Exclusive The OFFICIAL 2019 NBA Offseason Thread

[wizenheimer]

Guys like Hood, Hezonja, Tolliver, and Bazemore are all good 3 pt shooters. Harkless was dreadful last year. Chief was streaky as hell. ET was a disaster. It seems as though the difference in pts scored off of the 3 ball overall can be made up. But, yeah, I will miss Seth’s money stroke from the corner.

the league average 3ptFG% over the last 3 years has been a shade under 36%. Hood's career mark is 36.7%; Hezonja 32.1%; Basemore 35.2%; Tolliver 37.6%. That's 2 guys below average and two above. Bazemore is about as far below average as Hood is above. I'd define a good 3 point average as in the 39-40% range. Tolliver is the only one who has hit that mark. But he's also been below average a few times

you're right that Aminu and Harkless chipped a lot of paint last season. But if you add up the departing 5 players, Aminu-Mo-Curry-Meyers-Layman, they averaged 37%...10 points above average. If you add Turner and Stauskas to that, the mark drops to 35.9%. That's what Portland is losing. Meanwhile, the 4 'new' guys you highlighted shot 248-751. That's 33.0%. In other words, 36% leaving and 33% coming in

I don't see any advantage for Portland next season between in-cumming three point shooting vs outgoing. I don't think Portland will be much worse, but there's not much reason to think they'll be much better. As usual, it seems like a whole lot is riding on Simons and Zach

 

[PtldPlatypus]

I'd define a good 3 point average as in the 39-40% range.

Amongst players who shot at least 50 3's last year, only 56 NBA players met your criteria of a good 3-point average. Apparently, we no longer have a good 3-point shooter on the Blazers.

 

[B-Roy]

the league average 3ptFG% over the last 3 years has been a shade under 36%. Hood's career mark is 36.7%; Hezonja 32.1%; Basemore 35.2%; Tolliver 37.6%. That's 2 guys below average and two above. Bazemore is about as far below average as Hood is above. I'd define a good 3 point average as in the 39-40% range. Tolliver is the only one who has hit that mark. But he's also been below average a few times

you're right that Aminu and Harkless chipped a lot of paint last season. But if you add up the departing 5 players, Aminu-Mo-Curry-Meyers-Layman, they averaged 37%...10 points above average. If you add Turner and Stauskas to that, the mark drops to 35.9%. That's what Portland is losing. Meanwhile, the 4 'new' guys you highlighted shot 248-751. That's 33.0%. In other words, 36% leaving and 33% coming in

I don't see any advantage for Portland next season between in-cumming three point shooting vs outgoing. I don't think Portland will be much worse, but there's not much reason to think they'll be much better. As usual, it seems like a whole lot is riding on Simons and Zach

https://www.blazersedge.com/2019/7/...ee-point-stats-bazemore-hood-tolliver-2019-20

This article highlights pretty well what we’re losing vs what we’re getting in shooting.

Tl;dr, our three shooters leaving shot worse percentage on more open shots. The ones that are replacing them are shooting higher percentages on less open shots. The spacing for everyone is different if guys have to actually guard their man, something they regularly didn’t do with Harkless, Aminu and Turner.

 

[wizenheimer]

Amongst players who shot at least 50 3's last year, only 56 NBA players met your criteria of a good 3-point average. Apparently, we no longer have a good 3-point shooter on the Blazers.

sorry....I was talking career marks

but it's an interesting question...with the league average being around 36%, where exactly would you draw the line between 'above average' and 'good'? I'm drawing it at 39%...how far below that would you put it?

 

[Blazers Roy]

Two of Rich Paul's clients just fired him this weekend.

Also, it's interesting you used "Lebron's agency." Thought he had nothing to do with it?

I remember Bill Simmons saying AD was pissed off earlier this year with how clutch handled his situation.
I don't remember if he assumed it or if he actually had a real feel for the situation.

 

[e_blazer]

the league average 3ptFG% over the last 3 years has been a shade under 36%. Hood's career mark is 36.7%; Hezonja 32.1%; Basemore 35.2%; Tolliver 37.6%. That's 2 guys below average and two above. Bazemore is about as far below average as Hood is above. I'd define a good 3 point average as in the 39-40% range. Tolliver is the only one who has hit that mark. But he's also been below average a few times

you're right that Aminu and Harkless chipped a lot of paint last season. But if you add up the departing 5 players, Aminu-Mo-Curry-Meyers-Layman, they averaged 37%...10 points above average. If you add Turner and Stauskas to that, the mark drops to 35.9%. That's what Portland is losing. Meanwhile, the 4 'new' guys you highlighted shot 248-751. That's 33.0%. In other words, 36% leaving and 33% coming in

I don't see any advantage for Portland next season between in-cumming three point shooting vs outgoing. I don't think Portland will be much worse, but there's not much reason to think they'll be much better. As usual, it seems like a whole lot is riding on Simons and Zach

I think you're not giving Bazemore his due. He came into the league as a poor 3pt shooter: 29.4% and 33.6% his first 2 years. Once he got to Atlanta he shot 36.4%, 35.7%, 34.6%, and 39.4% in his first four years there, on much higher volume too, I would add. Last season, he dropped to 32%, but he had a nasty ankle injury that probably accounts for the drop. All-in-all, he's developed into about an average 3pt shooter when healthy.

Hood will be a starter and Bazemore, Tolliver and Hezonja look to be regular rotation players. Turner, Harkless, Aminu, and Curry are the guys they're replacing in the rotation. My overall point is that Curry was an excellent 3 pt shooter, but didn't put up many shots. Aminu, Harkless and Turner were overall abysmal from 3. I don't see it as being a stretch to think that the 4 new rotation players will average as much or more from distance than the 4 guys they're replacing. Adding in Meyers, Stauskas and Layman, all of whom were out of the rotation more than in it, doesn't tell you anything since they hardly played.

 

[wizenheimer]

https://www.blazersedge.com/2019/7/...ee-point-stats-bazemore-hood-tolliver-2019-20

This article highlights pretty well what we’re losing vs what we’re getting in shooting.

Tl;dr, our three shooters leaving shot worse percentage on more open shots. The ones that are replacing them are shooting higher percentages on less open shots. The spacing for everyone is different if guys have to actually guard their man, something they regularly didn’t do with Harkless, Aminu and Turner.

I don't disagree with that article much but it kind of cherry picks three players coming in (one of whom was already 'in' for part of last season) and three players going out. It also compares two of last year's starter to two players, at least one of whom won't start. That might not mean much but we know the space left for shooters depends on how much they play with Dame, and to a lesser extent, CJ

I also question the Tolliver/Layman comparison. Layman started 33 games and played over 1300 minutes. I have a hard time seeing Tolliver getting anywhere close to those minutes

 

[B-Roy]

I don't disagree with that article much but it kind of cherry picks three players coming in (one of whom was already 'in' for part of last season) and three players going out. It also compares two of last year's starter to two players, at least one of whom won't start. That might not mean much but we know the space left for shooters depends on how much they play with Dame, and to a lesser extent, CJ

I also question the Tolliver/Layman comparison. Layman started 33 games and played over 1300 minutes. I have a hard time seeing Tolliver getting anywhere close to those minutes

Why do you have an issue with them including Tolliver, the best three point shooter, but not with them leaving out Turner, the worst shooter leaving? Also, with Nurk our there’s a good chance Tolliver will get close to Layman’s 18 mpg given Portlands lack of depth at the bigs.

I think the point is valid when you consider they’re talking about the three guys that will eat up the bulk of the minutes left by Harkless, Aminu and Layman. I think if anyone, they should have included Zach, who is going to take a lot of Aminu’s minutes and will have to be a more reliable shooter.

A point that they actually understated was Turner leaving. Portland usually played 2 non shooters whenever Turner was out there. It’s hard to project Ant as being as good of a spacer as Seth, but it’s pretty clear he will be better than Turner. Portland’s roster next year should allow them to field 4 shooters on the floor at all times, Provided Zach is more consistent.

 

[PtldPlatypus]

sorry....I was talking career marks

but it's an interesting question...with the league average being around 36%, where exactly would you draw the line between 'above average' and 'good'? I'm drawing it at 39%...how far below that would you put it?

Interesting dichotomy. It's all semantics, I guess, but why does there have to be a line between "above-average" and "good"? Why can't anything above average be called good? The league average for scoring was 1.104 points per possession. Personally, I view any activity that on average results in greater than that average as "good". 37% 3-point shooting results in 1.11 pps; that's good enough for me.

Now, Portland averaged 114.7/100, so I guess to surpass that one would need to shoot .383 or better. Maybe that's our "above-average"/"good" dividing line...?

 

[Reep]

I'm happy with high volume shooters who hit above 34%. The reason our secondary shooters last year didn't work so well was not as much their %, as much as teams didn't fear them taking a lot of shots at a decent percentage. 33% from 3 = 50% from not three. Now it isn't quite that simple because you have long rebounds leading to fast breaks too, but I would rather have a guy who shoots 34% on 5-7 attempts per game, than a guy who shoots 39% on 1-3 attempts per game.

 

[wizenheimer]

I think you're not giving Bazemore his due. He came into the league as a poor 3pt shooter: 29.4% and 33.6% his first 2 years. Once he got to Atlanta he shot 36.4%, 35.7%, 34.6%, and 39.4% in his first four years there, on much higher volume too, I would add. Last season, he dropped to 32%, but he had a nasty ankle injury that probably accounts for the drop. All-in-all, he's developed into about an average 3pt shooter when healthy.

that's what I'm saying, if anything he's about average..that's the due I gave him. And if we're going to use Bazemore's injury as an excuse for his poor shooting last season, then you have to extend the same excuse to Harkless.

Adding in Meyers, Stauskas and Layman, all of whom were out of the rotation more than in it, doesn't tell you anything since they hardly played.

ok...those 3 guys combined for 417 three point shots. That's about 17% of the three's Portland shot. But there's context missing to that. They combined for 29% of the three's shot by Blazers other than Dame & CJ. So that's not insignificant

I guess I'm pushing back on this because I see a whole lot of 'best-case-scenario-ism' going on. Portland loses 36% shooting and brings in 33% shooting yet they will be a better shooting team because...spacing. Maybe that's how it will work out but I sure wouldn't count on it

 

[wizenheimer]

Interesting dichotomy. It's all semantics, I guess, but why does there have to be a line between "above-average" and "good"? Why can't anything above average be called good?

because it's bunk?

somebody who gets a c+ on algebra isn't good at math

what you're saying, if the league average is 36% then somebody who shoots 36.1% is good. And somebody who shoots 35.9% is bad. If both guys shot 300 three's, the guy who made 108 would be a good shooter and the guy who made 107 would be a bad shooter. wut?

That's not a matter of semantics...it's abandoning common sense....sorry

 

[PtldPlatypus]

because it's bunk?

somebody who gets a c+ on algebra isn't good at math

what you're saying, if the league average is 36% then somebody who shoots 36.1% is good. And somebody who shoots 35.9% is bad. If both guys shot 300 three's, the guy who made 108 would be a good shooter and the guy who made 107 would be a bad shooter. wut?

That's not a matter of semantics...it's abandoning common sense.

If one looks at it as binary--everyone is either "good" or "bad"--then sure. If not, then that logic doesn't quite hold up. Which is why I say it's semantics. Because that's what semantics is: debating the denotative and connotative meaning of words.

 

[B-Roy]

that's what I'm saying, if anything he's about average..that's the due I gave him. And if we're going to use Bazemore's injury as an excuse for his poor shooting last season, then you have to extend the same excuse to Harkless.



ok...those 3 guys combined for 417 three point shots. That's about 17% of the three's Portland shot. But there's context missing to that. They combined for 29% of the three's shot by Blazers other than Dame & CJ. So that's not insignificant

I guess I'm pushing back on this because I see a whole lot of 'best-case-scenario-ism' going on. Portland loses 36% shooting and brings in 33% shooting yet they will be a better shooting team because...spacing. Maybe that's how it will work out but I sure wouldn't count on it

I think you are understating how valuable spacing is. Percentages average out and settle over the season because it’s 82 games....and you play a bunch of bad teams, and there are extraneous circumstances. It’s different in the playoffs. Year over year we see teams abandon Aminu, Harkless and Turner to load up on Dame and CJ. They can try that with the new guys and it won’t work as well. At the very least it forces the other team to slightly change their defensive strategy. I’d be much more worried about the defensive end of the floor.

 

[B-Roy]

I'm happy with high volume shooters who hit above 34%. The reason our secondary shooters last year didn't work so well was not as much their %, as much as teams didn't fear them taking a lot of shots at a decent percentage. 33% from 3 = 50% from not three. Now it isn't quite that simple because you have long rebounds leading to fast breaks too, but I would rather have a guy who shoots 34% on 5-7 attempts per game, than a guy who shoots 39% on 1-3 attempts per game.

On this point, Blazers were too half in the league in 3 point percentage as a team, but actually bottom 10 in terms of attempt rate (volume). Our best shooters by percentage were not good volume shooters, or didn’t play enough minutes, so I’d say we were actually a below average shooting the team. When Harkless, Turner and Aminu are such significant parts of the rotation you just end up with a lot of lineups without proper spacing because you either have bad shooters or even average/good shooters that didn’t take enough shots.

 

[e_blazer]

that's what I'm saying, if anything he's about average..that's the due I gave him. And if we're going to use Bazemore's injury as an excuse for his poor shooting last season, then you have to extend the same excuse to Harkless.



ok...those 3 guys combined for 417 three point shots. That's about 17% of the three's Portland shot. But there's context missing to that. They combined for 29% of the three's shot by Blazers other than Dame & CJ. So that's not insignificant

I guess I'm pushing back on this because I see a whole lot of 'best-case-scenario-ism' going on. Portland loses 36% shooting and brings in 33% shooting yet they will be a better shooting team because...spacing. Maybe that's how it will work out but I sure wouldn't count on it

I think you’re arguing against a point I’m not making. I didn’t say the Blazers will be a better 3pt shooting team. Like you, I’m not sure they will be. I was responding to a question about who would replace Curry’s 3pt shooting. My point is that I think that the 4 new rotation guys can likely equal last year’s 3pt production of the 4 guys they’re replacing. Curry was fantastic. Aminu, Harkless and Turner were below average. If the 4 guys who replace them are around average, then there shouldn’t be an overall drop as a result of the change. Harkless’ injury undoubtedly factors into his shooting woes for last season, but a healthy Bazemore should shoot better than Moe did last year. The comparison is whether next season’s rotation players’ production will meet or exceed last year’s. I haven’t added Simons into the equation because his track record is so limited. That said, he could turn out to be a difference maker. Either way.

 

[wizenheimer]

I think you are understating how valuable spacing is. Percentages average out and settle over the season because it’s 82 games....and you play a bunch of bad teams, and there are extraneous circumstances. It’s different in the playoffs. Year over year we see teams abandon Aminu, Harkless and Turner to load up on Dame and CJ. They can try that with the new guys and it won’t work as well. At the very least it forces the other team to slightly change their defensive strategy. I’d be much more worried about the defensive end of the floor.

you could be right. I just don't have as much confidence in Hood and Bazemore as three point shooters as you do

I do agree that the loss of defense with Aminu-Mo-ET is a big worry. There are too many elite 6'7-6'9 wings in the NBA to be weak on defense at those positions

 

[B-Roy]

you could be right. I just don't have as much confidence in Hood and Bazemore as three point shooters as you do

I do agree that the loss of defense with Aminu-Mo-ET is a big worry. There are too many elite 6'7-6'9 wings in the NBA to be weak on defense at those positions

Yeah, they look bad if you are going by their percentages last year, but both have better career averages. Glass half empty/half full I guess.

Either way, Portland hit their ceiling with Mo and Aminu. Even if our floor is lower with the new guys I’m willing to see how it goes because the ceiling should be higher.

 

[Wizard Mentor]

https://www.blazersedge.com/2019/7/...ee-point-stats-bazemore-hood-tolliver-2019-20

This article highlights pretty well what we’re losing vs what we’re getting in shooting.

Tl;dr, our three shooters leaving shot worse percentage on more open shots. The ones that are replacing them are shooting higher percentages on less open shots. The spacing for everyone is different if guys have to actually guard their man, something they regularly didn’t do with Harkless, Aminu and Turner.

This.
It should be the final word.... but it won't be.

When playoffs roll around, opposing defenses won’t be able to sacrifice the perimeter and sell out on Lillard and McCollum either

 

[THE HCP]

 

[Rastapopoulos]

This is funny:
https://fansided.com/2019/07/15/nylon-calculus-kobe-ruin-jayson-tatum/

 

[BigGameDamian]

 

[SheedSoNasty]

That’s just weird. Caruso was pretty funny, though.

 

[UKRAINEFAN]

Amongst players who shot at least 50 3's last year, only 56 NBA players met your criteria of a good 3-point average. Apparently, we no longer have a good 3-point shooter on the Blazers.

That's a problem. I didn't realize there were that many good shooters in the league. I kind of did realize we don't have any that shot that high.

 

[LayneStaley]

Hey Lebron, go put on your ultimate warrior shirt, it’s the funniest thing you’ve ever done.

 

[blazerfan11]

What’s the average shooting percentage for 2-point shots for the league?

 

[Haakzilla]

 

[TorturedBlazerFan]

Part of me actually feels sorry for them.

 

[Haakzilla]

Part of me actually feels sorry for them.

...hopefully it's the part(s) that eventually fall into the toilet!

 

[H.C.]

Part of me actually feels sorry for them.

You mean for the people who paid 50$ for a teeshirt?