At what point will you believe this team is for real?

[e_blazer]

Not all of them at the same time, any one of them for 10+ games.

That's what I assumed you meant. I'd say it's true for the Thunder, as an example, if Durant, Westbrook or Ibaka went down for an extended period, or the Spurs if Duncan, Parker, or Ginobili suffered a major injury. As competitive as the West is, nobody can afford a major injury to one of their stars.

 

[Eastoff]

I was just looking at the point differential, how much we win by, and based purely on that, it would make us tied for 6th in the West. I think that's a reasonable standing to finish the year.

 

[Nikolokolus]

That's what I assumed you meant. I'd say it's true for the Thunder, as an example, if Durant, Westbrook or Ibaka went down for an extended period, or the Spurs if Duncan, Parker, or Ginobili suffered a major injury. As competitive as the West is, nobody can afford a major injury to one of their stars.

I agree with the Thunder being vulnerable because of their lack of depth but the Spurs have been dealing without Ginobli for extended periods for years and still seem to manage.

All I'm saying is that the Blazers seem especially vulnerable compared to a lot of other teams ... more resilient and better backups than last year, but not enough to get them to the playoffs when the margins already look pretty thin to begin with.

 

[blazedanugz]

honestly, if we can go 4-0 on this road trip it would definitely speed up my thinking of if this team is real or not. a 9 game win streak would be pretty eye opening. I don't think its that farfetched either considering who we are playing on this road trip. Brooklyn is playin horrible and that was the only game that scared me early on. for some reason todays game scares me a little bit also.

 

[BlazerBeav]

I'd love a 4-game winning streak, but each one is a challenge. We rarely even play decently in Boston. We've had trouble with the early start games in Toronto.

 

[Nikolokolus]

honestly, if we can go 4-0 on this road trip it would definitely speed up my thinking of if this team is real or not. a 9 game win streak would be pretty eye opening. I don't think its that farfetched either considering who we are playing on this road trip. Brooklyn is playin horrible and that was the only game that scared me early on. for some reason todays game scares me a little bit also.

4-0 and would be good - great even. But when I look at the teams we face I'm less inclined to read too much into running the table.

Caveat: if they manage to win by an average of 10+ points that would be an entirely different thing, that's something that would get my attention and make me think that they've got something cooking.

 

[illmatic99]

I was just looking at the point differential, how much we win by, and based purely on that, it would make us tied for 6th in the West. I think that's a reasonable standing to finish the year.

History has showed that point diff is probably the best indicators for a team's success. But this early in the season, it's hard to take this stat too seriously to compare teams as we've all played different opponents. Our diff is decent right now at + ~4, but needs to get a little better.

 

[tlongII]

I'll have a pretty good idea after this roadtrip.

 

[Paxil]

honestly, if we can go 4-0 on this road trip it would definitely speed up my thinking of if this team is real or not. a 9 game win streak would be pretty eye opening. I don't think its that farfetched either considering who we are playing on this road trip. Brooklyn is playin horrible and that was the only game that scared me early on. for some reason todays game scares me a little bit also.

4-0 would be a dream =) I'd settle for .500 on the road any day.

 

[milehighblazer]

Our lack of interior defense and dependance on perimeter shooting are going to cost us some games. Not to say I don't think our offense is sustainable, just that when our shots don't fall I don't see our defense making up for it on too many occasions. This team will have to find ways to draw more fouls(and hit free throws when they get there), attack the basket, and find ways to get easier points through transition. It's only 8 games in, but it really seems like we are "earning" too many of our baskets, if that makes any sense. We aren't forcing turnovers, nor getting overmatched looks leading to easy fast break points. Defensively I think they need to have guards fighting under picks on PnR defense(I doubt that'll change as it's not Stotts' intent) and dare more teams to make perimeter shots. Overall there's a reason Terry is a coach in the NBA and none of us are, so I imagine he'll be trying to find a way to add a few new wrinkles in the offense and experiment with different lineups defensively.

 

[Wizard Mentor]

I'll be OK with 2-2, very happy with 3-1, estatic with 4-0.

 

[Eastoff]

Defensively I think they need to have guards fighting under picks on PnR defense(I doubt that'll change as it's not Stotts' intent) and dare more teams to make perimeter shots.

Welcome to the board! People have pointed out that Stotts values the 3-point shot more than the 2. That's why we have so many shooters, and that's why he wants us contesting the 3.

 

[milehighblazer]

Welcome to the board! People have pointed out that Stotts values the 3-point shot more than the 2. That's why we have so many shooters, and that's why he wants us contesting the 3.

Yea that's why I don't see that changing at all. My thinking is giving up 3s sucks, but it might be a better way to get beat than having a team score 40 points in the point each game.

 

[magnifier661]

Our lack of interior defense and dependance on perimeter shooting are going to cost us some games. Not to say I don't think our offense is sustainable, just that when our shots don't fall I don't see our defense making up for it on too many occasions. This team will have to find ways to draw more fouls(and hit free throws when they get there), attack the basket, and find ways to get easier points through transition. It's only 8 games in, but it really seems like we are "earning" too many of our baskets, if that makes any sense. We aren't forcing turnovers, nor getting overmatched looks leading to easy fast break points. Defensively I think they need to have guards fighting under picks on PnR defense(I doubt that'll change as it's not Stotts' intent) and dare more teams to make perimeter shots. Overall there's a reason Terry is a coach in the NBA and none of us are, so I imagine he'll be trying to find a way to add a few new wrinkles in the offense and experiment with different lineups defensively.

I think taking away the perimeter is actually way more important than points in the paint. I rank rebounds #1, perimeter d #2 and fast break #3. Those are momentum changers. Anytime a shooter gets hot, it becomes a huge problem.

Rebounding the ball is a good way to limit the team to only one shot, but getting an offensive board also deflates teams as well. How many times did we watch our team play a solid 24 seconds, only to give up an offensive board. I saw how deflated our team was right after.

Fast breaks get the fans involved, but it also tires a defense out. Limiting that helps control the game.

Points in the paint is a stat that is not a telling tale of performance. A fast break layup or dunk counts for paint. Does that mean the team has an inside game? Denver was one of the best points in the paint teams last year, but they had zero post up ability.

 

[Paxil]

Welcome to the board! People have pointed out that Stotts values the 3-point shot more than the 2. That's why we have so many shooters, and that's why he wants us contesting the 3.

33% from 3 point line = 50% from the field = 50% from the foul line.

We are shooting less than 50% from the field and more than 33% from threes, so threes definitely are productive... but nothing matches going to the FT line. It is all about balance though.

EDIT: Actually I don't know what we are shooting from the field if you take out the 3 pointers... maybe we are close to 50%.

 

[Nikolokolus]

Mags, I think you underestimate just how important inside scoring (whether from post ups or off the drive) becomes in the playoffs. That's still where teams live and die in the post-season

 

[Pinwheel1]

Mags, I think you underestimate just how important inside scoring (whether from post ups or off the drive) becomes in the playoffs. That's still where teams live and die in the post-season

I know in theory you are right. But it seems when I watched the games in the playoffs last year they were all shooting jumpers. Yes Miami does a good job with Lebron, but Bosh and Wade were shooting jumpers. Duncan now shoots mostly jumpers. Durrant is mostly jumpers, Indiana=jumpers

When the game is on the line you have Westbrook, Lebron, Parker, and Carmelo who can attack the rim and get fouled. A handful of post up players in Zach, maybe Hibbert,occasionally Duncan but it is usually a jumper, potentially Love if they ever make the playoffs...I am sure there are more.... but how many?

Barkley and Shaq were going off last night about OKC and GS and their lack of an inside game. Live by the jumper, die by the jumper....but isn't that today's NBA? Fast breaks in the playoffs are hard to come by and a post up game is rare.

 

[OneLifeToLive]

Seems this board is mixed, so I want to know what it would take for you to finally believe?

I was a believer since most the acquisitions. I just knew that Lopez would help Aldridge in such a big way. From day one I thought we are a top 4 team.

I'd be shocked if we fell lower than the 4th seed.

I think you can believe in them right now. And I do. Because this team was built with players who are not of higher profile, bigger egos and personal agendas. I think they can sustain it. However, the roster will fall short in games against teams with better talent. Like they did against Houston. No matter how well they are playing together.

 

[Nikolokolus]

I look at the teams that were in the finals last year. The Spurs and the Heat both rely on good jump shooting but they also have guys in Lebron and Duncan who can make "close-in" high percentage shots. They don't have to score the majority of their points this way, but their ability to hit those shots stretches and strains a defense and forces them to be accounted for and also frees up their teammates to take jumpers that are less contested.

 

[blue9]

I look at the teams that were in the finals last year. The Spurs and the Heat both rely on good jump shooting but they also have guys in Lebron and Duncan who can make "close-in" high percentage shots.

Interestingly, thus far Tony Parker has taken 50% of his shots within 8' of the hoop (and is shooting 62% on those shots)!

 

[Strenuus]

All star break for me. Gotta see if we can keep rolling.

 

[milehighblazer]

I think taking away the perimeter is actually way more important than points in the paint. I rank rebounds #1, perimeter d #2 and fast break #3. Those are momentum changers. Anytime a shooter gets hot, it becomes a huge problem.

Rebounding the ball is a good way to limit the team to only one shot, but getting an offensive board also deflates teams as well. How many times did we watch our team play a solid 24 seconds, only to give up an offensive board. I saw how deflated our team was right after.

Fast breaks get the fans involved, but it also tires a defense out. Limiting that helps control the game.

Points in the paint is a stat that is not a telling tale of performance. A fast break layup or dunk counts for paint. Does that mean the team has an inside game? Denver was one of the best points in the paint teams last year, but they had zero post up ability.

I agree that you can get killed by a hot 3 point shooter. Just look at what Damian and Wes have done to kill opponents this year, it's demoralizing to get beat that way. And I suppose it really depends on your opponent. I would just like to see what the results would be like if we forced a team to beat us at our own game(3 pointers) rather than give them favorable match ups in the paint.

 

[Pinwheel1]

I look at the teams that were in the finals last year. The Spurs and the Heat both rely on good jump shooting but they also have guys in Lebron and Duncan who can make "close-in" high percentage shots. They don't have to score the majority of their points this way, but their ability to hit those shots stretches and strains a defense and forces them to be accounted for and also frees up their teammates to take jumpers that are less contested.

I think that should be our goal. And you are right those two teams as I mentioned before are one of the few who have someone who can make close in shots. But it is not a very long list.

 

[Strenuus]

I amend my post - I looked at the december schedule, and if we can get by that and still be decently over .500, I'd think we'd be legit.

 

[BrianFromWA]

Game One of the Second Round.

 

[Natebishop3]

It's going to all rely on the health of the team. I have no doubt that we will make the playoffs if we stay healthy. Getting to the show isn't the big accomplishment though. Getting out of the first round all depends on who we play against, if we have HCA, and if we're healthy. We've got some gamers on our team. I think someone like Lillard will thrive in the playoffs. I think Aldridge is ready to dominate in the post season. Guys like Mo and Dorrell will be crucial as well.

 

[Blazer Fanatic]

When they make a "Harlem Shake" or "What does the Fox Say" youtube video.

 

[jlprk]

When we hit 20 games and are still doing very well, I'll allow myself to truly hope.

I like what I see so far, after 20-25 games and let's talk and see what our record is

I think 20 games into the season we'll know if they are headed in the right direction for a playoff appearance and by 40 games if that trend is real or just a fart in the wind.

I start respecting the standings at 10 games in. I decided on this number somewhere from 30 to 35 years ago. Only a Cesium-35 test of my bones could determine whether it was the 70s or the 80s. Anyway, 10 is the number I use, and you can clearly rely on my numbers.

 

[BrianFromWA]

I think you forgot the "1" in Ce-135.

 

[jlprk]

33% from 3 point line = 50% from the field = 50% from the foul line.

We are shooting less than 50% from the field and more than 33% from threes, so threes definitely are productive... but nothing matches going to the FT line. It is all about balance though.

Close-in shots generate fouls generate free throws. So 50% from the field = about 40% from the 3-point line, not 33%.