I cannot comment rationally on the firing of KP, so I won't attempt to do so.  Suffice it to say, it's dumbfounding. Rather than focusing on the negative, though, I wanted to distract myself by analyzing KP's final piece of draft day wizardry - somehow flipping Martell Webster (who knew he had that kind of value??) into Luke Babbitt without sacrificing another pick, and then snagging another Nevadian (Nevadite?) sleeper in the second round. 

Continue reading this post »

Well, that game sucked really bad at first, then it looked like it was going to not suck, and then it sucked after all.  For whatever reason, the Mavs seem to have the Blazers' number.

Definitely one of the biggest losses of the year, and a missed opportunity to all but lock up a top seven playoff spot.  That being said, losses happen, and the 12-1 over the past 13 home games ain't too shabby.

The frustrating thing was that SO MANY TIMES the Blazers were right there and just needed ONE big shot to get over the hump.  Every time, that shot rattled out (or, in Sergio's case, careened towards the bottom of the backboard), and the Mavs responded by sinking back to back buckets and pushing the lead back up to seven or so.  Blake had two wide wide wide open threes to tie, and both of them seemed to scrape the bottom of the net and somehow pop back out.

On the bright side, Lamarcus's game was one of the best he's played this year, no question.  His dunk on Dampier (and I mean ON DAMPIER) was one of the best in the league all year.  His 15 for 21 (or whatever) line was ridiculous.  He played phenomenal D on Dirk down the stretch.

My question is this.  Brandon was obviously sick.  LMA was playing out of his mind.  How in the world do the Blazers go the entire stretch run without getting him the rock inside 22 feet?  Somehow.  Anyhow.  Figure it out.  Make it happen. 

Another thing - as Dirk was lighting up the Blazers in the first half, and Mike and Mike were commenting that the Blazers don't match up well with him, I kept thinking, if only the Blazers had one of the most athletic 6'11" guys in the league, capable of keeping up with Dirk on the perimeter AND shutting him down on the block.  Oh, wait, they do.  Loved the D down the stretch, but why were other guys guarding Dirk at certain points of the game?  And why was Dirk allowed to catch the ball inside 20 feet anytime he wanted it all through the first half?  Makes no sense to me.

Another point, and then I'll shut up: zone offense, or the lack thereof.  The Blazers looked about as adept at attacking the zone as my city rec league team looks.  And that's not very adept.  There was either (a) no real plan, or (b) a plan that was an epic failure in execution.  Smart money's on (b).  I saw guys trying to pick the corner to open up a three a few times, but generally, everybody was clueless.  It shouldn't be this hard.

All in all, the loss is no big deal, but the win would've been sweet.  Hopefully Roy gets healthy, Rudy comes back, and LMA keeps playing like he's playing.  If so, things are looking very good.

When the trade deadline came and went, just like many of you, I felt cheated.  I felt wronged.  I refreshed espn.com and blazersedge approximately 134 times in the hour before the deadline.  I felt like my internet MUST be broken. 

How, oh how, could Mr. Pritchard fail to cash in on RLEC?  How. Could. He. Let. It. Just. Expire.  Whoa is Blazernation. 

Many of us thought: KP's gunshy.  He's lost his nerve.  He overvalues his players.  Missed opportunity.  His first big mistake.  Sure, the Blazers could have a little cap space this summer as a result.  Maybe $7 million or so. 

But how the h-e-double-hockey-sticks could $7 mil in cap space be worth more than a $12 million expiring deal partially paid with insurance money Paul Allen doesn't need?  In this economy?!?  Wasn't everybody, somebody, ANYBODY desperate for that golden ticket?

The answer? Probably. 

But not as desperate as they're going to be this summer for that cap space.

As Hollinger explains today, the cap next year will likely be about $5-6 mil below where it was expected to be.  That means teams planned on being able to spend $5-6 mil more and still get revenue sharing. 

That means between the lost revenue sharing and the luxury tax bill, teams that planned to under the cap spending $75 mil or so on their 2009-2010 payroll could stand to lose $10-15 million (or more) due to the shrinking cap.  That's $10-15 million they absolutely cannot, cannot, cannot afford.

You're a small market owner.  You thought $75 million would put you under the cap.  Oops.  It won't.  Suddenly you're $5 million into luxury tax hell.  You have to escape.

The upshot?  You're DESPERATE to shave off $5 million in cap space this summer. 

Hollinger mentions several scenarios in the article where, essentially, teams would give away their top-three pick just to shave off that little bit of dough.

How much cap space will the Blazers have?  Oh, about $7 mil.  Doesn't sound like a lot. 

But that's enough to get other teams under the cap and take advantage of all that desperation. 

How many teams are in similar situations?  Very few.  How many of those are willing to take on extra money?  Even fewer.

Maybe KP's not slipping just yet, after all...

Depending on how into the trade deadline scene you are (I know, it was SOOO 2008), you've probably heard between ten and two-hundred names tossed around in trade rumors. 

One of the more concrete?  John Salmons.  Rip City Reign made a case for him last week. 

The Salmons idea has generally been met with a large dose indifference.  As jksnake said, "I’m not anti-Salmons but the deal doesn’t get me super-excited either."  Ditto for most of the Edge.

He's not sexy.  He's like the girl in the 80's movie wearing the horn-rimmed glasses with her hair up in a bun. 

Why?  Because he played for a football school (Miami).  Because he was a late first round pick.  Because he plays for the Sac-town Sackofpoo. 

But Salmons would be a nice, affordable piece for this team, and he would fit in perfectly.

First, look at the numbers.  Salmons TS% is 57.1.  Strong to very strong.  "Power" forwards are supposed to score more efficiently than wing players, and LMA has a TS% of 52.1.  Trout is having a career year from three, and consequently a career year in terms of TS%. But at 53.7, his TS% is still FAR behind Salmons.

Salmons is more comparable to the gold standard, B-Roy.  Roy has a TS% of 56.4.  (Don't get me wrong - Salmons is not Roy.   But he scores as efficiently as Roy.)

But what we need is defense, right?  Let's look to Hollinger's scouting report.  Here's what he says about Salmons D:

In addition to his slashing ability, Salmons is a very good defender who can guard three positions. He's quick and has good size at 6-7, and ranked in the top third of shooting guards in both blocks and steals per minute. The Kings often used him as the primary stopper against elite scorers, even when Ron Artest was on the court with him, and he held his own in those matchups.

So, basically, what I'm saying is screw Hollywood.  The Blazers don't need a big name (Richard Jefferson).  They don't need somebody with a ring (Tayshaun).  They don't need a leader (Butler).  The latter two of those guys would be great, but that's why they're probably untouchable.

The Blazers need a guy who can step into the three spot, play solid D, and score efficiently given the opportunity.  That guy could be John Salmons.  I wouldn't give up Bayless or Rudy, but if Trout or Martell + RLEC could get a deal done, the trigger needs to be pulled. 

You may recall that, way back in the mid-eighties, when many of us were either in diapers or elementary school (hopefully not both), or just a gleam in our parents' eye, a ground-breaking rhymic sensation that called themselves New Kids On The Block ("NKOTB" - you may recall all the "I heart NKOTB" buttons; that was back when it was normal to wear buttons outside of TGI Fridays) released a smash hit called "You Got It (The Wright Stuff)." 

It was misspelled on their album cover, unfortunately - obscuring the fact that the classic anthem was actually about potential trade prospects for the Blazers prior to the '09 trading deadline.  We should've known.

Flash forward to the present.  Now, the official NKOTB website has an announcement: "We're back." 

All this time, the world has been waiting.  And, it just so happens the best two available young players to provide some depth and rebounding at the SF/PF spots are Julian Wright and Brandan Wright.

Coincidence?  No.  NKOTB foresaw more than the future of pop... they foresaw that Channing Frye, Travis Outlaw, and Ike Diagu would not be the longterm answer for a young dynasty developing in PDX.

Hollinger had this to say today about Julian Wright, the young Hornets SF who looked great last year in limited minutes but can't seem to crack Byron Scott's rotation at all this season. 

In looking at the non-Lakers contenders in the West, one important question is: Which teams have the pieces in place to make further upgrades to their rosters? With that in mind, here's a name to file away: Julian Wright. 

Wright is a talented forward for the Hornets who can handle the ball, defend, rebound and score in transition. He's also not playing. The Hornets are big on floor spacing so that Chris Paul has plenty of room for his pick-and-roll magic, and Wright can't shoot. He's also had some difficulty remembering assignments, according to recent comments by coach Byron Scott, and that might also be affecting his playing time.

Either way, it makes him an interesting commodity as we head toward the trade deadline. The Hornets don't have large expiring contracts or other enticements to put into a deal for some much-needed frontcourt help -- if they do anything, it's with Wright as the bait. I wouldn't expect New Orleans to surrender him cheaply, but if the Hornets make any deals, he almost has to be the centerpiece.

Meanwhile, Brother Brandan (listed as a SF for some reason but really a pure PF) has been mired on the bench for much of the season in Golden State, and when he has played his PER has been through the roof at almost 20.  He has also been mentioned (more directly) by the media as being on the market.

Which guy would you be interested in, if either?  Would another "prospect" with "potential" be one (or two, or four) too many? 

Here's a potential deal: Channing Frye (maybe plus the rights to the Finn) for Julian plus filler.

Here's another: Travis Outlaw (though they might be more interested in Sergio) for Brandan plus filler.

Worst.  Win.  Ever.

Look, winning games when you play terrible is a good thing.  Winning home games against bad teams missing their best player when you play THAT terrible? 

Ok, still a good thing.  But not as good.

From Lamarcus, to Greg, to Rudy, to Travis, there were negatives all around in this one.  Nobody except the vets and the all-star (Joelzilla (love that), Blake, and Roy) looked like they gave a crap.  Pryz had a great game.  Scrappy.  He's having a heckuva season so far.  Stevie did what he does.  Hit open shots, played smart, went all out, and got sliced and diced on D.  Roy stepped up under pressure like he always does, although I'd like to see him demand the ball more when other guys are struggling. 

Other than those three guys, everybody made mental errors.  Nobody REALLY hustled.  Nobody consistently scrapped.

Part of it, undoubtedly, was the lack of energy in the building.  It's just hard to get pumped up for Sac-town at home, minus their best player, after blowing them out in their gym two days ago.  It is.  The NBA scheduling team should go back to the drawing board and NOT have teams play each other twice in the same four-day span.  Can't we figure that out?  Is it that difficult?  Completely lets the air out of the game.

But still.  Come on, guys.  I would be mad at a third-grade rec league team for playing that hard.  You're in the NBA.  I know you're a young team.  You're not going to have your A game every night.  But you've got to figure out a way to bust your tail anyway.  The execution's not always going to be there.  The effort needs to be.

Coming off the most lackadaisical effort of the year (win or loss), my question to Blazernation is this: you worried?  And if so, about what?

(I'm not talking long term.  Portland's embarassment of riches has been well documented.  RLEC is a gold mine.  All that cap space is like a scalpel - and KP is the best surgeon there is.  B-Rex is in waiting, and he's going to be a stud.  Oden, Rudy, and Nic will all get much better.  LMA and even Roy will too.  I could go on.)

But what about the immediate future?  THIS year?  Dallas, San Antonio, Denver... in all likelihood, one of these teams must be displaced for the Blazers to make the playoffs.  Looked at first like Dallas and/or SA would finally kick the bucket, but it's not happening.  The Billups trade has made Denver a legit contender for the first time.  They're not going anywhere.

Notwithstanding Hollinger's crystal ball, here in the real world, the Blazers are not 97.1% likely to make the playoffs...

Along the same lines as jksnake99's Fun with Small Sample Sizes post from a week or two back, the more numerically inclined (read: dorkier) of you might want to check out 82games.com, which just kicked off their advanced stats for 08-09.

One of the most interesting stats on 82games is efficiency differential (points scored per 100 possessions, and points allowed per 100 possessions) when a particular player is on/off the court.  This is basically a more evolved version of plus/minus.  As Dave and others have pointed out, stats like plus/minus are most useful over the long haul.  Tendencies that have started to emerge over 7 games might just as likely reverse themselves as continue through the rest of the season.  But even at this early stage of the season, some interesting patterns have started to emerge. 

The stats mostly reinforce what you already know, but there are a few interesting surprises.

Rudy has been everything we hoped he would be (and more).  The Blazers have been 16.6 points per 100 possessions better with Rudy on the court.  That's a number comparable to what the Lebrons, Nowitzkis, Ginoblis, Nashes, and CP3s of the world posted last year.  (Nobody on the Blazers had an efficiency differential of higher than 6.)  That number will likely decrease over the course of the season.  But it does illustrate that, so far, Rudy has taken all that ridiculous preseason/Olympic hype and somehow, some way, EXCEEDED expectations. 

LMA is playing (even) better than you think.  Early on, Aldridge struggled.  But over the last few games he has turned things around in a BIG way.  The Blazers have been 19.8 points per 100 possessions better with LMA on the court.  All of this differential is on the offensive side - with LMA off the court, the Blazers have mustered only 95 points per 100 possessions (bad), but with LMA on the court, they've scored 117 (phenomenal).  Again, this difference will shrink as the season progresses, but overall LMA has been the most important player on the team (except for Roy's late game heroics). 

Roy has struggled early, but dominated down the stretch.  B-Roy's overall struggles have been masked by dominant performances down the stretch.  The Blazers have been 13.7 points per 100 possessions worse with Roy on the court.  (This is a trend I would expect to reverse itself.  Roy led the Blazers in efficiency differential last year.)  But Roy has scored over 45 points per 48 minutes of "clutch" time (4th quarter or overtime, less than 5 minutes left, neither team ahead by more than 5 points).  Again, not much of a surprise here.

Batum is playing well, but not necessarily on the defensive end.  As others have noted, Batum's plus/minus has been strong, and his efficiency differential of +11.8 points per 100 possessions reflects this.  But the interesting thing (considering his defensive stopper rep) is that, so far, he's made more of a difference on the offensive end.  On D, the Blazers have given up 121 points per 100 possessions with Boom Boom on the court (terrible), versus 110 with him on the bench (still not good, but a little better).  It will be interesting to see if this continues.

Trout has shot the ball well but hurt the team's rhythm.  Trout has looked great in some ways - primarily shooting the three.  But he appears out of sorts and out of rythm on both ends, and the numbers reflect it.  The Blazers have been 16.4 points per 100 possessions worse with Trout in the game. 

Just like last year, the Blazers are better with Frye on the court than Joel.  With Pryz on the court, the Blazers have been 19.3 points per 100 possessions worse.  With Frye on the court, the Blazers have been 11.3 points better.  This is a huge difference.  There could be any number of theories to explain it, but it has been consistent (though not nearly as dramatic) since last year.  I attribute some of this differential to the effect Pryz has on LMA.  With Pryz in the game, LMA cannot get any room to operate inside, as Pryz is a non-factor on that end.  So LMA tends to drift out and toss up 22-foot bricks.  Frye keeps the defense honest and LMA has more room (inside and out) with Frye on the court.

Blake has struggled defensively.  This is another stat not likely to surprise many people.  While the Blazers have been about 4 points per 100 possessions better on offense with Blake on the court, they've been over 11 points worse on D.  Blake has consistently been beaten badly off the dribble, albeit by some very good point guards.

The Blazers best 5-man unit has been Sergio-Rudy-Trout-LMA-Frye.  It's far too early to make assessments about who plays best together, but so far (including last night), this has been the Blazers most effective unit.  They have scored 137 points per 100 possessions and given up less than 95.  Again, however, the sample size is too small to get excited about this one.

It will be interesting to see which of these patterns hold.  Hopefully, LMA and Rudy will continue to dominate, Roy will expand his phenomenal play in the clutch to the first three quarters, and Oden will make a positive impact all around.  All in all, I think Blazers fans have to be ecstatic about a 4-3 start with such a difficult schedule thus far (and with injuries to two projected starters).  The best is yet to come...

Pretend you're KP.  (Yes, it's pointless.  No, this will never happen.  Yes, this is really long. No, this is not an accurate portrayal of JP. This is just for purposes of debate.  Humor me.)  You just had lunch with Nelson Mandela, and he asked you for advice on how to win friends and influence people.  You got back to your office and sat down to review an advanced regression analysis that projects between 6-9 championships over the next 15 years, depending on which guy(s) you're able to bring in this summer with all that cap space.  Your phone rings.  It's your assistant. 

Assistant:  Kevin, John Paxson on the phone.  He sounds like he's been drinking.

You:  Again?  What is it, 3 'o clock Chicago time?  Ok, what the heck, put him through.

You pick up the phone.

Paxson: Kevvy Boy!  My man.  Listen to me.  Ok.  So.  I've got this guy I drafted.  Devin Rose.  He's good.

You: I know that guy. Big fan of Derrick. What about him?

Paxson: Well, I screwed up, kind of.  This guy.  Devin.  He's from Chicago.  Southside.  He's got friends.  Hundreds of them.  Thousands.

You: I'm sure he does. He's a good kid.

Paxson: Yes. He is. But listen.  These friends, they want tickets.  They want loans. From Darin. From me. They're outside climbling on the Jordan statue right now. They're his posse. I'm scared of posses. It's almost happy hour.  I have to do something. I've been watching this other kid you have on NBA.com.  What's his name. Gerald. Gerald Bayness. He's good.

You: Yeah, Jerryd's a great kid. We really like him. He's got a chance to be special.

Paxson: That's what I think.  Special. So listen. We like Gerald. He doesn't have friends. Not in Chicago. They won't climb statues. We want him.

You: I'm listening.

Paxson: I'll swap 'em.  Straight up.  Darin for Gerald. Plus a bottle of Jack. Sometime.  Anytime.  How 'bout today.

You: Well, that's an interesting offer, John.  Tell you what.  I want to talk it over with my people.  Can I call you back?

You hang up and hit the big red button under your desk. Within seconds, four of your top guys slide down firemen's poles into your office. You give them the rundown.  You ask for their thoughts.

Top Scout 1: Rose was the number one pick.  Oden was the number one pick.  I like number one picks.  Pritchslap. Do the deal.

Top Scout 2: Rose put the other 11 players at Memphis, and Coach Cal, and Worldwide Wes, on his rather amazingly strong back and carried them kicking and screaming through the NCAA tourney.  They almost won. I cried during One Shining Moment. It was magical.  Do the deal.

Top Scout 3: Rose is legit. He's a pass first point guard with upside. He has nuclear athleticism. He's the next Chris Paul, with the size of LeBron James. His wingspan makes me think that, in time, he may actually learn to fly. Do the deal.

Top Scout 4: Listen. I was out drinking at lunch, too. But hear me out. Isn't it possible Rose got a little overrated during that tournament run?  Weren't his stats pretty similar to Bayless's stats? Didn't he play for a much better team, with elite talent surrounding him, against mostly inferior athletes? Rose averaged 4.7 assists per game, Jerryd 4.0, with subpar teammates, in a superior conference. Jerryd had more turnovers, but he scored more.

Top Scout 1: Be quiet. You're an idiot. Go sober up.

Top Scout 4: Hold on just one second.  Wasn't Jeryyd's situation at Arizona pretty much a worst case scenario? Didn't Rose look pretty ordinary in a mock NBA environment in Orlando? Didn't Jerryyd look pretty incredible in Vegas?

Top Scout 2: It's summer league!

Top Scout 3: Marco Belinelli! Nate Robinson! Marcus Banks!

Top Scout 4: I'm just saying Rose and Bayless didn't look that far apart in college. Rose was the concensus number two prospect, Jerryd the concensus number four. Jerryd slid a bit, yes, with our help. That was a windfall.  But here's my point: given how close they looked in college, and how dramatically far apart they looked in summer league, doesn't that tilt the balance?  Isn't Jerryd a better shooter?  Won't he fit in nicely with Brandon? Are we ready to waive goodbye to the Bayless face?  Is there such a thing as the Rose face? I don't want to find out. Maybe I'm insane. Don't do the deal.

Your assistant pokes her head in.

Assistant: Paxson's on the line again. He says he's going to trade Rose to an Italian league team for a Lamborghini if you don't pull the trigger right now.

You: Go ahead and put him through...