Forum Game How much longer do you think Olshey deserves?

Yes you are right on that. You need a couple stars maybe even three and a really good supporting cast. Not just solid players. I see where you are coming from.

 

This line on Neil I don't don't find very convincing. Dame and CJ were drafted near to all mock draft expectations of their value. Congrats for not screwing it up.

Free agency has been a disaster for him, there's no kind way of saying it. If you can't do half you job well, this team can't compete for a championship.

 

I see Olshey similarly to Stotts: he's been good at times and bad at times. He's not one of the very best in the league, but he's competent. Just as with Stotts, I don't really think he should be let go until/unless the team has someone better lined up to replace him. I don't really believe in firing for the visceral satisfaction--fire because you have someone better to take over the job. (Unless the person in question does something so egregious that it wouldn't be appropriate to continue employing them, but that isn't relevant here.)

 

To be fair please tell us what teams "Free Agency" has been kind to? Then do the math on the percentage of teams that is. If it's less than 20% then you might have to look at that statement and revise your thinking?

 

You have a point there.

 

I don't get this mentality that when moves are questionable he's a terrible GM, but when they are good he was only lucky. That to me is pure desire to see him fail for one reason or another. It's pretty much the Canzano mindset.

 

Pfffft

 

Canzano - Click Bait John

 

Dame was the 2nd best player in the draft, taken at #6. That's a hit. CJ was the 2nd best player, taken at #10. You're only really "expected" to get an all-star calibur player if you have a 1 or 2. He also got Crabbe in the 2nd round.

 

Just to answer a couple guys here who say Olshey lucked into the Nurkic trade and was only interested in the pick.

Here is a quote from his interview after the trade (apparently was not a press conference): "We felt like we needed to get younger at the center position. We wanted more of a low post player, someone that could defend size, strength. We found that with Jusuf. And, look, this is the hard part of the business is you have guys that you get attached ... but you've got to make business decisions. We felt like in the long run this will pay longer dividends, having a young guy on a rookie scale (contract). We manage our cap with it. He gives us a different look defensively. He's a big time rebounder. And I think he'll make the game easier for guys like Dame (Lillard) and CJ (McCollum) because we've got more presence in the paint now defensively."
It sounds as if he thought Nurkic could make the team better than Plumlee.
His only mention of a draft pick is in answer to another question concerning the tradeline and he states that we have three draft picks to use one way or another.

And that is a reminder that he did the deals that allowed us to get three picks this year and trade up to get Zach Collins. He has done a lot of good little things that add up. Each time he does something it seems to make sense. But one has to wonder if he should have had a bigger vision. And of course his drafting of Leonard and then re-signing him was terrible. Without that I think most would say he was a pretty damn good GM.
http://www.oregonlive.com/blazers/i...zers_neil_olshey_were_probably_a_6_point.html

 

You make your own luck. It's not like he was sitting in his barcolounger and the trade came crashing through his roof landing in his living room. He went out and found it. Then he pulled the trigger. That's not luck.

 

But they only have to pay him for two years.

 

I think it's becoming very clear that Neil is still building this team as a rebuild process of slower evolution with young players. I see a lot of other teams making knee jerk trades and building immediate impact teams that will lack sustainability.

 

http://www.oregonlive.com/blazers/i...zers_neil_olshey_were_probably_a_6_point.html
In this very same story, there's this:

And this

Olshey was pretty guarded about Nurkic. Maybe secretly he was thrilled, but he definitely downplayed his part of the acquisition.

 

I like what Minnesota has done but tou guys are giving the three other teams in our division too much credit.

Denver just invested heavily on a player in the back end of his career. OKC is making a huge gamble on what could be a one year rental. Utah could be losing an All Star.

Pump the brakes fellas. This team was rebuilt on the fly and made the playoffs the past two seasons. Our cap space was out the window regardless after last year.

 

I just have to SMH with this idea that the Blazers only traded for the pick, Nurkic was merely some kind of throw in, and the Blazers were shocked that he turned out to be good. That's simply ridiculous. There were posters on this site who were begging for a Plumlee -- Nurkic trade for months before it happened. I was ecstatic with getting Nurkic and viewed the pick as a happy bonus. The Blazers scouts and stats guys know more than any poster here, and a shit ton more than me. It's completely implausible that all they wanted was the pick, and they thought Nurk was some kind of scrub. Hell, the talk wasn't IF Nurk was a starter, but whether he should start his first game.

 

If I recall most of the people wanting to see Plumlee traded, said so because they didn't want to see the Blazers see yet another asset walk out the door with zero compensation. Olshey blowing his wad on Crabbe, Turner and MyLe made this an absolute necessity.