OFFICIAL AROUND THE NBA: MARCH 2023

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in
Fairly-Hard said:
Not really. Take the Payton and Winslow games away and you don’t have nearly as many. Then take Badgi out and you really don’t.
The core was healthy most of the season.
Click to expand...
This is true. Injuries weren’t our culprit. It was the coach.
 
KingSpeed said:
This is true. Injuries weren’t our culprit. It was the coach.
Click to expand...

you know, it can be both. And a severe lack of proven talent, and decent bigs.
 
Westbrook shot 5/5 on 3s tonight. And RoCo hit 7/7. And they only won by 9 lol.
 
Fairly-Hard said:
Not really. Take the Payton and Winslow games away and you don’t have nearly as many. Then take Badgi out and you really don’t.
The core was healthy most of the season.
Click to expand...

Interesting, so how many games did Dame, Ant, Nurk, and Grant all play together?
 
KingSpeed said:
Westbrook shot 5/5 on 3s tonight. And RoCo hit 7/7. And they only won by 9 lol.
Click to expand...
If I'm not mistaken, the Clippers were without PG13....on the road.....at the #2 team in the west and scored 142 on them! And you're cracking on them that they "ONLY" won by 9? Man some of you here never cease to amaze.
 
The one that gets me the most is the conspiracy people who claim the league wants certain teams to win and some to lose. That right there is some nutbaggery! Simply amazing.
 
Pinwheel1 said:
Interesting, so how many games did Dame, Ant, Nurk, and Grant all play together?
Click to expand...

34 games, 577 minutes, net-rating of 0.4 (positive, but only just...)

https://www.nba.com/stats/lineups/advanced?slug=advanced&TeamID=1610612757&GroupQuantity=4

The Dame, Grant, Drew, Sharpe, in comparison, only played together 129 minutes, but has a net-rating of 18.1

So, clearly, assuming Dame and Grant are locks to be back, if the Blazers can upgrade from a slow moving center to an athletic modern center that's better than Drew and have someone bigger next to Dame...

Another interesting example, Dame, Grant, Winslow and Hart (with Winslow probably playing small center) had a net-rating of 31.3...
 
Last edited:
Fairly-Hard said:
Enough to know they weren’t good enough.
Click to expand...

I was just curious. You said the core was together for most games. I guess technically "most " does mean ....more than half.
And no I do not think they were good enough. But at the same time when many teams in the west were hovering around 500 up until about a 2 weeks ago, (when they started feasting on tanking teams) ...I am not all that convinced that it would take a major overall to greatly improve. If the team that started the season remained healthy, there is no question in mind that they would be over 500 right now. Is that good enough? No. But it is certainly better than where we are now.

For the record, I am fine with tanking this year when we did. (Earlier in the year I would have been pissed)
 
Pinwheel1 said:
I was just curious. You said the core was together for most games. I guess technically "most " does mean ....more than half.
And no I do not think they were good enough. But at the same time when many teams in the west were hovering around 500 up until about a 2 weeks ago, (when they started feasting on tanking teams) ...I am not all that convinced that it would take a major overall to greatly improve. If the team that started the season remained healthy, there is no question in mind that they would be over 500 right now. Is that good enough? No. But it is certainly better than where we are now.

For the record, I am fine with tanking this year when we did. (Earlier in the year I would have been pissed)
Click to expand...
The comment i was responding to was saying the Blazers were injured 170 games missed. It also eluded to that being the reason the team was underperforming.
Injuries were absolutely not the reason this team underperformed. They didn't help of course but the core was relatively healthy this year. You take out the Winslow and Payton injuries which the poster included and you don't have a tremendous amount of lost games.
Justice Winslow might have made a difference but was not a starter and neither was Payton.
Now try the metric you used on any other team using 4 core starters and see how many games you have with them playing together and stop it at the 60 game mark where this team pretty much called it quits. Out of the first 60 (heck I'm willing to go 65 games) games how many games did they play together?
My bet is 34-35 games is pretty good.
 
Glad the Knicks have a healthy lead over Miami for the 6th spot with Randal going down. They are in 5th now, so maybe Brooklyn moves up....but I doubt Miami can.
 
Fairly-Hard said:
The comment i was responding to was saying the Blazers were injured 170 games missed. It also eluded to that being the reason the team was underperforming..
Click to expand...

actually, all I said was that the label of "injury-plagued" fit the Blazers if it was based upon the full season. I never said that was the reason for 'underperforming'. It was a factor for sure, but it was one of several
 
wizenheimer said:
actually, all I said was that the label of "injury-plagued" fit the Blazers if it was based upon the full season. I never said that was the reason for 'underperforming'. It was a factor for sure, but it was one of several
Click to expand...
I guess I am more inclined to believe the reasons had very little do do with injury and a whole bunch to do with the “Several” you speak of.
Just felt injury plagued was a huge stretch for an excuse to tank.
Just see it different though I guess that argument has some merit.
 
Fairly-Hard said:
I guess I am more inclined to believe the reasons had very little do do with injury and a whole bunch to do with the “Several” you speak of.
Just felt injury plagued was a huge stretch for an excuse to tank.
Just see it different though I guess that argument has some merit.
Click to expand...

the excuse to tank was the record about 2 weeks ago. There was no light in that tunnel
 
In the last 20 years there have been two #1 picks that won a championship with the team that drafted them. LeBron & Kyrie
 
Hoopguru said:
In the last 20 years there have been two #1 picks that won a championship with the team that drafted them. LeBron & Kyrie
Click to expand...

That is a depressing point, but what about the previous 20 years?

Duncan, Robinson and Hakeem.
But go for the previous 40 years and you'd have Magic and Worthy (btw how much horse shit is it that the Lakers had the #1 pick in 79 and 82, both of which were massively lopsided trades in their favor)??


Oof...now I'm depressed.
 
Hoopguru said:
In the last 20 years there have been two #1 picks that won a championship with the team that drafted them. LeBron & Kyrie
Click to expand...

Kyrie only won because of Lebron. Cavs won 33 games the year before Lebron returned and 53 the year he did. Lebron didn't win a title in Cleveland until his 13th season...after returning from Miami

so much of winning a championship any more is circumstantial luck; right place/right time. How many championships would Dame have won by now if the Blazers had drafted Giannis in 2013?
 
julius said:
That is a depressing point, but what about the previous 20 years?

Duncan, Robinson and Hakeem.
But go for the previous 40 years and you'd have Magic and Worthy (btw how much horse shit is it that the Lakers had the #1 pick in 79 and 82, both of which were massively lopsided trades in their favor)??


Oof...now I'm depressed.
Click to expand...
The one and done is a factor now days.
 
Hoopguru said:
In the last 20 years there have been two #1 picks that won a championship with the team that drafted them. LeBron & Kyrie
Click to expand...
Yeah, there usually aren't can't miss prospects who are consensus number one picks but LBJ was one (4 championships), Duncan was one (5), Shaq (4), Magic (5). Now Wemby is being called that but we'll just have to wait and see.

I know that's not really a response to your interesting statistical observation but it just got me thinking about that.
 
This is such bullshit. These guys should be able to enter the league whenever the fuck they want to. IMO obviously.

 
I don't care if he's an all-star talent, we BETTER NOT be drafting a DICK

 
julius said:
That is a depressing point, but what about the previous 20 years?

Duncan, Robinson and Hakeem.
But go for the previous 40 years and you'd have Magic and Worthy (btw how much horse shit is it that the Lakers had the #1 pick in 79 and 82, both of which were massively lopsided trades in their favor)??


Oof...now I'm depressed.
Click to expand...
Surely the only relevant instance is: Portland and Walton.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

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