A jump-shooting team is liable to have a fair amount of variance. I'm just not at all convinced that that matters. In baseball, for example, I've seen interesting studies about whether pitchers who are extremely variable (have good games where they give up 0-1 runs and get shelled in other games) are more or less valuable than pitchers who were consistent (achieved the same ERA without the extreme variance). The results were that there was precious little difference and the highly variable pitchers might even be slightly more valuable (in terms of helping their team win games). Now, I'm not saying that tells us anything about whether a highly variable offense is good or bad. However, I definitely think the default is that the mean is the best measure of effectiveness and the burden of proof should be on showing that high variance is damaging. It might be that it is, but why should we believe it is? Intuitively, why would winning 30 games by 15 points per game and losing 10 games by 40 points apiece, for example, be worse than winning 30 games by 5 points per game and losing 10 games by 10 points apiece? I don't think extreme variance is intrinsically bad.
We are primarily a jump shooting team. Attacking the rim is the exception rather than the rule. We rebound well as a team, but trying to attribute offensive boards to some sort of relentless attack we have at the hoop isn't reality.
We obviously don't agree, but I'm curious to why you think we're a good offensive rebounding team? I do think Roy, Aldridge, and Oden command double teams, and all of those players get double teamed near the rim, therefore it has a direct impact on our offensive rebounds. I'm not trying to say our entire team goes to the basket, that certainly is far from the truth. I do think the player who creates a large majority of our offense does attack the hoop, and often that results in help being needed. I remember Tyson Chandler being such a good offensive rebounder last year. Was it because Peja, Mo Pete, and David West attack the rim? No. It was because they had one guy who could get into the paint, and his defender often was forced to help, allowing Chandler to get easy offensive putbacks.
lamarcus is like number 1 in offensive rebounding for forwards. or something like that. he is one of the best.
This proves my point. Does anyone thing LMA is a great rebounder? No. LMA is never going to push someone around. He struggles to get position on defensive rebounds, and that's when he is starting with inside position. However, when his defender is forced to help he can clean up the glass with ease.
Just once, I'd like to read a comment where Nate takes some sort of accountability for our poor play. He always seems to throw someone else (more often than not, Sergio) under the bus.
I've got to think KP cringes when he reads Nate's comments to the press. It's clear they have pretty serious disagreements about players, point guards most especially. I wonder how long KP is going to put up with it. barfo
While the law of averages (and the odds) will favor the team with the far superior record, the one thing I especially like about sports is that on any given day, at any given time, any team can beat any other team. It not only can, but it does happen ... whether we like it or not. Go Blazers! Play your game like you mean it, need it, want it, but play it with teamwork. JAFO
Watching the Spurs-Celtics game, San Antonio is like a defensive clinic on the pick on the roll. Parker or Ginobili do their best to fight through and go above the pick rather than fall behind. Then you have guys like Bonner or Thomas showing on the pick and leaving just enough time until Parker and Ginobili get back on their man. Then if the dribbler somehow gets to the hoop, Duncan is always right there to meet him in front of the rim. If the ball is passed to the roller, someone is always rotating over. But it all starts with guards being able to fight through screens and able to recover on their man, which we have a lot of trouble doing.
keep blaming nate.....keep hating on quick....keep saying im a trolll.... most will have the travis outlaw look on their face come mid april..... 'what happened deer in headlights look" after we lose to the knicks...maybe more of you will realize we r in trouble. maybe if we are the 9th seed by the break....it will be a much needed wake up call after our 4 game lead over utah is down to 2. GO SERGIO!!!! GO OUTLAW!!!!! GO KP....EVERYTHINGS FINE!!!!
Honestly what you are describing is Nate's whole notion of "staying connected" The man knows defense, but I'm increasingly of the opinion that unless you have one or two players on the floor who are able to understand the entire defensive scheme and are then able to communicate with everybody else (calling out rotations, directing traffic, etc.) then it just isn't going to click ... not for awhile anyway. Think about it, are the Spurs loaded with loads of hyper-athletic guys that are somehow magically more physically capable of of fighting through screens and rotating over more quickly than the Blazers? Not so much, they're pretty "old" and aside from Ginobli and Parker I wouldn't characterize that team as anything more than average physically. They are successful, because they can all read and react to whatever an offense throws at them, and that only comes from long years of experience and a willingness to sacrifice energy at the defensive end. I love what KP has been able to do in three short years (it's nothing short of miraculous in some respects) but this roster is overloaded with offensive players and woefully deficient in veterans and defensive specialists, some modest changes are in order and the time is now IMO
It's like a recording that just won't/can't get deleted. edit: actually, I just found the perfect parallel for Mixter . . . any of you guys gets those insanely annoying "THIS is the second notice that the extended warranty on your vehicle has expired . . ." telemarketing calls? I get them like 4x/day and those fucks are trained to hang up on you if you press a key in order to get someone live to yell at. Those calls and these posts are one and the same. That's funny shit.
i think Kp and Nate arent seeing eye to eye....I can see KP getting frusturated at nate's of gear his "schemes" to the personal on the team why do so few plays go threw aldridge and oden? whats up with nate letting outlaw chuck? why play batum for so little? and my #1 top thing that Nate does that drives me nutz: When he takes out people that are hot.... why the heck are you going to take out someone that is helping the team win? be in hot defensively or offensively?
I agree. We don't need something drastic here, but having a veteran or two here that's been through the grind of knowing what it takes would help a bit ... if the goal this season is to make the playoffs. We've let way too many teams shoot 50 percent or better in the first half. It's not our players' faults, some of them are just way too young and are still learning the NBA game. They can get picked apart easily. Sergio is a mediocre team and on-ball defender. Nicolas, G.O., Jerryd, Rudy -- they're all still learning the NBA game. Brandon's a good defender when he wants to focus there, LaMarcus I think is one of our best defenders. And unfortunately because we're mediocre defensively, Joel is left out on an island way too much. Unfortunately, there's no quick fix to this. We can bring in someone, but our core guys just need to learn the game through experience.
I too would like to know. It seems to this observer that pace is some what of a problem. When Sergio is able to get the pace quickened and the passing gets quickened the teams begins to score in bunches and the defense gets better and steals become better for fast breaks. Sergio and Rudy are players like that. They can't play well in a slower pace. Roy does but if it is for long stretches he and the team become very predictable. On the defensive side this team feeds off the offensive flow and become quicker over all. g
Well, if pace is an issue for skewing those stats, shouldn't the team being #5 in the NBA in point differential (+3.5) also be adjusted according to pace?
I think so. It was that logic that led me to argue that the Blazers' team from 05-06 was one of the worst of this decade. They finished with the worst record in the NBA at -8.9 point differential (second-to-worst was the Knicks, with -6.3) and had the third-lowest Pace in the NBA. http://www.basketball-reference.com/leagues/NBA_2006.html *shiver* Our +3.5 point differential is more impressive given our slow Pace than it would be if we played a more up-tempo game. Ed O.
