The teams assembled are the substance silly, there is nothing else that I or anyone needs to produce. I'm sorry you can't understand simple concepts like a GM is responsible for the team they assemble. Scouts and assistants evaluate talent too, but at the end of the day it is their call who is and isn't on the team. They draft the players. Not the media. Not the fans. If they do well in attaining talent, they get the credit. If they don't do well, they get the blame. Of course they'll always have their mother's love. Neil would really like some cookies... chocolate chip! STOMP
You seem obsessed with mothers and you post a lot of words, but seldom ever really say anything of substance. Have a nice day. CUP
There is only one person who thinks a struggling GM being held responsible for their actions assembling their team doesn't make sense, but she could cheer him up with some warm cookies and milk. Hope you have a good time in the kitchen today Mrs Olshey. STOMP
Mother issues and pissing matches between you two guys aside, your post really pushes the question of if Olshey is struggling. I'm looking at what he has lined up for next season and I'm excited. I'm pretty sure that both Whiteside and Melo will re-sign here. Carmelo has said as much and Whiteside just bought a house. Next season's roster is shaping up to look like: C: Nurkic, Whiteside (whomever the starter, I'd say they split the minutes pretty evenly) PF: Collins, Carmelo, Gabriel SF: Ariza, Hood (probably mid-season), Little, Hezonja? SG: McCollum, Trent PG: Lillard, Simons Add a first round pick probably in the 15-20 range and maybe a vet minimum guy. That's a pretty darned good starting unit with a ton of depth. There are a lot of GMs who would like to struggle like that.
So Olshey gets credit and is responsible for the 3rd or 4th best team last year. By that logic he's the 3rd or 4th best GM. In that case there isn't much to be so upset about.
ohhhh...this is a fun game! use playoff results as a gauge! But you can't use just one season for a GM who's been in charge since 2012. You have to use them all 2012-13 - 21st 2013-14 - 8th 2014-15 - 13th 2015-16 - 11th 2016-17 - 16th 2017-18 - 16th 2018-19 - 4th so, his average is 13th in a 30 team league. Now, if you want to discard that 1st season, and maybe that's fair to a degree, his average is 11th. Not even top-10. And he's had tax teams the last two years when his average is 10th. Blazers should at least be looking for a GM that can keep his team well into the top-10 over a 6 or 7 year time frame. Shouldn't settle for less
I dont agree with your assessments for the years you put them at 16, the east sucked those years they were much better than 16th. Not that it matters they dont play in the east.
What exactly are those numbers referencing. I click on the years and it directs me to a Lillard game log link.
Yeah, i figured that might have been his logic. If 16 teams make the playoffs, 8 teams loose in the first round so they should all be considered tied for 9th. You can't just select one and call them 16th. If anything they could be ranked using their season record. In other words each team that loses the 1st round will be ranked 9th through 16th by their respective record.
A couple of points here: + Technically, you can trade 2way contracts. They just are not included for salary matching purposes. + If Portland traded the clear 2nd best player this season (Whiteside) for Batum - there's no way Portland makes the playoffs & the move is a insult to Dame + Portland is VERY concise of the lux tax. With Batum's contract on the books, we'd start the offseason slightly below the tax level. That would eliminate any use of the MLE or TPE. Portland's offseason would consist of signing minimum contracts to stay under the tax. + A hypothetical trade that would occur around the draft can easily be pushed into July for the new season. + Hood, Ariza, & Mario can be combined to take back a contract value up to ~$26m. (Hood will pick up his option coming off the injury - it's crazy not too considering the risk. Mario will also - he might not be in the NBA next season if he doesn't). + For contracts over $26m, CJ can be included (because if we take on a contract that large, they damn well better be a better player than CJ). There may be one small scenario where trading Whiteside for Batum would turn out good. However, the probability of that is so minimal - the course Portland is taking is a much better option.
He could argue they won 0 games those years and I think all the other teams won at least one and its a decent point.
Not really. Totally different competition for each team. Even over all records are flawed as teams have different schedules, but that would be more fair than using the first round record.
Not all matchups are the same. Not sure that you can argue that with any credibility that the Blazers getting swept by the Warriors is a black mark. The following year sweep against the Pelicans, however, was awful. Might drop them to 24th.
c'mon man... Somebody else used playoff results at the gauge, not record or conference. Portland was "3rd or 4th best" last year by virtue of playing in the CF. I was sticking to that template that another poster used....do you see that? so then, in 2016-17 there were two teams that got swept in the 1st round, Portland and Indiana. Indiana had a 42-40 record, Portland had a 41-41 record, so the Pacers won the tie-breaker finishing 15th, leaving Blazers at 16th and, in 2017-18 there was only 1 team that got swept in the 1st round...take a guess which team it was. Thus the 16th ranking of course it's kind of a funky gauge, but as long as somebody else was using it, I played along. All in fun really, and it actually served to show the flaws in the logic, I'd think
I understand and you can read my posts below. I said you could make that argument. I think everyone else won a game.
For statistics, if you remove the low (21st), then you also remove the high (4th) and take the average. You are being much too generous just removing the worst and keeping the rest. Mighty kind of you.