Game Thread GAME# 65: BLAZERS @ HAWKS - MAY 3, 2021 - MONDAY, 5:00, NBCSNW

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in

If you could only choose one of the following, whom would you take out of Stotts' doghouse?

  • Total voters
    40
  • Poll closed .
blazerkor said:
Wait a minute I already said I was wrong and that "Enough is enough" was definitely real. It's made a huge difference in the way this team has played. I don't know if that difference will be enough to win in the playoffs or the change in focus and effort will be sustained but I was wrong and the people in here saying that it was a big deal were right.
Click to expand...
I know you did. I'm taking the skepticism another step further. You inspired me.
 
UKRAINEFAN said:
Dave from Blazers Edge actually has some good observations about some things Blazers are doing differently, both on O and D. I was certainly impressed with how they centered the offense around Nurkic in the first few minutes and set up Powell for a three on a curl around a pick. He also notices how many times in the game they again resort to iso play:
"Aggressive Start
The Blazers now have a definite style coming out of the gate. It’s typified by playing through Jusuf Nurkic in the center of the court, then feeding off of the inside-out action. As the Blazers are finding, starting a scoring play off of a collapsed defense is better than off of a set one.

The other hallmark of their early offense is serious aggression by Damian Lillard. For much of the last month, observers and opponents alike have been left guessing what Lillard will do with the ball in his hands. He’s been walking it, paced steadily, surveying options. In the last few games he’s been creating his own options, which is quite a different thing. Nurkic’s passing and Lillard’s scoring have become Scylla and Charybdis for Portland’s opponents.

Three Productive Guards
For the second straight game, Lillard, CJ McCollum, and Norman Powell all produced, and off of relatively few attempts. This can be directly related to the inside-out power and All-Star aggression mentioned above. With defenses turning towards the rim and Lillard, McCollum is left a ton of real estate to operate in. Once he gets hot, he’s not cooling down for anything less than a double-team. When defenses catch up to CJ, Powell is next, either hitting a three or driving it right back to the same rim where the initial threat started. Or, God forbid, the ball goes right back to Lillard and the Threepocalypse is nigh.


When the ball is moving and all three guards are hitting efficiently, the Blazers are playing BINGO with a card full of Free Spaces. It’s pretty easy to win that way.

More Screens
Don’t sleep on the ability (and willingness) of Nurkic, Enes Kanter, and sometimes Robert Covington to free up dribblers with picks. The Blazers weren’t as roll-ish tonight as they were against the Brooklyn Nets on Friday, but they hit approximately a million quick-release jumpers off of screens, many of which came from distance. This is one of two aspects of the game they’ve clearly emphasized during their “renewal” road trip.

Here’s the other...

High and Low Defense
The Blazers were not great on defense tonight—Boston shot 48.3% overall, 51.3% from the arc—but they did up the intensity. It shows in two ways.

First, they started the game all the way live in the paint. They were willing to cede the Celtics deeper shots as long as attempts in the lane were doubled. They were spry getting back to the arc after swarming inside as well. This dimmed a little as the game wore on, but the initial intent was there. For Portland, that’s something. In particular, it kicks the crap out of no intensity being displayed anywhere.

The Blazers also extended their defense out to the halfcourt line. They’ve gotten away from waiting flat-footed at the arc to see what the opponent will do, then making the point moot by never getting off those flat feet. Instead they’re sending both guards to pick up assignments as soon as their men cross the time line, starting the defense in motion and forcing the dribbler to work instead of setting up confidently.

In the third period, Portland forced turnovers outside the arc with their extended “D”. But whether they got the steal or not, the effort helped their cohesion and attention. Sure, Boston hit shots anyway, but at least they were contested better.

Transition Ball
We should also underline that the Blazers made a concerted effort to get back on defense tonight. They have been embarrassed on multiple occasions over the last month in just this area. Tonight Boston found a minimum of two, often three, defenders when they ran the ball back.

Just as importantly, Portland gave as good as they got on the run. Powell’s nose for layups appears to have infected his backcourt mates. The Blazers don’t have to win games on the break, they just have to avoid losing them there. They did that tonight. Each team scored 16 points in transition.

Threes Everywhere
For all that we’ve just said, this game still devolved into a game of three-pointers. The Blazers hit 19-38 (50%), Boston 20-39 (51.3%). Literally everybody who could shoot them, did. Quick threes, bail-out threes, transition threes...these two teams crafted a Bubba Gump Shrimp menu beyond the arc. Whether that style appeals is a matter of taste, but the Blazers will happily engage in a distance shooting contest with anyone. It’s their bread and butter.

Free Throws
Portland’s overall aggression appeared to pay off at the foul line tonight. They’ve often complained about a lack of respect from the referees, but lo and behold, when the guards forget everything and start scoring hard, free throws follow. Portland shot 22-26 from the line. The Celtics earned only 15 free throws, hitting 13.

When It Falls Apart
This isn’t to say that everything went perfectly for Portland on the offensive end. For large stretches of the game you could predict whether the Blazers would score based on the number of passes that preceded the attempt. Zero passes often resulted in a miss. Two indicated a make.

AD
Portland still drifts into isolation offense against permissive defenses far too easily. We’re not talking Carmelo Anthony buying time for the second unit or the open McCollum “J” here. The Blazers just seem to hit stretches where they forget how they’re succeeding. Everybody wants to get their moves and shots in. That’s so Portland, but it’s still hard to watch when they’re rolling otherwise.

Nurkic at the Rim
Jusuf Nurkic had another fantastic night, with 14 points on 6-10 shooting, 11 rebounds, and 4 assists. He remains the biggest difference-maker on the team outside of Lillard himself. His Achilles Heel—which Boston didn’t take advantage of but playoffs teams will—is his inability to score inside versus coverage. He doesn’t have a decisive move and he doesn’t have a strong finish. Portland’s inside-out attack is going to falter if there’s no “inside” to be had. Enes Kanter is much stronger in this area. The difference between them is noticeable. If Nurk can get even a little bit of that Kanter footwork and touch, he’d be devastating."
Click to expand...

Only took Stotts til the end of the season to play through Nurk, what a genius. Better late than never I guess.

I also don’t agree with the assessment that Nurk lacks a go to move inside. He’s got a great spin move and he’s got the power to back down essentially every player in the league. His problem is he gets too impatient and rushes shots. That’s when the scoops and flips join the party. Annoying because he’s just bailing the defense out with those. What I’ve noticed though is the more we feed him, the more the game slows down for him. Just keep playing through him and he’ll keep producing.
 
blazerkor said:
Unfortunately your wrong. If you read this...

In the event two or more teams are tied in the standings, a series of tiebreakers are applied to determine which team receives the higher seeding.

  • Two-Team Tiebreaker:
    • 1. Better record in head-to-head games
    • 2. Division winner (this criterion is applied regardless of whether the tied teams are in the same division)
    • 3. Higher winning percentage within division (if teams are in the same division)
    • 4. Higher winning percentage in conference games
    • 5. Higher winning percentage against playoff teams in own conference
    • 6. Higher winning percentage against playoff teams in opposite conference
    • 7. Higher point differential between points scored and points allowed
  • Three-Team Tiebreaker:
    • 1. Division winner (this criterion is applied regardless of whether the tied teams are in the same division)
    • 2. Best head-to-head winning percentage among all teams tied
    • 3. Highest winning percentage within division (if teams are in the same division)
    • 4. Highest winning percentage in conference games
    • 5. Highest winning percentage against playoff teams in own conference
    • 6. Highest point differential between points scored and points allowed
http://www.espn.com/nba/playoffs/matchups

... you can see that in a three way tie, division winner is the first criteria and head to head season series never comes into play because it's a tie between all three teams not any two of them. So we can be 2-1 against both teams but if we're also tied with both when the season ends and the Mavs win their division, they will get the highest seed, because the Lakers swept the Mavs which makes us tied for the second criteria and have the higher in conference winning percentage, they would get the next highest seed and we would get the lowest of the three seeds despite having beat both the Lakers and Mavs in our regular season series with them. This is all why the standings are what they are right now.

The Lakers are three games ahead of us in conference win percentage and the Mavs are three games in front of the Grizz for their division. So this stuff can change.
Click to expand...
Good catch on the Mavs being division winners. I missed that.

However, you are wrong as well. Lakers did NOT sweep Dallas. They actually lost the series to them 2-1.

If all 3 teams tie:
#5 goes to Dallas (Division Winner)
#6 goes to winner of Friday's game (Port/LAL)** (via head2head)
#7 goes to looser of Friday's game (Port/LAL)**
** even if the 3 team tie breaker rules are applied:
+ Portland would get the higher seed with a win via head2head winning %
+ Lakers would get the higher seed with a win vial the highest winning % in the conference.

If Dallas/Lakers tie:
Dallas wins via head2head criteria (2-1)

If Portland/Lakers tie:
Winner of Friday's game wins via head2head criteria (2-1)

If Dallas/Portland tie:
Portland wins via head2head criteria (2-1)
 
Strenuus said:
Yeah. Fundamentally there's a lot of issues. But it is clockwork.
Click to expand...

Teams seem to play better when starters like CJ and Nurkic are healthy and very good players like Kanter are playing behind them. The Norm Powell trade was huge because DJJ is not a viable starter for a good team and neither was Gary Trent Jr. at this point of his career.
 
tester551 said:
Good catch on the Mavs being division winners. I missed that.

However, you are wrong as well. Lakers did NOT sweep Dallas. They actually lost the series to them 2-1.

If all 3 teams tie:
#5 goes to Dallas (Division Winner)
#6 goes to winner of Friday's game (Port/LAL)** (via head2head)
#7 goes to looser of Friday's game (Port/LAL)**
** even if the 3 team tie breaker rules are applied:
+ Portland would get the higher seed with a win via head2head winning %
+ Lakers would get the higher seed with a win vial the highest winning % in the conference.

If Dallas/Lakers tie:
Dallas wins via head2head criteria (2-1)

If Portland/Lakers tie:
Winner of Friday's game wins via head2head criteria (2-1)

If Dallas/Portland tie:
Portland wins via head2head criteria (2-1)
Click to expand...

So uh Friday’s game is pretty important, wonder if they rest anyone vs the cavs
 
Mr. Robot said:
@bobf what say you
Click to expand...

He was previously a career 18% so I was very very much against him taking 3's. Now he's 10/26. The chances that an 18% shooter goes 10/26 or better is about 1%. So he could still be an 18% 3-point shooter but it's that unlikely. He could have worked like crazy and is now a 38% 3-point shooter. I doubt that but it's possible. More likely he's somewhere in between. For now I will stop saying he shouldn't shoot 3's until the sample size gets bigger! I'd much rather he takes 3's than long 2's in any case.
 
Go Blazers!! Two games in a row... what a treat! Coop the chicken Hawks.
 
Did Atlanta have to wear their black jerseys. This black and Grey is hurting my eyes
 
Snell is the best shooter in the NBA?
 
Norm with the steal and fast break! Free points.
 
Maybe don’t leave the guy shooting the highest percentage from three in the league wide open?
 
Kanter getting roasted on D. Try RHJ Terry.
 
I thought the parade was supposed to be us celebrating a regular season win, not them parading into the paint at will...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

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