More Blazer Talk
by GreatOden'sRaven on Dec 4, 2008 3:24 PM PST
Email
Print
Fanpost again because its far too long. Not as interesting as yesterday. Insiders so I dont link, and of course because who wants to read about other teams.
Apparently we need to keep up the winning. The analysts aren't sure about us just quite yet.
JOHN HOLLINGER:
j dubb (pdx): with the blazers off to such a great start, shouldn't B Roy be getting more hype as an MVP candidate? #'s 21-6-5, leading 2nd youngest team to wests 2nd best record...pretty impressive. 
John Hollinger: (4:09 PM ET ) Can't go there yet, sorry. Or have you not watched what LeBron James, Chris Paul and Dwyane Wade have been doing in the early going? It's gonna take way more than 21-6-5 to get into that discussion.
--------------
Chris: Denver, CO: Where do you rank the Nuggets among the west's elite? John Hollinger: (4:15 PM ET ) I think they're a low 50-win team; the question we're still trying to answer is where that puts them in the hierarchy. We haven't seen the best of Utah and San Antonio yet, and we're not totally certain how seriously to take this amazing 20-game start from the Blazers. I'd say somewhere between 3rd and 5th, basically, but that can change a lot by April.
----------------
Eric, Eugene: The Blazers have been near the top of your power rankings all year. Think they'll stay there, or will they fall closer to your 41-41 prediction? Given the toughness of their schedule, you'd assume they'd actually IMPROVE as the season goes on. John Hollinger: (4:17 PM ET ) The Blazers are probably going to blow away my prediction. I don't know if they're quite as good as their Power Ranking, because a few guys are playing well above their historic #s (Blake, Przybilla, Batum), but they're almost certainly going to be a top-five seed.
-----------------
Will J (Portland, OR): John, what do you think Portland's biggest weakness is (other than youth of course)? John Hollinger: (4:35 PM ET ) I could point to a couple, but the lack of easy baskets is probably the biggest. they're getting more than than last year, but this is still primarily a jump-shooting team. Not sure how that will fly come spring ...
------------------
Jake( Boise, Idaho): Give us your prediction Blazers or Celtics on Friday? John Hollinger: (4:57 PM ET ) Home teams win over 60% of the time in the NBA and the Cs have a slightly better power ranking, plus we have to consider the possibility that the past 20 games are a non-representative sample of Portland's talents. So I'll take Boston, but with the Blazers making a game out of it.
------------------
SORTA RELEVANT
Dean (DC): Is Conley just going through typical young player struggles, or are you starting to revise down expectations? John Hollinger: (4:46 PM ET ) Revising down, yes. I've been very unimpressed and very disappointed thus far.
------------------------
------------------------
CHAD FORD:
Tim (Portland, OR): Hey Chad! How good is Portland? This place will be mayhem after they beat the Celtics tomorrow! Chad Ford: I'm not sure they're that good, but good. I pegged them as a sixth seed in the pre-season and that seems about right. Maybe fifth seed. They have a great coach, first of all. I'm not sure why Nate McMillan doesn't get more love. Second, they are so loaded with talent at every position. The only knock on them is their youth. But even that seems to be a positive because the Blazers don't seem to understand that young teams can't consistently win in the NBA. If Pritchard can make a move by the trade deadline to bring in a very good veteran, they could be dangerous in the post season this year. If not, the future of the West is clearly between the Blazers, Lakers and maybe the Hornets.
-------------------------
JR (Chicago, IL): There were rumors recently about Portland having interest in Conley. Would Conley be a good long-term fit for the Blazers? Chad Ford: I'm not sure. Brandon Roy is so good with the ball in his hands, I'm not sure they need a guy like Conley. He honestly is having the same problem in Memphis. Mayo is so good with the ball that Conley can be a bit irrelevant because he can't shoot. I love Conley as a player, but I'm not sold he's the right guy for Portland, especially with the way Rudy Fernandez is developing.
-------------------------
24 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
so sad that they key in on stats for MVP...
It’s gonna take way more than 21-6-5 to get into that discussion.
how about considering record, schedule, clutch shots, etc…
"I'm pooping a win for the Blazers too!" - my 1yr old.
I agree
but that is a fact of life in the NBA and it won’t change. I don’t see Roy ever winning a MVP, but he won’t and we shouldn’t care if he is winning championships!
A few years ago, Steve Nash changed the definition of MVP
A championship-caliber Blazer team could do that again, involving Brandon Roy.
Sooner or later, the best player on a (near?) championship team, even with lower numbers, will get noticed.
I always thought
getting finals MVP would be pretty baller, and totally within Roy’s reach (if Blazers turn out to be a dominant team)
If schedule is a factor
then his numbers should improve as the schedule gets easier.
If it isn’t, they won’t, and schedule drops out of your list of factors.
If he’s putting up 23-8-7 by the end of the year, and we win in excess of 55, he’ll get some love.
Do you like asparagus?
LBJ also has a better record than Roy
and has been more clutch. This year LeBron is shooting 83% from the floor in the last 5 minutes of games within 5 points.
by as11osu on Dec 4, 2008 7:07 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
Yeah, that was almost laughable to me
Guys like Hollinger think stats tell all. In reality, basketball isn’t reducible to numbers. Brandon Roy may or may not be as valuable as LeBron, Paul, or Wade. But those numbers certainly don’t prove it either way. That’s just ignorant—and lazy.
"We don't back down to nobody." --Joel Przybilla
roy is not a top 5 mvp candidate
period.
he’s sitting right around #10 in my book.
Boomshakalaka
by jksnake99 on Dec 4, 2008 10:00 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
also the focus
on non pace adjusted stats is silly. The Blazers play one of the slowest paces in the league. When pace adjusted a guy like Wade starts to lose ground.
Life is exhausting when you are this stupid.
Excellent point on Conley by Ford
He’s just not the right fit for this team. Think about the way this team plays when they’re at their best. It’s all about ball movement. Conley wants to break down the defense himself and find the open man for the assist. From what I’ve seen, only truly elite players can play that style and be successful with it at the point. And Conley is not an elite player. Oden’s not going to play any better just cause his buddy is here, so here’s hoping the Blazers don’t jerk with the good thing they’ve got.
Besides…..is anyone here really disappointed with Blake’s play right now? Wouldn’t you rather have Steve Blake at the point for the Blazers for the next couple years instead of Conley? I know I would.
Yes! Yes! In the face!
I'm wondering what Batum's historic numbers are?
by TallTimber on Dec 4, 2008 4:11 PM PST reply actions 1 recs
I laughed at that too
Sadly, it reinforces the idea that he doesn’t know what he is talking about when he talks about the Blazers.
He used to side with his stat machine and say that is why the Blazers aren’t really good.
Now he disagrees with it to say that the Blazers aren’t really good…
haha!
I’m figuring historic rookie numbers for players of his stature???
Who knows, Hollinger is a crazy man who lives in a dark cave, dark dark.
BONUS
click above if you are winner,
by Outlaw is Rejector on Dec 4, 2008 8:59 PM PST up reply actions
He devised some formula to convert numbers from European leagues (40 minutes) to the NBA
But naturally those are pretty inaccurate.
he has found however
that his stats from Europe are far more accurate in predicting a players career than the college numbers. Which is strange, but ok.
"Why would we lie to ourselves dude?"
"Be excellent to each other."
"All we are is dust in the wind, dude."
"Strange things are afoot at the Circle K."
The Wisdom of Bill S Preston Esquire and Ted Theodore Logan
by GreatOden'sRaven on Dec 5, 2008 10:28 AM PST up reply actions
The problem with Hollinger
is that he project players by themselves. So if Blake was traded to a crappy team that didn’t give him open looks, his scoring and 3 point percent would probably go down.
Yet Hollinger wouldn’t look at that. He ignores chemistry and culture (of course, those things are hard to quantify)… but that leads him to underrate the Blazers significantly the last two seasons.
Joel and Steve playing above their career numbers means they had a great offseason, but more importantly, it means the team is playing well and it’s creating opportunities for those guys.
I think Hollinger had us winning 28 games last year (because we lost Z-Bo, our “best player”) and he had us winning in 42 games this year (because we really were a 35 win team last year based on +/- and Oden/Rudy/Bayless would only be worth 7 games).
Hollinger doesn’t understand that basketball is a team sport where the players interact with each other on the court like a symphony. He would be much better as a baseball analyst where chemistry and synergy are less important and individual match ups and stats mean something.
by Bust a Bucket on Dec 5, 2008 1:40 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
Hollinger's biggest problem:
the lack of easy baskets is probably the biggest.
I sure hope Portland is working on a fix for that.
We’re not feeding the big guys in position for easy baskets nearly as often as a good team should.
Watching Rondo pass to KG for repeatedly easy dunks, against the same team Portland struggled for interior offense against (the Wiz), was interesting.
Right now
we’re just letting Greg get used to playing at NBA speed, rebounding, defense, running the offense. I’d guess in about 20-30 games, we’re all of a sudden going to start to see more feeds inside.
You want to have it established by the time the playoffs start, but there’s no rush. We’re winning without it right now. Maybe our first round opponent won’t have that much opportunity to work on controlling Greg in the post.
This will come.
Do you like asparagus?
yeah some of them are insider
and if you can read them 1 hour after they are posted or while they are on, youre ok
after that they go insider. Some people dont have that, so i figure i would be a good samaritan and post them.
"Why would we lie to ourselves dude?"
"Be excellent to each other."
"All we are is dust in the wind, dude."
"Strange things are afoot at the Circle K."
The Wisdom of Bill S Preston Esquire and Ted Theodore Logan
by GreatOden'sRaven on Dec 5, 2008 10:29 AM PST up reply actions
Money and or ladies of the night will suffice
"Why would we lie to ourselves dude?"
"Be excellent to each other."
"All we are is dust in the wind, dude."
"Strange things are afoot at the Circle K."
The Wisdom of Bill S Preston Esquire and Ted Theodore Logan
by GreatOden'sRaven on Dec 5, 2008 2:48 PM PST up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
FanShots
Quick hits of video, photos, quotes, chats, links and lists that you find around the web.
Recommended FanShots
Recent FanShots
In Association With
Ball Don't Lie - NBA - Yahoo! Sport
- Days of NBA Lives: Wherein Roy Hibbert tap-dances to Maine
- Grizzlies Valentine’s Day cards are the key to love
- Kevin Love would like the NBA to take the MLB’s approach on All-Star games
- Kobe Bryant fires a few hilarious salvos at Jeremy Lin
- Brandon Jennings states the obvious regarding his 2014 free agency, everyone goes nuts
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
