Simons is legit

[B-Roy]

So I got curious about 3 man units in general.

https://stats.nba.com/lineups/advan...1610612757&sort=NET_RATING&dir=1&CF=MIN*G*100

The Dame/CJ/Seth lineup had one of the best net ratings for 3 man lineups on the team, and was played in 47 games. However, only a 110 minute sample size and the shooting numbers were actually quite bad. So I don't know how much you can read into this if at all.

Blazers also had 3 of the top 10 3-man lineups in the league, but they all featured either Aminu or Nurkic...

 

[illmatic99]

If he shoots >40% from three, he'll probably play in the three guard lineups that had Seth in with Dame and CJ. Those were usually played when Stotts felt the need to jumpstart the offense, or at end of quarter possessions where you need a bucket.

The Dame/CJ/Seth/Aminu/Nurk 5 man unit was one of our best 5 man units last year in terms of win percentage. Situational lineup though for sure.

CJ played SF for nearly a third of his minutes last year. Caught me by surprise. Not sure how bball reference differentiates between positions.

 

[illmatic99]

Does Ant have the second highest approval rating on the team? legit question. EVERYONE loves him

 

[wizenheimer]

The hype is getting crazy. .

personally, I think Olshey, 'off-the-record', is primary in fueling the hype train

I really hope this doesn't put too much pressure on Simons

 

[e_blazer]

personally, I think Olshey, 'off-the-record', is primary in fueling the hype train

I really hope this doesn't put too much pressure on Simons

It's only hype if it exceeds what Simons can deliver. I guess we'll find that out next fall.

 

[wizenheimer]

CJ played SF for nearly a third of his minutes last year. Caught me by surprise. Not sure how bball reference differentiates between positions.

bbref is horrible at determining positional minutes. You just can't believe their numbers. They say Curry played 223 minutes at SF when he didn't play a minute there. They also say ET never played a minute at SF....it's all bullshit. You are what you defend and Dame was more likely to defend SF's than CJ was because Dame is better at defending near the paint (or anywhere else) and has a stronger base.

82games is much more accurate. They say CJ spent 0% of his minutes at SF:

http://www.82games.com/1819/18POR3.HTM

 

[Wizard Mentor]

Does Ant have the second highest approval rating on the team? legit question. EVERYONE loves him

There will be times when he struggles. It'll be interesting to see who loses their shit.

 

[Orion Bailey]

That would put him in some elite company off the bench. 10, 4,3 off the bench in the past ten years:
View attachment 27033

lol. ET. lol

 

[Strenuus]

Heres the easy way to not get caught up in the hype:

Let him do the talking. Dont get brainwashed by the media.

Once he does it consistently, then I'll get excited. Until then, its a waste of time.

 

[blazerfan11]

There isn't much pressure on Simons despite the hype. He's going to get more slack than anyone else in the rotation because of his age and playing experience.
The new starters, Whiteside, Collins, and Hood, will be much more scrutinized than Simons and get the flack if fans aren't happy with their performance.
Bazemore with his huge salary will also be under more pressure than Simons. If fans are expecting a good shooter they could be very disappointed if he shoots like he did last season (Evan Turner level).

 

[RR7]

bbref is horrible at determining positional minutes. You just can't believe their numbers. They say Curry played 223 minutes at SF when he didn't play a minute there. They also say ET never played a minute at SF....it's all bullshit. You are what you defend and Dame was more likely to defend SF's than CJ was because Dame is better at defending near the paint (or anywhere else) and has a stronger base.

82games is much more accurate. They say CJ spent 0% of his minutes at SF:

http://www.82games.com/1819/18POR3.HTM

And yet 82games doesn't show Dame playing a minute at SF.

 

[Pinwheel1]

Bazemore with his huge salary will also be under more pressure than Simons. If fans are expecting a good shooter they could be very disappointed if he shoots like he did last season (Evan Turner level).

Is it the same level? Bazemore made 96 threes last year, ET made 11. (Harkless made 33) Big difference for Portland' s type of offense.
I am not expecting huge shooting numbers from Baze, just a better 3pt shooter when left open then we have had.

 

[B-Roy]

Is it the same level? Bazemore made 96 threes last year, ET made 11. (Harkless made 33) Big difference for Portland' s type of offense.
I am not expecting huge shooting numbers from Baze, just a better 3pt shooter when left open then we have had.

What is Portland's type of offense? Part of me wonders if our poor shooting is a function of the team or the offense.

We were 12th in 3 point percentage last year, which is okay, but actually 20th in 3 point attempt rate. The only playoff teams that attempted less 3 pointers than us were the Spurs, Clippers and Pacers. Our 3 point attempt rate has hovered around 30-33% since the Aldridge days. The league average attempt rate was 26% in 2013-14, Portland was 29% that season. Last season it was 36% league average, and Portland was 34%. So the difference is the league is shooting more, and we're shooting about the same amount.

With that said, 3 point shooting is only a function of the offense. We had the 3rd most efficient offense last year even without shooting so many threes, but maybe Stotts's offense just isn't actually good at generating three pointers. Maybe having more shooters will allow Stotts to revamp the offense, but if they run the same offense I wonder how much better we will actually be.

 

[wizenheimer]

And yet 82games doesn't show Dame playing a minute at SF.

cute, but you know what I meant

here's the thing, none of Dame-CJ-Curry were SF's. Sometimes Portland played without a C; and sometimes they played without a SF. They, in a few instances, ran with all of those 3 on the floor and when they did they had a 3 guard lineup

the main thing was that bbref's assignment of positional minutes doesn't make a lot of sense at all for some players

for instance, according to bbref, Dame-CJ-Curry played a total of 52 minutes together. Yet, they show CJ having played 713 minutes at SF and Curry playing 223 minutes at SF

according to bbref:

A. Aminu | D. Lillard | C. McCollum | J. Nurkić | E. Turner was the 3rd most used 5 man unit, and
Z. Collins | S. Curry | M. Leonard | D. Lillard | E. Turner was the 6th most used unit, yet they also show that Turner didn't play a single minute at SF. It's nonsense in just about every practical way except for bbref's apparent need to apportion 48 minutes a game to each position

 

[blazerfan11]

Is it the same level? Bazemore made 96 threes last year, ET made 11. (Harkless made 33) Big difference for Portland' s type of offense.
I am not expecting huge shooting numbers from Baze, just a better 3pt shooter when left open then we have had.

OK. We'll agree to disagree. Average 3-point shooting does not make up for shit overall shooting. I will not be impressed if he shoots worse overall than Al Farouq Aminu. And there is a chance he's he'll be the worst percentage scorer on the team with a $19 million salary, just like ET was.

 

[blazerfan11]

What is Portland's type of offense? Part of me wonders if our poor shooting is a function of the team or the offense.

We were 12th in 3 point percentage last year, which is okay, but actually 20th in 3 point attempt rate. The only playoff teams that attempted less 3 pointers than us were the Spurs, Clippers and Pacers. Our 3 point attempt rate has hovered around 30-33% since the Aldridge days. The league average attempt rate was 26% in 2013-14, Portland was 29% that season. Last season it was 36% league average, and Portland was 34%. So the difference is the league is shooting more, and we're shooting about the same amount.

With that said, 3 point shooting is only a function of the offense. We had the 3rd most efficient offense last year even without shooting so many threes, but maybe Stotts's offense just isn't actually good at generating three pointers. Maybe having more shooters will allow Stotts to revamp the offense, but if they run the same offense I wonder how much better we will actually be.

My impression of Stotts's offense is that it does not try very hard to get the shots they really want, it works to get good shots.
It's not hard to get the "good" shots especially when both your small guards can dribble.
CJ McCollum is great at "breaking ankles" in the 2-point area, but to me I'd rather expend that energy setting someone up for an open 3-pointer.
When I see teams like Golden State passing working much more to get the shots they want, I wonder what the Trail Blazers could do with a little more focus on the shot they really want.
Or maybe the mid range ankle breaker really is the shot Stotts wants.

 

[SIeepwalker]

The hype is getting crazy. What kinda numbers do you guys anticipate seeing from Ant this season?

Nothing short of 25/15/10

 

[CupWizier]

OK. We'll agree to disagree. Average 3-point shooting does not make up for shit overall shooting. I will not be impressed if he shoots worse overall than Al Farouq Aminu. And there is a chance he's he'll be the worst percentage scorer on the team with a $19 million salary, just like ET was.

You can spew as many negative stats as you want from last year, but the Blazers ended up being a 3 seed in the very tough west and made it to the WCF. That's the only stats that really matter.

 

[B-Roy]

My impression of Stotts's offense is that it does not try very hard to get the shots they really want, it works to get good shots.
It's not hard to get the "good" shots especially when both your small guards can dribble.
CJ McCollum is great at "breaking ankles" in the 2-point area, but to me I'd rather expend that energy setting someone up for an open 3-pointer.
When I see teams like Golden State passing working much more to get the shots they want, I wonder what the Trail Blazers could do with a little more focus on the shot they really want.
Or maybe the mid range ankle breaker really is the shot Stotts wants.

Well, the whole point of offense is to score as many points as possible. In that sense I don’t think it matters where you get your shots as long as it’s efficient. It’s worth noting that the Blazers, Spurs and the Clippers all had top 10 offenses despite shooting less threes. The Blazers were third and the Spurs were 4th. Why shoot threes if you can’t?

The reason I asked is because over Stotts 7 year career we’ve always hovered around the 30-34% range. That’s why I was questioning whether it was more a function of the roster or the offense. This season should test that theory.

I think there is benefit of increasing the spacing on the floor though, because the game is played differently in the playoffs. Good teams employed the same strategy against is to pretty good success because we haven’t had good enough shooters.

 

[blazerfan11]

What is Portland's type of offense? Part of me wonders if our poor shooting is a function of the team or the offense.

We were 12th in 3 point percentage last year, which is okay, but actually 20th in 3 point attempt rate. The only playoff teams that attempted less 3 pointers than us were the Spurs, Clippers and Pacers. Our 3 point attempt rate has hovered around 30-33% since the Aldridge days. The league average attempt rate was 26% in 2013-14, Portland was 29% that season. Last season it was 36% league average, and Portland was 34%. So the difference is the league is shooting more, and we're shooting about the same amount.

With that said, 3 point shooting is only a function of the offense. We had the 3rd most efficient offense last year even without shooting so many threes, but maybe Stotts's offense just isn't actually good at generating three pointers. Maybe having more shooters will allow Stotts to revamp the offense, but if they run the same offense I wonder how much better we will actually be.

Well, the whole point of offense is to score as many points as possible. In that sense I don’t think it matters where you get your shots as long as it’s efficient. It’s worth noting that the Blazers, Spurs and the Clippers all had top 10 offenses despite shooting less threes. The Blazers were third and the Spurs were 4th. Why shoot threes if you can’t?

The reason I asked is because over Stotts 7 year career we’ve always hovered around the 30-34% range. That’s why I was questioning whether it was more a function of the roster or the offense. This season should test that theory.

I think there is benefit of increasing the spacing on the floor though, because the game is played differently in the playoffs. Good teams employed the same strategy against is to pretty good success because we haven’t had good enough shooters.

If you are referring to Offensive Rating as defined by NBA.com, that is how many points are scored per possession, so it is not a shooting efficiency stat. You could miss 2 shots and get 2 offensive rebounds and make the 3rd shot. That would be good for Offensive Rating but you'd have a shooting percentage of 33% which is inefficient. (if you're meaning a different statistic what does it describe?)

edit: Am I correct on the definition of a possession in this stat? If you get a new possession on an offensive rebound or not...

For effective field goal percentage the Trail Blazers were 13th in the NBA.
For True Shooting Percentage, which includes free-throw shooting, the Trail Blazers were 9th in the NBA.
https://stats.nba.com/teams/advanced/?sort=EFG_PCT&dir=-1

 

[blazerfan11]

Is it the same level? Bazemore made 96 threes last year, ET made 11. (Harkless made 33) Big difference for Portland' s type of offense.
I am not expecting huge shooting numbers from Baze, just a better 3pt shooter when left open then we have had.

I understand what everyone is talking about with the "better fit". I just don't think we'll see the improvement that everyone is hoping for. Of course I hope I'm wrong.

 

[Defender]

Bazemore doesn’t need to be JJ Reddick, he needs to just hit open shots with some consistency. Given what we’ve seen in his career so far he can do that so that’s good enough for me.

 

[BonesJones]

CJ played SF for nearly a third of his minutes last year. Caught me by surprise. Not sure how bball reference differentiates between positions.

Probably listed ET at PG, Seth at SG, CJ at SF.

 

[CupWizier]

Bazemore doesn’t need to be JJ Reddick, he needs to just hit open shots with some consistency. Given what we’ve seen in his career so far he can do that so that’s good enough for me.

Reddick may be a better shooter, but Bazemore has more versatility and can help in more ways, It will be interesting and fun to see how he fits in.

 

[ripcity67]

https://bleacherreport.com/articles...om&utm_campaign=editorial&utm_medium=referral

did not see this posted anywhere

 

[TorturedBlazerFan]

I thought the process was every starter gets assigned a position, then every sub after that is assigned to the position of who they checked in for. I thought BBRef just used those numbers.