Looking at last year's stats, for the full season the Blazers averaged 107.9 ppg while allowing their opponents a whopping 108.5 ppg, for a net differential of -0.6 ppg. The offensive production was good for 5th in the West, while the points allowed was a horrible 11th in the conference. The net differential was only good for 9th best in the West. All of that said, if you look at just the 19 games that Nurkic started, the scoring went up to 110.7 ppg while points allowed dropped to 106.3 ppg. The net difference of 4.4 would have placed 4th in the West had it been carried out over a full season. So, is the Nurk effect really worth an overall improvement of almost 5 ppg in net difference between points scored vs. points allowed? Some of the improvement was undoubtedly due to relative strength of schedule as that was a softer stretch of games. However, if you include the fact that Nurk was out of shape and didn't know the system, it seems reasonable to think that his impact next season could translate to an improvement of about that magnitude. Other teams got better in the West, so I'm not saying that the Blazers should be expected to finish 4th in the conference, but I do think that this points to the fact that the media are sleeping a bit on the Blazers in their pre-season predictions.
Nurk will be a difference maker. I rewatched some of his games over the weekend, and a couple things stand out: 1 - He has a nose for the ball and boxes out well. We improved our rebounding over Plumlee when we traded for Nurkic. 2 - his passing is Sabas-like in its accuracy, timing, and overall skill. This cannot be underestimated; as he works with his teammates, they will all improve because he's a threat to get you 6 assists any night. 3 - you can't double him, but you can't not double him either. Nurkic has enough low post loves that he'll score on single coverage, or get a lone defender into foul trouble. But because of his passing, doubling him is a bad idea. It will come down to how many varied looks Nurkic gets each night to keep defenses on their toes. We had a couple of looks for Plumlee but he was too limited offensively to have four good looks. Nurk deserves six different plays that center on him, each run a couple times a night. My estimate is that he'll get 18/12/6 a night, if his teammates can take advantage of the opportunities he gives them. If he can hit this numbers, we will win way more games than we lose.
I wonder if "not knowing the system" might actually have been a good thing, as the defense didn't know what to expect from him. Perhaps once Nurk becomes part of the system he becomes more predictable and therefore easier to guard. Not saying that I think this is the case, but rather a devil's advocate counter to the idea that not knowing the system is a hindrance to performance. It's no secret that I don't think highly of Stotts. I will be curious to see what his offense looks like now that we have Nurk. I agree with BC that Nurk needs to be heavily featured, and touch the ball on most possessions. Because Dame isn't a natural passer (or maybe it's because Stotts' offense doesn't create good passing lanes for PGs?), I'd like to see Nurk used as a primary play-maker - a good inside/out offense, where Dame and CJ can play to their strengths as excellent catch/shoot players to provide Nurk with space and passing lanes. I'm not expecting terrific defense, but with our starting 5 we should have one of the top offenses in the league.
The weird thing about last season was how badly the defense fell off a cliff with basically the same roster (until the Nurkic trade). In 2015 the Blazers allowed 104.3 ppg, but that shot up to 108.5 last year. Even with an improvement in offensive production from 105.1 in 2015-16 to 107.9 last year, the net difference fell from a positive 0.8 to a negative 0.6. If the Blazers can get back to the defense that they had year before last, they should challenge for 4th to 6th in the West.
Question on the original post. When collecting all those numbers, does it put into account strength of schedule? Like the numbers would be drastically different if one of those games was against the Magic instead of the Spurs? Does it work like that, or no?
I do know the spacing on the floor was night and day different once Nurk showed up. So much more spread out. Amazing what having a low post threat can do!
You'll have to get one of the advanced stat geeks to do that analysis for you. I just entered the points scored and allowed for those 19 games into a spreadsheet. Here's the data: Opponent Us Them Orlando 112 103 Toronto 106 112 Detroit 113 120 Oklahoma 114 109 Brooklyn 130 116 Oklahoma 126 121 Philadelphia 114 108 Washington 124 125 Phoenix 101 110 New Orleans 77 100 San Antonio 110 106 Atlanta 113 97 Miami 115 104 Milwaukee 90 93 New York 110 95 Minnesota 112 100 LA Lakers 97 81 Denver 122 113 Houston 117 107 Average points scored: 110.7 Average points allowed: 106.3 Net difference: 4.4
That seems over-optimistic, particularly the rebounding (actually, the assists too). I think a lot will depend on whether or not he gets into foul trouble. My guess: more like 15/10/3, provided he doesn't get injured.
I'll split the difference with you: 15/10/5. I think Stotts really likes the high key "Point Center" configuration, and Nurk is better at it than Plumlee was, so we'll see it more often.
Logically, we should be quite a bit better. However, this is precisely the situation where we struggle. For example, I've seen the following many times: After a tough portion of our schedule... @HCP will point out how much easier our upcoming schedule is and predicts great things... Other posters will predict we'll win 12 of our next 14... @KingSpeed will predict 19 wins in 20 games... I'll get nervous... Blazers only win 7 of next 14... Another Example: Blazers looking like they could finish top 3 in the West, maybe top 2... We trade for a highly skilled scorer (Afflalo)... What could go wrong.... Again: Blazers have the highest odds of getting the #1 overall pick... We should be getting the best player in the draft, or at least close to it... We end up with the 4th pick. and Again: Blazers get lucky and get the #1 pick in the draft... A once in a generation center is available... We get him........ The story of the Blazers just seems like the tale of the Zen Master in the movie Charlie Wilson's war:
I think you are a bit high in the assist area. I can see him flirting with triple doubles on some nights but I don't see him averaging more than 4. I hope he gets to 6!!
Agreed. I've found myself falling into that thinking, though. There's no reason Nurk can't average 6apg - but I just don't see it happening. I think the ball will still primarily be in Dame's (and CJ's, and Turner's) hands. Also, Nurk does like to score - he'd have to focus almost entirely on play-making, at the expense of shooting, in order to average 6apg. I'd like to see him balance his offense between scoring and passing because the scoring is going to increase the foul rate of the defense, which benefits the entire team. If Nurk can average 4.5apg that'll help make up for Dame's pedestrian assist numbers. If the two of them can combine for 11+apg that would be pretty good.
I have pointed this out before... Predicting Nurk will average 6 assists per game is insanely optimistic. A center has only averaged => 6.0 apg twice in the history of the NBA. Both times it was Wilt. The last time he did it was 50 years ago. Keep in mind: a) It was Wilt . . . . . y) The game was different then z) He averaged 46.8 mpg Only twice since 1980 has a center even averaged => 5.0 apg. Joakim Noah averaged 5.4 apg in 2013-14 and Vlade Divac averaged 5.3 apg in 2003-04. Not to put too fine a point on it, but also keep in mind those guys were all veterans that had been starters for several years before they accomplished those numbers. Wilt was 31, Noah was 28 and Vlade was 35. Expecting that kind of production from a 23-year old who has never even been a full time starter for a full season is highly unrealistic. Last year, in his 20 games as a Blazer, Nurk averaged 15.2/10.4/3.2 with 1.9 bpg in 29.3 mpg. Honestly, I'd be thrilled with 75 games of that level of production. His per-36 numbers as a Blazer were 18.7/12.8/3.9/2.3. I doubt if he averages 36 mpg, he's never come close and I'd much rather have him fresh for the playoffs than worn out from playing too many minutes during the regular season. So, I think something like 16.5/11.0/3.5/2.0 in 32 mpg would be pretty damn fabulous. BNM
I still see the assists going up to at least 4.5 because Stotts will maximize his skills; it's a bet I'm making with myself, because yeah many signs point to 3.5 being his natural ceiling. However, I'm also banking on improvement. 15/10/3 in 29 minutes, at the age of 22, when you're out of shape? I think we can improve all those numbers by 1 each in the same number of minutes, including assists; add 3 minutes a game to his shift and players looking for him? I think he gets up to 4.5, 5.0 maybe. Yes, I'm being a total homer. I know and acknowledge this. But I think Nurk is special.
The fact that Hakeem isn't in the discussion during their championship runs, tells you how hard it is for a center to average those kind of assist numbers. It seemed like he was kicking it out to open 3-pt shooters a dozen times a game at least.
