Is it too soon to talk about defensive rating?

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in
Tince said:
Personally, I'm not comfortable coming to that conclusion. This year, under a veteran coach, he's averaging 5pts/3rebs; the lowest production since his rookie year. I think it's possible he's on the decline of his career and/or the style of the NBA no longer matches his skill set.

I think blaming effort/attitude/etc is the easy way out. I could be wrong though.
Click to expand...

You know that statement, “ a picture says a 1000 words?”

Look up some of his facial expressions towards the coach and in general, during the games where the coach was trying to implement something.
Yeah, it is hard to figure out someone else mindset and often we as humans are wrong, thinking everyone thinks the same.
But with that said, some things are more obvious than others. Him not buying in fits that category to me.

And yeah he is also on the decline so there is that. Maybe he thought the new system wasn't going to fit his aging timeline? :)
 
BlazerBender said:
You know that statement, “ a picture says a 1000 words?”

Look up some of his facial expressions towards the coach and in general, during the games where the coach was trying to implement something.
Yeah, it is hard to figure out someone else mindset and often we as humans are wrong, thinking everyone thinks the same.
But with that said, some things are more obvious than others. Him not buying in fits that category to me.

And yeah he is also on the decline so there is that. Maybe he thought the new system wasn't going to fit his aging timeline? :)
Click to expand...

I have heard the statement. My point is the 1000 words will be different for each person, and those words will be influenced by what they already thought of the subject.

I'm not saying your wrong. I'm not even saying that if I was forced to take a side, we wouldn't come to the same conclusion. All I'm saying is arm-chair psychologist is something I try to stay away from (I have got sucked into it before) and I'm certainly not going to use my lack of a psychology degree to try and explain why the defense is significantly improved, despite the data saying otherwise.
 
Tince said:
I have heard the statement. My point is the 1000 words will be different for each person, and those words will be influenced by what they already thought of the subject.

I'm not saying your wrong. I'm not even saying that if I was forced to take a side, we wouldn't come to the same conclusion. All I'm saying is arm-chair psychologist is something I try to stay away from (I have got sucked into it before) and I'm certainly not going to use my lack of a psychology degree to try and explain why the defense is significantly improved, despite the data saying otherwise.
Click to expand...

Perception is on the eye of the beholder.
Always has been. Always will be.
One has to weigh everything to have an informed opinion. Stats, eye test and storylines.
Without all three considered, most opinions will be off base.
 
upload_2022-12-30_23-43-1.png


* Note for those who are unware: The screenshot above does not include all 30 teams and is not meant to trick or confuse anyone. Blazers are 23rd according to NBA.com (same source at the 1st post in this thread).

** These rankings don't measure "accountability" "engagement" "effort".
 
Tince said:
View attachment 52478


* Note for those who are unware: The screenshot above does not include all 30 teams and is not meant to trick or confuse anyone. Blazers are 23rd according to NBA.com (same source at the 1st post in this thread).

** These rankings don't measure "accountability" "engagement" "effort".
Click to expand...
This team is incredibly flawed defensively. From Dame and Ant starting together in the back court to Nurk starting as the C in a switching defense, not to mention no size on the bench. A last place ranking for defense wouldn't be surprising and a 23rd ranking is a pleasant surprise.

With Dame, Ant, Grant and Nurk starting and not a really great bench it would seem that we are an offense first team that makes D a second or third priority. So as long as our offense is by far in first we should be on course to win a championship.
 
Blazers have moved up a lot in defensive rating over the last 10 days. I believe they've also dropped pretty hard in Off Rtg during the same period of time.

upload_2023-1-10_20-39-15.png
 
The reason Dame's playing "bad" this year is he's actually playing defense.
 
HailBlazers said:
The reason Dame's playing "bad" this year is he's actually playing defense.
Click to expand...
Is Dame playing bad this year? 27/4/7... Points/Assists above his career average, the rebounds 0.2 below. Steals/blocks and shooting % almost the same as his career averages.
 
Those are what are commonly referred to as "empty stats". Tonight was a perfect example.
 
Tince said:
Is Dame playing bad this year? 27/4/7... Points/Assists above his career average, the rebounds 0.2 below. Steals/blocks and shooting % almost the same as his career averages.
Click to expand...

2/12 from three tonight. Most turnovers of his career.
 
HailBlazers said:
2/12 from three tonight. Most turnovers of his career.
Click to expand...

I thought you were saying he was playing bad this year, I didn't think you were only referencing his 3pt shooting percentage tonight. My bad.

But yes, the team as a whole is turnover it over way more than they used to. I preferred the more simplistic offense that produced better results.
 
No legs to make late game shots playing our starters 40+ minutes focused on defense.
 
HailBlazers said:
No legs to make late game shots playing our starters 40+ minutes focused on defense.
Click to expand...

So is he having a bad year or is he just not as good late in games and taking care of the ball as he has been in the past?
 
HailBlazers said:
No legs to make late game shots playing our starters 40+ minutes focused on defense.
Click to expand...
This can be looked at from another angle. If the Blazers come out against the Magic and shoot well from the beginning they don't fall behind early in the game and have to fight to get back into it. If they make some shots in the third after a long halftime rest and don't fall behind again they don't have to fight and claw back into the game again and play 40 minutes.
The tired part i believe has everything to do with schedule but yes playing 40 minutes a night is not helping at all.
 
My bet is not having to catch a plane after this game and getting to relax just a bit more in their own practice facility and work on the little bumps and bruises will drastically improve their shooting on offense and that will allow them to play a bit better defense because they will not have to work quite so hard on both ends of the court.
I obviously could be wrong but my bet is the numbers on defense and offense will get better over the next 20 games.
 
HailBlazers said:
Any correlation with offensive improvement?
Click to expand...
I haven't been tracking on where we've been at, though I see we're 8th. I believe we were 13th a while ago.

What probably makes the most sense it to track the net difference between the two.
 
BonesJones said:
As if Chauncey isn't running different stuff to keep teams off balance, actively searching for what scheme works best for his roster while also holding guys accountable? And it's led to improvement no matter how much you want to act like it hasn't. AND he hasn't had his best defender.
Click to expand...

BonesJones said:
The data shows we've improved. The data shows the starting lineup is a top 10 defense. Derrick Jones Jr. was a better point of attack defender than anyone the Blazers have on this roster. Gary Payton II is our point of attack defender.
Click to expand...

Our best defender is back. Still confident in your stance that this is a signficantly better defense than in the past?
 
Tince said:
Our best defender is back. Still confident in your stance that this is a signficantly better defense than in the past?
Click to expand...
He will parlay that into Nurk and Winslow being out coupled with the few games Hart and GP missed.
Essentially he will blame injuries but of course that never was the problem 2-3 years ago.
 
Fairly-Hard said:
He will parlay that into Nurk and Winslow being out coupled with the few games Hart and GP missed.
Essentially he will blame injuries but of course that never was the problem 2-3 years ago.
Click to expand...

Not to mention the roster imbalance and Winslow's/Nurk's injury history were to factors that were known back in December. None of this should be a surprise to anyone who has been paying attention. Blaming previous below average defenses on a lack of adjustments or drop schemes was always an unfounded attempt to put far too much weight on the previous coaching staff, despite that clearly never being the main issue.
 
Tince said:
Not to mention the roster imbalance and Winslow's/Nurk's injury history were to factors that were known back in December. None of this should be a surprise to anyone who has been paying attention. Blaming previous below average defenses on a lack of adjustments or drop schemes was always an unfounded attempt to put far too much weight on the previous coaching staff, despite that clearly never being the main issue.
Click to expand...
It’s becoming painfully obvious that Terry Stotts was right in the way he coached and the schemes he used with the players he was given to coach.
Sorry to all involved but this simply needs to be said.
There I said it!
 
Fairly-Hard said:
It’s becoming painfully obvious that Terry Stotts was right in the way he coached and the schemes he used with the players he was given to coach.
Sorry to all involved but this simply needs to be said.
There I said it!
Click to expand...
Making change for the sake of change, without correctly identifying and addressing the root of the problem first was all the confirmation I needed that ownership (Jody & Bert) can't lead this franchise.
 
Fairly-Hard said:
It’s becoming painfully obvious that Terry Stotts was right in the way he coached and the schemes he used with the players he was given to coach.
Sorry to all involved but this simply needs to be said.
There I said it!
Click to expand...
Disagree. Just because Chauncey isn't the answer doesn't mean that stotts, then, was the answer. Both could be not ideal choices.
 
Fairly-Hard said:
It’s becoming painfully obvious that Terry Stotts was right in the way he coached and the schemes he used with the players he was given to coach.
Sorry to all involved but this simply needs to be said.
There I said it!
Click to expand...

It was obvious to anyone that was willing to pay attention when the team continuously made it to the playoffs with some really questionable rosters. But, there are a lot of armchair coaches on the internets, so there's that.
 
andalusian said:
It was obvious to anyone that was willing to pay attention when the team continuously made it to the playoffs with some really questionable rosters. But, there are a lot of armchair coaches on the internets, so there's that.
Click to expand...
BTW, I have now graduated to armchair GENERAL and am now in charge of Ukraine's war against russia.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

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