Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: Explaining Jeremy Lin's Early, Surprising Success

Titles?

Down to brass tacks, putting the rubber to the road...here's the question of the hour, especially as people go back and forth about moves that the Blazers should or shouldn't make:

Do you think the Blazers have the capability of winning an NBA Championship in the next five years as they are currently constituted?

Granted one or two moves are certain to come, but assume that the core remains the same as you consider the question.  Our new GM has inferred the answer is no.  What's your take?

Bonus Question:  If the Blazers could get Chris Paul (and I'll believe that the exact moment I see it) at the cost of Nicolas Batum, another young guy, and some contracts but leaving the Big Three intact, would that change your answer?

Have at it.

--Dave (blazersub@yahoo.com) 

Note:  This is NOT a Chris Paul trade suggestion thread.  We've done that already.  The question is simple:  Would acquiring Chris Paul change your assessment of Portland's championship chances?

Comment 109 comments  |  0 recs  | 

Do you like this story?

Comments

Display:

i can see what Cho is saying

But I’m still hopeful.

Chris Paul for those pieces? Yes of course. Absolutely. No question.

You're saying that they look like they're giving it their all. And you know why they look that way? Because they're bad, and it literally takes them the maximum physical effort to accomplish basic baseball tasks like throwing the ball from short to first. When David Eckstein throws the ball to first base, he has to wind up like a shot-putter, spin around forty-three times, and launch it at an angle 89 degrees from the horizontal. Afterwards, he undergoes an IV drip for a fortnight and he's so out of breath that he requires several months of acupuncture to regain the power of speech. For this we laud him. -Junior of Deadspin on 'scrappy' players

by TheOdenator on Jul 23, 2010 12:14 AM PDT via mobile reply actions  

Can we win a championship with the current roster?

If we can stay healthy, I say yes. Oden is the x-factor. Would I trade for Chris Paul if it meant including Batum in the deal? It’s close, but I don’t think you can pass up the opportunity to trade for the best PG in the league.

"Nicolas! You're the strongest boy in the world!"

by ericking on Jul 23, 2010 12:14 AM PDT reply actions  

Buy out of Przy and bring him back

He can re-sign with the Blazers 30-days later. If they trade Batum, the trade should include Posey who can start at 3 until the Blazers find a full-time replacement (Claver?)

by ORDucktape on Jul 23, 2010 2:48 AM PDT up reply actions  

I'd certainly rather loose Camby and Pryz than Oden or Batum

This is a total no-brainer. I doubt NO does this deal, but I would absolutely love it.

by upper left corner on Jul 23, 2010 6:59 AM PDT up reply actions  

i think its funny how highly us blazers fans overvalue our own players.

assuming you can get CP3 to ink an extension with the deal, how is it possible that you don’t trade batum for CP3 is beyond me.

Roy is a perrenial all-star, but HOF? Maybe. CP3? Yes. Yes he’s in the hall of fame no doubt.

Please, for the love of all that is holy, please stop using the following: "Book it.", "FTW", "Epic" & "Fail".

...no seriously--stop.

by nima on Jul 23, 2010 2:51 AM PDT up reply actions  

Not overvaluing Batum

I think most who are hesitant just witnessed what happened to the Cavs and would rather lock up Batum and watch him for 7 to 10 years than ship him out for a rental player for 2 years, no matter how good he is.

PTB Liberation Day - 2/10/04

by tssbro on Jul 23, 2010 7:07 AM PDT via mobile up reply actions  

?

how is it possible that you don’t trade batum for CP3 is beyond me.

I said I would trade Batum, but that the deal would be close.

Also, what do you think the odds of him signing an extension are? I think if we do trade for Paul and want him to stay, we need to either win a championship or come very close to winning one, otherwise he’s gone.

"Nicolas! You're the strongest boy in the world!"

by ericking on Jul 23, 2010 8:16 AM PDT up reply actions  

I agree with our new GM

It could happen, but it would take lots of good luck. With all of our guys healthy, we’re a very good team. Unfortunately, there are a number of other very good teams. We need a little more to make us a great team and have a better chance.

As for the bonus question. Say we lose Batum, Jerryd, Andre, Joel and other minor pieces, that is a major upgrade. Instant contenders for sure. That basically makes us the Heat of the west, with Paul, Brandon and Greg. Even after the gutting from the trade, we still probably have a better supporting cast. Unfortunately, I don’t see a very good chance of it happening. That being said, I’ll leave myself open to being pleasantly surprised.

Still on the Rex bandwagon.

by dan_the_man on Jul 23, 2010 12:14 AM PDT reply actions  

Sure doesn't feel like it.

As much as I believe in many of the pieces, the last year or so fills my head with doubts and visions of a team built around chronically injury-prone “stars” that may never get the chance to properly mesh.

by trevorthegreat on Jul 23, 2010 12:15 AM PDT reply actions  

How long, gentlemen?

And what will we recognize the squad if we ever get there?

encrypted to prevent harvest by spam bots.

by JuwanMVPHoward on Jul 23, 2010 12:15 AM PDT reply actions  

LOL

That’s what happens when you try to say the same thing two ways.

—Dave

by Dave on Jul 23, 2010 12:17 AM PDT up reply actions  

I figured that was the case. It was just calling to me though.

Also, while I have your attention, when did he say he didn’t think we could get a championship as constructed? Did I miss a story?

encrypted to prevent harvest by spam bots.

by JuwanMVPHoward on Jul 23, 2010 12:23 AM PDT up reply actions  

Thanks for catching it!

It’s a lot easier when people tell me about my goofs than finding them out 16 hours later when thousands of readers have already seen them.

As for your other question, I believe it was part of his opening day stuff.

—Dave

by Dave on Jul 23, 2010 12:37 AM PDT up reply actions  

Though it may have been indirect

I’m struggling to remember the exact comments and at 20 minutes shy of 1:00 a.m. I’m not keen on finding them.

—Dave

by Dave on Jul 23, 2010 12:39 AM PDT up reply actions  

In deference

I have changed the verb to “inferred”. So I can go to bed, that is.

—Dave

by Dave on Jul 23, 2010 12:41 AM PDT up reply actions  

Haha fair enough, I didn't mean to call you out,

I just wanted to watch/read whatever source it was from. Good night.

encrypted to prevent harvest by spam bots.

by JuwanMVPHoward on Jul 23, 2010 12:44 AM PDT up reply actions  

OK...here you go

From Ben’s earlier piece about six posts down…Day 1 of the Cho regime:

Any discussion of playoff expectations left Cho similarly cautious. Asked if the Blazers had enough talent to be considered the Northwest Divison favorites, Cho refused to over-sell. “It’s hard to say. A lot of it – we’ll see what happens with the injuries. I hope we’re in the thick of things and I’m going to do everything I can to improve the roster and hopefully take another step.” He also said he had no championship-or-bust mandate from Allen. “It’s more make progress from where we’ve been. He didn’t set any timelines.”

—Dave

by Dave on Jul 23, 2010 12:52 AM PDT up reply actions  

Thank you very much!

You are indeed a gentleman and a scholar.

encrypted to prevent harvest by spam bots.

by JuwanMVPHoward on Jul 23, 2010 1:34 AM PDT up reply actions  

I do NOT trade Oden as part of the package

Look, as I just posted over at O-live; I’d love to have Paul for some of our assets as long as none of them are Roy, LMA, Batum or Greg.

Other than that, let’s do this. CP3 would be amazing with those four!!! Forget Miami; that starting 5 would devour ring after ring after ring…. right off Pat Riley’s fingers!!!! Muaahhaaha.

"I come to you now, at the turn of the tide." -- Brandon "Gandalf" Roy, April 24th, 2010

by RedUniInLA on Jul 23, 2010 12:18 AM PDT reply actions  

rec

The only way this actually nets a champtionship is if that core stays intact. How many champtionships did Paul win over at NO? You have to have a strong core and a strong support bench – you simply can’t go all the way without it.

by Sonic Boom on Jul 23, 2010 6:44 AM PDT up reply actions  

wow

wow, lets just trade the water boy!!! again we are overrating our players. we want to pay 100 a month on a brand new car worth 40,000 we will have give to get!! but i say we roll the dice..a number of combinations will work…keep Roy and as much as you can but no one is safe in this trade!! …I dont think we are a great team currently..we all know we are a good team..look at it this way you have 3-4 teams on the east that could beat us. we have to adjust if we want the whole prize!! roll the dice, the risk is worth it….

by Danvegas on Jul 23, 2010 7:47 AM PDT up reply actions  

as constructed right now.....

no.

with minor trades here there I don’t belive so….the blazers need to learn a few things before competing for a title….

1. they need to learn how to man up and take in accountability for their mistakes.
2. everysingle player needs to know their roles. they need to perfect their roles. they need to know what to do every single night. every player needs to be consistent and bring it on the floor from the starters to the bench players.
3. they need to toughen up. hustle for every play, every opportunity, every loose ball. they need to hit back and hit back hard.

and for the second question, I think yes if they move to eight pieces to obtain cp3, this team can win a tittle. but u need to keep oden, u need oden to be there to match up with LA, Boston, Orlando and Miami. if u bring in cp but get rid of oden…. I don’t see them making it to the finals and loosing in the western confrencefinals every year.

by Hoi on Jul 23, 2010 12:24 AM PDT via mobile reply actions  

what scenario is more frightening?

our lineup a few years from now after miller retires, or our lineup after paul leaves us for new york?

by DefenderOfPants on Jul 23, 2010 12:26 AM PDT reply actions  

wrong nightmare

the nightmare is Miller still here in two years…

by blacknoiseNW on Jul 23, 2010 1:19 AM PDT up reply actions   1 recs

Remember

i believe we would only get CP for 2 years with his current contract. Losing Batum would hurt if CP decided to leave after 2.

by agwright1183 on Jul 23, 2010 12:27 AM PDT reply actions  

i think

it’s harder for Portland to get players in than out. once players get here they start loving the fans the team n the place.

for example everyone thought camby would leave but instead 1 game into the playoffs he signs an extention.

unless ur Spanish lol ud love it here and would stay.

by Hoi on Jul 23, 2010 12:36 AM PDT via mobile up reply actions  

He is already getting $15 million. He just needs to be extended.

Portland would have his Bird rights and the ability to re-sign him even if we are in luxury tax territory.

The only complicating factor would be the new CBA.

by upper left corner on Jul 23, 2010 8:05 AM PDT up reply actions  

I think a core of (healthy) Oden, LMA, and Roy is good enough to compete. But the role players around them are going to have to be solid, and either Oden or LMA is going to have to play at an all-star level. Roy at his best is not good enough for this team to win in the playoffs. The Big 3 all need to play to their potential, and the role players around them need to be content with their roles, if this team is going to win big.

Batum is great and has a very bright future, I think he has the potential to be a special player on both ends of the floor. But Chris Paul is not only rare, he’s an all-star right now, not someday in the future. As much as I like Batum, we can find another guy who can hit 3’s and play defense, in fact we just signed one. As we’ve seen, finding a starting point guard is hard, and a true star is incredibly difficult to find. Not only that, but Chris Paul fits our system and our players well; he doesn’t need to run and gun like some guys we’ve looked at, and he knows how to get the ball into the paint, which is going to be key if Oden stays healthy.

I think we have a lot of quality parts right now, but it’s anyone’s guess whether or not they come together to create a real contender in the playoffs. Adding Paul, even if it costs us Batum, increases our chances of reaching that level.

by JonathanPDX on Jul 23, 2010 12:32 AM PDT reply actions  

Championship with current core depends on Bayless and Oden

Bayless must continue to develop and Oden must stay healthy. I am a Bayless supporter and believe there is little doubt he will develop into an ideal compliment for Roy. Regarding Oden, since there is no pattern to injury history, I have to be optimistic but some players (especially big guys it seems) are just unlucky.

Paul for any players except Roy or Oden will make Portland an immediate championship contender. However, I do not believe Portland can get Paul without taking back Okafor and I don’t believe NO has any interest in Aldridge (owed too much $$\ duplicates West) or Camby (too old for a rebuilding team). So for the money to work the deal has to be essentially Paul and Okafor for Oden, Miller, Prysbilla and some combination of Batum, Bayless, and Fernandez. If Portland keeps Batum and/or Bayless, I actually think it’s a pretty even trade. It probably makes Portland better for the two years (Blazer fans undervalue Okafor) but a healthy Oden might make NO dominant for the rest of the decade. I’m optimistic about Bayless and Oden, so I don’t trade Oden to get Paul but I could sure understand if the Blazer brass saw it differently. Paul would make Portland a contender NOW and Okafor/Camby would make a really good (but not great) center tandem.

by chemistrymajor on Jul 23, 2010 12:37 AM PDT reply actions  

I really don't think we should trade based on talent expendability, but based on toughness.

Keep tougher players like Batum and Pryz. Keep the ones that’ll play with competitiveness and spirit. I like Miller that way too. Surround people with offensive fireworks, sure, but at the cost of the teams’ backbone?

by panfolk on Jul 23, 2010 12:38 AM PDT reply actions   1 recs

i like our chances

but it’s difficult to say… i mean, we haven’t even seen what our starting five look like together.

by DefenderOfPants on Jul 23, 2010 12:42 AM PDT reply actions  

Long shot without 1 more move

Without Chris Paul or another star acquired in a trade, we have to rely on the potential of Oden and Batum (and/or the other young players) blossoming in the next couple years. I don’t see Batum becoming any more than a brilliant role player, not another Pippen, in the next 5 years. Oden is our best bet, but I think he’s a long shot. He’s got a good chance of being healthy, but not of being healthy and being all-star caliber.

If we can get CP3 for Batum and others, I’d say go for it. Just because that trade didn’t pan out before doesn’t mean it won’t look better to the Hornets later on. And we definitely can’t let one of the other possible destination teams acquire him. If Dallas got him, it’d be that much harder to get a title in the next 5 years.

by mjohn on Jul 23, 2010 12:46 AM PDT reply actions  

Shortsited

Batum was being held back (per Monty’s comment) to function solely as a role player.

This coming season’s performance from Batum would displace
any of the doubt that Batum is just a role player.

by spencerbutte on Jul 23, 2010 8:16 AM PDT up reply actions  

?
…but not of being healthy and being all-star caliber.

You mean, he will be healthy if he doesn’t play?

by blacknoiseNW on Jul 23, 2010 8:23 AM PDT up reply actions  

Yes.

Next question.

facebook.com/year5000

by Y5k on Jul 23, 2010 12:56 AM PDT reply actions  

LMA, GO, and BR need to expand their game

Roy needs to become as crafty on defense as he is on offense. Take charges and learn how to flop. He loves Kobe so much, learn how to throw elbows.

Aldridge needs to become a skilled a defender as he is an offender offensive player. Take charges and learn how to flop. Get nasty. Stop trying to be so cool all the time.

Oden needs to gain experience, and learn from the team’s best players. But if Roy and Aldridge don’t change, they’ll be terrible role models. Oden will wind up a 1-dimensional, 1-way player. That can’t happen if they Blazers want to win a title.

I think the most important internal change that has to happen is a shift in the way McMillan manages the team. He needs to hold Roy and Aldridge to the same standard as everybody else, at least. He really ought to demand more from his best players.

The Blazers don’t need to add more pieces. They need to improve internally.

"I've hacked into your brain. You're throwing a party and no one's showing up."

by ignign*kt on Jul 23, 2010 12:59 AM PDT reply actions  

coach Nate needs to call coach monty

tell him….“yo Monty u know u owe me right? I let u become a assistant under me and now look ur a head coach! u gotta go convince them to give me CP. I’ll give u ur favorite player…. ;) u can have batum :D. so what u say?”

Monty: “ok! for sure! im on it! only if u throw in Rudy!”

Nate:" oh yah u can have him too! i’ll even go call sergio up and tell him to come back and u can have him too!"

Monty: “deal!!!!!”

by Hoi on Jul 23, 2010 1:06 AM PDT via mobile reply actions  

a trade NO might consider without us having to take on contracts..

plus we solve the guard clutter. I don’t like losing on of the supposed “Big 3” but we’d still be a dynamic and successful team if we got Pryz back healthy as his agent suggested he will be. I’m bracing for the boos.

http://games.espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=27b4eln

Paul / Johnson / Mills
Roy / Matthews / Williams
Batum / Babbitt
Aldridge / Cunningham
Camby / Pryzbilla / Pendergraph

As anyone knows we will be losing depth with this trade… I think it’d be for the better by All Star Break

by panfolk on Jul 23, 2010 1:30 AM PDT reply actions  

Argh..

this wasn’t supposed to be a trade thread. It’s infectious. It must be since I really am reserving judgement on whether the Blazers can make it until I see the team healthy for a few games.

by panfolk on Jul 23, 2010 1:55 AM PDT up reply actions  

Yes.

There is a chance. If Oden stays relatively healthy. say 70 games/year for the next 5 years, we should be right there. Even if Bayless or Batum don’t improve a whit, a healthy Greg Oden puts us in or very close to the NBA Finals.

If we get CP3 without giving up one of our big three, (pardon the expression) no durr we’re contenders! Haha. Unless he and BRoy get matching knee injuries forever (which I think we’re assuming won’t happen).

You can measure skill and talent with your eyes, but productivity is shown through statistics.

by austinpwnz on Jul 23, 2010 2:18 AM PDT reply actions  

Yes and yes

The roster, as currently constituted could be a legitimate contender for a title, provided Greg Oden remains healthy and plays as well as or better than he was when he got hurt this past season. The other proviso is that McMillan is going to have to do a better job integrating all the pieces on offense. Remember, before all the injuries last season, the Blazers were in a bit of a funk. They were winning as often as not, but the offense had no real flow to it. He’s going to have to open things up.

If the Blazers could do a trade for Chris Paul without giving up Oden, Aldridge, or Roy, then, yes, that absolutely improves their chances to win a title. It still would depend largely on Oden’s ability to remain upright, however. And such a trade would significantly thin out the bench. But Oden, LMA, Matthews, Roy, and Paul would be a terrific line-up (I’m assuming any trade for Paul would necessarily involve Nic Batum).

by hercher on Jul 23, 2010 2:40 AM PDT reply actions  

As currently constituted? That's tough. I say yes but thats only one ring and we

But that does not mean I don’t value Nic and whomever else but if you can keep the Big 3, Roy, LMA, and Oden, and get CP3? Yes I absolutely believe that we can win a championship

Being a Blazer fan is not exactly healthy.

by dpnim on Jul 23, 2010 2:43 AM PDT reply actions  

The changing NBA climate

Can Portland’s team as currently constructed win an NBA title? Yes. It would, however, require several developments to take place which are by no means guaranteed to occur:
1. Greg Oden must become the player everyone thought he would be.
When determining whether or not you can win an NBA title, you have to determine whether or not you have a plan to beat your likeliest opposition. The Miami Heat will be a freakishly physical team that excels at getting to the rim. Beating them will require one of two things: forming a team of equally talented physical perimeter defenders to keep them from getting to the paint; or having a truly elite post defense. A duo of Greg Oden and Marcus Camby be create the elite post defense necessary to defeat Miami in a series.

2. An internal candidate must emerge who can consistently exploit the oppositions greatest weakness.
The two greatest threats to the Blazers chances of winning an NBA title are the Lakers and Heat. Both share a similar weakness: PG play. Steve Blake and Mario Chalmers are by no means world beaters. If a player like Jerryd Bayless could consistently get to the rim against the opposition, it would open up excellent opportunities for others on offense.

The Chris Paul Question***
The answer has to be yes. Even with Chris Paul, I still feel that Portland would need a healthy and productive Greg Oden in order to win a title, but I think Paul gives the team the best opportunity to achieve both necessary ends to win a championship. He could consistently exploit the opposition’s PG’s while using his excellent PNR play to turn Greg Oden into a productive offensive player.

Tony Bennett reports that Minnesota and Portland are swapping draft picks -- Roy to Portland, Foye to Minnesota. That's it? That's the trade? None of the ESPN guys seem remotely fazed. I knew Kevin McHale couldn't just pick the best guy in the draft without somehow screwing it up. I would have bet my Ndudi Ebi rookie cards on it.

by Salem Stephen on Jul 23, 2010 2:45 AM PDT reply actions  

As currently constituted? That's tough. I say yes but thats only one ring and we would have to have things really go our way.

But if you can keep the Big 3, Roy, LMA, and Oden, and get CP3? Yes I absolutely believe that we can win a championship. But that’s simply put.

The way I see it is, Miami has gotten very tough. And contending teams all around are getting tougher to match them, unlike most years this last decade. Teams are really strapping down to get better. We would be ignorant to not do the same.

Being a Blazer fan is not exactly healthy.

by dpnim on Jul 23, 2010 2:47 AM PDT reply actions  

If we insist on the conditions "in the next five years as they are currently constituted," then the answer is probably "No"

This team has declining parts as well as improving parts. Miller and Camby have probably two years at most. We’re not sure about Joel being what he was before injury. So without changing a few pieces, I don’t think we have enough horses to get over Miami, the Lakers, or maybe even the rising Thunder. We can’t stand still and hope for a title.

by jayfisher on Jul 23, 2010 2:47 AM PDT reply actions  

I agree with this

As currently constituted, this team will have big holes in the front line or at point guard. Winning a title without major moves would require a number of things to happen, some more likely than others.

(1) Bayless improves his shooting, defense and distribution (slightly) to become a dynamite fit with Roy.

(2) We are able to acquire a good replacement for Camby without a “major move.”

(3) Oden stays healthy.

(4) Batum patches the rather substantial holes in his defense. He is a defender with immense physical gifts, but seems to drift in and out of games, and is not great in pick and roll situations.

(5) Whoever is coaching the team manages to extract decent effort from Roy and Aldridge on defense.

by atomiccafe on Jul 23, 2010 7:34 AM PDT up reply actions  

Capability as currently constructed?

Yes.

Likelihood? Less so. A lot has to go right. And a lot of hoped for growth and players all reaching potential has to happen. And then you hope for some breaks along the way. Granted we haven’t seen the full healthy team much lately, but it doesn’t feel like we’re there. Perhaps a few years from now, but it’s always easy to fill in that future with optimism, right?

Making a move for C3PO, or one more piece helps the odds. Continued roster improvement is a good direction to go in. Still, it’s no guarantee of titles. I’d hate to see the roster gutted to try and form a competing “super team” of star mercenaries, while getting entirely rid of Your Portland Trail Blazers. Just one opinion. But if it can be done while keeping a certain number of recognizable, homegrown pieces, I’m all for it.

by HowlinJoeWolf on Jul 23, 2010 4:00 AM PDT reply actions  

Capability?

I’d have to say yes, but it would have to be this year and Greg has to be the player he was right before the injury this past season for a relatively full season and all of the playoffs while Camby needs to be the same, and most everyone else needs to be healthy for the playoffs as well. Orlando or Boston should be able to beat Miami this coming year in the playoffs given the lack of talented role players. Next year? They’ll get their center, and it may end up being Przy for the MLE. I shudder to think what a player like him alongside those stars could do. The Lakers I think we would match up quite well with, but we would need a little help like homecourt advantage or Bynum being out or something along those lines. Past next year, there are changes that need to be made, but really only MLE-type consolidations, I believe as a dominant frontcourt will need to be maintained and solid perimeter defense.
If we got CP3 for only Miller, Przy, Batum and Bayless, maybe. DC, Pende, draft picks, Euros, what-have-you instead of Batum would work better, but giving up more frontcourt than Przy pushes our title chances out the window next year. Whatever we give up for CP3 we would need an MLE-type player added to the roster to replace something we lost, and so as constructed we are around the same position giving up something reasonable for CP3 as we have as constructed currently, but thats why NO would consider it, and it would mean we would need less quality added to compete later on.

by avalancheman on Jul 23, 2010 6:10 AM PDT reply actions  

As currently constructed. No

Unless Oden becomes a healthy, non fouling out beast which I have my doubts about all three (not that he won’t be a good center if healthy, I just don’t think he can be all three i.e. beast, healthy and not foul).

With Paul (and we don’t give up Oden or Roy to get him) then yes even if Oden is just a good center. If Oden is included in the deal or is never healthy then no.

Oden is the key either way.

#52

by blazermaniac32 on Jul 23, 2010 6:35 AM PDT reply actions  

Paul? and then a title?

Not so sure he’s the missing piece. Oden wouldn’t benefit from a guard like Paul as much as Aldridge would. So both Roy and LMA would average in the twenty’s, then there is Batum who would, with Paul, or Miller too, benefit from a speeding penetrating guard and score 12 to 14 points a game. Oden is at least ten points a game and Miller (or Paul) score around 10 – 15 pts a game. All of this adds up to 75 or so points a game. With Bayless and the rest of the Bench there is 15(?) points a game. Now the blazers are scoring a minimum of 90 pts a game. Paul is a better shooter than Miller so can score more consistently so it’s possible he can average a little higher than I’ve allotted here.

However, defensively Paul is less a player than Miller so the opponents will score more.

The Blazers become champions when enough of the player’s become difficult to defend. I think individual development and team chemistry need to continue to grow. And then we’ll see.

by 7677maniac on Jul 23, 2010 6:36 AM PDT reply actions  

As constructed: Highly unlikely. With Chris Paul w/o giving up both Oden and Batum: Good chance

And while certainly not an ideal outcome still possible with losing both but replacing Oden with Okafor and Batum with Matthews or a forward to be developed (Dante, Claver, Babbitt) or to be acquired later. Maybe even getting Posey in return would help, though that’s doubtful. Paul is that good, and would really fulfill the cliche of making everyone around him better.

Yes, I think we need another very reliable option that “does some things” for us every night, especially in the playoffs but also in the regular season. Some people might argue Oden will be that second option next to Roy, and while I hope for that I can’t realistically and exclusively build on that hope considering his foul troubles and his injuries. So an additional proven co-star to act as a security valve with Roy out of the All-Star or fringe All-Star category would make this roster much more of a surefire thing to deal with the powers in the West and East that be, and the powers that are rising. And that’s not just the Lakers and Heat or OKC or a possible return of Houston to the playoff echelons, even teams like the formerly lowly Kings have improved a lot. The league doesn’t stop and wait for our championship window with baited breath.

by Norsktroll on Jul 23, 2010 6:53 AM PDT reply actions  

Paul is good - but not that good

I’m sure there are plenty of reasons to object to the use of Win Shares – but that metric is available in per/48 minute numbers for a players entire career (at least those players relevant to this discussion).

What is useful about WS in this case is that it gives us an additive number. The more WS a team has – the higher the winning percentage. Highest winning percentage obviously does not guarantee playoff success – but then there is no magic formula for playoff success. You just build the best team you can and go on from there. At the very least, WS gives us an offensive/defensive composite.

So, if you compare Oden/Batum total contributions to WS (per 48 minutes) – they exceed Paul’s WS/48.

It’s that simple. Paul is not worth the two of them. It would make the Blazers worse. Paul is not good enough to cover for the loss of both.

The Blazer playoff chances hinge solely on chance – i.e., the probability of injury. A healthy Blazer squad for the playoffs is conceivably a championship favorite.

by blacknoiseNW on Jul 23, 2010 7:56 AM PDT up reply actions  

you must also consider who will replace the minutes of Oden and Batum, as well as the fact that you can only count on 24 mpg for Oden, making WS/48 somewhat dubious.

by jksnake99 on Jul 23, 2010 8:04 AM PDT up reply actions  

24 mpg for Oden is a completely arbitrary argument that get's less relevant with time

however, even at 24 mpg, Oden’s total WS would be 8.74, Batum’s 7.421. That add’s up to 16.161. Paul’s best year was 18.3.

You don’t have to add many minutes or improvement before the Oden/Batum combo is better than Paul’s best year ever (a year so good it may never be sniffed again).

In an injury plagued year (for all three), Oden/Batum were just shy of Paul’s numbers (5.7 vs. 7.3).

If I were a betting man, I would bet on Oden/Batum being better than Paul.

by blacknoiseNW on Jul 23, 2010 8:18 AM PDT up reply actions  

Right, but it’s not like we only play four players if we make a two for one trade. Okafor gives you some non-zero number of WS, as would Bayless (assuming he gets some extra time at SG in a few different three guard lineups).

by atomiccafe on Jul 23, 2010 8:28 AM PDT up reply actions  

agreed

Okafor is actually an above average player, although his performance took a drop from respectability in 2008/2009 to slightly above average in 2009/2010.

I’d expect Bayless to be significantly better this season, too – in terms of rate. Miller wasn’t bad last year (good, actually) – but the age hammer is going to drop, eventually.

A full analysis is a pretty daunting exercise when you consider all the possible iterations of available player contributions.

by blacknoiseNW on Jul 23, 2010 9:26 AM PDT up reply actions  

We can't solve this situation by adding up PERs or WS or whatever. That's how Hollinger's crummy trade machine analysis works.

It’s not like an empty void would play where once Batum and Oden would have played. That’s why I said Okafor and a player to replace Batum. They wouldn’t have the same quality (if Oden is healthy that is, and Okafor has been very durable), but they would be very good pieces. Roy has never had a player like Chris Paul, Chris Paul has never had a player like Brandon Roy.
Both could play off each other, and both are unselfish enough to help others on the team get good looks.

by Norsktroll on Jul 23, 2010 8:05 AM PDT up reply actions  

if you want to make the argument that both Paul and Roy would get better if they played together, fine

but I doubt you can make that argument quantitatively. You can object to quantitative analysis all day long – with validity – but that doesn’t mean the concept doesn’t have merit.

We have objective tools that tell us Oden/Batum is better than Paul. A quick and dirty discussion is only going to be so precise, however – and that is the weakness prone to rebuttal.

Remember, however – that even imprecise use of quantitative tools is better than no use at all.

by blacknoiseNW on Jul 23, 2010 8:11 AM PDT up reply actions  

I'm not against quantitative analysis

But it’s a bit simplistic to just add up numbers and assume the team with the highest number will be champion. And your formula is basically 1 + 1 > 1 to argue why replacing Oden and Batum with Paul is a bad move.

Yet we would also replace at least a big part of Batum’s and Oden’s contributions. Let’s say we take win shares/48 as the tool for this exercise like you did, and acquire Okafor and play Matthews at SF (where coincidentally he had a much higher PER, but that is besides the point). Okafor for his career is 0.112, slightly above league average. That’s also what he did last year. Matthews in his rookie season was 0.108 (he arguably also can still get better, just like Batum could). Paul for his career is 0.233.

That adds up to a healthy number, especially once you figure in that with a full season Greg’s and Nic’s numbers likely would have normalized with a few more bad games and gone DOWN a bit, not stayed at that level.

by Norsktroll on Jul 23, 2010 8:29 AM PDT up reply actions  

actual numbers might help (from basketballreference.com)

Chris Paul 2008/2009 had his best WS/48 at .284. He was at .204 last season. For reference, Roy’s best WS/48 was .223 in 2008/2009. Also for reference, .100 is considered league average.

Oden had a .214 WS/48 last season (better than Paul’s). Batum was at .181 WS/48. These are tremendously good numbers for sophomores. Better than Roy or Paul’s sophomore numbers by a wide margin (Roy made the All Star game with a WS/48 of .143).

Just like with other numbers, playing time is a factor in absolute production – but in terms of rates, Oden and Batum are combined to be much better than Paul, and our playoff chances are better with both of them vs. Paul individually. Plus, we can reasonably expect their WS/48 minutes to jump significantly in their third year.

Bottom line is that we have a championship caliber roster if it can stay healthy. If we did trade for Paul or any other “missing piece”, we would want to trade future production for current production in order not to neutralize the trade straight up. Not sure how to do that – but that would have to be the logic behind a move. Ask someone to take a risk on improving on one player’s production with multiple players, albeit one or two years removed.

by blacknoiseNW on Jul 23, 2010 8:08 AM PDT up reply actions  

The primary hole in your analysis is that in a 2 for 1 trade, you don’t end up playing 4 on 5. Someone replaces the minutes. You have to analyze the roster before and after.

For example, let’s assume that Batum would play double the minutes as last year at the same WS/48— giving him 7 win shares. Let’s also assume Oden does something similar (double minutes, same WS/48)— giving him 4.4 win shares.

Let’s now assume that in the trade, Paul replaces Miller’s minutes— that’s 2500 minutes at .204 WS/48— 10.625 win shares. Now let’s subtract Miller’s 7.0 win shares— we can now estimate Paul would give us a 3.6 win share improvement at PG. Let’s now consider who replaces Oden’s and Batum’s minutes after the trade. For simplicity, let’s assume Okafor replaces all of Oden’s and Matthews replaces all of Batum’s (assuming the number of minutes I used above— double Oden’s and Batum’s minutes from last year). By my math, that gives Okafor 2.3 win shares and Matthews 4.1 win shares, so we’d lose 2.1 win shares at C and 2.9 win shares at SF— so by this math the trade does make us 1.4 win shares worse (+3.6 – 2.1 – 2.9 = -1.4). However, if we assume Paul returns to his form from the previous year and racks up ~18 win shares, the trade makes us significantly better. By the same token, if you assume great health for Oden and that he plays 4 times the minutes he did last year, you can make the math be anti-trade.

I don’t think I’ve proved by that we should make the trade here by any stretch of the imagination. I only mean to show its not nearly as clear cut as you’ve indicated.

by jksnake99 on Jul 23, 2010 9:10 AM PDT up reply actions  

no disagreement

full analysis is certainly complex – but the fundamental premise is still the same – net performance/production.

You take it another step, here – and reveal a real issue with regards to projection: answers are all based on assumptions.

by blacknoiseNW on Jul 23, 2010 9:46 AM PDT up reply actions  

Very very flawed use of advanced stats.

WS48 is already a bad stat, but you use it in ways that it wasn’t intended. Let’s take a very very simple example.

Michael Jordan. GOAT. Peak WS48 of .321 in 1990-91 (his first title year).
Two players the blazers had at the time whose WS48 exceeded .321 when added: Danny Ainge (.175) and Buck Williams (.158). Ergo, you would’ve advised against trading Ainge and Buck for MJ. Fantastic analysis.

Or let’s take a trade that did happen. One of the worst trades in history is taken to be Barkley for the pupu platter. Barkley the season before the trade – WS .205. Hornacek – .181, Lang – .140, Perry .110. Shoot, the Suns are screwed! They gave up WS48 of .431 for a player that had a WS of .205! Sixers must’ve been awesome!

But of course, the exact opposite is true. The Suns improved 9 games and went from being bounced in the second round to the finals. Sixers lost 9 more games than the previous season.

by howlingfantods on Jul 23, 2010 2:09 PM PDT up reply actions  

with great power comes great responsibility

Danny Ainge and Buck Williams would beat Jordan 2v1 one hundred times out of one hundred! (but that isn’t the point of the exercise…)

However, let’s take your Barkley trade and evaluate it:

Post trade, those Philly guys had WS/48 of .106 (barely average); .045 (deplorable); and .046 (deplorable). WS/48 wasn’t the culprit – it was the idea that those guys would continue their production. They didn’t. If they had, it would have been a more even trade because they all had above average production at the time of the trade.

If you truly want to play games with statistics – you always must consider the entire context. One context is that the closer you get to average, the more replaceable your production and the less of advantage you have at a given position.

What you cannot argue is that the higher the total WS among all five starters – the better your team. Where the two connect is whether you can duplicate the lost production at two positions with the increased production at one position plus the replacement player contributions. It is admittedly a balancing act – but the absolute of production/performance remains.

What it means is that used here, the premise was correct. By trading both Oden and Batum, you give up way too much performance because both are young, project very well, and would be more difficult to replace together than Paul alone.

Very few players are worth multiple players in isolation -

by blacknoiseNW on Jul 23, 2010 5:08 PM PDT up reply actions  

What's odd is that you say some absolutely correct things

but come to the conclusion directly at odds to those correct statements.

Here for instance:

One context is that the closer you get to average, the more replaceable your production and the less of advantage you have at a given position.

Absolutely right. So the implication of that observation is that the more a player deviates from the average, the more irreplaceable their production is, and concomitantly the more worthwhile it is to trade multiple players for them. A great player is worth several good players because it’s very very difficult to get great players compared to getting several good players; a good player is worth several average players because it’s kind of hard to get a good player but not really that hard to get average players; an average player is worth several bad players, and so forth.

I’m also amused by this assertion:

What you cannot argue is that the higher the total WS among all five starters – the better your team.

I wonder if you’re familiar with how WS48 is calculated? This goes to why I don’t like this system by the way. Essentially, the system starts by taking the total wins and divvying them amongst the team. In other words, it’s not a coincidence that better teams (i.e. teams with more wins) have players with higher total WS. It’s because it’s part of the formula.

The problem is that as a player goes from a good team (say Hornacek at Phoenix) to a bad team (Philly), all of a sudden, his WS48 plummets. Then recovers as soon as he goes to another good team (Utah). This individual measure is actually pretty poor at isolating a player’s individual performance as opposed to the performance of his team as a whole.

by howlingfantods on Jul 24, 2010 8:36 AM PDT up reply actions  

if the players stay healthy then yes i think portland can contend in the next five years
i would trade combination of players/draft picks that left the big three in portland and added chris paul because i believe that would only enhance portland’s title chances

by revdjweb on Jul 23, 2010 7:01 AM PDT reply actions  

The following things need to happen in order for this team to win

1) Oden beats the injury bug. This guy is capable of dominating the league if he can stay healthy.

2) Brandon Roy relinquishes some of the offensive spotlight

3) LaMarcus Aldridge develops a competitive fire/killer instinct

These guys all have the capacity to be dominant players in the league. They’re not all there yet, though. We’ll see what happens, but I am not getting my hopes up that all three of those things come to pass.

Acquiring Chris Paul (for any number of non-big-3 pieces) and assuming he gets back to pre-injury form could mitigate 1) and 3), and is likely to help 2) happen more quickly. This would obviously DRAMATICALLY increase our chances of contending. Then again, I don’t think we have a chance at getting him so the point is somewhat moot.

by kickbrass on Jul 23, 2010 7:28 AM PDT reply actions  

so

Brandon would be more dominant by sacrificing offensive production?

by blacknoiseNW on Jul 23, 2010 8:20 AM PDT up reply actions  

I don't think Brandon

is able to dominate consistently at the Wade/Lebron/Kobe level. I think we need Brandon to be 80% of Kobe-level dominance, 15% from Oden and 5% from Aldridge.

by kickbrass on Jul 23, 2010 11:36 AM PDT up reply actions  

It's nice having Cho come in with an unbiased more realistic view of our team.

He doesn’t overvalue our players and knows they’re not as good as a lot of people in Portland think. We can’t just wait around for this roster to grow because it will never win a championship that way. It’s not good enough. Roy is not a superstar in this league, he’s only a star. He needs a lot of help, probably another star, which LMA has failed to grown into so far. Oden can change everything, but Cho has to take into account the actual probability Oden will be healthy enough to do that.

by Coastie07 on Jul 23, 2010 7:37 AM PDT reply actions  

As currently constructed, I think the chances are pretty low. Nonzero, but pretty low. Maybe 10% or so.

by jksnake99 on Jul 23, 2010 8:03 AM PDT reply actions  

with a healthy Paul and a healthy Oden— very solid chance.

with a healthy Paul and no Oden or Batum, not a very good chance, but I do think it would be better than what we have now, especially if we are getting Okafor in the deal.

by jksnake99 on Jul 23, 2010 9:27 AM PDT up reply actions  

Hmmm...

I love the idea of Paul on our team. It certainly would put us in the top tier of the league. I can’t see it without Oden though. The thought of moving Oden at this point makes me cringe. He’s going to have an impact in this league and to see him flourish on another team after all we have endured with him trying to establish himself is just not acceptable. Let’s see what he does for us this season first.

by schmugly on Jul 23, 2010 8:03 AM PDT reply actions  

Yes, with a healthy roster, notably including Oden and Roy, and coaching that maximizes our talent

we are potentially contenders. It remains to be seen if Nate provides that leadership.
As far as Chris Paul goes, it is more than just talent. Does he WANT to be here, because if he is ‘doing us a favor’, he can get lost. I am not interested in a prima donna narcissist regardless. And, no, he is not critical. So, if a non destructive trade is possible, such as you suggest, ok, but we are good without CP.

"You be realistic," Oden said. "I’m going to stay happy. All right?"

by Berkeley on Jul 23, 2010 8:09 AM PDT reply actions  

As currently constructed? They will not even be a contender.

I am so glad someone in the Blazer organization finally acknowledged this when Cho stated that the Blazers are still one or two moves away from being considered a contender for a championship. Keep in mind, a contender is a team that makes it into the conference finals a couple of times or to the finals.

With Chris Paul and Roy, Aldridge, and Oden, we move into contender status if they all stay healthy, but are not guaranteed of winning a title.

by JasonT on Jul 23, 2010 8:12 AM PDT reply actions  

If our core includes Oden

my answer is no. I have no faith in his ability to be a full-time NBA player. I would have no problem with him being traded for an upgrade. I hope the Blazers don’t acquire Paul. He’s another injury-prone player. And, he does not play defense. Incuding Batum in any trade at this point in his career would be less than an intelligent move.

by blzrfan1938 on Jul 23, 2010 8:28 AM PDT reply actions  

Everything depends on Oden's health.

I think we can all agree that it would be foolish to trade a healthy Oden, but what if Cho determines he’s to much of an injury risk?

Right now, there’s just too much speculation to argue trading Batum vs. Oden. If we trade Oden, I believe the Blazers would be saying that they can’t depend on him to be a reliable fixture on the team. If we keep him, they’re saying that he’s healthy and there’s a reason he was drafted #1.

"Nicolas! You're the strongest boy in the world!"

by ericking on Jul 23, 2010 8:39 AM PDT reply actions  

I think this team would be in a championship window right now if Oden could actually stay healthy...

but to quote to old Blazer Sedge proverb, “That’s a big if.” Could Oden get healthy and dominate? Absolutely. Might he also suffer another major injury? Absolutely. Which scenario is more likely? For me, this is a painful question to answer.

I would prefer one more season to test out Oden’s durability, but if he is the piece required to get CP3 I say do it. I’m not crazy about trading Nic AND Greg to get him, but I would probably do it. And yes, I think a starting line-up of CP3, Roy, Matthews, LMA, and Camby compete for a championship.

"What people need to know is that those pictures were taken a year and a half ago, and I've grown since then." - Greg Oden

by dario argento on Jul 23, 2010 8:50 AM PDT reply actions  

As constructed?

Yes.

Adding CP3 to the core 3?

Yes.

The key has always been (and seemingly will always be) Oden.

The whole question/answer thing gets a lot muddier if you ask whether moving Oden in a deal for Paul leads to championships… while Paul is amazing and a Paul/Roy/LMA led group would be very good, we haven’t seen championships being won by teams with elite PGs in recent history. Bigs are so vital… and we’ve learned that LMA doesn’t fit that role.

Being insistent when you're wrong is just really, really annoying.

by you'vegottomakeyourfreethrows on Jul 23, 2010 8:59 AM PDT reply actions  

Batum/Oden

If we were to acquire Paul in a trade, Portland would contend for multiple titles over the next 5 years or more. A couple of pieces must fall into place.

1) Would Paul resign with the Blazers? If he wouldn’t, then I would have to say no to the deal, because the trade is going to require a good chunk of our youthful assets. Mainly Batum and/or Oden.

2) Batum is an extreme diamond in the rough, that our scouting department found. Is he a consistant All-Star? No. Can he be? Yes. Are his skills replaceable for his position? Yes. This is where Portland should be looking. If NO wants him for Paul, he needs to be included. We can find, may even have, the next Batum.

3) Oden is going to have a very IMPORTANT year. He needs to comes through and put forth a healthy, full season. Should he get injured again this year, you can put him down as a BUST. If he can up his game, and maintain his healthy, he will provide what the Blazers have needed to go deeper in the playoffs, with our without Paul.

The Blazers bench can outplay any bench in the league. The starters would look a billion times better with Paul then without, but we would lose part of our bench. We can always replace our bench, it’s hard to replace the stars.

Chris

by cabhorn on Jul 23, 2010 9:31 AM PDT reply actions  

To answer I'm going to allow myself a badly over used cliche

Not a snowballs chance in hell. Even the best chemistry can’t overcome our weaknesses:

An injured(Oden and Joel), aging(Camby) and thin(LMA) frontline is active but not solid.

A backcourt featuring one superb player who is the only stabilizer in the 4th quarter.

A pair of wing players with a combined 3 years in the NBA always praised for their “potential.”

Ten players on the roster with less than 3 years experience.

8 players on the roster with less than 2 years experience.

A geriatric point guard who shoots nuckleballs and snarls at the passing world.

This team may be loveable and athletic and filled with potential, but it’s not a championship contender. In 2010 a championship team can’t be constructed from home grown draft picks. During Cho’s pess conference he gave the unvarnished truth. We’re still some pieces away from a contending roster. I think we may have to live with uncertainty at the center position. It’s not the end of the world as the Lakers have shown with Bynum. They make up for it with richness at the other spots but we don’t currently have that richness. Get the best possible player at any position in the backcourt or wing. A proven high scorer or playmaker to take the pressure off of Brandon Roy. There are lot’s of great scorers on weaker teams or just needing a change in location. Tony Parker, Chris Kaman, Andre Iguodala; any number of scenarios to bring Jameer Nelson or Devin Harris to town. If we let go of the notion that Greg Oden is our ticket to success we have all kinds of possibilities. Chris Paul is the best player currently available. He’d be an upgrade don’t you think? I can’t wait for PA and Cho to clean up this stockpiled mess.

by oregonslee on Jul 23, 2010 9:47 AM PDT reply actions  

lakes getting pau gasol negated some of the need for bynum, but

the unstated point that seems inherent in your post seems solid.

you have to give up quality, to get quality most of the time (yes there are giveaways such as how the lakers obtained gasol). paul would be a huge upgrade for the team, and i am someone who actually likes miller a lot. he is a player to build around, more than a brandon roy or an oft injured oden. to me dealing aldridge, roy or oden to get paul would be a nobrainer, and i realize that statement will get dumped on hard. would keep batum if possible. hell, i would go for okafor and paul for oden and roy!!!

by utahcoyote on Jul 23, 2010 11:29 AM PDT up reply actions  

I misread the paragraph

But still, the idea of dumping Roy blows my mind. He’s the Blazers’ MVP and he’s the guy you build around.

by Nuke on Jul 23, 2010 1:28 PM PDT up reply actions  

my point is to trade for paul you need to give up quality

the only player that paul’s existing team would want for sure, in my mind, is roy. no way in hell do they gamble on oden alone with his precarious health, and west is arguably superior to aldridge already. though i like batum a lot and want to see him stay on the blazers, i doubt other teams necessarily feel the same way.

you can’t just throw pieces the other team doesn’t want and expect the to take them. especially, since they have him under contract for couple years.

so~~~~~~~~~~~~~~to get paul, how does it work in the real world??

by utahcoyote on Jul 23, 2010 6:24 PM PDT up reply actions  

well said

Blunt, but never-the less contains the given circumstances that claim the reality of things. These are the facts that often get clouded in the more optimistic views…Sometimes the case for reality is staring you directly in the face and choosing to ignore them will not help (the organization) make the right decisions,, Yes, they are the harder decisions for sure, but if the “new phase” of this organization contains the mindset of evaluating weaknesses, they will have better options at improving the team.
  Know one knows for sure what Cho brings to the party. But you could almost bet, he is smart enough to not let pride or stubbornness rule his train of thought. He understands the team’s position and would never commit to undermining reality with the absurd notion that this team is ready for a championship run….Smart man… and also realizes the situation presents itself with plenty of opportunities to move on.
   Can Portland compete with the rising tide of 3 star player dictation ? Well, now, that’s another story altogether……

   Your list of weaknesses could be broadened, but it is a good generalization of the issues at hand…When the team starts to knock off some of the more prominent ones, the smaller ones (or more deeply opinionated ones) may smooth out. Once they deem they have the right player mix, then the coach’s seat gets a lot hotter. A lot of coaches get fired when they simply have bad players…As this team gets better suited (player wise) for getting more honest chances at championships, it will be time to scrutinize the man that puts it all-together .
   
    My opinion; You can add too stubborn of a head coach to your list of weaknesses. A coach that limits his options and suffocates his team at times. Automatic slowdown is an energy killer that no team deserves (or needs). However, I still think Nate has learned something over the last couple seasons. A fresh staff and different players may give him better chances at adjusting his style of play. Time will tell….., but that window appears to be closing down enough to demand a little more aggressive behavior.

[Good defense "releases" your offense]

by WyEast on Jul 23, 2010 12:02 PM PDT up reply actions  

I wonder about Nate

He deserves the benefit of the doubt. I think LMA is thin but a great player; definitely a keeper but not a superstar. I’d like to see he backed by a thumper like Carl Landry. Add a scorer like Iggy or Harris and yo’ve got a solid contender.

by oregonslee on Jul 23, 2010 12:47 PM PDT up reply actions  

really like igdougla (sp) too, but

he is a player who really needs a solid point guard. he had a very good time playing with andre miller, and then look at what happened to him when phillly didn’t resign miller. he looked lost most of last season.

just believe you need a power forward who can be a post presence and set solid screen. aldridge hasn’t show me that yet, and it seems he just doesn’t want to play physical.

by utahcoyote on Jul 23, 2010 6:29 PM PDT up reply actions  

I love paul

but would paul be great along side another ball dominate Guard like Broy. If he came here he would have bigs to play along side him. More than just one like the Magic.

Well that not the question…Would we win rings…
YES….

by broyshow on Jul 23, 2010 9:54 AM PDT reply actions  

The Blazers are a sleeper team right now.

In the eyes of many fans and media members, OKC has eclipsed the Blazers and we’ve returned to our eternal status as a decent team that makes the playoffs each season and then politely steps aside for the contenders. Well, I think we have the pieces we need to get 60 wins and go deep in the playoffs if injuries don’t derail us again.

I used to have a ‘68 Mustang with the 302 V8. I got in a race once and was winding the motor to the redline, where for some reason it began misfiring. Probably a carburetor issue. Anyway, that’s how I see the Blazers right now. We have a strong team that just needs good health and some fine-tuning to hit its stride.

I don’t think we need Chris Paul to reach the finals. We’ve shown the ability to beat every team in the league the last two years. We’ve shown that we can win on the road. We’re another year older. Our coach and core players have been together a while, though injuries have interrupted their progress. We have an All-Star SG and potential All-Stars at every other position.

So yeah, adding Chris Paul would make us even stronger and I’d love to see it happen if we can keep Oden, Aldridge, and Roy, but I don’t need for that to happen to be excited about our chances to blast our way to at least the WC finals this season.

by MiledAnimal on Jul 23, 2010 11:38 AM PDT reply actions  

Paul/Roy = Thomas/Dumars

It is not a far stretch to see CP and Broy coexist. Isiah Thomas was ball dominate and Joe Dumars, who was not some spot up corner shooter, easily worked well together. Both were all-stars in the same season playing for the same team multiple times, and they won some championships too! Trading Batum, who i love but is highly overrated by Bedgers, to get CP seems like a no-brainer. Replacing Batum is much easier than obtaining an All-star at, arguably, the toughest position in the league.

Also, everyone continues to call CP injury prone. He has played in a higher percentage of games available than DWade. Yet, I bet most anyone on this board would trade Batum in a hearbeat for Wade and never call him injury prone. CP has had 1 significant injury, it does not mean he is prone!

by jpearce6 on Jul 23, 2010 11:40 AM PDT reply actions  

those pistons were a team that played mean, and

chuck daly versus nate mcmillan is a tough comparison. dumars a very different player than roy. a pretty strong defender who got his shots in the offense, but wasnt really a shot creator.

by utahcoyote on Jul 23, 2010 6:34 PM PDT up reply actions  

IN THE NEXT 5 YEARS?

Heck yeah. Probably not next year but, every year after that we should be in the mix unless there is some kind of injur…wait a minute….forget i said anything. Don’t want to jinx anybody.

Damn the Blazers. Damn them to hell. - 'The Sports Guy' Bill Simmons

by doublezeroduck on Jul 23, 2010 12:28 PM PDT reply actions  

Paul, Roy, Oden, LMA, and other.

You bet it is possible this year. However, winning it all is contingent upon uncontrollable things; health, attitude, storyline, belief, being deserving, having no reasons to lose, want, but you are talking about talent I think. They would have enough talent.

Not being able to handle a hangover will lead to a level of maturity.
Wheels to Jason Quick

by Kampeska on Jul 23, 2010 1:10 PM PDT reply actions  

NO. YES.

The current team won’t win a championship in the next 5 years. Miller is too old/ not good enough.

With Chris Paul, or another good younger PG we can win it.

by desperationshot on Jul 23, 2010 1:31 PM PDT reply actions  

Former Champions didn't have young developing talent, they had experience and talent in the starting lineup

Lakers have no one that is young, developing and promising except Bynum

Celtics have no one that is young, developing and promising except Rondo

The Blazers as currently constucted have too much young, developing and promising talent but not enough talent in the starting lineup.

Trading Batum for Paul (but keeping Oden & Camby) will be painful but is the only way they have a shot at a Championship in the next 5 years. I would like to get back Posey in the deal so that Matthews has an experienced backup at SF, someone that is taller (Posey is 6ft 8, same as Batum, but Matthews is only 6 ft 5) and brings championship and deep playoff experience (2006 with Heat & 2008 with Celtics).

Teams don’t make a jump from “Out in 1st Round” to NBA Champs without experience and confidence, Posey has both but I agree that his scoring skills are greatly diminished….

by Chris M 81 on Jul 23, 2010 2:26 PM PDT reply actions  

Not that I'm for it but...

Shaq may play for us if we gave him the BAE. For the record, I do not want to trade Oden. But if it happened.

Paul
Roy
Batum/Matthews
LMA
Shaq/Camby

That is potentially a dangerous squad, depending on who is traded. Title this next year? Maybe. No dynasty though.

Being a Blazer fan is not exactly healthy.

by dpnim on Jul 23, 2010 5:25 PM PDT reply actions  

Forget CP, go for defense, depth, and discipline. The points are just waiting.

Give Brandons knees a fighting chance for the playoffs by keeping his minutes at 34 or less. Use Pendegraff, Cunningham, Bayless and Batum more, who are all poised for big improvements. Their energy, and court positioning are not found in the stats.

For GO, Its the comeback year, and the contract year, and the manhood year, for a very young and inexperienced player. (Pressure? What pressure? I don feel no stankin’ pressure, Iḿ gonna run these fatboy centers and skinny wannabeez ´til their heels bleed, and crush the chumps who come to MY rim lookin´ for easy money!)

With Camby playing measured stints at center and power forward, and talented rookies pressing Andre and LA to back away from the desert tray, and show up in both fighting spirit and condition, having a bench stocked with hungry defenders and scorers all competing fiercely for minutes can be a good thing, if well coached.

Wes the WildCard Mathews gives us a second crunchbang defender to slow down the league prima-dona corps, and a 3-point dagger in the corner, and he is ready to make his name this year, not in some future sci-fi galaxy. I see Wes and Brandon and Nicolas making crunchtime a lot more painful for opposing coaches this year.

Let Joel get healthy, and join the fray when 100%, and get Rudi into a Knicks or Spurs jersey, where he can get serious minutes, and prove his worth.

Send CP to Orlando, and let the Florida teams rip each other to shreds, great for both fans, and the league. Our team will be ready for the challenge, without drama, without
the soap opera, and with the best fans in the NBA

by dubbledribull on Jul 25, 2010 10:39 AM PDT reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

The ultimate coverage and analysis of the Portland Trail Blazers.

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recommended FanPosts

Small
The Blazers Future Regarding Free Agent Signings
Small
Thunderous Manboobies
Img_0878_1__small
Why do we hate LaMarcus Aldridge?
Small
Oregonlive "journalists" 2 new posts...same old drivel
2474796688_7cdc78828f_o_small
Greg Oden Suffers Life-Ending Injury; Gets 3-Year Extension

Recent FanPosts

Small
The Blazers' Future Regarding Trades
Small
WHAT TO DO WITH NIC BATUM BECAUSE WE WILL LOSE HIM IF NOT TRADED.
Small
Trade that helps us out now and the future
Small
How can the All-Star game be more fun and competitive?
Small
Earl Boykins!
Small
LaMarcus Aldridge about to become the 10th highest scorer in Blazers franchise  history
Small
New trade that gets us a new point and a three point shooter
Small
Portland getting.....
Small
The Sun Behind the Clouds: Blazers still on track.

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >

FanShots

Quick hits of video, photos, quotes, chats, links and lists that you find around the web.

Recommended FanShots

It's pretty clear that the season is over already ;)
Double rainbow of sadness:

1) JBay is getting shorter
2) We never got to see him with a mustache

I miss you tiny raptor man.

via The Basketball Jones http://blogs.thescore.com/tbj/2012/02/09/things-of-note-for-february-9-2012/#more-34561
Blazers Broadcasters Mike Barrett and Mike Rice re-enacted NBA referee Scott Foster's controversial goaltending call on Portland Trail Blazers forward LaMarcus Aldridge, who was defending Oklahoma City Thunder All-Star forward Kevin Durant, during this week's edition of Blazers Courtside. Remarkably, no one was injured during the taping of this segment.

Original video of the play here. 
Quotes from the players and coaches here. 
The NBA admitting it got the call wrong here. 
Dave's  extended thoughts here. 
BlazersMakr's FanShot: Major Vegas action on OKC prior to tip here. 
Audio of Chad Doing of 750 AM The Game going HAM on Foster here.

OK, that should just about wrap up the goaltending discussion.

Courtside video via Blazers Broadcasting cameraman John Curry.

-- Ben Golliver | benjamin.golliver@gmail.com | Twitter
In 2008 Tim Donaghy indicated that Scott Foster was a ref that also fixed games
Blazers Owner Paul Allen Ranked No. 3 American Philanthropist In 2011

Recent FanShots

"You Must Be Known For Your Defense, Because You Definitely Stole My Heart"
Bill Simmons: Deron Williams To Dallas 'Is A Lock'
LaMarcus Aldridge Needs Support Around Him
LaMarcus Aldridge Finds Out He's An All-Star With His Teammates
Congratulations to Portland Trail Blazers forward LaMarcus Aldridge, on his first All Star selection.

As seen on www.trailblazers.com
AWoj: Aldridge an All Star
CRAZY stat from Houston game
NBA MVP Rankings... LMA @ #10

+ New FanShot All FanShots >


Editors

Kitten_small Dave

Headshotsmall_small Ben Golliver

Lead Moderators

Getfuzzy-satchel_small Timmay!

Bucky3_small Cablinasian

Authors

Plainlc_small Storyteller

Moderators

Lamb_small T Darkstar

Small douglast

Terryporter_small prezofdeath

Small usmcr3049

Lrg_magpie_small Corvid

Wallpaper_small geoffm