RealGM

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.

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.

Pretty sure I would go Drexler in terms of pure value and no outside factors.

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.

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.

Not anymore.

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.

I have Drexler as the better player, and career so no.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.