Game 30 Recap: Blazers 94, Mavericks 102
by Dave on Dec 26, 2008 12:10 AM PST
58 comments
We finally got our new TV, the dish, and everything working together for the first time yesterday, which means tonight's game was my first ever watching in high definition. It's amazing! It's like somebody took Windex to my TV screen. And, of course, made it much, much bigger. I can finally see everything clearly. It's apparent to me now that all refs are incompetent conspirators, Nate McMillan is an awful coach who loses us tons of games, the Blazers need to trade everybody not named Brandon, and the red-haired Blazer Dancer is by far the cutest.
Thank God for big screens.
General Observations
You really want to know why Portland lost? Two reasons:
1. They gave up an obnoxious number of offensive rebounds and second-chance points to the Mavericks. The Blazers actually played decent defense during significant stretches of this game, including most of the second half. It didn't matter because they couldn't get the ball back. You may look at Greg Oden and Joel Przybilla with 5 boards each and say, "Aha!" but that wasn't the problem. The Blazer guards and forwards gave our centers no chance to succeed tonight. First of all they lost containment on their men so often the paint defenders should have been wearing Hazmat suits. The Three Mile Island perimeter defense caused the centers to play goalie, rotating over to protect the cup. When this happens the center gets totally out of position for the rebound. In such cases the guy who lost his man in the first place is supposed to lay a body on the center's original man in order to prevent the easy rebound. Also guys are supposed to come from the weak side to help get the board. Neither happened. Our smaller guys didn't bother boxing out on their own men on ordinary plays either. Erick Dampier only had 5 defensive rebounds tonight. The Dallas point guards had 13 between them. That's just wrong. The Blazers have neither the offense nor the sustained defense to overcome that.
2. We missed free throws like they were our Canadian girlfriend. On a night when the Blazers drew a 32-18 advantage in attempts (that would be +14) they ended up only +6 in points from the charity stripe. That's like giving away the game.
We had some other issues: transition defense early, defending Dirk Nowitzki, lack of aggressiveness early from Lamarcus Aldridge, inappropriate defensive switches. All of them could have been overcome but for those twin daggers in our back.
I guess a third major factor would be our failure to make a field goal in the last 7 minutes of the game but those 7 minutes would have looked different had we taken care of the fundamentals earlier.
The Blazers shot well enough from the field and the three-point line to win this game. They had Dallas on their heels a couple of times. Lack of basic execution allowed the Mavs to get up. When you start giving veteran teams like Dallas multiple chances to beat you they're going to take one of them and walk away with it.
I did like how the Blazers were matching physicality with the Mavericks, to the point of frustrating them even. I also liked Portland's pick setting in this game.
Individual Notes
Brandon Roy had 22 points which could have been 30 but for a handful of missed layups. He couldn't hit down the stretch either, which sealed the deal for Dallas. Still he was our best player out there.
Lamarcus Aldridge had a nice second half after getting torched by Dirk Nowitzki on one end and disappearing entirely on the other during the first half. It was frustrating not to see the Blazer forwards driving more after Nowitzki picked up his 4th foul early in the 3rd period.
Greg Oden hit 2 shots, grabbed 5 boards, committed 4 fouls and 3 turnovers in a rough night. He was running harder than we usually see him but he's thinking too hard on offense. At least he played 25 minutes tonight.
Steve Blake shot 5-11 for 14 points and 7 assists but he hit only 1-4 threes and made some mental mistakes which translated into turnovers for the Mavericks.
I don't think I'll comment on Nicolas Batum anymore unless he plays outside of the 12-18 minute range and/or notches anything more than a 3 in a statistical column.
Travis Outlaw had an interesting game. He played 34 minutes and took 13 shots but only hit 5 of them for 13 points. He had 4 steals and did a good job guarding Nowitzki in the second half. On the other hand he was a main culprit in the lack of rebounding.
Rudy Fernandez played 28 minutes, shot 5-8 plus 2-3 from distance, and scored the same 13 as Travis did. He wasn't much help on defense but it was a good game for him overall. I'm sure his reverse layup off of a Sergio pass will make the highlights.
Sergio Rodriguez was aggressive looking for his shot tonight and hit all 4 of his tries for 9 points with 2 rebounds and an assist in 10 minutes. He did well tonight.
Joel Przybilla got hung out to dry by his teammates as described above. He managed 4 points and 5 rebounds in 19 minutes.
Channing Frye got a rebound and missed a shot in 5 minutes of playing time.
Final Thoughts
This wasn't a matter of the Blazers folding or capitulating under a more experience team's onslaught. That, at least, is a good thing. The Blazers fought toe-to-toe with the Mavericks tonight. They just lost form on too many of their punches.
Check out the Mavs side of things at MavsMoneyball.
Review the Jersey Contest scores for tonight and enter Saturday's game here.
--Dave (blazersub@yahoo.com)
P.S. Added note: I just realized something funny. We got an amount of comments in the Gameday Thread for this game that in previous years would have neared or broken the record for most comments in a thread at this site. And that was for a game on Christmas Day. Welcome to Blazersedge 2008-09. (I fully realize that we'd be obliterating comment records left and right if the Gameday Threads weren't self-limiting by bogging down every time the comment count reaches 500 or so. Tech support is still working on that...)
0 recs |
58 comments
Email
Print
Comments
The defensive switching is absolutely killing us right now.....
Can someone tell me why we do this and if there is a solution for fixing it.
by ppilot on Dec 26, 2008 12:15 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Probably
Because Nate doesn’t like to take chances and willingly concedes mismatches.
The solution is rather simple – just fight through the screens, especially ones that will leave your 7 foot rookie center coming off major knee surgery on the perimeter where he’ll get tagged with a ticky tacky foul. In addition to prevent foul trouble for our bigs it’ll show the refs that we are aggressive and will help us get calls.
by TSE on Dec 26, 2008 12:19 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
It isn't exactly "simple"
to fight through a screen when it is set well and the man you are defending is skilled at running you into it.
In fact, often it is impossible, and you’re left with either switching or going beneath the screen, or trailing behind your man.
The only way to be guaranteed to be able to fight through is to overplay to that side, so that he has to go around you to get past the pick. Then, you can fight through, for sure — but if you overplay to that side, there’s a good chance he’ll just blow past you the other direction and not bother with the pick as he takes the easy route to the hoop.
If you are quicker, you can usually fight through. If he is quicker, or it is equal, most often you can’t. He’ll force you to respond to his threat one way or another, then all of a sudden he shoots one direction and passes within about 3 inches of the pick. You will only fight through by fouling him or the guy setting the pick.
If you can't convince them, confuse them -- Harry Truman, U.S. President
by jscot on Dec 26, 2008 12:46 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I'm wondering why the guy guarding the screener...
can’t step out and stop the progress of the dribbler and force him back to the original defender once in awhile.
Also we seem to have no weakside help when the dribbler does go toward the basket.
by TallTimber on Dec 26, 2008 1:13 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
That's certainly an option
The danger there is the pick and roll.
If the screener’s defender pops out, the guy setting the pick can roll to the hoop. If he does, he’s left his defender out high, and is defended by the guard on whom he was setting the pick. So you’ve got a center rolling to the hoop defended by a guard, who because of the pick may be out of position to defend as well. If the man with the ball can get it to him, it’s likely to be trouble.
Now, if the defensive center pops out HARD with hands up and really gets in the face of the man coming around the pick, he may not be able to get the ball to the offensive center rolling to the hoop. But then, you’re in a switch situation, which is awkward as well, especially if your center isn’t quick — he’s coming out hard to try and prevent the pass, he’s slower than the guy he’s defending, and bad things can happen very fast.
If the two centers are roughly equivalent in quickness and size, and the two guards are roughly equivalent, a well-executed pick and roll or pick and pop should ALWAYS result in an opportunity to create a decent look at the basket.
If the defender can fight through (which often happens when the man with the ball doesn’t run his defender into the pick well), you have a chance to defend it well. If not, you have to mix it up with different looks, and try to confuse the man with the ball so he doesn’t recognize where the opportunity is quickly enough to react and take advantage. It’s always a case of “pick your poison” on defending well-executed picks. Sometimes the best you can do is just go below the pick and let the guy have an open look on a long shot.
There’s a reason even the worst offensive NBA teams still usually score 80 or more when playing even the best defensive teams. You can’t defend everything.
If you can't convince them, confuse them -- Harry Truman, U.S. President
by jscot on Dec 26, 2008 4:33 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Many pick and rolls
are designed to make you do just that…hence the term pick and roll…they have primary first and second options of effectiveness…
they are actually hoping more for the switch of players because they have effectively moved the big man away from the basket and gained a mismatch to boot….
so some could actually consider this as the first option….that is why the defender must try his best to get the job done and get in front of the pick and not switch….And yes, Like jscot said, easier said than done…you need good team defense/rotation/communication to stop the play….
It's all about defense......
by 67 on Dec 26, 2008 3:00 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
it has always seemed best
when the guard fights through. The guard must anticipate and feel the screen. Seen our guards do it a little bit…maybe more sergio.
by Blazin' on Dec 27, 2008 1:25 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
getting through
a screen comes before the screen is set…..part of this is knowing how they set their plays and the main part is help from your defensive teammates…They tell you its coming, what side it it on, and also who’s covering what….. ..then you have to be “ahead” of the guy your guarding so you have room to get in front of the screen…Yes you overplay, because that is exactly what your supposed to do….once you go under the screen or get picked, you are beaten along with your whole defensive set….then it’s scramble/recovery time and usually an open man…
essentially you are forcing them into their second option and this is when team defense/rotation comes into play…..The guy guarding the motion player has done his job by stopping the pick off (first option) so now it’s up to his teammates to follow up\
yes the pick and roll is a tremendous weapon for the teams that execute it well…but good defensive teams can make it more difficult and less effective….And, I might add, why a “motion offense” runs the most effective pick and rolls…(because no one has taken themselves out of the play and leaves you with second, third, and fourth,options and defensive off-balance….)
It's all about defense......
by 67 on Dec 26, 2008 2:46 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
rec
Good stuff. Yes, communication helps, because you don’t overplay until you have to — but that overplaying will still be punished if the man with the ball recognizes it in time. And if he fakes left just before driving right around the screen, can you afford to overplay him to the right and risk that it really is just a fake to the left?
As always, they are going to get some advantage somewhere — if they are able to recognize and respond. If you have good defensive rotations, you may cut off that advantage, but that also will likely create another opportunity somewhere. But the more you force them into third and fourth and fifth options with your rotations, the more likely they are to make a mistake which results in a turnover (ideal), or a bad pass that they retrieve but which gives you time to reset your defense, or a misread of their options which kills their momentum and again lets you reset.
Very good point on a motion offense. There’s another really valuable aspect to that — an off the ball pick and roll can be even more effective because you don’t have to worry about the ball. If your center sets a pick for the man with the ball, the defensive center can jump out hard and get in his face, making it difficult to make an entry pass to your center rolling to the hoop. That is not an option if the guy doesn’t have the ball. You have taken away one of the defensive options, making it more likely that the pick is going to result in an effective advantage for you. If the ball is in the hands of someone who can recognize what the defense has given up, and make the quick pass to exploit it, the motion offense becomes highly effective, especially since you have perhaps 8-10 picks or more in a 24 second possession in a motion offense — one of them is going to result in an exploitable situation.
There’s other benefits to a motion offense, as well. It does take some good passers with good court sense to recognize defensive breakdowns as they are happening, so you can get the ball to the right guy at the right time. It can be very hard to learn to do effectively against lightning-quick, long-armed NBA defenders, but when it is done well, it is beautiful. It is one significant disappointment with Nate’s coaching that we don’t seem to be moving more towards this.
If you can't convince them, confuse them -- Harry Truman, U.S. President
by jscot on Dec 26, 2008 11:46 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
excellent critique
and your last paragraph explains why there are such Sergio homers out here.
by Blazin' on Dec 27, 2008 1:30 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, but
it’s Brandon’s team, and I suspect Brandon has never really learned how to play a motion offense. I can’t really fault Nate for building around Brandon, but I’d like to see us moving that direction anyway.
If you can't convince them, confuse them -- Harry Truman, U.S. President
by jscot on Dec 27, 2008 6:53 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Travis seems to lose his man once every three or four possessions.
First Kleiza, now Howard/Nowitzki/Terry… it kills us.
honor rasheed wallace
by Cablinasian on Dec 26, 2008 12:18 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
That was a frustrating game to watch
I can’t believe the Mavs got away with playing 3 point guards down the stretch. OK, technically Jason Terry isn’t a point guard, but he’s the size of one. Add him, Kidd, and Barrea together and you hardly have a full-sized NBA player. But the Blazers weren’t able to make the Mavs pay for fielding a team of Hobbits. Like I said: frustrating. Trout in particular blows so many defensive assignments and does so little on the glass. Argghh!!
But what counts is that the Blazers make the playoffs and are playing at a high level entering that first round series. Hopefully games like this can be part of the learning process.
Now I’m going to go watch a cooking show or something. Anything but NBA basketball.
"We don't back down to nobody." --Joel Przybilla
by hurryup09 on Dec 26, 2008 12:30 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Nic seems to have disappeared
I’m glad we got a glimpse of what he’s going to be, but we need a starting SF. Come back soon, Martell.
Painful loss, with some tough games coming up. We need the Toronto game, and our guys could use a blowout, primarily for the mental relief of it. But they are a dangerous team. Greg needs a break-out game, too.
I’m not overly concerned by Kidd getting a bunch of defensive rebounds. The defensive rebounds come because their big guys concentrate on boxing out our big guys. We may see a lot of guards get big defensive rebound numbers against us. The way our centers have been rebounding, opposing centers will be told to just box them out, and guards will be told, “You have to go get the ball.” Especially those who are historically good rebounders like Kidd.
It’s the offensive rebounds from their guards that are really bad. With the rebounding ability we have, opposing guards should get one or two of those on weird bounces. Oh, well, if it had to happen, I’m glad it happened on national TV on Christmas Day. That makes it much less likely that it will happen again if we see them in the playoffs. But you hate to see it cost you a win, and if there is one single factor, that was it. The free throws would have made it closer if we had hit 3-4 more of them, but may not have swung the game to us. Rebounding could have swung the game.
If you can't convince them, confuse them -- Harry Truman, U.S. President
by jscot on Dec 26, 2008 12:40 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
I'm pretty sick of his non production and only shooting 3's
"There is a difference between having two guys banging down low and having two guys who can bang down low." - Blazin'
by tominhawaii on Dec 26, 2008 10:52 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
LOTTERY again - unless thing changes
The more I watch the Blazers play, the more I am leaning toward Blazers missing another year of playoff. Unless something changes (trade, new coach) this team is not improving. Here are my observations:
1) No motion on offense – I don’t know whether it is coaching style or players not listening and executing, but the offense has no motion at all. How many times you see players cutting to the basket to get easy buckets? Watch other teams play and observe.
2) Stupid turnover – I don’t think it is due to players carelessness, it is more of coaching not teaching players to move in front of opponent player to receive the ball (especially inbound). Watch tonight game and observe.
3) Interior defense – periameter defense might contribute to opponent player driving to the hoop and make interior defenders react to the ball which in turn fouling the player driving to the hoop alot. Reactive vs proactive.
4) Oden – People please stop making excuses for this guy. Raw or injury not, it has been a disppointment for the #1 pick of the draft. Isn’t there a coach on the staff that can teach him how to defense by not constantly fouling people? Hire a legendary big man on the coaching staff.
5) Jump shooting team will only get you so far – trade, trade and trade. Get some touch interior players inside and do some damages.
by camcafe on Dec 26, 2008 12:58 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Bah Humbug!
That was such a frustrating game to watch. There’s no reason Kidd and especially Barea should combine to out rebound both of our 7’0 centers 20 to 10. Barea’s like 5’9. Someone box him out. Granted there seemed to be quite a few long rebounds, but for the opposing pg’s to get that many rebounds is unacceptable.
The other thing I thought we could have done more of is gotten the ball down the post to LA. I know he was in foul trouble the first half, but we should have gone to him more in the second half (especially once Nowitzki got in foul trouble). LA is our best low post scorer right now. Greg Oden is just not ready offensively. Every time he got the ball in the post, I just cringed. His left hook shot has been looking better the past couple of games, but other than that he’s yet to show any other effective offensive weapon. He should be the third or fourth option on offense right now. His focus should be on defense, rebounding, and staying out of foul trouble. A few dunks or put backs here or there are all the scoring I’m expecting from him right now. I think he will be more of an offensive threat down the road, but presently he’s more of a liability than a threat on offense.
Our perimeter defense stunk too. We couldn’t stop Barea from effectively running the high pick and roll during the fourth quarter at all. This has been a team weakness since the start of the season and I don’t see it improving much. Maybe Martell could help in this area when he returns.
by MonaLisa8 on Dec 26, 2008 1:46 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Playing inside out is key to opening things up for our shooters and to keep teams from doubling Roy early
GO needs reps down low, he isn’t very efficient right now, but he is going to get better and he is going to force others teams to foul once he gets a little bit better. He is thinking too much on offense, that makes him look “slow.” It may not be pretty at the moment, but we need to keep him involved in order to help him develop.
by upper left corner on Dec 26, 2008 8:49 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Back to basics.
At this stage, the rookies have lost some of their energy, and we’re not getting the production we need at SF and Center to be an elite team. Obviously, we need Martel back. Batum has pretty much disappeared now for most of the last 8 or so games. Travis, in turn, is not a starting SF – as we clearly see, and Frye is not giving us the minutes at PF that we need. As much as the team played with energy and enthusiasm during that early stretch, we can see that the better teams are stepping up.
by Eben Calder on Dec 26, 2008 3:53 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Agree about Martell.....
Not having a legitimate scoring threat at the three gives teams the ability to sag down low and clog things up.
Longer term, it would make a huge difference if our starting PG had the ability to drive the ball, and/or GO starts to become a legitimate threat in the low post..
It strikes me as all part of the process. Other teams have figured out what the Blazers do well and have responded. We really only have 2 1/2 players who can score in our starting five: BRoy, LMA, and Blake, catching and shooting.
My expectation is that the Blazers are going to struggle here for a stretch, but will find a new groove when the schedule gets easier, and when Martell is back and firing on all cylinders.
by upper left corner on Dec 26, 2008 9:02 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Not Nate's finest 2 hours.....
There was one player on the bench that could have stayed in front of the little water bug Barrea……Anyone? Anyone? The correct answer would be Bayless. Zero minutes DNPCD. It’s the CD part that tells the story. Back in the day, Hall of Fame coach Dr. Jack Ramsey started a rookie gaurd ( Jonny Davis ) in the N.B.A. finals. Ramesy had a 10 year vet that he could have started in stead, but chose speed and defence over Gilliam. Now if Dr. Jack can make that call in the finals, why can’t Nate give Bayless a shot?
2-4 the who
by 24thewho on Dec 26, 2008 9:02 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
I love Nate, and think he is doing a fine job overall, but.........
…….he is extremely conservative in his approach to the game. By that, I mean he seems uncomfortable with a lot of experimentation. He found a rotation early in the season, and he has not strayed from it very much. Mistakes in general, and turnovers in particular, seem to drive him crazy. He is putting up with Nic and with Greg and their rookie mistakes. I just think he can only tolerate a certain amount of change and uncertainty at a time.
I am hopeful that once Martell is back and well integrated into the starting five, Nate will be willing to give Bayless a chance to show what he can do. I agree that JBay’s speed and strength on defense and his ability to score off the dribble and break defense down with penetration could be a key piece of the puzzle.
Blake is probably vital to making the playoffs this season, but I think developing JBay is vital to getting Portland to the next level. I will add that Sergio has played some very good ball of late. If he could continue to improve his defense and learn how to finish well enough to be a legitimate threat off the dribble, he may be a better option than Blake. My problem with both Blake and Sergio is primarily at the defensive end. Blake doesn’t seem to have enough foot speed and Sergio doesn’t seem to have enough strength to play really good on-ball defense.
by upper left corner on Dec 26, 2008 9:18 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Agreed, I'm also a fan of Nate's overall job, but.....
If you coach the same way, with the same rotation, night in and night out, you give the rest of the league the advantage of locking in on what you do. Now if what you do can’t be stopped, that’s one thing. But if what you do takes a night off…..what then? Barrea roasted Blake and Sergio time and time agian last night and by all accounts, Bayless gets after players in practice. So in my mind, that should be a proven and trustwothy part of his game that Nate should have been able to call on, not an experimentation….
2-4 the who
by 24thewho on Dec 26, 2008 12:38 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
for the record Barea didn't roast Sergio at all last night
in Sergio’s first half stint Barea was totally ineffectual. In Sergio’s 2nd half “stint” aka 2 minutes, Barea wasn’t in yet. Now, I’m not saying Sergio wouldn’t get burned by Barea, but let’s at least not say he did until it happens.
"It's like, 'Urrrrrrgh!'" Rodriguez says, his cupped hands turning into fists. "It is a good feeling. Good feeling."
by sergioFTW on Dec 26, 2008 2:58 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I'm as big a fan of JBay as anyone....
…….but, my support is primarily based on his physical skills, intelligence, and attitude rather than what we have seen on the floor. I hope he gets his shot and soon. When he does, I hope both the fans and Nate are patient: JBay is going to make a lot of mistakes on both ends.
I agree that Nate sometimes seems a touch slow to adapt to the opposing coaches line-up changes. Part of that is having a very young team. Having a stable rotation helps the young guys know what is expected of them. Hopefully as our team matures we will get better at imposing our style of play on the opposition, and better at responding when we can’t.
by upper left corner on Dec 27, 2008 8:11 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
+1
We missed free throws like they were our Canadian girlfriend.
Hilarious line Ben. Too bad most of us Bedgers were too cranky to notice it.
Batum has hit the wall. If Martell ever comes back, I think Nic will be out of the rotation, lickety-brindle.
MLB2PDX!!! (someday...)
by The Cactus Leaguer on Dec 26, 2008 9:32 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Not only were you too cranky to notice the line
you were too cranky to notice it wasn’t Ben writing the recap!
—Dave
by Dave on Dec 26, 2008 10:28 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Whoops, sorry Dave. Ummm, I forgot to take off the ski gloves when typing? And yes, I’m cranky too (but not about the Blazers, that game had “L” written all over it, and that’s OK, their time will come)!!!
MLB2PDX!!! (someday...)
by The Cactus Leaguer on Dec 26, 2008 11:31 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
LMA rant
I think the guy that I am most disappointed in right now is LMA. I kept hearing over the summer about how he’s packing on all this muscle and boy oh boy he’s going to be a force. Well OK, he’s a good (albeit streaky) offensive threat. But I am starting to get sick of seeing him get abused on a nightly basis at the defensive end, and I’m tired of watching him hoist 18 footers all the time, whether he makes them or not.
Here are the starting PF’s for the contenders in the West: Gasol, West, Stoudemire, Boozer (or Milsap), Martin, Duncan, Scola, Nowitzki. Can LMA stop any of those guys? Maybe Scola, but Houston’s team is focused at C, SF, and SG. LMA has great potential but clearly he is not ready for prime time against the big boys at the 4.
I always hear about how LMA is one of our untouchables. He’s a fine young power forward (and I know I should cut him more slack because of his age) but I do not consider him untouchable. If we have to give him up in order to acquire the missing piece to a championship run, I would strongly consider it.
MLB2PDX!!! (someday...)
by The Cactus Leaguer on Dec 26, 2008 9:32 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
well the blazers point guard need to get the ball to him in the paint more.
In the first half of yesterday’s game Lamarcus had 4 freethrows and 0 field goal attemps. That means he was given two opprotunities in the first half to be in the paint. I’m sorry, but Lamarcus’ poor showing this season, i’m beginning to realize, is as much on our point guards/ offense as it is on Lamarcus.
honor rasheed wallace
i like ike
by Zaron5551 on Dec 26, 2008 9:56 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I think that’s a fair and debatable point about LMA’s offense. The blame for LMA not posting up enough may lie with the coaching staff, the PG’s - heck, it might even be Oden’s fault for all I know. I don’t know what’s inside his head, I only see the endless stream of 18 footers and lack of presence in the paint.
But you can’t blame his defensive struggles on the PG, or on Nate. I just don’t think he’s ready yet. Hopefully he’ll get better with age, with his frame filling out, and with Luke teaching him all of his tricks.
MLB2PDX!!! (someday...)
by The Cactus Leaguer on Dec 26, 2008 11:37 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
What dissappoints me at about LMA
is that he doesn’t use his jumper to set up drives to the hoop. He would be super hard to guard if he wasn’t afraid to dribble more than once. I wouldn’t mind him shooting the 18 footer if it meant it would lead to some better shots at a later point during the game, but that doesn’t really seem to happen with him.
by HeadBandWagon on Dec 26, 2008 1:32 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
LMA is not a Power forward, he is a Tall outside shooting forward that occasionally posts up.
He can’t defend big power forwards or rebound against them. He gets 6.7 boards per 36 minutes. Frye gets 6.5 boards per 36 minutes. Enough said.
by BlazerFanSince1970 on Dec 26, 2008 10:25 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Portland could only wish it had perimeter containment as good as ...
Three Mile Island.
Shows even the best of analogists occassionally miss the mark.
I too was able to watch on a big screen – our daughter’s boyfriend’s 52 inch. The feed was not HD however. Still pretty good. Unfortunately, we were playing palor games so I was unable to concentrate on the game the whole time and then we left to go home midway through the 3rd qtr. Caught the last 7 minutes at home (and boy do I realize how much my tv sucks now). The one aspect that stood out for me was the lack of rebounding. I’ve gotten used to watching Portland win the rebound battle most nights.
I was also struck by how good Nowitszki is. That guy nailed several tough jumpers.
hakkaa päälle !
by timg56 on Dec 26, 2008 10:09 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
I understand the arguments (pro and con) about starting Oden,
(although I think he should be coming off the bench), but can anyone explain the logic of why he was playing during crunch time in the 4th quarter last night (or most nights)? Joel is a better defender, better rebounder, makes fewer turnovers, and commits fewer fouls, i.e. he is the more reliable (veteran) for the 4th quarter.
by BlazerFanSince1970 on Dec 26, 2008 10:37 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
i disagree with you on the cutest blazer dancer dave.
The cutest one is by FAR the one with black hair and freckles, how does that even work! I don’t know, but it is wondrous.
The end is in the beginning and yet I go on....
-Beckett
by eyeotiger on Dec 26, 2008 10:44 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Why did Travis let them shoot so many 3's?
It seems like every time the Mav’s shot a 3 it was all on Travis. Then when the long rebound went to the only Mav under the basket, I’m pretty sure it was up to Travis to block that guy out. Why didn’t Travis shut down Dirk? I’m pretty sure it was up to him. He should have shut down Jason Kidd as well. I also blame Travis for the island of Oahu being sold out of Wii’s.
"There is a difference between having two guys banging down low and having two guys who can bang down low." - Blazin'
by tominhawaii on Dec 26, 2008 10:56 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
i'm blaming brandon's lines
they were so 1988.
Activate Shavlik Randolph
by appel82 on Dec 26, 2008 11:36 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
He's turning into a crybaby
I’d love for him to get back on defense instead of complaining to the refs.
"There is a difference between having two guys banging down low and having two guys who can bang down low." - Blazin'
by tominhawaii on Dec 26, 2008 12:01 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Totally agree
but unfortunately complaining WORKS in the NBA. The biggest whiners are also the best players. I loved the Blazers last year because they hardly ever complained, but Roy has definitely changed this year.
by HeadBandWagon on Dec 26, 2008 1:37 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
If you don't stretch your arms out after a drive and stare at the ref,
then the referees won’t bother calling fouls.
I’m really not sure why it’s the case. But many current NBA stars have made a living that way.
I really dislike Brandon begging for calls every play, but he’s using a tried-and-true technique perfected by the superstars of the NBA.
Now if he can just keep his mouth shut about it during interviews.
by Timmay! on Dec 26, 2008 4:49 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
We're 18-12
Looks like a familiar record doesn’t it?
by Eventine on Dec 26, 2008 12:04 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
How much longer can we afford to start Batum?
He has severly dropped off and hardly contributed at all. Maybe he would fit better in the run and gun second unit and getting easy buckets in transition
Woof
by Charles Barkley McLovin on Dec 26, 2008 12:40 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Who do you suggest we replace him with?
Webster, who obviously would be the best fit for the starting line-up, is still out.
by Eventine on Dec 26, 2008 1:43 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
read my sig
Activate Shavlik Randolph
by appel82 on Dec 26, 2008 2:21 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
A few people have brought up a big change.
Start Sergio, Roy, Rudy, LMA, Oden.
Bench is Blake, Batum, Outlaw, Pryz. Depending on the game, some minutes for Ike, Frye, Bayless.
I’m assuming that line-up has probably failed miserably in practice (though partially because it hasn’t had time to gel). But until Martell comes back, it’s probably the only reasonable alternative lineup.
I’d probably leave the lineup as it is.
by Timmay! on Dec 26, 2008 4:51 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I was really encouraged by this game for Oden's sake. When Oden started making strong moves in the post
he looked excellent. It was the most aggressive I have seen him since coming back, but that went away as he got tired. Still, it looks like something is waking up inside of him.
by BRoyInThe4th on Dec 26, 2008 4:03 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Aldridge really had the opportunity to burst
12 points in just three shots? Goodness.
by Eventine on Dec 26, 2008 4:49 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
He got in foul trouble at the same time as Dirk.
It doesn’t excuse two things though…
1. Why he was invisible during the first half while Dirk was going off.
2. Why he didn’t get the ball against 4-foul Dirk in the post in the second half (since Dirk was guarding him at times)
by Timmay! on Dec 26, 2008 4:53 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
#1 I kinda forgive him from
It seemed that the team wasn’t running the offense through him, which was really weird, since Dirk is far from a good defender.
But #2 is something I totally did not understand. Those three shots he made came off jump shots, and if he continued getting to the foul line and shooting those jumpers, he could’ve made one hell of a difference. That could’ve meant also fouling out, though.
Oh well.
by Eventine on Dec 26, 2008 5:02 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
LMA/SR vs Dallas
Aldridge: I don’t know if LA, the PG, or Nate is to blame on this. Yes, he played less minute due to foul trouble, but 24 minutes is enough time to put up 10 good shots. LA pretty much scored/got to the line at will this game. Why wasn’t the offense being run through him? Every timeout should have been drawing up plays for the guy that Dallas couldn’t stop. The only quarter Portland went to LA was the quarter than Dallas got beat in. Coincidence? NO! Either LA needed to fight to get open/post up, Blake needed to get the damn ball to LA, or Nate needed to call his number. Either way, avoiding LA killed Portland.
Sergio: What does Sergio have to do to play alte in close games? He scored 9 points in 7 minutes in the first half on 4-4 shooting with a lone turnover. That turnover was partly due to Outlaw’s laziness. (The pass was wide left, but if he’d a moved his feet instead of simply reaching out, he’d a caught it.) Regardless. 9/1/1 with 1 turnover is a great line.
Second half, he comes in for 2 minutes in which Roy pretty much runs the point anyway. He gets an offensive rebound and he wasn’t beat on defense at all. Why he lasted all of 2 minutes is beyond me. Blake did a good job of driving to the middle, getting stripped, recovering the ball, and then throwing it away though.
Blake is still the better PG than Sergio. The thing is, if Sergio has an off play, Nate won’t hesistate to bench him. If Blake makes crazy bonehead plays, he continues to stay in the game. This is getting ridiculous and it’s almost to the point where I’d like to see Blake get a flu and miss 3-4 teams to see how Sergio does with some actual minutes.
Nate may be a damn good player coach, but thus far I sure haven’t seen any proof that he’s a good game coach.
by ChapinRA on Dec 26, 2008 8:36 PM PST reply actions 1 recs
Very well said - rec
Blazer's Edge Ambassador to The Dream Shake Blog
Blazers Sucked against Dallas
by LaMarvelous on Dec 26, 2008 10:40 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
My two main complaints...
Why is it when we have players that are being effective in a game (LMA/Sergio), Nate doesn’t focus on telling the other player to run the offence through them and get the most out of the hot hand? Sergio earned it and LMA would have if the others would stop pretending he is invisible. Don’t give me that foul trouble stuff either, Dirk was in foul trouble and you don’t see him wimping out.
Time after time I have seen Nate take both of those guys out of the game right when they are getting hot – stupid!!!!! Instead what do we have Travis taking 6 or 8 outside shots when the only thing he has gotten to go through the basket is shots in the paint – Aargh!
If the outside/perimeter shot isn’t going why, why , why don’t our guys start working the paint??
I am going crazy – that game made me mad as heck, and now here I am writing comments the next day and I am still mad.
Blazer's Edge Ambassador to The Dream Shake Blog
Blazers Sucked against Dallas
by LaMarvelous on Dec 26, 2008 10:54 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
So much for the two complaints idea...
Blazer's Edge Ambassador to The Dream Shake Blog
Blazers Sucked against Dallas
by LaMarvelous on Dec 26, 2008 10:55 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
FanShots
Quick hits of video, photos, quotes, chats, links and lists that you find around the web.
Recommended FanShots
Recent FanShots
Certain photos copyright © 2009 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
