Przybilla
I love how after the last couple close losses we had, there were outcries over Joel's lack of playing time at the end of close games. Yet todya, he only played 14 mins, and I'm not so sure we could have won had he played much in the 2nd half. Making that comeback would have been difficulut had we been playing 4 on 5 on offense.
So, did Nate still make a mistake not playing Przy? He would have helped us sooooo much (sarcasm).
13 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
wow
haha
I personally like what he brings. We don't have any bigs who board reasonably well, so we need him. He didn't look good today though.
I just think that when games come down to a point or two, whether it is a loss or a win, then it's pointless to question the coach. He obviously knows what he's doing. That small lineup at the end of games has been a constant during this resurgence of ours.
Come on, man
Pryz
In the previous games tho, he did have a strong impact, so you could have argued for him to be in the game late. Yet I dont think you could have done it today.
NATE - as far as nate went I was happy to see that nate did adjust his substitutions to fit more with the flow of the game today. He put in Sergio and not Jack in the 4th with Roy bc Sergio had a decent first half. Nate kept the cold players from getting huge minutes while rewarding those who were playing well which is a sharp contrast to earlier in the season.
I hope this trend continues
4 on 5 offense
It seems like we have enough other firepower to play 4 on 5 offense. Joel can sometimes score 1 on 0.
Doesn't his offensive rebounding and picking count for something in the offense?
by blazernerd on Jan 27, 2008 7:12 PM PST reply actions
Teams are doubling Brandon
by t jay on Jan 28, 2008 2:50 AM PST up reply actions
Watch them play...
Frye: (previous to last game) sets a pick, turns around, and hopes somebody throws him the ball so he can shoot an 18 foot jumper.
He played a good game against the Hawks though, from the highlights I saw.
t
Joel sucked today
This game was a bit different because we were trying to make a comeback. The game against Toronto on the other hand, would have been won if we could have made just one or two defensive stops, and Joel could have provided that.
It's all about the matchups...
What I like is how one big come-from-behind victory makes the super-fans go rabid against the critics.
t
Or
Basically all that happened is that Nate found a way to use Channing's and Lamarcus' strengths, which makes their weak areas less painful. Hopefully, that trend will continue.
Nate has limited Joel's minutes all season
Earlier this year I was advocating more Joel, but the more I watch, the more I'm convinced I was wrong. Nate and the coaches can see it, but as fans we tend to look at players through rose-colored glasses.
Playing "4 on 5 offense" with Joel is not a matter of firepower. The offense initiates with Roy. The other teams have figured out that if you double Roy by leaving Pryz open, Brandon has trouble initiating the offense, and they don't have to worry about Joel as a scoring threat. Combine this with the fact that Blake's shooting has cooled off and sometimes it's 3 guys on Roy. Not good.
With Frye in the game, he can hit the uncontested mid-range jumper, so Roy can make them pay for the double- or triple-team by finding Frye.
I mean, let's face it, when Oden is ready, Joel is coming off the bench anyway. It's actually a good role for him.

by 



















