Minny announcers baffled on our success

I was a proponent of Lillard leading up to the draft because you need a primary ballhandler than can shoot from deep or drive to the hoop to win in today's NBA. That's the intangible than the stats overlook. Close games go your way more often than not when you've got that guy on the roster.

 

Mook, FTW again!

Good News: I think we have a very, very good team.
Bad News: 4 or 5 guys is apparently my definition of a team.

 

Team would be 29th in pace and top 10 in efficiency with Nate as coach. Probably would be worth 2 more wins at this point. :MARIS61:

Really though, the answer is that the Blazers have 4 players who could arguably be in All-Star consideration so far this season. Hickson/LMA/Lills/Batum

Only LMA will make it, but the other 3 are playing at a very high level, and mostly doing it consistently. When you can count on 4 players most nights to play well, you're going to win some games.

 

2013 is one seriously tough schedule for the Blazers. So while it's nice to think that the Blazers might keep up their current pace and continue to win close, odds are the teeth of the schedule is going to take a bite.

 

Considering our bench can't get any worse and was young / inexperienced to begin with, they are likely to improve at least a little bit. Maybe some improvement from them will help offset a portion of an increased schedule difficulty.

 

I have some hope for Babbitt, Freeland, and Price being at least semi-competent, and Leonard too if he can get healthy.

Not an ideal bench, but Babbitt can at least score a little bit, Freeland is getting good looks and even has some post moves, Leonard is an energy guy, and Price is well, Price, but he's not screwing up too bad in recent games.

 

Maybe the bench gets marginally better, but I think there are a couple of factors that give me pause. The Blazers' starters have been remarkably healthy. Aside from some missed games from Matthews, the starting five have enjoyed a pretty good run of luck when it comes to availability. Can we count on that in the second half of the season? Secondly, I think Lillard may hit a bit of a rookie wall; he's playing so many minutes and being asked to carry such a burden. Maybe he can keep it up, but I worry about him wearing down.

In any case, I'm not guaranteeing a cratering, but I think some fall-off is inevitable as the degree of difficulty ramps up and the law of averages catches up a little bit.

 

This sentence just goes to show how snake bitten we've been the last few years. LA came into the season pretty obviously not in game shape due to surgery and has been banged up and missed 2 games while dealing with a few lingering issues, Mathews has missed 5 games and played less then 10m in 2 others and its not just missing a few games for Mathews he has been playing pretty banged up for quiet a few games. Batum has missed a game and came out early in another and had a handful of games were he played with (what was it an injured back?). We'v been remarkably healthy compared to the Blazers of the last few years but its not like were OKC Healthy here.
Actually after looking at most of the other "playoff" teams/contenders I take it back, we have been remarkably healthy with our starting 5 compared to a lot of other teams.
I do also think were going to run into more injuries from LA/Mathews/Batum/Lillard due to how many minutes played

 

When it comes to win-loss record, this team is seriously overachieving. Basketball-reference calculates expected won-loss record based on a number of key team stats.

Here's what they say about the Blazers:

PTS/G: 96.5 (15th of 30) ▪ Opp PTS/G: 98.6 (19th of 30)
SRS: -2.33 (20th of 30) ▪ Pace: 90.6 (23rd of 30)
Off Rtg: 104.8 (14th of 30) ▪ Def Rtg: 107.2 (24th of 30)
Expected W-L: 14-19 (20th of 30)
Actual W-L: 18-15

Compare that to the underchieving Lakers:

PTS/G: 102.9 (5th of 30) ▪ Opp PTS/G: 100.8 (26th of 30)
SRS: 2.38 (9th of 30) ▪ Pace: 94.3 (3rd of 30)
Off Rtg: 108.7 (6th of 30) ▪ Def Rtg: 106.6 (21st of 30)
Expected W-L: 19-14 (10th of 30)
Actual W-L: 15-18

So, why are the Blazers winning more games than the stats predict? My theory is outstanding late game execution in close games by our above average starters. If you look at our starters, they are all above league average (PER = 15.00)

J.J. Hickson, PER = 20.5
LaMarcus Aldridge, PER = 19.5
Nicolas Batum, PER = 18.0
Damian Lillard, PER = 16.6
Wesley Matthews, PER = 15.3

These are the guys playing the closing minutes of close games. And, I like the way Stotts is using them. Instead of predictable ISOs where everyone in the gym knows who is going to take the last shot, the Blazers have multiple options. Batum has hit a couple big game winning/game tying shots, as has Lillard, and Aldridge has at least one as well. This makes it much harder for our opponents to defend the Blazers with the game on the line. They can't simply key on one player. The Blazers may not have one superstar go to guy, but they have multiple guys who can take and make the big shots. I like this versatility, and Stotts play calling takes advantage of it.

Also, the Blazers most likely to have the ball in their hands late in the game are all good free throw shooters. And, that helps win close games.

Nicolas Batum, FT% = .872
Damian Lillard, FT% = .848
LaMarcus Aldridge, FT% = .805

Compare these same metrics to the underachieving Lakers.

Lakers Starters ranked by PER:

Kobe Bryant, PER = 25.6
Dwight Howard, PER = 20.1
Steve Nash, PER = 16.9
Pau Gasol, PER = 14.7
Metta World Peace, PER = 13.7

That's two below average starters, and Nash has only played in 9 games. In his place the Lakers tried starting Steve Blake (PER = 8.9) and Chris Duhon (PER = 9.6) before finally settling on Darius Morris (PER = 7.7)

And when it comes to FTs, Nash is a great FT shooter. He hasn't missed yet this season, but he's only he's only attempted 9 FTs all season. With the ball in Kobe's hands late in the game, Nash is only averaging 1 FTA/G and simply doesn't get the opportunity to get fouled. So, that leaves Kobe and Dwight as the Lakers most likely to get fouled late in the game.

Kobe Bryant, FT% = .847
Dwight Howard, FT% = .508

Kobe is a good FT shooter, but not as good as Batum and on par with Lillard. But, Dwight is an absolute disaster. His poor FT shooting makes him a liability late in close games. So, they don't even look to get him the ball.

Before Nash came back, the Lakers were essentially playing 3-on-5 on offense in close games (with a single digit PER PG and Dwight a liability), and 2 of those 3 are having below average seasons (Pau, PER = 14.7 and Meta, PER = 13.7). Even with Nash back, he doesn't have the ball in his hands enough to make a difference. Nash is great at making average players better. He can create for those who can't create for themselves. But Kobe doesn't need that. He creates for himself and needs the ball in his hands to be effective - which is why Nash is a bad match for Kobe. As good as Kobe is, at the age of 33, he's essentially playing 1-on-5 ISO ball with the game on the line. And, if you look at Kobe's clutch time stats at 82games.com, you'll see he's not getting the job done. He's settling for jump shots and not making them. Check out some of his clutch time stats:

Net Pts: -25
Off: 94.5
Def: 118.4
Net48: -23.9
W: 5
L: 11
Win%: 31.3%

FG%: .359
eFG%: .410

Now, compare that to the Blazers Big 3 when the game is on the line:

Damian Lillard:
Net Pts: +54
Off: 111.1
Def: 78.2
Net48: +33.0
W: 13
L: 4
Win%: 76.5%

FG%: .459
eFG%: 568

Nicolas Batum:
Net Pts: +56
Off: 113.0
Def: 78.2
Net48: +34.8
W: 13
L: 3
Win%: 81.3%

FG%: .423
eFG%: 577

LaMarcus Aldridge:
Net Pts: +46
Off: 107.9
Def: 78.9
Net48: +29.0
W: 11
L: 5
Win%:68.8%

FG%: .459
eFG%: .459

And, that's pretty much why the Blazers are overachieving and the Lakers are underachieving. With the game on the line, the Blazers are a 3-headed monster that is very difficult to stop. With the game on the line, the Lakers are playing 1-on-5 and relying too heavily on an aging superstar who can no longer get it done. I'd hate to be Mike D'Antoni. He's pretty much fucked either way. If he keeps deferring to Kobe with the game on the line, the results won't improve and he'll get fired. If he takes the ball out of Kobe's hands, he'll piss him off and get fired. And, even if he does, he really only has 38-year old Nash to turn to. Nash can create for others, but do you want the ball in the hand's of Dwight Howard (.508 FT%) or Metta World Peace (100% head case) with the game on the line. So, that leaves Nash creating for himself and Pau (whose confidence is shot). So much for the idea of assembling a dynasty by combining 4 future Hall-of-Famers on one roster.

Executive Summary:

With the game on the line, our young guys have been dominant and their old guys have sucked.

BNM

 

I'm not gonna quote you BNM because that is one long ass post, but i'd wonder how Lillard/Batum/LA compared to Parker/Ginobli/Duncan in there championship years, they kind of remind me of them. Three very different players all unafraid to take the last shot and unafraid to give it up to someone with a better shot.

 

Bnm; you are a scholar!

 

I haven't seen enough to make me think we'll win more than 34-38 games.

Hope I'm wrong, but I just don't see much more. For the record, given the roster, a rookie PG, injuries, etc.... I could handle that. I don't think we're far from a 6-8 seed, but we don't have any depth and the season is 82 games. Now, if Lillard continues to improve, guys adjust to bigger roles and continue to grow (Wes, Nic, and JJ especially), we could see us combat the upcoming tougher schedule. Time will tell, but I expect we'll continue to win tough games, lose ones we shouldn't, finish a few games out of 8th, and feel comfortable knowing that if we add some depth, we'll be back in the playoffs with the potential to be spoilers next season.

Is that most exciting? No. But I feel better about the future now than I did back at the end of the summer.

 

Wow BNM, great analytical post. I think I agree, but being much dumber than you I'm going to have to contemplate your sage words a while before finally giving up and turning my attention to youporn.

 

Too long, and the opinions contained in your post are still not facts.

Learn how to be more brief and get your opinion across. Which of the multitude of facts are we supposed to accept as facts that prove your opinion?

 

9-2 in close games says alot!

However, this is a very solid starting lineup. Easily a +.500 starting lineup. It's just that our bench sucks so much. I thought before the season started, that this was about a .500 team, factoring in that our weak bench would drag us down some.

Also consider that we've played 3 more games on the road so far.....

 

Not great team stats, but a good record can be marked up to good coaching IMO. Their is about 4-5 games that could have gone either way against inferior opponents that we lost, as well.

 

http://espn.go.com/nba/standings

The "Diff" column in the standings, when out of order, tells you which teams have stats disproportional to their win record.

I vaguely remember that we were lucky that some of those teams had an injured player missing, short-term right when they played us.

 

We had some key injuries with 5 of our losses. Do we get to take them back?