Are we looking better without Lillard?

[handiman]

That's just this year. I'm talking about the team's record post-LMA with and without Dame.

Chicago isn't an awful team. They've been one of the hotter teams in the league since Mirotic returned to the lineup. San Antonio tends to win no matter what lineup they trot out. And you just dismissed OKC for the same "awful effort" excuse that's exactly why we're questioning Dame's effect on his teammates of late?

Who'd we beat in his absence? ATL, CHI, and LAL, all awful teams.

And then we beat a SAS team without 3 starters and their 6th man by 1, at home.

And then we beat an OKC which turned in an awful effort and will lose to anyone some nights.

The team isn't better than him out, at all. With he way the rest of our team played against HOU and NOP, we would've lost by more.

Correlation doesn't equal causality.

 

[Shakur]

I love him, but I'm just saying. He's a rythim guy.

He’s a good player nothing special

 

[Shakur]

Wow Lillard is shooting 34% from 3 this season?

Damn didn’t realize it was that bad

 

[Cippy91]

He’s a good player nothing special

Lol new member huh? Damn the trolls are out hard

 

[Cippy91]

Stupid ass Portland fans

 

[Portland2014]

I'm starting to want to see Lillard traded for picks so people on this board can see just how bad portland is without him.
Unfortunately if this were to happen.
Certain posters would stop visiting this board, or never admit they were wrong about this roster being better without Lillard.

SINCE ALDRIDGE LEFT:

95-90 W/ Lillard
12-9 W/out Lillard

 

[BrunoSOC]

Stupid ass Portland fans

what lillard try to say i dont get the expression

 

[BonesJones]

He’s a good player nothing special

Great, another one of these guys. Where are the good new posters?

 

[BonesJones]

SINCE ALDRIDGE LEFT:

95-90 W/ Lillard
12-9 W/out Lillard

So what?

 

[BonesJones]

And you just dismissed OKC for the same "awful effort" excuse that's exactly why we're questioning Dame's effect on his teammates of late?

Again, correlation doesn't equal causality. Our last two losses went from a lack of effort, and Dame didn't have an effect on Pat that caused him to play horribly when Dame wasn't in the game.

 

[BonesJones]

unfortunately he is not that great a 3 pt shooter, career avg of 36.8% and a subpar 34.8% this season. Entire league avg this yr is 36.3%, he IMO needs to be more selective and up that percentage

He's streaky, and yet the threat for him to pull up from anywhere at anytime opens up a lot of things for the offense.

 

[handiman]

Again, correlation doesn't equal causality. Our last two losses went from a lack of effort, and Dame didn't have an effect on Pat that caused him to play horribly when Dame wasn't in the game.

Chill with the "correlation doesn't equal causality" every single post... Unless you have a good explanation of why the team's effort has picked up when Dame is out of the lineup, then you can't dismiss the possibility that they're not responding well to his presence.

We've all had that coach who thinks he's motivating by getting in everyone's face and screaming, when in fact it makes half the team clam up. That doesn't seem to fit Dame's personality, but there may be something along those lines going on. It could be something as simple as him being The Man to too great of an extent for some weaker minded teammates to co-exist.

If you go back to my first post in the thread, I'm not saying Dame is to blame for the team's record being better without him, but that there's an apparent problem there that needs to be looked into. It involves him but isn't necessarily because of him.

 

[H.C.]

The worst poster on this forum quoted me.


This current roster without Lillard would be in contention for the #1 pick this year.
This isn't homerism, this is a fact.
Anyone who denies this, yet has touted their 'vast basketball knowledge' as why people should listen to them on a fan forum. Isn't worth the time it takes to type a real reply to.

 

[e_blazer]

In my opinion, last night’s loss was primarily attributable to the fact that the Blazers were cold from 3 point range. A lesser factor was ET being out. For all of the crap he gets around here, he’s been playing well of late. I’d much rather have had him getting the minutes that Harkless got.

 

[Shakur]

Great, another one of these guys. Where are the good new posters?

No im not disrespecting Lillard at all he’s a very good player I’m just saying he’s not special. For example Curry is special.

 

[e_blazer]

No im not disrespecting Lillard at all he’s a very good player I’m just saying he’s not special. For example Curry is special.

Swap Lillard and Curry and the Warriors don’t skip a beat.

 

[Strenuus]

But for some reason, people like Pat, Zach, and Mo played better when Dame was out. Their production has gone way down since Dame came back. Not saying we should trade Dame but the bench guys have to play just as hard when Dame is in the lineup.

Then thats on them, not Dame.

 

[Strenuus]

I really love dame and i hope he have his breakout perfomance just to shut up my mouth but that sad thing is this can actually true, he need's to controll his shoot selection he shoots 11 3pointers what he was thinking.

I'd gather that half of those were open. I only remember one bad Dame 3 pointer.

Stats never tell the whole story. Look at when those shots were taken. It's really quite simple.

Plus, dude drove to the rack a ton. He's always done that. Look at the game in the present, not from what you saw him do in the past.

 

[stampedehero]

CJ stepped up as the second most paid player on the team should. I think the adjustments made by Stotts and better consistency with Harkless since Dame went out made a difference. The question of whether we need Dame is a wish.. Management would not let him go unless some outrageous deal occurs!

 

[MARIS61]

Silly thread title question.

Of course not, Lillard is probably the most handsome player on the team.

 

[riverman]

Stands to reason bench players will look better when Lillard is out....25 pts to spread around

 

[Strenuus]

Silly thread title question.

Of course not, Lillard is probably the most handsome player on the team.

 

[ripcityboy]

We look better when the rest of the squad hit their shots. But they didnt have a choice when Dame was out. Now we go to the same limited offense and it stinks when Dame and CJ go hero ball mode.

 

[BonesJones]

Chill with the "correlation doesn't equal causality" every single post... Unless you have a good explanation of why the team's effort has picked up when Dame is out of the lineup, then you can't dismiss the possibility that they're not responding well to his presence.

We've all had that coach who thinks he's motivating by getting in everyone's face and screaming, when in fact it makes half the team clam up. That doesn't seem to fit Dame's personality, but there may be something along those lines going on. It could be something as simple as him being The Man to too great of an extent for some weaker minded teammates to co-exist.

If you go back to my first post in the thread, I'm not saying Dame is to blame for the team's record being better without him, but that there's an apparent problem there that needs to be looked into. It involves him but isn't necessarily because of him.

I'm not going to chill with that until people understand it. If their effort is waning because Dame is playing, then we need to trade them ASAP. That's on them, not Dame, and some people are making it out to be. I just think it's ridiculous that people come to extreme conclusions about causality based on correlation over a small sample size. There's always people that are quick to bash Dame every single year and it gets annoying.

 

[handiman]

I'm not going to chill with that until people understand it. If their effort is waning because Dame is playing, then we need to trade them ASAP. That's on them, not Dame, and some people are making it out to be.

He's the leader. It's on him, whether or not it's because of him.

 

[BonesJones]

He's the leader. It's on him, whether or not it's because of him.

So if you were a coach:
"Dame, you're the leader, so I'm holding you responsible for Connaughton airballing multiple 3s and for Harkless' fragile and inconsistent mindset. They played better in a couple games where you were out, and I'm not saying they're playing bad because of you, but it's on you to get them playing better."

Lmao.

 

[DUB]

I think we play at a slower pace with Dame on the court, and I don't think that suits anyone else.

I think Dame can, and should lift the tempo.

 

[handiman]

I think we play at a slower pace with Dame on the court, and I don't think that suits anyone else.

That's the sort of thing that needs looking into, and the sort of thing that never will as long as people bury their heads in the sand.

We have plenty of talent, as evidenced by being an above .500 team whenever our borderline all-star is out. We need to figure out how to make that talent be more cohesive.

 

[BonesJones]

That's the sort of thing that needs looking into, and the sort of thing that never will as long as people bury their heads in the sand.

We have plenty of talent, as evidenced by being an above .500 team whenever our borderline all-star is out. We need to figure out how to make that talent be more cohesive.

Aka we need a better coach.

 

[handiman]

Aka we need a better coach.

I don't necessarily disagree with that, but if the coach is the problem, it wouldn't really explain the team playing better (and faster?) without Dame. I doubt Stotts is telling them to slow down when Dame is out there.