Yao Ming, a man barely alive. We can rebuild him, gentlemen. Better than he was before. Better, stronger, faster. barfo
In NO, out Portland. I just think there is going to be a lot of turmoil this offseason with KP. I honestly feel it will have an impact on this season. I also don't belive for 1 second that this team can stay healthy, and if that happens, I am not sure it has the resolve to do what it did this season.
You really think they won't make a run at low post scorer? They've got almost enough money for a max free agent which means they could make a play for Bosh in a sign and trade scenario (maybe giving up Jeff Green and a draft pick?) or maybe they try to work out a lopsided trade with some other team to acquire a legit low block big man (Jefferson, etc.) But then you say "a healthy Oden," I hope we see that but it remains to be seen. But maybe most importantly, at only 21 Durant is still probably five years away from even peaking and entering his prime (as crazy as that sounds) if he continues to make strides at the defensive end (like he showed flashes of this season) then that team is only going to get better. I'm not happy about it, but I think it's pretty clear that OKC has a the much brighter future at this point (A star in the making in Westbrook, a bonafide MVP candidate in Durant, while our best player has already had 4 operations on the same knee, LMA has plateaued, and Oden has missed 2/3s of his potential games entering his fourth year in the league).
Blech. When you put it that way, it's actually quite disheartening. However, it makes me wish 10x over that they were still in Seattle. The I-5 rivalry would have been amazing.
Like I said, there's no one available that can help them where they really need it, which is the interior. It's too bad none of our guys have any chance of improving, but OKC's players can only get better. I'm also saddened to hear that our players will continue to be injured while OKC will always have perfect health. In a year when we had pretty good health and had youth, we won 54 games and went 4-2 in a first round series. We missed 311 games due to injury and still won 50 games, AND managed to beat OKC 3-1. I'll take my chances with the Blazers.
You betray your anti-Portland bias (out of depression, I realize, not due to "not being a true fan") by comments like this. With Bayless, who is also 21, you barely allow that "maybe he still has some upside." With Durant, he's "probably still five years away from even peaking and entering his prime (as crazy as that sounds)"! Don't you see the rhetorical double-standard you're employing here? It may not be intentional, but it is spin...downplaying the same dynamic when it comes to Portland, hyping it when it comes to the competitor you "fear" most. And, no, I don't think Durant being far better than Bayless changes anything in this respect. It changes the baseline...how good each is now and how good each will be in their prime. It doesn't change where each is on the development curve. In fact, if there is any difference, I'd say it weighs against Durant developing more in the next five years than Bayless. Freaks like Durant don't start amazing and ascend to godhood over the next 5-6 years. They start amazing and then see diminishing returns because there's only so good a human player can be. Jordan fine-tuned his game over the years, but he really wasn't much better at 27 than he was at 22 or 23. Same for LeBron James. Most really great talents had a big jump in their first couple of years, as they acclimated to the NBA, and then saw fairly modest improvements the rest of the way to their prime. The real issue is that these freaks simply have a longer prime...it starts very, very early. Durant is always going to be much, much better than Bayless. But there's a pretty solid chance that Bayless develops more in the next five years. He has much more room to improve than Durant and nothing suggests that Bayless isn't going to follow the usual development curve...after all, his production improved considerably from Year 1 to Year 2. I realize that just as a person can often be his/her own harshest critic, passionate fans can often be the team's own harshest critics. But I think you cloud your analysis too much with your "omg It's never going to happen for my team, is it?" pessimism. You should temper your pessimism, just as some need to temper their optimism. Just my opinion.
I'm not sure what this has to do with my opinions of Jerryd? I agree that Bayless went from 'mostly disastrous' to 'decently efficient' which is nice, but despite Bayless' leap in production, I'm not real high on him mostly because I just think he's a bit of a square peg in a round hole on this roster with his particular strengths and weaknesses ... and even if here were to finally get to the point of being a very good point guard in 4 or 5 more years, I don't think this team has that much time to invest his development. As for my pessimism, I admit that I've kind of soured on this team's long term prospects of ultimate success, that doesn't mean they won't be one of those perenially 'good' teams that you see in the playoffs every year for 5 or 6 years -- I fully expect that in fact -- I just don't think the team is primed for deep playoff runs, conference championships and titles as currently constructed (even when fully healthy). Of course my outlook could change drastically with a few moves or if Oden surprises me and stays really healthy for an extended period (like 2 or 3 years playing 85% of available games) or if Batum takes another surge forward and becomes Pippen 2.0. I'm just not holding my breath; I've been a Blazers fan for a long, long time.
I thought I explained that...you used Durant's young age as a reason for (further) optimism about him and yet you spin Bayless' age as almost (though not entirely) irrelevant. Your analysis is inconsistent when you analyze Portland. It's not even exactly off-topic here, as the discussion has, at least in part, turned to OKC vs. Portland. That was precisely my point. You have this "Blazers are cursed, so nothing is ever likely to turn out well for them" mentality. Don't you think using past bad results (which involved different players, coaches and GMs and different opposing teams) is a bit irrational in determining what the team will do in the future? I understand the "fun" of superstitions and fan/franchise identities...Cubs are cursed, Blazers are cursed, Red Sox are cursed (wait, scratch that one ). It's just not a very sound element in analyzing the current prospects of a team, IMO. I won't keep mentioning it...I probably shouldn't have this time, since you're entitled to feel any way you want and I don't want to seem preachy. I just thought you might want to consider that you might cloud your own analysis (and, by extension, happiness when thinking about the team).
Maybe Durant will peak sooner and that will still leave him at a near MVP level. I just think the jump from 'terrible to decent' in Jerryd's case is a lot easier to make than 'really good, to top 5' in Duran't case -- Durant has made more difficult leaps in production whereas Jerryd got his production up to 'acceptable' ... and he's still a pretty ho-hum shooter for a shooting guard and not really much of a passer or 'quarterback' in a point guard role. I don't count myself an especially superstitious person, but this season certainly strained that belief. But it's not even about "curses" at this point, the cornerstones of this franchise are indeed pretty physically fragile. Roy had injury concerns in the draft that have proved to be just that 'concerning' and Greg's been one of the more fragile big men I've seen in quite awhile (albeit in a short amount of time and suffering seemingly unrelated injuries). Look, I'm not trying to piss in everybody's cheerios, I'm just expressing my belief that if you had to bet on a 'horse' finishing the race at this point between OKC and our team, OKC looks like the safer play -- I hope the Blazers prove me emphatically wrong.
Heh, of course Durant has made the more difficult leaps. He's far and away the better talent. I just don't understand why Bayless doesn't also get the benefit of production at a young age. Being an "acceptable" NBA player at age 21 is difficult and impressive. Not as difficult and impressive as being a top-ten player in the NBA (as I consider Durant) by age 21, but Bayless isn't that Hall of Fame caliber talent. If Bayless is an "acceptable" NBA player at 21, doesn't that suggest that he has a pretty good chance of being a very fine NBA player by age 26? And somewhere in between as he gets older. Will Bayless become a great floor leader? Probably not. But Roy is the floor leader anyway. Roy is not a gifted enough passer to be the only play-maker, but between Bayless, Roy and Batum, there is the chance to have fairly good passing overall in that perimeter. Obviously, everything hinges on Oden staying healthy. But to be perfectly honest, I think there's a better chance that Oden will put in reasonably healthy seasons than that OKC will acquire a high level post presence with ~$10 million in cap space (which is not enough for a max contract). Beyond those "hopefuls" for each team, Portland has lots of room to improve in Oden (apart from his health issues, he can also simply get better at basketball, which is pretty nice considering he's already over 20 PER with great defense), Batum and Bayless.
