Does a great start and great game plan translate to playoff success?

[cmeese47]

Stotts game plan this year has been brilliant. The Blazers are dominating in offensive efficiency, and in the win loss column and it comes down to three reasons why.

The first reason is simple, 3>2 Portland knows that without FT's and an equal number of FGA's shooting 35% from 3 point range is better than shooting 50% from 2 point range. The Blazers are did a good job loading this team full of capable shooters, so much so that the bigs (LA and Leonard) want to shoot the triple as well. To LA's credit most of his three point shooting has been limited to practice. The Blazers likely won't shoot 41.5% from three point range all year but if they stay anywhere close to 40% this team will win a lot of games.

The second reason is Damian Lillard, Lillard's most important stat is his 5.5 FTA per game. Sure his above 40% 3 point shooting 5.6 assists and 20 points per game are nice but it is his willingness to attack the basket that makes the biggest difference. While Lillard and LA's FTA are not elite they are both in the top 30 and that is a good sign for this team. Overall Portland needs to get to the line a lot more often and I believe Lillard will continue to improve his dribble penetration, which will only help. However, what Portland needs is someone to attack of the bench. If Portland could figure out how to land Jeremy Lin or Isiah Thomas to replace Mo Williams they team would really take a huge step forward.

The third reason for this teams success is not offense related but defensive. Portland surrenders a lot of open or poorly contested mid range jumpers. On most nights this is not going to hurt you and it has not. The reason this has been so successful is basic. Mid range jumpers are statistically the worst shot in basketball. Furthermore, mid range jump shots rarely lead to foul trouble. For Portland's offense to be its most effective their opponent needs to focus on two point shot attempts and to stay off the free throw line. It has worked really well so far, Portland crowds the three point line giving up a league low 16.4 attempts per game and the has the 6th lowest 3pt% given up at just .338. They also are 8th in the NBA allowing only 21.6 FTA per game. With that combination Portland is tied for the 8th lowest PPS allowed at 1.17.

While all three of these things have contributed to a wonderful 18-4 record to start the season I have really big concerns looking at the playoffs. I have a hard time seeing this team being successful in the playoffs with the current roster. Yes the teams shooting will win them a game or two, its defense will also likely cost them as much. Portland is not skilled enough defensively to keep quality playoff teams off of the free throw line. Chris Paul and Russel Westbrook will kill this team if it is not careful, Lillard does not seem capable yet of elevating his game to 10 FTA's per night that will be needed to offset Paul, and Westbrook. I also am concerned by LA's continued over reliance on mid range jumpers. Portland needs someone who can get to the free throw line off the bench and they need at least one more quality defender preferably a big.

While the team has looked great this year it would be hard for me to expect anything more than what the Warriors were able to accomplish last year. An entertaining yet ultimately fruitless playoff run. But that is a lot better than where we were a year ago.

 

[KingSpeed]

WArriors were 6 seed. We will likely be #1 seed. #3 seed at worst. As for needing someone off the bench who can attack the basket, just wait for CJ McCollum. You will be pleased.

 

[magnifier661]

I think we will do finding the playoffs. Stotts has proven that his mid game adjustments have been stellar, as our team is dominating second halves. Just imagine when we face just one team, with a day practice I'm between.

We have a post player, but that isn't used dominantly unless they take away our three point shot. We have so many angles, so many weapons and a coach that can make mid game adjustments on the fly.

I'm not worried


Go Blazers!

 

[Nhawz]

I think we will be very pleased with CJ. I'm saying it here the kid will be a stud in this league.

 

[cmeese47]

Forgive me if I am not ready to jump on the McCollum bandwagon just yet, he is still a rookie and has yet to play in a meaningful NBA game. On paper yes CJ fills that need for a ball handler who can get their own shot and get to the free throw line. If that works out great, Portland still has a glaring weakness on the defensive side of the ball.

As of now the thought of Freeland, Robinson or Leonard getting any significant playoff minutes is scary.

One player I think the team would be wise to consider would be Kyle Lowry, he would be a major upgrade over Mo Williams and at a 6.2 million price point could be had without trading any of the teams core. We would still need a big but this move would certainly put us one step closer to being a real contender.

 

[magnifier661]

Forgive me if I am not ready to jump on the McCollum bandwagon just yet, he is still a rookie and has yet to play in a meaningful NBA game. On paper yes CJ fills that need for a ball handler who can get their own shot and get to the free throw line. If that works out great, Portland still has a glaring weakness on the defensive side of the ball.

As of now the thought of Freeland, Robinson or Leonard getting any significant playoff minutes is scary.

One player I think the team would be wise to consider would be Kyle Lowry, he would be a major upgrade over Mo Williams and at a 6.2 million price point could be had without trading any of the teams core. We would still need a big but this move would certainly put us one step closer to being a real contender.

For normal rookies I would agree with you, but we've had our share of 4th year guards that immediately contributed right out the gate. Did you feel the same about Lillard last season?

 

[cmeese47]

I knew Lillard was going to be great because I got to watch him a lot in college. However, was Lillard ready to lead this team on a significant playoff run last year? Not even close, Lillard's shot selection and defense last year were both very suspect at times. Most of that can be attributed to being a rookie and a lot of it can be contributed to not having any bench forcing Lillard to try and play hero ball.

Lillard also never had a significant injury that he had to come back from last year either.

Can CJ contribute? Certainly. Is he enough to make us an NBA title contender? In my opinion not even remotely. If our record is legit then we know what we have and getting a nice veteran piece who can come in and fill a specific role will help. Someone like Kyle Lowry I feel would make a bigger impact on this team than a healthy CJ McCollum.

 

[e_blazer]

Sixty games to go, a good rookie we haven't even seen play yet, possibilities of trades up to the deadline in February, and we're worrying about how we're going to do in the playoffs? I guess rising expectations are fun, but...PREMATURE!

 

[cmeese47]

Sixty games to go, a good rookie we haven't even seen play yet, possibilities of trades up to the deadline in February, and we're worrying about how we're going to do in the playoffs? I guess rising expectations are fun, but...PREMATURE!

I hardly think they are premature now considering our start. IMO 44 wins will be enough to make the playoffs that means Portland can go 26-34 from this point on and still manage to make the playoffs. Considering the team is 18-4 I would say that barring significant injuries it is fairly easy to assume that the team would be able to match the 26 wins needed to make the playoffs.

Considering the likelihood of making the playoffs now is fairly high, getting prepared to actually have playoff success is important. If the Blazers lose in the first round of the playoffs again especially if everyone is healthy then I think the question about will LA stay or go will reemerge. After next season only Batum is guaranteed to still be under contract and no one wants to see this team start rebuilding again.

 

[Mediocre Man]

WArriors were 6 seed. We will likely be #1 seed. #3 seed at worst. As for needing someone off the bench who can attack the basket, just wait for CJ McCollum. You will be pleased.

Are you fucking kidding me?

3 seed at worst? McCollum attacking the basket?

Have you ever seen him play? that's not even what his game is about, Eric

As for the playoffs, assuming we get in, I believe we will struggle because we rely too much on the 3 point shot, and teams will lock us down from it. I'd like to see us win a few more "ugly" games first before deciding if they will have any real playoff success.

More fouls in the playoffs, means more Joel Freeland and Thomas Robinson, which probably doesn't equate to playoff success at this point in their careers

 

[magnifier661]

Are you fucking kidding me?

3 seed at worst? McCollum attacking the basket?

Have you ever seen him play? that's not even what his game is about, Eric

As for the playoffs, assuming we get in, I believe we will struggle because we rely too much on the 3 point shot, and teams will lock us down from it. I'd like to see us win a few more "ugly" games first before deciding if they will have any real playoff success.

More fouls in the playoffs, means more Joel Freeland and Thomas Robinson, which probably doesn't equate to playoff success at this point in their careers

There is nothing in your post I agree on. We've won games when our shot isn't falling. Shit last game we is a prime example.

Against Chicago, they played such a physical game against us and our three wasn't falling, yet we still won.

Just because our team shoots a lot of threes, doesn't mean that we are like Golden State and need it to win. We have Aldridge that can give us half court baskets. Also, we have become a great second half team, defensively and offensively.

 

[e_blazer]

I hardly think they are premature now considering our start. IMO 44 wins will be enough to make the playoffs that means Portland can go 26-34 from this point on and still manage to make the playoffs. Considering the team is 18-4 I would say that barring significant injuries it is fairly easy to assume that the team would be able to match the 26 wins needed to make the playoffs.

Considering the likelihood of making the playoffs now is fairly high, getting prepared to actually have playoff success is important. If the Blazers lose in the first round of the playoffs again especially if everyone is healthy then I think the question about will LA stay or go will reemerge. After next season only Batum is guaranteed to still be under contract and no one wants to see this team start rebuilding again.

Not saying that it's premature to think that the Blazers will make the playoffs or even that they're going to be a top-four seed in the West. I'm saying that there's a ton of season to play between now and the playoffs. The contributions of the bench should get better just because guys like Robinson and, hopefully, CJ will be able to grow as players and fit in better. A mid-season trade is always a possibility, too. Beyond that, it's not reasonable to think that Olshey can remold the character of this squad significantly between now and the playoffs. I mean, he can't just decide that, hey we're doing way better than I thought we would, I'll just change out my current bench for seasoned NBA playoff guys. If he can find a trade that brings in one more seasoned big guy, I'd be happy, but I'm not holding my breath. Next summer he can use exception money to add a couple of guys if need be, but this year I think he's going to have to be content with seeing how far these horses can take the team.

 

[magnifier661]

Not saying that it's premature to think that the Blazers will make the playoffs or even that they're going to be a top-four seed in the West. I'm saying that there's a ton of season to play between now and the playoffs. The contributions of the bench should get better just because guys like Robinson and, hopefully, CJ will be able to grow as players and fit in better. A mid-season trade is always a possibility, too. Beyond that, it's not reasonable to think that Olshey can remold the character of this squad significantly between now and the playoffs. I mean, he can't just decide that, hey we're doing way better than I thought we would, I'll just change out my current bench for seasoned NBA playoff guys. If he can find a trade that brings in one more seasoned big guy, I'd be happy, but I'm not holding my breath. Next summer he can use exception money to add a couple of guys if need be, but this year I think he's going to have to be content with seeing how far these horses can take the team.

T. Rob looked really good last game. The more comfortable he gets, the better our team will improve. I think Him and Aldridge should work this summer on Aldridge's regime. I think if T. Rob has any inside game, he would be a beast. I hope Aldridge takes on a leadership role to the next level and train T. Rob in becoming a legit threat off the bench.

 

[Mediocre Man]

There is nothing in your post I agree on. We've won games when our shot isn't falling. Shit last game we is a prime example.

Against Chicago, they played such a physical game against us and our three wasn't falling, yet we still won.

Just because our team shoots a lot of threes, doesn't mean that we are like Golden State and need it to win. We have Aldridge that can give us half court baskets. Also, we have become a great second half team, defensively and offensively.

Shocking

Rose going out had nothing to do with it

I understand we have Aldridge. What you don't understand, or refuse to try and understand is that our team still relies on the three. I am not saying they have to rely on it, but they do. Until I see differently on a consistent basis, I stick with limited playoff success

 

[BlazerWookee]

Sometimes.

 

[magnifier661]

Shocking

Rose going out had nothing to do with it

I understand we have Aldridge. What you don't understand, or refuse to try and understand is that our team still relies on the three. I am not saying they have to rely on it, but they do. Until I see differently on a consistent basis, I stick with limited playoff success

Rose going out? We made our come back with Rose playing. In fact, when Rose went out, Chicago played us better. But you can try again.

Do you have an excuse when we beat Indiana when they played physical and took out of three point shot in the first half? As I said, our second half adjustments just dominated them and we found a way to win, even with PG playing out of his mind.

I know in your world, it's cloudy and gloomy, so I understand you can't feel good about this success. Just like you still think we won't even make the playoffs, having to play .300 ball the rest of the way.

 

[Mediocre Man]

Rose going out? We made our come back with Rose playing. In fact, when Rose went out, Chicago played us better. But you can try again.

Do you have an excuse when we beat Indiana when they played physical and took out of three point shot in the first half? As I said, our second half adjustments just dominated them and we found a way to win, even with PG playing out of his mind.

I know in your world, it's cloudy and gloomy, so I understand you can't feel good about this success. Just like you still think we won't even make the playoffs, having to play .300 ball the rest of the way.

So your opinion is that Chicago is a better team without Rose. Got it.

2 of our 5 3pt shots were in the first half. Not sure how they took it away in the first half and not the second

Actually, I still don't think the playoffs are a lock, not that we won't make the playoffs. Two very different things

 

[magnifier661]

So your opinion is that Chicago is a better team without Rose. Got it.

2 of our 5 3pt shots were in the first half. Not sure how they took it away in the first half and not the second

Actually, I still don't think the playoffs are a lock, not that we won't make the playoffs. Two very different things

No my opinion is that you are a doom and gloom fan. That you will find any angle to downplay any success. I really don't give a rats ass about your opinion on this team, since I already know mostly what you will say.

 

[Mediocre Man]

No my opinion is that you are a doom and gloom fan. That you will find any angle to downplay any success. I really don't give a rats ass about your opinion on this team, since I already know mostly what you will say.

Avoiding the Rose question is genius of you because you will look foolish answering it honestly with your statement earlier

 

[magnifier661]

Avoiding the Rose question is genius of you because you will look foolish answering it honestly with your statement earlier

I didn't feel the need to answer because the way you rock back and forth. It really doesn't matter MM, I know how you've played your hand this year. Does it bother you that you've been wrong all season?

 

[Mediocre Man]

I didn't feel the need to answer because the way you rock back and forth. It really doesn't matter MM, I know how you've played your hand this year. Does it bother you that you've been wrong all season?

How have I been wrong?

I said the Blazers would struggle this year to make the playoffs. They have played 20 games and are doing WAY better than most anyone not blinded by their Moda colored glasses thought they would. Since the playoffs are still 5-6 months away, I find it almost impossible to understand how I have been "wrong"

Again, quality avoidance of the Rose question

 

[e_blazer]

I believe what mags is saying is that the Blazers were trailing by 15 at the start of the 3rd quarter of the Bulls game, but had managed to come back and tie it up by the time that Rose was injured, so it wasn't as if his presence was any guarantee that the Bulls would win the game. Would Rose playing in the 4th have tipped the game in the favor of the Bulls or was the fact that the Bulls outscored the Blazers in the 4th a result of them being inspired to play better by his injury? Who knows? This is one of those pointless discussions where both of you can say things that are "true" but ultimately prove nothing.

 

[Wizard Mentor]

MY goal for this team is to win a playoff series, not "make the playoffs" or "be 'contenders'". Based on our start I am very optimistic. The game plan of low post player surrounded by shooters has led to playoff success in the past and it will in the future - there can be no intelligent debate on this point.

This team has the potential to improve and to stay together for a long time. "It's a good day to be a Blazer."

 

[magnifier661]

How have I been wrong?

I said the Blazers would struggle this year to make the playoffs. They have played 20 games and are doing WAY better than most anyone not blinded by their Moda colored glasses thought they would. Since the playoffs are still 5-6 months away, I find it almost impossible to understand how I have been "wrong"

Again, quality avoidance of the Rose question

The rose question? You mean that he played in 70% of the game? By the time he was out, we already had control of the game. It didn't matter if he was there or not because historically, our second half adjustments prove me right and you wrong.

Care to explain the win against OKC, SAS, Golden State, Indiana and Denver? Maybe you'd like to avoid them as well.

 

[Mediocre Man]

The rose question? You mean that he played in 70% of the game? By the time he was out, we already had control of the game. It didn't matter if he was there or not because historically, our second half adjustments prove me right and you wrong.

Care to explain the win against OKC, SAS, Golden State, Indiana and Denver? Maybe you'd like to avoid them as well.

The Rose question was. Do you think the Bulls are a better team without Rose in the line up

What is to explain? we beat them as we also beat Chicago. I don't understand?

 

[magnifier661]

The Rose question was. Do you think the Bulls are a better team without Rose in the line up

What is to explain? we beat them as we also beat Chicago. I don't understand?

I didn't say they were better without Rose, you made that assumption. I didn't response because I thought the question was ridiculous! Just like you said we beat Chicago without Rose, when he played 88% of his season average (27:31 minutes out of his 31 season average).

Oh yeah, you are using hyperbole! Got it!

 

[Mediocre Man]

I didn't say they were better without Rose, you made that assumption. I didn't response because I thought the question was ridiculous! Just like you said we beat Chicago without Rose, when he played 88% of his season average (27:31 minutes out of his 31 season average).

Oh yeah, you are using hyperbole! Got it!

I should have said we beat Chicago without Rose down the stretch

 

[magnifier661]

I should have said we beat Chicago without Rose down the stretch

I'm sorry I jumped on you man. I had a long work day yesterday and am really weathered right now.

 

[cmeese47]

Stay on topic people, is Portland as currently assembled a playoff threat. IMO they are not, at best they are the Warriors from last year competitive, entertaining but not a championship threat.

 

[e_blazer]

Stay on topic people, is Portland as currently assembled a playoff threat. IMO they are not, at best they are the Warriors from last year competitive, entertaining but not a championship threat.

Well which is it: playoff threat (as in a threat to win a round or two; i.e. "playoff success"); or "championship threat"? I'd say yes to the first and probably not to the second.