Billups: I hate that we’re a counterpunching team

After the loss to the Cavs, Chauncey said what bothers him most is that he hates that the Blazers are a counterpunching team. That got me to thinking, and it seems to me that he’s right. During the Lillard era, this team has hardly ever jumped on teams and put them away early. Even when they get leads, they almost always let the opponent back in the game so that it’s close at the end and then Dame rides in to the rescue with his patented fourth quarter magic. Maybe it’s just that he can’t sustain that level of effort throughout a game, or maybe he needs the pressure to get him to flip the switch? The rest of the team seems incapable of setting a dominant level of play without Dame being in that mode. Are they psychologically addicted to Dame Time, or simply not good enough? Is there a fix, or is it a necessary component of having Dame as the team’s star?

 

If Dame is ever not a blazer, I will definitely go through some withdrawals.

 

Interesting and something Ive noticed for a few years. Just my opinion and observation is that teams come out shooting a whole bunch of three to see if they can get a jump if they are hot. Where i think Dame has tried to get his players more involved early and if its not working, then you get CJ & Dame starting to iso more. Offensive teams can be that way, where if a team is solid in both O&D there seems to be more room for error in getting a positive result.
I think its good Dames assist are good as they should be, imo as a pg in the league. When you have two guards that want to shoot 20-25 shots a night you better have efficient scorers and defenders. And if the two guards are simply below average defenders, well?

 

Not assertive?

Non-aggressive?

It’s the Neil Olshey way. Welcome to Portland, Bi-bi-bi-billups!

 

Yup. And I didn’t expect it to be washed away in the first ten games of the season. If we’re still playing with that attitude by Christmas, it’s no longer a coaching issue.

 

The team has relied on Dame because they're not a dominant team when he's not blazingly hot. And counting on one guy to be blazingly hot is not sustainable. This just gets back to the (generally) poor rosters that have surrounded Lillard.

 

“poor roster” yet CJ takes his game to another level and essentially replaces all of Dames production when he’s out.

more like poor coaching.

 

CJ playing out of his mind and replacing Dame as the "blazingly hot" player doesn't in any way refute what I just said. But if you think that's sustainable, then the answer is to trade Lillard for some goodies and turn the team over to CJ. Somehow, I doubt that'll work.

 

my point is it was always more of a coaching issue than a lack of talent. Our entire offense was catered to isolation basketball. It’s hard for anyone to make an impact when their primary responsibility is to stand in the corner and watch a game of 1 on 1.

This season we’re seeing more guys involved. For example, Norm is slashing a lot more than he did last season. He’s actually allowed to play his game.

We’re missing rotations defensively as well as a lot of open shots offensively. But I think you can live with those missed shots because they’re coming off good actions. In the course of 82 games you have to believe those shots will balance out and guys like Dame won’t be shooting 20% or whatever crazy percentage hes at now.

As for the rotations, it’s a new system. The more they play in it the more comfortable they’ll get.

Those two issues should level out. The mentality is the biggest question but at least Billups recognizes it. Ultimately it comes down to the players, but if the coach isn’t emphasizing it, then it’s easy to lose that edge. Teams are often, if not always, a reflection of their coach. Time will tell.

 

Do you really believe Stotts went out of his way to coach them that way? He would just say, that's ok, take your time off until the 4th quarter and let Dame do his thing?

Do you know what team did not have this issue? The 2013-2014 Blazers. Do you really believe that this was because Stotts still has not come up with the brilliant idea of letting them coast for 3 quarters before Dame bailed them out - or maybe, just maybe, that team had LMA and Wes and Batum and all these other guys and Dame did not have to go super-human to keep this team afloat...

I have no issues with changing the coach after all these years, but these kinds of statements are why NO is still in charge of the Blazers after all these years. Stotts was a perfectly capable coach, no doubt he was not the best ever, but he certainly was never as bad as people here are trying to paint him. It's the roster. It's unbalanced, it has for years had to rely on only 1 all-star level player, in the western conference, going against a dynasty for 5 years of that period. Unreasonable expectations meets looking for solutions under the street light instead of checking where that battle was really lost and so forth.

 

I disagree that it was mostly a coaching issue. I don't think the team has been very talented beyond Lillard, relative to the league, and so Stotts tried to maximize the main talent they did have--Lillard and, to a lesser extent, McCollum. I also think Lillard's skillset is more suited to on-ball dominance (like Harden) than an all-court on/off-ball role (like Curry). I think those are some realities that Stotts was dealing with and that Billups will have to deal with too.

Could a more innovative coach add some frills and complexity even with a limited roster and a superstar that has an iso-ball mindset? Could a great coach teach Lillard a new skillset that he can also be great at? Maybe. But I don't think any average coach (which is roughly how I see Stotts) could do those things. Is Billups a particularly innovative or great coach? Chances are low, purely due to how rare such coaches are, but I'm willing to wait and see. But my guess is that Billups will run into many of the same roster limitations that Stotts did (maybe eased slightly, as I think Nance and Zeller were good additions).

 

I'm not really buying into any boxing analogy here. I think the difference between the two sports is too broad. But I'll go with it anyway. and, if you were to extend that analogy, I'd think you'd find that counter-punching wins a lot more games than landing the first punch. Adjustments....maybe Billups is having trouble figuring out effective adjustments (wouldn't that be counter-punching?)

as for the notion that somehow this 'flaw', if it even exists, is due to an over-reliance on Dame, or even due to Dame's flaws...like he can't be super-star all game long...that's not seeing the forest thru the trees IMO

to me, this is all just trying to figure out a way Portland can play like they have lots of elite talent when they don't. Knockout punches in boxing require power. Knockout punches in basketball require elite talent. Portland only has Dame and that's been the case since Aldridge left

and, carrying that boxing analogy even further: when almost all your punching power (scoring) is centered in 6'3 and under guards on a floor where the basket is 10' off the floor there will always be trouble sustaining an attack

look at this:



69% of Portland's shots are taken by those 4 players 6'3 & under. 67% of Portland's scoring comes from those 4 players

so then, to wear that boxing analogy completely out: not only does the knockout punch require power, it requires excellent balance to throw that punch with the required power. Portland does not have good balance and they've never had it in the Dame/CJ era. An imbalanced roster can't throw balanced punches

so then, Billups is complaining about Olshey's roster...right?

 

Yeah. Except it wasn’t just the 4th quarter, it was the entire game. He really only trusted two players, three if you wanna count Melo.

 

I think we slap and then run away then come back hoping we can get the last slap in to win.

that 90’s team would punch people in the mouth and the other teams expected to lose against us. This team doesn’t have that, hopefully Billups can instill it into this team. Or alternative is to make trade to bring some players in who have that in them Draymond Green good example

 

You know what I hate? The new decor for team-related posts, like on Instagram. It looks like bad 70s motel decor. I mean seriously, did they fire all their design guys? I mean, look at this shit:

 

I don't think that's on Stotts....I think it's on Olshey for hiring a bench that couldn't stop anybody or build a lead....our problem was that our bench couldn't stay on the floor without the starters coming in to provide scoring....only problem now is Dame is trying to shoot his way out of a slump and play defense at the same time. Our bench can hold a lead if our starters can build one

 

Blazers traded toughness for "culture". Lillard and CJ never seen noone else but Stotts, that was "no stress" coach.
We are soft. It is sad that Nurk is soft as well. Billups went here from Ben and Sheed kind of culture. Our backcourt is having hard times listening what to do. That's why CJ should be changed for size and defense. No news here.