THIS JUST IN: Jarret Jack is the man in San Antone

by broggerboy19 on Oct 29, 2007 5:20 PM PDT Comment 18 comments

Hot off the presses, from Jason Quick (who else?):

http://blog.oregonlive.com/behindblazersbeat/2007/10/jack_named_starting_point_guar.html

This sets our starting lineup as:

PG: Jack
SG: Roy
SF: Web (woohoo!)
PF: LMA
C : Pryz

Frye, Outlaw, Blake, and Jones will round out a 9-man rotation.

Here's a poll regarding our bench:

Poll

Who will get more burn this year?

Green

30 votes

Sergio

62 votes

92 votes | Poll has closed

0 recs | Comment 18 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

heck yeah

I called the starting AND second unit.

I suppose I shouldn't dance around too much though, so did a lot of other people. I mean, who ELSE would be playing those positions.

Guard rotation was predictable too.

We applied the cortical electrodes but we're unable to get a neural reaction from either patient.

by ratbastird on Oct 29, 2007 5:58 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Ditto that

Two of the big unforeseens were the preseason explosion of Martell and Nate's man-crush on Taurean.

I forgot to mention in my diary:

Do you guys think this will be the starting lineup for all 82, barring injury?

I think it's very likely. I really like the current set-up, but I kind of like Jack in the second unit for more scoring.

PG is most likely to change, in my opinion, but it probably won't.

"Life is a meaningless sequence of events in between Blazer championships"

by broggerboy19 on Oct 29, 2007 6:44 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

The only reason to mix something up would be for match-ups, but I don't think we really have too many issues there... or options. We're not really deep enough yet. (which may change as the new guys become more familiar with our guys and they improve with practice)

As you stated, the guard position will probably swivel back and forth. The point that JJ1 plays the SG position pretty well due to a scoring mentality could have him moving to the second unit and then a rotation of guards for subbing.

Now, if/when Roy goes down... then I think JJ will start with blake and the rotation will include sergio and green. Otherwise Green is not going to see a lot of playing time unless we're blowing someone out.

I also think Webster would see guard time in the above situation.

We applied the cortical electrodes but we're unable to get a neural reaction from either patient.

by ratbastird on Oct 29, 2007 6:57 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Oh Snap

You posted that the same time as I did. Shoots brah, it's okay, it's da kine.

Fatty, Big Daddy on the BE, Man o' international renown, Postin' from his own thrown, Tellin' us what we couldn't see

by tominhawaii on Oct 29, 2007 6:59 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Same time???

I beat you by a full minute!

We applied the cortical electrodes but we're unable to get a neural reaction from either patient.

by ratbastird on Oct 29, 2007 7:01 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Yeah

But I stay Hawaiian time. It's lihdat.

Fatty, Big Daddy on the BE, Man o' international renown, Postin' from his own thrown, Tellin' us what we couldn't see

by tominhawaii on Oct 30, 2007 12:25 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Not me

I think Nate will change the starting point guards based on match ups. I don't know about the other positions.

Fatty, Big Daddy on the BE, Man o' international renown, Postin' from his own thrown, Tellin' us what we couldn't see

by tominhawaii on Oct 29, 2007 6:58 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

right decisions

I appreciate that Nate paid attention to preseason and let people earn their roles, particularly in the case of Webster (who many of us WANTED to earn the role, but few expected to actually go out and do it). That's pretty much the 9 man rotation I would go with as well. There will be games where Sergio is used as a change of pace and gets on a roll, and I would hope Nate stays with him on those occasions. I also think there will be games late in the season where Josh McRoberts is more effective than Channing Frye and hopefully Nate will ride the hot hand.

In general though, the 9 listed are the 9 we should (and will) be counting on.

by jksnake99 on Oct 29, 2007 6:45 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

it's official

Sergio is back at #3 in the PG rotation. Obviously i'm glad about that, but I'm also glad to see Nate being open minded, i'm pretty sure this is not what he would have said pre-camp.

from the article: "The second guard will come from a rotation between Brandon Roy, Jack and Blake and possibly Sergio Rodriguez, McMillan said."

by sergioFTW on Oct 29, 2007 8:17 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

I think this is a mistake

I think unless you are planning sending Blake to the DEEP bench that it is better for tactical reasons to start and Jack be the first guard off the bench and leader of the second unit. Jack is a combo guard NOT a point guard. He acts far more like an undersized shooting guard then an over sized PG. This is not a bad thing in a player. However, it is not a good idea to have him on the first unit with THREE other players who need alot of touches with him deciding who gets them. His lack of D is also troubling although that can be said of all of our guards other then Green. Blake is the best of the other three but nothing to write home about. I don't buy the Blake = Kobe stopper argument. I think it works on occasion but I'm pretty sure Blake isn't a legend among lock down 2 guards. I still stand by the fact that Blake was a guard they brought over to give Oden touches. With Oden gone and hindsight being 20/20 bringing Blake in was a mistake. Sergio and Green in combination or individually make decent PG's off the bench at least over short stretches until Green learns control and Sergio learns defense. Split 25-30 minutes of PG between them and they will grow and learn and make mistakes but guess what. THIS is the year to grow these two not next year when Rudy is learning the NBA and Oden is learning how to move at NBA speeds again. We need to know this year whether Sergio and Green can grow and flourish or whether they are too big of projects for a team with our timeline. Blake to me was the mistep of the offseason but that could not have been forseen and as you will see he isn't exactly the reason it's a problem...

Me saying bringing Blake here was a mistake is true but it's a fact that he is here for this entire season (He has a no trade clause this year in his contract) Blake should start as he is a better defender then Jack, he's a pass first PG who can hit open shots and will defer to Roy, LMA and Martell for shots. He can also run the break something I hear we want to start doing. Jack and Sergio as a back court with Outlaw, JJ2 and Frye sounds like a lineup with some vim and vigor. Make that second unit led by Blake and suddenly Outlaw looks like the NBA Scoring champion compared to his companions. You need JJ1 in that second unit to bring his fire and passion and scoring. The problem is he is not man enough to accept a bench role for the good of the team. That worries me.

Blake will be starting by All-Star break. Jack will be MUCH angrier after being starter for that long when the inevitable demotion to the bench occurs. As his largeness would say...book it.

October, October, October, October, October...... (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Odin)

by Idog1976 on Oct 29, 2007 8:46 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

I agree 100%

Well, maybe 99%(I still like the blake aquisistion and dont think it was a mistake). I think this is more to keep Jack's confidence up and for nate not to sound like a hypocrite. Nate would sound stupid if he said whoever played best in preseason got the job, and then gave it to Blake(although it can be argued that Jack's success was mainly playing the 2). I dont think it will be long before JJ1 has to accept his combo guard role. When the battle is this close, it will make the team better to have the less offensively talented point guard on the floor with your best offensive players and have the better scoring point guard playing on your fairly offensively challenged 2nd unit.

RUDY > MJ

by myemic23 on Oct 29, 2007 9:14 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

You make a good point but...

I follow and agree with you about creating playing room for Green and Sergio to develop and be evaluated. That is consistent with what the Blazers have been doing. Letting go of the old, which is anyone who will be over the hill by the time Oden is should be in stride.

On the other hand, also consistent with the Blazers has been an attempt to bring in competition at each position, well at least the positions that are still questionable. So I think Blake was not brought in for Oden but to make Jack earn the starting role since there was no competition for him on the current squad. Given that, the decision to bring in Blake may rest on how much better Jack plays and outwieghs the possible retardation of Green and Sergio's development. After all, Jack is shown to be a starting guard caliber, while Green and Sergio have not, and may never be.

Bottom line competition at the point guard by a guy who works hard is what they have in mind. I personally believe Jack will prove to be a very decent and capable point guard but, may the best player win, and if neither do well enough bring in a free agent or trade for a high draft pick.

by mrwonderfull on Oct 29, 2007 10:11 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

green not starting caliber???

he's yet to play a regular season game... i strongly disagree with you. to banish someone to a bench role without first giving them a single game to show something is rather well, dumb. he's a rookie that has two ncaa titles under his belt on a team where he was the leading scorer and assist man. what's not starting material here? since when did he become such an "average player"... he's a rook and it might take a few seasons to develop, but to say he's not a starter at this point is just plain short sighted. maybe not right now. i can concede that, but never? that's a little strong. especially considering that he's probably our best backcourt defender, and nates a defensive coach, i have a feeling that he will be starting in his career. (maybe not with us).

Get busy livin', or get busy dyin'. -the shawshank redemption.

by pdxborn on Oct 30, 2007 1:10 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I agree

Blake was brought in to play with Oden, LMA, and Roy in the starting lineup.

I don't agree that bringing him was a mistake. It just means a delay in the real benefit of bringing him. If other PGs develop, maybe we didn't need to, but we have insurance.

If Oden hadn't gone down, Blake would be starting. I'm not sure whether or not he should be tonight, but I think it would be better. But Nate is no dummy, he has his reasons.

by jscot on Oct 30, 2007 2:03 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Don't agree

Roy will be assuming more and more of pg role as the season progresses. Lets face it, when operating at its best, our first team offense runs through Roy so it doesn't really matter if we have a pass first or shoot first pg (the ball will be in Roy's hands).
The signing of Blake wasn't a mistake it's called depth. This isn't the year for us to be feeding minutes to Sergio & Green hoping that they grow. This season is about LMA and Roy and their growth.
We pretty much have a three guard lineup. Blake will be the first guard off the bench. When he subs for Roy, Jack will slide to shooting guard. In that scenario Jack's versatility as a combo guard is still being utilzed.

by jayjaylbh on Oct 30, 2007 8:01 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

One thing to consider, units.

The starting unit is more of a half-court group. Roy is a half-court player, and Aldridge, Webster and Przybilla probably do as well in the half-court as more uptempo. Jack cannot run a break, and is a solid half-court scorer.

The second unit is more of a running unit, particularly with Rodriguez at the point. Putting your most experienced guard with Sergio is a good idea. Travis and James can put pressure on the D, force some turnovers and get running.

The last point is that Jack's confidence can get broken down, and we want him to be playing well so that we can get good return when we trade him.

by EnglandDan on Oct 30, 2007 12:33 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

If it changes...

... I'd bet Jones would sub for Webster and maybe Frye for Joel, if he goes back into the tank for some reason... I think there WILL be some changes, because Nate loves to reward hard work in practice and games.

by barryj on Oct 29, 2007 8:48 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

I only had the advantage

of watching one preseason game...Seattle. In that game Jack clearly played better. And that was true on both ends of the floor. It seemed to be a bit closer during the rest of the games, but still jack was a little better, although box scores don't measure defensive effectiveness well. One notable statistic in my view, was that Jack and Blake's assist/turnover ratio was about the same, and that was supposed to be an advantage for Blake.

So after the pronouncements about the benfits of competition by both KP and Nate, jack needed to be named the starter. That fit's that 'culture' thing KP keeps extolling the virtues of.

I doubt that Jack starting status will survive a string of poor performances though.

One thing I think is overstated is the notion it's best to bring jack off the bench because he can play SG. If Blake replaces Roy, Jack can simply slide to SG, that's not really a logistical problem.

by moldorf on Oct 29, 2007 9:35 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs