Quoting myself here, the difference in pace made me curious. So, I looked it up. During the seasons Blue9 referenced, adjusting for pace, both Zach and Aldridge attempted exactly the same number of FGA per 100 possessions (28.8). The big differences were FG% (.436 for Zach and .458 for Aldridge) and team wins (21 for Zach's team and 54 for Aldridge's). Yes, quality of teammates has a huge impact on team success (of course), but the fact of the matter is Aldridge was a much better first option on a 54 win team than Z-Bo was on a 21 win team. So, if Aldridge did us a favor by walking, then we should be forever grateful to the Knicks for taking Z-Bo, the even more inefficient chucker, off our hands. BNM
I still contend it wasn't Roy who demanded that the FO trade Zach, but LMA. The reports never said which young player it was. We all just assumed it was Roy.
Come on, it was Roy. Aldridge wasn't important enough at the time to cater to AND if it was Aldridge who requested Zach gone and they obliged I would think LMA would be a bit more grateful to the organization, just knowing his personality.
No way did rookie Aldridge, who didn't even become a starter until late February when the team stopped "showcasing" Jamaal Magloire (how is that even possible?) have that kind of clout. For the 1+ month they started together, Aldridge and Zach actually fit pretty well and Aldridge had some monster games. If they were trying to appease a young player, it had to be Roy, but I think winning the lottery and getting the right to draft Greg Oden is what really sealed Zach's fate. While not old, Zach was significantly older than the new core of Roy, Oden and Aldridge the front office planned to build a dynasty around. BNM
Just wool gathering here..... If you had a time machine and could flip Roy and Dame...what would happen? Could Dame excel in the Nate ISO offense? How would Roy deal with a motion/share the ball attack? Would LMA have been the same player? Would CJ have ever been more than Steve Blake? Context is huge.
I think a little part of why he didn't want to pass much is because he didn't trust Telfair, Sergie Monia or Charles 'Spider' Smith to hit the open shot.
Yeah, you're probably right about those guys, but what about his teammates that actually played significcant minutes. You know, guys like Jarrett Jack, Steve Blake, Joel Przybilla, Theo Ratliff, Ruben Patterson, Darius Miles, Viktor Khryapa and Travis Outlaw - who all had a higher FG%, but got far fewer FGA than Zach. Did he not trust them either? Maybe he should have. Blaming Zach's ball hogging on the quality of his teammates is bullshit. Yeah, his teammates sucked, but so did he. I mean come one, how disingenuous can you get? Zach shoots .436 from the field and averages 18.0 ppg and 8.0 rpg on 28.8 FGA/100 possessions and he's a hard working hero. Last season, LaMarcus Aldridge shot .466 from the field, averaged 23.4 ppg and 10.2 rpg on 28.7 FGA/100 possessions and all we heard all season long (and continue to hear) from the Aldridge haters was what a soft, inefficient chucker he was. Seriously, take a long hard look at those numbers and try, in vane, to explain why Zach's 18.0/8.0 on .436 FG% on a 21-win team is somehow superior to Aldridge's 23.4/10.2 on .466 FG% on a 51-win team. And that doesn't even include comparing their defense, which would be even more laughable. Zach was an absolutely horrible defender than didn't even try to put in any effort on the defensive end back then. That's the problem with nostalgia. The good old days are seldom as good as we remember them. BNM
Stotts is a good coach he has this team playing together on both ends of the court.Everyone what stars player and most of the time that don't work right Houston. PA has tried to buy a championship and that didn't work he was close sometimes. The year the Blazer won it all that team play together.
A big part of why Stotts has been such a great coach is the players acceptance of his coaching. They all buy in and do everything he asks and work their butts off. They don't complain when he gives them a DNP. Everyone outside of Dame and CJ play under 30 mpg. They have embraced his offense, who gets the shots, who is a role player in ways that LaMarcus, Kaman, TRob, Afflalo, and Mo Williams never did. Stotts deserves most of the credit for sure, he has done an amazing job coaching this year. The adjustment against Golden State of pushing on made baskets while the rest of the league tries to slow down. Staggering CJ and Dame's minutes so one is always on the floor. Giving Aminu the green light and confidence to become a contributor at the 3 point line. The defensive improvements over the homestand. But a big reason is the players all doing exactly what he wants. There is credit to go around. Compare that to Houston; where the players don't listen to McHale. Or the Cavs; where players wouldn't follow Blatts plays. Sometimes I think having a good coach is more about all the players following him than necessarily the details of what he is saying. Its similar to workout plans; people will search for some perfect "system". But any workout routine will have huge success if you attack it 100%.
I agree with this 100%. Whether it's the influence of Dame or Stotts or some combination, the players are buying in. The Thunder don't look that different from when they had Brooks as coach. Donovan ran some good stuff at Florida but none of it shows on the current thunder team. I think the fact that Blazers, both the 2013-14 and 2015-16 squads have great chemistry that results in more wins than most thought is a testament to how well Stotts gets his guys to play.
I wonder how much time Stotts has earned himself to be the Blazers head coach? I think regardless of what happens next season he'll return for the 2017-18 season. So summer of 2018 at a minimum and that would be with major failures between now and then leading to a critical evaluation of his job. Might still keep him even if we underachive; but that is the earliest date his job could conceivably be in question. One problem for him with his excellent coaching is expectations will be raised and it may become harder and harder to meet those. If he got this team to overachive by 8 wins this year then next year he has to get them to overachive again just to do what some will say is an average job. Dame has said he really enjoys playing for Stotts. How cool would it be if 6 years from now if we're talking about one GM one coach one superstar all being here working together with this team for a decade? They all came here within a month of each other. Long term stability is rare in the NBA.
I'm not trying to discount any of that, and I'm not the stats guy so I'll ask: I have the perception that Zach used to get a lot of his own misses around the basket resulting in him still scoring on the same possession, maybe missing a few more shots but scoring more 'efficiently' or 'consistently' in terms of 'attempts' (defined as shots in a single possession)? You know, kind of a Moses Malone thing? It was a LONG time ago though, so IDK (and not that I care, but the thought crossed my mind reading this discussion, so I thought I'd ask).
Absolutely. You also cannot discount the attitude and impact of the team's (any team's) marquee player. If Dame were a bitch like Kobe or Lebron, and he didn't like Stotts, Dame would tune him out, the rest of the team would tune him out, and he'd be history. As long as Dame is the leader of this team, and as long as the players support Dame and Dame supports the coach, the players will continue to listen to Stotts and his job will be much easier.
Great Post, but I'll add 2 more things: The unquestioned leader/all-star on the team loves the coach and has shown public support: he wants him here "as long as I'm here." Stotts runs a system based on reads. The players have a freedom that many of them haven't found in other systems. Players tend to like that.
And this is why I'm not sold on Stotts - when the going gets tough he's nowhere to be found. He does a great job of letting players do what they do, but he leaves a lot to be desired when it comes to actually coaching a game of basketball.
