So Dame might lead the league in scoring next year

[santeesioux]

Right? Outside of Meyers and CJ, who's gonna have the potential to average over 15ppg? I think we should go after Kanter just to have another guy that can take the load off of Dame on the offensive end.

 

[magnifier661]

I wouldn't be surprised if Dame averages 28-30 ppg. I'm hoping he does it efficiently though. I wouldn't want to see him scoring that much on 40% from the field.

 

[blue9]

I hope not - that's going to be inefficient, losing basketball that doesn't lend itself to developing all the other players on the team. Lillard should be focused on developing, too, rather than doing the same things he's always done (score).

 

[BlazerCaravan]

I'd rather see 12 assists a game, to blue9's point.

 

[Minstrel]

I don't think Lillard can score 25+ PPG efficiently. That's the type of production the greatest scorers ever provide. I like Lillard, but he'll have to take a couple gigantic steps up to be that caliber of player. I think he'll score 20-22 solidly efficient points and his assists will go up. He's going to be playing pick-and-roll a lot, and he's going to draw a double-team from a lot of those pick-and-rolls because he's the only proven scorer. If he makes the right play each time, he'll be passing a lot. It'll be on other guys to hit open shots.

 

[magnifier661]

I agree with both of you guys. Dame will be dishing 20 assists and scoring 30 points a game!

 

[HomerLovesKoolAid]

I think he would if he went into K*be chuck mode. 15-43, 4 assists, 7 TOs, about 43 ppg. Awesome.

 

[BlazerCaravan]

I think he would if he went into K*be chuck mode. 15-43, 4 assists, 7 TOs, about 43 ppg. Awesome.

As long as we lose in an entertaining fashion and get a top 3 pick?

 

[BBert]

I don't want Dame trying to carry that load. I want him to show leadership by guiding his team and putting his teammates in positions to grow and succeed, in the long-term.

 

[BrianFromWA]

K*be will sign with us for our 2016 cap space thinking: "That young'un is my kind of player! And don't worry, Aminu and Ed Davis...you guys just play D and clean up the boards...we'll be fine back here"

 

[BrianFromWA]

On a serious note, with teams having to respect the "and roll" much more on the P&R, you will probably not see as many bigs hedging up to double Dame. Last couple years other teams have known that worst-case scenario the get by trapping Dame is an open 41% jumper from LMA or a chance to catch back up on D as the ball swings its way around the floor to the other corner. (For players that had 2 P*R chances per game, LMA was worse than everyone except Luis Scola, Josh Smith and Thaddeus Young at .83PPP). Even though he led the league in P&R possessions, his shooting of the P&R was well below his first two years. Now, with a couple of crashers to the rim as our bigs (and maybe, dare I say, lobs and alley-oops?!) the defending big will be forced to stay back, giving Dame either an open mid-range or 2-on-1 drive to the hoop if the defender goes over the top, or a calm 3 as they go under the screen. Either way, I expect higher efficiency, higher 3pt% and more assists even with the same number of P&R plays. If we have more P&Rs...wow.

Before he hurt his back against MIA in January, Dame was shooting 42% on 3's.

 

[blue9]

On a serious note, with teams having to respect the "and roll" much more on the P&R, you will probably not see as many bigs hedging up to double Dame. Last couple years other teams have known that worst-case scenario the get by trapping Dame is an open 41% jumper from LMA or a chance to catch back up on D as the ball swings its way around the floor to the other corner. (For players that had 2 P*R chances per game, LMA was worse than everyone except Luis Scola, Josh Smith and Thaddeus Young at .83PPP). Even though he led the league in P&R possessions, his shooting of the P&R was well below his first two years. Now, with a couple of crashers to the rim as our bigs (and maybe, dare I say, lobs and alley-oops?!) the defending big will be forced to stay back, giving Dame either an open mid-range or 2-on-1 drive to the hoop if the defender goes over the top, or a calm 3 as they go under the screen. Either way, I expect higher efficiency, higher 3pt% and more assists even with the same number of P&R plays. If we have more P&Rs...wow.

Before he hurt his back against MIA in January, Dame was shooting 42% on 3's.

I had to "unlike" this a couple times just so I could "like" it again!

 

[Orion Bailey]

I wouldn't be surprised if Dame averages 28-30 ppg. I'm hoping he does it efficiently though. I wouldn't want to see him scoring that much on 40% from the field.

Yeah, cause we all saw what Westbrook wasn't able to do by being an inefficient volume scorer. Set records...but lost.

 

[blue32]

Dame can green light all he wants if he can get back to pre-adidas shoes form.

 

[dd def]

Dame can green light all he wants if he can get back to pre-adidas shoes form.

...what? he's been with adidas since BEFORE he was pro. i don't understand what you're trying to say here

 

[dviss1]

K*be will sign with us for our 2016 cap space thinking: "That young'un is my kind of player! And don't worry, Aminu and Ed Davis...you guys just play D and clean up the boards...we'll be fine back here"

Blasphemy!!

 

[BlazerCaravan]

...what? he's been with adidas since BEFORE he was pro. i don't understand what you're trying to say here

When he premiered his signature shoe, coincidentally his game took a turn for the worse. Pre-Damian-1 days is what we mean.

 

[Nikolokolus]

Damian's about to enter a whole new world as the focal point of every team's defensive effort. Aldridge took a ton of pressure off of him and I think there's going to be a major adjustment period for him. Will he lead the league in scoring? No I doubt that, at least not while Lebron, Durant, Westbrook, and Curry are still in the league. He'll probably put up about 23 per game on 38-40% shooting . . . and we'll lose a shit-load of games and that's just fine by me because I don't relish the idea of sacrificing our first round pick to Denver.

 

[BlazerCaravan]

Damian's about to enter a whole new world as the focal point of every team's defensive effort. Aldridge took a ton of pressure off of him and I think there's going to be a major adjustment period for him. Will he lead the league in scoring? No I doubt that, at least not while Lebron, Durant, Westbrook, and Curry are still in the league. He'll probably put up about 23 per game on 38-40% shooting . . . and we'll lose a shit-load of games and that's just fine by me because I don't relish the idea of sacrificing our first round pick to Denver.

I've been thinking about that draft pick... if 2016 is as weak as we think, do we want to risk having a worthless 8th pick this year and accidentally getting too good in 2017 to keep our pick? Playing our asses off, and giving Denver a non-lotto pick in 2016 gives us freedom to trade the 2017 pick, or whatever.

I'm thinking it's a win-win scenario for us either way.

 

[magnifier661]

I've been thinking about that draft pick... if 2016 is as weak as we think, do we want to risk having a worthless 8th pick this year and accidentally getting too good in 2017 to keep our pick? Playing our asses off, and giving Denver a non-lotto pick in 2016 gives us freedom to trade the 2017 pick, or whatever.

I'm thinking it's a win-win scenario for us either way.

If we are gonna lose the pick, it should be this season. The 2016 draft supposedly one of the worst in the last decade. And who's to say we don't trade one of our valuables to move up anyway? If the draft is as weak as they say, then a player with promise and a little cap space could do the trick.

 

[blue9]

I've been thinking about that draft pick... if 2016 is as weak as we think, do we want to risk having a worthless 8th pick this year and accidentally getting too good in 2017 to keep our pick? Playing our asses off, and giving Denver a non-lotto pick in 2016 gives us freedom to trade the 2017 pick, or whatever.

I'm thinking it's a win-win scenario for us either way.

Don't the pundits get the strength/weakness of drafts wrong quite a bit? Maybe not, but I thought there was a recent draft that, a year out, people were saying was super weak, but then as the season played out there were a bunch of prospects. I don't follow NCAA so I could be totally wrong, but I'm not going to worry about keeping a lotto pick in a weak draft - it's still an asset! Either find the diamond in the rough or use it in a trade...either is better than just giving it to DEN.

 

[Orion Bailey]

Damian's about to enter a whole new world as the focal point of every team's defensive effort. Aldridge took a ton of pressure off of him and I think there's going to be a major adjustment period for him. Will he lead the league in scoring? No I doubt that, at least not while Lebron, Durant, Westbrook, and Curry are still in the league. He'll probably put up about 23 per game on 38-40% shooting . . . and we'll lose a shit-load of games and that's just fine by me because I don't relish the idea of sacrificing our first round pick to Denver.

I've been wondering a lot about this. I too at first thought Dame will have a much harder time, but the more I think about it the more I think he will be better off. IF we have our bigs down low then the guys defending them cant do as much help trapping. I don't really see much difference. I see Wes being a bigger factor to Dames game than LMA. Without Wes as another outside shooter, now the guards can focus on Dame more. I think its more about who we have next to Dame than the bigs we give him that will affect his game more. Plus with the bigs down low, Dame can get double teamed like he was, but have more bigs to lob to, etc.

Tough one, but I am becoming less concerned than I first was.

 

[blue9]

I've been wondering a lot about this. I too at first thought Dame will have a much harder time, but the more I think about it the more I think he will be better off. IF we have our bigs down low then the guys defending them cant do as much help trapping. I don't really see much difference. I see Wes being a bigger factor to Dames game than LMA. Without Wes as another outside shooter, now the guards can focus on Dame more. I think its more about who we have next to Dame than the bigs we give him that will affect his game more. Plus with the bigs down low, Dame can get double teamed like he was, but have more bigs to lob to, etc.

Tough one, but I am becoming less concerned than I first was.

I agree. (Shockingly, I know) I don't think LMA took all that much pressure off of Dame - the only time that was the case was when we threw it into LMA and stood around and watched while he tried to score on his own. True, we won't have that option any more, so Dame will be tasked with creating more offense. But, like you, I think he'll have an easier time when the ball is in his hands.
For one, maybe one of our new bigs knows how to set a screen - LMA never did. For another, whenever LMA set a "screen" it resulted in Dame being doubled - so LMA was actually making things more difficult for Dame when the ball was in Dame's hands.
LMA may have let Dame rest on several possessions - which is certainly beneficial to having to run the show the entire time - but he put more pressure on Dame by not setting good screens, and playing in a manner that allowed the defense to double Dame while leaving LMA wide open at the top of the key. Leonard will be a better pick/pop partner, and I'm assuming Davis will be a better pick/roll partner.

 

[Nikolokolus]

If we are gonna lose the pick, it should be this season. The 2016 draft supposedly one of the worst in the last decade. And who's to say we don't trade one of our valuables to move up anyway? If the draft is as weak as they say, then a player with promise and a little cap space could do the trick.

They said that about the Roy, Aldridge draft too. Injuries to Roy aside we managed to find talent. Just because it's not a talent rich draft, doesn't mean you can't get a guy who turns out pretty good. Sure, there's no Durant or Lebron coming out to tank specifically for, but for team that is as talent poor and shallow as ours is, cheap lotto talent seems like a pretty good strategy . . . I also think this rebuild isn't going to be a one year turn-around - probably more like 2-3.

 

[B-Roy]

They said that about the Roy, Aldridge draft too. Injuries to Roy aside we managed to find talent. Just because it's not a talent rich draft, doesn't mean you can't get a guy who turns out pretty good. Sure, there's no Durant or Lebron coming out to tank specifically for, but for team that is as talent poor and shallow as ours is, cheap lotto talent seems like a pretty good strategy . . . I also think this rebuild isn't going to be a one year turn-around - probably more like 2-3.

When we lost Roy/Oden we were in a similar or arguably worse position, and that rebuild was essentially one year (if you don't count the Failton season where they actually tried to win)

One star - Aldridge --> Dame
Young talent - Batum --> Leonard/CJ
Veteran traded for youth - Wallace for Lillard --> Batum for Vonleh
Young role players - Matthews/Hickson --> Davis/Plumlee

Of course the kicker is that Lillard actually became a star. Jury is out on Vonleh. Anything can happen though.

 

[blue32]

When he premiered his signature shoe, coincidentally his game took a turn for the worse. Pre-Damian-1 days is what we mean.

Yep. Very weird coincidence. But as soon as he strapped on those new shoes his shooting %'s slumped. No longer was he hitting the 5 foot back 3's with relative ease.

 

[Denny Crane]

I don't think Lillard can score 25+ PPG efficiently. That's the type of production the greatest scorers ever provide. I like Lillard, but he'll have to take a couple gigantic steps up to be that caliber of player. I think he'll score 20-22 solidly efficient points and his assists will go up. He's going to be playing pick-and-roll a lot, and he's going to draw a double-team from a lot of those pick-and-rolls because he's the only proven scorer. If he makes the right play each time, he'll be passing a lot. It'll be on other guys to hit open shots.

Seems to me if he's making well over 33% of his 3's, he's efficient enough...

 

[ThugginPaulyGAllen]

I've been wondering a lot about this. I too at first thought Dame will have a much harder time, but the more I think about it the more I think he will be better off. IF we have our bigs down low then the guys defending them cant do as much help trapping. I don't really see much difference. I see Wes being a bigger factor to Dames game than LMA. Without Wes as another outside shooter, now the guards can focus on Dame more. I think its more about who we have next to Dame than the bigs we give him that will affect his game more. Plus with the bigs down low, Dame can get double teamed like he was, but have more bigs to lob to, etc.

Tough one, but I am becoming less concerned than I first was.

This is more along my thinking - additionally, playing alongside CJ and Henderson will be much better for him than Wes. Love Wes to death, but he could not dribble to save his life.

Henderson, is a slasher so he has some dribbling game to him. CJ, obviously, can create. He gets BUCKETS. So, if they were to trap him at half court again like they did late in the season last year, he could pass to CJ/Hendo. But I think a 3rd ballhandler would be nice, as well. Aminu...is not a great outlet valve IMO.

And Plumlee/Davis/Vonleh should ALL excel in he PnR with Lillard (Lillard was ABSURDLY good at the PnR coming into the league. - Plumlee and Davis, that is their greatest strength.)

 

[Minstrel]

Seems to me if he's making well over 33% of his 3's, he's efficient enough...

That's true assuming his two-point shooting is also adequate. The question is whether he can do all that while putting up 28-30 points. Efficiency tends to fall the more shots you put up, since you can't select for just the best opportunities. Generally, only the great scorers in NBA history are able to efficiently average that many points per game. I'd be very happy, though, if Lillard proves to be one of them.

 

[Denny Crane]

Seems to me that that's true. The question is whether he can do that while putting up 28-30 points. Efficiency tends to fall the more shots you put up, since you can't select for just the best opportunities. Generally, only the great scorers in NBA history are able to efficiently average that many points per game. I'd be very happy, though, if Lillard proves to be one of them.

He better be. He's being paid to.

At 33%, it would be a drop in his recent 3pt%, no?