I feel like a lot of the fan base as well as Paul Allen try hard to believe everything is fine. Statements like "were young" and "there's always the summer/trade deadline" as well as our easy early schedule inflating our record make it easy to believe we don't have to make changes now. But most also realize that things need will need to change at some point. However, waiting until we HAVE to change things is too late, as by that time Dame will be too late in his career and we'll be fucked unless we pull a rabbit out of a hat (which Olshey hasn't shown he can do).
Man, you make it seem like it is so damn easy to build a contender. I think winning a title in the NBA is one of, if not the hardest thing to do in all of professional team sports. Yes, he fucked up in 2016. However, I am glad he hasn't compounded those mistakes by mortgaging the future just to be the 4 seed instead of the 6th or 7th seed. It seems like some people just discredit every accomplishment this team makes. 2015-2016 regular season the sample size wasn't big enough (even though they went 29-14 over their last 43 games which projects out to 55 wins). 2015-16 playoffs they only won because the Clippers had two players injured (even though we were blowing them out in game 4 and the series was about to be tied 2-2 anyway, not to mention the Clippers always choke in the playoffs and had blown 2-0 leads in series before). 2016-17 regular season they got lucky with the Nurk trade. 2016-17 playoffs they suck (even though they had lost Nurk and also didn't have Davis). 2017-18 regular season the only reason they are even in the playoff race is because of their easy schedule (even though they are right there with all those juggernaut teams that made such great moves this off season). Now I'm not saying their accomplishments are great either but at some point we have to acknowledge that there has to be something going right. Some people act like we're the freaking Kings.
1.) I know it's hard but it's starts by having a structure in place from the owner to the front office to the coaching staff to the team culture. 2.) It's not mortgaging the future of you trade for someone who's still young (I was down for Hernangomez and Mirotic). Those guys would've likely been here for years, about as likely as our draft pick has of becoming as good as Mirotic. 3.) 15-16. Had a good stretch, likely overachieved/ took teams by surprise at the end of the season as thwy aremt anywhere close to a 55 win team. 4.) It was obvious Olshey value the pick more than Nurkic. Without the pick I bet NO doesnt do that trade. Me, Scalma, and others were advocating for Nurk in a month before we acquired him. 5.) We are currently 1 game ahead of 9th, 2 games ahead of 10th (which is a team on fire thatbjust blew us out in Portland), and we've had one of, if not the easiest schedule of all the teams were bunched up with. I wouldn't say things are going right. Things are mediocre. Average. And to some that's okay, and some (like Olshey) will try to spin it as success. I think there's a 75% chance we get a 7/8 seed or miss the playoffs entirely. That means no playoffs or a sweep. And we'll be in the luxury tax the year after, with the same mediocre team.
If our only way to “finish the rebuild” is through the draft(because the only 3 players we have worth anything are untouchable per Neil and we have zero cap space to sign a difference maker) wouldn’t it be better to finish in the lottery the next two years? Or is the team getting better by GS kicking their teeth in every year in the first round?
There were two teams other than the Blazers interested in signing him. That's what the evidence is. There may have been more than two others. NO's offer had to be better than the Celtics could offer. As attention turned from the top tier FAs to what was left, the offer had to beat what the teams left holding tons of cap space might offer, too.
They were (and are) under the LT, they did use their space under the LT to re-sign their players. You're just wrong. It was use it or lose it. $25M in CAP space allows you to take a player for basically nothing in return, just absorb the salary. It lets you sign FAs to MAX contracts. We'd be in the same boat if we didn't sign Turner. We'd just have Crabbe on the roster instead.
Interesting behind the scenes look at how Cleveland GM worked. http://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/pag...their-season-flurry-trades-adrian-wojnarowski
1) The Blazers are obviously trying to build that structure by keeping this group together. Once again, this can't just be accomplished by hiring someone new as it takes years to establish a new culture. Through all the shit that's happened over Olshey's tenure the team continues to be competitive and make the playoffs. Isn't that the definition of building a winning culture? 2) If you find the right player in a trade who is young of course it isn't mortgaging the future. We don't know that Olshey didn't try for Mirotic and the Bulls simply liked the Pelicans offer better (little better contract back and most likely better draft pick position). Mirotic has been very streaky in his time in the NBA, maybe he's figured it out now but who knows. It is questionable whether giving up a pick for him is worth it. Especially when if a big trade ever becomes available we'll need as many picks as we can get to make it work. 3) This seems like you are discrediting it again, which is exactly my point. It was a 43 game sample. That isn't exactly a "good stretch", it's over half the season. 4) This is just a guess on your part. I was excited for both (I wanted Nurk too and love getting extra picks), why couldn't Olshey also have valued getting both? 5) We are also only 3 games out of 3rd. Why don't we see how the season plays out before writing this team off? The last two seasons they played their best basketball at this point in the year.
Olshey and Stotts are in their 6th season of being here together. In that time the Blazers have only missed the Playoffs their 1st season. Some of you guys are too young to remember how chaotic a coaching or GM change can be. Stability is really important as long as measurable success is there too. Taking over a non playoff team and getting it to the playoffs and keeping it in the playoffs after letting 4 of 5 starters go is far from a failing track record. It's only just now that we start seeing a lack of upward trajectory that we can consider evaluating if those guy are right. The key to that is Now and consider, it's not a failure at this point at least not enough to say wow they are driving the team into the ground (I have seen that quote today). In a lot of ways I think it would benefit the team to miss the playoffs this year. Not because a better draft pick is the answer but because a stagnant to slightly downward trajectory will force the front office and Ownership to really evaluate if what they have now is the plan or if it's time to start a new plan. Since the roster is so young there's no reason to think many of the existing pieces today can't be a part of a new direction.... But that still doesn't mean that either Stotts or Olshey are on the chopping block until this team starts to meltdown the way Cleveland was.
I don't think they would. I think there would be pressure to correct the trajectory. AKA the heated seats would get flipped on but Olshey in Particular would be given time to correct.
1.) What do you call the Warriors first season with Kerr then? It can be accomplished. 2.) A winning culture is a team that plays at .500 level? 3.) Schedule was easier than average, and 2.5 season is greater than half of one. 4.) He could've valued him. If he did, why would he say, we just wanted to add a draft pick? He didn't tout Nurkic at all. 5.) The past 2 years they've also had an easy schedule over the last past of the year. In two and a half years, we haven't consistently beaten above-.500 teams.
I didn't know the goal was to make the playoffs (which more that half the teams in the league do). The summer of 2016 is driving this team into the ground. We're young, as in a lot of mediocre talent with little upside. Some people are happy with 1st round playoff exits, I guess.
The Warriors were 51-31 in the season prior to Kerr arriving, and 47-35 the year before that. The core that was so successful was in place before Kerr took the job. And the Warriors had the success they had in building the roster by sticking to the core they put in pklace and making adjustments around the core.
They still have Nurkic to re-sign, while being essentially at the luxury tax line. They're almost certainly going to lose Napier. There's no way they can use the full MLE, because they'll run up against the apron and the hard tax. If Vonleh had turned out to be really good, Portland would have really struggled to re-sign him. These are all issues that could have been avoided by not giving out dumb contracts in 2016 like Turner's (and Crabbe's and Leonard's). That's why this "use it or lose it" meme is silly. Sure, they were going to lose the cap space to McCollum's extension, but cap space has rarely been particularly useful to Portland. What is useful is space under the tax and apron, for re-signing their own free agents when they graduate from rookie-scale deals and Portland has less of that space. They didn't have to use it, because they weren't going to lose their space under the tax line or the apron line. Using that space on awful deals for Turner, Crabbe and Leonard cost space that could have been used later.
Ahh yes passive aggression always get;s your point across. It's not that people are happy with it, it's that there are differing opinions on how it should be fixed. You keep sticking to your dialogue and I keep disagreeing not with the principle but with the reality. You can call 2016 what you want, I get why Neil did what he did, it made sense to me at the time, I am not s subscriber to hindsight as being the only appropriate gauge to use.
