Blazers Play-in Thread

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in
wizenheimer said:
ok...some players and coaches have a feeling. Maybe they are right; maybe not; maybe they are too close to the situation; maybe they are thinking about the extra money they get for playoff experience

I was just asking for the evidence that the 'first' playoff experience actually pays off. You'd think better playoff results the next season would be evidence, but that hasn't been the case with the Blazers. Higher seeding the following season? That hasn't happened for Portland either

you also have to factor trade-offs. Is getting swept in the first round better for a team in the short and long term than being able to draft a Dame or an SGA or an Avdija or a Haliburton? Would the Blazers be better this season if they had made the playoffs in 2024, been stomped in the 1st round, and didn't have the pick to draft Clingan? Granted, Portland is in kind of a unique situation because of Olshey's idiot trade for Nance. Normally, Portland making or not making the playoffs would probably be the difference between a 17th pick and a 12th pick. That's would be a difference but the significance wouldn't be great. But that's not the Blazer situation at present; that's the difference between no pick and the 12th pick, Stakes are higher

you're right: there are so many factors and variables at work I think it would be next to impossible to demonstrate that early playoff experience consistently matters

as to your question, average age of Blazer rosters:

2013-14.....25.8
2015-16.....24.3
2018-19.....26.2
2025-26.....25.2 (Blazers 10th youngest, same as OKC)

1976-77.....24.5 (Blazers win it all first time in playoffs)

average age.....26.1 (this season)
Click to expand...
Again, context and situations. If a young tram makes the playoffs one year but the next is riddled with injuries, then it is more unlikely that experience pays dividends that next season.

I also think you are cherry picking pdx. How about kther teams in the league?
 
Well 50 years ago a young team with no playoff experience won it all, so obviously it doesn't matter.
 
RR7 said:
Well 50 years ago a young team with no playoff experience won it all, so obviously it doesn't matter.
Click to expand...
Someone in the Detroit Pistons video team is making a motivational video on this topic right now
 
  • Like
Reactions: RR7
SharpeScooterShooter said:
Again, context and situations. If a young tram makes the playoffs one year but the next is riddled with injuries, then it is more unlikely that experience pays dividends that next season.

I also think you are cherry picking pdx. How about kther teams in the league?
Click to expand...
I asked a question....that's all. 'Where's the evidence?' Maybe there's plenty; but maybe it's vague and circumstantial. And, I'm familiar with Portland history. It's not that big enough deal to me to go in depth

my hunch is that if a team is good enough to solidly make the playoffs one year they should be good enough the next year. If they are only good enough to barely make the playoffs one year, they might be lottery next season. Fringe is fringe

I'm also wondering about the continuity you mentioned. With changes to the last few CBA's and the more punitive tax and apron provisions, have the windows of roster continuity been significantly shortened? I'm thinking that's the case. My guess is that there is more roster churn now than 10 years ago and that may accelerate in the future
 
The Sun's schedule down the stretch is not easy. The Blazers may have had a chance for 7th if not for the losses to Philly and Dallas.
But then again, I would not be surprised if they lost to the Pelicans. They need to get Grant and Shae back for the last two games of the regular season so they can at least come off the bench.
 
wizenheimer said:
I asked a question....that's all. 'Where's the evidence?' Maybe there's plenty; but maybe it's vague and circumstantial. And, I'm familiar with Portland history. It's not that big enough deal to me to go in depth

my hunch is that if a team is good enough to solidly make the playoffs one year they should be good enough the next year. If they are only good enough to barely make the playoffs one year, they might be lottery next season. Fringe is fringe

I'm also wondering about the continuity you mentioned. With changes to the last few CBA's and the more punitive tax and apron provisions, have the windows of roster continuity been significantly shortened? I'm thinking that's the case. My guess is that there is more roster churn now than 10 years ago and that may accelerate in the future
Click to expand...
The evidence you are seeking is sometimes hard to quantify in stats I think. Just like some players can have an impact without getting stats, I think playoff experience rides that same wave. There is no specific play you can point to and because every season has different injuries issues, a season is hard to also pinpoint and quantify.

I think, in a perfect world, with no injuries and all rosters staying the same, there may be some direct statistical evidence, but that isn't ever going to happen… so maybe that plays into your point.

I think continuity is huge. Players need to know each others tendencies and once they become family, then can then often be able to read things earlier, like a quarterback knowing when his WR likes to cut and throwing the ball in advance to that spot. That same knowledge is huge on both offense and defense.
With that said, and i agree with you, is that continuity may only become harder and harder to garner. Though, to me, that makes it all that much more important. If less and less teams can maintain a core roster for any duration, then the ones that do/can, i think have a leg up on the opponents.
 
SharpeScooterShooter said:
Im just gonna go ahead and trust the plethora of basketball players/coaches and experts who have repeatedly said there is nothing like playoff experience over stats that can be skewed to fit either narrative.
I am sure if we scour the details of each season pointed out, we will find the reasons why we sucked. Injuries. NO’s door of mediocre players brought in to improve the team. Etc.

The team has to have real talent first for the experience to have maximum value. Playoff experience doesn't matter if the roster keeps changing. Continuity is probably more important than playoff experience.
This team is much much younger than those earlier teams i think? Experience goes further the younger you are in my opinion.
Click to expand...
I thought our 2019 playoff run definitely had something to do with the awful playoffs of 2018. During the OKC series, CJ and Dame said as much. The 2018 series left a bad taste in their mouth and due to that playoff experience, they made a run to the WCF. The loss in the WCF should’ve inspired and even better 2020 but Collins and Hood got injured, Olshey’s pick ups did nothing and then Covid happened.
 
wizenheimer said:
ok...some players and coaches have a feeling. Maybe they are right; maybe not; maybe they are too close to the situation; maybe they are thinking about the extra money they get for playoff experience

I was just asking for the evidence that the 'first' playoff experience actually pays off. You'd think better playoff results the next season would be evidence, but that hasn't been the case with the Blazers. Higher seeding the following season? That hasn't happened for Portland either

you also have to factor trade-offs. Is getting swept in the first round better for a team in the short and long term than being able to draft a Dame or an SGA or an Avdija or a Haliburton? Would the Blazers be better this season if they had made the playoffs in 2024, been stomped in the 1st round, and didn't have the pick to draft Clingan? Granted, Portland is in kind of a unique situation because of Olshey's idiot trade for Nance. Normally, Portland making or not making the playoffs would probably be the difference between a 17th pick and a 12th pick. That's would be a difference but the significance wouldn't be great. But that's not the Blazer situation at present; that's the difference between no pick and the 12th pick, Stakes are higher

you're right: there are so many factors and variables at work I think it would be next to impossible to demonstrate that early playoff experience consistently matters

as to your question, average age of Blazer rosters:

2013-14.....25.8
2015-16.....24.3
2018-19.....26.2
2025-26.....25.2 (Blazers 10th youngest, same as OKC)

1976-77.....24.5 (Blazers win it all first time in playoffs)

average age.....26.1 (this season)
Click to expand...
Look at recent champions (OKC, Boston, Denver, GS, Milwaukee). They all had heartache in playoffs before success.
 
KingSpeed said:
Look at recent champions (OKC, Boston, Denver, GS, Milwaukee). They all had heartache in playoffs before success.
Click to expand...
And even more so they have an understanding of what it takes to turn it on. That has an effect on the way they play the regular season and their overall wins and losses tend to get better. That usually gives them better seeding and a better chance to get deeper into the playoffs 2nd and 3 round. Once you are in the semis anything can happen. Look at the injuries last year.
 
Big games tonight:
Phx @ Charlotte
Cle @ GS
NOP @ PTB
SAS @ LAC

If Charlotte, Cleveland, SAS and the Blazers all win, Blazers move a half game up on the Clips and only 2.5 games behind Phoenix for 7.
 
Figured it was a good time to revive this gem

tumblr_o50yitfUzJ1r4fk9jo4_250.gif
 
I am going to go out on a limb here and assume we lose our next 2 games on the road. So....we need the Clips to lose to OKC at home and then lose to Portland two days later. We will then own the tie breaker.
 
Pinwheel1 said:
I am going to go out on a limb here and assume we lose our next 2 games on the road. So....we need the Clips to lose to OKC at home and then lose to Portland two days later. We will then own the tie breaker.
Click to expand...
I have been thinking that the battle for the eighth seed will come down to that game between us and the Clippers. That game will likely be high drama.
 
Damn, the Clappers won against the Mavs last night. Our last games are INSANELY critical. So NICE that the refs handed that game to Denver and screwed us over.
 
Domihatin said:
Damn, the Clappers won against the Mavs last night. Our last games are INSANELY critical. So NICE that the refs handed that game to Denver and screwed us over.
Click to expand...
We also got screwed by Huff missing free throws in the Indiana/Dallas game. Hopefully, that doesn’t come back to haunt us. The refs gave us a win against Sacramento.
 
HailBlazers said:
So where does everything stand
Click to expand...

The AI says:

1775981049202.png

The Lakers have the tie-breaker with the Nuggets. The Nuggets lead the Lakers by one game.
So the Nuggets need to beat the Spurs in San Antonio or pray the Lakers lose to the Jazz in Los Angeles to secure the 3rd seed.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

KingSpeed
Blazers winning thread
2
Replies
43
Views
2K
Phatguysrule
Phatguysrule
SlyPokerDog
Led by Splitter, Blazers earn win day after Billups' arrest
Replies
4
Views
315
julius
julius
J
Biggest Giants Game in Years
Replies
5
Views
168
JTM
J
SlyPokerDog
Wweek.com - Portland Must Confront the Real Danger of Losing the Blazers
5 6 7
Replies
187
Views
9K
AldoTrapani
AldoTrapani
SlyPokerDog
USA Today Preseason Power Rankings (Blazers #26)
2
Replies
35
Views
2K
SharpesTriumph
SharpesTriumph

Users who are viewing this thread

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