Keep reading. It gets better. Hyperbole to show logical fallacy is just one of the tools in my belt. You could learn something. Don't know. But Blake doesn't do much that he's not good at--like shooting 41.8% for your career on long jumpers and instead of thinking "Let me use my awesome post game b/c I'm the best PF in the NBA" you decide "I'm going to take the most inefficient shot in the NBA more than anyone else in the NBA, and more than double every other player 6'8 or above in the NBA". And perhaps if we had someone like Chris Paul to tell LMA that he'd get frozen out the next time he took a stupid effing fadeaway J instead of getting his ass into the paint, LMA would be a 26/12 player and all-NBA first team. But, alas... You're making my point. With all those stats, he's still more efficient than LMA on offense.
Not really, but it cracks me up when you see other writers on, the east coast for example, say, "Blazer Insider Golliver reports....." He's no insider and knows no more than people on here.
Most of his stories involve who can cut the lawn the fastest, and where Juan had his low-rider bike made.
Everybody is an expert or insider on everything, including Mrs. HCP, in today's world of social media.
Not this time. Bring in your jump-shot comparison about 25-30 ft and you're in business, although still very successful. lol I'm really not making your point at all. I'm talking about a post game, not an ability to dunk or run down an open lane for a dunk, ally-oop, or lay in. "The most inefficient shot in the NBA", which LA makes at nearly the exact same clip that he does from inside the restricted area. So you are incorrect in saying that he would be more efficient at the rim. Clearly, he is as efficient from both spots. See for yourself: Look at LA’s shot chart. 31 FGM were assisted by Dame, 70 by the rest of the team combine, 101 total 63% of LA buckets outside the paint are assisted. 40% in the restricted area are assisted. Look at Griffins shot chart. 68 FGM were assisted by Chris Paul, 47 from the rest of the team combined, 115 total 95% of Blake buckets outside the paint are assisted. 72% in the restricted area are assists. Stop ignoring the obvious which I’ve already said. Griffin plays with the best PG in the NBA. He’s athletic, which enables him to jump high, run fast, and get rebounds and dunks. Where is the skill in that? Check out what kind of shots Blake gets at the bottom of the page, and you see it’s even more apparent that Blake’s “post game” is all about being athletic and not so much about any post game. LA shoots as well from “his spot” as he does from under the basket. In fact, LA is shooting 17% higher than the league average from “his spot” just outside the left block. Consider the Volume he shoots and the double teams he draws. It's not even debatable. Perhaps the most compelling argument is that when the Blazers need a bucket, they go to LA and his mo money, wet as the ocean, post moves. He could do that at 5 ft from the rim, but then he runs the risk of help defense being able to cheat over. By shooting away from the basket, opponents have to fully commit to a double team, stay away, or get called for illegal defense. Small sample size, but the opponent is a constant, and you can make a fair and equal comparison: Did the LAC beat Indy? No Griffin 16/12 (6/13 shooting, 4-5 FTs), 2 ast, 1 stl, 5 to Did Minn beat Indy? No Love 20/17 (6-20 and 1-5 from 3 shooting), 2 ast, 1 stl, 5 to Did Portland beat Indy? Yes LA 28/10 (11/19 shooting), 3 ast, 1 stl, 1 blk, 0 PF, 0 to Five turnovers a piece, and either low shot attempts or poor shooting for Blake and Love. Make excuses for Love and Griffin all you like (it was an off night, or he took less shots because… you still don’t have a compelling answer for the last one), but LA is clearly the better player getting off more shot attempts and making them versus the same competition. "We shot the ball poorly, plain and simple, and you are not going to win that many games doing that," Love said.” Face it, Love is the best player and HE shoots poorly, as does Griffin. Everyone who plays Portland, and loses, talks about how the Blazers make impossible shots. It’s a classic cognitive dissonance to avoid accepting that LA is simply that good. That’s his game. You can split hairs over where LA chooses to set up his post game, but at the end of the day, he burns opponents with post moves better than anyone in the NBA right now. It’s an unwillingness to accept LA for what he is, that his post game isn’t at the rim, and he’s not an athletic freak or elite rebounder. He’s a good rebounder, with an elite post game. Love and Griffin and elite post game are practically antonyms.
lol Where was this in the "By Ben Golliver" thread? I won't tell anyone you reply to rooks. Promise. You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to HCP again. Awe.
BF, you will get the response you deserve after the kids are in bed. As a teaser, I think you're wrong on about 3 different levels, and your selective use of both niche stats and small sample size (choosing, seemingly, to ignore 4 years of previous history of these players) seems to show a willingness to fit stats to your narrative ("he burns opponents with post moves better than anyone in the NBA right now"--completely unsupported by stats-- and "Perhaps the most compelling argument is that when the Blazers need a bucket, they go to LA and his mo money, wet as the ocean, post moves. He could do that at 5 ft from the rim, but then he runs the risk of help defense being able to cheat over"--which has been debunked by LMA himself ("I bang Chuck Smith 6 times to get that 15' jumper).)
Well, make your case. I'll read it. I don't agree with being selective to fit a narrative, rather, those specific stats speak to where and how, and how often, they get their points. I'm not compelled by the counter arguments you've made thus far that either Love, or Griffin have a better post game. I submit Steve Kerr as my "expert" witness.
Whoa, hold on. I don't think "Love or Griffin have a better post game." (Post 28) I did say: in reference to you saying that LMA got 27 against Indy while Blake got 17 due to a post game. It was due to 6 more shots, and since only 4 of LMA's shots were in the paint, that didn't account for it. If your argument is that LMA is (or at the very least, among) the best PF in the NBA (well, not named LeBron), I'm not going to waste a lot of time discussing it since I feel similarly. If your argument is that LMA has great post moves and is a force when he chooses to use them, I'm right there with you. But since I don't think that a jumper from 16-23' qualifies at all as a "post game", no matter the orientation of his back when he receives the ball, then I disagree that a "post game" is what separates LMA from Love and Griffin or is a reason he gets more points against a good team or not.
Let's not get hung up on me making a blind statement that the 10 pt difference between LA and Griffin was post moves. It was said with heavy sarcasm, that even if zero of the difference between those 10 points was because of post play, IN GENERAL, LA is BY FAR, superior to Griffin and Love in skill to make post moves and get buckets. My real objection came when you said, "to say that his post game is what separates him from Love and Griffin is a bit disingenuous". It ABSOLUTELY is was separates LA from Griffin. The Blazers philosophy is to give up the most inefficient shot in the game (mid-ranged 2s) in favor of limiting 3s and lay-ups/dunks. Teams that also do this are typically also great defensive teams (Indiana/Chi). So what happens when a team uses this strategy versus the Blazers? The Blazers STILL win. I submit the wins over Chi and Ind (although it is a small sample size). And, to my point, the reason the Blazers win is because when teams force Portland to take Mid-Ranges shots, the Blazers don't rely on guards, they go to LA. Mo Williams is the exception with 35 makes, but LA is the Blazer's mid-ranged game which is what a stretch 4 does. He doesn't just shoot open jumpers though, he works from the restricted area, to the block, out to 18ft, pulling the opposing bigs out of the restricted area/paint and backing them down and getting a high percentage shot (he is as efficient from the left wing, as he is from inside the restricted area). LA takes his post game away from the block, depending on the defensive coverage, and gets buckets at a more efficient rate than anyone in the NBA from that spot. LA makes a POST MOVE to get his shot, and that is his POST GAME. If you wish to assert that a player's foot needs to be ON the block, and shoot IN the restricted area to be considered a post game, then I think your argument is overly simplistic and stuck inside a box, inside a box, in another really tiny box. The reason Portland is successful is due to a number of factors, the most of which is that LA IS the Blazer's mid-range game, he IS the "go-to-guy" when Portland needs a bucket, he IS the most consistent Blazers, and he IS doing it with patented post moves against conventional bigs. The added effect is that now there is a big man out of the middle, and the Blazers have a greater opportunity to secure an offensive board. So, yes, he shoots a LOT from mid-range, but he gets those shots using POST MOVES as any conventional big does. He is the best in the NBA at it. And it is why the Blazers are winning, and why he is head and shoulders better than Love AND Griffin. I'll admit, being great at this level of team competition has much to do with fit. Not only is LA a better PF, but he is utilized to his potential on this Blazer team, which is why he is in the conversation for MVP. I don't think he was drastically different last season, or the season before. The most significant difference to me is the players complimenting LA's post game. When you look at a stat sheet (points in the paint) it is quite deceiving. LA's post game, pulled out to 12-15 feet, should actually be included in points in the paint for teams looking for a way to stop the Blazers.
Update to Mr. Fran Blinebury perception of Portland (NBA.com) after the win @ SA. "With four losses in six games from the end of the old year through the first week of the new one, it was easy and popular to say that reality might finally be taking a bite out of the Trail Blazers. Losing to the lowly likes of New Orleans, Philadelphia and Sacramento will do that. There were questions about Portland’s 3-point happy offensive attack, ability to engage in elite level defense, to have the kind of tough inner stuff that marks the true contenders. It was one thing to snap out of the funk with a couple of home wins over the Celtics and Cavaliers. It is quite another to deliver against the upper crust. The Blazers’ road trip to San Antonio, Dallas, Houston and Oklahoma City is nothing but hard, crusty competition, four games in five nights against nothing but Western Conference playoff teams. So it was satisfying and maybe revealing that the Blazers took the opener against the No. 1 seeded Spurs. “To beat the best team in the West on their floor, that sticks out,” said coach Terry Stotts. “Like I said, we showed a lot of resolve at both ends of the floor…I thought we showed our mettle.” It was more than the usual bundle of points from LaMarcus Aldridge, Damian Lillard and Wesley Matthews and more than another night in triple-double neighborhood by Nicolas Batum. It was a game than could have gotten away from the Blazers after coach Gregg Popovich’s ejection that lit a fire under Manu Ginobili that lit a Spurs charge to a 78-77 lead. If there was a time when the Blazers’ resolve and mental toughness was going to be pushed to the limit, this was it. The fact that letting it slip away could have set a bad tone for the start of the grueling road trip only made the situation more urgent. It was a time for poise over panic, and the Blazers delivered. Their recent slippage notwithstanding, the truth is Portland has been coming up big against the elite teams all season. The win over the Spurs gives them a 6-1 record against the top five teams in the Western Conference. Going into tonight’s back-to-back game at Dallas (8:30 ET, League Pass), the Blazers are just one-half game behind the Spurs for the top spot in the conference and it’s even possible that with a strong finish to the trip, Stotts could be in the running to coach the Western Conference All-Stars in the Feb. 16 All-Star Game. “We have a pretty good record right now,” Matthews said. “We’re beating teams that are upper echelon, home and road. We just got to keep our heads down and stay humble and know that we can compete with anybody. We’re not getting too full of ourselves. We’re sticking with the process.” The trip continues at Dallas, Houston and OKC with a chance for the Blazers to provide their answer to any questions." Looks like 'ol Franny is coming around. Only took 40 games. Who's next?
