Game Thread Game #20 - BLAZERS @ WARRIORS - NOVEMBER 26, 2021 - FRIDAY - 7:00 PM (PDT) ROOT SPORTS

[SlyPokerDog]

PLAYER NOTABLES:

• Stephen Curry recorded his seventh game of 30-plus points this season, posting a game-high 32 points… He passed Scottie Pippen (18,940) for 62nd on the NBA’s all-time scoring list after entering the game with 18,913 career points.
• Draymond Green tallied his second double-double of the season, recording 12 points (two shy of his season high of 14) and 12 assists, also two shy of his season high of 14.
• Andrew Wiggins scored 20-plus points for the sixth time this season.
• Kevon Looney posted a season-high 12 points (previous: 11 on 11/10 vs. MIN), his second outing with double-figures on the season.
• Jordan Poole dished out five assists, his fourth outing of five-or-more assists this season… Prior to this season, he had 13 total games of five-plus assists.
• Juan Toscano-Anderson grabbed a season-high eight rebounds (previous: six, twice)… Over his last two games he is averaging 10.5 points and 7.0 rebounds in 24 minutes per contest.

 

[royo]

Right now Portland doesn't even have a GM! You think NO will lift a finger to help this team during/after this investigation? NFW. I am convinced he will take the team down with him. No trades, no picks, nothing. This team is not any better than it was years ago, as was pointed out. There is no excuse for not being able to improve when you have a loyal superstar. No excuse other than incompetence, hubris, or apathy. Take your pick.

No, no, no. No need to cry after game with easy best team in NBA. GS can sweep ANY team right now, so it's not a game that should indicate anything.
We are in totally different place now.
Obviously (AF) we need to make this trade. And work, work, work.
Blazers not gonna fly like Warriors after 2 months with new coach. This team needs to grind like Memphis few years ago until they learn to move the ball.

We got Ant and Nas.

I would wait with crying few more weeks. I sure hope Olshey is gonner and new GM will trade CJ.

 

[GDiama]

We don't have to be. CJ is respected enough around the league to at least get another rotation player for him... if a team had the right needs we might be able to get a starting forward for CJ and RoCo.

He may be respected but he also gets paid a ton and cannot play next to point guards that are not at least decent defensively. I m scanning all rosters to find something and honestly i can't.

 

[BBert]

So how the fuck is Jordan Poole the same age as Simons taking a huge leap this year and Simons takes a baby one

Because they aren't the same person?

Should every basketball player his age have the same talent and skill set as Jordan Poole?

 

[FlashWad]

Seems like we are pretty far off from being on the warriors level. I don't think we are going to magically play better than this though later in the season. They basically don't practice much anymore just go game to game so without massive trades this is the level we will be.

 

[Rastapopoulos]

of for fuck's sake... we're playing in utah next?

can we just not bother, take the L, and fly home instead?

What does not kill you... may thoroughly demoralize you

 

[Rastapopoulos]

 

[Labinot41]

no heart, no pride in this team. Cant wait for the damn rebuild

 

[Fairly-Hard]

I watch too. It’s clear that Curry outplays Dame by a huge margin this year, much wider than Curry’s teammates out-shoot Dame’s teammates.

I agree with you there as well.
I'll explain my problem with stats being the tell all though.
Just as an example in this game. Because it is in fact a perfect example of the stats not telling the story.
Lets take three point shooting. Blazers ended up 13-38 for 34.2%. Warriors ended up 12-37 fro 32.4%. This would be taken pretty easily that the 3 point shooting was not the problem and in fact the Blazers shot the ball better.
Here's where the game comes into play. Warriors-Curry 6-15, Wiggins 3-5, Poole 2-6, Green 0-1. Starters 11-27 - 40.7%
Blazers- Lillard 2-7, CJ 3-6, Roco 1-7, Norm 1-1, Nurk 0-2. Starters 7-23 - 30.4%
Watching the game you watched Roco get open looks. Some would even say WIDE open looks(Because they were WIDE OPEN looks). You also watched Nurk get a couple Wide Open looks. If early on RoCo makes a couple of those shots and even if Nurk hits those shots the entire game changes for Lillard. The Warriors are forced to guard RoCo at the top of the arc. We all know RoCo can hit those shots but he wasn't and the Warriors were very willing to let him shoot them. Nurk the same. If they make lets say 3 in the first half the score is much different and Lillard has the same options that Curry had on the court. We have watched this in home games this season when the players around Lillard hit their shots.
By the time Simons started catching fire the game was already lost. You simply do not play catch up against Curry and the warriors from 20 down on their court. It made absolutely no difference that Belicia, Porter Jr, and JTA went a combined 0-7. Curry was getting open looks in single coverage because the Blazers had to defend Wiggins and Poole.

Now lets look at Rebounding. The Blazers got out rebounded badly 48-37. Why? You would think having the biggest guy available on the court for both teams would weigh heavily in the Blazers favor? Again this goes to shooting. Overall field Goal percentage was Warriors 54% to the Blazer 41%. The Warriors stretched the floor and had better open looks which they made. They also went with "Shooters" that Nurk was rendered useless against. Personally if i was Billups i would have stayed with Nurk longer and continued to pound the ball inside a bit more. He was 6-10 but only played 24 minutes. His +/- was just as bad as everyone else though so there you go again. The stats might not tell the story.

I will give you this though. Stats can be fun to look at. But Facts??? No they are not really facts at all. They are numbers that people use to draw conclusions. Usually those conclusions are emotionally based opinions and not really facts at all.

 

[Fairly-Hard]

No.

Maybe? I have been trying to support what CJ is doing for a long time but it's getting real hard to justify not making a trade of some value for him.

 

[Fairly-Hard]

Varsity vs JV

That’s what that was.

Just a little point to make ya feel a bit better. The Blazers actually came back and made a game out of it a bit and the Warriors are making a lot of teams look pretty bad right now. Not just the Blazers.

 

[Hoopguru]

I agree with you there as well.
I'll explain my problem with stats being the tell all though.
Just as an example in this game. Because it is in fact a perfect example of the stats not telling the story.
Lets take three point shooting. Blazers ended up 13-38 for 34.2%. Warriors ended up 12-37 fro 32.4%. This would be taken pretty easily that the 3 point shooting was not the problem and in fact the Blazers shot the ball better.
Here's where the game comes into play. Warriors-Curry 6-15, Wiggins 3-5, Poole 2-6, Green 0-1. Starters 11-27 - 40.7%
Blazers- Lillard 2-7, CJ 3-6, Roco 1-7, Norm 1-1, Nurk 0-2. Starters 7-23 - 30.4%
Watching the game you watched Roco get open looks. Some would even say WIDE open looks(Because they were WIDE OPEN looks). You also watched Nurk get a couple Wide Open looks. If early on RoCo makes a couple of those shots and even if Nurk hits those shots the entire game changes for Lillard. The Warriors are forced to guard RoCo at the top of the arc. We all know RoCo can hit those shots but he wasn't and the Warriors were very willing to let him shoot them. Nurk the same. If they make lets say 3 in the first half the score is much different and Lillard has the same options that Curry had on the court. We have watched this in home games this season when the players around Lillard hit their shots.
By the time Simons started catching fire the game was already lost. You simply do not play catch up against Curry and the warriors from 20 down on their court. It made absolutely no difference that Belicia, Porter Jr, and JTA went a combined 0-7. Curry was getting open looks in single coverage because the Blazers had to defend Wiggins and Poole.

Now lets look at Rebounding. The Blazers got out rebounded badly 48-37. Why? You would think having the biggest guy available on the court for both teams would weigh heavily in the Blazers favor? Again this goes to shooting. Overall field Goal percentage was Warriors 54% to the Blazer 41%. The Warriors stretched the floor and had better open looks which they made. They also went with "Shooters" that Nurk was rendered useless against. Personally if i was Billups i would have stayed with Nurk longer and continued to pound the ball inside a bit more. He was 6-10 but only played 24 minutes. His +/- was just as bad as everyone else though so there you go again. The stats might not tell the story.

I will give you this though. Stats can be fun to look at. But Facts??? No they are not really facts at all. They are numbers that people use to draw conclusions. Usually those conclusions are emotionally based opinions and not really facts at all.

Pertaining to 3 point shooting, Norm only got one attempt 1for1.
He should have been touching the ball more imo.

 

[Fairly-Hard]

Pertaining to 3 point shooting, Norm only got one attempt 1for1.
He should have been touching the ball more imo.

I agree.

 

[Tince]

Maybe? I have been trying to support what CJ is doing for a long time but it's getting real hard to justify not making a trade of some value for him.

I didn't say I was against trading him, I said "no" to the thought that losing him would be "addition by subtraction". Losing him for nothing wouldn't make us better.

I remember KD telling CJ he would be a great 6th man on his own podcast. I think KD meant it as a compliment, but CJ didn't take it that way. CJ certainly has value. I don't think he's basically an all-star like some here try to claim. I worry that because of his contract, the type of player we'd get in return for CJ wouldn't be good and/or would have a bad contract. That's not CJ's fault, that's on Olshey.

 

[Fairly-Hard]

I didn't say I was against trading him, I said "no" to the thought that losing him would be "addition by subtraction". Losing him for nothing wouldn't make us better.

I remember KD telling CJ he would be a great 6th man on his own podcast. I think KD meant it as a compliment, but CJ didn't take it that way. CJ certainly has value. I don't think he's basically an all-star like some here try to claim. I worry that because of his contract, the type of player we'd get in return for CJ wouldn't be good and/or would have a bad contract. That's not CJ's fault, that's on Olshey.

CJ is a 6th man. He is exactly what this team needs as a 6th man. Contract be damned. Billups needs to make these adjustments. He has the pieces that changes could be made and the roster could fit together better.
This place has been screaming for Powell to start at the SG position for months. They have a real SF in RoCo. They have a PF in Nance. They have a decent bench that include Little and Simons that CJ would only make better.
Seriously this board at times could pick better rotations than what we have seen from both Stotts and Billups. How many times have you read "The 3 Guard 6-3 line up isn't going to cut it"?

 

[Tince]

CJ is a 6th man. He is exactly what this team needs as a 6th man. Contract be damned. Billups needs to make these adjustments. He has the pieces that changes could be made and the roster could fit together better.
This place has been screaming for Powell to start at the SG position for months. They have a real SF in RoCo. They have a PF in Nance. They have a decent bench that include Little and Simons that CJ would only make better.
Seriously this board at times could pick better rotations than what we have seen from both Stotts and Billups. How many times have you read "The 3 Guard 6-3 line up isn't going to cut it"?

I agree with a lot of what you're saying. I don't think RoCo is a SF thought.

Billups was given a roster where 5 of the top 7 players are 6'5" or less, which makes it difficult to start a lineup with solid length.

 

[Fairly-Hard]

I agree with a lot of what you're saying. I don't think RoCo is a SF thought.

Billups was given a roster where 5 of the top 7 players are 6'5" or less, which makes it difficult to start a lineup with solid length.

Listed as the same height as Nance but plays smaller. Both 6-7 but Nance is 30 lbs heavier. Covington is listed as a SF first on most of his listings. He is not really a PF. Nance is listed as a PF first and Center.

 

[Tince]

Listed as the same height as Nance but plays smaller. Both 6-7 but Nance is 30 lbs heavier. Covington is listed as a SF first on most of his listings. He is not really a PF. Nance is listed as a PF first and Center.

I 100% disagree with you the RoCo is better at SF. It's been a long time since he played the majority of his minutes at SF. He's actually played more minutes at center than SF for a few reasons:

1. He's a good, not great shooter
2. Below average ball handler
3. Can't create for others
4. Struggle to defend the point of attack against anyone with speed

If RoCo could be a very good SF, he would've been playing it under his last 4 coaches.

 

[Buffalo Custard]

Listed as the same height as Nance but plays smaller. Both 6-7 but Nance is 30 lbs heavier. Covington is listed as a SF first on most of his listings. He is not really a PF. Nance is listed as a PF first and Center.

RoCo is 2 years older and sometimes plays 10 years older.

 

[Fairly-Hard]

I 100% disagree with you the RoCo is better at SF. It's been a long time since he played the majority of his minutes at SF. He's actually played more minutes at center than SF for a few reasons:

1. He's a good, not great shooter
2. Below average ball handler
3. Can't create for others
4. Struggle to defend the point of attack against anyone with speed

If RoCo could be a very good SF, he would've been playing it under his last 4 coaches.

Maybe move him for a better one then? Maybe let the youngster Little move into that spot and bring RoCo off the bench at the PF position?
I feel CJ would be a better 6th man and they need to make some changes around the team and put the best players on the floor. Even if that means we need some development.
This whole 6-3 lineup with RoCo and Nurk is not working out well. If CJ's ego can't take that then so be it. If RoCo's ego can't take that then so be it also.

 

[Fairly-Hard]

RoCo is 2 years older and sometimes plays 10 years older.

He sure does play older at times. No question there.

 

[Labinot41]

Pertaining to 3 point shooting, Norm only got one attempt 1for1.
He should have been touching the ball more imo.

We’ve been saying this almost every game, and we will say this in the future again and again and again. Nothing will change with this team, it is how it is

 

[wizenheimer]

I 100% disagree with you the RoCo is better at SF. It's been a long time since he played the majority of his minutes at SF. He's actually played more minutes at center than SF for a few reasons:

1. He's a good, not great shooter
2. Below average ball handler
3. Can't create for others
4. Struggle to defend the point of attack against anyone with speed

If RoCo could be a very good SF, he would've been playing it under his last 4 coaches.

I'm wondering about something:

the NBA has 'evolved' a lot over the last decade. I'm thinking one thing that has evolved is the definition of 'tweener'. It used to be that tweener forward was dependent on size; not only height, but weight. A PF was the necessary 2nd big on the floor, but some teams utilized a "stretch-4" when matchups allowed it

but in the new NBA, tweener is dependent on skills, not size. To be sure, length is still advantageous, but it's what a player can do that defines position. Good SF's play good defense; they have to. RoCo has that skill, for the most part, and he has length. But offensively, good SF's need to have good handles and good court vision. They need to be threats from the perimeter and on dribble-drives. They need to be able to break down defenses with penetration or with the three. RoCo can't do much of that at all. He'd be a decent starting SF if the Blazers had an elite PF, but that's a fantasy that will never come true under Olshey

RoCo is a tweener, and like almost all tweeners of the past, he lacks enough skills to fit well at either forward position. He's a default starter because Portland doesn't have enough of an upgrade to warrant a change

I'd say, maybe, Portland's best starting unit would be Dame-Powell-Little-Nance-Nurkic. But Portland won't move CJ to 6th man or trade him, so replacing RoCo with Nance leaves a bench rotation of Simons, Little, RoCo, Zeller. That's pretty weak and looks mismatched to me

 

[Bingo Bango]

no heart, no pride in this team. Cant wait for the damn rebuild

But Billups said they played hard.

 

[TBpup]

But Billups said they played hard.

He also said he would hold players accountable...

 

[Bingo Bango]

He also said he would hold players accountable...

But did they play hard last night or not?

 

[TBpup]

But did they play hard last night or not?

No.

Which is the point I was trying to make, but obviously did a poor job. Chauncey may say some things and be well intentioned, but I have yet to see the 'hold accountable' part and didn't see much effort last night other than CJ and Dame trying to get their shots on offense.

 

[Bingo Bango]

No.

Which is the point I was trying to make, but obviously did a poor job. Chauncey may say some things and be well intentioned, but I have yet to see the 'hold accountable' part and didn't see much effort last night other than CJ and Dame trying to get their shots on offense.

Simons also said they played hard and fought all the way. Interesting that the team’s performance looked so different to the fans.

 

[wizenheimer]

Simons also said they played hard and fought all the way. Interesting that the team’s performance looked so different to the fans.

my thinking is that most of the time, there is no discernible difference between not playing hard and not playing well. It's pretty rare to be able to gauge effort from a TV screen

 

[e_blazer]

my thinking is that most of the time, there is no discernible difference between not playing hard and not playing well. It's pretty rare to be able to gauge effort from a TV screen

There's some truth to that, but I'd say that a team can be playing hard yet not be playing well due to simply missing open shots.