Portland's Historic Rise
About a month ago, Dave finished his assessment of the Blazers by saying: "We have not seen a sense of wonder like this since the late-80's Drexler-led teams started to emerge. That's quite an accomplishment. This was quite a season." That final statement got me thinking about more than just this season. I wanted to know if, from both a franchise and an NBA perspective, a team like Portland had ever "risen" (as defined by three straight years of win percentage improvement) like this before. I found the following:
From a franchise perspective:
Only one time before in the history of the franchise has Portland increased its win percentage for three consecutive seasons. Those '71-‘72 to '74-'75 teams were lead by Sidney Wicks and Geoff Petrie. They help bring Portland from winning only 18 games in 1971 to winning 38 games in 1974. Nevertheless, Portland was not able to keep that momentum going and dropped to 37 wins in 1975 - which happened to be Bill Walton's rookie year. For comparison purposes, I stacked the win percentage increase of the two teams:
As you can see, the disco Blazers (much easier to say than the '71 to '74 Blazers) did not improve their record nearly as much as the current squad and were never able to win more than half of their games. From a franchise perspective, the city of Portland has never seen a "rise" like this before. I should also note that if Portland can win more than 54 games, they will be the first Blazer squad ever to improve their record for four consecutive years.
From a league perspective:
Using a slightly more stringent test (a team must have improved its record by at least 10% for three years in a row), I found that Portland is in some seriously rare air. In fact, only 3 other teams in the history of the NBA have ever the same type of record improvement.
Team 1: ’70-’71 to ’72-’73 Celtics. This team was led by John Havlicek, Dave Cowens and Jojo White, who combined went to a whopping 27 all-star games. They won 44, 56 and 68 games for those three seasons and followed that up by averaging 49 wins for the next 5 seasons. Most importantly, their success culminated in two championships during the '73-'74 and '75-'76 seasons.
Team 2: ’72-’73 to ’74-’75 Sixers. This team seems to be the most different one compared to the other three because their best players seemed to change every year. Fred Carter led them for all three years followed up by Tom Vanarsdale for two and Billy Cunningham and Doug Collins for one year. In total, those players accounted for 12 all-star games in their careers. The Sixers won 25, 34 and 46 games for those three seasons and followed up that run by averaging 55 wins for the next 5 seasons. They did make it to the Finals in '77 but were snuffed out by your Portland Trailblazers!
Team 3: '98-'99 to '00-'01 Mavericks. I almost missed including the Mavs because their first year of improvement came during the strike shortened '98-'99 season. They were led by Dirk Nowitzki, Michael Finley and Steve Nash, who have accounted for 14 all-star games. The Mavs won 19, 40 and 53 games for those three seasons and followed that up by averaging 57 wins for the next 5 seasons. They made it to the Finals in '06, but lost the battle of the whistles to the Heat.
These three teams are good examples of the possibilities that are in store for the Blazers. It is very doubtful that this Portland team as currently comprised will have any sub .500 seasons. In fact, 50 wins a season seems to be the minimum that should be expected. Adding to the first point, all of those teams played in the NBA finals within 6 years of their improvement. Portland stacks up pretty favorably with all three of these teams, as the graph illustrates below:
In the end, history backs up the fact that Portland's three-year rise has been something that is rarely ever seen. With some good luck, Portland will use this momentum to propel themselves into the upper echelon of NBA teams and start collecting those championship rings as early as next year.
14 recs |
22 comments
Comments
I wonder...
…if the reason no team has increased their win total for more than three years is because once teams prove to themselves they can beat anybody anyday in the regular season they then turn more of their focus to being prepared for the playoffs?
"The Edge... there is no honest way to explain it because the only people who really know where it is are the ones who have gone over."
by GonzoFan on Jun 7, 2009 3:40 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Well...
Teams have increased their win totals for a lot of years in row (I think the largest one was something like 6 straight years) but they have not been so dramatic. Additionally, you can only win so many games, for Portland to improve by another 10% next year, they would need to win 63 games. I definitely do not see that happening. However, based on the teams of past, it does show that Portland is no one year wonder.
by da34shadow on Jun 7, 2009 3:46 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
You don't see that happening?
I think the over/under for Portland’s wins next year is at least about 60. 63 is within reason. 54 came despite 4 important players being rookies, and Bayless will play far more next year, otherwise I would’ve only counted that as 3. Any of our rookies could be MIP, all showed excellent upside. LaMarcus improves each year. Oden is doing squats again, he will be able to have his legs in shape for next year. Bayless has an opportunity to learn how to use the pick and roll.
by lurtsman on Jun 7, 2009 6:21 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I agree
As you said, organic improvement is going to happen. However, I think the jump to 60+ wins is much more difficult and would require both improvement and health. I am not sure that both of those factors are going to happen. Besides, I don’t want to get too excited.
by da34shadow on Jun 7, 2009 8:04 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
And one other important factor: Luck.
Teams can improve to the 50+ win plateau, and so long as you have the talent, you can pretty much take that to the bank.
Getting significantly more than that, into the 60+ win range, does require quite a bit of fortune in factors beyond your team’s control. How many of your key players suffer unfortunate injuries? How many close games can you win based on one or two lucky bounces of the ball? How many other teams in your division or conference do you just happen to play on favorable terms (second game of back-to-backs, with a key player out injured, on a long road trip, etc). How well-composed is the talent level of the competition? How much easier is it, say, for the Cavs to compile 60+ wins in the east where there is a higher percentage of lesser quality teams?
This is something that makes that leap from 55 wins to 65 wins so much harder, and is often overlooked. Good as your team is, and as well prepared as you are, you’ve still got to play the games, and chance enters into the equation far more at this level than when you are a bottom-feeder, or even borderline playoff team.
Portland Trail Blazers, Future World Champions 2010-2021.
by Majikj0n on Jun 9, 2009 4:49 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
60 wins is tough though
Especially in the west. I won’t be putting money on the over for 60 wins until they prove they can win on the road.
by MavetheGreat on Jun 8, 2009 9:31 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
It also points out that experience matters in the NBA
Even those teams weren’t playing in the finals their third year, and while they no doubt improved their rosters, they didn’t get to the finals by dumping core pieces of their teams in hopes of a blockbuster to put them over the top.
by raoulduke on Jun 7, 2009 3:43 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Great research man.
As if I wasn’t already expecting great things from our Blazers.
by BlazerBen on Jun 7, 2009 5:09 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I have to disagree
Disco was popular from 74-79
"You're welcome friend
I love you."
- Tom "Dragline" inHawaii
by 92wastheyear on Jun 7, 2009 5:28 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
ha
I guess I should say pre-to-early-disco-era-Blazers.
by da34shadow on Jun 7, 2009 5:36 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
That helps trim down the verbiage .....don't it?
"You're welcome friend
I love you."
- Tom "Dragline" inHawaii
by 92wastheyear on Jun 7, 2009 5:45 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Not in my house...
it wasn’t.
So he said in himself: "O vilest of those wherefor was made the byword: 'The pilgrimage is not perfected save by copulation with the camel!"' Richard Burton, Arabian Nights
by -ken on Jun 7, 2009 5:57 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Disco sucks?
"You're welcome friend
I love you."
- Tom "Dragline" inHawaii
by 92wastheyear on Jun 7, 2009 7:48 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, from '71-74
You had the transition from the Beatles to disco. A whole lot of Elton John and Jim Croce (my Jr high years)
Then the Bee-Gees came “back” with Saturday Night Fever and all of those “That ’70s show” stereotypes were born
I doubt you’ll find another team that went from conception "70 to championship ’76 and won a title in their first crack at postseason
The Florida Marlins or Arizona D-Backs in MLB, maybe
by two4larue on Jun 7, 2009 6:14 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
This made me happy
And I smiled a lot. Just the kind of thing to think about as I watch the L*kers pull out another one they barely deserved.
Thanks
RoadBlazer
by Roadblazer on Jun 7, 2009 8:11 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
For me the most amazing thing all year
Was that, except in the playoffs, we won virtually every close game. That’s the sort of thing you only typically see veteran things do well. If we’re doing that at this point, we’re in great shape…
Proud member of Duck nation!
by skywaker9 on Jun 8, 2009 8:39 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
This Post = good
* Building a Greg Oden Fanboy Treehouse Clubhouse this summer...
by OdenFanBoy on Jun 10, 2009 12:11 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Rise with Us
I think the blazers PR deportment deserves a lot of credit too.
That's right, that's a picture of me with my new bff Joel Przybilla. He said my Billy Idol Karaoke was spot on.
by svlittle on Jun 10, 2009 1:37 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

by 
























