Interesting mostly unbiased view of the Blazers

Repp'd! Couldnt have said it better myself!

 

Yes, but Dirk is someone you could build around in his prime. The guy was unconscious. I hated playing against him because he was so difficult to defend. Aldridge is, arguably, not someone you can build around. He doesn't have the right frame of mind for it. The only time he has that killer instinct is when someone pisses him off, which is rarely, or when he plays against his homestate teams. Obviously he puts up good numbers, and he's solid, but is he the guy that you know you can count on when your team needs points? When Roy was healthy, he was that guy. He was one of the best in the league at it. Aldridge is not that guy. He has never been that guy and I don't think he'll ever be that guy, and that's fine. I'm just hoping that Lillard will take over that role.

 

.... Denny I don't see how you can think this.

Stockton never averaged even 12 FGA per game. His highest scoring average was 17 ppg for three years in '88 through '91. After that he never averaged over 15 ppg. During that same stretch, however, he was averaging right around 14 assists per game. The guy is the quintessential pass first point guard.

 

Aldridge needs Roy or Lillard. They are exactly the type of players to play batman. Unfortunately Roy will never play effectively again, but Lillard is developing into that go to guy.

I understand many dont believe Lillard will be a superstar, but i personally think he will. I think the core of Aldridge, Lillard and Batum is definitely a core that can compete with Durrant, Westbrook and Martin or paul, griffin and jordan.

 

I'm willing to bet Kevin Martin won't be back next year for OKC, and if I was the Clippers I would be worried about Chris Paul's knees (but maybe that's just the Blazer fan in me talking).

 

Gentlemen! We have all watched this team play with historically the worst bench to ever play the game. Just imagine if we actually had a bench? What if we had that go to scorer 6th man? What if we have that defensive minded center that can protect the paint? What if we had that key reserve pg that can run plays without turning the ball over?

You act as though this team cant get significantly better with a few key pieces. Lets wait until oshley has a full summer and cap space to build a contender. Then if next year isnt panning out, we can make these drastic changes. Until then, stop jumping the gun because you believe the sky is falling.

Aldridge isnt the batman, lillard is. Lillard needs an aldridge to open the paint for his penetration.

 

Exactly! The only teams i would be concerned with is houston, golden state and denver. They are the only ones that can keep their entire team together for years. Spurs and clippers are in a win now mode. They have a two year window.

 

And during those three years he averaged

11.3 FGA
11.8 FGA
11.9 FGA

He was just a very efficient shooter.

53.8%
51.4%
50%

We're looking at FGA as the main point here.

Lillard 15.5 FGA
Paul 12.0 FGA (has never averaged under 12 FGA, while Stockton never averaged over 11 FGA in his career)
Deron 13.5 FGA (although he has averaged many more FGA in his career)

 

Based on the number of people who get defensive or outright hostile when you bring up the topic I'd say that there's a considerable portion of the people that post around here who think (or at least hope) he's the guy to lead this team to championship contention.

Personally I think he's more second fiddle than a true top ten player, who can carry a team when everybody else is faltering around him. If there's anybody currently on the roster who has a shot of being that kind of guy it's Lillard and I think it's a little early to say whether or not that's likely to happen -- he'll definitely be "good" but will he be great?

If the only reasonable way to contend for a title is to somehow acquire a top ten player -- the kind of guy that gets brought up in MVP conversations -- then what do you do? Trades rarely happen with those kinds of guys, except when they're forcing their way out to a "destination city" and free agent MVP caliber players just don't pick places like Portland. If LaMarcus isn't the man, then their best shot of getting a guy who is, most likely happens through the draft.

So really if LaMarcus is traded we all know it won't be for an established superstar, at best you trade him for as many lottery picks as you can and then pray that get lucky and hit the jackpot.

The thing is, it's pretty clear to me that most people around here would rather hold on to being "respectable," with lots of first and second round exits vs. enduring the pain of being a lottery team until they strike it rich with a franchise level player. I'm always in favor of the high risk, high reward approach, but I can understand why most people aren't.

 

If Aldridge can net us a superstar talent, then I'd be all for it. But if you trade Aldridge for players that are still second fiddle or maybe 3-5th fiddle; then what's the point?!

Aldridge and Matthews for Howard is a great deal. Aldridge for Monroe and a couple players doesn't move the needle.

 

Are two second fiddles better than one?


My theory is always " does it make you better" Or at least better on paper

Aldridge > Monroe

But Aldridge < Monroe, Singler, Maggette (expiring, additional 11 mm in cap space for someone like Milsap) and a 1st

Monroe and Milsap are probably better than Aldridge and anyone we could get at center

 

Look at millsap this season and get back to me. Hickson and Aldridge are greater than Monroe and millsap this season already. Wtf?!

And Monroe and singler is not even close to being better than Aldridge. Sorry, play it all you want; but it just won't change my mind.

 

Best case in a trade for Aldridge is young guy that think still has untapped potential. He might not currently be better than LaMarcus, but someday he might be. Barring that you trade him for a player and a top five lottery pick and gamble that the pick turns into a great player.

Think of it like this: let's say you've got a really nice hand in a poker game, but for whatever reason you know that there's one player at the table with a better hand and you can't bluff him. Do you hold on to your "really nice hand" and lose and say afterward, "gee I was so close!" or do you turn in four or five cards and take the 2% chance that it might be better than the guy with the current winning hand? Personally I'd trade in the 0% chance hand for the 2% chance.

 

Well if we could trade Aldridge for Drummond and singler; I would be excited. That falls into your category.

 

Well if we could trade Aldridge for Drummond and singler; I would be excited. That falls into your category.

 

Not sure what the hate is for Milsap?

18/9/1.2blks in 36 minutes
20.6 PER

vs Aldridge at 21/9/1.2 in 36 minutes
20.2 PER

 

Crap sorry. I thought you meant detroits pf. Yes millsap is a beast. My bad