The Blazer’s Edge Mailbag covers tons of Portland Trail Blazers topics. Usually we spend an entire article on one subject because they tend to be deep and interesting enough to do so. Today we’re going to take a look at a couple of the briefer questions that have come in over the last couple months, cleaning house, so to speak. If you’re a Blazers or NBA fan, have a look and see if you agree with these answers!
Dave,
Why are you dogging on Scoot? The Blazers have never given him a chance to show who
he is. They need to get a coach in here who will let him play.
Ryan
I’m not dogging on Scoot Henderson at all. We’ve talked multiple times about his physical gifts, his improving three-point shot, how he’s starting to look like an NBA player and not just a flashy project. In the process we’ve highlighted his overall development. We’ve also modified expectations seriously since he came in as a rookie, switching from, “Will this guy be the Next Big Thing?” to, “Appreciate him for what he gives, especially through injury and trying times.” We’ve been more flexible with Scoot than any other player in recent memory, simply because his career so far has required that.
As far as coaching, I’m not a Chauncey Billups defender, but I don’t think Henderson could have had a greater advocate than Portland’s former coach. Scoot got the keys to the car and a green light last season. His distance shooting and field goal percentage improved dramatically. His turnovers went down. That shored up weaknesses that made him all but unplayable. It still amounted to 12.7 points and 5.1 assists in 26.7 minutes per game. Those are fine numbers, but not exactly setting the world on fire. I don’t think Scoot’s career arc has been dependent on coaching, or even that it’s a primary factor.
Scoot’s doing fine. And I’m fine with where Scoot is right now. You will not hear me complain about him. I like his minutes on the floor. I also understand why the Blazers are not playing him more.
For those who want more than that, I believe the original question shows the issue. Great players—the kind of player Henderson was once forecast to be—don’t wait for someone to give them a chance. They take that chance every day, from practice to games and everything in between. They don’t let themselves not be played. Their talent and contributions become obvious to the point of being undeniable.
Scoot is a long way from that. He may not, in fact, be that kind of player. It’s not wrong to say that! In fact, I believe that 99.9% of Blazers Nation is understanding (and saying) that very thing already. Plenty of people speculate that the franchise needs to get another star on board to pair with Deni Avdija. Approximately zero people pipe up with, “They’ve already got one! It’s Scoot!”
Given that, the question misses the point a little. We’re moving past the stage of judging Henderson by expectations—draft-position/reputation-related, personal, or otherwise. Henderson is rightly judged now only by what he contributes on the court, including the amount of minutes he earns. Anything else is a fool’s errand.
That doesn’t mean I think Scoot’s journey and growth are done. I said the other day that he might need to get to his sixth season before we get a really good read on him. If the Blazers want to ride with him that long, I’m down. I don’t even discount that he could become a star player in the interim! But we can’t anticipate how that journey will go. We’re going to have to let him show us whether he’s a star, a role-player, or out of the league. That will be up to him…not coaching, not circumstances (outside of injury), not phases of the moon or motion of the stars, but him.
Scoot Henderson has a chance at an NBA career that only a limited number of people get in this lifetime. Everybody who gets that chance faces adversity, competition, setbacks, and headwinds. Like players before him, he will either emerge stronger and more sure from those conditions or he’ll lose the opportunity to someone who did.
Dave,
I still can’t solve my internal debate on whether LeBron is the GOAT. What’s your take?
Kyle
It depends on how you measure. Michael Jordan was the most vicious winner I’ve ever seen. He also evolved his game at least a couple times over the course of his career. Inside, outside, defending the perimeter, running the court, he was deadly in just about every way imaginable.
I’d say if you want to put one guy on a pedestal as the best NBA basketball player ever in a frozen moment in time, that’s Mike. So, too, if you need one game, one time, and you absolutely have to win. Give the ball to Jordan. He’s not going to fail.
Shaquille O’Neal was the most physically dominant player ever. If you need just one play and it’s against fellow human beings, you’d want Shaq.
Both Shaq and Michael were aided by reffing in their time. O’Neal was probably the most cheated-for player in the history of the game. There did come a point where Michael could do anything he wanted on the floor and opponents couldn’t touch him, a true Made Man in the mafia style. That colors my perception somewhat.
LeBron has had some big free-throw seasons, but he’s a bigger guy and more physical than Jordan was. I think I could argue that he hasn’t gotten all the calls he could have over his career. He hasn’t been coddled to the same level as the other two. That’s an argument for him in my book.
Longevity also goes to LeBron. 23 seasons so far, 22 All-Star appearances? WHAT??? Anybody who has a 22-year career is blessed as heck. 22 consecutive times in the league elite boggles the mind. 21 All-NBA nominations so far too, 13 First Teams and 4 MVP’s. That boggles the mind.
It keeps going too. LeBron is doing stuff at 41 that most players—literally 90% of NBA participants—don’t do at 23. Jordan averaged 20 at 39 years of age but that was for a crappy Washington Wizards team that had nothing else to do but feature him. LeBron still has legitimate expectations at 41.
The thing that gets me, though, is the 10 NBA Finals appearances. Hey Blazers fans, how hard is it to get to the NBA Finals even once? How long have you been waiting? LeBron DRUG teams to the Finals on his back. Those early Cleveland squads had basically him and nobody else. He had some Kyrie Irving help later. Obviously the Heatles were stacked. Still, there were plenty of years when you could clock a conference’s NBA Finals participant by asking whether James was on the team or not. Even Jordan wasn’t doing that. Neither was Shaq. I’m not sure we’ve ever seen anything like it.
Personally, I’ve always been a Mike guy. But as LeBron’s career winds onward, I find myself more able to be convinced that he’s the most enduring, unshakeable example of a professional basketball player the world has ever seen. If he’s not the greatest of all time, no Mt. Rushmore could possibly be without him.
I’m also struggling to find any kind of analogy to James coming up nowadays. Victor Wembanyama is going to be a unique player and may end up Rushmore-ing himself before it’s done, but already durability seems to be an issue. That’s the only guy close. Otherwise, we know when LeBron retires that we’re seeing something that will never be replaced, just like we did with Jordan, Shaq, Magic Johnson, and Larry Bird. That’s good enough for me, even if people still like Mike better.
To finish, I’ll go where I often go, to easily-viewed WWE comparisons. Michael Jordan was like Stone Cold Steve Austin, probably the greatest peak champion and draw the business has ever seen. But he didn’t have the longevity. Shaq might be Andre the Giant, a physical anomaly and completely dominant, but also an oddball example whose size was his main feature. LeBron is The Undertaker, champion a few times, but not having to be in order to make an impact and see his greatness. Which of these is the greatest depends on what you’re looking for. There’s no one answer, which is why it makes for a great debate.
Dave,
Why have you and the blazer media stop discussing Love who showed he can score the 3 with more consistency than any other player?
Mort
(Note to regular readers: it’s a different Mort than you’re thinking.)
Caleb Love remains an interesting case. I’m curious to see whether and how he fits into an NBA mold. He plays with more of the classic G League style, as a hot-button scorer with boundless confidence who can give you 10 points in 8 minutes but will also be a bit of a random wildcard. You have to live with Love’s ups and downs in order to play him. He’d be well served by shoring up the basics in his game and raising the floor so the cost for playing him reduces. Then you only have the ups.
As far as three-point shooting, it just hasn’t been there. He’s shooting 32.1% for the season. That’s below Donovan Clingan. It’s the ninth-best mark on the team among players who have played regularly.
But the main reason people have stopped talking about Love is that he’s on a two-way contract with a 50-game limit on how many times he can appear for the NBA version of the Blazers. He’s near that limit now, having played in 45 games already. That means any forecast growth—or even participation—will come next year.
There are more questions in the hopper, but we’ll save them for another time. If you want to send yours in, email it to blazersub@gmail.com and we’ll try to answer as many as possible!
