OK Eric, fine. The Suns WERE better than us. Nice to know that their success was "fool's gold" but ours is just righting the ship (and nothing to do with playing a string of really shit teams, often without key players).
I love Nurk, but do you really think he's as key to us as KAT to the Timberwolves? Or Steph Curry and Klay Thompson to the Warriors?
Portland is literally missing three fifths of their starting lineup, and four rotation players overall. It’s not just Nurk. And to answer your question, yes he is. He’s Portland’s second most valuable player after Dame. He makes everyone around him better, on BOTH ends.
uh, we're missing some key players. Like 3 starters. Nobody can realistically cite the missing player excuse by opponents this year.
Because the Blazers' greatness cannot be captured by something so puny as standings or win/loss record?
Sigh. Look, are we, right now, good? The fact that we have won a couple of games against shitty opposition does not, I believe, show this. It just shows we're not totally crap. I don't even think it shows we're better than the Suns, because for a fair comparison we would have had to have faced the same strength of schedule. (And yes, I realize that this comment seems inconsistent with my snarky response to Eric above, but I am large, I contain contradictions.)
Just half a game back and from now on they also get Ayton back. Good chance they are better than us right now.
Also, Booker is only 23, and Ayton is only 21. These guys will get better every year. Meanwhile, Dame turns 30 next season and CJ turns 29.
Not sure if it matters, but they are also younger at another important position. Monty Williams is 48, Terry Stotts is 62.
Is age really a factor in coaching (Popovich is 70) or is coaching history more important? Looking at coaching records, Stotts is far ahead of Williams. I have always liked Williams a lot, but I can't see how one can argue that Williams has done a better job at coaching than Stotts.
