Blazersedge: An SB Nation Community

Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Sports blogs for fans, by fans.
Around SBN: SB Nation NFL Power Rankings for Week 11

Game 21 Preview: Blazers vs. Celtics

Rewind the memory-o-meter to Wednesday, January 16th, 2008.  The young Portland Trail Blazers had surprised the league by rattling off 18 wins in their last 20 games.  Though the 23-15 record was still somewhat modest by NBA elite standards it was still good enough for the division lead and there were whispers around the league that the Blazers just might be for real.  Those whispers were all but shouts among Blazer fans.  Right here on Blazersedge.com post after post trumpeted this matchup between elite teams, most excited about the possibility of putting down the Celtics and claiming our rightful glory, many predicting exactly that happening, some even saying this would be a prelude to a playoffs matchup (which, of course, could only happen if both teams made the NBA Finals).  Both nerves and anticipation reached a fevered pitch as the teams took the floor.  You could hear it clearly in the voices of the TV announcers.  You could read it in the tide of comments that came across our main page and sidebar.  This was it!  Finally the Blazers had a chance to claim their due.

The net result?  A 100-90 victory for the Celtics in a game where the Blazers led early but pretty much got squashed like a bug when it mattered.  It was only a 10-point loss, but the way we got manhandled down the stretch made it seem like twice that.  Everybody talked bravely afterwards.  “It’s just one loss.  We’ll get them next time.”  In truth it would be a month and a half before the Blazers even managed consecutive wins again.  They never won more than two in a row after that point.  Their record following the Boston loss was 18-26 and they missed the playoffs entirely.  They didn’t even manage to get the Celtics back, losing by 10 on their home floor five weeks later.

Now fast-forward back to today, Friday, December 5th, 2008.  Ten and a half months later the Blazers’ record stands at 14-6.  Though the current six game winning streak seems paltry compared to 18 of 20 the caliber of opponent in this stretch has been much tougher.  The whispers are more pronounced among national media folks.  The Blazers really are looking like they’re for real.  Yet the groundswell of confidence about this game is not as evident among Blazer fans.  Maybe they know instinctively that more is at stake here…that we’re not just making flippant predictions about playoff position anymore…that these matchups are not terribly far from becoming reality.  Maybe the rings Boston won last year have a sobering effect.  Maybe Portland’s memory is just long.  Or maybe we’ve smartened up.  Any way you slice it, this is bound to be a tough game.  Portland may be moving towards the head of the class, but there are a couple of huge bullies yet in the way.  The dismissal bell just rang.  It’s time to see if we can make it to the bus without getting our clocks cleaned as we step into the courtyard.

A Look at the Celtics

The easiest way to explain this matchup is to say that most things the Blazers do well the Celtics do at least a little bit better.  The Blazers are 15th in the league in scoring at 98.7 ppg.  The Celtics are 11th at 99.4.  The Blazers are 7th in points allowed with 93.2 ppg.  The Celtics are 1st at 90.3.  The Blazers are 9th in field goal percentage, the Celtics 5th.   The Blazers are 20th in field goal percentage allowed, the Celtics are 1st.  (Big gap there.)   The Celtics draw more fouls and force more steals and turnovers.  They also defend the three-point arc better.  The teams are virtually tied in defensive rebounding, assists, blocks, and free-throw percentage.  That leaves the Blazers few clear advantages in a game where they need them.  The Blazers are a better offensive rebounding team.  The Blazers take and hit more threes.  That’s about it.

Those two particular advantages do open the door a crack, however, in that they have the potential of generating extra points.  Extra points are exactly what you need while playing the Celtics.  You’re not going to out-defend them. You’re not going to out-grind them.  You’re not going to win if the game comes down to a couple of critical possessions with your guys against theirs.  They have Kevin Garnett, Paul Pierce, and Ray Allen.  I wouldn’t say it’s impossible to outduel those three in a two-critical-possessions game but I would never, ever put my money on it.  Denver scored 94 and Indiana 95 in the only two games the Celtics lost this year plus they’ve had a couple close calls with lesser teams who scored in the 100’s.  Topping the century mark is no sinecure, mind you.  The Celts also win when scoring in the 115-120 range.  They can win any kind of game.  That’s what makes them great.  Nevertheless you’re going to need to put points on the board and build a lead to beat them.  If this were wrestling they would want to put you in a hammerlock submission with that 41% field goal percentage allowed.  You better come with the Hurricanrudy off of the top rope and add a Flying Sergio off the ladder for good measure.

Boston’s three stars need no introduction.  All you need to know is that they’re seamlessly blending together once again.  All of them score.  All of them rebound well for their positions.  All of them pass.  Ray Allen’s shooting is back near normal levels after a down year last year.  Paul Pierce’s shooting has fallen off.  No matter, they do what they have to do in order to win.  Rajon Rondo is also having a great year, averaging near 8 assists and 5 rebounds plus shooting 52% from the field.  Their other starter, Kendrick Perkins (or K-Perk, as I like to call him) is shooting 57.5% from the field on the few shots he takes and also grabbing 8 rebounds per game in fewer than 30 minutes of play.  Guards Tony Allen and Eddie House plus forwards Glen Davis, Leon Powe, and Brian Scalabrine round out the regular rotation (thought Allen is day-to-day with an ankle injury).  Most of that supporting cast knows what it’s doing.  Occasionally someone will take a flight of fancy (House, Perkins) or no-show (Powe, Scalabrine) or just plain suck (Davis) but with such a strong core the bit players can’t do too much damage even on their worst nights.  You are going to have to fight all game long to end up close, let alone on top.

Worst of all for the Blazers the Celtics are not going to get rattled.  Should the Blazers come out and build a 20-point lead in the first the Celtics will probably figure they’ll catch them in the end.  They’re the champions.  They’re used to being the biggest game on everyone’s schedule.  They’re handling it marvelously.  You’re not going to backdoor a win here.  If Boston has an off-night they only beat you by 5 instead of 15.  Barring a weird Garnett ejection or something of that nature the Blazers are going to have to earn this honestly.

Keys to the Game

1.  Don’t get destroyed early.  This game can’t be won in the first 20 minutes but it could be lost there.  If Boston gets up big you may see the Blazers make the typical underdog comeback but the Celtics will just lower the boom when it matters.  Portland needs to stay in contact the whole way.

2.  The outside shooting has to be there tonight.  The Celtics are not quite as adept defending on the perimeter.  Hitting those shots will make them commit defenders and free up the rest of the floor.

3.  The Big Three all have to come strong.  Greg Oden could be a huge wildcard with his rebounding, offensive rebounding, and putback abilities.  If we hit a couple of deep shots and he starts tearing up the middle the dam could burst on the Celtics.  Brandon Roy has to drive past whoever the Celtics put on him.  Lamarcus Aldridge just has to play Garnett within shouting distance and not get obliterated.  Sometimes he rises to these challenges surprisingly well.  It would be nice if tonight were that night.

4.  This is not an opponent like the Knicks or Wizards where you have to remind yourself to respect them enough to play your game.  With Boston you have to remind yourself not to respect them too much.  This is a game.  They are an NBA team just like we are.  They are good and you need to be on point but anyone who says a win is impossible hasn’t watched the NBA very long.  Do not put too much pressure on yourself to make this game special.  Do not be in awe of the opponent.  Do not feel you have to make every possession perfect.  Go out, share the ball, take your shots where you get them, crash the boards, and hustle back to defend.  You could still lose doing those things but if you get distracted away from doing them or start thinking instead of executing you’re going to lose for sure.

5.  Energy, hustle, and confidence are always keys when facing a superior opponent.  Sometimes they snowball into a win.

Final Thoughts

So…back now to the story of Friday, December 5th, 2008.  This is a big game for fans, quite understandably.  We’re all going to be extra excited tonight when the teams take the floor.  I bet the Blazers will be a little extra excited too.  But as soon as the ball goes up it’s down to business.  And putting on our business hat we have to understand that this is one game among many and really has few permanent consequences.  Winning tonight would be a nice feather in Portland’s cap, of course, but it doesn’t go much further than that. 

I know people are going to argue with me about this but trust me…we cannot become an elite team by winning this game.  That only comes by winning 55+ and then performing really well in the playoffs.  Those landmarks come in April and May, not December.  Anyone who remembers the Drexler years can tell you that winning games against opponents in the regular season means bubkus when you get into the post-season.  It’s a whole new world and as soon as Game 1 commences nobody remembers what happened before.  The only thing that’s going to markedly change if the Blazers win is that the national pundits are going to ooh and aah and maybe some other fans will say, “Portland is for real.”  Those last exactly until Sunday when we play Toronto, when we are once again capable of losing all of that with one bad performance.  That’s about what it means…a temporary high.  It would be nice, to be sure, but if you’re a Portland fan you’ll know already not to hang your hat or your pride on what other people say about your team because they’ll always say it louder and longer about somebody more famous.

The opposite is also true.  We cannot lose the season or our status by losing this game.  The only real danger here is that the emotion of testing ourselves against the World Champions gets out of control and we get deflated if we come up short, letting it affect us like a triple-bogey affects some otherwise good golfers and ruins their entire round.  This team is on FAR more solid ground than last year’s team was when they met the Celtics so I don’t think that’s too big of a danger.  It would be nice to know the fans were on that solid ground as well.  Just like the effects of winning this game could be blown in Toronto the effects of losing it could be made good in Toronto…or anywhere really.  One win and it’s back to neutral.

Is this a big game?  Sure, for December.  But that modifier “FOR DECEMBER” is crucial, win or lose.  It’s great that this game is exciting, but what makes it exciting is not just the opponent, but the position we’re in as we approach the game.  That position will not change too much no matter what the result tonight.  The position--the play that brought the Blazers to it and that hopefully will continue on after tonight--is what truly excites me, not just one game in December.

Check out the Celtics’ point of view at the always-popular (and newly renovated) CelticsBlog

Enter the Jersey Contest form for this game here.

This game starts at 5:00 p.m. Pacific and is televised on ESPN as well as CSN KGW locally. 

--Dave (blazersub@yahoo.com)

2 recs  |  Comment 50 comments |

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Display:

I don't know who this Dave fella thinks he is...

…But he might just be the best sports writer there is.

by Blazersaurus on Dec 5, 2008 1:19 AM PST reply actions   0 recs

were gonna win by 4

according to my jersey contest sheet.

by tevisthe4th on Dec 5, 2008 1:25 AM PST reply actions   0 recs

no bonus but a lot of impact

is possible tonight. Dave is right; you don’t fluke yourself into a win against Boston in their place. So the impact of a win—that yes, doesn’t count any more in the standings than the Wiz game—is that you can see with your own eyes that Portland has the talent and character to beat Boston straight up, man for man. Great NBA teams do indeed lose, but crazy circumstances excepted you have to come with everything you’ve got.

If everything they got is enough for an honest takedown of the Celtics—particularly with an eye towards what Roy is clearly looking for in his interviews, respect by refusing to be intimidated—that will mean something. It won’t buy them anything, but it WILL mean something.

It’s a scary thought. The Celtics are fairly evidently the best basketball team on the planet, aren’t they? Are the Blazers very nearly the best basketball team on the planet? This group of young guys? How possible is that? Is it scary because it doesn’t sound immediately absurd?

by torridjoe on Dec 5, 2008 1:33 AM PST reply actions   0 recs

I think it would be a confidence boost to Portland

when they get to the playoffs at the end of the season. “We beat the Celtics so we can play against these guys.” However the value of that boost won’t be critical to the team’s chances and doing without it wouldn’t kill us. I guess what I’m saying is that only good can result from this game. If we win it’s a real feather in our caps. If we lose it was against the Celtics on the road…no big deal. At worst it’s basically a neutral outcome. However the good that results is also limited. It’s not far-reaching and it won’t win us a ton of games. Good play and execution are more important. It’s like a psychological boost when you get to Mile 6 of your marathon. It’s cool—even cooler if you’re running a personal best—but you still have to grind out the steps the rest of the way. If you don’t do that your boost will have meant nothing. Nor does it guarantee that you’ll still be running a personal best by the end of the race. It’s a good barometer for now, but NOW is all it’s good for.

I guess there could be a lasting negative if we get blown into smithereens like we did against the L*kers in the first game of the season. But I don’t really see that happening and the team would probably bounce back within a game or two anyway.

—Dave

by Dave on Dec 5, 2008 1:44 AM PST up reply actions   0 recs

I'd say if we battle them down to the wire

it’s a confidence boost even if we win. We don’t have to win to come out of this confident that we can play with these guys. I’m right with you on what this game means. We’ve already established that we are playing elite basketball (whether we maintain that is another question). A win here is just a nice bonus. How we play at Toronto and Utah and Denver, and home against Orlando and Phoenix and Dallas and Denver, will tell us a lot more than one game in Boston.

Do you like asparagus?

by jscot on Dec 5, 2008 3:25 AM PST up reply actions   0 recs

My keys to the game

Use Aldridges long jump shot to force Garnett out. The same tactic should allow Greg to make his mark in the middle. As the preview said, we need the long ball to drop. Roy… We need you. Early. Often. Late, always. The bench will play a large role in my mind. If they play well enough to keep the score within 10, it will allow the starters to be rested for the battle that will be the 4th quarter. Sergio’s defense will be tested again, against one of the best up & comers Rajon Rondo. We need someone to bang their bigs around, especially Garnett. I am looking at you Channing. Do the same thing you did to Howard in Orlando. Deflate his baloon.

by TheGreatDane17 on Dec 5, 2008 9:51 AM PST up reply actions   0 recs

KGW Locally, I believe.

That way you can pick which High-Def broadcast you want to watch.

I still can’t decide, but I’ll probably go with ESPN to hear the national take, even though we’ve been hearing it a lot already this season with all the national broadcasts the Blazers had been on.

by FlyingOutlaw on Dec 5, 2008 2:54 AM PST reply actions   0 recs

It is on KGW.

"When I die, I want to go peacefully like my Grandfather did, in his sleep -- not screaming, like the passengers in his car"

by you'vegottomakeyourfreethrows on Dec 5, 2008 10:23 AM PST up reply actions   0 recs

Will it be HD on KGW?

All the KGW broadcasts I’ve seen recently have been SD.

by pualo on Dec 5, 2008 11:18 AM PST up reply actions   0 recs

I'm fortunate enough to have the HD cable package...

I don’t know how it works for everyone else.

"When I die, I want to go peacefully like my Grandfather did, in his sleep -- not screaming, like the passengers in his car"

by you'vegottomakeyourfreethrows on Dec 5, 2008 11:52 AM PST up reply actions   0 recs

Are you saying that all your KGW games are in HD?

Why would they have HD for digital cable, but SD for over-the-air? Are they just screwing us for fun?

by pualo on Dec 5, 2008 12:44 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

I honestly don't know how it works, but yes, that's what I'm alluding to.

I have KGW in regular and in HD. When I flip back and forth between the two (one is 8, one is 708), there appears to be a major difference in clarity… especially during sporting events.

That’s not to say I’m not just imagining the difference…

"When I die, I want to go peacefully like my Grandfather did, in his sleep -- not screaming, like the passengers in his car"

by you'vegottomakeyourfreethrows on Dec 5, 2008 12:50 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

Oh I can definitely see the difference for most programming.

But the Blazer games have all been in SD. On the sidebars of the screen, they show some kind of Blazer logo (which is in HD), with the game action in the middle, in lower definition.

by pualo on Dec 5, 2008 1:11 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

Am I to understand then...

that I’m not watching the games in HD after all?

"When I die, I want to go peacefully like my Grandfather did, in his sleep -- not screaming, like the passengers in his car"

by you'vegottomakeyourfreethrows on Dec 5, 2008 1:29 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

I don't know.

But I know:

- it’s in a 4:3 aspect ratio, which is not typical of HD
- it looks clearer than analog, because analog broadcast have crappy compression, but not as good as real HD programming
- it’s obviously broadcast in HD, but I think it’s filmed in SD
- who knows if you’re watching the same thing I am

by pualo on Dec 5, 2008 1:34 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

you got Comcast?

"When I die, I want to go peacefully like my Grandfather did, in his sleep -- not screaming, like the passengers in his car"

by you'vegottomakeyourfreethrows on Dec 5, 2008 2:18 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

Yes

But not digital. So I don’t get any HD cable channels. But I can do HD broadcast channels, either via antenna or via QAM tuner on the cable line (the law requires cable operators to include anything that is broadcast over the air on the cable).

by pualo on Dec 5, 2008 3:53 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

so...

I watched the game on ESPNHD… which is definitely in HD. I also checked out the KGWHD channel… not HD. Better than the KGW picture, but not as good as ESPNHD.

What a pain in the arse…

"When I die, I want to go peacefully like my Grandfather did, in his sleep -- not screaming, like the passengers in his car"

by you'vegottomakeyourfreethrows on Dec 5, 2008 9:03 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

im not afraid of a loss

as with the mindset this team seams to display in interviews suggusts a redoubaling of efforts would be immidieatly following. a win however, could have the effect of injecting overconfidence and a lessend work ethic. i hope ofr a win, and a balenced accepting of it. wonderful read

Travis please save us

by Sabonis4Ever on Dec 2, 2008 5:14 PM PST Gameday Open Thread: Blazers vs. Knicks on Blazer's Edge

by maid tu rek on Dec 5, 2008 2:55 AM PST reply actions   0 recs

Sergio is not amused

"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 10:19 AM PST up reply actions   0 recs

I never quite realized

how SEXAY you are!

—Dave

by Dave on Dec 5, 2008 11:37 AM PST up reply actions   0 recs

Disagree re Boston

They are an outstanding team, but they are not at least equal to Portland in every phase of the game, as you state.

Some of Boston’s slightly higher numbers are a simple reflection of the pace at which they play. The play at a higher pace: more shots, more rebounds, more assists, more everything. So in terms of quantity, their numbers are often higher.

But in terms of efficiency, Portland is superior in several areas.

Portland is a much better three point shooting team, as you say.

They are a better rebounding team, partly because they are a far superior offensive rebounding team.

Relative to their opponents, they have a better turnover—to-turnover ratio.

Portland is a better offensive team, overall; they get more points per possession than the Celtics.

The Celtics are good in all areas, but their dominance comes from defense, and it’s cued by Kevin Garnett. They were an indifferent defensive team before him, and they’d be one without him. Garnett’s game is down this season, and might not return to its highest peak. They are running on unusually old legs, by NBA standards; their shelf life right now has t be in question.

They play much better defense than the Blazers: granted. But it’s not accurate to suggest they are as good or better at Portland at everything else; it’s not accurate to suggest they are better at anything else. I don’t think the data supports that.

by Hulk on Dec 5, 2008 6:47 AM PST reply actions   0 recs

Very nice round-up, Dave, as usual

Rudyculize: The act of Rudy making others look slow, dim and generally oafish.
http://www.myspace.com/y5k

by Y5k on Dec 5, 2008 6:58 AM PST reply actions   0 recs

And

Portland also handles the ball better, period. The Blazer’s assist to turnover ratio is second in the league, and far ahead of Boston. This reflects the fact that the Blazers get their points out of moving the ball to the open man—adeptly—while Boston relies more on one-on-one.

It’s good to temper fan expectations at this point, and you clearly try to do that often. It’s fair to temper enthusiasms here because Boston is eager to intimidate Portland; they dread a much more confident Portand team, which is just what they’d face the rest of their careers if Portland wins tonight. So no one should expect a Portland win tonight.

But Portland does a number of things better than Boston: pass, avoid turnovers, rebound, shoot the three, and maximize offensive possessions. Boston is better only at keeping opponents for scoring—but they are incredibly good at it, the model for the league.

by Hulk on Dec 5, 2008 7:08 AM PST reply actions   0 recs

Good points

I intentionally omitted the passing stats because I want to see how Portland fares moving the ball against Boston before I lean on them too heavily. I did mention the importance of ball movement to Portland in the keys to the game though. Ditto with the maximizing offensive possessions for the same reason.

In general when I’m not sure Portland is going to be able to prosecute some part of their game because of an opponent’s strength I will downplay that aspect in the preview. That’s simply because I don’t want people watching for or leaning on things I’m not sure will be there. In some senses what matters is Portland’s ability to maximize offensive possessions against Boston rather than just against the people they’ve played so far and, in turn, Boston’s ability to maximize offensive possessions against Portland. I’m guessing Boston’s defense will put a bigger dent in Portland’s offense than Portland’s defense will put in Boston’s. The areas where I am pretty sure Portland can still prosecute their superiority are the two I mentioned: offensive rebounding and three-point shooting.

Hope that makes sense.

—Dave

by Dave on Dec 5, 2008 11:36 AM PST up reply actions   0 recs

Well put Dave

I agree with your overall perspective, and the game ended up demonstrating the wisdom of it.

But there’s an added perspective, using the season’s performance, that is useful. Against its average competition, the Blazers have handled the ball better, scored more efficiently, rebounded better (offensively, primarily) and shot from three (a huge weapon) better than the Celtics.

And then they come into the game and get handled, clearly.

The Blazers have the demonstrated abiltity to play well, but playoff basketball, or lay-it-all-on-tonight’s-line basketball, is different. And the Celtics are much better at that game right now.

Tonight also confirmed that it’s not only understandable to hate the Celtics, but totally justifed. Garnett is a punk. Watching his game suffer the inevitable declines of age, and watching his feet fail to do what his lips insist they can will be among the great pleasures of professional basketball over the next three years. Their days will very soon be gone. Go Cavs. . .

by Hulk on Dec 6, 2008 6:46 AM PST up reply actions   0 recs

Stats can be misleading

Maybe I missed it but one thing I didn’t see mentioned was the strength of schedule for both teams so far. They beat Cleveland in game 1, the Pistons twice and Orlando once. Other than that most of their other wins were against arguably mediocre teams. We all know how tough the Blazer schedule has been.

Can’t wait for the game tonight.

by hellsfrozenover on Dec 5, 2008 4:22 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

Oh boy...

I try not to get too excited about games like this, but then I read your take and the comments and, well….

Dave, points #4 and 5 in your keys to the game are exactly correct. This game will be won or lost on what happens between the ears…. can’t wait.

by rburg on Dec 5, 2008 9:04 AM PST reply actions   0 recs

I could be wrong

but I know I’m not because I never am-

This game is on KGW locally, meaning us folks with the antena can catch the game! Booyeah!

by 50backflips on Dec 5, 2008 9:43 AM PST reply actions   0 recs

nice write up

i’m starting to take these for granted.

by appel82 on Dec 5, 2008 9:46 AM PST reply actions   0 recs

KGW

Hey Dave, I think tonight’s game is broadcast locally on KGW as opposed to CSN.

by MavetheGreat on Dec 5, 2008 10:14 AM PST reply actions   0 recs

I think you hit it on the head

The Blazers need to not OVERRESPECT the Celtics.
I know Roy may be different, but i am worried that the team goes in there thinking, boy i hope we beat these guys tonight, we are playing hard and we will do our best.
Not, we should and will win this game (ala NY and DC)

"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 10:23 AM PST reply actions   0 recs

+1

I accidentally posted an exact copy of your thought, so yeah, what he said.

Good night, Blazer fans, whereEVER you may be.... DAA-daddle-a-DA-da-da-DA-da-da-DAA

by jerome glide porterworth on Dec 5, 2008 1:00 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

Dave's stats

Dave,

I always love your analyses, but I wish you would stop quoting scoring averages like they mean anything. Listing 98.7 ppg doesn’t say anything at all about how how good the Blazers offense is. Giving points per possession is far more informative and useful.

Luckily you don’t usually give any rebounding numbers, but if you did, the useful form would be offensive rebounding rate and defensive rebounding rate.

by pualo on Dec 5, 2008 11:13 AM PST reply actions   0 recs

I try to keep the stats simple and light

because writing gobs of stats isn’t a great read. I look at the statistics that you and hulk name above, compare them, and make a reasonable extrapolation of what ones are going to factor in tonight, but when I write about them I will usually use the simpler versions you’d find in a boxscore because those are accessible and understandable to everyone. If those basic stats don’t reflect the whole story I’ll either omit them or explain why. For instance there have been several teams this year who have gotten more rebounds than the Blazers per game—sometimes by wide margins—but my preview has said the Blazers are a better rebounding team for exactly the reasons you mention.

My theory of previewing is that deep statistics are like underwear. People should generally be able to tell that you have them on but you shouldn’t be parading them out in front of people every time you talk to them to prove it.

—Dave

by Dave on Dec 5, 2008 11:26 AM PST up reply actions   0 recs

That's cool.

I respect your decision. I just think that it kind of perpetuates a common misunderstanding among more casual fans that you can tell how good a team’s offense or defense is by looking at the scoring totals. I worry about someone seeing you using those stats, and thinking “if someone as smart as Dave uses them, they must mean something.” But I understand that you also want to keep the numbers simple so that everyone can understand them. It’s a tradeoff of course.

by pualo on Dec 5, 2008 11:47 AM PST up reply actions   0 recs

Yeah

There are a lot of decisions to be made like that. Some bloggers do go with the deep stats every game and such. Everybody’s different.

I also look at it this way: I provide the basics but leave space for you guys to bring nuances here, as you just have. It’s way more fun to have a discussion like this than for me to be exhaustive with details that I really don’t know are going to matter to people, leaving nothing for people to add. When you comment on what matters to you—agreeing or disagreeing or bringing up things that I didn’t even mention—that makes things more authentic, I think.

—Dave

by Dave on Dec 5, 2008 11:55 AM PST up reply actions   0 recs

Listing 98.7 ppg means everything...

when it’s compared to 93.2 ppg allowed. They’re averages, so they do indicate true data. It shows that on average we will win.

The low scores should scream slower pace, not poor offense.

I like the modern, sexier stats, too, and totally get what you’re saying. But those stats aren’t meaningless.

"When I die, I want to go peacefully like my Grandfather did, in his sleep -- not screaming, like the passengers in his car"

by you'vegottomakeyourfreethrows on Dec 5, 2008 12:02 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

I've found that point differential

is useful in many ways. I don’t care how fast or slow you play, rather how well that style is allowing you to beat your opponents. You can be high-paced and good or low-paced and good. You can also suck either way. In this case the Celtics score more and allow less, which is a pretty good indication that they’re going to be a tough team no matter which way you slice the stats. There’s no way to jimmy those numbers around.

—Dave

by Dave on Dec 5, 2008 12:14 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

Good point

98.7 to 93.2 does tell you something. It tells you that you have a good team, obviously. But it doesn’t tell you if you are good because of good offense, or good defense, or a mix. Saying that the Blazers are #2 in offensive efficiency and #16 in defense tells you even more. So maybe meaningless was a stretch, if you look at both numbers together, but you still only get half the meaning.

by pualo on Dec 5, 2008 12:38 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

Indeed

I think when the schedule calms down a little we’re going to have a main page post about stats and meaning and which ones are best and/or favorites…but especially what they tell you and what they don’t. I think that would be a great discussion.

—Dave

by Dave on Dec 5, 2008 12:42 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

Oh and I'll point out,

not that anyone cares I’m sure, that if I was going to list some very simple but very meaningful statistics to tell you something about a team, those are the ones that I think are best, and have the best balance of simplicity vs. meaningfulness. 2 and 16 for Portland, 9 and 1 for Boston.

by pualo on Dec 5, 2008 12:43 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

Dave got the psychology of this matchup in a nutshell:

“This is not an opponent like the Knicks or Wizards where you have to remind yourself to respect them enough to play your game. With Boston you have to remind yourself not to respect them too much.”

Very well put. We may not win; heck, in all actuality it’s more likely that we don’t. Getting acclimated to this kind of high-profile stage will be crucial to the development of our “playoff mindset”, yeah? I hope we got the stage-fright smacked out of us in LA.

Win or lose – we’re with ya, boys! Now go kill.

Good night, Blazer fans, whereEVER you may be.... DAA-daddle-a-DA-da-da-DA-da-da-DAA

by jerome glide porterworth on Dec 5, 2008 12:57 PM PST reply actions   0 recs

Dave, great read, and I really mean that, a really good piece.

It isn’t that big of game for all the well laid out reasons you gave but it is for me in the respect of this will gives us a closer idea of how good we are and how far we may have to go to get back to the promised land. I’m fairly anxious to see how we come out and how we can play, so for this, it is a “big game.”

I love your moderation. It is sensible and prudent. I can’t help feeling a bit giddy though. We are now at this moment, #2 in the Western Conference. The the question of how far we’ve come rings loud. I too have waited since the last championship (8 years old) and I’m getting excited…big game…;-)

by ColoradoBlazerFan on Dec 5, 2008 4:15 PM PST reply actions   0 recs

Yeah

I am giddy too. I am getting butterflies as the game approaches. Afterwards, though, I’m going to try and calm down and put it in perspective. But an hour before gametime all bets are off!

—Dave

by Dave on Dec 5, 2008 4:24 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

A site by Blazer fans, for Blazer fans
Start posting about the Trail Blazers »

Join SB Nation and dive into communities focused on all your favorite teams.

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recommended FanPosts

Un_bohemien_small
Is Roy a Good Teammate?
Kpavatar2_small
Just Another Junk In The Wall:  11-18-09
Terryporter_small
Blazers Edge Community Podcast Episode 008
Small
Why is the Blazers’ offense bad this year? Why is the defense so good?
P1010399_small
Photos from the Hawks game, 11/16/2009

Recent FanPosts

Small
Blake: Breaking Up Is Hard To Do
Portland-trail-blazers_small
Individual Observations - Little Mac
Photo__2__small
junkdrawer in case of SO armageddon
Small
Rotation...Oden
Small
Impressive Early Season Blazers Stats
Imported_photos_00004_small
The Blazer Guards
Small
Portland and the summer of Lebron
Copy_of_dcp_2180_small
Tough act to follow junk Nov.19
Small
Nate? Avery? Adelman?

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >

FanShots

Quick hits of video, photos, quotes, chats, links and lists that you find around the web.

Recommended FanShots

A modest proposal: Fire Mike Rice and Antonio Harvey!
For Ann, and Travis.
FREE GREG ODEN
"It's been good for us," Oden said. "We're going to stick with it. We have...

Recent FanShots

Greg Oden with a Kimbo Slice/Baron Davis beard. What do you think?
Andre Miller is tough
Michael Jordan says "don't retire my number"
Charles Oakley to the Blazers? He says there are talks
Lamarcus: The King Cobra?
Surprising Stats from Basketball-Reference
Oden #5 and Rudy #9 ranked soph espn.com
NYT: The Pick-And-Roll is the NBA's Old Reliable
At this point, what the Blazers want most is rebounding. That was an...

+ New FanShot All FanShots >


Editors

Kitten_small Dave

Ben_small Ben.

Moderators

Pict1126_small -ken

Polar_bear_small jorga

Terryporter_small prezofdeath

Small usmcr3049

Jesus_icon_i_small T Darkstar

Wallpaper_small geoffm