Ibaka is head and shoulders above LA on defense, no contest. On offense, he won't give you those monster nights like LA can deliver every once in awhile, but he's a lot more efficient. And efficiency is a big deal in my book. I don't care how many points a player scores if he's less efficient than his teammates. So if Ibaka is a lot better on defense....and maybe slightly behind on offense, he still comes out ahead in the comparsion.
well you are certainly objective. why aren't you in the front office? I guess Lillard got his swagger and maturity from Aldridge. Obviously Lillard will lack toughness next year. Or did he lack it this year? Batum came into the league as a finesse EU player. Will always have that type of game. Batum has been far more influenced by the French national teams than he has the Blazers players/staff/whomever. Leonard doesn't lack toughness, he lacks everything else. Jordan farmar.
you have to ask yourself. As the #1 option on offense or hell even the #2 option. Would ibaka shoot 54% from the field? I highly doubt it. He plays with Durant and Westbrook, can't tell me if he played with Lillard he'd shoot 54% still. Aldridge shot 45% this year as the teams #1 option. If anyone thinks or posts Ibaka would shoot a higher or equal % from the field had he been in Aldridge's role this year is high.
Slightly behind. Ha! This is just dumb as shit. And I say your post is so I don't attack the poster. So much dumb here. Not gonna bother
Agreed. lol. Because scoring 8 points on 4/6 is so much better than 40 on 20/31 of shooting. Makes sense. For the record, those are not real stats from Ibaka and LA... in case anyone was wanting to play semantic stat dingle smack.
It's that time of year, When the board falls apart, Every thread you read, Seems to say, "Let's trade our All Stars, May our summer dreams come true."
I don't mind the OP, it's basketball discussion and a viable topic to discuss. However some of the posts saying Ibaka is even on Aldridge's level(or slightly behind) is outrageous, due to the fact if the Blazers called up the Thunder and said. Trade you Aldridge for Ibaka straight up.. The Thunder couldn't fax the paperwork into the NBA office fast enough. Not because Ibaka is a bad player, but because Aldridge is better than Ibaka, and would make them The Championship favs hands down.
See my avatar. How do you know about my front office experience? As for Lillard not following Aldridge as a role model, I meant that only for young forwards and centers. As for the early Batum being finesse, actually he was a more thrilling defender than now, as you recall the praise he used to get, before he settled into the example set by Aldridge. Aldridge defines the PF position purely by shooting skill. But that's last priority in the conventional description of a star PF. I don't care how good of a shooter our next PF is. He'll never be more than 5 feet from the basket, collecting rebounds, blocks, steals, altered shots, loose balls wrestled down to the floor, and lost fingernails.
Batum has never been a physical defender, or a physical offensive player. He doesn't have the body for it and sad to say it's a EU stereotype that fits him perfectly. He was only a "good defender" on nash or parker because he has length and length bothered them. So Aldridge is the Leader of the team right? he only influences the "bigs" never talks to the "guards" nope never. I wish I knew how to make a "grasping @ straws" gif.
No. LaMarcus Aldridge was the undisputed best player in the playoffs after 2 games. Playing on the road. Nobody else out of 16 teams was even mentioned as being close. So if you're looking to improve a weak spot that is keeping us from being a playoff dynasty team, starting power forward is a ridiculous place to start.
That's 1980's and 90's NBA thinking. In today's world, your PF needs to be able to stretch the floor or else your guards are going to be bottled up all game driving into congestion. It's been a common theme on this board since I joined that several of you guys underestimate or undervalue LMA's ability to stretch the D and draw shot blockers out of the paint and what it does for other guys on the court.
I don't think anyone here isn't appreciative of his ability to stretch the defense. What I was saying is someone like him, who will command a maxish deal more valuable than a player at the wing position who would command the same defensive attention (or close to it) and a player like Ibaka who is defensive oriented as well as a guy who can step out and hit a consistent 15-18 footer.
Look I maybe in the minority here but I would trade LA for Rodman in his prime everyday. The dude was a wrecking ball on defense he is hands down the greatest defense PF in nba history (Although I would at least listen to an argument for Tim Duncan). He was also the greatest rebounder in NBA history on a percentage scale his rebound rates for offensive, defensive and overall are amazing.
I understand what you are getting at. It is a valid question. And if I was building a team from scratch I would lean towards that philosophy. Ideally i think it is best if your max players are your PG, and either a SG or SF. Then fill the rest in with the best players possible. However it is not the only way to do it. We can get away with Lillard and LMA as our max guys, and build the rest with the best players possible. I admit I would pause if Wiggins was offered, although to be honest I am going more off of reputation than resume. Thankfully that type of trade won't occur because it is really risky. Moving LMA for a a potential or current max wing has a very small chance of successfully happening. I think these types of threads are interesting as we wait until after the draft, but hopefully by then we can focus on what we have now and how we can get better with LMA and not how we can better without him. Because those same type of scenarios we discussed all of last summer, would have been bad moves for the Blazers.
I agree that there's more than one way to skin the team-building cat (please don't report me to PETA, I'm using a euphemism here). OKC is built along the PG/SF model, the Heat are lucky to have a big 3 at SG/SF/PF, the Spurs are a SG/PF team with a whole bunch of really good role players thrown in. Historically, there have been champions built around a variety of All-Star combos. I think the important thing is for a GM to tailor the rest of the team around the strengths and weaknesses of the best players on the roster. Portland's best two players aren't as dominant individually as some of the other contender's best players, so Olshey is going to have to build a team with depth along the lines of the Spurs if the Blazers are going to join the elites of the NBA.
