Nate to open the season with Last Years Starters
Jason Quick just got done talking to Nate and came on the radio to report Nate will start Sunday's game against Denver--and is leaning towards doing the same to open the regular season--with a lineup of Blake, Roy, Batum, Aldridge, and Przybilla
over 2 years ago
douglast
85 comments
2 recs |
Email
PrintComments
And the news is:
Nate is going to open the season against Houston with a starting lineup of:
Blake
Roy
Batum
Aldridge
Przybilla
Nate didn’t like the defense he saw last night from the starters. The above lineup will start the game on Sunday against Denver (this is the game that will be managed like a regular season game).
Wow.
How did you guys win that?
"We scored enough points. We scored 107, they scored 105.
-Nate McMillan Postgame, 3/4/2009
2+ hours ago
Jason reminded Vance/Allen that Steve is a notorious slow starter, and Blake certainly hasn’t played well so far in October. Perhaps this will “settle everybody down” and get the players to “buy in” to McMillian’s defensive concepts, better. But if I was Oden I’d be breaking things in Utah, right about now
(So much for “earning your minutes” eh, Greg?)
And I suspect Marc Spears has gotten a slew of voice/text messages from Miller, this afternoon…
When reached 39 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
I get the arguments for Blake and Batum
But Greg should be starting. It doesn’t seem as though he’s killing us on defense exactly… But if the argument is to keep him paired with Andre, then so be it.
How did you guys win that?
"We scored enough points. We scored 107, they scored 105.
-Nate McMillan Postgame, 3/4/2009
Greg has really earned the start this year.
And he seems to be keeping up defensively just fine.
Pairing him with Andre is overrated in my opinion. The more Oden works with Roy and Aldridge, the better. Those are three guys who will be playing the big minutes in the playoffs. And they will likely be playing them together in the most difficult situations.
The Blazers’ future relies on getting these three in sync with one another.
*Unless KP has a secret plan that makes this statement incorrect.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><>
by staylost on Oct 15, 2009 3:11 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
exactly!
we have to get those 3 in sync over the long term. if it means starting slow for the first 20 games this year, then I’d rather spend that time now then at the end of the year or next year or whenver.
bite the bullet and get them together.
How did you guys win that?
"We scored enough points. We scored 107, they scored 105.
-Nate McMillan Postgame, 3/4/2009
all I got to say is
If Oden is playing less than 30-32 minutes a night and it isn’t because of fouls, then I will be a very unhappy Blazer fan.
How did you guys win that?
"We scored enough points. We scored 107, they scored 105.
-Nate McMillan Postgame, 3/4/2009
by douglast on Oct 15, 2009 2:29 PM PDT reply actions 1 recs
after last night I'd like to see a whole lot less of Outlaw
even if it means Greg/Joel are on the court together, for 5 minutes a half
When reached 39 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
Thanks for the news.
I like the decision. Andre and Greg play well together; Blake and Przybilla play at their best in the starting lineup because they are improved by Roy. Andre will make all the second unit so much better.
I wonder what the lineup will be in the closing minutes?
--
by CaptainSexyJacob on Oct 15, 2009 2:33 PM PDT reply actions
This is a little disturbing
Greg earned that starting spot, and I don’t get the impression that his defense has been bad at all. I understand the argument about no firepower on the bench if you go with last nights starting lineup, but I was under the impression that Martell would be coming off the bench. Rudy would ideally be rested (and have healed back) by opening night too. For all of his faults, Travis can get a shot off against anyone as well.
Don’t even get me started on Miller. If Brandon can’t adjust because Miller does something besides camp out at the three point line then either he’s not a max player (doubtful) or there’s a problem with your system (much more likely). I’m not a fire Nate guy but he may be “coaching” his way into some serious trouble. Way to “get Greg rolling”.
(insert inspirational quote here)
by Milkbomb on Oct 15, 2009 2:41 PM PDT reply actions 1 recs
yeeehaawww
nate did change the opening lineup last year (remember: Travis), so I’m not too worried about it.
Kobe is my profile pic because of this beatdown I received.
Blake > Andre
new rotation idea based on this:
By half:
First 6 minutes: Blake,Roy, Batum, LMA, Joel
18:00 to 14:00: Miller, Roy, Batum, LMA, Oden
14:00 to 10:00: Miller, Rudy, Webster, LMA, Oden
10:00 to 6:00: Miller, Rudy, Webster, Outlaw, Joel
6:00 to 4:00: Blake, Roy, Webster, Outlaw, oden
Final 4:00: Roy, Oden, LMA, and whoever’s hot at the 1 and 3 spots.
How did you guys win that?
"We scored enough points. We scored 107, they scored 105.
-Nate McMillan Postgame, 3/4/2009
The only possible reason for Greg not starting is
nate wants to pair him with Andre.
Roy, Aldridge, Oden, Rudy, Batum, Outlaw, Webster, Bayless, Blake, Miller, Joel... Holy crap!
It could be time for a new coach.
Greg should be starting.
by Nick Van Excellent on Oct 15, 2009 2:50 PM PDT reply actions 1 recs
Greg is coming off the bench....
Cause Blake can’t get him the ball.
by tmundal on Oct 15, 2009 2:52 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
yeah, that makes sense...
How did you guys win that?
"We scored enough points. We scored 107, they scored 105.
-Nate McMillan Postgame, 3/4/2009
(that was sarcastic btw)
If Blake can’t get Oden the ball, then Blake is the problem, not Oden.
How did you guys win that?
"We scored enough points. We scored 107, they scored 105.
-Nate McMillan Postgame, 3/4/2009
by douglast on Oct 15, 2009 2:57 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
It's a stupid idea.
The best center shouldn’t come off the bench. The best PG shouldn’t come off the bench either, but that point is more debatable. I think Nate has some control issues, which is not uncommon among coaches. Avery Johnson had the same sort of thing and I still consider him a good coach.
Having Joel not front Yao in the post was really stupid on Nate’s part. Starting Outlaw over Batum last season was also pretty silly, but I think this has them both beat. Not starting Oden is tremendously disconcerting to me. I think it could be time for Nate to leave.
by Nick Van Excellent on Oct 15, 2009 3:02 PM PDT up reply actions 2 recs
its like the 4th quarter last night
Oden was dominate in the first half, and Phoenix is trying to guard him with Frye and Amundsen. So Nate’s answer is to first) NOT get the ball to Oden, and second) go smallball with LMA at center. Nothing has irritated me more over the years than a coach who lets the other team dictate matchups. If the you have a beast in the middle, and the other team goes small – PUNISH THEM INSIDE!!!
How did you guys win that?
"We scored enough points. We scored 107, they scored 105.
-Nate McMillan Postgame, 3/4/2009
by douglast on Oct 15, 2009 3:05 PM PDT up reply actions 2 recs
No joke.
I’m not sure what’s going on with Nate. It’s hard to judge a coach because you don’t see what’s going on behind the scenes, but after he got thoroughly out-coached by Rick Adelman in the playoffs last season I think he should be on thin ice.
If he benches Oden and the Blazers get off to a slow start then I think maybe it’s time to move on. Who’s available? Avery Johnson? Jeff Van Gundy? Terry Porter?
I’m not sure there is a good replacement, but having Oden come off the bench seems pretty silly to me.
by Nick Van Excellent on Oct 15, 2009 3:32 PM PDT up reply actions
Jeff Van Gundy > Nate McMillan.
Van Gundy wouldn’t be pushover around LaMarcus Aldridge and Brandon Roy, either.
Stupid people have stupid ideas.
Cause Blake can’t get him the ball.
Then have Roy get Oden the ball
I suspect the national writers will soon have a field day after hearing this news
When reached 39 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
by two4larue on Oct 15, 2009 3:46 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Dre will get Oden the ball...
If Nate does this, we’re going to have the best point differential in the league from the 4 minute mark of the 1st and 3rd quarters to the 6 minute mark of the 2nd and 4th…
Everyone's sort of in self-destruct mode over this ...
I disagree with the decision too, but like he always says that starting lineup pretty much helped us win 54 games last season. It can change after only a couple games and, frankly, I’m sure it will. If we get into December and we’re not doing hot then certainly we should expect Nate to change it up. If he doesn’t, well THEN we can talk about his future here. For now it’s logical to go with what you know, and Nate knows that this lineup is good. Our bench is going to be killer too.
I'll be fine with these starters, IF
Oden gets 30+ minutes
Miller gets 30+ minutes.
If Miller or Oden’s productivity take a big dip coming off the bench and/or discord ensues, then it’s on Nate.
How did you guys win that?
"We scored enough points. We scored 107, they scored 105.
-Nate McMillan Postgame, 3/4/2009
I'd be fine with Miller getting 30+ minutes...
If he starts to play some serious man defense when he is on his guy.
*Unless KP has a secret plan that makes this statement incorrect.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><>
I've been suggesting this, except for Przy.
The Blazers and Brandon in particular have had zero rhythm in 4 preseason games, and the defense has obviously sucked for (at least) the last two. Batum is a no-brainer starter because we must have his defense to start the game.
Miller and Oden are obviously the better players, but we need to get Roy going and re-establish the teams rhythm. There is no need to force that to happen over 8 pre-season games, so let Blake start and let the chemistry between Miller and Roy develop more gradually. Roy will rest about 12 minutes a games, and Miller will always be in the game while Roy rests. So Miller and Roy will still be on the court together for 16 minutes or more if Andre plays 28 minutes or more a game. That is plenty of time to work things out between them while still getting Roy and the team off to a good start.
I had hoped to see Oden starting, but I think Nate is more comfortable getting Roy and LMA going without feeding the ball to Oden. Greg will probably come off the bench after about six minutes and play as long as he can stay out of foul trouble. I still expect Greg to play about 28-30 minutes without foul problems. He will probably be starting in a month or two.
by BlazerFanSince1970 on Oct 15, 2009 2:58 PM PDT reply actions
My only concern is the possible affect on Oden's psyche
The guy WANTS to start – he wants to earn. He busted his butt all summer to get in shape and improve his game. He’s been playing great all preseason and looking dominant at times. And he gets rewarded by…not getting to start. How’s that going to affect him? Why continue to work hard if it doesn’t mean anything? This sends the entirely wrong message to him and our other young guys – work hard, but it won’t matter in the long run. Great.
We have to remember these are YOUNG guys. I think it’s a mistake to screw with their heads like this.
How did you guys win that?
"We scored enough points. We scored 107, they scored 105.
-Nate McMillan Postgame, 3/4/2009
by douglast on Oct 15, 2009 3:02 PM PDT up reply actions 2 recs
Nate will just tell him that it's to his advantage to start games with Andre,
with both coming off the bench until the team gets more used to feeding him the ball and making him part of the offense. i.e. Greg will get more touches and chances playing with Andre off the bench to start the season. It will also take some pressure off Greg early in the season. Although it wasn’t my first choice, I kind of like it the more I think about it.
I was thinking strongly last night that the team needs to get it’s flow back, and re-establish where it was at the end of last season. Forget about the Houston series, we have all year to prepare for the playoffs and the make the lineup adjustments we will need for that. We need to get this young team confident and flowing again. Let’s integrate Miller, Webster, and Greg’s new skills just a touch slower and improve upon what we had, not throw it into turmoil and uncertainty, which I think is what has been happening.
by BlazerFanSince1970 on Oct 15, 2009 3:13 PM PDT up reply actions
The team's flow now doesn't matter
What matters is the flow next May and June. Rather than try to go back to what we’ve done in the past, which seemed to be pretty exposed by Houston in the playoffs. Wouldn’t it be preferable to start off on a new trajectory that fits our current players better and have more time to adapt to that rather than go with what suited our personnel last year and try to integrate guys later?
Who cares if we drop a couple games early integrating Oden and/or Dre? I’d rather work from day one establishing a new rhythm that plays to two guys who are clearly better than their more limited counterparts than go with what we had to use last year because of those limitations and try to shoehorn the better players in later.
You don't blow up and rebuild a team that won 54 games.
Miller/Blake is an unusual situation because of Roy. Miller is not a better version of Blake. He is a much better PG, but a totally different version of a PG that necessitates your best player, your most dominant force, make major changes to his game, which then disrupts the entire team. Let Miller and Roy work out their playing styles more gradually. They will still play together for at least 16 minutes a game. If it is going to work at all, they will work it out in a month or two.
As I said, I favor Oden starting, but this is not a big deal. He’s not a child. He can understand the advantages of playing more with Andre, and that he will get more offensive touches and opportunity to work on his offensive game if he comes in after 6 minutes than if he starts. He’s going to get all the minutes he can stay on the floor without foul trouble. If he plays well and integrates into the offensive flow, he will be starting in a couple of months.
There’s no reason to blow everything up and try to force this to be a PG dominated team with a scoring center in the first month of the season. We can introduce those elements more gradually off the bench and we will have plenty of time to move it into the starting line up if it’s effective long before we get to the stretch run and the playoffs.
by BlazerFanSince1970 on Oct 15, 2009 3:54 PM PDT up reply actions
Starting off on a new trajectory was a little severe for what I meant
but the Oden thing is absurd. It’s the exact same situation as with Bynum going into last season. If Oden is going to be starting in a couple months anyways, why go through this charade when he’s clearly played well enough to earn the job?
Who cares how well we’re playing in the first week? I repeat, what matters is how we’re playing come the playoffs. Not starting a guy who has clearly earned the job (after an “open” competition) just undermines the authority and creates needless controversy, especially with such a high profile national pick like Greg. This isn’t a case of “we have to start Greg because of his draft position” that Nate apparently seems to loathe so much. Our starters will have to learn to play with him anyways, they should start getting more reps now.
by Royster on Oct 15, 2009 4:08 PM PDT up reply actions 2 recs
right, Nate said the players will tell him who starts by their play on the court?
except you, Greg
and Blake has not “beat out” Miller, by any stretch of the imagination
So, the starters didn’t defend well enough last night, that’s the reason why Nate’s going with Blake and Przy, again? I didn’t notice Brandon busting his hump to get back on defense on that first possession, so maybe Rudy should now be starting instead of Roy?
To me this smacks of Roy and LMA entitlement re: “getting their touches and being option 1 and option 2” to begin each half. Miller and Oden are probably looking sideways at Nate and wondering how much more BS is he going to be feeding them, this fall
When reached 39 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
by two4larue on Oct 15, 2009 4:08 PM PDT up reply actions 2 recs
So you would really risk injuring Roy or Aldridge just so they can really push themselves to prove they are starter material?
I guess I believe there ought to be an entitlement for being one of the two best players on your team.
Don’t get me wrong, I think Oden should start. He, pretty obviously, plays some intense defense.
Miller… not entitled.. not much defense…
Not that Blake is an upgrade here either.
Now if we could just STOP TURNING THE BALL OVER I could care less who our PG is.
Creator = Roy
High post spread option = LMA
Low post dish option = G.O.
+ someone else who can make threes & a point guard who can control the ball. Bayless?
*Unless KP has a secret plan that makes this statement incorrect.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><>
the point was
Nate has been telling everyone for years that the players will show him who should play
Oden and Miller showed him, Przy and Blake haven’t
but then, Brandon was agitated with how he was being used on offense, and LMA was concerned that he wasn’t getting enough touches. They went to Nate and complained, and a couple of days later the starting lineup was right “back to the future”
bad precedent, very bad.
earlier today, Quick reminded everyone that Blake is a slow starter. So the Blazers are beginning the season with a PG that needs a couple of months to reach peak capacity? I’m sure there will be fans who will be gald that Miller is getting his “come-uppance” for popping off to Spears, but if you’re Andre right now you’ve gotta be wondering “what kind of organization have I joined, here? Are the inmates running the asylum?”
When reached 39 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
Oden deserves his minutes.
Simple as that. It’s insulting to him to not start him… he has put in the work and it is showing.
START GREG!!
Chuck Norris' tears cure cancer. Too bad he has never cried.
by FiveOhThree-RipCity!! on Oct 15, 2009 3:01 PM PDT reply actions 2 recs
So if this preseason and training camp aren't enough
for Oden to win the starting job, what will be?
Blake I don’t agree with, but I can understand. But Greg? This is needlessly playing mind games with the guy. He’s clearly busting his butt and is super motivated already, what more does he need to do. He’s a legit player who deserves to start and this is just a pointless embarrassment to make him come off the bench. Maybe we’re okay with it as long as he plays 28-30 minutes, but he’s still going to have to deal with the national media and perceptions about being picked over Durant and then not even being a starter.
We need more creators in the second unit, fine. Put Dre there if you must. Between him, Rudy, and Outlaw filling in at PF that’s way more shot creating potential than what we had in the second unit last year. Given that those guys are almost never all on the floor at the same time, why force this upon Oden?
by Royster on Oct 15, 2009 3:10 PM PDT reply actions 1 recs
couldn't agree more
Oden finally seems to have his head where it needs to be right now, and then he gets this crap piled on. He said a few weeks back that starting is important to him, and he’s worked his tail off for it. Now he gets the national media BS heaped on in addition to his own internal disappointment.
here’s hoping Nate comes around by the 27th at least on the Oden issue.
How did you guys win that?
"We scored enough points. We scored 107, they scored 105.
-Nate McMillan Postgame, 3/4/2009
I think Oden might have some trust issues with McMillan at this point.
There is more to an athlete than how fast they can run, they also better be able to see what they are doing and know why they are doing it.
It's funny, because the EXACT same situation happened in LA going into last season
when they were incredibly successful after Bynum went down and they acquired Gasol. The Gasol/Odom lineup was killer, and helped lead them to the finals, and yet Phil Jackson somehow summoned up the courage to start Bynum and bring Odom off the bench.
That seemed to work out okay
Odem is at an entirely different stage of his career than Greg, so for that reason alone, I am not sure the analogy applies.
Also, I do not think Odem is actually better than either of those players. I would take Gasol over him in a heartbeat, and I would take Bynum as well (in spite of the injury concerns).
There is more to an athlete than how fast they can run, they also better be able to see what they are doing and know why they are doing it.
Sorry, I meant, "Odom."
There is more to an athlete than how fast they can run, they also better be able to see what they are doing and know why they are doing it.
Oden isn't Odom in the analogy
Oden is Bynum here. They had a successful lineup, led them to the finals and a blue chip big man coming back. Did Jackson say, “Well, Gasol and Odom worked well last year, let’s stick with that.”? No. It was clear that integrating Bynum as a starter was better for the long term prospects of the team, and he did it.
Ooops! Apologies! Combined with much bowing and scraping.
Now I get what you are saying and I could not agree with you more. If Nate does this he is seeking known safety in the short term rather than taking the risk of setting the bar higher. I am much more focused on how good we are going to be at playoff time this year and next.
There is more to an athlete than how fast they can run, they also better be able to see what they are doing and know why they are doing it.
I knew the preseason was meaningless but
I didn’t know it was this meaningless. Oden, Miller, and Webster were the best Blazers during the preseason and badly outplayed Joel, Blake, and Batum. So I guess the only logical thing to do is start the guys that didn’t play well.
Roy, Aldridge, Oden, Rudy, Batum, Outlaw, Webster, Bayless, Blake, Miller, Joel... Holy crap!
by axel360 on Oct 15, 2009 3:21 PM PDT reply actions 1 recs
Oden and Miller I agree with
But Batum was not outplayed by Webster. Batum has sat almost the entire preseason to get rest and will always be a lot better on D than Webster.
Martell looked awfully good, last night
but the main reason to start Webster ahead of Nic was if Miller was also starting, and now we know that that won’t be the case
man, what a mess. KP has some “cleanup” work to do, pronto
When reached 39 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
The SF spot is still up for debate.
Miller vs Blake is a bit more touchy because I could see Miller being effective off the bench, even though I do think it’s a dumb idea.
Oden vs. Joel is the one spot where there isn’t really a contest.
by Nick Van Excellent on Oct 15, 2009 3:35 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Gotta agree with the others.
Yup, Webster outplayed Batum. Because Batum didn’t play. Because Batum is tired and already a lock to start until Roy & Blake & Miller, et. al. get some defense.
*Unless KP has a secret plan that makes this statement incorrect.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><>
well, if Quick says it, it must be true
I for one am furious. Fire Coach Iavaroni!
oh man, I think I'm average like, ten points, like, twelve, thirteen dimes, like two, three assists, and about four, five rebounds, and if we need me to play, play a different position, I might get a little bit more.
It's a long season
Oden and Miller will both be starting soon enough.
Witty Unpredictable Talent and Natural Game
NOOOO
bayless leaves over my dead body
andre miller>hedo, blake
real.baller
R.A.M.B.O (do it nate, if you are smart)
"I could have killed 'em all, I could kill you. In town you're the law, out here it's me. Don't push it. Don't push it or I'll give you a war you won't believe. Let it (last years starting line-up) go. Let it go."
by thomasikehara on Oct 15, 2009 3:58 PM PDT reply actions 1 recs
I haven't posted on the edge in awhile
I just wanted to post here again just to say Nate has lost his flipping mind. Absolutely, inconceivable to start Joel over Oden. Roy needs to adjust, is he a superstar or just a guy who’s good at Iso’s? I think he’s a superstar and needs to adjust. Everyone else lit it up last night except for Roy, he can’t blame Miller for his choice to take the summer off. Oh and Nate is insane.
"Death is not final," Gita says. "If any man thinks that he slays, and if another thinks that he is slain, neither knows the truth. The Eternal in man cannot kill: the Eternal in man cannot die. The soul in man is neither born nor does it die. Weapons cannot cut it; fire cannot burn it; water cannot drown it.
The Bhagavad Gita
by Idog1976 on Oct 15, 2009 4:11 PM PDT reply actions 3 recs
Ridiculous.
I have been a Nate defender for a long time but I am quickly losing my love for him. This decision is imbecilic to me. We are NOT starting 2 players that are the best at their position thus far. Way to let Greg down. He did EVERYTHING right this off season. He worked his tail off, lost weight, saw a sports psychiatrist to get his mind right, came back hungry and happy, hearing Nate’s motto that you earn your minutes, only to get a slap in the face such as this. Unbelievable. I am a little peeved at this.
Maybe this has to do with Brandon. Maybe it’s about inspiring the other players to play defense, I don’t know. If Greg isn’t starting REAL soon, I will be on the fire nate bandwagon.
by dario argento on Oct 15, 2009 4:22 PM PDT reply actions 2 recs
PRAMB...
Is just not very catchy. PARMB? BRAMP? No.
I’m pretty surprised at this… and I’ve been using spreedsheets to try to explain why it could be logical to bring Miller off of the bench.
To play devil’s advocate a little: in neither game has the RAMBO starting line-up dominated and both games were against pretty mediorce opponents. It’s only been two games, you say, but that’s all Nate has to go on at this point. By contrast, last year’s starters were very good.
More importantly, I believe in minutes more than starters. As long as GO and Miller are playing 30 minutes a game, the fact that they aren’t starting doesn’t mean that much to me. Others, however, seem pretty closely attached to the convention that the best five players start. I still have not seen a convincing logical argument as to why that is in fact a better basketball strategy. Yes, that is the convention, but there is a long list of other conventions that proved to be flawed or outdated. Here’s a few:
Footbinding
Taking a football snap from under center (still used, but not mandatory anymore)
The two-handed set-shot
Corsets
Arranged marriages
The wishbone in football
Not substituting defensive backs in third and long (football again)
I’m sure others are analogous.
i will believe it when i see it. this is nate flexing.
by Ben Golliver on Oct 15, 2009 4:32 PM PDT reply actions 1 recs
hope you're right...
How did you guys win that?
"We scored enough points. We scored 107, they scored 105.
-Nate McMillan Postgame, 3/4/2009
Let's hope he doesn't
flex so hard he strains muscles in his brain. Because while last year watching the starting line up mostly be 3-5 or 2-5 offensively and at the best 4-5 offensively this year will not be so fun.
If Nate really can’t figure out how to balance both units by not taking his starters out at a pre-decided time I will be sad.
yeah
more often than not, we started the first 8 minutes of the game in a (often sizeable) hole on the scoreboard. Great, so he wants defense to start the game, but that doesn’t do you much good if you struggle to score.
How did you guys win that?
"We scored enough points. We scored 107, they scored 105.
-Nate McMillan Postgame, 3/4/2009
keep in mind also
that Quick has been saying for weeks “don’t be surprised if Nate keeps Blake as the starter” so either Jason “knew something” or Nate is using the media to send a message
To who, and for what purpose is open to debate…but I wonder if McMillian called Andre and Greg up to the front of the plane on the ride down to Salt Lake? That “1st class” cabinet meeting that Roy had with Nate last weekend sure did wonders for Brandon’s role in the offense…
When reached 39 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
Quick again on 95.5
Recapping:
—Nate has told the players Sunday’s game is going to be as close to “real game minutes and rotations” as we’ll see in the preseason
—Nate will start Blake,Roy,Batum,LMA,Przybilla on Sunday
—Ergo, Nate is LEANING towards making this his opening day lineup come October 27
—Nate wants balance on both units, rather than best 5 on one unit, since it makes it hard to get all these guys touches
—Andre/Oden become the focal points of the 2nd unit
—Nate likes Martell and Oden in the same lineup
—Nate: “Your best 5 players aren’t necessarily your starting unit”
—It’s all going to come down to whether guys (Miller & Oden specifically) can swallow their egos and do what’s best for the team
—Nate sees the startng line (Oct 27) coming up and doesn’t like where this team is at. Not clicking, defense is bad. Nate wants a comfort level to start the season.
How did you guys win that?
"We scored enough points. We scored 107, they scored 105.
-Nate McMillan Postgame, 3/4/2009
one more from Quick
Travis is in danger of losing his spot in the rotation to Juwan Howard, who has been playing very well all preseason. Howard is going to get the backup 4 minutes on Sunday, with Outlaw playing some at the ‘3’ due to Rudy’s resting.
How did you guys win that?
"We scored enough points. We scored 107, they scored 105.
-Nate McMillan Postgame, 3/4/2009
at last, some good news
KP needs to pull the trigger on an Outlaw trade the day the Euro-holds come off the cap. This is a relationship that has been propped up for ’way too long
When reached 39 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
I totally agree with Nate
First of all, not starting doesn’t mean not getting starters minutes. There’s no way Oden and Miller aren’t on the court 30 plus minutes a game. The Spurs did that with Ginobli for a long time.
Second if the R.A.M.B.O. unit starts that gives us a bench of Blake, Fernandez, Webster, Outlaw, and Pryzbilla. Horrible line-up. Four jump shooters with no post presence and no one who can get into the lane to create.
There should be three things on the court at all times:
1. A creator, someone who can run the pick and roll and break people down off the dribble. (Roy, Miller)
2. An offensive post presence. (Oden, Aldridge)
3. A three point shooter to stretch the D. (Blake, Fernandez, Webster)
A starting line-up of Blake, Roy, Batum, Aldridge, and Pryz gives us all three as well as pretty solid D. (1. – Roy, 2 – Aldridge, 3 – Blake)
The second unit of Miller, Fernandez, Webster, Outlaw (I’d rather see Howard here and ship Outlaw out on a barge), and Oden would also have all three components. (1 – Miller, 2 – Oden, 3 – Fernandez/Webster)
With Miller and Oden both playing starters minutes there will be plenty of cross-over with Roy and Aldridge and we have a strong team on the court at all times. This plan also maximizes everyones abilities, for example, letting Blake play off Roy, or letting Roy and Miller be the primary ball handlers the majority of time they are on the court, or letting Oden and Aldridge be the primary post threats the majority of time they are on the court. All good things.
For those who say Nate would be going back on his word by not letting the players who’ve earned it start, Nate has said over and over that it is about fit and having 2 strong units. I don’t ever remember him saying that the best 5 players will start. He has repeatedly put an emphasis on who finishes the game not who starts it. The best players will play the most minutes, I have no doubt. But whether they are there for the opening tip or come in 5 minutes later shouldn’t matter.
"I'm polymerized tree sap and you're an inorganic adhesive, so whatever verbal projectile you launch in my direction is reflected off of me, returns to its original projectory and adheres to you." - Sheldon
Look
there is a reason the best players start for your team and play the most minutes, IT WINS GAMES! If this happens, and I still will believe it win I see it, Nate will lose alot in my mind, (for whats that worth).
Miller is OBVIOUSLY better than Blake, individually and for the team.
Oden is OBVIOUSLY better than Blake, individually and for the team.
Nate needs to stop blaming the players and start looking at himself and his other coahces who haven’t been able to adapt the Blazers offensive and defensive schemes. Oden is at least on par with Joel defensively and is already lightyears ahead of Joel offensively. There is a reasonable expectation that a NBA caliber coaching staff should be able to mold him in a starting lineup that would increase its overall effectiveness on both ends, and the same could be said for Miller.
If the Blazers have to fall back on plan B, (it worked last year, so lets not get any better!) then that is a failure on the coaching staff in my opinion. Nate keeps saying over and over, “that starting lineup won 54 games last year.” But what he leaves out is, that starting lineup lost badly in the first round of the playoffs last year as well. Improvement is needed, and the easiest way to get that improvement is to add BETTER players to the rotation.
I can only hope that Ben was right, and this is just a motivational tactic by Nate.
Ben II Blazersedge.com || New to Blazers' Edge?
by usmcr3049 on Oct 15, 2009 6:12 PM PDT reply actions 2 recs
So the Spurs didn't win when Ginobli came off the bench?
What is the point of loading your starting lineup with post players when only one can have the ball in the post at a time, or two players most effective with the ball in their hands when only one can have the ball at a time. Oh, and by the way, it’s harder to get the ball into those post players and harder for your ball handlers to create because the defense is cheating since your starting lineup has no sharpshooters to keep them honest. If the best 5 don’t complement each other well as a unit, find one that does. Every unit needs complimentary players to promote the strengths of your best players. The best players do have to play the most minutes, but there is no reason to force players with redundant skills that don’t compliment each other onto the court at the same time just so they can all say they’re starters. Meanwhile your second unit can’t do anything except swing the ball around the perimiter and chuck three pointers. I’ll take two functional units over two dysfunctional ones anyday.
"I'm polymerized tree sap and you're an inorganic adhesive, so whatever verbal projectile you launch in my direction is reflected off of me, returns to its original projectory and adheres to you." - Sheldon
6th man is a different story.
Ginobli has started before, but PREFERS to come off the bench. If Miller wanted to come off the bench it wouldn’t be a problem. If Ginobli wanted to start he would.
by Nick Van Excellent on Oct 15, 2009 7:40 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
ok
if you are going to play the best players the most minutes, then they are going to have to learn to play together anyway, so just start them!
Look I posted before, as did many other people, that a rotation can work with the RAMBO starting lineup. So far Nate has given them 2 games and some practice time to see if it works as well as a lineup that played 82 games last season, that seems a bit much to ask. Give them time and Miller and Roy will work well together in a back court. Give them an offensive system beyond the highschool level and LMA and Oden can work well on the court together. Has everyone forgotten what was said when Oden was drafted before he got hurt? Oden and LMA were predicted to be the twin towers, perfectly suited to play together. Well they still are, even more so now that Oden has developed his offensive game and regained much of his athleticism. But now suddenly they can’t play on the court at the same time?
Last season Miller played with Iggy in Philly, who’s game while different from Roy’s, is not that far off. Roy is a very smart bball player, and can play with Miller, infact when Miller was signed one reason given was for him to take pressure off of Roy, take the ball out of his hands so Roy doesn’t get over worked all game. Is Nate just throwing all of that out of the window because the defense in one game against the Suns, who have consistantly had the top offense in the NBA over the last few years, was bad? It sounds like an over reaction from Nate, something I hate to see from coaches, as they cause more problems then they solve.
Manu comes off the bench in SA because they have no other offensive options on their bench, however the Blazers shouldn’t have that problem with Rudy, Travis and Webster coming off the bench. Travis is a one on one player, Webster is a slasher and a spot up shooter, and Rudy is a shooter and creater off the pick and role. Sure they all need to get better in different ways, but they all provide offensive off the bench, and its not like we are going to sub in Blake, Rudy, Webster, Outlaw, and Joel half way through the 1st qtr. There is a great post in the recommended fanposts about the Blazers rotation this year, in there many people have detailed great ideas for rotations that would keep plenty of offense on the court, one bad game where Rudy was missing for 1/2 of it is not enough to trash the idea.
Ben II Blazersedge.com || New to Blazers' Edge?
by usmcr3049 on Oct 15, 2009 9:37 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
There is no question...
…that Oden and LMA can play off each other very well as they have very different skill sets. Let me be clear, Oden and LMA are a great pair and I would like to see them on the court together frequently. However they are also the two best, and really the only offensive post presence on the team. If they start together that leaves a second unit with no offensive post presence. For that reason I’d like to see one of them on the court at all times which is tough to do if they both start.
Just because you and “many other people” posted something doesen’t make it valid. Remember, the vast majority of people in the world used to believe the earth was flat.
As far as the Philly team last year, their well reported weakness was a lack of three point shooting. They were a very atheletic team that lived on the fast break and couldn’t hit a three to save their lives. Andre Miller is a great point guard in some areas, but he is by no means complete. If he had a 3 point shot and was an above average defender there would not be a question about whether or not he should be starting. His weak 3 point percentage is a liability unless you put the ball in his hands and surround him with shooters, like he would be with Fernandez and Webster on the second unit as opposed to Roy and Batum on the first. He is still, however, the best point guard on the team.
I don’t think Iggy and Roy are that simmilar. Iggy has not had the ball in his hands running the offense the way Roy has, he did play off of Miller. Whether Roy can play off Miller that way is a moot point, I don’t want Roy to have to play off of Miller. Roy is exceptional with the ball in his hands, I don’t want them to take that away from him. Miller takes pressure off him as the only player who can run the pick and roll, and also takes pressure off Blake as the only true point guard on the team, but I don’t want him taking the ball away from our star player.
As far as the second unit with the R.A.M.B.O. starters, there are offensive players, but none who can really run that unit and their skills certainly don’t complement each other well. Blake can’t consistantly break people down off the dribble or run the pick and roll. Look at how he’s playing in preseason so far trying to prove that he can do what Miller can do. He has had his greatest success playing off of Roy, no question about it. Fernandez is a great shooter and a good passer but has suspect handles and can’t create for himself or others off of the dribble. Martell can take it to the hoop when he only has to go in a staight line, but he also hasn’t shown the ability to create his own shot or for others, and also has suspect handles. Outlaw can take two dribbles and pull up for a jumper or hit the corner 3, but other than that he’s relying on someone else to set him up. Pryzbilla’s offense is nill. I have visions of this lineup swinging the ball around the perimiter for 24 seconds until someone is forced to throw up a contested 3. That or someone is going to try to force something that is beyond their skillset out of nesessity. Either Way, yikes!
Manu Ginobli came off the bench for San Antonio because when Tony Parker wasn’t running the offense, they wanted Manu running it. Manu can break someone down off the dribble, Manu can create his own shot or create for others. Name someone else the Spurs have had that could do that over the last several years that wasn’t named Tony Parker. It’s the same with Miller and Roy, one of them should be running the offense at all times.
It really comes down to this, if you believe the best 5 players should start, then it should be Miller, Roy, Aldridge, Oden, and someone else in the starting lineup. Unfortunately that creates either defensive or 3 point shooting deficincies in that group. That lineup also creates serious problems in the second unit as stated above.
What Nate is saying is this:
Why not have lineups on the floor without serious defficiencies as much as posible. Why not have on the floor at all times a post presence, a 3 point shooter or two to stretch the D, and someone highly skilled in running the offense.
If you believe the best five should start, you’re entitled to that opinion.
I side with Nate on this one.
"I'm polymerized tree sap and you're an inorganic adhesive, so whatever verbal projectile you launch in my direction is reflected off of me, returns to its original projectory and adheres to you." - Sheldon
you can have everything you asked for
and still start the best 5 players. Nate can keep Oden or LMA on the court at all times if he wants, he can also keep Miller or Ron on the court at all times if he wants, that is not the issue at all. Nate claims it is because the defense was so bad vs the Suns well last night vs the Jazz the Blazers only scored 13 first qtr points while giving up 25, with basically last years starting lineup. Does that sound familiar, it should, because it happened alot last year.
Nate should be trying to improve on last year, instead of trying to keep everything the same, it is a typical NBA coach playing it safe to keep his job, which is something I never expected from Nate. The Blazers offense, while efficient, was not good enough last year because it relied on the team hitting mid range and long range jump shots. This year, with an added post presence in Oden the Blazers could dominate in points in the paint, a stat that is much more condusive to winning consistantly than mid range jumpers.
Yes we still need 3 point shooters, if that is the case then start Blake, but what is the case for starting Joel? There is none.
Ben II Blazersedge.com || New to Blazers' Edge?
by usmcr3049 on Oct 16, 2009 7:30 AM PDT up reply actions 2 recs
I agree...
…that the most curious of those left out of this starting line up is Greg. But again if it’s balance on both units that nate is after then he needs a post presence off the bench. As I said above, I do want to see Greg and LaMarcus on the floor together frequently.
To say the team will be the same as last year is not even close to being correct. Starting or not, Miller and Oden will be playing starters minutes. That’s adding 30 plus minutes of a point guard who is much better than the best we had last year, and increasing Oden’s minutes as well. Meanwhile, Blake and Joel’s minutes will go down significantly and the likes of Sergio will be nowhere in sight.
Last years jump shooting mode was a cause for concern, that can only get better with more talented offensive players playing more minutes, starting or otherwise.
"I'm polymerized tree sap and you're an inorganic adhesive, so whatever verbal projectile you launch in my direction is reflected off of me, returns to its original projectory and adheres to you." - Sheldon
I have visions of this lineup swinging the ball around the perimiter for 24 seconds until someone is forced to throw up a contested 3
I have visions of Webster and Rudy curling off screens and shooting rhythm jump shots in this lineup, with Blake feeding them the ball
I’m just not sure if Nate has the same “vision” (Maybe they’re just running a “plain vanilla” offense in the preseason, like all the NFL teams do?)
When reached 39 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
Thats exactly...
…what usmcr3049 was talking about above. The way the team relied on the midrange jumper last year was not a good thing. Why would we put a unit on the floor that limits their offensive options to jumpshooting. Why not throw in some pick and roll players and a post threat while you’re at it. That is a luxury not a lot of teams have and something that our depth affords us. That way too you ensure there are plenty of touches for Roy, Miller, Aldridge, and Oden. Everyone else’s offense will fill in around those 4. If you start them all together, someone doesn’t get their touches and those who should be filling in the gaps become primary offensive options on the second unit.
"I'm polymerized tree sap and you're an inorganic adhesive, so whatever verbal projectile you launch in my direction is reflected off of me, returns to its original projectory and adheres to you." - Sheldon
The way the team relied on the midrange jumper last year was not a good thing.
The only players who “relied” on the midrange jumper last year were Roy, LMA, Outlaw and Frye. Martell and Rudy are kind of notorious for shooting either 3 pointers, or dunks
Exhibit A of the bench offense I’m proposing is Webster’s 24 point quarter against Utah, a few years back. Those plays are still in the book, and with two cutters it would be difficult to prevent both of them from getting off open looks
Is penetration and/or PnR the only way to score in the NBA? No, they just seem to be the “attack options” of choice for the last 10-15 years. But you don’t have to go that far back to find teams that made a living off of the screen and pop (Reggie Miller, Indy…Rip Hamilton, Detroit, etc)
When reached 39 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
This problem would easily be solved...
If the starting lineup consisted of:
Miller, Rudy, Batum, LA, and Oden…
then, we could have the second unit that is very comfortable with each other:
Blake, Roy, Martell, Travis, and Pryz…
Remember, total minutes <> who starts and who comes off the bench...
And our max salary guy should be confident enough to take one for the team…
I had to eat him...
Actually, I wanted to log in with my yahoo ID, and couldn’t figure out how to change it, so I made me a new one…
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
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
In Association With
Ball Don't Lie - NBA - Yahoo! Sport
- Days of NBA Lives: Wherein Roy Hibbert tap-dances to Maine
- Grizzlies Valentine’s Day cards are the key to love
- Kevin Love would like the NBA to take the MLB’s approach on All-Star games
- Kobe Bryant fires a few hilarious salvos at Jeremy Lin
- Brandon Jennings states the obvious regarding his 2014 free agency, everyone goes nuts
Certain photos copyright © 2012 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.
