Better record this year: Utah or Portland?

[Daddy 801]

What was CJ's +/- this year as a whole? What was it over the 6 game stretch when he started and Dame was out? I don't know, I'm curious.

Everyone knows Dame and CJ are one of the best back courts, it's the defense that fans need to be worried about.

[Wizenheimer]

'CJ' continued that trend the entire time that Lillard was out. When CJ had the keys to the team, he ran it well.

26 ppg
6.5 apg
5.5 rpg
.496 fg%
.400 3pt%

That's a damn good line as the starting PG. Does he keep those numbers up all season? Obviously not. I'm sure his efficiency drops, and so his ppg as well, but he elevated his game when he played without Lillard, and that's what this conversation was about.

I disagree with you about what the "conversation is about"

it's about the CJ's ability relative to Utah's best players. Yeah, it's an exercise in conjecture and has tons of variables, but that's what it is about. To essentially say that CJ would put up better numbers without Lillard is disputed by a much larger sample size then that useless 7 game stretch. It's disputed by all 82 games. You could probably find 80 NBA players last season that looked HOF if you focused on their best 7 game stretch rather then the full season. If CJ was the #1 scoring option also tasked with running the offense, and the best supporting player he had was a tier or two below him, like he is below Lillard, CJ's efficiency numbers would crater. His raw volume numbers might climb, some, because of usage and opportunity, but without a star to earn the focus of the defense, CJ would be struggling to not only run the offense but to score efficiently. And that's exactly what his Lillard-on/off numbers show

CJ was 18th in the league in scoring; taking into accout where he was coming from, that was an impressive accomplishment, especially considering he increased his efficiency while nearly tripling his FGA's. But the important context there is opportunity: while CJ was 18th in points, he was 10th in FGA's. CJ's true shooting % is barely above the NBA average, mainly because he doesn't get to the FT line. He was tied for 86th in points/shot. I'd agree that's not as bad as it sounds because of his low assisted FG Rate. Still, there's nothing there that screams "build a team around him" like the Blazers are doing with Lillard

another thing too, and I imagine you'll probably want to focus on that 7 game sample size instead...CJ as a starting PG? He was tied for 137th in the NBA in assist rate and had an assist/turnover ratio of 1.74. If a team's starting PG is posting those kind of numbers, he better be as good as Russell Westbrook or his team will lose a lot of games

fortunately, he's not the #1 guy...he's a sidekick. In that role he did pretty well, and that's the role he'll have going forward

it might make for an interesting poll to rank the relative value of CJ, Hayward, Gobert, & Favors.

[CoreyGallagher]

What was CJ's +/- this year as a whole? What was it over the 6 game stretch when he started and Dame was out? I don't know, I'm curious.

Everyone knows Dame and CJ are one of the best back courts, it's the defense that fans need to be worried about.

On 108.6 ORtg 106.4 DRtg, Off 109.3 ORtg 113.8 DRtg.

During 6 game stretch - On 111.5 ORtg 109.6 DRtg, Off 101.4 ORtg 106.0 DRtg

Ratings are just per 100 possessions.

[wjun15]

And1. I'd like to see some more people tapping that button for this post.

Take Damian Lillard out of the equation and make CJ the star and see what happens. Hayward gives his team wins. CJ gives his team points.

That said, Damian Lillard is SO GOOD! I love watching him play and I wish we had him in Utah!

People are sleeping on Rod Hood in this thread. He looked good against the Olympians on the select team. To quote Hood on what he learned from playing against the best: "I can compete with anybody. I'm really confident in myself and I can take that into the season."

(http://www.sltrib.com/home/4146238-155/olympics-utah-jazzs-rodney-hood-gets)

Um,

When Damian was out with Plantar fascitis CJ led his team to 4-2 record averaging 26pts/5.5reb/6.5assts off 49.6% FG.

If anything, he puts up way better numbers without Dame.

I'm sorry, but as a Blazer fan, I have to dispute that last statement of yours

first of all, in that stretch of games without Damian, they only beat one good team and that was the total fluke game against Cleveland. The rest of the wins came against lottery teams, and germane to this discussion, one of the losses was a 13 point loss to Utah. And by the way, the Blazers were 4-3 in that stretch, not 4-2

First of all, they DID go 4-2. If you look closely, you can see both CJ and Damian did not play against ATLANTA on Monday December 21, 2015. So Damian missed I believe 7 games but CJ only played in 6 of them. Regardless of who you are playing, 4-2 (including a win against the cavs you cant just say "oh they got lucky") is good without your star player. CJ put up 26/5.5/6.5 as the clear number 1 option shooting 50%fg. Yes, it is a small sample size of 6 games, but thats the only stats we can base it on.

but mainly, what's wrong with your assertion about CJ doing better without Dame are CJ's numbers last season when Lillard was on the floor and when he was off the floor: CJ had an eFG% of 53.4% playing with Lillard and one of 49.2% when Lillard was sitting; CJ shot 44.1% on three's with Lillard and 36.9% without. Those numbers seem directly related to assisted FG rates. CJ had an assisted FG rate of 48.8% with Lillard on the floor and 18.7% with Lillard off the floor

in other words, CJ spent last season drafting off of Lillard. It was too his advantage that Lillard was the primary focus of opposing defenses and was often double-teamed & trapped. That opened opportunities for CJ. Somewhat surprisingly, Lillard's numbers with CJ on/off the floor don't show nearly the differential as CJ's do. Lillard shot a little better with CJ on the floor but the differences are more incremental then significant. Lillard had a bigger differential with Plumlee's on/off numbers then with CJ's, but Plumlee was the only other quasi-playmaker in the Blazer rotation, and his usage rate was only 63% that of CJ's; Plumlee looked to pass while CJ looked to score. This is why the Blazers ran so hard at Evan Turner; they needed to add that extra ball-handler/play-maker

I never said CJ would be better from an efficiency standpoint. Of course having another star player relieves pressure off anyone. KD out of the lineup, you saw what happened to Russell's efficiency. It happens to every star player.

Also, keep in mind your basing your statement (that he sucks with Lillard) heavily on his stats at his first 20 some starts in his career. You cannot argue that it takes some time for an NBA player no matter how great you are to get adjusted to the NBA. Keep in mind he never played over 15minutes a game on average in his career until last season.

There was an article a while back titled "McCollum No Longer Owes His Success to Lillard" which shows how good CJ was post December without Lillard.


"This chart shows that McCollum's efficiency numbers without Lillard are up across the board since late December. Remarkably, these are not small increases - McCollum's original eFG% would have placed him in the bottom 20 in the entire league, but his new average is within two percent of Klay Thompson. McCollum's offensive rating has also skyrocketed, improving from Kevin Seraphin-esque to on par with LeBron James.

Additionally, the data show that CJ's usage has stayed nearly identical as his play has improved (32.5 percent vs. 32.3 percent). For many players, an increase in efficiency accompanies a deference on offense. That has not been the case for McCollum - he continues to dominate the ball when Lillard leaves the game, but has improved his performance nonetheless.

Importantly, the Blazers as a team have benefited from McCollum's improved play. Portland's stats since late December with McCollum and without Lillard illustrate that point"

...

Note the positive change across the board in shooting percentages, and the massive rise in offensive rating. To put the improved offensive rating and eFG% into perspective, the increases in those metrics are the equivalent of jumping from last in the league to second overall. The result: a 23-11 record over that span after an 11-20 start.

At this point, it's clear that McCollum's improved efficiency has correlated with a meteoric rise in efficiency for the team as a whole, which makes it somewhat difficult to put together a causal explanation for the improvements. Did C.J. make the team more efficient, or did the team give C.J. a boost? The annoying answer to that question is probably "a little bit of both."


I know you are not a CJ fan at all from seeing all your anti-CJ posts but please give the man some credit. I know its an easy thing to say oh this player sucks without this guy...But think of the other way around. Damian is probably a lot more efficient with CJ than without CJ as well. For example, look at Damian's one game without CJ in the lineup against the Clippers this year (the Doc Rivers lineup issue game) Damian shot 7-25fg in a loss. Yes he played against a great defensive point guard...But you get my point. You can make a good case for literally anything...

[wjun15]

it might make for an interesting poll to rank the relative value of CJ, Hayward, Gobert, & Favors.

I would probably think most people on Realgm would pick all the Jazz players. I noticed Blazers players always get overlooked even on realgm, including Lillard. Lets have the NBA GM's rank them.

[rasta_marley]

I was poking around the general forums and saw a post a jazz fan made saying that the jazz had the best chance to best the warriors out of any team..... Oh jazz fans.

Seriously you guys are looking good and would love to play ya in the playoffs. I doubt very much that your ready to beat us this year. However I will be watching you guys....

[Daddy 801]

I was poking around the general forums and saw a post a jazz fan made saying that the jazz had the best chance to best the warriors out of any team..... Oh jazz fans.

Seriously you guys are looking good and would love to play ya in the playoffs. I doubt very much that your ready to beat us this year. However I will be watching you guys....

That was me. I stand behind my statement 100%. If you don't understand matchups then that's your fault. Certain players and style of play match up better than others. The Blazers could easily be a better team than the Jazz, and I really liked both Dame and CJ out of the draft and they are better offensive players than anyone on the Jazz as of now, but the Jazz could also be the best matchup for GS. Im not including the Cavs obviously.

Also your remark "oh Jazz fans" is pretty ignorant. I grew up in St. Louis, which if you don't know has no NBA team, and then moved all over the country. I am a fan of Jazz, Bulls, Boston, Dallas, and GS. Having lived in those areas for a few years at a time means I'm not just being a Jazz fan. I'm looking at matchups.

[Daddy 801]

Let me also say if the T Wolves add a good big man to their team to team up with Towns than in a year or two they will be the best team equipped to take advantage of GS's weaknesses.

[Gomagic44]

I take the Jazz as a team. I think the Blazers over performed last season. They could remain where they were but I think it's more likely they take a bucks dive, or close to it.


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

[Catchall]

Jazz have more size and defense in the backcourt and more offensive ability across the entire line-up. That's the difference to me.

The Blazers have nice defensive length in the frontcourt (Aminu, Davis and Plumlee all underrated), but all the scoring really comes from Lillard and McCollum taking turns creating. Portland's bigs are treading water on offense, and their main guards are treading water on defense. Terry Stotts is one hell of a coach though, so somehow he holds it together. Plus, Lillard can go off for 45 points on any given night.

I think the Jazz would have had a better record than Portland last year if Favors/Gobert didn't combine to miss like 30 - 35 games. The Jazz didn't have the depth to deal with that at all. The Jazz's PG situation this year is much better than last year when they were playing 4 on 5 a lot of the time. Neto was a rookie back-up and Burke is a fringe player. Mack was 3rd-string in Atlanta. Hill and Exum are a huge upgrade on both sides of the ball.

[Catchall]

Will be interested to see what Evan Turner does.

[Lakers_Forever]

I realize that Utah has a nice stash of young players and all and granted that Portland lost good player the Spurs last year, but I think they are still the better team and more established. In a few years from now after the new players have developed some, that might be possible, but the are not ready to mix it up with Portland yet

[JasonStern]

Blazers are built to overachieve during the regular season. lots of depth, shooting, players that can play multiple positions, Stotts' high powered offense, etc. the problem comes playoff time when teams have time to prepare for Portland and can lock down Lillard and McCollum. I like the Blazers for season win total, but feel the Jazz have a better chance of advancing in the playoffs, especially once the game slows down.

[Mystical Apples]

Utah: 53-54 wins.
Last year's point differential/schedule suggested 47 or 48 wins. Their additions - mainly G. Hill instead of replacement level minutes - and slightly better health from Gobert and Favors should put them comfortably above 50 wins, high side 56 being reasonable. And relative to Portland, Utah's roster/altitude makes them a terribly difficult HCA opponent.

Portland: 44-46 wins.
Their win total was in-line with actual performance. Portland's biggest "improvement" would be replacing Vonleh's and Henderson's collectively negative minutes with Turner/Leonard netting ~ 4 additional wins. On the negative side, their best players experienced uncommonly good health....a *total* of 14 games missed by Lillard, McCollum, Aminu, Crabbe, Plumlee, Davis, and Harkless. Their depth should help with injuries though the law of averages isn't in their favor.

[zimpy27]

Anyone not choosing the Jazz is a fool.

[LofJ]

I really like Utah, but they have a problem with scoring when things get tight. That's why they won several less games than their SRS numbers suggested they should. I think Joe Johnson will alleviate this problem somewhat, but he and Hayward can't do it alone. If the Jazz want to make the leap Burks and Exum need to prove that they can score and create offensive opportunities when the game is close in the 4th quarter.

Portland has the opposite problem, I have doubts about their ability to execute defensively down the stretch. Typically, during the regular season the better offensive teams win more games so Portland has a good chance of finishing with a better record. That changes though if Burks, Exum, and Hill can consistently create offense. That said when you get to the playoffs defensive execution becomes much more important, so I think the Jazz are more likely to advance.

[Waynearchetype]

I like to think that this comparison is a bit more nuanced. They'll be close, and it'll come down to x-factors.

Will Lillard finally be rid of his foot tendonitis?
Will Gobert play like he did 2 years ago or last year? Same for George Hill.

Each team has a large number of players in the early 20's. Improvement can be expected from some. Who takes the leap this year?

Ultimately, though, I give the edge to Portland. It isn't always the best team that has the best regular season record, it is the deepest. We had the historically best regular season team struggle in the conference finals and lose in the finals. They had the best record because they were deep and could constantly adjust for injuries without losing pace. The Blazers have a glut of good not great players. They can lose any starter and still field a competitive lineup. I think that will push them over the Jazz.

I think Jazz will take the head to head matches, but I think Blazers end with the better record.

[Duffman100]

Tough. Utah has more talent and depth, but Portland has something Utah doesn't....playmaking guards who are able to break down the D and get themselves and others shots. Lillard and Mcollum make a huge impact.

As much as Utah has always been a favourite team of mine and I love their team, I'm going with Portland.

[76ciology]

Utah. Better depth while I don't think Lilliard+CJ is that much better than Hill+Hayward, that I think Jazz's frontcourt can more than compensate for any talent disadvantage.

[Mystical Apples]

Tough. Utah has more talent and depth, but Portland has something Utah doesn't....playmaking guards who are able to break down the D and get themselves and others shots. Lillard and Mcollum make a huge impact.

As much as Utah has always been a favourite team of mine and I love their team, I'm going with Portland.

While a true statement, Portland had that last year and won 44 games with Lillard and McCollum combining for 5500 minutes and massive 31/27 usage rates. If anything I'd say their reliance upon those 2 would explain a potential dip should they miss > 7 total games.

Not saying Portland can't improve, just that if they do it'll likely be from another source.