Addresses the Blazers specifically at the 11:55 mark. He is the voice of the Utah Jazz and has a radio show. He's definitely a student of the game. It was good to hear not only his opinion about us, but why he has that opinion. http://weareutahjazz.com/lockedonjazz/?powerpress_pinw=9701-podcast Give the last 3.5 minutes a listen when you have the time.
Thanks for sharing this, Wiz. Interesting theory Locke has about building a team around players who uses possessions efficiently above the league average, what he calls PAAC (Points above average created). PAAC is an offensive efficiency stat he came up with; however he doesn't explain how he formulates it in this audio clip. For those that didn't listen to the audio, Locke said LaMarcus was below average in this stat. And that the Blazers this year are full of guys that are above average in this stat. He then stated that the Sacramento Kings are comparable to the Blazers in players that are above average in PAAC, but the Kings players' bad attitude and problems may override the analytics.
I agree with his theory that low post scorers hurt their teams more than they help them. Lamarcus was a black hole. Once the ball made it to him it just died. This doesn't just apply to him though. I'll take the ball movement any day. Remember how we beat Houston by letting dwight go off? No one else was able to get in a rhythm on Houston because the ball didn't move once it got to Howard.
Holy fucking shit, this is EXACTLY what I've been saying for years, and many blazer fans didn't want to listen to me, all they could say is shit like "La is the highest scoring player on the team"
Though I don't agree with the idea that post play in general is ineffective, it's just that today, there are not many efficient post up players. The really good post up layers of years past would be 55+% from 2. Today, there are a plethora of "post players" that are under 50. And they can scarecly be called post players when you compare them to true ones like Kevin McHale
Great analysis. It doesn't surprise me that analytics guys aren't surprised. We have an analytics coach, an analytics GM, and an analytics owner. We dumped an entire team's worth of average guys, and min-maxed our acquisitions for the best use of possessions: pick and roll guys, slashers, garbage men that extend possessions, shooters who know their spots and hit them. I feel like we uncovered three or four Zach Randolphs (you know, a good player stuck on the bench or not getting enough time, wh blossoms with minutes) in Harkless, CJ, Aminu, and Ed Davis.
I think we're going to see a lot of back pedaling in sports journalism early on here. Utah always has top shelf media guys from everything I've listened to and this just adds to the list...great link..thanks for posting it
The Blazers are #2 right now in the league in eFG%, behind golden state. We're also 5th in the league in Net rating (diff between offensive and defensive rating)
What I love about this roster is the equality I feel in our rotation guys...doesn't matter who starts or comes off the bench, there's just no vast drop off..they can build a lead or hold one..it's not like, the days when you held your breath if any starter was in foul trouble...now, no problem
I agree with this. The post scorer is not dead in the modern NBA. But, unless a player is fucking phenomenal at scoring in the low post, it should be used situationally to add a different look and further diversify an offense. It is a valuable tool to keep the other team guessing. It can also be used to target a specific defender who is weak at defending the post, or used to get a dominant opponent big into foul trouble. It is situational, but still effective when used intelligently in small doses. Given the way that the NBA game has evolved though, it doesn't make sense to have a post scorer as a primary option. Not going to cut it in today's game.
I'm still in shock that we have several 7 ft guys who can dribble the length of a court and finish a layup...we used to suck at finishing layups
David Locke replaced "Hot Rod Hundley" for the Jazz radio play-by-play and made me sometimes listen to their games just to hear his insight. Easily the most cerebral and knows his shizz.
The thing about low post scorers is you can pretty easily shut them down if you want to just by doubling. Yeah it opens things up for others but that guy still has to know where and when to pass out of the double team. LA never really perfected it. Then again teams couldn't really double him because he was surrounded by shooters. That actually hurt us IMO. It's a lot harder to shut down guys that can get to wherever they want on the court like Lillard and CJ
I used to listen to Locke all the time on the radio as well. Usually for about the first 39 minutes of his show to get his analysis and then it got kind of monotonous. I believe he was the one who was "forced out" of SLC in the 90's when Karl Malone disliked him for some comments. I was glad to see him eventually go back. I always liked him, even if he can be a bit dry with his delivery.
This is why low post scorers seldom take big shots in the last minute of ball games. Especially after time outs. Once the double comes.....it's over. You have to be able to do it all to routinely hit game winners. (Shoot the 3, attack the basket, and pull up for a mid range jumper.) Other wise you are too predictable. We had Dame, now we have Dame and CJ.
