The lockout provides time to think about the larger on-court issues facing NBA teams, and those always include debates about positional fit. The lines between the traditional five positions get blurrier every year, but they remain important in discussing roster construction. In that spirit, we’re going to take look at some thorny position-related issues facing a bunch of NBA teams. Today: Can LaMarcus Aldridge be the long-term solution at center for Portland? Another way to ask this question — one that recognizes increased positional flexibility — might be this: Can Portland thrive using more lineups in which Aldridge is the biggest or tallest guy on the court? The Trail Blazers started to answer this question last season, when injuries and other roster realities forced him to split his minutes almost evenly between center and power forward, with the latter lineups featuring Marcus Camby or Joel Przybilla as more traditional centers alongside Aldridge. Przybilla missed most of the season before the Blazers dealt him to the Charlotte. Greg Oden, the elephant in the room here, missed the entire season and will be a restricted free agent once the NBA resumes business. Camby remains a useful player, but he’s well into the twilight of his career and such a non-factor on offense that Portland almost plays four-on-five when he’s on the court — at least until a shot goes up and he can do his thing on the glass. The Blazers also have a roster stocked with wing players, including at least one guy (Gerald Wallace) with loads of experience as a small-ball power forward. (Note: Nicolas Batum has played the “four” as well, but he hasn’t proved to be reliable over long haul.) Aldridge is big enough at 6-foot-11 (and with a much-improved post game that draws constant double-teams) that he’ll always play some center, but the Blazers will have to decide whether such lineups will be core fixtures or change-of-style weapons. I looked at every regular-season lineup (minimum: 20 minutes of floor time) and playoff lineup (minimum: six minutes of floor time) that featured Aldridge at power forward and center to see how the Blazers functioned in each setting. The division between the two is pretty stark; the smaller lineups typically featured either Wallace and Dante Cunningham (also dealt to Charlotte) as the next-tallest player on the floor, and each of those guys is probably better-suited as a small forward rather than as a power forward. The general results: Small lineups 1,406.28 minutes 114.6 points per 100 possessions 106.05 points allowed per 100 possessions Big lineups 1,470.59 minutes 108.1 points per 100 possessions 105.5 points allowed per 100 possessions The huge leap in scoring stands out. With Aldridge at power forward, the Blazers were a very good offensive team — a borderline top-10 scoring team. With Aldridge at center, they morphed into the best offensive team in the league, scoring at a higher rate than the Nuggets (No. 1 overall in points per possession) managed in the regular season. The fact that Portland would score more efficiently with Aldridge at center isn’t surprising; Camby and Przybilla are minimal contributors on offense, and the Blazers’ versatile wing guys can fill a variety of lineups and cause matchup issues for opponents. The size of the jump, though, is jarring, and it’s probably bigger than the Blazers had hoped it’d be. Depending on personnel, a team can probably anticipate taking a hit on defense and on the glass by going small, with the goal being to minimize that hit while going gangbusters on offense. The Blazers pulled that trick last season. They indeed allowed more points with Aldridge as the lone true big on the floor, but the jump amounted only to half a point per 100 possessions. Perhaps a bit more surprising: The Blazers’ defensive rebounding numbers remained almost exactly the same, at least on the surface, regardless of which lineup they used. Both the big and small lineups featuring Aldridge rebounded about 66 percent of available defensive boards, according to Basketball Value. But that may a bit misleading, for two reasons: • The Blazers were a very bad defensive rebounding team, so the status quo — their overall average — isn’t good enough. • Among the lineups with Camby in the middle, two of the three that got by far the most minutes — including the team’s most-used five-man group — blew away Portland’s overall rebounding average. That’s enough to suggest the bigger lineups might — might – do much better on the glass in the long run. After all, Aldridge is a mediocre rebounder for his size and position, with an overall rebounding rate not far above that of Amar’e Stoudemire. Still, the overall points scored and allowed numbers suggest the Blazers can at least think about committing to being a smaller team. There are three major caveats here, though: • Wallace makes noise now and then that he prefers playing small forward, he’s getting older and he has only two seasons remaining on his deal. His rebounding makes him an almost ideal small-ball “four,” but he won’t be around forever. • The Blazers tendered Oden the $8.9 million qualifying offer required to keep him a restricted free agent, and if he ends up as part of Portland’s long-term picture, the calculus changes completely. • As well as Portland’s small groups may have played last season, most recent champions or championship contenders had two legit 7-foot types — dynamic two-way players, or at least game-changing defenders — either starting or playing huge roles in their rotations. The Lakers, Celtics, Spurs, Pistons, Mavericks — they’ve all been able to gain advantages by playing heavy minutes with lots of length. Having two 7-footers on the court at once isn’t a requirement for contention (the Heat nearly won the title by flanking Chris Bosh with Udonis Haslem and Joel Anthony), but the evidence suggests it helps, a lot. It’s an interesting discussion, but the Blazers should probably be looking for that second impact big man, whether it’s Oden or someone else. http://nba-point-forward.si.com/2011/08/24/best-position-for-aldridge-is-up-for-debate/
Thanks Sports Illustrated for now noticing what posters on this board (and others) have been discussing for years. Look at old threads talking about LA at center part-time, the pros & cons of moving him there full-time and any mention of "small ball", which for the Blazers the past few years is code for: LaMarcus at Center.
Also, I would like to point out a key problem with reading a lot into those numbes splitshe is using to show Small Ball is so good - the minutes are not random. The lineups are selected by the coach, and presumably McMillan (if he has a choice) increases Small Ball minutes when the matchup is favorable, and decreases them when it is not. As pointed out in the article, two good 7 footers seems to be a great predictor of success in the playoffs, and I think one reason is that you aren't waiting for a "good" matchup. You are the matchup problem.
The Blazers could do some damage if they decided to build around LMA at the five and trading (who wants out) for Kevin Love; his high-post game would mesh in nice with LMA. -Jan. Yahoo article They bring over Rubio but they, yet again, bring in a PF tweener. With such an unbalanced frontcourt they aren't going to win many games with Darko as their center or Beasley/DWill playing out of position at SF.
What are we going to give up for Love? Would they go for a resigned Oden and Batum? I'm not certain Paul would want to give up on Oden but your not going to get Love for Luke Babbit or Camby or anything.
I agree with HCP that the first post's article is badly-written. Each sentence could be interpreted several ways. There is no by-line despite the author's use of the 1st-person. To understand it, I wound up condensing it from 1008 words to 393 words. For your pleasure, here's my rewrite. ---------------- Can LaMarcus Aldridge be the long-term solution at C for Portland? Aldridge is big enough that he’ll always play some C, but the Blazers will have to decide whether that is their core or change-of-style. Camby is such a non-factor on offense that Portland almost plays 4-on-5 when he’s on the court, at least until the opponent misses and his rebounding strength shows. I looked at every regular-season lineup (minimum 20 minutes floor time) and playoff lineup (minimum 6 minutes floor time) that featured Aldridge. The smaller lineups typically featured Gerald Wallace or Dante Cunningham as the next-tallest player, despite both being better SFs than PFs. Small lineups 1,406.28 minutes 114.6 points per 100 possessions 106.05 points allowed per 100 possessions Big lineups 1,470.59 minutes [jlprk note: 1406 + 1471 = only 5/6 of Aldridge's minutes last season] 108.1 points per 100 possessions 105.5 points allowed per 100 possessions The huge leap in scoring stands out. With Aldridge at PF, the Blazers were about the #10 team in scoring. With Aldridge at C, they were #1 in points per possession, better than the #1 Nuggets. The fact that Portland would score more efficiently with Aldridge at C isn’t surprising; Camby and Przybilla were minimal contributors on offense, and the Blazers’ wing guys were versatile. The size of the jump, though, is jarring. When a team goes small, it hopes the increase in offense will more than offset the decrease in defense and rebounds. The Blazers pulled that trick last season. A bit more surprising: The Blazers got 66% of available defensive rebounds going either small or big. But that may be misleading because: • The Blazers were a very bad defensive rebounding team, so the status quo, their overall average, isn’t good enough. • Portland’s overall rebounding average was skewed much higher by lineups with Camby. So bigger lineups might do much better on the glass in the long run. Aldridge is a mediocre rebounder. Still, the overall points scored and allowed suggest the Blazers might commit to being a smaller team. Caveats: • Wallace prefers playing SF, although his rebounding makes him an ideal small-ball 4. He won’t be around forever because he’s getting older and has only 2 seasons remaining on his deal. • Most recent championship contenders had two legit 7-footers. The Blazers should look for that 2nd impact big man.
Also, the numbers may be skewed by the fact that LMA was putting up HOF numbers during the majority of his stint at center, having started the season typically slow and then faltered a bit at the end when he either ran out of steam or took somewhat of a back seat with Roy/Camby's return.
