Game Thread GAME #46 - BLAZERS @ RAPTORS - JANUARY 23, 2022 - SUNDAY - 3:00 PM (PDT) ROOT SPORTS

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in

Are you surprised the Blazers are 3-2 on this current road trip?

  • Yes

    Votes: 22 68.8%

  • No

    Votes: 3 9.4%

  • Not really, they beat the teams they should have

    Votes: 2 6.3%

  • They are supposed to be tanking dammit

    Votes: 2 6.3%

  • Gotta win sometime

    Votes: 3 9.4%
  • Total voters
    32
AmirIcon said:
I've said this for a long time. We have the talent. We very well could be one player away from completely transforming the ceiling of this team. It's already getting to be good. Imagine if we're able to add a Simmons or Siakam. We can compete with the best of them.
Click to expand...
Which is why I said… I’ll wait to see what happens at the trade deadline.
 
Scalma said:
Give your misery a break, or at least save the rest of us from hearing about it.
Click to expand...
Miserable? I think I was the only one who predicted we would be bad this year because of having a new coach that would be dealing with growing pains.

I’m quite content. I’ve enjoyed this season.
 
AmirIcon said:
I've said this for a long time. We have the talent. We very well could be one player away from completely transforming the ceiling of this team. It's already getting to be good. Imagine if we're able to add a Simmons or Siakam. We can compete with the best of them.
Click to expand...

people are completely blinded by the Stotts era. I don’t really care how seasons played out in the past this is a new staff, new system, new way of playing. I’d at least give em the rest of the season to see what happens. I don’t get the sense a blowup is necessary here right now. They can use their surplus at guard to balance out the roster and see how far they can go.
 
AmirIcon said:
I've said this for a long time. We have the talent. We very well could be one player away from completely transforming the ceiling of this team. It's already getting to be good. Imagine if we're able to add a Simmons or Siakam. We can compete with the best of them.
Click to expand...
could be off on my eval here but id rather have OG or Barnes than Pascal (to pair with Dame). masai ujiri prolly figures the same calculation on that roster.

siakam needs a ton of space to work his 8 million spin moves on every drive.
 
AmirIcon said:
I've said this for a long time. We have the talent. We very well could be one player away from completely transforming the ceiling of this team. It's already getting to be good. Imagine if we're able to add a Simmons or Siakam. We can compete with the best of them.
Click to expand...
The defense has been coming around and seems they are moving the ball around more.
 
Anyone here observe how CJ not being a ball hog now. He actually passing the ball.
 
TBpup said:
Ball movement....what an intriguing concept. And look at the results!
Click to expand...

Checked the stats and we are averaging 30 more passes per game, but it's only resulting in 1.4 more assists per game, 3 more turnovers, and 8 less points per game than last year.

At least in the short term, it appears to be a net negative.
 
SheedSoNasty said:
I could be wrong, but it feels like scoring is down league wide compared to last year
Click to expand...

You're not wrong. Scoring is down about 3.5ppg league wide - Portland is down 8ppg. Also of note. Portland defense is giving up 2.3ppg less this year than last year.

So in comparison to last year, we're worse on both ends when you factor in league wide changes.

More passes, more assists, worse offense, worse defense, and a worse winning percentage.
 
Last edited:
For those wondering the impact passing is having on wins this year. Here's the chart with the trend line decreasing. 6 of the best 8 teams in the NBA pass the ball less than the league average.
upload_2022-1-23_22-9-17.png
 
Last edited:
illmatic99 said:
could be off on my eval here but id rather have OG or Barnes than Pascal (to pair with Dame). masai ujiri prolly figures the same calculation on that roster.

siakam needs a ton of space to work his 8 million spin moves on every drive.
Click to expand...

Disagree. And they are in rebuild mode it sounds like anyway. Siakam can play any which way. He'd be a great fit.
 
Tince said:
Checked the stats and we are averaging 30 more passes per game, but it's only resulting in 1.4 more assists per game, 3 more turnovers, and 8 less points per game than last year.

At least in the short term, it appears to be a net negative.
Click to expand...

4-2 on this last road trip. It would seem, short term, it's bee a net positive. Can't remember a the last time we went on a 4-2 road trip with so many main players out.

Also, this is a different type of ball movement. Passes before that were often short hand offs, are now quicker, longer passes requiring more defensive movement and involving more than just a couple players passing/handing off to each other.

Shot selection is more evenly distributed, and it is certainly more pleasant to watch.
 
TBpup said:
4-2 on this last road trip. It would seem, short term, it's bee a net positive. Can't remember a the last time we went on a 4-2 road trip with so many main players out.

Also, this is a different type of ball movement. Passes before that were often short hand offs, are now quicker, longer passes requiring more defensive movement and involving more than just a couple players passing/handing off to each other.

Shot selection is more evenly distributed, and it is certainly more pleasant to watch.
Click to expand...
Pretty strange to see 7 players with at least 9 points, but nobody above 19, and nobody but Ant taking more than 12 shots.
 
Tince said:
Checked the stats and we are averaging 30 more passes per game, but it's only resulting in 1.4 more assists per game, 3 more turnovers, and 8 less points per game than last year.

At least in the short term, it appears to be a net negative.
Click to expand...
what about per possession?
 
TBpup said:
4-2 on this last road trip. It would seem, short term, it's bee a net positive. Can't remember a the last time we went on a 4-2 road trip with so many main players out..
Click to expand...

Portland is back to doing what they have done for several season. That is generally lose to teams with winning records and generally beat most teams they play who don't have winning records. The two losses on the road trip came against good teams, and they lost those two games by 22 points/game

against teams with winning records, Portland has had 1 win this season when Dame hasn't played. Brooklyn a couple of weeks ago.
 
wizenheimer said:
Portland is back to doing what they have done for several season. That is generally lose to teams with winning records and generally beat most teams they play who don't have winning records. The two losses on the road trip came against good teams, and they lost those two games by 22 points/game

against teams with winning records, Portland has had 1 win this season when Dame hasn't played. Brooklyn a couple of weeks ago.
Click to expand...

Come on, man, I know you want to tamp down expectations, but this post is pretty hard spin on the negative. You average the two losses to Denver and Miami to come up with 22 points per game losing to the two "good teams"? Never mind that the Denver loss was a 32 point blowout and the Miami game was competitive until the final minutes. And the wins over Boston and Toronto count as bad teams because they currently sit at .500? Toronto had a winning record before the Blazers beat them. The Celtics had a winning record the game before they played the Blazers. Winning on the road is tough regardless of opponent records. Going 4-2 with a roster that's missing Dame, Norm, Nance and Zeller? That's a pretty good sign that the Blazers are starting to put things together. Should Cronin see that as a sign that all is well with the Blazers roster? Of course not, but it doesn't mean nothing either.
 
e_blazer said:
Come on, man, I know you want to tamp down expectations, but this post is pretty hard spin on the negative. You average the two losses to Denver and Miami to come up with 22 points per game losing to the two "good teams"? Never mind that the Denver loss was a 32 point blowout and the Miami game was competitive until the final minutes. And the wins over Boston and Toronto count as bad teams because they currently sit at .500? Toronto had a winning record before the Blazers beat them. The Celtics had a winning record the game before they played the Blazers. Winning on the road is tough regardless of opponent records. Going 4-2 with a roster that's missing Dame, Norm, Nance and Zeller? That's a pretty good sign that the Blazers are starting to put things together. Should Cronin see that as a sign that all is well with the Blazers roster? Of course not, but it doesn't mean nothing either.
Click to expand...

please show me where it was I said "bad" teams. I didn't. I said teams with winning records vs teams without...no? And please show me where I said the wins meant "nothing"

as I said, the Blazers recently have been doing what they generally do, and that's beat the teams they are 'supposed' to beat...teams at .500 or below. The big problem has been that those aren't the types of teams they face in the playoffs
 
Last edited:
wizenheimer said:
please show me where it was I said "bad" teams. I didn't. I said teams with winning records vs teams without...no? And please show me where I said the win meant nothing

as I said, the Blazers recently have been doing what they generally do, and that's beat the teams they are 'supposed' to beat...teams at .500 or below. The big problem has been that those aren't the types of teams they face in the playoffs
Click to expand...

I put quotes around 'good teams' because you used that phrase to characterize Denver and Miami (Denver currently sits two games above .500, but they've been under that mark at various points in the season so I don't know how much better they are than either Boston or Toronto). I didn't put quotes around 'bad teams' because you didn't say that. You just lumped Boston and Toronto, both .500 teams that have been "winning teams" at various points this season, with the non-winning record losers.
 
wizenheimer said:
please show me where it was I said "bad" teams. I didn't. I said teams with winning records vs teams without...no? And please show me where I said the wins meant "nothing"

as I said, the Blazers recently have been doing what they generally do, and that's beat the teams they are 'supposed' to beat...teams at .500 or below. The big problem has been that those aren't the types of teams they face in the playoffs
Click to expand...
wizenheimer said:
Portland is back to doing what they have done for several season. That is generally lose to teams with winning records and generally beat most teams they play who don't have winning records. The two losses on the road trip came against good teams, and they lost those two games by 22 points/game

against teams with winning records, Portland has had 1 win this season when Dame hasn't played. Brooklyn a couple of weeks ago.
Click to expand...

this is next level cynicism.

I'm waiting for your weekly "Ant isn't that good post," now.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RR7
e_blazer said:
I put quotes around 'good teams' because you used that phrase to characterize Denver and Miami (Denver currently sits two games above .500, but they've been under that mark at various points in the season so I don't know how much better they are than either Boston or Toronto). I didn't put quotes around 'bad teams' because you didn't say that. You just lumped Boston and Toronto, both .500 teams that have been "winning teams" at various points this season, with the non-winning record losers.
Click to expand...

ok...so then?

not trying to be combative here I'm just not sure what it is you're objecting to...the 'tone' of my post?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

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