And Dame just passed the 10K point level. Durant just won a championship and had to join a super team to do it and he just passed 20K points. This talk about Dame being too old is just crazy talk? I am over 50. I stay in shape. Believe me when i tell you i didn't feel a real drop until 40. Great players get better as they approach 30. Then they adjust their game after 35.
I was only looking at the last couple of years. You can read, right? It was never a total rebuild, it was a half-ass job built from castoffs, rejects and overpaid non-performers like Turner and MyLe. This team looks pretty much maxed out in terms of room for growth and if this was the big plan it's an unqualified failure -- few moveable assets, not a lot of cap flexibility, and two years away from Lillard's impending free-agency who isn't getting any younger.
If dame learnd to defend like Chauncey then maybe contention is realistic until then we can maybe reach a second round with a good match up or a bit.of help.
Dame's defensive improvement is commendable this year....and as I've said...defense is a team skill ...Chauncey was bounced all around as a role player before he put it all together
Gonna take your "You can read right" comment and discard that for what it's worth. Both your links cover 48 years of Blazer basketball. Enough said. You can read right? Now if you don't consider moving 4 of 5 starters and losing your franchise player a total rebuild then i guess this conversation is over because you lack the vision of what actually happened. The Blazers had not only lost their #1 pick in the draft but their ROY to knee issues and were working with their third option of what was pretty much considered a dynasty in the making. Aldridge was leaving simple as that. That my friend is a total rebuild.
I just disagree with the assessment that we are one role player away--like really really disagree. I have not seen major growth from this team. If anything, I see a hyper-motivated individual (Dame) trying to lead a bunch of mercurial dudes by example. It's some Sisyphus-like futility. Hell, I was MUCH more jazzed about them prior to summer 2016. Since? They've disappointed. And listen here: Olshey during ET's introduction video says with Chief at the 4 we project as a 53-54 win team and with him at the 3 mid-40s. That year we won 41. That's our GM, not me. This whole "process" thing is a joke. When has that ever worked? Good teams all take chances, and are continually active, and most importantly put themselves in position to get lucky. Houston is an interesting example, the personnel on that team is seemingly ever-changing, but there's a plan in place. You can actually see it; what's our plan again? Something about a proverbial cake?
You're freaking me out. Houston traded 20 guys for CP3 this summer (and like 800 transactions during the Neil Olshey era). This summer alone Boston signed Hayward AND(!!!!!!!!!!!!!) traded their savior for Kyrie Irving. Toronto somehow ended up with Ibaka last season. GS signed Kevin-fucking-Durant! Arguably (by others) the best SF in the league. And that's just barely the highlights of the transactions. Barely. They are active. En route they were active too. GS traded Monte CJ Ellis to the boos of the fans... This surfing the baby waves is getting old. I'd actually be more understanding of a fire sale for picks than what's happening here. At least then you could tell what the plan is.
You do realize Golden State made it to the finals 2 times without Durant right. They even won it once. Then Houston made it to the Conference Finals once without Paul right? It also took them 6 years to get there with Harden. I don't even want to go into the eastern conference because well James.
(I don't like this "You do realize..." stuff.) I hate comparing GS with Portland because they've done such a good job, it's sickening. GS went 23-43 and traded Ellis. Next season? 47-35 and a trip to the Western Conference Semis. It's different, see? They took a chance and put themselves in position to succeed. They made it happen. Houston has been cycling through players looking for the right combination. That's their process: trying. Hell they let Dwight Howard walk. And you can't deny Ainge isn't active for fuck's sake. And Toronto is so boring... if that's our future I'm going to be disappointed.
Not at all trying to be condescending. But what you are describing is years 3-6 of rebuilds. Portland is only just starting to get to those points. They took some chances some are working some didn't. That goes for all of those teams i just named. Portland is no different. They have taken some chances. Some have worked and some have not. They have drafted pretty well. Sure i can name some players after the fact that might have been better but bunches of teams can attest to that. I also think you are way off by not thinking a true 3 and D threat would change this team. When Turner is hitting shots and playing solid defense this team wins. Same goes for Harkless. If he was consistent this team would be rolling. They need that solid wing player to be in games at the end and win. Turner just doesn't seem to fit the best. I really don't think it was a bad move. It was IMO a good move that didn't work out as well as it could have. Look at his numbers for Jan. He played well and the Blazers won. His play dropped off and the Blazers are struggling.
You do realize that Damian isn't even remotely an MVP caliber player right? He might not even be the tenth best guard in the league. Building around Damian is fine if he were better or if he was the second best player on the team, but he's not, so there's no point in comparing the Blazers' situation with GSW or Houston.
Well that sir is an opinion. One i simply do not care to debate because i cannot say what you feel is wrong. I disagree. Dame IMO is top 5 because what you have said is "Guard" not "Point Guard". Dame is a PG and a team leader. With the right pieces around him he can bring 50+ wins no question. He already has.....
I've noticed that the club just isn't pro-active in trades and that does worry me. There seems this attraction to let the lineup bake. Which is fine, if we were developing players, but outside of Pat, Meyers is dogshit, Layman is worse than that, and Harkless..... well he's decent on D. We had the ability to get a wing in the draft and we both opted for projects.... I'm not saying that, letting time (even everything out) WON'T WORK, I am just saying every successful team has a large amount of roster turnover. It's just a healthy thing to do. We are the equivalent to a sick dog that does it's business behind the shed once in a blue moon.
He is younger and better than Lillard is, he might even be in the MVP conversation but Brad Stevens coaches for balance rather than relying on Kyrie going for 40 a night.
Okay, good. BUT we are back to where we started: Dame's timeline. I'm saying we haven't shown enough improvement over the last 3 seasons to warrant optimism. Remember Dame talking about playing in the WCF before the 2016-17 season? Now that's laughable. The (perhaps irrational) tone I'm sporting is because it feels claustrophobic to be painted into a corner. And this is where Olshey has left us, it seems. But maybe you're right, KJ: maybe I should just look on the bright side. Maybe the verbal and contractual missteps will somehow reveal a plan. Maybe it's all be subterfuge and when Olshey unveils his masterplan--and scoffs at the notion he should've shared it earlier--we'll be halfway on the road to a championship. If not, when can the alarm be raised? Year 4?
Watch more Boston games then or just look back to the year the Cavs beat the Warriors it was Kyrie doing the work that sealed that series and the only 10 secs Kevin Love ever played defense.
Nope, he isn't one either. What's your point? Boston has a much deeper team, coach and their pieces fit together.