Hindsight is an excellent tool for evaluation. As long as we are playing hindsight GM and using speculation. Mathews doesn't get hurt, Afflalo also doesn't get hurt and is a great 6th man off the bench and we continue at the same pace and go on to make it to the finals and win it all. Do you think Aldridge leaves then?
I disagree. They had like the 2nd or third best record in the NBA before injuries started to creep in, we point to the Wes injury (and I agree that was the final nail for sending him out), but Lopez had been hurt that year, Dame was a year older and was getting better, lets not forget LMA played through an injury too. That team had a good chance to make noise. Its easy to say now it was a mistake to keep LMA, BUT, had they decided that summer or midyear to just throw in the towel fans would've been upset about that too. For the record Barton is at best an NBA Role player losing him wasnt a big deal. Afflalo got hurt that year too. I know GM’s get judged largely by hindsight, but had that team stayed healthy and had made it to the WCF’s (or further) people wouldnt complain. Instead injuries did that team in, much more than the GM.
That post wasnt based off hindsight, because I think our best chance to win a championship with Dame wouldve been trading Aldridge, regardless of if he stayed or not. Im not saying he shouldve traded Aldridge because he left, Im saying he probably shouldve traded Aldridge regardless. I also understand why he (and others) wouldnt have.
People use the Matthews injury as an excuse for Olshey, but I think that injury highlighted a problem with the team Olshey built. That team had little to no depth. Any injury to our starting 5 would've made us a likely 1st round exit. We had just traded for a "solid" replacement at Matthews position, and had a young player at that position who broke out in the playoffs, and we still got dominated. That was a problem with that team. With how much they got paid, it probably wouldn't have been possible to bring back Matthews and Afflalo so you would've been looking at a bench with C.J. McCollum and a bunch of mediocre fringe rotation players. Any injury in the future would've meant our team completely falling apart. Injuries happen. That team wasn't built to withstand them. The argument I usually hear towards this is "But losing Wes was extra-bad because he was the heart and soul of this team!".... But so is Nurkic, and Nurk is better than Wes ever was. Yet we still made the WCF because we could absorb that injury. Those Aldridge-led teams were unable to absorb any injury to their key guys. So I don't think that team was built to truly contend. I think it's ceiling was about the same as the teams that followed, and therefore, I think it was probably the right decision to trade Aldridge regardless. Fans may have been upset but as I said, it's on the GM to have more foresight than fans. If we got back a good package behind Aldridge, it got leaked that he had turned down a contract extension, and Olshey went forward with wanting to "build around Dame" and "Get younger talent that can grow with Dame, CJ, Will, etc" then I think our fanbase would've been somewhat understanding. Obviously, Paul would've had to sign-off on it and it's definitely possible he wouldn't have.
I dont agree that Nurk / Wes are even comparable. Wes was the glue for that team. Dame is the glue for the current team. Nurk does a lot for them but they still talk and dont have any major rifts. Dame / Aldridge had a huge rift that Wes kept them both all in. Depth was definitely their issue, but Depth is an issue for a lot of teams that win, because ultimately its a star driven league, and while depth is nice very few teams win because of depth, they win because their best players are better.
I can almost guarantee Aldridge would've stayed if that season played out like this past one instead of the bottom falling out the way it did.
I'm sorry Bones but anyone who claims we didn't have a chance against the Warriors and should've traded Aldridge is a liar. The Warriors hadn't won a title yet. They were the 6th seed the year before and lost in the 1st round. Many people thought they were a good up and coming team but no one foresaw them being as dominant as they were the following year. The Blazers could've and were just as easily thought of as a greater threat in the West than they were heading into the season. I think the argument should be that signing Steve Blake and Chris Kaman that summer were the mistakes. Barton showed some things in the Spurs series the year before but was awful when given more of a role that following year. Barton absolutely sucked that year. His game is not designed to be a core piece on a winning team. Look at how his role diminished on Denver last year when they got good.
Wrong! Aldrige could only sign a 3 year, $55 million extension that summer. The following summer he could sign for 5 years, $108 million. Why would anyone in Aldridge's position want to take $53 million less in guaranteed money? The extension process was a joke back then. If he could've signed the full 5 year extension like Dame did this summer, he would've.
Say wrong all you want. I wanted to trade trade him and we'd be a much better team today if we had. So who's wrong? Lol
You cant prove they’d be better now had they traded him. It sounds good go young, get picks, get the best offer. Its all question marks.
I'm not just saying it now. I said it as soon as he blew up against the Rockets. And then I begged for it when he refused to sign the extension.
Go young? We'd have a ton of assets. Nothing is guaranteed, but we'd certainly have a lot more assets. Are you going to honestly argue that letting Aldridge walk was likely a better outcome than trading him could have been?
Name one star in their prime that would sign for that low of an amount instead of waiting? It is kind of interesting how there is no post history from you between 2012 and 2016 to back up your claim to have wanted to trade Aldridge at the time.
Who knows? LMA left, they went young had cap space used it. Who knows if they wouldve gotten a “ton” of assets in return.
If you knew Aldridge was leaving the moment he didn't sign the extension does that make you smarter than other teams or if not why would any other team trade for him knowing he was a one year rental?
I know there are people who wanted to trade LMA at the time and good for them, but I disagree. Its not very often in a small market you have two legit all stars and a chance to try to make a run. I think they had to make a run for it. Injuries wrecked that team (and yeah a lack of depth didn't help). You can get caught in a cycle of perpetually restarting the process and trading away what talent you have because they “might” leave. I am not sure we want to be in that cycle either... If a guy doesnt extend just trade them go young and hope you find someone else about as good so you can trade them when you think they may leave. I mean eventually you gotta build a team to try to win instead recycling the we’re playing for five years from now thing...