Why is the Blazers’ offense bad this year? Why is the defense so good?
by OKBLAZER on Nov 17, 2009 3:06 PM PST
Email
Print
The Blazers are shooting 44% from the field (23rd in the league) and 36% from distance (near the league average). We’re scoring 95.3 points per game, 23rd in the league. Yes, we play at a slow pace, but last year we managed to score 99.4 at an equally slow pace, while shooting 46.5% from the field and 38% from 3.
On the other hand, we’re allowing a league-best 88.1 points per. This is not just a function of our slow pace: we’re also holding opponents to a league-best 41% shooting (although we don’t force many turnovers).
How do we explain these changes?
Our rotation has undergone the following changes from last year:
Subtractions:
1. Sergio – played 15 minutes a night, shot 39% from the field, probably increased team offensive efficiency with his passing. He also played, in my subjective analysis, absolutely atrocious defense.
2. Frye – played 12 minutes a night, shot 42% from the field. Defensively, he’s the big-man equivalent of Sergio. Terrible, terrible defender. Terrible. Luckily for Channing, he saved his career by inexplicably morphing into Reggie Miller over the summer.
3. Batum – shot a reasonably efficient 44.6% (37% from 3) on limited attempts in 18 minutes a game. Above-average defender, superior to any wing defender in this year’s rotation.
Additions:
1. Andre Miller – averaging 29 minutes, shooting 39% on 9 attempts a night, also getting to the free throw line 4 times and converting at 86%. Like Sergio, he may increase the team’s offensive efficiency with his passing (although this is debatable). Defensively, Miller can’t stay in front of quick point guards. He does seem to be doing a decent job of matching up with bigger guys in our 3-guard lineup.
2. Martell Webster – averaging 20 minutes, shooting 37% with half his attempts coming from deep. Defense has ranged from excellent (against Durant) to spotty.
Summary: We lost our best wing defender and our two worst defenders from last year’s rotation. Offensively, our subtractions were largely inefficient (Sergio and Channing) or essentially a non-factor (Batum). We added Miller, a career 46% shooter and one of the league’s better passers, with a reputation for mediocre defense, and Webster, an average-defending, 3-point shooting specialist (who can’t seem to make a 3). I would have expected our offense to improve slightly, while the loss of both good and bad defenders would have little net effect on our defense.
Why have we fallen from one of the league’s most efficient offensive teams to mediocrity?
- Brandon Roy’s efficiency is down. He’s shooting 44% compared to last year’s 48%. Why? Pull up his hotspots chart on nba.com. These charts show shot attempts from four zones (layups, short-range, mid-range, and 3-point range). Last year, 41% of Roy’s shot attempts were layups. This year? 25.6%. As you might expect, layups are Roy’s most efficient shot-attempt zone. He’s also not hitting his 3s (35% compared to 38% last year). Possible explanations for why Roy isn’t getting to the hole: Opposing defenses scheming to keep him out; Oden clogging the lane is making it hard to drive; Miller’s man is helping on Roy because Miller can’t shoot. Explanation I’d rather not acknowledge: Roy looks tired and a step slow this year.
2. Andre Miller is shooting, and missing, a quite a few shots. He’s shooting 15% from the right elbow, 25% from the top of the key area, and 17% from the right corner.
3. (i) Travis (38%), (ii) Webster (37%) and (iii) Blake (35%) aren’t making shots, either. Explanations, respectively: (i) shot selection, (ii) rust and (iii) “looking over his shoulder because everybody but Nate knows he should have lost his starting job a long time ago.”
4. We’re entering the ball to Oden more frequently. Greg is shooting 61% from the field, which obviously isn’t hurting us. But he’s also turning the ball over, and those post-ups are not good for ball movement.
5. Not enough Rudy. Rudy is shooting 46% from the field and 44% from 3. That makes him our second-most-efficient scorer behind Oden. He’s also the runaway team leader in steals.Why (6’2” mired-in-a-shooting-slump) Steve Blake starts at shooting guard and plays 30 minutes a night while (6’6” shooting-the-lights-out-from-deep) Rudy comes off the bench and plays 20 minutes, I cannot explain.
6. Lack of chemistry/weird lineups. I can’t pinpoint the chemistry issue. It just feels like we don’t have as much ball movement, player movement and quality spacing as we should. I also refuse to believe that starting two point guards is optimal for offensive efficiency.
7. Small sample size. It’s only been 12 games. Maybe we’ll start hitting some shots. Roy and particularly Miller have had slow starts in the past. Hopefully they’ll both start shooting better. Miller wasn’t mid-range game wasn’t nearly this bad last year. Maybe Roy is still getting in shape, and will start attacking the basket soon.
Why is our defense so good?
1. Soft schedule. Games against Charlotte, Minnesota (x2), Oklahoma City, San Antonio (minus Parker) and New Orleans (a total mess) are favorably skewing our stats.
2. More Oden. Oden is playing more, and playing better. He’s blocking and changing shots. He’s gobbling up defensive rebounds.
3. The second unit is better defensively. Dropping Sergio and Channing = addition by subtraction. We’ve replaced terrible defenders with mediocre defenders.
4. Our defensive rebounding is among the best in the league. Credit Oden and Pryzbilla, primarily.
5. Sample size, again. It’s possible our opponents are just missing a lot of makeable shots. I hope we maintain our defensive prowess, but I’m not confident we will.
36 comments
|
9 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
On defense, it's two things
I think the improvement of our defense can be attributed to two inter-related things. First, Oden is much improved defensively. This improvement (combined with Joel’s consisent good D) allows the Blazers to play zone defense for much of the game. The zone interrupts passing/driving and relies on good interior defense to make up for lack of perimeter quickness. The perimeter guys don’t have to play man to man but can focus on being in the right space and funneling certain directions.
The result is that the Blazers have been playing a very solid and disruptive zone defense.
As for offense, I think part of the issue is chemistry and part of it is just cold shooting by a number of guys. Those should both improve over time.
www.blazerguy.com
don't forget defensive quarterbacking
Andre Miller is a big plus defensively because of his brain and his mouth.
"The only 'Advanced Metric' that matters is what you see with your eyes." -Timbo, Nov., 2009.
Very interestiing
and illuminating commentary. Thanks for offering it.
by blazer_believer on Nov 17, 2009 3:36 PM PST reply actions
Roy needs to attack.
Im tired of seeing blake, miller, or whoever just dribbling or passing until late in the shot clock leaving us with a bad shot attempt. Also in the forth quarter isn’t roy supposed to be our man? I know atlanta has some shot blockers but it seems like brandons passing at the end of his drive rather than putting it off the glass with a classic BROY attack. People are stepping up but Roy has just flattend out. Where’s our all star this year?
Good analysis
Offensively, I think its a slump due to unsettled line-up. Defensively, I think its the level of competition.
I'd Agree if it Wasn't for Atlanta
Atlanta may have won the game, but they didn’t even break 100 in an overtime game, and for mostof the game they were largely held in check.
The defense on the team is definitely better this year, and the defensive concentration may be affecting scoring, too.
Steve Blake starts at shooting guard and plays 30 minutes a night while (6’6" shooting-the-lights-out-from-deep) Rudy comes off the bench and plays 20 minutes, I cannot explain.
Because Blake plays better team defense with Roy and Miller. Keep in mind, Rudy missed some training camp sessions and most of the preseason games, and Nate was installing “new” defensive concepts during this time. Rudy may eventually impress the coaches enough to become a starter alongside Roy and Miller, but right now they know what they have with Blake, and what they have has been working (41% opponent’s FG% is awesome)
Rudy also wants to handle the ball more on offense, and he would not have the opportunity if he started each half alongside Andre and Brandon. (He doesn’t like just “doing a Portland” out in the corner)
Roy looks tired and a step slow this year.
This is because Brandon’s now guarding larger players, for pretty much the entire time he’s in the game. So I don’t expect him to start looking any “fresher” any time soon
When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
Blake rudy and miller
What about the idea that the three gaurd line up is only temporary. So Nate is eventually going to bench Blake more. Allowing Roy to play his normal spot so he will be fresher and score more efficiently. Andre, Webster, Lma, and Oden will also start. This should help to provide better offence, by keeping players at there natural positions. The problem is martells bad play, but I think that’s only rust and will improve plus I feel he’s a good defender. Rudy should get more minutes but this three gaurd starting line feels like it’s part of the reason for the poor offensive, it might be good for spurts buy I. The long term it’s going end up hurting the team. Although I would rather take miller rudy and Roy in a three gaurd line up. Rudy pllayed the best ball in Atlanta and deserves some more minutes.
by edawg on Nov 18, 2009 1:34 AM PST via mobile up reply actions
Your "explanation," while possible, sounds a lot like wishful thinking
This seems to be the new meme around here: “Blake is suddenly some sort of defensive mastermind who somehow dramatically improves our team defense.” Count me as highly skeptical:
Blake is not a good individual defender, this is acknowledged by most observers. Defense is hard to evaluate, but according to the Defensive Rating index at Basketball Reference, he has a rating of 103, exactly the same as Miller. Rudy has a rating of 95, Martell has a rating of 97 (lower is better). Blake has obvious trouble staying in front of quick PGs. He has to back-off significantly which means he puts very little on-ball pressure on opponents.
Blake is a smart guy and he does seem to have a solid understanding of where to be on the floor. He has quick hands which is helpful in tipping balls and reaching in when providing help. But it seems like a real stretch to suggest that one player, who is a below average individual defender and who has limited speed and athleticism, has a dramatic impact on team defense. It just isn’t logical.
Other than Blake’s positive +/-, which is a notoriously fickle stat subject to all kinds of uncontrolled variables, there is no real evidence to support this “theory.” For the most part, this theory seems to have evolved in response to those of us who have pointed out the significant drop in Blake’s production this season. Making unsupported statements like,
Because Blake plays better team defense with Roy and Miller
as though they are statements of fact rather than a hypothesis seems, at best, unhelpful in advancing our collective understanding of what is occurring on the floor.
by upper left corner on Nov 18, 2009 7:03 AM PST up reply actions 1 recs
this theory seems to have evolved in response to those of us who have pointed out the significant drop in Blake’s production this season
That’s not my motivation. I just observe that Nate made a starting lineup decision when the team was 2-3 and I’m trying to explain what his thought process might have been in making it. It certainly wouldn’t hurt my feelings if he replaced Blake with Webster in the starting lineup, but would the team win 6 out of the 7 games following that change? That’s the relevant stat, to me
And I think the “Steve plays better, smarter defense with Roy and Miller” is a better explanation than “Blake must have compromising photos of coach McMillian” to get all of this extra PT when his shooting stats are so poor.
When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
Somewhere between
1. Steve plays better defense
2. Steve has compromising photos of Nate
is a third alternative for why he is still starting:
Nate is like every other human being and does not make perfectly rational decisions every time. Whether it’s familiarity, respect, consitency, or whatever, I think it’s pretty clear that Nate is not making the perfectly rational choice as far as who to start.
and don't forget about Brandon's comfort zone
I think this is a huge consideration. Miller was added to the starting lineup to get the ball to Oden, Blake wasn’t removed from the starting lineup (in part) because Roy likes playing alongside Steve
but I still think the results of the last 7 games show that the M-B-R backcourt is playing superior team defense than any Blazer unit in recent memory. 41% opponent’s shooting percentage is outstanding, no matter what group of NBA teams they’ve been facing
like you said, the truth is in the middle. But the rotation ain’t broke so Nate is unlikely to tinker with it…unless Roy says he’s tired of guarding SFs all the time
When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
Not to nit pick, but.....
I still think the results of the last 7 games show that the M-B-R backcourt is playing superior team defense than any Blazer unit in recent memory. 41% opponent’s shooting percentage is outstanding, no matter what group of NBA teams they’we been facing
The quality of the opponents is HUGELY important to evaluating the team’s performance, so is sample size. If it remains at this level after a representative number of games against quality opponents then we can conclude that that the team’s defense has really improved. At this point I think it is really dangerous to make any pronouncements other than to say that it looks like they are playing better D.
Furthermore, saying “the rotation ain’t broke” seems premature. Playing a three guard line-up comes with a price. We got a hint of that in the Atlanta game: needing to play zone to cut down on scoring in the paint creates rebounding difficulties. We will know more after we play a few more teams with strong “3s” and big back-courts.
by upper left corner on Nov 18, 2009 4:11 PM PST up reply actions
I was saying the same thing, right after the news broke that Nate was going small
I said this stating lineup is temporary, it wont last until the end of the road trip, etc
Then the Blazers rattled off 6 in a row and started playing defense like we haven’t seen ’em play it for a real long time
And yes, I was upset that they got outrebounded in the ATL game in the 4th quarter, but somehow the Blazers small lineup managed to lead that game in double-digits, up until that time. And, as Ben pointed out in the recap, the zone defense was used (an awful lot) down the stretch when Rudy was in the game, we haven’t seen nearly as much of it with the starters.
My point remains: Brandon is the driving force behind Blake’s longevity in the starting lineup. First, he lobbied for Steve when he was interviewed during camp.Then, when the season started 2-3 and lineup changes were made, it was Martell who was sent to the bench, not Blake,even though that meant Roy would have to defend SFs. And now, it’s going to be “up to Roy” to determine how long this 3-guard lineup lasts as a novelty, because if he complains about having to guard larger 3s then Nate will have no choice but to return Webster to the starting 5. Everyone “assumes” that Steve would then go to the bench, and I hope so, too—not because of Blake’s performance—but because I think it’s important to keep Miller and Oden linked up, as much as possible.
So, if you don’t like the rotation, take it up with Brandon. Sure, the buck stops with Nate, but (it says here) he won’t tweak things again without Roy’s say so
When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
two separate questions
One is whether Blake really is a superior team defender than the other guards on the team. The other is whether the Blazer coaching staff thinks that Blake is a better team defender than the other guards on the team. My impression is that the latter is true, but I’m just not sure I’m qualified to judge the former.
www.blazerguy.com
according to Hollinger
Rudy has really improved his defense this year, so that is at least one “outside” opinion on the subject.
Personally I think Rudy needs to play more than Blake, his shooting is way better right now, and his defense is at least compareable to Blakes if not better.
Ben II Blazersedge.com || New to Blazers' Edge?
I think Andre Miller gets some credit for the defense.
He’s directing people better on defense then anyone we’ve had in a long time. He’s also guarding bigger guys on switches better than Blake or Sergio could have ever dreamed. It’s nice to have that option.
by Nick Van Excellent on Nov 17, 2009 8:44 PM PST reply actions
One reason is because Oden is playing more
Not that Joel is an offensive powerhouse, but I think the ball moves better when Joel is out there simply because Joel moves better. Oden is superior to Joel on defense, but pretty much just stands around on offense.
Blazer Fan
Excellent Post. These seem like very important questions to me.
Rec’ ed. I hope we can have a good discussion around these questions.
I have been pondering these rather surprising numbers as well. Given our roster changes, it does seem a bit counter-intuitive that adding a better offensive PG and loosing our best perimeter defender to injury has resulted in better defense and reduced offensive efficiency. Some of the change is probably just a result of small sample size and the quality of the opposition so far this season, but it is unclear why lousy opponents would cause our offensive efficiency to fall.
Oden seems like the most obvious answer to our improved defense. I think LMA likely deserves some credit as well. Our defensive rotations seem better. Our pick and roll defense, while still not great, seems less vulnerable than last year’s hot mess. If you look at the defensive ratings of individual players, almost all are better than last year. Whether this is cause or effect is difficult to figure out.
On offense, two of our three players who have been playing the most minutes have seen their production and efficiency drop off. Brandon is down noticeably, and Steve’s numbers have fallen off a cliff. Perhaps this is just a matter of the guy’s finding their rhythm, or perhaps it is a matter of teams having figured out more effective defensive schemes to control both players.
I hope some of the site’s best commentators will take a good look at these questions.
by upper left corner on Nov 18, 2009 8:39 AM PST reply actions
here's a question
my impression, based on watching the games, is that the Blazers are playing much more zone defense this year than last, which might account for the difference in effectiveness. But I’m not sure whether that’s actually true. Does anyone keep data re: team defensive schemes and their percentage use? Are the Blazers really playing more zone defense this year?
www.blazerguy.com
I think some of that is Steve Blake coming back to Earth
He had a career year last year (43% from 3-pt as opposed to his career mark of 39%). 35% or so on the year seems entirely within reason and if he shoots that % suddenly he’s a much bigger liability on offense.
Blazer Fan
by leeroyjenkins on Nov 18, 2009 10:56 AM PST up reply actions
I agree...
I think the same can be said of a lot of guys last year. Joel’s offensive efficiency was way above normal. Brandon’s may have been an outlier (harder to say with young guys). Travis’s true shooting percentage was almost 5 points above normal. This year he was back around his career average.
I think the fact of the matter, is that the Blazers’ role players had freak years last year, and what they’ve been doing this year is more in line with what we should expect. It’s nice to win with a lot of guys contributing, but that’s not very reliable. Great NBA teams have a few stars who carry everyone else. It’s time for LA and Roy, and maybe Rudy and Oden, to carry this team. I think Roy needs to move back to the 2 to do that. He just looks too warn down at the 3. LA’s minutes should come back up to 37-38 per game, not 32.
Losing batum has hurt our offensive efficiency
Because Roy has to exert much more energy on D than last year.
As for why we are playing better D … remember we started playing very good D at the end of last year. Houston was the worst worst possible match up so that fact was diminished. This just looks like a team that already had height and athleticism improving with age and familiarity. Looks like there is more alternating between zone and man, better filling of the lane, and more of our players are staying in front of their guys.
by Sound_Automatic on Nov 18, 2009 10:16 PM PST reply actions
I think what ideally we want is Roy scoring less and playing more of an all around game
I don’t think that’s a negative
Blazer Fan
by leeroyjenkins on Nov 19, 2009 7:23 AM PST up reply actions
Good post...
First, it’s still early. And, it’s great to be 9-3 (regardless of the competition) when we are not playing anywhere near as well as we will be playing come playoff time…
First, yes, Blake is an intelligent team defender. (I would argue, so is Rudy). But he’s not the reason for the improved D. That is (a) Oden, and (b) Miller. You have to really concentrate to see it, but Miller is quarterbacking this team on O AND D when he is in. I think the majority of the credit should go to Dre. But certainly Oden’s intimidating presence is a huge help.
Certainly, having Roy play out of position is not helping him. While others say he is concentrating on D… well, I sure hope this isn’t the D he plays when he concentrates, because he’s been very soft, IMO… But I can’t believe the people who think going back to BRoy iso in the 4rth is a championship strategy! The Blazers need to let Dre run this offense in the 4rth, and continue going into the post each possession… (I also strongly disagree with a poster above who says that ‘going into the post reduces ball movement’. Nothing could be further from the truth. Going inside, and either jamming it or passing it out to an open wing will be the essence of this team’s play in the playoffs.)
In short, let Dre, Rudy, Roy, LMA, and GO play together. They are the best 5 we have, and should be an amazing offense to watch. (And, I submit, will play just as good defense when the only change is Rudy in, Blake out.)
Well said, BUT one big question
If you are right about Miller quarterbacking the defense, and I think you are, why the heck is Nate often taking Miller out during the fourth? He seems to sub Rudy for Miller rather than Rudy for Blake in the fourth. It makes absolutely no sense to me.
I agree that Miller deserves some of the credit for improved team defense. He is not a great individual defender at this point in his career, but he flat out understands the game and is helping get guys in the right spots. I see less frequent defensive breakdowns than we have had in the past. Our pick and roll defense is less of an oozing sore.
I would like to see Martell start games and Rudy finish them. I think Martell would greatly benefit from a more settled spot in the rotation. To my eye, he shows all the signs of a guy who is trying too hard.
by upper left corner on Nov 20, 2009 7:51 AM PST up reply actions
Rebounding!
Their offensive efficiency is also down because their offensive rebounding is down. They are 16th this year after leading the category last year (I think they led it last year at least). They barely have more than their opponents (10.8 vs 10.6).
Wow, you are on to something!
kinda a head scratcher. I had forgotten that our very high ORR distorted our efficiency last year.
by Sound_Automatic on Nov 20, 2009 7:01 PM PST up reply actions
Honestly neither has been impressive to me. How we are 9-4 is beyond explanation. I have not
been impressed by the style of play. We are winning on just pure talent, not actually smart play like last year. I’m still waiting for the Blazers to form an identity on both ends.
Also winning because the teams they Blazers have played have been awful
Sans the Hawks
Blazer Fan
by leeroyjenkins on Nov 20, 2009 7:20 AM PST up reply actions
fwiw Hollinger on the Blake/Miller fiasco
“Craig (Seattle)
John, when does the love affair between Steve Blake and the city of Portland end? He’s our starting 2 guard, shooting 36%, and can’t create his own shot. Wouldn’t Portland be better off with a lineup of Miller, Roy, Webster, LA, and Oden?
John Hollinger (12:17 PM)
I’ve wondered for a while if the three-guard lineup is a precursor to starting Miller, and Blake is making it an easy choice right now. He missed a ton of open looks that could have won the Atlanta game. I’ve always felt he’s better in a backup role anyway."
http://espn.go.com/sportsnation/chat/_/id/29466/nba-with-john-hollinger
Blazer Fan
Well, duh.
I think just about everybody with a pulse sees it. Outside of a few die-hards, it isn’t a love affair between Portland and Blake, it is a love affair between Nate and Steve.
by upper left corner on Nov 20, 2009 7:54 AM PST up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
FanShots
Quick hits of video, photos, quotes, chats, links and lists that you find around the web.
Recommended FanShots
Recent FanShots
In Association With
Ball Don't Lie - NBA - Yahoo! Sport
- Days of NBA Lives: Wherein Roy Hibbert tap-dances to Maine
- Grizzlies Valentine’s Day cards are the key to love
- Kevin Love would like the NBA to take the MLB’s approach on All-Star games
- Kobe Bryant fires a few hilarious salvos at Jeremy Lin
- Brandon Jennings states the obvious regarding his 2014 free agency, everyone goes nuts
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
