Blazers Sign Cliff Alexander

Well said chzbrgr. It's amazing how brazen armchair coaches/managers can be with hindsight on their side. Four months ago people would have crucified Olshey at the thought of trading LMA for assets. Who could have foreseen a March 5th achilles tear?

We're going to have to allow the process to manifest itself to see how this teams gels moving forward.

 

Back on topic......

In response to Barfo, I'd like to say...
I LOVE players with yellow/red flags.

Clyde Drexler had red flags (he couldn't shoot)
Terry Porter had red flags.
Jerome Kersey had red flags.
Duckworth had red flags.
Sabonis had red flags.
Roy had red flags.
Wes had red flags.
Batum had red flags.
.........................................................

If a player doesn't have red flags of some sort, then they are priced out of our market. So, I love players with red flags. These flags allow rival GMs to get nervous and pass them up, allowing us to swoop in and pick them up at a discount.

In this case, we get a top talent for what is essentially zero. He does take up a roster spot, and has a minuscule salary. So yes, I'm excited by Alexander.

 

Olshey didn't need to convince us. Only ownership. There were at least a couple of posters here that saw LMA's departure coming. Why didn't Olshey?

 

Oh nice! That'll make it a bit more worthwhile. I might go to a game if it's cheap.

 

Wrong... There wasn't a single poster that had substantial evidence that LMA was leaving. And I suspect Aldridge was down to resign up until Matthew's injury. There is no reason he would play through an injury unless he was committed.

 

Nate started Trout over Batum until Roy demanded Batum start.

 

You talkin to me?

 

I think we will get to see just how accurate your dislike of Lamarcus is. If you are correct then Pop and the Spurs are even more fucked up than the Blazers.
You won't need to remind me of your correctness if Aldridge is a flop in Texas. I will sing your praises on early evidence.

 

Naw Mags, I can't explain any of your questions, But I can say, I expect managers to succeed or leave. Good excuses for failure just piss me off.

Two questions I would like to have you or anyone else answer. 1. Why do the Spurs think they can be sucessfully with Lamarcus where the Blazers blew the chance.
2. Why did Lamarcus want to leave? It can't be for money, so it must be for success. Then why the Spurs instead of the Blazers?

For my part, I think Lamarcus is probably right in his assesment, I don't think he thinks success is possible here like it can be in San Antonio. Can you telll us why that might be true?

 

Sadly I think Pops is the one coach who MIGHT be able to make LMA a worthwhile player. That doesn't matter, because it was NEVER gonna happen here. Just because LMA MIGHT succeed in a world class organization such as the Spurs - where players take massive pay cuts in order to build a great roster - doesn't mean we should be upset that he left.

And as great as Pops is, I still have serious doubts that he can turn LMA into a franchise player. The way I see it is that LMA will have to take a back seat to Leonard once the old guard retires. Wonder how he'll like that!

 

I am not upset that he left, I think he felt it was necessary. What pisses me off is that he didn't see success as possible here, and from what I saw (differently than you), he is correct, and that really hurts.

 

Because Aldridge was the franchise player here in Portlabd, forcing our management to suite his fragile ego. Aldridge wants to be pushed around by a strong coach and franchise that won't take his shit.

Spurs makes winners because they have a system and work ethic and sacrifice that doesn't give a shit who you are. If Aldridge doesn't do what pops says, he will bench him. I doubt our staff or management will ever do that.

 

Very good and spot on. I agree, the Blazers will not do what is required to produce a highly competitive team which includes putting a coach in charge that is a leader.
Pop knows the way, Steve Kerr sure showed he knows the way.
So, the bottom line is we lost Aldridge because the Blazers never brought in a coach to make this team highly competitive in the late season during Lamarcus' 9 years here.
I think that sucks, but I sure understand why he left.

 

Stotts only coached Aldridge for 3 of his 9 years here. He was a +12 wins his first year and a 54 win next and 53 the year after. He was the only coach to coach him to the second round, without a bench. Management did everything it could with what little room they had.

Aldridge wasn't smart, he was lazy. We were on our way to contend if he just waited. We had cap room and another star to work with. I consider him very stupid

 

I'm happy we no longer have that prima donna on our team. Now, we have a team of blue collar type players centered around Dame. Dame is now the center of the Blazer universe and I have to believe we'll go far with him as our franchise player. Good days are ahead, my friends!

 

Ok Mags, I see it differently. I think Stotts is a way better coach than McMillan, but nowhere good enough to lead a contender. I think the team reflected the lack of leadership
the last half the season and it was very apparent in the playoffs. What Aldridge saw may even be more damning.

 

Exactly this! It's weird when you look back and see such a timid star like Aldridge. So glad our new star is a leader

 

You said it, bro. We have a leader in Dame and he WANTS to take the big shots when it matters most.

 

You need a kangeroo court of similar players like Tim Duncan and Tony Parker discipline a star player. A coach like Stotts doesnt pull enough weight. You can't pull a Win One For The Gipper speech with LA. He is playing for a salary and knows what to do. Outside of Wes, is Dame gonna sit him down and give him a progress report. LA was GONE a long time ago. He just haven't made up his mind.

 

<insert dick pics>
to all you bitches!