Blazers #1 in Offensive efficiency

by usmcr3049 on Dec 29, 2008 12:45 PM PST Comment 33 comments

The Cavs surrendered the No. 1 spot in offensive efficiency to Portland. This is an insider piece from John Hollinger, so for those who can't see it I will post the Blazer related info.

1. One casualty of Cleveland's recent "slump" has been that the Cavs surrendered the No. 1 spot in offensive efficiency to Portland. Yes, Portland. The Blazers offer an interesting case study because they get very little post scoring and shoot a ton of jumpers -- an approach that traditionalists instinctively frown upon.

In the 1990s, this was indeed a bad idea. But in this decade, you can score big by spacing the floor with shooters and putting good decision-makers in the middle, and that's exactly what the Blazers have done under Nate McMillan.

The other interesting note is that the Blazers are playing the league's slowest pace, which has made some folks really, really slow to catch on to just how good Portland's offense is -- the Blazers are only 14th in points per game, a category that the league still insists on using to rank teams in the official stats.

This is very interesting to me, as many fans, (myself included) don't like the offense the Blazers run. Personally I would like to see more inside scoring, off cuts, and movement, but you can't agrue with success can you?

Hollinger also had this to say about Canzano's recent article about Oden vs Pryz.

2. The Oregonian's John Canzano, who ranks right behind Henry Abbott on my list of favorite bald writers from Portland, pointed out in Monday's column that Joel Przybilla is still outplaying Greg Oden, and we've got almost half a season under our belts, so maybe Portland ought to think about starting Przybilla and having Oden play with the subs.

The column reads like a knock on Oden, but the real story here is Przybilla, who has just been way, way, WAY better than anyone had any right to expect. The dude is shooting 75.5 percent and leading the league in rebound rate at 22.0. In addition he has been a force on defense with his shot-blocking, partly making up for the Blazers' softness on D at the other positions (they're 21st in defensive efficiency).

Oden's numbers are actually decent -- a 16.36 PER, a strong rebound rate, 53.5 percent shooting -- and in a vacuum he'd be worthy of a starting spot. Once he figures out that he can't allow 300-pound centers to post him up three inches from the rim because he can't count on being able to block the shot like he did in college and high school, he should be as much of a factor on D as Przybilla is, too.

But for now, Canzano is dead-on: Przybilla has been fantastic, and his reward should be a starting gig 'til further notice.

I don't agree, but the stats don't lie, Joel is out performing him. The biggest thing to me is this, Greg's development is more important to this teams future success than Joel's affect on this years team winning games.

2 recs | Comment 33 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Joel is a veteran TEAM stud !

GO needs to pay close attention.
Remember Joel is team MVP*, MIP, &
DPO1/3Y.
How about that Prz !!

It's GO time !

by walkoff41 on Dec 29, 2008 1:01 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

starting means "nothing" in the NBA anymore

most good teams are playing 6-7 guys who could/should be the starter and some have deliberately moved better players to the bench..

I’m more surprised by the amount of time that Nate has given GO down the stretch.. and I definitely wondered why Przy wasn’t playing more in the fourth quarter against the Mavs..

Boycott Rose Garden Concessions!!!
http://www.blazersedge.com/2008/11/8/657044/boycotting-rose-garden-con

by idoltime on Dec 29, 2008 1:07 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

Hack a Joel works

Hack a Greg dont

by southern oregon on Dec 29, 2008 5:19 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

I don't know

those four straight at the end of the.. what was that… the Denver game at the Garden.. those were great…

but I agree..all signs point to hack a joel being a significant better strategy than hack a greg will..

Boycott Rose Garden Concessions!!!
http://www.blazersedge.com/2008/11/8/657044/boycotting-rose-garden-con

by idoltime on Dec 29, 2008 7:46 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Joel's shooting 67% from the line, GO 65%.

by howlingfantods on Dec 29, 2008 10:37 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

ya big delution killer, leave fact out of this

December 18, 2008.

"Roy is Roy, and if I were to bet my life on a game of 5-on-5, I’d bet on whichever team Roy was playing on." by HurraKane212

by maid tu rek on Jan 1, 2009 1:20 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Instinctively

I agree that the best or best playing should be starting. This also appeals to my “win now” mentality as Joel provides the best chance to win every night. However, given the extraordinary potential of Greg I believe the organization is making the right choices regarding Greg’s development.

by oregonslee on Dec 29, 2008 1:15 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

I personally like GO starting.

The same argument could be made for Batum. Batum is being outplayed by…well, just about everybody.
I think the biggest negative of GO’s play is his tendancy to get into foul trouble. His numbers, other than that, are fine for the amount of time he is on the court. Prz is the old man of the team. You can’t play him 40 minutes a game.
Let the young fella work it out.

-Shad

"If a doctor ever gives me six months to live, I want it in basketball time." - Marc Acito

by NBAstard on Dec 29, 2008 1:32 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

Hollinger

this guy is just a stat geek that has a claim to fame of inventing PER….He jumps on and off bandwagons after each game gets played…he continually forces his stat lines into the public eye as a means of promoting himself……he obviously does not have a good grip on basketball fundamentals and how the game should be played….any one who thinks offense is the key stat line to success has no clue about the game…..How many great teams rely solely on the outside shot to insure success in the playoffs and ultimately a championship?

It's all about defense......

by 67 on Dec 29, 2008 1:51 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

While Player Efficiency Rating is a statistical masurement used mainly to evaluate players' overall ...

offensive production, you’re downright ignorant regarding your asinine, seemingly prejudiced judgement of ESPN columnist John Hollinger.

For example, Hollinger wrote a riveting, well-informed article — which I sadly can’t access in the archives at this moment, since I don’t have ESPN Insider — soon after the Phoenix Suns dealt Shawn Marion and Marcus Banks to the Miami Heat for Shaquille O’Neal. Within the piece, I vividly remember that Hollinger explicity noted that Marion’s defense was the glue to the Suns’ long-term success. Yet, instead of wrongly using PER to support his hypothesis, I recall that he used defensive based stats (e.g., net points allowed per 100 possessions, defensive rating, et cetera) to validate his claim. Also, as it concerns ol’-fashioned basketball analysis, Hollinger referenced O’Neal’s inability to effectively defend the pick-and-roll ‘cause of his dwindling speed, quickness, agility, mobility — along with Amare Stoudemire’s laziness pertaining to weakside help defense — as something that’d ultimately become a major problem for the Suns.

Now, while I also suscribe to the theory that defense wins championships, it’s clearly evident that PER is a useful tool when it comes to evaluating players’ overall offensive production. It, however, doesn’t take one statistic to judge someone’s all-around ability, but rather a combination of different metrics; that’s why Hollinger incorporates measurements like True Shooting Percentage, Assist Ratio, Rebound Rate, and Turnover Ratio into his analysis, too.

by AK1984 on Dec 29, 2008 7:01 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

it's my opinion

and you haven’t changed my mind what-so-ever. …………Hollinger will always be sitting behind a keyboard pounding out his star struck stats while the real basketball world gets a grasp on reality….. When I played ball we had a stat man and his job was to write down the stuff and give it over to the coaches during half time and games end to evaluate…..I can’t remember the coaches asking him one time for his opinion and what he thought they should do….
you might consider getting a little grip on reality yourself……..take a look out the window sometime and check to see if it’s raining, rather than sitting in front of a screen and having someone tell you it might …….the real world is out there, if you care to take a look…..You might be able to make up your own mind, instead of having someone do it for you….
I can’t help it, if you fell in love with the Hollinger show (this is what he does..he sells stats and he has worked hard on it…..I applaud his efforts)….some people do get hooked but many basketball people would never use his stat line to develop a game plan or even see it as a useful tool to measure his players………..get real…..this stuff is for the fans and media…….

Hollinger referenced O’Neal’s inability to effectively defend the pick-and-roll ‘cause of his dwindling speed, quickness, agility, mobility — along with Amare Stoudemire’s laziness pertaining to weakside help defense — as something that’d ultimately become a major problem for the Suns.

Gee, I guess this makes Hollinger a genius….stating the obvious….my sister figured this out and she’s never read a sports article and doesn’t understand all the rules….
please note; this next paragraph could be considered personal…but you have brought out the worst in me and I figured you deserved something back

I guess you could be considered somewhat ignorant as well…are you asinine? I don’t know …but I can surely tell your a smart ass and your mommy never taught you much respect….too late for that now…..no one there to whack you when pop off your big mouth…..
But have fun playing with your stats…….

It's all about defense......

by 67 on Dec 29, 2008 9:58 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Absurd.

Everyone in basketball acknowledges that Hollinger has a fantastic basketball mind. If anything, the major criticism of Hollinger comes from the more extreme statheads like Dave Berri, who argue that Hollinger enshrines conventional wisdom with his modeling.

by howlingfantods on Dec 29, 2008 10:40 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

I never thought

I would see the day that Ted Kaczynski would use a computer.

Life is exhausting when you are this stupid.

by jonestr on Dec 29, 2008 11:22 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Hollinger will always be sitting behind a keyboard pounding out his star struck stats while the real basketball world gets a grasp on reality….. When I played ball we had a stat man and his job was to write down the stuff and give it over to the coaches during half time and games end to evaluate…..I can’t remember the coaches asking him one time for his opinion and what he thought they should do…

What I don’t think you are grasping is that Hollinger isn’t the guy out there collecting stats, he’s the one analyzing it. Stats have become a vital part of ALL major sports. It doesn’t mean he’s always correct or that there isn’t something beyond the stats but to toss out stats thinking you can catch all that you need just by watching is absurd.

by ericande on Dec 30, 2008 12:04 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Gentlemen

Perhaps you should behave like gentlemen, something of which you are both entirely capable.

Throwing insults around doesn’t enlighten anyone. Nor does throwing insults back at someone just because they were crass enough to insult you.

You both are fully capable of arguing your point without that stuff.

If you can't convince them, confuse them -- Harry Truman, U.S. President

by jscot on Dec 30, 2008 1:26 AM PST up reply actions 2 recs

Agreed!

there are good arguments for and against Hollinger’s MO but ad hominem aggression are not part of that. When I feel the need to rip into somebody, I visit one of the OKC blogs

"its tough to play with one eye, unless you're a pirate." Delonte West
"una canasta a Pau en la cara" Rudy

by Honka Playboy on Dec 30, 2008 1:37 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Ah, I occasionally enjoy a smidge of lighthearted, good-natured banter; it's mighty fun stuff.

Yet, all joshing aside, I still attest to the fact that John Hollinger has a brilliant basketball mind.

by AK1984 on Dec 30, 2008 2:19 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

+1

Honor Terry Porter

by Philthyanimal on Dec 30, 2008 5:53 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Dude, I honestly couldn't care less about the substance of your, um, personal shot against me.

My only opinion is that it seems hypocrticial of you to whine about “respect” when you’re apparently not showing any yourself. Admittedly, though, my philosophical belief contends that “respect” is an entirely nominal concept that doesn’t mean squat. Since we’ve each got our own unique definition for this idea known as “respect,” it’s impossible to truly quantify it. Oddly enough, I don’t need stats to inform me that there’s no such thing as “respect” and whatnot.

by AK1984 on Dec 30, 2008 2:36 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

no need for this

you’re downright ignorant regarding your asinine, seemingly prejudiced judgement of ESPN columnist John Hollinger.

No matter how asinine it was, it’s not nice to say so. – Elgin

It doesn't mean you should just because you can. Like Abraham and Ishmael, fighting over sand - it doesn't mean you should just because you can. That is a fact of life. - Adrian Belew

by 22baylor on Dec 30, 2008 10:23 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

good post

say it with me: DEFENSE DEFENSE DEFENSE. Oden stinks at defending the pick and roll. Aldridge is hesitant with his help D and poor at defending scorers 1v1 in the post. Our whole team is lazy chasing shooters around (Travis is the biggest culprit, but Roy, Rudy and Batum lose their guys also). Our PGs can’t keep people in front of them. Its ugly man. Joel’s good D and our strong rebounding keep us at #21 instead of the absolute cellar defensively.

If we were an average defensive team, we’d be the leading candidates for the #2 seed out West (as well as a reasonable threat to the Lakers). Alas, we are not.

Boomshakalaka

by jksnake99 on Dec 29, 2008 3:16 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

Your choice of adjectives

seems accurate, alas.

by oregonslee on Dec 29, 2008 4:11 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

If Portland were an average defense team,

they would be the number one seed. They’d be practically undefeated. Hyperbole? On a Blazers’ site? No way, but their defense really is that bad. I’ve been the last two games live and couldn’t believe how many shooters were left open. Hmmm…Terry is lighting it up, let me go double down on Dampier and I’ll be able to get back to Terry…uh…crud…

It was funny to hear Nate criticize Sergio’s defense. He really could’ve put any other Blazers’ name in there (except for Przy and maybe Oden) and it would’ve been true. I have more respect for Outlaw after seeing him do a pretty good job on Nowitzki, but one game does not make a career.

Come to think of it, Portland doesn’t play much of a team game at all on either end of the court. Very few passes on offense and poor rotation on defense. Does everyone have the green light to shoot?

by torsoheap on Dec 29, 2008 5:28 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Nate criticized the team's defense

When Quick asked him why Sergio was taken out, he said, “Defense”.

Quick put those two in juxtaposition to make it sound like Nate was putting all the blame on Sergio. Somehow, I seriously doubt the rest of the players think Nate blamed Sergio. I suspect they all got ripped pretty heavily behind closed doors.

But Quick was playing his games, I suspect.

If you can't convince them, confuse them -- Harry Truman, U.S. President

by jscot on Dec 30, 2008 1:30 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

I think the offense could be a lot better

through a few simple adjustments
Our beloved Blazers offense stagnates at times, and players fail to get open. Part of the problem is our awful, awful screen play. Screens are lazy, strolling up to stand there, not really putting yourself in a position to make a successful pick and not adjusting to be able to hit the oncoming player. The person using the screen curls round loosely, allowing the defender to come through the pick side by side rendering it useless. We don’t utilise rolls properly. We don’t punish teams when they double on Brandon screens.
The other part is ball watching, after watching and taking notes on Oden for a game I noticed he spends a lot of time just watching the ball. The players ought to make more cuts, and set a few off the ball screens to create some more options on the weakside.
The offense clearly isn’t the problem though is it?

That might be down to our beautiful defense.

by BeloHorizante on Dec 29, 2008 5:57 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

what about the defense?

Spanish Air-Mada

by Nakamura on Dec 30, 2008 11:35 AM PST reply actions 0 recs

we're #20 in D right now

Boomshakalaka

by jksnake99 on Dec 30, 2008 1:45 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

if I remember

that was a decent improvement over last year? Didn’t we end in the mid-20s last year?

Boycott Rose Garden Concessions!!!
http://www.blazersedge.com/2008/11/8/657044/boycotting-rose-garden-con

by idoltime on Dec 30, 2008 2:55 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

nope

the numbers vary somewhat depending from site to site (I guess people differ on how to figure out the # of possessions from box score stats), but according to knickerblogger.net, we finished 17th in D last year (108.4 pts given up/100 possession) and we are 24th this year (109.6 pts allowed/100 possessions). Hollinger has us as the #20 D… and I’m not exactly sure what the disconnect is.

One thing seems clear, however: Our D has not improved over last year. Our O has.

Boomshakalaka

by jksnake99 on Dec 30, 2008 3:20 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

but i remember from last year

that it was our O that had improved from the year before also.. I thought our D has been pretty consistently sub-average the last three years.. but had hoped that it had gone up from the bottom to closer to average.

Of course it is kind of strange how they come up with different numbers..

It almost feels like when we had the worst team record (05-06) we had the same exact ability to defend and it is only improvements on offense that have made us relevant since then… but I can’t find the numbers to back that up..

Boycott Rose Garden Concessions!!!
http://www.blazersedge.com/2008/11/8/657044/boycotting-rose-garden-con

by idoltime on Dec 30, 2008 3:34 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Pretty much

Our O has gone from really bad (05-06) to solid (last year) to really good (this year), and our D has pretty much stayed putrid.

Boomshakalaka

by jksnake99 on Dec 30, 2008 3:39 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

that does make sense

I remember some post where someone attacked the notion that Nate is a defensive minded coach despite the fact that every team he has coached has been a poor defensive team.. if I remember the point of the post, it was that neither the Sonics nor the Blazers ever showed improvement on D and it was their offensive that helped both teams improve..

Boycott Rose Garden Concessions!!!
http://www.blazersedge.com/2008/11/8/657044/boycotting-rose-garden-con

by idoltime on Dec 30, 2008 4:06 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs