Game Thread GAME# 37: BLAZERS @ HEAT - JANUARY 5, 2020 - SUNDAY, 3:00 PM, NBCSNW

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in

Do you miss Meyers Leonard at all?

  • Total voters
    53
  • Poll closed .
Tince said:
I've always wondered why Olshey never wanted to give Stotts a Greg Anthony type backup that he could deploy on nights like tonight when Dame/CJ were getting torched.
Click to expand...
They have had a few. But they never keep them around.
 
Same thing that will happen to 1M in a year. He will go to another team unless they find a way to get rid of CJ? Not sure that will happen or if that would even be the best thing? But i don't see 1M staying here if he cannot get a starting position?
 
hoopsjock said:
Yup, Nurk single-handedly transformed a historically bad defense into a decent one because he's skilled enough to mask a few of the problems.
Click to expand...

I think you're significantly overstating things and are wrong when you say he did it "single-handedly" Blazer defensive rating & ranks under Stotts

2012-13 109.2 - 26th (Stotts 1st year; JJ Hickson C
2013-14 107.4 - 16th (Lopez + Aldridge + Batum/Matthews)
2014-15 103.7 - 10th (Lopez & Kaman)
2015-16 108.0 - 20th (Big Roster Change; Plumlee + Davis + Aminu/Harkless)
2016-17 110.8 - 24th (Plumlee traded for Nurkic BUT Ed Davis hurt plays half a season)
2017-18 106.4 - 8th (Nurkic PLUS healthy Ed Davis & Aminu/Harkless/Turner/Napier +Zach)
2018-19 110.5 - 16th (Ed Davis gone; Curry for Napier; Nurkic + 2nd year Zach)
2019-20 111.9 - 20th (Whiteside & all the 7 dwarves)

if Nurkic was so transformative on defense, the Blazers wouldn't have give up 4.1 more points/100 and dropped from 8th to 16th last year. Everything else was the same...except no Ed Davis. I'm seeing that just one time was Portland not in the bottom half of the league in defense. And that one season was when everything was firing on all cylinders. They had Nurkic, Aminu, and Harkless on the front line as starters. And they had the tag team of Ed Davis and Zach as the 2nd unit. That was good defense. But they only had that one year

in other words, I think you're giving too much credit to Nurkic for that defensive success. Last year, with Nurkic and Zach, two guys a lot of people here say are great defenders, Portland had it's 3rd worst defensive rating in Stotts' tenure. Yeah, the NBA is changing, but just 4 years earlier Portland allowed almost 7 less points per 100 possessions.

don't get me wrong, I'm not saying Nurkic isn't good defensively. I am saying there's some exaggeration about how good his defense is
 
Last edited:
wizenheimer said:
I think you're significantly overstating things and are wrong when you say he did it "single-handedly" Blazer defensive rating & ranks under Stotts

2012-13 109.2 - 26th (Stotts 1st year; JJ Hickson C
2013-14 107.4 - 16th (Lopez + Aldridge + Batum/Matthews)
2014-15 103.7 - 10th (Lopez & Kaman)
2015-16 108.0 - 20th Big Roster Change; Plumlee + Davis + Aminu/Harkless)
2016-17 110.8 - 24th (Plumlee traded for Nurkic BUT Ed Davis hurt plays half a season)
2017-18 106.4 - 8th (Nurkic PLUS healthy Ed Davis & Aminu/Harkless/Turner/Napier +Zach)
2018-19 110.5 - 16th (Ed Davis gone; Curry for Napier; Nurkic + 2nd year Zach)
2019-20 111.9 - 20th (Whiteside & all the 7 dwarves)

if Nurkic was so transformative on defense, the Blazers wouldn't have give up 4.1 more points/100 and dropped from 8th to 16th last year. Everything else was the same...except no Ed Davis. I'm seeing that just one time was Portland not in the bottom half of the league in defense. And that one season was when everything was firing on all cylinders. They had Nurkic, Aminu, and Harkless on the front line as starters. And they had the tag team of Ed Davis and Zach as the 2nd unit. That was good defense. But they only had that one year

in other words, I think you're giving too much credit to Nurkic for that defensive success. Last year, with Nurkic and Zach, two guys a lot of people here say are great defenders, Portland had it's 3rd worst defensive rating in Stotts' tenure. Yeah, the NBA is changing, but just 4 years earlier Portland allowed almost 7 less points per 100 possessions.

don't get me wrong, I'm not saying Nurkic isn't good defensively. I am saying there's some exaggeration about how good his defense is
Click to expand...
Really hated losing Ed Davis. To me that was a terrible move.
 
wizenheimer said:
WTF???

Dragic makes his 7th three with 6 minutes left in the 4th Q, and because he was 0-1 after that, you're crediting Stotts with an adjustment?
Click to expand...

Don't you think of Dragic was 1/7 throughout the game and then hit a late 3 people would be all over Stotts for leaving him open at the end?
 
wizenheimer said:
I think you're significantly overstating things and are wrong when you say he did it "single-handedly" Blazer defensive rating & ranks under Stotts

2012-13 109.2 - 26th (Stotts 1st year; JJ Hickson C
2013-14 107.4 - 16th (Lopez + Aldridge + Batum/Matthews)
2014-15 103.7 - 10th (Lopez & Kaman)
2015-16 108.0 - 20th Big Roster Change; Plumlee + Davis + Aminu/Harkless)
2016-17 110.8 - 24th (Plumlee traded for Nurkic BUT Ed Davis hurt plays half a season)
2017-18 106.4 - 8th (Nurkic PLUS healthy Ed Davis & Aminu/Harkless/Turner/Napier +Zach)
2018-19 110.5 - 16th (Ed Davis gone; Curry for Napier; Nurkic + 2nd year Zach)
2019-20 111.9 - 20th (Whiteside & all the 7 dwarves)

if Nurkic was so transformative on defense, the Blazers wouldn't have give up 4.1 more points/100 and dropped from 8th to 16th last year. Everything else was the same...except no Ed Davis. I'm seeing that just one time was Portland not in the bottom half of the league in defense. And that one season was when everything was firing on all cylinders. They had Nurkic, Aminu, and Harkless on the front line as starters. And they had the tag team of Ed Davis and Zach as the 2nd unit. That was good defense. But they only had that one year

in other words, I think you're giving too much credit to Nurkic for that defensive success. Last year, with Nurkic and Zach, two guys a lot of people here say are great defenders, Portland had it's 3rd worst defensive rating in Stotts' tenure. Yeah, the NBA is changing, but just 4 years earlier Portland allowed almost 7 less points per 100 possessions.

don't get me wrong, I'm not saying Nurkic isn't good defensively. I am saying there's some exaggeration about how good his defense is
Click to expand...

Very solid points here on Nurk and otherwise.
 
wizenheimer said:
I think you're significantly overstating things and are wrong when you say he did it "single-handedly" Blazer defensive rating & ranks under Stotts

2012-13 109.2 - 26th (Stotts 1st year; JJ Hickson C
2013-14 107.4 - 16th (Lopez + Aldridge + Batum/Matthews)
2014-15 103.7 - 10th (Lopez & Kaman)
2015-16 108.0 - 20th Big Roster Change; Plumlee + Davis + Aminu/Harkless)
2016-17 110.8 - 24th (Plumlee traded for Nurkic BUT Ed Davis hurt plays half a season)
2017-18 106.4 - 8th (Nurkic PLUS healthy Ed Davis & Aminu/Harkless/Turner/Napier +Zach)
2018-19 110.5 - 16th (Ed Davis gone; Curry for Napier; Nurkic + 2nd year Zach)
2019-20 111.9 - 20th (Whiteside & all the 7 dwarves)

if Nurkic was so transformative on defense, the Blazers wouldn't have give up 4.1 more points/100 and dropped from 8th to 16th last year. Everything else was the same...except no Ed Davis. I'm seeing that just one time was Portland not in the bottom half of the league in defense. And that one season was when everything was firing on all cylinders. They had Nurkic, Aminu, and Harkless on the front line as starters. And they had the tag team of Ed Davis and Zach as the 2nd unit. That was good defense. But they only had that one year

in other words, I think you're giving too much credit to Nurkic for that defensive success. Last year, with Nurkic and Zach, two guys a lot of people here say are great defenders, Portland had it's 3rd worst defensive rating in Stotts' tenure. Yeah, the NBA is changing, but just 4 years earlier Portland allowed almost 7 less points per 100 possessions.

don't get me wrong, I'm not saying Nurkic isn't good defensively. I am saying there's some exaggeration about how good his defense is
Click to expand...
One problem Zach and Nurk hardly play together and when they did in short that actually shut down few teams and we went on a run on offense.
 
James lamphear said:
One problem Zach and Nurk hardly play together and when they did in short that actually shut down few teams and we went on a run on offense.
Click to expand...

Good grief. CJ for Love? Is that the best we could come up with? That trade might lead me to valet park Olshey’s car in the Willamette.
 
Tince said:
I'm probably forgetting someone... Who would you say has been our best lockdown backup PG since we've got Dame?
Click to expand...
"Lockdown" is the key word there now isn't it? My statement was more about having a quality backup in general that could play defense. You can go a ways back even before dame and say Patty Mills, Steve Blake did play decent defense. Crabbe played fairly good defense but he was more SF. Of course we all know Wesley Mathews but he has never really recovered the same way. Gerald Henderson could play a bit. I was a Pat Con fan myself and he has done well since leaving. Napier did plap defense but he was better on offense in my opinion. Where the heck did Wade Baldwin go? Wasn't Tim Quarterman supposed to be the next big thing? Wish there was a way to keep Curry. Dude was solid all over the court.
Didn't the Blazers have a chance at Gary Payton II??? I thought they traded him or something?
 
e_blazer said:
Good grief. CJ for Love? Is that the best we could come up with? That trade might lead me to valet park Olshey’s car in the Willamette.
Click to expand...
Right now i'd do it. It's pretty obvious Dame/CJ isn't gonna work out. Pull in Love and keep playing 1M. Then move Whiteside and Bazemore for some real defensive help. Get Nurk back and play Little as much as possible. Get Collins back next year and see what happens?
 
kjironman1 said:
"Lockdown" is the key word there now isn't it? My statement was more about having a quality backup in general that could play defense. You can go a ways back even before dame and say Patty Mills, Steve Blake did play decent defense. Crabbe played fairly good defense but he was more SF. Of course we all know Wesley Mathews but he has never really recovered the same way. Gerald Henderson could play a bit. I was a Pat Con fan myself and he has done well since leaving. Napier did plap defense but he was better on offense in my opinion. Where the heck did Wade Baldwin go? Wasn't Tim Quarterman supposed to be the next big thing? Wish there was a way to keep Curry. Dude was solid all over the court.
Didn't the Blazers have a chance at Gary Payton II??? I thought they traded him or something?
Click to expand...

Wade Baldwin, that's that one! Seemed like he had a lot of tools, thought we got a steal, then I figured he would do really well in Cleveland. That guy could defend!
 
I would be so mad if Dame gets hurt chasing that number 7 or 8 seed only to be demolish by either the Lakers or Clippers
 
hoopsjock said:
19/4/4 on 8 of 15 shooting and this is the game you decide to post this?
Click to expand...

We don't let stats ruin a good narrative around this place!

I thought Ant was decent tonight. Missed a few wide open 3's and is still getting abused on defense, but tonight was one of his better games of the season.
 
Tince said:
Don't you think of Dragic was 1/7 throughout the game and then hit a late 3 people would be all over Stotts for leaving him open at the end?
Click to expand...

no I don't

I'm sorry Tince, I know you've decided to defend Stotts against all the slings and arrows, but on this one point...about the way Portland defended Dragic tonight, it's completely legitimate to criticize that defense

obviously, the instructions weren't to "leave Dragic open"...that's not the issue. What is the issue is the longstanding Blazer defensive scheme that is some hybridized version of the ICE defense. But the way Portland plays it is one of the most passive defenses in the NBA on the ball-handler at screens. Portland's bigs almost always hedge heavily back into the paint and toward the rim. They almost never jump the screen and attack the ball. That was the case with Lopez, Aldridge & Kaman; with Plumlee & Davis; with Nurkic, Davis, and Meyers; and with Nurkic & Zach. And now with Whiteside....

I'm assuming the hope is that Portland's guards can fight around the screen well enough to contest shots from the arc, while baiting opponents into longer mid-range shots as the Blazer bigs defend the rim and paint. It worked better when the Blazers had Matthews because he had the strength, length, and moxie to fight thru screens. But since him, the Blazers have had Dame, CJ, Napier, and Curry, and it's hard to imagine a smaller less physical group of guards who would be more disadvantaged by the physicality of NBA screen-setters
 
yeah, I thought this was the best game for Simons in a month. He looked in control of himself on offense. He did have 2 or 3 ugly turnovers, and he lost his man several times on defense (giving up some three's), but if we're giving demerits for bad defense, every Blazer had a bucketful.
 
wizenheimer said:
no I don't

I'm sorry Tince, I know you've decided to defend Stotts against all the slings and arrows, but on this one point...about the way Portland defended Dragic tonight, it's completely legitimate to criticize that defense

obviously, the instructions weren't to "leave Dragic open"...that's not the issue. What is the issue is the longstanding Blazer defensive scheme that is some hybridized version of the ICE defense. But the way Portland plays it is one of the most passive defenses in the NBA on the ball-handler at screens. Portland's bigs almost always hedge heavily back into the paint and toward the rim. They almost never jump the screen and attack the ball. That was the case with Lopez, Aldridge & Kaman; with Plumlee & Davis; with Nurkic, Davis, and Meyers; and with Nurkic & Zach. And now with Whiteside....

I'm assuming the hope is that Portland's guards can fight around the screen well enough to contest shots from the arc, while baiting opponents into longer mid-range shots as the Blazer bigs defend the rim and paint. It worked better when the Blazers had Matthews because he had the strength, length, and moxie to fight thru screens. But since him, the Blazers have had Dame, CJ, Napier, and Curry, and it's hard to imagine a smaller less physical group of guards who would be more disadvantaged by the physicality of NBA screen-setters
Click to expand...

This doesn't explain why the majority of years (5 out of 7) under Stotts we are at the league average or better on 3pt% defense and often near the top on fewest 3pt attempts given up. If your theory is true that we just lay off and give up wide open threes to quality shooters, then that would mean the majority of teams decline to attempt those wide open threes. Not only that, but when they do attempt these wide open threes, their percentage isn't great, which over a large sample size seems highly unlikely given that you contend they are wide open.

Can you explain why the data doesn't line up with your narrative?
 
Tince said:
This doesn't explain why the majority of years (5 out of 7) under Stotts we are at the league average or better on 3pt% defense and often near the top on fewest 3pt attempts given up. If your theory is true that we just lay off and give up wide open threes to quality shooters, then that would mean the majority of teams decline to attempt those wide open threes. Not only that, but when they do attempt these wide open threes, their percentage isn't great, which over a large sample size seems highly unlikely given that you contend they are wide open.

Can you explain why the data doesn't line up with your narrative?
Click to expand...
I think the issue defensively is rebounding. So their a mediocre to bad defense right now anyways but they give up the 2nd most opponent offensive rebounds in the NBA, which means a lot of times they get “stops” they dont actually get stops.

Thats where injuries have hurt them, their left with whiteside as the only good rebounder left.

https://www.teamrankings.com/nba/stat/opponent-offensive-rebounds-per-game
 
Tince said:
This doesn't explain why the majority of years (5 out of 7) under Stotts we are at the league average or better on 3pt% defense and often near the top on fewest 3pt attempts given up. If your theory is true that we just lay off and give up wide open threes to quality shooters, then that would mean the majority of teams decline to attempt those wide open threes. Not only that, but when they do attempt these wide open threes, their percentage isn't great, which over a large sample size seems highly unlikely given that you contend they are wide open.

Can you explain why the data doesn't line up with your narrative?
Click to expand...

1st, let's be clear about something...at no point did I say Portland intentionally gives "wide open" three's to quality shooters. That isn't the plan and sometimes Portland executes the plan. But if you think the Blazers haven't been punked by wide open three's by quality shooters I refer you to game 1 of the Warrior series last year and a cat named Curry

2nd, where are you getting those numbers?

Portland opponent 3pt% ranks:

2015-16 - 28th
2016-17 - 27th
2017-18 - 16th
2018-19 - 20th
2019-20 - 17th

that's from bbref

(I didn't feel like posting the numbers from the Aldridge team because as I said, a defense that will work moderately when the defenders are guys like Matthews, Batum, and Crabbe is probably not the same defense you want when the defenders are CJ, Napier, and Curry)

that's simply not good for a playoff team with designs of being a contender. Yes, Portland tends to give up fewer attempts but think about why that may be. When a ball-handler comes around a screen and finds open shooting space, he's also going to find an open driving lane, and a lot of ball-handlers will drive instead of immediately gunning up a three like Dame and CJ. In other words, yeah, Portland gives up fewer three's, but some of that, perhaps a lot of that, is because the lane is open into the paint

and what might be the result if that's true?

2105-16 - Blazers rank 30th in opponent FG% in the 16-23' zone and rank 26th in opponent FT/FGA
2016-17 - Blazers rank 22nd in opponent FG% in the 16-23' zone and rank 28th in opponent FT/FGA
2017-18 - Blazers rank 29th in opponent FG% in the 16-23' zone and rank 18th in opponent FT/FGA
2018-19 - Blazers rank 16th in opponent FG% in the 16-23' zone and rank 16 in opponent FT/FGA

I think the biggest issue people have with that scheme, including me, isn't so much the defense but that it seems un-adaptable and static...always the same no matter the opponent. When was the last time you saw Portland aggressively jumping the PnR like teams always do against Portland & Dame? Yeah, me neither
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Back
Top