Is Dame Actually the Greatest Blazer?
Moderators: Clyde Frazier, Doctor MJ, trex_8063, penbeast0, PaulieWal
Is Dame Actually the Greatest Blazer?
-
- Lead Assistant
- Posts: 5,646
- And1: 6,341
- Joined: Jul 12, 2014
-
Is Dame Actually the Greatest Blazer?
Simmons made what I think was a pretty good point on his podcast yesterday. A lot of people are calling Dame the "greatest Blazer" (I've even said it discussing his trade request) but is that even true?
Walton lead them to their only championship in 1977 and was one of the 5 best players in the league that year, something Dame has never been. Then Walton won MVP in 1978 before getting hurt. He obviously doesn't have longevity in Portland, but hitting that peak and delivering a championship is "greater" than Dame's really good 11 years in Portland IMO. The Blazers have been at least decent that whole time, but they haven't won a game in the conference finals and Dame's never been more than like the 9th or 10th best guy in the league.
I also agree with Simmons that Drexler is a "greater" Blazer. From 1990 to 1992 the Blazers won 59, 63 and 57 games, respectively, making the Finals twice and losing to the Lakers in the 1991 conference finals. Dame has never been on Portland teams that good. I think Drexler has gotten a bit underrated since Jordan destroyed him in the 91 Finals, but that's Michael Jordan we're talking about. Drexler has an argument for the second best guard of the 90s with Stockton and Payton, he's definitely the second best SG.
Longevity does matter. Most Laker fans (me included) consider Kobe the greatest Laker even though Magic and Kareem hit higher peaks in a Laker uniform. Kobe won 5 titles though, so his longevity edges out Magic and Kareem who also have 5 Laker titles. But I can't take Dame's aggregate stats/longevity with the Blazers over guys who actually made/won the Finals and lead elite Blazer teams.
Walton lead them to their only championship in 1977 and was one of the 5 best players in the league that year, something Dame has never been. Then Walton won MVP in 1978 before getting hurt. He obviously doesn't have longevity in Portland, but hitting that peak and delivering a championship is "greater" than Dame's really good 11 years in Portland IMO. The Blazers have been at least decent that whole time, but they haven't won a game in the conference finals and Dame's never been more than like the 9th or 10th best guy in the league.
I also agree with Simmons that Drexler is a "greater" Blazer. From 1990 to 1992 the Blazers won 59, 63 and 57 games, respectively, making the Finals twice and losing to the Lakers in the 1991 conference finals. Dame has never been on Portland teams that good. I think Drexler has gotten a bit underrated since Jordan destroyed him in the 91 Finals, but that's Michael Jordan we're talking about. Drexler has an argument for the second best guard of the 90s with Stockton and Payton, he's definitely the second best SG.
Longevity does matter. Most Laker fans (me included) consider Kobe the greatest Laker even though Magic and Kareem hit higher peaks in a Laker uniform. Kobe won 5 titles though, so his longevity edges out Magic and Kareem who also have 5 Laker titles. But I can't take Dame's aggregate stats/longevity with the Blazers over guys who actually made/won the Finals and lead elite Blazer teams.
Re: Is Dame Actually the Greatest Blazer?
-
- Senior Mod
- Posts: 53,227
- And1: 22,236
- Joined: Mar 10, 2005
- Location: Cali
-
Re: Is Dame Actually the Greatest Blazer?
Fitting to bring this up given how quickly things have gone south in Portland.
I've always thought it wrongheaded for people to have this debate and not even mention Bill Walton. Analytically of course Dame, Clyde, and many other guys dwarf Walton with their longevity...but within a city's culture, a championship can be a really, really big deal and this is the case in Portland.
Prior to this off-season, I thought that the way Lillard had carried himself would allow him to be beloved enough by the fans to give him a clear nod over Big Red that Drexler couldn't...but with the way it's ending, nah, I think Walton's going to continue to have a really strong case.
One note: I think a lot of folks don't know about how problematic Drexler was as a young star. Things went bad with coach Jack Ramsay - who had architected the Walton scheme that won the team the chip and continued to make the Blazers respectable in the years afterward to the point that Ramsay went off on Drexler in comparison to Walton after the fact - and then there was the need to bring in Buck Williams to be the leader that Drexler couldn't be, and instill a level of defensive culture that made all the difference in elevating Portland to be a contender.
Then of course there's the matter while that leaving the team and immediately winning a title on another team helps Drexler's NBA GOAT standing, it doesn't necessarily the Blazer fans feel like he's theirs.
I've always thought it wrongheaded for people to have this debate and not even mention Bill Walton. Analytically of course Dame, Clyde, and many other guys dwarf Walton with their longevity...but within a city's culture, a championship can be a really, really big deal and this is the case in Portland.
Prior to this off-season, I thought that the way Lillard had carried himself would allow him to be beloved enough by the fans to give him a clear nod over Big Red that Drexler couldn't...but with the way it's ending, nah, I think Walton's going to continue to have a really strong case.
One note: I think a lot of folks don't know about how problematic Drexler was as a young star. Things went bad with coach Jack Ramsay - who had architected the Walton scheme that won the team the chip and continued to make the Blazers respectable in the years afterward to the point that Ramsay went off on Drexler in comparison to Walton after the fact - and then there was the need to bring in Buck Williams to be the leader that Drexler couldn't be, and instill a level of defensive culture that made all the difference in elevating Portland to be a contender.
Then of course there's the matter while that leaving the team and immediately winning a title on another team helps Drexler's NBA GOAT standing, it doesn't necessarily the Blazer fans feel like he's theirs.
Getting ready for the RealGM 100 on the PC Board
Come join the WNBA Board if you're a fan!
Come join the WNBA Board if you're a fan!
Re: Is Dame Actually the Greatest Blazer?
-
- Analyst
- Posts: 3,261
- And1: 2,972
- Joined: Dec 25, 2019
-
Re: Is Dame Actually the Greatest Blazer?
Pretty sure I would go Drexler in terms of pure value and no outside factors.
Re: Is Dame Actually the Greatest Blazer?
-
- Analyst
- Posts: 3,037
- And1: 3,965
- Joined: Jun 28, 2013
Re: Is Dame Actually the Greatest Blazer?
No, Walton and Drexler are ahead. Dame would have become their GOAT if he had stayed his whole career but he chose to ring chase which I don't fault him for (rooting for him really) but it does have a cost.
Re: Is Dame Actually the Greatest Blazer?
- Jaivl
- Head Coach
- Posts: 7,041
- And1: 6,700
- Joined: Jan 28, 2014
- Location: A Coruña, Spain
- Contact:
-
Re: Is Dame Actually the Greatest Blazer?
SK21209 wrote:I also agree with Simmons that Drexler is a "greater" Blazer. From 1990 to 1992 the Blazers won 59, 63 and 57 games, respectively, making the Finals twice and losing to the Lakers in the 1991 conference finals. Dame has never been on Portland teams that good. I think Drexler has gotten a bit underrated since Jordan destroyed him in the 91 Finals, but that's Michael Jordan we're talking about. Drexler has an argument for the second best guard of the 90s with Stockton and Payton, he's definitely the second best SG.
Lillard never had the luxury of playing with someone nearly as good as him (Porter) plus a supporting cast full of all-star level guys or close to it (Buck, Clifford, Ainge, Duck, etc).
Still agree Drexler is the greater Blazer. Not by much, though.
This place is a cesspool of mindless ineptitude, mental decrepitude, and intellectual lassitude. I refuse to be sucked any deeper into this whirlpool of groupthink sewage. My opinions have been expressed. I'm going to go take a shower.
Re: Is Dame Actually the Greatest Blazer?
-
- General Manager
- Posts: 9,003
- And1: 5,535
- Joined: Jun 03, 2023
Re: Is Dame Actually the Greatest Blazer?
Not anymore.
Warspite wrote:Billups was a horrible scorer who could only score with an open corner 3 or a FT.
Re: Is Dame Actually the Greatest Blazer?
-
- Senior Mod - NBA Player Comparisons
- Posts: 30,301
- And1: 9,865
- Joined: Aug 14, 2004
- Location: South Florida
-
Re: Is Dame Actually the Greatest Blazer?
Jaivl wrote:Lillard never had the luxury of playing with someone nearly as good as him (Porter) plus a supporting cast full of all-star level guys or close to it (Buck, Clifford, Ainge, Duck, etc).
Still agree Drexler is the greater Blazer. Not by much, though.
Drexler played with a better supporting cast but not at the level you are making it out. Terry Porter, Buck Williams, and Cliff Robinson were All-Star level guys, but Porter was not Drexler level any more than CJ was Lillard level. Ainge was a role player who played 2 years in Portland and wasn't even a starter, and Duckworth was Enes Kanter/Thomas Bryant level (though in an era where that skill was more valuable), a guy who could give you points at decent efficiency but neither strong rebounding nor good defense.
“Most people use statistics like a drunk man uses a lamppost; more for support than illumination,” Andrew Lang.
Re: Is Dame Actually the Greatest Blazer?
-
- Head Coach
- Posts: 7,104
- And1: 3,912
- Joined: Oct 04, 2018
Re: Is Dame Actually the Greatest Blazer?
I have Drexler as the better player, and career so no.
Re: Is Dame Actually the Greatest Blazer?
- MartinToVaught
- RealGM
- Posts: 15,707
- And1: 17,778
- Joined: Oct 19, 2014
-
Re: Is Dame Actually the Greatest Blazer?
rand wrote:No, Walton and Drexler are ahead. Dame would have become their GOAT if he had stayed his whole career but he chose to ring chase which I don't fault him for (rooting for him really) but it does have a cost.
Even if Dame had stayed for his whole career, I don't think he'd have been better than Walton or Drexler. It's just recency bias and two game-winners (in an otherwise unremarkable playoff career) that are clouding people's judgement.
A more interesting hypothetical is where Brandon Roy would have ranked if he had ever been able to stay healthy.

Re: Is Dame Actually the Greatest Blazer?
- Dr Positivity
- RealGM
- Posts: 62,673
- And1: 16,363
- Joined: Apr 29, 2009
-
Re: Is Dame Actually the Greatest Blazer?
I think they all have pretty decent case
For Walton I'm ok with the idea of "Greatest" player for a franchise taking into account winning a title, especially when it's a 1x title team. With that said, he wasn't that much closer to being the best player in the league than Drexler at his best, and you could argue Drexler's team was better than 77 Blazers, it's not his fault he had to play the 92 Bulls instead of 77 Sixers. The late 70s are the easiest time to win a title in post shot clock era hands down.
Lillard's case for Drexler would be if you rated the 2010s higher than the 90s, and otherwise his caliber for a PG was relatively close to Drexler's for a wing. Unless he becomes famous for being his game winning shots like Miller, I could see Lillard becoming underrated in the long run as kind of this era's Lanier that other good stats PG in the 2010s than Curry/Harden/etc., but never had a super memorable playoff success. I think ultimately, I feel a little better about Walton and Drexler's cases.
For Walton I'm ok with the idea of "Greatest" player for a franchise taking into account winning a title, especially when it's a 1x title team. With that said, he wasn't that much closer to being the best player in the league than Drexler at his best, and you could argue Drexler's team was better than 77 Blazers, it's not his fault he had to play the 92 Bulls instead of 77 Sixers. The late 70s are the easiest time to win a title in post shot clock era hands down.
Lillard's case for Drexler would be if you rated the 2010s higher than the 90s, and otherwise his caliber for a PG was relatively close to Drexler's for a wing. Unless he becomes famous for being his game winning shots like Miller, I could see Lillard becoming underrated in the long run as kind of this era's Lanier that other good stats PG in the 2010s than Curry/Harden/etc., but never had a super memorable playoff success. I think ultimately, I feel a little better about Walton and Drexler's cases.
Liberate The Zoomers
Re: Is Dame Actually the Greatest Blazer?
-
- Ballboy
- Posts: 21
- And1: 53
- Joined: Jul 06, 2021
-
Re: Is Dame Actually the Greatest Blazer?
I feel like there’s 3 related, but subtly different, concepts at play whenever discussing “greatest (x team) player”. The first, which is pretty clearly not applicable, is “greatest player to wear this uniform”. To me, this is pretty absurd— otherwise, Hakeem is the “greatest raptor”. Secondly, is the player whose career spent with the franchise would rank the highest on a CORP ranking or a greatest player list. I think this is a common way to evaluate this, but it’s not my preferred method. Instead, I’d go with a third option, which is the player who’s had the “greatest” (less quantifiably beneficial, more emotionally/ historically significant). I recognize that you can apply this method to ranking an all time list for the league at all, but I feel like there’s a sense of loyalty, emotional resonance, and intangible significance that’s more salient to team rankings than to league rankings. Things like team success, popularity with a fan base, and even time with the franchise outside of playing are meaningful to me, here, in a way that is less relevant with, say the top 100 project.
I’m not a Blazer’s fan, so I’m not going to take a definitive stance, so I guess this is a somewhat long winded way of saying I think Clyde’s team success can and should matter a lot her, regardless of the supporting cast.
I’m not a Blazer’s fan, so I’m not going to take a definitive stance, so I guess this is a somewhat long winded way of saying I think Clyde’s team success can and should matter a lot her, regardless of the supporting cast.
Re: Is Dame Actually the Greatest Blazer?
-
- General Manager
- Posts: 8,111
- And1: 1,487
- Joined: Aug 13, 2005
Re: Is Dame Actually the Greatest Blazer?
Lillard hasn't had bad teams until maybe the last two years. Aldridge was a very good player early in Lillard's career and Nurkic, McCollum were very good as well, as well as some other players they had. Drexler had quite good teams as well but he was a much better two way player and allround player while being a very good scorer himself. The numbers show that Drexler was one of the most allround players of his era. Cliff Robinson only became allstar caliber in 1993, when Portland was no longer a real contender. Porter also dropped off after 1993.
Re: Is Dame Actually the Greatest Blazer?
- homecourtloss
- RealGM
- Posts: 11,375
- And1: 18,774
- Joined: Dec 29, 2012
Re: Is Dame Actually the Greatest Blazer?
penbeast0 wrote:Jaivl wrote:Lillard never had the luxury of playing with someone nearly as good as him (Porter) plus a supporting cast full of all-star level guys or close to it (Buck, Clifford, Ainge, Duck, etc).
Still agree Drexler is the greater Blazer. Not by much, though.
Drexler played with a better supporting cast but not at the level you are making it out. Terry Porter, Buck Williams, and Cliff Robinson were All-Star level guys, but Porter was not Drexler level any more than CJ was Lillard level. Ainge was a role player who played 2 years in Portland and wasn't even a starter, and Duckworth was Enes Kanter/Thomas Bryant level (though in an era where that skill was more valuable), a guy who could give you points at decent efficiency but neither strong rebounding nor good defense.
Impact signals and metrics that we have for Terry Porter suggest that he was a much more impactful player than CJ McCollum is.
Terry Porter’s partial 1991 RAPM has him as a top 5-top 10 impact player. strong regressed approximations, and 1994 through 1996 that are also strong all the way up into the lake 1990s and early 2000s.
He was a high motor, really strong defender and the impact signals seem to corroborate this. Their problem was that they had a huge negative in Kevin Duckworth, who wasn’t really good at anything— hello efficiency office, wasn’t a good rebounder, was not a good defender. Replace him with any tough rebounder, rim runner, vertical threat, and the team would be a monster.
lessthanjake wrote:Kyrie was extremely impactful without LeBron, and basically had zero impact whatsoever if LeBron was on the court.
lessthanjake wrote: By playing in a way that prevents Kyrie from getting much impact, LeBron ensures that controlling for Kyrie has limited effect…
Re: Is Dame Actually the Greatest Blazer?
-
- Starter
- Posts: 2,265
- And1: 2,270
- Joined: Jul 01, 2022
-
Re: Is Dame Actually the Greatest Blazer?
homecourtloss wrote:penbeast0 wrote:Jaivl wrote:Lillard never had the luxury of playing with someone nearly as good as him (Porter) plus a supporting cast full of all-star level guys or close to it (Buck, Clifford, Ainge, Duck, etc).
Still agree Drexler is the greater Blazer. Not by much, though.
Drexler played with a better supporting cast but not at the level you are making it out. Terry Porter, Buck Williams, and Cliff Robinson were All-Star level guys, but Porter was not Drexler level any more than CJ was Lillard level. Ainge was a role player who played 2 years in Portland and wasn't even a starter, and Duckworth was Enes Kanter/Thomas Bryant level (though in an era where that skill was more valuable), a guy who could give you points at decent efficiency but neither strong rebounding nor good defense.
Impact signals and metrics that we have for Terry Porter suggest that he was a much more impactful player than CJ McCollum is.
Terry Porter’s partial 1991 RAPM has him as a top 5-top 10 impact player. strong regressed approximations, and 1994 through 1996 that are also strong all the way up into the lake 1990s and early 2000s.
He was a high motor, really strong defender and the impact signals seem to corroborate this. Their problem was that they had a huge negative in Kevin Duckworth, who wasn’t really good at anything— hello efficiency office, wasn’t a good rebounder, was not a good defender. Replace him with any tough rebounder, rim runner, vertical threat, and the team would be a monster.
Had Arvydas come into the league earlier, I think Portland would have been an absolute gauntlet to go through. A perennial Blazers-Bulls rivalry potentially panning out is one of the greatest “what-ifs” in NBA History.
Mogspan wrote:I think they see the super rare combo of high IQ with freakish athleticism and overrate the former a bit, kind of like a hot girl who is rather articulate being thought of as “super smart.” I don’t know kind of a weird analogy, but you catch my drift.
Re: Is Dame Actually the Greatest Blazer?
- Clyde Frazier
- Forum Mod
- Posts: 20,226
- And1: 26,106
- Joined: Sep 07, 2010
Re: Is Dame Actually the Greatest Blazer?
Since winning the title is the ultimate goal of any franchise, I can see giving Walton his flowers as #1 regardless of his short time there.