Fan Fest 2025 Official Thread

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in
THE HCP said:
I pray that our starting center can put up “hollow” stats like DA did.
Click to expand...
Jabari Walker was superior per minute and he couldn't even get a vet min deal. He's a two way player.

Clingan was flat out better last season than Ayton and directly led the Blazers to more wins.

Weren't you the one saying all of last season that Ant was the Blazers best player? Personally I care about players helping the team win. Not collect empty stats.
 
THE HCP said:
I pray that our starting center can put up “hollow” stats like DA did.
Click to expand...

I'd rather he put up better effort and not randomly disappear from the game. Plus, DC was a better rebounder, better defender and blocked 3x as many shots (as a rookie who got winded getting off the bench) than DA was per 36.

Also, DC got the FT line at a higher clip than DA did, and again, that was as a rookie who couldn't play 12 minutes without looking like he was about to pass out.

Let's not act like DA was putting up superstar #'s.
 
SharpesTriumph said:
Weren't you the one saying all of last season that Ant was the Blazers best player? Personally I care about players helping the team win. Not collect empty stats.
Click to expand...
Well won more games last year BECAUSE of Ant, not in spite of.
 
THE HCP said:
I pray that our starting center can put up “hollow” stats like DA did.
Click to expand...

You really should not. We already have seen that DC, as a rookie had a higher WS and WS/48 (contributed more to winning, and done it more efficiently than DA). Even in the offensive category where DC is not great, his TS% was pretty much identical to DA (this tells you that even if DC does not become better in his 2nd year on offense, just by getting the same volume of shots as DA did, he will give you the same stats.

I know that this is the stock answer, but it really does not apply here even a little bit.

Give DC the same 14 FGA per 36 that DA got instead of the 9 he got last year - and these low-level, raw stats you pray for are there...

That's just a bad take. Simple as that.
 
THE HCP said:
Well won more games last year BECAUSE of Ant, not in spite of.
Click to expand...

Ant's WS/48 was 9th on the team last year. His WS was #3 - but that was because CB played him so much. The Blazers last year won as much as they won mostly because of Deni, Tou and to a lesser extent DC.

The Blazers problem last year was that Matisse was the only guard on the roster that was more efficient than Ant in the WS/48 department (which is probably why CB played him as much as he did).

Now, if Shae and Scoot take only a small improvement, they will give you the same WS/48 as Ant did, if one of them pop, the Blazers are much better (hoping it's Shae's year).

FWIW, Jrue, in a down-year, had a much much higher WS/48 than Ant had last year, so expect the Blazers efficiency at guard to go up even if Scoot and Shae do not take the uptick we all hope for.
 
THE HCP said:
The you have absolutely NO reason to sweat this season.
Click to expand...
I have zero concerns about the wins we could not have because Ayton is gone. Zero.

Even worse case unlikely scenario where we lose 10 games more than expected from shit center play - I'd happily prefer that outcome as I don't have to watch the painful crap defense we've seen from Ayton over the last two years.

He's right there with Raymond Felton and Damon Stoudamire as Blazers I most despise watching play the NBA game.

If we can get anything at all from Clingan or Yang or whoever sure that's a bonus. But even getting zero's from all of them - Ayton leaving is a big win.
 
andalusian said:
Ant's WS/48 was 9th on the team last year. His WS was #3 - but that was because CB played him so much. The Blazers last year won as much as they won mostly because of Deni, Tou and to a lesser extent DC.

The Blazers problem last year was that Matisse was the only guard on the roster that was more efficient than Ant in the WS/48 department (which is probably why CB played him as much as he did).

Now, if Shae and Scoot take only a small improvement, they will give you the same WS/48 as Ant did, if one of them pop, the Blazers are much better (hoping it's Shae's year).

FWIW, Jrue, in a down-year, had a much much higher WS/48 than Ant had last year, so expect the Blazers efficiency at guard to go up even if Scoot and Shae do not take the uptick we all hope for.
Click to expand...
HCP is like a 2002 Knicks executive in that he only looks at PPG in judging how good players are.
 
THE HCP said:
Well that clearly indicates that stat doesn’t mean shit. Talent does.
Click to expand...

This is actually false and that is not a matter of opinion. For a highlights video guy, you don't know a lot about the actual game and team, do you?
 
THE HCP said:
Well won more games last year BECAUSE of Ant, not in spite of.
Click to expand...

Again, same response:

This is actually false and that is not a matter of opinion. For a highlights video guy, you don't know a lot about the actual game and team, do you?
 
Domihatin said:
...you don't know a lot about the actual game and team, do you?
Click to expand...
That's actually the main reason I visit this forum. Compared to most people, I don't know a lot about basketball. But the members of this forum make me look like a basketball genius.
upload_2025-10-6_15-36-46.png
@THE HCP
 

Attachments

  • upload_2025-10-6_15-36-46.png
    upload_2025-10-6_15-36-46.png
    179.1 KB · Views: 88
While I have nothing against Ant it’s pretty telling story that no one wanted to trade for him. Boston desperately needed to dump salary and asked us to throw in a 2nd round draft pick. While I love that we have Jrue, he’s on tail end of career with big contract.

As soon as Boston got Ant they were looking to trade him. Again nothing against Ant I really like the kid but he was good at one thing and one thing only, scoring. I think Sharpe can easily replace his scoring and clutch scoring. Believe sharpe was something like top 8 in clutch moments last year.
 
THE HCP said:
Well won more games last year BECAUSE of Ant, not in spite of.
Click to expand...
It's just a stat and stats can be misleading but Ant played in 28 of our wins and 42 of our losses last season... that makes our win percentage with Ant 40%.

The team had 36 wins and 46 losses overall for a win percentage of 43.9%.

That means we went 8 and 4 in games without Ant. That's a win percentage without Ant of 66.6%

The games without Ant should be easy to breakdown:

A win against the Wolves on 11/13
A win against the Hawks on 11/17
A loss against the Thunder on 11/20
A win against the Bulls on 1/19 *
A win against the Nuggets 3/21

Ant sat all of April

A win against the Hawks 4/1
A win against the Raptors 4/3
A loss against the Bulls 4/4
A win against the Spurs 4/6
A loss against the Jazz 4/9
A loss against the Warriors 4/11
A win against the Lakers 4/13

I went back and looked at the games without Ant and if Ayton played in them... if Ayton played I put an * on that game because I know you think we'll miss Ayton too and a lot of people on here seem to think both DA and Ant leaving are addition by subtraction.

One of the wins without Ant was a game Ayton played in and none of the losses. That's still 7-4 without Ant or Ayton with a win percentage of 63.6%. The combined win percentage of the teams we played without both guys was 51.6% so obviously a little better than the league average but a balanced sample size. That's just a look at things, it wasn't meant to be an argument one way or the other.

TLDR 40% win percentage with Ant, 66.6% without him.
 
42N8Bounce said:
That's actually the main reason I visit this forum. Compared to most people, I don't know a lot about basketball. But the members of this forum make me look like a basketball genius.
View attachment 75562
@THE HCP
Click to expand...

Brilliant. Appreciate your take. It's very true. I just can't stand the jerky, pompous (which is especially ridiculous because the ones acting pompous aren't particularly intelligent and they lack a sense of humor or it's very limited) guys here.
 
Last edited:
Domihatin said:
Brilliant. Appreciate your take. It's very true. I just can't stand the jerky, pompous (which is especially ridiculous because the ones acting acting pompous aren't particularly intelligent and they lack a sense of humor or it's very limited) guys here.
Click to expand...

Reginald, please show this young man the door. And should he return, have my yardmen give him the thrashing he so richly deserves!

barfo
 
andalusian said:
Ant's WS/48 was 9th on the team last year. His WS was #3 - but that was because CB played him so much. The Blazers last year won as much as they won mostly because of Deni, Tou and to a lesser extent DC.

The Blazers problem last year was that Matisse was the only guard on the roster that was more efficient than Ant in the WS/48 department (which is probably why CB played him as much as he did).

Now, if Shae and Scoot take only a small improvement, they will give you the same WS/48 as Ant did, if one of them pop, the Blazers are much better (hoping it's Shae's year).

FWIW, Jrue, in a down-year, had a much much higher WS/48 than Ant had last year, so expect the Blazers efficiency at guard to go up even if Scoot and Shae do not take the uptick we all hope for.
Click to expand...
This is all hearsay!
 
barfo said:
Reginald, please show this young man the door. And should he return, have my yardmen give him the thrashing he so richly deserves!

barfo
Click to expand...
Get him a mirror ROFL
 
Last edited:
Domihatin said:
Brilliant. Appreciate your take. It's very true. I just can't stand the jerky, pompous (which is especially ridiculous because the ones acting pompous aren't particularly intelligent and they lack a sense of humor or it's very limited) guys here.
Click to expand...

so does this mean I am one of the few that actually CAN act pompous?
 
blazerkor said:
It's just a stat and stats can be misleading but Ant played in 28 of our wins and 42 of our losses last season... that makes our win percentage with Ant 40%.

The team had 36 wins and 46 losses overall for a win percentage of 43.9%.

That means we went 8 and 4 in games without Ant. That's a win percentage without Ant of 66.6%

The games without Ant should be easy to breakdown:

A win against the Wolves on 11/13
A win against the Hawks on 11/17
A loss against the Thunder on 11/20
A win against the Bulls on 1/19 *
A win against the Nuggets 3/21

Ant sat all of April

A win against the Hawks 4/1
A win against the Raptors 4/3
A loss against the Bulls 4/4
A win against the Spurs 4/6
A loss against the Jazz 4/9
A loss against the Warriors 4/11
A win against the Lakers 4/13

I went back and looked at the games without Ant and if Ayton played in them... if Ayton played I put an * on that game because I know you think we'll miss Ayton too and a lot of people on here seem to think both DA and Ant leaving are addition by subtraction.

One of the wins without Ant was a game Ayton played in and none of the losses. That's still 7-4 without Ant or Ayton with a win percentage of 63.6%. The combined win percentage of the teams we played without both guys was 51.6% so obviously a little better than the league average but a balanced sample size. That's just a look at things, it wasn't meant to be an argument one way or the other.

TLDR 40% win percentage with Ant, 66.6% without him.
Click to expand...
When the stats confirm what the eye can see, then that's a pretty good argument that can hold water. Ant is just simply not a player that is going to be on many winning teams. While above average on offense, he's a huge liability on defense and that leads him to be a negative player over all. There is a reason Boston (to my knowledge) never had a press conference to announce him coming on board and by all rumors were shopping him the minute after they traded for him. I'm sure he's a nice guy, but his skill set is easily replaceable and could very well be addition by subtraction because of his abysmal defense.
 
THE HCP said:
That was Michael Jordan‘s rule. And if it’s good enough for MJ, it’s good enough for me
Click to expand...

it's a stupid 'rule'...it's basically meaningless.

all 15 Blazers who played more than 200 minutes last season had more points than shots. And Portland was one of the worst shooting teams in the league. They were 26th in FG%; 26th in 3ptFG%; 24th in 2ptFG%; 26th in FT%; 25th in eFG%; 23rd in TS%....they sucked

The player who came closest to the 1:1 mark was Kris Murray at 1.03

points/shot:

Avdija 1.44
Walker 1.37
Timelord 1.32
Clingan 1.31
Thybulle 1.27
Camara 1.23
Ayton 1.23
Scoot 1.22
Sharpe 1.21
Simons 1.20
Grant 1.18
Reath 1.17
Banton 1.10
Rupert 1.09
Murray 1.03

(for his career, Dame is at 1.364; Avdija 1.298)

I'd guess that over 95% of NBA rotation players had more points than shots. Probably 80-85% of all NBA players did the same. It's a useless standard
 
THE HCP said:
That was Michael Jordan‘s rule. And if it’s good enough for MJ, it’s good enough for me
Click to expand...
It’s the first thing I look at when I look at the box score.
After that I look at hustle stats.
The rest to me is pure fantasy stuff.
 
wizenheimer said:
it's a stupid 'rule'...it's basically meaningless.

all 15 Blazers who played more than 200 minutes last season had more points than shots. And Portland was one of the worst shooting teams in the league. They were 26th in FG%; 26th in 3ptFG%; 24th in 2ptFG%; 26th in FT%; 25th in eFG%; 23rd in TS%....they sucked

The player who came closest to the 1:1 mark was Kris Murray at 1.03

points/shot:

Avdija 1.44
Walker 1.37
Timelord 1.32
Clingan 1.31
Thybulle 1.27
Camara 1.23
Ayton 1.23
Scoot 1.22
Sharpe 1.21
Simons 1.20
Grant 1.18
Reath 1.17
Banton 1.10
Rupert 1.09
Murray 1.03

(for his career, Dame is at 1.364; Avdija 1.298)

I'd guess that over 95% of NBA rotation players had more points than shots. Probably 80-85% of all NBA players did the same. It's a useless standard
Click to expand...

It would be better to acknowledge that a 20 point on 19 shots is much worse than 20 points on 14 shots.
You also are not looking at players that get 6 points on 4 shots.
The way you interpret things matters here.
When talking about the main scoring threat or a scrub in garbage time might make a difference.
Obviously MJ was doubled nearly every night.
Lillard the same.
Those players deal with a total different metric so that kind of shoots your whole premise down.

I mean not one player on the Blazers roster last year was ever doubled or considered a primary threat more than a few times a game.
 
kjironman1 said:
It would be better to acknowledge that a 20 point on 19 shots is much worse than 20 points on 14 shots.
You also are not looking at players that get 6 points on 4 shots.
The way you interpret things matters here.
When talking about the main scoring threat or a scrub in garbage time might make a difference.
Obviously MJ was doubled nearly every night.
Lillard the same.
Those players deal with a total different metric so that kind of shoots your whole premise down.

I mean not one player on the Blazers roster last year was ever doubled or considered a primary threat more than a few times a game.
Click to expand...

I don't know what you think "my premise" was. And it wasn't my premise; I didn't bring it up, I just expanded on it. The fact that all 15 blazers last season with over 200 minutes had more points than shots sure indicates that that 'more-points-than-shots' is a useless standard. Kris Murray had more points than shots; so did Deni, but they sure weren't equal as scorers

I do think points per shot is a very valid gauge of scoring skills. It isn't the only one, but it's a primary gauge

obviously, like a lot of 'advanced' stats there is context. Volume is part of context. PER is a very good gauge of overall impact, but it needs to be layered. You shouldn't take much from PER when you are comparing a 34 minute/game starter to a 19 minute/game backup. Same for points/shot. And yes, part of the context needs to be the resistance each player faced, and when
 
1 Eye Jack said:
While I have nothing against Ant it’s pretty telling story that no one wanted to trade for him. Boston desperately needed to dump salary and asked us to throw in a 2nd round draft pick. While I love that we have Jrue, he’s on tail end of career with big contract.

As soon as Boston got Ant they were looking to trade him. Again nothing against Ant I really like the kid but he was good at one thing and one thing only, scoring. I think Sharpe can easily replace his scoring and clutch scoring. Believe sharpe was something like top 8 in clutch moments last year.
Click to expand...
One dimensional scorers have no value in 2025. It used to be different. Nobody offered anything for Clarkson, CJ, Cam Thomas, Sexton, Poole, etc either.
 
andalusian said:
First, good job for using that word of the day calendar. Proud of you.
Second, Given that the formulas to calculate said stat and the data are publicly available, that's the wrong word to use here, but it's close. Keep working on it, I believe in you. ;)
Click to expand...
#SuperBAM
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top