Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: Terry Collins, David Wright, And The Mets/Brewers Kerfuffle

Game 49 Recap

Ohhhhhh...AAAAUUGGGGH!  So close!!!  This game had so much gut feeling to it.  You knew when the Bulls were dishing out more turnovers than an all-night bakery and Portland wasn't taking advantage of it there was going to be trouble.  And there was and the Bulls made their big run to close the first half.  But then you knew the Bulls would come out overconfident and probably sloppy and the Blazers would make a run back, and they did.  And then it was a matter of who would execute down the stretch.  Both teams played a much better brand of basketball in the fourth quarter but the Blazers executed about 65% of the time and the Bulls about 75% and that was the difference.

Bulls 88, Blazers 86
Boxscore

Team Observations:

--As I said, the Bulls were serving this one to us on a platter early.  There were more balls shot into the stands tonight than souvenir t-shirts.  For all of that we never extended the lead beyond eight and that barely.  The Bulls scored 12 points in the first quarter, weren't playing their best defense, and yet we could only muster 16.  We have absolutely no inclination to hop all over anyone.  It's like we're a beaten orphan who doesn't know what to do with a Christmas gift.  All of these guys pounded on people in college.  Why can't they conjure back the spirit of those early-season Basketball U vs. South Hillbilly State games and just lay a whuppin' on someone every once in a while?

--The second quarter put the "UGH!" in UGLY as we started prosecuting one-on-three moves like they were going out of style.  You really, really have to credit Chicago's defense.  They always had a man on the ball and another ready to help instantly.  These guys are GOOD defensively.  And the few times we shook free of people it was off a pass to a perimeter guy and none of those were hitting in the first half.  Meanwhile on the other end we had a massive communal stroke which killed the part of our brain responsible for remembering that CHICAGO CAN SHOOT THE BALL FROM DISTANCE.  Nocioni wide open for three...swoosh!  Hinrich wide open for three...swoosh!  Gordon wide open for three...swoosh!  Blazers try a three...DOINK!  Chicago runs the ball out, layup and one.  Gentlemen, welcome to your 17 point halftime deficit.  

--Smart money says that Nate McMillan broke some clipboards at halftime.  In fact it wouldn't surprise me if he took some folding chairs to backs and came off the top turnbuckle as well.  Whatever it was, it worked.  This time when Chicago came out flat we jumped on them (with cries of "Nobody makes us bleed our own blood!" no doubt).  First we played tough in the halfcourt defensive sets.  Joel Przybilla was really the main man there.  We also got back in transition.  With the massive scoring leak fixed we began to move the ball through the 3rd and 4th periods.  Brandon Roy and Jarrett Jack were huge catalysts.  When we knocked off the one-on-one moves into the best defense in the league we actually started getting somewhere and our horrible 30-ish shooting percentage ended up at a bad-but-not-crippling 42%.  We quickly made up the lead and got even late in the third.  After that it was claw and scratch, rebound and drive.  We managed to play with one of the better, more physical teams in the league and we came ever so close to being able to pull it off.  It was something of a moral victory but one nobody will want because we really could have had it with one or two more plays.

--I'm going to do a little bit of questioning individuals below, but as much as I defend Nate and what he's doing, I do have one very specific question for him.  32.7 seconds left, it's a tie game, there's a timeout and Chicago is going to get the ball.  We have two timeouts left and are going to use one no matter what happens on the next possession, make or miss by Chicago.  We come out of the timeout with the same five guys that went into it...a group that doesn't include Joel Przybilla, who has been shutting down the middle all night long.  All we need is a stop there.  I do not understand why he wasn't in.  The result of the play was Ben Gordon driving on Juan Dixon and drawing a foul.  Now Juan had a bunch of steals in the first half but none of them were one-on-one and I don't think any of them were against Gordon either.  Juan is about Gordon's size but his defensive capabilities don't even come close to matching Gordon's offensive ones, especially since Ben had scored in double-digits that quarter alone already.  Gordon sank his shots, Roy missed on a drive at the other end, and that was basically the ballgame.  This isn't the first time Nate has passed on an offensive-defensive substitution pattern, yet sometimes he does it as well.  Maybe it's a dumb question, but I'd like to know the reasoning there.  (And keep in mind this is from the guy who just said, and still believes, that much of the criticism leveled at Nate for his substitutions is unwarranted.  I haven't changed that position overall either.)

--By the way, for those who think we've transitioned into more of a development and less of a winning phase, Nate's rotation is tightening, not getting looser.  He only played eight guys for significant minutes tonight and the same was true last night in Denver.  That sounds like trying to win to me...

Individual Observations

--Ah, Zach...Zach...such a conundrum.  On the one hand you have to say without his 27 points we wouldn't have been in this game.  Plus he did shoot reasonably well at 11-23.  But the thing is he went 11-23 and we lost when he so easily could have gone 13-22 and we would have won.  It's not like he didn't have some really nice stands in there.  There were a couple of rebounds that were great and he had a 45-second flash in the fourth where he was just all there on both ends of the court.  If he were a rookie we'd be praising the heck out of this game.  But he's not a rookie!  He's supposed to be the guy who's leading us.  

<rant> When we were making our comeback it was clearly because we were playing in a certain style...running back hard on defense, sharing the ball on offense.  And Zach was getting shots in this style!  He was scoring as much as anybody.  Roy was feeding him like a goldfish before the family vacation.  And yet we climb all the way back and we're on a roll and all of a sudden Zach tries to take over by holding the ball and going 1-on-2 into Ben Wallace and help.  You just don't do that!  It took all the air out of our sails and not coincidentally after that point a lot of guys reverted to the 1-on-1 ways that got us in trouble in the first place (and did again here).  Even the Mikes were openly questioning why the ball wasn't still moving through Roy first.  And you know if they're saying something critical it's pretty much out there.  You can go back and look at the second half game tape and draw a straight, unwavering line:  Zach receiving ball off the pass and shooting without hesitation...mostly makes and great for us.  Zach holding ball and making his move without anyone else being involved...mostly misses and the team wilts.  It ain't rocket science!  And you know, you can point to those 27 points but we still lost.  And I think everybody's getting tired of 27 points and losing, especially when the balance is so fragile in some of these games.  We need smarter play here, and we need 27 points without Zach having to miss nine of his first ten shots in the first half from going one-on-one before he figures out how to play...and without him reverting to that form when the game gets on the line.  Is that harsh?  Maybe.  But at 72 million dollars with the keys to the franchise some harshness is called for.  </rant>

--Roy took a long time getting into it also tonight.  And he's a rookie so he gets more leeway, but maybe a little jab is warranted in that we need to see fewer jumpers to start the game and more of that great second-half play earlier on.  At 6-11 with 16 points and keying many critical plays there's not quite as much to complain about here though.  He was really brilliant coming down the stretch.  He may be taking a little too much of the burden on himself to make the very last shot each game though.  The defense is keying on that and moving quickly to shut him down.  One of these times if he's way covered a nice dish (like the one to Jarrett the other night for three) would serve him well.

--Speaking of Jarrett, he also had a reasonably good game.  6-9, 16 points, 4 assists.  The ball really wasn't in his hands as much or the assists might have been higher.  He was selective and decisive about his offense though, and you like to see that.

--Ime and Joel really played brilliant defensive games...Joel with his blocks and Ime with his tough rebounding.  At one point Joel single-handedly stopped TWO Chicago players in the lane.  He stepped in hard and intimidated the driver into a pass then he shifted over and blocked the shot of the guy he passed to.  You just don't SEE that!  Both guys got in foul trouble and Joel really does need to be a little smarter about giving up those fouls because they took him out of the game at a critical time.  I will say this, though:  two blocking fouls went against him in succession and it looked like neither one was clear cut.  The drivers hit him square in the chest, squared up, both times.  He wasn't exactly motionless or I'd be yelling a lot louder but those calls go about 50-50...for everyone except Joel.

--Dixon had a very active night with 4 steals and 3 rebounds and probably earned more playing time.  He only shot 4-12 though.  A couple of those the team (mostly...well, guess who) strung him out to dry by holding the ball too long and then dumping it to him at the buzzer though, so maybe he gets a little bit of a break.

--Lamarcus did OK with 5 rebounds and 8 points in 23 minutes, but he was rushing his shot out there against their defense.  He wasn't quite as smooth as usual.

--Did I say it felt like a big night for Martell?  Uh...never mind.

 --Travis Outlaw got four minutes to burn the rust off.  He had a nice dish to Lamarcus but that was about it.

Miscellaneous Observations

--The crowd was way up and down tonight.  I suppose it was that kind of game.  The cheering was really loud when it happened though!

--Dave (blazersub@yahoo.com)

Comment 8 comments  |  0 recs  | 

Do you like this story?

Comments

Display:

Sometimes
there was nothing to cheer about. I've noticed the crowds are good at exhorting De-Fense, but can't seem to muster encouragement on offense.  They said a sellout, but there were empty seats.  At least tonight they were scattered rather then entire sections.  Quite a few Chicago fans mad themselves heard.  

No Paul Allen, but Patterson was there.  I think KP was there in the first half, but can't say for sure.  Sergio was there looking very cute in white shirt, gray jacket, gray sweater and jeans.  

Anyone know who the guys are in coats & ties who sit up behind the Blazer bench with piles of papers, notebooks and taking notes?  I'd never noticed them before.

And no, Dave, Children's Services didn't charge me with child abuse for taking my grandson to this game.  He had a good time and i didn't even feed him.  This is the kid who was born with a Blazer-Laker playoff game playing in the background.  I recently came across a picture of his first birthday party with my gift of a Blazer shirt..  I think he had Blazer baby socks his first Christmas.  He had a black & red Blazer basketball to wrestle with at my house.  It's time we went to a game together!

I couldn't believe the shooting percentage.  I looked at the stat board once and BOTH teams were shooting 29%.  Then Chicago started getting it together and ours dropped to 25% before it started to climb. Our missed shots didn't look like bad shots, but they weren't going in.  A couple (one for us, one for the Bulls) actually went a way into the basket before popping out.  It was weird.

No one knew what happened when Brandon went to the locker room only a minute + into the game.  It was a relief to see him in the 2nd half.  But oh, we really needed Sergio.  He makes things happen.

Joel was trying to be more active, but early on he had the ball inside with his back to the basket and really looked like he didn't know what to do with it.  I guess one forgets if one doesn't touch the ball much??  And if you heard me yelling, it would have been "DO something" to Zach.  I yelled that more than once.  He'd just stand there with the ball!!  He was definitely limping late in the 4th quarter; I didn't see what happened and of course they never tell us anything.

But it was a good game to be at, I'm just sorry  we couldn't have won (or at least added a few more points so I didn't lose so many in the jersey contest.  Also think I lost the bonus for about the 25th game in a row...)  And my grandson wants to go again.  Yippee!!

by jorga on Feb 4, 2007 12:10 AM PST reply actions  

Also meant to say
that Magloire played a lot less than he has been. Is there a trade in the works or has Nate finally decided that he doesn't add much?  I didn't miss him (other than noticing he wasn't on the floor.)

by jorga on Feb 4, 2007 12:27 AM PST reply actions  

Eeek
Sounds like Roy made a rookie mistake and was too impatient to run the designed play. Here is how Quick tells it:

"The designed play was the Blazers' staple -- one up four -- meaning Randolph comes to set a high pick for Roy at the top of the three-point circle. But Roy didn't wait for Randolph to come set the pick, instead opting to drive before Gordon could be knocked off by Randolph's screen.

"We weren't patient enough," McMillan said. "That was the play, we wanted to use Zach as a decoy, but (Roy) went a little early." "

by damir on Feb 4, 2007 1:07 AM PST reply actions  

Critical error...
I just caught the end of the game on the radio. It was at about the 2:00 minute mark when the Blazers had tied the score again. Portland had streaked back after being down by 10 or 11. Skiles wanted to call time but was either out of TO's or only had one left. Nate bails him out by calling time in the middle of that run! Chicago regroups and pulls it out.

To those of you who watched, did Nate really do that or did Wheels mis-speak (Skiles called it)?

"...though you may fail...aim at something high." Henry David Thoreau

by Dr Dave on Feb 4, 2007 7:38 AM PST reply actions  

Never mind...
I just read the open thread and it was at the 0:33 second mark. Zach rolled an ankle and a timeout was appropriate at that point. Sorry, Nate. Love ya to pieces!
"...though you may fail...aim at something high." Henry David Thoreau

by Dr Dave on Feb 4, 2007 8:56 AM PST up reply actions  

On the cheering thing
I was there last night, and what I will say is that there were a whole lot of Chicago fans there.  I was surprised at how many.  Within an immediate radius around my seats there were definitely more Chicago fans than Portland fans.  It seemed to me like it was only when the Blazers were really in the game that our fans were perking up and making themselves really loud - clearly dominating the very large Chicago crowd in the cheer factor, for the rest of the game it just seemed like the Chicago fans were winning the game and the cheering contest, and if one were to get too into applauding Blazer rebounds, defensive pressure that forced a TO or an out of bounds pass it only brought the Chicago fans back louder the next time a significant or insignificant play happened.  It was unusual, I've certainly seen decent amounts of other teams' fans there on other nights, but never where it actually felt like the Blazer fans could be coming close to being the minority.  Maybe it was just where I was sitting, but that's my perspective on the cheering and lack there of.

by drawingjeremy on Feb 4, 2007 10:57 AM PST reply actions  

One thing I noticed
When Joel was on the floor, the Blazers scored more points.  When he wasn't, they didn't.  On the offensive end, I noticed that Joel was setting pick after pick after pick freeing up and loosening up the offensive playmakers to make plays.  I'm not certain (I don't always have the time/eye to watch trends), but I think without Joel setting some of his unforgiving picks the (Espressoless) team isn't as good as getting into the offense.  Roy or Jack aren't as able to get penetration and it allows the D to focus on; 1.ball, 2.Zach rather than having the p&r ruin the simplicity of the defensive game plan.

Having said that I am a huge Joel homer and love when he plays well so I look for the good.:)

It wasn't the first time I'd been kicked in the cherries and called a rat by a woman, but it was the first time I didn't mind.

by shenanigans on Feb 4, 2007 10:41 PM PST reply actions  

Joel is THE BEST
person on this team at setting picks, and one of the better ones in the league.  That's a huge strength for him.  Jamaal is decent, Zach is horrible, Lamarcus doesn't know quite how or when or where yet.

Our guards also need to work on their pick usage.  It's not only timing, like came out in Jason Quick's article regarding the key play in the Chicago game.  It's spacing too.  They often dribble three feet away from the pick setter, I guess assuming that their man is going to magically run into the guy somehow.  Jerry Sloan would have a conniption fit if his guards did that.  If the big guys are going to set them, you've got to make their effort worthwhile.

You can see the difference in the guards' confidence when Joel sets and when Zach (for instance) sets.  With Joel they run a lot crisper and closer because they know he's going to stick in there for them.  With Zach it's sloppy and slow because they see him bail out early a lot so why bother?

--Dave

by Dave on Feb 5, 2007 12:07 AM PST up reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

The ultimate coverage and analysis of the Portland Trail Blazers.

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recommended FanPosts

Small
Trade Drawer: The Big 5?
Kpavatar2_small
Not 5, not 6, not 7, not EVER - Junk with Heat poll
Small
Dissecting the Champions
Kitten_small
What Happened to the Junk Junk Drawer 5 12 12
Small
Batum and Salary - a Comp

Recent FanPosts

Duck_pot_small
View from Pounding the Rock
Duck_pot_small
View from Cannis Hoopus on Batum
450px-the_thinker__rodin_small
Top Free Agents: Centers
1_small
LMA or Dirk ?
Myvydas_small
Blazers Reportedly Interested in Any Current NBA GM/AGM. Anyone.

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >

FanShots

Quick hits of video, photos, quotes, chats, links and lists that you find around the web.

Recommended FanShots

Quick: Stern Says Blazers Not For Sale; More GM Interviews Coming
Freeman: Blazers Want To Bring Over Joel Freeland, Victor Claver

Recent FanShots

If you liked my SABAS Arvydas Sabonis video, here's my 2nd highlight video: MAGIC vs BIRD. Songs...
Good news for Seattle?
Would Houston Do This Trade?
Schwan analyzes Dragic versus Jack
Haynes: Batum's Agent Says No Waiting For Blazers
Valencia's GM: Victor Claver Will Stay In Spain Next Season
OKC exploits Andrew Bynum’s weakness
Ben Golliver helped us out at SB Nation Studios in New York with some recap and analysis of Game 1 of the Eastern Conference Semis between the Heat and Pacers. Rumor has it he'll be our point of contact for the Lakers-Thunder series as well. Thanks Ben!

Also, BE denizens, am I correct to assume you all are pulling for the Thunder in that series?
OT, but the Onion does it again...

+ New FanShot All FanShots >


Editors

Kitten_small Dave

Headshotsmall_small Ben Golliver

Lead Moderators

Getfuzzy-satchel_small Timmay!

Bucky3_small Cablinasian

Authors

Plainlc_small Storyteller

Moderators

Lamb_small T Darkstar

Small douglast

Terryporter_small prezofdeath

Small usmcr3049

Lrg_magpie_small Corvid

Wallpaper_small geoffm