I think you make a good point -- a very astute point even. It's a poorly kept secret that PA's other ventures (charter cable, etc.) have been hemorrhaging money and with the recent downturn in the economy he's probably lost a third of his net worth in the past year. I think it's possible the team will look to add at least one free agent or do a lopsided trade that brings somebody making slightly more than the MLE, but I'm increasingly of the opinion that the team is going to do the best that it can to operate at or near the luxury line, and more importantly operate at or near 'in the black.' It also goes without saying that you don't want to be saddled with tons of overpaid players even if you can afford them, because it makes it tougher to do deals and maneuver when you have to.
what were the players available to them and what was the cost besides RLEC? Throwing out vague stuff like this and then drawing conclusions about management's approach seems pretty shaky STOMP
Many, many, many reports have come out from several different media people saying Portland could have had Richard Jefferson, Vince Carter, Gerald Wallace, and Andre Miller. Portland chose not to for different reasons in all of them.
Hmmmm. Most of the starting 5 was traded for though, so how organically grown is that? Wallace was part of the Grant Hill trade. Hamilton was picked up from the Wizards.
I think there is some truth to what your saying but I also think your wrong about PA and his spending. I think PA is very hungry to win a championship and will spend what ever it would take if it was the right fit. If the right player/players became available and KP and PA thought they would make us title contenders right now PA when go way over the LT. He will be very careful though because he already did that in the jailblazer years and it didn't work.
Unconfirmed rumors/speculations equal reports in your world I guess, but I refer you back to my question... what was the cost beside RLEC? Not being willing to throw in Batum doesn't necessarily equate Paul Allen tightening up his wallet. STOMP
I don't believe all those reports and I believe KP was never interested in VC with his bad contract and age. I do think Miller and maybe Wallace were something the Blazers were after and just fell through. I think Wallace is a question mark for me with his injury history. From what I read the Bucks just wanted way to much for Jefferson. I'm sure KP was trying to make a trade but the right player wasn't available.
Yeah, right. If by organically, you mean primarily through the draft. I thought the line was deep playoff experience / or not. Sorry.
The players who were moved are a matter of public record. Look at what Brad Miller and John Salmons did for the Bulls - I'd think Salmons would have instantly been your starting SF and solved those problems for at least a couple more years, and Miller is no worse than putting off the EXPIRING part of RLEC for a season (plus he can actually still play halfway decently). Sacto would have done it in a heartbeat. They bought out Gooden and they're looking for a sucker to take Nocioni and their draft pick. That's one example, Billups was basically moved for a big expiring deal... There were a lot of key players rumored available, including Amare.
i think you're fooling yourself if you think acquiring a young player somehow sets back the blazers. as long as the player is an improvement of what the blazers have, age is irrelevant, the player will make the team better.
did you miss orlando in the finals? when you compare them to boston and cleveland, they don't come close to stacking up playoff experience wise, but we all know who won both of those series.
Orlando???? Yeah, I saw the 5th OLDEST TEAM IN THE LEAGUE in the finals. I also saw Orlando beat Boston without clearly it's best player in Kevin Garnett. Then I saw the 12 players on Orlando beat Lebron James. Then I saw Orlando get it's ass kicked by the L*kers, and heard Kareem, Magic and other NBA experts mock SVG when he said experience didn't matter. The Magic by the way have been to the playoffs 3 years in a row. Boston 2 years in a row Cleveland 4 years in a row. So I'm not sure where comes from.
Experience is helpful, but it's not the highest priority IMO when adding new players to our roster. If our team was constructed differently I'd change my mind, but we've added pieces that have been developed in outstanding programs and have battled it out in their age group's toughest competitions. Let's not forget the goal. Portland's attempting to build a dynasty. I'm sure if Pritchard wanted to he could trade for Nash, Kidd, Miller, Carter, Jefferson, Wallace, Prince or Butler. There are issues though with doing this. The cost is high, some are out of their primes, others are leaving their primes, and the others don't really have much more experience than our current core. I contend that draftees like Curry, Flynn, or Rubio would have more talent (increasing significantly each season for the next decade) and less experience (decreasing significantly each season for the next decade) than a Nash or Kidd. IMO, it would even out for the next couple of seasons. Given this, I'd rather take Rubio for the next decade than Nash for the couple of years.
right. so like i've always said, being the better team matters not experience. the magic beat more experienced teams when the magic were better than them, but lost to the more experienced team when they weren't better. all the blazers need to do is work on improving their team to be the best team in the league. doesn't matter if that's adding rookies or guys with finals experience who have been in the league for 10 years. whatever it is to improve the team gives them a better shot at winning. the experience level of the players is irrelevant.
You're wasting your breath dude. There is a subset of Blazer fans who will not accept the claim that experience means anything until the day that KP signs/trades for a vet and crows that he has added an important piece to the team. Until/unless that happens, they will rationalize that vets must have no value.
nope, that's not it at all. vets are fine. experience is certainly not a negative. it's just that it is vastly overrated as a positive. if the blazers add a vet who i feel helps the team i'll be happy just like i would be if they added a young player who i feel helps the team. but it won't change how i feel at all about how much experience matters and whether or not the blazers "need" to add a vet.
boston was in the finals last year. all of their players gained finals experience. ray allen played in the 2nd round with seattle and was a game away from the finals in milwaukee. paul pierce also played in the conference finals previously with the celtics. the cavs made the finals two years ago. that gave lebron, gibson, big z, varejao, and pavlovic finals experience. ben wallace has tons of playoff experience. wally, west, and joe smith all experienced going to game 7 in round two with the champs last year. the only significant player without much playoff experience was mo. compare that to the magic. dwight howard had experienced getting dominated by the pistons. lewis had the same sonics experience as allen, but nothing more. hedo came off the bench for some playoff teams, but never made the finals. the only time alston got out of the first round was off the bench. other than lewis, all their playoff experience came as bench players. that doesn't compare to the finals experience from the past two years of boston and cleveland. in terms of playoff experience, boston and cleveland definitely beat orlando. but they didn't beat orlando on the court. is that really difficult to see?
