I easily caught up. You're not understanding his point. He's saying playing or giving more minutes to some specific yet wouldn't qualify as "tanking" even though you're saying it would. He's saying it wouldn't qualify since they're not worse than guys that are already playing. You're talking about "How do you think fans would react if we started losing games because we played this guys", and he's saying "Playing these guys wouldn't lead to more losses".
So you don't think Baldwin could match Turner's abysmal 49.3% TS%? Or how about his terrible 19.1 TOV% which means he turns the ball over almost 1 out of every 5 times he has the ball. I think he could potentially be better defensively too.
I've had the same point the whole time KJ. You are the one who is trying to change my point to mean we are tanking or not thinking about the business. And if you think just throwing out this same style of play and playing the same guys is good for any team's business model when they can't even win a playoff game then I don't know what to tell you.
I honestly dont know. Baldwin has looked really good in short samples, I totally agree there. Theres gotta be some reason he never plays, and that Memphis cut him loose so quick. Im also not sure he’s a very willing passer. I just dont think weve seen enough to know.
That is kind of my point. We've seen what Turner does, right? Is that going to lead us to a WCF or even out of the 1st round (we're 0-8 in the playoffs with Turner)? Without a major trade we need someone to pop if we are going to take any steps, would you agree with that? Turner is who he is. Guys like Baldwin could still potentially breakout and be really useful players.
You're clearly of the mindset that a lack of talent is the main culprit of the Blazers right now right? While also arguing that the Blazers need to play that lack of talent so they don't lose business and fans? HUH?
Yeah. I agree Im on board for trying young guys and letting them see what they have. I just have trepidation about Baldwin. I really would like to see Simons and Trent Jr though. Considering how much it was talked up that Trent was “NBA ready” I thought he would play more.
You think we arent seeing youngins’ much because Stotts knows his seat is hot this year? I mean our opinions dont matter. Im sure he can read and knows he was close to being done after the Pelican series.
Are Trent, Simons, and Laymen truly inferior players to the guys ahead of them, or just less experienced? There is frequently an assumption that younger players will be less predictable/consistent than vets. Anybody watching the Blazers can see how silly that argument is. Aminu, Harkless, Turner, Leonard, Stauskas, Curry....there isn't a one of them you can honestly call consistent. Trying to develop the younger players to replace them is a logical step in *improving* the team. How is that "tanking?" The worst case scenario is that the team continues on as it is now. The best case is that by the end of the season they have improved enough to be relevant. If Collins/Simons/Trent are exposed as untalented as well as inexperienced - that is just another reason to kick Olshey to the curb.
I do. I think he has more trust in his veteran players nad doesnt want to sacrifice any type of drop off by taking a chance on the unproven inconsistencies. THis is why im losing trust in him. The players he seems to trust, i dont.
I think that's probably a logical assumption. The other is that they were so convinced in the off season that playing Turner at PG and having shooters around him would work.
Seems like you missed me saying play em also. Just understand that yours and hoops opinion are different than not just a bunch of people but a team of coaches. We aren’t talking about just Stotts. We are talking a whole coaching staff. If the idea of playing Wade Baldwin was better than playing Turner don’t you think that would have come up? It’s kind of funny how both you and Hoops seem to want to jump in on each other’s conversations. It’s like you both simply cannot stand someone else saying something different than what you perceive to be fact. If you think this team would fair better with Baldwin playing instead of Turner then I’m fine with that. All I’m saying and have been saying is not only do I doubt it but the fan base would not appreciate the losses from making a change like that. It would be considered tanking and just allowing this season to be a total loss
I dont think you are giving the fan base enough credit to know that the inconsistencies the young unproven talent would have already exist in those they are replacing. Its not like we are sitting dame for simons.
You're literally misunderstanding what he's saying, saying he's off-topic and nobody can keep up with what he's saying because you misunderstand him, so then I come in to explain what he's trying to say. That's what happened. So now you're mucking up the conversation with the following: - Hop in on Hoops conversation? Me and Hoops post a lot. Do I need to avoid threads he's posting in, and him the same? Damn @hoopsjock, we're gonna have to cut back on our posting a bit. - We can't stand someone else saying something different... We're literally just stating opinions. Isn't this forum for discussing opinions on basketball? We've been doing so respectfully, but apparently thats a problem too Hoops. Dang, if we can't disagree with anyone then I guess that'll help us cut back as needed. "Coaches can never be wrong because they're coaches, so they know more." is a paraphrased version of the type of thing you keep on saying. Blanket statement that doesn't even address any context involved in the actual point someone's trying to explain. Many coaching staffs do something differently, so why are you belittling our opinions because they disagree with the current staff? If we're not losing more games and Baldwin is playing up to the low standard Turner has set in the past couple years, fans wouldn't view it as tanking. We'd be just as competitive, so why would they? That's Hoops whole point.
wut? Huh? Yikes!...you need to define "very good" because he's well below average in my book * out of 324 players who have logged 200 minutes or more, Turner ranks 235th in PER. That's the 27th percentile meaning 73% of the league is better * he ranks 277th in TS%, That's the 14th percentile which means 85% of the league is better * he ranks 260th in winshares/48. That's the 20th percentile which means 80% of the league is better * of the 309 players who had a Box plus/minus of -5.0 or better, Turner ranked 201st. That's the 35th percentile which means 65% of the league is better * of the 451 NBA players tracked for RPM (real plus/minus) Turner ranked 415th. That's right, 415th out of 451. That's the friggin 8th percentile which means 92% of the NBA is better to me, all that matches pretty well with the eyeball test. Another way to put it is that Turner kinda sucks which may or may not be the same as "very good" depending upon which pages of your dictionary are missing
I think its fit and system. The idea was flawed this summer. The idea was make him a PG / Ball handler and surround him with shooters. The flaw he’s not a threat on offense, he’s not good enough as a floor general to get around that. Rondo might be the best floor general around and his lack of shooting has made him a journeyman pg that hasnt stuck, and he’s won a championship. The spacing is bad, the offense doesnt really flow. They’re very dependant on the 3 ball dropping, which yes most teams are these days but their spacing to get good shots is bad. ET doesnt fit that. I think ET like most role players could be solid in the right situation, but Portland with Stotts isnt it.
Both of you are really something. I get in here a couple times a month for any extended conversations. Other than that it's check the game thread and see what notifications i got waiting. This particular thread has been going since 2016 and has 39 pages by last count almost 800 comments. Go back and read some of them. Over the last couple years a number of people have come in with a different view and it seems they are not allowed that view. Anyway that was way off topic. I simply responded to a simple statement with It was kind of a light hearted poke but yes it was a poke at Hoops. He responded with- I responded with- He responded with- I responded with- Can you read the part where it says "You will get no argument from me on that"? This is where the plot thickens-------- Hoops responded with- Now at this point nobody anywhere said to bench Dame or CJ. But i did say the NBA markets them. Marketing them means they need to play and play as well as they can with the players that help them win. Now you can also see where Hoops changes his statement to playing other players than Leonard Turner and Stauskas. Remember he wants to give a "Ton of minutes to Simmons, Baldwin, Layman (Who i agree wholeheartedly with) and Collins(who is already getting nearly 20 mins a game). So i respond with- So Hoops then comes back with making this about Turner and Leonard (These are both of your stand by whipping posts) At this point i'm still trying to stay on topic. Talking about the team trying to win or are they trying to develop. Honestly at this point i ask an honest question. I even said "Play Em" I actually agree because this season to me is meaningless at this point. The team is a 42 win team maybe? Here is Hoops response- Now he is on Turner saying saying he doesn't give the team the best chance but he muddies the water even more and says "While Stotts is coach and Dame is on the team. From there on out its all off the topic. This is you and Hoops game. You both have been at it for about a year now. You can't beat people down into thinking your way. That is not the way the forum works. Both of you are very intelligent posters that do some research but unfortunately it's pretty one sided and only the way you believe things to be. This is the last time i go back and spell shit out for you. I have way too much going on in the real world and i will not be bullied on a forum i was a member of before either of you. Go ahead and be the posters that make the most comments on here and try to gang up on people but it isn't bringing more people around. It's simply running people off. Good people who love the Blazers just as much as both of you do. Have a nice night. I got a stadium seating area to build and keep on schedule. Then i have to get back to Vegas and help the Raiders Stadium. Then hopefully the airport terminal will be ready and with any luck we can start a baseball stadium soon. I'll drop in when i have time but don't expect me to cowtow to either of you again.
I'm just going to ignore all the other bullshit from your post. Don't you think there is pressure to play Turner given he makes $17.8 million versus the minimum contract of Baldwin? You don't think they pretty much have to play Turner after propping up how great it is going to be with him leading the 2nd unit surrounded by shooters? As @TorturedBlazerFan eluded to, you don't think Stotts is coaching for his job and is afraid to take risks right now?
