For sure it's over simplied, I agree. Much like blaming one coach would be a massive over simplification.
That's a good point. When we added Nurk, our constants were Dame, CJ, and Stotts. So what parts were there during that change that are no longer there now? That would be a logical conclusion to who is to blame for the dip back on the defensive end. 2 starting forwards who could defend 1-4 being replaced by 2 starting forwards, one who doesn't defend any position well and one who probably defends 4-5's.
one interesting thing about those offensive and defensive ratings: It doesn't matter as much where either rating is. What matters is net rating, the differential between the two ratings. If you 'study' the net ratings ranking year after year in comparison to records, there is a real strong correlation. The better the net, the better the record right now, Portland is at -1.1 and they have 35-39 record. Historically, their record is actually over-achieving their rating by 2 or 3 wins, but that points to the season Dame has had. Last season, Portland had 53 wins and a net rating of +4.2. The year before, 49 wins and a net of +2.7. And the year before that, 41 wins and a net of -0.5 there are variances and outliers in the correlation, like there are in all statistical correlations, but it's one of the more predictive relationships. Unfortunately, for Portland, there is also a mildly strong correlation between playoff success and regular season net rating. When/if Portland faces the Lakers, there will be a net rating differential of 6.8. That's a pretty wide gap going back to last season's playoffs: *Portland had a net of +4.2; OKC a net of +3.3. A differential of 0.9 indicating a closer series but Dame went off * Portland had a net of +4.2; Denver +4.1. A differential of 0.1 and the series couldn't have been closer * But Golden State had a net of +6.4 giving them a 2.2 differential advantage. And, they limited Dame like they always do in the playoffs. Sweep and sure, there could be a chicken/egg, cart/horse thing going on in this correlation
Yeah, the missing pieces are Aminu and Harkless, but with Ariza and Hood that more than makes up for Harkless and I think Collins can still be a factor but if not then target a stretch 4 that can play decent defense. I think Little and Trent can be strong defensive contributors off the bench as well. The good thing is, we have shown we can also score pretty easy against other teams defense during this Orlando episode.
Hard to put much stock in this season as we had a tremendous amount of injuries to key players and depleted any depth we had. I would classify this season as more of an anomaly than the norm.
except for the fact, that in the bubble, Portland's defense was even worse than their season average of 114.8 (Memphis) 120.9 (Boston) 131.4 (Houston) 101.2 (Denver) 122.2 (LAC) 123.2 (Philly) 116.9 (Dallas) 125.6 (Brooklyn) 126.9 that's absolutely terrible defense the reasons Portland was able to go 6-2, is that they had unsustainable stratospheric offensive ratings and Dame went super-nova again. And of course, they were all close games and just one minor break going against the Blazers would have put them in the lottery. For instance, that Dame fluke three that bounced 15 feet in the air would have fallen outside the hoop 99 times out of 100. That one bounce the other direction and we're all waiting for the lottery balls Portland will get swept again if they are giving up 1.21 points/possession like they did in the bubble
Let's revisit it next year when the team will be whole as I chalk this whole season up to an anomaly and hard to consider this season a normal season. Fluke three by Dame? What about Kwahi Leonards "fluke" shot against Philly in the playoffs last year? There have been hundreds of those type of shots over the years as well as many that rim around or go in and pop out. Are those considered fluke misses then?
lol...c'mon man. Both Dame's shot and Kawhi's were flukes. How many times between Kawhi's shot and Dames has a three attempt hit the rim, boucned higher than 3 feet and missed? Thousands out of the 65,000 three's shot in that time? vs a few dozen fluke's I never know why it is you push back so hard against something like this with all these tangents. Is it because you think it's a slight against the Blazers? all I was saying is that net rating correlates to winning. And that a terrible defensive rating, as in historically bad like the 1.21 points/possession Portland gave up in the bubble, is not going to generate any playoff success. Their defense has to get better because the offense they were generating in the bubble is unsustainable and the Lakers are going to blanket Dame. We know that's coming, assuming Portland beats Memphis
and all I was pointing out for every fluke made there are likely 4-5 times as many "fluke" misses in the same game as I recall there were several balls (mostly threes) that rimmed around and came out. If you disagree fine, but it's not going to change my perspective. You tend to look at things in a negative way and I tend to look at it in a positive way. The only stat that matters is we went 6-2 and over came 3 games behind in an 8 game season with a very tough schedule. That alone is very impressive and where we go from here is still unwritten. Oh, and as far as me "pushing back hard" is me just merely stating my opinion. That's still allowed isn't it?
I would just prefer that Stotts recognizes when Nurk is completely gassed and use Whiteside. I have a feeling that game wouldn't have been nearly as close at the end of Hassan had been in there to box out Allen.
well, last game it was Nurk -12. Whiteside +15 which supports the idea that game action should dictate playing time. Also, that single game +/- numbers are too noisy. Nurk had it today, Whiteside didn't.
Yes... correlation is about +2.7 additional wins per +1.0 net point differential. Some of that may be correlation without causation because winning can cause end-of-game desperation fouling which inflates the difference. But I bet most is is real. We should be a lot closer to the Lakers than our point differential shows with the addition of Nurk & Collins as well as changes to the roster earlier in the year. Still way underdogs though.
Except I go far more in-depth in a very detailed way on my channel. Further in depth than anyone goes on this forum. But you can make up that bullshit narrative if you want. This type of stuff is why I barely post here anymore.
I really don't understand why we were playing so close to Morant today. The guy is not a good shooter. He got almost all of his points in the paint. And yet I saw Dame and Trent right up in his face.
I like the confidence you have in yourself and I wish you the best of luck on your channel. There are many people in the industry with your mindset that have been very successful.
