Because the GM and the coach are not the same person. The coach wants to win, especially since he is a lame duck coach at this point without an extension. The GM, I believe, would want to see what the young kids can do without the veterans for the rest of the year - and after the trade deadline he will give the marching orders. That's my opinion and nothing more, I think the Blazers FO lets Billups play for wins before the trade deadline because it helps with some of the learning of the young players and helps build trade equity for the vets. Once the trade deadline has passed - whoever of the vets that remain do not need to be featured and the tank can start in earnest if the Blazers FO is still under the impression that this team still lacks some top-end talent. So, that's my prediction for what's going to happen. If it does or not, I have no clue, but that is my logic based on what I have seen from the FO over the years and how much they seem to value the draft.
A lot of stats have been posted about Scoot vs Simons. He has outshot Simons the past 15 games and the last 6 weeks. That’s really what Simons brings to the table, no?
At some point I’m not sure why Simons or Grant would want to sit out. Simons is almost up for an extension. He wants to prove he’s worth the money.
Grant is already extended - so for him it is not a question. For Simons, I understand your point, I still think the team can promise him they will try to trade him in the off-season or that they know how good he is for his extension. I still think that the FO wants that pick this year and will find a way to get it.
It's the Monte Ellis/Steph Curry thing all over again. Ant is good but Scoot is so much higher on impact. Why not give him more responsibility as he's breaking out?
or perhaps he has, in fact I'd be surprised if he hadn't taken him to task many times over his D. But what is he going to do? Bench him in favor of his loafing youngins? STOMP
Ellis and Curry played together for 2 seasons then Ellis was traded midway through Curry's 3rd season. I wonder if that will happen with Simons and Scoot. Next season will be Scoot's third.
Great synopsis, and actually good content from Quick. Let's hope this spirited defense continues as the rest of February gets tougher. Thanks for posting E!
On thing about the Scoot Ant comparison that is a factor..Scoot is coming off the bench playing against bench players more than Ant and Ant is double teamed where Scoot is left to shoot without the attention of the other team's best defender, advantage, Scoot. Scoot is so much better than Ant was in Ant's sophmore year though already..Ant is going into year 7
If management was down with your tanking is the only way to go this season philosophy, they'd have Billup's back with a contract extension and Banton & Co would be getting big minutes nightly As it is Chauncey's coaching career sure isn't better off with more and more L's. Clearly the importance of the young talent that is already here is highly valued and management wants to bring them up in a competitive environment with winning games as a goal. The team isn't a math equation, it's made up of real people who they're trying to instill the right mentality/work habits in. Many in the "We" disagree with you as to what makes them better off including the team itself... STOMP
I think if you would have gotten rid of Ant and Grant and played Sharpe and Scoot heavy minutes to start the season they could have tried to win games and would have still lost more games. Even while instilling the right mentality and work habits. That would be far better for them than punishing some players for not playing defense but not others. I think both Sharpe and Scoot would be better off for it, as would Banton, and we'd likely have half as many wins. At no point did I suggest players should be doing anything other than trying to win. A huge part of my concern is that management doesn't seem to agree that we need more talent and Chauncey doesn't seem to agree that all players should be held accountable for playing shit defense.
Why insist on beating the same dead horse with me on subjects we've already gone over umpteen times? I disagree that they could just "get rid" of certain players as thats not reality. I disagree that Sharpe and Scoot aren't getting enough minutes this season to develop. I am pleased with the young talent already here and like the way they're bringing them along. Playing your worst players ahead of better players is absolutely telling your young talent that you're trying to lose... good grief STOMP
But I'm not advocating for playing our worst players over our best players... You seem to keep implying things I'm not saying, so I'm clarifying. If you're sitting Sharpe and Scoot for not playing defense you should definitely not be playing Simons. Or arguably Grant. I think we could have almost certainly unloaded Grant to the Lakers and Simons to Orlando. We may not have gotten back a first round pick, but those guys should no longer be on this roster. That's going to cost us what could have been a top 5 pick in this super loaded draft.
what are you talking about? When I was discussing the young players and Ant with another poster, you responded... "Sit them all and play Banton. We're better off losing anyway." You are advocating playing the team's worst player(s) over their best players and their young talent to do your desired tank. It's not implying it's what you wrote. And I'm sure the whole board is crystal clear on this being your stance, no need to sideswipe every conversation STOMP
You're mistaken in what I was saying. I'm advocating for punishing players equally for not playing defense. If you're sitting Scoot and Sharpe but not Simons you're already playing worse players ahead of better players (at this point). If you're going to punish players for shit defense, you just as well sit Simons and play Banton.
