Trade for Greg Oden
by Andy G on Jun 8, 2009 8:40 PM CDT
Email
PrintHere's a trade idea that will probably draw some strong reactions:
Kevin Love and the 6th Pick for Greg Oden.
I won't repeat all of the same arguments why I think we need a center, and why Love-Jefferson is not a good recipe for playoff success. But, specifically in the case of Greg Oden, I wonder if this deal could be reached. We would need to add a small salary, like Madsen's or Smith's to make it work. The bigger obstacle would probably be Portland's reluctance to give up on Oden so early. Frankly, I don't think they would. However, it arguably helps both teams.
Minnesota can trot out Jefferson and Oden as a very big, very talented, very complementary tandem of big men. Oden has a ways to go, and his injuries are a red flag to say the least, but I think there's a reasonable chance that in a couple years, Jefferson will be the best offensive big in the league and Oden will be the best defensive big man in the league. That would make quite a pair.
Portland can draft Stephen Curry, who could be a BJ Armstrong to Brandon Roy's Michael Jordan, and add a very valuable 6th Man in Kevin Love, to round out a big man trio of Aldridge, Pryzbilla and Love. Since their team is relatively stacked, right now, and they haven't gotten anything from Oden yet, they might see Curry and Love as a stabilizing move that deepens their talent pool for a slew of playoff runs ahead. I doubt it, but you never know.
I'd be interested to hear from any Portland fans that read this, as to what they'd think of the idea. (I have a feeling I know how the regulars at Canis will feel about trading away Stephen Curry and Kevin Love, but feel free to bash away:))
681 comments
|
3 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Injuries
Neither Jefferson or Oden have been able to stay healthy on a consistent basis, with Oden being the scarier long-term question mark in that regard. But let’s not forget that Al Jefferson has had a pretty spotty health history as well except for that first year in Minnesota. So I won’t even go into how they blend together as players since I doubt they’d even be healthy enough to be on the floor together all that often.
By the way, although I’m all for getting a guard/wing prospect at the top of this draft, the chronic rash of injuries to NBA big men is a reason why going after guys like Thabeet or Hill at #6 could be defended. You literally can’t have enough talented bigs on your squad these days. Inevitably someone will go down. That being said, if you don’t have a dynamic perimeter threat, you have zero chance of winning. But I could totally see why keeping our mitts on Pekovic and/or drafting Mullens at #18 may make sense.
Look at the Finals, though
How many big men are actually playing in the series? Bynum is considered more valuable to Orlando than to LA when he’s on the court. Howard just looks confused. Odom and Lewis were small forwards 10 years ago. That’s partially style of play, but it certainly didn’t help Cleveland that they had so many potential guys to guard Dwight Howard. Here’s a new rule: you can never have enough players between 6’5 and 7’0 who can do multiple good things on the court. Athletes who are functionally flexible are the way to achieve roster balance and depth.
by pagingstanleyroberts on Jun 8, 2009 10:28 PM CDT up reply actions
You are one ballsy mammo jammo.
Actually, in this draft, it’s not the worst idea in the world—especially if GrifRubHardThaCurry are already gone.
But here are the reasons it doesn’t make sense for the TWolves to do it:
Bash 1. It makes Portland even better.
Bash 2. It doesn’t improve the Wolves one bit—some would argue it makes them worse.
Bash 3. It sends a scrappy hometown favorite back to his hometown, so the Wolves should be able to get even more in return.
Bash 4. The Wolves would then be starting an oft-injured foul machine who can barely drink legally at center, and a recovering non-leaper at the four.
Bash 5. Physical injuries aside, I’m not sure Greg Oden’s head is in the right place right now.
I’m not even sure I’d trade them even up at this point.
Agreed
Portland comes out waaaaayyyyy ahead in this trade. Is Oden more of a difference maker than Love right now? At best I think you can say that it’s a draw. Throwing in the sixth pick so Portland can get Curry too? Why not just kick my dog while you’re at it.
I appreciate the spirit, and I think you knew you’d probably get some strong reactions out of this, but if we’re giving up Love and the sixth for anyone it’s got to be CP3 or similar.
"Come on Eddie, let's get serious."
Then Love and the sixth are off the table.
Because no GM, not even Chris Wallace, would give up an MVP candidate for Love and the 6th. Unless Blake Griffin falls to 6, the pick doesn’t have a whole lot of value. Love has some value, but not for a young All-Star. Oden has the potential to be a perennial All-Star center, and anchor of a championship team. Portland would probably not agree to this trade, but it’d be worth exploring.
It will be tougher
But at this point in their careers, Love also has a chance to make it to multiple all-star games. Remember that Wally World made it, and Love has more game than Wally. The only thing that will get Oden more All-Star appearances than Love is that Oden is a center and we all know there’s about 2 good ones per conference, whereas there are about a bazillion competent forwards per conference. For as great as Oden is supposed to be, there’s still a surprising amount of debate over on Blazer’s blogs about whether his value is even superior to Joel Przbilla (sp?) (the stats suggest that Przbilla holds his own).
I’ll sum up my position this way—if Oden looked like he was the next Hakeem the Dream, or even David Robinson, then I’d say yes. But he’s not. He’s a good rebounding big man who may or may not develop into a 14+ ppg guy who has a history of getting hurt. Love is a slightly better just as good a rebounding smaller big man who may or may not develop into a 14+ ppg guy who has a history of staying healthy and improving the play of those around him. Oden blocks more shots, Love is an adequate help defender.
I think Love has more long term upside in that he’ll be healthier, has a lower bust potential, and fits more schemes. Yes, Oden may turn into a true #1 or 2 guy on a team, whereas Love’s ceiling is a #2 guy at best, but the difference for me is that Oden could also become the #5 or 6 guy on a team, whereas I don’t think Love will be no worse than the #3 guy. All things considered, I’d rather keep Love and the #6 and look for wing help.
"Come on Eddie, let's get serious."
Fair enough
I like the debate this trade proposal generated, as it’s interesting to hear the different takes on how to build a team and how people value potential, athleticism, and production (not just with bigs, but with other players too.) It’d be cool if we could get some Blazers fans to weigh in—I’d love to hear their take on it.
"Come on Eddie, let's get serious."
"Oden is a center and we all know there’s about 2 good ones per conference, whereas there are about a bazillion competent forwards per conference."
That statement explains why the Blazers would never…ever….trade Oden for Love….even if Love and Oden were equal (which they ain’t).
"You're welcome friend
I love you."
- Tom "Dragline" inHawaii
Not a draw!
Dude, let’s be real. Kevin Love is a much, much better pro right now than Greg Oden. And he probably always will be. According to my internal calculator, there’s maybe a 35% chance that Oden puts ever puts together the combo of 1) Staying healthy for an entire season and 2) Putting it together mentally so he can actually contribute for more than 11 minutes and 6 fouls a night.
Why should we give up a lottery pick when we’re also giving up the better player?
by princelyfrank on Jun 9, 2009 12:15 PM CDT up reply actions
Wolves rarely get better, sadly.
But Love is one of the few who will. Sorry if offends anyone that I let the way a player has actually performed on the court to influence my expectations of their future performance.
Generally, I go by this rule. If a player plays well, I expect them to continue to play well in the future. If a player has played badly, I expect them to play badly in the future. Crazy, I know.
You Blazer fans seem to think we Wolves fans think our players are great. You might want to look around these message boards to get a more accurate reading on our assessment of our players. Namely, we pretty much think they stink. We all gave up on our hopes for Foye a while ago. This is the “despairy home companion,” after all.
by princelyfrank on Jun 9, 2009 4:23 PM CDT up reply actions
Kevin Love
can’t jump, can’t play anything but power forward, and will never be as good as lamarcus aldridge, would never have a chance to start on the blazers, and is not actually liked in portland that much (got booed at introductions in both t-wolves v. blazers games i went to).
Greg Oden on the other hand is still recovering his explosiveness, yet still out classes love by leaps and bounds in athleticism, has more size, is a better rebounder (check rebounding %) and can actually play D, why would the blazers trade for an offensive minded power forward and trade away a defensive center when they already have a better offensive power forward
by blackandwite323 on Jun 9, 2009 9:57 PM CDT up reply actions
Its funny
biggity asked portland fans and we want no part of love and the #6.. we will stick with Oden thanks.. no PART
by GreatOden'sRaven on Jun 9, 2009 6:22 PM CDT up reply actions
Never Never Never
Curry and K.Love for an injury prone center? I doubt I’d trade Love for Oden. I’m not sure if I’d trade 6 for Oden. I do admire this trade from the guts perspective.
Would knee & hip replacements be included in the deal?
Portland would have to send 2 of each, plus a big medical insurance contract.
Would I do it then?
No.
Which team says no to this deal?
My guess is Portland, or possibly (but not likely) both. If Kahn were able to make a splash like acquiring Oden without giving up Foye or Jefferson (or Miller’s contract or Pekovic) I think he considers it a no-brainer.
Actually, it's likely both say no to this deal
Portland does it because it would be admitting that in hindsight, they should have drafted Durant instead of Oden, and won’t give up on the big lug after just two years.
Minnesota won’t do it because of the 25% chance that this story would appear in June 2012:
THANK YOU MINNESOTA!
New Wolves GM Even Easier to Swindle than the Old One!
As Portland seems all but assured to capture their third consecutive NBA championship, one man deserves a ring next fall at least as much as any Blazer player or employee: Minnesota Timberwolves owner Glen Taylor. Because without him sending Brandon Roy, Steph Curry, and hometown favorite Kevin Love to the Trailblazers, none of this would have been possible.The three All Stars represent the head, heart, and soul of the team, both on the court and in the community that has come to embrace the team and players like family.
The players the Blazers sent back to the Wolves in return for these three haven’t fared quite so well. Randy Foye is believed to be an off-the-bench scorer for Mambo Italiano, last years’ runners up in the prestigious Neapolitan League. And after suffering through toe, foot, heel, ankle, knee, femur, pelvis, coccyx, and spleen injuries over the last four years, Greg Oden was finally diagnosed with clinical depression, and hospitalized for treatment. Interestingly, many of his fellow patients are former Timberwolves fans who are suffering from the same condition.
And in an ironic twist to the story, the million dollars Portland included with Foye in the trade for Roy was the exact amount Glen Taylor spent in legal fees to break his lease at Target Center, and move the team to Seattle.
Don't forget
Also hurting the Timberwolves during this stretch was Rob Moor’s ill-fated trade for Wayne Gretzky to run the point.
"Come on Eddie, let's get serious."
Genius.
Did you write that, PoorDick, or do you have some special internet connection that actually lets you browse the future?
by princelyfrank on Jun 9, 2009 12:17 PM CDT up reply actions
Don't let him kid you...
He drives this souped up DeLorean…
Better Trade- Courtesy of Real GM
http://www.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=911937
I love thier trade board- just to come across suggestions like these. You would probably need the 6th pick to assume Deng’s Contract.
I like that trade
and it’s more realistic than the one I proposed. I hope we do something with Miller’s contract.
I've been blathering...
about a Deng trade over at TWB. Given the number of holes on this roster I think they need to get Deng without giving up the #6. My hypothesis is that given the opportunity cost of having the big contract on the books Deng can be had for expirings/one of our younger players (Foye/Brewer)/and the #18.
Oden to Wolves
I just don’t like the AL/Oden pairing. Both of them are most effective on Offense in the low-block. Neither would be that effective guarding players away from the basket. The real issue for me though is how healthy is Greg Oden going to be long-term. I’m not sure because of this I give up 6 alone for him.
Oden has more potential in his pinky finger than Kevin Love will ever have.
Kevin Love may lead the league in rebounding due to his freakish instincts, but he will never be able to do anything else (like score against NBA big men or play defense against them), while Oden has the potential to play elite post defense, rebound at a stellar rate (due mostly to his size), and can become a decent scorer if he ever regains his athleticism.
If you continue to hope that Randy Foye will become a freakish basketball talent after 3 nonproductive years in the league, you can at least give the same due to Oden, who hasn’t had even close to the same time on the court (recall that he was one of the rookie leaders in PER when he actually got on the court). If GO’s instinct to foul continues to match Love’s instinct to rebound, then, maybe we might regret not doing this trade. But I’m willing to give the guy 2 more years to wait and see what he does. Good luck with the #6 pick, maybe it would be better if you didn’t trade it this time around.
"B-Roy is the best shooting guard I have played against"
-Ron Artest
If Artest can say it, so can I. Broy>Kobe.
No
1. If Kevin Love can’t score in the Post how did he have a higher TS% than LaMarcus Aldridge? Could this ignore the fact that Love gets to the FT Line 1 out of every 2 attempts? This is also assuming Love doesn’t diversify his game more like he did at UCLA where he shot nearly 35% from deep as a Frosh. The good thing about Love’s game as pointed out by SNP is that he’s one of the rare players who could potentially dominate 2 of the 4 factors on a nightly basis.
2. Oden can barely stay on the court playing 16% of the team’s minutes his two seasons in the league. While he foul prone ways are a small issue- his knee and foot problems would be a big issue. Issues like this give serious pause to pursue big men this is why Presti backed off from the Chandler trade. Oden clearly has potential but these issues are going to hamper his trade value.
3. I’m not sure of one person- who’s called Foye a “Freakish SG” talent. The most common response on this board- has been to dump him off as trade filler. It’s quite rare that I see arguments here that he’s a long-term solution at the 1 or 2.
4. The 6th pick is not a filler especially if you hope this might be the last top 10 pick for a while. I’m not opposed to trading it for the right player (Gerald Wallace). This is not a place where you casually dump it.
5. Love’s defensive instincts are quite where they need to be- then again Oden wasn’t as great in this area as expected. Love shows signs of at least being fundamentally sound in this area.
The injuries are the risk
but how else would you be able to land a 21-year old center with the physical tools that Oden has? He was arguably the second-most hyped prospect ever, behind LeBron James.
Clearly, Oden is all “potential” since he’s battled injuries in his first two seasons. But his potential is off-the-charts and a lot more to get excited about than Love and whoever we get at 6. I doubt that a single NBA GM would disagree with me on that.
Potential is all
Gerald Green had lots of potential too. So did Ndudi Ebi (sorry, couldn’t resist). The thing with Oden, and I think every GM in the league would agree with this, is that if he gets hurt and loses some of his athleticism, he becomes just another 7-footer who sometimes plays well and most of the time tries his best to not get schooled by Yao, Dwight Howard, Big Al, Bynum, and so on. If such things matter, it’s telling that Pryzbilla was often the big man in the game in the fourth quarter during crunch time and not Oden.
Love certainly doesn’t have the ‘potential’ ceiling that Oden has, neither does he have the ‘potential’ bust floor that Oden has. If we think of it in terms of a scale of 1 to 10, where 10 is awesome, Oden could be as good as a 9, but could also get hurt and end up having a career around 4-5. Love’s ceiling is probably (maybe a little generously) an 8, but his floor is probably a 6, and my guess is that he’ll produce at 7 out of 10 for many, many years. Oden will produce sometimes at 7 or 8 out of 10, sometimes at 4-5 out ten. Look at Bynum.
Lastly, Foye is only freakish in that we traded Roy for him.
"Come on Eddie, let's get serious."
When Przy was in at the end of the game
it was always due to foul trouble.
"You're welcome friend
I love you."
- Tom "Dragline" inHawaii
that's completely false 92.
There were a number of games where Oden was just not as effective as Joel, and that’s why Joel was in. Don’t be disingenuous.
My memory may be faulty
But I am not being disingenuous.
"You're welcome friend
I love you."
- Tom "Dragline" inHawaii
by 92wastheyear on Jun 10, 2009 8:08 AM CDT up reply actions
Maybe not always, but most of the time
jk just needs to pick on something. He’s right it wasn’t every time, but he way he said smells like he’s just trying to not look homerish.
I'm a really really ridiculously good looking orange mocha frappaccino drinking manhammer sandwich
Exactly
It was rarely due a matchup issue…it was almost always because Greg was in foul trouble.
"You're welcome friend
I love you."
- Tom "Dragline" inHawaii
by 92wastheyear on Jun 10, 2009 1:55 PM CDT up reply actions
I am ingenious and being disingenuous
"You're welcome friend
I love you."
- Tom "Dragline" inHawaii
by 92wastheyear on Jun 10, 2009 2:11 PM CDT up reply actions
Joel was in at the end on a number of occasions do to his being more effective than Oden
You did notice that Joel was our starter for the stretch run and the playoffs, right?
I did notice that
however….typically…if Greg was available for late game situations…Nate put him in.
"You're welcome friend
I love you."
- Tom "Dragline" inHawaii
by 92wastheyear on Jun 10, 2009 5:19 PM CDT up reply actions
"He was arguably the second-most hyped prospect ever, behind LeBron James."
Between that statement, and liking the trade of Miller and the 6th pick for Deng’s contract, I can see you’re becoming a big fan of satire as well.
Do you disagree?
I think The Oden Draft Lottery was the most anticipated that I can remember, other than LeBron’s. Maybe Tim Duncan’s was up there, too.
Nope
Patrick Ewing, for one. I would say Magic Johnson, too. Shaq. Shaq was a no doubter. I would say maybe Chris Webber too. Oden was anticipated, but there was a non-negligible population in and around the game who preferred Kevin Durant.
by Eric in Madison on Jun 9, 2009 9:31 AM CDT up reply actions
Andy, Andy, Andy
You’re a good guy, and, with your permission, I’ve reacted strongly to this proposal, and bashed away—almost to the point of being a jerk about it (Key word: “almost.” Knowing juuuusssst when to pull back is one of my many attributes).
But going after a player because he was ridiculously-hyped is, well, ridiculous. There is nothing that “hype” can do make a player or a team better. In fact, buying into hype not only causes GMs to overvalue prospects, but it flies in the face of all the metrics and Darryl Morey stuff that we say we believe in.
I liked Greg Oden as a player, and what seems to be as a person. But I don’t want to give up the only young, good, healthy player the Wolves have to get him, much less one of the highest picks in team history (or, hopefully, in the future as well).
I'm being polite in this post...
but I’ll just point out a couple things wrong with your criticisms, in my opinion.
First, I’m not advocating for this trade because of how hyped Oden was. I’m just pointing it out, because the stat geeks of the world have seemingly forgotten that this guy was a dynamite prospect, prior to his micro-fracture surgery. Unless he picked a bad surgeon, or something, I think he’ll probably show the usual “second-year” progress that recent guys have shown.
Second, I don’t follow metrics and Darryl Morey. In my experience, the qualities that make a good prospect are more evident on the floor than the stat-sheet. Derrick Rose was a great example, last year, and I whole-heartedly bashed anyone who called Michael Beasley the better prospect. I think that Rose’s physical talents, although less evident on the college stat-sheet, have proven to carry over more effectively in the NBA game, and will continue to do so. Greg Oden’s injury issues are serious, but not career-ending or totally devastating, at this point. Considering the guys I’m talking about dealing away, I think Oden’s physical talents make it an easy decision for the Wolves to say yes, and easy for the Blazers to say no. I just find it interesting that so many Wolves fans are unwilling to face reality on Kevin Love and (apparently) the #6 pick. Neither has significant trade value that can bring back a young All-Star player. Oden’s injuries are the only factor that allows my proposal ANY sort of realistic probability of happening. And even with those considered, it’s not a trade that Pritchard would go through with.
This insane enthusiasm for K-Love makes me wonder how much basketball is actually watched by his ardent supporters. It’s not hard to see how he falls short (literally, and metaphorically) of the premier big men in the league, and how his ceiling is relatively modest, despite his strong fundamentals. The guy is good, but not great, and he’s never going to be great. There is just no precedent for players with his body type and poor athleticism to dominate the modern pro game. He would be the first, and while it’d be fun to see him be a pioneer for the chubby white guys of the world, I don’t expect it to happen.
You are right in a lot of areas
You have been extremely polite in defense of your proposal. I’m not surprised, because I make a point of reading everything you post here. But it’s still nice to see.
You are also correct that Kevin Love’s upside is probably that of a “very good” player, and Oden’s is that of an “excellent” player. But Love is much more likely to realize his upside than Oden is his respective potential.
Right now, Love is a better player in every way, other than your eyeball test. You may not trust stats, but the fact remains that Greg Oden averages 6.5 fouls for every 36 minutes that he is on the floor—nearly twice the rate of Love. And Oden played next to Pryz and Aldridge for the entire season, whereas Love had AlJeff and . . . and . . . Shelden Williams.
I watched Oden about a dozen times in college. Yes, he was hurt. But I never saw an offensive skill that would translate well into the NBA. I still haven’t. “Yeahbbutt, he’s been hurt!” He’s always been hurt. Early injuries for a big. lumbering 7-footer are not a good sign.
Between an inability to stay out of foul trouble and off the injured reserve, I don’t think he’ll enjoy a long, productive career. But even if he eventually does, I refer back to my original argument. There is no way that adding Oden to the Wolves makes them a better team right now than they would be by keeping Love and adding the median production level of a player picked with the sixth pick in this draft.
Magic wasn't involved with the Lottery
didn’t exist yet
"You're welcome friend
I love you."
- Tom "Dragline" inHawaii
The difference-
Lebron’s hype was all true. Oden is never, never, ever gonna live up to it.
by princelyfrank on Jun 9, 2009 12:19 PM CDT up reply actions
Well, I don't entirely disagree with your point
but…first of all, I have no expectations for Randy Foye. It wouldn’t shock me if he were out of the league before he was 30; my best case is that he’s a decent scorer off the bench. “Freakish basketball talent” sailed away long ago.
I wouldn’t actually do this as the Wolves, because I’m convinced that staying healthy is a skill. When was the last time Greg Oden was really healthy? High school? Nothing’s worse than having a franchise cornerstone who can’t stay healthy, and that’s the risk with Oden; one I’m not willing to take. If I thought the odds were 50/50 on who would play the most games over the next 6 years, Love or Oden, I’d be more inclined to make the deal, but I don’t think the odds are 50/50.
Still, I do think we on this board, like fans everywhere, have overvalued our draft pick. It’s a perennial problem—we know intellectually that the draft is weak and the chances of getting a good player at 6 aren’t really very good, but we start to romanticize it because it gives us the opportunity to dream. We don’t KNOW what Curry or Evans or whoever is going to be, so we dream them into something they probably won’t be. We know the weaknesses of the players already in the NBA that we might trade for, we don’t know that about the draft pick.
by Eric in Madison on Jun 9, 2009 9:19 AM CDT up reply actions
I find it helpful to look back at previous drafts and see the high number of mediocre players that were though (on their draft days) to be great prospects. Since this draft is considered weak at the outset, I don’t like our chances of landing an impact player at 6.
The injury concerns for Oden are very legit. But his upside is high enough that it’s a move I think we would make and Portland would refuse. They would have to want that 6th pick pretty badly, because Love would come off their bench. (Still a very helpful addition, but not something you give up Greg Oden for when he’s 21 years old.)
Yep, that was sort of my point about the draft
We tend to forget how many of these guys don’t work out. I definitely have to fight to keep perspective on the value of the draft pick, because I’m human and a fan, and I want to dream too. But the reality is what it is. Can’t be too wedded to the pick not to consider the possibilities.
We’ll have to disagree about Oden. I’m willing to take risks to improve this team, but not that one. To me, it’s almost not a risk, but a likelihood that Oden is going to miss significant time. It’s hard for guys that big to stay healthy, and Oden has already shown a propensity for injury. I know you know all this, and would do it anyway. I just think it’s a recipe for frustration.
by Eric in Madison on Jun 9, 2009 9:29 AM CDT up reply actions
Actually, I just took your advice, briefly
I took a quick look at the players who were drafted 5-7 from 2000-2006, and I must say there were far fewer busts than I expected to see, and many more solid and above average players than I expected.
Wade is obviously the best player among the 21 guys in this group. Others include Mike Miller, Brandon Roy, Jason Richardson, Shane Battier, Nene, Chris Kaman, Kirk Heinrich, Devin Harris, Josh Childress, Luol Deng. So that’s half the group who are good players. Then there are guys who aren’t bad—the non busts, some of whom still might get better: Felton, Foye, Villanueva, Webster.
Fewer busts than I thought we’d see. Still not unwilling to trade the pick in the right deal, though.
by Eric in Madison on Jun 9, 2009 9:50 AM CDT up reply actions
Just for fun...
Here are the past #6 picks, in recent memory:
2008 – Danilo Gallinari
2007 – Yi Jianlian
2006 – Brandon Roy
2005 – Martell Webster
2004 – Josh Childress
2003 – Chris Kaman
2002 – Dejuan Wagner
2001 – Shane Battier
2000 – DeMarr Johnson
1999 – Wally Szczerbiak
I wouldn't consider any of them busts...
Only because some are too young and the two who are out of the league (Johnson and Wagner) had huge injuries that derailed their careers. Setting aside Wagner, Yi (who has shown flashes) and Gallinari, the rest of these guys have started on good teams, even Johnson after his career-threatening injury. There aren’t too many high-ceiling guys, though. Regardless, if the trade were any of the non-Roys on this list and Love for Oden, I’d be on the fence about it because Old Man Oden has some question marks that have been mentioned previously.
Can’t speak for anyone else on the board, but I think the upside of Love is as good or slightly better than Okur or Brad Miller in their primes. That’s All-Star level. Love’s a better rebounder than both and has shown a good shooting touch and uncanny ability to get to the foul line to boot. Neither of those guys are considered stellar defenders, either, but both hold their own. Obviously, Love would be more of a 4 while they are 5s. Neither of them are great athletes, either.
by pagingstanleyroberts on Jun 9, 2009 10:43 AM CDT up reply actions
I didn't mean to rip on those guys...
just listing them for a reference point. Looking at the last 10 #6’s gives some idea of the caliber of talent we’re looking at. Potential for a mild bust, potential for a superstar (1 out of 10) and potential for a solid player. How much trade value does a young Shane Battier or Chris Kaman have? That seems like the median-level talent there…although that might even be a bit generous since this class is considered weak and those two are probably on the top-half of that list.
I'd definitely make this trade...
… the truth is, we have no idea what Oden can do yet, but he has more potential than any big man to enter the league since Shaq. Given the facts that he already excels at defense and is extremely big and tall, and those are among our biggest needs, I think it is a no brainer to make this deal if you’re the Wolves. Kevin Love is nice, but he’s still somewhat redundant with Jefferson at the PF position and there is no guarantee that the number six pick is going to yield an outstanding player. Besides, we have two other first round picks this year that might yield players who are (almost) as good as the one we could take number six. If Oden ends up scratching the surface of his potential, this would be a steal for Minnesota. Making a deal like this would show that Kahn is serious about making moves that could lead to a championship.
Maybe I don't know what potential means
but I find your first sentence to border on the absurd. Doesn’t potential refer to what a player could become? Well, off the top of my head, Tim Duncan and Kevin Garnett have entered the league since Shaq. Two big guys who pretty obviously had great potential. I might be more inclined to agree if you were referring to Jermaine O’Neal, not Shaquille.
by Eric in Madison on Jun 9, 2009 10:42 AM CDT up reply actions
He was probably also referring to the hype...
But even then, Duncan’s hype was very big. It caused the Spurs to tank for a full season and Rick Pitino to leave a great college job for the chance to coach him with the Celtics.
by pagingstanleyroberts on Jun 9, 2009 10:45 AM CDT up reply actions
The Spurs didn't tank
They lost Robinson for the season to injury.
Witty Unpredictable Talent and Natural Game
Garnett isn't a center...
… and Duncan is more of a PF than a C, though it’s an arguable point. The point is, when Oden was drafted, people considered him that kind of prospect with that kind of potential. People forget what an amazing prospect he was and how good he looked carrying OSU to the championship game during his freshman season. I think we’ll be reminded over the next decade why he was considered to be a truly elite level center prospect, and we’ll wish we had a center like him. Maybe not—injuries and psychological issues are a concern. But when you’re in dire straight like we are, he’s the kind of talent you roll the dice on unless you’re content going for the sure thing (by which I mean getting 12 and 9 from K-Love for the next ten years and averaging 29 wins a season during that span).
by Shogun on Jun 9, 2009 10:50 AM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
This post is thoroughly unfair
First of all, what people “considered” Oden to be 2 years ago doesn’t really matter. What he is and what he can be does.
Second of all, and this doesn’t really matter, you didn’t say “center” in your first post, you said “big man.” Garnett and Duncan qualify. After 2 years in the league, they were both way ahead of where Oden is.
Third, you’re patently unfair to Kevin Love. I don’t have a mania for the guy, but 12 and 9 for the next 10 years? He was 11 and 9 as a rookie in 25 minutes a night.
If you want to discuss this seriously you should refrain from the Shaq comparisons and the unfair assumptions.
by Eric in Madison on Jun 9, 2009 10:59 AM CDT up reply actions
Couldn't have said it better
Objective testing at the combine told us Kevin Love was a better athlete that anyone expected. But somehow that doesn’t count because the tests aren’t a true indication of athleticism. Then KLove comes in and posts the highest rookie PER, while improving each month during the season, but still he won’t get any better because he’s limited athletically.
Players like Oden with “Potential” are apparently a given to solve their foul issues, polish their offensive game, and beat injuries, but KLove will never improve to be a better player than he was playing 25 minutes as a 20 year old NBA rookie.
I'm not going to lie...
… my assessment of Love is that his ceiling is somewhere below the level of a “star.” He struggled on offense last year. He couldn’t get his shot off around the basket. His post game was tentative. Many of his offensive rebounds and points came on putbacks of his own misses or shots that were blocked. I like him, but I don’t think I’m being unfair by saying that his ceiling is lower than Oden’s, especially if we’re looking at each player’s overall potential to impact his team’s future playoff prospects. As others have said, Oden may never reach his full potential, but my basketball philosophy is that when you’re in an extreme rebuilding situation, you accumulate the most potential possible and hope that it develops into a contending team.
I’m sorry you misunderstood what I meant by “big man.” I should’ve been clearer. I would place Duncan in the subjective category of a “big man” but I wouldn’t place Garnett, a SF for most of his career whose game relies so heavily on passing, in that category.
Finally, I disagree that what people “considered” Oden to be two years ago does matter because we still don’t know what he’ll end up doing, and he isn’t a worse prospect now than he was then unless he cannot recover from his knee surgery. The problem with relying on statistical analysis exclusively is that it can only tell you what people have done in the past, not what they can or will do in the future. Although there’s a correlation between one’s past and future performances, the relationship is not deterministic and Oden is precisely the kind of guy whose future performance is unlikely to be predicted by his past performance for various reasons (his injuries; a learning curve in the NBA; starting out on a team that was already in contention and already has a good veteran center; etc). People are making way too big of a deal of his supposed lack of production last year. As one Blazers fan noted, that point is by itself debatable. However, I think we need a significantly bigger sample before Oden can be evaluated. I’m not saying that he’s going to be the next Bill Russell; I’m just saying that I think people are dismissing him way too summarily without good reasons. He’s extremely young, extremely big, and extremely talented. That’s the kind of guy I’ll take a risk on.
Oden ABSOLUTELY is a worse prospect than he was 2 years ago
There is no question about this.
First of all, he’s missed over a year of development time. He’s missed the opportunity to improve in practice and in games.
Second of all, there is question about his recovery from the knee problems. People don’t have major knee surgery without effect.
Third, 2 years ago, we weren’t as aware of his propensity to get hurt. We know more now.
by Eric in Madison on Jun 9, 2009 11:26 AM CDT up reply actions
Read what he wrote
“…unless he cannot recover from his knee surgery.” It’s a risk—nobody disputes that.
Well, I did read that
My point #2 was that it seems unreasonable that there are no effects from such a surgery.
Even ignoring that, I’m still right. Oden is a worse prospect than he was 2 years ago. Isn’t this obvious?
by Eric in Madison on Jun 9, 2009 11:36 AM CDT up reply actions
Fair points
but I think his qualifier was pretty significant. If you assume that Oden has a good (probably not possible to have an absolutely complete, but let’s go with this) recovery from surgery, then his prospects as a pro player are about the same as in 2007. I don’t think last year is a very telling indicator of anything, because he was in recovery mode, and trying to learn NBA basketball at the same time.
Well, I disagree
because I think the missed development time is actually significant, even completely ignoring any long term effects of the injuries.
But it seems to me that you are contradicting yourself somewhat. You’ve consistently pointed out that Portland wouldn’t consider this 2 years ago. If he still has the same prospects as he did then, why would they consider it now? It has to be that, for some reason, they don’t consider his future prospects as good as they were 2 years ago.
by Eric in Madison on Jun 9, 2009 11:52 AM CDT up reply actions
You're right...
I am. Part of the reason that I wanted to post this, was to see the reaction it would get. In my opinion, and I am quite sure that Pritchard’s would be the same, this is a terrible trade for Portland. But, Wolves’ fans here think the opposite way. I don’t really think Portland would do it, but you’re right that the injuries are an issue to consider and lower Oden’s value.
Blazer's fans speak
And they don’t like the trade (even though they appear to like Love, but they also point out there’s no position for him on Portland).
"Come on Eddie, let's get serious."
They wont consider it now
All you will get from Kevin Pritchard is Laughter at the thought of this trade.
Dunning-Kreuger
Look it up!
I'm a really really ridiculously good looking orange mocha frappaccino drinking manhammer sandwich
Look at the guys that had MF surgery
their 1st years back were horrendous. Then, in year 2, big improvements. Know something about the process if you’re going to use it as a huge concern. The foot issues? A sprained ankle is a foot issue?
I'm a really really ridiculously good looking orange mocha frappaccino drinking manhammer sandwich
Love is way ahead of Oden. And he's younger.
Oden has one thing over Love and one thing only. Size. Love is, was, and always will be a better basketball player. Write this down – Oden will never be an All Star. Love will be an All Star. 11 and 9 as a rookie! Vastly better than that if you look at just the second half of the year, after the miserable start he got off to.
Love is going to be a 20 point scorer in this league. He is already the second best player the Wolves have ever had. DO NOT TRADE LOVE.
by princelyfrank on Jun 9, 2009 12:25 PM CDT up reply actions
Oden has a far greater chance at being an all star than Love...
Look at the NBA today. How many really good centers are there compared to PF’s. Love is not the second best player the Wolves have had.
"And once again we can say, it's a GREAT day to be a Blazer."- Brian Wheeler
Ya
Definitely not second best ever. I think All-Star games are poor measures in this case because realistically Oden is competing against far fewer and weaker competition at the center position than Love is at the forward position. Not that Oden doesn’t have game, but he needs far less of it to get the All-Star game.
"Come on Eddie, let's get serious."
Point taken. It's true it's way easier to be an All Star C than PF.
So let me rephrase. Love is going to have a better career than Oden. And a longer one. With less injuries.
Who would you guys say is the Wolves’ second best player ever? Cassell? Gugliotta? Marbury? Terrell Brandon? Sprewell? Wally, god help us? Big Al? Chauncey? Anybody who had more than two good seasons for us? The pickings are depressingly slim, looking back on it.
But you’re right, Love probably does not qualify for that superlative – YET. He is, though, the second-best 19 year old the Wolves ever had (and was, frankly, comparable to KG as a rookie, at the same age, if less visually impressive).
by princelyfrank on Jun 9, 2009 1:10 PM CDT up reply actions
Me?
I like Al. My only problem with him is his usual lack of concentration on defense, through which he basically has rendered himself a one-way player. I do have high hopes he can improve on his D, though.
So, Big Al is our second best player ever? Sure, why not. I guess I agree with that. But I don’t feel that it’s as cut-and-dried as you suggest, I guess, since we’ve still only seen one and a half seasons out of him.
I guess that was my point. We haven’t had any great players who performed at a high level for more than a season or two other than KG, period. It makes me sad.
by princelyfrank on Jun 10, 2009 2:26 PM CDT up reply actions
Oden has as much potential as Duncan and KG did when they entered the league.
With the hindsight of their hall of fame careers, it’s hard to say that he’ll reach it like they did. But his size, athleticism and skill-set at such a young age is every bit what those guys had at 21. Duncan was still at Wake Forest and KG was still a pretty raw offensive player.
As everyone keeps repeating, the injuries are the concern, but they’re also the only reason why Oden could potentially be had in a reasonable trade like the one I suggested.
Even when Oden has been "healthy"
(a relative term for him), he hasn’t been that productive. Can you at least accept 15 points and 11 rebounds per 36 minutes as stats that can be used? Because if you do, then he’s been good, not great. Of course, with 6.5 fouls per 36 minutes, too, he likely wouldn’t be on the court long enough to achieve those numbers.
Maybe someday, but there is very little evidence other than hype to demonstrate that Greg Oden will be a Great Big Man.
Right, but you saying that
“if it weren’t for the injuries, Portland would never make this trade” is like saying the plane would have been on time if it hadn’t crashed.
I admit the injuries are an issue...
but you’d never in a million years have thought the Wolves could trade for Greg Oden, two years ago. If it’s possible, and his knee passes a physical exam, then it’s a risk worth taking.
It’s not like his career is over. I think the knee is a legitimate excuse for a 7-foot rookie to struggle. As more time goes on, it becomes less of an excuse and he needs to show something.
How about trading for Oden last year?
Would you rather trade for Oden last year or Chandler?
"Come on Eddie, let's get serious."
It probably depends on health
Chandler failed a physical. That is a red flag, obviously. Oden had microfracture. It would depend on which player is healthier. But Chandler, at no point in his career, has shown an aptitude for low-post play. His offense, when good, has been alley-oop finishes from CP3. Oden has a decent touch with both hands and, if healthy, has a lot more upside.
Exactly--how can you scout potential when they're hurt?
Here’s another trade proposal from last year:
Would you rather have Oden or Przybilla?
Portland’s top 4 guys + Oden = +6, 40% win share
Portland’s top 4 guys + Pryz = +174, 64.4% win share
"Come on Eddie, let's get serious."
That +174 with Pryz in unit
ranks 3rd among all 5 man units in the NBA last year, behind the Celt’s big 3 and Lebron’s cohorts and ahead of Kobe and Howard’s best units. Interestingly Portland’s second best group of 5 guys (in terms of +/-) would rank 11th overall at +93, also with Pryz in the group.
"Come on Eddie, let's get serious."
I cannot believe you're having such a hard time defending this deal.
Are these the Wolves management? Would explain much.
I'm a really really ridiculously good looking orange mocha frappaccino drinking manhammer sandwich
Taking away as much of the subjective arguments as possible...
I look at it this way:
Could Greg Oden realistically make the Timberwolves a title contender in the next three years?
Answer: Yes.
Since this move, on its own could do something that will likely take us many off-seasons, lucky draft picks, and minor trades, I think it’s a complete no-brainer on our end.
I don’t think its QUITE as terrible for Portland as their fan base (as shown on this board at least) makes it out to be. Portland has the makings of a title contender in future seasons, even without a healthy Oden. Since Love and the 6th Pick could provide them with two good, healthy players, it’s not completely stupid to think that two solid players is better than a risk like Oden, who could be the league’s best player, or sitting out in street clothes.
I still wouldn’t do it if I were Portland, but if Roy and LMA are as good as many of the Blazer fans think they are (and I tend to agree that they are very good, All-Star caliber players) then the idea of bringing in more good players for one that can’t seem to stay healthy isn’t completely off-the-wall stupid.
For Minnesota, it’s a risk that’s obviously worth taking because of where we currently stand, and where Oden could potentially take us. We need a healthy Greg Oden more than you do, and you need good, solid, healthy players more than we do. If that makes sense.
But yeah, Kevin Love is a bit overvalued here, I think.
That's the point
I really do hear you when you keep saying that this trade is only possible because of the injury concerns, and that Oden could still turn out to be a extremely good player that would make the trade look good.
But that knife (or microfracturing device) cuts both ways—a 7 footer with a history of injuries is historically a bad gamble. Sometimes they do work out, more often than not they don’t. And Oden’s biggest value is in his athleticism for his size, and if you remove even 10% of his athleticism from his game his much talked about ‘potential’ drops significantly. The strength of Love’s game isn’t dependent on athleticism, but rather his basketball smarts, and that’s the crux of the differences of opinion on this board:
Either you favor risking on freakish size and athleticism over the long haul, or you go with a guy who’ll still be able to produce pretty well at a given level for a long time.
"Come on Eddie, let's get serious."
There's evidence
He changes the game the second he enters. Catch some games, and see how the court alters around him. He’s just so big, and has the power to move people around.
I'm a really really ridiculously good looking orange mocha frappaccino drinking manhammer sandwich
Well, you assume he has as much potential as they did
I don’t make that assumption. Duncan and Garnett both had the potential to be MVPs and Hall of Famers. We know this to be true because they did in fact become MVPs and Hall of Famers.
Frankly, I’m one of the more sympathetic people here to your proposal, but I think you’re going off the reservation here.
Through age 21, Garnett had 3 full seasons and was giving you real numbers as a starter and star. (18.5/9.5).
Age 21 was Duncan’s rookie year. A mere 21 and 12 in a full season.
The point being, they were both well on their way to fufilling their potential, a potential which, at that time, was becoming clear BY THEIR PLAY.
Oden, on the other hand, has done none of those things. He has played 60 of a possible 160 games. He hasn’t established any basis for great potential by his play in the NBA. I just don’t see how you conclude that his potential is to be at that level.
by Eric in Madison on Jun 9, 2009 11:08 AM CDT up reply actions
Eric...
…this is a tautology.
“Duncan and Garnett both had the potential to be MVPs and Hall of Famers. We know this to be true because they did in fact become MVPs and Hall of Famers.”
You can’t only look at the ex post results to assess talent. You have to assess whether Oden had/has as much talent as these guys when he entered the league. Most people on draft day said that the answer was “yes.” Oden still has 10-15 years to make good on that talent. I’m not ready to write him off yet. Even if he became half the player Duncan or Garnett became, he would be a huge asset on the Timberwolves at the center position.
That was my intention
I was trying to point out that we talk about potential, but its meaning is unclear. We’ll never know how much potential Greg Oden has at this very moment. What he actually accomplishes will, by definition, be something less than his peak potential.
I also disagree that he has as much talent as those guys. I frankly think the chances that he does have as much talent (by which I mean all of the abilities that make up being a great NBA player) are probably around 1%. It might have been a little higher on draft day 2 years ago, but we aren’t making this trade on draft day 2 years ago, which Andy has eloquently pointed out.
I agree, though, that if even if he isn’t those guys, it doesn’t mean he can’t be a good player. Ultimately, my real objection is the injuries and their attendant risk, with my belief that health is a skill.
by Eric in Madison on Jun 9, 2009 11:33 AM CDT up reply actions
Oden for 60 games a years
is better than Love for 82. Oden at 60% health is better than Love at 90%
I'm a really really ridiculously good looking orange mocha frappaccino drinking manhammer sandwich
Thanks for clearing that up
Now that you’ve proven to me by saying so that Oden for 60 games a year is better than Love for 82, I guess it must be true.
Good god. If this is the best you can do, you really shouldn’t bother. If you are so convinced you’re right that you cannot be bothered to make cogent arguments, I don’t know why you came here to post.
Anyway, in the spirit of your brilliant logic, I’ll tell you that you are wrong on both counts.
by Eric in Madison on Jun 10, 2009 7:29 PM CDT up reply actions
What about Dwight Howard?
I think he has more potential than Oden, and more importantly is further along in actually realizing it than Oden.
"Come on Eddie, let's get serious."
"Further Along"
Yep. Been in the league a few more years. Definitely further along. Great call.
"The Edge... there is no honest way to explain it because the only people who really know where it is are the ones who have gone over."
Fair enough. Can't believe Howard's been in the league since 2004 already.
"Come on Eddie, let's get serious."
I agree with you there.
Time flies. I still remember when Shaq got drafted like…was I really 13 when that happened?!?
"The Edge... there is no honest way to explain it because the only people who really know where it is are the ones who have gone over."
I do wonder
why when Love is talked about not being able to score. His Free Throw Rate and TS% are never mentioned? These rants also assume he’s not going to develop the shooting-range he showed at UCLA or improve as a finisher around the basket.
Just because you can shoot a high percentage...
Does not mean you are a good scorer. Joel Przybilla shot 62% from the floor for the year but if you watch the Blazers at all you would know that Przybilla is not a good offensive player.
"And once again we can say, it's a GREAT day to be a Blazer."- Brian Wheeler
True
But Pryzbilla’s usage was also half of Love’s usage. A player like Pryzbilla’s usage rates tend to indicate this fact. The problem with these rants which is somewhat more easily forgiven of Trailblazer fans is that people assume that drawing fouls isn’t an offensive skill.
Drawing fouls is absolutely a very good offensive skill to have...
With that being said I think Oden has a chance to be far better than Love at drawing fouls on opposing bigs. He is still very raw on the offensive end and teams are already doubling and fouling him to prevent dunks.
"And once again we can say, it's a GREAT day to be a Blazer."- Brian Wheeler
Oden's not the issue here
He’s very good at drawing fouls when in the game. My main issue is the injury risk and that Al rightly or wrongly plays more like a traditional center thereby wondering whether how will they would play together. My issue is all these rantings consisting of the idea that Love can’t score which ignores this fact.
by Jose Cordoba on Jun 9, 2009 11:55 AM CDT up reply actions
Przybilla.
"The Edge... there is no honest way to explain it because the only people who really know where it is are the ones who have gone over."
Here's a suggestion...
Go post this at Blazers Edge and see how fast you get laughed out of the place. There is absolutely no way that Portland does this deal. What a lot of you are forgetting is that Love plays the same position as Portlands second best player, LaMarcus Aldridge. They would be essentialy getting a back-up PF and the sixth pick in a fairly weak draft for a really good defensive center with the potential to be great. Not to mention Portland does not need to be getting any younger.
"And once again we can say, it's a GREAT day to be a Blazer."- Brian Wheeler
by lrh86 on Jun 9, 2009 11:45 AM CDT reply actions 1 recs
Nobody overestimates a team's players
as much as the fans of the team overestimate the players. We prove that on an hourly basis here.
Irh86
I have no doubt that it would get that reaction, and I understand that. For the record, I think this would be a steal for the Wolves and Portland would never do it. It’s just interesting that our fans here consider it a bad idea, and yet both front offices would think the opposite way.
I totaly understand where you are coming from...
I like it when people bring things like this up. It makes for interesting and fun conversation.
"And once again we can say, it's a GREAT day to be a Blazer."- Brian Wheeler
Andy
it is precisely because of that fact (“our fans consider it a bad idea”) that I went on that slightly insane rant. The thing that ticks me off about Oden bashers (I use the term bash very loosely) who criticize him for his low statistical production is that they always make excuses for their own players. That is why I brought up Randy Foye as an example, because he is obviously a guy who hasn’t panned out the way you wanted him to. I would speculate that 2 years ago after Foye’s rookie season, the prevailing attitude among Wolves fans was that he still had plenty of time to reach his “potential”, and that he would significantly improve the next season. This is true of fans in general, we tend to hold a double standard when analyzing player failures on other teams when compared to our own. I brought up Foye in order to illustrate this double standard because if wolves fans held the hope that Foye would improve significantly after his rookie season (and expected it to happen), why wouldn’t Oden get the same benefit of the doubt?
"B-Roy is the best shooting guard I have played against"
-Ron Artest
If Artest can say it, so can I. Broy>Kobe.
Another example is Corey Brewer
He had a bad rookie year, a torn ACL in his second year, and many of our fans (myself included) hold out hope that he can become a good pro. The thing with Oden is that his potential is so great. He has MVP potential, and I’m a little surprised that more of our fans here, as much as they value K-Love, wouldn’t want to do this trade if it were possible.
I dont remember coming here after the draft
(i like your guys’ site a lot, even if Jose C is delusional.. :)
When you first got him, were you guys big fans of Love? He is an Oregon kid so he had lots of admirers, then he shunned the Oregon colleges and got a lot of haters, and then won a lot at UCLA and got MORE haters, but I was just curious what Canis’ reaction to drafting him was?
by GreatOden'sRaven on Jun 9, 2009 6:36 PM CDT up reply actions
Your arguments are so well-argued
I don’t know how I couldn’t be convinced.
reading some of your comments is making me puke
by PippenAintEasy on Jun 9, 2009 6:54 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
Originally I thought Jose C was an intern or some sort of spinster for the wolves...
but I think he is actually just delusional and does in fact believe the stuff he writes
Because the comments on this site used to be good until you and several other posters
started bombarding it with your terrible analysis and disgustingly over-the-top homerism.
I can't stress enough...
…that this sort of BS will not be tolerated on this site. I get that you have a shtick and that part of this involves being an over-the-top commenter but enough with the calling people delusional and putting up comments that amount to little more than “HA, HA, you suck.” Go somewhere else for that. 1 week penalty.
The World's Leading Exporter of Small Area Quickness
www.canishoopus.com
Homerism???
1. I’ve stated on several occasions my dislike for numerous Wolves Players such as: Collins, Ollie, and Carney.
2. When Mike was on here from the Bullets Forever- he acknowledged my valuations of Miller, Foye, and Gomes were more than fair.
3. I’ve defended Bassy,Brewer, Shelden, and K.Love
4. I haven’t said anything that no one else has really said in regards to Al.
hahaha
collins ollie carney.. of course you dislike them.. they arent good..
i dislike raef lafrentz, shavlik randolph (not really, your cool, but not good) and Michael Ruffin..
see im not a homer!!!
by GreatOden'sRaven on Jun 9, 2009 7:22 PM CDT up reply actions
this was a question.. not an argument.. hence the ? at the end
however.. i will say.. if you TRULY think Love is better than Aldridge.. or that Portland would give up Oden for him.. do what you do. It would more likely take AJ, Miller and #1 this year, maybe next too… .
by GreatOden'sRaven on Jun 9, 2009 7:00 PM CDT up reply actions
andy if you get a chance, answer this for me.. im just curious
because of what i mentioned earlier.. he wasnt particularly loved in Portland, just want to know how it was up there
by GreatOden'sRaven on Jun 9, 2009 7:28 PM CDT up reply actions
Sorry for the slow reply
There was a very mixed, and polarized reaction to the Mayo Trade. Myself, and a few others were extremely upset with the trade, mostly because we felt like Mayo was the clear-cut third best player and that Mike Miller was no reason to give that up (Miller was the “tipping point” for the trade) and also the fact that we didn’t like Jefferson playing center in 2007-08 and that Love’s addition would cement Jefferson in that spot.
Regarding Love, specifically, fans were initially enthused about his combine workouts, and 35" reported vertical. Then, we saw him play and he wasn’t very athletic and he struggled a lot right away. Throughout the year, he showed himself to be a really good rebounder, in a “boxing out” sense, more than a “leap up and grab it” sense. I know it sounds like a stupid distinction, but Garnett, Howard and Oden are great rebounders in a completely different way that Love is.
This website, and its administrator, Stop-N-Pop, has been a big supporter of Love from the outset. I can’t recall exactly what others thought right away, but CanisHoopus has always been filled with a lot of Pro-Love voices and this discussion today isn’t too different from the sentiments that you would’ve read before this past season, and throughout most of it, (aside from the first couple months, when everybody was a little concerned that Love was not going to make it.) Sometimes, I think it gets taken too far, but it makes for good discussion and debate.
You're underestimating his instincts as a rebounder...
He’s not good just because he boxes out. He understands shot angles and caroms and gets to the ball on both ends a step quicker than other players. By the end of the season, teams were doubling him to make sure he didn’t grab offensive boards.
It’s also because he showed a knack of getting to the foul line despite having no post up game and getting his shot blocked fairly consistently (and his foul shots weren’t primarily because of 3rd and 4th attempts after blocks) and because his potential as an outside shooter was largely ignored on the offensive end this year.
Bottom line, he produced despite not being put in good positions to succeed. They didn’t run pick-and-pop plays for him (the best possible situation for him), dumped the ball to him in the low post against taller or stronger guys, and made him play extensive minutes at center with Gomes or Smith at power forward, yet he still put up 12 and 9.
by pagingstanleyroberts on Jun 9, 2009 10:47 PM CDT up reply actions
Love's probably better than Lamarcus
If you go based on Statistical Efficency. You can make all emotion based arguments you want. Love had a higher TS percentage and was a vastly superior rebounder. Aldridge is clearly longer- but then when Love collects 12 percent more Defensive Rebounds this also has to be factored in. I would also wonder what quality of looks Love would get if he had Brandon Roy with the ball in his hands most of the time as opposed to Bassy. Along with going from a terrible shooting basketball team to a very good shooting basketball team.
What I will say is that K. Love doesnt’ match up real well with LaMarcus although this will improve with time. What I can clearly sayed is based on Lamarcus’ progression I would rather have Kevin Love long-term.
Wow!
Have you fell off your rocker? How much would Love rebound while playing next to two good rebounders in Oden and Przybilla? Aldridge is a vastly superior offensive and defensive player than Kevin Love and thats not even debatable. The only thing Love does better that Aldridge is rebound and only by 1.6 per game and don’t bring up your precious TS% because Aldridge shoots a higher percentage from the floor and he is only slightly behind in his TS%. I think you will find very few people to agree with you on your opinions of Love and Aldridge.
"And once again we can say, it's a GREAT day to be a Blazer."- Brian Wheeler
Funny
One actually draws contact but the other one doesn’t. You act like 48 percent shooting for a 4 who doesn’t draw contact is great. You also believe that Rebounds Per Game is more indicative than rebound rate. Love’s also three years younger and a more productive rookie than Aldridge was in 2006/2007.
As far as being surronded by talent when Love was playing next to Al and had actual outside shooting for one month. His numbers projected out to 19 PPG and 15 RPG per 36. The issue with Love’s numbers related to surronding talent.
The only reason this isn’t debate is because you choose to ignore stats and whose on both their teams.
by Jose Cordoba on Jun 9, 2009 12:49 PM CDT up reply actions
Just wait.
You’ll see. Aldridge put up his numbers on a playoff team. Love did it on a team screaming for somebody, anybody, to do something.
"The Edge... there is no honest way to explain it because the only people who really know where it is are the ones who have gone over."
You’re still comparing a 20-year-old rookie to a 3-year veteran, who should be further ahead in his development.
by pagingstanleyroberts on Jun 9, 2009 2:10 PM CDT up reply actions
How much further in his development should he be?
He was getting consideration for all star in his third year. He is putting up 18 and 7.5 on a playoff team. Not to mention the last few months of the season he was putting up huge numbers. He was a big reason that the Blazers got the fourth seed in the playoffs.
"And once again we can say, it's a GREAT day to be a Blazer."- Brian Wheeler
It should also be stated
Looking at splits Love’s best Month-January was vastly superior to any month LaMarcus had.
So...
12.6 and 10.0 is better than 19.8 and 8.5. Where did you go to school?
"And once again we can say, it's a GREAT day to be a Blazer."- Brian Wheeler
by lrh86 on Jun 9, 2009 2:34 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
38.7 MPG vs 24.0 MPG
The Wolves also went 10-4 this month. If you take the minutes out to 36 Minutes this equates to 18.9 and 15.0 on 54.0% Shooting- along with getting to the line at a rate of over .50.
Once again...
There is a reason Love was only playing 24 minutes a game. Look at it this way, how many teams would Love start for? Playoff teams? There are only about 4-5 playoff teams that Aldridge wouldn’t start for and even then they would probably move him to the center position because he is too talented to not have on the floor.
"And once again we can say, it's a GREAT day to be a Blazer."- Brian Wheeler
He was a freaking rookie. Do I think he’s better than Aldridge now? No. Do I think he’ll be better than Aldridge in 2 years? Yes. It’s not difficult to envision him being as good of a shooter as Aldridge, a better rebounder and passer, more capable of drawing fouls, and a slightly worse defender due to lacking length and agility. Love played more minutes as a rookie than Aldridge did, and if Jefferson had been healthy the whole season, the 08-09 Wolves would’ve finished with a similar record as the 06-07 Blazers.
by pagingstanleyroberts on Jun 9, 2009 5:21 PM CDT up reply actions
So in other words....
You think that Love will be All-NBA, multiple all star in a couple years because thats what its going to take to be considered better than Aldridge.
And for the record, it’s not like I don’t like Kevin Love as a player, I actually think he will be a pretty good player in the NBA for a long time. I certainly think he has the tools to be good, just not great.
"And once again we can say, it's a GREAT day to be a Blazer."- Brian Wheeler
Oh, I didn't realize LMA was All-NBA and on the All Star Team.
Oh, what’s that? He’s not either of those things?
by princelyfrank on Jun 9, 2009 6:12 PM CDT up reply actions
What I'm saying is...
I think he will have accomplished these things in a couple years. He arguably could have been on the all star team ahead of David West this year if you ask me(and a lot of fans for that matter).
"And once again we can say, it's a GREAT day to be a Blazer."- Brian Wheeler
Hey Homer
Their were a heckuva lot better players that LMA left off the all star team. One of them being the best player on the Wolves, Al Jefferson. I don’t know why I am responding to you though, your blanket statements as facts, and man-crush on LMA is evident by all your nonsense on the Blazers board.
I actually think Big Al got screwed by not getting on the all star team.
He should have made it over Shaq. Al is a center. not a PF.Who else was left off that was better than LMA at forward? The only one I can think of is Melo and he was going through injury struggles for the first half of the year and wasn’t putting up his usual numbers.
"And once again we can say, it's a GREAT day to be a Blazer."- Brian Wheeler
KD
didnt start to pick up steam until after the break
by PippenAintEasy on Jun 9, 2009 7:37 PM CDT up reply actions
back it up....
As far as PFs go, start naming players that are a “heckuva lot better than LMA left off the all star team”
by PippenAintEasy on Jun 9, 2009 7:06 PM CDT up reply actions
I won't say they were a lot better...
But ’Melo, Paul Millsap (or Boozer if not injured), and Stoudemire were forwards who had comparable numbers to Aldridge.
by pagingstanleyroberts on Jun 9, 2009 10:52 PM CDT up reply actions
was there a stoudemire who wasnt in the allstar game?
not only was millsap not a “heckuva” lot better than aldridge, he was not even as good.
melo did not deserve it anymore than aldridge…. if we are basing it on play, not on status.
BOOZER!!!???? ahahahahaha….. injured… why even mention him “he should have been on the allstar team over aldridge.. if he wasnt injured all year”
by PippenAintEasy on Jun 9, 2009 11:00 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
My bad on Stoudemire. As for Boozer/Millsap, the point was that one of the two Utah PFs would’ve been in contention. Learn to read. ‘Melo deserved it because he’s the star of the Nuggets, unlike Aldridge. Unlike Aldridge, teams have to account for ‘Melo first in their gameplan every night. The title of the post was "I won’t say they were a lot better," which implies that I don’t think any of them were a lot better. Again, learn to read.
by pagingstanleyroberts on Jun 9, 2009 11:11 PM CDT up reply actions
I didn't like you much on BE
But I’m really starting to miss you
I'm a really really ridiculously good looking orange mocha frappaccino drinking manhammer sandwich
A weak rebounding jump-shooter being a multiple all-star and all-NBA player? I’m not seeing it happen. He MIGHT get an all-star berth in the same way David West did, but seriously, he’s not THAT good. A nice #2/3 player, sure, but don’t overrate the guy..
nah, i don’t think that wolves fans could even argue that kevin love is going to be the best player on a contender. he’s a 2 or 3 guy as well.
heart of a champion, will of the warrior.
I would say...
maybe a sixth man or role player on a contender.
"And once again we can say, it's a GREAT day to be a Blazer."- Brian Wheeler
because being a fantastic rebounder and efficient scorer isn’t particularly useful?
heart of a champion, will of the warrior.
Very useful...
I just don’t think he has enough overall skills to be a 2nd or 3rd option on a contender. He very well could play an important role on a championship contender. Kinda like a Leon Powe type of player.
"And once again we can say, it's a GREAT day to be a Blazer."- Brian Wheeler
those are the two most useful things a post player can do, and considering that he’s already one of the best rebounders in the nba, an improving scorer and already much better than leon powe (and i’ve argued that he’s already better than aldridge in terms of production), there’s really zero comparison between love and powe.
heart of a champion, will of the warrior.
Well if you still think that Love is better than LMA...
the only thing that can help you is many many hours of intense therapy or even a full frontal lobatomy. (or maybe remove your hatred for the TrailBlazers and see where that gets you. I don’t think for a second you are looking at this unbiased.)
"And once again we can say, it's a GREAT day to be a Blazer."- Brian Wheeler
i like the blazers. they’re a fun team to watch play and i don’t think that love is head and shoulders above him, but i’ve made the case for love as a non-wolves, non-blazers fan based on actual production, if you disagree, that’s fair, but it’s not my blinding hatred of LMA or the portland trailblazers that makes me prefer kevin love. read the rest of my comments on this post for the rationale.
heart of a champion, will of the warrior.
I'm sorry...
but there is no way that i can believe that you are not bringing bias into the arguement when everything points to LMA being the far superior player. I’ve already made my arguments for why LMA is better so i don’t need to make them again. Also there is a few Blazer fans that presented far better arguments than i did that indicate LMA’s superiority.
"And once again we can say, it's a GREAT day to be a Blazer."- Brian Wheeler
rebounding rates and scoring efficiency point to kevin love being the better player, and his age indicates that he will continue to improve. i’ve backed up my claims with stats, most posts in aldridge’s favor rely on aldridge having played more minutes or having a better midrange jumper. those things don’t impress me. it has nothing to do with a burning hatred of the blazers.
heart of a champion, will of the warrior.
AGAIN
Why do you think he is playing more minutes? It is because he is better. Besides he is playing 38 min per game on a 54 win team. Love is playing 25 min per game on a team that flat out sucked. That speaks volumes.
"And once again we can say, it's a GREAT day to be a Blazer."- Brian Wheeler
McHale
If you followed the wolves at all this year, you would know that Mr. McHale believes rookies need to earn thier time and not just get it handed to them. I also believe that the point was made that KLOVE played more minutes than your mancrush guy in his rookie year. Now we can agree to disagree and while I like LMA ok, I will take Love and his potential right now over LMA and what he has accomplished to this point – TYVM
Sometimes the obvious is hidden.
by frankenhoops on Jun 11, 2009 3:30 PM CDT up reply actions
You can have Love
he is an undersized, slow power forward that can’t keep up with smaller forwards.
You can’t teach size.
I’ll take the second option on a 54 win playoff team that has actually proven that he can put up good numbers on a really good team.
"And once again we can say, it's a GREAT day to be a Blazer."- Brian Wheeler
If Love was on the Blazers his #'s would go down because he would be surrounded by better scorers & rebounders
If LA was on Minn. he would have better #’sas he would be the focal point
Kevin Love could've started ahead of David West, too.
West had injuries and sucked.
Three things you must know:
-"Ben Gordon is a bundle of muscle and clutch. That's all he's made of. Drink BG7 energy drink, you'll grow a pair of balls on your balls."
-Pau Gasol: The defense of a seven foot ladder paired with the post presence of Manute Bol.
-Joakim Noah is better than you.
I’m saying that a third-year player should be ahead of a rookie at this stage of his career. Comparing last year’s Aldridge to last year’s Love is faulty because one had been in the league for two years and the other was in high school two years ago. It has nothing to do with Aldridge not being developed enough.
by pagingstanleyroberts on Jun 9, 2009 5:12 PM CDT up reply actions
The Win difference between the Two Teams was 30 games.
Take away Jefferson’s injury the win difference is more like 24. This is based on WOW’s figures at the time of Al’s injury. Trade the perimeter play of Roy for Foye then the difference becomes much narrower. When you consider Portland’s vastly superior depth- the difference becomes narrower still. My main point in that the difference between the two teams has nothing to do with Kevin Love vs LaMarcus Aldridge.
Yeah...usually minutes are tougher to come by with superior depth.
I do see your point from your point of view, but no way I trade Love for LMA. Lord no.
"The Edge... there is no honest way to explain it because the only people who really know where it is are the ones who have gone over."
If he is so darn good...
why isn’t he playing 36 minutes a game?
"And once again we can say, it's a GREAT day to be a Blazer."- Brian Wheeler
This has been discussed here at nauseam
Kevin McHale believed in limiting his minutes for development sake.
This could easily be turned around
and asked why if Greg Oden is worth a Top 15 Player in the league given his durability why is he playing half of Pryzbilla’s Minutes in the playoffs?
Because Przybilla is flat out better than Oden right now.
That was never the argument.
"And once again we can say, it's a GREAT day to be a Blazer."- Brian Wheeler
Foul trouble due to a lack of speed coming back from injury, the coach forcing him to learn how to jump out at the perimeter, being a dumb rook learning the game, etc.
When he was really healthy, he had no problem putting up very good numbers. He e.g. stayed on the floor for almost the whole game against the Wizards, and even during overtime against Philly. Both games when he was better than 15 and 10.
If you look at the series against the Rockets, Oden is doing a very good job fronting Yao and denying him the ball. Better than Przybilla, better than most centers I have ever seen play Yao.
hmm..
This isn’t a debate because there is no place for Love to play for us. We need about 10 mins for a backup for LMA.
It will not improve our team. We built this team around our big 3. Kevin Love brings a different set of skills to the table, but he can’t bring what we NEED for our team.
Having 2 legit 7-footers is an underrated aspect of the basketball design we create. That, in itself, is too valuble to add a pointguard project and a backup PF.
The trade also suggests that Pryz can support himself through the timeline we have set. I dont see that happening.
Grol Odzilla is currently our center, a four armed blocking machine. It would be a mistake to give up on Greg. Watching him for his first full season impressed me when he had so many things going against him:
Sitting out a full year from major knee surgery.
Spending one year in college, he came into the draft raw as it was.
Recovering from said surgery during the season.
Getting thrust into a world of unreal expectations.
Learning the speed of the NBA. Centers can take awhile to adjust, espessily when they are considered raw to begin with.
Getting injured on the first game of the season, not what i would call a great start.
And with all of that, Oden impressed me by leaps and bounds. Look at his rebounding percentage, it is just plain rediculous. As the season went on, he looked more and more athletic, and looked less lost on the court then at the beginning of the season. At his WORST i could see him being a dominate defensive force. Blocking shots and grabbing boards in complete Beast Mode.
Upside like that is just plain stupid to give up on after just a year with all those previous factors.
As his athleticism grows while he recovers and adjusts to the speed of the NBA. We could see a monster rising from the NorthWest.
I love watching what kevin love brings to the table, so unless we move LMA to center alot more often, i dont see how this would work at all.
We already have a project PG in Bayless. At this point I would not want to take on another highly drafted prospect unless his name was Ricky Rubio and he was from Spain.
I just dont see us getting a sizeable impact player from that draft pick. Curry and Jennings would be nice but rolling the dice on Greg Oden is a much more safe thing to do in my eyes.
He could be Kwame Brown, or he could be Bill Russel. Im going to take my chances on that.
* Building a Greg Oden Fanboy Treehouse Clubhouse this summer...
That is part of the reason this discussion is ridiculous. All of us know that this will never really happen. Oden has potential and Love has potential and why would either team make the trade. I can see it more from the Wolves side (if you think we really need a 7’C instead of a 6’10 one), but not one that I would just jump on.
Sometimes the obvious is hidden.
by frankenhoops on Jun 11, 2009 3:36 PM CDT up reply actions
I like Love, but let me save you some time: NO!
Love and Aldridge existing next to each other would pose the same problems as Jefferson and Love. Even more so, since both are high-post players.
What I'm interested in is how you view Oden at this point
How much do the injuries reduce his value? How concerned are you that he lacks the skill to stay healthy? How much does the lost development time hurt him going forward (I seem to be the only person who thinks this matters, but I’m sure I’m right)?
by Eric in Madison on Jun 9, 2009 12:23 PM CDT up reply actions
I am super duper scared off by Oden's injuries.
I don’t know how much you guys remember Nervous Pervis Ellison?
by princelyfrank on Jun 9, 2009 12:33 PM CDT up reply actions
After watching Bynum in the playoffs struggle massively coming back from injury and Howard dominating on raw athleticism alone (he is still not a very skilled player, which is frightening considering he is only 23 and could still add better post moves and a mid-range jumper) people are a lot more optimistic about Oden again. First reports from summer training are very encouraging that he is regaining speed an vert, he e.g. had not started doing squats again before this month so you can expect him to build a lot of strength back in his lower body. He was playing last season at about 60-70 percent of his athletic ability and still trying to adapt to the increased speed of the game. And they are teaming him up with Jerryd Bayless, who while not having a great rookie season with little playing time is the hardest worker on the team.
The sky is the limit for Oden, and even if he wasn’t that impressive himself (though about the same PER as Love and a fantastic rebounding percentage isn’t shabby) he instantly made everyone around him better. Once he gets his quickness back (look up his predraft camp times) and his teammates learn to find him when he is open he can be very very helpful to the team, since he has better hands and is a better passer than say Bynum or Howard. I doubt the Blazers would trade him for anyone outside of an established star in or before his prime.
If Oden ever has a better season that Dwight Howard I will eat my hat.
by princelyfrank on Jun 9, 2009 1:04 PM CDT up reply actions
I don't think he will, but he will end up with more rings ;-)
Josh || BlazersEdge.com || "Friend to all women, lover to none"
And careful accepting that bet on Oden ever having a better season
Most people don’t know that princelyfrank’s hat looks like this:
I always make it a point to wear delicious hats.
Just in case I lose a bet. Never hurts to think ahead.
by princelyfrank on Jun 9, 2009 1:23 PM CDT up reply actions
Thatta boy.
Couldent of said it better Norsk.
Not that we diss on Love. We just like our core right now, plain and simple.
* Building a Greg Oden Fanboy Treehouse Clubhouse this summer...
Also, as suggested by your post
is your main concern about this fit as opposed to raw value going forward?
by Eric in Madison on Jun 9, 2009 12:24 PM CDT up reply actions
for me its both
Oden is more of a gamble— an unknown quantity— but the Blazers are trying to win a title here, so they need to take some risks in order to get past LeBron in the next few years. Oden has the chance to be a game changing defender and low post presence, which is something Love can’t be. Both are great rebounders (Love was a bit better last year), Oden has much more potential to be great in other areas as well. If the Blazers make this trade, they never get past round 2. With Oden, there’s still some significant hope for a title if Oden can stay healthy.
Exactly my argument...
… for pulling the trigger on this if I were David Kahn and Pritchard were dumb enough to agree to it. I think you have to do it from a strategic perspective.
Now this I agree with,
and it’s why the trade won’t get done.
Three things you must know:
-"Ben Gordon is a bundle of muscle and clutch. That's all he's made of. Drink BG7 energy drink, you'll grow a pair of balls on your balls."
-Pau Gasol: The defense of a seven foot ladder paired with the post presence of Manute Bol.
-Joakim Noah is better than you.
Portland fans would never, ever, (even at gunpoint) accept this trade.
Josh || BlazersEdge.com || "Friend to all women, lover to none"
Kevin Love is great, but he needs minutes
He’s not going to get them behind LaMarcus Aldridge.
Basically we’re trading our starting center of the future for a backup 4 who will get cranky and want to be traded and a crapshoot in a historically weak draft.
Josh || BlazersEdge.com || "Friend to all women, lover to none"
And he absolutely would be behind LaMarcus.
Despite what you’ll read in here. Understandable, however uninformed imhbfo.
"The Edge... there is no honest way to explain it because the only people who really know where it is are the ones who have gone over."
Of Course- you don't challenge me numbers wise.
or point out the difference in surronding talent on the rosters. You only call me uninformed. This is quite an argument.
They are so far apart talent wise that you don't have to go to the numbers
Ask any coach or player in the league and I’ll guarantee you that they’ll say Aldridge is the superior player. Teams develope game plans around him.
"And once again we can say, it's a GREAT day to be a Blazer."- Brian Wheeler
Hypothetical
put Aldridge on the Timberwolves this year playing out of position at Center. Playing alongside Ryan Gomes and Craig Smith along with weak perimter play. How effective would he truly be? Put Love alongside Pryzbilla and Oden in the Front-Court with Brandon Roy how effective would he be? Surronding talent is a huge part of this discussion. You seem to think this would have no effective on numbers.
You do that and I firmly believe....
That Aldridge would have made the wolves a far better team than Love ever could. You can’t guard a guy like Aldridge one-on-one if he is getting the majority of touches. This would open things up for shooters on the floor and i don’t care who you have, NBA players can hit a wide open jump-shot.
On the reverse, If you put Love on the Blazers with Roy it would limit Roy’s effectiveness because then teams would be able to focus all their attention on Roy where before they had to account for Aldridge. Love just isn’t the polished offensive player that Aldridge is.
"And once again we can say, it's a GREAT day to be a Blazer."- Brian Wheeler
"NBA players can hit open jumpers"
Obviously you didn’t watch a lot of Wolves basketball this year.
by princelyfrank on Jun 9, 2009 4:26 PM CDT up reply actions
Time will tell.
And I’m a HS coach. You can have yer numbers. I’ll take players.
"The Edge... there is no honest way to explain it because the only people who really know where it is are the ones who have gone over."
Double Hypothetical.
If Aldridge played for you he would make your team better. He is a special talent. Teams game plan around LMA. Not to mention the 2nd half tear he went on this year. LMA is still improving and pushing himself to the next level.
Just my opinion
* Building a Greg Oden Fanboy Treehouse Clubhouse this summer...
And I'm sorry if you thought I was calling you out (as you seem to be me)...
…but “imhbfo” means in my humble Blazer fan opinion. Not trying to say I’m right or you’re wrong. I would think we are correct in arguing that pretty much anybody who is not a fan of either teams takes LMA over Love, and I watched him play plenty in HS.
"The Edge... there is no honest way to explain it because the only people who really know where it is are the ones who have gone over."
i like imhboao
in my humble but obviously accurate opinion
Josh || BlazersEdge.com || "Friend to all women, lover to none"
not in a million years does Portland do this
For me, it would take an in-prime top 15 NBA player to give up Oden.
Although hometown boy Pryzbilla would be a better fit next to Jefferson
I doubt he could bring back that much trade value.
I’m curious if you guys would be interested in Tyson Chandler, as he is obviously on the market and seems like a good fit next to Jefferson…
Koponen - PG of the future. For Italy, that is. Book it.
I'd love to get Chandler...
… especially if he could be had for the price OKC had bought him for.
Also while Oden seems like Sir Foul-a-lot
Many times that was due to the coach’s stubborn refusal to get his players to fight through picks.
This resulted in Oden trying to guard speedy PGs and wings. When players started fighting through picks, Oden didn’t foul as much.
Koponen - PG of the future. For Italy, that is. Book it.
Wait--
when did the big change occur, causing Oden to get less fouls? Because if you’re talking about just the last three games of the regular season, I don’t think that counts as being statistically significant. The rest of the year there are a lot of 4-5 fouls per game, in 20 minutes or less.
He’s a tremendous specimen, that’s true. But he’s a terrible passing big man (one assist in his last 300 minutes on the court during the regular season). Worse yet, he will soon be playing at 300 pounds or above—not a good sign for someone with an injury history as a 20 year old. Defensively I think his size and injuries will hurt his career. Offensively, I don’t see a shooter with a repertoire of low-post moves.
I hope I’m wrong, because I like the guy. But at this point, I will be surprised if he becomes one of the NBA’s greatest centers.
300 lbs? Not a chance
He’ll be lighter this year than last.
I'm a really really ridiculously good looking orange mocha frappaccino drinking manhammer sandwich
I asked the same on BE: How do you feel about Al Jefferson coming back from his ACL injury?
Surgery and rehab for that procedure is probably better understood than rehab from microfracture, but it’s still a significant injury for such a big heavy dude. Will he have the same speed and agility to make post moves?
You see, Oden is not the only big with potential question marks about staying healthy in the future. Z had a few terrible years early in his career, now he overcame that and is pretty healthy. Bynum had two knee surgeries. Spencer Hawes had microfracture on both knees. Same with Kenyon Martin. Amare Stoudemire. But somehow people think Oden’s value should be massively discounted because of unrelated injuries before he could really show what a player he can become. That’s what drives Blazers fans up the wall.
We seem to be conducting this argument in 2 places
But I’m very worried about Jefferson’s future, frankly.
as for those other guys…I dunno, seems to me they make my point at least as much as yours. Martin’s injuries absolutely sapped him of any chance he had to be a real star. He’s also consistently missed games throughout his career.
Bynum…exactly. 50 games this year, I believe. After missing most of last season. We’ll see where that goes. Amare had a couple of full seasons after his surgery, which is good, then played 50 games this year.
Guys who get hurt tend to get hurt, as I said at your place. Regardless of how or whether injuries are “related,” bodies are different.
by Eric in Madison on Jun 9, 2009 1:37 PM CDT up reply actions
Yup
A lot is riding on Big Al, and I think a lot of Wolves fans are in collective denial right now about it. Of course we hope he comes back, but in returning from an ACL injury in any sport—the proof is the pudding. My base assumption is that those players will come back at 85% the first year, and then whatever you get the second year is it.
Coming back is hard for big guys, and arguably injuries to big guys are riskier because they are bigger. And ‘unrelated injuries before he could really show what a player he can become’ is precisely the point with Oden, and with Bynum for that matter. The success rate of microfracture is 75-80% for everyone, including pro athletes, and for every Amare out there, there’s a Jamal Mashburn or a Terrell Brandon, a CWebb or Penny Hardaway, even McDyess. Vegas would not bet on Oden returning to his pre-microfracture form, because the odds are that he’ll recover somewhere just below that.
So, the question becomes, if Oden realistically regains 95% of his prior athleticism, is he a good enough ball player to still become the next Admiral?
"Come on Eddie, let's get serious."
This looks like a trade...
…neither team would do. Nice chatting with you guys. This is probably my second favorite blog in SBN. Oh yeah, and Tom Penn says “hi”.
"The Edge... there is no honest way to explain it because the only people who really know where it is are the ones who have gone over."
For the Record
I wouldn’t suggest Portland trade Oden. I think his value probably isn’t high enough on account of injuries even this year besides the microfracture. Their seems to be very little chance to get a Top 15 player for him. I could be wrong- I just don’t see a GM as that bold.
I agree, and that's why Oden won't be traded
It would take an in-prime, top 15-20 player to get him, and I doubt any GM is willing to take that risk.
Let's list the top 15 players
and see if you would trade any of them for Oden straight up (no particular order):
1. LeBron
2. Kobe
3. Dwade
4. DHoward
5. CPaul
6. Melo
7. Dirk
8. Yao
9. Pau
10. BRoy?
11. Tony Parker?
12. Chauncey?
13. Bosh?
14. Pierce?
15. Garnett? Rose? Granger? Durant?
I don’t know—I don’t see a whole lot I would part with for Oden. Maybe if contracts are taken into consideration, or KG’s age, but otherwise . . .
i kind of want to turn this into a fun activity where we reorder them. i’d put kobe below wade and move roy up to 6 or 7 and probably not inculde bosh or chauncey, but i’m not sure who i’d replace them with.
heart of a champion, will of the warrior.
Poordick it the only person I have ever heard who has melo above roy
by Sabonis4Ever on Jun 10, 2009 3:59 PM CDT up reply actions
Only person? Ever?
Add me to that list. Roy is great, but Melo is better. Sorry. I wish the T-Wolves had either.
by princelyfrank on Jun 10, 2009 5:47 PM CDT up reply actions
hate to do it to you, but you left it wide open….
you did have roy.
heart of a champion, will of the warrior.
I'll agree that it is argueable.
But I honestly think that Roy has the edge. Partly due to his leadership.
"And once again we can say, it's a GREAT day to be a Blazer."- Brian Wheeler
CP3 moves ahead of Dwight.
BRoy at 6 with melo at seven.
Duncan still belongs somewhere in the top ten still. Probably at nine or ten.
I’m also one of the guys that thinks Kobe has a slight edge on LeBron still. Very close though.
A healthy Manu is probably at about 15.
"And once again we can say, it's a GREAT day to be a Blazer."- Brian Wheeler
lebron is better at every facet of the game than kobe, outside of maybe hitting the last shot, but if you look at their clutch stats, they’re very similar. lebron is a better scorer, passer, rebounder and as of this year, made the leap to being a better defender. it isn’t close, lebron is way better.
heart of a champion, will of the warrior.
Kobe Bryant
has the best fundamentals of any basketball player in the game right now. Maybe all time. Kobe is a better jump shooter, one-on-one defender, post player, clutch player, and overall team leader than LeBron.
If LeBron developes his fundamentals to the extent that Kobe has, and combines that with his athletic ability, he will be the best player to ever play the game. For now, Kobe has an edge on him.
"And once again we can say, it's a GREAT day to be a Blazer."- Brian Wheeler
kobe does more things well than lebron, but as far as what matters (scoring, passing, rebounding, and defense) lebron is better. there’s a good argument to be made in favor of kobe’s defense. it’s close, but i’ll take lebron. the rest of the things aren’t close, lebron scores better, passes better, and rebounds better by wide margins. is kobe really a better leader? he has better teammates, so he gets farther in the playoffs, but where are you getting “better leader” from? i just don’t see it. he doesn’t make his teammates better , what makes him such a good leader?
heart of a champion, will of the warrior.
No
LeBron has better numbers because he is the only one on his team doing anything. This doesn’t necessarily mean he does them better.
"And once again we can say, it's a GREAT day to be a Blazer."- Brian Wheeler
if kobe were capable of putting up lebron’s numbers, wouldn’t he have done it when he was younger, more athletic, better and playing with almost no teammates in ‘05-’06? if you have a guy that can produce at that level, you let him produce at that level. he’s not a one man show because his teammates suck; he’s a dominating force because he’s the best player in the nba. there is no better offensive option than getting the ball to lebron james and letting him work. none.
heart of a champion, will of the warrior.
There is a far better option...
Give the ball to a TEAM and let them work. The Magic just proved it.
You can’t tell me that you honestly think Kwame Brown and Smush Parker are better options than Mo Williams and Big Z. That is what Kobe had to work with.
"And once again we can say, it's a GREAT day to be a Blazer."- Brian Wheeler
you just said that since kobe’s teammates were better, he performed worse. i gave you a period of time where kobe’s teammates were worse and asked why his stats weren’t as good as lebron. you dodged the question.
i was talking about individually, it is obviously preferable to have one superstar a couple all-star caliber players and a few more very good players than it is to have the clear cut best player in the nba, one sham all-star (mo williams didn’t deserve it this year) and a bunch of guys who aren’t that good.
honestly, does kobe bryant score less efficiently and pass less often and less successfully because his teammates are better? how does that make sense?
heart of a champion, will of the warrior.
Kobe
averaged 35.4, 5.3, and 4.5 for the 05-06 season. Don’t tell me thats worse than the 26.8, 5.2, and 4.9 he averaged last season.
"And once again we can say, it's a GREAT day to be a Blazer."- Brian Wheeler
they were worse than lebron’s stats this year. that was my point.
heart of a champion, will of the warrior.
and my point is...
if Kobe had better teammates to pass to that would actually hit a shot he would have put up better assist numbers. As far as rebounding goes, of course LeBron is going to get more. He plays at the forward position. Forwards are supposed to get more rebounds than guards.
"And once again we can say, it's a GREAT day to be a Blazer."- Brian Wheeler
also
35.4 is a hell of a lot better than 28.4 in points
"And once again we can say, it's a GREAT day to be a Blazer."- Brian Wheeler
Lebron got to the finals with Big Z and no Mo Williams.
So Lebron sucks because he can only carry a subpar supporting cast almost to the championship, but Kobe’s the greatest ever because he led a similar supporting cast to missing the playoffs?
by princelyfrank on Jun 10, 2009 7:51 PM CDT up reply actions
Look at which conferences they each played in.
I know the east has since caught up with the west but in 05-06 the western conference was much better than the east. They got absolutely murdered by the Spurs that year.
"And once again we can say, it's a GREAT day to be a Blazer."- Brian Wheeler
They did get murdered by the Spurs
but that’s because they had no reason being there in the first place. Lebron’s great play elevates his team. Kobe was unable to get anything done with the Lakers until the gods gifted him Pau Gasol, an unguardable All Star center in his prime. The Cavs don’t have another player as good as Pau. Or Odom. Hell, the Cavs probably would’ve beat Orlando if they could’ve traded Wally for Ariza. (unprovable speculation alert)
by princelyfrank on Jun 10, 2009 8:12 PM CDT up reply actions
Exactly my point
They didn’t belong there but the only reason they were is because they playing in a JV conference. If they played in the west they would have been counting their lottery balls.
"And once again we can say, it's a GREAT day to be a Blazer."- Brian Wheeler
so the best team in the east was the ninth best team in the west that year? i highly doubt it.
heart of a champion, will of the warrior.
Therefore the Blazers would be the number 1 team in the east if they switched conferences!!!!!
LaMarcus Aldridge Finals MVP!!!!!
Three things you must know:
-"Ben Gordon is a bundle of muscle and clutch. That's all he's made of. Drink BG7 energy drink, you'll grow a pair of balls on your balls."
-Pau Gasol: The defense of a seven foot ladder paired with the post presence of Manute Bol.
-Joakim Noah is better than you.
You didn't see . . .
. . .or hear the comments from Zo – Kobe is all the coach the Lakers need. That is what makes him a better leader. ( I am now going to hurl in my office trash can for having typed that).
Sometimes the obvious is hidden.
by frankenhoops on Jun 11, 2009 3:41 PM CDT up reply actions
Kobe's not that good in the clutch.
That’s his reputation, but it’s not that accurate. Most of his “clutch”-ness stems from the fact that he gets way too much respect from the refs. If you look at shooting stats in the closing minutes of close games, Melo is way better.
by princelyfrank on Jun 10, 2009 5:52 PM CDT up reply actions
Go to 82games.com
Look at the clutch stats. Now tell me who is at the top of the list. Uh huh. Kobe Bryant. Melo is clutch but Kobe beats him in that department.
"And once again we can say, it's a GREAT day to be a Blazer."- Brian Wheeler
is kobe’s one more point per 48 minutes of clutch play on a 10% lower fg% with 6 less rebounds and 7 less assists per 48 clutch minutes what make him more clutch than lebron? 82games gives a pretty strong case for lebron in that regard.
per 48 “clutch” minutes:
kobe: 56.7 pts .457 fg% .400 3fg% 8.4 rebs 5.7 asts
lebron: 55.9 pts .556 .fg% .421 3fg% 14.3 rebs 12.4 asts
melo: 55.4 pts .565 fg% .583 3fg% 7.6 rebs 2.9 asts
it doesn’t look like kobe’s the run away victor in that department. melo’s the most clutch shooter and lebron is the most clutch overall player.
heart of a champion, will of the warrior.
We’re going on 3 staight years where Oden has been enable to even be healthy. His NCAA season where he missed a ton of games and hurt his writst. His two NBA seasons where he’s been injury prone. Oden sure is a unique physical specimen with all things being equal will be a better player than Love, I don’t think most people disagree with it, the thing the disagree about is whether things are equal.
That being said, I’ve never seen so many Blazer fans aghast at this proposed trade. Clearly when KLove left Lake Oswego and went down the coast to LA, ORegon fans have never forgiven him. At least Ernie is bringing on the assistant from AZ this year to actually play strategic baskeball, but Love made the absolute right move not to be a Duck. He should have been a Husky :)
The key part of this trade is
Gambling on Greg Oden reaching his potential and staying healthy
vs.
Kevin Love + another high lottery pick, when you know Love has been healthy and is already a steady contributor at young age.
It’s not that farfetched to make this proposal.
LaMarcus Aldridge sucks!
Booooooooooooo!!!
[Go Tyrus Thomas! :P]
Three things you must know:
-"Ben Gordon is a bundle of muscle and clutch. That's all he's made of. Drink BG7 energy drink, you'll grow a pair of balls on your balls."
-Pau Gasol: The defense of a seven foot ladder paired with the post presence of Manute Bol.
-Joakim Noah is better than you.
I won't respond to every individual place I was challenged
Here’s a few points regarding K. Love vs Lamarcus entering 2009-2010
1. The issue is who is better right now. Considering Love improved throughout the season- take away the first 2 months. The issues that I’ve been told make Aldridge a better Offensive Player aren’t quite clear. I haven’t heard one remotely convicing argument for this fact. Love had a slightly higher TS percentage which is the ulitmate indicator of Offensive effectiveness along with similar rates of usage. This doesn’t even mention that K.Love led the league in Offensive Rebound percentage. I’m always refered to stats like points (Volume-Based).
2. When people knock Kevin Love’s Defense- do they not consider Defensive Rebounding a Defensive Skill? The amazing thing about the T-Wolves this season inspite of their size defiency they were 5th in the NBA in DRR. This is amazing considering thier size. Lamarcus though clearly is a good defender against 4’s (Especially those who move well in space). I just tend to think this aspect is being ignored. Also anyone that knock Kevin Love’s defense has to admit that the Wolves’ Perimeter Defense was horrid often causing Love to cover help-side leading to easy layups.
3. The idea that teams gameplan for LaMarcus Aldridge is somewhat quizzical. Considering 2/3 of his shots are jumpers which he hits at a EFG of .416. This is by no means a great offensive player. Certainly not one that a team should game-plan around.
4. This might not sound like much but K.Love’s contributions on both ends of the court are what kept the Wolves from being the Worst Team in Basketball.
5. The key to winning Basketball games is to win Possessions. You do this by either scoring or stopping the other team. Rebounding Rates along with the ability to get to the line are a huge part of this. If you look at the four factors- Love is potentially dominate in 2 of the 4 (Free Throw Attempts, and Rebounding). I’m unclear where in four factors- Aldridge dominates.
6. Lastly WOW has Wins Produced totals Per 48 as Aldridge .0057 vs Kevin Love .0234 I can tell you which one is higher. Love also ended up with double the wins produced. WOW though is quite big on Greg Oden. I don’t take WOW’s methods as perfect as they undervalue certain players that make those around them better. A very good example would be calling Bassy one of the worst players in the NBA- based on shooting PCT.
For starters...
If you don’t think that Aldridge improved over the season you are out of your mind.
Also if you don’t think teams gameplan for Aldridge you haven’t watched many Blazer games. He is a very important piece to running an effective offense in the half-court set. If he goes off it usually means the Blazers win. They won 54 games this season.
Also if the key to winning is possessions then if Aldridge scores on average 5.5 points more per game and rebounds only 1.6 per game which if you are going by two point shots equals roughly 3 points, isn’t Aldridge being more effective. Also if you consider straight up defence, which Aldridge plays much better, the Blazers are gaining more possessions due to shot clock violations, bad shots, and turnovers.
No matter which way you want to look at it, LaMarcus Aldridge is the more effective, skilled, and talented basketball player.
"And once again we can say, it's a GREAT day to be a Blazer."- Brian Wheeler
LaMarcus improved some
In regard to Rebound Rate. Kevin Love improved more if you compare his first two months to the rest of the season.
Yeah WOW overvalues rebounds by quite a bit
They had Joel Przybilla as the best player in the NBA for a while. Which I hope we can agree is wrong both as Blazers and Wolves fans.
Or is it
That fans undervalue rebounds. Or that they argued Przybilla was the 6th man of the year, not best player in the NBA.
That is...
..his most annoying trait. It will eventually do him in completely.
The World's Leading Exporter of Small Area Quickness
www.canishoopus.com
"Why did you kill Berri?"
“That ******* ******** was so ******** smug!” -crazy blogger
Three things you must know:
-"Ben Gordon is a bundle of muscle and clutch. That's all he's made of. Drink BG7 energy drink, you'll grow a pair of balls on your balls."
-Pau Gasol: The defense of a seven foot ladder paired with the post presence of Manute Bol.
-Joakim Noah is better than you.
I found a New Favorite Real GM Trade
Expirings for Jason Richardson- But wait there’s more. Kevin Love for Brendon Haywood.
http://www.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=912034
This even tops Mike Miller and 6 for Luol Deng for Half a Decade.
Just wanted to throw this out there
go back and read your own comments in this thread.
I know Love played good, but those of you demanding its robbery to get Oden thought we wouldnt take Love AND Miller for Bayless/Webster/Pryz.. which in all fairness you would be MUCH more likely to get.
Good posts tho guys.. you have a well written board.
by GreatOden'sRaven on Jun 9, 2009 6:41 PM CDT reply actions
lets see if I summed this up correctly
Love > Aldridge
Love > Oden
Foye > Roy
you people…. are flat out….. out of your mind
Love + 6th pick and I’d maybe give you Rudy, but no way freaking Oden.
I refuse to respond to anyone who will claim that Love is better than LaMarcus. Thats not even close, in all aspects of basketball and life in general. Love is a hometown kid, I am from Lake Oswego and I am a fan of his, but Aldridge is far and away the more valuable peice of basketball ass. I dont want to pull up numbers in this situation because it doesnt even… i cant even….. eirumviudeuf….. how can you possibly think, even with unprecedented homerism, think that love is better than aldridge… I cant even fathom this
by PippenAintEasy on Jun 9, 2009 6:52 PM CDT reply actions 1 recs
And you're even MUCH nicer than before
Man, that’s not the guy I remember.
I'm a really really ridiculously good looking orange mocha frappaccino drinking manhammer sandwich
I'm liking the term "piece of basketball ass"
"And once again we can say, it's a GREAT day to be a Blazer."- Brian Wheeler
Who said Foye is better than Roy?
Seriously, who said that? Maybe somebody said it before they were selected three years ago. I think we’re all aware that BRoy is the superior player of those two. Your examples are not examples.
by princelyfrank on Jun 9, 2009 11:07 PM CDT up reply actions
whoa
Where did someone say Love > Roy.
Tell me that was sarcasm in action.
* Building a Greg Oden Fanboy Treehouse Clubhouse this summer...
These arguments are Rich
1. No one has ever said Foye’s better than Roy. You find a post like that from a Regular Poster- then I’ll apologize.
2. I’m called all sorts of names like by “Blazer-Fans” cause I don’t agree to arguments like “I’m a High School Coach” or “Lamarcus Scored More Points in 1.5 times the minutes” or “True Shooting doesn’t determine Offensive Value”
3. I’ve also never been told of any unique skill Lamarcus has unless you consider making 41 % of long- jumpers a rare skill. Lamarcus’ best skill is actually on D- he’s an average Offensive player. I’m sure I’ll here plenty of hyperbole arguing this.
4. The truth is my arguments are numbers based and take surronding cast into effect versus arguments that are basically name-calling.
"LaMarcus' best skill is actually on D"
How can anyone even respond to that?
by PippenAintEasy on Jun 9, 2009 7:00 PM CDT up reply actions
You must not watch LMA play D.
Common misconception though.
Which is why im not going out of the way to lable any of your players. Not enough sample size. But I will say that many of us are VERY opposed to breaking up any of our core. Espessily our big 3. Our plan for the future starts with those 3.
* Building a Greg Oden Fanboy Treehouse Clubhouse this summer...
This is funny
http://www.blazersedge.com/2009/5/6/866544/the-season-in-review-lamarcus
The one stat that stands out most is Per Differential. It is impressive the +6 when he plays the 4. I saw no other stat that stood out. Here’s the argument
Me: Citing Numbers
Blazers Fans: Name-Calling Insults
Since this is what the argument basically is- I’m not too convinced I’m on the losing end.
you should post this to an NBA writer.. or fprmer player .. whoever you choose
go ahead and ask which one they would want.. i’d be amazed if 10% said Love.
Love is good. but not trade for Oden good.
by GreatOden'sRaven on Jun 9, 2009 7:07 PM CDT up reply actions
You think Greg Oden's Injury History
Merits a High Trade Value?
absolutely
do you think because Amare had the same surgery you could get him for Love?
by GreatOden'sRaven on Jun 9, 2009 7:09 PM CDT up reply actions
Of Course
Considering Amare was on the Block for Rudy Gay. Amare’s actually shown to be more durable than Oden.
Indeed he has been in the league longer
Amare was on the block but it was for more than Rudy Gay..
Now since Amare bounced back just fine.. why would we trade a #1 pick before we get to see his “bounce back year”
by GreatOden'sRaven on Jun 9, 2009 7:11 PM CDT up reply actions
About those injurys
None of them have ever been the same body part. They are not chronic. Just different parts at different times.
that would be that he is injury prone.. ie he gets hurt a lot
however if its not the SAME injury it cant be classified as “chronic”
by GreatOden'sRaven on Jun 9, 2009 7:12 PM CDT up reply actions
What's the use of having words if you don't care what they mean?
I'm a really really ridiculously good looking orange mocha frappaccino drinking manhammer sandwich
its a serious injury
and one that cant be judged on one season alone…
he was the #1 pick for a reason
by GreatOden'sRaven on Jun 9, 2009 7:09 PM CDT up reply actions
Abusing, not citing
anyone can twist a number around until it’s utterly useless. There’s no genius to your argument, just a lot of grueling number re-arranging.
I'm a really really ridiculously good looking orange mocha frappaccino drinking manhammer sandwich
Props to Dave
This is a well-written reasonable take on LaMarcus Aldridge.
I like this part
“Outside of a Chris-Paul-level deal LaMarcus isn’t going anywhere. Over-the-hill stars won’t pry him away from the Blazers. Promising youngsters won’t either. It would take an Olympian in their prime to make Portland even blink at this point. LMA is at the heart of the promising young core of this team and is likely to be there for a long time.”
What would it take to get K-Love?
by GreatOden'sRaven on Jun 9, 2009 7:10 PM CDT up reply actions
Things I've never heard
1. Arguments why Lamarcus is an effective Offensive Player such as TS% or Rebound Rate % or Shot-Creation.
2. Any challenge of the Numbers I’ve posted in depth.
1. LaMarcus can get his own shot. Kevin Love cannot. That makes him a more effective Offensive player. You might not have watched him a lot but he has at least 2 go to moves that are unstoppable. He might miss occasionally, but they are unstoppable..
by GreatOden'sRaven on Jun 9, 2009 7:14 PM CDT up reply actions
his job is to play the high post
while Pryz and Oden take the lane. The farther you get from the hoop the lower your percentage goes. I imagine if Love was able to score as much as Aldridge he would have to step out more. If he did, his numbers would go down as well. theres a BIG scoring differential. Sure everyone would like to score with a percentage like Shaq, but the only players how have amazing shooting percentages are the ones who only shoot in the paint (not love) or dont score much (love)
by GreatOden'sRaven on Jun 9, 2009 7:20 PM CDT up reply actions
Difference in Points Per 36 is 15.8 vs 17.6
This is no huge difference.
points per is a VERY misleading stat
if he was better he would have played more. And scoring two points in garbage time every game gives you a 48pts per…
You can blame McHale if you want, but assuming that Love would score those extra point is an unreliable measuring tool
by GreatOden'sRaven on Jun 9, 2009 7:26 PM CDT up reply actions
The minutes you play are a strong indicator of how effective of a basketball player you are.
This is less so on a good team that has more talented players but in Loves case he is on a crappy team therefor he should be playing at least 32 min per game if he is any good.
"And once again we can say, it's a GREAT day to be a Blazer."- Brian Wheeler
The Big Difference
Is how our season went. We projected a 7-8 seed with these guys at the beginning of the season.
We played into homecourt advantage and exceded all expectations.
If something isn’t broken, we arent going to fix it.
AI and Zach Randolph showed that it isnt just numbers that factor into wins. It’s team basketball, we have 12 players that fit into our system and are willing to bind to their roles and do their jobs night in and night out.
If it was about numbers, we would of pulled an Amare deal at the deadline. There is a reason we didn’t.
* Building a Greg Oden Fanboy Treehouse Clubhouse this summer...
As far as that goes...
I wish LMA would take it inside a little more. He started to be more aggressive towards the end of the year so hopefully that will translate into next year.
"And once again we can say, it's a GREAT day to be a Blazer."- Brian Wheeler
or at least stick on the block with the fadeaway or the jumper across the lane
cant block either of them.
by GreatOden'sRaven on Jun 9, 2009 7:26 PM CDT up reply actions
This Proves What
He makes 60 %^ of his shots within 2 feet. His mid-range numbers or numbers around that basket -don’t scream elite. They just don’t
Those pick and roll at the top left of the key and low block numbers arent bad..
49% is pretty damn good. or did you miss that one?
by GreatOden'sRaven on Jun 9, 2009 7:32 PM CDT up reply actions
This isn't a real effecient shot
Since it’s worth 2 points and doesn’t draw a lot of contact.
Most players have much more cold spots, looks like a carpet full of wholes especially for big guys (and undersized guards who can’t finish at the rim). A player who is hot around the basket and not cold anywhere inside the three point line is pretty rare. Dirk Nowitzki would qualify. Danny Granger would qualify, who happens to have become an All-Star last year. As a comparison, here is the chart of arguably the best power forward of the last decade. Not that LMA is likely to reach him, but it’s not too shabby.
I want to commend Andy G for getting this conversation going.
So far this conversation has gotten about 400 comments between BE and Canis Hoopus. Who would have know that a controversial trade proposal involving Oden and Kevin Love would turn into an argument on who is better between LaMarcus Aldridge and Kevin Love.
"And once again we can say, it's a GREAT day to be a Blazer."- Brian Wheeler
Um...
Prague (there’s something in the water) and Phillie (gotta go with cheese steaks).
"Come on Eddie, let's get serious."
It's from a different story about which PF BRoy might endorse, by Blazers PR man Casey Holdahl, but it fits for many threads
It’s a story tailor made for the internet: short on facts, long on speculation.
sadly mayo was already paid like one before he got to the NBA
and it cost Floyd his job today
by GreatOden'sRaven on Jun 9, 2009 7:16 PM CDT up reply actions
Oh come on now...
We probably shouldn’t rub the salt into their wounds too much. This is the T-Wolves blog after all. Wouldn’t want to get booted.
"And once again we can say, it's a GREAT day to be a Blazer."- Brian Wheeler
Ha Ha
Maybe Blazers Fans are just drawn to jump-shooters that don’t get to the line. You do realize OJ’s addition made Memphis the 29th ranked Offensive Team.
Actually they are at 28th.
And where are the T-Wolves….. a whopping 25th.
"And once again we can say, it's a GREAT day to be a Blazer."- Brian Wheeler
RE
Love was not the cause of the T-Wolves Offensive Woes.
And I would venture to guess...
OJ Mayo is just as much as fault for his teams offensive woes as Love is. Mayo doesn’t necessarily have an all star cast either.
"And once again we can say, it's a GREAT day to be a Blazer."- Brian Wheeler
Mayo's not the fault of his team's offensive woes,
but it’s hard to say that he dragged them up to a respectable level.
Three things you must know:
-"Ben Gordon is a bundle of muscle and clutch. That's all he's made of. Drink BG7 energy drink, you'll grow a pair of balls on your balls."
-Pau Gasol: The defense of a seven foot ladder paired with the post presence of Manute Bol.
-Joakim Noah is better than you.
love + 6th pick wont even get Mayo back
ahahahahahhahahahaahahahahaha
by PippenAintEasy on Jun 9, 2009 7:33 PM CDT up reply actions
If this is what the board looks like
When a team has more than just diehard fans, who make blanket statements, namecall, and utterly fail miserable to prove a point, I don’t know how excited I am for the team to turns things around…
It's hard to prove a point...
when the other person isn’t listening.
"And once again we can say, it's a GREAT day to be a Blazer."- Brian Wheeler
Ironic
That for all the comments, it’s about the same 12 commenters from either site making up 95% of the verbiage. I think we should just take this outside and settle it playground style—who can pee higher up the wall.
"Come on Eddie, let's get serious."
Oden will be peeing for us
bet you want him now, huh?
I'm a really really ridiculously good looking orange mocha frappaccino drinking manhammer sandwich
by hobobob on Jun 10, 2009 3:04 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
+1 HARD!!!
snap, burn, took to the wood shed.
The Faith don't panic, the faith freaks out, burns out farms, and torchs small villages in the name of The Faith.
What Point is being made
I argue Love based on Numbers and he offers a more valuable skill-set than LaMarcus Aldridge.
This is fine if you don’t agree. I’m made plenty of arguments having been in the minority.
are you arguing Loves numbers are better? Love is a better player? Love is more valuable?
all of the above?
by GreatOden'sRaven on Jun 9, 2009 7:30 PM CDT up reply actions
LMA wins in most categories
best numbers: LMA
more valuable: LMA
better player: LMA
better looking: LMA
shorter: Love
Love only wins 1 category
by PippenAintEasy on Jun 9, 2009 8:04 PM CDT up reply actions 3 recs
Is that like Pippen's winning categories?
Such Pippen’s number of rings without Michael?
"Come on Eddie, let's get serious."
Wait, I can make up random stats too!
More white: Love
Better rebounder: Love
Younger player: Love
Better outlet passer: Love
Better at not taking the ball to the hole: LMA
…
Oh snaps.
Three things you must know:
-"Ben Gordon is a bundle of muscle and clutch. That's all he's made of. Drink BG7 energy drink, you'll grow a pair of balls on your balls."
-Pau Gasol: The defense of a seven foot ladder paired with the post presence of Manute Bol.
-Joakim Noah is better than you.
Hard to argue with those stats.
Love might be the whitest player in the whole league.
by princelyfrank on Jun 15, 2009 1:02 PM CDT up reply actions
Chris Quinn wants a word with you
The Kings have the best bench I’ve seen. There are easily 14 guys on this team good enough for every bench in the league. Now if we could only get some starters, I’d totally jizz in my pants.
Kings fan
by dyshooter182 on Jun 19, 2009 6:07 PM CDT up reply actions
I've got other stuff to do.
I’ll respond eventually to all the insults later.
That statement is a good way to get booted from a blog community.
You don’t always have to play nice but a little civility goes a long way when trying to argue a point.
"And once again we can say, it's a GREAT day to be a Blazer."- Brian Wheeler
You're Ron Artest aren't you?
I'm a really really ridiculously good looking orange mocha frappaccino drinking manhammer sandwich
several times i have added points that he didnt respond to
point-making doesnt work on someone who thinks Aldridges’ best asset is his DEFENSE… That should be banable
by PippenAintEasy on Jun 9, 2009 7:35 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
Roy for Foye
Garnett for Jefferson
Mayo for Love
And now you would laugh at a trade of Love for Oden
This franchise needs to be thankful that the clippers take the spotlight when it comes to the laughing stock of the NBA
You would be soooooooo lucky to get Oden for Love
Favorite Barkley quote ever
Talking about the Jailblazers era of Portland basketball,
“They might be good, they might be bad, but I guarantee one thing—they’re all gonna be high.”
I wish Barkley would coach the Twolves—that’s what I call entertainment.
"Come on Eddie, let's get serious."
maybe i’m missing what’s great about aldridge, but i just don’t see what’s screams “franchise cornerstone” about a jumpshooting 4, who doesn’t score particularly efficiently and is a crappy rebounder. i’m not even a wolves fan and i can tell you that i’d take love over aldridge in a heartbeat.
heart of a champion, will of the warrior.
See shooting chart listed in one of the above posts to find out whats wrong with your statement
Aldridge doesn’t doesn’t get a lot of defensive rebounds, but that’s mainly because pryzbilla is one of the best/efficient defensive rebounders in the league. He is a very good offensive rebounder who plays good defense and can score from anywhere on the floor. That total package is not very common
that total package should be more productive than a .529 TS%, 7.3 rebounds per 36. there is little statistical evidence to suggest that being paired with a good rebounder makes a player a worse rebounder. guys generally grab boards at the same rate no matter where they play or who they play with. show me real production before i start calling him a good rebounder by any stretch of the imagination.
“can score from anywhere on the floor” doesn’t do anything for me. i’m a warriors fan, jamal crawford can score from anywhere on the floor and if i were the gm, i’d be begging teams to take him. he hurts the team every time he steps on the floor. mostly because he doesn’t score efficiently or defend well and rebounds his position terribly. all three of those things apply to aldridge. crawford is certainly a worse player than aldridge, i’m just saying that overvaluing the skillset vs the actual production is a great way to build around mediocre players. aldridge is decent. nothing more.
and while we’re here, someone should tell him to be a little more aggressive defensively, his blocks have decreased every year along with his fouls. fouls are obviously bad, but when you regress so thoroughly in blocked shots and are only averaging 2.5 fouls per 36 as a big, it seems like you aren’t being active defensively.
heart of a champion, will of the warrior.
then he likes a jumpshot he can’t really hit that well way too much. if you get a lot of points off dunks and still can’t shoot over 50% from the floor, you probably like your jumper more than you should.
heart of a champion, will of the warrior.
i saw the chart. 40%-ish from midrange doesn’t knock my socks off, sorry. the midrange jump shot is the least effective way to score in all of basketball and he loves his midrange jumper. unimpressed.
heart of a champion, will of the warrior.
Did you notice he has a higher percentage around the basket than Timmy?
Can’t get to Love’s hotspot chart right now, but below are his numbers from 82game, he certainly isn’t a more efficient shooter, not even close around the basket (eFG%). Few PFs are. Note that Love also gets blocked more. And Aldridge is doing it on a team where he isn’t the #1 scoring option and asked to play a little further away since a big center is standing around the rim.
Love left, Aldridge right
of course, love does have the higher TS% which bothers to factor in how often you get to the line (it’s close, but love has the edge), absolutely murders him on the glass and is a better defender.
i just don’t buy how being on the blazers makes aldridge a worse player than if he were on the wolves. don’t you think that playing next to jason collins would force love away from the basket some, considering that jason collins has no semblence of skills from farther than 2 feet out? that sounds like a lane clogger to me. al jefferson isn’t exactly known for his stellar perimeter game either. most teams have guys like that and when love still is able to get to the basket and post a higher TS%, you have to take note. considering that he’s a few years younger, i don’t even see how this is a debate. if the wolves and blazers traded aldridge for love straight up, the wolves would be getting screwed.
heart of a champion, will of the warrior.
Go Cap N Hack Go !!!
I love Third Party Supporters.
yep, my crazy golden state warriors’ bias prevents me from thinking clearly about two guys who aren’t on my team or a team that i hate.
heart of a champion, will of the warrior.
i haven’t met any warriors fans who hate LMA. i don’t know where that’s coming from.
heart of a champion, will of the warrior.
yeah, you’re around quite a bit and an appreciated poster around GSoM. i just don’t pick up on the LMA hate outside of “he’s overrated” which isn’t hate. it’s making a judgment about a player based on his production.
heart of a champion, will of the warrior.
i don’t know about wright (due to injury worries), but i’d take randolph over LMA just as quick as i’d take love over him.
heart of a champion, will of the warrior.
you just ended our arguement right there.
The Faith don't panic, the faith freaks out, burns out farms, and torchs small villages in the name of The Faith.
That's crazy talk
Randolph and Wright are interesting. But nowhere near Aldridge. Next time you see that smack being laid down, you come find me.
don’t make me go on a randolph rant. he’s the youngest player in the nba and a killer on the boards as well as blossoming on both the offensive and defensive ends of the floor. he looks really good if you check his per 36 stats (pretty similar to love’s actually), despite his woeful showing when he was foolishly played at small forward at the beginning of the year and his general lack of understanding of how to play basketball, which is much improved now. last year, aldridge was better, but randolph has as bright of a future as almost any young big in the nba.
heart of a champion, will of the warrior.
Good Argument
I’m crazy since I back my arguments with extensive numbers rather than just shooting my mouth off.
Funny- You have no arguments other than Name-Calling
Bring it- Tell me where I’m wrong. You’re going call names , You’re not going to argue any stat measures. Weak
He says everybody has 'called names'
It’s literally in every single one of his posts.
by Sabonis4Ever on Jun 9, 2009 10:01 PM CDT up reply actions
Norkstroll did
and you failed to comment on his posts
by GreatOden'sRaven on Jun 10, 2009 8:31 PM CDT up reply actions
I responded to him- Several times
Why let the facts get in the way of a good story?
by Jose Cordoba on Jun 10, 2009 9:04 PM CDT up reply actions
Sometimes it gets confusing...
when you reply because often times you just comment on the original post rather than hitting the reply button on someone’s comment.
Simple misunderstanding.
I'm not sure about this statement
Defense is tougher to evaluate. If you go off of Per Differential- then LA is a better defender. Love does a rather decent job when in the post assuming he’s not total outsized. Defensive Rebounding though is a fairly valuable skill which seems proper to evalauate.
fortunately for love, being a much better rebounder is much more important than guarding guys on the perimeter as a 4.
heart of a champion, will of the warrior.
Depends on your gameplan...
…and who else is on the team.
"The Edge... there is no honest way to explain it because the only people who really know where it is are the ones who have gone over."
He is a much better defensive rebounder
Only a slightly better offensive rebounder, and worse at everything in the offensive department.
and love averages 4.8 orb per 36 compared to aldridge’s 3.1. that’s not slight. that’s getting worked.
heart of a champion, will of the warrior.
No, I think the Blazers are better shooters.
The Wolves miss more which gives Love more opportunities to grab Orbs.
Koponen - PG of the future. For Italy, that is. Book it.
I think you're confused on being Efficient.
Considering that also requires the ability to get to the Line. Hence why Love has a Higher TS%.
You also honestly think that LaMarcus doesn’t get better looks on account of being surronded by with better Perimeter Players?
Of Course
Once Jefferson went down he was pretty keyed on in the paint. If you want to look at his monthly splits this is plain to see.
I'm Back
Cap N Hack’s not even a T-Wolves fan and he’s questioning the love affair with Lamarcus.
Here’s a post that might draw further ire for WOW-http://dberri.wordpress.com/2009/04/02/greg-oden-or-kevin-durant/
Like the Thunder, eleven Blazers have logged at least 500 minutes. Unlike the Thunder, though, the majority of these Blazers – six to be exact – have posted above average WP48 marks (none of these are named LaMarcus Aldridge).
I’ll Now respond to some of these posts
1. If Lamarcus Aldridge scored from anywhere on the floor- He would have a much higher TS% since this would assume he’s a reliable 3 pt-shooter like Rashad Lewis. This isn’t quite the case. The main argument I’ve had with Blazers fans is PPG vs TS% plus Offensive Boards as a matter of Offensive Value. It’s true that Usage rates also play a factor in this discussion (For example Brandon Roy vs Joel Pryzbilla). Although Love’s vs Aldridge’s are pretty similar. When you consider this along with Love leading the league in Offense Rebounds- it’s fair to say based on these metrics which are considered leading indicators he has more value on this end of the floor.
2. It’s true Aldridge maybe has additional value in that he’s a better jump shooter. Although I question the value of most of the shots in Aldridge’s range. This would be a different discussion if he hit 3’s. To shot a medicore pct on mid-range jumpers doesn’t really help an Offensive rating that much as an example look no further than Memphis Grizzles.
3. As far as Defensive Value- I think Love is underrated here. Both on account of his Defensive Rebounding Rate and the fact that he’s surronded by horrible talent on D. LaMarcus must have some defensive skill if he has a Per Differential of 6. This is actually LaMarcus’s strongest statsical argument. If I was his agent I would ram this home next summer. Although some of this can be attributed to playing with Greg Oden and Joel Pryzbilla.
If Blazers Fan want to stop with the Name-Calling we can debate these points. I’m more than willing to argue for K. Love.
Let's make sure to compare notes at the all-star break.
Good luck next year, Timberwolves fans.
"The Edge... there is no honest way to explain it because the only people who really know where it is are the ones who have gone over."
And have fun looking up and comparing TS%‘s and PER’s while we are busy celebrating yet another victory. You guys have been beautiful – GOOD NIGHT!
"The Edge... there is no honest way to explain it because the only people who really know where it is are the ones who have gone over."
Pretty amazing level of arrogance
for fans of a team that won 50-some games, and got wiped out of the playoffs as if they weren’t even there. By a team that got wiped out of the playoffs as if they weren’t even there.
But I suppose when you’re from a podunk town with one major sports team, you’ve got to grab on to what little you can.
GOOD NIGHT!
The same place the Blazers were
when the Wolves were making their run a few years ago.
Look, you’ve got a nice young team with some interesting players. The Blazers are a long way from the top, but I think they have the best chance of getting there of any team without LeBron. But coming in here and gloating about a team that got trounced in the first round of the playoffs doesn’t reflect well on the rest of the fans, or the team, or Portland.
But maybe I’m overestimating the fans and the town. If so, I apologize.
The Wolves made the playoffs one year when the Blazers didn't
04’
by Sabonis4Ever on Jun 9, 2009 10:48 PM CDT up reply actions
My bad.
I wasn’t aware we were comparing previous years. The history of the Blazers is still greater than the Wolves anyway. I wasn’t gloating about losing in the first round of the playoffs, but at least the Blazers were there.
Certified blazer.fangirl
the wolves may not have made the playoffs....
but atleast they have……… um………..
…………….
………………
……………………
randy foye
by PippenAintEasy on Jun 9, 2009 10:55 PM CDT up reply actions 3 recs
I accept your apology
But if you’re going to bring up ancient team history, you can’t exclude the great George Mikan and the Minneapolis Lakers.
Blazers vs Rockets went to 6 games (two decided by less than 3 points)
Rockets vs Lakers went to 7 games.
Portland has a major league soccer team.
major league soccer is a minor league sport. i like portland as a city quite a bit, but you can’t really cite MLS as a major pro sports team. in terms of popularity in america and quality in comparison to other soccer leagues. it’s minor league.
also, can i just say that in my experience with BEdgers, there are some very intelligent, good posters with interesting things to say, but the amount of folks from that site who decide to come to other SB nation blogs to pick fights with the posters from that site is really irritating. you are poster whose insights i enjoy having on GSoM and is generally very respectful, but i figured that if you wanted to help your blog’s rep around SBnation, you might want to tell the obnoxious, name calling homers to stay away from other blogs.
heart of a champion, will of the warrior.
Everybody has em. We probably have the most.
A Wolves’ fan posted a fanpost on BE about this trade and linked to this site. It sounds wrong to say “they started it” but it was a Canis Hoopus member that first brought it up.
by Sabonis4Ever on Jun 9, 2009 10:10 PM CDT up reply actions
yeah, i’m not calling out BE as a blog. of course, you guys are going to have the most obnoxious posters; you have the most posters. i’m just saying that if you want to come to someone else’s house, show some respect for the folks who live there.
during a discussion of love/biedrins/randolph/jefferson that was mostly about their merits as players, but originated as a biedrins for love trade post, i linked to it on GSoM and had a randolph homer flying around here trying to convince me (and oddly almost no hoopus posters) that randolph was a superstar in the kg/rashard lewis/magic johnson mold. so i know that it’s bound to happen with bigger blogs like BE and GSoM. it’s just annoying when it does.
heart of a champion, will of the warrior.
i love turiaf as a player. great man defender in the post, brings a lot of energy, blocks shots. he’s a bad rebounder for a center, and subpar for a pf, but he does enough things well where he’s great to have around as a backup center for the warriors and could fill a power forward spot on a team with two guys who will be taking the minutes at center. i’m not sure who the blazers would be willing to give up that i’d be excited to have in a trade, though. outlaw isn’t enough of an upgrade at sf (if he’s an upgrade at all) to warrant giving up a very good backup center and steve blake really doesn’t add much to the mix for us either with ellis getting a shot at the point and (probably, judging by who will likely be on the board at the 7) a rookie pg coming in.
turiaf gives us some depth at the center and power forward and losing him makes us much thinner, both literally and in terms of team depth. i wouldn’t rule out a deal, but i’m not sure what makes sense for both teams in this case. make me an offer.
heart of a champion, will of the warrior.
we all love
our players.
I mean… blazer fans voted 40% way back when to keep zach Randolph who now, I believe, has really shown what a cancer he can be to a team.
"Fernandez, to my eyes, is the Blazer who walks that walk most comfortably. A lot of Portland's fans (egged on, dare I say, by their local broadcasters) lament things like how Ron Artest or Yao Ming get to hit Brandon Roy's arms.
But I suspect Fernandez sees all that and thinks: We get to hit arms! Cool!"
http://myespn.go.com/blogs/truehoop/0-39-135/On-Playoff-Experience.html
The posters who join along with
“hey we’re all going over to make fun of Grizzlies fans” are the worst kinds of cowards. They mouth off anonymously from the comfort and safety of their own dorm rooms, yet still are only brave enough to post something if other fans have already started it.
Valid argument: Blazers did not get wiped out of the playoffs, as the Blazers vs Rockets went to 6 games (two decided by less than 3 points).
Invalid argument: Portland is not a podunk town, as it has a major league soccer team.
by PoorDick on Jun 9, 2009 10:43 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
Major League Soccer?
There is one sport in Oregon. Basketball.
This makes us blazer fanatics. We band together. It is nice being able to focus on one team year round.
* Building a Greg Oden Fanboy Treehouse Clubhouse this summer...
Uh...
The Blazers were beat by a very good Yao Ming led team. The same team took the Western Conference Champs to seven games before losing. I wouldn’t say that they got wiped out of the playoffs as if they weren’t even there.
54 wins, tied for second best record in the west, and the fourth seed in the playoffs is no joke for the team with the youngest playing rotation in the NBA. They played four rookies for significant minutes throughout the season and they still made the playoffs. Two of them started for most of the season. I think they did pretty good all things considered.
"And once again we can say, it's a GREAT day to be a Blazer."- Brian Wheeler
and
didn’t Yao go down with a foot injury?
"Fernandez, to my eyes, is the Blazer who walks that walk most comfortably. A lot of Portland's fans (egged on, dare I say, by their local broadcasters) lament things like how Ron Artest or Yao Ming get to hit Brandon Roy's arms.
But I suspect Fernandez sees all that and thinks: We get to hit arms! Cool!"
http://myespn.go.com/blogs/truehoop/0-39-135/On-Playoff-Experience.html
Blazers Edge
Since no one is challenging the number basis of my argument.
Here is a response to a few of their complaints- over there.
1. I ignore differences in Minutes played. Here’s a really good article on this topic from Hoops Hype:
http://ballhype.com/story/love_and_mathematics_pt_2_the_paul_millsap_quandary/
2. The other argument is that I cite select stats. Such as I undervalue FG percentage to the sake of TS%. This seems to be an argument made by Norsktroll. I’m not quite sure only to point out that getting to the line is an valuable Offensive skill this is why it’s listed as one of the Four Offensive Factors.
They also point out Love gets more looks near the basket. What is helpful to also bring up is the fact that he also led the NBA in Offensive Rebound Rate (Thereby producing good looks). This is clearly an Offensive Skill.
3. Their are numerical arguments that could be used to argue for Aldridge. The two most impressive would be PER Differential (Which in both players case is impacted by surronding defenders) and Plus/Minus rate. But Plus/Minus is also greatly impacted by surronding talent (I’ve never made the argument that the rest of the rosters are comparable). This is why I tend not to prop up such an argument.
4. I find it odd that Blazers fan seem to think surronding talent doesn’t impact the two players production. If you don’t think the quality of looks a player receive when Brandon Roy is creating Offense as opposed to Bassy. The Blazers are also a vastly better shooting team 8 in FG % along with 5 in 3FG% compared to 29th in FG% and 24% in Three Point Shooting for the Wolves. I think it’s not quite accurate to say if they swapped places- Love would have better shooting stats and Lamarcus worse shooting stats. I would say though their would probably be more of an evening out of Rebounding Stats.
by Jose Cordoba on Jun 9, 2009 11:27 PM CDT up reply actions
how many of love's
points/boards/TS% are products of a blowout game when the other team is just going through the motions with their backups?
by PippenAintEasy on Jun 9, 2009 11:36 PM CDT up reply actions
Love's stats...
Were better in wins than losses, so so much for that.
by pagingstanleyroberts on Jun 9, 2009 11:58 PM CDT up reply actions
ok
considering the Wolve’s winning percentage over the next ten years, this does not bode well for his future stats
by PippenAintEasy on Jun 10, 2009 12:00 AM CDT up reply actions
You have access to stats from the future?
That must make it awfully easy to win bets.
by princelyfrank on Jun 10, 2009 1:49 AM CDT up reply actions
seriously...
if you want free cash, just bet against the Timberwolves… this team is my personal ATM…
But i’m not special, everyone knows how bad the timberwolves will be for the next decade
by PippenAintEasy on Jun 10, 2009 1:51 AM CDT up reply actions
REALLY -
You have a hot line to the future that shows the Wolves are going to be terrible for the next ten years? What about the Blazers? Conference Champs anytime soon? What about LeBron – the Knicks or the Nets? or maybe you think he’d come play in Portland?? Give me a break, if all you can do is kick a team when they are down, then by all means – go away.
Sometimes the obvious is hidden.
by frankenhoops on Jun 11, 2009 4:30 PM CDT up reply actions
Brilliant
Sometimes the obvious is hidden.
by frankenhoops on Jun 12, 2009 12:44 PM CDT up reply actions
You know what's going to be fun
when the Blazers don’t improve over the next several years
Three things you must know:
-"Ben Gordon is a bundle of muscle and clutch. That's all he's made of. Drink BG7 energy drink, you'll grow a pair of balls on your balls."
-Pau Gasol: The defense of a seven foot ladder paired with the post presence of Manute Bol.
-Joakim Noah is better than you.
I'll challenge your numbers.
You can use statistics to justify anything, by either saying Love is better or Aldridge is better.
For instance, you might say “Love has a better offensive rebound rate.” Well, that might be true, but why is it true? Is it because Foye is clanking shots off the rim while Roy is hitting over 50%? So maybe Love gets more opportunities? Or maybe Pryzbilla scoops up a lot of balls while Aldridge is out on the high pick-and-roll?
To judge a player, statistics only tell part of the story. Here’s a youtube compilation of some Aldridge highlights:
I’m not saying Aldridge is better. I’m just saying don’t put blind faith in a number. You have to also watch the player.
Koponen - PG of the future. For Italy, that is. Book it.
Hey where'd my link go?
Let’s try again:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v_0aQY68fTo
Koponen - PG of the future. For Italy, that is. Book it.
1. Rebounding Rate is the percentage of Total Avaliable Offensive Rebounds to a player. If Roy hits more shots than Foye this doesn’t matter. The only difference is LA might have 12 chances to effect his Offensive board pct rather than 15. If I was making the case based on pure numbers this would be somewhat true- I go more of pcts.
2. Love’s most effective rebounding was playing away from the Basket with Big Al inside. He moves quite well without the ball in this way. It’s true Pryzbilla is also a very good rebounder and the Blazers are as a team. This probably effects his numbers some- not enough to indicate the difference between an Elite Rebounding Rate and a Medicore Rebound Rate. I could turn this around and ask how different would Love’s Offensive stats look if he had a Top 6-7 Player (Roy) with the Ball in his hands so much around him?
by Jose Cordoba on Jun 10, 2009 8:39 AM CDT up reply actions
Wow, you took me literally. That was just an example I made up
but you missed the point. Is Al’s man going to leave him wide open to double Love? No way, Al is the best offensive player on your team. But that’s what happened to Aldridge because Pryzbilla is not an offensive threat (he can’t catch an entry pass to save his life). I could go on all day and so could you, but you actually have to watch what happens during the game. Looking at a number doesn’t tell the whole story. If it did, it would be easy to spot the best talent in the draft, which free agent to sign, and which guy to trade for. This is not always the case.
I appreciate the time you spent to respond, and I thank you.
Koponen - PG of the future. For Italy, that is. Book it.
by Blazerholic on Jun 10, 2009 11:31 AM CDT up reply actions
LMA is a lot prettier than Love.
And more polished at this point (as well he should be, being a three year vet, drafted higher than Love too). Love is funky looking dude, short and fat and slow, yet he does produce at a very high clip, he plays efficiently, grabs boards at an insane rate, passes well, and rarely makes any mistakes. I understand why you guys might underestimate Love, as I assume that most Blazers fans probably weren’t going out of their way to watch a ton of T-Wolves basketball. But I will tell you this – the more you watch Love the more you are likely to grow to appreciate all the excellent things he does out on the court.
It’s funny that this argument is raging about a trade that no one proposed and neither team would do.
But I’d say it fair to say that LMA and KL are both good young players that their current teams are happy to have on their roster.
by princelyfrank on Jun 10, 2009 12:11 PM CDT up reply actions
in other words....
both teams played hard
by PippenAintEasy on Jun 10, 2009 12:20 PM CDT up reply actions
While I never said Pryzbilla is not a great Offensive player- “How much better do you think LaMarcus looks playing alongside Brandon Roy?” Who is one of the Top 7 players in the league. You don’t think this creates better looks for 4’s than playing alongside Bassy and Randy Foye? I would then to argue better shot opportunities are created by having a Dominant Perimeter player than a gifted scoring Big-Man.
by Jose Cordoba on Jun 10, 2009 12:40 PM CDT up reply actions
Better shot opportunities...?
While perimeter players and guards do create shot opportunities for others, a high scoring, dominant big man will provide more shot opportunities for players due to the constant need to double the post player. Orlando’s whole post season run is based on playing through the post to create shot opportunities for the wing players.
You can get away with not doubling a perimeter player way before letting a dominant big man free reign in the low post.
"And once again we can say, it's a GREAT day to be a Blazer."- Brian Wheeler
Just for argument's sake...
21-year-old Aldridge (rookie): 63 games (22 starts), 22 mpg, 9 ppg, 5 rpg, 1 bpg, 17 PER, 53% TS%, 50% eFG%, 12.6 OREB%, 15.3 DREB%, 3.2 AST%, 4.2 BLK%, 3.3 Win Shares
20-year-old Love (rookie): 81 games (37 starts), 25 mpg, 11 ppg, 9 rpg, .6 bpg, 18.3 PER, 53% TS%, 46% eFG%, 15.1 OREB%, 27% DREB%, 6.8 AST%, 1.9 BLK%, 5.3 Win Shares
Now, I don’t think Love is currently better than Aldridge because he hasn’t played 36 mins/game, but to imply that Love will never be better than Aldridge is at the very least misguided. It’s more than possible.
by pagingstanleyroberts on Jun 9, 2009 11:30 PM CDT reply actions
to imply that Love
is more valuable in a trade than Aldridge is at the very least misquided.
by PippenAintEasy on Jun 9, 2009 11:37 PM CDT up reply actions
I didn't say that
Maybe others did, but watch who you’re calling out.
by pagingstanleyroberts on Jun 9, 2009 11:42 PM CDT up reply actions
i never specifically called you out
but that statement seems to be the consensus over here
just so everyone is aware:
Love < Aldridge
Love < G.O.
Love < Mayo
Love + 6th Pick < Mayo < LMA < Oden
Love < ………steve blake
by PippenAintEasy on Jun 9, 2009 11:46 PM CDT up reply actions
care to back any of those statements up with any evidence? i already know what the answer is, but i figured i’d ask.
“player x is better than player y” is not a real argument, it’s just a declaration. you seem to love to type declarations, but are flatly disinterested in arguing any points in a real way. why bother to come to a sports blog if you have already declared your opinions to be fact and show no interest in explaining why that may be the case.
heart of a champion, will of the warrior.
I dont need to make a case that Oden and LMA are both better in every possible way than Love. No need to nerd myself up by shuffling through meaningless stats like TS% in January during home games after a back-to-back.
You give me Love + the 6th pick, and ill give you back…. Segio?
by PippenAintEasy on Jun 10, 2009 12:15 AM CDT up reply actions
fine....
i’ll throw in the rights to Freeland
by PippenAintEasy on Jun 10, 2009 12:32 AM CDT up reply actions
alright, If Klove is so much better then oden and Aldridge then keep him
no arguement here or from any blazer team. I am glad you have found David lee 2.0
That's right, that's a picture of me with my new bff Joel Przybilla. He said my Billy Idol Karaoke was spot on.
i’m not a wolves fan; i’m a warriors fan (hence the picture of don nelson that appears next to my comments). i’m also not saying that there are no arguments to be made on the behalf of aldridge in this debate, but they must put homerism in the water up there if you think there’s no reason to say love is the better player. in my judgment (something that i have backed up with actual numbers as opposed to just spouting off how great my preferred player is), love is superior.
i’d be happy to listen to real points that demonstrate why LMA is the better player, but right now the majority of the comments seem to be based on things aldridge’s skillset as opposed to real production or his per game numbers, which are a pretty terrible way to show how good a player is; rate numbers are a much better indicator of what a player can do.
i have declined to comment on oden for the entirety of this post because at this point, he’s been injured too often to really talk about anything but his potential and i don’t pretend to have a crystal ball telling me whether he’ll become a yearly fixture at all-star games and the nba finals or if he’ll spend his career in the trainer’s room and on the sideline in a suit. to make any guarantees about a guy who has been injured that much is a very risky venture. i understand blazers’ fans enthusiasm based on how highly regarded he was entering the pros, but the injuries are a huge concern.
heart of a champion, will of the warrior.
Let me fix this for you
“i understand blazers’ fans enthusiasm based on how highly regarded he was entering the pros his performance and per minute stats.”
by Sabonis4Ever on Jun 10, 2009 12:40 AM CDT up reply actions
that foul rate doesn’t scare you at all? his per minutes stats look good outside of that, but when you’re fouling as much as him, that usually inflates your blocks and might inflate your rebounds too (i’m not sure about that, but it seems possible). i don’t know, oden’s looked pretty good, but based on what he’s done so far do you really want to say that he’s a lock for a bunch of all-star games in the future? he’s risky, that’s all i’m saying.
heart of a champion, will of the warrior.
Every young big man fouls
They all get past it. He has looked like a dumb rookie coming off major surgery with no athleticism. Yet he has a huge impact on the game already.
by Sabonis4Ever on Jun 10, 2009 12:53 AM CDT up reply actions
just bringing this up for fun, but anthony randolph has very similar rate numbers to oden, except he fouls less, and has higher assist, block, and steals rates. randolph does have a lower FG and TS% but no injury history. oden also projects to be the better on ball defender, but randolph is make considerable strides there too. i’m not interested in a oden vs randolph debate for the simple fact that i think oden has a massive range of possibilities and both of us would just be guessing about his future injuries, but it’s some food for thought.
heart of a champion, will of the warrior.
Randolph = STUD!
I hope Nellie actually gives him some burn next season. You never know with that guy.
As much as I love Randolph’s game, he just doesn’t impact the game as much as Oden. I like stats as much as the next guy, but I think I get as much from watching the games unfold live, in-person.
There is no doubt that the opposing team has to account for Oden’s prescence when he’s on the court. They double-team him, foul him, and box him out with two guys. I don’t think Randolph will ever have that kind of impact on the game in the near future.
Right now Randolph seems like a high-energy guy that gets everything with his hustle and athleticism. He’s as raw as Ty Thomas (another LSU alumn) was coming out and he’s still far from polished.
agreed, but he should become a pretty good defensive player as he adds the strength to d up in the post. i don’t think randolph has as high of a ceiling as oden, i’m just saying that there’s an interesting similarity in the rate numbers (with randolph’s being slightly better and oden being better at the areas of the game that don’t show up in those numbers).
heart of a champion, will of the warrior.
I was very impressed by Randolph's late-season push
I just wonder if he can produce at the same rate for a whole season. Teams start to figure you out after you play significant minutes in 50+ games.
i like his odds to keep producing at his current level. he was very raw and very productive during his rookie year; regressing from that doesn’t seem too likely, though as kg put it, “ANYTHING IS POSSIBLE!”
heart of a champion, will of the warrior.
He has to get minutes
Who loses in the minute crunch behind Biedrins, Turiaf, Maggette, Wright, and Randolph. I can never tell who’s going to get burn on your squad. Nothing will hurt a player’s developement like riding the pine.
the depth chart should look like this:
c1: biedrins c2: turiaf
pf1: randolph pf2: wright
maggette should never have to play pf again considering the development of randolph and wright, and turiaf’s ability to play the 4, but with wright’s injury history, you never can tell. it was hard to say who was going to get burn last year because of all the injuries and randolph’s slow start, but things should settle down considerably in that regard this upcoming season.
i’m not opposed to rookies earning their minutes in practice and don’t think it hurts their development. with guys like randolph, one of his biggest issues was that he didn’t understand our offensive or defensive sets (as well as playing out of position). that sort of stuff is what practice is for, game experience isn’t needed to learn those things.
heart of a champion, will of the warrior.
I was just referencing the fouls
When Greg is in, Joel is out. Greg had to watch our crappy perimeter defenders let their man by and try to stop them himself. His is a dumb rook who would always try and stop them instead of pick his spots.
by Sabonis4Ever on Jun 10, 2009 2:15 AM CDT up reply actions
ah, gotcha, that’s fair. though, randolph makes his living as a weakside shot blocker on d, a pretty good way to rack up fouls if your perimeter defenders suck. he’s not the anchor, but the way he plays d is not a good way to avoid foul trouble and it was a big problem for him at the outset of the season.
and i’ve got to say, i don’t think you want to have a debate about who has dumber perimeter defenders, the blazers or warriors. i don’t think the argument can be made that the blazers are worse in that regard. jamal crawford got considerable minutes on the warriors. JAMAL CRAWFORD.
(i don’t think you were implying that the blazers were worse, i just think how bad the warriors are defensively on the perimeter warrants mention whenever someone talks about perimeter d)
heart of a champion, will of the warrior.
Actually -
I do think the Wolves win this one. At least the Warriors HAD some perimeter defenders. . .
Sometimes the obvious is hidden.
by frankenhoops on Jun 11, 2009 4:41 PM CDT up reply actions
love has peaked
Aldridge makes steady increases in all areas of his game each year, and opposing coaches are nervous
by PippenAintEasy on Jun 9, 2009 11:39 PM CDT up reply actions
You're right...
A lot of players peak at age 20 in the NBA. Happens all the time.
by pagingstanleyroberts on Jun 9, 2009 11:42 PM CDT up reply actions
Lifetime ban for Andy G...
For drawing Blazers fans back to this site :).
I didn’t even think this was a plausible trade, I don’t think Love is better than Oden or that he’s currently better than Aldridge, and I like Brandon Roy and Rudy Fernandez as players. One of my favorite sports books is Breaks of the Game. These conversations, though, are what I imagine talking to Eric Cartman would be like if he were real. (Maybe that makes Wolves fans Kenny or some bit character like Craig.)
I can’t speak for every Wolves fan on this site, but rejecting every point made against you isn’t winning an argument. Some of you are smart; some of you come off as hacks and morons. No one on this site would deny the Blazers were a good team last year and have the potential to be better than that. Even if that happens, though, all you’ll be is fans of a successful team; it’s not like it’s something you can put on a resume or consider a life accomplishment. I couldn’t care less about your team; it’s just 1 of the 29 I want the Wolves to beat. I don’t agree with all or most of the opinions of my fellow Wolves fans, but at least many of them take the time to write thoughtful and reasonable responses and don’t reek of partisanship.
by pagingstanleyroberts on Jun 10, 2009 1:43 AM CDT reply actions 1 recs
Sorry about the BlazersEdge trolling
What we have here is a failure to communicate.
It seems to me that our moron posters are frustrating your quality posters and vice-versa. Kevin Love is a fine player. LM Aldridge is a fine player. Please try not to judge all of us based on some of the comments here and I, in turn, will extend the same courtesy toward y’all.
BlazerTag
I can do that. All I think is that it’s arguable who will be better in 4 years. Some disagree well, others disagree like 12-year-olds. I don’t lump both of them in the same group.
by pagingstanleyroberts on Jun 12, 2009 2:31 PM CDT up reply actions
Is it just me...
or does anybody remember a rumor that we could have traded KG for Deng, Henrich and the pick that eventually became Aldridge? Yeah, it’s late and I sure could be wrong.
As far as Love goes, I think he’s got a ton of potential. He may not be as athletic as everybody wants, but his basketball IQ will even that out. He’s only 20 years old, folks; he’s going to get much better! The comparision I make is with Bill Laimbeer – he was nobody’s idea of an elite athlete, but his shooting and rebounding ability made him a very valuable piece of a championship puzzle (plus, while in college, he had a guest spot as a sleestak on the “Land of the Lost” TV show – how cool is that??).
I remember that...
It was Chandler, Deng, the pick that became Aldridge, and the following year’s #1 (not sure if that would’ve been Noah or Carney/Sefolosha). As for Laimbeer, he led the league in rebounding twice and was a 3-time All-Star during a decade that was stacked with talent.
by pagingstanleyroberts on Jun 12, 2009 2:33 PM CDT up reply actions
Why I prefer Aldridge to Love
There is no way you can reasonably argue that Aldridge is a better rebounder than Love. The only thing you can do is make excuses (like some of the other Blazer fans here). Likewise, there is no arguing who is better at getting points at the free throw line; again, it’s Kevin Love.
There is also no arguing that the Portland Trail Blazers are, by far, the superior team compared to the Minnesota Timberwolves based on each team’s win total from this past season. LeMarcus Aldridge was the 2nd scoring option on the better team as well as being it’s 3rd or 4th best defender.
As has been pointed out in Norkstroll’s post showing Aldridge’s shot chart (despite many Canis posters’ claims that BEdger’s aren’t backing up arguments with stats), he can score from anywhere on the court. This helps free up the inside game for our all-star franchise player, Brandon Roy.
Some here have argued that a jump-shooting pivot player isn’t desirable; that it’s preferrable to have a guy that goes to the hole every position. In game one of the Rockets/Blazers playoff series, that is exactly what Aldridge tried to do and it was a DISASTER. The Rockets packed the paint, Roy had no room to work, and the end result was Houston by 30-ish. The Blazers were much more competitive when Aldridge took what the Rockets gave him, which was usually a 18-20 footer.
Aldridge’s jump shot and turn around jumper are things of beauty. His length, quick shooting motion, and high release point make it difficult to defend. He doesn’t always hit (who does?), but he almost never gets blocked.
Kevin Love’s jumpers, on the other hand, have a very low release point, so he has difficulty getting them off in the NBA (unless they’re uncontested). He was a terrific shooter in college and here in Oregon at the High School level, but he has yet to prove himself able to consistently produce from the perimeter as a pro.
LeMarcus Aldridge is also a better passer and decision maker than Kevin Love. Did you know Aldridge was 8th in the league in Assist/Turnover ratio? He was right behind Brandon Roy, who was 7th. The Blazers have a slow, methodical offense that is predicated on efficiency. The additional possesions the Blazers would receive from Love’s offensive rebounds (if he were on the team) would be negated by the amount he turns the ball over compared to Aldridge.
Aldridge is a workhorse, averaging around 38 minutes a game. He also rarely misses games because of injury (the only time being missed in his rookie season when he was coming off of shoulder surgery, which is why I don’t consider it valid to compare Love’s rookie campaign to his). It is a blessing for a coach to know that he can depend on a player to contribute on a playoff-caliber team day-in, day-out for as many minutes as Aldridge did.
Kevin Love, not so much. His minutes were sporadic on a roster full of has-beens and never-will-bes. I understand that his per-36 minute numbers are quite good, but the fact that he can’t get enough burn on a developing team to realize that potential is a huge red flag. That means that the coaches (even the one that drafted him) see something in his game that give them pause.
LeMarcus Aldridge is a terrific defender. I think we can all agree that defensive metrics are a work-in-progress at best, so the only thing I can point to is his +6 PER differential when compared to the other team’s PF while he’s in the game. He isn’t a great weak-side help defender or a great defensive rebounder, but his post and perimeter defense are excellent. Many on here have argued that perimeter defense isn’t important for a pivot-man, but in the Blazer’s system it is.
Nate McMillan’s ideal pick-and-roll defense is akin to what the Pistons did during their finals runs. They had two post defenders (the Wallaces) that could show on the perimeter, then collapse back in the paint in time to recover and defend the bigs. In order to do that, the opposing guards have to respect your ability to defend them. Part of the reason Oden gets so many fouls is because he hasn’t recovered enough athletic ability to keep up with the smalls. Aldridge doesn’t have that problem; he can keep up with them just fine.
Kevin Love isn’t quick enough to keep up with perimeter players and he’s not long enough to contest shots as a post defender or weakside-help. That gives you guys two PF’s that can’t play any D (unless you really think Jefferson is a center).
LeMarcus Aldridge also runs like a gazelle. I have never seen his man beat him down the floor and that’s not hyperbole. As of yet, it hasn’t translated into a lot of fast break opportunities (the Blazer’s starting pg is a failure in transition), but it does wear out the opposing bigs and allows the offense to set early in the shot clock.
I’ll admit to not seeing Love play live as a Timberwolf, but I saw him plenty in high school and in college. The only way I think you can get him to sprint to the other side of the court is if you lure him there with a tub of hot fudge. He makes great outlet passes, but sometimes I think he uses that ability to excuse himself from running down the floor.
Since Aldrige has arrived to the Blazers, they have improved by 14, 6, and 13 wins each season. Since Kevin Love arrived on the Wolves they have improved by 2 games. Plenty of time to make that even out, but chances are it ain’t gonna happen.
It has been argued that having better players around you improves your stats and opportunities. I think it’s a wash. I’ve seen plenty of players go from a terrible team where they averaged great stats, only to go to a better team and become non-factors. I’ve also seen the opposite become true. I’d have to see some hard evidence one way or the other to make either argument work.
I agree that Kevin Love has been impressive in his rookie campaign and has plenty of time to develop into a great player, but the Blazers are a playoff team that is building for the NOW more than the future. Aldridge’s advanced skill set puts them in position to be championship contenders next season and for several years beyond that.
But beside all that, the main reason I prefer Aldridge to Love is because the last time we had a great-rebounding, tubby power forward it didn’t work out so well. And to this day I still despise Zach Randolph.
This is a reasonable -thoughtful argument.
I thank you for your time in crafting it.
1. As far as LaMarcus Shot’ chart. The reality of the situation is that a long 2 isn’t really that effective a shot. It really shouldn’t be your primary shot. It should be a shot used to keep Defenses honest. If LaMarcus had three point range- the arguments as a floor stretcher would be valid. Perhaps they would even be more valid if their was an elite interior scorer. I can’t complain about the Blazers Offense as a whole. It’s worth noting on this end of the floor- LaMarcus ranked 7 out of 9 players with more than a 1000 minutes in TS%.
2. I think I should respond to the Minutes played argument since it’s been brought up several times. The reason Love didn’t play 36 minutes had nothing to do with the rest of the roster (One glancory look at Win Share Numbers) will prove this. They had to do with a pretty firm decision by the Coaching Staff to limit his minutes for the sake of his learning. This blog ranted about this time and time again as we also argued about whether he was the team’s best player.
3. Aldridge is more agile and better covering 4’s on the Perimeter than Kevin Love. The one defensive skill- Kevin Love brings is Rebounding. The strongest by far T-Wolves Defense metric was DRR which they were 5th. Again this is amazing considering how undersized they often were once Al went down. As Cap N Hack pointed out Kevin Love also probably holds position better inside. I also think anyone with familarity with the two rosters- would state that LaMarcus is surronded by much better players on this end of the court.
4. As far as the Timberwolves only improving by 2 games.
1. Big Al was injured (WOW said this probably cost us 6 games)
2. Their was regression from players (Gomes and McCants)- This had a pretty decent impact in the final win total
3. Additional Injuries (Brewer- Best Perimeter Defender)
The key factor in evaluating how a player helps a team win is how they contribute in each of the four factors
FG%- From the start of year on- This was about equal between Love and Aldridge. Although I’ll give the edge to LaMarcus since he probably influences FG% on the other end of the court more.
Rebounding- Love hands down
Free Throw Attempts- Love hands down.
Turnovers- Lamarcus hands down
So then the question is which of these skills are more valuable in a 4. I would tend to say 1,2,3.
4. A lot of these arguments I’ve heard are physical-based arguments for LaMarcus. Since Numbers- based arguments are harder to make. This is fine but numerical production should be the final outcome of physical prowess.
In conclusion- the quality of play around Kevin Love had a huge impact on his production. His best month January was by far the Wolves best month. The reasons being it was by far the Team’s Best Shooting Month and Al was still healthy. The sample size was small- but K.Love had easy PER 36- All Star Numbers this month. I tend to think LaMarcus’s weaknesses would be more exposed if he played apart from Oden/Pryz or Brandon Roy.
its not even close
LaMarcus > Love….. according to every head coach in the league
by PippenAintEasy on Jun 10, 2009 11:48 AM CDT up reply actions
Have you personanlly polled every HC & GM in the league?
Nope, didn’t think so
Sometimes the obvious is hidden.
by frankenhoops on Jun 11, 2009 5:04 PM CDT up reply actions
I can tell you haven't
Kahn and McHale would keep Love rather than LA
Sometimes the obvious is hidden.
by frankenhoops on Jun 12, 2009 12:45 PM CDT up reply actions
You don't limit someone's playing time to help them learn!
This is like saying up is down or left is right. To maximize a developing player’s potential, you need to PLAY THEM AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE. If the talent evaluators closest to the team (i.e. the coaches) don’t see him fit to play over 30 minutes a game on a roster that has nothing to lose but 50+ games, I don’t know what y’all see in him.
That was our argument. If the guy is one of our best players – PLAY HIM. I don’t think there was a Love supporter here that didn’t want him playing more. But, as we have lamented, we are not the head coach. . .:(
Sometimes the obvious is hidden.
by frankenhoops on Jun 11, 2009 5:06 PM CDT up reply actions
You convinced me
Other than being able to put the rest of a given team’s roster in perspective or back it up with Adv. Stats Analysis. My view is not that much of a minority as indicated by the only neutral poster (Cap N Hack) we’ve had in this discussion. WOW also shares my belief.
The point is to take a given players contributions to the situation as a whole and evaluate how they help a team win. The Four Factors is a pretty good formula for this (Love is potentially dominate in 2 of the 4). LA i’m still waiting to hear what his unique skill is other than making 40% of long- 2- Point jumpers on 2/3 of his shots.
Lamarcus Aldridge
1. Doesn’t shot a terribly high Pct from the field
2. Doesn’t rebound all that well
3. Is surronded by vastly superior players
4. Doesn’t get to the line
5. Yet he’s a elite player. Tell me “Why” ? Where are the elite skills?
1. What is a “terribly high percentage from the field” in your book? LeBron? He sucks at mid-range shots. As shown above multiple times, Aldridge’s shooting from anywhere inside the three point line (and the Blazers have much better shooters than him from outside, so that is not really needed) is close to or above 40%. His shooting around the rim is 60%, higher than many great PFs e.g. Tim Duncan. His eFG% is excellent. And the holy TS% cited several times is also good, on a level with Al Jefferson who by god is playing closer to the rim.
2. He is 8th in the league among all players in offensive rebounding. How is that “doesn’t rebound all that well”? On defense he is a lesser rebounder, but he is playing next to Joel Przybilla and Greg Oden, who both gobble up rebounds at rates above 20%.
3. He is surrounded by one vastly superior player: Brandon Roy. Until further notice, he is the second best player on a team winning over 50 games and making the playoffs, unfortunately running into one of the teams that matches up worst with them in the first round. One more missed shot by Finley, and the opponent would have been a depleted Spurs team or a confused Hornets team, both of which were very beatable.
4. Doesn’t get to the line: He has 334 FTAs last season. In other news Kevin Love hat 336 FTAs. Only 23 forwards had more than him. Maybe he could have more, but how is that bad? And that list includes Nene with 368 who is more of a center. Is he also bad at inside scoring?
5. His unique skills: He does everything well. He is the prototypical modern power forward. He is super quick for a player on his position in the open floor, he is tall, he can catch and shoot, he can play with his back to the basket and facing the basket, he can block. Many guys are one-dimensional, they can shoot but are weak in the post, they can rebound but can’t score. Aldridge doesn’t have one amazing skill, he has many very good ones. He currently is working on developing his left hand so he can drive past defenders on that side, once he got that down he will be even harder to keep away from the basket.
Ergo: He is an elite player. He could be an All-Star as soon as next season. Or not. Who knows. I’m glad we have him and nobody else does. In fact there is only one PF I would want over him considering age, skill and potential, and that is Chris Bosh. Who next year wants a max contract that will pay him up to $25 million, while Aldridge will cost half that on his next deal.
Response
1. For a 4 – 48% percent isn’t a terribly high percentage from the field if you’re not hitting 3’s. Second it’s true Jefferson’s TS% is around Aldridge’s. Jefferson was constantly doubled- team in the low-block. I can’t imagine teams often double-teamed Lamarcus’ 17 footers. This doesn’t change the fact for all the hot air about how great he is an offense- his TS% is behind Kevin Love’s. My opinion which hasn’t changed is the type of shots he likes to take aren’t great shots to take in the NBA except on much more limited basis than he does.
2. He’s 18th in Offensive Board-PCT (Solid)- he’s not as good in getting Defensive boards (True). His rates pale in comparsion to Kevin Love’s (True). No one would ever call him an Elite NBA rebounder.
3. I’ve never hated on the Blazers as a team. They’re a team that could win 60 games next year. The Wolves hope to win around 40. But you would have a hard time demonstrating that the Blazers aren’t a vastly better shooting team, and a vastly better defensive team. This does limit Kevin Love’s production.
4. This is an average rate for a 4. Love gets to the line at much higher rate considering the disaprity in Field Goal Attempts. The issue isn’t that LaMarcus is bad at scoring inside- he isn’t. I think it’s fair to say he’s not as agressive a player as he should be given his skill-set.
5. It think it’s fair to say he’s solid in many areas- but not elite in any areas. He’s not an elite floor stretching shooter (Rashard Lewis), an Elite Rebounder (Kevin Love) or an Elite On Ball Defender (Anderson Varejao).
Could he be an All-Star? The talent is there (No Doubt). I’m just looking at the final numbers and making the evaulation that he’s not quite there yet.
by Jose Cordoba on Jun 10, 2009 2:22 PM CDT up reply actions
i will poop my pants and eat it if the Wolves win 40 games next year
by PippenAintEasy on Jun 10, 2009 2:30 PM CDT up reply actions
if this trade happened
id chalk them up for 40 wins
by PippenAintEasy on Jun 10, 2009 2:32 PM CDT up reply actions
If you ever read WOW or David Thrope
I’m pretty sure you don’t. They would tend to disagree with the following assesment about the value of Love vs Oden.
by Jose Cordoba on Jun 10, 2009 2:33 PM CDT up reply actions
WOW is probably the worst of all the advanced amalgamate stats, and Thorpe overrates his own clients
He could explain you why Joakim Noah is better than Al Jefferson and Kevin Love combined.
RE: point 3
Please show me evidence that NBA players’ stats are better on better teams. I’ve seen lots of instances where the opposite is true.
Kevin Garnett
would be an excellent example as he sacrificed stats for team.
"Fernandez, to my eyes, is the Blazer who walks that walk most comfortably. A lot of Portland's fans (egged on, dare I say, by their local broadcasters) lament things like how Ron Artest or Yao Ming get to hit Brandon Roy's arms.
But I suspect Fernandez sees all that and thinks: We get to hit arms! Cool!"
http://myespn.go.com/blogs/truehoop/0-39-135/On-Playoff-Experience.html
He's good in this area
I think this is somewhat affected by who they’re playing with also.
by Jose Cordoba on Jun 10, 2009 2:35 PM CDT up reply actions
if aldridge is all of those things
and he is still better than Love (which he is), then Love must be straight garbage
by PippenAintEasy on Jun 10, 2009 1:59 PM CDT up reply actions
The "talent surrounding him" excuse...
is just that, an excuse. I want to see evidence that players improve their stats on better teams if you’re going to keep quoting this argument. There are plenty of players that have their stats improve when going to crappier teams. You claim yourself to be a numbers guy. SO SHOW ME THE NUMBERS TO PROVE THIS ARGUMENT.
Another raw stat you conveniently keep omitting is W's and L's
The Blazers had a lot of the former, the T’wolves had a lot of the latter. Aldridge is the second-best player on a playoff team. Where does Love rank on your squad? He’s behind Jefferson. Is he behind Miller? Gomes? Carney? Foye?
love, in my estimation, is the second best player on the wolves, behind only jefferson. the reason that the blazers are so much better is that their best player (roy) is much better than jefferson, and players 3-15 on the blazers roster are better than players 3-15 on the wolves. you can’t fault love for the wolves’ crappy record, just like how you can’t give aldridge all the credit for the blazers’ success. the blazers are a very deep team with a young player right on the cusp of superstardom; the wolves are a shallow team with two very good big men, one of whom spent most of the year in a suit after blowing out his knee.
considering the cap space, draft picks and the love/jefferson combo, there’s reason to be optimistic for the wolves, but last year was not going be a good year for them. despite the efforts of love and jefferson.
heart of a champion, will of the warrior.
All things being equal...
I’ll take the Blazer’s 2nd best player to the T’wolves.
I like Kevin Love and all, but we need players that can create their own shot. The Blazers have only 3 players that can do that: Brando Roy, Travis Outlaw, and LeMarcus Aldridge. We have plenty of efficient scorers, we need a couple of guys to score in volume.
that’s a totally fair argument based on the needs of the blazers team. i disagree in terms of what is generally useful and haven’t scouted the blazers to determine what they need to improve upon, so maybe it’s true. in terms of what love does on the court, i’d say he’s generally more valuable. it’s close and really just comes down to what you want your player to do. with comparable scoring efficiencies and a massive rebounding edge for love, he’s the guy i want, but like i said, it’s very close. i’d say that the wolves would be a worse team if LMA and love were swapped, but it’s possible the same would be true for the blazers. i also think that love being a few years younger is important to note as well. he’s going to improve more rapidly than aldridge.
heart of a champion, will of the warrior.
Blazer Tag Response
1. Look at a comparsion of Kevin Garnett’s Offensive and Defensive effectiveness when he was surronded by much better players on the Celtics. Compare Pau Gasol’s numbers in Memphis vs the Lakers- his TS went up nearly 8 points. These are the two most prominent 4’s traded in Recent Memory from horrible supporting casts to terrific supporting casts.
If Love improves his True Shooting to 55-56% This makes a huge Difference in overall Offensive effectiveness.
2. Your knowledge of the Timberwolves season seems weak. Love led the team in Win Shares per minute as produced by WOW. He had a much higher rating than Lamarcus in this area if you adjust for the quality of surronding players. The four players you mentioned are bench players at best on a really good team. The T-Wolves record had nothing to do with Kevin Love’s production rather poor shooting, and poor perimeter defense along with poor depth because of injuries.
That is not numerical evidence...
1. Those are two instances where players improved on better teams. I’ve got another two for you who did the exact opposite. Maurice Taylor when he went from Clippers to Rockets and Stephon Marbury when he went from the Knicks to the Celtics, that’s just off the top of my head. We could go back and forth on this all day. Show me evidence that isn’t isolated instances.
2. I wasn’t trying to be insulting. I can garauntee I didn’t watch the T’wolves as much as you did (thank God). I was asking an honest, straight-forward question. To which you still weren’t able to answer me “yes” or “no”. I’ll ask again. Is Kevin Love the second-best player on the T’wolves?
Marbury isn't a good example.
He went from the Knicks to forced retirement to the Celtics.
As for your question, the answer depends on who you ask, but most posters here would probably tell you that yes. Love is the second best player on the T-Wolves. Maybe third best after Miller, but Miller drove us all nuts this year with his refusal to shoot so we’re pretty down on Miller around here too.
by princelyfrank on Jun 10, 2009 3:18 PM CDT up reply actions
I'm also not as sold on Wages of Wins as you are.
I think it over values rebounding. Case in point, our own Joel Przybilla was leading the league for in WOW for a while. I love the big fella… but c’mon.
Response
1. I don’t know that bringing up a PG that goes to having very limited burn is the most relevant example. As far as Maurice Taylor this is a bad example considering he increased his RR% and TS% along with nice increases in his OR and DR.
2. The debate is whether he or Big Al is better long-term. There’s a division on this blog in regard to the subject. If I didn’t believe Kevin Love wasn’t at least debatable to be their best player- we wouldn’t have this argument.
Fair Enough on WOW
I’m not nuts about all of their methodology either. I do want to make that clear since I don’t want to be bound to judgements like Mike Miller is better than Kobe Bryant.
so....
explain to me why LMA’s best attribute is his D
by PippenAintEasy on Jun 10, 2009 2:49 PM CDT up reply actions
I've only cited
The Per Differential about 6 times. This was mentioned on Blazers Edge- Season Ending Recap.
by Jose Cordoba on Jun 10, 2009 5:30 PM CDT up reply actions
A PG that doesn't get any burn is exaclty my point
The playing time crunch on good teams makes it harder for them to contribute. I don’t think Love would get more than 10 minutes on our squad.
From 82 Games - Sorry if any of these stats have already been posted
Roland Rating
Aldridge – 20th
Love – 130th
2pt FG %
Aldridge .418
Love .361
Inside FG %
Aldridge .623
Love .533
Foul %
Aldridge 11%
Love 18%
Dunks
Aldridge – 107
Love – 37
Rebounding Player Rating
Love – 37.3
Jefferson – 31.5
Pryzbilla – 40.6
Oden – 36.5
Aldridge – 22.5
The first thing that jumps out to me is the Roland Ratings in which Aldridge is the 20th ranked player in the NBA. Admittedly it isn’t that most comprehensive rating in existence but it paints a significantly different picture that many on this board are trying to prove. Additionally Aldridge’s shooting percentages are much higher all across the board. and gets almost twice as many dunks even when taking in account for total minutes played.
To me the most telling stat is the rebounding ratings. I don’t think there is any question that love is much more efficient rebounder than LMA, but a lot of people here seem to be comparing the two in a vacuum. Both Pryzbilla and Oden were elite rebounders and I didn’t even include Roy who is one of the best rebounding guards in the NBA. Who else rebounds for the Wolves when Jefferson is out?
rebound rate is possibly the most consistent stat in basketball. it seems like teammates would have a greater impact on in it, but that’s really not the case. i don’t know why, but that’s what the numbers indicate.
heart of a champion, will of the warrior.
How?
I am fairly confident that if Pryzbilla was not on the blazers that LMA would have a significantly higher rebound rating.
Do have evidence to the contrary?
it’s hard to cite direct evidence of something with such a massive scale. throughout the history of the nba, rebounding rates stay very similar. i’d have to track down a few studies for you to demonstrate it, but it’s difficult to find players who saw dramatic increases/decreases in their rebounds per minute with a different supporting cast.
heart of a champion, will of the warrior.
That what I was trying to get at.
Both of our points would be very difficult to prove. Another aspect of this argument that non blazer fans are missing is the blazers offense. One of most run plays this year was the pick and pop with a guard and LMA. Obviously he wouldn’t be in position then if was was playing more of Kevin Love’s role. This is an aspect of the Blazer’s offense that frustrates a lot of people especially since Aldridge is such a match up problem and is double teamed almost every time he gets the ball even with Roy in the game
LMA could very well be the better fit in portland. two guys who bring different things to the table would definitely be better or worse fits depending on the team. i’m just saying that considering what a great rebounder love is and what a subpar rebounder aldridge and given their very comparable TS%, it’s reasonable to make arguments both ways, depending on what you’re looking for in a player.
i’ll take love because he’s one of the best rebounders in the nba (and is likely to continue to rebound at that level), scores efficiently and is younger, so it can be assumed that his shooting precentages will go up as he adjusts to the nba game. aldridge is more versatile and has a better game away from the paint. i don’t think many people would argue with either of those assesments; from there it’s a judgment call.
heart of a champion, will of the warrior.
So basically....
You have Aldridge who is a significantly better player on defense (both perimeter and low post), transition game, a much more versatile offensive player who can play both in the paint and on the perimeter, but a worse of a rebounder and yet you still take Love (a player who still hasn’t had to deal with double teams much in the NBA).
To each their own…using the Roland Rating, I really think that shows disparity between the two players as of now.
aldridge is not a better post defender than love; there we have some disagreement. i also think that his versatility is somewhat overrated in terms of what he’s actually produced on the court. his midrange jumper isn’t as effective or useful as many blazers fans have argued. if his supposed versatility is taking him away from where he’s actually effective (the paint), either by not posting up or not driving to the hoop, that’s not helpful for his team.
love scores slighlty more efficiently and embarasses aldridge on the boards (getting over 1.5x the rebounds as aldridge per minute). aldridge’s activity on the defensive end has dropped (see his blocks; they’ve plummetted) as well as his fg% and demonstrates an aversion to contact defensively. his 2.5 fouls per 36 show this. while fouls aren’t a good thing, but that few from a big indicates an unwillingness to mix it up, especially when coupled with a drop that substantial in blocks. i’m comfortable saying that this is something of a toss up.
to be honest with you, i’m not sure exactly what a roland rating measures. i’d be interested to hear an explanation, but generally aggregate “here’s how good a player is” stats really don’t interest me that much. they usually each have pretty gaping holes. if this one’s better than the rest, i might be more convinced, so if you want to give me a rundown, i’m all ears (or eyes, as the case may be).
heart of a champion, will of the warrior.
Here is the definition
“The main components of the ‘Roland Ratings’ are a production measure (a variant of John Hollinger’s PER rating) for a player’s own stats versus the counterpart player on the other team while he is on the court, as well as a simple on court/off court plus minus.”
so, it’s an adjusted plus minus? i stand by my skepticism, especially if it’s based on PER, which rewards high volume, low percentage shooters.
heart of a champion, will of the warrior.
Regarding the per minute stats
You have to factor in the fact that if you are playing 24min a game, you will probably be a lot fresher and active during your time on the floor than if you play 38min per game. This could be a contributing factor to Love’s better per minute stats.
I mean, do you really think Love would be as effective and efficient if he had to play 38mins a night?
yes. see: millsap, paul. rate numbers usually get better with increased minutes, not worse. this could be because professional athletes are well conditioned enough to be able to play hard for 36 minutes of stop and start action and it could be because they require some time to get used to the flow of the game, but for the most part, rate numbers get slightly better as you get more minutes.
heart of a champion, will of the warrior.
Kevin Love is well conditioned?
I thought that was one of the factors holding him back at the NBA level, but I could be wrong
i’ve heard that too, but i didn’t see that as a problem for him this year. that could be a limiting factor for him, but generally speaking nba players are able to keep their feet firmly on the gas pedal for the entirety of their minutes, or at least have the energy to produce at similar rates regardless of minutes played. i’m sure there are exceptions to that rule as you get into the really, really high minutes totals, but for the most part, it’s a non-factor.
heart of a champion, will of the warrior.
It was thought that may hold him back
but it hasn’t, really.
by princelyfrank on Jun 10, 2009 7:45 PM CDT up reply actions
We all thought so...
But he got stronger as the season went on and said he felt great at the end of the season. His minutes will go up, but if Vlade Divac can play 36 minutes a game while being a chain smoker (admittedly hearsay), I think Kevin Love can get to that point.
by pagingstanleyroberts on Jun 12, 2009 2:47 PM CDT up reply actions
Response
Roland Rating is heavily influenced by the quality of players around you. For example last year- Al Jefferson was clearly the best player on the Timberwolves-yet he had a negative Roland Rating. This year for Love when you’re paired with Gomes, and Smith this is going to have a negative impact in how effective this metric is for a given player.
But isn't that the problemt with assigning a single number to a player to determine his effectiveness
Look the through the APB Rmetrics forum if you want more discussion over this. Overall it’s a pretty good measure of the importance of a player to a team. Of course being really good or bad will skew the number
if having bad teammates will skew an individual players number downward, then it’s really unfair to say “look at the roland ratings! aldridge is better!” when aldridge has vastly superior teammates. it’s hardly a conclusive point, which is what you were essentially arguing when i said that i preferred love.
To each their own…using the Roland Rating, I really think that shows disparity between the two players as of now.
that sounds like it should be able to measure players conclusively, but from everything you’ve just said, that sounds false.
heart of a champion, will of the warrior.
By being really bad or really good was meant for the team as a whole
As I said in a previous post, it’s acknowledged as being the most reliable metric available to the public at this time. There are other more detailed metrics but those are only available to paying customers.
so what your really saying is that your entire team is not that good and you just don't want to admit that the gem of your crop a Kevin Love isn't all that special if he was surrounded by actual talent?
The Faith don't panic, the faith freaks out, burns out farms, and torchs small villages in the name of The Faith.
How is it that in this thread you guys have Kevin Love...
…being better than the Blazers 2nd best player, but in a different thread most of you are agreeing with your new GM that he would be the 4th best player on a championship contending team?
Does that mean you think the Blazers have to find 2 players better than LaMarcus Aldridge before they can become legitimate contenders?
if the wolves are going to contend, yeah, love might need to be the 4th best player. they just don’t have a superstar to carry them over the top. brandon roy should make things easier on aldridge, but if oden doesn’t come along or they get another all-star, they won’t win a title. the blazers weren’t legit contenders this year.
heart of a champion, will of the warrior.
Garnett had 20 & 10 year after year & never made the finals.
When he went to a team with more talent his #’s went down but he won his ring!
i really don’t see what your argument is here. his numbers went down because he was older, and he won a ring because he was playing with pierce, allen and rondo. what’s your point?
heart of a champion, will of the warrior.
and in kg’s defense as far as his “numbers” are concerned; they barely dropped. per minute, he was almost exactly as effective as he was the year before; and his PER and win shares actually went up.
heart of a champion, will of the warrior.
so kg was equally effective, played with better players and won a title? what is your point?
heart of a champion, will of the warrior.
These LMA fanboys are pretty irrational
LMA is a nice player and all, but the arguments here are ridiculous.
The sky is blue. That proves it! LeMarcus is an All-Star!
by princelyfrank on Jun 10, 2009 8:14 PM CDT up reply actions
the sky is blue is at least a premise, even if it is unrelated to the conclusion. there’s been a lot more “aldridge is great; you’re stupid if you don’t see it!” than anything else.
there are perfectly valid arguments on both sides of this issue; i really don’t see how this should boil down to declarations of superiority and an obnoxious, arrogant tone. i said it somewhere in the middle of this monstrosity of a thread, but if you want to come to someone else’s house; treat the owners with respect and definitely try to contribute something useful in the process. if you disagree, explain it and don’t be arrogant when someone isn’t convinced. sorry for the mini-rant, but as someone who likes coming here and isn’t a wolves fan, i do my best to not be irritating and actually listen to the good posters on here. would it be so hard for others to do the same?
heart of a champion, will of the warrior.
I'm just having fun with you
I never said anyone was stupid & if I came across as arrogant it was unintentional but it goes both ways if you dismiss someones opinion out of hand they may just respond
you didn’t call anyone stupid, but there was a ton of remarks of that nature made throughout the comments here. i was giving an overview of what i thought of the discourse on this post. i just think that coming over to another team’s blog to say “our player is better than yours” is meaningless without some sort of reasoning to back it up, particularly if someone says, “here’s why i think our guy is better” and then the response is just mocking and saying that that person doesn’t know what they’re talking about.
there were plenty of BEdgers who were great in this post; there were also plenty who were obnoxious. it’s safe to assume that most portland fans think aldridge is better, if that’s all you have to add, don’t bother.
heart of a champion, will of the warrior.
To say a good rebounders #'s go down when playing next to great rebounders is an opinion
There are only so many rebounds to go around. It’s common sense there is no way to prove it, just as there is no way to disprove it. If you dismiss something out of hand that cant be proven statistically well I just dont get it. It seems so obvious to me I am amazed you cant see it.
check the rebounding numbers on guys who switch teams and start playing with better rebounders; they don’t get worse. there has been a lot of research done on the subject (not by me); i wish i had a link for you to those studies and since i don’t, i understand your skepticism. it flies in the face of common sense, but that’s how the numbers look.
marcus camby for example pulled down almost the same number of rebounds per 36 when he moved from denver (where there wasn’t much rebounding help) to the clips, where he was competing with zach randolph and chris kaman. you’d expect the numbers to drop, but they remain remarkably similar and his % of total rebounds actually went up a bit.
heart of a champion, will of the warrior.
I wish you had the link to.
I will need to see it. I am not against Love either he was one of the best to come out of the portland high school system.I like to think that I’m not a total homer but I call them like I see them & I see more Portland games.I have followed Loves career though what I like about him is his outlet passes.He sometimes makes the pass before he hits the ground
Also the Clips never had everybody healthy at once for more then a few games all year
Will need a better example
There is a pretty obvious fallacy to this line of thought
Because unless you think that adding a rebounder makes for more missed shots (more actual rebounds to get) then somebody’s getting less rebounds.
"You're welcome friend
I love you."
- Tom "Dragline" inHawaii
by 92wastheyear on Jun 11, 2009 12:13 PM CDT up reply actions
I'm sure where to find these stats either
but I’ve seen them before and Cap’N Hack is correct: Rebounding is the most consistent stat and, for whatever reason, outside variables don’t much affect a guy’s rebound rate. Hollinger has written about this in the past.
Great rebounders just grab rebounds. They’ll snag them away from opponents, teammates, their own mother, it really doesn’t matter.
by princelyfrank on Jun 11, 2009 12:39 PM CDT up reply actions
I didn't say that the stats aren't true
just that you can’t have it both ways. The are a finite number of rebounds….so if you built a starting lineup who each averaged 10 per game the previous year ….someone’s average will drop…..has to
"You're welcome friend
I love you."
- Tom "Dragline" inHawaii
by 92wastheyear on Jun 11, 2009 1:01 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
My point is if Love was playing next to a dominant rebounder
Oden-Pryz He would not get the rebounds he gets on the Wolves
love rips down rebounds at 1.5x better rate per minute than aldridge, considering the absolute lack of evidence to suggest that rebound rates change much at all when players switch teams/teammates, that’s a contentious claim with no evidence to support it other than what you assume to be true.
heart of a champion, will of the warrior.
dense arguement....
if you put your love next to a real center he doesn’t rebound as many boards as he does, can’t guard forwards as fast as aldridge, can’t shoot over forwards as long as lamarcus … it’s just silly to think that his good production on a crap team for one season even puts him in the same ball court as lamarcus.
The Faith don't panic, the faith freaks out, burns out farms, and torchs small villages in the name of The Faith.
Yes
And if you read all the posts on that particular post you will also notice that we said that he has the potential to be a #2 or #3. I actually think that the Blazers do need another player that is better than LA. You may already have him in Oden though. . . .
Sometimes the obvious is hidden.
by frankenhoops on Jun 11, 2009 5:25 PM CDT up reply actions
If you guy's really want to trade K Love
We might consider giving you Travis Outlaw & Sergio Rodriguez. That’s about as good as your gonna get.
The Blazers have absolutely no use for Kevin Love.
He is a little too good of a player to only command 10-15 minutes a night backing up LMA. Another thing against him is he can’t really move to other positions to utilize him. He is too small to play center and would get abused by small forwards on defence.
There is not a single player on the Wolves roster that I would want on the Blazers. Big Al is good but we already have two excellent centers.
"And once again we can say, it's a GREAT day to be a Blazer."- Brian Wheeler
Few thoughts
- LMA is a great fit with the Trailblazers and a better player than Kevin Love is for now. He can play soft and fuzzy with heavies like Przy and Oden around, so his mediocre rebounding, FTA’s, and blocks aren’t much of an issue. I think all the other stuff he brings to the table – defense, minutes, scoring – puts him ahead of Love.
- However, Love could still end up being the better player. If he gets to LMA’s level as a mid-range shooter, gets himself in NBA shape, and also gets more touches, there is no reason he can’t surpass LMA as an impact player. And none of those areas are unrealistic to expect improvement on from Love.
- The initial Oden-Love/#6 trade proposal is a lose-lose proposition for both teams. It’s too big of a risk for the Wolves due to Oden’s injury history and it just doesn’t make sense for the Blazers due to a myriad of good reasons, not least of which they are in “tweak” mode in terms of contending and have a bunch of other assets at their disposal to take the final step. If Oden ever develops into the stud he’s capable of being and gets over these injury issues, they could be a dynasty.
- Overall this has been a highly entertaining debate. Jose C. has been a friggin’ terrier on the Love issue, but in the end these two franchises are on different ends of the spectrum and there is very little reason for either team to do business with the other.
Sorry
Being a lifelong Vikings fan, my pride has been beaten to a pulp over many years. I take a typical Minnesota stance – or at least a stance I share with many of my close relatives and friends that continue to live there: Lower your expectations such that at worst they are met and at best you are pleasantly surprised. That often comes across as being reasonable in an emotion-charged debate, when in fact it’s probably more a symptom of simply being a defeated and dejected Minnesota sports fan. Go Jose!!!!
Being a Vikings fan teaches many important life lessons.
I know it has prepared me well for a lifetime of failure.
by princelyfrank on Jun 11, 2009 2:34 PM CDT up reply actions
Excellent life lesson
And one I’m trying to pass down to my son, but he insists on rooting for the Eagles. That should prepare him for a lifetime of imprisonment.
by Rascal Flatts on Jun 11, 2009 7:00 PM CDT up reply actions
Well, I give up...
Apparently a 25 mpg bench player on a 30 win team is better than the second best player on a 54 win playoff team. If you want to think that way, good for you. At least you believe in your guys I guess.
"And once again we can say, it's a GREAT day to be a Blazer."- Brian Wheeler
Here's why it's better to have Love
Here’s Love and Aldridge in their first seasons. First, their per game stats:
Player Age G GS MP FG FGA FG% 3P 3PA 3P%
LaMarcus Aldridge 21 63 22 22.1 3.8 7.6 50.3% 0 0 0.0%
Kevin Love 20 81 37 25.3 3.9 8.5 45.9% 0 0.2 10.5%
Player Age FT FTA FT% TRB AST STL BLK TOV PF PTS
LaMarcus Aldridge 21 1.3 1.8 72.2% 5 0.4 0.3 1.2 0.7 3 9
Kevin Love 20 3.3 4.1 78.9% 9.1 1 0.4 0.6 1.5 2.5 11.1
Okay, that's not readable
Go here for the comparison:
http://www.basketball-reference.com/fc/tiny.cgi?id=iEwwa
Long story short: in their first seasons, Love was better than Aldridge at everything except fg%, turnovers, and blocks. There’s no way you can look at this and say anything except that Love had a far superior rookie season. AND he did it at a younger age than Aldridge. Also, not only did Aldridge not hit 36 min/game, he was on the floor less than Love. If you’re a team starting from scratch, you would absolutely want Love.
Another thing to like about Love: his floor is a 10-9 guy (not good, but not bad off the bench). His ceiling, however, is a 20-15 starter. And I’m not blowing smoke, either. If he becomes a 40 min/game guy (like LaMarcus Aldridge did) than he would be a 18-14 guy off his rookie numbers, meaning if he improves at all from his rookie season and plays 40 minutes a game, he’ll have a chance at 20-15 for a season. The only player to do that in the 3-point era? Moses Malone on the 82-83 76ers.
Now, I can hear the everyone (except possibly Cap’n Hack and Jose) screaming in horror, so let me point out three things.
1) To the snarky, useless reply of “if he’s so good, why didn’t he play more?”: he had the 10th most minutes per game of any true rookie, 12th if you want to count internationals, meaning he played a lot. He also was saddled with Randy Wittman to start the season, who is on the short list of worst head coaches in NBA history. Later he was stuck with McHale, who has somehow parlayed a decent half-season coaching stint from 3 years ago into people thinking he’s a good coach.
2) I’m not making this up at all. It would just take starters playing time plus a modest improvement in his playing (and thus numbers) to hit 20-15.
3) Again, that’s his ceiling. Very few players ever reach the pinnacle of their potential. But if you’re looking at upside, Love’s is as almost anyone in the game.
Check the link in the other one
It has their per minute numbers, and Love is far in front of Aldridge.
Per minute Numbers only mean so much
Comparing a player that gets half the minutes of the other is not very reliable. Gortat from Orlando also has very good per minute numbers….does that make him just as good as love?
I’m at work so I can’t pull specific numbers for you, but Gorat falls into what we here call small sample size theatre. The rule of thumb is that a guy needs 1200 minutes (about 15 min/game for 82 games) in order to have a large enough body of work where a per minute rating can work. That’s why we can apply it to Aldridge and Love, but not Gorat. Examples (off the top of my head, so I’m not promising I’m 100% right) are Landry between this year and last year, and Craig Smith from his first season to his second.
Additionally, Gorat is probably better than just being Howard’s backup, and could conceivably start for a team that is looking for an average PF/C to hold up the middle (I’m looking at you, New York). However, he is not as good as Love.
Again....Aldridge played almost twice as many minutes as Love
so actually it is very similar to comparing Gortat to love.
How about Joel Pryzbilla ….his TS% of .652 and rebound percentage of 22.1, both of which are better than Love’s.
My point is that statistics are definitely useful but do not tell the whole story…a lot of people on this board are cherry picking statistics in order to find a basis for their opinion. Carl Landry said that LMA was the toughest Forward he’s guarded and Aldridge is on the USA Select team for second consecutive year.
Again no is saying Love is not a good player.
Quick response
first, I’m comparing Aldridge’s first season to Love’s. That means Aldridge actually played less minutes. Second, again, you have to figure in that magical 1200 mark. It’s kind of a requisite to escape small sample size theatre.
Speaking of small sample size theatre, Przy’s 65.2% TS is a member of that special club. As for his rb%, he did 22,1% to Love’s 21.0%. It’s a little better, yes, but it’s an 8 year vet vs a rookie. I can’t stress this enough, but the reason we like Love is for what he will do, not what he has done.
And it’s a little hypocritical to accuse someone of cherry-picking data (which I didn’t do in my first post and my second one, again, was off the top of my head while at lunch) and then defend your position by using an anecdote.
Let me try that first paragraph again
I’m comparing Aldridge’s first season to Love’s, and comparing them Love played 656 more minutes. They both played over 1200 minutes, which is the mark, I mentioned, that makes such comparisons possible. Gorat didn’t so it doesn’t work with him (though again, he’s probably better than a 10 min/game backup).
Love is a historically good rebounder
LMA is much better offensive player. Both teams like who they have.
by Sabonis4Ever on Jun 12, 2009 4:10 PM CDT up reply actions
So what you're saying is...
Because Foye averaged 10.1, 2.7, 2.8 in his rookie season he will be better than Kobe Bryant who averaged 7.6, 1.9, 1.3 in his rookie season.
Your argument sucks and you know it.
"And once again we can say, it's a GREAT day to be a Blazer."- Brian Wheeler
Somewhat different
Kobe was younger than Foye during their respective seasons, so more improvement could be expected out of Kobe. Conversely, Love was younger than LMA during their rookie seasons. Your statement backs up the theory that Love is more valuable long term, as Love would be the Kobe in this scenario (although LMA was also younger as a rookie than Foye).
by princelyfrank on Jun 11, 2009 2:14 PM CDT up reply actions
No No No.
What McCleak was trying to say is that because Love averaged more in his rookie season that he would be the better player. Foye avereaged better numbers than Kobe in his rookie season and we all know that Foye is nowhere near Kobe.
"And once again we can say, it's a GREAT day to be a Blazer."- Brian Wheeler
Irh86, stop and use your brain for a second.
Most guys can be expected to improve upon their rookie numbers. Generally speaking, the younger a guy is as a rookie, the more we can expect him to improve upon those numbers. If a 19-year-old rookie and a 24-year-old rookie put up identical numbers, generally speaking, the 19-year-old guy is a better prospect. Kobe was straight out of high school, while Foye was a four-year college player, so one would presume that Foye as a rookie was closer to being a finished product than Kobe was.
Love had better numbers than LMA did as a rookie, and he was younger at the time. Obviously, these are not hard and fast rules, but that would usually indicate that, three years from now, Love stands a good chance of putting up better numbers than LMA did this year, as well. Most players improve a great deal between the ages of 20 and 24, and Love is far from being a finished product.
So your argument is, what, exactly? Anyone who puts up better numbers than Kobe during their respective rookie season is doomed to failure? That we should pay no attention to stats whatsoever because Kobe is a God and everyone else is doomed to failure because they are not Kobe? That putting up strong rookie numbers is a good indication that a player will be bad, long-term, while putting up bad rookie numbers means he’s a future MVP? Strong stats indicate a player is bad?
Please explain your “logic,” because I’m not following.
by princelyfrank on Jun 11, 2009 2:33 PM CDT up reply actions
He was using his reasoning to imply that Love is going to be a better player than LMA.
I was simply stating that his line of reasoning is complete horseshit. Yes Love was the better rookie. That don’t mean shit. There is a lot of rookie players that put up decent numbers that do not improve significantly. All you can do is wait and see. LaMarcus Aldridge has already proven that he can improve each season and is on the brink of stardom. Love hasn’t proved a damn thing other than he is able to come off the bench and get some decent numbers on a craptastic team.
Bottom line: LMA is and probably always will be the better player.
"And once again we can say, it's a GREAT day to be a Blazer."- Brian Wheeler
Well, basketball, like life, is subjective
and we are all entitled to our opinions. I just thought your cherry-picking an example of two players who don’t really parallel the two players being discussed here (because of the age factor) did not “disprove” McCleak in any way.
LMA is a useful NBA player, certainly. Love was a very good rookie. Only time will tell who ultimately will be the better player.
by princelyfrank on Jun 11, 2009 3:03 PM CDT up reply actions
A response to all your posts
Two things: First, the bit you’re responding to is an accidental post. Second, if you read the followup part., you’ll notice I’m compare them mainly on 36-min (this becomes very explicit if you read my bits with ppilot). Now, setting aside the staggering age difference between Bryant and Foye in their rookie seasons, let’s look at their per 36 numbers:
http://www.basketball-reference.com/fc/tiny.cgi?id=3zy4O
Hey, it turns out Bryant had a better season! And I can already hear you complaining that Foye almost had as good of a per 36 season, and so therefore must almost be as good as Bryant. And here’s where that pesky age issue we set aside before comes in. If you read any statistical information on player development, you’ll quickly realize that the single most important issue in their future improvement in their age. Surely we can agree that 19 years olds who outplay 24 year olds in their respective rookie seasons (again, per 36 minutes) have a brighter future, as evidenced by, in fact, Bryant vs. Foye?
And that actually leads to another argument in favor of Love: Go onto Basketball Reference and look up the Love’s and Aldridge’s PERs for their rookie years (18.3 and 17.1 respectively). Now take rookie forwards 21 and under who played at least 1000 minutes. I limited it players who had a PER +/- 1 of the player in question (so a range of 17.3-19.3 for Love and a range of 16.1-18.1 for Aldridge) and players within a year of their rookie ages (19-21 for Love, 20-21 for Aldridge) so that we can get a good comparison. I also limited it to forwards who played during the shot clock era and had their rookie season at least 4 years ago (meaning 1979-1980 to 2005-2006) to get a better sense of players who have hit their prime.
Here’s the guys that Aldridge is the most similar to:
http://www.basketball-reference.com/fc/tiny.cgi?id=YVRi4
AND here’s the guys that Love is most similar to:
http://www.basketball-reference.com/fc/tiny.cgi?id=MyiAP
We can both agree that Love’s list is much better right? And that’s why I’m saying (note: not “trying to say” but saying) that Love will have a better career. People that enter the league at his age and play as well as he did turn out very well.
Now there isn’t a straight line correlation (which means I’m not saying Paul Pierce is better than LeBron James, and I’m not saying Channing Frye is better than, well, about 2/3rds of the players on that particular list), but it does give you a ballpark estimate for their career paths.
As to your huffing dismissal of my ignoring Aldridge’s 2 & 3rd season, I’m doing it because rookie seasons are the only points of valid comparison we have right now. Comparing Aldridge’s third season to Love’s rookie campaign is an apples to oranges comparison. In fact, it gives credence to the pro-Love side, since a 20 year old rookie played almost as well (per 36 minutes) as a 24 year old 3-year vet. Now, I’ll grant you that Aldridge is, at present, on a better career path than 4/5s of his list, but, again, he’s had more time to prove it. Also, all Love has to do to best that mark is be in the top 7 of the 9 players (counting Love) in his list.
So when you take this all together, here’s why I choose Love over Aldridge: because the numbers tell me so. It’s that simple. It has nothing to do with homerism or blind faith or willful ignorance or any other lazy dismissal that’s been bandied about for 500+ posts. I choose Love because the odds favor him having a superior career.
In fact, I’ll be you an elephant that’s what happens.
Very Good McCleak
Sometimes the obvious is hidden.
by frankenhoops on Jun 12, 2009 12:50 PM CDT up reply actions
There's no point in Responding to this
I’ve addressed every point several times. The Blazers are a good team- the Wolves aren’t. The Blazers are a better shooting team, and a better defensive team.
I’ve never denied this. What I did question was the idea that LaMarcus Aldridge’s numbers make him more valuable to a given team than Kevin Love. I realize this is a minority position. There’s no point in breaking down Kevin Love’s value to the Timberwolves since it’s just assumed LA must be better since he played on a better team. Since Numbers have bandied about till the Cows come home I’m disengaging from this one.
I have nothing against the Blazers or Blazers Edge. Ben and Dave have written some really good articles over there including their Oden and Aldridge season reviews. I appreciate Norkstroll’s visits over here. There were a lot of good posters from Blazers Edge and a lot of passionate posters from Blazers Edge in this discussion. I appreciate their passion for their team and their players. We disagree on player evaluation that’s not good or bad just a different perspective to evaluating a game.
Best Wishes on this post.
PS. Shout out to Cap N Hack.
I wouldn't trade for Aldridge
But I wouldn’t trade for Love if I was Portland. They’re both bad fits given where the teams are.
you people cant see past your unwarranted homerism
say what you want about numbers, but you cant compare these two players’ numbers. One played a key role on a playoff team, the other hardly played for a garbage team…
If you want the answer to the question of who is better… just ask any GM outside of these two teams who they would rather have on their team. 100% would say LMA. I dont need to back this up with any rediculous WOW stats or per 36 minute stats… shut up with that garbage… every head coach and GM would take Aldridge over Love, forget about it
by PippenAintEasy on Jun 11, 2009 1:30 PM CDT up reply actions
Pippen, you keep saying this.
Why don’t you call all the NBA GMs and ask them this question, and we’ll see what they say?
Oh, what’s that? You don’t have any way of getting their answers? You’re just attributing opinions to people when you have no idea what their actual opinion is?
Just ask any Supreme Court Justice what their favorite popsicle flavor is, 100% will say raspberry. Just ask any astronaut who their favorite Seinfeld character was, they’ll say it’s Kramer.
You don’t know what these GMs would say, Pippen. I don’t know you personally, but I suspect you lack the psychic powers you claim to display, unless you were involved in some kind of Gamma radiation accident we don’t know about it.
by princelyfrank on Jun 11, 2009 2:00 PM CDT up reply actions
How do you know...
that he doesn’t have a way to get the answers from NBA GMs. You don’t. I’m not saying I think he can but you saying that he can’t without having any way to tell who he really is is stupid. For all you know he could be front office worker for one of the 30 NBA teams.
"And once again we can say, it's a GREAT day to be a Blazer."- Brian Wheeler
If that guy works in the front office of the NBA
I will eat another hat, of his choosing.
by princelyfrank on Jun 11, 2009 2:35 PM CDT up reply actions
And even if he does
He still wouldn’t know what ALL 30 GMs would say or do. I stand by my original rebuttal. Even if PippenAintEasy is an NBA GM himself slumming it on the blogs, he cannot possess the perfect knowledge he claims to, for the other GMs would keep their own analysis and opinions on the matter at least somewhat subject. No one knows what lurks in the hearts of men but God- and the Shadow. Bwah ha ha ha ha!
If it turns out that PippenAintEasy is the Almighty’s blogging tag, then I will retract my post, and not before.
by princelyfrank on Jun 11, 2009 2:54 PM CDT up reply actions
What i'm trying to say is...
You don’t know a damn thing about him so how can you say he doesn’t know this or can’t do that.
For all I know you could be a retired billionaire or a 12 year old kid on his daddies computer without his permission.
"And once again we can say, it's a GREAT day to be a Blazer."- Brian Wheeler
If no one on Earth can know a thing
then it stands to reason that Pippen can’t know it either. I have left open the possibility that he has supernatural abilities or time-bending sci fi machinery. If that’s the case and Pippen possesses perfect knowledge of the inside of men’s minds, then you’re right, I am the ass.
However, if Pippen is a mere mortal man (or woman, or child), then I am correct and he is claiming knowledge he does not have. The only assumption I make about Pippen is that he is human, although some simple deductive reasoning from reading his posts indicate that he makes a habit of making broad declarative statements that cannot be proven.
by princelyfrank on Jun 11, 2009 3:09 PM CDT up reply actions
You are going off the assumption that GMs and front office people...
don’t discuss these things. If they didn’t they wouldn’t be doing their jobs.
"And once again we can say, it's a GREAT day to be a Blazer."- Brian Wheeler
If pippen works in a front office
than I’m LaMarcus Aldridge. It’s just as likely.
cheers,
this was a lot of fun and you know i’ll be around this offseason, but i’ve got to check out too. this is becoming too much.
and to answer we-b-dunkin’s question: i don’t think either team should make that trade, both would probably be worse because of it. it probably hurts the wolves a little more though.
heart of a champion, will of the warrior.
595 comments is sick
so I’ll just have to skip them .. but ..
I wouldn’t do it in a heartbeat but it does sound like something that should be mulled over a lot. If we were to give up the 6th pick we would need portlands next year’s first rounder, no protection.
Beater of the early Thabeet drum ... but not so much of the late one
so you would need next years 30th pick to make this deal happen?
my favoriteline at this site….“Love + 6th pick should get us someone in the CP3 range”……. OMFG!!! shut your stupid traps
by PippenAintEasy on Jun 11, 2009 1:32 PM CDT up reply actions
I feel stupid
for even reacting to this but … you seriously believe you’ll be the best team next year? Man that’s arrogant.
“Shut your stupid traps”; real constructive.
Beater of the early Thabeet drum ... but not so much of the late one
by Wim (Belgium) on Jun 15, 2009 12:55 PM CDT up reply actions
portland's next year first rounder will = the 26th pick or something
not that exciting. Minny would rather have this year’s 31 probably, since it’s a non-guaranteed contract.
by prezofdeath on Jun 16, 2009 11:59 PM CDT up reply actions
Your own new GM has a brutally honest assessment of Love
Said specifically that Love’s ceiling is right below all-star level.
-For a championship caliber team, Al Jefferson and Kevin Love are, respectively, 2nd and 4th best players. The team needs to find players who can be the 1st and 3rd best players, according to Kahn.
i wouldnt
even trade love for oden straight up
that would be a stupid trade
throwing away love AND A PICK
what this is the dumbest idea ive ever heard
blazer fan here
i wouldn’t give oden for love and your draft pick.
no offense, just sayin.
by prezofdeath on Jun 16, 2009 11:57 PM CDT up reply actions
you guys need love...we need oden
no reason to trade players. just the way it is.
by prezofdeath on Jun 17, 2009 12:02 AM CDT up reply actions
Sure you don't want us to throw in Brandon Roy too?
I love it when fans of other teams speculate with a straight face on the possibility of a trade that would be a steal for them.
"In the empty spaces - lacunae, vacuums, pauses, voids, black holes - new things begin. We are born anew from the unexplored space, the badlands, the outlaw territory." - Sam Keen
That's the best part
Speculation is what some of us fans do best. If we are tired of our FO getting screwed by everyone else, why not dream up a scenario where we screw the other team (in your opinion). That being said, did anybody even see that Pau Gasol robbery coming down the pipe?
Sometimes the obvious is hidden.
by frankenhoops on Jun 17, 2009 1:00 PM CDT up reply actions
No chance
The Blazers would basically be throwing their entire championship plan away by doing this deal. Greg Oden has had injuries and they are a concern for the Blazers, but they have put all their chips on this guy to make them a contender over the next decade. Kevin Love and the #6 pick is not a bad bit of trade bait, but it is not going to make the Blazers any better than they are right now and it would make them a lot less dangerous. It’s pretty clear from the comments above that people aren’t aware of Greg’s efficiency and the effect his presence has on the game. I’m not a stat geek, but Greg’s per 48 stats and his defensive presence are consistent with his hype. Bottom line, Greg has the potential, barring injury, to be as dominant a center as there has ever been. He also has the potential to spend his career on the bench. Either way, the Blazers are going to take that gamble and they are right to do so.
"Sasha? That's a sissy name." -Mike Rice
by koyote on Jun 19, 2009 2:48 PM CDT reply actions 1 recs
No... no.... and no.
Kevin Love now is greater than Oden now. I can see merit in that statement. After all, love can stay on the court.
Oden had a broken wrist, knee surgery, his tonsils taken out, and sprained his ankle. These things have all lead to him being “injury prone”.
Oden was recovering from a year plus of being away from basketball. His cardio was never back and his moves were CLEARLY raw. He looked ugly at the beginning of the season, but as it progressed the guy looked smoother and more dominate. He got the shots he wanted and he began to look comfortable.
Oden’s major issue, despite his amazing rawness is becoming comfortable on the team and avoiding fouls. WHEN he’s on the floor he completely dominates and alters the game. To me, he reminded me of a teenager attempting to fit within his changed body. I have no doubt that he’ll figure his body out for next season.
I do not trade for Greg Oden unless you are Lebron or possibly Howard. This is a guy that dominated in college while playing with a broken wrist. This is a guy that was hailed as a can’t miss talent as in the likes of Lebron. His injuries could have happened to anyone and have happened to many other greats.
So this raw Oden dominates when on the floor… what happens when he’s no longer raw and has his groove back? That thought is why I would not trade Oden. Time will tell, but I’m definitely willing to take a gamble because i really don’t believe Oden is much of a gamble.
"Fernandez, to my eyes, is the Blazer who walks that walk most comfortably. A lot of Portland's fans (egged on, dare I say, by their local broadcasters) lament things like how Ron Artest or Yao Ming get to hit Brandon Roy's arms.
But I suspect Fernandez sees all that and thinks: We get to hit arms! Cool!"
http://myespn.go.com/blogs/truehoop/0-39-135/On-Playoff-Experience.html
absolutely not
We wouldn’t trade Oden for #5, #6 and Love, especially in such a weak draft.. Sorry, but you are way off. There isn’t a single player in this entire draft that would start for Portland, why would we trade our future for backup scrubs?
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Canis Hoopus
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
Next Game
In Association With
Ball Don't Lie - NBA - Yahoo! Sport
- Days of NBA Lives: Wherein Roy Hibbert tap-dances to Maine
- Grizzlies Valentine’s Day cards are the key to love
- Kevin Love would like the NBA to take the MLB’s approach on All-Star games
- Kobe Bryant fires a few hilarious salvos at Jeremy Lin
- Brandon Jennings states the obvious regarding his 2014 free agency, everyone goes nuts
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
