Lillard's invisible performance

Dame is playing poorly. He's not making the situation any better with his decisions. (poor shot selection/going for glory shots/weak passing) = crap leadership/setting poor example - the one intangible he's supposed to excel at.

Love Dame - but there's no gain in sugar coating/rose glassing it- best to be straight up;
When your being out played by Austin Rivers and Prigioni - I'm sorry but your performing at a D-Leaguer level.

 

Well, you've worked yourself into a frenzy over nothing, because I never said Lillard sucks. I was referring to one game only, not his career and not even this season. One game. Look at the thread title in case you're still confused.

He had a great fourth quarter last night, and was a big part of our win, but again for most of the game he was shut out. His long stretches of unproductive play are noticeable of late, and are worth talking about on a board like this, where we all come to discuss our concerns, our happiness, and the state of our team.

Go, Blazers!!!

 

Absolutely worth talking about if we lose. If we win and he goes scoreless I couldn't care less. That goes for next series as well. If he puts up 35 in a game and we lose then oh well. If the next game he puts up 7 points and we win then fine by me.

 

Here are the issues that I think people are overlooking:

1. Lillard has NEVER played well against LAC. Conversely, he has always seemed to play VERY well against GS, so that bodes well for us.

2. Glenn Rivers has built his entire defense around stopping Dame. I have really only seen Dame get a few easy, wide open shots in this series. They just aren't available.

3. This is the first year where Dame is the number one option on offense in the playoffs, and the defense is built around stopping him, so any past playoff numbers are somewhat irrelevent because the circumstances were significantly different with Aldridge on the floor.

4. Terry Stotts has adjusted our offense so that the ball flows through the hands of Plumlee. This is why we have seen Plumlee's assists go up, and Dame's go down. Our offense has been about drawing the defense to Dame, passing to Plums, and then rotating to Harkless, Aminu, or Crabbe. It is why we're WINNING. People need to stop overlooking this.

5. Despite what people are claiming about shot selection, Dame was 5-10 from three last night. So are you unhappy with his drives? His mid-range shots?

I really haven't seen Dame forcing shots as much as some people would like to claim. And there seems to be some kind of strange "dammed if you do and dammed if you don't" situation because people bitch if he isn't taking shots while being doubled, but then they bitch even more if he DOES take shots while being doubled. Which is it? Do you want him to force the issue and try to get shots, or do you want him to pass the ball and serve as a decoy? You can't have both.

 

Yes, the shot selection has been noticeably bad. Even the NBA TV commentators were talking about it last night. I guess they can point it out, but if you say it on this board you get your head cut off.

 

He would take about five shots per game if he waited for an open look. The Clippers aren't leaving Lillard. They have someone glued to him for the duration, and they double/trap when we try to screen his man.

So which would you prefer, Dame take very few shots (and have people accuse him of checking out) or have him take tougher shots because that's all the Clippers are giving him?

 

Lillard made some threes in the 4th but a few were still bad shot selections. The one he banked in was a horrible shot but it's overlooked because it luckily went in.

 

The problem is that the Blazers won't win against the Warriors, even without Curry, unless Lillard is playing big. He's going to have to defend Shaun Livingston, who's going to abuse him in the post. The only way to offset that is for Lillard to go off on the other end.

The Warriors are still an excellent, though not legendary, team without Curry. The Blazers must have blazing hot Lillard next series.

 

"I want to complain.......... but he made the shot, so I can't. Drats!"

 

It's just pointing out that a lucky shot doesn't take away from the concern over bad shot selection.

 

Steph Curry has made a living off of taking and hitting what many people would consider to be "bad shots."

That game winner he hit against OKC was ridiculously deep from the three point line. Was that a "good shot?" He made it though, right?

What do you think about my question? Would you rather Dame take 5 shots a game if he's only taking open looks? Because he sure as hell isn't getting more than a handful of shots that are open against this defense. And if he only took 5 shots, would you complain about his lack of aggression?

 

I believe Lillard has his highest scoring average against GS vs any team in the league last I looked. But as I said, if he does score single digits once and we win? Then cool with me.

 

I swear some of you have blinders on when watching the games. Yes Rivers defended him some, but Prigionni was the pest in his side. And probably had Doc saying I don't care what you do, just hound Dame.

I don't care if they are all NBA or not. If you are being guarded by a PG who's SOLE job is to make it harder on you, That PG will generally be successful, because its all he needs to focus on.

If some of you people don't see WHY Lillard is playing the way he is, then you seriously have no clue about the FULL COURT play of basketball and how OTHER players can affect your game.

 

Yup.... plus the way the refs are letting Rivers and Prigioni constantly foul him. That might play a small role.

 

I don't care how many shots he takes as long as he's being aggressive, demanding full attention from their defense, and isn't forcing bad shots.

I have no idea why you're obsessed with his shot count. He's shooting 36%, which is horrible.

However, my eyes tell me he's making a very high percentage of his shots that aren't ill-advised and on balance.

The only player shooting a worse percentage than Lillard is Gerald.

So yes, I worked be fine with Dame shooting less if it meant better shots.

 

What is your definition of a "bad shot?"

What is ill-advised?

 

Dame isn't close to the shooter that Curry is. The worst Curry has ever shot from 3pt in a season in his career is 42.4%. He made 45.4% on 11+ attempts this year.

Dame's best 3pt% was his second season when he shot 39.4% on 7 attempts.

Long story short, Curry actually makes those ridiculous shots, Dame doesn't. A 28' jumpshot over two guys with 18 seconds left on the shot clock is a good shot for Curry. It's not for Dame or 99.9% of the league.

 

Dame was 5-10 from three last night, and it's usually three pointers that people call ill-advised bad shots. So they went in..... 50% of the time, they went in.