Game Thread Game #59 - BLAZERS @ GRIZZLIES - FEBRUARY 16, 2022 - WEDNESDAY - 5:00 PM (PDT) ROOT SPORTS

I'm going to make the argument that the Blazers shooting is sustainable to a degree, because the shots they are taking aren't being taken in a vacuum. I'm looking at how they get those shots and who's taking them.

One thing about the way the Blazers have approached the past few games is they aren't following the crowd in how they generate their 3s, or even their shots. They look more like an old-fashioned NBA team. They push the pace a lot but not looking specifically to generate 3s. For the most part, not always, but the most part, the Blazers are looking to take shots at the rim. They realize that maybe shooting 33% from 3 is as good as shooting 50% from 2, but when you have numbers and are getting right to the rim, that's not the situation -- it's more like 75% made 2s vs. 40% made 3s. That doesn't even include foul shots.

Hart's getting probably as many 3s as he's been getting in his career. He's not forcing contested shots against the shot clock. He's been getting clean, open looks that he can take in rhythm. He's a pro and a good if not spectacular shooter. If he's getting open looks that aren't tenaciously contested, I like his chances to make a good percentage of those. Our other 3s are being generated now by penetration, pitching and good ball movement. That's going to get more open looks.

 

"chauncey-ball" really is a thing now, huh? see this mentioned so often. I think I'm just gonna wait until we're at least .500 before making too much of it.

 

Hart has shot 53% on three's when his career mark is under 35%; and that's with a 282 game sample size. 53% isn't sustainable over the long term. Simons has shot 46% over the 3 wins. That's probably not sustainable either but there may not be much of a drop off. As a team, they shot 37.4% over the 3 wins. That's sustainable, but if either Simons or Hart have a slump, it could drag the team down a ways

 

There are so many variables, aren't there? You have a new coach trying to develop his philosophy, but you also need players to buy in, you need guys to be able to fill different roles when injuries affect the rotation, etc.

I think Chauncey's done a good job in a couple of respects. First, I think he's seen what this assemblage of talent needs to do to have the best chance to survive. Second, I think he understands that the Warriors success changed basketball to an extent, but it didn't revolutionalize the game entirely; there are multiple ways to win, multiple ways to create disadvantages and use them to make your team the better team. You just have to be able to impose your style, your most advantageous position over the opponent.

It's chess.

OK, some team like the Rockets is going to play five guys under 6-7 and hope that all those guys are going to offset the other team getting a lot of shots inside the restricted area. If you use the 33% v 50% rule, that works. If it's 33% v 60% or 25% v 50%, though, it fails.

All sports follow trends that to some degree take a major tactical move that pays off (we don't remember all the ones that failed) and then everyone tries to emulate them or run some kind of variation of them ... which in turn leads to a market inefficiency that will make a team that uses a variation of the older, proven methods effectively a big advantage in many situations.

 

You're arguing degrees, though, and partialities of my statement. I specified that they were sustainable to a point ... good, not spectacular 3-point shooting might be sustainable, especially when you consider the manner and circumstance those shots are being taken.

It's part of the reason I'm not sold on analytics as the be-all, end-all. A guy might have a great year shooting inside the 3-point line and it skews his statistics. Except then you look at the tape and see other years he was the second option instead of the third option, that he was playing with guys who couldn't get him the ball in positions where he was comfortable shooting. Suddenly he's cast in another role and he's getting the ball 12 feet from the hoop with less defensive resistance than he's faced before. Maybe he has a point guard who just sets him up really well. That can lead to a deviation from the previous norm that is reasonable to see as largely sustainable.

 

3ptFG% is not an analytic

 

Wiz, stop it. You're being unnecessarily pedantic. Every statistic is by its nature somewhat analytic, unless you are going to take the unusual position that a shooting percentage is not a measurement to analyze someone's ability to shoot 3s. The very way you presented it in your post was analytical.

 

If you were to ask those who truly know, because they are actually doing it, they will 100% tell you that Every Win Is A Quality Win.
This is the NBA. There are millionaires on every team.

 

lol...ok. It was "analytical" in the sense that I compared a 3 game sample to a career sample....for the same player. But the stat itself is not analytics. It's simply a raw mark, like wins and losses. The only formula used was made shots divided by total shots. basic math

 

To me the biggest difference is we push the ball more and even look to fast break. Thats not been blazer bb over the last number of years. Not so predictable with dame walking the ball up.
Im reading “Kersey” and Ramsey didn’t plan on playing him much but he couldn’t be denied, he earned more minutes even though he wasn’t a good shooter. What he brought was energy and super athleticism. We have few players like that now, JWin and Hart. Kersey was good on the break and so are a few blazers now. Ball movement and allowing more than one person to push the ball which can put defenders on their heels.
The nice blend of youngsters and vets that are willing to-stay in front if their guy makes a difference.
Even CJE brings energy and a knack for being a disrupter, a floor pirate.

 

opponents are admittedly taking us lightly and guys like Hart and Winslow are playing at levels they have never played before. I have a healthy dose of skepticism about its sustainability.

While I LOVE the aggressive way we're playing (and it's something I've been begging for us to adopt for nearly a decade) , i'm also cautious about making too much of this. It wasn't too long ago that we got trampled on by the hapless Magic at home while playing this same "chauncey ball."

 

Oh, and dont forget the fun factor, Im sure stats back that up.

 

Stats tell the entire picture.
Everybody knows that.
(he sarcastically quips)..

 

So nobody down here in Memphis wears masks….. ANYWHERE. Just trying to completed why…. Then I see this posted in the bathroom of the hotel lobby. Maybe they got bigger problems to deal with!!!

 

One thing this team is playing the right way on both ends of the floor

 

Guys, one thing I observed with these young Blazers. They defend, Rebound and Run. I never seen a Blazers team that runs after the rebound since Scottie Pippen as our PG. Dame and Roy slows the game down.