but someone we could actually get as a free agent. This is very doable. SF........this is the missing piece that will be hard to get. If we land a stud SF the rest of the squad is good enough to compete for it all. Is the missing SF in the draft? That is the big question I have. I agree we can not stand pat. But I think if we land the right SF the other holes are small enough to fill that we will not have a problem doing so.
It's all relative. Of course all of these guys in the pros are light years ahead of your average rec. league schmoes, but at the NBA level the trend seems to be needing a transcendent player to get over the hump between pretty good and great. The trouble with what you are saying is that the Blazers aren't unique in the league. Every team has plenty of guys with those same issues and deficiencies that you mention in your second paragraph and if they didn't have those deficiencies some of those guys would be All-NBA caliber players. Talent to me is more than just the raw physical tools. It's putting everything together. So back to my deconstruction of @Orion Bailey's assertions, I'm not sure what you disagree with? I was specifically addressing the idea that we just need to let these guys mature together and gain "confidence" and that will be enough. Do you really think that this roster has all of the guys it needs and they just need time? I guess anything is possible, but I sure wouldn't bet that way.
I guess there's a lot of variables... could we sit on the roster, as it is, and one day be a championship caliber team? Maybe. Vonleh is a bit of a question mark at this point. I think he could be a 20-10 guy at some point. Dame has the drive and the talent to one day be a top 10 guy. There's just a lot of unknowns at this point. That's why coaching is so important. It can really make all the difference. The Warriors with Steve Kerr have been vastly better than the Warriors with Mark Jackson. I like Terry a lot, but I'm not sure if he's the guy that wins a championship.
The problem I see with the team (right now) is that they are defensively deficient on the perimeter with Damian and CJ, and while both of those guys will probably marginally improve with time, I doubt they'll ever be lock-down defenders. Secondly, the offense seems way too guard oriented, which doesn't mean they necessarily need a great low-post scorer to succeed, and that it's a bad thing to have two guards who can score a ton, but unless Damian somehow magically rises to the lofty heights of Steph Curry, it's hard to see that strategy paying off in the long-term. Other than that I think you have some good ideas and understand some of the team's other deficiencies. Ideally, I'd like to see a 3 and D 2 guard paired with Damian as a starter and have CJ come off the bench as a super-sub. Aminu isn't good enough and he's never going to be. His D is pretty good, but he's an awful offensive player. Vonleh and Davis could be a decent PF combo, but that probably rests on Vonleh raising his game to something approximating "David West in his prime" level. I also completely agree about a rim protecting big man.
Nik, you have repeatedly ignore the "problem of perception." If our current team made it to the conference finals this year, everyone would talk about how talented we are. Prognosticators, including you and I, decide how good players are based on how well they've performed up until now. This seems sensible, but it really isn't. Example, Drexler Blazers: A non-lotto dude leading a bunch of late 1st rounders and 2nd rounders did not impress the league, or anyone else. After Buck joined the team we went to the conference finals, the perception was that we "played over our heads." The next year when we kicked ass the perception was that we were ridiculously talented. The players were the same, just the perception changed. Example, 2006/7 Blazers: We finished the season 32-50. Many would say we sucked. However, we had THREE future MULTIPLE-time allstars on that team. The problem wasn't that we sucked, they problem was that our awesome players needed time to develop/gel/define their roles. Again, the common perception was wrong. Sometimes, the cake does indeed, need to bake, and the quality of a player can improve.
Doesn't the exact same thing apply to those saying that making the playoffs is bad. Experience, Long term, growth. All can be applied to missing the playoffs too.
how is missing the playoffs going to speed up growth? I think Olshey is a genius for finding guys who were drafted high two years ago and buried on a bench somewhere. We draft another talented college player and he's going to take 2 years minimum probably to crack the rotation. Noah Vonleh has cracked the rotation without being another Cliff Alexander on the bench. Just last year he was buried on Charlottes bench. Maybe I'm just too old to think about a competitive team 4 years from now as opposed to this season. I like the direction. A lot can happen second half of the season...remember Wes? The same thing that happened to us last season could happen to any top 4 seed in the west. Giving up this early is like ignoring a season of Blazer basketball that you might as well enjoy
