Exclusive The Blazers Offense is Stepping Up Without McCollum & Nurkic

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in
PtldPlatypus said:
I watched some youtube video recently that said that all three will most likely be offered contracts this summer worth more than the $5.5M we can offer them with our taxpayer MLE. Seemed like the dude knew what he was talking about.

Lemme know if you want the link; I can probably track it down.
Click to expand...

I think I saw that at www.duh.com.
 
hoopsjock said:
Another overlooked stat in Nurk's favor is he was getting to the free throw line 5.1 times per game this year. Kanter with the Blazers is averaging 2.9 attempts per game and 2.7 for his career. The ability to get to the line consistently is an underrated offensive skill. It's one of the reasons CJ isn't as efficient as Dame is because he doesn't draw as many fouls.
Click to expand...
It's been better since he has been starting though.
 
kjironman1 said:
Crazy thought but i wonder why they thought they had to offer incentive for him to play 70 games and have the team win 50 games?

Nah.... Lets just leave it as a feel good story.
Click to expand...
He signed an extremely team friendly deal. This was a way to reward him if it worked out in our favor, which it did this season until he got hurt. Nothing conspiracy wise here.
 
Orion Bailey said:
LMA


CJ and picks for LMA.


LMA has better D than Blake. Offense is different but kinda the same.


Ive turned the corner. If we could trade CJ and a pick or two for LMA, I think we can weather the next year without Nurk and then be a powerhouse for the next 5.
Click to expand...

Eww yuck. I wouldn’t want LMA for nothing.
 
PtldPlatypus said:
I watched some youtube video recently that said that all three will most likely be offered contracts this summer worth more than the $5.5M we can offer them with our taxpayer MLE. Seemed like the dude knew what he was talking about.

Lemme know if you want the link; I can probably track it down.
Click to expand...
He also says that they could open up the Full MLE by trading one of ET, Moe, and/or Meyers.
 
B-Roy said:
Kanter is a better offensive player than Nurk. There's literally no metric that says otherwise.
Click to expand...

Actually there is ORPM. The most complete offensive stat there is.

2018 Nurk +0.76
2018 Kanter -0.32

2017 Kanter -0.02
2017 Nurk -2.28

2016 Kanter +0.56
2016 Nurk -2.11

Typically only the top 10-15 centers in the NBA have a positive ORPM.
 
Here is my own scoring measure. It's similar to TS% except it uses individual play-by-play events from nba.stats.com so it doesn't have to estimate the number of possessions used by a player as TS% does. Also it includes two additional factors:
(1) Continuation points after a missed shot regardless of who scored, points from drawing fouls. Some shots create much better chances of continuation points.
(2) Bonus points which give value to fouls drawn as that moves our team closer to the free throw bonus.


Code: 
Nurkic (2018)
                            Points/Possession
                ----------------------------------------
Shot Type       Shots   And1    FTs   Cont  Bonus    PPP     %POSS    PTS
Layups          0.895  0.047  0.301  0.041  0.026  1.309 |   39.1%    480
1-5 feet        1.009  0.006  0.192  0.051  0.013  1.271 |   31.8%    380
6-14 feet       0.739  0.015  0.139  0.030  0.010  0.933 |   13.4%    118
15-23 feet      0.780  0.000  0.108  0.000  0.007  0.895 |    9.3%     82
Twos            0.900  0.024  0.221  0.039  0.017  1.201 |   93.6%  1,061
Threes          0.310  0.000  0.000  0.000  0.000  0.310 |    2.9%      9
Shooting        0.882  0.023  0.214  0.038  0.017  1.174 |   96.6%  1,070
Non-Shooting    0.000  0.000  1.529  0.000  0.100  1.629 |    3.4%     52
Total           0.852  0.022  0.260  0.036  0.020  1.189 |  100.0%  1,122

Kanter (2017-2018)
                            Points/Possession
                ----------------------------------------
Shot Type       Shots   And1    FTs   Cont  Bonus    PPP     %POSS    PTS
Layups          1.234  0.042  0.162  0.021  0.015  1.474 |   54.7%  1,188
1-5 feet        0.862  0.028  0.099  0.035  0.009  1.033 |   18.9%    282
6-14 feet       0.834  0.008  0.070  0.051  0.005  0.969 |   15.7%    217
15-23 feet      0.758  0.000  0.056  0.000  0.003  0.817 |    5.4%     67
Twos            1.066  0.031  0.128  0.027  0.012  1.265 |   94.6%  1,754
Threes          0.771  0.000  0.000  0.000  0.000  0.771 |    2.3%     27
Shooting        1.059  0.031  0.125  0.027  0.011  1.253 |   97.0%  1,781
Non-Shooting    0.000  0.000  1.630  0.000  0.100  1.730 |    3.0%     75
Total           1.027  0.030  0.171  0.026  0.014  1.267 |  100.0%  1,856

Shots = Points/Possession from made shots
And1 = Points/Possession from completing "and one" free throw
FTs = Points/Possession from getting fouled excluding "and ones" and excluding techs
Cont = Points/Possession from continuation after a missed shot, regardless of who scores.
Bonus = Points/Possession value from drawing fouls and getting opposing team closer to the penalty
PPP = Points/Possession total of above
%POSS =  Percent of possessions used in this category of shot
 
bobf said:
Here is my own scoring measure. It's similar to TS% except it uses individual play-by-play events from nba.stats.com so it doesn't have to estimate the number of possessions used by a player as TS% does. Also it includes two additional factors:
(1) Continuation points after a missed shot regardless of who scored, points from drawing fouls. Some shots create much better chances of continuation points.
(2) Bonus points which give value to fouls drawn as that moves our team closer to the free throw bonus.


Code: 
Nurkic (2018)
                            Points/Possession
                ----------------------------------------
Shot Type       Shots   And1    FTs   Cont  Bonus    PPP     %POSS    PTS
Layups          0.895  0.047  0.301  0.041  0.026  1.309 |   39.1%    480
1-5 feet        1.009  0.006  0.192  0.051  0.013  1.271 |   31.8%    380
6-14 feet       0.739  0.015  0.139  0.030  0.010  0.933 |   13.4%    118
15-23 feet      0.780  0.000  0.108  0.000  0.007  0.895 |    9.3%     82
Twos            0.900  0.024  0.221  0.039  0.017  1.201 |   93.6%  1,061
Threes          0.310  0.000  0.000  0.000  0.000  0.310 |    2.9%      9
Shooting        0.882  0.023  0.214  0.038  0.017  1.174 |   96.6%  1,070
Non-Shooting    0.000  0.000  1.529  0.000  0.100  1.629 |    3.4%     52
Total           0.852  0.022  0.260  0.036  0.020  1.189 |  100.0%  1,122

Kanter (2017-2018)
                            Points/Possession
                ----------------------------------------
Shot Type       Shots   And1    FTs   Cont  Bonus    PPP     %POSS    PTS
Layups          1.234  0.042  0.162  0.021  0.015  1.474 |   54.7%  1,188
1-5 feet        0.862  0.028  0.099  0.035  0.009  1.033 |   18.9%    282
6-14 feet       0.834  0.008  0.070  0.051  0.005  0.969 |   15.7%    217
15-23 feet      0.758  0.000  0.056  0.000  0.003  0.817 |    5.4%     67
Twos            1.066  0.031  0.128  0.027  0.012  1.265 |   94.6%  1,754
Threes          0.771  0.000  0.000  0.000  0.000  0.771 |    2.3%     27
Shooting        1.059  0.031  0.125  0.027  0.011  1.253 |   97.0%  1,781
Non-Shooting    0.000  0.000  1.630  0.000  0.100  1.730 |    3.0%     75
Total           1.027  0.030  0.171  0.026  0.014  1.267 |  100.0%  1,856

Shots = Points/Possession from made shots
And1 = Points/Possession from completing "and one" free throw
FTs = Points/Possession from getting fouled excluding "and ones" and excluding techs
Cont = Points/Possession from continuation after a missed shot, regardless of who scores.
Bonus = Points/Possession value from drawing fouls and getting opposing team closer to the penalty
PPP = Points/Possession total of above
%POSS =  Percent of possessions used in this category of shot
Click to expand...
TS% doesnt estimate possessions used?
 
bobf said:
Here is my own scoring measure. It's similar to TS% except it uses individual play-by-play events from nba.stats.com so it doesn't have to estimate the number of possessions used by a player as TS% does. Also it includes two additional factors:
(1) Continuation points after a missed shot regardless of who scored, points from drawing fouls. Some shots create much better chances of continuation points.
(2) Bonus points which give value to fouls drawn as that moves our team closer to the free throw bonus.


Code: 
Nurkic (2018)
                            Points/Possession
                ----------------------------------------
Shot Type       Shots   And1    FTs   Cont  Bonus    PPP     %POSS    PTS
Layups          0.895  0.047  0.301  0.041  0.026  1.309 |   39.1%    480
1-5 feet        1.009  0.006  0.192  0.051  0.013  1.271 |   31.8%    380
6-14 feet       0.739  0.015  0.139  0.030  0.010  0.933 |   13.4%    118
15-23 feet      0.780  0.000  0.108  0.000  0.007  0.895 |    9.3%     82
Twos            0.900  0.024  0.221  0.039  0.017  1.201 |   93.6%  1,061
Threes          0.310  0.000  0.000  0.000  0.000  0.310 |    2.9%      9
Shooting        0.882  0.023  0.214  0.038  0.017  1.174 |   96.6%  1,070
Non-Shooting    0.000  0.000  1.529  0.000  0.100  1.629 |    3.4%     52
Total           0.852  0.022  0.260  0.036  0.020  1.189 |  100.0%  1,122

Kanter (2017-2018)
                            Points/Possession
                ----------------------------------------
Shot Type       Shots   And1    FTs   Cont  Bonus    PPP     %POSS    PTS
Layups          1.234  0.042  0.162  0.021  0.015  1.474 |   54.7%  1,188
1-5 feet        0.862  0.028  0.099  0.035  0.009  1.033 |   18.9%    282
6-14 feet       0.834  0.008  0.070  0.051  0.005  0.969 |   15.7%    217
15-23 feet      0.758  0.000  0.056  0.000  0.003  0.817 |    5.4%     67
Twos            1.066  0.031  0.128  0.027  0.012  1.265 |   94.6%  1,754
Threes          0.771  0.000  0.000  0.000  0.000  0.771 |    2.3%     27
Shooting        1.059  0.031  0.125  0.027  0.011  1.253 |   97.0%  1,781
Non-Shooting    0.000  0.000  1.630  0.000  0.100  1.730 |    3.0%     75
Total           1.027  0.030  0.171  0.026  0.014  1.267 |  100.0%  1,856

Shots = Points/Possession from made shots
And1 = Points/Possession from completing "and one" free throw
FTs = Points/Possession from getting fouled excluding "and ones" and excluding techs
Cont = Points/Possession from continuation after a missed shot, regardless of who scores.
Bonus = Points/Possession value from drawing fouls and getting opposing team closer to the penalty
PPP = Points/Possession total of above
%POSS =  Percent of possessions used in this category of shot
Click to expand...
Pandas and NumPy?
 
BonesJones said:
TS% doesnt estimate possessions used?
Click to expand...

TS% does estimate possession used. But mine doesn't estimate, it actually counts the number possession used because it can tell the difference between "and 1" free throws and other free throws. TS% estimate is probably pretty good though unless a player gets unusually high or low number of "and ones".
 
bobf said:
TS% does estimate possession used. But mine doesn't estimate, it actually counts the number possession used because it can tell the difference between "and 1" free throws and other free throws. TS% estimate is probably pretty good though unless a player gets unusually high or low number of "and ones".
Click to expand...
A made 2 point shot and made FT does as much for someones TS% as a made three does, as it should. A made 3 and a made FT does better for ones TS% than a 3 does. So that's a bigger boost in one possession than a regular 3. Made And-1s are accurately accounted for in terms of efficiency by TS%. The only negative is missed and-ones, but those arent frequent for most good players (due to them usually being good FT shooters). Missed And-1s are also pretty constant among players in comparison to variations in volume and conversion rates of normal trips to the line, 2pt shots, and 3pt shots. So that flaw is extremely small and negligible.
 
Here is the data I used to estimate the intangible value of drawing a team foul and getting closer to the bonus.

Code: 
3,639 games | 107.621 pts/g | 18.478 fouls/g | 99.253 poss/g
Fouls  Poss/G   PPP
  0    24.116   1.042
  1    19.775   1.100
  2    17.485   1.092
  3    14.196   1.088
  4    23.682   1.107
TOT    99.253   1.084

Strangely, the biggest jump is from 0 to 1 team foul, not from 3 to 4 as expected. Makes me not totally trust it. At any rate, I use this data to do monte carlo simulations of games at two foul rates (1) normal (2) normal + 1 foul/gm. The average difference between scores is the value of drawing a foul. This came out to +0.1 point.
 
BonesJones said:
A made 2 point shot and made FT does as much for someones TS% as a made three does, as it should. A made 3 and a made FT does better for ones TS% than a 3 does. So that's a bigger boost in one possession than a regular 3. Made And-1s are accurately accounted for in terms of efficiency by TS%. The only negative is missed and-ones, but those arent frequent for most good players (due to them usually being good FT shooters). Missed And-1s are also pretty constant among players in comparison to variations in volume and conversion rates of normal trips to the line, 2pt shots, and 3pt shots. So that flaw is extremely small and negligible.
Click to expand...

Made and-ones are not accurately accounted for in TS% because it counts the one FTA as part of a possession when the possession has already been fully counted in the FGA.

TS% = 0.5 * Points / (FGA + 0.44 x FTA)

Player A makes a two pointer, gets fouled, and makes the FT.
Player B makes a 3 pointer.

Both scored 3 points on one possession. Should be equal.

A TS% = 1.04
B TS% = 1.50
 
TorturedBlazerFan said:
Hope it doesnt come off as argueing to argue, one other thing Nurk does very well that I dont think Kanter is as good is setting screens.
Part of that may be just not having the same Chemistry with the team as the Nurk did.
Click to expand...

Kanter's dribble hand offs are horrible and his screens are nowhere near as good as Nurk. His post moves aren't better than Nurk's and neither is his footwork and passing.

People are arguing semantics.

Kanter is a more efficient scorer than Nurkić.

That does NOT make him a better offensive player as there are MANY more things to do on offense than score.
 
dviss1 said:
Kanter's dribble hand offs are horrible and his screens are nowhere near as good as Nurk. His post moves aren't better than Nurk's and neither is his footwork and passing.
Click to expand...

Agree.

dviss1 said:
Kanter is a more efficient scorer than Nurkić.
Click to expand...

He is.

dviss1 said:
That does NOT make him a better offensive player as there are MANY more things to do on offense than score.
Click to expand...

True, but in the case of the Blazers, Kanter's Blazers ORTG is higher than Nurk's is - so maybe in the case of this team, he is a better offensive player even if Nurk does some stuff on offense better than EK.
 
andalusian said:
Agree.



He is.



True, but in the case of the Blazers, Kanter's Blazers ORTG is higher than Nurk's is - so maybe in the case of this team, he is a better offensive player even if Nurk does some stuff on offense better than EK.
Click to expand...

Are dribble handoffs and screen assists past of the ORTG?

If not the stat is flawed.
 
dviss1 said:
Are dribble handoffs and screen assists past of the ORTG?

If not the stat is flawed.
Click to expand...
ORTG may be flawed but its a pretty simple formula.
100*(pointsscored)/(possesions)
I think. Its just saying how the team performs per possesion. The arguement is that team performs better on offense with Kanter then Nurk. Im not taking a stance here as I dont know how I feel about it.
 
dviss1 said:
Are dribble handoffs and screen assists past of the ORTG?

If not the stat is flawed.
Click to expand...

Everything that gives you points as a team is part of ORTG - the Blazers scores more points per possession when EK is on the court - it does not really break it into the details.

The argument could be that he played more with the second unit against lesser defense - but if this was the case, you would expect to see most bench guys having a large ORTG and other than Meyers - it is just not true for the Blazers - so I suspect that this reflects how effective EK's offense is for the Blazers (just like DRTG shows how dominant Nurk is for the Blazers)

The interesting thing is that if you take the delta between Nurk and EK when looking at (ORTG - DRTG) the Blazers are actually OK without Nurk when EK is on the court. What we do have to remember is that the Blazer's schedule with EK was pretty easy so far - and obviously, by losing Nurk, the Blazers lose the efficiency that the second unit had with EK

--

BTW - an interesting thing that might explain why EK is so good for the Blazer's offense - the Blazers are ranked 12th in the league in FG% but 3rd in offense - the Blazers do tons on the offensive glass - and I suspect that EK's ability to clean up the glass and score there is one of the reasons the his ORTG on the Blazers is so high.
 
andalusian said:
The interesting thing is that if you take the delta between Nurk and EK when looking at (ORTG - DRTG) the Blazers are actually OK without Nurk when EK is on the court. What we do have to remember is that the Blazer's schedule with EK was pretty easy so far - and obviously, by losing Nurk, the Blazers lose the efficiency that the second unit had with EK
Click to expand...

Yep the schedule has been very favorable indeed.
 
andalusian said:
Everything that gives you points as a team is part of ORTG - the Blazers scores more points per possession when EK is on the court - it does not really break it into the details.

The argument could be that he played more with the second unit against lesser defense - but if this was the case, you would expect to see most bench guys having a large ORTG and other than Meyers - it is just not true for the Blazers - so I suspect that this reflects how effective EK's offense is for the Blazers (just like DRTG shows how dominant Nurk is for the Blazers)

The interesting thing is that if you take the delta between Nurk and EK when looking at (ORTG - DRTG) the Blazers are actually OK without Nurk when EK is on the court. What we do have to remember is that the Blazer's schedule with EK was pretty easy so far - and obviously, by losing Nurk, the Blazers lose the efficiency that the second unit had with EK
Click to expand...
Another thing that I haven't seen brought up is CJ being out. If CJ is playing this whole time are Kanter's Blazer numbers about the same or would they be worse? I don't have time to look it up but I'd love to see Nurk's numbers in games without CJ this year (granted that's a fairly small sample).
 
hoopsjock said:
Another thing that I haven't seen brought up is CJ being out. If CJ is playing this whole time are Kanter's Blazer numbers about the same or would they be worse? I don't have time to look it up but I'd love to see Nurk's numbers in games without CJ this year (granted that's a fairly small sample).
Click to expand...

Good question. If my theory that he is feasting on the offensive glass is correct - I suspect that CJ's percentages which are a bit better than the team's average will bring his offensive rebounds opportunities down - but it is not a huge difference.
 
andalusian said:
Good question. If my theory that he is feasting on the offensive glass is correct - I suspect that CJ's percentages which are a bit better than the team's average will bring his offensive rebounds opportunities down - but it is not a huge difference.
Click to expand...
I was also thinking about in terms of Kanter getting less shot attempts outside of offensive rebounds too since he'd probably see a slight decrease in post touches. There is also the unmeasurable aspect of having to exert more effort on defense which could lead to a tick lower offensive production as well or things like foul trouble.
 
dviss1 said:
Kanter's dribble hand offs are horrible and his screens are nowhere near as good as Nurk. His post moves aren't better than Nurk's and neither is his footwork and passing.

People are arguing semantics.

Kanter is a more efficient scorer than Nurkić.

That does NOT make him a better offensive player as there are MANY more things to do on offense than score.
Click to expand...

Exactly. Scoring efficiency is kinda like you make yourself better. The rest of offense is how well you make everyone else better. And then there's defense.
 
TorturedBlazerFan said:
ORTG may be flawed but its a pretty simple formula.
100*(pointsscored)/(possesions)
I think. Its just saying how the team performs per possesion. The arguement is that team performs better on offense with Kanter then Nurk. Im not taking a stance here as I dont know how I feel about it.
Click to expand...

Small sample size.
 
bobf said:
Exactly. Scoring efficiency is kinda like you make yourself better. The rest of offense is how well you make everyone else better. And then there's defense.
Click to expand...
In terms of offensive rating, I believe there is a different calculation for player ORTG and team ORTG, this is just going over the team's offensive rating with Kanter. Like I said not taking a side, for one we should see them face some more teams actually trying...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

SlyPokerDog
Blazers Spend Little Time Without Lillard And/Or McCollum
Replies
9
Views
314
handiman
handiman
trailblazer18
The Ringer: The Blazers Finally Have the Edge They Needed
Replies
23
Views
1K
riverman
riverman
Reep
1 Reasons the Trail Blazers Offense Can’t Score
2 3
Replies
68
Views
7K
Labinot41
Labinot41
ABM
Travis Demers On His New Role as Trail Blazers’ Play-by-Play Radio Announcer
Replies
1
Views
169
BoBoBREWSKI
BoBoBREWSKI
Portland2014
  • Poll Poll
McCollum for Saric, would you do it?
2 3
Replies
82
Views
4K
Fez Hammersticks
Fez Hammersticks

Users who are viewing this thread

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