FIX YOUR EFFIN DEFENSE TERRY!

[CupWizier]

Terry’s coaching style is based on having a top-5 offense and a mid-level defense. That’s where the Blazers were last year and probably would be this year if they'd had Nurk and Collins from the start. Is that style good enough to win a championship? I'd say that the offense would have to tick up to top 3 and the defense had better get closer to top 10.

Nurkic, Collins, Hood, Ariza and Trent earning a more prominent role next year should improve our defense as well as make us a much deeper team.

 

[Orion Bailey]

Nurkic, Collins, Hood, Ariza and Trent earning a more prominent role next year should improve our defense as well as make us a much deeper team.

bring em all back and let them gel.

great mix of vers, defenders, shooters, wing men.
I really like our squad when 100% healthy

 

[UKRAINEFAN]

Not complaining. Just pointing out it probably isn't the best idea to have CJ with a broken back, who is already not a great defender, defending the opponents leading scorer all game and especially on the last possession. Very happy LeVert missed.

CJ had a great game on the other end. It is really something that he is literally playing with a broken back to help the Blazers win. Very grateful!

I question our defense on the last play. They only needed two to win, and a three has less chance of going in than a two. Why would we want to risk going one on one against a really hot player? There must have one guy out there who was not a great shooter that we could have left to double team LeVert. Hell, I think LeVert would have been so surprised that we double teamed him that he might have thrown a bad pass out of it. There was just as good a chance that that ball went in the hoop as if it didn't ; so we basically took a chance on a coin flip.

 

[Labinot41]

I think the defense was def. a problem, but Brooklyn was shooting lights out all night. What was it over 50%? Yes some of that was because shots were incredibly good looks but Levert made plenty of tough shots. Portland, on the other hand, had a terrible shooting 3rd. And between Nurk and Zach they must have blown >5 layups.

Guys like Ariza, and even Hood, would have helped. Wenyen and Nas need minutes. Why not have them pick up a few fouls in 5 minutes? Better that than multiple starters playing with 5 down the stretch. Fouling is a major issue too. Dumb fouls, a lot of them. Why give Levert an and-one on a layup with time running out? Give him the fucking two and move on.

EVERY TEAM is shooting lights out against us, EVERY TEAM

 

[CupWizier]

I question our defense on the last play. They only needed two to win, and a three has less chance of going in than a two. Why would we want to risk going one on one against a really hot player? There must have one guy out there who was not a great shooter that we could have left to double team LeVert. Hell, I think LeVert would have been so surprised that we double teamed him that he might have thrown a bad pass out of it. There was just as good a chance that that ball went in the hoop as if it didn't ; so we basically took a chance on a coin flip.

And if we doubled and he finds the open man for a bucket how would you have liked that as Lavert is also a good passer. Also, like Hassan says, they got shooters. As it was, McCollum played good d and forced him into a tough shot. Hard to complain about the results.

 

[Labinot41]

 

[Tince]

Nurkic, Collins, Hood, Ariza and Trent earning a more prominent role next year should improve our defense as well as make us a much deeper team.

I agree that those guy healthy should improve (not sure if Hood will ever get back to 100%). Still, having Dame and CJ as the first line of defense is always going to create some sort of liability.

 

[Pinwheel1]

Interesting stat when you win 75% of your games during the same stretch.
Do you have the legs when it is needed most if you play tough D all game? The Blazers can be down 9 points with 6 minutes left and I still feel we are in the game.

Granted you want two-way players at every position, but I would be happy if we just had one "stopper" on the team (who can shoot) and 4 additional shooters. The NBA is all about the last few minutes. Shooters win games....but you need multiple ones on the court. We just need to play D in the last 6 minutes, but the lack of depth at the wings hurts.

 

[James lamphear]

McCollum played good defense on that last play. Give credit where credit is due. We win a huge game and all some of you posters can do is complain. That's why this forum can be such a downer at times.

Your right it is becoming a downer site but they don't wait after the game they do it the whole game. They go after certain players really hard.

 

[James lamphear]

Most games are decided in the last 5 minutes of the game.

 

[UKRAINEFAN]

And if we doubled and he finds the open man for a bucket how would you have liked that as Lavert is also a good passer.

I think that's way that Stotts thinks about it also; that's the only way it could look like his mistake, and he doesn't risk that.

 

[Natebishop3]

Sidenote: Why was Nurk still in there while he was clearly gassed? I think Hassan would have prevented at least three of those offensive rebounds that Nurk lost to Allen. And it just looked like Nurk was too tired to box him out.

 

[CupWizier]

Your right it is becoming a downer site but they don't wait after the game they do it the whole game. They go after certain players really hard.

Yeah, it's why I avoid game threads during the game. I couldn't imagine being in a house or somewhere watching the game with some of these posters as it's the same shit every game and then after a huge win they still keep whining about the coach and certain players. They do not represent what people say are some of the greatest fans.

 

[CupWizier]

Interesting stat when you win 75% of your games during the same stretch.
Do you have the legs when it is needed most if you play tough D all game? The Blazers can be down 9 points with 6 minutes left and I still feel we are in the game.

Granted you want two-way players at every position, but I would be happy if we just had one "stopper" on the team (who can shoot) and 4 additional shooters. The NBA is all about the last few minutes. Shooters win games....but you need multiple ones on the court. We just need to play D in the last 6 minutes, but the lack of depth at the wings hurts.

Over all our defense was not strong (a lot due to injuries) but this team had a way to get themselves up and get important stops down the stretch when needed.

 

[bobf]

I question our defense on the last play. They only needed two to win, and a three has less chance of going in than a two. Why would we want to risk going one on one against a really hot player? There must have one guy out there who was not a great shooter that we could have left to double team LeVert. Hell, I think LeVert would have been so surprised that we double teamed him that he might have thrown a bad pass out of it. There was just as good a chance that that ball went in the hoop as if it didn't ; so we basically took a chance on a coin flip.

Maybe if you came at him late. I wouldn't want to compromise my defense early in the shot clock because once your defense is scrambling there's a good chance they get two shots instead of one. I don't know why he shot so late either - he gave them no chance for a put back.

 

[BonesJones]

We can drop on Morant tomorrow though, right? He hasn't been shooting well from 3 (9/40 in the seeding games). Make him beat us there instead of giving him a chance to run to the rim.

Morant is one of the few high-profile ball handlers that struggles against drop-scheme. I'd go into tomorrow it against them since their secondary pick n roll creator (Kyle Anderson) isnt a shooter either (I'd just go under the pick on him though to be honest.

If Morant figures it out and starts playing against it, we'd need to adjust, but we wont. So hopefully he doesnt figure it out am even though he'll have all game to do so.

 

[BonesJones]

As you know, all defense starts with players ability to defend 1:1. If you have 5 players who can defend 1:1 you have a lot of schemes that can be successful. If you have 0 who can defend 1:1, you'll have zero schemes that will be effective long term.

I know you think talent isn't that big of the deal and coaching makes up 90% of every outcome and I respect your opinion, I just don't agree with it.

It's no where near as black and white as you're making it out to be in regards to individual player defense, and you're vastly oversimplifying how that plays out as a collective.

 

[CupWizier]

I agree that those guy healthy should improve (not sure if Hood will ever get back to 100%). Still, having Dame and CJ as the first line of defense is always going to create some sort of liability.

Yeah, but look at the huge leap our defense made when we acquired Nurk. I believe we were a top 10 defensive team and that was with Lillard and McCollum.

 

[wizenheimer]

Yeah, but look at the huge leap our defense made when we acquired Nurk. I believe we were a top 10 defensive team and that was with Lillard and McCollum.

that needs a closer look though

in 2016-17, when the Blazers had Nurk for those 20 games, they were 24th in DRating

in 2017-18, when Portland had 79 games of Nurkic, they were 8th

BUT, in 2018, when Portland had 72 games of Nurkic, they fell back down to 16th; bottom half of the league

so, when you look at what was different about 2017-18, it becomes pretty clear that the key was having Nurkic AND Ed Davis for most of the season. It wasn't just Nurkic. Everything else was close to the same: Aminu, Harkless, Zach....Dame & CJ. It was the combo of Nurkic and Davis. Having about 78 games of those two was much better defensively than having 75 games of Nurkic and Collins

but that makes pretty obvious sense. Having 48 minutes of a fundamentally sound paint defense and rim protection is better than having 30 minutes

 

[Orion Bailey]

that needs a closer look though

in 2016-17, when the Blazers had Nurk for those 20 games, they were 24th in DRating

in 2017-18, when Portland had 79 games of Nurkic, they were 8th

BUT, in 2018, when Portland had 72 games of Nurkic, they fell back down to 16th; bottom half of the league

so, when you look at what was different about 2017-18, it becomes pretty clear that the key was having Nurkic AND Ed Davis for most of the season. It wasn't just Nurkic. Everything else was close to the same: Aminu, Harkless, Zach....Dame & CJ. It was the combo of Nurkic and Davis. Having about 78 games of those two was much better defensively than having 75 games of Nurkic and Collins

but that makes pretty obvious sense. Having 48 minutes of a fundamentally sound paint defense and rim protection is better than having 30 minutes

thats why i hope Whiteside is cool with it and we bring him back to come off the bench.

 

[Tince]

It's no where near as black and white as you're making it out to be in regards to individual player defense, and you're vastly oversimplifying how that plays out as a collective.

For sure it's over simplied, I agree. Much like blaming one coach would be a massive over simplification.

 

[Tince]

Yeah, but look at the huge leap our defense made when we acquired Nurk. I believe we were a top 10 defensive team and that was with Lillard and McCollum.

That's a good point. When we added Nurk, our constants were Dame, CJ, and Stotts. So what parts were there during that change that are no longer there now? That would be a logical conclusion to who is to blame for the dip back on the defensive end. 2 starting forwards who could defend 1-4 being replaced by 2 starting forwards, one who doesn't defend any position well and one who probably defends 4-5's.

 

[Tince]

that needs a closer look though

in 2016-17, when the Blazers had Nurk for those 20 games, they were 24th in DRating

in 2017-18, when Portland had 79 games of Nurkic, they were 8th

BUT, in 2018, when Portland had 72 games of Nurkic, they fell back down to 16th; bottom half of the league

so, when you look at what was different about 2017-18, it becomes pretty clear that the key was having Nurkic AND Ed Davis for most of the season. It wasn't just Nurkic. Everything else was close to the same: Aminu, Harkless, Zach....Dame & CJ. It was the combo of Nurkic and Davis. Having about 78 games of those two was much better defensively than having 75 games of Nurkic and Collins

but that makes pretty obvious sense. Having 48 minutes of a fundamentally sound paint defense and rim protection is better than having 30 minutes

Very strong breakdown, well done!

 

[wizenheimer]

one interesting thing about those offensive and defensive ratings: It doesn't matter as much where either rating is. What matters is net rating, the differential between the two ratings. If you 'study' the net ratings ranking year after year in comparison to records, there is a real strong correlation. The better the net, the better the record

right now, Portland is at -1.1 and they have 35-39 record. Historically, their record is actually over-achieving their rating by 2 or 3 wins, but that points to the season Dame has had. Last season, Portland had 53 wins and a net rating of +4.2. The year before, 49 wins and a net of +2.7. And the year before that, 41 wins and a net of -0.5

there are variances and outliers in the correlation, like there are in all statistical correlations, but it's one of the more predictive relationships. Unfortunately, for Portland, there is also a mildly strong correlation between playoff success and regular season net rating. When/if Portland faces the Lakers, there will be a net rating differential of 6.8. That's a pretty wide gap

going back to last season's playoffs:

*Portland had a net of +4.2; OKC a net of +3.3. A differential of 0.9 indicating a closer series but Dame went off

* Portland had a net of +4.2; Denver +4.1. A differential of 0.1 and the series couldn't have been closer

* But Golden State had a net of +6.4 giving them a 2.2 differential advantage. And, they limited Dame like they always do in the playoffs. Sweep

and sure, there could be a chicken/egg, cart/horse thing going on in this correlation

 

[CupWizier]

That's a good point. When we added Nurk, our constants were Dame, CJ, and Stotts. So what parts were there during that change that are no longer there now? That would be a logical conclusion to who is to blame for the dip back on the defensive end. 2 starting forwards who could defend 1-4 being replaced by 2 starting forwards, one who doesn't defend any position well and one who probably defends 4-5's.

Yeah, the missing pieces are Aminu and Harkless, but with Ariza and Hood that more than makes up for Harkless and I think Collins can still be a factor but if not then target a stretch 4 that can play decent defense. I think Little and Trent can be strong defensive contributors off the bench as well. The good thing is, we have shown we can also score pretty easy against other teams defense during this Orlando episode.

 

[CupWizier]

one interesting thing about those offensive and defensive ratings: It doesn't matter as much where either rating is. What matters is net rating, the differential between the two ratings. If you 'study' the net ratings ranking year after year in comparison to records, there is a real strong correlation. The better the net, the better the record

right now, Portland is at -1.1 and they have 35-39 record. Historically, their record is actually over-achieving their rating by 2 or 3 wins, but that points to the season Dame has had. Last season, Portland had 53 wins and a net rating of +4.2. The year before, 49 wins and a net of +2.7. And the year before that, 41 wins and a net of -0.5

there are variances and outliers in the correlation, like there are in all statistical correlations, but it's one of the more predictive relationships. Unfortunately, for Portland, there is also a mildly strong correlation between playoff success and regular season net rating. When/if Portland faces the Lakers, there will be a net rating differential of 6.8. That's a pretty wide gap

going back to last season's playoffs:

*Portland had a net of +4.2; OKC a net of +3.3. A differential of 0.9 indicating a closer series but Dame went off

* Portland had a net of +4.2; Denver +4.1. A differential of 0.1 and the series couldn't have been closer

* But Golden State had a net of +6.4 giving them a 2.2 differential advantage. And, they limited Dame like they always do in the playoffs. Sweep

and sure, there could be a chicken/egg, cart/horse thing going on in this correlation

Hard to put much stock in this season as we had a tremendous amount of injuries to key players and depleted any depth we had. I would classify this season as more of an anomaly than the norm.

 

[wizenheimer]

Hard to put much stock in this season as we had a tremendous amount of injuries to key players and depleted any depth we had. I would classify this season as more of an anomaly than the norm.

except for the fact, that in the bubble, Portland's defense was even worse than their season average of 114.8

(Memphis) 120.9
(Boston) 131.4
(Houston) 101.2
(Denver) 122.2
(LAC) 123.2
(Philly) 116.9
(Dallas) 125.6
(Brooklyn) 126.9

that's absolutely terrible defense

the reasons Portland was able to go 6-2, is that they had unsustainable stratospheric offensive ratings and Dame went super-nova again. And of course, they were all close games and just one minor break going against the Blazers would have put them in the lottery. For instance, that Dame fluke three that bounced 15 feet in the air would have fallen outside the hoop 99 times out of 100. That one bounce the other direction and we're all waiting for the lottery balls

Portland will get swept again if they are giving up 1.21 points/possession like they did in the bubble

 

[CupWizier]

except for the fact, that in the bubble, Portland's defense was even worse than their season average of 114.8

(Memphis) 120.9
(Boston) 131.4
(Houston) 101.2
(Denver) 122.2
(LAC) 123.2
(Philly) 116.9
(Dallas) 125.6
(Brooklyn) 126.9

that's absolutely terrible defense

the reasons Portland was able to go 6-2, is that they had unsustainable stratospheric offensive ratings and Dame went super-nova again. And of course, they were all close games and just one minor break going against the Blazers would have put them in the lottery. For instance, that Dame fluke three that bounced 15 feet in the air would have fallen outside the hoop 99 times out of 100. That one bounce the other direction and we're all waiting for the lottery balls

Portland will get swept again if they are giving up 1.21 points/possession like they did in the bubble

Let's revisit it next year when the team will be whole as I chalk this whole season up to an anomaly and hard to consider this season a normal season. Fluke three by Dame? What about Kwahi Leonards "fluke" shot against Philly in the playoffs last year? There have been hundreds of those type of shots over the years as well as many that rim around or go in and pop out. Are those considered fluke misses then?

 

[wizenheimer]

Let's revisit it next year when the team will be whole as I chalk this whole season up to an anomaly and hard to consider this season a normal season. Fluke three by Dame? What about Kwahi Leonards "fluke" shot against Philly in the playoffs last year? There have been hundreds of those type of shots over the years as well as many that rim around or go in and pop out. Are those considered fluke misses then?

lol...c'mon man. Both Dame's shot and Kawhi's were flukes. How many times between Kawhi's shot and Dames has a three attempt hit the rim, boucned higher than 3 feet and missed? Thousands out of the 65,000 three's shot in that time? vs a few dozen fluke's

I never know why it is you push back so hard against something like this with all these tangents. Is it because you think it's a slight against the Blazers?

all I was saying is that net rating correlates to winning. And that a terrible defensive rating, as in historically bad like the 1.21 points/possession Portland gave up in the bubble, is not going to generate any playoff success. Their defense has to get better because the offense they were generating in the bubble is unsustainable and the Lakers are going to blanket Dame. We know that's coming, assuming Portland beats Memphis

 

[CupWizier]

lol...c'mon man. Both Dame's shot and Kawhi's were flukes. How many times between Kawhi's shot and Dames has a three attempt hit the rim, boucned higher than 3 feet and missed? Thousands out of the 65,000 three's shot in that time? vs a few dozen fluke's

I never know why it is you push back so hard against something like this with all these tangents. Is it because you think it's a slight against the Blazers?

all I was saying is that net rating correlates to winning. And that a terrible defensive rating, as in historically bad like the 1.21 points/possession Portland gave up in the bubble, is not going to generate any playoff success. Their defense has to get better because the offense they were generating in the bubble is unsustainable and the Lakers are going to blanket Dame. We know that's coming, assuming Portland beats Memphis

and all I was pointing out for every fluke made there are likely 4-5 times as many "fluke" misses in the same game as I recall there were several balls (mostly threes) that rimmed around and came out. If you disagree fine, but it's not going to change my perspective. You tend to look at things in a negative way and I tend to look at it in a positive way. The only stat that matters is we went 6-2 and over came 3 games behind in an 8 game season with a very tough schedule. That alone is very impressive and where we go from here is still unwritten.

Oh, and as far as me "pushing back hard" is me just merely stating my opinion. That's still allowed isn't it?