BlazersEdge: 4 Problems with the Offense

[Wizenheimer]

I rarely go to Blazer's Edge anymore, but I went tonight and saw an analysis Dave did on the offense; I thought it was interesting:

Here’s the list of bad things that can happen when opponents leave Portland’s wings outside alone:

They might hit the shot.

That’s it.

Now here’s the list of good things that result from keeping an extra defender near the lane:

Shut off Lillard and McCollum driving angles
Force Nurkic to take longer making his post moves, increasing the chances he’ll turn it over
Stop momentum on the Nurkic-Lillard high pick and roll before it starts
Close off passing lanes
Crowd McCollum’s mid-range shot
Take away offensive rebounds, including those that might result from three-point wing misses

Lacking scoring depth, faced with extra defenders inside, the Blazers get forced into isolation ball. This is not as bad as it seems. Almost any shot from Lillard is preferable to the average attempt from scorers 4-12 on this team. But once upon a time the Blazers managed to generate quality attempts for their main scorers through crisp screens and decoy motion. As the supporting cast has been frozen out of the offense, their enthusiasm about participating in same seems to have waned.

We’ve already chronicled Portland’s horrid 4.1 point-per-game production on the fast break, a historically-low mark that trails the entire league by a wide margin

The Blazers rank 25th in the league in Points in the Paint, 27th in Points off Turnovers. Even though they’re 9th in offensive rebounds per game and offensive rebounding percentage, they rank 16th in second-chance points . They’re also down to 13th in the league in free throws attempted per game. A month ago they ranked 6th in that category.

When opponents have to pick and choose what to stop, you have a good chance of winning. When they can stop everything they want to and the rest doesn’t matter, your team’s in trouble. Against good defensive teams, this is starting to happen with regularity. The Blazers haven’t found a solution yet. Whether that’s tweaking the system or getting new players, they need to...and soon.

there's a lot more in that article if you want to read it

https://www.blazersedge.com/2017/12/8/16750382/trail-blazers-offense-stats-lillard-mccollum-nurkic-rankings

[Shem]

And Stotts is stumped on adjustments.

[Epicurus]

And Stotts is stumped on adjustments.

sure, one of the best offensive minds in the NBA, is stumped, and none of his assistants, well experienced, can figure it out also. Sometimes I wish literacy was not wide spread.

[7-12-52]

And Stotts is stumped on adjustments.

sure, one of the best offensive minds in the NBA, is stumped, and none of his assistants, well experienced, can figure it out also. Sometimes I wish literacy was not wide spread.

Sometimes I wish literacy was more widespread. If you did more reading you would know you're committing an obvious logical fallacy. An argumentum ad verecundiam or appeal to authority. You think that because you consider Stotts to be "one of the best offensive minds" that it is logical he can't be "stumped on adjustments."

This is a fallacy because you've never actually witnessed Stotts' make said adjustments so far. He tried to use Aldridge like he was Dirk. He asks Evan Turner to keep shooting 3's. This is not a man known for changing his offense to fit the players on his team.

[Downtown]

And Stotts is stumped on adjustments.

I've been saying this for a month that it seems that Stotts has no plan B when teams disrupt the offence. He's rigidly sticking with the program (which isn't always a bad thing).I agree with some of the article that Wiz posted in that the supporting cast isn't doing their job so teams are concentrating on Lillard, McCollum, and Nurkic.

My guess is that Stotts will be forced to make adjustments, which could take a while to figure out what works and what doesn't. So I could see the team trying to play through this rough patch until the adjustments prove to work out or not. If not then the ball is in Olshey's court. But at the moment I think he's giving Stotts some space to see what he can do.

[Epicurus]

And Stotts is stumped on adjustments.

sure, one of the best offensive minds in the NBA, is stumped, and none of his assistants, well experienced, can figure it out also. Sometimes I wish literacy was not wide spread.

Sometimes I wish literacy was more widespread. If you did more reading you would know you're committing an obvious logical fallacy. An argumentum ad verecundiam or appeal to authority. You think that because you consider Stotts to be "one of the best offensive minds" that it is logical he can't be "stumped on adjustments."

This is a fallacy because you've never actually witnessed Stotts' make said adjustments so far. He tried to use Aldridge like he was Dirk. He asks Evan Turner to keep shooting 3's. This is not a man known for changing his offense to fit the players on his team.

When many within a profession say something, then an appeal to authority makes sense. I realize you seek merely to appeal to your impressions, which sorry don't come with any warrants of expertise.

Finally, your assumptions regarding Stotts' thought process and his history, based upon a couple of cases whose relevance to your major point is questionable, again lack any warrants of actual knowledge.

[Epicurus]

I'd just like to see some facts from the "must make adjustments" crowd that less open shots are being taken or less shots in the restricted area are being taken. Till then, I'll think what my eyes suggest (supported by some data) that some players are missings shots they made at a higher rate previous seasons.

By the way, the flow offense, as I understand, is basically a read and react offense, allowing much liberty to players. That is, it is flexibility in essence. More specifically to this topic, the offense itself contains adjustments. It is NOT some junior high set play offense.

[zzaj]

And Stotts is stumped on adjustments.

sure, one of the best offensive minds in the NBA, is stumped, and none of his assistants, well experienced, can figure it out also. Sometimes I wish literacy was not wide spread.

Sometimes I wish literacy was more widespread. If you did more reading you would know you're committing an obvious logical fallacy. An argumentum ad verecundiam or appeal to authority. You think that because you consider Stotts to be "one of the best offensive minds" that it is logical he can't be "stumped on adjustments."

This is a fallacy because you've never actually witnessed Stotts' make said adjustments so far. He tried to use Aldridge like he was Dirk. He asks Evan Turner to keep shooting 3's. This is not a man known for changing his offense to fit the players on his team.

Probably worth it just to leave it alone, 7-12-52. Half of Epicurus' posts are condescending and baiting...

Everybody has a different perspective, but for me? 'we just aren't hitting shots' or 'we never got into a rhythm' type excuses don't work for 25 games. It works for 1 or 2 games. After that it's up to the head coach to make adjustments. Maybe there are certain things Stotts is doing that aren't apparent from a fan perspective...but how effective are those things if they aren't helping the team beat the Pelicans at home without their best player.

[Epicurus]

Disagreeing with your speculations is not ipso facto being condescending. In truth, I work hard at not being condescending to your posts. Admittedly for anyone preferring accuracy and relevance, that is difficult. Accusing any professional coach of not making adjustments is just bizarre. (now the moderator will enter).

[Epicurus]

"I'd just like to see some facts from the "must make adjustments" crowd that less open shots are being taken or less shots in the restricted area are being taken. Till then, I'll think what my eyes suggest (supported by some data) that some players are missings shots they made at a higher rate previous seasons." At the risk of zzaj being aggrevied once again, I ask once again.

[zzaj]

Disagreeing with your speculations is not ipso facto being condescending. In truth, I work hard at not being condescending to your posts. Admittedly for anyone preferring accuracy and relevance, that is difficult. Accusing any professional coach of not making adjustments is just bizarre. (now the moderator will enter).

I never said disagreeing = condescending. Disagreements happen here all the time and posts are still respectful. Phrases like, "In truth, I work hard at not being condescending to your posts. Admittedly for anyone preferring accuracy and relevance, that is difficult." are the issue. That is condescending and actually pretty insulting. It insinuates that my posts are inaccurate and irrelevant...but you know that.

As for, "Accusing any professional coach of not making adjustments is just bizarre."...I'd say "common". It's probably been been happening since the dawn of sports.

[Epicurus]

Disagreeing with your speculations is not ipso facto being condescending. In truth, I work hard at not being condescending to your posts. Admittedly for anyone preferring accuracy and relevance, that is difficult. Accusing any professional coach of not making adjustments is just bizarre. (now the moderator will enter).

I never said disagreeing = condescending. Disagreements happen here all the time and posts are still respectful. Phrases like, "In truth, I work hard at not being condescending to your posts. Admittedly for anyone preferring accuracy and relevance, that is difficult." are the issue. That is condescending and actually pretty insulting. It insinuates that my posts are inaccurate and irrelevant...but you know that.

As for, "Accusing any professional coach of not making adjustments is just bizarre."...I'd say "common". It's probably been been happening since the dawn of sports.

You conflate language precision with condescension. Probably just a generational thing.

[zzaj]

Disagreeing with your speculations is not ipso facto being condescending. In truth, I work hard at not being condescending to your posts. Admittedly for anyone preferring accuracy and relevance, that is difficult. Accusing any professional coach of not making adjustments is just bizarre. (now the moderator will enter).

I never said disagreeing = condescending. Disagreements happen here all the time and posts are still respectful. Phrases like, "In truth, I work hard at not being condescending to your posts. Admittedly for anyone preferring accuracy and relevance, that is difficult." are the issue. That is condescending and actually pretty insulting. It insinuates that my posts are inaccurate and irrelevant...but you know that.

As for, "Accusing any professional coach of not making adjustments is just bizarre."...I'd say "common". It's probably been been happening since the dawn of sports.

You conflate language precision with condescension. Probably just a generational thing.

So you were trying to be precise with your insult. Thanks. Why don't you do something like mix in a little bit of Ageism without even knowing my age...oh wait.

I've held off about 11 years adding anyone to my ignore list. I always have been able to let things roll off my back pretty easily here, despite some pretty marked differences in opinion and certainly some heated exchanges. You're the first poster that I've encountered here that consistently makes it un-fun for me to check in to RealGM...I can always count on some veiled insult in a response to one of my posts that feels like constant baiting--all hidden behind a coy, toe-on-the line of knowing how to get away with not officially breaking the forum rules. I don't enjoy it and honestly I find it a distraction from the other great posters here whom I agree and disagree with. So...I'm ignoring you. I'd rather not feel insulted nearly every time I give my opinion on an open forum.

[PDX MM]

The lack of fast break points really bothers me. They are easy baskets so it does not make a lick of sense to me why we don't push the ball more.

[Epicurus]

The lack of fast break points really bothers me. They are easy baskets so it does not make a lick of sense to me why we don't push the ball more.

True, fast breaks are rarer this season for the Blazers than previous seasons. I think that part of the reason relates to the improved defense, specifically having perimeter defenders who are beat trail the driver who is slowed up by the presence of Nurkic. Then they stay in for defensive rebounding outnumbering. That is, no leaking or early releases from opponents' shots. Last night the rules seemed different (and the defense less trailing and staying, with more early releases and thus more fast break points).. Unfortunately it appears the Blazers can't do both---stay with the ball on defense and get out on fast breaks. They must choose their poison.