Official other teams injuries vs Portland thread

[Mediocre Man]

Or, perhaps, we could look at this with the perspective that we should both have as long time NBA fans: Each individual game is a unique blend of factors that makes comparing scores and looking at who was playing and who wasn't pretty foolish. Butler misses the game against OKC, but "over-the-hill" Derrick Rose plays an out of his mind blast from the past and scores 50, leading the hapless TWolves past Utah. The Lakers are on a mission to beat the Blazers and the 16 game win streak and meet a cold shooting, turn-over prone, Blazers team that has to try to rally from 20 points down and can't quite get the job done. The next night, the Lakers are flat and perhaps a bit overly optimistic about their chances against the Raptors because Kawhi isn't playing, and Ibaka goes off for 34 points. The Blazers pull the same kind of overly confident start against the Pelicans absent Davis and Randle comes off the bench as a one-man wrecking crew in the first half before the Blazers finally make some adjustments and end up pulling out a comfortable win. Teams get hot from three or can't hit the broad side of a barn. Plays run like clockwork or can have sloppy passes sailing into the arms of an opponent or a fan sitting in the first row. Those kinds of things are why comparing scores and looking at who is missing is a futile effort.

The Blazers are 7-3 and you and others may knock them for some of their opponents not being at full strength, but that's the NBA. Every team has games like that and they also have games where they're undermanned themselves due to injuries or other factors. The only thing a team can do is try to win the game that is in front of them. The Blazers 70 percent start will help them later in the season and maybe will make it so that they don't need a super late season push to make the playoffs. I'm celebrating that.

No one is knocking them. I started this thread because like last year, it will come up

 

[THE HCP]

Good for you starting this thread. It's true last season people claimed opposing stars missing games against us had no effect/affect on our win total basically. Has nothing to do with other teams, just us.

 

[e_blazer]

No one is knocking them. I started this thread because like last year, it will come up

Oh, the knocking comes later. I guess I'll bookmark my post so it's readily available for when the fun starts.

 

[Mediocre Man]

Oh, the knocking comes later. I guess I'll bookmark my post so it's readily available for when the fun starts.

You do you

 

[PtldPlatypus]

So far Harden, Davis, Butler

This was a big topic last year, so I thought a preemptive thread was in order

You forgot Dejounte Murray being out for the Spurs.

I think more interesting (or instructive) than looking at how many teams were missing significant players is looking at how have we played against teams that were at (relatively) full strength.

To that end, I would consider the games against LA, WAS, ORL, MIA, IND, and LA again as fitting that description. In those games, we're 3-3.

I'm glad we've also got 4 wins against weakened teams, and I hope we get plenty more, but I think the preceding sentence is more indicative of the team's overall quality.

 

[PtldPlatypus]

I'm curious, when we talk about stats, should we not count the easy buckets? If Dame gets a breakaway layup, should that not count towards his averages because it was so easy? Should difficulty be a factor when we talk about his three point shooting? Are there points for style?

I look at it as more comparable to (and pardon the cross-sports analogy) when college QB's play in conferences that don't have legit pass defenses, or in an offense in which the scheme more often than not generates wide open receivers. When evaluating that QB for potential pro success, you don't focus on how well or often he can complete passes with no DB within 10 yards of the target; you focus on situations in which he actually has to make throws comparable to what he'd have to make in the NFL. If he's completing 70% of his throws overall, but only 40% on passes where defense is actually being played, then that's a bit of a red flag.

 

[hoopsjock]

You forgot Dejounte Murray being out for the Spurs.

I think more interesting (or instructive) than looking at how many teams were missing significant players is looking at how have we played against teams that were at (relatively) full strength.

To that end, I would consider the games against LA, WAS, ORL, MIA, IND, and LA again as fitting that description. In those games, we're 3-3.

I'm glad we've also got 4 wins against weakened teams, and I hope we get plenty more, but I think the preceding sentence is more indicative of the team's overall quality.

I don't think we can count anyone who got injured prior to the season starting and won't play in a single game this year. No team has to play them at "full" strength.

 

[Boob-No-More]

I don't think we can count anyone who got injured prior to the season starting and won't play in a single game this year. No team has to play them at "full" strength.

Yeah, that's like saying all the other teams got lucky because they don't have to play us with Gred Oden and Brandon Roy this year.

BNM

 

[PtldPlatypus]

I don't think we can count anyone who got injured prior to the season starting and won't play in a single game this year. No team has to play them at "full" strength.

If you insist. Call us 4-3 against "relatively" full strength teams, with two good wins (vSAS, @IND) and two bad losses (vWAS, vLAL). Still pretty average.

 

[hoopsjock]

If you insist. Call us 4-3 against "relatively" full strength teams, with two good wins (vSAS, @IND) and two bad losses (vWAS, vLAL). Still pretty average.

Hey, can we count the Heat game as unlucky because Dion Waiters didn't play? We probably would've blown them out if he suited up.

 

[PtldPlatypus]

Hey, can we count the Heat game as unlucky because Dion Waiters didn't play? We probably would've blown them out if he suited up.

That's funny. Well played.

 

[Mediocre Man]

Hey, can we count the Heat game as unlucky because Dion Waiters didn't play? We probably would've blown them out if he suited up.

This is a great point

 

[PtldPlatypus]

Avery Bradley out for the Clips, and now possibly Tobias Harris too.

 

[Labinot41]

Avery Bradley out for the Clips, and now possibly Tobias Harris too.

We're the luckiest Team in the history of the NBA

 

[THE HCP]

Haaaaaaaa!

 

[dviss1]

Avery Bradley out for the Clips, and now possibly Tobias Harris too.

Giannis looked pretty healthy the other night.

This is a stupid thread...

 

[PtldPlatypus]

Giannis looked pretty healthy the other night.

Nobody said that every star is missing games against the Blazers, or that every team is playing them weakened. The Spurs (basically) and Pacers were full strength as well. Lakers and Magic too (although those are probably less significant). But if you want a complete picture of the team's overall quality of play, it's not unreasonable to note the instances in which they face incomplete squads.

So far, they're 5-3 against full strength teams, including 3 quality wins. Still good, even discounting the "missing star" victories.

 

[Boob-No-More]

Giannis looked pretty healthy the other night.

This is a stupid thread...

Some posters feel the need to minimize the team's success and make excuses when they win. Seems kind of ass backwards to me, but they claim to be fans, so whatever.

BNM

 

[dviss1]

Nobody said that every star is missing games against the Blazers, or that every team is playing them weakened. The Spurs (basically) and Pacers were full strength as well. Lakers and Magic too (although those are probably less significant). But if you want a complete picture of the team's overall quality of play, it's not unreasonable to note the instances in which they face incomplete squads.

So far, they're 5-3 against full strength teams, including 3 quality wins. Still good, even discounting the "missing star" victories.

All teams have injuries.

Golden state won a title against a severely depleted Cavs squad.

You don't see anyone putting an asterisk on that win.

I just think this thread is silly.

 

[Boob-No-More]

Nobody said that every star is missing games against the Blazers, or that every team is playing them weakened. The Spurs (basically) and Pacers were full strength as well. Lakers and Magic too (although those are probably less significant). But if you want a complete picture of the team's overall quality of play, it's not unreasonable to note the instances in which they face incomplete squads.

So far, they're 5-3 against full strength teams, including 3 quality wins. Still good, even discounting the "missing star" victories.

Please update us on everyone else's records (at least the Western Conference) against teams "missing stars". If we're going to discount our wins, everyone else's wins should be equally discounted. Then, and only then, will we have the One True Standings. Please submit the results to Adam Silver so he can propose using True Standings instead of the current Portland is SUPER Lucky Standings for determining correct and accurate playoff seedings.

BNM

 

[PtldPlatypus]

All teams have injuries.

Golden state won a title against a severely depleted Cavs squad.

You don't see anyone putting an asterisk on that win.

I just think this thread is silly.

Some actually do asterisk their 2015 title, just like some asterisk Cleveland's 2016.

Thank you for making your voice known. I love when reasonable people disagree. Keeps things interesting and lively.

 

[PtldPlatypus]

Please update us on everyone else's records (at least the Western Conference) against teams "missing stars". If we're going to discount our wins, everyone else's wins should be equally discounted. Then, and only then, will we have the One True Standings. Please submit the results to Adam Silver so he can propose using True Standings instead of the current Portland is SUPER Lucky Standings for determining correct and accurate playoff seedings.

BNM

Well, since nobody said that the standings should be adjusted, I'm going to go ahead and not do that. But thanks for the mockery and sarcasm; it's always welcome.

 

[Labinot41]

Some posters feel the need to minimize the team's success and make excuses when they win. Seems kind of ass backwards to me, but they claim to be fans, so whatever.

BNM

Oh okay, now anyone who does not share your opinion is not a real fan, that's pretty dumb. It has nothing to do with making excuses if we win, I just want to see the Blazers play opponent at Full strenght. That's all.

 

[Boob-No-More]

Oh okay, now anyone who does not share your opinion is not a real fan, that's pretty dumb. It has nothing to do with making excuses if we ein, I just want to see the Blazers play opponent at Full strenght. That's all.

And since you can't control that, why "keep track of it", which is the point of this thread.

BNM

 

[stampedehero]

Useful in what way? Trying to convince POR fans that we are the luckiest team in the league? Or do you actually plan on also tracking how many games those same players miss against other Western Conference teams. If not, I don't see how this will be "useful".

BNM

Stats Geeks Love It. You know, we would have to go through a complicated formula for luckiness. The good old Minutes per game is a stat than can be used. On a comparative scale that stat could determine the injury aspects of a player or if they suck as a 4 or a 5 as the coaching staff dictates.

 

[Boob-No-More]

Well, since nobody said that the standings should be adjusted, I'm going to go ahead and not do that. But thanks for the mockery and sarcasm; it's always welcome.

You felt the need to point out POR's record minus their lucky wins. It doesn't seem particularly relevant if you don't make similar adjustments for all the other teams in the West.

I understand why tracking "lucky wins" matters in determining how good our team really is, but if that's the point don't we also need to know how lucky we are relative to the other teams we are competing against for playoff seedings? Without that, you have a single, isolated data point. If you're not going to track everybody else's lucky wins, what's the point. You might as well just do the same thing the NBA does and use actual won:loss records.

I'm glad you welcome the sarcasm, even though I did not use the obligatory green font.

BNM

 

[Boob-No-More]

Stats Geeks Love It. You know, we would have to go through a complicated formula for luckiness. The good old Minutes per game is a stat than can be used. On a comparative scale that stat could determine the injury aspects of a player or if they suck as a 4 or a 5 as the coaching staff dictates.

Now you're talking! Unfortunately, that was not the intention of this thread. The intent was right there in the subject line - keeping track of POR's "luckiness" against other teams. In isolation, this seems useless to me.

BNM

 

[PtldPlatypus]

You felt the need to point out POR's record minus their lucky wins. It doesn't seem particularly relevant if you don't make similar adjustments for all the other teams in the West.

I understand why tracking "lucky wins" matters in determining how good our team really is, but if that's the point don't we also need to know how lucky we are relative to the other teams we are competing against for playoff seedings? Without that, you have a single, isolated data point. If you're not going to track everybody else's lucky wins, what's the point. You might as well just do the same thing the NBA does and use actual won:loss records.

I'm glad you welcome the sarcasm, even though I did not use the obligatory green font.

BNM

If I were using that information to compare the Blazers' record to other teams, then sure, your claim holds water. I'm not, so it doesn't.

 

[kjironman1]

Useful in what way? Trying to convince POR fans that we are the luckiest team in the league? Or do you actually plan on also tracking how many games those same players miss against other Western Conference teams. If not, I don't see how this will be "useful".

BNM

It would make your head spin is all. Injuries happen and all teams get chances to both take advantage and deal with them.

 

[kjironman1]

Cute story but a fairy-tale.

Recently Not so much a fairy tale.