Impressions on preseason so far

[LayneStaley]

Then your back to square one because now you need another cj

Wouldn’t Trent be that?

 

[blazerkor]

exactly how am I "twisting stats"??

'Twisted stats'? Those are verbatim from the basketball reference website....just as they are for any other player in the league. And it wasn't just one or two cherry picked categories. It was a large cross section of many different stats for both players. Since both have missed many games due to injury, even that part is fairly apples-to-apples.

If someone wants to interpret them in different manners or under different circumstances, so be it. But the stats are not twisted. Then again, fake news is the norm these days.

I don't think either of you are serious right now. You know that projecting stats into per 36 is not an accurate way to portray two guys who fulfilled completely different roles on their teams and played on teams that were competing in completely different ways. Giles was getting less minutes on a shitty team and Zach was getting more minutes on a team that was competing every game. Context needs to be added to stats not just putting some numbers in bold to paint one player as better than the other. When you post what you did, you really aren't making any point at all, you're attempting to pull a fast one. There are a lot of stats that you can cut and paste that contradict reality. Sometimes per 36 are very accurate and sometimes they are completely misleading. What you did was much closer to completely misleading. So yeah, you picked the stats that supported your opinion even though they obviously didn't represent the two compared players' contributions to wins.

Just for fun I'll give you a stat that twists the narrative. Trae Young, James Harden, Russell Westbrook, Luka Doncic and LeBron James had the most turnovers per game this season so they're obviously the worst in the game at protecting possessions, while Justin Jackson, Semi Ojeleye, Marco Belinelli, our own Gary Trent Jr. and Patrick Patterson had the least turnovers per game this season so they're obviously the best in the league at ball safety. That's not the right context so those stats have been twisted to fit a false narrative.

The funny thing is if healthy I'm not sure who will be better out of Zach and Giles but I do know that the stats you put up have no baring on how effective they have been in relation to each other to this point in their careers.

https://www.datapine.com/blog/misle...ics are simply the,have the full data picture.

 

[BonesJones]

I think they start off 10-10, but after that win 2/3 of their games. It's clear they need time. Two new starters = more time to click.

They will continue to be torched by teams that are outstanding from 3. They have not altered the perimeter defense. You can pass faster than a defender can run.

We haven't altered are perimeter defense? Huh? I'm not sure we could've altered it more...

10-10 would be an absolute disaster considering only 2, maybe 3 out of their first 20 games are against teams that are more talented than them, and a lot of other teams are incorporating new guys...

The Blazers are incorporated RoCo (who fits well anywhere) and DJJ. Kanter played here just a season ago. Maybe they'll have to incorporate Giles as well, but he might not play regularly.

Other teams:
LAL - Schroder, Harrell, Matthews, Gasol
LAC - Ibaka, Kennard, Batum
HOU - Wall, Wood, Cousins,
PHX - CP3, Crowder, Galloway, Smith, Moore
DAL - Richardson, Johnson
GSW - Oubre, Wiseman, Bazemore, Wanamaker
NOP - Bledsoe, Adams, Lewis

 

[BonesJones]

Yep... but that's never going to happen as long as NO is around. Because, as you know - CJ is a foundational piece for this team.

It actually doesn't solve it.

 

[BonesJones]

Wouldn’t shedding CJs salary solve a lot of these problems with Trent, DJJ and whoever else we currently might not be able to keep? If we could get expirings and maybe picks for him?

1. Shedding CJs salary wouldnt solve any of that.
2. Shedding CJ would make us a far worse team.

 

[BonesJones]

They're literally using Per 36 to account for the minute differential between two players and to view production on a per minute scale without it being skewed due to a time variable, but apparently that's "twisted" and outside of people's mental scope.

 

[kjironman1]

They're literally using Per 36 to account for the minute differential between two players and to view production on a per minute scale without it being skewed due to a time variable, but apparently that's "twisted" and outside of people's mental scope.

Not being argumentative but i always kind of thought that was what it was used for?
Now i do understand the players had different roles on teams that were at a different place as far as talent and records are concerned. So that would have to be a variable? One of them was being asked to be a fourth or even at times fifth option and the other was being asked to carry much more of their load. I do wonder what those same stats would look like if they were in opposite situations?

 

[wizenheimer]

I don't think either of you are serious right now. You know that projecting stats into per 36 is not an accurate way to portray two guys who fulfilled completely different roles on their teams and played on teams that were competing in completely different ways..

I did not project any stat....bbref compiled the data and I used print screen of the data

and not only did they use per36, they also used per possession which is quite different than per36; it's based upon rates of production and efficiency rather than minutes. And they also compiled the advanced stats

in reality, neither player has been very impressive so far in their careers. They both have below average shooting efficiency although Giles is almost average. Their FT rates are essentially the same. Giles is a decent rebounder but nothing special; Zach is a poor rebounder. Giles is a much better passer with a slightly lower turnover rate. They both have significantly negative BPM marks, but Giles is a little better. Not a lot to get excited about in their careers so far
******************************************************

so I guess what's left is calculating upside. Neither player can be counted on for durability at this point; that's a first consideration. Giles is only a half year younger so there's no 'youth' advantage. We've seen a lot more of Zach which is probably why so many are unimpressed at this point compared to Giles averaging 18.5 points and 13.5 rebounds over two meaningless pre-season games. A little hard to imagine Zach posting numbers like that. By the way, just for the sake of pissing you off, that's Giles averaging 26 points & 19 rebounds per36....

 

[wizenheimer]

2. Shedding CJ would make us a far worse team.

I don't know about "far worse".....in 2019 when CJ missed 12 games, the Blazers went 10-2. Small sample size but still

however...sure, if CJ is simply erased from the roster Portland is probably a worse team. But that's not the discussion is it? The assumptions are CJ would be traded and the player(s) brought in from that trade might more than offset the loss of CJ

as an example, if you gauge wins by winshares, CJ has contributed 30 wins in the 5 seasons he's been starting. 6 wins a year. When Aminu played for Portland he contributed 18 wins in 4 seasons; 4.5 wins a year. I'd sure hope that the Blazers could trade CJ for a package better than Aminu.

 

[blazerkor]

I did not project any stat....bbref compiled the data and I used print screen of the data

and not only did they use per36, they also used per possession which is quite different than per36; it's based upon rates of production and efficiency rather than minutes. And they also compiled the advanced stats

in reality, neither player has been very impressive so far in their careers. They both have below average shooting efficiency although Giles is almost average. Their FT rates are essentially the same. Giles is a decent rebounder but nothing special; Zach is a poor rebounder. Giles is a much better passer with a slightly lower turnover rate. They both have significantly negative BPM marks, but Giles is a little better. Not a lot to get excited about in their careers so far
******************************************************

so I guess what's left is calculating upside. Neither player can be counted on for durability at this point; that's a first consideration. Giles is only a half year younger so there's no 'youth' advantage. We've seen a lot more of Zach which is probably why so many are unimpressed at this point compared to Giles averaging 18.5 points and 13.5 rebounds over two meaningless pre-season games. A little hard to imagine Zach posting numbers like that. By the way, just for the sake of pissing you off, that's Giles averaging 26 points & 19 rebounds per36....

Fair enough

 

[blazerkor]

1. Shedding CJs salary wouldnt solve any of that.
2. Shedding CJ would make us a far worse team.

1. I think it would solve the salary problem allowing us to re-sign DJJ, then do whatever we want with our RFAs and get more talent with the MLE after that.
2. You've been stating this like it's a fact for a while but it's just your opinion. I think when CJ is out of the game this season might change your perspective but I guess we'll see.

 

[wizenheimer]

Fair enough

I understand the objection to per36 stats. I think they can be misused sometimes too; mostly when there's a big gap in average minutes. For example, using per36 to compare a player averaging 32 minutes to one averaging 17.

and especially using them to compare high minutes starters to low minutes backups

but for Zach and Giles, you're talking about two players who have mostly come off the bench and have averaged 17.5 and 14.5 minutes. It's a lot more apples to apples

 

[Natebishop3]

Shedding CJ means bringing in new talent in trade and starting Trent. I'm not sure if I think that's a huge loss for the team.

 

[e_blazer]

Shedding CJ means bringing in new talent in trade and starting Trent. I'm not sure if I think that's a huge loss for the team.

I know that the trade CJ train is going to be rumbling along the tracks all season, but I'd say that the probability of that happening before the trade deadline is about as close to zero as it's possible to get. Near the deadline, it's going to depend on how the team is playing and what CJ's numbers are. Given how tight he is with Dame, it's going to have to be a trade that clearly makes the team better and not just a salary dump.

 

[blazerkor]

Shedding CJ means bringing in new talent in trade and starting Trent. I'm not sure if I think that's a huge loss for the team.

I think I agree but we'll just have to see how everyone plays this season. Then some time after the season and before free agency starts you decide who needs to stay. If Gary and DJJ do what I think they will, they will be in the "needs to stay" category maybe even more so than CJ. It will also depend on what CJ could draw in return.

 

[blazerkor]

I know that the trade CJ train is going to be rumbling along the tracks all season, but I'd say that the probability of that happening before the trade deadline is about as close to zero as it's possible to get. Near the deadline, it's going to depend on how the team is playing and what CJ's numbers are. Given how tight he is with Dame, it's going to have to be a trade that clearly makes the team better and not just a salary dump.

You had me until the Dame stuff. I think that shit is so overblown. Dame just wants to win and he doesn't like it when he loses any teammate but he has said time and time again that he knows this is a business and he just wants to stay in Portland as long as the team wants him. He's also addressed this almost directly saying it's much deeper than any teammate but that it's about this city and team. He likes to compare himself with Dirk and Dirk lost Nash and that was a team decision. I think Dame will be just like everyone else, if it makes sense based on what happens this season, he won't love it but will be all in to win with the team he has going forward.

 

[e_blazer]

You had me until the Dame stuff. I think that shit is so overblown. Dame just wants to win and he doesn't like it when he loses any teammate but he has said time and time again that he knows this is a business and he just wants to stay in Portland as long as the team wants him. He's also addressed this almost directly saying it's much deeper than any teammate but that it's about this city and team. He likes to compare himself with Dirk and Dirk lost Nash and that was a team decision. I think Dame will be just like everyone else, if it makes sense based on what happens this season, he won't love it but will be all in to win with the team he has going forward.

Well, I guess we're all entitled to our opinions. I know that Dame has had multiple teammate friends who have been traded away and he's ultimately come to accept those moves based on the "it's a business" thought. None of them have been the same level of player that CJ is. I think that if it's just a salary dump, Dame would be PISSED, and rightly so. If it happens, it had better be a deal that clearly makes the team better or I'm going to by PISSED.

 

[blazerkor]

Well, I guess we're all entitled to our opinions. I know that Dame has had multiple teammate friends who have been traded away and he's ultimately come to accept those moves based on the "it's a business" thought. None of them have been the same level of player that CJ is. I think that if it's just a salary dump, Dame would be PISSED, and rightly so. If it happens, it had better be a deal that clearly makes the team better or I'm going to by PISSED.

I agree with that, if it's "just a salary dump" but if Gary and DJJ prove to Dame and the world that they are more important to this team winning than CJ is by the time a trade went down to free up cap space to keep those guys then I just have to think Dame would be a little sad to lose CJ but not PISSED. Dame is smarter than he is blindly loyal to one teammate staying a teammate because "letting" CJ go wouldn't mean that he was not loyal to CJ as a teammate and friend, just that Dame was willing to put the team first as he has done many other times.

All of this is a little premature though. The only time this debate should be had is after we see what we have with the different lineups playing together for a while. Maybe Gary is a lot less than what some think he is. Maybe DJJ doesn't take the jump it looks like he's ready to take. If those two things are true then obviously trading CJ for anything less than equal value would be crazy and all of us should be PISSED if that was done. Neil would never do that and may not even do it if it makes sense, Dame probably isn't the guy anyone needs to worry about holding up this move if it's a good one.

 

[AldoTrapani]

Wouldn’t Trent be that?

Trent can’t really create offense for himself like a cj does. Cj is made for the playoffs when the game slows down and it’s time to manufacture buckets. Trent is great but he’s nowhere near as good as cj

 

[blazerkor]

Trent can’t really create offense for himself like a cj does. Cj is made for the playoffs when the game slows down and it’s time to manufacture buckets. Trent is great but he’s nowhere near as good as cj

Yeah, it's really early to be making any of these assessments. We don't know what Gary is going to look like this season, while we have a pretty sure thing in what we know CJ will be. Maybe Gary isn't even as good as he was in the bubble but maybe he's improved just as much as he did between last season and the season before and this time he's added getting his own to his arsenal but is also a willing passer who takes open shots. We'll just have to wait and see.

 

[e_blazer]

I agree with that, if it's "just a salary dump" but if Gary and DJJ prove to Dame and the world that they are more important to this team winning than CJ is by the time a trade went down to free up cap space to keep those guys then I just have to think Dame would be a little sad to lose CJ but not PISSED. Dame is smarter than he is blindly loyal to one teammate staying a teammate because "letting" CJ go wouldn't mean that he was not loyal to CJ as a teammate and friend, just that Dame was willing to put the team first as he has done many other times.

All of this is a little premature though. The only time this debate should be had is after we see what we have with the different lineups playing together for a while. Maybe Gary is a lot less than what some think he is. Maybe DJJ doesn't take the jump it looks like he's ready to take. If those two things are true then obviously trading CJ for anything less than equal value would be crazy and all of us should be PISSED if that was done. Neil would never do that and may not even do it if it makes sense, Dame probably isn't the guy anyone needs to worry about holding up this move if it's a good one.

As is usual on this board, we're probably both in overall agreement, but finding nits to pick with each other. There are some folks around here who seem to be of the "improvement by subtraction" mindset when it comes to CJ. I find that position to be silly. Improvement by actually getting equal or greater value in trade? Sure, if the right deal comes along I'm okay with that and I suspect Dame would be too.

 

[Natebishop3]

Well, I guess we're all entitled to our opinions. I know that Dame has had multiple teammate friends who have been traded away and he's ultimately come to accept those moves based on the "it's a business" thought. None of them have been the same level of player that CJ is. I think that if it's just a salary dump, Dame would be PISSED, and rightly so. If it happens, it had better be a deal that clearly makes the team better or I'm going to by PISSED.

Don't get me wrong, I love Dame. He's my favorite Blazer of all time. But this isn't his own personal super friends club.

I would trade Dame if it meant winning a championship. I want to see this damn team win a title in my lifetime. If we don't trade CJ because it would upset Dame, but it would make the team better, then Dame needs to go too. I don't enjoy treadmill teams. It's a complete waste of time. The Raptors dealt a fan favorite in DeRozan and they won a title. Sometimes you have to roll the dice.

I get that you were saying "salary dump" but I think there are different forms of salary dumps. If we could trade CJ for some young talent on rookie contracts, I would do it as long as the talent was worth it. Think something like Rod Strickland for Rasheed Wallace.

 

[Scalma]

I don’t think Zach is a bust, maybe relative to where he was drafted. But his defense alone will allow him to stick in the league a long time. If he just continues to improve his set shooting he could carve out an Ibaka type (the raptors version) role, which is pretty valuable.

 

[Natebishop3]

I don’t think Zach is a bust, maybe relative to where he was drafted.

That's pretty much the definition of a bust though. He should have been a late first rounder. Not the 10th pick in the draft. He's a clear bust based on where he was picked.

 

[e_blazer]

Don't get me wrong, I love Dame. He's my favorite Blazer of all time. But this isn't his own personal super friends club.

I would trade Dame if it meant winning a championship. I want to see this damn team win a title in my lifetime. If we don't trade CJ because it would upset Dame, but it would make the team better, then Dame needs to go too. I don't enjoy treadmill teams. It's a complete waste of time. The Raptors dealt a fan favorite in DeRozan and they won a title. Sometimes you have to roll the dice.

I get that you were saying "salary dump" but I think there are different forms of salary dumps. If we could trade CJ for some young talent on rookie contracts, I would do it as long as the talent was worth it. Think something like Rod Strickland for Rasheed Wallace.

And, again, we're pretty much in agreement. I never meant to say that Dame gets veto power, but if it was seen as just a salary dump, he'd be right to be pissed at seeing a talented backcourt mate getting dumped to save the team money during Dame's prime. I don't think that there's any chance Olshey would even contemplate doing such a thing, but I've had the impression that some folks around here might be in favor of it. Anywho...I think that there's no chance of something involving trading CJ being contemplated until at least near the deadline and only then for pieces that would make the team better.

As far as winning a title in your lifetime, I'm a lot more of a short-timer than you are and I really want to see another title in MY lifetime. I never imagined that when I went to the championship parade in 1977 it might be a one-shot deal.

 

[Scalma]

Another note about Giles v Collins that I think goes a little under the radar when evaluating players, especially bigs: hands.

Giles has them. Collins meanwhile has struggled throughout his career so far imo. He drops a lot of balls, and a lot of them slip through. I don’t know what the measurements are on either guy but I’m pretty confident that Giles has bigger mitts, and it shows. It’s a pretty important trait for a big; rebounding, finishing in traffic, etc etc.

 

[blazerkor]

As is usual on this board, we're probably both in overall agreement, but finding nits to pick with each other. There are some folks around here who seem to be of the "improvement by subtraction" mindset when it comes to CJ. I find that position to be silly. Improvement by actually getting equal or greater value in trade? Sure, if the right deal comes along I'm okay with that and I suspect Dame would be too.

Sometimes it takes a little more of a nuanced approach than just "improvement by subtraction". This time it might come down to being forced to subtract and then therefore what subtractions make the team the best. So getting equal value for CJ in certain situations becomes less important because Neil may have to get the best value possible while shedding enough salary to keep the players he sees as giving us the best chance at a championship. Of course, like I said, this is all very premature. If anyone is saying we should trade CJ who is a known commodity for less than he's worth right now based on some expectation of players who are unknown commodities needing the cap space in the off season then those people are crazy. This is all conjecture right now. In a few months or after the season, players' individual values might be a complex mix of individual talents/skills, fit with others on the roster and what salaries it takes to keep whatever combination of these things the team wants to move forward with.

 

[Scalma]

That's pretty much the definition of a bust though. He should have been a late first rounder. Not the 10th pick in the draft. He's a clear bust based on where he was picked.

We just have different definitions of bust.

Maybe he isn’t as good as some of the players taken after him, but to me, anyone that makes a team better can’t be labeled a bust. A bust is someone sitting on a bench that doesn’t play, or someone completely out of the league. I don’t even consider a player whose career got cut short because of things out of their control (injury) a bust either, cough Oden.

 

[blazerkor]

Another note about Giles v Collins that I think goes a little under the radar when evaluating players, especially bigs: hands.

Giles has them. Collins meanwhile has struggled throughout his career so far imo. He drops a lot of balls, and a lot of them slip through. I don’t know what the measurements are on either guy but I’m pretty confident that Giles has bigger mitts, and it shows. It’s a pretty important trait for a big; rebounding, finishing in traffic, etc etc.

The fun but also the pointless thing about all of these conversations being had right now is that we and more importantly Neil has at the very least until the trade deadline and more likely until the season is over to make all of these assessments that are big time question marks right now. When it's all said and done will Giles be better with all things considered than Collins? Will guys like Gary and DJJ prove to be worth a ton more than they are known to be right now? If they do prove that will it be enough to make some tough trades so we can retain them and what will those trades and signings be? These questions are fun and nice problems to have but they don't need to be answered or addressed for quite some time or before we have a ton more to base them on.

 

[tester551]

As is usual on this board, we're probably both in overall agreement, but finding nits to pick with each other. There are some folks around here who seem to be of the "improvement by subtraction" mindset when it comes to CJ. I find that position to be silly. Improvement by actually getting equal or greater value in trade? Sure, if the right deal comes along I'm okay with that and I suspect Dame would be too.

That is the crux of the issue. Everyone seems to value what CJ brings differently.... So no one can agree what 'equal or greater' value actually is.

It appears that NO sees CJ as a franchise cornerstone. I personally think that view is severely over-valuing CJ. He is a mid-tier starter in the NBA (~75th best player - out of 150-starter positions).