A.) He probably doesn't do that here under Stotts B.) Since he's playing that good, what makes you think we could've realistically traded CJ for him?
If CJ is viewed as an all-star like some claim, Harris and maybe another asset should be obtainable. If CJ isn't an all-star, then I think this trade would be far more difficult to pull off.
the mythology about CJ's playoff prowess is just loopy: PER: regular season 17.5....playoffs 15.8 FG%: regular season .454....playoffs .439 FT%: regular season .826....playoffs .774 TS%: regular season .552....playoffs .532 eFG%: regular season .524....playoffs .503 Assist%: regular season 17.5%....playoffs 13.2% off. rating: regular season 111....playoffs 106 def. rating: regular season 112....playoffs 115 winshare/48: regular season .106....playoffs .056 BPM: regular season 1.2....playoffs 0.9 he is worse in the playoffs in every single category. Now, in anticipation a couple of excuses for these numbers: * "these numbers are lower because of his first 2 seasons when he was inexperienced and not a starter"....He only played 24 of his 1758 playoff minutes as a rookie and that's not enough of a sample to move his overall numbers in any significant fashion. And in his 2nd playoff season, when he played 166 minutes, almost every one of his numbers were better than his career marks. So, if anything, his first 2 playoff seasons moved his numbers up, not down * "playoff defense is more focused and more intense so naturally his numbers will drop"....that is generally true but somehow, CJ is getting credit for playoff prowess when his impact and efficiency have dropped --> mythology. Not only that, as we all know, in the playoffs opponents have been obsessively focused on stopping Dame which always leaves CJ single-covered by worse defenders; so the 'playoffs-have-tougher-defense' excuse for CJ doesn't ring true. In the playoffs, he has drafted off the attention paid to Dame, and still posted worse numbers. That is not upping his game like the fable says IMO, CJ is getting way too much credit for the game 7 against Denver. Yes, he was great in that game, but somehow the credit for that game has whitewashed his entire playoff career. If CJ was so good in the playoffs, then he would have been ready and capable of carrying the burden in the series right after that game 7 when the Warriors were doubling and tripling Dame all over the floor. How did he do: His FG% was .393; his 3pt% was .355; his FT% was .647; his TS% was .481. He took 14 more shots than Dame but scored 1 less point. if CJ was truly some great playoff performer then teams would not be able to focus on Dame, and could not have success when they did
It's because Dame gets all the focus and doesn't look great, so CJ looks passable because he doesn't have teams doing everything in their power to stop him.
I like Harris, but if CJ is overpaid and Harris will be paid even more (6 million more next year) he would need to be a difference-maker at PF. His wingspan btw is the same as NP. Can Nassir Little develop into essentially the same player? Can Collins stay healthy?
I dont think anyone in the history of humankind has written more on a subject than @wizenheimer has on correcting CJ "falsehoods".
Interesting but not too surprising given the Blazers’ relative lack of postseason success. Playing great defensive teams like the Warriors or last season’s Lakers tends to squash overall regular season stats that get inflated against poor teams. I’d be willing to bet that there are few, if any, recent Blazers players who have better postseason than regular season stats.
and I don't think anybody has noted it as much as you but since you brought it up...was anything in that post wrong, or was there any context about CJ I missed? In other words, do you have anything to add other than talking about my "CJ history"?
