RealGM

His points, rebounds, assists were all really really low as a starter. So it confuses me how Portland started him for so long.

confidence and a firm handshake

cellphonecamera wrote:His points, rebounds, assists were all really really low as a starter. So it confuses me how Portland started him for so long.

Because it was obviously a weak area for them? I'm not sure they could afford better really. That being said his value isn't in counting stats. He's a negative offensive player. Defensively he can guard 3-4 positions though and has those random games where he goes off like Jeff Green. He was never a focal point for them. I'm just curious how much he can improve now that he's coached by Doc and has this much wing talent around him. I'd imagine at 26 he can't be completely set as a player right?

Probably because he is a 6'9, long wing, who if not injured, can hit a corner three.

Great defender but yeah don’t underestimate the firm handshake

Harrison Barnes was essentially the starter for GS for 4 years (2nd year started 1/3 of the games), and 1 of those years they won the championship and another they won 73 games. I think it was the same thing for Portland as it was for GS, basically that was the weakest spot in the starting lineup and a long athletic 6'9 guy to plug in there and play okay defense and asked to hit the occasional open 3 was enough to get by.

Lack of a better option

He started, but didn't really get starter minutes in the last two seasons. He averaged 23.6 minutes in 2018-19 and 21.4 minutes in 2017-18. It was kind of a position by committee where minutes were determined based on the night's performance, matchups, etc.

Lack of better options is high on the list. But, Portland also was invested in his development. He is tremendously streaky on offense, and can be disengaged for months at a time. But, there was direct correlation ot Harkless waking up and playing well and Portland as a whole winning games. It sounds odd, but he was a lynchpin for PDX late season surges the past few years.

Portland hung onto him hoping he would become consistent. He has all the natural talent to be an Otto Porter level starting SF, but just cant stay engaged. Its likely that he doesnt develop at this point and carves the rest of his career out on the bench as a 8th man type IMO.

BlazersBroncos wrote:He is tremendously streaky on offense

That's just another way of saying he's a bad shooter.

He got a lot of playing time.

He would sometimes burn me in DFS because he played so many minutes but only cost like $4500. I'd take the risk and he'd produce far below his low price.

Well, according to Chinese artificial intelligence..

viewtopic.php?f=6&t=1873815

Probably by method of having the coach deciding not to have him come off the bench and choosing to have him play from the beginning of the game

Isn't he kind of a "fake" starter? I mean he averages like 20 mpg, and Evan Turner is around 25 mpg during those years.

The thing is they have two ball handlers starting at the backcourt, they really don't need Turner there. Harkless' defense and hustle is much better suited for the starting lineup.

One thing strange I find about Harkless is his 3pt% went up to 41% in one year then 27% the next. Any reason for that volatility, POR fans?

There's a reason Mo, Turner and Leonard are all gone. I’ll leave it at that. The fact we upgraded all these positions too makes it hilarious everybody has Portland outside of the West Top 4 somehow.

Need that 3pt% to go back up to respectable. With the clippers bench all he has to is spot up or cut when needed. Defense as always and any points in transition are a bonus

ken6199 wrote:Isn't he kind of a "fake" starter? I mean he averages like 20 mpg, and Evan Turner is around 25 mpg during those years.

The thing is they have two ball handlers starting at the backcourt, they really don't need Turner there. Harkless' defense and hustle is much better suited for the starting lineup.

One thing strange I find about Harkless is his 3pt% went up to 41% in one year then 27% the next. Any reason for that volatility, POR fans?

He was a very frustrating player in Portland. Obviously has talent, good length and athleticism, but seemed to seriously lack motivation for about 80% of the season. Pouted and sulked when he was deservedly benched. With a lack of other options, the starting role was his to lose and he lost it multiple times.

With Moe, you got No Show Moe for most of the season and Motivated Moe for about one month, plus one or two games in the post season.

TheNewEra wrote:Need that 3pt% to go back up to respectable. With the clippers bench all he has to is spot up or cut when needed. Defense as always and any points in transition are a bonus

That was his role and Portland, benefiting from the defensive focus on Lillard, McCollum and Nurkic, and he still struggled to score consistently. It's not about opportunity, or even skill with Moe, it's about focus and motivation. Maybe Doc can light a fire under him, but I'm not sure if Moe is the type that will respond, or if it will just make him go into his annual 3 - 4 month funk.

Pattycakes wrote:There's a reason Mo, Turner and Leonard are all gone. I’ll leave it at that. The fact we upgraded all these positions too makes it hilarious everybody has Portland outside of the West Top 4 somehow.

If we improved, it was only marginally. Utah, the Lakers and Clippers all improved significantly, and I wouldn't be surprised if all 3 jumped us.

Last season Denver and Golden State finished above us. The Warriors will be significantly worse this year, but I don't see any reason to think Denver drops off, so pencil them ahead of us.

Also, the finishes last year were razor thin, as they have been for years. The 8 seed and 2 seed were seperated by 6 games. So not much of a difference between the teams, random luck plays a big part in how things shake out. Last season Portland abused the Eastern conference to a 24-6 record. Do you see us replicating that? Because if we don't, we need to make up those wins in the West.

So I have us at the 5 seed. Could finish slightly higher or lower depending on circumstance, but 5 sounds right. I don't think fans of any team should be offended by where their teams are projected to finish. The projections don't matter at all. Last season, ESPN projected us to finish 10th, and the Lakers 6th. But instead, the Lakers finished 10th and we finished 3rd.

Pattycakes wrote:There's a reason Mo, Turner and Leonard are all gone. I’ll leave it at that. The fact we upgraded all these positions too makes it hilarious everybody has Portland outside of the West Top 4 somehow.

Yes, many in the forum are commenting on Portland losing significant pieces when those pieces were significantly flawed. Giving Turner's minutes to Bazemore (or any player with a pulse) and Moe's minutes to Hood will only make Portland better.

Portland's biggest flaws the past four seasons has been inconsistent and downright bad, play at the forward positions, and the poor fit of players like Turner. Sure, all of Aminu, Harkless and Turner had their moments. The problem is they were way too few and very far between. Having two guys on the floor, at all times, that you can't rely on to give you anything offensively, is not a good thing and makes it so much easier for defenses to key on Dame and C.J. Good guys, but good-bye and best of luck with your new teams.