The non-conventional issue

Discussion in 'Portland Trail Blazers' started by Schilly, Feb 15, 2017.

  1. Schilly

    Schilly Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2009
    Messages:
    3,161
    Likes Received:
    3,345
    Trophy Points:
    113
    When Plumlee was traded I started thinking about his fit. I came to a person conclusion, he's too non-conventional... Ball handling Center with no range at all and no post game, great passer, but due to lack of scoring skills not enough room to really operate etc.... And it got me to thinking, we have a lot of non-conventional players, or rather players playing out of position.

    CJ is undersized as a 2, then isn't really a PG though he plays the roll when Dame is out.
    Turner is a Mid range shooting Point Forward with less than stellar athleticism
    Aminu is a SF who is forced to play PF
    Leonard is a stretch post who won't shoot the ball when he's open
    etc...etc...

    Beyond that we are running a jump shooting offense but lack jump shooters beyond Dame, CJ and Crabbe. I know to an extent we were trying to mimic Golden State but reality is we need to get some convention back into this roster. We can handle a couple guys but not quite so many I think.
     
    Kaydow, Stevenson, Strenuus and 7 others like this.
  2. illmatic99

    illmatic99 formerly yuyuza1

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2008
    Messages:
    56,114
    Likes Received:
    53,918
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    NYstateofmind
    What's the point of becoming a cheap version of GS? We will never be better than them at what they do.

    It's better if we just build some other strengths to play in a different way.They don't have a low post presence. See if we can develop Nurk into that. If not, keep building assets and go after Boogie. Then surround Boogie/Dame/CJ with defensive minded role players.

    Trading CJ is not an option. He is a huge building block who keeps getting better.
     
    Jade Falcon, Eastoff and BBert like this.
  3. rotary111

    rotary111 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2014
    Messages:
    3,443
    Likes Received:
    4,582
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Real Estate.
    Location:
    Ridgefield Wa.
    Wouldn't Drummond fit us better than Cousins? He's not a head case and is a rebounding monster on both ends of the court. Defensively he seems to be much better at least from the eye test. Not sure if he really is available or that we would even look at it now that we have Nurkic. Personnely I would throw the kitchen sink at them and see if we can pull off a miracle.
     
    Dougnsalem, Eastoff and BBert like this.
  4. Rhal

    Rhal Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2009
    Messages:
    12,997
    Likes Received:
    2,756
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    UPS
    Location:
    Portland
    I think this is the point of not signing older players and wanting to stay very young. We can't beat them so might as well try and build a team taht peaks around the time GS is falling off.
     
    illmatic99 and Schilly like this.
  5. Rastapopoulos

    Rastapopoulos Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2008
    Messages:
    37,389
    Likes Received:
    21,980
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Ballin'
    Okay then we have to trade Lillard. We can't make it far with two sieves in the backcourt.
     
  6. TBpup

    TBpup Writing Team

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2013
    Messages:
    22,362
    Likes Received:
    34,003
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Investment Management / Financial Planner
    Location:
    Lake Oswego
    Sadly, I believe that is true. They are just both so poor defensively at the first point of defense that it puts the back line at risk on almost every play. A small back-court rarely works and the one time I can think of that it did, Joe Dumars was a defensive stud.
     
  7. Schilly

    Schilly Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2009
    Messages:
    3,161
    Likes Received:
    3,345
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I don't think it's completely as simple as just blaming Dame and CJ's defense. Yes it is a huge part of the problem, but the fact that they have poor defenders behind them as well makes it just that much more glaring.
     
    Kaydow likes this.
  8. illmatic99

    illmatic99 formerly yuyuza1

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2008
    Messages:
    56,114
    Likes Received:
    53,918
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    NYstateofmind
    Just because it's not been done before doesn't mean it can't ever be done. This is the kind of conventional thinking that results in mediocrity.

    Who woulda thought a team that just shot threes all day and pushed the pace while being led by a three point shooting PG would win a title and 73 games? Who woulda thought this team would be anchored by a 6'7 center leading the team in assists?

    The game is changing. GS/Dantoni are owning the current paradigm with the current rules.

    We gotta try to get a step ahead.
     
  9. Minstrel

    Minstrel Top Of The Pops Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2008
    Messages:
    26,226
    Likes Received:
    14,405
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    User Interface Designer
    Location:
    Hello darkness, my old friend
    But those are basically just examples of shifting production or getting production in unconventional ways. There's a big difference between that and, "Maybe we can succeed just punting something as important as perimeter defense." Which I believe a team with two poor defenders in the backcourt would be doing.

    If what you're saying is that it isn't literally impossible to build a title contender around a backcourt like Lillard/McCollum, I'd agree with that. If you had a prime Scottie Pippen, Dennis Rodman and Hakeem Olajuwon, for example, in the other three spots, I'm sure it'd work. Less extreme versions might work too. But if you're saying that you don't think the task is much harder, I'd disagree. I think that, as hard as it is to build a title contender already, the task becomes even harder when you're building on a foundation of two bad defenders, especially when both bad defenders are guards in an increasingly guard-dominated league.
     
    TBpup likes this.
  10. rotary111

    rotary111 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2014
    Messages:
    3,443
    Likes Received:
    4,582
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Real Estate.
    Location:
    Ridgefield Wa.
    CJ and Dame get bunched together too often when it comes to defense. Dame gets killed time after time. CJ doesn't. If his man gets a step on him he's getting better at making it up and stripping the ball or making it difficult for him to shoot or pass. I'm seeing so much more effort from CJ on the defensive side than before. Dame is either bothered by a nagging injury or has given up on the defensive side of the ball.
     
    RR7, Dougnsalem and blue9 like this.
  11. Schilly

    Schilly Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2009
    Messages:
    3,161
    Likes Received:
    3,345
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Yes Non-convention can work, if you have players that fit the system. But if you don't then you are relegated to finding players to fit the system.
     
    TBpup likes this.
  12. Minstrel

    Minstrel Top Of The Pops Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2008
    Messages:
    26,226
    Likes Received:
    14,405
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    User Interface Designer
    Location:
    Hello darkness, my old friend
    It forces you to thread the needle perfectly--you need to both find sufficient talent and exactly the sort of talent that will make it all work. While complementary talent is always going to be important for any contender, the more unconventional (or the more you're giving up in your foundational stars) the more narrowly focused your talent search has to be, making the task that much harder.
     
  13. TBpup

    TBpup Writing Team

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2013
    Messages:
    22,362
    Likes Received:
    34,003
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Investment Management / Financial Planner
    Location:
    Lake Oswego
    The game is certainly changing but the successful version of the examples (the Warriors) did so with at least on very good defensive player in the back-court who is several inches taller than either of our two starters.
     
  14. blue9

    blue9 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2012
    Messages:
    10,729
    Likes Received:
    7,169
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Totally agree - CJ might not be a great defender, but he's not nearly as bad as people make him out to be.

    I'm on the fence whether Dame/CJ will work long-term, but I sure don't want to break them up until I see what happens when they have a slightly better roster around them and a better system to operate within.
     
  15. illmatic99

    illmatic99 formerly yuyuza1

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2008
    Messages:
    56,114
    Likes Received:
    53,918
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    NYstateofmind
    Of course team building is nuanced.

    It's also pretty fluky and so much is dependent on luck and serendipity. Remember when GS gave away picks to clear room to sign DeAndre? What about the Klay for Love deal that was supposedly nixed by consultant Jerry West?

    All I'm saying is that following these age old conventions (size in the backcourt/ post presence/ etc etc) might not be the best way to build a team in a sport that is constantly changing. Just 5 yrs ago, the league leader in 3s attempted was Orlando at 27 a game. This year, the Rockets are averaging nearly 40 attempts a game, and eleven teams would surpass Orlando's mark. Teams that built their rosters with this increased emphasis on threes in mind tend to be the ones that are successful now. Who knows where this league is going five years from now?

    Given that, all I'm urging is that our FO be cognizant of these rapid changes to the way the game is played and build accordingly. Dame and CJ comprise a back court with a mix of skills that is not found on too many other rosters in the league. Breaking up that advantage to build a more conventional roster might not be the best way to go -- especially considering how far away we are from a finished product.
     
    JDC likes this.
  16. roroyo

    roroyo Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2017
    Messages:
    133
    Likes Received:
    141
    Trophy Points:
    43
    CJ seems to learn quicker. I believe he can be much better defender at some point just because you can see he constantly adds something to his game. He is smart in copy/paste from different sources if you know what I mean. That's why I think his ceiling is higher than Dame's. CJ enjoys learning basketball and
    it seems to me like Dame depends on his killer instinct more. And he lost half of it lately. (Hope not for long).

    I would love them finding the way to play together, but when "better roster" can happen? Will we be retooling every next season until Olshey find formula accidently? (I think he doesn't know what he's doing since he lost Aldrige for nothing).
    And what "better system to operate within" means? Changing coach or what?

    The non - conventional issue is we are running like headless chicken since Wes Matthews went down and I don't think it's that close to being "cheap version of GS". Not only because it's not so cheap after all.

    We were supposed to built around Lillard. CJ genius went out of the blue. How lucky can you be? Now we can built around one of them and use another to bring someone, that can push us higher. What we do? And this is "unconventional". We pray that it will work somehow. Well, it doesn't work.
     
    Strenuus likes this.
  17. JDC

    JDC Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2008
    Messages:
    3,294
    Likes Received:
    3,116
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I think the script for building this team is pretty simple.

    Build around Dame and CJ with talented offensive players that have enough tools and smarts and to execute a scheme and hope Dame and CJ have a late prime bump in play ala Curry or IT.

    Top 3 Offense
    Top 10-15 Defense

    That's the thesis for this team becoming a perennial top half WC playoff team. Pairing them with limited defense first players is wasting rather than complementing their talents.
     
    illmatic99 likes this.
  18. Schilly

    Schilly Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2009
    Messages:
    3,161
    Likes Received:
    3,345
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Out of curiosity.... Dame and CJ are each down about 1 assist per 36, Plumlee was up 2 assists per 36. Also Plumlees USG% is up from last year. I'm starting to wonder more and more if the Blazers shifted too much reliance onto Plumlees ball handling.
     
    riverman likes this.
  19. Minstrel

    Minstrel Top Of The Pops Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2008
    Messages:
    26,226
    Likes Received:
    14,405
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    User Interface Designer
    Location:
    Hello darkness, my old friend
    Players who can bring the team defense to top 10-15 despite Lillard and McCollum would have to be fantastic defensive players. Talented offensive players who are also fantastic defensive players are basically stars on the level of Jimmy Butler or Paul George. So if the script is to find three near-superstars to man small forward, power forward and center, it's definitely simple to explain but extremely hard on the verge of impossible to execute.
     
    TBpup likes this.
  20. UKRAINEFAN

    UKRAINEFAN Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2008
    Messages:
    13,539
    Likes Received:
    10,874
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    un-retired
    Location:
    Autonomous Republic of Crimea, Ukraine
    Not sure that you would have to throw the kitchen sink at him anymore. I think Zack Lowe has a story out they are shopping him and Jackson hard and someone has the opinion Jackson will be easier to trade.
    http://www.sportingnews.com/nba/new...mond-reggie-jackson/saisv8ursi6d1suiflvfkoif0
     

Share This Page