...reminds me of the late-80s/early-90s Blazers teams. Incredibly deep in talent, lots of multi-talented players and scorers, and a great passing team. The only difference is that this team got the young Arvydas Sabonis (so to speak).
Which would have made all the difference in the world.....then. Anyway...... This team is probably the deepest in the league, and I don't think that statement is coming from blind fandom. It's more than likely an accurate statement.
We're so deep it's silly. Jerryd Bayless would already be playing major minutes for a lot of teams, and then of course we've got Martell Webster who hasn't played a second yet, and Batum who is going to keep getting better, and Oden who has barely scratched his potential. Wow. This is going to be fun for years to come.
I disagree for a few reasons. In the playoffs minutes get consolidated into the club's better players... it's better to have a better 5th guy then a sweet 11th & 12th man who are reduced to clapping. And if your 15th guy has the most desirable contract maybe ever... people tend to speculate. Portland is loaded with desirable players and assets. I also doubt you can keep everyone happy. Guys hopefully do and say the right things, as thats part of being a professional. But professionals are generally out for money and respect, not feel good stories. They need to play to meet their goals. Maybe through juggling injuries and enjoying a winning vibe the club can avoid the obvious looming minutes crunch tension that comes with good players sitting throughout this season. But thats not a sure thing. Sell high buy low... if the value of your quality lessor players is likely going to fade due to inaction, doesn't it follow to sell now while their value is high? The club is always in a state of flux. Embrace it STOMP
Watch our games. Read our boxscores. Our bench scored 60 points in a game this season. We have depth at every single position and two of the best sixth men in the league in Rudy and Travis. The Lakers (and Celtics) are deep too. But not as deep as us. Watch the game where we played the Bulls. Look what our bench did. We routed the Bulls by 42 because we always had great players in the game. Our "scrubs" aren't scrubs. The Lakers barely beat the Bulls. How many 42 point wins do the Lakers have this season?
I don't think the Celtics are deep, but the Lakers certainly are. Ariza, Farmer, Odom, Sasha, and Walton are all very good NBA players. 6-12, I think we're better than the Lakers. However, 1-12, you'd have to give the Lakers serious consideration.
I guess the Cs aren't as deep this year but I think last year, they were the deepest with PJ Brown and Posey there.
Well... I think that the strength of the Drexler teams was the starting five. "The best in the business" featured five guys that were potential mismatches for opponents. The bench had its moments, including Uncle Cliffy. The team just wasn't that DEEP, though. What it was? The five guys were mature. Buck Williams turned 30 his first season as a Blazer (89-90). Drexler was 27. Porter turned 27. Duck turned 25. Kersey was 26. Cliffy was 23, Drazen was 25, Danny Young was 27, Cooper was 33. That's a core that is all entering their prime together. Compare that to our team's ages... we're like six years away from reaching that level of physical maturity. Not to put down your comparison at all. It's just interesting to compare and contrast. Ed O.
Hmm, well you know the team better. I wasn't a Portland fan then. My impression of those teams was that they kept bringing one good player after another off the bench. "Drexler and lots of good players." The nine players you mentioned plus Danny Ainge. Ten good players is pretty deep! This team may be deeper depending on how much you think of players like Frye, Webster, Rodriguez and Bayless.
I think this is generally an accurate statement, but not this year. Our guys are young and embracing the team concept. It's true that most teams shorten their rotation in the playoffs, but that doesn't mean we have to. Teams that shorten their lineup have a few players that are clearly the best on their team and therefore get the most minutes. Our team isn't like that. We roll 11 deep, and there is basically no dropoff with any of the 11. Next year we'll probably need to consolidate, but not now.
Well I obviuosly disagree. Sure if KP can really steal a starter for our 7th, 11th, and 12th man you look at it. But you guys keep saying that our players will lose their trade value by not playing. 90% of GM's and scouts know more than us about our players. In some instances a player's value is higher by not playng because his flaws are exposed. It can go both ways. But the bottom line is I have yet to hear a trade scenario that wasn't either a bad idea for us or just plain unrealistic. And even if a trade happens we will still ALWAYS have players that want to play so they can meet their goals. And that is a good thing because it means we have depth. Embrace it. What ever KP does, just don't trade Drazen or Jermaine because they want more fucking minutes.
That's an oversimplification. We're not talking about the 11th and 12th guys, we're talking about our second unit, which is the 5 guys who back up our starters. Those are the guys who help carry you through a season, give the starters a rest when they need it, and keep the lead for you. One great 5th man can't do all of that. Not to mention the very real possibility of injuries during the year. Roy and Oden, in particular, have been a little injury prone, so it's great to have reliable guys on the bench to back them up. It's bench strength that gets you through the regular season and INTO the playoffs; without a deep bench, it's harder to endure the bumps and bruises of a long 82-game schedule. I would point to the 2000 Blazers as a prime example of the value of a deep bench. Sure, we lost to the Lakers in the WCF, but that Blazer team was deep and loaded for bear. If we'd been able to avoid that collapse in the fourth quarter of Game 7, we would have gone on to a championship. And we would have done it with a very deep bench. Finally, there is no reason why McMillan couldn't continue to play our bench during the playoffs. If you have a bench that you can rely on (and ours has not just kept leads, but extended them), then it can be an extra advantage in the playoffs, when you're going against teams that have to rely on their starters for more minutes. As their starters begin to wear down in the fourth quarter, ours will be fresher because they have been able to get some rest.
in a few weeks when Webster comes back, do you really think Channing will be embracing his DNP-CD to 5 MPG role in a contract year? Or what if Webster can't beat out Batum and Travis and is only getting scraps... do you think he's going to be a happy camper? Whats wrong with having better players or some lousy team's 2009 #1 (maybe a shot at Rubio) and less of a minutes crunch today? Having too many good players is a good problem to have, but it is a problem. Ignore it and you run the risk of it becoming a real distraction. STOMP
