Lillard Time vs NLT

[noknobs]

It's not bashing Lillard to bring up valid observations. He's easily my favorite player, but...

For as good as Lillard is, there are about 2-3 times a game when he just comes down and jacks up a contested thirty footer with 18 seconds on the shot-clock (or a contested, off-balance fade away from the baseline with 18 seconds left on the shot-clock). Occasionally one goes in, but usually it's no better than a turnover. I don't really understand why he does it, especially since he's a pretty intelligent player the rest of the game. I'd understand if he took those after he'd just made two in a row or something, but he'll do this when he's 1-7 from the field and ice cold. Take those 2-3 odd shots a game away and his FG% is suddenly much more efficient.

But where he and the rest of the team are really in need of improvement is on defense. Just nowhere near good enough.

 

[Orion Bailey]

Im just curious. Is it easier for people to observe flaws than it is great plays? Not trying to bicker, but even to me, it seems its easy to dwell on the one bad play and forget all about the good plays.. or chalk them all up into one sentence.. When Lillard time is hot IT's white hot... but...

 

[TBpup]

It's not bashing Lillard to bring up valid observations. He's easily my favorite player, but...

For as good as Lillard is, there are about 2-3 times a game when he just comes down and jacks up a contested thirty footer with 18 seconds on the shot-clock (or a contested, off-balance fade away from the baseline with 18 seconds left on the shot-clock). Occasionally one goes in, but usually it's no better than a turnover. I don't really understand why he does it, especially since he's a pretty intelligent player the rest of the game. I'd understand if he took those after he'd just made two in a row or something, but he'll do this when he's 1-7 from the field and ice cold. Take those 2-3 odd shots a game away and his FG% is suddenly much more efficient.

But where he and the rest of the team are really in need of improvement is on defense. Just nowhere near good enough.

Very much what I was referring to and certainly not on a single game basis. I would just like to see the non-Lillard Time not so often be in the low 30% shooting range so that his overall percentage improves and he becomes the player most of us believe he can be. If that is construed as bashing, then throw away the dictionary.

 

[B-Roy]

Not true. Plums can dribble. One of the best dribbling bigs in the NBA. Crabbe can dribble some. Harkless can dribble some. I expect Hark, Plums and Crabbe to continue to improve this about thier game. Where does that then put us?

Being able to dribble is not the same as being a playmaking threat. Yes Crabbe can dribble, but no teams are afraid of Crabbe dribbling. Yes Harkless can dribble, but no teams are afraid of Harkless dribbling. Yes Plumlee can dribble, but not even the Blazers want him dribbling outside of pushing a fast break. Asking these guys to make plays on a consistent basis is what other teams want us to do. Rather than these guys being the beneficiary of Lillard and McCollum wreaking havoc.

The answer to slowing down Portland's offense is to deny McCollum and Lillard the ball. After watching 77 games I think that has been the clearest answer to slowing the Portland offense. Of course there are outlier games where Aminu or Crabbe goes crazy and we pull one out, but in a 7 game series you can bet that OKC or the Clippers or whoever are just going to trap Lillard and McCollum on the pick and roll and then deny them the ball - force other players to make plays against the shot clock. At that point someone else has to be able to make plays on a consistent basis, and looking up and down the roster I don't see a single player I would trust in a series. That's no knock on our guys, they have done a tremendous job and if the defense was on par with our offense (6th best in the league), I would feel a bit more confident. As it stands, it still feels like the roster needs an upgrade somewhere and obtaining another offensive threat would certainly make our offense less predictable.

 

[riverman]

Being able to dribble is not the same as being a playmaking threat. Yes Crabbe can dribble, but no teams are afraid of Crabbe dribbling. Yes Harkless can dribble, but no teams are afraid of Harkless dribbling. Yes Plumlee can dribble, but not even the Blazers want him dribbling outside of pushing a fast break.

The answer to slowing down Portland's offense is to deny McCollum and Lillard the ball. After watching 77 games I think that has been the clearest answer to slowing the Portland offense. Of course there are outlier games where Aminu or Crabbe goes crazy and we pull one out, but in a 7 game series you can bet that OKC or the Clippers or whoever are just going to trap Lillard and McCollum on the pick and roll and then deny him the ball. At that point someone else has to be able to make plays on a consistent basis, and looking up and down the roster I don't see a single player I would trust in a series. That's no knock on our guys, they have done a tremendous job and if the defense was on par with our offense (6th best in the league), I would feel a bit more confident. As it stands, it still feels like the roster needs an upgrade somewhere and obtaining another offense threat would certainly make our offense less predictable.

good post..I also think that we tend to forget this is almost this entire rosters first season of playing together...Nic became a great facilitator several years into playing with pretty much the same starting lineup...I've enjoyed watching them develop chemistry and think the guys who stick around will use the clock much better given another season together. Dame has improved in his ball protection I think but he does need to improve in shot clock management.

 

[Orion Bailey]

Being able to dribble is not the same as being a playmaking threat. Yes Crabbe can dribble, but no teams are afraid of Crabbe dribbling. Yes Harkless can dribble, but no teams are afraid of Harkless dribbling. Yes Plumlee can dribble, but not even the Blazers want him dribbling outside of pushing a fast break. Asking these guys to make plays on a consistent basis is what other teams want us to do. Rather than these guys being the beneficiary of Lillard and McCollum wreaking havoc.

The answer to slowing down Portland's offense is to deny McCollum and Lillard the ball. After watching 77 games I think that has been the clearest answer to slowing the Portland offense. Of course there are outlier games where Aminu or Crabbe goes crazy and we pull one out, but in a 7 game series you can bet that OKC or the Clippers or whoever are just going to trap Lillard and McCollum on the pick and roll and then deny them the ball - force other players to make plays against the shot clock. At that point someone else has to be able to make plays on a consistent basis, and looking up and down the roster I don't see a single player I would trust in a series. That's no knock on our guys, they have done a tremendous job and if the defense was on par with our offense (6th best in the league), I would feel a bit more confident. As it stands, it still feels like the roster needs an upgrade somewhere and obtaining another offensive threat would certainly make our offense less predictable.

Did you read your own post I responded to? Your the one who said we don't have anyone who can dribble. so that's what I used when referencing play makers, because that's what YOU used as a measurement.

 

[TBpup]

Im just curious. Is it easier for people to observe flaws than it is great plays? Not trying to bicker, but even to me, it seems its easy to dwell on the one bad play and forget all about the good plays.. or chalk them all up into one sentence.. When Lillard time is hot IT's white hot... but...

It is completely acknowledging #LillardTime but also acknowledging that #LillardTime is often small portion of the game and then being open-minded about the majority of the game and how that can be hopefully closer to 40% shooting than the so often 25-35% shooting for the rest of the game. Is it okay to acknowledge the whole game?

 

[Natebishop3]

The dude was flat out CARRYING us after the All-Star break. I think it's fatigue. He wanted to make the playoffs so bad, and now that we're virtually a lock, I think he's showing the wear and tear of the season.

 

[B-Roy]

Did you read your own post I responded to? Your the one who said we don't have anyone who can dribble. so that's what I used when referencing play makers, because that's what YOU used as a measurement.

Not just being able to get their own shot, but to be able to handle the ball and make plays. We have two and a half players that are playmaking threats. The rest can't really dribble at all.

What about this do you not understand? If you're going to just argue semantics why waste everybody's time?

 

[Orion Bailey]

It is completely acknowledging #LillardTime but also acknowledging that #LillardTime is often small portion of the game and then being open-minded about the majority of the game and how that can be hopefully closer to 40% shooting than the so often 25-35% shooting for the rest of the game. Is it okay to acknowledge the whole game?

Certainly. Just sure would be nice to log on this site and see a thread title of something like,... Dame goes toe to toe with Curry and holds his own...
For every positive thread, there are 5-10 breaking

I mean I could do this and create the threads, but i'm already under the gun and considered annoying. But on the serious, It sure would be nice if those who do create daily threads for topic, chose some of these topics for discussion, rather than always trying to put the negatives as the topic. Not by any means trying to call you out or say that's what you do. Just the forum in general. For such a great season, scan the pages of thread topics. Very little positivism overall compared to how many threads are breaking the guys down. Understandable at the beginning of the season, but now???

 

[Orion Bailey]

What about this do you not understand? If you're going to just argue semantics why waste everybody's time?

This is what you posted...

"Not just being able to get their own shot, but to be able to handle the ball and make plays. We have two and a half players that are playmaking threats. The rest can't really dribble at all."

I commented on this and you call it semantics? *Palm to forehead*

My point was that we have 2.5 today. Next year we might have 3.5 to 4. Let them progress. Be happy we have 2.5 and not one.
Now your just wasting my time...

 

[B-Roy]

Certainly. Just sure would be nice to log on this site and see a thread title of something like,... Dame goes toe to toe with Curry and holds his own...
For every positive thread, there are 5-10 breaking

I mean I could do this and create the threads, but i'm already under the gun and considered annoying. But on the serious, It sure would be nice if those who do create daily threads for topic, chose some of these topics for discussion, rather than always trying to put the negatives as the topic. Not by any means trying to call you out or say that's what you do. Just the forum in general. For such a great season, scan the pages of thread topics. Very little positivism overall compared to how many threads are breaking the guys down. Understandable at the beginning of the season, but now???

My question to you is, why does it bother you so much that some people decide to take a more critical approach to analyzing the team? In the end it doesn't make them less of a fan. I don't even think it makes Tunchi a less of a fan despite his incessant need to chime in every time the Blazers are playing poorly.

The simple thing to do (imo) is to just ignore it, or don't comment. If you are just posting to tell people they should stop being critical (or "negative" as you like to call it), you are unlikely to get any takers. Frankly, I think some of the more interesting discussions arise from threads like this, rather than the constant circle jerks. It doesn't mean I dislike the team, or think that what they've done this season is anything short of amazing, it's just something to talk about as fans on a message board.

 

[B-Roy]

This is what you posted...

"Not just being able to get their own shot, but to be able to handle the ball and make plays. We have two and a half players that are playmaking threats. The rest can't really dribble at all."

I commented on this and you call it semantics? *Palm to forehead*

My point was that we have 2.5 today. Next year we might have 3.5 to 4. Let them progress. Be happy we have 2.5 and not one.
Now your just wasting my time...

I think the meaning is pretty clear in the context of the sentence, and the posts that preceded. Taking everything literally is certainly arguing semantics.

 

[riverman]

The dude was flat out CARRYING us after the All-Star break. I think it's fatigue. He wanted to make the playoffs so bad, and now that we're virtually a lock, I think he's showing the wear and tear of the season.

I think it's also Dame's first season here as the true captain and leader of the team...Lamarcus was that and if I remember...Lamarcus took over two games for us in the playoffs...count em...two..against the Rockets...Dame is just getting started.

 

[Orion Bailey]

My question to you is, why does it bother you so much that some people decide to take a more critical approach to analyzing the team? In the end it doesn't make them less of a fan. I don't even think it makes Tunchi a less of a fan despite his incessant need to chime in every time the Blazers are playing poorly.

The simple thing to do (imo) is to just ignore it, or don't comment. If you are just posting to tell people they should stop being critical (or "negative" as you like to call it), you are unlikely to get any takers. Frankly, I think some of the more interesting discussions arise from threads like this, rather than the constant circle jerks. It doesn't mean I dislike the team, or think that what they've done this season is anything short of amazing, it's just something to talk about as fans on a message board.

Because rarely does it read as a more critical approach, as more of a " lets dig until we uncover the numbers that make the team look bad, or not as good, or whatever"
Most of the time it reads as only half a viewpoint. And too many threads only seem to provide the negative half of the viewpoint. So when I chime in and try to bring the positive side, I get told I'm annoying.
I never said it makes anyone less of a fan, but as a fan, it gets old. Just like I've been told I get old. but I've been a posting member since 2015, but the negative, overly critical threads, without or little mention of good play, has been posted for years.
Again, check thread history.

If I ignored all of them, there would be VERY little to read, so I might as well delete my membership ( too some peoples chagrin).

 

[riverman]

My question to you is, why does it bother you so much that some people decide to take a more critical approach to analyzing the team? In the end it doesn't make them less of a fan. I don't even think it makes Tunchi a less of a fan despite his incessant need to chime in every time the Blazers are playing poorly.

The simple thing to do (imo) is to just ignore it, or don't comment. If you are just posting to tell people they should stop being critical (or "negative" as you like to call it), you are unlikely to get any takers. Frankly, I think some of the more interesting discussions arise from threads like this, rather than the constant circle jerks. It doesn't mean I dislike the team, or think that what they've done this season is anything short of amazing, it's just something to talk about as fans on a message board.

What nerd wouldn't love to join a constant circle jerk?

 

[Orion Bailey]

I think the meaning is pretty clear in the context of the sentence, and the posts that preceded. Taking everything literally is certainly arguing semantics.

But see, that's why I brought it up. I thought you were arguing semantics about not being able to dribble... since you posted it.
Again, I get your point and don't disagree on the need, but I just think we have it internally already with continual development.(playmakers)

 

[BlazerCaravan]

Good examples, but we already have 2.5 who can and a couple guys who can still improve to that ( dribbling).

Look at the shooting stats on basketball-reference; guys who can and do create their own shot typically have low Assisted % on their shots. Dame and CJ are assisted only about 20-25% of the time. Every other player on our team is assisted more than half the time (except Montero and Roberts but honestly, they don't count). We need one more guy who can shoot effectively without needing an assist from a playmaker to do it. He should come off the bench.

 

[riverman]

Because rarely does it read as a more critical approach, as more of a " lets dig until we uncover the numbers that make the team look bad, or not as good, or whatever"
Most of the time it reads as only half a viewpoint. And too many threads only seem to provide the negative half of the viewpoint. So when I chime in and try to bring the positive side, I get told I'm annoying.
I never said it makes anyone less of a fan, but as a fan, it gets old. Just like I've been told I get old. but I've been a posting member since 2015, but the negative, overly critical threads, without or little mention of good play, has been posted for years.
Again, check thread history.

If I ignored all of them, there would be VERY little to read, so I might as well delete my membership ( too some peoples chagrin).

Simple solution...start threads about good things and I recommend using the ignore button for threads or posters that make your experience unpleasant...balance is good. I think talking about the team is where common ground exists but talking about posters is always going to lead to the same place. A guy I put on ignore last season is now one of my favorite posters....now that Lamarcus is gone. Hang in there dude...crank the Marshall up to Spinal Tap levels and wail!

 

[B-Roy]

But see, that's why I brought it up. I thought you were arguing semantics about not being able to dribble... since you posted it.
Again, I get your point and don't disagree on the need, but I just think we have it internally already with continual development.(playmakers)

I thought "playmaker" has enough applied connotation. But fair enough, agree to disagree.

 

[Orion Bailey]

Simple solution...start threads about good things and I recommend using the ignore button for threads or posters that make your experience unpleasant...balance is good. I think talking about the team is where common ground exists but talking about posters is always going to lead to the same place. A guy I put on ignore last season is now one of my favorite posters....now that Lamarcus is gone. Hang in there dude...crank the Marshall up to Spinal Tap levels and wail!

Great points. I just don't know if I'm the right guy to create these threads since so many see my Homerism as annoying.

 

[B-Roy]

A guy I put on ignore last season is now one of my favorite posters....now that Lamarcus is gone.

Ahahahahaha, I think we all know who this is.

 

[B-Roy]

Because rarely does it read as a more critical approach, as more of a " lets dig until we uncover the numbers that make the team look bad, or not as good, or whatever"
Most of the time it reads as only half a viewpoint. And too many threads only seem to provide the negative half of the viewpoint. So when I chime in and try to bring the positive side, I get told I'm annoying.
I never said it makes anyone less of a fan, but as a fan, it gets old. Just like I've been told I get old. but I've been a posting member since 2015, but the negative, overly critical threads, without or little mention of good play, has been posted for years.
Again, check thread history.

If I ignored all of them, there would be VERY little to read, so I might as well delete my membership ( too some peoples chagrin).

Sometimes threads are meant to be critical, sometimes they are all positive. There were a lot of "Dame will be the best Blazer ever" type threads when he was on the 30 point hot streak.

I think riverman gave the best advice. I don't think you're annoying, but I don't think telling people how to post helps your case.

 

[BlazerCaravan]

Sometimes threads are meant to be critical, sometimes they are all positive. There were a lot of "Dame will be the best Blazer ever" type threads when he was on the 30 point hot streak.

I think riverman gave the best advice. I don't think you're annoying, but I don't think telling people how to post helps your case.

He's still going to be the best Blazer ever, though. Clyde was lazy and predictable on offense. Walton was amazing but made mostly of balsa wood and Elmer's glue. Dame is streaky and still forces it a bit, but is a born leader AND the hardest worker on the team, which has never happened before.

 

[B-Roy]

He's still going to be the best Blazer ever, though. Clyde was lazy and predictable on offense. Walton was amazing but made mostly of balsa wood and Elmer's glue. Dame is streaky and still forces it a bit, but is a born leader AND the hardest worker on the team, which has never happened before.

No arguments here. Was just using that as an example that there have been lots of strictly positive threads.

 

[Orion Bailey]

Ahahahahaha, I think we all know who this is.

How the hell did you quote me on that when I never said that? lol. Weird.

Sometimes threads are meant to be critical, sometimes they are all positive. There were a lot of "Dame will be the best Blazer ever" type threads when he was on the 30 point hot streak.

I think riverman gave the best advice. I don't think you're annoying, but I don't think telling people how to post helps your case.

I must have missed most of those thread,s Cause I think I saw one and thats it.
Agreed though. Im still a newbie according to HCP anyhow. I need time to develop and improve.

 

[B-Roy]

How the hell did you quote me on that when I never said that? lol. Weird.

That was riverman's. I dunno how I ended up quoting you, haha.

 

[TBpup]

Great points. I just don't know if I'm the right guy to create these threads since so many see my Homerism as annoying.

Your 'homerism' ( and I wouldn't call your perspective that) is not annoying. It is usually followed by a reasonable explanation and thought. If everyone agreed on everything, how boring would this be. At the same time, there are some posters (both positive and negative) that abjectly refuse to see outside of their own vision. That is where things get a bit annoying.

As for Dame, I will reiterate:

This franchise is INCREDIBLY fortunate to have such a strong leader with the will to win, continually get better and who has taken to Portland in such a loyal fashion. He bided his time while LA was here but still brought us the one Playoff series win (in the most dramatic fashion possible) that this team has seen in over a decade. I think he is also a very good ambassador for this team and has good relationships with other players around the league that can only help bring FA talent here.

If anyone takes a point I have made about Damian as bashing or overly negative, then either they clearly don't understand the point I'm trying to make or I am not communicating it in an effective manner. This teams best days are ahead of it and Dame is the foundation piece of the growth that has taken place this season and what we all hope is to come.

(blue for old times sake and to make as clear of a point as possible)

 

[riverman]

Your 'homerism' ( and I wouldn't call your perspective that) is not annoying. It is usually followed by a reasonable explanation and thought. If everyone agreed on everything, how boring would this be. At the same time, there are some posters (both positive and negative) that abjectly refuse to see outside of their own vision. That is where things get a bit annoying.

As for Dame, I will reiterate:

This franchise is INCREDIBLY fortunate to have such a strong leader with the will to win, continually get better and who has taken to Portland in such a loyal fashion. He bided his time while LA was here but still brought us the one Playoff series win (in the most dramatic fashion possible) that this team has seen in over a decade. I think he is also a very good ambassador for this team and has good relationships with other players around the league that can only help bring FA talent here.

If anyone takes a point I have made about Damian as bashing or overly negative, then either they clearly don't understand the point I'm trying to make or I am not communicating it in an effective manner. This teams best days are ahead of it and Dame is the foundation piece of the growth that has taken place this season and what we all hope is to come.

(blue for old times sake and to make as clear of a point as possible)

I was going to say the blue is suspiciously Bay Area blue but then I read your tag!

 

[Natebishop3]

I still think Dame is learning how to be the best player on this team. Sometimes he tries to do too much. Sometimes he tries to force it when his shot is off. Sometimes when the team is down, he will think that he needs to start taking over, which isn't necessarily wrong, but he'll start jacking bad shots instead of trying to get his teammates involved. It's all part of the learning process, in my opinion. He has grown quite a bit as the season goes on. I can't wait to see what he does in the playoffs.