Replace Aldridge with prime Hakeem at the Roy Blazers

NeilsCeltics · Post #1 » by **NeilsCeltics** » Fri Jan 9, 2015 10:28 pm

Replace Aldridge with prime Hakeem at the Roy Blazers, how well do you think they will they do?

Biddy77 · Post #2 » by **Biddy77** » Fri Jan 9, 2015 11:02 pm

Unbelievably better, for many reasons.

1. Nate made us force feed the bigs to start the first and 3rd Qs every game. Roy wasn't really looked at for scoring for at least the first few minutes of either. Hakeem receiving that? Yes, please.

2. Yao doesn't eat our lunch in the playoffs.

3. As a guy whose offense revolves around long 2pt jumpers, LA is both inefficient, and inconsistent.

4. LA is a very valuable defender. Hakeem is on a whole other level.

5. We don't waste time on Oden.

6. We were very well stocked with shooters to make space for Hakeem.

7. Roy was great at damn near everything on O, except for one specific, important skill: hitting a ROLL man with a pass. Pop/fade? No problem. Rolling? Ugh. He was terrible at the bounce pass to hit a roller. Hated seeing so many jump passes get picked off. Hakeem fixes that by not being a P&R guy. We set him near the block and use other guys for high pick & fade. Done.

RSCD3_ · Post #3 » by **RSCD3_** » Fri Jan 9, 2015 11:02 pm

If healthy slight west favorites

Portland and then slightly below them but all in the same category
Dallas, Golden State, San Antonio, Memphis

Edit misread the question I was basing the results on prime Hakeem for LA this year

Post #4 » by **Quotatious** » Fri Jan 9, 2015 11:09 pm

I think they would've had a good chance to win it all in 2009. That team won 54 games on 5.00 SRS in the RS (IMO that's an overachievement, like the Cavs that same year, too, but still it's a fact that they did), so with Hakeem instead of LMA, they probably win about 63-65 on 7.50 SRS or something like that.

In the playoffs, I'd say they beat the Rockets, and barely edge out the Lakers (probably in 7 games, and at least IMO Hakeem/Roy would be a bit better than Kobe/Pau, not sure about the rest of these two teams..) in the second round. They should be able to beat the Nuggets in the WCF, too. Hakeem would likely outplay Dwight by a solid margin in the finals, so it probably gives them an edge against Orlando.

Wizenheimer · Post #5 » by **Wizenheimer** » Sat Jan 10, 2015 2:49 pm

before the 1984 draft, if the coin had landed heads instead of tails, Hakeem would have been the Blazer C with Clyde Drexler, Terry Porter, Jerome Kersey & Clifford Robinson rounding out the starting 5

if that would have happened Michael Jordan's legacy would look a bit different

Biddy77 · Post #6 » by **Biddy77** » Sat Jan 10, 2015 3:17 pm

Well... We probably still draft Kersey in 84, but our draft position changes in subsequent years, and we probably don't get Porter or Cliff. I suppose Porter was possible, given his relatively under the radar status, but... Things unfold a lot differently.

Clyde and Hakeem, though... Yeah, that would have changed things. A lot.

Wizenheimer · Post #7 » by **Wizenheimer** » Sat Jan 10, 2015 11:21 pm

Biddy77 wrote:Well... We probably still draft Kersey in 84, but our draft position changes in subsequent years, and we probably don't get Porter or Cliff. I suppose Porter was possible, given his relatively under the radar status, but... Things unfold a lot differently.

Clyde and Hakeem, though... Yeah, that would have changed things. A lot.

Porter was taken with the last pick (24) of the first round, 1 year after Hakeem, with a pick obtained in a trade with Dallas. That still could of and very likely would of happened since the GM, Stu Inman, was extremely high on Porter. He traded Kelvin Ransey to get that pick

Robinson was taken 36th....9th pick in 2nd round. It's likely he would have still been there for Portland as well

buy yeah, altering history is tricky business.

another track is if Arvydas Sabonis would have decided to come to the NBA in 1989-90 after the USSR lifted their prohibition. Put a 26-30 year old, relatively healthy Sabonis into a starting lineup with Clyde-Porter-Jerome-Buck...yikes!

Post #8 » by **mojomarc** » Sun Jan 11, 2015 1:57 am

Biddy77 wrote:Unbelievably better, for many reasons.

5. We don't waste time on Oden.

If we have Hakeem instead of LMA, we don't draft Oden at all. We draft Durant instead. Blake-Roy-Durant-Hakeem and a fourth player to play PF or Durant at PF with Batum at SF? Yes please!

Biddy77 · Post #9 » by **Biddy77** » Sun Jan 11, 2015 3:30 am

mojomarc wrote:
Biddy77 wrote:Unbelievably better, for many reasons.

5. We don't waste time on Oden.

If we have Hakeem instead of LMA, we don't draft Oden at all. We draft Durant instead. Blake-Roy-Durant-Hakeem and a fourth player to play PF or Durant at PF with Batum at SF? Yes please!

If we had Hakeem in the same draft with Roy, we never get that number 1 pick

JordansBulls · Post #10 » by **JordansBulls** » Mon Jan 12, 2015 2:13 am

So the 2009 Blazers only or what years?