Notice This is the worst Blazer team I have seen in my lifetime.

[Hoopguru]

Ok, but first of all you are making a different point. Your point might make Stotts a bad coach, but not making the finals for 10 straight years does not.

If you look at how we got swept by the Pelicans you can surely make the argument that Stotts was totally out-coached. My first reaction is to agree. Stotts runs a one-dimensional offense which has an achilles heel and New Orleans exposed it badly. On the other hand I honestly can't imagine us actually punishing that trap with the personnel we had. They had two defensive guards. Dame's a short point guard. He's not a fantastic passer. The passes out of the trap were weak. Nurk, CJ, Aminu, Harkless were not capable of punishing in the 4 v 3 with a tiny advantage. AD was there at the rim to block shots and long enough to bother 3's from a distance. So maybe yes maybe no, you can lay that all on Stotts,

As far as our playoff results as a whole: If you accept that the Blazer's have performed up to our talent in the regular season then our playoff record is also on par with our talent. Under Stotts we are 20-36 in playoff games which is 36%. Sounds abysmal but that's actually about what is expected when a 47-35 team faces a 57-25 team, which was our average matchup.

In individual series we've won more than our fair share of the close matchups (4-2):
2013-2014 we beat the Rockets who had the same record as us.
2014-2015 we lost to the Grizzles who had 4 more regular season wins than us.
2015-2016 we beat the Thunder who had 9 more regular season wins than us.
2017-2018 we lost to the Pelicans who had 1 less regular season win than us.
2018-2019 we best the Thunder who had 4 less regular season wins than us.
2018-2019 we beat Denver who had 1 more regular season win than us.

The rest of the match-ups I don't think we stood much chance - Spurs (1) Warriors (3) Lakers (1).

So overall it looks to me like we've performed roughly up to our talent level under Stotts both regular season & playoffs. Many of the arguments made against Stotts seem valid to me. I'm just not sure that Stotts doesn't know better than what seems right to me. So I'm not saying anyone is wrong about Stotts, just I'm not personally convinced.

Nice take...

 

[TBpup]

I'm convinced. Let's keep the same coach, keep doing the same things, be terrible at defense way more than we should be, last or next to last in assists, passing, forced turnovers, fast break points, all while enabling some of the most selfish play in the league.

How did I not realize this before?

 

[Tince]

I'm convinced. Let's keep the same coach, keep doing the same things, be terrible at defense way more than we should be, last or next to last in assists, passing, forced turnovers, fast break points, all while enabling some of the most selfish play in the league.

How did I not realize this before?

How are we all those things, with 1 all-star, and magically win more playoff series in the last 7 years than we did in the previous 13 under three different coaches. That doesn't add up at all, does it?

The roster is not elite, Stotts is not elite, but the narrative makes it sound like you've been watching the Knicks for the last decade.

 

[BonesJones]

Funny, so do I, and it's not from YouTube ads.

If you say so

 

[Drttimmy]

Next game will be Dame going for 60 and we will be close to win. But what's the point? We were very bad in assists for some time, this season will be very bad in reb too. ISO + no D. Dame +40=win. It would be 1game issue if we see changes = ball movement. "They are not use to such ball movement yet, give them time." That woul be fair. But Dame saying he wasn't expecting other team gonna trap him is a joke and constant ISO plays are even bigger joke.

I'm surprised this isn't being mentioned more. If Dame or CJ go nuts, which they're both capable of doing at times, we can beat a lot of teams. See Dame in the bubble, against OKC, CJ against Denver. When they score closer or underneath their averages, we're summarily dealt with. It's basically been the annual strategy since Aldridge left. We've needed something additional to count on that doesn't require superstars- like being among the best defensive teams, or rebounding teams, or 3 point shooting teams - and Olshey hasn't made it happen. I think this is probably why CJ said it all comes down to Nurkic. He understands we're basically the same flawed team we've been, and Nurk could be the difference making wrinkle. Hate to discount it, but to me it appears as flimsy a strategy as relying on Dame or CJ scoring 40+. Yeah, if Dame's only scoring 9 points in a game, we'll have a tough time beating anyone, let alone a playoff caliber team like Utah. I still have some hope we'll be better defensively, but not expecting anything noticeable until March or so.

 

[Orion Bailey]

Funny, so do I, and it's not from YouTube ads.

but you tube ads can add up to alot more than a salary for a reporting agency.
Whens the last time a hired news reporter went viral and made millions from it?

but you can find you tube video makers who aRe now multi millionaires.


Now im not saying they all got there because of their content, but to try to diminish someone because they have a youtube channel vs a salary from a news agency is pretty laughable in todays day and age...
People will go to where the money is. Whether talented or not.

Sounds like you are stuck in yesterdays format and not realizing that the internet is the way of news now. Including sports.

I haven't watched espn in years....

 

[TBpup]

How are we all those things, with 1 all-star, and magically win more playoff series in the last 7 years than we did in the previous 13 under three different coaches. That doesn't add up at all, does it?

The roster is not elite, Stotts is not elite, but the narrative makes it sound like you've been watching the Knicks for the last decade.

No it doesn't, but nice try. More legitimately though, where is the growth? Where is the taking advantage of players strengths to actually better the team? There are numerous examples which have been identified over and over. What is distressing is that we HAVE had one of the best PGs/players/leaders in the league....and yet have very little to show for it. It is certainly not the hyperbole of 'watching the Knicks', but it seems fair to expect some signs of growth instead of routine, stagnation of being swept out of the Playoffs year after year. Fair?

 

[kjironman1]

Actually, I do.

Ooops. He's been around a long time Bones.

 

[kjironman1]

Funny, so do I, and it's not from YouTube ads.

And there it is. I knew that was coming.

 

[kjironman1]

but you tube ads can add up to alot more than a salary for a reporting agency.
Whens the last time a hired news reporter went viral and made millions from it?

but you can find you tube video makers who aRe now multi millionaires.


Now im not saying they all got there because of their content, but to try to diminish someone because they have a youtube channel vs a salary from a news agency is pretty laughable in todays day and age...
People will go to where the money is. Whether talented or not.

Sounds like you are stuck in yesterdays format and not realizing that the internet is the way of news now. Including sports.

I haven't watched espn in years....

Yeah but trying to say the local media sucks (Which i can agree with in part) is the flip side to that coin. Chad has worked hard for what he has. Danny has worked hard. Heck even Jason Quick and John Canzano have worked hard to get theirs.
You Tube has it's value for sure. But lets not take away from those who are working at another level because they are not you tube either.

 

[BonesJones]

Ooops. He's been around a long time Bones.

And what? I answered his random question truthfully.

 

[BonesJones]

Yeah but trying to say the local media sucks (Which i can agree with in part) is the flip side to that coin. Chad has worked hard for what he has. Danny has worked hard. Heck even Jason Quick and John Canzano have worked hard to get theirs.
You Tube has it's value for sure. But lets not take away from those who are working at another level because they are not you tube either.

They worked hard for their jobs. Nobody is saying they haven't. Doesnt mean their basketball takes are or aren't shit.

 

[Orion Bailey]

Yeah but trying to say the local media sucks (Which i can agree with in part) is the flip side to that coin. Chad has worked hard for what he has. Danny has worked hard. Heck even Jason Quick and John Canzano have worked hard to get theirs.
You Tube has it's value for sure. But lets not take away from those who are working at another level because they are not you tube either.

yeah but someone can work hard and still suck.

I dont think Bones was saying they haven't paid their dues or anything. Just saying their takes and analysis sucks. I don't think Bones was taking Anything away from them more so just affirming his own professional outlet that was being somewhat mocked for being “just” a youtube channel.

in part i agree. I watched some of the post game shows last year. Nothing innovative. No hot takes or outside the box thoughts/ comments.
Mostly just opinions like the rest of us.
Bones and hoopshock bring alot more of the x’s and o’s factors, that i just Dont see much of in the others.

if im going to listen to commentary, post gMe analysis, team assessment, etc i want it to be more factually based vs opinion.
Meaning, support the opinion with facts based on play vs just a colorful opinion without references as to why it was formed.

I love reading Bones’ posts Bout the team. I might not agree with it all but i sure as hell learn alot about the little things.
(Dont tell him though!)

 

[PtldPlatypus]

The idea that people who are "paid for their takes" are paid because those takes are good is laughable. Media is paid to be readable/listenable/watchable--nothing more. Many paid media put terrible opinions out in well-constructed packages and are paid handsomely for it.

The fact that someone is paid to comment on sports is no argument against the opinion that their takes are garbage. The two are completely independent.

 

[bobf]

...We've needed something additional to count on that doesn't require superstars- like being among the best defensive teams, or rebounding teams, or 3 point shooting teams - and Olshey hasn't made it happen.

Last year with that crappy roster we were
#3 in 3-point shooting
#2 in lowest turn-over rate
#3 in offense (points per possession)

Our defense was awful negating all that, but it’s not like we don’t have some positives to hang our hats on. This year we have 6 good defenders: Nurk, RoCo, DJJ, Trent, Giles, Collins. We didn’t have that last year. I expect this team to be good, something approaching two years ago. Good but not contending.

 

[bobf]

No it doesn't, but nice try. More legitimately though, where is the growth? Where is the taking advantage of players strengths to actually better the team? There are numerous examples which have been identified over and over. What is distressing is that we HAVE had one of the best PGs/players/leaders in the league....and yet have very little to show for it. It is certainly not the hyperbole of 'watching the Knicks', but it seems fair to expect some signs of growth instead of routine, stagnation of being swept out of the Playoffs year after year. Fair?

We had growth up to two years ago. We had the #3 offense and an average defense. We grew from 41 wins up to 53 wins. Then injuries + terrible moves trashed what we had leaving us with hot garbage for depth and putting us back at square #1. Now we have our depth back plus some better defenders we should be back on course. But we still don't have the talent around Dame to be legitimate contenders.

You said in a prior post we have the lowest assists, lowest passing, and terrible defense. I agree with you about the defense. But our low passing/assists resulted in the #3 offense in the NBA. You pass to get better shots, yet every pass adds risk so it's a trade-off. Along with our lowest assists we had the 2nd lowest turnover rate. So maybe from an offensive efficiency POV Stott's boring offense is actually right.

 

[kjironman1]

They worked hard for their jobs. Nobody is saying they haven't. Doesnt mean their basketball takes are or aren't shit.

Fair enough. Just understand They might not agree with you either. The point is they are in a business of giving an opinion. Respect has been earned. That's all i'm saying Bones. You have earned your respect and so have they.

 

[kjironman1]

yeah but someone can work hard and still suck.

I dont think Bones was saying they haven't paid their dues or anything. Just saying their takes and analysis sucks. I don't think Bones was taking Anything away from them more so just affirming his own professional outlet that was being somewhat mocked for being “just” a youtube channel.

in part i agree. I watched some of the post game shows last year. Nothing innovative. No hot takes or outside the box thoughts/ comments.
Mostly just opinions like the rest of us.
Bones and hoopshock bring alot more of the x’s and o’s factors, that i just Dont see much of in the others.

if im going to listen to commentary, post gMe analysis, team assessment, etc i want it to be more factually based vs opinion.
Meaning, support the opinion with facts based on play vs just a colorful opinion without references as to why it was formed.

I love reading Bones’ posts Bout the team. I might not agree with it all but i sure as hell learn alot about the little things.
(Dont tell him though!)

A little more about respect is what I'm saying. They don't (At least that i have heard) go on their site or show and say another person working in the field "Sucks". I like X's and O's as much as the next guy. It can be fun to see what happens. I personally find Dwight Jaynes nauseating at best to listen to. There is a point i can't even watch the guy. However there are other things involved in and with an NBA team than simply "Drop Schemes" and "Cutting to the basket" "Lob passes" "Fronting" " Flow Offenses" "Corner threes". Those things are High School/College level learning curve issues. Way more to dealing with NBA players and the overall business product. It's why we are fans and we get it sold to us.
Even Bones has learned this. Look at the difference between what he posts now and what he was doing just a year ago. He has to understand everything he posts and says can get thrown in his face. He also has learned that a "Toxic" environment will eventually bring him down. Look for HoopsJock? He isn't even around anymore unless he is lurking?
Respect in the business goes a long ways. Bones and Hoops are earning it and they are working daily to create a product. The NBA is a Business. This is all for Entertainment. It's literally my signature on my comments.

 

[blazerkor]

No it doesn't, but nice try. More legitimately though, where is the growth? Where is the taking advantage of players strengths to actually better the team? There are numerous examples which have been identified over and over. What is distressing is that we HAVE had one of the best PGs/players/leaders in the league....and yet have very little to show for it. It is certainly not the hyperbole of 'watching the Knicks', but it seems fair to expect some signs of growth instead of routine, stagnation of being swept out of the Playoffs year after year. Fair?

To be fair the last sweep was in the conference finals. I realize we supposedly got lucky with other teams' injuries but we didn't have Nurk which was a huge blow. So that does show some growth. That being said I'm with you most of the way. I need to see more improvement/adapting from the coaching staff but they have said they will do that with the new blood that Olshey has brought in which is my other problem. Olshey hasn't been aggressive enough in getting players that complement Dame's strengths and cover for his weaknesses.

 

[Stevenson]

but you tube ads can add up to alot more than a salary for a reporting agency.
Whens the last time a hired news reporter went viral and made millions from it?

but you can find you tube video makers who aRe now multi millionaires.


Now im not saying they all got there because of their content, but to try to diminish someone because they have a youtube channel vs a salary from a news agency is pretty laughable in todays day and age...
People will go to where the money is. Whether talented or not.

Sounds like you are stuck in yesterdays format and not realizing that the internet is the way of news now. Including sports.

I haven't watched espn in years....

When you assume...

Frankly, you have no idea what you are talking about.

 

[blazerkor]

yeah but someone can work hard and still suck.

I dont think Bones was saying they haven't paid their dues or anything. Just saying their takes and analysis sucks. I don't think Bones was taking Anything away from them more so just affirming his own professional outlet that was being somewhat mocked for being “just” a youtube channel.

in part i agree. I watched some of the post game shows last year. Nothing innovative. No hot takes or outside the box thoughts/ comments.
Mostly just opinions like the rest of us.
Bones and hoopshock bring alot more of the x’s and o’s factors, that i just Dont see much of in the others.

if im going to listen to commentary, post gMe analysis, team assessment, etc i want it to be more factually based vs opinion.
Meaning, support the opinion with facts based on play vs just a colorful opinion without references as to why it was formed.

I love reading Bones’ posts Bout the team. I might not agree with it all but i sure as hell learn alot about the little things.
(Dont tell him though!)

I'll be honest with you guys and no offense to Bones or Hoopsjock but I need better content from the Blazers/NBCSNW. It boggles my mind why they can't find one former Blazers player with a good/great mind for Xs and Os to be in studio breaking down games with the kind of basketball analysis that these two guys (Bones and Hoopsjock) bring at Blazers Uprise https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCaNUdqLz6sZjSOCNEJRbufg but with the weight of pro experience and Blazers fan buy in.

I'm also greedy I want a former Blazers player with personality to be our color commentator. I just don't understand why we can't invest a little more money of a team worth over a billion dollars or Comcast that is worth 230.5 billion to put out a quality product. If it's a Comcast issue the team should just pony up. The other thing that it would do is show guys around the league that they will be valued by this franchise after their playing career is over.

 

[kjironman1]

The idea that people who are "paid for their takes" are paid because those takes are good is laughable. Media is paid to be readable/listenable/watchable--nothing more. Many paid media put terrible opinions out in well-constructed packages and are paid handsomely for it.

The fact that someone is paid to comment on sports is no argument against the opinion that their takes are garbage. The two are completely independent.

This is all fine and dandy except just about every take on this entire board has been said by someone who is "Paid For Their Takes". Go listen to ESPN (Any of their NBA specialists), Blazers Outsiders, Pregame, NBA on TNT, Inside the NBA and you will hear something you will again read on here. So with ALL DUE RESPECT I'm calling BS on this entire post.
Go talk to anyone on the street and get an opinion and they will say something they have heard unless they happen to be on the "Inside".

The idea that people who are "paid for their takes" are paid because those takes are good is laughable. Media is paid to be readable/listenable/watchable

Would a "Readable" "Listenable" " Watchable" take be a good take? Is Stephen A. Smith Listenable to you or is he barely watchable? Do you listen to Kenny Smith? Or do you listen to Shaq vs Barkley? Does Woj ring a bell? Rachael Nickols? Doris Burke?
Did Dick Vitale ever say anything worthy or was he simply watchable? It takes a combination of savvy and journalistic prowess to convey a message to a wide range of people.

 

[kjironman1]

I'll be honest with you guys and no offense to Bones or Hoopsjock but I need better content from the Blazers/NBCSNW. It boggles my mind why they can't find one former Blazers player with a good/great mind for Xs and Os to be in studio breaking down games with the kind of basketball analysis that these two guys (Bones and Hoopsjock) bring at Blazers Uprise https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCaNUdqLz6sZjSOCNEJRbufg but with the weight of pro experience and Blazers fan buy in.

I'm also greedy I want a former Blazers player with personality to be our color commentator. I just don't understand why we can't invest a little more money of a team worth over a billion dollars or Comcast that is worth 230.5 billion to put out a quality product. If it's a Comcast issue the team should just pony up. The other thing that it would do is show guys around the league that they will be valued by this franchise after their playing career is over.

I agree with this wholeheartedly. They absolutely can do better.

 

[Stevenson]

I'll be honest with you guys and no offense to Bones or Hoopsjock but I need better content from the Blazers/NBCSNW. It boggles my mind why they can't find one former Blazers player with a good/great mind for Xs and Os to be in studio breaking down games with the kind of basketball analysis that these two guys (Bones and Hoopsjock) bring at Blazers Uprise https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCaNUdqLz6sZjSOCNEJRbufg but with the weight of pro experience and Blazers fan buy in.

I'm also greedy I want a former Blazers player with personality to be our color commentator. I just don't understand why we can't invest a little more money of a team worth over a billion dollars or Comcast that is worth 230.5 billion to put out a quality product. If it's a Comcast issue the team should just pony up. The other thing that it would do is show guys around the league that they will be valued by this franchise after their playing career is over.

Surprising. I think Lamar is very good. Wild Rice was great, even if not always the best communicator. But damn fun.

Channing Frye has a podcast that's entertaining, and I think it is Blazer sanctioned. But maybe not.

 

[blazerkor]

Surprising. I think Lamar is very good. Wild Rice was great, even if not always the best communicator. But damn fun.

Channing Frye has a podcast that's entertaining, and I think it is Blazer sanctioned. But maybe not.

So put Frye in the studio. Lamar is OK but I would just like the weight and hopefully a little more explosive personality (like Rice but maybe have it a little more together) that I'm sure we could find among all of the Blazers alumni that don't already have broadcasting gigs.

 

[kjironman1]

Surprising. I think Lamar is very good. Wild Rice was great, even if not always the best communicator. But damn fun.

Channing Frye has a podcast that's entertaining, and I think it is Blazer sanctioned. But maybe not.

Lamar is getting trashed on this board because he said a few too many times the Blazers were missing shots last game. (Which they were no question)
He also won't say out loud what a few happen to think that Stotts is the problem. (Which he may be) but it would be foolish for him to say if he wants to keep his job.
The point is there is more to it that to say "They Suck".

 

[blazerkor]

Lamar is getting trashed on this board because he said a few too many times the Blazers were missing shots last game. (Which they were no question)
He also won't say out loud what a few happen to think that Stotts is the problem. (Which he may be) but it would be foolish for him to say if he wants to keep his job.
The point is there is more to it that to say "They Suck".

They don't suck at all. I'm just more interested in what a guy I have more invested into and has professional experience has to say and Lamar could be a lot more exciting... he's a little tame for my taste but maybe I'm an outlier and this is what the majority of fans want to hear.

 

[calvin natt]

I like Lamar. Kent is just so boring and bland. As for “experts” here or anywhere, I don’t listen to anyone as an expert unless they are involved with the actual team. If you aren’t at practice or the locker room, you are guessing at just about everything. And your guess is as good as mine (or worse...)

 

[Orion Bailey]

A little more about respect is what I'm saying. They don't (At least that i have heard) go on their site or show and say another person working in the field "Sucks". I like X's and O's as much as the next guy. It can be fun to see what happens. I personally find Dwight Jaynes nauseating at best to listen to. There is a point i can't even watch the guy. However there are other things involved in and with an NBA team than simply "Drop Schemes" and "Cutting to the basket" "Lob passes" "Fronting" " Flow Offenses" "Corner threes". Those things are High School/College level learning curve issues. Way more to dealing with NBA players and the overall business product. It's why we are fans and we get it sold to us.
Even Bones has learned this. Look at the difference between what he posts now and what he was doing just a year ago. He has to understand everything he posts and says can get thrown in his face. He also has learned that a "Toxic" environment will eventually bring him down. Look for HoopsJock? He isn't even around anymore unless he is lurking?
Respect in the business goes a long ways. Bones and Hoops are earning it and they are working daily to create a product. The NBA is a Business. This is all for Entertainment. It's literally my signature on my comments.

oh gotcha. Then i agree there definitely is something to be said about professional etiquette.

 

[Strenuus]

Bruh

Bones and hoops are out there doing their thing.

You don't have to watch them. Don't know why it's a big deal they are doing work...