The one player will we have to trade to take it to the next level

The only issue with that that I see is, if you trade Aldridge for a banging PF(not sure who that is), who is playing C for us? On the assumption that G.O. goes down, and basically is done. I agree with those above that say a good portion of our future success depends on Oden. And Aldridge pairs up, potentially, so well with him. If you move him for some low post banger, then that low post banger better also be a good defender, because pairing a low post guy with Przybilla is going to be awkward on offense. You'd end up needing to find a C that can go outside a little more. Whcih then just reverses the roles of our PFs and Cs now. And everyone would then say our C is soft, and we need a new one. And then we'd find one, overlap with the PF, so we'd need to trade the PF, etc. We'd go from Sheed to Zach to Sheed to Zach, essentially. Which is going to be the better fit long term? Aldridge's raw numbers might never improve, but from an individual standpoint, he still has a lot of room for growth in his game that I like my chances with him as our PF for a long time.

 

I disagree. I think right now that the adjustment needs to be made on the bench guards/SF, which can be made through small trades, draft or free agency.

If I could trade up in the draft to say, #4 and get Cousins for center insurance, I would be all over it.

 

Cousins doesn't strike me as someone who's going to be a happy camper as a backup 4/5. If you commit to starting him at some point, sure. But if you thinkwe have 4 of our starters for the future, then I think making big moves to add young guys is a bad thing to do right now. Well, maybe adding Wall. I think a lot depends on what we think out of Roy, Aldridge, and Oden. And Batum. Need to find pieces that fit around those guys. I agree with you on the bench. We built up a roster of starting caliber players. The only issue with that is, not many of them look to be bench capable players. And by that I mean, Frye looked good when he would start and get 20 minutes, but was poor as a bench hustle guy. Bayless looks good when he starts and gets 20 minutes. I'm not giving up on him, but he doesn't look like a bench/hustle guy. Rudy seems to need time to get into a flow, but I think he can work as a bench hustle guy. I just don't think he wants to. Webster was alright starting and getting big minutes, but again, doesn't seem good in short stretches.

There has been mention that we miss Outlaw. I can agree to a point, but it's not Outlaw specifically, it's having 4 people come off the bench who can score. That was important because they're all so inconsistent that, with 4 of them, you can assume at least one will be on that day. With 3, the inconsistencies can all strike at once, leaving you with no bench help. I don't think we need to find another inconsistent bench scorer, just better fits for bench depth.

 

Yea, but with the way things have been going, he won't have to be a backup. That is the reality of the situation.

 

I'm just thinking you'd need to commit to that, or run the risk of a situation you don't want to be in with upset young players.

 

Here is my thinking. It gives us 2 scenarios, and to me, it is win/win.

Scenario 1: Greg Oden stay healthy. Cousins is unhappy. I really don't give a shit, because Oden is healthy, so Cousins, go fuck yourself.

Scenario 2: Greg Oden gets hurt 2 weeks into the season again, and Cousins gets all his playing time and his happy.

 

So, who was the banging PF on any of the Laker championship teams of the past 10 years?

I love Buck Williams, but he was never the "missing ingredient", at least in terms of winning an NBA title. I obvioulsy also love Brian Grant, but more for his hustle and getting in Karl Malone's face. As a player, Grant was replaceable.

 

What because they never won a title with him it means everything? The team was getting eliminated in the first round every year until Buck Williams showed up. The same with Brian Grant. 1 and done. That was the playoff motto until the toughness showed up.

 

Well, I thought the goal was to win an NBA title. My mistake.

 

Yeah, Cousins go fuck yourself is fine and good. Oden is kicking ass. Of course, we probably traded Rudy, Bayless, our first, and something else to get up to get Cousins. Probably took on crap salary. He's not happy as a bench player. he voices that displeasure. We're stuck without a backup, and hurt our bench to get there. So we kill his value, and move him in the offseason for less than we gave up to get him. And as a franchise, things start to go to shit. And fans on the board would flip out after his first good game that he should start over Aldridge or Oden. We'd hear how Nate is ruining him, etc.

 

It is. But it doesn't mean a tough player doesn't improve the team. Michael Jordan ruined a lot of dreams for a lot of teams. That is the reality of the situation. If there was no Jordan, there would have been a hell of a lot of championships split between Portland and Utah.

As for Grant, the LA and Portland teams that clashed that year were 2 of the finer teams in NBA history IMO. Somebody had to lose.

 

Yep getting more good players on your team always ends up badly. In fact, because it always ends up badly, you should never get more talent on your team ever. I see how it is.

 

I just don't see Buck Williams as a "missing ingredient" in terms of winning an NBA title.

Because ... he wasn't.

 

That's not at all what I said, but if that's the discussion you want to have, so be it. The issue is adding people that for one have shown to already have character issues, but then bringing them in with the thought that you might be telling him to fuck himself. Talent matters a lot. So does chemistry. And having a group of guys with individual agendas usually isn't an ideal recipe for success.

I'm all for adding talent. I'd prefer the right talent. And finding talent that will fit the roster. I'm not of the mindset that throwing 12 starting caliber players onto a team is always going to lead to success. You need hustle guys. You need role players. Cousins doesn't necessarily project as a role player. If you think he's starting C quality, and a front court of him and Aldridge is achampionship level front court, I think you should look to move Oden. Unless you know that that rookie is going to buy into being a career backup.

But hey,

Maybe so.

 

if oden is our only hope to a title...

we better start rebuilding

 

Aldridge is a very good player, but not a star. Even if he doesn't improve, as an 18-19 PER player who plays good defense, he's a solid second-best player on a title contender and a fantastic third-best player. If Oden stays healthy and continues to produce like he was this season (let alone improving as should be expected), everything will fall nicely into place.

As maxiep mentioned, Aldridge is a great fit alongside Oden. Oden's role, if he remains healthy, will be in the low post. Aldridge's skillset is much better aimed at the high post. That's a very complementary set of bigs.

Certainly, if Aldridge and a piece or two (that don't include Roy, Oden or Batum) could be parlayed into Bosh, that would really cement the team as a big-time power. But Aldridge is certainly good enough, as the second- or third-best player, to win titles. (And there's even the outside chance that Batum becomes a 20 PER player and pushes Aldridge to fourth-best, which would be an embarrassment of riches.)

 

Not a big fan of Oden, eh?

 

That's actually a good sign. This is coming from the brilliant mind that thought Webster is much better than Batum. I think Oden is just about penciled in for the hall of fame, right here, right now.

 

As much as I love Miller and Aldridge, it would have been a coup to sign David Lee and trade LMA for a point guard before signing him to that big extension.

With that said, the past is in the past, and I am very happy with Miller and I think Aldridge is extremely underrated by the fans here.

 

Which PG do you imagine us trading him for?