Rehashing Why Greg Oden is the Key
I’m sure I have talked about this once before, but it’s been a while and with all of the talk about the impact of new players and talent depth it’s been on my mind.
Depth, talent, and versatility are important. Those things are valuable in getting through an 82-game grind and positioning yourself for the playoffs. The more arrows you have in your quiver the better chance that some of them will strike home over the long run. However once you get to the playoffs it becomes a different game…not so much about the number of arrows (as the chances to fire are more limited over seven games than eighty-two) but about how accurately you take your best shot and how much damage you do with it.
Fast forward eight months down the road. The Blazers are entering the playoffs for the first time since back in Ought-Three. For fun let’s say it’s against the L*kers. (If you don’t like that, figure instead at some point we’ll have to face them to make it to the promised land.) I guarantee you somewhere--could be a fanpost here, could be another site entirely, might even be in a print publication--somebody is going to offer some version of the following analysis. (I’m using last year’s
Derek Fisher vs. Steve Blake: Push
Lamar Odom vs. Martell Webster: Edge L*kers
Andrew Bynum vs. Greg Oden: Edge Blazers
Bench: Edge Blazers
Blazers have three edges, L*kers have two, Blazers should win.
Sounds logical on paper. Reality doesn’t follow that logic, however. The fly in the ointment is that the NBA playoffs don’t depend on edging out your opponent in more positions as much as they depend on who has the best overall player on the floor. Even in this new, team-game-friendly league the gap that matters most is the superstar gap. You can edge a team out in three or four of six positions (including bench). They’ve got
The key to playoff success is simple: You have to have a guy on the floor who has the potential to be the best, most dominant player out there on a given night, who fulfills that potential more often than not, and who warps the whole game for both sides when he does fulfill that potential.
Consider
Fast forward once again to today. Brandon Roy is an incredible leader, a clutch player, an amazing scorer…in many ways he’s the Terry Porter of his time. (Keep in mind that while we think of Terry as a point guard he really shaded towards a hybrid who marked scoring and team leadership among his strongest gifts.) Lamarcus Aldridge is going to become dominant, perhaps as much as Mo Lucas ever was offensively. The young talent surrounding those two has everybody salivating. But
Greg Oden will have the potential to trump any opponent mismatch in the same way Kobe Bryant does…not just an edge, but THE edge that makes the opponent edges not matter anymore. Whatever happens or doesn’t happen in the regular season, when it’s go-time in April, May, and eventually June, that’s going to make the difference. You can win a series here and there without him, but if you want to dream about Finals appearances, Oden is your guy.
--Dave (blazersub@yahoo.com)
2 recs |
246 comments
Comments
What are you guy's talking about?
I'm a little confused by your tactics
by oderiferous emanations 74 on Aug 27, 2008 12:06 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Same guy
Not sure where we’re getting the GO = Joakim Noah scuttlebutt. If anything, I’d say GO has been hitting up the protein shakes a bit much, though.
Dave – I’m glad you called Fisher / Blake a push. Blake has been not getting the props he deserves as a smart, level-headed PG who can twist the dagger when needed. Plus, he’s a classy guy (like all the current crop of Blazers).
by DonkeyShins on Aug 27, 2008 12:12 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Looks as if the posts were pulled
Last night some chucklehead was posting multiple comments claiming GO had reefer madness. Clearly he was hitting the Night Train.
by DonkeyShins on Aug 27, 2008 9:24 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Interesting return to our basics
You can argue that for 10 years that nuclear bomb was Shaq. But it was not until Shaq had K*be or Wade that he won. Same for The Admiral. Add Duncan and a ring. Same for Clyde. All those complementary pieces in Portland and his ring comes through Hakeem. Same again for KG. His ring comes courtesy of Paul Pierce.
So it appears that Oden is indeed our nuclear bomb. But Roy and Aldridge are secondary keys as well, also should they become dominant. They are the bombers that deliver the bomb. The rest seem exactly as you describe – arrows (chaff) to occupy the shields (air defenses) while the bomb is delivered.
It also speaks to our huge weakness – it is nearly all potential until it actually works. But as fans we see the best case as probable and need that assumption (dominance of GO) in order to dream of rings. Any other case cannot be considered because we lose that hope. I don’t know if you intended to rain on our parade, Dave, but I’m keeping my umbrella of hope open just in case.
Aldridge said. "We feel like we can beat any team. We feel like we can beat the Spurs, Suns, Lakers, Mavericks, whoever any night right now, and we'll still be here when those teams get old and their guys retire. We're going to be here for a long time."
by lee3022 on Aug 27, 2008 12:20 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Indeed
You could say rightfully that we need all three of the Big Three, but THE guy who makes them the Big Three is Oden. Without Roy or Aldridge for a while we’re a good team that maybe still has a chance to dominate. Without Oden we’re just a good team. I could see us winning a tough playoff series without Lamarcus if he was injured. Even without Roy if we had to, though I’d like that less. But without Oden, not so much.
—Dave
by Dave on Aug 27, 2008 12:34 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
So without Oden
The Blazers could potentially have just another Stockton/Malone pair in Roy/Aldridge. Good to make you competitive but not enough to win it all. Oden—the difference maker.
by NWfan on Aug 27, 2008 10:25 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I do agree
You have reordered my own thinking – thanks
Was the late Al McGuire right? You have to have an aircraft carrier? Can anyone beat us without an offsetting force to Oden in the post? (over a 7-game series and assuming GO is all we hope for).
Aldridge said. "We feel like we can beat any team. We feel like we can beat the Spurs, Suns, Lakers, Mavericks, whoever any night right now, and we'll still be here when those teams get old and their guys retire. We're going to be here for a long time."
by lee3022 on Aug 27, 2008 7:32 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Oh and, having started a Wilt Chamberlin fan,
I do love me some aircraft carriers.
Aldridge said. "We feel like we can beat any team. We feel like we can beat the Spurs, Suns, Lakers, Mavericks, whoever any night right now, and we'll still be here when those teams get old and their guys retire. We're going to be here for a long time."
by lee3022 on Aug 27, 2008 7:39 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
best dave post ive seen in a while
heres a post of mine from a couple weeks ago………kinda along the same lines
Could Oden Be Like Hakeem?
by BroyTheTruth on Aug 27, 2008 12:22 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Excellent analysis
One historical inaccuracy, though. Portland probably would have won that first round series in 78, even without Walton, if they hadn’t also lost Bobby Gross and Lloyd Neal to injuries. And I think Lucas played, but was just coming back from injury and wasn’t 100%.
But our dominance, and chance to repeat as champions, went down when Walton went down. Your point stands.
There’s something really interesting about this team, though. When there are so many arrows in your quiver, superstar dominance recedes in importance.
Martell can singlehandedly win a game for you (ask Utah). It seems pretty obvious that Rudy can, too. So can Travis — when he’s unstoppable, he’s unstoppable. I think Jerryd is that kind of explosive player, as well.
Now, none of them are Kobe or Lebron. But all of those guys are capable, for a quarter or a half, of having that kind of impact on a single game.
If you can figure out who has the hot hand on a given night, and ride it, you can steal a series, even from a team that has a dominant superstar.
Likely to happen? Not very often. It’s not something that you see much of when you look back at NBA history. But I’m not sure how many teams have been assembled with this much depth, either.
And there’s another thing we might do that can change the whole superstar dynamic. With all the depth, and all the young players, we can have everyone just go bust his gut for 25 minutes a game, come at teams in waves, and just wear them down. We are two deep in top quality players at every position. Even if Oden isn’t the superstar I think he’ll be, we might have some very interesting years ahead.
Other people don't have as much practice at being wrong as I do -- HT, timbo
by jscot on Aug 27, 2008 1:09 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Best example I could come up with (after 10 seconds of thinking)
Of a recent team that won a championship without a superstar is the Pistons. It’s very rare in NBA history
by two4larue on Aug 27, 2008 3:21 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
They got Sheed to put them over the top
Before that, they were just a good team; Rasheed Wallace was a game changer.
by NWfan on Aug 27, 2008 3:51 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Also Billups played in that series like the best PG in the league
Aldridge said. "We feel like we can beat any team. We feel like we can beat the Spurs, Suns, Lakers, Mavericks, whoever any night right now, and we'll still be here when those teams get old and their guys retire. We're going to be here for a long time."
by lee3022 on Aug 27, 2008 7:33 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
But perhaps
that makes the point.
You don’t actually need a superstar, but you need somebody to play like one. And if you’ve got a lot of “arrows”, more arrows than anyone has ever had before (and we just might have that in a year or two), you’ve got a decent chance of one of them playing like a superstar for a series or two.
Other people don't have as much practice at being wrong as I do -- HT, timbo
by jscot on Aug 27, 2008 9:27 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I still think
you’re undervaluing Brandon tremendously. It’s Brandon Roy that makes them the Big 3. He had clutch defensive plays to end games last year as well as offensive WITH Kobe defending him. Brandon will still be relied on the most to handle late game situations and will score more points down the stretch than Oden who’s offensive prowess is still dubious to say the least. Oden will be our enforcer, our Lambeer, but Brandon will still be needed on the perimeter to guard the array of shooters next season too afraid to enter the paint. I also think we’ll be hearing a lot from Greg this next year about how Brandon is such a great leader and Greg will actually defer to Brandon. My last point is that last year we were the 3rd youngest team in league history, and we got 41 double-yous. Even without Oden, Bayless, or Fernandez, I would expect last year’s team to continue to steadily improve by 5 wins or so. Brandon is still getting better! If the celtics had Dwight Howard they’d still be the big 3, but you’d say the leader was Pierce. It’s only because Garnett has been around for so long that he is the man. Oden hasn’t played a game, and he’ll have to play at least 82 and some change before he gets more props from me than our current all around best player (and one of the best all round players in the league)
"You can't buy your woman a watch because she got a clock on the stove."-Sir Charles Barkley
by shwa on Aug 27, 2008 1:13 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I don't think he's underrated Brandon
I think that you might be underrating how important ODEN will be.
We all know Roy is the straw that stirs the drink, but Oden is the damn drink AND the glass AND the ice cubes!
With just Roy and LMA, our ceiling is the Mavs, Kings, Suns— good, sometimes great, but won’t win it all without a LOT of things going our way (and thus, we ain’t gonna win). With ODEN, we have a chance to be truly dominant.
KG is what changed the Celtics, not Pierce. That team won nuthin’ for a million years with Pierce as the main guy (and I’m a Pierce fan). KG is the player NO ONE can match up with and his defensive presence allows for everyone to lock down defensively and his leadership keeps the energy, focus, and intensity up for 48 minutes.
If anything, KG made Pierce relevant again, not the other way around.
Our team would eventually be good without Oden… we did win 41 games as the 3rd youngest team ever without him, of course. But Oden is that over-the-top nuclear weapon that obliterates all who come before us. Roy is good, great even, I LOVE Roy. But he isn’t a nuclear weapon.
Mortimer
by Mortimer on Aug 27, 2008 5:03 AM PDT up reply actions 5 recs
+1
Well said, M. That’s why they pay you the big bucks. Ginobli is great, but the Spurs are the Spurs because of Duncan, and Kobe is great, but he’s never won anything without Shaq or Gasol. Oden is the ingredient that upgrades a “really good team” to a potential dynasty.
That being said, as the KG/Celtics example illustrates, Oden is extremely, extremely lucky to be coming into a team that’s already equipped with enough talent (or close to enough talent) to win championships down the road. Duncan was in the same boat when he came into the league, and that’s worked out pretty well for him. KG has been dominant his whole career, but aside from that one MVP season, he never had the supporting cast to really win. To win multiple championships, you need guys like Pierce/Kobe/Roy AND guys like KG/Shaq/Oden.
Bayless isn't the second coming of Jordan.
Jordan was the first coming of Bayless.
by KP Corleone on Aug 27, 2008 7:02 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Kobe still hasn't won anything with Gasol
And it was Shaq who went to Miami and won again. So in this regard Shaq is the Nuke, Kobe the Fluke.
"It's how you play the Ga-ame..." - Greg Oden with Justin Timeberlake at the Espy's
by BlazermaniacAndy on Aug 27, 2008 10:16 AM PDT up reply actions 2 recs
+10
Boo on Kobe.
He's Coming! Oden Slayer of Giants
by Idog1976 on Aug 27, 2008 11:59 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
roy is
forsure a nuclear weapon. As I said, KG proved to be nuclear in this league for over ten years before before he made it to the celts. I know physically Oden is the most akin to this weapon analogy, but you’re still putting the cart before the horse. Oden may become our Nuke eventually but seriously, Brandon could win a championship without GO as arguably his career has started as good as anyones for the first two years. I would love to see Oden explode, but we may have to get used to idea of being able to get it done without him should only his knee explode
"You can't buy your woman a watch because she got a clock on the stove."-Sir Charles Barkley
by shwa on Aug 27, 2008 10:07 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don't think I can
I don’t think I can get used to the idea of being able to get it done with Oden. I have to agree with the folks who write PTB would be close but no cigar without the big guy. But I like your allegiance to Roy – the catalyst of all that is good in Portland.
Free Joel Freeland! (with the purchase of 1 Wafer)
by LaughingJon on Aug 27, 2008 10:44 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
of course I meant WITHOUT Oden.
Free Joel Freeland! (with the purchase of 1 Wafer)
by LaughingJon on Aug 27, 2008 10:45 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Agreed shwa.
Roy fuels the engine on this team. He’s the Larry Bird equivalent on those Celtic’s teams. Sure they had Parrish and McHale but what made that team special was Bird’s smarts and all around abilities. Brandon plays the same role for us, and without him we won’t be much better than the Celtics without Bird.
I remember telling him how impressed I was with a player during summer league. In Avery's unique voice, he replied, "Marc, it's summer league." I
by TwoDeep on Aug 27, 2008 9:06 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
thank you
Brandon holds the conch shell and GO doesn’t know how to blow into it anyways
"You can't buy your woman a watch because she got a clock on the stove."-Sir Charles Barkley
by shwa on Aug 27, 2008 10:09 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I almost responded that Greg is the shell
and Brandon - but I better not go there.
Aldridge said. "We feel like we can beat any team. We feel like we can beat the Spurs, Suns, Lakers, Mavericks, whoever any night right now, and we'll still be here when those teams get old and their guys retire. We're going to be here for a long time."
by lee3022 on Aug 27, 2008 7:38 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Aldridge>Gasol?
That’s pretty debatable. I think Aldridge will surpass Gasol, potentially as soon as next year, but Pau was better last year.
I agree that Oden is the key though. If he’s dominant, this team will win championships. If he’s just ok, this team will be good but never win a title.
Boomshakalaka
by jksnake99 on Aug 27, 2008 1:34 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
To the extent Dave was asserting LMA > Gasol,
in the immortal words of Lumbergh, I’m going to have to go ahead and sort of, um, disagree with him there. The Lakers picked up Gasol and were transformed from being a middle-of-the-pack WC team to a dominant WC team. Their record w/ him in the lineup was ridiculous. LMA scores points, but he doesn’t have close to Gasol’s impact on a game. In fact, here’s yet another crazy statement I believe is true: Roy is closer to Kobe’s level of productivity than LMA is to Gasol’s.
I’ve said this before, but according to a stat called “win score” developed by a few economists in the book Wages of Wins, LMA was among the most overrated players in the league last year. Win score doesn’t tell the whole story… but it does correlate directly with actual wins and the best players in the league (KG, Kobe, Manu, Duncan, Lebron, CP3) perennially lead the league by a wide margin. Because LMA doesn’t rebound well and doesn’t score particularly efficiently, he grades out as a below average player. The theory is, basically, even though he scores 18 ppg or whatever, he doesn’t do it efficiently enough (I guess because he doesn’t draw many fouls) to outweigh his below average rebounding, and other average NBA players would generate just as many (or more) points per shot attempt.
All that being said, he’s just a second year guy, and last year he was needed to carry a bigger chunk of the offense than he’ll need to this year (to make up for Pryz’s offensive limitations). He’s not Gasol, yet, but I love him as a partner in crime with Oden. They’re going to be fun to watch together.
Bayless isn't the second coming of Jordan.
Jordan was the first coming of Bayless.
by KP Corleone on Aug 27, 2008 7:26 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Interesting points below
about LMA dominating Gasol head-to-head. I don’t think I saw that game. I do think that sometimes guys who make nice looking moves end up getting overrated at the end of the day, though. You can make the prettiest move ever to get an open look, but in the end, if you hit it 45% of the time, you’re not really helping your team. And you can look ugly taking what the defense gives you, shooting 55%, and quietly grabbing a few more rebounds, and that may help contribute more to Ws.
But, certainly encouraging that LMA looked good head-to-head. That’s the kind of thing that makes you think a young guy like him makes “the leap” to being a great player.
Bayless isn't the second coming of Jordan.
Jordan was the first coming of Bayless.
by KP Corleone on Aug 27, 2008 7:35 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
LMA's an interesting case
PER and Win Scores disagree more on him than on any other player in the league. PER likes guys who carry the offensive load (the break even point for shooting is lower— ie it rewards go to guys even if they aren’t the most efficient players ever) and Win Scores loves rebounds (guys like Millsap grade out very well— too well, I’d argue).
I’m not saying to ignore Win Scores— I hope LMA can become more efficient now that the Blazers are adding some major offensive options, and he certainly can improve his rebounding— but I think Aldridge is a much better player than his “win score” shows, and judging from his high finish in the MIP vote, so do NBA beat writers.
Boomshakalaka
by jksnake99 on Aug 27, 2008 8:21 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
But even in terms of PER Gasol was better than LaMarcus last year
21.68 vs. 18.56. Lets be honest and face it, while LaMarcus can be better than Pau (especially more physical and thus get easier points), currently he isnt’t yet.
Odenied: Asked whether he noticed Oden favoring his right knee, Frye dismissed it entirely. "He favors dunking on your head, that's what he favors."
by Norsktroll on Aug 27, 2008 8:41 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I still think Gasol,
can easily be taken out of his game and dominated. Look at the Celtics/Lakers finals. Gasol was a non entity, completely average. I still would rather have a Lamarcus on my team when a game really counts. But that is just my opinion.
by lethaldose on Aug 27, 2008 8:48 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
He was also the top scorer in the Olympics, ahead of anybody on Team USA
Sure it can be done, I guess nobody would argue this or that there aren’t players out there who are or will be better. LaMarcus could be one of them. But why does he still give most teams a lot of trouble consistently? Pau might be only an average defender, but at this point in his career I still like his offensive capabilities.
Odenied: Asked whether he noticed Oden favoring his right knee, Frye dismissed it entirely. "He favors dunking on your head, that's what he favors."
by Norsktroll on Aug 27, 2008 8:53 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Pau
was the centerpiece on his team in the olympics and its best most experienced player no doubt; However, no one on team USA played more minutes I would bet. Plus with a team of all stars they shared the ball, the scoring load, everything. If Kobe, Lebron, or Wade wanted, any one could have averaged 30 a game.
I would agree though that right now Pau is a slightly better offensive player than LMA, but he has probably reached the peak of his potential and LMA is still getting better.
by lethaldose on Aug 27, 2008 9:02 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Gasol had 0.71 points per minute, on Team USA only Wade was more efficient (0.85)
The other main guys, not so much. Kobe, Lebron, Anthony, Howard are all in the 0.6 ppm range.
I don’t try to make the point that they can’t be more efficient than him (over the course of a season most of these guys are), only that Pau is better than people give him credit for. Which is also demonstrated by his pretty high NBA PER, win score, etc. that started this discussion. And he just turned 28, so he still has some years in his prime even though he won’t suddenly become a great defender or develop a three point shot.
Like I said, I have no problem to believe that LMA can one day be better, and maybe he matches up favorable with Pau. I just wouldn’t count on him producing more effectively over the whole season or playoffs already next year.
Odenied: Asked whether he noticed Oden favoring his right knee, Frye dismissed it entirely. "He favors dunking on your head, that's what he favors."
by Norsktroll on Aug 27, 2008 9:25 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I agree 100%
I have always stated that Pau was better than Aldridge last year. LMA has yet to prove he can consistently be on Gasol’s level- I’d be curious to see Dave’s justification for saying “Edge: Blazers” on that one.
Boomshakalaka
by jksnake99 on Aug 27, 2008 9:23 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Dave said...
…somebody is going to offer some version of the following analysis…
The Midnight Rambler
by amlmart1 on Aug 27, 2008 9:38 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
agreed
i cant see how LMA was better than Pau last year. LMA may have a higher upside than Pau, but Pau’s talents are vastly underrated.
by Philthyanimal on Aug 27, 2008 6:16 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, that's the disconnect between win score and PER
The break even point on PER is 33% for two point shots and something like 22% for threes – shooting at those percentages doesn’t win games, so I don’t understand why Hollinger, et al, set these stats up like they did. If Iverson shoots 40% taking 30 shots per game, should that really improve his player EFFICIENCY rating?
The break even point for win score (not in actual shooting percentage, but in points per attempt, so foul shots help) is much higher – something like 50% for two point shots and 33% for threes. Nonetheless, though, most “scorers” generate pretty high win scores because they also draw fouls, rebound, set up teammates, etc. Guys who don’t include Ben Gordon, AI, etc – inefficient shooters. For whatever reason, LMA falls into that category so far in his career.
It seems to me that the ideal “break even” point would be somewhere in between. But I guess statistically, the way it works out is that if you’re relying on a guy who’s generating less than one point per FG attempt, you’re not going to win a ton of games.
Bayless isn't the second coming of Jordan.
Jordan was the first coming of Bayless.
by KP Corleone on Aug 27, 2008 8:45 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Win Score is far more flawed than PER.
I’ve posted on this a few times. The “break even point” is illogical in Win Score for one thing. You get credit for rebounding, assists, steals, and blocks in Win Score. Yet, you don’t get any credit for scoring since league average eFG% is roughly 49% while the “break even point” in Win Score is 50% from the field. Scoring from the field is averaged out to zero while rebounding is nothing but huge net positives. Therefore, an above average rebounder is greatly overrated while a guy who takes a heavier burden on scoring gets no credit.
All other systems realize something that has been shown many times. There is a negative correlation between usage and efficiency (taking more shots will start to drag down your efficiency in most cases), and having high usage, lower efficiency players often times increases overall efficiency of the offense. This is why high scorers are so highly valued. There is obviously a point where it’s too inefficient, but it’s not at above league average 50%.
It’s also been shown that every single rating system, including all boxscore and plus minus systems, except Win Scores shows Aldridge to be significantly above average. The fact that Win Score deviates from that doesn’t show there’s a problem with every other system.
by poster on Aug 27, 2008 10:02 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Adding on...
Gasol was clearly better than Aldridge statistically last season. Aldridge will need to improve significantly again to match or pass Gasol this coming season. I think it’s in the unlikely, but possible area of happening.
by poster on Aug 27, 2008 10:05 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Every other system rewards shot attempts...
Should it really increase a player’s efficiency rating that he simply shoots more, if he shoots between 35-45% from the field and never draws a single foul? That’s what PER and NBA efficiency do. And not surprisingly, that doesn’t track very closely with wins.
Here’s the point – why should you rewards scoring at the average legel of efficiency? If you’re doing that, you’re not doing anything another average player couldn’t do. So, not surprisingly, you’re not helping your team win games.
Win score, on the other hand, does directly correlate with victories, because it’s really just an individual calculation of offensive efficiency (with D factored in by team). Offensive vs. defensive efficiency is, in the end, what wins and loses games. If you do more with each possession than your opponent, and you’re able to end your opponent’s possessions by getting rebounds at a higher rate, you win. Simple.
I agree with you that, to some extent, win score does seem to overrate rebounding. But couldn’t it just as easily be true that the general bball public underrates it? The fact is, possession-oriented statistics have MUCH more to do with Ws and Ls than “old school” stats like ppg.
Bayless isn't the second coming of Jordan.
Jordan was the first coming of Bayless.
by KP Corleone on Aug 27, 2008 12:01 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Shooting should be rewarded as much as anything else though.
The issue is that rebounding, assists, etc. give you positive credits for being average, above average, or below average. A guy who averages 1 rebound per 1000 minutes gets that 1 rebound added as a positive. Someone who gets 1000 points on 1000 shot attempts from the field (not including the FT line) gets no credits in Win Score, the same as a guy who absolutely refuses to shoot. Logically, it shouldn’t be hard to see that a guy who doesn’t shoot at all helps the team less than a guy putting up a respectable 50% shooting.
Correlation with wins has also been discussed before. PER has a 0.82 correlation with wins. Raw Win Score has a 0.69 correlation with wins. These numbers were found on the APBRmetrics forum here. Despite Berri’s claims, he fudges the numbers to fit efficiency differential.
Efficiency is very important to winning. But usage rate should factor into efficiency in practice because of its effect on team efficiency.
by poster on Aug 27, 2008 12:38 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
PER correlates with wins much more strongly than win score does
Players can help their team offensively by scoring a lot of points even if they have only average or slightly below average efficiency. Players that score a lot tend to raise the efficiency of their teammates because the defense becomes more focused on them and the other players don’t have to try to score much unless they get an easy shot. This will also decrease the number of turnovers that the teammates commit. Because of this a volume scorer who shoots above about 35% on 2-point shots will help his team offensively, even though his efficiency is below average.
As far as rebounding goes Win Score makes the erroneous assumption that any missed shot that a player doesn’t rebound will be rebounded by the other team. In reality, it is likely that many of those rebounds (especially the defensive ones) are actually taking the ball away from another player on the same team who could have rebounded the ball. This causes Win Score to overvalue rebounds.
by trk on Aug 27, 2008 11:21 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I agree with you as far as rebounding is concerned, in a sense...
…but the fact remains that, whoever guys are taking the ball away from, certain guys consistently get 7 rpg and certain guys consistently get 11 rpg, and there’s a huge difference in how that impacts a team.
As far as your statement that “a volume scorer who soots above about 35% on 2-point shots will help his team,” that doesn’t pass the laugh test for me. How are you helping your team if you’re taking several more shot attempts to score the same number of points as an average player?
For instance, when AI was on Philly the season he got traded, they were terrible. They won like 5 of their first 30. And yet, he was shooting well over 35, so his PER was decent and his ppg was great. But for some reason, when Andre Miller took his place, Philly became a .500 team the rest of the way. Why? BECAUSE HE DIDN"T WASTE 6 POSSESSIONS PER GAME SHOOTING 40 FROM THE FIELD.
I think you make some valid points, but the 35% thing, I just don’t get.
Bayless isn't the second coming of Jordan.
Jordan was the first coming of Bayless.
by KP Corleone on Aug 28, 2008 7:34 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don't think Aldridge is better than Gasol, but
I think he will produce more efficiently next season because he won’t have to carry so much of the burden offensively (and defensively too). Defenses won’t be able to key on him and he won’t be required to be our main post option. I think his ‘inefficiency’ is, at least partly, due to being one of the go to guys last year.
The street lights is on.
by Magnum on Aug 27, 2008 3:44 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hrmmmm, lemme see
Center: GO, Vanilla Gorilla and RLEC
PF: LMA, The Frye Man and Ike
SF: Webster, Troutlaw and the Batman
SG: BRoy, Rudy and Mr. Bayless
PG: Steve Blake, Mr. Bayless and Spanish Cocoa
Is it just me, or is there a lot of Versatility here? Perhaps a montage of different abilities to throw at our opponents this year? How do they compare to Blazer teams past? Potentially, a combination of some our best teams of the past. The ingredients are all right there. With the proper seasoning and guidance, I am super hyped to see this season unfold!
by coastrider on Aug 27, 2008 1:52 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Metaphor
If Nate is the quiver and our players are arrows then most of our arrows are magic arrows and Greg Oden is our arrow-of-slaying.
But Greg is more than that since he will negate other teams magic arrows. In the immortal words of Mortimer in a past thread “he will encourage the other team to take more jumpers” (or something like that).
And even more, he will make our magic arrows more magical. Not to mess with my illustration, but the discussion regarding LMA is moot now that Greg is in the line-up. They can’t guard him like they did last year, he can operate in ways he never dreamed and I dare say he’ll even be better on defense. In the ‘78/’79 season Bobby Gross was in the all-star game only because Bill Walton made him a much better player … and LMA is vastly superior than Bobby Gross was (O yes he is).
So we have very few mundane arrows, a lot of +1’s and all our +2’s get bumped up to +3’s. And we have an arrow of negation that doubles as an arrow of slaying.
Posting this is one of the most courageous things I’ve ever done.
by dvcastle on Aug 27, 2008 8:48 AM PDT up reply actions 4 recs
Hahaha
I’ll rec you just for your gumption.
Plus, I know what you’re getting at.
"Jerryd is straight ahead at you. Rudy dips around. Jerryd is a rock. Rudy is the wind. Jerryd loves the ball in his hands. Rudy moves without it. Jerryd defends by getting up in your grill. Rudy plays the spaces in between. Jerryd has focused vision. Rudy sees all around him. Jerryd likes to score off of the dribble. Rudy can catch and shoot. Jerryd is aggressive. Rudy is sneaky. Jerryd will hit you hard. Rudy will annoy you until you hit him." -Dave
Word.
by joelor on Aug 27, 2008 11:07 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think a more accurate analogy
is we have a quiver of arrows 1 through +4 and Oden is our intelligent Vorpal Sword with the ability to talk and cast spells such as disintegrate. I would go so far as to say that my hope for Batum is for him to be come a short of defense +3/5 vs Kobe’s.
He's Coming! Oden Slayer of Giants
by Idog1976 on Aug 27, 2008 12:35 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Wow sorry about all the typos
but yay on the DnD references dvcastle!
He's Coming! Oden Slayer of Giants
by Idog1976 on Aug 27, 2008 1:10 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Greg Oden is our nuclear bomb, swarmed by fighter jets and tricked-out tanks - love it
I’m a peaceful guy who did alternative service, but this analogy creates a funny picture in my head (hey, I didn’t bring arrows, bombs, jets and tanks into the discussion). Follow me to the battlefield:
Imagine a huge bomb on the court below the basket with Greg’s face on it, flanked by LaMarcus as a modern mobile tank on wheels. Channing is an infantry fighting vehicle, whereas Joel is a big classic tank on continuous tracks (limited firepower, but looks impressive). Same with the slightly undersized Ike model.
Then we have Rudy and Martell swarming in as the quick strike fighters for long range interdiction who can just as well operate deep behind enemy lines (Rudy is a proven Eurofighter right now, but considering his nickname he could also transform into a dangerous attack helicopter in the future. I can hear the Valkyries right now). Nicholas is the sleek multi-purpose joint strike fighter (still under development). Brandon is the best air superiority stealth fighter aircraft on the market, or at least on the Blazerforce. And Jerryd as the quick precise sidewinder missile that hits you without warning. Travis is the mobile artillery that gives the opposition heavy hits from which it can’t recover.
Steve “Lieutenant Dan” is the mobile command vehicle on the ground. And Sergio as a fire support combat vehicle (upgrade to a mobile gun system with command capabilities might be a future possibility, but still requires some work). We are sad to report that our expensive destroyer warship Raef is currently scheduled to go out of service next year after many years on duty, as generals Kevin and Nate (nicknamed “Sarge” despite his higher rank) are only seeing limited use for it in modern Blazerfare. We hope to find another friendly harbor for his old days in exchange for more fitting equipment, or retain him for the price of a swiftboat.
While there is still a position open in our forces, mobile command vehicle Petteri is in a maneuver in Italy for the foreseeable future, joining British Army “Warrior” infantry fighting vehicle Joel Freeland in Europe. And a lot of training is still required for all units anyway before we are ready for the final battle.
Cue the music: War, what is it good for,… until all enemies play “Surrender” (you can decide from which artist).
Now we can go back and imagine the Blazers as classic knights in the Official Blazersedge Bedtime Fairy Tale. Have a good night.
Odenied: Asked whether he noticed Oden favoring his right knee, Frye dismissed it entirely. "He favors dunking on your head, that's what he favors."
by Norsktroll on Aug 27, 2008 3:28 AM PDT reply actions 2 recs
LMAO
That was awesome.
Beaver believer!
by mannyfresh1 on Aug 27, 2008 8:50 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Your mommy's all right. Your daddy's all right.
They just seem a little . . . WEIRD.
=(_8c(|)
by QualityPie on Aug 27, 2008 9:21 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Bonus points
For the embedded Cheap Trick reference + lyrics.
by DonkeyShins on Aug 27, 2008 9:29 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
LOL Pau Gasol vs. Lamarcus Aldridge: Edge Blazers. LOL
Sorry Dave after reading “Pau Gasol vs. Lamarcus Aldridge: Edge Blazers” I had to stop reading your analysis. LOL
by cbp on Aug 27, 2008 3:58 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Gasol is better
but head-to-head, Aldridge outplayed him last year. In a playoff series, it is that head-to-head matchup that matters.
Dave didn’t say that he would do that analysis, anyway, he said someone will do it.
Other people don't have as much practice at being wrong as I do -- HT, timbo
by jscot on Aug 27, 2008 4:05 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Head to head
LMA ate Gasol up. I was at the game here in LA where the Blazers lost because we didn’t have Roy, and LMA was impressing the whole crowd with his moves.
Gasol could not stop him, and Gasol did nothing on the other end. Head to head, LMA was better and will only get better.
Gasol is good, and a great interior passer. LMA has shown some good passes before and with Oden I think it’ll really open up his game even more. No more double teams, no more beefy defenders draped over him.
I would argue that if LMA isn’t better than Gasol it is only a matter of time before he is. Aside from triangle passing, LMA does everything Gasol does, better. Just needs to gain more experience and consistency— remember, LMA just finished his 2nd season and put up his numbers as the 2nd option.
Mortimer
by Mortimer on Aug 27, 2008 5:08 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
LMA also put up 30
on Gasol early in the season against Memphis.
Boomshakalaka
by jksnake99 on Aug 27, 2008 8:08 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Granted, I didn’t see the game so probably talking out of my rear end on this, but hearing that LMA ate Gasol up means nothing to me, especially with the Zen Master coaching the opposition. Did the L*kers double LMA? What kind of plays did they run for Gasol? Had he been integrated into the offense? Was anyone in foul trouble? Maybe they gave LMA some room to manuever because they figured out that the offense would stagnate. etc., etc.
I gasped a bit when I saw Fisher = Blake, but I almost fell over when I saw LMA > Gasol. I mean, c’mon, give me a break!
When Gasol was 21 years old, he averaged 17.6 points, 8.9 rebounds, 2.4 blocks, 2.7 assists, 52% FG, and 71% FT. As a “soft” Euro. Fresh off the plane from Spain. As a rookie. He is one of the top PF’s in the NBA and, barring injury, will stay at that plateau for at least the next 3-4 years (he’s only 28).
I will be absolutely thrilled if LMA = Gasol within the next 2-3 years. But LMA is not there – yet.
MLB2PDX!!! (someday...)
by The Cactus Leaguer on Aug 27, 2008 6:25 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
One game doesn't mean Pau Gasol vs. Lamarcus Aldridge: Edge Blazers
Please give LMA time to develop his full potential and after that you can write “Pau Gasol vs. Lamarcus Aldridge: Edge Blazers” if he really outplays former rookie of the year Gasol consistently.
It’s beyond my comprhension why people always minimize Gasol accomplisments. Last year Lakers were not a title contender until Gasol was added to the squad. Was that by chance?. If LMA were added instead of Gasol would be Lakers a title contender?.
pleeeeeeeeeease have a little objectivity.
by cbp on Aug 27, 2008 6:30 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I actually think...
… that the Lakers would be a title contender if you swapped LMA and Gasol. LMA would be a tremendous fit there- maybe even better than Gasol since he can play on the perimeter (freeing up the inside for Bynum).
I agree that Aldridge has yet to consistently prove he’s on Gasol’s level, and many of us Blazer fans could work on our objectivity, but I’ve also yet to see you write a post that does anything but sing the praises of a Spanish player, so maybe we could all work on objectivity.
Boomshakalaka
by jksnake99 on Aug 27, 2008 8:07 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
You are right, maybe I'm not objectivity when I'm referring to spanish players
but let’s compare stats:
GASOL 2007-08 Statistics
PPG 18,9
RPG 8,4
APG 3,2
SPG 0,4
BPG 1,5
FG% 0,534
FT% 0,807
3P% 0,250
MPG 35,6
LMA 2007-08 Statistics
PPG 17,8
RPG 7,6
APG 1,6
SPG 0,7
BPG 1,2
FG% 0,484
FT% 0,762
3P% 0,143
MPG 34,9
playing the same minutes by game Gasol is up in all of them except steals (0,4 vs 0,7).
To me it is very important the gap in FG% (0,534 VS0,484). If you make an average of shoots attempts of both of them, Gasol makes 13,5 attemps per game while LMA makes 15. So LMA needs 1,5 shoot attempts more than Gasol to score (15*0,484=7,2 vs 13,5*0,534=7,2) the same baskets (7,2 vs 7,2) than Gasol. This means Blazers by LMA’s fault wastes 2 attacks compared to Gasol’s lakers.
I think everything is said.
As I said I don’t read the whole analysis but it is clear it is wrong as it is based on a wrong assumption "Pau Gasol vs. Lamarcus Aldridge: Edge Blazers". The most funny thing I have read lately.
by cbp on Aug 27, 2008 9:24 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Again, I agree with you that Pau is better
I’m just trying to argue that its closer than you think.
Boomshakalaka
by jksnake99 on Aug 27, 2008 9:25 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Pau is better @
Flopping , flailing , Complaining , and looking like some crazy dude who lives under a bridge. Other than that, it’s LMA hands down.
2-4 the who
by 24thewho on Aug 27, 2008 11:25 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Appearance
I love my Spanish brethren, nearly as much as I love my Spanish Coffee, here on this board. But there is a stereotypical aspect of his continental effects that fail to measure up appreciatively to LMA’s more professional carriage.
by dvcastle on Aug 27, 2008 11:41 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
wow
look at some stats or watch a game.
Boomshakalaka
by jksnake99 on Aug 27, 2008 11:42 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
but isnt the nature of the analisys that Dave proposed "head to head"?
that would lead to the “aldridge is better”, cause its about how they matchup in a playoff setting, more then how they did through out the year, right? pau might terrorize the league, and kill aldridge in every stat, but if head to head, aldridge has his number and plays with him like a toy, then doesnt the aldridge > pau, seam appropriate in this perticular steeing? ill have to scrool back up to check, but isn’t the post about hypothetical analasys for playoff prediction, for a seven game series? idk. Daves analisys seams appropriate to me. I think people are taking opprotunity to disagree a little too quick.
im not saying anything to you specificaly jksnake, mainly cause I fully respect your analisys, and your one of the people I default read when I have to skim through for lack of time. this is whear i decide to add my 2 cents concerning the nature of Daves analisys. I dont even think I disagree with anything youve said.
(our) great industrial nation is controlled by its system of credit, our system of of credit is privately concentrated, the growth of our nation, therefore, and all our activities are in the hands of a few men... who necessarily, by very reason of their own limitations, chill and check and destroy genuine economic freedom.
We have come to be one of the worst ruled, one of the most completely controlled and dominated governments in the civilized world - no government by free opinion, no longer a government by conviction and the vote of the majority, but a government by the opinion and the duress of small groups of dominant men.
--- Woodrow Wilson
by ptwnblzr on Aug 28, 2008 3:02 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
7.6 RPG is not getting it done for LMA, either
He really needs to step that up. That’s a good number… for a SF. And yeah, the gap in FG% is very important.
Bayless isn't the second coming of Jordan.
Jordan was the first coming of Bayless.
by KP Corleone on Aug 27, 2008 9:27 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
yeah
Its partly because of how often he plays on the perimeter, but I think we can all agree that LMA needs to become a better rebounder (though Oden may gobble up any opportunities he has to increase his total next year).
Boomshakalaka
by jksnake99 on Aug 27, 2008 9:32 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Przybilla is GREAT on rebounds.
Did plenty board gobblin’ last year.
Might have been a factor in LaMardridge’s meagre 7.6.
=(_8c(|)
by QualityPie on Aug 27, 2008 10:37 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think LMA's rebounding numbers are a bit skewed
(1) because he’s having to rotate frequently to cover the many holes in our perimeter defence which leave him out of position for defensive rebounding and (2) because he doesn’t play low post as much as he could (or IMHO should) he’s not close enough in the paint for offensive rebounds.
Can’t do a whole lot about #1 until we get better perimeter defense (hear that, Blake, Sergio, Bayless, Roy, Webster – you guys need to rachet it up a bit), but with GO in the paint attracting the double-team, that should allow LMA to play more low-post without getting banged up. Of course, he’ll have to want to play with his back to the basket a bit more – hopefully he’s not too much in the mold of ’Sheed (avoiding banging).
by DonkeyShins on Aug 27, 2008 9:35 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Four games, not one
I’ll leave out the head to head games while Pau was at Memphis, because I’m lazy (sorry). Here’s the four L@kers vs. Blazers games, head to head comparison.
26 February (at LA)
LMA
24 pts FG 10-19 FT 4-4
4 rebounds (1 offensive)
0 assists
1 TO
Gasol
15 pts FG 7-12 FT 1-2
10 rebounds (3)
0 assists
1 TO
19 February (at Portland)
LMA
22 pts FG 10-18 FT 2-2
8 rebounds (5)
2 assists
0 TO
Gasol
15 pts FG 4-10 FT 7-8
9 rebounds (4)
4 assists
1 TO
2 April (at LA)
LMA
11 pts FG 4-15 FT 3-3
12 rebounds (5)
2 assists
2 TO
Gasol
10 pts FG 3-8 FT 4-6
6 rebounds (2)
7 assists
2 TO
8 April (at Portland)
LMA
22 pts FG 9-18 FT 4-5
16 rebounds (4)
1 assist
1 TO
Gasol
21 pts FG 7-12 FT 7-8
13 rebounds (5)
4 assist
3 TO
Totals
LMA
79 pts (19.75 pg) FG 33-70 FT 14-14
40 rebounds (10 pg)/15 offensive
5 assists
4 TO
Gasol
61 pts (15.25 pg) FG 21-42 FT 19-24
38 rebounds (9.5 pg)/14 offensive
15 assists (3.75 pg)
7 TO
Against Pau with the L@kers, LMA in his second year was a 20 points, 10 rebounds per game player, while Pau was 15 points and 10 rebounds per game against LMA. You’ll just have to forgive us Blazer fans for thinking that’s an edge.
Box scores don’t tell the whole story, of course. But as jksnake99 said, LMA lit up Gasol when he was with Memphis, too. Gasol was obviously much more effective over the course of the season, but for some reason when they match up against each other, it is favorable to LMA.
Other people don't have as much practice at being wrong as I do -- HT, timbo
by jscot on Aug 27, 2008 8:15 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
15 assists!
Isn’t that why he made the lakers so dominant last year? His ability to pass. Dont those extra assist make up for the point differential between the two players?
Also, isn’t comparing stats like this to gauge a players worth for a team sort of newbie-ish? I mean your talking about a player who is asked to compliment kobe bryant who eats up shots like a maniac versus a playmaker that aldridge faces in roy. seems like incomparable stats.
the point i will grant is that aldridge was having his way with pao on the block last year… in the words of lakers color analysist stu lantz, “the lakers are making Lamarcus look like kareem abdul-jabar!”
but isn’t that sort of different when Pao is playing powerforward and not center? not having to worry about defending the paint which he is poor at? I mean things totally change when you add two new starters to two different teams… we have no idea what this matchup will be like. If you ask me to put my money on an answer here… i would easily say that this matchup is a “push” at the least, i mean give Pau some credit for getting lakers to the finals and being an all-star caliber player. my god.
secondly, seems like this whole post — and the hopes and dreams of blazers fans is how good oden can be — and dave makes that point in the post. I second that, but with one qualification. Oden hasn’t played ONE GAME in this league and we have no idea how good he is going to be. Andrew Bynum is a max player, we know this, we know he is going to contend with dwight howard for best center in the league. Anyone who has watched him play for more then 4 games knows that he is unstoppable once he has the ball in the paint, he scores on everything, even leading the league in field goal percentage AND has really underrated post up game. He didn’t have to post up cause they didn’t need it, but trust me if you’ve spent anytime watching him at all you would know that the lakers can throw the ball down in the block.
What do we know about greg oden? that he was really good in ncaa ball. which is probably the worst sport in the whole world. im not saying oden wont be good, but we have no idea if he will be slightly better then chris kaman or as good as shaq. who knows.
by mandoman10 on Aug 27, 2008 8:36 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hmmm
I’m not sure it is newbie-ish to compare stats. Like I said, box scores don’t tell the whole story.
Do assists make up for the point differential? To some extent, sure. That’s partly mitigated by higher turnovers, but it still is obviously an advantage for Pau.
The point was that our Spanish friend said “pleeeeeeeeeease have a little objectivity”, and the stats give an objective basis for the idea that, at least head-to-head, LMA will have the edge this year.
Will he? I don’t have a clue. But the stats say there’s a case to be made. The stats prove that, when they face each other, Gasol is not way ahead of LMA. And that fits with the subjective view of those who watched the games, as well.
Other people don't have as much practice at being wrong as I do -- HT, timbo
by jscot on Aug 27, 2008 8:46 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
i agree
as in my comment, aldridge WAS able to score on Pao in the block. My point is, pao seemed very effective on his block. So does that make adridge way better.
the argument people seem to be using is that, because aldridge is in his second year, that means the advantage is to blazers because he can develop more and pao is at his peak.
Ive been watching this league for allot of years and i have seen alot of players show some games of brilliance and even a whole year of brilliance and improve very little. Especially after contracts have been signed. we have NO idea how good Lamarcus is going to get. Pao is a legit all-star caliber player. I remember two years ago jameer nelson avg like 20 points and 8 assists over two months or something like that. he is nothing now.
im just saying is all, at the very least it is was “push.”
by mandoman10 on Aug 27, 2008 9:01 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
agreed
Pau was better than Aldridge last year, so I can’t agree with Dave, but I also think its much closer than cbp or KP Corleone have argued.
Boomshakalaka
by jksnake99 on Aug 27, 2008 9:21 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Pau has four teammates who can catch & score
If Joel is playing, LMA only has three (I love Joel, but his hands are from New Hampshire), so the quick dump to the other big man (when being double teamed) for that high percentage low-post shot just wasn’t available to him last year (except when Channing was playing at the same time). With GO and Ike, I expect LMA to have a bit better assist percentage.
by DonkeyShins on Aug 27, 2008 9:38 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
ok ssooo...
doesn’t that explain why his points are higher given that pao shot a higher percentage?
by mandoman10 on Aug 27, 2008 9:40 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Good point
I guess we have the 2008-9 season to see how this shakes out, don’t we?
;-)
by DonkeyShins on Aug 27, 2008 9:43 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
More offensive threats means spread defensive focus.
Theoretically, that means Aldridge had more defense focused on him to make shots tougher.
I don’t think that explains the difference, but that is a theory that’s used.
by poster on Aug 27, 2008 10:49 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
that's a possibility but I don't buy it.
I think Gasol has mor skills than LMA. He can shot with both hands and better postig and also I believe he pays more attention than LMA.
by cbp on Aug 27, 2008 1:26 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hmm
“Ive been watching this league for allot of years and i have seen alot of players show some games of brilliance and even a whole year of brilliance and improve very little. Especially after contracts have been signed. we have NO idea how good Lamarcus is going to get. Pao is a legit all-star caliber player. I remember two years ago jameer nelson avg like 20 points and 8 assists over two months or something like that. he is nothing now.”
And Bynum is for sure a max, good-as-Howard player, huh?
I think Bynum will be good, but you’re not very consistent in your arguments.
Pau was above average as the main guy in Memphis. He got to be a great role player with LA and fits the Triangle perfectly because he’s a good passer. Just because Bynum comes back it doesn’t mean he won’t face up on a fellow PF in LMA. LMA will still gobble up Pau because Pau is a god-awful defender (sorry cbp— he is).
Offensively, LMA and Pau aren’t too different, and defensively, LMA is better— MUCH better.
I am not a Pau or a Bynum hater (I often support the argument that they are good) but to say it is outlandish to think LMA is better than Pau or Oden will be better than Andrew Bynum could mean you might be biased towards one direction too much. Pau is good, but he’s a one way player. Bynum was good, but in the Tyson Chandler way. He needs a guard (like, say, Kobe) to throw the ball to him where he can dunk it.
And to preempt the kneejerk response, yes, I did watch Laker games. I got ‘em on my TV box and they even replay on my TV box. Pau helped a ton because he’s great for the triangle. Defensively, he’s as squishy soft as his haters say.
Mortimer
by Mortimer on Aug 27, 2008 10:12 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Bynum's gonna get the max
If not from the Lakers, then from someone (assuming he’s healthy next year).
Boomshakalaka
by jksnake99 on Aug 27, 2008 10:19 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Oh, he'll get the max
I’m just saying, his argument that LMA could be a flash in the pan just doesn’t jibe well with his “we all know Bynum is Jesus” line.
Bynum is very long and athletic. He’s also not very skilled, and not as explosive as Howard (or Oden). He should have a very good career.
But like Tyson Chandler, you take him away from a playmaker, and he looks like Przybilla (of course, Joel can’t even score anymore WITH a playmaker, but that’s not the point dangit).
I have no doubt Bynum will continue to develop, and he’s too young not to. I hope he comes back strong so we have a nice rivalry.
But he really, really, did not play so well as to establish a new order of centers on the West coast. He did better than expected (and expectations were low) and did it for LA and Kobe’s Lakers after all of the trade rumors, which brought a lot of attention to him. He is GOOD but he isn’t a player you can place anywhere and he’ll be effective.
He’ll block shots anywhere, that’s for sure.
Mortimer
by Mortimer on Aug 27, 2008 10:26 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Let me remind you that Z-bo is also a max player
Not all max players are created equal. Bynum will be a better max player than z-bo, though his stats won’t necessarily be as good. LaMarcus will also be a max or very nearly max player (at least as close to it as Pau got); as will Roy and Oden.
by NWfan on Aug 27, 2008 11:51 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
again,
no one is saying pao is way better then l.a. its a wash in my view as you say.
and my point about bynum is that, in the words of d’antoni (who blew up their team because of bynum) "he has arrived: whereas oden needs to show us how good he is gonna be. Bynum is getting the max deal, any team in the league would have him… your right though, in that its possible bynum flames out after a contract. that is entirely possible.
by mandoman10 on Aug 27, 2008 10:23 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
you dont give
joe pryzbilla a max contract.
and to be honest, i just have to disagree with you about your analysis of bynum. Bynum is like a hundre billion times better then tyson chandler. Tyson chandler cant score from three feet out, it has to be an alley-oop. Bynum is ABSOLUTELY unstoppable anywhere in the paint even with guys on him. He has hook shot, both hands, dunks galore, and exceptional footwork. To be honest, i do think his post up game is going to surprise you. its ok to disagree, lots of scouts disagree on their assessment of players strengths.
You think he is tyson chandler level. I think he is dwight howard level.
p.s. again you are right, it is entirely possible that bynum stops developing.
by mandoman10 on Aug 27, 2008 10:30 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I've argued about Bynum...
… with Morty several times. I don’t think he’s as good as Howard, but I agree he’s vastly better than Chandler. Morty isn’t as high on him as we are.
Boomshakalaka
by jksnake99 on Aug 27, 2008 10:34 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
which is
fine. we are talking about players who haven’t accomplished anything in the playoffs, (bynum, aldridge, oden and howard) so there is bound to be major deviance on assessment.
by mandoman10 on Aug 27, 2008 10:35 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Just wanna add
I really don’t think Bynum will burn out. I think he’ll be good.
The point was only made in relation to the possibility of LMA burning out after a good 2nd season.
If Bynum is that unstoppable, they really should go into him more. There aren’t a lot of centers bigger than him, he should manhandle them.
More clarification: The Przybilla comment was more just to use a player who no offense on their own, ala Chandler. For the record, I think Bynum will be a rich man’s Chandler.
That’s good, so I don’t think he’ll suck at all.
Mortimer
by Mortimer on Aug 27, 2008 10:45 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
i see your level of props to bynum.
im just pretty convinced bynum is a franchise player. the type that will make you fear (in the way that dave talked about in this post) and change your team for as the suns already did this past year.
by mandoman10 on Aug 27, 2008 10:48 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
and yes
see your clarification about burning out. i made the point with aldrige without making it about bynum. I admitted that mistake several times.
by mandoman10 on Aug 27, 2008 10:50 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
not a bynum guy...
by BroyTheTruth on Aug 27, 2008 11:25 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
i love that clip!
that is star player power right there! give me the ball! because he was calling for it in the post and rad didn’t believe in him.
hes like “no punk, give me the ball im going to be running things around here soon enough and i need to prove myself.” especially since that was a pre-season game.
oh and i forgot to mention bynum is a better passer then gasol.
by mandoman10 on Aug 27, 2008 11:29 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
seriously?
thats the kind of thing that breaks team moralle….i hate playing with guys like that……….dickheads…
by BroyTheTruth on Aug 27, 2008 11:55 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
you dont want your unstoppable low post prescience not calling for the ball
in post ups… otherwise you will end up with dead-end chris webber or i dont really care to use my talent even though i am the best player ever in the whole universe of everything RAsheed wallace.
by mandoman10 on Aug 27, 2008 11:57 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
there's a differnece between calling for the ball...
and bitching out a teammate………….
the latter is just immature…..and id hardly call Bynum an unstopable low post presence
by BroyTheTruth on Aug 27, 2008 12:02 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
this clip is from a pre-season game
and its before andrew bynum exploded and his teammates were sure he could score with the ball. He was trying to prove himself to win that starting spot. remember Kwame was above him on depth chart.
and also, my guess is that most nba players are yelling stuff like this, we just dont get to hear it that often.
also, i bet if you were being guarded by a guy you KNEW you could take and repeatedly your teammates wouldn’t throw you the ball… and that your whole game dependent on being thrown a post-entry path you might get a little upset. add that to the fact that millions of dollars are on the line here for bynum, you might get a little grumpy too.
by mandoman10 on Aug 27, 2008 12:07 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
your logic does not sway me....
seems like a punk kid….i cant picture oden acting like that….calling for the ball sure. but not cuzzing people out for not giving it to him………….btw oden will eat him alive
by BroyTheTruth on Aug 27, 2008 12:10 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
please tell me your evidence for saying oden
will eat bynum alive.
im open to the possibility, because i think oden is gonna be good player. but what is the evidence subjective or objective that he will eat andrew bynum alive.
keep in mind, that during the offseason, andrew bynum ties kevin garnet and Amare Stoudemire to poles and does bicept crunches with them.
by mandoman10 on Aug 27, 2008 12:12 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
a couple links
Oden makes men look like boys….judging by his temperment, Bynum is still a little kid…
Greg will eat your babies, then wash’m down with a protein shake
by BroyTheTruth on Aug 27, 2008 12:23 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm starting to wonder...
… if you’ve ever seen Bynum play. He was 14th in the entire NBA in PER last year.
There’s every reason to believe Oden’s going to be good. I think Bynum will be a worthy rival for him, not just fodder. I think Oden will get the best of him, but he’s not going to eat him alive IMO.
Boomshakalaka
by jksnake99 on Aug 27, 2008 12:26 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
to be honest
ive seen bynum make all-star caliber powerfowords and centers look like babies. so i would have to see allot from Oden for me to think that bynum will be dominated by him.
by mandoman10 on Aug 27, 2008 12:29 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
honestly
those posts and the videos show me that he is skilled and good… and worth even a comparison to bynum.
but how does that evidence say he is going to be WAY better then bynum. I have actual games of Bynum not playing oden up in my head that tell me the same things those links tell me, that bynum is a quality player.
the point is you have no idea who will be better till they face each other.
by mandoman10 on Aug 27, 2008 12:26 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
and...
during the offseason, andrew bynum ties kevin garnet and Amare Stoudemire to poles and does bicept crunches with them.
by mandoman10 on Aug 27, 2008 12:27 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
what i have seen of bynum
he looks like a less athletic version of Aldridge, that cant shoot like him, but can rebound well enough
by raging WebTed on Aug 27, 2008 12:50 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
??
No offense, but that’s a terrible comparison. Bynum outweighs LMA by 40 pounds, and is a dominant inside player. You are right that he can’t shoot like LMA, but that’s because he’s not a pick-and-pop 4— he’s a catch-spin-dunk 5.
Their games could not possibly be more different.
Boomshakalaka
by jksnake99 on Aug 27, 2008 12:53 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
ok just a reference point...
just an anonymous game against a decent center: Chris Kaman.
Notice three things: 1) kaman’s kaman’s inability to score against bynum. 2) bynum’s creation of his own shot through post-up opportunities through byum. 3) how much bigger he is then everyone else and his absolute dominance with the ball from three feet in.
not much on his passing skills, which i think are better then pao gasols.
by mandoman10 on Aug 27, 2008 1:19 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don't think he'll burn out
As long as he comes back healthy, just like Oden.
I also find it hard to believe that a 2nd year raw big man like LMA would suddenly regress to inconsequential land. It doesn’t really happen unless an injury happens, or if a player doesn’t work very hard.
I was under the impression that a lot of Laker fans (the ones I know anyways) discovered the “real” Pau during the playoffs and weren’t as high on him anymore. Bynum will help him a lot because he’s so long and athletic, and Pau is just… just abysmal, dreadful defensively.
Most teams don’t have two post threats that will cause problems for the Lakers. The Suns do, as long as Shaq can walk. The Blazers have a great matchup with the Lakers, and yes— Oden has to play, but so does Bynum. And we’ve seen how Pau handles LMA.
When ya factor in how Roy did against Kobe and Kobe’s loss of athleticism over the last few seasons (can’t tell me ya ain’t seen it! Since the knee surgery last summer he hasn’t been the same) AND his encroaching age, the conract situation of Odom and his lack of value on the open market (plus if you’re relying on him he’ll deliver every 7th game), and the prospective bench advantage of the Blazers… things are lookin’ good for the Blazers, as long as a few things go our way.
It’ll be a great battle, that’s for sure.
Mortimer
by Mortimer on Aug 27, 2008 10:35 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
agreed
the blazers (and the rockets?) seem like the two teams in this league that can even hope to match up with the lakers in the coming future.
by mandoman10 on Aug 27, 2008 10:37 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
No way "Offensively, LMA and Pau aren’t too different, and defensively, LMA is better— MUCH better"
LMA and Pau offensively are very different (just check stats) but also Pau makes his fellows much better something LMA doesn’t. If you don’t agree just ask Lamar Odom and Koby Bryant. You just have to check how Odom’s and Bryant’s stats grew from February despite Bynum leave.
As for deffense maybe you can say Pau is lazy but he blocks and rebound more than LMA.
by cbp on Aug 27, 2008 11:58 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah
I gotta agree with cbp here, Morty.
Boomshakalaka
by jksnake99 on Aug 27, 2008 12:08 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
That's chill on the rad tip
I’m a Blazer homer, he’s a Spanish homer, and while I don’t think saying LMA is better than Gasol is laughable for hours (he might still be giggling over it), I could see someone preferring Gasol. That’s believable.
I know I’d rather have someone who isn’t “lazy” (to put it charitably) on defense, where I find the other attributes near-equal.
Gasol is good, but I’d take LMA any day of the week. More range, more potential, more athletic, better defender. Gasol is a great interior passer, and I hope LMA becomes half as good as Gasol at that. I’ve seen Gasol get chewed up by pretty much every PF ever in the history of the world though, and that’s no fun.
Keep in mind I’m not saying Gasol sucks or anything crazy like that— I’m just saying LMA isn’t that outlandishly behind him currently, and I would prefer LMA for the future.
Gasol is fine. He’s good. LMA (and Z-Bo before him) always did well against him. So do a lot of PFs.
Mortimer
by Mortimer on Aug 27, 2008 12:18 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Mortimer you are entitle to your Opinion
To you LMA is better than Gasol but to me is not. That’s it.
I do think LMA has more potential than Gasol to develop further in future but right now to my opinion there is no doubt. Moreover the gap between both are very high (my opinon) although I recognize sometimes I get very frustrated with Gasol´s defense.
by cbp on Aug 27, 2008 12:30 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Mortimer is a Blazer fan living in LA surrounded by the fans of most hated team by Blazer fans.
He “needs” to believe ….
Y con certeza es habitualmente uno de los tipos más graciosos de este blog.
The Midnight Rambler
by amlmart1 on Aug 27, 2008 2:02 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
because...
… they have beaten us in the playoffs many many times.
Also, the city of LA is in many ways the antithesis of Portland- huge, ugly, smoggy, full of SUVs and celebrities, etc.
If you are going to join Blazer nation, you have to learn to hate the Lakers… even Pau Gasol (you can still think he’s a great player, and root for him when he’s wearing Spain’s colors, but you have to hate him as a Laker).
Boomshakalaka
by jksnake99 on Aug 27, 2008 5:53 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
thanks jksnake99. I think I can understand you..
Actually I’ve got the same feelings against other cities here in Spain. I’ll join the Blazer nation as long as Nate McMillan joins spanish nation. LOL.
If Rudy becomes a key factor for Blazers my heart will be divided if Lakers meet Blazers in the western finals. I’ll be happy anyway for both of them.
by cbp on Aug 27, 2008 11:34 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Rudy will become a key factor for the Blazers
And eventually we’ll meet them in the playoffs, sometime in the next few years. There are other teams that could knock one or both of us out, but it will happen.
And if you follow the Blazers for long, you’ll love our other guys, too, especially compared to Mr. Ego in LA.
To know the Blazers is to love them.
Other people don't have as much practice at being wrong as I do -- HT, timbo
by jscot on Aug 28, 2008 1:37 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yes jscot but it wasn't like that some years ago...
….I remember to read in spanish media (maybe 5- 6 years ago) most of the blazers players went arrested and jailed becuase of drugs, guns, rape etc. I don’t remember very well but think it was when Rassheed Wallace, Miles, Bonzi Wells etc were in the roster.
by cbp on Aug 28, 2008 5:24 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
You are absolutely right
And I actually stopped following the team for a time because of that stuff. I wouldn’t say “most of the players” were arrested, that’s overstating it, but there were a lot of bad guys on the team.
I think that’s one of the reasons everyone loves this group of players so much. You will, too, if you follow them for long.
Other people don't have as much practice at being wrong as I do -- HT, timbo
by jscot on Aug 28, 2008 5:58 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, people remember them as "the Jailblazers".
Now the Blazer nation is totally focused looking for good guys and rejecting players with debatable behavior. People you can be proud of.
The Midnight Rambler
by amlmart1 on Aug 28, 2008 6:14 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Like much you read in the media
that exaggeration is really sad. Anyone remember a player convicted and jailed while a Trail Blazer? Even one? Anyone remember a rape while a player was a Trail Blazer? Not me. Not one. Maybe you were thinking about the L@kers and K@be?
No denying some of these guys were into pot and hot rod racing on the streets (1) and cruelties to animals (1) and frequenters of night clubs but in the USA you don’t go to jail for that (except Michael Vick from Atlanta in the NFL).
The city became intolerant of the above behavior, maybe to slowly. But jail blazers was a coined phrase that was pure media.
Aldridge said. "We feel like we can beat any team. We feel like we can beat the Spurs, Suns, Lakers, Mavericks, whoever any night right now, and we'll still be here when those teams get old and their guys retire. We're going to be here for a long time."
by lee3022 on Aug 29, 2008 10:14 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Thugs and Idiots
They flipped off the crowd, cursed the coach, got accused of rape, hauled drugs on planes, lead the league in technicals, prowled the nightclubs and stripclubs with their “posse’s” … I could go on. Yeah, they didn’t get behind bars; I’ll give you that. But the coined phrase was deserved by their intentional, persistent and unrepentant bad behavior. Good riddance to all that.
by dvcastle on Aug 30, 2008 1:16 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don't agree
pleas jscot see my post called “very intersting these stats”.
To me the stats hed to head Gasolis better than LMA.
by cbp on Aug 27, 2008 9:41 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
i see what you are saying.
im just pretty convinced bynum is a franchise player. the type that will make you fear (in the way that dave talked about in this post) and change your team for as the suns already did this past year.
by mandoman10 on Aug 27, 2008 10:47 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
adding the Memphis games
November 9 @ Portland
LMA
30 pts on 12 for 20 FGs; 6 for 7 fts
10 rebounds (1 offensive)
0 assists
3 stl, 3 blk
2 tos
Gasol
19 pts on 8 for 10 fgs; 3 for 4 fts
4 rebounds (2 offensive)
0 assists
0 stl, 0 blk
1 TO
—-
December 3 at Memphis
LMA
23 pts on 11 for 23; 1 for 2 FTs.
5 reb (3 offensive)
1 assist
1 blk, 2 stl
2 tos
Gasol
14 pts on 4 for 14; 6 for 6 fts
15 rebs (4 offensive)
4 assists
1 stl, 2 blk
3 tos
Boomshakalaka
by jksnake99 on Aug 27, 2008 8:40 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
OK, let's total them
LMA
132 pts (22 pg) 56-113; FT 21-23
55 reb (9.2 pg) 19 offensive
6 assists
8 TO
(I didn’t total blocks and steals on the LA games, so we’ll leave that out)
Gasol
94 pts (15.7 pg) 33-66; FT 28-34
57 rebounds (9.5 pg) 20 offensive
19 assists
11 TO
The worst you can say about LMA is its a push, as far as head to head competition goes. Certainly, you can make a case for him having an edge.
Probably most of us have experienced this kind of thing, where you go up against a player that is better than you, and you know it, but for some reason, the matchup just works well for you and you hold your own or even outplay him every time. And then you go up against a player that you know you are a lot better, but there’s something about his game that just messes you up.
Maybe that’s what it is with LMA and Pau. If you look at the season as a whole, Pau was significantly better, but not against us.
Other people don't have as much practice at being wrong as I do -- HT, timbo
by jscot on Aug 27, 2008 9:21 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
vey interesting these stats.
This stats just proves Gasol did it much better than LMA head to head. LOL. Gasol went to the line 10 times more so he was more agressive than LMA. Moreover Gasol was 50% in FG% while LMA was 47%. Gasol shoot much less tha LMA s I am assuming lakers didn’t need Gasol offense or Koby just absorbed the offense.
An let’s not to talk about assists.
by cbp on Aug 27, 2008 9:33 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
agreed
the assists make up the point differential. Coupled with the fact that the lakers did not need Pao to score as much in those games.
BUT, dont kid yourself, Lamarcus was having HIS way on the block against the lakers. The only point here is that pao pretty effective aswell.
by mandoman10 on Aug 27, 2008 9:35 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Assists make up the point differential?
You rate assists more highly than I do.
Figure a team scores, on average, 1 point per possession. That may be a little high, it may be a little low, but it’s pretty close. So you can figure, even without the assist, that you would have had one point on that possession, on average. With the assist, you get two. In the 6 games head to head, Pau had 13 more assists and 3 more turnovers (effectively costs you a point each) for a net of +10. LMA outscored him by 38.
I don’t know if Pau is a better passer, but he’s a good one, and he’s in an offensive that utilizes that skill well, whereas LMA wasn’t. It’s an edge to Pau, but really, in no way can Pau be said to have been much better.
Other people don't have as much practice at being wrong as I do -- HT, timbo
by jscot on Aug 27, 2008 2:16 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
LMA outscored Gasol by 38, but
he took 47 more shots to do so. If shot attempts are treated like turnovers (I know there are offensive rebounds, but not enough to make a big difference), then Pau wins the statistical comparison.
by trk on Aug 28, 2008 12:07 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hmm
That’s shaky, very shaky. Season stats for two players follow:
Player A
2323 pts 775-1690 FT 623-742
517 rebounds
441 assists
257 turnovers
Player B
371 pts 144-250 FT 83-122
649 rebounds
27 assists
95 turnovers
If missed shots count as turnovers, Player A had 1172 turnovers, Player B had 201.
If a turnover costs you two points, then the turnovers make up the point differential. Advantage to Player B on rebounds, to Player A on assists.
Player B provided his production in only about 20 mpg, Player A took almost 40 mpg to provide what he provided. Big advantage for Player B there.
Perhaps Player A is better (if a missed shot is a turnover), but not by a huge amount.
Player A is Kobe, Player B is Joel Przybilla.
Other people don't have as much practice at being wrong as I do -- HT, timbo
by jscot on Aug 28, 2008 2:11 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Very Interesting...
but you are comparing too heterogeneus players, positions (Center vs shooting guard) and productin while Gasol and LMA are homogeneus in positions and prodution.
by cbp on Aug 28, 2008 5:34 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Oh, I know
My point was only that to count missed shots as turnovers, when both players shoot similar percentages, is not really appropriate.
Here’s my view on shooting percentages and missed shots, for what it’s worth. I figure break even is about 45. If a player shoots under 45, taking more shots is a negative — you don’t really want a guy who converts that few shots taking the bulk of your shots.
If he shoots over 45%, taking more shots is probably a positive. It means your guy is working hard to get open, or he’s established himself as a guy who carries a significant burden in your offense. Both of those are good things.
The higher volume of shots, the harder it is to shoot a good percentage. If you take a lot of shots, you are the key guy, you are the one the defense is focused on, you are going to take some shots with the clock winding down. If you ask me which is more valuable, the guy who takes 10 shots a game and hits 50% or the guy who takes 20 and hits 45-46%, I would say that the second guy is probably more valuable. At least five of his shots are probably significantly more difficult than the shots of the first guy.
Kobe shot 45.8% last year. That’s superb for the volume of shots he took. Brandon Roy shot 45.4%, virtually the same. No one should say, “Well, Kobe took a lot more shots than Roy to get his points, and all those misses are like turnovers, so it’s an edge to Roy.” We should instead say, “Kobe is a phenomenal scorer, and shoots a decent percentage even though taking a very high volume of shots.”
My point relative to LMA and Pau? The fact that LMA took more shots is actually a positive relative to Pau, because they hit a comparable percentage. Despite bearing more of the offensive burden, he was able to maintain a high percentage.
If Pau shot 55% and LMA 45%, then there would be something to this argument. But their percentages are very close, and both over the league average.
If you’ve got a guy who is shooting over the league average for FG%, you WANT him to be taking more shots, and you run your offense accordingly.
Other people don't have as much practice at being wrong as I do -- HT, timbo
by jscot on Aug 28, 2008 6:14 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Understood your point but....
…..I would agree to you if LMA instead of shoting 15 per game he shot 20-25 shots. Moreover the Gasol’s FG% was burdened mainly by his games in Memphis where he was alone so more hard because he run the team offense which means more focus on him than LMA in Portland.
If I were coach I would take as a break even th average FG% of my team so the break even is a very good reference and a real competition is created within the team because if somene has a good FG, he is forcing the team break even to be higher so the ones under that FG ar forced to increase his FG%.
by cbp on Aug 28, 2008 10:26 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
LMA had the same defensive pressure
LMA was double teamed every night, just like Gasol was in Memphis, and it didn’t relent like when Gasol went to the Lakers.
Gasol had Rudy Gay, who actually led the team in scoring for the Grizzlies, even while Gasol was on the team. And LMA has Roy, who also led his team in scoring. As far as offensive focus and how much the defense keys in on them, both LMA and Gasol were in similar situations (at least until Gasol went to the Lakers, where his offensive game become much easier because Kobe Bryant and Lamar Odom get much of the defensive focus).
LMA’s offensive load lasted an entire season, while Gasol’s only lasted about half a season. It’s not a surprise he looked so good in a Laker uniform, because they had so many weapons. That should be taken into account as well.
Mortimer
by Mortimer on Aug 28, 2008 10:47 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Gasol stat's in Memphis always was above 0,5 (without Rudy Gay) with no weapons around him for 5 years
…while LMA played around Roy.
Gasol looked so good in a laker uniform as he looked in a Grizzlies or spanish uniform. LOL.
by cbp on Aug 28, 2008 11:01 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I give up
I don’t yield the point, but we’re just not going to find any common ground here. You think Gasol had an advantage in their head to head matchups, I think Aldridge did. Those who saw the games, for the most part, agree with me. A case can be made from the stats that I’m right, as well. You may not see it that way, but it is a defensible argument.
Do I think Aldridge will have an edge in future matchups? I don’t have a clue, but I can understand someone saying that. Can I understand someone saying Gasol will have the edge? Of course. He’s proven himself to be a legitimate star for years, and shown far more than LMA. Will he have the edge? I don’t know, but I can sure understand why someone would expect him to.
I can understand either argument. I don’t think either is silly or ridiculous. Time will tell. Maybe they’ll take turns dominating each other. Maybe one will be clearly superior. Maybe they’ll both play terrible when they go head to head in future. Who knows?
It’s almost as if there was an ocean between us. But I suppose when there’s England, the Channel, and France, that’s perhaps worse than an ocean in some ways.
In any event, I really don’t think there’s anything more that I can say, except that these guys are both very good players on very good teams, and it should be fun for at least 4 years or so, until Pau and Kobe start to slow down. Then, it will be fun for Blazer fans for quite a few more years after that, but hopefully not so fun for LA fans.
Other people don't have as much practice at being wrong as I do -- HT, timbo
by jscot on Aug 28, 2008 11:25 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
COMMON GROUND! HOORAY!
Perhaps it’s like Gibraltar. Most Spaniards and most Brits may not agree, but almost all agree it is going to be interesting to see what will happen. (I can see both arguments, but it seems to me that the Spaniards care more than the Brits, which should count for something).
All the best to you, and I hope the Gasol brothers have long and productive careers, with great success until they run into the Portland juggernaut in the playoffs every year.
Other people don't have as much practice at being wrong as I do -- HT, timbo
by jscot on Aug 28, 2008 12:08 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
All the best to the Blazers too and LMA too.My impression when I see his face is that he is kind and goodness.
I don’t mind LMA to be over Gasol. If he is to my mind I will say so.
As for Gibraltar the main problem is that the people who lives there by no way thay want to becoe spanish but like a inependent country. UK want to solve it but it will e difficult.
by cbp on Aug 28, 2008 12:31 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
They'll probably
end up being paid lots of money to move back to Britain, eventually.
I actually don’t know why the Spanish care so much, either. To me, it’s just a big rock. If the Spanish owned Bass Rock in the Firth of Forth near Edinburgh, I’d say, “That’s crazy, why do they want that?” And then I’d shrug, and say, “Oh, well, their problem.”
But I probably don’t really understand the Spanish mindset. Someday, I’ll rule the world, and then I’ll have all you Spanish guys on here to advise me so I’ll know how to rule the Continent well. And I’ll sort out Gibraltar, too. I’m nice that way.
Until then, I’m having enough trouble ruling my fingers and making them type what they are supposed to.
Other people don't have as much practice at being wrong as I do -- HT, timbo
by jscot on Aug 28, 2008 1:18 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
The British have some weird nightmares that the Empire will fall if they surrender Gibraltar
Hasn’t it done precisely that already?
Odenied: Asked whether he noticed Oden favoring his right knee, Frye dismissed it entirely. "He favors dunking on your head, that's what he favors."
by Norsktroll on Aug 28, 2008 1:20 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
So why not surrender, then?
Few Brits care.
Other people don't have as much practice at being wrong as I do -- HT, timbo
by jscot on Aug 28, 2008 1:49 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
maybe it's just pride the reason Spain wants that rock back
Anyway when you rule the world, fire David Stern and open NBA into Europe, create a franchise in Spain leading by Rudy and Gasol so we will start disscusing head to head Gasol vs LMA and Roy vs Rudy. Finally as you will rule I will be your typer.
by cbp on Aug 28, 2008 1:37 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
LOL
I think it’s just pride you want an NBA franchise in Spain, too.
But if it happens, no way are we giving up Rudy.
Don’t worry about Stern. KP is going to trade for his desk and position one of these days. No one ends up saying no to KP if he really wants something.
Other people don't have as much practice at being wrong as I do -- HT, timbo
by jscot on Aug 28, 2008 1:51 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
speaking of KP. Did you know he played in the Spanish ACB?..
He was a heck of a player (21,4 point per game and 4.7 assists). It is funny because his first game in Spain was against Joventud de Badalona (former Rudy’s club). He played for Caceres. I think one or two seasons. I recall him to be a big three pointer.
by cbp on Aug 28, 2008 2:25 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I didn't know that
Perhaps that is why he was so sure of going after Rudy, his contacts over there were talking to him.
Other people don't have as much practice at being wrong as I do -- HT, timbo
by jscot on Aug 29, 2008 1:23 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Rooster Rock
I think it would be cool if some other (friendly) country owned a little bit of land around here. We could all celebrate their holidays, give us more reasons to go out drinking, figure out ways to pull stunts with our taxes.
Kind of like the way people from Vancouver treat Portland.
by dvcastle on Aug 28, 2008 2:37 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
LOL
It might be a little different if the other country had taken Rooster Rock at a time when they weren’t friendly.
I was back there a few years ago, and drove down the Gorge. The trees have grown so it wasn’t as obvious to my kids as it used to be when I was a kid why it was called Rooster Rock.
Someone told me it isn’t really a place you take your kids anymore. Don’t know if that’s true or not.
Other people don't have as much practice at being wrong as I do -- HT, timbo
by jscot on Aug 29, 2008 1:26 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don't see...
… how you can look at those numbers and say Gasol was “much” better. I think its pretty much even head to head.
For the record, the Blazers won 2 of 4 games against the Lakers and both games against the Grizzlies that Gasol played in.
Gasol had the better season by pretty much any measure, but head to head it was basically a push.
I’d still like to see Dave’s explanation for saying “Edge: Blazers.” Perhaps he’s just predicting that Aldridge will become better than Pau- Dave isn’t typically one to overrate Blazer players, so this is unusual for him.
Boomshakalaka
by jksnake99 on Aug 27, 2008 9:39 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
no
im not saying pao is way better… in my comment i just said that lamarcus had his way against pao.. im just saying gasol got his too. so im saying it was a wash.
and your right, long term or short term makes a difference. but i still dont think we can predict how good players will be. you never know.. maybe lamarcus will stop improving after a contract or something. who knows. pao is here NOW.
by mandoman10 on Aug 27, 2008 9:41 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think you an I are on the same page
Boomshakalaka
by jksnake99 on Aug 27, 2008 9:42 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
i also agree
that this is unusual for dave, their is allot of blazers hope in this analysis
by mandoman10 on Aug 27, 2008 9:42 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
sorry I didn't mean much better I meant better. But you know I am still laughing "Pau Gasol vs. Lamarcus Aldridge: Edge Blazers"
by cbp on Aug 27, 2008 9:51 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Welcome to Blazermania.
You can find some old posts talking about how we overrate our players, doing self-criticism of our behavior as fans. In a very American way of life, we continue doing the same after. It´s a lot of fun. You know Spanish people we use to do the same, only with a little less self-criticism. Also there´s a lot of knowledge here and a great desire to discuss friendly. Enjoy.
The Midnight Rambler
by amlmart1 on Aug 27, 2008 10:04 AM PDT up reply actions 5 recs
A pleasure.
I was thinking about recommending my own comment but the site doesn´t allow that possibility. ;-)
The Midnight Rambler
by amlmart1 on Aug 27, 2008 2:06 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'll do it for you
Other people don't have as much practice at being wrong as I do -- HT, timbo
by jscot on Aug 27, 2008 2:17 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
P.S.
Now you owe me a rec sometime, Alfredo. Though only if I’ve earned it.
Other people don't have as much practice at being wrong as I do -- HT, timbo
by jscot on Aug 27, 2008 2:24 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Check my profile out:
Recommended The Dunk Heard Round the World on Blazer’s Edge – 08/26/08 6:31 PM CEST
The Midnight Rambler
by amlmart1 on Aug 28, 2008 9:29 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
LOL
I’ll forgive you for trying to make me a senator.
Other people don't have as much practice at being wrong as I do -- HT, timbo
by jscot on Aug 28, 2008 9:56 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
You´ll do it and only you will. The rest of the Worl thinks I gave birth to your megalomania.
The Midnight Rambler
by amlmart1 on Aug 28, 2008 10:33 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
The rest of the world
will be eternally grateful to you.
Other people don't have as much practice at being wrong as I do -- HT, timbo
by jscot on Aug 28, 2008 11:13 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I still don't even get "better"
Over the six games, they both shot 50. Even if you limit it to the four with LA, the difference between 50 and 47% over four games is virtually negligible. We’re talking 33-70 vs. 35-70. If you’re going to base your claim of Pau’s superiority head-to-head on 2 shots out of 70, that’s kind of weak, isn’t it? In that case, I guess I can argue that since LMA averaged 10 rebounds and Pau only 9.5 in those four games, advantage LMA. But that would be a weak argument, too.
If you say Pau was better over the season, I’ll give you that hands down. If you say he fit better with his team, or provided what they needed more effectively, we could debate it, but I won’t call you a “homer” for saying so.
But head to head, over either the four or the six games, few people would laugh at the idea that LMA had the edge last year. Not if they saw the games. They might not agree, but they wouldn’t laugh. But perhaps you didn’t get to see any of the six games, either.
Mind you, if I had just watched the Olympics and Pau’s performance, I would find it laughable that someone would give the edge to a guy who didn’t make the U.S. Olympic team. But LMA did make the U.S. Select team. He ain’t chopped liver, as they say.
Other people don't have as much practice at being wrong as I do -- HT, timbo
by jscot on Aug 27, 2008 2:23 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Clarifications on stats
Shotting percentage is a wash both were 50%, but Lma took and made more shots even for the Memphis games (where there was no Kobe to absorb the point difference. FT’s Lma had one more miss than totaled sohe is really 20/23 vs 28/34, yes Pau made more point sat th line bu he still produced fewer points overall. Pau is clearly at the advantage delivering 2 more per game than Lma which just about washes out the point differential scored by the two players. Conclusion both players were comparable in head to head match up is 6 games. Gasols production in games vs. portland was indistiguishable whether he wore a Laker uniform or Grizzly uniform.
by NWfan on Aug 27, 2008 12:08 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hypothetical trade
I agree with Dave – it’s Oden or bust. Would you do the following trade: Everyone but the big 3, for the assurance that Oden would reach his potential and have a long, relatively injury free, motivated career. I would do that trade in a second…
by Engineering Problem on Aug 27, 2008 8:11 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Hmm
I think I would, too. For one, we’d have a ton of cap space to go get some role players.
Fortunately, we probably don’t have to do that trade, we are likely to get that long, very productive career AND get to keep a lot of the guys we have.
Other people don't have as much practice at being wrong as I do -- HT, timbo
by jscot on Aug 27, 2008 8:16 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
in a nanosecond
if we’re guaranteeing he’ll be the dominant center in the league for a decade.
Boomshakalaka
by jksnake99 on Aug 27, 2008 8:16 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
mmmmmmmmm ..... yep.
http://www.myspace.com/y5k
by Y5k on Aug 27, 2008 8:30 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
What are you?
The Devil?!? Tempting me with this sort of choice!
Dog help me, I’ll take that trade.
by DonkeyShins on Aug 27, 2008 9:40 AM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
I agree with Dave.
LMA matched Pau in his second year in the league. Next year, with Oden and Bynum in the center, Aldridge and Pau will both play at their permanent and natural position, which is PF. Pau, to a great degree, is already at his peak. Aldridge is not. The edge, over time, will go to Aldridge. Oden, needless to say, is indeed the game changer. Every player on the floor is affected by a dominant center. Every player on the floor is not, however, affected by a dominant guard nor forward. Oden changes how teams play. Teamed with Aldridge, that edge is simply magnified. Oden limits the inside game, forces players outside, and reduces the numbers of second shots they will have. His defensive skills, as players like Walton and Russell so effectively demonstrated, will be the one contribution that every team will have to contend with. You can offset scoring, but you cannot offset superior defensive play unless you have an equivalent player.
by Eben Calder on Aug 27, 2008 8:41 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
OMG
have you people seen any games with andrew bynum in them? lol. wah wah.
by mandoman10 on Aug 27, 2008 8:43 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Huh?
Sorry to inform you but as good as LMA is Gasol is much better and more experienced.
by SuperCrazy on Aug 27, 2008 8:43 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
awsome, thanx for the information,
oh, wait, hey, this stuff is faulty, with nuthing backing it up, this isn;t information, this is SuperCrazy!! :-)
(our) great industrial nation is controlled by its system of credit, our system of of credit is privately concentrated, the growth of our nation, therefore, and all our activities are in the hands of a few men... who necessarily, by very reason of their own limitations, chill and check and destroy genuine economic freedom.
We have come to be one of the worst ruled, one of the most completely controlled and dominated governments in the civilized world - no government by free opinion, no longer a government by conviction and the vote of the majority, but a government by the opinion and the duress of small groups of dominant men.
--- Woodrow Wilson
by ptwnblzr on Aug 28, 2008 3:59 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Dave
This stuck out
not the sleek fighter jet or the tricked-out tank, but the freakin’ nuclear bomb?
I just had to comment on that one line..corny! Its alright because I agree with the entire analysis-for the 100th time :)
"Thank God those nightmarish booty-less days are behind us. I blame cocaine."-Mortimer
I detest that man who hides one thing in the depths of his heart, and speaks for another. - Homer
That was a very hard winter,
and it was just like one long night,
with me lying awake, waiting and waiting and waiting
for daybreak.
- Black Elk
1881
by BlazerFan1 on Aug 27, 2008 8:44 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I respectfully dissent
Love the nuclear bomb line! Nice to see Dave’s relentless even-handedness pierced with some dramatic imagery. And I think it illustrates a good point. (Although as nuclear weapons are concerned, Kobe is a bit overrated. He’s a really big missile, but I don’t know if there’s really nuclear technology there.)
Bayless isn't the second coming of Jordan.
Jordan was the first coming of Bayless.
by KP Corleone on Aug 27, 2008 8:53 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Dont get me started on that :)
I could go on for days . I never said it wasn’t accurate, just corny.
"Thank God those nightmarish booty-less days are behind us. I blame cocaine."-Mortimer
I detest that man who hides one thing in the depths of his heart, and speaks for another. - Homer
That was a very hard winter,
and it was just like one long night,
with me lying awake, waiting and waiting and waiting
for daybreak.
- Black Elk
1881
by BlazerFan1 on Aug 27, 2008 9:46 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I was thrown off by the weapons imagery as well. Then I said what the heck and ran with it (see above)
Odenied: Asked whether he noticed Oden favoring his right knee, Frye dismissed it entirely. "He favors dunking on your head, that's what he favors."
by Norsktroll on Aug 27, 2008 9:47 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yes how could i miss that piece of art
:)
"Thank God those nightmarish booty-less days are behind us. I blame cocaine."-Mortimer
I detest that man who hides one thing in the depths of his heart, and speaks for another. - Homer
That was a very hard winter,
and it was just like one long night,
with me lying awake, waiting and waiting and waiting
for daybreak.
- Black Elk
1881
by BlazerFan1 on Aug 27, 2008 10:21 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Funny Note:
People are debating the matchup paragraph. When I wrote that paragraph I purposely wrote it to be non-controversial to the main audience here, as I wanted to use it merely as an example of what people would say rather than an accurate analysis. So, as part of a throw-away example I made sure to put LMA over Gasol, knowing otherwise I’d see 92 posts saying, “How could you do that Lamarcus is better than Gasol I’d way rather have him than an old guy Memphis traded away for peanuts and Gasol didn’t win L.A. any rings and can’t play defense and I don’t think you’re a real Blazer fan anymore Dave so there!” when that little line wasn’t the point of the piece and didn’t matter to the piece except for illustrating the format used sometimes to predict playoff matchups.
So I check the site this morning and what do I find? A few dozen comments on how right or wrong it is that I rated Aldridge over Gasol.
(sigh) I cannot win.
—Dave
by Dave on Aug 27, 2008 9:42 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Actually, you do win
You got way more page views which means more ad revenue for the site which means more $$$$.
Very clever, Mr. Bond…
by DonkeyShins on Aug 27, 2008 9:44 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
BUT
I don’t get paid.
Not so clever, Mr. Bond.
—Dave
by Dave on Aug 27, 2008 9:45 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
And that is the flaw in your master plan
Time for you to retreat to your subterranian lair and your quasi-futuristic clothing.
Oh, wait, I’m mixing you up with jscot. :-)
by DonkeyShins on Aug 27, 2008 9:51 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
JScot is a hack.
Clearly I will eventually rule the…what? Oh, sorry Mr. Scot! I didn’t see you standing there! Ummm…yes, I guess that is obvious. Yes, I will get back to scrubbing pots now. Thank you Mr. Scot! Or may I call you “J”? OK, Mr. Scot it is. Yes sir. Thank you sir.
—Dave
by Dave on Aug 27, 2008 9:54 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Your Momma's
basement is a subterranean lair.
Use your pajama top to dry those pots.
You may call me “Your Eminence”. For now.
Other people don't have as much practice at being wrong as I do -- HT, timbo
by jscot on Aug 27, 2008 2:29 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
i may have laughed hard enough to wake up my neighbore
(our) great industrial nation is controlled by its system of credit, our system of of credit is privately concentrated, the growth of our nation, therefore, and all our activities are in the hands of a few men... who necessarily, by very reason of their own limitations, chill and check and destroy genuine economic freedom.
We have come to be one of the worst ruled, one of the most completely controlled and dominated governments in the civilized world - no government by free opinion, no longer a government by conviction and the vote of the majority, but a government by the opinion and the duress of small groups of dominant men.
--- Woodrow Wilson
by ptwnblzr on Aug 28, 2008 4:03 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I was told
he’d be coming back at me sometime. That post was just the beginning.
Other people don't have as much practice at being wrong as I do -- HT, timbo
by jscot on Aug 28, 2008 6:15 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
what's up with that anyway?
why don’t you get to share the national ad revenue?
No blog without the blogger.
by Section323 on Aug 28, 2008 7:44 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
On the up side
LMA vs. Gasol appears to be good conversation.
—Dave
by Dave on Aug 27, 2008 9:45 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I knew it was trouble
I skimmed last night and it was the first thing I saw. No joke about it, just that instantly I knew a lot of comments were going to be about the comparisons.
by tominhawaii on Aug 27, 2008 1:29 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think...
… you needed a disclaimer that your matchup edges weren’t to be taken literally.
Boomshakalaka
by jksnake99 on Aug 27, 2008 9:45 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Perhaps
I guess I thought, “Somebody, somewhere is going to make this kind of analysis…” would illustrate that it was a faux third-party example and not my own analysis of the matchups. But as DonkeyShins points out, more hits ain’t bad.
—Dave
by Dave on Aug 27, 2008 9:47 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Now we just need someone to post this at Forum Blue & Gold
Just think of the cross-traffic you could generate…heck, let’s get the Blogfather to link as well and break the BlazersEdge UUs/PVs records!
Sorry, I’m geeking out here on web traffic. That’s what happens when I go on vacation.
by DonkeyShins on Aug 27, 2008 9:53 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
i agree...
interesting conversation this way and smart to put la over pao so that it wouldn’t turn out the way you said it would.
by mandoman10 on Aug 27, 2008 9:47 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
this sound me excuse instead of recognize a mistake.
by cbp on Aug 27, 2008 12:31 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Not this time. Not that it´s a big matter but I can promise you that we are all hoping for some Dave´s mistakes ;-)
The “biased” posts are a tradition in this blog so when he said “…somebody is going to offer some version of the following analysis…” was describing a tipical blazersedge behavior probably more in the line of an " I disagree with" post than an “I agree with” post.
The Midnight Rambler
by amlmart1 on Aug 27, 2008 2:17 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Besides that
why in the world would I analyze a Blazers-L*kers playoff series in August when:
A. We don’t know who’s making the playoffs.
B. We have no idea if they’d play against each other.
C. We haven’t seen concretely how the Blazers play together.
D. Nor their rotation.
E. Nor whether either squad will get through the year healthy. And…
F. We don’t even know the official opening day rosters for 2008-09 yet!
—Dave
by Dave on Aug 27, 2008 2:34 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Ohhhhhhhhhh....I see where this is headed...
you expect us to thoughtfully ANALYZE based on FACTS and INFORMATION and stuff.
Heh. I’ll see your facts and raise you some WILD SPECULATION. And just when you think you’ve got the upper hand…KAPOW!!! I’ll hit you with some RUMOR and chaka-chakakakakaka…a barrage of UNREASONABLENESS from the trade machine. Ha! You think you can deflect that with LOGIC and whatnot? THWAAACK!!!! That’s right…how ’bout a facefull of SHORTSIGHTEDNESS??? How do ya like them apples?
Uh oh…pulling out your big guns now, eh? TRUTH.
Dang, I’m gonna have to play dirty. That’s right…..BAD GRAMMAR!!! HA HA HA HA HA!!! BOOWOOOHAAHHAAA HAAA HAAA!!!
Ahem.
; )
by lukeyhere on Aug 27, 2008 3:30 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I surrender
to your self-evident superiosity!
However I do maintain that if our starting five and the L*kers starting five each were to fuse into one, giant super-robot our robot would beat their robot six falls to five.
—Dave
by Dave on Aug 27, 2008 3:44 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
No
If Dave made a mistake, we’d be all over his case. I wrote a whole fanpost about his mistakes about Rudy (well, it might have covered a few other points, too), and it got a ton of recs. He’ll say they weren’t mistakes, of course, but the recs rolled in.
I said in my first comment that it wasn’t his analysis, that he had said someone would say that. It was obvious to me he wasn’t trying to argue that.
Other people don't have as much practice at being wrong as I do -- HT, timbo
by jscot on Aug 27, 2008 2:32 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
my only question...
is where is the roy is better then kobe flame war.
by mandoman10 on Aug 27, 2008 9:48 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Yah
I battled over that internally, thinking how far I could go in these hypothetical, possibly Blazer-biased, matchups. But I decided if I said, “Kobe vs. Roy: Edge: Blazers” I’d have droves of L*ker fans over here to comment on what a complete idiot I am. It’s not so much that I mind the “idiot” part, I’m just fresh out of Lysol. So I figured I better keep Kobe on top.
—Dave
by Dave on Aug 27, 2008 9:51 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Ohhh..
i know what would have been good. a phil jackson is better then nate mcmill flame war!
ill bring it right now! lolz
by mandoman10 on Aug 27, 2008 9:53 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Phil is better
for the L@kers. Sarge would have crucified K*be by now.
Wait. Maybe that would be good for the L@kers. Oh, well. We’ll never know.
Other people don't have as much practice at being wrong as I do -- HT, timbo
by jscot on Aug 27, 2008 2:34 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
oohhh(2)
phil jackson has edge over nate.
by mandoman10 on Aug 27, 2008 9:57 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
which is made up by
blazer fans over laker fans. I love this game!
by mandoman10 on Aug 27, 2008 9:57 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Lakers celebrity fans
are more famous than Blazer celebrity fans. I don’t know if that’s an edge for them or for us.
Boomshakalaka
by jksnake99 on Aug 27, 2008 9:58 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
For us, pseudo fans don't cheer, stand up, etc. The Staples Center was awfully quiet during most of the finals.
Odenied: Asked whether he noticed Oden favoring his right knee, Frye dismissed it entirely. "He favors dunking on your head, that's what he favors."
by Norsktroll on Aug 27, 2008 10:00 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
well...
ive made this point a billion times to peeps. anyone who has lived in l.a. knows that the people who go to staples center are weak sauce. its a long drive let me tell you from just about anywheres.
by mandoman10 on Aug 27, 2008 10:02 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
but again,
screaming fans at home dont mean much for home court advantage.
by mandoman10 on Aug 27, 2008 10:03 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
What?
I would say that is exactly what home court advantage is.
"Jerryd is straight ahead at you. Rudy dips around. Jerryd is a rock. Rudy is the wind. Jerryd loves the ball in his hands. Rudy moves without it. Jerryd defends by getting up in your grill. Rudy plays the spaces in between. Jerryd has focused vision. Rudy sees all around him. Jerryd likes to score off of the dribble. Rudy can catch and shoot. Jerryd is aggressive. Rudy is sneaky. Jerryd will hit you hard. Rudy will annoy you until you hit him." -Dave
Word.
by joelor on Aug 27, 2008 11:20 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Who has the richest owner....
THAT trumps any Penny Marshell or Denzell Washington mojo.
2-4 the who
by 24thewho on Aug 27, 2008 11:38 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
oh
i meant at home watching television as opposed to being at staples.
by mandoman10 on Aug 27, 2008 11:20 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
It's the big man -DUH
Any student of basketball knows that a dominant big man always trumps anything else. Jordan and company won because there was no dominant big man with a decent supporting cast when they won their rings.
That’s why Oden is such a big deal – they don’t come around like that very often.
Start drooling Blazer freaks
by ralphzillo on Aug 27, 2008 11:29 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Sorry Dave
I can’t really applaud this as great analysis. I think everyone in The Basketball world understands or should understand that Oden is the key. At least the key to how good we might become how quickly. As much was said about Oden before we even drafted him. Write a piece about how we reach Championship viability “if” we don’t have Oden. Everything you said about Oden and his value is correct, but also as you stated in the title you are rehashing. Oden is the key to our immediate championship, upper echelon team hopes but I think the “key” to The Blazers is ownership and management. I have a nice feeling and belief that as long as Paul Allen remains motivated and active as our owner and KP and excellent staff are supported with the mandate to improve, The Blazers one way or another will regain The Spot or one of the spots atop the N.B.A. again. We’ve got a shot with Oden, Brandon and LMA but even if by some dark force this incarnation should fail? I think the key is Ownership and Management.
"Mother Nature started this fight, I think it's about time we ended it!"
by Krang on Aug 27, 2008 11:37 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
i disagree
i think some would think that roy has ability to be franchise mvp type player. and think oden is gonna just be an all-star. he is saying its the opposite.
by mandoman10 on Aug 27, 2008 11:39 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
cant wait
to see our big three vs bostons in 3 4 years when were in our prime and theyll be on the down hillllll
by rippedcity on Aug 27, 2008 11:46 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I don't think that we need Oden to win a championship, but we do need Oden to be dominant.
Without Oden the Blazers would be a very solid team ala Detroit Pistons and could probably win a championship. With Oden the Blazers will dominate and win multiple championships.
by Zaron5551 on Aug 27, 2008 11:55 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
If Oden = Nuclear Bomb,
and Kobe = Nuclear Bomb,
Then I can see what you mean: we have to have Oden to survive. Only the threat of mutually assured destruction, which can only exist if all sides have nuclear bombs and thus have the ability to massively retaliate, can save the world from nuclear holocaust. John Foster Dulles would be proud.
But this is where your analysis breaks down, because it is guaranteed that there will never be a Lakers-Blazers series. KP will pick up the red phone, cooler heads will prevail, and a nuclear showdown will be avoided.
That is, if the Lakers love their children too.
by TimG on Aug 27, 2008 2:11 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
which they dont
the heartless bastards…………….
by BroyTheTruth on Aug 27, 2008 3:03 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I like Kobe
I think it was classy the way he poured water on Coach K. You could tell some other player thought it was classy too because he reached in to help.
by tominhawaii on Aug 27, 2008 4:24 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
My sentiments exactly and I thought Coach K. shared them.
"Besides, AnntheFan will be here any minute to #25 you." T Darkstar
by annthefan on Aug 27, 2008 8:57 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
fair enough......
but know this, he’d probably swallow your first child alive for a championship
by BroyTheTruth on Aug 27, 2008 5:32 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Dave
this has been one of the more fasinating conversations ive read in a while, you really brought out the best in some people. so many participents were respectful in their aproach, so much knowledge, intelect, research, experience went into this very worldly debate, absolutly facinating. this made me realise with a sharp clarity what a generous facilitator you have been, allowing so many indeviduals to shine. you make people want to participate. something funny, is how highly valued, (like a rudy>howard dunk) making an iteligent, but desenting point to one of your posts seams to be. its becouse your so measured and acurate, even true hoop links to you on a consistant basis. funny, but ive been searching all over the internet to expand my knowledge base and perspective, and almost universally, the most enjoyable, and seamingly(to my eyes) most insightful, frequently link to your sight.
so greg is the bomb for the blasers,
then you are the bomb for this comunity, with out wich, we might exsist, but not in these numbers and certainly not this succsesfully or cohesivly. please dont ever get over us. this comunity would erode with out you.
sorry fot the excesive kissing up, its just after reading you state that sometimes you feal that you kant win for loosing, I felt compelled to express my thoughts of the matter. Dave, you the man.
(our) great industrial nation is controlled by its system of credit, our system of of credit is privately concentrated, the growth of our nation, therefore, and all our activities are in the hands of a few men... who necessarily, by very reason of their own limitations, chill and check and destroy genuine economic freedom.
We have come to be one of the worst ruled, one of the most completely controlled and dominated governments in the civilized world - no government by free opinion, no longer a government by conviction and the vote of the majority, but a government by the opinion and the duress of small groups of dominant men.
--- Woodrow Wilson
by ptwnblzr on Aug 28, 2008 4:37 AM PDT reply actions 2 recs
Well said and well deserved Dave
r’ecd
Aldridge said. "We feel like we can beat any team. We feel like we can beat the Spurs, Suns, Lakers, Mavericks, whoever any night right now, and we'll still be here when those teams get old and their guys retire. We're going to be here for a long time."
by lee3022 on Aug 29, 2008 10:33 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

by 












