Gary Harris would make our bench a lot better. He signed a $20+M/year extension a few days ago. The guy shot .420 from 3, and well over .500 overall. His 1.2 steals is some indication he can at least bother the passing lanes. In one of the best trades in history, Harris and Nurk were traded by the Bulls to Denver for the rights to draft Doug McDermott with Anthony Randolph's contract added in.
I think we have an almost perfect roster, that we could be what Houston was last year and that Briscoe would have had an important role as backup guard and that without him we'd be forced to play too big with Turner at guard which would do not us nor Turner any good and that it would cost us at least two spots at least according to my own prediction so I predict top 4 but probably not top2. If we bring a real contributor at backup guard, even a backup SG, but prefferably a PG, because I think Caunaghton should play anyway and I wish we kept Briscoe to be able to even use both of them and let Dame and CJ sit at the same time (which means more minutes they play at the same time)
Are you just now acquainting yourself with Blazer4ever ('s posts)? I believe this is why you instigated the 'no rooks' (post) policy
You're thinking of OPP 3FG% on wide open attempts (no defender within 6-feet). Quoting wide open 3FG% without also including the frequency (which is what Lowe did) is really kind of stupid. Can't most players in the NBA knock down wide open 3-pointers at a pretty decent clip? The key is to not leave them wide open (duh). The Blazers were actually 2nd best in the entire league in OPP wide open 3FG frequency. They can't really control how good, or bad, their opponents shoot when left wide open, but they are doing a good job of not leaving them wide open at the 3-point line. Combine their second best OPP wide open 3FG frequency (which they can control), with their third worst OPP wide open 3FG% (which they can't really control) and they were actually 5th best in the league in number of OPP made wide open 3-pointers. Which is basically what Stotts' defense is designed to do (in theory) - run 3-point shooters off the line and force them to shoot long 2-pointers. Which is one reason our team defense got so much better after adding Nurkic. Now when an opponent steps around the defender closing out on the 3-point shot, they have to deal with Nurk contesting any drive or pull up 2-pointer in the lane. This forces opponents into settling for more long 2-pointers, rather than attacking the paint, like they did before we had Nurkic. When we had Plumlee, when opposing players stepped around the close out they usually attacked the basket, knowing we didn't have a great rim protector. Now, they think twice. BNM
It snows in Vegas every year. At least every one of the 7 years I lived there. Enough on the ground for the kids to build snowmen.
the quote was 41.8% OPEN 3's. The point they were making was Portland's opponents were making a higher percentage of their open looks then against the league mean, or, they suffered some bad luck on top of not so good D. The part of the assessment that bothered me was... "Blazers have no choice but to use a ton of lineups, including the starting group, featuring three unreliable 3-point shooters." I guess it depends on what one terms unreliable, but over the last 3 seasons the league average for 3pt % is 35%... the Blazers have 5 guys besides Lillard and CJ who shot that or better last season & Collins and Biggie seemed to be selected in part because they can stretch the floor. Anyhoo, being dismissed/undervalued is to be expected by the national media as Portland's relatively tiny fanbase isn't the one they're attempting to lure in with their coverage. Until our ratings go way way up, thats going to continue to be the case. STOMP
