Zombie Fire Olshey

You've heard from several people that he wanted out. Do those people have to be reporters? If Canzano or Quick said it....which he did, would you believe it then, or are they not reliable enough either?

I get the stigma of "I have sources", or "I have inside knowledge", but some people just know some people that know things

 

Just because you don’t believe it to be a fact doesn’t mean it’s not a fact. I know 100% for a fact that LMA went directly to NO and said he wanted to be traded to a Texas team. This isn’t debatable. You can choose to not believe it.

 

Kind of surprised how many are clamoring for Olshey and Stotts' heads. It's been something of a mixed bag, but jeez, am I the only one who remembers what it was like before they came here? Patternash, Cheeks, McScribbles, Cho, Buchanan...there are probably a few other names I've drunk enough alcohol to force myself to forget. The Blazers were a fucking shit show for most of a decade, punctuated by the random "luck" of drafting a generational center with centennial knees, a franchise shooting guard who taught us all the word "meniscus,"and a prima donna PF who holds a grudge against every damned thing in his life this side of his mother's birth canal.

I guess I'm old, but the 21 win 2005 season still haunts me. If it doesn't for you, well, congrats. Enjoy this picture:


If our current US president has taught us nothing else, it's the incredibly valuable lesson that there's no such thing as rock bottom. It can always get worse. It doesn't mean you should fear change, but it does mean you should approach it with eyes wide open.

Does Portland have the best GM/Coach team in the league? Not even close. Is it about as good as we're likely to do? Based on what I've seen over the past 15 years or so, yeah, I think it probably is.

 

The ET mistake is the one that is most egregious. AC was bad but at least he somewhat mitigated it by getting rid of that contract without using assets. Rest of his decisions are hit or miss, which every GM has.

But I am getting increasingly annoyed by this past draft however. Collins is so far away from actually contributing, while others in his age group are flourishing. I wonder if this was a pick for another team involved in a deal that was reneged-- perhaps for PG?

I give him until this summer to fix this roster. I need to see a clear direction with this team-- Dame needs to see the same. Right now, we are just a whole bunch of clutter (overpaid clutter).

 

Depends on what you see as rock bottom. To me there is literally no difference in the way I feel about watching this team play when they are stuck at being a .500 team as if they are a .250 team. In either case you're no closer to winning a championship, except that in the case of the .250 record you at least have an improved chance of getting a difference maker (particularly for a team like Portland that can't attract free agents, and players are never going to force their way here in a trade).

I'm probably in the minority, but I'd take 10 straight 20-win seasons if it meant that at the end of all that suffering they'd at least have a punchers chance of putting together a loaded roster who could actually do something vs. 10 straight years of 7-8 seeds and first round exits.

 

But would you prefer 10 straight 20-win seasons if there was no guarantee at all that at the end of it there would be even a puncher's shot at a loaded roster?

 

Yes, because in the NBA, there's zero chance that you win a championship without a super-duper-pooper star.

How often does a team come completely out of left field and win the championship? How often does the plucky underdogs shock the world and pull off the miracle win? This isn't the NFL. There isn't such a thing as parity in the NBA.

 

So you'd be okay with no Blazers basketball (worth watching) for the small possibility of some after a decade? And then if that doesn't happen, trade another decade of no Blazers basketball for another small chance of a dominant team? What's the point? Especially when you consider that a title does not warm a fanbase for years. I've read Lakers forums during the prime Shaq/Kobe years and Warriors forums now, and fans are just as angry/frustrated/upset over losses where the players "put in no effort," "sucked," etc.

A championship is great. It's not worth throwing away decent basketball for decades at a time to chase small chances at one.

 

Now you're gettin' it.

Seriously though, the NBA is the ONLY sport that has this problem. In the NFL, it's single elimination and a team can catch lightning in a bottle and win a championship. It's the consummate team sport. You could have the best QB in football, but if you don't have an offensive line or receivers or a running game... well.... you're fucked.

In baseball, a team can develop talent or go the route of free agency. You can try the moneyball strategy and have success because it's difficult for one star to dominate the game (with the exception of maybe a pitcher). Rarely do you run into a situation where a single ump can take over a game and ruin it for a team.

With the NBA, unlike any other sport, one guy can completely dominate the game. And the worst part is that the league wants it that way. They've built it that way. They have shaped the league to support star players. And the refs are the worst in pro sports. They have egos. They control the game. They have an impact unlike any other league. The NBA is a fucking mess.

Can you build a team and maybe luck into enough star power to contend? Maybe. How often has that happened? Out of all the successful teams in the past 30 years, how many had multiple hall of fame caliber players on their roster? How many had once-in-a-generation talent to lead the way?

When was the last time the Blazers had that? What is the most likely way that we could get that kind of talent in the future?

 

Sure, you can. The Blazers could've/should've with Oden/Roy/Aldridge/Batum, but hit snake-eyes on health. The Blazers had a shot again a few years ago, but again got torpedoed by a bad injury.

The most likely way is through the draft, but the chances of doing that is incredibly slim. How many decades are you willing to waste chasing it? Especially when, even if the team won a title, you'd be annoyed all over the next season when they hit a stretch of losing 5 out of 8 games. IMO, the benefit of winning a title doesn't outweigh the cost of terrible basketball for years, and it's not even a guarantee that you get the one for the other. You get the bad basketball for years and may not ever get the championship.

I'd rather the Blazers continue trying to build normally, rather than purposely tank. Yeah, they've had bad stretches, but they've had title possibilities too. 2000/2001, 2007-onwards had Oden and Roy not been hurt, 2014-15 had Matthews not been injured. They never purposefully tanked for any of that. This team doesn't currently look like a title contender but A. it's a perfectly solid team to watch play and B. as last season's Nurkic experience showed, sometimes you can be an unexpected development away from getting into the conversation.

 

The word "guarantee" and the phrase "puncher's chance" are mutually exclusive in my mind. It sounds like what you're asking is would I be OK if it was just a "snowball's chance in Hell?" I'd say yes, it'd be worth it to me.

 

Yeah, things got a little weird working with "puncher's chance at a loaded roster"--I was more thinking (in my head) of a puncher's chance at a title. And asking if a decade of unwatchable Blazers basketball would be worth it if it came with no guarantee of even a puncher's chance (in that context, they're not mutually exclusive, IMO---a "puncher's shot at a title" suggests to me being one of the legitimate title contenders, so I'm saying no guarantee of being one of them after the ten years).

Anyway, I think you answered my question, word choice aside.

 

At the time I did. At the time he WASN'T the Texas turncoat. You can point to your story and then I can point to this one published on Nov 5th 2013.

LaMarcus Aldridge says he's happy now with Blazers

PORTLAND, Ore. – LaMarcus Aldridge knew this was a big-picture conversation, meaning there would be no softball questions thrown his way about how the Tuesday night matchup against the Houston Rockets is a big one in light of his recent prediction that his Portland Trail Blazers are a playoff team.

He's the two-time All-Star who reportedly wanted out of this sleepy little city during the summer, and now he's the veteran leader of this team that is promising enough that he talks about it with a pleasant grin fixed on his face. So – in the name of knowing whether he's the next star who plans to force his way to a larger market – is he happy or not?

"I'm happy here right now," Aldridge told USA TODAY Sports while sitting on a bench inside the team's practice facility. "I feel like we have a team that can win, that can make noise, and I feel like if we buy in then anything is possible. So I'm happy, and it's still my team and I'm playing well.

"I feel like the team has jelled around me. I feel like coach (Terry Stotts) has trusted me more this year to where I'm getting different opportunities that I didn't get last year, so I think everything is going great right now."

The cynics in the crowd will focus on the fact that Aldridge said 'right now' twice as if it was a subconscious qualifier of sorts, and that's understandable given how the NBA culture programs us to assume young stars will long for the grass that isn't always greener. But that much notwithstanding, this much is clear: he's a whole lot happier now than he was at the end of last season.

In the here and now, Aldridge – who has two seasons and a combined $30 million left on his deal – said there is no desire to be traded or a request of any sort that general manager Neil Olshey move him to a better situation if that opportunity presents itself. And while rival front-office executives will certainly continue monitoring his situation, the league-wide belief is that he's going nowhere unless a proposal includes, among other things, an All-Star player in return. When asked what the current message to management is, Aldridge said, "It's not 'If there's a better deal, then get me out of (Portland) or take that. It's 'We're here. Let's win, and let's try to have the best season that we can.'"

The vast improvement in Aldridge's mood is not hard to understand. After seeing the Blazers falter so badly at the finish last season (they lost 13 consecutive games after starting 33-36), he wanted a veteran center to play alongside him rather than a fellow forward (6-foot-nine JJ Hickson started 80 games for Portland last season). Now, after the latest handy-work of the second-year Blazers general manager who did wonders turning the Clippers into contenders before coming to Portland, Aldridge shares the floor with sixth-year pro Robin Lopez (acquired from New Orleans in a three-team trade on July 4) and a British back-up big man in Joel Freeland who has impressed in the early going and beat second-year center Meyers Leonard for his role (Freeland was drafted 30th by the Blazers in 2006 but played internationally until returning last season).

After being such a big part of the Blazers teams that made the playoffs from 2009 to 2011, Aldridge quickly grew tired of the rebuilding route and was yearning for more of a veteran presence on the roster. On cue, Olshey – who was part of the team's makeover that included the addition of Stotts two summers ago – brought in the likes of Dorell Wright, Earl Watson and Mo Williams as free agents to help balance the youth movement headed by reigning Rookie of the Year Damian Lillard.

With every move, Aldridge's frustrations were allayed a little more.

"The team that we have now is a good balance of old and young, a good balance of hungry and – not satisfied – but hungry and older," said Aldridge, who is averaging 24.5 points and 6.3 rebounds per game during the Blazers' 2-2 start that included wins vs. Denver and San Antonio after an opening-night loss to Phoenix and Tuesday night's loss to the Houston Rockets. "By 'hungry' I mean (players like) T-Rob (Thomas Robinson), who was a (No. 5) pick and he's trying to prove that he should be here (Robinson was traded to Portland from Houston on July 1).

"You've got (2012 second-round pick) Will Barton, who feels like he should be here. So these guys are really hungry. You have Joel Freeland, who was drafted in my draft and got sent overseas for five or six years, and he's here now and hungry trying to prove that he should be here. I think having that balance of these (players) who want to go out and kill it every night and prove some things has been good for me."

Meanwhile, the older additions came with a convenient ripple effect on the dynamic between Aldridge and Stotts that, he said, was at times difficult.

"I think having Terry adjust to having older players has been great too," Aldridge continued. "I feel like last year, we were so young that it was just too strict for me last year. I went from having (teammates in) Marcus Camby, Andre Miller and Gerald Wallace – (players) who coaches know that those guys are pros so it wasn't as strict – to having this really young team last year where everything was just so strict that I didn't know how to handle it. But this year I feel like coach is giving us a little bit more leeway of (saying) 'I have veterans now,' so it's been good for me."

Stotts, the former Milwaukee Bucks head coach who was a trusted assistant under Rick Carlisle in Dallas when he was hired as Blazers coach, is convinced Aldridge is content again.

"He's playing at a very high level," Stotts said. "He's certainly in a rhythm. I think he appreciates the roster moves that we made and knows that we're going to be a competitive team this year. I think he has seen the growth in the young guys.

"He was frustrated with losing. He wants to win….He's in the prime of his career, (and) he wants to be on a playoff team."

Stotts, it should be noted, clearly has a strong sense of understanding when it comes to Aldridge's frustrations. Players in their primes, as he well knows, almost always grow tired of teams on the decline. Yet conveniently enough, Aldridge – who made his view known publicly in late October that he sees the Blazers finishing seventh in the Western Conference – has become a believer.

 

Man y’all really trying to cheapen a chip? We’ve been celebrating 77 for 40 fucking years.

 

I don't understand how you can call him a liar in one minute.... and then believe this bullshit the next minute.

 

Because your timeline is off. I called him a liar AFTER he chose SAS.

I'm actually not understanding why you don't know that. I've been pretty vocal about it.

 

Being a liar is a personality trait. If he lies, he'd do it before AND after he choose SAS

 

Because I think he was lying for a lot longer.

 

Nate’s point is usually liars are liars. No timeline needed.
It isn’t relevant when you thought he lied or not. If you think he lied about one things it’s plausible he lied about other things too, regardless of when it was said.

 

It doesn’t take very much or very long to get you to this point does it? Where you need to get personal. Just accept that sometimes people know things.