Broussard(along with a GM, assistant coaches and a scout) On the Blazers

[Nikolokolus]

Looking back at the Finals last season, Spurs shot same amount of 3s per game as they did in the regular season. Shot a better %.
Same thing with the Heat. And both teams gave up a far worse percentage in the finals than they did throughout the regular season.

Same thing for the Spurs in WCF against the Grizzlies, same amount, shot same % as regular season.
Miami did take slightly less against Indy

Indy shot fewer in that Miami series, but at a better percentage.
Memphis shot slightly more at roughly the same percentage.

Top 4 teams last season so no significant change in the playoffs to assume they were all of a sudden stopping the 3 more.

Am curious if you have a stat that supports your take I'm missing?

Picking one year does not make a trend.

I don't have a stat in hand and I don't really have the time to go digging through years of game records at basketball-reference.com and then cross-reference them between playoff and regular season averages (knock yourself out) but is it really that controversial of a statement to suggest that teams typically play better defense and easier points are harder to come by in the playoffs?

Maybe it's not a hard and fast law, and maybe the percentages don't always go down a ton, but if you're forcing your opponent to take less 3s in a playoff series and make them step in for long 2s, that does translate into fewer points.

 

[RR7]

I'm not saying it's a controversial statement. I'm just wondering if it's one if those statements that get repeated so often people take it as fact with nothing to go on

 

[maxiep]

I'm interested to see CJ McCollum's impact. He, Lillard and Williams seem to be the same player.

Also, I wonder how Bieber is doing, whether the demotion has destroyed his confidence or made him work harder. At some point in time, we're going to need Leonard.

 

[Mediocre Man]

I'm interested to see CJ McCollum's impact. He, Lillard and Williams seem to be the same player.

Also, I wonder how Bieber is doing, whether the demotion has destroyed his confidence or made him work harder. At some point in time, we're going to need Leonard.

Hopefully that is to make salaries match in a 2 for 1 trade

 

[Nikolokolus]

I'm not saying it's a controversial statement. I'm just wondering if it's one if those statements that get repeated so often people take it as fact with nothing to go on

If anybody is so inclined it's a simple (if tedious) exercise to compile these figures.

 

[blue9]

The idea of Lopez going down is frightening though.

I actually think - depending on how long he's down - we'd fare the best with him as our missing starter. I think Freeland would fill in just fine for a short stretch of games. The problem would be giving Freeland a breather. LMA would have to step up and take on some C duties so we don't have to rely on Leonard.
LMA going down would be tough, but if it happens later in the season I'd be more hopeful that Robinson could fill in capably enough. He won't replace LMA's scoring - but we have plenty of other players to pick up the scoring load. And Freeland would play some minutes at PF too. With Lillard, Wes and Nic we'd still have enough scoring punch to weather a short stint without LMA.
Lillard going down would really hurt - depending on who we'd face during his missed games. Lillard wins games for us in the 4th quarter. However, if Mo happens to be "hot" during that hypothetical time period, it could turn out just fine.
The idea of Wes/Nic going down is what concerns me most. If it's <5 games, we'll be fine. If it stretches on for weeks that would really hurt.

 

[Nikolokolus]

There is NOBODY on this team who can protect the rim outside of Lopez. Freeland isn't big enough nor athletic enough and he'd get eaten alive in a starting role.

 

[blue9]

There is NOBODY on this team who can protect the rim outside of Lopez. Freeland isn't big enough nor athletic enough and he'd get eaten alive in a starting role.

It depends on the competition. Freeland does an excellent job of protecting the rim. But he's not going to look so good if he's guarding Howard, Cousins, Bynum, etc - but will Lopez? There aren't a ton of teams that run offense through a C so, like I said, depending on the competition I think Freeland would do just fine. He's quite good at sliding over and jumping vertically to contest wings driving to the hoop.

 

[Draco]

I'm not saying it's a controversial statement. I'm just wondering if it's one if those statements that get repeated so often people take it as fact with nothing to go on

Its one of those old fashioned stupid statements that is outdated. The Spurs shot a ton of threes in the playoffs last year and had Danny Green in the running for finals MVP because of his 3 point shooting. The Spurs ended up losing because Miami was drilling three’s with LeBron and the famous Ray Allen shot to avoid elimination.

Teams that don’t shoot threes have major problems in the playoffs! Its exactly the opposite of what is repeated. Take Andre Miller, he’s never been out of the first round. In the regular season it doesn’t matter nearly as much because defenses are tired, out of position, and less focused. But during the postseason if you don’t have the floor spacing of three point shooters a good defense can double team their opponent without paying a penalty. The Blazers team with Andre Miller and Gerald Wallace both on the court at once couldn’t make Dallas pay for leaving them wide open.

Look at Miami’s players, almost all of them can hit the three. They have shooters like Mario Chalmers, Ray Allen, James Jones, Shane Battier, Rashard Lewis, last year Mike Miller; even Bosh is shooting well from 3. The 3 pointer is far more important in playoff basketball than in the regular season.

 

[magnifier661]

It depends on the competition. Freeland does an excellent job of protecting the rim. But he's not going to look so good if he's guarding Howard, Cousins, Bynum, etc - but will Lopez? There aren't a ton of teams that run offense through a C so, like I said, depending on the competition I think Freeland would do just fine. He's quite good at sliding over and jumping vertically to contest wings driving to the hoop.

He is really really good at that straight up defense. Truly impressed

 

[KingSpeed]

Wow. Lillard is an elite PG, Aldridge is best PF in game, and the Blazers are legit contenders. All this from people who know basketball the best. Suck on it, haters!

 

[Mediocre Man]

Wow. Lillard is an elite PG, Aldridge is best PF in game, and the Blazers are legit contenders. All this from people who know basketball the best. Suck on it, haters!

Has anyone said anything different? other than LA being one of the best and not the best?

 

[KingSpeed]

There is NOBODY on this team who can protect the rim outside of Lopez. Freeland isn't big enough nor athletic enough and he'd get eaten alive in a starting role.

You clearly don't watch the games.

 

[Mediocre Man]

You clearly don't watch the games.

Eric, Freeland isn't the defender that Lopez is. he does well in his role, but there is a pretty big drop off in defensive production

 

[KingSpeed]

I'm interested to see CJ McCollum's impact. He, Lillard and Williams seem to be the same player.

Also, I wonder how Bieber is doing, whether the demotion has destroyed his confidence or made him work harder. At some point in time, we're going to need Leonard.

I'm interested too. I think we can definitely use his scoring. Right now, our backp SG is Lillard. MCCollum can take some of those minutes and when Mo is cold, we will need McCollum's shooting. I can't wait for him to come back.

 

[KingSpeed]

Eric, Freeland isn't the defender that Lopez is. he does well in his role, but there is a pretty big drop off in defensive production

Lopez is better. That is why he starts. But Freeland has done a great job of protecting the rim. Anyone who has watched all the games knows this.

 

[KingSpeed]

Has anyone said anything different? other than LA being one of the best and not the best?

Yes, it has been debated if Lillard is elite and most people here don't consider us contenders.

 

[Nikolokolus]

You clearly don't watch the games.

I clearly know that Freeland does OK in a spot minutes role, but that if asked to do it for 30+ minutes per night he'd be in over his head.

 

[Mediocre Man]

Lopez is better. That is why he starts. But Freeland has done a great job of protecting the rim. Anyone who has watched all the games knows this.

I was reading a stat the other day that showed opponents FG% in the paint with Lopez vs Freeland. It was a pretty big difference....something like 5% lower with Lopez.

I will find that again and post it

 

[Mediocre Man]

Yes, it has been debated if Lillard is elite and most people here don't consider us contenders.

We aren't contenders.....it's 18 games

 

[KingSpeed]

To be clear, the one game Freeland didn't play due to injury, we lost. He is a very important player on our team.

 

[KingSpeed]

We aren't contenders.....it's 18 games

So Miami, Indiana, OKC, and SA aren't contenders? After all, it's been 18 games.

SEVERAL of those people (GM, coaches, and scout) said we were contenders.

 

[Nikolokolus]

Correlation is not causation.

 

[KingSpeed]

I clearly know that Freeland does OK in a spot minutes role, but that if asked to do it for 30+ minutes per night he'd be in over his head.

I agree with that.

 

[Nikolokolus]

So Miami, Indiana, OKC, and SA aren't contenders? After all, it's been 18 games.

SEVERAL of those people (GM, coaches, and scout) said we were contenders.

Those teams have already showed they can compete at that level. Teams that haven't been there or showed they can go deep in the playoffs don't get the benefit of the doubt.

 

[blue9]

Those teams have already showed they can compete at that level. Teams that haven't been there or showed they can go deep in the playoffs don't get the benefit of the doubt.

Why is this such a difficult concept for people to understand?

 

[Mediocre Man]

So Miami, Indiana, OKC, and SA aren't contenders? After all, it's been 18 games.

SEVERAL of those people (GM, coaches, and scout) said we were contenders.

IMO, it's a bit different when you are talking about teams that have been contenders and didn't make any significant roster moves than a team that was piss poor last year and added a couple of role players. Might we be contenders as the season rolls on? absolutely. Are we contenders right now after 18 games and going 33-49 last year? Not sure how anyone can honestly say yes

 

[riverman]

In probably all these GM, Ass Coaches and Scouts, they think we're for real because we just beat them! After beating Indy, the media is all of a sudden jumping on the band wagon. Steve Kerr is the ONLY guy who thought we were good from the start! Stotts just lets the game do the talking! Start of a dynasty here if you ask me.

 

[KingSpeed]

IMO, it's a bit different when you are talking about teams that have been contenders and didn't make any significant roster moves than a team that was piss poor last year and added a couple of role players. Might we be contenders as the season rolls on? absolutely. Are we contenders right now after 18 games and going 33-49 last year? Not sure how anyone can honestly say yes

Lots of people are honestly saying yes. Read the first post on this thread. People who work in the NBA, coaches scouts, are saying we are contenders. Deal with it.

 

[KingSpeed]

Honest answer from NBA scout:

"I think the Blazers are very much contenders. I've seen the Clippers and I'm not sure the Clippers are better than them. It could be a toss-up. Portland has what it takes to go deep into the playoffs because of their ability to shoot from the perimeter, and they have a great inside player. They mirror Indiana. They're a good defensive team, they're big, they can score and their defensive numbers are pretty good. They're playing much better on that end than they did last year.