Have we overcorrected from the '90s?

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in
55 for giannis tonight

150 for OKC in a blowout win against an almost fully healthy Boston team. And they were missing SGA.

what is happening
 
Given the ridiculous amount of offensive talent and parity in the league, wouldn't it behoove us to pivot and invest most of our $ in defensive stoppers right now?
 
illmatic99 said:
Given the ridiculous amount of offensive talent and parity in the league, wouldn't it behoove us to pivot and invest most of our $ in defensive stoppers right now?
Click to expand...

that's kind of what Olshey was settling for when he added RoCo, Jones, and Nance.

but I don't think it works when the stoppers really can't stop consistently, and they are not solid on offense. It stresses any offense to be playing 3-on-5 when you have the ball. The highest value is in two-way players, especially at wings. Of course, getting those types of players is the biggest hurdle
 
wizenheimer said:
that's kind of what Olshey was settling for when he added RoCo, Jones, and Nance.

but I don't think it works when the stoppers really can't stop consistently, and they are not solid on offense. It stresses any offense to be playing 3-on-5 when you have the ball. The highest value is in two-way players, especially at wings. Of course, getting those types of players is the biggest hurdle
Click to expand...

Roco was actually very good his first year. He just fell off a cliff his second year.

Nance also was the right kind of player in theory, but his injury prone nature makes him less valuable than assumed.

I don't necessarily agree that we HAVE to have all two-way players. I'm thinking moreso about trading away some of our offensive talent for guys who could show up on all defense teams. Ant for OG for example. I've been hesitant in the past to pull the trigger on something like this, but would be open to it now just to zag when other teams are zigging. In the long run, OG could be more valuable because of his lockdown ability than Ant's three pt shooting.
 
illmatic99 said:
Roco was actually very good his first year. He just fell off a cliff his second year.

Nance also was the right kind of player in theory, but his injury prone nature makes him less valuable than assumed.

I don't necessarily agree that we HAVE to have all two-way players. I'm thinking moreso about trading away some of our offensive talent for guys who could show up on all defense teams. Ant for OG for example. I've been hesitant in the past to pull the trigger on something like this, but would be open to it now just to zag when other teams are zigging. In the long run, OG could be more valuable because of his lockdown ability than Ant's three pt shooting.
Click to expand...

ok...I see where you're coming from

Ant for OG has been discussed here. I've never been a big OG fan like a lot of people, so my initial response was negative

upload_2023-1-4_10-48-51.png

at this point, I'd be inclined to say that Ant's alleged superior offense has shown up inconsistently, at best. Meanwhile, I'd have to assume that OG's defense shows up much more often. Ant just doesn't have a big advantage on offense, although it's probably hard to gauge his floor-spreading impact

I'd be inclined to say that the 'trade' would make Portland a little better team...? Dame-Hart-OG-Grant-Nurk is definitely a better defensive lineup. Would the defensive upgrade be enough to offset the offensive downgrade? and how big a downgrade would it be, really?

I sure would not trade both Ant and Sharpe in the deal
 

Attachments

  • upload_2023-1-4_10-48-51.png
    upload_2023-1-4_10-48-51.png
    71.9 KB · Views: 56
Last edited:
wizenheimer said:
ok...I see where you're coming from

Ant for OG has been discussed here. I've never been a big OG fan like a lot of people, so my initial response was negative

View attachment 52574

at this point, I'd be inclined to say that Ant's alleged superior offense has shown up inconsistently, at best. Meanwhile, I'd have to assume that OG's defense shows up much more often. Ant just doesn't have a big advantage on offense, although it's probably hard to gauge his floor-spreading impact

I'd be inclined to say that the 'trade' would make Portland a little better team...? Dame-Hart-OG-Grant-Nurk is definitely a better defensive lineup. Would the defensive upgrade be enough to offset the offensive downgrade? and how big a downgrade would it be, really?

I sure would trade both Ant and Sharpe in the deal
Click to expand...

Was that a typo? Did you mean to say you would NOT trade both for OG? Because that would be crazy to give them both for OG
 
WAY over corrected. It's like all star games on some nights. OKC just dropped 150 points on the Celtics WITHOUT SGA. They had 5 players with 20 points or more and the Celtics had Tatum/Brown playing. Scoring 30 points isn't even a highlight anymore. Mitchel gets 71, Greek Freek drops 55, and the amount of players putting up over 40 isn't even special.
 
What needs correction would be refs....they reward defensive excellence to turn into get out of trouble free throws over and over or goal tending calls where it's questionable. Defenders are getting squeezed out of the impact on games. Pop is right...it's going to lead to crap basketball. The 90s had some bad refs and too many free throws as well. I don't glorify that era like some folks do...there was a lot less parity in the league back then too.
 
I'd love to see an exposition NBA game (next years all star game) played with the rims at 12'. The impact of just the one change would be fun to watch and see if there are more lay in's and what the shooting would be like.
It's time to raise the bar (rim) and allow new adjustments to the game. I doubt you have have as many stretch 4's & 5's hangin around the 3 point line. Pop is on target about the game becoming nothing but a offensive circus.
 
Goal posts were on the goal line. When the NCAA moved them to the end zone's backline in 1927, the NFL followed suit. In 1933, however, the NFL adopted its own rule book and placed the goal posts back on the goal line. NFL goal posts stayed there until 1974, when they were moved to the back of the end zone.Sep 28, 2015
 
I wonder what the injury rate has looked like over the last 5 years compared to a five year stretch 20 years ago. Not for the Blazers obviously because we’re cursed, but for the rest of the league.

I’d rather see less defense and more scoring leading to fewer injuries and more star players playing more nights. But I haven’t done the research.
 
I think bringing back handchecking would do more for defense than raising the rims..let them play defense...in Euro ball there is no goal tending so you can really protect the rim more than in the NBA
 
If hand-checking was allowed there would have to be a compromise. The '90s went too far with the grabbing and "guiding" players away from where they wanted to go. Too much holding away from the ball as well back then.

I think there are more minor things they can try first that would help the defense, especially when guarding three point shooters. They are babied out there as compared to what goes on in the paint.
 
I think it has more to do with players improved shooting ability than the rules.

But I'm in favor of abolishing the 3pt shot. Other sports don't give you a different number of points based on where you score.

It would bring back incentive to get onto the paint
 
Offensive rating went up from 103 to 106 when hand checking rule was implemented. But its now at 115.

Teams are shooting 2x as many 3s. Its the 3pters stupid
 
I think the problem is that the defense get punished for the offense’s mistakes. They get called fouls even when the offensive player fall down to the ground even when the defender make a great play. The other problem is that the offense can do all sort of things that throw off the defense like carrying, traveling, and illegal screens. These stuff don’t get called anymore. When you combine those two issues, it’s no wonder why these guys don’t play defense. It’s because they’re aren’t allowed to quite literally
 
riverman said:
I think bringing back handchecking would do more for defense than raising the rims..let them play defense...in Euro ball there is no goal tending so you can really protect the rim more than in the NBA
Click to expand...
Hand checking is a key element of every good defensive team in the EuroLeague: post-ups, drives to the basket, pressing full court; hands are involved all the time and fouls are called only if you use them excessively.
 
I know that this seems backwards because basketball is our game that we brought to the rest of the world but I just think we should adopt all FIBA rules and allow the physicality they allow... we already did it with the take foul, we should just go with all of the rest of them. We don't have to use the same ball as they use but we should go with their rules.
 
blazerkor said:
I know that this seems backwards because basketball is our game that we brought to the rest of the world but I just think we should adopt all FIBA rules and allow the physicality they allow... we already did it with the take foul, we should just go with all of the rest of them. We don't have to use the same ball as they use but we should go with their rules.
Click to expand...
Yes, except for the goaltending thing where you can touch the ball the moment it touches the rim. That rules sucks.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)

Featured content

Back
Top