Does you crystal ball happen to know the year? I got some money that i want to put on that so i can retire when it happens. (Notice i said WHEN)
They haven't declined too much offensively. Defensively, CP3 isn't near what he used to be and LeBron is a shell of his former defensive self. Dame (like Curry) was never that good to start with, so much a decline would be terrible. Dame will be good offensively for years to come, but will inevitably decline just like everyone else....while his salary reaches astronomical proportions.
Sure, I was just interpreting what I thought he was saying with respect to how he come off a screen catches and shoots. Dame runs 2.56 mpg & Curry 2.54 but that doesn't indicate how they run or with or w/o ball.
well, that could be because Paul worked so hard on defense in his first dozen years he simply wore down. Dame won't have that problem... Dame has skills, and many of them are not 100% welded to athleticism. Skills don't fade as fast or as soon. A lot of aging players make up for a lost half step and less vertical with BBIQ, experience, and recognition. I think Dame will be one of those players...he's no dummy. I think the first thing that subtly starts to fade is stamina. Dame isn't there yet, IMO Look (olshey-tm), I know it's inevitable that at some point over the next 4 years Dame will start to fade. There will be erosion. But for me, Dame's trade value doesn't matter at all. Not one little bit. If he doesn't want to be traded, Portland shouldn't trade him. Walton wanted to leave Portland; Drexler did too and has treated his Blazer career poorly. Dame has been all in on the Blazers, and the city, for a decade, and it's looking like that loyalty hasn't faded. That's unique. He may not be the player that Duncan and Dirk were, but his loyalty is more than equal to them, and his leadership is too.
But playing styles can dictate how long a player stays in the NBA. The mind degrades much slower than the body. A player like CP3 or Stockton can stick around a lot longer because they're premier setup men and they can run an offense. Paul's body is nowhere near what it was 10 years ago. His knees are shot. But he can still run an offense better than anyone else in the NBA. Stockton played until he was 40 and he still averaged nearly 10 ppg and 8 assists. Dame is not a bad passer, but his game isn't built around passing. He's still a score-first point guard and that can't be said for either Paul or Stockton. PNR is NOT the same as running off screens. It's MUCH harder on the body. How many times have we seen Dame get trapped by two players after trying to run the PNR and then slapped around? A player that constantly moves without the ball and lets his teammates screen for him so he can get open for a quick shot is way different than trying to shake two players and either drive to the hoop or shoot over the top. Because Dame runs the PNR so much, he goes to the hoop WAY more than Curry and he takes way more of a beating because of it. Ray Allen retired at 38 (probably could have played longer) Reggie Miller retired at 39 Who is the comp for Dame? Can he shift his game to be more of a catch and shoot scorer? His ability to beat traps and shoot over his defender will slowly degrade, and if teams know he doesn't have the first step to get to the hole, they will get right up on him. He needs his quickness to keep teams honest on defense.
you're arguing that Dame's body will eventually 'fail' to perform well on an NBA court I'm arguing you don't know when that will be, but for the sake of advocating a Dame trade you're assuming it will be soon. You're saying that CP3 and Curry, two completely different players, will last longer than Dame. I'm saying you don't know that but taking it further, if CP3 and Curry were more durable than Dame, than they would have been injured less over their careers....that's the sign of durability, no? But those guys have been injured dozens of times. Dame hasn't. Why is it that Dame's body can withstand 82 games much better than those 2 guys, but not 1000 games?
I said no such thing. 4 years is not "soon". I think he will most likely cease to be a top 10-15 player around 36. Maybe sooner, maybe later, but the question is whether we can build a contender around him before he starts to slip. And again, I'm using Paul and Curry as examples of players who have a style that can take them later into their 30s. I don't think Dame has a style that will translate well when his athleticism starts to wane. It's not about just about staying on a court. Dame clearly played through injuries that he should have addressed. If he had addressed his current injury sooner, maybe he wouldn't have needed such drastic treatment. It's about staying on the court and being effective at a high level. Dame very well might play until he's 40, but how much money will he be making and how good will he actually be in his late 30s?
Also, just so we're clear: That's not an argument. That's a literal fact. All players will eventually fail to perform well on an NBA court. I never said soon. I said in the next 4-5 years. That's not "soon." I never once mentioned the word durability.
let's just distill it down to that...Dame may be pretty damn good over the next 4 years (which takes him to CP3's current age by the way) but you're convinced Portland can't build a contender around him in that time. If Portland can't build a contender around Dame over the next 4 years, how could they build one without him?
What would it take to build a contender? Free agents? Trades? Hitting on the draft? We have a horrible track record in free agency, and Cronin has shown to be completely inept at trades. So our only hope is the draft. And when I say contender, I mean an actual contender. A team that could compete for a ring. I'm not talking about getting back to the playoffs or being another also-ran. We need to be a legitimate threat to win the championship. Those are completely different timelines. Trying to build around Dame is going down a totally different road than if we traded Dame this summer and started building around Ant/Little/draft pick. One has a window. A finite length of time for which it can be accomplished, and that's how long Dame is still good enough to be the alpha dog. Whether that's 4-5 years or 9-10 years, it's still finite. The other is based on how quickly we can obtain players that are good enough to win a ring. That could be 4-5 years if we get good draft picks, or it could take longer if our front office sucks and we don't hit on any of our picks. And just to be clear, I'm not saying that I would even necessarily keep Ant/Little. I think anyone should be on the table. One path is building a contender around Dame. One path is building a contender, period.
We would have to be incredibly lucky to get a player as good as Dame in the next 4 or 5 years. If we keep Dame, we already have that player. That's the toughest piece to get.
We have that player... for a finite period of time. That's the whole point. Dame will only be this good for so many years. Dame will only be worth this much value for so many years.
