Mike Fratello: "Blazers are a very deep team."

There is another angle to "deep". I have seen drafts listed as deep but lacking in elite talent. I think after Mo out bench talent is very equivalent with all being 9th-10th man talent, your last man in you regular rotation. And tgat is due to simple lack of experience.

 

To a lot of people, depth means older players on the downward side of their careers. For the Blazers, it's more about young guys with talent who haven't totally figured out what to do with that talent. This should equate to a more effective bench over the next few years.

 

We certainly have talent on the bench. However, it is unrealized talent. I think a better way to look at it is that if we keep many of these primary pieces, we will have an really deep bench next year or the year after.

 

I also find it "interesting" that you post this exact same comment every time someone in the national media says anything positive about the Blazers. Must suck to live in a world where every silver lining has a cloud.

Seriously, it's not like everyone in this thread is in adamant agreement with Fratello's assessment. For example:

The consensus is the Blazers have a young bench with potential that has shown improvement recently. Barton, Robinson, Leonard and Dorell Wright have all made valuable contributions recently, but lack consistency. To be fair they also lack consistent playing time. But, I think even the homers here will agree that Barton, Robinson and Leonard all still have a ways to go before our bench can be considered anything more than mediocre.

In terms of our actual bench production, we remain dead last in the league in bench scoring at 24.1 ppg (up from 18.5 ppg last season). But that's not a surprise, our bench is also dead last in minutes played. Other teams of note with low scoring benches:

HOU - Rank 25th, 26.4 ppg
IND - Rank 26th, 26.2 ppg
GSW - Rank 28th, 25.3 ppg

And again, all those teams play their benches more minutes than the Blazers.

In terms of PTS/48, our bench is 18th, so a little below league average, but not as abysmal as the raw numbers would indicate. In terms of PTS/48, our bench outscores all of: OKC (24th), IND (26th) and MIA (28th).

The Lakers rank 2nd in raw bench scoring and 1st in bench PTS/48. I prefer our 41-18 record and "shitty" bench to their "great" bench and 20-39 record.

In terms of overall bench production (Deff/48 - Efficiency Differential/48), I find it interesting that we are right in the middle of a group of teams that are closest to us in the standings and fighting for HCA in the playoffs. In terms of Deff/48, the Clippers are 23rd, we are 24th, Golden State is 25th and the Rockets are 26th.

So, we aren't the only good team that relies heavily on their starters. I'm actually surprised to see the Clippers ranked that low given the reputation of their bench, but they have also had significant injuries, so that plays a role.

In a nutshell, our bench is WAY better than last season (our bench truly was historically bad last year). Last year, Meyers Leonard was our best bench player. This year, he's not even part of the regular rotation. Joel Freeland made a huge jump last year from totally lost to solid rotation player. Barton, Robinson and Leonard have made positive contributions, but are all still works in progress. If we hold on to them, our bench should be much better in a couple years.

For now, our bench is dead last in scoring, but not so bad when you look at PTS/48. Our bench is not a strength, but in terms of production/48 is on par with the teams we are battling in the standings for HCA in the Western Conference.

BTW, hoopsstats.com is the source for all the data I used when compiling this post.

BNM

 

Wait, its a flattering comment from the media, so I'm supposed to think its stupid right? I can never remember all these rules, so I just make up my own mind instead

 

That's what she said

 

Another thing I'd point out for those of you who are pissed off at seeing Patty Mills and Jeff Ayers (Pendergraph) doing well on another team, the Blazers aren't going to be able to keep all of the young talent that they have on the bench now either. Luxury tax rules and raises due Lopez and Matthews and, soon Lillard, will result in Olshey having to decide which guys he can afford to keep as they come off of their rookie contracts. Every team has to have a bench made up of primarily veterans on minimum contracts and young guys on rookie contracts. Unless they can push out guys ahead of them on the starting lineup, it's likely that guys like CJ and Meyers will learn how to play here and then get their first big money contract somewhere else.

 

Another analogy might be the difference between "potential energy", which we have, and "kinetic energy" which we hope to harness. Or in the case of hustle players like Will and Trob: "frenetic energy".

I think we're sitting pretty good. We need to develop the resources we have this season and in the playoffs, and recruit wisely this off-season.

Simmer and serve.

 

Despite the five-game winning streak and how the team stepped it up in LMA's absence and all, JPRK's comment provides the true answer as it pertains to Mikey.

 

Oh, god, he's using physics analogies on a Blazers forum. My head is throbbing...make it stop.

 

I just hope reading that doesn't injure The HCP.

 

Newtons third law of deepness clearly states that before you get too deep make sure you have a ladder in the hole

 

Is it a black hole? Are we signing ZBo again?

 

Thats racist

 

For every rebound there must be an equal and opposite challenged 20 footer

 

The HCP generally skips over sentences with more than 5 words in them, so it should be okay.

 

At least I didn't add anything about dark matter.