I was looking at some team stats for the past ten games, and, since I'm a Portland fan and not a Spurs fan, it made for some depressing reading. FG% differential: Third from bottom (above only the Lakers and Philly) Defensive FG%: Fourth from bottom (throw in Washington) Personal fouls: Fifth most 18th in team assists - this is particularly bad because we start two "PGs" and Stotts preaches motion Team steals: tied for last (so we're fouling a lot rather than getting steals) Team turnover differential: DEAD LAST (again, as an undersized team, shouldn't we be trying to force turnovers?) Team turnovers: 4th most Blocked shots: DEAD LAST Ugly. And the worst part is: we're not even losing all the games, so we can't even tank right. Also annoying: the kind of player we need most is a shotblocking defensive big man - and there aren't any in the draft.
Hassan Whiteside would fit that C requirement nicely, and since we are likely headed for a top 5 pick it would seem we will ultimately "fit" those poor stats you listed
Poeltl? 10 reb and 2.2 blocks in 28 minutes isn't bad. Skal is getting 2.1 blocks in 21 minutes. We are certain to get one of those if we don't luck out on Simmons (1.4 blocks too). I agree we aren't tanking correctly though.
I think the records across the league are starting to level out in that beeter teams are starting seperate themselves and worse teams are starting to fade more. We can expect some changes though I don't expect Portland to start playing better than they have been. If the draft were today (no Lotto) we would have the 5th pick. I can see New Orleans moving up past us as they sort things out and it wouldn't take but a couple games for Brooklyn to pass us as well. I think the Blazers could be a slow as the 3rd worst team in the league but no higher than the 7th worst.
This team has too much talent to be at the bottom. Some of the worst teams last year won 16, 18, 20 games. That's not going to be us. My prediction was 32 wins, and I'm sticking with that. We actually have quite a bit of depth, and teams like Philly (1 win), Brooklyn (8 wins), and LA (5 wins), don't have a player on the same level as Dame, or even CJ for that matter. New Orleans is a joke though. They have no excuse. Anthony Davis is a really good player, but he's clearly not good enough to elevate that shitty organization.
Just another piece of evidence to support the idea that you don't build around a PF (unless he also happens to be one of the best to ever play the game, regardless of position).
You can, but he has to be a really good offensive weapon, like Garnett, Malone, Duncan, or Dirk. Davis isn't really on the same level as those guys, at least not in terms of overall offensive ability.
It's not a question of talent as much as the composition of the talent. There isn't a third scorer that you really can count on, and our two bread-and-butter scorers get their points in the same way. We don't have a post scoring option. We don't have a team that gets to the line enough, and our bigs, while they each bring something rather unique to the table, are undersized and get abused by true centers. We don't get a lot of transition points. We are young throughout the roster who are learning by making mistakes, and, when you don't have proven scorers or get enough free throws or easy layups, that's the difference in a close game. As for New Orleans, they have enough talent and have it spread in such a manner that their struggles really confound me. But I think that talent is enough to get them going at some point so that they pass the Blazers in the standings. Which is fine with me. I think there are a couple of elite-level talents in this draft and I think when you might be able to go seven deep in players who become multi-year all-stars. After around 8-10, though, there's a pretty considerable drop off ... although I think guys like Sabonis or the Hammons kid at Purdue will become solid contributors on good teams from the latter part of the first round if they get into the right system.
The thing about depth though, is that it allows you to have an off night. We're getting close to 30 points off our bench every night. That's so much better than our bench from a few years ago. We have guys like Crabbe and Harkless and Davis, who can score and contribute. I agree that it's not enough to make us a good team, but it's enough to keep us around 30 wins.
Yes, but wouldn't you agree that part of that is because we don't have the offensive threats on the first unit and that there isn't much separating the guys you mentioned from our last three starters so that they actually get more minutes and by default get more scoring opportunities? Don't get me wrong, I am with you in liking this bench. I just think the 30-point-per-game figure is a little inflated by circumstances. Crabbe and Davis aren't guys that create their own shots; they score more off of moving without the ball and teammates or rebounds finding them. I wish Harkless could return to the form he showed in the first couple of weeks; I think he could be a steal in the long term.
Garnett did nothing until he was a tertiary player on BOS. Malone never won (but at least competed in the Finals), and played with one of the best PGs ever - so he wasn't really the centerpiece of the Jazz, but rather part of a Dynamic Duo lead by Stockton. Duncan is one of the best to ever play the game, regardless of position. Dirk - a HOFer - got lucky once in 18 years and is the sole outlier.
What.... what exactly is your definition of "nothing?" The Wolves went to the WCF with KG. Garnett is easily a HOFer and he was one of the best players in the game while he was in Minnesota.
In the NBA, you win by building around superstars. The Wolves didn't win because they were going against the Lakers with Payton, Kobe, Malone, and Shaq. The Jazz didn't win because they were going against Jordan/Pippen/Rodman. It's not about the position. It's about the overall talent. Duncan has been the centerpiece of how many championships? Garnett was the centerpiece in Boston. Dirk was the centerpiece in Dallas, and you could make the argument that LeBron was the power forward in Miami. The last 10 Champions GS - Curry (PG) SAS - Duncan (PF) MIA - LeBron (PF) MIA - LeBron (PF) DAL - Dirk (PF) LAL - Kobe (SG) LAL - Kobe (SG) BOS - KG (PF) SAS - Duncan (PF) MIA - Wade (SG) I mean, even if you don't count LeBron, the fact that Duncan, KG, and Dirk were all the best players on their team, and won championships, I think that disproves the hypothesis.
I am not necessarily in agreement that you cant build around a PF, just pointing a few things out. Lebron was the small forward though. He had Bosch at C and Haslem at PF I thought? I would also say that Pierce was as big a cornerstone as Garnett.
Sorry, I meant Dirk as a sole anomaly. Both Garnett needed two other all stars next to them to win and Duncan is the best ever at his position. Again, Im not in disagreement, just pointing a few things out. Honestly, as much as the NBA has changed, I still think the best position to build around is a beast of a center like Drummon, Whiteside, Boogie, ETC. Then would be shooting Guard.
