one more pre-season review.

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

UKRAINEFAN

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 30, 2008
Messages
14,962
Likes
12,144
Points
113
by three guys who probably consider themselves experts but are not particularly astute. The thing is, I think their opinions would be pretty representative of the average fan around the league. They don't offer any alternative course that the Blazers could have taken, probably because I don't think there was any. Again some more people who don't think Turner fits; this will be one of the most interesting things for me to watch this season; see if the team and Stotts can make it work well with Turner.
http://www.todaysfastbreak.com/nba-...rs/roundtable-trail-blazers-offseason-review/
 
I don't understand why guys who call themselves basketball experts don't get the reason for the Blazers going after Turner. Last season, whenever Dame went to the bench the Blazers only had one playmaker, CJ, in the game. That made the offense a lot easier to contain than when there are two guys on the court capable of running the offense. The Blazers got Turner for his playmaking abilities in order to resolve that problem.
 
Last edited:
I don't understand why guys who call themselves basketball experts don't get the reason for the Blazers going after Turner. Last season, whenever Dame went to the bench the Blazers only had one playmaker, CJ, in the game. That made the offense a lot easier to contain than when there are two guys on the court capable of running the offense. The Blazers got Turner for his playmaking abilities in order to resolve that problem.
Bill Simmons had Brad Stevens on his podcast today and they raved about Turner's ball handling and ability to create for others. And Simmons noted repeatedly how great of a fit he'll be in POR, in a system where both our guards LIKE and excel while playing off the ball.

Common misconception by some of these pundits like the ones above is that they think Dame and CJ pound the air out of the ball and can only be effective by doing so. They forget the fact that all of that was driven by necessity, not preference. These guys look at usg% and freak out by the idea that they won't have the ball in their hands if Turner is in the lineup. Just keep looking a bit deeper into those numbers and find how effective our guys are in catch and shoot situations.
 
Bill Simmons had Brad Stevens on his podcast today and they raved about Turner's ball handling and ability to create for others. And Simmons noted repeatedly how great of a fit he'll be in POR, in a system where both our guards LIKE and excel while playing off the ball.

Common misconception by some of these pundits like the ones above is that they think Dame and CJ pound the air out of the ball and can only be effective by doing so. They forget the fact that all of that was driven by necessity, not preference. These guys look at usg% and freak out by the idea that they won't have the ball in their hands if Turner is in the lineup. Just keep looking a bit deeper into those numbers and find how effective our guys are in catch and shoot situations.
I'd be more re-assured if it was Stevens rather than Simmons that thinks he will be a great fit with Portland.
 
Bill Simmons had Brad Stevens on his podcast today and they raved about Turner's ball handling and ability to create for others. And Simmons noted repeatedly how great of a fit he'll be in POR, in a system where both our guards LIKE and excel while playing off the ball.

Can you give me a minute mark to start listening?
 
I don't understand why guys who call themselves basketball experts don't get the reason for the Blazers going after Turner. Last season, whenever Dame went to the bench the Blazers only had one playmaker, CJ, in the game. That made the offense a lot easier to contain than when there are two guys on the court capable of running the offense. The Blazers got Turner for his playmaking abilities in order to resolve that problem.

I posted this in one of the other many preseason threads, but it seems to fit here as well (especially the part in bold). Last year when one of Dame or C.J. went to the bench the other was left alone on an island as both the ONLY ball handler/distributor AND primary scorer. A very difficult role for one player and very easy to defend. In hindsight, it's actually a miracle it worked out as well as it did. Turner will make them both better and their lives easier.

I think most "experts" are missing the point of our off season acquisitions. Evan Turner was not brought in to be a scorer. He was brought in to be our secondary ball handler/distributor. That's playing to his strengths and addressing a major weakness we had last year that was especially exposed in the playoffs. Last year, we didn't have a single ball handler coming off the bench that played significant minutes. Our backup PGs were Tim Frazier and then Brian Roberts. Between the two of them, they only played in 51 games, and when they did play, they only averaged 7 MPG. It was even worse in the playoffs when Roberts averaged only 3.6 MPG, almost entirely in garbage time.

And there's a reason they didn't play more. Both are generously listed as 6'1" (and Frazier isn't even close to that). Given that Dame and C.J. are both just 6'3", playing one, or the other, with Frazier or Roberts left us severely undersized in the back court.

Enter Evan Turner. At 6'7", Turner can easily play with Dame, or C.J., or both. This is the real reason we brought in Turner. Most in this forum seems to understand this, but many in the national media do not. Anyone who says Turner isn't a good fit, has entirely missed this point. Last year, when either Dame or C.J. sat, we were left with one ball handler on the court - and that one ball handler happened to also be our best/primary scorer. Do you know how easy that is to defend, especially at the NBA level? Just swarm the heck out of the guy handling the ball and you shut down not only his scoring, but your entire opponent's offense.

Turner gives us a 3rd ball handler/distributor. That means we can always have 2 of the 3 of Dame, C.J. and Turner on the court. No longer will Dame or C.J. be left on an island when the other rests. That's a HUGE improvement. It also lets Dame and C.J. both play off the ball more, which will result in more, higher percentage, catch and shoot opportunities. The player Turner is replacing on the roster is Gerald Henderson. Henderson was a decent scorer off the bench, but like our other leading bench scorer, Allen Crabbe, he is not a distributor. His 8.2 AST% is only about 1/3 of Turner's 23.9. And, we don't really sacrifice much in scoring. Although he isn't a primary scorer, Turner's scoring rate and efficiency was only slightly lower than Henderson's. The real benefit of adding Turner is more catch and shoot opportunities for everyone else, not just Dame and C.J. Add Crabbe, Meyers and Aminu to that list.

BNM
 
Stotts said Turner is gonna shoot the 3 better in his system. I bet Turner shoots 33-36%. You heard it here first.
 
by three guys who probably consider themselves experts but are not particularly astute.
http://www.todaysfastbreak.com/nba-west/portland-trail-blazers/roundtable-trail-blazers-offseason-review/

They agreed on every question. They need to manufacture disagreement to make the article interesting.

I don't understand why guys who call themselves basketball experts don't get the reason for the Blazers going after Turner. Last season, whenever Dame went to the bench the Blazers only had one playmaker, CJ, in the game. That made the offense a lot easier to contain than when there are two guys on the court capable of running the offense. The Blazers got Turner for his playmaking abilities in order to resolve that problem.

The panel would answer, there were many PGs (like Napier) available for far less than we overpaid Turner. No, the biggest reason that Olshey got Turner was for his ability to create baskets by himself, due to his clutch dribbling. We didn't have a forward who can do that. Turner's assists are just dessert, and are you sure that he "runs the offense?" Dribbling maniacally through traffic under the basket, looking for shoot vs. pass opportunities, is not the same as setting up plays.
 
Last edited:

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top