The "New and Improved" Offense without Roy

[PapaG]

Dead last in pace
16th in offensive efficiency after being 2nd and 7th the past two years
Dead last in 3pt %
24th in TS%
25th in eFG%
26th in FTA/game
25th in PPS
26th in FG%
25th in PPG
27th in fastbreak points (dead last in last three games @ 8ppg)

So much more fun to watch and more efficient overall?

http://espn.go.com/nba/hollinger/teamstats/_/sort/effectiveFGPct

http://espn.go.com/nba/statistics/team/_/stat/offense-per-game/sort/fieldGoalPct

 

[EL PRESIDENTE]

So you're just ignoring the fact that we're missing a two-time NBA allstar and don't have a lot of talent?

 

[MIXUM]

when looking at that... its amazing we are over 500.

 

[PapaG]

So you're just ignoring the fact that we're missing a two-time NBA allstar and don't have a lot of talent?

Three time All-Star, and this thread is in response to the many "but this team is so much more fun to watch without Roy" posts that I've read over the past few months. Hell, people were even posting W-L records to say that team is better than Roy.

 

[RR7]

Dead last in pace
16th in offensive efficiency after being 2nd and 7th the past two years
Dead last in 3pt %
24th in TS%
25th in eFG%
26th in FTA/game
25th in PPS
26th in FG%
25th in PPG
27th in fastbreak points (dead last in last three games @ 8ppg)

So much more fun to watch and more efficient overall?

http://espn.go.com/nba/hollinger/teamstats/_/sort/effectiveFGPct

http://espn.go.com/nba/statistics/team/_/stat/offense-per-game/sort/fieldGoalPct

Do you have the breakdown, by chance,for games with and without Roy this season? I'm not saying we've improved at all, but showing FULL season statistics to knock a Roy-less offense, when Roy has played in 23 of our 41 games seems rather foolish to me. Maybe if you showed the stats with Roy and without Roy.

 

[BlazerCaravan]

This "new" system is 9-6. The "old" one was 12-14.
The old system scored 100+ points 9 times out of 26 games; the new system has scored 100+ points 9 times in 15 games.

Neither is awesome, but one is definitely more effective at winning and cracking 100 points than the other.

 

[Mediocre Man]

This "new" system is 9-6. The "old" one was 12-14. Neither is awesome, but one is definitely more effective at winning than the other.

I was just gonna post that

 

[PapaG]

This "new" system is 9-6. The "old" one was 12-14. Neither is awesome, but one is definitely more effective at winning than the other.

The "old" system won 54 games. The "modified" system won 50 games. This "new" system, if that's what you want to call it, is barely squeaking by terrible teams like the Wolves and Nets at the RG.

 

[BlazerCaravan]

The "old" system won 54 games. The "modified" system won 50 games. This "new" system, if that's what you want to call it, is barely squeaking by terrible teams like the Wolves and Nets at the RG.

This new system is on a 49.2-win pace, so it's about as good as the modified system. The old system apparently was "have a top-10 player", while the modified system was "Have a top-20 player". I'd say we have exactly that right now, only he plays PF, not SG.

 

[EL PRESIDENTE]

Three time All-Star, and this thread is in response to the many "but this team is so much more fun to watch without Roy" posts that I've read over the past few months. Hell, people were even posting W-L records to say that team is better than Roy.

The team is more fun to watch. I think mainly because LaMarcus is beasting.

 

[PapaG]

This new system is on a 49.2-win pace, so it's about as good as the modified system. The old system apparently was "have a top-10 player", while the modified system was "Have a top-20 player". I'd say we have exactly that right now, only he plays PF, not SG.

That's a 15 game sample, and as I posted, the "new" system is worse than the "modified-old" system.

Get back to me in March and we'll see what the record is, if no major changes are made to the roster.

Pointing out that the team is worse off offensively, even compared to last season, is a fact.

 

[PapaG]

2010 - 25th in team shooting efficiency
2009 - 12th in team shooting efficiency

http://www.teamrankings.com/nba/stat/shooting-efficiency

 

[RR7]

Again, show with and without Roy this season. Otherwise your point is lost.

 

[e_blazer]

Ah, another day, another pissing match.

Can I choose the current offense, with Aldridge beasting and scoring from the low post, and a healthy Roy?

 

[Ghost Pepper]

How was the system with a hobbled Roy this year? Isn't that what we are really talking about now?

Roy could always create his own shot, thus why he WAS an allstar. That was then now we've got a guy with no lift, no speed and getting his own shot is a thing of the past. I'd also suggest that if Roy was off for a night we were doomed cause no one else had seen the ball when he was on the court. That's not the case today... True this team has lost some ugly games without him, but I like the direction of getting many other players involved and confident for down the road. I don't think Batum, Mathews, LA, or Mills would be growing as players with Roy as the sole focus. I also believe that when Oden comes back being able to give him more touches that Roy would typically take will make his game all that much better too. Remember this is a team sport! The last few years it's been BRoy 1 on 5 and his teamates where drinking cokes watching...

 

[PapaG]

Again, show with and without Roy this season. Otherwise your point is lost.

Is it? The last three games, all of the seasonal numbers are lower than the aggregate, and the team is averaging less ppg, with lower efficiency, than without him. I welcome you to look up your own splits; the fact is that this team is borderline terrible on offense without the old Roy.

 

[MIXUM]

fyi... nate said roys surgery went well!

 

[PapaG]

Pointing out W/L with or without Roy is disingenuous at best when you consider that 8 out of 15 games without him were at home, while only 10 out the of 26 with him were at home.

 

[RR7]

Pointing out W/L with or without Roy is disingenuous at best when you consider that 8 out of 15 games without him were at home, while only 10 out the of 26 with him were at home.

And pointing out full season stats, half of which were played with a hobbled Roy, to show that this season's offense is worse than last season's is disingenuous at best, considering his hobbled state in one way or another contributed to those stats.

 

[Minstrel]

Three time All-Star, and this thread is in response to the many "but this team is so much more fun to watch without Roy" posts that I've read over the past few months. Hell, people were even posting W-L records to say that team is better than Roy.

I didn't see anyone say the team was better without prime Roy. They were saying that the team was better (and more fun to watch) without a hobbled Roy attempting to go through the motions.

So how the team played the last couple of years is pretty irrelevant. If the team has been worse this season without Roy then they were this season with Roy, you'd have a point.

 

[PapaG]

I didn't see anyone say the team was better without prime Roy. They were saying that the team was better (and more fun to watch) without a hobbled Roy attempting to go through the motions.

So how the team played the last couple of years is pretty irrelevant. If the team has been worse this season without Roy then they were this season with Roy, you'd have a point.

Oh really? I certainly remember many posters last year saying that the Royless Blazers were a better team.

 

[PapaG]

And pointing out full season stats, half of which were played with a hobbled Roy, to show that this season's offense is worse than last season's is disingenuous at best, considering his hobbled state in one way or another contributed to those stats.

My good friend BGrantFan posted the statistics earlier in the season with Roy. I invite you to look them up, and compare them to the recent statistics.

 

[Minstrel]

Oh really? I certainly remember many posters last year saying that the Royless Blazers were a better team.

You'll have to show me a post about that, because I've never seen anyone say the team is better without Roy until this year, when Roy is clearly no longer a high-level NBA player.

 

[Fez Hammersticks]

It's not new or improved, it's the same 'ol slow-it-up-ISO-ball.

 

[PapaG]

You'll have to show me a post about that, because I've never seen anyone say the team is better without Roy until this year, when Roy is clearly no longer a high-level NBA player.

Last year. Game One. Phoenix series. Plenty of talk on multiple boards how the team was better w/out Roy. I've seen it as far back as three years ago.

 

[Minstrel]

Last year. Game One. Phoenix series. Plenty of talk on multiple boards how the team was better w/out Roy.

Oh, so when he was hobbled with essentially the same problem. That still doesn't contradict what I said, which is that no one has been arguing that the team is better off without a prime, healthy Roy. Just that the team is better off without this broken version of Roy.

 

[PapaG]

Oh, so when he was hobbled with essentially the same problem. That still doesn't contradict what I said, which is that no one has been arguing that the team is better off without a prime, healthy Roy. Just that the team is better off without this broken version of Roy.

I completely disagree. I've had those arguments in the past with some posters. It's my personal experience; if you don't believe it, that's not my problem, is it?

 

[Natebishop3]

Oh papag... up to your old shenanigans?

Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk

 

[Colonel Ronan]

Ah, another day, another pissing match.

Can I choose the current offense, with Aldridge beasting and scoring from the low post, and a healthy Roy?

And I'll be damned! Look who's in the middle of it! Piss splashing off of his chiin and all!

 

[Minstrel]

I completely disagree. I've had those arguments in the past with some posters. It's my personal experience; if you don't believe it, that's not my problem, is it?

It's nobody's problem that I don't believe that many people preferred a team without a healthy Roy. If you're saying that you've run across a couple of nuts who wanted the team to be minus their best player, I can believe that. I'm not sure what that proves. You can find a couple of people who believe anything.