Who still thinks we "overvalue" our players?

So, does that mean the coach has the team playing above their real value?

 

I think all of them have a certain level of value. I think at certain times each of them will take our breath away, and at other times each will disappoint. The question is this - who will take our breath away more often than disappoint us?

I'm glad I don't have to make that decision. That shit ain't easy to predict. In fact, it might be flat out impossible.

 

I'll gave Nate some credit here, he gets guys to play hard for him most nights, and in the NBA that will get you a handful of wins you wouldn't otherwise be able to count on (there are a lot of teams in the league that half ass it)

But it also means that when they have their top 10-15 player in the league (Roy) they always have a chance to win and have enough good players (LMA, and Miller primarily) and enough pretty good to OK players to compete most nights. Take Roy out of the equation and this is a .500 or below team (as evidenced by their 7-9 record without him).

The 'Pareto Principle' seems to be pretty hard at work here -- roughly, that 20% of your people are responsible for 80% of your production. In NBA terms stars usually carry you.

Take Miller out of the equation or Aldridge and what's left would be lucky to win 2 games in 10.

 

Isn't it fair to say that missing Oden and Przybilla have had an impact on the W/L record w/out Roy? Unless Juwan Howard is a suitable replacement, which I don't think he is. Plus, Miller is basically play SG at this point, considering how many shots he is putting up a game. A line-up of Blake/Miller/Webster/Aldridge/Howard just beat one of the hottest teams in the league on the road. Let's give some credit to the coaching staff for putting together a great game plan in a back-to-back game.

 

Sure, but this team was sucking balls to start the season, and despite the dropoff in defense, Howard has probably contributed enough offense to almost off-set what Pryzbilla provided (Oden and Brandon were just getting in each other's way).

But anyway I'm not sure what you're on about. What does 'fans overvaluing players' have to do with giving credit to the coaching staff? I already said Nate gets them to play hard. My only point in here is that I believe many of these players are overrated by fans, and that many fans overvalue these players

 

After lurking here for a while, I'd say that many fans here undervalue the Blazer players and overvalue players on other teams.

So, we disagree.

 

I think most overreact a nightly basis. After wins we under-value our players, but after losses there is a thread saying we over-value them.

 

Yeah, this forum used to be a lot more fun - but persistent whining and the "fire Nate", "trade Blake" and "trade Outlaw" brigade took over.

It is what it is. At least some of us still enjoy the team and believe in it's future.

Go Blazers.

 

I think we "overvalue" Rudy, Webster, and Bayless... and "undervalue" Outlaw and Blake.

 

In other words, we undervalue experience. The first 3 will become as good as the last 2 if we wait 4 years. But the team will get just as many wins if we give away the first 3 for nothing, and replace them with experienced $800,000 per year journeymen like Juwan Howard.