Bill Simmons thinks Blazers are overrated (kind of)


Figured I’d pass along this tidbit rom his chat today:

Matt (Olympia): Bill, What should the Blazers do to get themselves to the next level? They have something like 5 draft picks…can they package some of those to get a veteran? Who would you want to put with their core of BRoy, Aldridge and Oden(other than Durant)?

SportsNation Bill Simmons: I think their talent has been vastly overrated – they have 2 keepers (Roy and LA) and I’m not sold on anyone else on that roster except Rudy. Outlaw, Blake, Pryzbilla, Oden… these are all bench guys. I thought they made a serious mistake not using Raef’s contract to get a blue-chipper this year. They look better on paper than they actually are…

I’m not going to say much here, just wanted to pass it along. But….I struggle to see how a 54-win team can have ‘vastly overrated’ talent. There may be Blazer fans who think too highly of some of the players on this team (same across the league) but there is no denying this team is deep.

Any thoughts?

Tags: Bill Simmons Portland Overrated Portland Trail Blazers

  • http://www.viewfrommyseats.com Matt

    I like how he didn’t even answer the question. The question posed was “What should the Blazers do to get themselves to the next level?” Simmon’s answer: The Blazers are overrated… apparently neither Rajon Rondo nor Kendrick Perkins are overrated though.

    Look, I’m a Lakers fan (please be kind), but everyone out here in the West has to respect the Blazers and their talent. Losing to the Rockets wasn’t a talent thing– it was a match-up thing (and experience).

    I’d take Portland’s talent every day of the week and twice on Sunday. With all of the guys that are legit NBA players, you have to figure that the 5 draft picks will get flipped to either better picks and/or NBA ready guys…

    From an outsider’s perspective, I think Simmons is way off on this one…

  • http://ripcityproject.com Coup

    Matt, you make the rational point.

    But the larger point, as we’ve said before, is that everything Simmons says should be taken with a grain of salt. Obviously the majority outlook on Portland is great young team, future contender, so would it make more sense for Simmons to agree with that or take the opposite opinion.

    The only thing that irritates me about stuff like this is that so many people read Simmons that — without sounding too high and mighty — don’t think about things for themselves, that his quasi-devil’s advocate opinions people very popular points for people to make.

    That’s why the man is good at the job he earned.

    I mean, we all know calling Pzybilla and Oden bench guys is silly, but people around the country who don’t watch Portland very much aren’t going to know that, and Simmons is writing for them, not us. I’d love to read the column about Portland he talked about writing, since most of his back-and-forth opinions on the Blazers all us Northwest fans like to pick apart are from broader columns, podcasts and emails/chats, which isn’t the best way to have a productive internet debate.

  • Tony

    i think simmons is right.

    i love our contending team but all the talk of our team having the potential to be a dynasty is hogwash. look…rudy won’t be around very long (sharing playing time w/ b-roy, serj leaving, conflicting to coach mac’s playing style), oden is a little bit above average, LA doesn’t rebound or play inside and our point guards just plain suck. also, b-roy is my hero, but everyone forgets that his defense is a little suspect. he’s not a defensive sieve, but he’s not a lockdown defender.

  • Pingback: Ackerman on Health Care | Easy Tips Health Care

  • Patrick

    Tony,

    I really hope that’s sarcasm, because Simmons’ entire article doesn’t make any sense. “The Blazers are much better on paper”?????? How does that make any sense at all? Was he expecting Portland to win 60 games? I am fairly certain that if you look at preaseason predictions that Bill had us in the high to mid forties.

    Simmons is a joke and should only be read for entertainment purposes only.