Game Thread GAME# 44: BLAZERS @ HEAT - MARCH 25, 2021 - THURSDAY, 4:30, TNT & NBCSNW

[Chris Craig]

Enjoyed that game.
Another win on the road!
Looking at the schedule i did not have them winning this game or next.

You had us losing to Orlando?

 

[B-Roy]

 

[bobf]

Exactly, you can run all kinds of analytics and statistical modeling, but the most accurate metric to predict a result and quantify a team’s quality is simply margin of victory/net rating. Right now the Blazers are 20th in the league with negative net rating of about -1.0; simply put, they are giving up more points than they are scoring. When they play good teams they get blown out and they are eeking out wins over bad teams that Dame is single handedly pulling out with his greatness. You run this with enough instances over time and the numbers will catch up to you.

So wins are great, but the way you win does matter.

But if you take the set of players we've been playing with Nurk & CJ out, that's roughly what our net margin should be... using advanced stats as a metric. It's more about who we've been playing not how we've been playing. Surprise, shitty defenders yields shitty defense. Hood & Trent --> Powell & more Little, will improve our defense and our offense. Nurk will improve our defense. Things are looking up.

 

[kjironman1]

Wasn't it the same with Mike Dunleavy when he was coaching in Portland?

Dunleavy actually coached a great year. He was fired because he changed after winning it and lost his team the following year.

 

[HailBlazers]

Blazers find a way to survive in Miami and squeeze out a victory. The Blazers Uprise Postgame Show will talk about the game and wrap up today's trade deadline. Come chat hoops with us:

Good stuff y'all. Loved the stotts insanity bit Eric.

 

[kjironman1]

Exactly, you can run all kinds of analytics and statistical modeling, but the most accurate metric to predict a result and quantify a team’s quality is simply margin of victory/net rating. Right now the Blazers are 20th in the league with negative net rating of about -1.0; simply put, they are giving up more points than they are scoring. When they play good teams they get blown out and they are eeking out wins over bad teams that Dame is single handedly pulling out with his greatness. You run this with enough instances over time and the numbers will catch up to you.

So wins are great, but the way you win does matter.

You know the way you lose matters also obviously if you are going to take that metric and make it a tell all (It's Not At All).
They win 3 games by 3pts 5 pts 4pts. and then lose one game by 20 points on the fourth game in 6 nights and the second of a B2B guess what?
There metric as you have explained it has them -8 margin of victory rating but they are still 3-1. So they are giving up more points than they are scoring.
Sorry what you have come up with here is utter trash.

 

[kjironman1]

You had us losing to Orlando?

When this came out yes. Orlando was the 2nd of a B2B and with after a game against the Heat that i figured would have Butler.
Circumstances change quickly. Also just because Orlando is a mess right now don't think those are not NBA players. The Blazers still need to come out and play a game.
Another issue was we didn't know exactly when CJ or Nurk would be back?
Another win on the road is always a good thing.

 

[OneSport3]

You know the way you lose matters also obviously if you are going to take that metric and make it a tell all (It's Not At All).
They win 3 games by 3pts 5 pts 4pts. and then lose one game by 20 points on the fourth game in 6 nights and the second of a B2B guess what?
There metric as you have explained it has them -8 margin of victory rating but they are still 3-1. So they are giving up more points than they are scoring.
Sorry what you have come up with here is utter trash.

Haha funny. Maybe take statistics 101 before you call it trash. I make my living off statistical modeling and predictive algorithms.

Answer this question. How many of those below .500 teams that you beat by 3pts, 4pts and 5pts will you face in the playoffs genius???

 

[kjironman1]

Haha funny. Maybe take statistics 101 before you call it trash. I make my living off statistical modeling and predictive algorithms.

Answer this question. How many of those below .500 teams that you beat by 3pts, 4pts and 5pts will you face in the playoffs genius???

My response was hypothetical. How about we take the wins against the 76ers 4 pts, Dallas 3 pts, and the Pelicans 2 pts. All probable playoff teams. then we take the loss to the Mavs by 40.
What you are doing is trying to make a living off statistical modeling and I'm actually building the model and bringing home a paycheck.

 

[OneSport3]

My response was hypothetical. How about we take the wins against the 76ers 4 pts, Dallas 3 pts, and the Pelicans 2 pts. All probable playoff teams. then we take the loss to the Mavs by 40.
What you are doing is trying to make a living off statistical modeling and I'm actually building the model and bringing home a paycheck.

You obviously don’t know how statistics work so there’s no point in continuing here.

 

[wizenheimer]

I said something similar in another thread...but, Stotts is not the only stubborn, by the numbers coach. CJ was ripping Miami's defense apart tonight. They single-covered him with average defenders. They did that so they could double and trap Dame most of the night, even though Dame couldn't throw the ball in the ocean

all game long Miami was focused on Dame. I wish the Blazers ran a little more motion offense to take advantage when a defense does that, but I guess it's not in the playbook

Dame time came a bit early tonight. Dame got his 4th Q rest and Portland got blitzed 19-9. Dame returns and Portland blitzed back, 25-12....although Kanter scoring 8 points off 3 offensive boards sure helped

 

[crandc]

Damn, people sure get nasty after a Blazers win.

For the record I have studied statistics. But in sports a great player skews stats. Blazers won games they statistically should not have because of Dame.

 

[kjironman1]

You obviously don’t know how statistics work so there’s no point in continuing here.

I know exactly how stats work. I also know they always can be proved wrong. Always.
Basketball is a game. If stats could tell the story people wouldn't watch it.

 

[OneSport3]

Damn, people sure get nasty after a Blazers win.

For the record I have studied statistics. But in sports a great player skews stats. Blazers won games they statistically should not have because of Dame.

That’s exactly right. Dame is skewing the stats. That just shows how great and historical Dame’s season is having. But when Dame has a bad game you have no chance. Look at the Dallas and Brooklyn games, Dame has a bad game and you get blown out of the building and lose to a team missing 2 superstars. This is even more critical come playoff time when each game is more valuable. Dame has a bad game in the playoffs and the Blazers lose. So you pretty much have 6 games to win 4 instead of 7 games to win 4.

 

[OneSport3]

I know exactly how stats work. I also know they always can be proved wrong. Always.
Basketball is a game. If stats could tell the story people wouldn't watch it.

Prove this wrong then. Name a team that has ever made it to the conference finals with a negative net rating.

 

[julius]

This team is so trash. All ISO. No ball movement. Nobody defends. Open coroner 3s all day every day. I fucking hate you terry stotts. You cunt. You filthy idiotic cunt. Worst coach that has ever existed on any level . Fire this bitch

1. What exactly is an "open coroner 3"?

2. You can stop the charade, you clearly aren't who you claim you are.

3. I see you don't remember Maurice Cheeks.

4. And most importantly, you stay classy.

 

[BonesJones]

Huh?

They're a 7th place team that's 23-19. That's as close to average as it is to good.

 

[BonesJones]

I guess that's in line with the data that says timeouts have little/no impact on momentum.

Ok, I won't call for firing him yet!

So you think coaches call timeouts for what, fun?

 

[wizenheimer]

So you think coaches call timeouts for what, fun?

no...it's so we can all run to the internet and post snarky comments about the action, and still have time to grab a beer

 

[BBert]

Good win but CJ missed his last 6 threes.

Too many minutes you could see by his shots his legs were clearly gone in the 4th. I saw it why didn't the coach. It would be one thing if he was there to be a decoy, but they were setting him up to be a primary scorer.

Amazing performance in the first half though. It's so nice having someone to take some pressure off Dame.

 

[Tince]

So you think coaches call timeouts for what, fun?

To answer your question directly, I would guess that no, coaches are not calling timeouts for fun.

I can only speculate each coaches reasons for calling timeouts. I think it's safe to assume most are following the practices of the previous coaches they worked under. Reasons a coach might call a timeout could include: Retain possession, prevent a turnover, make a substitution, review a play, provide rest for players, to advance the ball, to change strategies, etc.

As you know, if there is a theory out there, I'm interested if there is data to support to disprove that theory. On this topic, I've read two studies that come up with slightly conclusions. The stronger of the two in saying timeouts have value, said that over the next 10 points, the team that called timeout was likely to score like 0.2 points than their opponent. That certainly isn't nothing, but it's not big either. The other pointed out that the immediate possession was likely to see an uptick in offensive success, but that after that, there appeared to be no benefit from the timeout. Maybe it's that first possession that leads to the additional 0.2 points of the next 10? I don't know.

This leads me conclude that saving timeouts for the end of games might have more of a positive impact, but I'm not sure. I've seen coaches like Pop & Kerr decline to call timeout late because they like the matchup on the floor and either don't want to allow the opposing team to sub or set their defense. The theory makes sense to me, but I don't know the results there.

I agree with you that almost all coaches call timeout during an opponents run at some point. I just haven't seen anything that backs up this being a meaningful strategy mid-game to turn the tides around.

Slightly off topic, but the icing the kicker strategy in football is a good example of coaches doing something because they've seen it done, the theory makes sense, but the data does not back it up. Just because the majority of coaches do something, does not mean that it's the optimal strategy. Football coaches punt on 4th down far more often than they should. Do they do this for fun? Again, I doubt that is the reason.

 

[MickZagger]

To answer your question directly, I would guess that no, coaches are not calling timeouts for fun.

I can only speculate each coaches reasons for calling timeouts. I think it's safe to assume most are following the practices of the previous coaches they worked under. Reasons a coach might call a timeout could include: Retain possession, prevent a turnover, make a substitution, review a play, provide rest for players, to advance the ball, to change strategies, etc.

As you know, if there is a theory out there, I'm interested if there is data to support to disprove that theory. On this topic, I've read two studies that come up with slightly conclusions. The stronger of the two in saying timeouts have value, said that over the next 10 points, the team that called timeout was likely to score like 0.2 points than their opponent. That certainly isn't nothing, but it's not big either. The other pointed out that the immediate possession was likely to see an uptick in offensive success, but that after that, there appeared to be no benefit from the timeout. Maybe it's that first possession that leads to the additional 0.2 points of the next 10? I don't know.

This leads me conclude that saving timeouts for the end of games might have more of a positive impact, but I'm not sure. I've seen coaches like Pop & Kerr decline to call timeout late because they like the matchup on the floor and either don't want to allow the opposing team to sub or set their defense. The theory makes sense to me, but I don't know the results there.

I agree with you that almost all coaches call timeout during an opponents run at some point. I just haven't seen anything that backs up this being a meaningful strategy mid-game to turn the tides around.

Slightly off topic, but the icing the kicker strategy in football is a good example of coaches doing something because they've seen it done, the theory makes sense, but the data does not back it up. Just because the majority of coaches do something, does not mean that it's the optimal strategy. Football coaches punt on 4th down far more often than they should. Do they do this for fun? Again, I doubt that is the reason.

Pops is notorious throughout his career for using timeouts as soon as the opposing team even seems like it’s going on a run. It is effective, especially in road game atmosphere.

 

[Tince]

Pops is notorious throughout his career for using timeouts as soon as the opposing team even seems like it’s going on a run. It is effective, especially in road game atmosphere.

I don't have the data on Pop or any specific coach, so I'll have to take you at your word. I'm assuming you don't have any data to back it up either, correct?

I have seen Pop call a timeout in the first 2 minutes of a half or something. Again, I have nothing to reference to determine if it's a successful strategy for him. I think it would be hard to credit this strategy to them winning championships.

 

[stampedehero]

Trail Blazers vs. Heat - Box Score - March 25, 2021 - ESPN<<<<

 

[kjironman1]

Prove this wrong then. Name a team that has ever made it to the conference finals with a negative net rating.

So did you think this team was going to make it to the conference finals? Really? Here's your Stat. Maybe but probably not.
Stats are a tool like anything else that you use. I'm sure you use your tools well and i can appreciate that.
If the Blazers happen to make the conference finals this year and have an overall negative net rating it will be easy to manipulate the reason with another stat. "Oh well since Nurk came back their overall rating changed". You see where this goes.
Hope you enjoyed the win vs the Heat. A month ago that win was improbable. On 3/25/21 at about 6:45 PM pacific time Ariza fouled Lillard with 1 second remaining and this game was in the bag. It's why we watch sports.
How about the championship two years ago that wouldn't have gone to the Raptors if not for a lucky bounce in the semi's against Philly. They don't even make the conference finals without that shot?
Now would you like to talk about Lebron James?

 

[kjironman1]

They're a 7th place team that's 23-19. That's as close to average as it is to good.

But as it stands they are absolutely a playoff team and they are currently 4 games over .500 in the west.
Dallas is a dangerous team no matter how you cut it.

 

[James lamphear]

He saves our asses night after night.

Your right but it's wasn't his defense that save our ass it was his offense rebounding that save our ass.

 

[James lamphear]

Too many minutes you could see by his shots his legs were clearly gone in the 4th. I saw it why didn't the coach. It would be one thing if he was there to be a decoy, but they were setting him up to be a primary scorer.

Amazing performance in the first half though. It's so nice having someone to take some pressure off Dame.

Hell CJ even admitted it his post game with TNT.

 

[SIeepwalker]

Man, Hood and Nas on defense is night and day

 

[kjironman1]

Man, Hood and Nas on defense is night and day

No question.
Little might be the very piece that can move this franchise forward in the next couple years.