Getting to 100ppg

[Denny Crane]

Blazers scored 102.8 last season.

Theres no point in comparing last years starter to this years; we had 4 guys playing 35mins a night but this next season we'll have one. Our #2 scorer is very likely coming off the bench.

Edit: Ok I think you are talking about FGA. We had a good defense last year and would take our time in half court sets that reduces FGA. I expect more shots for both teams.

Right. But to project all this scoring from guys as if they match their per 36 suggests they need to play 36.

That's all I'm saying.

If Stotts has them chucking up shots in the first 6 seconds of the :24 clock, both teams will get more shots. Obviously.

The issue I see is Leonard isn't going to either draw double teams or get particularly easy shots. He's no LMA, as you point out.

 

[BonesJones]

The way I look at it, is if we have a starting lineup of Dame, Henderson, Aminu, Leonard and Plumlee and they all play 30 minutes, we should be able to get 70 points
CJ will get around 30 minutes which should get us at least 14ppg

Our 2 bigs off the bench should be able to get us a total of 13ppg (36min total)

Factor in our backup SF (Crabbe, Harkless) getting 15 minutes a game and they should be able to get us 5ppg.

That leaves us at 102.
We'll run more so I could see us getting a couple more per game

 

[Duckhook]

I really see Henderson as our X factor for next year. He was stuck in a slow, plodding offense and I see us running A LOT next year. I see more points for him:

Dame: 26
CJ: 15
Henderson: 18
Legend: 11
Vonleh: 6
Plums: 8
Aminu: 8
Davis: 5
Crabbe: 5
Total: 102

 

[chzbrgr]

Right. But to project all this scoring from guys as if they match their per 36 suggests they need to play 36.

That's all I'm saying.

If Stotts has them chucking up shots in the first 6 seconds of the :24 clock, both teams will get more shots. Obviously.

The issue I see is Leonard isn't going to either draw double teams or get particularly easy shots. He's no LMA, as you point out.

None of the players listed is at their per 36 except Dame and Cj other than that who is that far above their season avgs other than Vonleh?

No Lenoard is not going to draw double teams like LMA but he will stretch the defense more than LMA teams will learn to respect his jumper or pay the price. Opening driving lanes for cutters like Henderson and Aminu. The point is we are probably in for a team that is above average on offense and as of right now a mystery on defense. However, with a roster full of active and athletic players the chances are good we can play league average defense.

 

[rasheedfan2005]

dames going for 30 and the 3 point record. he's also posterizing at least 1 big man a game. the trick there is he's only going to dunk on lamarsha so he has to do it 82 times to average 1 a game. and each one will taste oh so sweet

 

[Draco]

Right. But to project all this scoring from guys as if they match their per 36 suggests they need to play 36.

That's all I'm saying.

If Stotts has them chucking up shots in the first 6 seconds of the :24 clock, both teams will get more shots. Obviously.

The issue I see is Leonard isn't going to either draw double teams or get particularly easy shots. He's no LMA, as you point out.

There should be a number of the guys who score much more than their historical per 36. CJ as an example was the 4th option offensively when he was on the court but now he'll be the 2nd or 1st option. Instead of taking a shot when two other teammates have passed them up he will have the ball at the start of a play. His usage rate will be much higher and his scoring average as well. Same can be said for many of our players; they will have drastically higher usage percentages than prior seasons.

All of these Blazers are at points in their careers where its possible a few of them can increase their usage and retain the same effectiveness in scoring efficiency. My projections assume a few Blazers excel in larger roles of the offense than they've ever had. If none of these Blazers can handle a higher usage percentage it could really hamper our offense and lead to lower team scoring as I believe you're projecting.

 

[oldmangrouch]

I so love to watch the sunbeams and unicorns at play amongst the kool-aid fountains!

 

[SlyPokerDog]

I so love to watch the sunbeams and unicorns at play amongst the kool-aid fountains!

I like to mix my kool-aid with 151 Bacardi. BrianFromWa got me hooked on it when he was here.

 

[oldmangrouch]

I like to mix my kool-aid with 151 Bacardi. BrianFromWa got me hooked on it when he was here.

Sounds like 1970s fraternity party punch: Kool-aid + 2 bottles of MD 20/20 + 1 bottle of 151 rum + 1 pint 180 proof grain alcohol.

Good times - what I remember of them! (some time I may have to tell you the story of Betty Ford's visit to U of O.)

 

[SlyPokerDog]

Sounds like 1970s fraternity party punch: Kool-aid + 2 bottles of MD 20/20 + 1 bottle of 151 rum + 1 pint 180 proof grain alcohol.

Good times - what I remember of them! (some time I may have to tell you the story of Betty Ford's visit to U of O.)

I remember parties like that at Uof O. Used to soak fruit in the grain alcohol and then throw that in the punch. Also never used the MD 20/20.

 

[Nikolokolus]

I was going to write up something thoughtful and well reasoned as a rebuttal to this crazy assertion and then it dawned on me how fruitless and pointless that all would be.

Carry on with your circle jerk gentlemen. Via con dios.

 

[PtldPlatypus]

I was going to write up something thoughtful and well reasoned as a rebuttal to this crazy assertion and then it dawned on me how fruitless and pointless that all would be.

Carry on with your circle jerk gentlemen. Via con dios.

I guess that speaks to your view on the purpose of posting in the forum: Is it to generate discussion and the exchange of ideas, or is it too convince people of the validity of your position? Your comment suggests that you are more interested in the latter than the former.

 

[Nikolokolus]

I guess that speaks to your view on the purpose of posting in the forum: Is it to generate discussion and the exchange of ideas, or is it too convince people of the validity of your position? Your comment suggests that you are more interested in the latter than the former.

No. It probably speaks more to the fact that I've been working 65 hours a week for about 13 weeks straight and I stayed up way too late last night.

 

[magnifier661]

Just because we may score 102 a game doesn't mean that the opponent will score less. I think the defense will be the biggest concern. And it's not because our players aren't capable of being good defenders. It's more about timing and communication that veteran teams are really good at

 

[Pinwheel1]

Sounds like 1970s fraternity party punch: Kool-aid + 2 bottles of MD 20/20 + 1 bottle of 151 rum + 1 pint 180 proof grain alcohol.

Good times - what I remember of them! (some time I may have to tell you the story of Betty Ford's visit to U of O.)

Ah yes.......Green Death. ....... Those poor unsuspecting freshmen coeds...........

 

[Nikolokolus]

Since I'm awake now after a refreshing 6 hours of sleep, I'll go ahead and postulate why 100 points per game might be a bridge too far.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/POR/stats_per_game.html

So in Stotts' three years as coach they broke the 100 points mark twice; which seems on the surface to suggest that he must be pushing the pace or something, but when you start to pull the numbers apart to see what made the offense so prolific the past two years it really only comes down to two things. A high volume of 3 points shots, shot at a good percentage. Everything else: 2 pt attempts, 2 pt %, offensive rebounds, steals, free throw attempts, FT%, etc., are all well within a standard deviation of each other (mostly).

Now I know he'll try to adjust his system to account for new players with totally different strengths and weaknesses, but since he's already said that the team's defensive philosophy is unlikely to change, I'm not sure I would count on a huge uptick in points created off of turnovers or fast-break points. Compounding the problem is the fact that we have a real dearth of shooters/scorers on the team. Some have hypothesized that we'll hit teams with a steady diet of pick-and-roll with a more attack oriented roster - guys that like to get close to the hoop to score - but without the spacing provided by shooters who can catch and shoot from the corners consistently, it's easier said than done. Not to mention that this team is probably going to take awhile to gel and learn each other's sweet spots.

So putting aside what the defense will look like, wins and losses, and overall points-differential for the moment. When you look at this team who are the bonafide scorers outside of Lillard and maybe McCollum? That probably sounds like a rhetorical question, but I'm serious. Do guys like Aminu, Henderson, Plumlee and Davis have the chops and I've just never noticed? Full disclosure, I've watched them play very little.

I don't mind being wrong, but I haven't seen a compelling case yet for why this team will be any good at generating points on a consistent, night-to-night basis.

 

[oldfisherman]

Man, if you guys can remember the 70’s, you where not really there.

 

[blue9]

Adding up player point averages doesn't equate to team scoring average. If it worked that way our team scoring average last season would be 143.9, when it was actually 102.8. So if you're projecting our players scoring averages to total 102 that means we'll likely be averaging something closer to 73ppg.

I think we'll average mid/high-90s, and that our point average will be slightly inflated due to garbage time. But I hope I'm wrong. I currently don't have any faith in Stotts' ability to coach a high-functioning offense, but I am very interested to see what he comes up with. I think the roster has the ability to score points (and defend), but it'll require a team-centric approach, rather than a player-centric approach. I think Jerry Sloan or Larry Brown could do wonders with this roster...if only we had a fountain of youth the rejuvenate those guys!

 

[magnifier661]

Adding up player point averages doesn't equate to team scoring average. If it worked that way our team scoring average last season would be 143.9, when it was actually 102.8. So if you're projecting our players scoring averages to total 102 that means we'll likely be averaging something closer to 73ppg.

I think we'll average mid/high-90s, and that our point average will be slightly inflated due to garbage time. But I hope I'm wrong. I currently don't have any faith in Stotts' ability to coach a high-functioning offense, but I am very interested to see what he comes up with. I think the roster has the ability to score points (and defend), but it'll require a team-centric approach, rather than a player-centric approach. I think Jerry Sloan or Larry Brown could do wonders with this roster...if only we had a fountain of youth the rejuvenate those guys!

No, I believe we are talking about regular rotation points.

I guess we could really break this down by position.

PG: 28 PPG: Starter: 25 (Bench: 4)
SG: 19 PPG: Starter: 12, (Bench: 7)
SF: 13 PPG: Starter: 7, (Bench: 6)
PF: 26 PPG: Starter: 13 (Bench: 13)
C: 16 PPG: Starter: 8 (Bench: 8)

That's 102 points. Very conservative numbers. Remember that our points will come with more efficiency when the top shooter isn't tossing 16 shots at 2 points for 40%.

 

[blue9]

Remember that our points will come with more efficiency when the top shooter isn't tossing 16 shots at 2 points for 40%.

Oh, you don't have to remind ME. I think I'm probably the happiest guy there is when it comes to the fact that LMA isn't on our team anymore!

 

[magnifier661]

Oh, you don't have to remind ME. I think I'm probably the happiest guy there is when it comes to the fact that LMA isn't on our team anymore!

I know!!!! LOL...

Anyway, I think our offense will be much more efficient with roles clearly laid out. I feel this new team will be more dynamic, with many different scoring options. I just hope Stotts is aware of the diversity on offense he has. He has the opportunity to kill you from inside, mid range, slashing and outside. He just needs these players to buy into his offensive scheme. Dame needs to round up the troops and make them believe they are good because they really are.

 

[blue9]

Anyway, I think our offense will be much more efficient with roles clearly laid out. I feel this new team will be more dynamic, with many different scoring options. I just hope Stotts is aware of the diversity on offense he has. He has the opportunity to kill you from inside, mid range, slashing and outside.

I'm with you on the roster - I think there's a ton of potential there. But until I see Stotts make meaningful changes, and implement an offensive system that utilizes more than two players at a time, I don't have any faith in him. I'll give him about 20 games and if we don't see improvements in HOW the team plays (I'm not concerned with results at the moment) then I really hope he's fired. He just seems too simplistic and would rather let players free lance in his "flow offense", than put in the work to devise and teach a robust offense predicated on many moving parts with many different options.

 

[PtldPlatypus]

No, I believe we are talking about regular rotation points.

I guess we could really break this down by position.

PG: 28 PPG: Starter: 25 (Bench: 4)
SG: 19 PPG: Starter: 12, (Bench: 7)
SF: 13 PPG: Starter: 7, (Bench: 6)
PF: 26 PPG: Starter: 13 (Bench: 13)
C: 16 PPG: Starter: 8 (Bench: 8)

That's 102 points. Very conservative numbers. Remember that our points will come with more efficiency when the top shooter isn't tossing 16 shots at 2 points for 40%.

I would reduce the backup PF scoring and increase the backup SG scoring by about 5 each. Otherwise--makes some sense.

 

[Orion Bailey]

My prediction is that Lillard's scoring average will go down to 18pts a game. Without LMA and Wes it will be easier to double team him. But I believe that his assist average will go up to 7.5 a game as he adjusts to the increased pressure and the abilities of his teammates.

CJ will have nights were he scores 16-18pts, and nights where he struggles and scores 6-8pts. Not sure if he will have more good nights or struggling nights.

The rest I just don't know yet. A lot depends on how they jell together.

A dollar short and a day late, but your still being a buzzkill Sly!

 

[SlyPokerDog]

A dollar short and a day late, but your still being a buzzkill Sly!

I don't see how Lillard increases his assists is a buzzkill.

 

[Hobbesarable]

I think we'll average mid/high-90s, and that our point average will be slightly inflated due to garbage time.

This. Our team averaged 102.8 ppg last season and we are expecting a drop off this upcoming season.

Points per game leaders for 2014-15 season.

 

[Draco]

Adding up player point averages doesn't equate to team scoring average. If it worked that way our team scoring average last season would be 143.9, when it was actually 102.8. So if you're projecting our players scoring averages to total 102 that means we'll likely be averaging something closer to 73ppg.

I think we'll average mid/high-90s, and that our point average will be slightly inflated due to garbage time. But I hope I'm wrong. I currently don't have any faith in Stotts' ability to coach a high-functioning offense, but I am very interested to see what he comes up with. I think the roster has the ability to score points (and defend), but it'll require a team-centric approach, rather than a player-centric approach. I think Jerry Sloan or Larry Brown could do wonders with this roster...if only we had a fountain of youth the rejuvenate those guys!

Good post.

I kind of assumed for my answer it was a breakdown of 9 or 10 players points scored in one game if they played every minute instead of 9 players average for a whole season. But yes you are right.

 

[Trackjack]

I think 100 to 102 is pretty good estimate where they will be but don't be surprise our defense will be better than people thinks.