You guys can argue over that all you want. The repeated kick in the nutz by the injuries this year pretty much make the whole argument completely moot. I can't remember a more frustrating season.
The Blazers were good enough this season to get the 6th seed in the West even while losing more than 300 player games to injury. The starting lineup changed multiple times, they played without a true center for a good portion of the season and yet they still made the playoffs. Once they made the playoffs, they took the hottest team in the league to 6 games while playing 3 games without Brandon and 3 games with a far from normal Brandon. Batum and Camby were both hobbled with injuries, yet the Blazers managed to go 6 games. I see no reason to be less than optimistic about the team's future. Many of the issues that the OP raises, I believe go away with a healthy roster. Aldridge will likely never be a dominant low post player, but if Oden is able to play, he doesn't need to be. Camby, Miller, and Howard may not have many seasons left in them, but there are always guys like them at the end of their careers who are looking to hook up with a contending team. When their stints are over, they can be replaced. Ultimately, whether this team is able to be a serious contender for a title, IMO, depends upon Oden. He's the difference maker between the Blazers and the rest of the good teams in the West. It's easy to write him off as injury prone, but I think that's short sighted. Players can overcome injury problems and have productive careers. Grant Hill certainly makes a good case for not writing off a talented player because of injury. Hopefully, Oden will be back at full strength next fall and will begin to write a more positive chapter to his career.
Thank you. This is exactly how I feel as well. I'm glad I didn't have to muster up the enthusiasm to write those two paragraphs; it's too early in the grieving process for me.
With the caveat that they played a pretty soft schedule to start the season ... I do agree that their early issues seemed to be more about offensive identity though (the identity isn't so much of a problem now, but offense is still a problem).
Let's see how their offense looks with a healthy Roy, Oden and Batum to go with Miller and Aldridge. Camby is a nice player but he doesn't have the same impact on offense that Oden, even as raw as Oden is. The team had one of the best offenses in the NBA in 2008-09. I think the talent is certainly there to return to top of the offensive charts. The talent is also there to be at least an above average defense. If the team is healthy (big if, granted), I see both of those things happening.
I guess you're referring to their offensive efficiency rating (points per possession)? But wasn't all of that really predicated on a couple of things that maybe aren't all that bankable in the playoffs? Namely getting to the foul line more than your opponent and pulling lots of offensive boards (which don't reset a 'possession'). This team is still very middle of the pack or poor in categories that I think matter more in determining just how effective an offense really is and those are team field goal percentage, and points in the paint (post scoring and fast break points). I wish there was a way to track just how many contested shots this team takes or were taken under some kind of duress. Frankly, I see this as a very good regular season offense, but one that is probably doomed to more struggles against a playoff caliber team over a seven game series.
Why aren't those things bankable in the post-season? Aren't the playoffs supposed to favour teams that get to the line and rebound like madmen? Also, I think it was predicated on getting good shots. One thing I will admit, Blake helped that. He could space the floor and shoot open threes. I don't think that's the most valuable skill, or the hardest to find, but the team is missing it. It would help if Webster or Rudy were knocking down their open shots, or if Batum were given more shots.
Fouls tend to dry up somewhat in the playoffs ... or they are at least called a lot more loosely, with a lot more contact allowed. Secondly, playoff teams are usually decent at boxing out and rebounding (otherwise they probably wouldn't be a playoff team), which means if your offense is predicated on crashing the boards after misses to corral the loose ball and get a second shot there probably won't be as many opportunities as you might see over the course of 82 games against a mix of bad and good teams with varying degrees of length and skill. Floor spacing was a real problem this year, but even with Blake in the lineup for 40+ games this team had trouble getting clean looks a good deal of the time. I dunno, I just want to see guys actually setting good hard screens, moving off the ball when the ball handler is operating, reversing the ball better and generally getting more people involved in something where guys don't stand around on the perimeter and watch.
At the same time, why can't we get a PG who can do both things? Why do we always get a PG who is one dimensional. Ok this guy can penetrate the paint and get assist, but can't hit an outside jumper to save his life. This guy can hit an outside jumper at a high rate, but can't penetrate the lane or make good decisions. Why the fuck can't we get a player who is well rounded? The reason Miller wasn't in the games a lot near the end, is because to take advantage of a big man switch to your point guard, you need to have an outside shot to take full advantage. If you don't have an outside shot, they just sag off you and make you ineffective. I talked about this when we got Miller. I said at some point that teams will sag off him and beg him to shoot outside shots. I like Andre Miller in many ways. But unless he has a pick and roll player to work with, it is hard for him to play his game. Now part of this, was because Aldridge is not an effective paint player. He never put himself in position to take the pressure off of Miller. When you have no face up game, and you catch the ball out on the perimeter, all you are doing is making it easy for the defense. What is the first thing they teach big man defenders? Make your opponent catch the ball as far away from the hoop as possible. Lamarcus is a big man defenders wet dream. He catches it 18 feet out, and has no face up game. So now what happens? Well that perimeter player who needs spacing to be effective, is basically within arms reach. Teams can double team Lamarcus, and double team our perimeter players with minimal effort, and switch back and forth quickly because of the bad spacing. This is no mystery as to why the team struggles when Lamarcus gets double teamed. The problem is the motor of the PF. It only runs for a quarter or so per game. It may be a glorious quarter he has, but for the rest of the game, you aren't going to get much out of him.
I'm not sure how relevant this is. It's not about absolute values, it's about relative values. As in, yes, the team won't get AS many free throws and AS many offensive rebounds as they do against the league as a whole, because the competition has upgraded. But they should still be as far ahead of their playoff opponents as the stats suggest. Do you have any reasoning as to why gaps between playoff teams in terms of free throws and offensive rebounding would close? I'd like to see more movement in the offense, too. I think it would play to the strengths of all the players on the team (this is my main frustration with McMillan). But I think that by and large, McMillan's emphasis on limiting turnovers, getting high percentage shots and hitting the offensive boards also fit in pretty well with the strengths of the team (so long as Oden and either Przybilla or Camby are there and Roy is healthy).
Because point guards who have the entire offensive skillset (penetration, vision, passing and shooting) are rare and teams don't let them get away. If you luck out and get one in the draft, great. It's just very hard to do that if you don't pick in the top-five. And once a player is proven capable of all those things in the NBA, they are rarely available. Nash and Billups are like the only two examples I can think of in the past decade or so who became available, and both were due to massive mistakes (IMO) by their GM/owner.
You cannot win an NBA title with the type of offense Portland is currently running...come on now. Look at how many easy\open shots Phoenix was getting and compare it to the Blazers, who struggled MIGHTLY to generate offense... You cannot win playoff games consistently if you don't generate easy scoring opportunities... The offense has to change...the "iso" sets that we run are pathetic, even Roy as good as he is can't consistently beat double and triple teams, and our spacing is bad, recongition of double team...slow reactions there (Aldridge in particular), very little movement...and this early or late in the shot clock mantra is pure bullshit... early, when do the Blazers initiate early? Since they don't like to run, they very rarely initiate early...and late is a pure disaster aganinst good defenseive teams or teams that prepare well for Portland. How many forced shots with 2-3 seconds left in shot clock do some of you have to see before you admit that is not good offensive basketball? Those are the types of shots you WANT to force opposing offenses into, not RELY on for offense yourself....Seriously it has become ridiculous... Did anyone listen to Alvin Gentry speak last night? It was embarassing to hear a coach say that by taking away 2 things from our offense they essentially negated our best plays? Is that all Nate and crew can come up with? Very frustrating watching Phoenix tear our defense apart while creating ridiculously easy scoring opportunities and they in essence (the defensive juggernauts they are) completely shut the Blazers down or force difficult shots.... We need better offensive sets and may need better offensive players as well...
What an incredibly depressing post! I disagree strongly on virtually everything you said. For one Roy is still injured I don't care what he says it's not conditioning that was his problem. I was at 2 of the 3 playoff games and can say the from watching. He wasn't quick to begin with , like a player out of condition would be, then lagging. He was slow from start to finish. His knee is still clearly bothering him. Rudy is limited. I agree with that. Webster was amazing in game 6 and kept us in the game with great defense and an offensive mindset. He's no Chris Paul obviously but I think he is an excellent backup 2/3 and 2nd defender after Batum. What's more he seems to have accepted this role and looks more confident then ever. I agree Batum could be a star especially defensively. Bayless is getting better all the time and is an ideal back court mate for Roy barring a huge upgrade like Collison or Paul. Those are likely pipe dreams. Bayless only needs 4 to 5 assists a game if he starts with Roy. The biggest problem this year is McMillan had very little to work with and was force to use akward lineups. I love Miller, but he simply is not a good choice next to Roy. We need another guard who can hit the three consistently. I think Bayless could be that guy. Aldridge I tend to agree with you about although he could be perfect next to Oden if they ever get to play together. Pulling out the PF who would double Oden on the block. He lacks heart and I feel is our best trade chip, but only for a star like CP3 etc. That leaves me with Oden. Yes he has had some phenomenally heart breaking injuries and that could continue. Other then that and foul problems he was looking great right before he went down in December. I feel his ceiling is as high as ever. If he can stay healthy then I think we will be a real contender. Things aren't NEARLY as bad as you make them out to be. With the most snakebit team I've EVER seen suit up for the Blazers we still won 50. Think about that.
This is a big part of the problem. Nate = good on defense and terrible on Offense. We really need an assistant coach who understands how to run an offense. We need the A-team to kidnap Tex Winter and bring him on board, I suppose that might require a time machine... At any rate we need help with our coaching staff. Not sure there is an AVAILABLE coach who is better then Mac much as he drives me berserk. Unless folks are willing to roll dice with Bill Laimbeer...
Evaluating this team based on this year is nuts. We lost to Phoenix for one simple reason: The playoffs are about matchups and our three advantages--Roy, our physical low-post players and Batum--we either sitting in street clothes or severely diminished. Fuck, just give me a healthy Roy and we win that series in six games.
If we're healthy we'll be the best team in the West next year. I have no doubt about that. With Oden, Camby, Batum, and Aldridge we will dominate every team in the frountcourt. The key is to stay healthy.
