ESPN predicts 31 wins

[BonesJones]

Joerger caled out CJ as someone they had to deal with after game 4.

In game 5 he dropped 33...

 

[Nikolokolus]

Right there is the flaw. They didn't have to because you yourself said Memphis could live with them scoring.
The holes never "materialized" because they didn't have to. They were somewhat already there. Read your statement again, your basically saying this.

And again, everyone is acting as though Memphis's D was only there for two guys. Wish there was a way to email or forward the game I watched to you. CJ AND Meyers broke the D down several times. Just because they didn't break down Mark Gasol And ZBO doesn't mean they still didn't get it done against an elite defense.
Im not saying I expect superstardom next year or they will ever be superstars, but to say that just anyone can do what they did to Memphis last year is simply laughable, which is what got me involved in this convo. People are acting as though anytime the ball went into their hands the Memphis D just laid down on the court or something. Meyers had a run and dunk from the three point line that was contested and he jammed it down their throats. Many times CJ broke down the D, got around them and got to the hoop.
Watch the game again....

The holes I'm talking about are a team's defense falling apart - stress points that forces your opponent to adapt or lose. If Memphis' strategy was to lock down the folks that were a real threat to overwhelm them (LA and Lillard) and nobody else forced them to change that strategy (CJ and Meyers) then how can you say they got it done against an elite defense? That defense was never brought to bear against them fully.

EDIT:
I never said just anyone can score against Memphis' defense, but if that defense doesn't focus its attention on those guys I don't think you can point to their effort and say that it's a good predictor of what you can expect from these guys when they are getting all (or at least a good portion) of a team's defensive effort - which is what they will face this coming year.

 

[BlazerCaravan]

ESPN Article says 31 wins, good for 11th in the WC.

Do you have the over or the under?
I'm torn between 32 and 35 wins, but I basically admit to being a homer. Rather than do an exact win/loss record, it seems like it's easier to compare with ESPNs guess.

31.5 is a perfect over/under for our season.

 

[Wizard Mentor]

By that rationale every young player in the NBA should be making some kind of great leap from unknown to great with increased play time. How often is that actually happening around the league? What makes these two guys so special compared with all of the other aspiring young prospects around the league?

I don't know what he assumed, but it's very clear that in the aggregate, players improve. I'm not sure why I'm arguing because you know this very well. The Rookie/Soph. game is just one good example of this. Why is there no more such game any more? Because the Sophs were kicking ass pretty much every year. Why? because players improve and don't peak until around 28 or 29.

Why these two players in particular? To ME, it's not because they did well in the playoffs against arguably the best defensive team in the league. It's how they scored. CJ knows how to use pace, change of pace, screens... to get good shots he can make. Biebs has shown an ability to hit 3s and defend as a 7 footer - which is pretty unique. Having these established skills in tow, they can work on other parts of their game where other players their age are spending their time working to develop the skills CJ and Biebs already have - that's why them in particular, IMHO.

Personally, I think Biebs will turn into an in-his-prime Brad Lohaus THIS season. I'll be interested in seeing him surpass Lohaus in subsequent years. While not glamorous, Lohaus was a very good player and quality starter. That being said, I'm expecting even MORE from CJ.

 

[Orion Bailey]

Joerger caled out CJ as someone they had to deal with after game 4.

In game 5 he dropped 33...

The holes I'm talking about are a team's defense falling apart - stress points that forces your opponent to adapt or lose. If Memphis' strategy was to lock down the folks that were a real threat to overwhelm them (LA and Lillard) and nobody else forced them to change that strategy (CJ and Meyers) then how can you say they got it done against an elite defense? That defense was never brought to bear against them fully.

EDIT:
I never said just anyone can score against Memphis' defense, but if that defense doesn't focus its attention on those guys I don't think you can point to their effort and say that it's a good predictor of what you can expect from these guys when they are getting all (or at least a good portion) of a team's defensive effort - which is what they will face this coming year.

I don't know what he assumed, but it's very clear that in the aggregate, players improve. I'm not sure why I'm arguing because you know this very well. The Rookie/Soph. game is just one good example of this. Why is there no more such game any more? Because the Sophs were kicking ass pretty much every year. Why? because players improve and don't peak until around 28 or 29.

Why these two players in particular? To ME, it's not because they did well in the playoffs against arguably the best defensive team in the league. It's how they scored. CJ knows how to use pace, change of pace, screens... to get good shots he can make. Biebs has shown an ability to hit 3s and defend as a 7 footer - which is pretty unique. Having these established skills in tow, they can work on other parts of their game where other players their age are spending their time working to develop the skills CJ and Biebs already have - that's why them in particular, IMHO.

Personally, I think Biebs will turn into an in-his-prime Brad Lohaus THIS season. I'll be interested in seeing him surpass Lohaus in subsequent years. While not glamorous, Lohaus was a very good player and quality starter. That being said, I'm expecting even MORE from CJ.

Nikolokolus, I am not as smart as many here. The questions you are asking me have the answers quoted above in several ways. Was there any other player that was an unkown and made a name for himself other than Delavadova? CJ showed the country you better pay attention. I beleive he is very intelligent and most intelligent players ( because lets be honest. There arent alot of them) usually continue to improve to the point of a solid rotational player or more depending on thier physical skills. I thyink CJ's physical skills are VERY impressive. Combine that with his IQ and ability to continue to adapt as he learns the game more and I think at the very least, he is the leagues next Jamal Crawford, but I think he is gonna go further. I think him and Dame learn some D together and create the next decades elite duo.
Call me a homer. The chips are laid out for this to happen. I only see injuries ( I just knocked on wood. seriously.) or trades preventing this. IF this starts to happen, it will only benefit Leonards game as he post up at the three because now both Dame and CJ can create thier own shot. Add Plumlee and Davis to provide quality screens and crash the boards.
This team is built for CJ and Meyers to succeed next to Dame, when you start to look at it, with some quality potentials also scattered through the lineup.

Im gonna change my profile pick though... cause I think I look kinda like a homer...

 

[oldmangrouch]

In what sense did I generalize too much? Lots of young guys flash potential and never put it together consistently (few actually manage it). I wanted to know what makes CJ and Meyers so special compared to all of those other young "promising" prospects that play around the league - aside from "because I believe really hard," or "because they play for the Blazers."

Exhibit A: Rudy Fernandez. Got everyone excited as a rookie and spent the rest of his time in Portland proving how badly he could disappoint us.

 

[Wizard Mentor]

Exhibit A: Rudy Fernandez. Got everyone excited as a rookie and spent the rest of his time in Portland proving how badly he could disappoint us.

Rudy wasn't a lotto pick or close to it. gg.

 

[oldmangrouch]

Rudy wasn't a lotto pick or close to it. gg.

No offense, but I don't see the relevance.

Rudy's rookie season showed more sustained success than we have seen from CJ or Leonard. If an entire season can be a mirage - a few good games certainly can be!

I wish the best for Cj and Leonard (and Vonleh, Harkless, etc). I will believe it when I actually see it.

 

[Wizard Mentor]

No offense, but I don't see the relevance.

Rudy's rookie season showed more sustained success than we have seen from CJ or Leonard. If an entire season can be a mirage - a few good games certainly can be!

I wish the best for Cj and Leonard (and Vonleh, Harkless, etc). I will believe it when I actually see it.

OK, then the obvious retort then is Exhibit B: LBJ. Exhibit C: Damian Lillard....
I was and am unimpressed with your Exhibit A.

That being said, I'm not all in on the notion that they're going to improve a lot. I would say it like this:
I wish the best for Cj and Leonard (and Vonleh, Harkless, etc). I will remain cautiously optimistic until I actually see it.

 

[Orion Bailey]

Exhibit A: Rudy Fernandez. Got everyone excited as a rookie and spent the rest of his time in Portland proving how badly he could disappoint us.

Difference. Rudy. Rookie. CY and Meyers going into 3rd and 4th years.
Already noted as the years most guys who figure it out and break out do so.
Rudy, came out hot from the start and basically was what he was for a bit, then declined. Plus, Rudy was no where near as athletic as CJ. Athletic players have a much higher percentage of improving their game over those that are unorthodox and one dimensional, kind of like Rudy.

Oh yeah, and then there's this...

Rudy wasn't a lotto pick or close to it. gg.

Look, there are plenty of players in the NBA that can back up both sides of this debate.
I like what I saw. I think they will improve upon it and I think their expectation to do so is more than that of most players in similar situations around the league. Even Velavadova, who made maybe the largest impact in the playoffs for an unknown.
Again, we will have to agree to disagree.

 

[Hobbesarable]

OK, then the obvious retort then is Exhibit B: LBJ. Exhibit C: Damian Lillard....
I was and am unimpressed with your Exhibit A.

That being said, I'm not all in on the notion that they're going to improve a lot. I would say it like this:
I wish the best for Cj and Leonard (and Vonleh, Harkless, etc). I will remain cautiously optimistic until I actually see it.

CJ should improve pretty well with his offensive abilities and BBIQ.

I'm on the fence when it comes to Meyers. I will definitely need to see a full season from him. See how he reacts with defenders focusing on him during the game. I'm also hoping he'll surprise me with improved defensive awareness.

 

[riverman]

Easiest $100 I'll earn from wearing a thong

FIFY

 

[riverman]

Did Meyers' and CJ's contributions "tilt the court," so to speak? If they were breaking down Memphis' defense wouldn't you expect that to have had a different effect on their teammates or is it maybe more likely that Memphis said, "We can live with anybody but Lillard and Aldridge taking over."

Really good players, playing impact basketball create holes in a defense which in turn creates opportunities for their teammates. The fact that those holes never materialized and those opportunities never presented themselves is telling I think. In the end, even with Meyers and CJ having a good showing in the series, it had no impact on the outcomes of the games - huge blowouts, the Blazers always looked helter skelter, and they weren't even really competitive.

I'm not saying they aren't capable of having breakout years, I'm just saying I don't think the Memphis series is all that valuable for predicting future success (for a variety of reasons).

It's highly possible Meyers and CJ had their Linsanity moment against Memphis but they haven't done anything yet...it's yet to be seen if they can build on it or how they respond to defenses actually scouting them for a change. There's no doubt the talent is there

 

[Denny Crane]

Last season, the only teams to win less than 31:

East
Philly
Knicks
Orlando

West
Denver (won 30)
Minnesota
Sacramento
L*kers

Lillard makes the Blazers better than most of those teams.

Some of those teams have impressive talent (Orlando, for example), but don't play well as a team (chemistry) to win.

31 seems doable, IMO. I assume no chemistry issues and good coaching.

 

[PCmor7]

ESPN is a Blazers homer.

 

[jlprk]

I predict over 31, but I'm a critic, not a homer. I think you homers overrate our returning players (especially foul-prone, gimmick shooter Leonard). It's our new players who will get us the 35 wins.

 

[UncleCliffy'sDaddy]

I predict over 31, but I'm a critic, not a homer. I think you homers overrate our returning players (especially foul-prone, gimmick shooter Leonard). It's our new players who will get us the 35 wins.

Now that's an interesting take on Leonard. I hope like hell you're wrong but I can see where you're coming from.....

 

[jlprk]

The story that will engage our interest will be the new frontline guys, not the same-o same-o from Lillard, McCollum, Crabbe, and Leonard.

I like annual roster changes. And a new coach and GM about every 3 years.

 

[UncleCliffy'sDaddy]

The story that will engage our interest will be the new frontline guys, not the same-o same-o from Lillard, McCollum, Crabbe, and Leonard.

I like annual roster changes. And a new coach and GM about every 3 years.

I agree on annual bottom 8 roster changes though, apropo nothing, I tend to think Crabbe is overrated....

 

[riverman]

It's highly possible Meyers and CJ had their Linsanity moment against Memphis but they haven't done anything yet...it's yet to be seen if they can build on it or how they respond to defenses actually scouting them for a change. There's no doubt the talent is there

I predict over 31, but I'm a critic, not a homer. I think you homers overrate our returning players (especially foul-prone, gimmick shooter Leonard). It's our new players who will get us the 35 wins.

Leonard actually learned to stay on the court last season, he made a huge leap in staying out of foul trouble and improved defensively.

 

[riverman]

The story that will engage our interest will be the new frontline guys, not the same-o same-o from Lillard, McCollum, Crabbe, and Leonard.

I like annual roster changes. And a new coach and GM about every 3 years.

You must have been thrilled when the Sonics moved to OKC and the Grizzlies moved to Memphis...actually Charlotte would be ideal for a fan of coach swapping and roster swapping...even name swapping

 

[riverman]

Wouldn't the opposite of homer be homeless?

 

[UncleCliffy'sDaddy]

Wouldn't the opposite of homer be homeless?

Homerless......doh!!

 

[oldmangrouch]

Wouldn't the opposite of homer be homeless?

Roadster?

 

[ebott]

What's your definition of good? CJ, Meyers, Plumlee, Davis, Aminu, Dame, and Henderson are all good pieces in my eyes. And those who were average will likely improve.

Don't put Dame on a list with those guys. It's rude.

good = winning games

All those guys might be decent players in a couple years and we'll be a winning team. Right now they're not. We need two more guys as good as Dame if we're ever going to be a contender. Nobody on that list is gonna do that and we don't get free agents. So our only hope is that we hit the lottery the next two years and get guys as good as Dame. So I don't want them to win games. I want them to spend the next two seasons losing all 82 games by 1 point.

 

[riverman]

Don't put Dame on a list with those guys. It's rude.

good = winning games

All those guys might be decent players in a couple years and we'll be a winning team. Right now they're not. We need two more guys as good as Dame if we're ever going to be a contender. Nobody on that list is gonna do that and we don't get free agents. So our only hope is that we hit the lottery the next two years and get guys as good as Dame. So I don't want them to win games. I want them to spend the next two seasons losing all 82 games by 1 point.

but really we don't know what these guys are, so to project there aren't 2 guys playing at Dame's level this season isn't a factor yet. I want balance on both sides of the court and 6-7 players in double digits every game..make the playoffs, tweak the roster at the deadline a bit, next season have more chemistry, deeper playoff run, 3rd year, contender..I don't trust the draft like most fans..you use the draft but don't build around it

 

[BonesJones]

Don't put Dame on a list with those guys. It's rude.

You're saying I shouldn't put Dame on the "Good Pieces" list?.....

good = winning games

All those guys might be decent players in a couple years and we'll be a winning team. Right now they're not. We need two more guys as good as Dame if we're ever going to be a contender. Nobody on that list is gonna do that and we don't get free agents. So our only hope is that we hit the lottery the next two years and get guys as good as Dame. So I don't want them to win games. I want them to spend the next two seasons losing all 82 games by 1 point.

You're assuming I said those pieces would make us a contender...

CJ and Meyers were the reason we won game 4. And helped us win a few more, all while playing limited minutes. Their role has expanded. They'll be better, so it's foolish to say they won't help us win games.

Davis averaged something like 15 and 12 per 36 and is a great defender. Those guys make big impacts in games.

Plumlee was a 15 and 10 guy, and having an athlete like that in the pick and roll with Dame is lethel. It makes Dames hob easier at getting us good looks. The more good looks you get, the more games you'll win.

Aminu helped Dallas win a game in the playoffs. His energy is contagious, his defense is top notch, and he's a high motor athlete who rebounds like a beast. A good piece for sure.

Hendersons a 15 or 16ppg per 36 with solid defense and veteran leadership. He's had great offensive games that have won Charlotte games in his 6 year career.

 

[ebott]

You're saying I shouldn't put Dame on the "Good Pieces" list?.....

Dame is not a "Good Piece." Dame is an all-star. Putting him on a list with guys that haven't proven they're legit NBA players yet is disrespectful.

You're assuming I said those pieces would make us a contender...

CJ and Meyers were the reason we won game 4. And helped us win a few more, all while playing limited minutes. Their role has expanded. They'll be better, so it's foolish to say they won't help us win games.

Davis averaged something like 15 and 12 per 36 and is a great defender. Those guys make big impacts in games.

Plumlee was a 15 and 10 guy, and having an athlete like that in the pick and roll with Dame is lethel. It makes Dames hob easier at getting us good looks. The more good looks you get, the more games you'll win.

Aminu helped Dallas win a game in the playoffs. His energy is contagious, his defense is top notch, and he's a high motor athlete who rebounds like a beast. A good piece for sure.

Hendersons a 15 or 16ppg per 36 with solid defense and veteran leadership. He's had great offensive games that have won Charlotte games in his 6 year career.

With the exception of Davis all of those players had much better players to attract the attention of the opposing team's offense. A lot of players tend to produce a lot more when they're on the floor with better players. There's a TON of players that are mediocre/promising on teams with good players and then sign with a bad team and they're a big disappointment.

But maybe you're right and all of those players will be just as productive in more minutes here as they were on better teams. I really hope you're wrong. Because if those guys turn out to be useful enough that we end up doing so well it takes us to the end of the lottery or *shutter* we make the playoffs and lose our draft pick we're gonna be doomed to mediocrity for a long time and we'll be reliving this off-season in six years when Damian leaves.

 

[Trackjack]

Dame is not a "Good Piece." Dame is an all-star. Putting him on a list with guys that haven't proven they're legit NBA players yet is disrespectful.



With the exception of Davis all of those players had much better players to attract the attention of the opposing team's offense. A lot of players tend to produce a lot more when they're on the floor with better players. There's a TON of players that are mediocre/promising on teams with good players and then sign with a bad team and they're a big disappointment.

But maybe you're right and all of those players will be just as productive in more minutes here as they were on better teams. I really hope you're wrong. Because if those guys turn out to be useful enough that we end up doing so well it takes us to the end of the lottery or *shutter* we make the playoffs and lose our draft pick we're gonna be doomed to mediocrity for a long time and we'll be reliving this off-season in six years when Damian leaves.

Why would we be doom it tell we got good young team that made the playoff so why would we another young player when we got a whole team of young player.

 

[BonesJones]

Dame is not a "Good Piece." Dame is an all-star. Putting him on a list with guys that haven't proven they're legit NBA players yet is disrespectful.

HAH I never said Dame wasnt at a higher level...
A good piece wins you games
Dame certainly wins games

With the exception of Davis all of those players had much better players to attract the attention of the opposing team's offense. A lot of players tend to produce a lot more when they're on the floor with better players. There's a TON of players that are mediocre/promising on teams with good players and then sign with a bad team and they're a big disappointment.

But maybe you're right and all of those players will be just as productive in more minutes here as they were on better teams. I really hope you're wrong. Because if those guys turn out to be useful enough that we end up doing so well it takes us to the end of the lottery or *shutter* we make the playoffs and lose our draft pick we're gonna be doomed to mediocrity for a long time and we'll be reliving this off-season in six years when Damian leaves.

Every player plays better with good players around them. That's basic basketball. The thing is these guys aren't coming from great teams as it is anyway. You're completely overanalyzing the situation.

If we make the playoffs then we're fewer pieces away from contending, so we wouldn't need the pick (especially in a shallow draft). If we make the playoffs with a cheap and young group like this will attract a solid free agent or two, and our players trade values will be a lot higher. It's not like theyre all 29 and overpaid.