I like Littles youth, Harts experience and consistency on both ends but for some reason I think Winslow would be the best fit. I like his defense, strength, passing, and basketball IQ. Also like the bench with Little, GP and Hart
More like a reflection of questionable decisions already made. Seems to me like a case of the GM constructing the roster to force the coach to follow a particular path. You could make a strong argument that four of our six best players are guards.
You've got that right. I love our guys, but watching this game, we look like what we are: small (ESPECIALLY starting Josh Hart at the 3).
I agree completely. He fits well with the other 4 players IMO. Dame, Ant, and Grant all can shoot from deep and I think Winslow can attack and find an open shooter. We need a little more bulk in the starting unit.
You dont know that. pop went 17-47 in year one. Last five years he went: 47-35 48-34 32-39 33-39 34-48 stars matter in this league more than coaching. You are overanalyzing bro. Not sure how you think Billups should know how all the new players will play against other starters in the league without giving him a few games to test it?
I'm overanalyzing but Billups is underanalyzing? I think you've got it backwards. Josh Hart is the 5th best Blazer and a second unit dreamboat and has always been. Nas isn't, but is a great complementary piece to Dame and the starters (as has already been proven). This is known. You can try out various lineups at any point in a game. This is different; he's fucking with a man's confidence and minimizing both players' potential--more so with Nas. Also, this coach is a coach because Tyronn Lue gave him a weeklong TEDtalks on coaching. He's shown nothing thus far beyond that players like him and that he implements schemes that don't work... Time will tell, obviously. Stars matter, yes, but coaches hold the keys to unlock their potential.
This is, I think, the one thing that has given me pause about Chauncey from the get-go--that whole story about how he wasn't really about coaching, and then he hung out with T.Lue for a bit, and now he's suddenly ready to run an NBA team. I'm still optimistic about him--as is my nature--but tons of doubt hangs in the back of my head.
I do wonder if the "competition" for the starting 3 spot is leading to (or going to lead to) hesitancy from the "competitors". Especially for Nas, who I think would be the most susceptible to getting in his own head with an uncertain role. I could be WAY off on this, but I feel like he just needs to be told: "this is when you will play, this is how much you will play, this is what we want/need from you--now go out and do it".
Speaking of silly and lazy, it's pretty easy to look at his career stats and see that you're throwing out complete BS. He came off the bench when he was 25 & 26 and only started for 349 of his 1057 career games. When the team needed him to start he started. When it was best to have him off the bench, thats what he did too. Throughout his prime he always played major minutes for them. https://www.basketball-reference.com/players/g/ginobma01.html You asked for an example and a recent HOFer was provided that fit all your silly criteria. Instead of saying oops, my bad, you make shit up and throw out more insults. Big fat fail on your part. Few situations are exactly alike, but talented players doing whats best for their team make Ant and Manu's situations comparable. STOMP
My "silly criteria" were "a player in his 20s who was the second-highest player on his team." Manu started 74 of 74 games in the only season in which both of those applied. And I never insulted you. Not once. My comments were about your reply, not about you personally. I will never, never insult a poster--even you.
i had voted for nas initially. but i had a thought -- i know chauncey would never do it, but why not let shaedon get a token role like vonleh did? let him get 8 minutes to start each half.
So your silly criteria was more pure stupidity then silly and you're backing up your stupid criteria with dumb reasoning. No offense to you personally for coming up with and standing by such moronic nonsense. Obviously using language like that is not how to have a reasonable productive conversation regardless of whether I'm attacking you or your post, thats how to offend. Nothing I'd posted warranted the insulting silly and lazy insulting response I received for supporting Zags comments and subsequent Manu example. You were also flat wrong in saying "he didn't start coming off the bench until he was 29". Own it or don't, but thats why we've butted heads here. No team wants their two best players to both be 6'2 PGs for numerous good reasons, but thats where we find our Blazers. The question isn't what you or I would do, it's what will the team do? 6'2 190 lb guys struggle to match up/guard most of the league's players and like the CJ & Dame duo prior, both guys have shown they're much more effective as the lead with the ball in their hands then off ball in a supporting role. Trying to ram a square peg (Ant) into that round hole (Portland's SG spot) because they had to pay to keep him, puts Portland's young stud in a position to struggle not succeed. Having watched Dame & CJ exploited for most of the past decade, I can't believe there are still PDX fans who want extra helpings of that. Starting both players as an ego stroke makes it much more difficult to effectively stagger their minutes to keep one on the court at all times. Sorry it does. It's a poorly constructed team without contending level talent, but I expect them to at least give it their best shot at winning games. A starting lineup that is undersized at 3 of the 5 spots will predictably struggle to get stops. If they go with that to start the year, I expect that CCB will change things up shortly as the results come in. Above all else the potential to win games is what dictates lineups and PT allotment as it's the coach's job to win with what he's got. My "wishful thinking" is that management recognizes the obvious and is actively exploring it's options at the trade deadline. STOMP
I thought both Winslow and Grant looked good together in the first quarter. Complete opposites of one another, but they mesh well.
Based on the first couple of preseason games, I actually think Winslow fits best with the starters. I definitely would not have picked him earlier in the summer.
not true. Your first post insinuated that he either doesn't watch the game or knows nothing about defense. Go reread your first post dude. He is responding to your abrasive posts in kind. Not the other way around…. Chill pills on isle 7. You seem to be in need.
