Are the Portland Trail Blazers better with/without Greg Oden?

Discuss this

I'm wondering now after i saw an answer on Y/A saying that the Blazers are a lot better without him

True/False?

he really has not been in enough games to judge.

But in those games when he has been in,which situations suits the Blazers a lot better

Are the Portland Trail Blazers better with/without Kevin Durant?

Please,Nick,don't ask questions like that.The question is are the Portland Trail Blazers with or without Oden..

Okay.

Obviously Oden helps on defense and with rebounding. He's limited offensively, but thats okay because Aldridge is the offensive front court player and they have other players that can score meaning all Oden has to do is rebound and get tip ins, put back and alley oops... Any other scoring he provides would be a bonus. Oden would definitely help the Blazers be better.

In reality though... like CBI said it's kind of hard to know without him playing enough games to gauge his impact or (not including being injury prone) his weaknesses on the court.

Portland had good run when Oden put great numbers in limited time,something like 9-3

Defense! wrote:

Portland had good run when Oden put great numbers in limited time,something like 9-3

What is 9-3?

Well their record with Oden in 82 regular season games + 6 playoff games is 54-34. But in some of those games he only played like 10 minutes cuz of foul trouble. The won some of those and lost some of those..

idk.. they're kinda the same with and without him. A healthy and effective Greg Oden would obviously help though.

In 2007-2008, Portland was:
41-41 (.500) without Oden (not including playoffs)

In 2008-2009, Portland was:
14-7 (.667) without Oden (not including playoffs)
40-21 (.632) with Oden (not including playoffs)
24-15 (.615) with Oden as a starter (not including playoffs)
16-6 (.727) with Oden as a bench player (not including playoffs)

In 2009-2010, Portland was:
37-24 (.607) without Oden
13-8 (.619) with Oden (not including playoffs)
13-8 (.619) with Oden as a starter (not including playoffs)

In 2010-2011, Portland is:
8-10 (.444) without Oden

It isn't really fair to compare 2007-2008 and 2009-2010. So let's just look at the two seasons in which Oden did play.

From 2008-2010 Portland was:
51-31 (.623) without Oden (not including playoffs)
53-29 (.646) with Oden (not including playoffs)
37-23 (.617) with Oden as a starter (not including playoffs)
16-6 (.727) with Oden as a bench player (not including playoffs)

So in games where Oden played, the Trailblazers were 2 games better than in games he did not. Based on win percentage, Portland was less than 1 game worse when Oden was a starter for them. Again based on win percentage, Portland was more than 8 games better with Oden when he came off the bench.

Because Oden only played 22 games off the bench, the sample size is really too small to compare it to Portland's overall record. However, since the team played an equal number of games with and without Oden over the two seasons, we can conclude something if there is a noticeable difference. There is not. So essentially the team has done about the same with and without Oden, which is typical off a good team that loses just one player.

It is interesting to note that Portland did win 4 more games in the year Oden played 61 games than they did in the year he played only 21. It is still not enough of a difference to say that they are better or worse without him, especially since they exited the first round both years.

They probably would be a better team with a full year of him healthy and active, but we don't know that for sure. He certainly isn't one of their best players even when healthy. Arguably 3rd, but probably more likely their 4th or 5th.

I remember back when I used to spend 20 minutes digging up stats to make the best argument available...

But so it looks like Oden or not, the Blazers do well haha

Nick C wrote:

Are the Portland Trail Blazers better with/without Kevin Durant?

That comment made me chuckle.
I read it earlier when I was in class and laughed out loud.

Anyhoo, like everyone else is saying...he hasn't played a sufficient amount of games for one to make such an argument. So not much point dwelling on this topic when there is pretty much nothing to discuss. Sorry Darko...

I Like It wrote:

Nick C wrote:

Are the Portland Trail Blazers better with/without Kevin Durant?

That comment made me chuckle.
I read it earlier when I was in class and laughed out loud. (

YEEEESSSS. Mission Accomplished.

Nick C wrote:

Defense! wrote:

Portland had good run when Oden put great numbers in limited time,something like 9-3

What is 9-3?

Never mind...

Yo Adrien! wrote:

In 2007-2008, Portland was:
41-41 (.500) without Oden (not including playoffs)

In 2008-2009, Portland was:
14-7 (.667) without Oden (not including playoffs)
40-21 (.632) with Oden (not including playoffs)
24-15 (.615) with Oden as a starter (not including playoffs)
16-6 (.727) with Oden as a bench player (not including playoffs)

In 2009-2010, Portland was:
37-24 (.607) without Oden
13-8 (.619) with Oden (not including playoffs)
13-8 (.619) with Oden as a starter (not including playoffs)

In 2010-2011, Portland is:
8-10 (.444) without Oden

It isn't really fair to compare 2007-2008 and 2009-2010. So let's just look at the two seasons in which Oden did play.

From 2008-2010 Portland was:
51-31 (.623) without Oden (not including playoffs)
53-29 (.646) with Oden (not including playoffs)
37-23 (.617) with Oden as a starter (not including playoffs)
16-6 (.727) with Oden as a bench player (not including playoffs)

So in games where Oden played, the Trailblazers were 2 games better than in games he did not. Based on win percentage, Portland was less than 1 game worse when Oden was a starter for them. Again based on win percentage, Portland was more than 8 games better with Oden when he came off the bench.

Because Oden only played 22 games off the bench, the sample size is really too small to compare it to Portland's overall record. However, since the team played an equal number of games with and without Oden over the two seasons, we can conclude something if there is a noticeable difference. There is not. So essentially the team has done about the same with and without Oden, which is typical off a good team that loses just one player.

It is interesting to note that Portland did win 4 more games in the year Oden played 61 games than they did in the year he played only 21. It is still not enough of a difference to say that they are better or worse without him, especially since they exited the first round both years.

They probably would be a better team with a full year of him healthy and active, but we don't know that for sure. He certainly isn't one of their best players even when healthy. Arguably 3rd, but probably more likely their 4th or 5th.

Good stats.But i think when Oden is healthy,he helps them more then that they can do on their own because he\s one of the best defenders,shot blockers,rebounders and centers around the NBA

Defense! wrote:

Good stats.But i think when Oden is healthy,he helps them more then that they can do on their own because he\s one of the best defenders,shot blockers,rebounders and centers around the NBA

That's because you're an Oden fan. It clearly shows that they do about the same with and without Oden.

how should we know? when has he played?

Raza wrote:

Defense! wrote:

Good stats.But i think when Oden is healthy,he helps them more then that they can do on their own because he\s one of the best defenders,shot blockers,rebounders and centers around the NBA

That's because you're an Oden fan. It clearly shows that they do about the same with and without Oden.

I'm Oden fan,there's nothing wrong with that but they don't stand a chance without Greg against great teams such as the Lakers,Celtics etc...They just get owned inside