It's an interesting "stat" and another way to illustrate how young AND good this team is, but the whole 50 games played thing is a little deceptive. Yeah, Bayless has played 50 games, but only 631 minutes. Yes, he's a rookiem but he's not part of the regular rotation.
The most recent young team that had some success playing four rookies big minutes was the 2004-05 Bulls. They had four rookies (Gordon, Nocioni, Deng and Duhon) that played over 1600 minutes, including two that played over 2000, and finished 47 - 35. The Blazers have a better record, but are less reliant on their rookies than that Bulls team was. The Blazers will only end up with one rookie (Rudy) playing over 1600 minutes compared to the 4 Bulls.
Not that I'd trade our roster for those Baby Bulls, just pointing out how this "stat" doesn't show the whole picture.
BNM
The Baby Bulls had everyone excited. That they had 4 rookies making big contributions, PLUS much of the rest of their team were very young: Hinrich 24; Curry 22; Chandler 22. The Baby Bulls was an apt moniker and their 47 wins was impressive.
But I don't think 47 wins in the East is anywhere near the accomplishment of 50ish wins in the West.
Also, I think the Blazers overall are on par with those Baby Bulls in terms of overall experience level.
Both teams had 9 players with 1,000 plus minutes. Let's concentrate on that 9 man rotation.
Bulls average age: 24.7
Blazers average age: 23.8
Bulls total years NBA experience: 26
Blazers total years NBA experience: 24
Antonio Davis, who was very important to that team as the vet leader, aged 36, does skew their numbers. Even factoring that, the youth and experience of the two teams looks to me to be roughly the same.
Other notes: Both teams had an experienced Euro "Rookie".
Both teams had two old guys (Davis, Harrington and Blake, Pryz).
Both teams had two rookie PGs who weren't very good (yet). The difference? We mostly sit Bayless down. They played Duhon big minutes as they had little choice.
Both teams had 10th & 11th men who got between 600 and 1,000 minutes. The difference? Our guys - Bayless and Frye pretty much have sucked (this season) and have not contributed to victories. Win Shares combined; 0.7. And Bayless is a prospect who is part of our "assets" for the future. The Bulls 10th & 11th guys were 30+ year old vets who won games for that team even in limited minutes. Piatkowski and Griffin had Win Shares combined of 3.6. Makes our 50ish wins even more impressive when you realize McMillian doesn't even have a Piatkowski or Griffin caliber vet on the bench to turn to when the need arises.
http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/CHI/2005.html
http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/POR/2009.html
The difference between these two very youthful and successful teams?
The Blazers are already a much better team at the same stage than those Bulls. And they way the Blazers win is much more promising. Blazers have an excellent and methodical offense (Offensive Rating No. 1, Pace Factor 30th) that should translate long-term to quality playoff basketball.
The Bulls hung their hat on defense (Defensive Rating 2nd), hustle and outworking the other team. Great defense is great for playoff basketball, but the constant hustle wears thin over time. Their offense was terrible (Offensive Rating 26th) and they had trouble improving it without affecting their "hustle" and defense or trading away core youth.
I think the Blazers will find an easier time improving their already not so atrocious defense (Defensive Rating 18th) than the Bulls did trying to improve their offense. Just having Oden and Batum play big minutes in the coming years will make a huge improvement. If we can add a PG who can slow ball, plus factor in the expected normal NBA experience improvment in defense for Aldridge, Roy, Rudy, Webster and Bayless, and good team defense should happen.
