2023-24 Trail Blazers

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in
Teams are going to look at Matisse's 3pt % and be impressed, because his defensive prowess is already known. I would use him to sweeten the pot in a trade.
 
beast crnjo said:
Teams are going to look at Matisse's 3pt % and be impressed, because his defensive prowess is already known. I would use him to sweeten the pot in a trade.
Click to expand...
I don’t think Thybulle ever needs to be added as a “sweetener”. Thybulle on his own should fetch a mid tier 1st, otherwise, his skillset off the bench is great.
 
BankTeller said:
I don’t think Thybulle ever needs to be added as a “sweetener”. Thybulle on his own should fetch a mid tier 1st, otherwise, his skillset off the bench is great.
Click to expand...
The more you give out, the more you get back. I think it's safe to say Brogdon is going to be moved. Thybulle seems like a better fit as a roleplayer on a good team.
 
beast crnjo said:
Teams are going to look at Matisse's 3pt % and be impressed, because his defensive prowess is already known. I would use him to sweeten the pot in a trade.
Click to expand...
If I were the Blazers, I'd use Thybulle to get a player that:
- Has excellent defensive instincts. (perhaps selected to an NBA all-defensive team)
- Shoots over 40% from 3 (proven for over half a season)
- Still on the early side of their career (perhaps in the 26-27 year-old range)
- On a very team friendly contract. (Say around $11.5M over 3 years)

Where could the Blazers find a player like that?
 
42N8Bounce said:
If I were the Blazers, I'd use Thybulle to get a player that:
- Has excellent defensive instincts.
- Shoots over 40% from 3 (proven for over half a season)
- Still on the early side of their career (perhaps in the 26-27 year-old range)
- On a very team friendly contract, say around $11.5M over 3 years.

Where could the Blazers find a player like that?
Click to expand...

I'd trade him for a young forward with upside, decent size, that can rebound. There's a reason Thybulle is not our starting SF. I like shooting efficiency, but it's kind of a mirage on really low volume shooters (think Meyers Leonard/Drew Eubanks)
 
BankTeller said:
I don’t think Thybulle ever needs to be added as a “sweetener”. Thybulle on his own should fetch a mid tier 1st, otherwise, his skillset off the bench is great.
Click to expand...
On a reasonable contract too.
 
beast crnjo said:
I'd trade him for a young forward with upside, decent size, that can rebound. There's a reason Thybulle is not our starting SF. I like shooting efficiency, but it's kind of a mirage on really low volume shooters (think Meyers Leonard/Drew Eubanks)
Click to expand...

5.8 attempts per 36 is not low volume. Not sure why you mentioned Meyers with Eubanks. Meyers was actually a threat that was guarded from 3 (that's the only place he was guarded). Eubanks never averaged more than 1 attempt per 36, so that comparison makes even less sense.
 
beast crnjo said:
I'd trade him for a young forward with upside, decent size, that can rebound. There's a reason Thybulle is not our starting SF. I like shooting efficiency, but it's kind of a mirage on really low volume shooters (think Meyers Leonard/Drew Eubanks)
Click to expand...
4 3pa a game is not low volume. That is decent volume. Of course you would want him to to shoot more of them, but that’s not the reason he’s not our starting forward. If shooting volume was the reason Thybulle isn’t starting, neither should Camara.

The reason he isn’t a starting forward because of his frame and lack of fundamentally sound defense. He gambles too much and is already smaller than the average SF. If Thybulle were 6’8 in shoes rather than 6’6 in shoes, you might disregard the fact that he flys for a three point block on literally ANYONE who is smart enough to pump fake with him within 6ft of them. But he’s 6’6, so there you go.
 
beast crnjo said:
I like shooting efficiency, but it's kind of a mirage on really low volume shooters (think Meyers Leonard/Drew Eubanks)
Click to expand...
Both of these comparisons are irrelevant. Meyers took forever to decide whether or not he was open and confident enough to shoot it. Eubanks had similar problems, and his shot seemed just as slow as Meyers’.

Thybulle has shown so much more, and it lies in the confidence I’m seeing in his shots. These aren’t just spot of 3’s. He’s taking one dribble into the direction of a pick to get that little extra space before letting them go. He’s pump faking, taking a dribble to the right and regathering before taking a wide open 3 with his guy five feet to his left. He will take a couple dribbles and throw one up if he feels like he’s in rhythm.

The decision on whether or not to take a 3 has been impressive. He doesn’t think about it much at all, and I can tell.
 
B-Roy said:
5.8 attempts per 36 is not low volume. Not sure why you mentioned Meyers with Eubanks. Meyers was actually a threat that was guarded from 3 (that's the only place he was guarded). Eubanks never averaged more than 1 attempt per 36, so that comparison makes even less sense.
Click to expand...

If you score 10 points per 36 with 66 TS%, you're a low volume shooter. I'm not understanding why that comparison is confusing to you and Bank. Meyers was a low volume shooter as well, but he actually averaged a bit more points with great TS% numbers.

Efficient shooting is nice, but doesn't extrapolate up, and the players limitations on offense may be hurting the offense in ways that don't show up on the stat sheet.
 
BankTeller said:
4 3pa a game is not low volume. That is decent volume. Of course you would want him to to shoot more of them, but that’s not the reason he’s not our starting forward. If shooting volume was the reason Thybulle isn’t starting, neither should Camara.

The reason he isn’t a starting forward because of his frame and lack of fundamentally sound defense. He gambles too much and is already smaller than the average SF. If Thybulle were 6’8 in shoes rather than 6’6 in shoes, you might disregard the fact that he flys for a three point block on literally ANYONE who is smart enough to pump fake with him within 6ft of them. But he’s 6’6, so there you go.
Click to expand...

Hmm ok. I hadn't thought defense would be why he's not a starter. He made the all nba defensive team 2 years. I think he doesn't really have the overall skill to play guard, nor the size/rebounding to be a forward. And while his shooting numbers look good, he's still not good on the offensive end. It's a Drew Eubanks type mirage.

Anyway, my main point is, I'd rather take care of filling the holes in the starting lineup before spending 10 mil on reserves.
 
beast crnjo said:
If you score 10 points per 36 with 66 TS%, you're a low volume shooter. I'm not understanding why that comparison is confusing to you and Bank. Meyers was a low volume shooter as well, but he actually averaged a bit more points with great TS% numbers.

Efficient shooting is nice, but doesn't extrapolate up, and the players limitations on offense may be hurting the offense in ways that don't show up on the stat sheet.
Click to expand...

The response was to this:

but it's kind of a mirage on really low volume shooters (think Meyers Leonard/Drew Eubanks)
Click to expand...

Which was a direct response to a post about his THREE POINT EFFICIENCY. Now you're changing the goalpost talking about his PPG.

It also implied that:

1.) He's a low volume 3PT shooter.
2.) He's a negative on offense.

And the point I am making is that

1.) He's not low volume on 3s. 42% on 5.8 per 36min/7.9 per 100 possessions is not low volume. It puts him in the top 25%-tile in the league in terms of volume.
2.) If he's being guarded on the perimeter, he's not a negative on offense, and he is definitely being guarded with the combination of his volume and shooting efficiency.

I'm not even sure why you're bring up Meyers. Meyers literally runs counterpoint to your argument because Meyers was not a negative on offense. His team played better on offense when he was on the floor, and it was because of his ability to stretch the floor. Meyers problem was that he couldn't stay on the floor defensively, which obviously Thybulle has no problem with. The Eubanks comparison made zero sense, because teams never guarded him on the perimeter.

Hell, the Blazers play better on offense with Duop Reath, and it's based on his ability to stretch the floor.
 
Hoopguru said:
The melt?
Click to expand...
At the end of every game…..I put together, depending on how much action occurred, a melt. 20-35 min of the best of the best of game action. Super-Mo, artsy shots and game action from all the different angles. Get sent down the line to ESPN/NBA/Turner/local news stations, whoever wants it.

Of course if I’m doing a Boise State vs Eastern Washington football game that ends 10-7, the melt will be shorter than an NBA Finals game.

Shit, when Dame closed out the series over PG13 and the Thunder, just the final play and post game celebrations and reactions from 10 different camera angles took 40 minutes by itself.
 
beast crnjo said:
Hmm ok. I hadn't thought defense would be why he's not a starter. He made the all nba defensive team 2 years. I think he doesn't really have the overall skill to play guard, nor the size/rebounding to be a forward. And while his shooting numbers look good, he's still not good on the offensive end. It's a Drew Eubanks type mirage.

Anyway, my main point is, I'd rather take care of filling the holes in the starting lineup before spending 10 mil on reserves.
Click to expand...
The implication that Thybulle is an offensive liability is not supported by the data. His offensive-rating is the highest on the team among active players (only RW3's is higher). Even if you don't think he does much on offense, the offense as a whole does well when he's on the floor.
 
beast crnjo said:
Hmm ok. I hadn't thought defense would be why he's not a starter. He made the all nba defensive team 2 years. I think he doesn't really have the overall skill to play guard, nor the size/rebounding to be a forward. And while his shooting numbers look good, he's still not good on the offensive end. It's a Drew Eubanks type mirage.

Anyway, my main point is, I'd rather take care of filling the holes in the starting lineup before spending 10 mil on reserves.
Click to expand...
Thybulle alone isn’t landing a starter. Spending $10m on a reserve that’s as high value is actually a bargain. Guys who have made All Defense as a reserve are extremely rare. We traded a 2nd for him, and the potential return could be a 1st eventually.

I do agree that none of Thybulle’s positives make him a “keeper” (starter or 6th man, to me) by any means. But not only did you compare Thybulle to Eubanks and Leonard, you doubled down and mentioned their names in a reply. You’re seriously underselling Thybulle to think that, and I’m not sure why you think he could ever be worth a valuable starter or forward prospect if the comparison to Eubanks or Leonard were apt.

I had to relook at Drew’s stats, cause I thought he was hovering around .5 3pm a game and was ready to say Thybulle makes three times as many per game. Dude…Eubanks makes a 3 in every 10 games (.1 3pm)…Thybulle has had 3-4 makes in 7 games, that’s like 33% of the ongoing season. Leonard was a less lazy comparison, but still not a great one.
 
PtldPlatypus said:
The implication that Thybulle is an offensive liability is not supported by the data. His offensive-rating is the highest on the team among active players (only RW3's is higher). Even if you don't think he does much on offense, the offense as a whole does well when he's on the floor.
Click to expand...
He's really a bargain as long as he really wants to be here.
 
Should the Blazers roll the dice on Jonathan Issac? He's one of the best defensive players in the league. The gamble of course, is his injury history, but if it doesn't work out, we're only on the books for 1.5 years.

We could give up Brogdon for Issac. I don't know how the magic are feeling about him now...
 
beast crnjo said:
Should the Blazers roll the dice on Jonathan Issac? He's one of the best defensive players in the league. The gamble of course, is his injury history, but if it doesn't work out, we're only on the books for 1.5 years.

We could give up Brogdon for Issac. I don't know how the magic are feeling about him now...
Click to expand...
There are a lot of people in this forum who would say no solely due to his political stances. I'd wager that might also be one of the things you like about him.
 
beast crnjo said:
Should the Blazers roll the dice on Jonathan Issac? He's one of the best defensive players in the league. The gamble of course, is his injury history, but if it doesn't work out, we're only on the books for 1.5 years.

We could give up Brogdon for Issac. I don't know how the magic are feeling about him now...
Click to expand...
I was into the idea a couple years ago. Now, nah. To this point, this has been his healthiest season since the bubble season. Not really worth anything more than filler now imo. A lot of what I thought he could become, I now see in guys like Wagner and McDaniels. Isaac has been in the league longer than those guys and is still the same player because he can’t play.

Pass. Something valuable please.
 
PtldPlatypus said:
There are a lot of people in this forum who would say no solely due to his political stances. I'd wager that might also be one of the things you like about him.
Click to expand...

It might be the quickest way for fans to just boycott the team and make them sell. The city would be upset about it if we ever acquired him.

Note: I don't think he doesn't deserve to be in the NBA. But his political stances are pretty extreme and Florida seems like a much more welcoming place for his views than here. Meaning, there are teams for him, Portland would not be one of them.
 
PtldPlatypus said:
There are a lot of people in this forum who would say no solely due to his political stances. I'd wager that might also be one of the things you like about him.
Click to expand...
Yes, I love his political stances. But he'd also be a tremendous player for us if he could stay healthy. It's a gamble...we gambled on Rasheed and his attitude issues and it paid off.
 

"tomorrow is as healthy as the Blazers are ever going to be.
It'll be our first chance to actually see the full team."


 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Back
Top