I don't want to stir anything up. But I think about this organization and if Kevin Pritchard would have selected Kevin Durant instead of Greg Oden. With Durant, Roy and Aldridge this team could have been amazing. All those players complement each other so well and I get goose bumps thinking about it. I'm not even a Blazers fan I just find that idea very intriguing.
Add in the solid vets like Miller, Camby and the young guys like Batum and this team would have been in the NBAs elite company with the Lakers.
I think a lot of things would be different. I doubt we would have drafted Batum, and if we did he would have stayed overseas for a bit, and even if that happened, he would likely have been traded.
Roy would still have his knee issues, so that would still be a set back.
I do think the Blazers would be better with Durant, but I think we would still struggle down low. But hindsight is 20/20. I still think that if Oden never got hurt, we'd be better now than we would be with Durant right now.
I was thinking the same thing Friday night watching them play the Thunder. Oden is on the bench nursing his injury and Durant is out there looking like a MVP candidate.
Durant, Roy & Aldridge would make a lot of Rip City highlights
I've disagreed with this notion a lot. Durant wouldn't be this good had he come to Portland. The Durant you see right now is the result of the freedom he's been given in Seattle/OKC. In Portland, he would be behind Roy and Aldridge. Moreover, he has to follow a system, even come off the bench. These things would severely hamper his development. He would be a much different Durant than what he is. Also, may I remind everyone that Durant was absolutely terrible his first season? Even now, I'm still not sold on Durant due to last year's playoff where Ron Artest completely obliterated him.
Anyways, Greg Oden can still make a comeback. Portland's contention rest on his shoulder. I still hope Portland get some key pieces for Andre + Camby's contract.
I agree with a lot of what you said, but he wouldn't have came off the bench. Oden was pushed into the starting line up to develop even when he didn't appear ready because he was the #1 pick. The same would have happened with Durant.
I agree with a lot of what you said, but he wouldn't have came off the bench. Oden was pushed into the starting line up to develop even when he didn't appear ready because he was the #1 pick. The same would have happened with Durant.
Umm, Oden only started half the game in his rookie season. And I believe it's because he made a large impact on the floor. Imagine a skinny, defensive liability, trigger happy rookie with terrible shot selection, that's what Durant was his first season. Surely he'd have come off the bench sometimes until he develop more.
Nate McMillan hates changing the starting line up. Once he sets it for the season, it takes a lot of constant criticism before he finally changes it (Blake/Miller situation) or an injury that forces somebody into the line-up. Oden got the start at beginning of his first season, but then got hurt. After that, the line-up was established with Przybilla and McMillan was reluctant to change the now established starting 5. Eventually, Oden worked his way back into the starting line-up, but it took a long time for McMillan to decide to make the change. Durant would have started just like Oden in his first game, but his consistent health would never have forced McMillan to make a change. I agree that Durant's overall role would have been different on this team than on the Thunder, but lack of starting would have hardly been a problem IMO.
Btw, you act as if Durant was terrible as a rookie, when in fact he easily won rookie of the year.
Nate McMillan hates changing the starting line up. Once he sets it for the season, it takes a lot of constant criticism before he finally changes it (Blake/Miller situation) or an injury that forces somebody into the line-up. Oden got the start at beginning of his first season, but then got hurt. After that, the line-up was established with Przybilla and McMillan was reluctant to change the now established starting 5. Eventually, Oden worked his way back into the starting line-up, but it took a long time for McMillan to decide to make the change. Durant would have started just like Oden in his first game, but his consistent health would never have forced McMillan to make a change. I agree that Durant's overall role would have been different on this team than on the Thunder, but lack of starting would have hardly been a problem IMO.
Btw, you act as if Durant was terrible as a rookie, when in fact he easily won rookie of the year.
He might have won ROY, but he was terrible. Come on, you and I both know ROY means nothing. In fact, a lot of people were calling him bust and glad we got Oden. No way he get a guaranteed spot in the starting line up. A chucking skinny defensive liability, that's what he was. Remember that the team only won 20 games for consecutive seasons.
Potential Dynasty
