As is being competitive for championships.

However, I would say that once a championship is in-hand I relax a bit more about it, knowing that “we got one”. Yes, there is still the thrill of chasing it, but at least you can fall back on the satisfaction that there is at least one in hand. This is said from a long-suffering Minnesota Vikings fan, a team that hasn’t climbed all the way up the mountain . . . yet. Every decent season that falls short feels like a tease. This is in contrast to the Twins where at least I can fall back on the accomplishments of 1987 and 1991.

A title is what these guys play for, nothing less. Probably the biggest problem that I had with the “jailblazers” era with Trader Bob was that none of major contributors (Z-bo I’m looking at you) one on the team was willing to sacrifice their numbers for the betterment of the team. To me that’s what makes Roy special, he is willing to spread the wealth if it means him winning. The kid is wise beyond his years, and I 100% believe Roy can lead this team to a title before it’s all said and done.

Roy’s willingness to play for the betterment of the team, and less-so himself, is contagious and it’s a big part of this team’s great chemistry. If this team lost that drive to win, and to win a title, my enjoyment of the games is severely diminished. I still bleed Red and Black, but it just wouldn’t be the same.

I need to experience the Blazers winning a championship in my lifetime. I would trade the whole team in a heartbeat if I could guarantee a championship. I think that once I get that feeling (if I do), I could feel better about runs like the Blazers had in the 90s— great teams that never win it all.

I really enjoy watching this Blazer team, but I think there’s a high likelihood it never quite makes it to the top, and that scares me. I’d make any move that increases the chances that it will.

That I highly respect rooting for the current team, and not wanting to change out the whole roster simply for the benefit of the cance at a championship.

But this view should not cloud the fact that a championship is what we want, and the reason we love this squad is because they could bring us one, and without the baggage.

I agree that if the championship meter is at 0%, a lot of the thrill of the game is gone. However, if you knew there was a 100% chance of winning a championship wouldn’t that take a lot of the thrill out of it? To me that would be like TiVoing a game, only to have someone ruin the ending for me before I’ve watched it. I’m still going to enjoy it, especially if my team wins. However, some of the edge, the excitement of every basket or good defensive play made by the Blazers and the angst of everything the other team does well would be dulled. While I would still enjoy winning the championship, I think a lot of the excitement and joy that comes from winning it comes from the uncertainty built into the outcome. I would love a championship, but nothing in life is guaranteed. As long as the team is competing and doing their jobs to the best of their ability I will be happy.But I consider management as part of the team as well. They need to be doing their jobs as well, looking to improve the team, including trading players. I am fine with this as long as it is done keeping the idea of improving the team in mind, rather than just making moves to make moves. I don’t want to look back after this era of the Blazers comes to a close and say “if only…” Hopefully this makes some kind of sense. I’m taking a break from writing a paper on Vygotsky’s cognitive development theory

I would love for the Blazers to get a ring but i love being an underdog. There is something special about being a fan through the low years and getting rewarded with an eventual championship. (Believe me, I’m still waiting on the Lions to get a Lombardi Trophy). I would only want to change just enough pieces to get a championship but not have it be a sure thing.

In my dream world we would win the championship with most of our current squad intact. I want to win one while we are still the underdog. After that, it’s all icing.

I am enjoying the journey as long as I feel we are generally moving in the right direction. What can I say, I grew up on Hoosiers.

when.

But if we ain’t working for a title, then it is almost pointless.

When I see another team building around pieces that they like but they are clearly NOT championship-level players, I just say, “what’s the point?”. Yeah, you can like those guys and they are yours, but if you’re just going for mediocrity and not the big enchilada… that is lame. And boring.

I think you can have it both ways, like what we got cooking now. We love our guys, they are awesome to watch and to enjoy as fans and as kids at heart, but we also know they are working for something higher which gives some MEANING to the team.

I can enjoy an early 00’s Clippers team, a team that was fun but had no chance of being more than decent at its peak, or the WE BELIEVE Warriors team— but only as a peripheral fan. If they were my main team, I would be nothing but annoyed because the nice moments are superfluous. They are obviously, ultimately, meaningless, since a title is not even a remote possibility.

If ya fail at getting the title, I will still love this team and enjoy watching them. It wouldn’t have been a waste of time… as long as we were always trying for the title, and not just trying to stay afloat or just be okay.

If your core can’t ever feasibly win a title, then blow it up and start over, no matter how much we “like” the players. Because it is a waste of time in a league where the point is to win the championship.

Mortimer

If there ever was a team that sold itself out to get a ring, it was that Boston team and he said as a fan, it was absolutely worth it.

If I have to get rid of a player to fight for a title I´ll do it. That´s not new. The paths of glory are full of corpses.

The problem stands in the conditional: do we really have to get rid of some players? Why? Who are they? Who should take their place?

There is a 1 in 30 chance of winning and that’s if the team is actually a contender. I want the Blazers to win it all and I think it is the ultimate goal but saying it is the, “only meaningful goal of a professional sports team,” is very short sighted. The fan experience, the way a kid from Make a Wish responds to meeting a player, the emotional bond that fans build with the players and organization are also meaningful.

You put together what you think gives you the best shot, after that, it’s the thrill of the ride.
But nobody……nobody, plays for second best.

As I’ve said before, I don’t regret the Drexler era Blazers because they didn’t win. If I had the magic championship meter pointed at them early on and discovered they never would win, well yeah that would change things. But that is the point. You don’t have the magic meter and you don’t know. That’s why we watch and hope and cheer and gnash our teeth.

That’s part of the plot that keeps the story interesting. But the Blazers’ story that I have been watching doesn’t start over each season. Rather, it takes place over multiple years. It has been engaging in that story that has made me a fan. I want to see what happens next. I want to read what’s on the next page. All the fun gets taken out of it when you read the last page, or know if you are going to win a championship or not. If there was a meter, as a fan, I wouldn’t want to look at it. However, I think I would want the GM to do so.

I do expect the Blazers to always be improving, trying to reach that goal. I’m not worries as much if they make it or not, but that they try to push the story further. Getting only good enough to make the playoffs and stalling out would make for a dry story though.

Looking at it this way, though, makes it hard to make those necessary trades. It’s like getting attached to a character in a book only to have him killed off by the author. But even in those cases, if that character’s death pushes the story onwards, then it was a good move. I didn’t want to see Jack traded last year, but has proven critical to the Blazers’ plotline, who now have Rudy in that role, doing a better job.

The last few years have been exciting to watch, and I hope that trend continues.

ala the late 80’s / early 90’s

those are still great memories even w/o the title

I vote for building a championship contender. I don’t care if we win it all, so long as that is the aim. And, players acquisition coincides with the culture of the team.

but I don’t want to see just any guys in blazers jerseys win, I want to see a group of guys improve, grow, and develop chemistry to win. I would not want to just trade every guy on the team for a new team that would win a guaranteed title. I would trade some guys, that’s part of the game, but only if it was for someone is not only good himself but who makes the other players better, and who adds to the team as a whole. I wouldn’t want the best player in the world if the team then just won a title by watching him do it all. It would be better to see they guys you know and have watched for a while improve enough to win. Otherwise why not just rent an apartment in june in the city of the team you think will win, and then just be all “yeah, my team just won!”

I think that why having a character group of guys is important. I don’t mind the 1st round exits or the almost made it’s. As long as I don’t have to deal with that and a bunch of crud in the media. That is why I was lost as a blazer fan before the K.P. erea. That team had a 0.0% on the champ’o’ meter and that for sure wasn’t fun anymore. And call me a casual fan or a band wagoner I just couldn’t stick with the jail blazer teams.

Put these in order of most desirable, best to worst, looking at 3 factors. Good guys vs. knuckleheads. Guys that have grown with the team (long term) vs. guys that the team traded the future for (short term). Title winners, contenders or also rans. Here’s mine.

1) Long term team of good guys that contends for years, wins one or more titles.
2) Long term team of good guys that contends for years and never wins a title.
3) Short term team of good guys built for one title shot and wins.
4) Long term team of knuckleheads that contends for years, wins one or more titles.
5) Long term team of good guys that never contend.
6) Short term team of knuckleheads built for one title shot and wins.
7) Short term team of good guys built for one title shot but doesn’t win.
8) Short term team of knuckleheads built for one title shot but doesn’t win.
9) Long term team of knuckleheads that never contend.

So I value the character of the team and the players tenure with the team pretty highly as compared to winning.

I object to the thought experiment proposed. Having a championship detector would take away some of the joy of following the Blazers whether it said they would never win or if it said they would win. If we found out that they would never win a championship, yes, that would make me more willing to move players to get there. On the other hand, what if the championship detector should us, in a flash, exactly how the Blazers would win the championship? That’s the equivalent amount of information as knowing they would never win. It would be nice to know that they would win, but it would make it less exciting to watch them win it. The suspense of not knowing what will happen is one of the things that makes sports exciting.

So, here is the thought experiment that I would propose: would you be willing to make a trade that not only improves the chances that the Blazers win a championship, but guarantees that they win a 1 championship in the next three years and that shows you (as well as all Blazer fans), at the moment you decide to make the trade, exactly how and when they win and well as the knowledge that they will not win in other seasons? I wouldn’t. I prefer to live in my world as it is.

A championship is most important.

That said, some are better than others. IF the blazers had won in 2000 then I would have been happy and it would have white washed over issues. Still, IF Roy and team were to win, I’d love that win so much better for the journey and the character of people representing this town.

If trading people makes for a championship, yes I do it.

If trading for a cancer puts the chances higher but for a shorter duration, then no I don’t do it. It’s all a balancing act.

Will I love these blazers if they fail, probably. Will I be VERY disappointed? An emphatic yes.

Now that he’s established himself as a star, even a Superstar I would say, he wants to win and he wants to do it soon.

Each of the last 3 years (even the 30 winner) has been fun because you’ve seen the team grow. The problem is that means next year second round, year after third round, year after finals, year after title. If we’re not winning a title in 4 years, it means we’ve quit improving, and going backwards is no fun at all. It will happen someday of course, but I don’t have to like it.

So basically, for now I’m okay not winning titles, but once we go to WCF or Finals and lose, I will definitely want a title the next year because stagnating isn’t any fun.

At its root, professional sports is about winning.

Professional sports is about entertainment. Overall if it’s not entertaining, no one watches, and then no one gets paid. Pure competition with no regards for spectacle only exists in things like amateur wrestling (sorry rulan) and look at how popular that is. Pro sports are just soap operas for men.
fan 1
fan 2
(vids above have curse words)

I don’t know all the economics of the NBA, but I know some of the NFL. The Colts have lost money the past five years, including the Superbowl winning team. The Bengals have earned money for the past 19. Mike Brown, owner of the Bengals is under no pressure to win, the team is honestly his main source of income (he also employs basically his entire family in the front office).

Most professional owners do end up making money, but it’s mainly only once they eventually sell. The only way things go bad for them is if pass on, and will the team to their children, what with the tax laws on inheritance.

I like to watch Brandon. I like to watch LaMarcus. I like how this team has built in the draft. I didn’t enjoy watching the old traderbob teams that were built like the steinbrenner Yankees. I did not even really care about the epic collapse in game 7, since I only really liked detlef and sabonis (I liked Grant a little, but only b/c I know his friends from back home in Ohio). I had no emotional tie to that team, and so there was no worry.

I watch sports to enjoy the game in that instant, living in the now. Win or lose, I want to be entertained. This is the main reason I find the majority of the trade discussions on here only amusing when tominhawaii or myself take them way less seriously. Swapping half the roster for an aging superstar is what teams from annoying cities that feel entitled to victory do.

I do not have to see us win it all to consider it a successful season. I drop my expectations down a notch. A successful, ecstatic season to me is playing in the Western Conference Finals. That’s the cake. A tastier cake is actually playing in the finals.

If we have the players capable of fairly consistently getting us that cake—— even without the frosting of a championship, I’d be good with not drastically altering the ingredients.

“Standing Pat” Can bite you in the rear end. That is why I made the post about Artest. Puts us in contention next year.

We will find out what KP thinks of Bayless very soon. We need an upgrade at starting PG. We need to know if Nate is going to be stubborn about needing a big PG(Like Rodney Stuckey) or if he will actually play a 6’1" guy(Like Mike Conley).

Winning a title is great,
but what I most love is WATCHING the team play. As long as I see players I like playing the exciting brand of basketball I like (which the Blazers do), then it’s game-by-game for me.

And besides, the “do things to get better” routine is how we ended up in the whole Jail-Blazer debacle. You may say that KP is savvier than Whitsitt was about personalities and such, but we’re still talking about the same type of thinking – doing “whatever it takes” to make the team better. Personalities, egos, lawfulness, those are just special cases of the types of deterioration that can happen when you put winning first. Maybe it could be complacency; the inability to win the ‘big game’, whatever. When you put winning first, you define your success – and your ability to enjoy – on if winning happens. That’s not how any of us learned to PLAY sports, so why should we have a different attitude as fans towards watching sports?

and I’m not much interested in watching guys play who don’t seem to want to win won, nor am I interested in watching guys play who want to win one but have zero chance.

But that still leaves a lot of chances to watch good basketball.

My main disagreement with the “championship now” tribe is the assumption that there is a way to get one now, if only the right trades were made and the right pieces shuffled.

If the team isn’t good enough to win a championship, it probably isn’t good enough to trade for a team good enough to win a championship.

What’s needed is growth, and that needs patience.

that if we knew that our team was never going to win a ring, would we still watch and follow the team. I thought it was a terrible question. the entire reason why I watch the game is for the chance to see a championship, the mystery of whether or not we will win a ring is what makes watching this team so addicting. sports has the ultimate level of randomness and flare for the unpredictable, that’’s why we watch.

Grant Hill.

Rather have the steady, vet Grant Hill, playing backup 3 behind Batum. Then the unpredictable, 24 year old Travis Outlaw? Can a swap(With Phoenix) like that land us a falling player in the draft like DeJuan Blair or Brandon Jennings?

Antonio McDyess.

How can you put this?… Still ballin. Knows his role & does it about as good as anyone in terms of a reserve PF. Whoever we decide to draft(good time to do so) for the 3rd PF spot, will be better having McDyess on this roster.Could we pry Stuckey from them? http://espn.go.com/nba/players/profile?playerId=3235

But I think the concept that only the ultimate winner (in whatever arbitrary matchup decides that) is the only one that matters, and that all other achievements are worthless in light of that is one of the fundamental problems with our culture. As if the silver medalist who came in .001 second behind the gold medalist is completely without virtue or skill, and the rest of their life is garbage. It’s a supremely shallow view in my opinion, and one that breeds both stress to achieve without valuing the journey to get there, AND sets up for utter disappointment and failure 99.99% of people working their butts off for the same goal who just happen to not be the ultimate in the world on the given night a trophy is handed out.

While I want a championship for the team, we can’t go into the ensuing years of fandom viewing it with the same hindsight view as some view draft picks BEFORE it even plays out. Thus it’s a useless exercise to imagine a team with or without a trophy on down the road other than to torment ourselves or ensconce ourselves in our divisive homer/cynic roles. Let the team play.

For the record, I’d take a decade of elite status with no rings over winning one and then being ousted in round one for 9 years.

However, I do disagree with Dave’s assertion that:

At its root, professional sports is about winning.

I know what Dave’s saying, but to me professional sports is about entertainment. Yes, winning is a big part of that entertainment, and it can become more than entertainment to certain fans, but it’s really about the moment and the journey than the end result. Otherwise, why would we watch the game? Just look up the score at the end of the game. Or for that matter, look at the standings at the end of the season. Thinking of that puts it in perspective—it’s about the entertainment, the grace and power of the athletes, the edge-of-your-seat moments—not all about the number at the end of the game.

I enjoy the games as they’re played, win or lose—play hard, try hard, aim for a championship (of course), but that old cliche “it’s not whether you win or lose it’s how you play the game” is exactly right. I enjoy basketball for basketball, not for Blazers winning every time.

With that said, I want this team to be good as much as the next guy. I do enjoy the winning, but it’s just a part of the experience for me.

this team won 54 times. add webster, get growth from oden and bayless, and they’re probably good for 58. to me, that means don’t bother making a move unless it is for a dream team caliber player. but to get quality, quality has to be moved. so the idea of aldredge for chris paul, while signing david lee to be the 4 is probably the type of move that needs to happen if anything.

more importantly, we need to show some creativity on offense. all the things they say about cleveland is true about the blazers. unless nate steps up we won’t be able to beat another good team 4 out of 7.

…. Yes and yes.

However I don’t think he’s framed the issue completely.

Should it be the goal of the team to win a championship? Yes.

Would we as fans, if it was up to us, be willing to trade away anyone, if we thought it would make a real improvement in the team’s chances to win a title? Yes again.

But the unasked question is – For the fans, is a championship the only meaningful goal. That is a completely different question than what Dave asks. And my answer also differs from above.

No. For us fans, watching the team win a title should not be the “only” meaningful goal. That’s not to say it shouldn’t be one. But if that’s the only one, then I’m not sure how much of a fan you are. Maybe that’s not a good way to put it. I guess I’m trying to say that there is more to following a team and rooting for it than seeing them win titles. Championships are an award to us fans for supporting our team. They are not our due. If they are, then a fan should only root for those teams that always win titles.

Think about it. Everyone here who believes that AS FANS, the only meaningful goal is a championship might as well don the purple and gold and let everyone know what they really are – Laker’s fans (or Red Sox or Yankees or Cowboys, etc).

I watch other teams play all the time… just to enjoy how the game is played.

and these blazers (assuming Dave’s premise of 0% chance of winning it all), I’ll take these blazers. Now, if these blazers knew they had a 0% chance of winning it all, that’d probably change how they played, but never mind that. Maybe I’m still too close to the whitsit, bonzi, sheed, rider, pippen blazers, but (both eras holding the assumption that they could win it all) I’d take this era of blazers every day of the week.
Do I expect them to operate with winning it all in mind? Yes!
Would I still root for them if they weren’t going to win it all? As of now, yes!

If it took a jailblazers that hate their own fans, disrespect themselves and the game, and just aren’t likable at all to win a championship while a lovable group like this one would never win the trophy even if they might get far…

Well, I feel like we blazers-fans are less ignorant when it comes to this choice. Obviously I would never sit down and just take it like a man, I would want to make changes to win the trophy, but if you look at the extreme, no, I would rather have a moderately-succesful lovable team that never wins over the “deal with the devil” team.

There is obviously a lot of gray area though, and I agree that we should never “settle”. For the most part, actions that bring us closer to winning are obviously the best actions to take. But there IS a line.

I think 99.9% of us would chose to shake up the team if the was 0% chance of winning a Title. I think a better premise is this: Suppose you hooked up your Champ-o-meter and it said 37% of a title with the current squad and 77% with a total remodel including a bunch old mercenaries. Would you make that change??

PS I have been playing Tiger Wood 09 on PS3. It has a feature (on the lower difficulty levels) that will show you the result of a putt after you line it up. The caveat is that you can only use it once. If it shows that you will make the putt you just go ahead and do it. However if it shows that you miss it long and left….you can make your adjustment but not check it again to see if the adjustment works. You just have to take your chances. For some reason this reminds me of this discussion…can’t say why