The Trail Blazers are taking the NBA by surprise, but can they sustain this level of play over the course of an 82-game season? Was Robin Lopez the most under-appreciated offseason signing? And can teams like the Suns and 76ers keep up at their pace? Five local reporters who eat, sleep, and breathe Trail Blazers basketball give their take in the inaugural edition of Running The Break.
1. As of this writing (November 14, 2013), the Trail Blazers own the third best record in the NBA at 6-2. Are they legit contenders for Home Court Advantage or is their record a product of beating up on teams they should beat?
Casey Holdahl (@Chold), TrailBlazers.com: While the Trail Blazers should be commended for their impressive start, it's going to be a knock down, drag out fight just to get into the playoffs, let alone secure home court advantage. I'm guessing the list of teams that have gone from missing the playoffs completely to finishing in the Top Four of the conference the next season is rather small. And of the teams that have accomplished that feat (assuming there are any), I would imagine those teams added franchise-changing players in the offseason or had franchise players return from injury. While Robin Lopez, Mo Williams and Dorell Wright were all great pickups, they don't qualify for that distinction.
Chris Haynes (@ChrisBHaynes), CSNNW.com: I’m not ready to go that far and say they are a legit Top 4 team. I do believe they’re a playoff team. Reason being, all their wins have come against teams that I predict will finish the season .500 or lower, with the exception of San Antonio. They beat the Nuggets, Kings twice, Pistons, Suns, Celtics and Raptors. The schedule has been good to Portland thus far. But hey, you play who’s on the schedule.
Erik Gundersen (@BlazerBanter), The Columbian: Right now, they are just taking care of the business they need to take care of. Their hot start may be a product of a favorable schedule but last year they played teams they should beat early on in the season and lost a lot of them. Either way, it's a step in the right direction.
Mike Acker (@mikeacker), Willamette Week: I think it’s really a combination. Portland has beaten at least one very good team (San Antonio) and has beaten up a couple not so good teams. There’s a very good chance that once the Blazers’ schedule gets a little more difficult they will slip in the standings. The Blazers had a super easy first half last season and were at around .500 after 41 games. This season’s Blazer team is in a different league than last season’s Blazer team, though. Portland might not be a top three, top five, or top ten team at the end of the season, but they’re certainly contenders for the Playoffs in the west.
Dave Deckard (@blazersedge), BlazersEdge: I’d say neither. The Blazers are shooting a torrid percentage from the three-point arc, a shot that fits their skill set and which Coach Stotts values. The long ball is not as consistent as a paint attack but when you’re firing that well it’s more efficient than almost any two-point look you can get. Despite ranking dead last in points in the paint per game at the time of this writing, they’re third in the league in offensive efficiency. They trail only the Heat and Clippers. That’s impressive.
When the Blazers are draining threes they can play with anybody in the league. If the opponent doesn’t have a great night themselves the Blazers can beat anybody in the league. That’s what we’re seeing early on. Facing Sacramento a couple times hasn’t hurt the record, but it’s hardly the sole cause.
When you’re talking home court advantage in the playoffs, though, you’re talking an entire season of work. Will the threes keep falling? Will Portland’s current problems scoring in and defending the paint—plus their problems scoring and defending transition buckets—erode the advantage at the arc? Will the Blazers’ perimeter-oriented attack continue to deprive them of foul shots? Those are three sources of easy points that Portland cedes on a nightly basis. It hasn’t hurt them over 8 games, but over 82?
2. Through two weeks, the biggest surprise about the Trail Blazers is … ?
The Blazers are shooting 42 percent from three as a team, and while you would assume that percentage is going to come down as the season wears on, you have to consider the possibility that having five above average three-point shooters taking all of your three-point shots in a system designed to get good looks from behind the arc is a potentially sustainable approach.
Deckard: The relative ease to which the players have acclimated to each other and the chemistry they’re showing. They’ve had ups and downs but so far they’ve looked more poised and consistent than their opponents. It’s a credit to the coaching staff, the game plan, and to the work of guys like Robin Lopez and Joel Freeland who are playing complementary games right now.
3. Despite allowing opponents to shoot 46% from the field (Ranked 21st out of 30), forcing the least amount of turnovers per game (12), and giving up 195 field goals in the paint (Ranked 25th), the Trail Blazers are still winning. Is this a recipe for long-term success? How are they winning in spite of these defensive numbers? And lastly, are they correctable?
As for fixes, the Trail Blazers need to find a way to limit the number of points in the paint they're giving up a nightly basis. The issue isn't that other teams' low-post players are scoring a lot of points, it's that Portland's guards are having a hard time keeping opponents in front of them. The Trail Blazers also seem prone to letting teams force tempo early in games, resulting in easy points in the paint attempts. Terry Stotts has switched Nicolas Batum onto opposing guards in the fourth quarter in an effort to lock down in crunch time, and with some success, but it's not a move he can make from the start of the game. It's incumbent on Damian Lillard, Wesley Matthews and Mo Williams do to help Robin Lopez and LaMarcus Aldridge out by slowing down their individual defensive assignments.
Deckard: Let’s compare winning to getting a hot air balloon aloft. The Blazers are pouring on the flame with their accurate shooting and offensive rebounding. The issues you mention—and you might be underselling because the Blazers are dead last in the league in points in the paint allowed per game—are like a rip in the side of the fabric. Right now we’re getting liftoff but the Blazers have to work extra hard to keep the thing inflated. Again, how long will that last in an 82-game season? How much heat can you generate before you run out of fuel?
One saving grace for the Blazers is that they’re allowing a comparatively modest true shooting percentage…10th in the league in that department. As long as that keeps up, Portland’s own shooting will have a chance to tell.
That achievement is directly related to Portland’s philosophy of contesting every shot even if it means leaving guys in single coverage instead of putting pressure on opposing stars. The only semi-free shot they want to give is the lowest efficiency shot: a mid-range jumper. Right now the Blazers will sacrifice points in the paint with that single coverage rather than give up the open three.
This works because the Blazers are also gang-tackling every rebound and managing not to foul much. Again, as long as this holds true they’ll be in good shape. How long it will continue once opposing teams get a better read remains to be seen.
The good news is that plenty of things are going right for the Blazers right now. That shouldn’t be minimized. They’re playing some really pretty basketball out there and it’s a credit to everyone involved. The bad news is that they’re walking a tightrope needing plenty of things to go right in order to win. If one link in the chain goes I’m not sure they have another gear or a solid back-up plan.
While the issues you mention could be corrected for, the defense would probably incur a corresponding cost. Send guys to double and you risk the open three. Or you risk penetration down the lane forcing Lopez to help out, likely drawing more fouls on him, forcing him to sit, and giving the opponent extra points off of free throws. I assume the Blazers will adjust according to opponent, but for the most part they have to stick to the philosophy their skills dictate and hope the good outweighs the bad.
4. Robin Lopez recently posted his third-straight double-double. Considering GM Neil Olshey only gave up second round pick, Jeff Withey and cap room, is it safe to say that Lopez was the best value pic-up this offseason?
But in general, there is no arguing that Neil Olshey didn't have the best bang-for-the-buck offseason with the trades for Lopez and Thomas Robinson and the very reasonable free agent signings of Mo Williams and Dorell Wright. If the Trail Blazers somehow manage to end up sixth or better in the Western Conference, Olshey has to be a serious contender for Executive of the Year.
Deckard: If you’ll forgive the response, to me “best value pick-up” is an off-season designation. Once the ball tips on that court contracts don’t matter. Opportunity cost doesn’t matter. Draft considerations don’t matter. All that matters is whether that player is providing value for his team in that game. Thus far Lopez has provided plenty of value, which means he’s a good player to have. We can’t answer the other question with 8 games of data. We need at least a season under his belt, a better look at where the team is going, and the same from teams around the league in order to make a fair comparison of value against other possible acquisitions.
5. Teams such as Philadelphia and Phoenix are surprisingly competitive considering most had this season pegged as a developmental year while playoff staples Memphis, Houston, and Brooklyn are struggling. Why is this happening and will these trends continue?
I have yet to come across a player who didn't feed of an "us against the world" mentality, and seeing your team trade away your best players for draft picks, draft picks who are going to come in the next season and try to take YOUR job, is a great way to bond a locker room together. It can't sustain you through an entire season, but it'll work for a while, at least until the inevitable sets in. As Gunnery Sergeant Hartman said in "Full Metal Jacket" in reference to Joker, the movie's main character "he's silly and he's ignorant, but he's got guts and guts is enough." Some things that work in the Marine Corp work in the NBA.
As for the struggling teams, each has their own set of issues, some fixable, some not.
The Grizzlies are struggling to recapture their "Grit and Grind" mentality after letting Lionel Hollins walk in the offseason despite taking Memphis to the Western Conference Finals. They may find it, but the idea that you can replace a guy like Hollins with a first-year coach and not miss a beat is an insult to the profession.
I don't think it's really categorize the Rockets as a "struggling" team, but it is going to takes some time to work a franchise player like Dwight Howard into the rotation. Reports that Omer Asik isn't taking his demotion so well isn't helping either, though anyone who couldn't see that coming a mile away is delusional.
As for the Nets, they've got an old roster and are breaking in a first-year head coach. I'm often skeptical of great players like Jason Kidd going into coaching, especially without ever being even an assistant, as I don't think they realize how hard the job actually is. The game comes so easily to them as players, but there are few if any inherent talents when it comes to coaching. You have to learn like everyone else, and that takes time.
As far as Memphis goes, there’s no Lionel Hollins. The Grizzlies went cheap and it’s costing them. No surprise there. Houston just needs a little bit more time to gel. They’ve got some nice pieces and bringing Jeremy Lin off the bench will bolster that second unit. It’s only a matter of time before James Harden and Dwight Howard start to click. Brooklyn? Lol. They hired Jason Kidd to coach a supposedly championship-ready team? George Karl, Lionel Hollins, Vinny Del Negro, Jerry Sloan were/are all out there. There’s also the little fact that the roster is old. A first year coach coaching old players? The writing was on the wall.
Deckard: Memphis was going to slip some, it was just a matter of how much. Brooklyn was probably overrated coming into the season. Philly and Phoenix went the opposite way, “tanking” teams that have flourished early. But off-season assessments are neither confirmed nor denied solidly by the season’s start. It’s the NBA. Anything can happen in any given 10-game stretch.
If I had to guess I’d posit that Memphis’ issues are the most systemic and indicative of future performance among the teams you’ve named, but that doesn’t mean they’ll only win 31. Phoenix would be another, though obviously that’s to the good. That doesn’t mean they’ll win 51 either. It’ll normalize. The season’s marathon only allows for so much luck. Eventually the heat and pressure will refine your good points and expose your impurities.