Can this Blazers contend for chip in the next 3 years?

[marioe25]

they will prob. stick with this roster for 3 more seasons, having similar results, (at best a 4 or 5 seed in playoffs), then realize they cant contend. Rebuild, and maybe contenders in 10-12 years. sounds good compared to the Bucks

[Froob]

Nope.

[Brandon-Clyde]

The Blazers have one of the most important assets to improve this offseason and that is a large amount of capspace($10-15 million depending on certain factors). They could also have a top 12 pick in the draft. So any assumption that they have no assets to improve is false

[sir G Wallace]

Blazers need a solid rebounding and defensive Center and a couple of competent bench producers. Their other 4 starters are already able to compete with just about any team. Lillard's development will have a big say in what happens in the next 3 years.

[justinian]

Blazers need a solid rebounding and defensive Center and a couple of competent bench producers. Their other 4 starters are already able to compete with just about any team. Lillard's development will have a big say in what happens in the next 3 years.

rebounding defensive center? JJ Hickson is putting up career numbers in rebounds, however he is no shot blocker to patrol the middle

[sir G Wallace]

Blazers need a solid rebounding and defensive Center and a couple of competent bench producers. Their other 4 starters are already able to compete with just about any team. Lillard's development will have a big say in what happens in the next 3 years.

rebounding defensive center? JJ Hickson is putting up career numbers in rebounds, however he is no shot blocker to patrol the middle

Hickson's defense is atrocious not only on 1 on 1 but also help D in the paint and altering shots. Omer Asik would be the perfect fit for Portland.

[TheAlchemist]

All about coaching.

Let's put it this way..

If they had Popavich, they'd be a Western conference finalist team (barring development is messed up for lillard). However they don't and Aldridge/Batum is somewhat overrated.

[inquisitive]

Asik + Patterson + TJones for LMA

[tsherkin]

I'm gonna go with a "no."

It's tough to look at them and make that prediction because youth is hard to predict, but LMA is a known quantity. They're fairly unimpressive right now, mostly because they are very bad on defense and not elite on offense. LMA is an unimpressive offensive centerpiece, Hickson isn't a foundational piece (even if he's a nice roleplayer), Batum isn't that impressive, and generally speaking, Lillard doesn't look like the type of player to lead a team offensively... That could theoretically change, but even a REALLY good version of Lillard (aka a scoring point guard) in Rose has only so much offensive mojo.

Portland doesn't have the star power to legitimately contend, so unless something big changes in one or two of their existing players, then they just don't have the juice. And again, their primary issue is defense, so we'll have to see where that comes from.

[Liver_Pooty]

Not even close.

[fart]

No, they need to trade Aldrige for a nice haul and continue building through the draft, because by the time they become relevant again, Aldrige will be too old.

OKC in:
Aldrige

Portland in:
Lamb
Toronto pick.

Edit: add PJ3 to Portland in.

[sir G Wallace]

Asik + Patterson + TJones for LMA

This is about how to make them a contender not put them back 3 years.

[Xsy]

Oklahoma City, Denver, Minnesota, Utah, Detroit, Cleveland, Golden State, Houston, New Orleans, and maybe even Toronto have better young cores than Portland.

[twinthunder3]

They're a really poor man's OKC, & they are lacking a solid bench along with role players.

[Bskey]

I'm gonna go with a "no."

It's tough to look at them and make that prediction because youth is hard to predict, but LMA is a known quantity. They're fairly unimpressive right now, mostly because they are very bad on defense and not elite on offense. LMA is an unimpressive offensive centerpiece, Hickson isn't a foundational piece (even if he's a nice roleplayer), Batum isn't that impressive, and generally speaking, Lillard doesn't look like the type of player to lead a team offensively... That could theoretically change, but even a REALLY good version of Lillard (aka a scoring point guard) in Rose has only so much offensive mojo.

Portland doesn't have the star power to legitimately contend, so unless something big changes in one or two of their existing players, then they just don't have the juice. And again, their primary issue is defense, so we'll have to see where that comes from.

Aldridge started the season slow like always and is having a down shooting year overall but his play has been great lately. He's been a good defender (on a really bad defensive team), clutch and has helped carry a team with no bench to more than expected wins.

Honestly, Batum is unimpressive? Based off of what? There are only a handful of small forwards better than him, and his contract is proving to be a great deal. His impact is quite large.

As for Lillard he's a rookie so it's hard to say where he will be in 3 years as a player.

The "right now" with this team is not what it will be in a few years, over half of the roster is bench filler and there are 5 rookies and they still manage to be on pace for more wins than anyone was really expecting. They are in the middle of a partial rebuild.

[DavidSterned]

Oklahoma City, Denver, Minnesota, Utah, Detroit, Cleveland, Golden State, Houston, New Orleans, and maybe even Toronto have better young cores than Portland.

Jazz homer alert

In terms of potential for the 3 best players, aged 25 or younger

Lillard > Favors
Batum > Hayward
Leonard = Kanter

Oh, and Alec Burks looks like a bust.

[DavidSterned]

No, they need to trade Aldrige for a nice haul and continue building through the draft, because by the time they become relevant again, Aldrige will be too old.

OKC in:
Aldrige

Portland in:
Lamb
Toronto pick.

Edit: add PJ3 to Portland in.

Portland doesn't trade LMA unless they get at least one proven player in return.

[carayip]

I don't know why people are so pessimistic on Portland. Their biggest problem is clearly the bench. But bench role players are the easiest and cheapest to find in the nba. They will look a whole lot better next year when they get some good bench players which should not be a difficult task since they still have decent cap space and draft picks. Dare I would say it, I think they will have a better record than the Warriors who everyone seems to love starting next year.

[tsherkin]

Aldridge started the season slow like always and is having a down shooting year overall but his play has been great lately. He's been a good defender (on a really bad defensive team), clutch and has helped carry a team with no bench to more than expected wins.

I never said he was a bad player, I just said that he's not what they need to contend for a title. There is actually a middle ground between "scrub" and "top 5 player in the league," you know.

Aldridge isn't an elite offensive player and never has been. He's improved some since he's been getting into the post a little more but he's still not that great. He's wholly unimpressive at getting to the line, doesn't dominate with high FG%, isn't a 3pt specialist, isn't elite when he does actually get to the line, he isn't an elite passer (though certainly not bad), I mean he doesn't do anything all that special. 20+ ppg on below league-average efficiency doesn't really get it done. He's got one season in his entire career where he meaningfully separated from league average and that was a lockout season where he missed 11 games, which leads to some questions. He shoots almost as many long twos as did a prime Dirk, and he's not anywhere near the level of shooter required to justify that from a big man, and while he's got a really nice mid-post game, he's not especially talented at generating shots at the rim or drawing fouls, which really limits his overall efficiency and thus his utility as a volume scoring option slash offensive keystone player.

I like LMA, but he's like a poor-man's Bosh, he should pretty clearly not be the primary player on a team.

That said, again, Portland's problem is less so offense. They don't really have championship-level O, but their D is a much bigger concern. Aldridge isn't a defensive hindrance, he's actually a pretty good defender, but he's far from a defensive anchor. Maybe they could add another frontcourt piece to do that, I mean you can't always expect everyone to be brilliantly dominant at both ends, those are legends and expecting one of those to fall into your lap isn't reasonable, but Portland needs to account for that and obviously the absence of Camby and Wallace hasn't been great for them, among other factors.

Honestly, Batum is unimpressive? Based off of what? There are only a handful of small forwards better than him, and his contract is proving to be a great deal. His impact is quite large.

I'm not sure what to be impressed by. He's not a bad player; he's efficient on lower volume, I'll give him that. He's an OK 3pt shooter who's pretty weak at drawing fouls, and a reasonable spot-up shooter. Not especially dominant in any capacity. He's got traits beyond scoring, but again, it's clear that he's not of sufficiently high impact on either end to help elevate Portland out of their current rankings by any great measure. Wings have trouble doing that defensively until they are at the extreme end of defensive talent and of course he's not that great on offense. Above average, surely, and a good value contract absolutely, but nothing that's really stunning. Like many, he's pretty much piss-poor between the rim and the arc, and he isn't anything special at the rim or from 3, either. Really FT shooter, though. He's not really a stunning isolation talent, and he's making more of his impact with his passing than with his offense, I'd say, but so did Boris Diaw, once upon a time. Neither player really strikes me as a stunner.

He could get better, and he's having kind of a breakout season as far as playmaking, but of course he's also become a turnover factory in the process, so it's a little bit of give and take in that regard.

As for Lillard he's a rookie so it's hard to say where he will be in 3 years as a player.

I said as much, but unless he becomes one of the greatest scorers under 6'6, I really don't see him pushing this team to any great heights. Remember, they are a terrible defensive team, so the offense would have to be so blindingly amazing as to overcome that fact, AND the defense would have to improve... and historically, that's STILL not generally good enough unless the defense improves into the top 10 area... which Lillard's improvement won't facilitate.

The "right now" with this team is not what it will be in a few years, over half of the roster is bench filler and there are 5 rookies and they still manage to be on pace for more wins than anyone was really expecting. They are in the middle of a partial rebuild.

Right, I don't disagree with that point and that's why I raised the issue of predictability in my own post. The problem is, they don't have any elite talent. They have some fairly nice role players and secondary pieces, but they don't have the talent you need to field a true title contender... far from it, and I think that's obvious.

The draft, free agency, trades, there are so many things that could happen over three years that could change things, but based on Portland's history and the assets they have, I'd be SHOCKED, like flat-on-my-ass-shocked if they made the Finals in the next three seasons. Obviously, they could miss the playoffs and luck into a 1.7% chance for the #1 overall pick as the Bulls did and that MIGHT propel them in the right direction, but to lay odds on that would be somewhat foolish. Even factoring in player development, the sheer number of things that would have to happen is a little unbelievable.

[tsherkin]

I don't know why people are so pessimistic on Portland. Their biggest problem is clearly the bench.

No, that's not true. The problem is clearly more the starters than the bench. Starters drive teams, not the bench. Players coming off of the pine are very much important, but they are also very clearly secondary.