Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Decades? We were out of the playoffs, which is the only place Olshey really gets us, for five seasons because of Nash's moves. Then everyone credits KP with Pattersons moves. That's when we drafted Roy and LA. Then KP drafted Oden. Then KP drafted Nic. Then we made the playoffs for three seasons while watching Oden and Roy's careers destroyed by injury. Cho didn't do shit on his one draft day because he really didn't have shit to do, then he pulled off one of the most gangster moves ever, stealing Wes from Utah and then made the Gerald Wallace trade mid season. So Cho actually did a great job.I don't want to be Rich Cho'd (chode haha) or John Nash'd or Steve Patterson'd again.
These guys set the franchise back decades.
I agree there doesn't seem to be any correlation; but has any team that was last in assists ever won the championship?I love the assist data set. It's been proven to have near zero correlation with winning basketball.
We could find large data sets where Portland is top 2, like 3 pointers made. But what good is that data if it doesnt' correlate to wins? If you have a stat where Portland is 29th in league that also has a strong correlation to wins, please provide it. I've asked you for this many times, but you tend to deflect, go to "eye tests" or provide a tiny data set.
100% believe what you're saying as the data I've seen says there is a correlation. Curious what you mean by strong correlation though. Did you take a rank range (top 10, top 5) and match it against champions? Look at all the champions defensive rating and find the mean/median? Would love to see how that spreads out to finals teams, conference finals teams, playoff teams, etc.
I'll have to find the most recent data set I saw, but it did have a stronger (not strong) correlation to offensive rating and wins (not championships) than defensive rating did. The weighted combination true shooting percentage, rebound rate, turnover rate, and free throw rate seem to give you by far the highest correlation.
What I'm seeing is... "Stotts is less mediocre" "No Olshey is less mediocre" Who the fuck cares? They are both mediocre and our franchise should try and get better. We might not get better but we have to try. If you consistently come in right in the middle of the pack for nine years, you have to change it up. If either guy wanted to save their job they should have had the other fired sooner.
.
I don't want to be Rich Cho'd (chode haha) or John Nash'd or Steve Patterson'd again.
These guys set the franchise back decades.
but here's another very real factor in my view: the NBA has changed drastically over the last 10 years. Would the strengths of a champion 18 years ago really apply to how the NBA is played today?
I think that's a really good question. With the rise of the 3-point shot and near-death of the mid-range game, defenses certainly are different than they used to be. It seems like having the ability to switch and rotate quickly is way more paramount than it used to be. The extended range of guys like Dame and Curry also impacts how much court defenses have to cover. I'm not sure that it's possible to defend guys like them with single coverage. None of that was true ten years ago.
I'm definitely in favor of Olshey being fired....asap. I'm also fine with Stotts following Olshey out the door
but I would not argue that either is mediocre. They both have strengths and qualities easy to gauge. In Olshey's case, I think he has some fatal flaws as a GM that overwhelm his strengths. He has stubbornly driven the Blazers into a cul-de-sac. It's a nice neighborhood, but it's not an elite neighborhood. That is a couple of exits down the block. Unfortunately, the object of the game is to buy the best house in that elite neighborhood, yet Olshey keeps doubling down on the same damn address in the cul-de-sac in the same less-than-elite neighborhood, and there's a big treadmill in the driveway the Blazers are stuck on. And that's been going on for 9 years
it's well past time to put the car in reverse and get out of the cul-de-sac, and Stotts was operating the GPS that put Portland into that cul-de-sac. So yeah, new driver and new navigator. Yeeeesh, I'm tired of that analogy
I'm actually to the point of blaming Seattle for some of this. Nobody seems accountable
maybe defenses have to start with the new NBA in mind. Just spitballing it seems a good modern defense would need good switchable perimeter defenders (three point line) and some solid rim protection and defensive rebounding.
looking at the Lakers last season, they had Lebron, Caldwell-Pope, Danny Green, Avery Bradley, Rajon Rondo and Alex Caruso to defend the perimeter. And they had AD, McGee, and Dwight Howard to patrol the paint.
that's 9 players in the rotation who are solid to very good on defense. Looking at the numbers, the Lakers were 3rd in defensive rating; 7th in opponents eFG%; 7th in defensive rebound rate; 2nd in defensive rebounds/game; 3rd in opponent turnover rate; 7th in opponent 3pfFG%; 8th in opponent 2ptFG%; first in blocks; 5th in steals; 7th in opponent assists. Essentially, they were an aggregate top-5 in a whole bunch of defensive gauges
I look at their perimeter rotation last year, and the half-dozen main rotation player who were all solid to good on defense; then I think of Dame, CJ, Trent, Hood, and Simons. There's just no way Portland can have a perimeter defense that can push the team into elite status. RoCo and Jones can only cover so much ground. Then add almost no rim protection and weak defensive rebounding to the mix. Portland at 21-14 has vastly over-achieved their projection. Pythagorean wins and expected wins formulas have Portland at 4-5 fewer wins then they have. Same for their negative ratings and point differentials
compare Portland's defensive numbers this season to Lakers last year: Blazers are 28th in defensive rating; 22nd in opponent eFG%; 27th in defensive rebound rate; 26th in opponent turnover rate; 8th in opponent 3ptFG%; 24th in opponents 2ptFG%; 18th in steals. The aggregate shows them somewhere in the bottom-6 or 7 teams in the league. They've stayed afloat because of Dame's clutch performances, offensive efficiency and a relatively easy schedule. They will really need to improve in some of these defensive areas because their 2nd half schedule is much more difficult
I don't have time to go through it all so I'll just do the last 10 years but here are the regular season defensive ratings of the conference finals teams (Champ listed first, runner up second):100% believe what you're saying as the data I've seen says there is a correlation. Curious what you mean by strong correlation though. Did you take a rank range (top 10, top 5) and match it against champions? Look at all the champions defensive rating and find the mean/median? Would love to see how that spreads out to finals teams, conference finals teams, playoff teams, etc.
I'll have to find the most recent data set I saw, but it did have a stronger (not strong) correlation to offensive rating and wins (not championships) than defensive rating did. The weighted combination true shooting percentage, rebound rate, turnover rate, and free throw rate seem to give you by far the highest correlation.
I think like anything else in life, or basketball, things adapt and evolve. Just like the 3 pt shot is what all NBA offenses seem to be revolving around, I expect defense to catch up. If you are defending in this sport, seems logical the teams that defend the primary source of points the best, will win. Of course, you will open up other avenues for points - going to the rim or even back to a midrange game again. Who knows. But sitting there and letting teams launch threes over and over seems risky. Unless you are a team with the absolute best three point shooters and plan on winning that contest every night.In the words of Gary Payton...you can't play defense in the modern game....you'll foul out in a few minutes...refs don't let players bang anymore or really get physical...the game isn't called like it used to be by a long stretch.
I don't have time to go through it all so I'll just do the last 10 years but here are the regular season defensive ratings of the conference finals teams (Champ listed first, runner up second):
2020: Lakers 3rd/Heat 9th/Nuggets 11th/Celtics 5th
2019: Raptors 5th/Warriors 13th/Blazers 16th/Bucks 1st
2018: Warriors 11th/Cavs 29th/Celtics 1st/Rockets 6th
2017: Warriors 2nd/Cavs 21st/Spurs 1st/Celtics 13th
2016: Cavs 10th/Warriors 5th/Thunder 13th/Raptors 11th
2015: Warriors 1st/Cavs 18th/Rockets 8th/Hawks 6th
2014: Spurs 3rd/Heat 11th/Pacers 1st/ Thunder 6th
2013: Heat 9th/Spurs 3rd/Pacers 1st/Grizzlies 2nd
2012: Heat 4th/Thunder 11th/Celtics 1st/Spurs 10th
2011: Mavericks 8th/Heat 5th/Bulls 1st/Thunder 15th
So the worst defensive ranking to win a title is 11th (I believe that is the worst all-time as well if we continue to go back). With the exception of the Cavs runs through the weak East the worst defensive ranking for a Finals team was 13th. Also important to note that the one year the Cavs beat the Warriors was their only good defensive year and their worst year most people thought they were kind of coasting through the regular season and changed their roster up some at the deadline. Also interesting that outside of that Cavs team the Blazers have the worst defensive rating of any conference finals team over the last 10 years. I don't know what kind of correlation you're looking for but it's pretty apparent to me that being near the bottom of the league in defense is not a recipe for making it far in the playoffs.
As far as assists go, the Heat and Thunder in 2012 were both bad in assists but since that series no finals team has been worse than 19th in the league in assists per game.
I don't think top-5 is reasonable, but certainly middle of the pack. I also don't believe the offense would look any worse with any coach. Anyone can throw the ball out there and run the most ISO's and 4th most PnR's in the league while shooting the most contested shots.All good stuff!
Now that leads to the main question: What is the cause for our bad defense? Why have they been as high as 8th and as low as 29th? We know the main constants are Stotts, Lillard, and CJ. I would be interested to see if we got a new coach if we would become a top 5 defense while maintaining our offensive rating. That would be best case scenario for sure!
I think most of us know, this isn't a championship roster, defense included.
All good stuff!
Now that leads to the main question: What is the cause for our bad defense? Why have they been as high as 8th and as low as 29th? We know the main constants are Stotts, Lillard, and CJ.
"This game is and has always been about scoring buckets". Every great player and coach has said that.I just looked up All NBA defensive players going back 20 years and it's shocking how few 1st team defenders were bumped in the playoffs early and didn't win a ring....many of the best defenders year after year have not won anything....Rudy Gobert is an example...also on that list of defensively ranked teams in the playoffs....Memphis led the league for a long time as the best defensive team...no rings...zero..............intangibles....you can lose 82 games by 1 pt in overtime and be in the lottery but highly ranked defensively. We need to be a better defensive team but elite defenders don't always translate into championship winners. In the end, you win by outscoring the opponent in 4 qtrs period. How much you win by is irrelevant. To me the best example of defensive minded team that won a chip and made the finals multiple years was the Chauncey Billups Pistons. They were the team that says defense wins championships to me and there's a lot to learn from that team.
the current team has no chance to be top-10 in defense, and maybe 18th - 20th is about as high as we can expect. That team that finished 8th had Aminu and Harkless; RoCo and Jones are as good defensively but Aminu's superior defensive rebounding, might give that pair and edge. Dame/CJ are constants. But a Nurkic/Kanter rotation at C can never be as good defensively as Nurkic Davis. Where the comparison really breaks in favor of the past team is in the 2nd unit. Portland welded Davis and Zach together and they were solid defensively as a tandem. They also had Turner, Napier, Connaughton, and Vonleh (until traded) coming off the bench, That's 6 decent defenders in the 2nd unit. Meanwhile, the current team has Trent, Simons, Hood, & Melo coming off the bench. Three defensive sieves and one below average defender. Coupled with Dame/CJ starting that's always going to yield bad defense
I just looked up All NBA defensive players going back 20 years and it's shocking how few 1st team defenders were bumped in the playoffs early and didn't win a ring....many of the best defenders year after year have not won anything....Rudy Gobert is an example....also on that list of defensively ranked teams in the playoffs....Memphis led the league for a long time as the best defensive team...no rings...zero..............intangibles....you can lose 82 games by 1 pt in overtime and be in the lottery but highly ranked defensively. We need to be a better defensive team but elite defenders don't always translate into championship winners. In the end, you win by outscoring the opponent in 4 qtrs period. How much you win by is irrelevant.
"This game is and has always been about scoring buckets". Every great player and coach has said that.
Portland in my view is a contender......and it's fine if you want to disregard my opinion about a team like Memphis never having playoff success with a great defensive team...or first team defensive players who are ringless as well...as far as "we are talking about"......if it's a private conversation use pm....here, my opinion is part of the "we" equation.If Portland wants to be a contender
We have won more games locking down the 4th qtr and getting stops than we have chucking jumpers....what we have done is make game changing buckets when it counts...something great teams can do...turn it on and finish strong. Our 4th qtr game has been pretty impressive in wins.it has always been a race to the most buckets. But there are two ways to win the race: score a lot or keep the other guys from scoring a lot. Actually best plan is to score a lot AND keep the other guys from scoring a lot. That's where championships are made
Portland in my view is a contender......and it's fine if you want to disregard my opinion about a team like Memphis never having playoff success with a great defensive team...or first team defensive players who are ringless as well...as far as "we are talking about"......if it's a private conversation use pm....here, my opinion is part of the "we" equation.
We have won more games locking down the 4th qtr and getting stops than we have chucking jumpers....what we have done is make game changing buckets when it counts...something great teams can do...turn it on and finish strong. Our 4th qtr game has been pretty impressive in wins.
I'm actually not missing anything....I'm debating the point that elite defense translates to championship success and finals appearances.....I don't know what "dog bites man news means" Maybe a Sly reference? Some might say ratings and charts are dog sells ideas news. There's a point being missed here but it's not me missing it. "Almost always good" didn't sell me.you are really missing the point. It's not that good defensive teams can be average. That's dog-bites-man news. The point is that contenders are almost always good defensively. Both things are true
I'm actually not missing anything....I'm debating the point that elite defense translates to championship success and finals appearances
I have been supporting my view ....I read your charts and graphs....they say nothing about how the games are called, who the refs are....which games Donaghy betted on...etc...according to the topic the number 1 defense should win every year...championships are not achieved by formulas ...they are speckled with intangibles and teams ratings are affected by those things....getting calls. I agree with everyone that defense is important to wins....not as important as offensive exectution, but important....with the 3 pt shot the long rebound has changed defensive stats ...transition buckets are a big part of that ....players don't play half court sets like the old school teams..and the league is adapting to a changing game...it's fine to put your trust in those stats, it just isn't the bottom line as to success....there's luck involved as well....if Dame and CJ are so lazy and incapable of getting through a defender, they'd never score in the paint or blow by a defender....they do both those things and both guys are improved this season on that end of the ball...our best defense is usually in the 4th qtr....which is a good time to have it...as to repeating my mantra that's simple...Go Blazers!then support your argument. Just repeating your mantra isn't evidence
I've listed the last 20 NBA champions and 18 of 20 were top 10 in defense. About 9 or 10 were top-5. Last year, in the finals, it was #3 vs #11 and #3 won. The year before that it was #5 vs #13 and #5 won. The year before that, Golden State won with the 11th rated defense, and that was the only team to win without a top-10 defense in 19 years