Blazersedge: An SB Nation Community

Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Sports blogs for fans, by fans.
New Blog: World Soccer Digest for Soccer Fans!

Starting Blake and Pryz? WHAT?!


      So, Nate tells his players that they have to earn the starting spots. SO Oden and Miller go out and outplay Steve and Joel hands down. Now after giving the RAMBO lineup a whole 2 games to figure each other out, Nate throws in the towel and says he is starting last years five opening night which is still 2 weeks away. Most concerning Nate states this is about defense. Steve Blake and defense? Only Sergio makes THAT look like a fact.

       Now Nate has made a significant issue for the rest of the season. When will you start Oden?  Isn't Andre a LOT better than Blake? Does anyone remember how often last years lineup fell flat on its face at the start of games?

        IF Andre and Roy need to work out the chemistry isn't on Nate to figure out an offensive scheme that keeps them on the court together?  What message are you giving Oden NOW!? Lets face it, last years starting five was very close in winning percentage as the starters with Oden in the lineup. Yes we won 54 games and we also got shut down in round 1 because we had zero offense when the Rockets doubled Roy and Aldridge.

         I, for one do not believe a lineup with Joel and Blake starting is going to win ANY playoff series and is therefore pointless.

O.R.

10 recs  |  Comment 191 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Display:

Agreed

This preseason was as much about getting Adre and Roy comfortable as it was about seeing what ODEN could bring and how much his conditioning would pay off. ODEN has proved himself so far and outplayed almost everyone else, maybe besides Adre and he stated bluntly he wanted to start. I think this will affect him more than Nate realizes and that Nate is simply going to what he thinks will work without sticking with and giving these guys some room to grow. In the end this will hurt.

by Lito on Oct 15, 2009 4:55 PM PDT reply actions   0 recs

Absolutely agreed

a virtually flawless post. McMillan = Anti-Phil Jackson. He is the worst psychological motivator, hot hand recognizer and substitution pattern coach I have ever seen. He may be an incredible young player trainer and good in time outs but he is plain horrible in player management. I’m scared to death this will trigger an Oden regression or worse his desire to play on a team that has a coach with an IQ over 90.

"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 5:33 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

+1

Bedge or go home.

by Ojala John on Oct 15, 2009 5:35 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

GREEN!

+2

Chuck Norris' tears cure cancer. Too bad he has never cried.

by FiveOhThree-RipCity!! on Oct 15, 2009 6:14 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

"If you want rings in the NBA, roll . . . "

       How about the Duncan-Parker Spurs with Manu coming
off the bench ? I disagree with your premise even though I
am the biggest GO fan around. I think he will be a starter, but
fans have short memories. Pryz had some unbelieveable rebounding/
defensive games last year, in addition to becoming a better finisher and
playing the tough guy to a T. GO’s MO has been his humble, team 1st
mantra since HS and even though I think he will play more minutes than
Joel per game, it’s only a matter of time. . .

     GO BLAZERS !! Pre season is a warm up &
                                                                                       COINCAST SUCKS !!!!!

It's GO time !

by walkoff41 on Oct 15, 2009 10:07 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Ginobli wants to come off the bench.

It’s his preference. He’s also started 270 games in his career, (Including 38 playoff games) so it’s not like it doesn’t work when he starts.

by Nick Van Excellent on Oct 15, 2009 11:07 PM PDT up reply actions   1 recs

Exactly!

Everyone forgets Ginobli WANTS to come off the bench. Oden has made it clear both with his mouth and with his game, that he wants to start. This isn’t quantum physics, start the man!

"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 18, 2009 2:45 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I'm not against GO starting, just Miller !

      GO’s skills overlap Joel’s, except for experience and
staying out of Foul Trouble.
 
       IT’S GO GO GO TIME !!!!!!!

It's GO time !

by walkoff41 on Oct 21, 2009 2:38 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Also 100% agreed!

I really can’t understand his thinking, but it just seems more personal than strategic. I just don’t get it. Yeah, our line-up was effective last year. It got us 54 wins, but it also got as a 1st round exit. Only caring about keeping Roy and Aldridge happy with the ball in their hands will not win us a championship. Guaranteed. The playoffs are a different game than the regular season as shown last year. We definitely need Oden, amongst others. Teams will concentrate on our 2 man team and then we’ll be out. Honestly, Roy and Aldridge should be able to work out playing with Oden and Miller anyway if they are really championship type stars. I believe they are, especially Roy, so it’s time for Nate to make that chemistry play out, which will take the regular season.

by Coastie07 on Oct 16, 2009 11:47 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Starting Line-up: Miller and Oden for sure!!!

I don’t know why Nate is tripping all over this… I mean, Coach Mac has been wanting to bring in solid veterans to compete and help mature and improve this team. The biggest Vet he brought in now is getting jerked around? Andre Miller is going to be very important for Portland, if not for any other reason, because his skills at drive and dish to the big man will really get our #1 Overall Pick Greg Oden involved in the offense. Here is my message to Nate: “Hey dude, you got a young post with unlimited potential who needs a PG who will penetrarate and draw defenders away from the big guy… and you got a proven winner veteran PG with elite BBIQ, surround B.Roy with the best players possible so start them both!”

I would also like to see Nicolas Batum continuing to be the starter at SF… not because he has outplayed Martell (Martell is clearly looking better all-around), but because with SOOOOO much offense already in the starting line-up with Roy, Aldridge, Oden and Andre Miller, having Batum’s Defensive Ace mentality and 20-year old energy out on the court to start each game on a mission to press and fatigue opponents top wing threats. I would bet that Martell will see more minutes than Batum, though.

by Portland Dynasty on Oct 17, 2009 7:50 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Yes. Agreed wholeheartedly, and the only reason I didn't make my own fanpost about this was because I knew someone else would.

I hate, hate this decision if it does come to fruition. However, as Ben has pointed out on the front page in the game day thread, this may be a motivating factor to get people to play more focused defense. If that is the case I don’t like it, mainly because of Greg. The guy worked his tail off on the off season to get faster, lighter, better, and more of a REAL center. He has always heard Nate preach " you earn your minutes. " This decision would fly in the face of that motto, as Greg has clearly established himself as the best center.

by dario argento on Oct 15, 2009 5:02 PM PDT reply actions   3 recs

I’ll just be disappointed that our three, G.O., LMA, & Roy, won’t be together on the floor most of the time.

That is the only axe I have to grind. PG & SF are a bit more unclear (whoever defends the best should start), but those three guys are our long haul, lockdown, absolutely keep core. I want them to always play together so they can get their games together, even if it is as difficult as a 1000 piece puzzle is to Paris Hilton.

*Unless KP has a secret plan that makes this statement incorrect.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><>

by staylost on Oct 15, 2009 5:21 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I was mostly playing

I don’t give a crap about the preseason and won’t sweat the lineup until I see it on opening night. Nate’s obviously seen them play a lot more than any of us. I honestly think he’s just looking for some consistency and to develop a rhythm before the season starts.

by tominhawaii on Oct 15, 2009 5:41 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

How can a brand new starting line-up--including Miller & GO--develop a rhythm so quickly

My take is that Nate is panicking. Ultimately, for the Blazers to get to the next level—winning playoff series—they must become less Roy-centric. Now is the time to start making that transition—not half-way into a playoff series.

Sorry, but I don’t like this at all—pre-season or no. I feel like Nate is caving here—possibly in part to Roy’s wishes.

Hopefully, I’m wrong, of course. I’d like to think that Nate knows what he’s doing and has the cajones to make necessary changes even when they don’t immediately click.

"We don't back down to nobody." --Joel Przybilla

by hurryup09 on Oct 15, 2009 5:54 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Nate is not panicking

He wants the team to play like they did at the end of last year, not like they’ve been playing.

I’m sure if Roy had any say, he’d probably want Oden to start, so I don’t think this is on Roy’s wishes. It might be to get Roy going. They got 82 games to become less Roy-centric. The Blazers can win being Roy-centric but they’ll have a lot harder time winning if he’s still in a funk at the start of the season.

They also have 82 games to work Miller and Oden into the starting unit. I think forcing it would be more of a panic move than go with the line up that has shown it can win together.

by tominhawaii on Oct 15, 2009 6:15 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

totally agree...
They also have 82 games to work Miller and Oden into the starting unit. I think forcing it would be more of a panic move than go with the line up that has shown it can win together.

Easing those guys into the starting lineup is absolutely the right call. The team isn’t ready as of now for multiple reasons, the largest of all being the fact that a Blake/Rudy/Webster/Outlaw/Pryz 2nd unit would not work until somebody steps up and show they can create some offense for themselves and others…

by Rudiculous on Oct 16, 2009 12:42 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

That "Second Unit" will have less than 15 minutes on the floor together for the entire season

We should always have one of our big three in the game and that kills this second unit garbage. This isn’t hockey, this is about matchups. That’s why you put your best players on the floor to start (because that’s what the other team is doing) and you sub in and out to create or react to matchup issues.

That second unit as a whole would be awful to watch.

by The_Lance on Oct 16, 2009 11:59 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Right

NBA teams don’t sub out their entire starting line-up wholesale and put in a second 5-man unit. This idea that the Blazers’ “2nd unit” must be the equal of the first in every respect is nonsense. No NBA team plays that way. Teams sub out players as starters pick up fouls, show fatigue, or get beat due to unfavorable matchups.

"We don't back down to nobody." --Joel Przybilla

by hurryup09 on Oct 16, 2009 12:35 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I played HS on a team that platooned

It sucked. Then in the playoffs, our coach thought he’d get cute and switch up the teams. Needless to say, we crumbled because nobody had played together all year.

Everybody on the team hated the platoon idea, except maybe those who wouldn’t have played much without it.

Witty Unpredictable Talent and Natural Game

by iDea on Oct 16, 2009 12:57 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

The last NBA head coach who ran a true platoon, Hubie Brown, won the ...

2003-2004 NBA Coach of the Year Award with the Memphis Grizzlies. Now, the main problem at first wasn’t Brown’s platoon based rotations, but rather that Pau Gasol was still inexperienced, relatively inefficient on offense, and soft on defense. It didn’t help matters that Bonzi Wells and Jason Williams were knuckleheads; yet, that impending crisis only festered under the radar that year and didn’t rear its ugly head until the following season when those two loudmouth hotshots then clashed with Hubie’s son and lead assistant coach, Brendan Brown, over playing time and other utterly selfish bullcrap.

Stupid people have stupid ideas.

by AK1984 on Oct 18, 2009 8:12 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

dude, nate sucks

did you see the end of the season? they struggled to score 85 a game in the playoffs. nate has no offense, so he better play miller.

by shallwemaui on Oct 21, 2009 12:24 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I think Nate's panicking a bit

We haven’t looked all that hot as a unit and it seems like he’s panicking a bit. Reverting back to what he knows rather than what’s possible. I have a feeling we’ll rely on Roy even more when the season starts.

Weird.

Witty Unpredictable Talent and Natural Game

by iDea on Oct 15, 2009 6:24 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

also

I don’t care if Miller comes off the bench.

Oden needs to start. ODEN NEEDS TO START.

For the future

Witty Unpredictable Talent and Natural Game

by iDea on Oct 15, 2009 6:27 PM PDT up reply actions   1 recs

Well, that's a given

"We don't back down to nobody." --Joel Przybilla

by hurryup09 on Oct 15, 2009 6:31 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Seriously

Right now Miller is in the game with Bayless and Howard. Why are people freaking out about the preseason?

by tominhawaii on Oct 15, 2009 6:34 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

You haven't been paying attention, Tom

Nate said some time ago that, because the Jazz game was a back-to-back, that he’d rest guys and field a hodge-podge line-up. Same for the final preseason game. But he’s also stated that the starting line-up for the later preseason games (with the exception of the last one) would be the line-up he’d start the season with.

Nate’s stated plan was to use the first few preseason games to experiment with different starting units, then make his decision in time to allow the opening night unit to gell.

That decision has now been made, and folks are questioning it—particularly because it so clearly contradicts Nate’s earlier statements about rewarding starting slots to the guys who played best.

"We don't back down to nobody." --Joel Przybilla

by hurryup09 on Oct 16, 2009 12:47 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I wonder if he will change his mind about the last game of preseason

if we don’t start clicking together better in the preceding two games?

by BlazerFanSince1970 on Oct 16, 2009 7:38 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Yeah, that will be interesting to see

But I think Nate’s view is that he has to commit now for better or for worse. Otherwise the season will open and the Blazers won’t have a starting 5 that’s familiar with each other—even if that’s the same group that finished the season.

Equally important, he must feel that the reserves need time to gell as a group. Not that they’ll actually be substituted en mass. That’s been one fallacy in this whole process—the idea that there are actually two separate 5-man units that will play with each other but not with the other players. In reality, NBA teams—including the Blazers—substitute piecemeal (in response to foul trouble, for one thing).

"We don't back down to nobody." --Joel Przybilla

by hurryup09 on Oct 16, 2009 9:14 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

the idea that there are actually two separate 5-man units that will play with each other but not with the other players.

Yeah, my comment the other day was that the “black” team and the “white” team may be a practice time reality, but they’re a regular season urban legend

When reached 39 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!

by two4larue on Oct 16, 2009 9:32 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Yeah, same talk about 5-man substitutions last year.

It doesn’t happen at all in the regular season. In fact, 5 reserves were rarely on the floor together last season as Nate tried to keep Brandon or LMA on the floor at all times.

I think the top priority of the rotation this year will be to keep Brandon or Miller on the floor at all times, but he will also try to keep LMA or Brandon on the floor again as well.

Brandon’s playing pattern is pretty easy to predict. He normally goes to the bench to rest with about 2 minutes left in the 1st and 3rd quarters, and then comes back with 8 minutes left in the 2nd and 4th quarters. That gives him about 6 minute rests plus the break between quarters.

A couple plausible scenarios for Miller’s playing pattern to keep him and Roy always in the game might be:

A) If Miller starts he might play 6 minutes, rest 4 minutes, come back and play 6 minutes while Brandon goes out, rest 4 minutes, and then play 4 minutes to finish the half and game. That would give him about 28 minutes. Or he could skip all or part of the second rest to get as much as 32 minutes a game.

B) If Blake starts, then Miller could come in at the 6 minute mark and play 10 minutes until Brandon comes back with 8 minutes to go in the 2nd and 4th quarters. Then rest 4 minutes and play the last 4 minutes. That would give him 28 minute a game.

Key point – Regardless of whether Miller starts or not, he and Brandon will play together for at least 16 minutes if Miller plays at least 28 minutes. So they must learn to play together effectively. It’s not just about starting. More importantly, it’s about finishing. If Miller and Roy can’t play together well, Miller can’t be on the floor at the end of games. I’m more concerned about Miller finishing than starting.

by BlazerFanSince1970 on Oct 17, 2009 2:43 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I think Roy & Miller will figure out how to play together

For one thing, remember how, in the second half, Roy used to get a breather alongside Jarrett Jack? Roy would move to the weak side and let Jack penetrate & draw fouls. Last year, there was no way for Roy to take a breather without actually leaving the court. But Miller will be able to fill that Jack role.

Even more importantly, though: remember how the team went to hell last season whenever Roy & Blake both went to the bench? Occasionally, Sergio would have a strong stint. But you always had to hold your breath. Now, barring injury, there will never be that on-court leadership vaccum. Roy, Miller, Blake, or some combo of the three will always be on the floor at any given time.

"We don't back down to nobody." --Joel Przybilla

by hurryup09 on Oct 17, 2009 7:54 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I think they will too,

but they are obviously not there yet. In my mind it’s just a matter of how long it will take, and how well they can learn to manage those last 3-4 minutes of the game together. There’s just no need to rush this. In one interview Nate said it wouldn’t happen in preseason and it could take several months (or words to that effect). Team success is more important than Miller’s ego. We need to get the entire team in a winning rhythm as soon as possible, and then we will have plenty of time to get the Miller/Roy backcourt executing efficiently.

by BlazerFanSince1970 on Oct 18, 2009 1:05 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Nothing new there.

Chuck Norris' tears cure cancer. Too bad he has never cried.

by FiveOhThree-RipCity!! on Oct 16, 2009 10:13 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Nate is not a risk taker

He is stubborn and inflexible. This news doesn’t surprise me, but it’s disappointing to hear it.

If this is true, Miller never got a chance to fit in with the starting group. I was afraid McMillan would be incapable of developing an offensive system that would maximize Miller’s talents. I haven’t heard anything about pushing the ball up the floor for easy buckets with a defensive rebounding monster in Oden, the fastest PF in LMA, and excellent finishers like Batum, Webster, and Roy.

I feel bad for Miller and Oden, they earned their starting spots and deserve a chance to gel together with the starting unit. Somehow, people already made up their minds that Miller and Oden couldn’t fit in the starting five, but I guess McMillan made sure we won’t find out.

"I'm at the thingamajig talking the yakety-yak" - Kenny Smith

by blzrfan on Oct 15, 2009 5:08 PM PDT reply actions   0 recs

Other than Quick thinking Nate does, who else really wants Przybilla in the starting spot over Oden?

*Unless KP has a secret plan that makes this statement incorrect.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><>

by staylost on Oct 15, 2009 5:15 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Its hard to understand why he doesn't want to start Oden

I can understand not starting Miller over Blake for reasons of fit, but Oden actually fits well with Roy and Aldridge. Oden has been the Blazer’s best player in preseason, he is clearly an important part of the Blazer’s long-term plans, and there isn’t much Przybilla can do that Oden can’t do better. McMillian ought to be giving Oden as much time with Roy and Aldridge as possible so that they can develop chemistry. Not starting Oden at this point just doean’t make any sense.

by trk on Oct 15, 2009 5:26 PM PDT up reply actions   1 recs

Rec'd

A much more measured version of what I think of this situation. For the life of me, I just don’t understand what Nate’s trying to do here.

I hate Comcast.

by blazeraddict on Oct 15, 2009 5:36 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I can't even understand the Miller part

If Roy can’t figure out how to play with another playmaker, how good is he? Jordan figured out how to play with another playmaking wing and they were unstoppable. Jordan was still the center of the offense but Pippen only made him that much better. The more time they spend together working on their game, the better the Blazers become.

by The_Lance on Oct 16, 2009 12:05 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

My Guess

Is that Nate is making a sacrificial lamb out of Oden so as to appease Andre. It could be a passive aggressive way to say to Dre that, “See, I’m not singling just you out.” If this is the case, I do find it a bit of a shame as Oden has clearly flourished.

by Stryder9 on Oct 15, 2009 5:55 PM PDT reply actions   0 recs

This is what bothers me about that approach

Oden has a history of struggling with his mindset when his game falters. He had a trying season, between injuries and criticism, and I think “rewarding” the obvious strides and growth he made in the off-season with this is a terrible move. Nate knows these guys better than any of us, but from the outside looking in, I don’t see the sense in this

I hate Comcast.

by blazeraddict on Oct 15, 2009 6:58 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Ego management?

If Miller is not starting it may be bad – at least he won’t be the only great player not starting he will be on the bench with the number one pick.

Pryz and Blake will have been shown the full confidence of the coach so when the inevitable happens their feathers will be smoother.

I have faith in Nate and feel he is not the type of Sarge that gets shot in the back by his own troops. However, he may have a few guys go AWOL before the end of the year.

by Jacksonville on Oct 15, 2009 5:56 PM PDT reply actions   0 recs

Well I disagree.

Nate had Roy, Blake, Batum, Alridge, and Przybilla for the lineup in the latter half of the year and we did just fine. I think this should be the lineup for the beginning of the year. Miller would be great to help out the 2nd unit, as would Webster. Oden would be much better if he started later on in the game…

by lawalteral14 on Oct 15, 2009 6:06 PM PDT reply actions   0 recs

"Just fine" is not good enough.

The team is supposed to take the next step not repeat what they did last year.

There is absolutely no reason to start Joel over Oden. Not only can Oden do everything Joel does and some things better, but he’s been the best player on the team this preseason. Oden has played great and shown more effort on the court than anyone not named Webster. He’s played without fouling or getting winded, there’s no reason to not start him.

As for Blake, he’s played bad. Really bad. Andre is earning that spot. For all the “fit” talk that goes on with the Blake vs. Andre debates Blake has not played well or help Roy any more than Andre. Andre is a willing passer who got Roy some nice shots and layups, it was Roy who was failing to execute. Roy even had a nice play with Miller when Roy was the playmaker.

The honest truth is that Andre and Oden have both more than earned their spots. Roy’s slump is on him an no one else. If Roy is the super star we know he is then he will pick it up once the season starts regardless of who he’s playing alongside in the back court. If Nate starts Blake and Przy that is sending the wrong message when it’s always been you earn your spot on camp and preseason. Nate is starting to look far too stubborn for his own and this team’s good. If Greg and Andre are not starting by the opener then Nate needs to be smacked upside the head.

Blake will pick up his play I have no doubt, but Andre deserves the spot come season opener.

by Bskey on Oct 15, 2009 6:38 PM PDT up reply actions   1 recs

Who cares

who starts?? If Oden plays well during the season he’ll play. It seems blazer fans think Oden is a top 5 center or something when he’s not even close.

by BBG on Oct 15, 2009 8:30 PM PDT reply actions   1 recs

I care who starts

Do you know that the team had a habit of starting very slow last season? So, I care who starts. You should too.

Blazer Fan

by leeroyjenkins on Oct 16, 2009 6:55 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

actually,

can you name 5 centers that are objectively better, and not just out of position PF’s? After all, if it doesn’t count when he beasts on out of position PF’s, then they should not count against him in a positional ranking. On a per minute basis, especially with his D and rebounding, I’d say very few are better right now.

Howard
Duncan
Oneal
Maybe Gasol.
Ming when healthy?

And when Yao comes back, Shaq will be done.
Al Jefferson (a true PF) has a great post game and rebounds well, but he provides little defense and he’s not a shot blocking/altering presence.
Stoudamire is a PF who cannot be bothered with peasants work like D
Bynum is OK, nice offense, wouldn’t put him above Greg until he is a presence on both ends of the floor.
Nene is a PF, and Greg should surpass him this year.

etc etc.

Yeah, I wouldn’t be surprised if Greg was a top 5 center right now and actually that’s what Hollenger projects.

Come on you gotta listen unto me,
lay off that whiskey and let that cocaine be. ~Johnny Cash

by HurraKane212 on Oct 16, 2009 6:57 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

And why he's going to be an All-star.

You can measure skill and talent with your eyes, but productivity is shown through statistics.

by austinpwnz on Oct 16, 2009 2:14 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I would like to start by saying that I think that GO is a Top 5 Center in the game because right now there is definitely a shortage of quality centers in the league. Howard is the unanimous number 1, and Yao, prior to his injury was 2. Everything else is debatable at this point. But you go on to discredit Bynum for his lack of D, when he averaged more blocks (1.8) last year than GO (1.13) while only playing 8 more minutes a game. And Hollinger does think GO will be the fifth best center in the game (which I agree with), but you fail to mention that Hollinger has Jefferson 2 and Bynum 3.

by LakerFANtilDeath on Oct 17, 2009 8:52 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Blocks are not defense

they are an element of defense. Yeah, Bynum isn’t a game changer of D, Oden is.

Hollinger rates by PER, which doesn’t really take D into account. Also, Jefferson is one of the aforementioned out of position PF’s.

I didn’t say Bynum sucks, I said he didn’t bring the D as well as the O, like Greg and his Great D and developing O. So I couldn’t put Bynum ABOVE Greg, both need to work on half their game.

Come on you gotta listen unto me,
lay off that whiskey and let that cocaine be. ~Johnny Cash

by HurraKane212 on Oct 17, 2009 4:47 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Bynum and Oden are neck-and-neck this pre-season. Advantage to Bynum by a hair...

"A bizarre and extremely rare hybrid Blazer/Laker fan, Timbo has always struggled to contain the Beast Within, like Dr. Jekyll, Bruce Banner, or Ted Kennedy." — Miled Animal

by timbo on Oct 17, 2009 5:57 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Bynum has no hair. Only hair fractures.

"I think he can still play" - Kevin Pritchard on Juwan Howard

by Norsktroll on Oct 17, 2009 6:34 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I am an Oden homer

But as of now, Bynum has just shown a lot more. By what he has done thus far, he has to be ranked above Oden if one is making a meaningless list of big men.

I believe Oden will do very well this season, though, and remind people why we knew who he was since he was in 8th grade.

Morty

by Mortimer on Oct 18, 2009 1:05 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Agreed--Bynum has shown more

But, based on the glimpses we’ve seen this preseason, GO is ready to put Bynum in his rear view mirror. Nene is another matter. He showed last season what he can do when he’s healthy, and it’s impressive. The guy is very athletic & versatile for his size. (If he’s a power forward, he’s a pretty dang big one.)

I think that, for the moment, Nene is the class of the West at the center position. But GO shows the potential to surpass ALL these guys, in my opinion—even the Beast of the East, Dwight Howard.

"We don't back down to nobody." --Joel Przybilla

by hurryup09 on Oct 18, 2009 9:25 AM PDT up reply actions   1 recs

As much as I love Greg

have you seen what Bynum is doing this preseason? He is playing just as good as Greg if not better so far.

by usmcr3049 on Oct 21, 2009 12:06 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I agree about how Al Jefferson is a glorified Zach Randolph without all the off-court junk, ...

but you’re doing a disservice to Nenê. At 6’11" and 250 lbs., Nenê’s a true center with his size and strength. Last season, Nenê had an exceptional 64.5% TS%, had a 67.5% FG% on close-range shots — which comprised 70% of his overall field-goal attempts — and was a proficient scorer off of the pick-and-roll led most often by Chauncey Billups. Nenê was also a solid, if not underappreciated low-post defender.

Stupid people have stupid ideas.

by AK1984 on Oct 18, 2009 8:31 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Nene was busting Oden

on baseline drives last year, drawing fouls at will

It will be interesting to “see” if Greg has learned something from their past encounters and can cut Nene off at the hoop without fouling. It will be important for “whoever” is playing alongside Greg to beat Martin and Anderson to weak side rebounds.

I wouldn’t mind seeing Oden and Przy to get some time together on the court, tonight and Tuesday. Preseason is a good time to break out that “twin towers” frontcourt (especially with LMA out) and give the Nugs and the Jazz something “else” to think about, heading into the NW division championship season

When reached 39 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!

by two4larue on Oct 18, 2009 3:04 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Yes, Nene will be a great test for GO

Last season Nene proved that when he’s healthy, he’s a force. If GO holds his own tonight, that’ll be a great sign.

But like you said, GO will need help on the boards. It’ll do no good for GO to block out Nene if the Blazer forwards—and even guards—don’t block out the other guys. Martin, Birdman, ’Melo, Billups—those guys ALL get after it on the boards.

"We don't back down to nobody." --Joel Przybilla

by hurryup09 on Oct 18, 2009 4:38 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Greg Oden and Joel Przybilla should never be on the court at the same time, since ...

they’re both true pivotmen. Now, if Kevin Pritchard could somehow manage to swing a trade whereby LaMarcus Aldridge is moved for a 7-footer with an array of face-up skills such as Brook Lopez, then I’d happily employ a “Twin Towers” frontline featuring Oden at center.

Stupid people have stupid ideas.

by AK1984 on Oct 18, 2009 8:30 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Oden's got skills

and never is a long time

as much as I “never” want to see Greg float away from the basket and shoot face-up jumpers, he has that shot in his arsenal and it could be put to good use if he was in the game alongside Joel, for short minutes, each half

and that’s a better option than Juwan Howard, says I

Lopez will stay in NJ, and LMA will resign with Portland. But far be it for me to squash your buzz

When reached 39 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!

by two4larue on Oct 18, 2009 9:28 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Have you forgotten last season's glorious victory over the Celtics?

In that game, Nate countered the Garnett / Perkins / Big Baby bully front line with GO / Przy, and the Celtics never recovered. The topper came when GO dumped Ray Allen into the seats like a sack of potatoes. Garnett raged, but GO all but yawned in response. The bullies had become the bullied.

"We don't back down to nobody." --Joel Przybilla

by hurryup09 on Oct 19, 2009 3:13 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Words to eat crow by...

“not even close”???

Clearly you haven’t been paying attention…

This year, Greg will:
- have more than 50 double-doubles
- average 15/11 or so, with 2-3 blocks,
- win the Most Improved Player award
- be on the All-Star team
- lead us to a first round playoff victory…

And clearly be rated among the top 5 centers in the NBA.

by Visionary2 on Oct 16, 2009 8:07 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I would take 2 of those 5

So long as it included the last one

by MadBlaze on Oct 18, 2009 1:24 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

oden

will have to start, hes more of an offensive threat than pryz

by Yawnie on Oct 15, 2009 9:31 PM PDT reply actions   0 recs

I don't expect Nate to be coaching the blazers next year.

Truth never was or can be propagated by fire and sword - Albert Gallatin
my last.fm

by Zaron5551 on Oct 15, 2009 9:53 PM PDT reply actions   0 recs

Ding! Ding! Ding! We have a winner...

Who had “preseason” in the “first to call for Nate’s head” sweepstakes?
Dang it, I had “first two game losing streak”…

by Visionary2 on Oct 15, 2009 11:49 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

It's time.
On May 12, 2009, Van Gundy expressed his desire to eventually return to coaching on ESPN writer Bill Simmons’ podcast, stating he would even consider being an assistant coach.

by Nick Van Excellent on Oct 16, 2009 12:19 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

did JVG have any interviews, this summer?

Given the choice, I’d rather see PA dangle $$$ at Tom Thibodeau

When reached 39 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!

by two4larue on Oct 16, 2009 1:13 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

We are just trying to break our record of overcoming 10 point deficits

Which stands at 18. After all don’t they give out a trophy for that or free pony rides!

by FlyinSouth on Oct 15, 2009 10:07 PM PDT reply actions   0 recs

I'm OK with it...

And I’m not really surprised… Nate’s pretty predictable in his loyalty (some would say Sarge like, inflexible, traditional, lacking in imagination, but not me)….
.
I also think that the first unit will struggle, and all will clearly see the improvement when Dre, Rudy, and Greg enter the game, which will inevitably lead to changes.

Fortunately, this team is talented enough to win most of its early regular season game even with internal issues.

And this honestly makes sense: Dre needs some time to learn the players, Martell is basically brand new, and the team needs some time to adjust to Oden’s increased offensive skills. Let the 5 that are familiar with each other play together, at least for the first few weeks, while the other guys get used to each other.

I have no doubt that bringing in Greg, Dre, and Rudy against tired starters or less skilled subs will be great for our team..

So we continually fall behind by 10 in the first with last year’s starters… Big rallies and come from behind wins makes for much better TV than 20 point blowouts by the end of 3, like this team should produce…

by Visionary2 on Oct 15, 2009 11:44 PM PDT reply actions   0 recs

Holy shnikeys blazer fans....

If fans are getting this worked up over Oden and Miller not starting, we are in for a long season and a lot of BS here on the Bedge. Oden probably does deserve to start, and he will eventually. Likely sooner than later. I will eat my hat if Pryz starts more games than Oden this season(barring injury). This is about taking a cohesive unit into the regular season and developing chemistry rather than forcing 2 players into the starting lineup because said players are more talented than their counterparts. Miller will get more minutes than Blake, Oden will get more minutes than pryz. Does it really matter if Miller/Oden gets 30 minutes each as a starter, or as a reserve? They will still both get 30 minutes, regardless of who is in the game at tip off.

This is all about balancing units and playing players that mesh well with each other, not a game of satisfying egos by putting the most talented players in as starters. Joel has proven what he is capable of over several seasons, Oden has had 4 good preseason games against horrible frontcourts. Okur has been his toughest competition(3-10 shooting might I add). Isn’t it possible that Nate wants to make sure that Oden is able to maintain his current level of play before benching the reliable Pryzbilla, who also happens to have a good deal of chemistry with Roy/LMA/Batum/Blake. Settle down people, Nate isn’t stupid…

by Rudiculous on Oct 16, 2009 12:58 AM PDT reply actions   0 recs

I'm ambivalent

On one hand, I agree that folks seemed to be over-reacting a bit. The team was playing well last spring and trying to stick with the rotation from last spring may be the best way to get the team back to playing at that level. Over time Oden and Miller can be worked into the first unit if that appears to be the way to go.

On the other hand, I do think that Miller and Oden should be in the starting line-up. The Houston series showed that only having 2 1/2 scorers in the starting five makes it easy to double up on Roy and LMA. If the role players aren’t hitting from distance, the whole offense bogs down. Adding Miller and Oden to the starting line-up adds a more scoring and more play-making. I hope that Nate’s comments are a temporary measure and not a long-term strategy.

I also have to point out that Nate is being a bit of a hypocrite. He said guys need to earn their spots and yet he is making his decision based largely on fit. Oden and Miller have definitely “earned” the start.

by upper left corner on Oct 16, 2009 10:03 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

+ 1

       Exactly waht I’ve posted. Take a big DEEP breath folks, it’s
Pre-Season. We won 54 games last year without Martell, three
rookies playing significant minutes and GO in & out of the lineup.
GO & Miller will get their minutes and be a intregal part to our success
if they play hard and go with the flow ! TEAM CHEMISTRY !!!

It's GO time !

by walkoff41 on Oct 16, 2009 1:53 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Where´s the poll?

I think Nate took in the past most advantage of every talent he got. He made it with less talent (considering injuries and development). I think he can do it again and I won´t doubt until some results prove otherwise. Facts are stronger than the best of speculations.

And this is only the starting unit for the beginning of the regular season. The NBA regular season is long enough to make adjusments. And playing time means more than starting.

I like the “we win together” slogan, for players and for fans. It won´t be funny when every player asks for playing time, starting, touches, roll or whatever he thinks he deserves. It won´t be funny when fans take sides and start arguing about it. Yes, I know I´m a soft Euro.

I don´t understand why people use the last playoffs outcome against Nate. The Blazers gave the Rockets a run for their money in their first playoff appearance, with a very young team, with several players suffering injuries or aches and pains (I´ve heard of Roy, Rudy, Blake, Batum and, of course, Webster). Houston almost beat the Lakers. Without Yao! Houston simply surprised the Blazers in their first playoff game.

I think Blake and Priz are more valuable in the first unit with Roy, LA and Batum, if only because they have been playing together for a long time. And both could suffer playing in the second unit, specially Blake. On the other hand, Oden is used to play with the second unit, where Rudy and Miller can feed him in the low post. And Miller and Oden can have more touches in the second unit. And at the end of the game Nate will go with the best mix.

And that´s my message and I approve it.

by amlmart1 on Oct 16, 2009 4:45 AM PDT reply actions   2 recs

You are softish, Euro. But I like you.

<End sanity interlude. Resume calls for Nate’s head and general hysteria.>

by MiledAnimal on Oct 18, 2009 1:46 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

That guillotine reminds me of one of my favorite jokes

There once were a couple of criminals who were on death row and sentenced to be beheaded. One was fairly bright, the other guy was mentally “challenged” On the day that they were scheduled to be executed, they were led to the gallows and given the standard choices

“Do you want your head to be facing up, or facing down?”

“Facing up” replied the first prisoner (the bright one)

“Blindfold, or no blindfold?” asked the executioner

“No blindfold”

They put the prisoner in the stocks and pulled the lever on the guillotine. About halfway down, the blade stuck. (Now, there was a law that if this situation ever occurred, the condemned man was to go free, because he had already faced enough trauma and would likely lead a reformed life, afterwards.) So, the first prisoner staggered off the platform, his head still attached to his shoulders, and was permitted to leave on his own recognizance.

Meanwhile, the guillotine blade was repositioned for it’s next victim. (As I said earlier, the second prisoner had fewer “marbles” than the first, but he had been paying attention to the first man’s answers and thought he would try the same pattern.) So, when he was asked

“Do you want your head to be facing up, or facing down?”

He replied “facing up” just like the first prisoner had

“Blindfold, or no blindfold?”

“No blindfold” he answered, confidently.

So the executioner positioned the prisoner with his face upwards and his eyes uncovered and prepared to pull the lever. But in the moment before he could trigger the blade, the second prisoner cried out

“Wait! I think I can see what is wrong with the guillotine!”

When reached 39 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!

by two4larue on Oct 18, 2009 5:47 PM PDT up reply actions   1 recs

Excellent amlmart!

We took Houston to 6 games with Yao playing. The Lakers hand their hands totally full with Houston minus Yao. We had a damn successful season with a pack of young guys last year.

But now all these Johhny come lately fans(?) (and other types too) are jumping all over Nate because he’s not playing their favorite players, i.e., a new guy to the team who has yet failed to mesh, and Oden a guy who’s always been held to unrealistic expectations and maybe still is.

Although there isn’t any doubt in my mind that Oden will soon start, this team would excell this year playing the same rotation as Nate played late last season.

Wow, I’m shocked by all this garbage we’re hearing about how Nate has it all wrong. I’ve been critical of Nate in the past too (for not running enough) but this is absurd. i

Brandon Roy just destroyed everything in his path. There's your rational analysis -- Dave

Also: COMCAST SUCKS!

by TwoDeep on Oct 18, 2009 6:44 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

"Johhny come lately" (?) . . .

        Do you mean _ _ _ _ wagon FANS (?)
In my loooong time as a Blazermaniac, I’ve seen them come
and GO. Perhaps these will just GO !!

It's GO time !

by walkoff41 on Oct 21, 2009 2:43 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

He's either lying or he's on a power play trying to prove he's not going to be bullied by factors like common sense and reality

If we’re putting our marquee free agent pickup and our #1 pick future superstar on the bench, I quit.

If he does make this inane move, I hope to God he wins 60 games and gets to the FInals or else his future here will be on shaky ground.

Blazer Fan

by leeroyjenkins on Oct 16, 2009 6:53 AM PDT reply actions   0 recs

Great comparison. Lerbron and Miller.

Brandon Roy just destroyed everything in his path. There's your rational analysis -- Dave

Also: COMCAST SUCKS!

by TwoDeep on Oct 18, 2009 6:45 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

It was meant as a joke.

Noting more.

My favorite teams are the Blazers and any team that is playing the Lakers.

by OCBlazerFan1 on Oct 20, 2009 8:37 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

^oops, nothing

My favorite teams are the Blazers and any team that is playing the Lakers.

by OCBlazerFan1 on Oct 20, 2009 8:38 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

For everyone trotting out the Spurs

If this is true, then the Blazers will be starting 3 players who are worse than their reserve at their position. Miller is better than Blake, Oden is better than Joel, and a case can be made that Web is better than Batum at the moment, (although I believe Batum is about equal and will pass Web). The Spurs do it for one player, the Mavs do it for one player. Are we really trying to say that if SA had Oden on their team they would bring him off the bench because TD and Parker needs more shots? I am willing to believe that a championship coach like Pop would find a way to make it work, and so should Nate.

Maybe he should start by changing his offense away from the current HS offense he runs, (all pick and roles, Roy vs 5, no post presence, little to no movement without the ball). Or maybe he should hire an assistant who can actually teach NBA defensive concepts.

by usmcr3049 on Oct 16, 2009 8:03 AM PDT reply actions   1 recs

Agree 100%
Are we really trying to say that if SA had Oden on their team they would bring him off the bench because TD and Parker needs more shots? I am willing to believe that a championship coach like Pop would find a way to make it work, and so should Nate.

That sums it up right there. Part of being a championship coach is getting your superstars to buy in to what will best help the team achieve it’s goals – Jackson and Popovich have both done this, although it hasn’t been pretty all the time (remember all the Parker trade rumors early in TPs career?). Nate needs to sit down with Brandon/LMA and tell them that in order for the Blazers to be a championship roster, it can’t be them and 3 npon-scorers. They will still be the focal points of the offense (as they should be), but it might mean 17 shots for Roy and 15 for LAM rather than 20+.

Also, I’m totally with your point on the offense. More ball movement/more possessions (increased pace) would create more scoring chances. The Blazers were efficient last year, but given their number of possessions, they had to be. A tweak or two could both increase the wiggle room and create more opportunities.

I am so frustrated by all this – I hope it works out well

I hate Comcast.

by blazeraddict on Oct 16, 2009 8:24 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Come on: this is a little over the top

Do you imagine Nate McMillen is some complete hack? Is that why he keeps getting hired to coach the US national team—and why those All-Stars invariably rave about him afterwards?

Nate’s far from infallible, and I certainly question this starting line-up decision. Promising starting slots to the guys who earned them, then reneging on that decision, is poor form for sure. But don’t try to convince me that Nate McMillen flat can’t coach. It’s easy to pick his coaching apart from the vantage point of our couches and computer terminals. We’re not at the practices or on the bench during games, seeing what he sees and understanding all that goes into the decisions he makes.

Nate McMillan is an extremely bright, hardworking guy who has played and coached NBA basketball for his entire adult life. Truth his, he probably knows more about NBA hoops than all of us BE posters combined. Part of being a fan is second-guessing the coach. But get real: Nate McMillen didn’t learn the game by reading “Basketball for dummies.”

"We don't back down to nobody." --Joel Przybilla

by hurryup09 on Oct 16, 2009 1:05 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I'm with that assessment

Nate is the right coach for this team, imo. I think that’s why I’m so frustrated by this situation. Instead of figuirng out a way to facilitate the true gelling of the big three, Nate seems to be panicking at the first signs of growing pains. It will take these guys a lot of time to fully mesh – this apporach only steepens the learning curve

I hate Comcast.

by blazeraddict on Oct 16, 2009 1:55 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

This is what I've been saying too

But I hold out hope that we’re wrong. Maybe Nate correctly determined that the team needs to transition gradually to a radically different starting line-up (two or three new guys). Starting the season with the line-up that ended it could be viewed as “training wheels.”

As much as Nate’s decision smells of “panic” to you & me, it may turn out to have been sheer brilliance. Let’s hope so.

"We don't back down to nobody." --Joel Przybilla

by hurryup09 on Oct 16, 2009 5:33 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

It doesn't take a basketball genius

To figure out Coach Nate is not the best X’s and O’s coach in this game. That doesn’t make him a bad coach, as he makes up for it in different ways, but me pointing that out should make you jump to me calling him a bad coach. Nate has very clear good parts, and bad parts to his coaching abilities, he is a very young coach and could/should/will learn to be better in some areas, but right now you can say that from watching his teams in Seattle and Portland he is not able to or doesn’t want to install very complicated offensive or defensive schemes.

His offense system since he has been in Portland has tried to feature his best player, which is a good start, but what he has been unable to do is layer other talented players ontop of that to create an offense that is very hard to defend. With Zach is was dump it in, and let him work, not much spacing, not much shooting, I guess we can defend that by saying, that team just wasn’t very good. With Roy the last two years, the offense has been give it to Roy and let him create, for himself or for others. The secondary offense was give it to Travis and let him create for himself, or give it to LMA and let him create from the mid post. The end result in all of these offenses was a jumpshot, you may remember Barkley on TNT pointing that out just a few times over the last few years. While the 3 point shot can be a very efficient way to score the ball, the mid range jump shot is not and should never be a stable of a teams offense.

I am not calling for Nate’s head….yet. I believe he is the coach for this team, what I am calling for is for him to bring in help, hire an assistant or two that can install an offense that layers all of the offensive talent on this team together so that when the playoffs come again, the Blazers can have a chance. At this point it looks like we are going to go into this season underutlizing Rudy and Greg on offense for sure, and possibly Batum, Webster, and Outlaw as well.

As for defense, well so far I am unimpressed with what Nate has been able to do, but they are getting better so more time might prove that wrong. One thing I will be watching very closely this season is what KP will do to help Nate out, KP loves Outlaw, he loves Rudy, and he loves Blake, but all 3 are very bad defensively in different ways. If none of them improve then KP needs to use one or all of them to make a move and get a player or two that can help this team become the defense team that it needs to be to succeed in the playoffs.

by usmcr3049 on Oct 18, 2009 8:13 AM PDT up reply actions   1 recs

Before we light the torches, I think we should wait and see what actually happens

We are weeks from opening day. These things can change in a hurry. Nate is an excellent coach, and while that doesn’t mean blind devotion, I do think we can wait until at least the first regular season game is played.

by matthewcc on Oct 16, 2009 8:46 AM PDT reply actions   0 recs

I guess we can't analyze what the coach actually says now?

We’re not putting words in his mouth or speculating. These are bush league statements by the coach of the basketball team.

by The_Lance on Oct 16, 2009 12:15 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

another thought

if this is really about the best fit, then maybe Nate should bring LMA off the bench instead of Oden. Offensively and defensively Oden is a better fit with the other starters. On offense he is the post presence we all wish LMA could be if he continues his preseason play. He is getting close in shots, drawing fouls on the other team, and creating open shots for teammates, all things LMA has not done consistantly. If we want to take some pressure off of Roy, why not start Oden and use LMA off the bench? Oden would give the starting unit a second offensive option that doesn’t need Roy to create for him, as of now LMA needs Roy to run the pick and roll to get him some of his shots, and his “post” game usually starts outside of the key from about 10-12 feet.

Oden’s post game is 8 feet and in, he is execellent at sealing his opponent and recieving the ball, and he is a good passer out of the double team, (something LMA has yet to figure out). The logical move would be to use Oden as a 2nd option on the starting unit and use LMA to bring scoring power off the bench!

by usmcr3049 on Oct 16, 2009 9:04 AM PDT reply actions   2 recs

If Aldridge comes off the bench, then who starts at PF?

Trout? He is probably and even worse fit for the starting lineup than Aldridge is.

Also, your reasoning that Aldridge should come off the bench because he is most effective when running pick-and-rolls with Roy doesn’t make any sense. If Aldridge is most effective together with Roy, then that is all the more reason to play them together as starters.

Oden’s post game is 8 feet and in, he is execellent at sealing his opponent and recieving the ball, and he is a good passer out of the double team, (something LMA has yet to figure out). The logical move would be to use Oden as a 2nd option on the starting unit and use LMA to bring scoring power off the bench!

LMA is excellent at passing out of double teams (better than Greg). Aldridge had an assist to bad pass ratio of 5.9 last year, which is an extremely good ratio for a big man.

At this point I actually trust Aldridge’s post game more than Oden’s. Oden can get good post position more easily against most opponents, but he turns the ball over way too often. He also isn’t as skilled as Aldridge and unlike Aldridge he doesn’t have many options in cases where he isn’t able to to establish deep position.

Anyway, I think we should start both of them. Continue running the offense through Roy and Aldridge, and let Oden get most of his offense through put-backs and easy catch-and-finish plays unless he has a significant match up advantage.

by trk on Oct 16, 2009 1:07 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I agree that both should start

my point was that it is just as dumb to have LMA come off the bench as having Oden come off the bench.

by usmcr3049 on Oct 18, 2009 8:15 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Interesting thought

But the whole rationale for drafting GO was to pair him with LMA as a new “twin towers.” By his own admission, KP has patterned this team after the Spurs, and he specifically pointed to the great Duncan/ Robinson combo when he announced his decision to draft Greg Oden. Two agile shotblocker/ rebounders can dominate an NBA game even when the team is cold at the offensive end.

GO and LMA, as a tandem, are still very much a work in progress. But both guys are unselfish, hard-workers with all the necessary tools: length, agility, speed, strength (especially GO), good hands, etc. I wouldn’t split these two up for anything. In time, they should dominate the paint at both ends. And domination of the paint is key to winning championships.

"We don't back down to nobody." --Joel Przybilla

by hurryup09 on Oct 16, 2009 1:12 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Speaking of the Spurs

Dajuan Blair looks really good with them.

by Kaboomm on Oct 16, 2009 4:51 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Did you have to remind me?

After the draft, I wrote a Fanpost comparing KP to a food item-fixated trout.

For the non-fishermen among you: trout sometimes are so narrowly focused on a particular hatching bug that they don’t notice even more delectible items that come floating overhead. Similarly, it seems that perhaps KP, having assumed that Blair would be long gone before the Blazers picked, could only see his targeted—and exhaustively researched—guys (Cunningham & Pendergraph) when Blair floated by.

Alas—what a 2nd round meal he’s proving to be for the Spurs. Oh, that’s right, I forgot: Blair is damaged goods thanks to his bum knee (unlike that iron man Pendergraph).

"We don't back down to nobody." --Joel Przybilla

by hurryup09 on Oct 16, 2009 5:45 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

out of sight, out of mind

the Blazers had Hansbrough, Pendergraph and Cunningham working out together at the PF before the draft, but Blair was “too good” to be there showing what he could do for a team picking down in the 20s.

Then on draft night, Wheels said Portland tried to trade up and select Psycho T, and later settled for Jeff and Dante when DeJuan was still on the board

This reminds me of the joke “If a man says something in the wilderness and there’s no woman around to hear him…is he still wrong?”

When reached 39 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!

by two4larue on Oct 16, 2009 9:37 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

No.

The Blazers researched everyone, I’m sure. Blair wasn’t on their board for other reasons. It could have been his knees or it could have been his much suspected drug use, or it could have been his poor work ethic.

Either way, I love Blair. I think he’s going to be great until he has health problems. Someone I know who has a similar injury in one of his knees, gives Blair a year and a half until he has serious issues. He said he feels fine and then every once and a while his knee twists because it lacks stability he should get from his ACL. I would be amazed if Blair makes it more than three years before he’s a fixture on the injury reserve. He’s looking at a Shaun Livingston type situation. Going from playing 30 games a year to over 90 is a big difference.

by Nick Van Excellent on Oct 16, 2009 10:18 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

We shall see, we shall see

You did notice who ended up taking Blair, didn’t you? None other than the Spurs—the franchise KP is modeling the Blazers after. I seriously doubt that the Spurs blundered in taking Blair. His knees gave him absolutely no trouble in college.

But again: time will tell.

"We don't back down to nobody." --Joel Przybilla

by hurryup09 on Oct 17, 2009 8:05 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

If the Portland Trail Blazers passed on DeJuan Blair because he smokes weed, then ...

Kevin Prtichard and his staff are thereby a crew of haughty, hidebound stuffed shirts who’re stuck in the mud with their hackneyed bullcrap about culture and baking cakes. I seriously hope that Pritchard and his associates in the basketball operations department — or, if it wasn’t their call there, then Paul Allen and his fellow Vulcan, Inc. executives — aren’t that nauseatingly illiberal in how they run the organization from an off-court perspective. Heck, if nothing else, those supposed geniuses — who come across as freakin’ mouth-breathers in this case — must fully realize the fact that it’s on-court production that trumps everything.

Stupid people have stupid ideas.

by AK1984 on Oct 18, 2009 9:16 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Uh, ever hear of the "Golden Mean"

Yes, to pass on an incredible rebounder in the second round—when that’s exactly what you need coming off your bench—because he allegedly has smoked weed would be questionable. But I can’t follow you from that conclusion to “…hackneyed bullcrap about culture and baking cakes.” Listen to Bill Walton talk about the ‘77 Blazer team. Compare them to the 76ers squad they beat. What was the difference? It sure wasn’t talent.

It’s HARD to win championships. Your character & cohesiveness as well as your talent will be tested. Blazer fans should understand that better than anyone after watching the loaded ‘sheed / Bonzi edition crash & burn in the 4th quarter vs the Lakers. Yes, you can go overboard with the whole “culture” thing. But that doesn’t mean it’s so much hoo-hah.

"We don't back down to nobody." --Joel Przybilla

by hurryup09 on Oct 18, 2009 9:40 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Your character & cohesiveness as well as your talent will be tested

It’s interesting to me how much Maurice Lucas is revered in Portland (and rightully so) but at the time of the ABA dispersal draft the thing he was best known for was decking Artis Gilmore in an ABA game.

It takes more than talent to win in the playoffs, it takes a physical and mental toughness that I would argue has not yet been fully seen or completely developed on Portland’s roster. Lucas’ “Enforcer” rep preceeded him to Portland, and his “duel” and handshake with Darryl Dawkins became “the” turning point in the ’77 finals.

Now, I have no way of knowing if Blair would’ve become “the man” like Luke was for the ‘77 Blazers, but he would’ve been a step in the right direction. Nate talked about adding a “beast” to the roster, last July. KP said following the Rocket’s series that he needed to add “toughness and physicality” to the roster.

Well, talk is cheap. The playoffs require big men who will do “whatever it takes” to secure the basketball. Houston had a few more of those guys in their lineup than Portland, last April. So, what has KP done to remedy that situation? Drafted Pend/‘Ham and signed Howard. Good, but not good enough, I reckon. Blair would’ve been a good banger to get, especially without having to “trade up” to get him.

Good for RC Buford, he took advantage of an opportunity

When reached 39 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!

by two4larue on Oct 18, 2009 3:24 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Nate's starting line-ups?

Remember last year when he said he was starting Batum, then changed his mind for the Laker’s game and then changed his mind again.

I have a feeling that Nate is going by gut here and he will be changing his tune the second the rubber hits the road.

by boppitywop on Oct 16, 2009 10:43 AM PDT reply actions   0 recs

How did he not learn from his mistakes?

He started Outlaw once and started Batum for the rest of the year when he wasn’t injured.

At some point fans have to give him the benefit of the doubt given the results he’s produced over the years.

He has his reasons. One logical argument for this lineup would be: Chemistry first and foremost. That lineup helped them win 54 games and they would have been in the second round had they not played against their worst matchup of any team in the NBA. Roy thrives with the ball and is a playmaker but his ability to play without the ball is a weakness in his game. Blake is an excellent spot-up shooter. Pryz can hold it down against most starting centers but doesn’t provide offense. They feed the ball inside to LMA early and often. Batum adds perimeter defense. Miller is also playmaker who thrives with the ball and feeds the ball into the post very well. If he’s better in the second unit because of these reasons, then it makes sense to put Oden with him to give them an inside presence. How many back-up centers could keep him from getting deep in the paint?

The second unit with RAMBO (what a cheesy acronym) as a starting lineup is chock full of jump shooters who can’t create their own shot or get to the rim consistently.

It’s not like starters always get the lion’s share of minutes anyway. Batum averaged 18 minutes a game last year.

by Benjamanic on Oct 16, 2009 10:27 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

You guys dont get it!

This is all a big smoke screen. Nate is making it LOOK like everything is up in the air just to throw off other teams. This must be driving the scouts crazy! Plus Rambo is KP’s favorite movie so there is no doubt really. Secretly management know that the Blazers are going to win like 70 games this year.

hmmmkay

by TylerM on Oct 16, 2009 10:48 AM PDT reply actions   0 recs

So he learned from Mangina?

Witty Unpredictable Talent and Natural Game

by iDea on Oct 16, 2009 1:02 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

On the Other Hand

Doesn’t this make our second unit pretty much as good as the first? Which means we basically have 2 first units to fire at will?

Wow, imagine that. ANDRE MILLER on the BENCH. Incredible.

by thetsaiguy on Oct 16, 2009 12:21 PM PDT reply actions   0 recs

But I'm not sure Miller likes the sound of that.

I would like it if he were!

My favorite teams are the Blazers and any team that is playing the Lakers.

by OCBlazerFan1 on Oct 16, 2009 1:03 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

It's all politics.

This just stinks to high heaven as lighting a fire under Miller to make it work with the starting line-up, to throw off opposing teams scouting reports and to get the most out of Greg. Settle down!

Life is hilarious.

by SolGoode on Oct 16, 2009 1:15 PM PDT reply actions   0 recs

cool

i have no opinion b/c i cant watch any of these games

the boxscore says miller >>>>>>>> blake
the boxscore says Oden>>>>>>>>> joel

Wonder if brandon complained .. i wouldn’t put it past him.

Sophia

The Princess of Blazersedge

It just takes an iron fist to keep the riff raff under control and her princess hand is mad strong- Idoltime

by BlazerFan1 on Oct 16, 2009 1:20 PM PDT reply actions   1 recs

If Nate does start Blake and Joel,

I think it will be more about comfort than anything else. Right now, the team is just not playing well together. Given the number of crazy lineups Nate has been using, the lack of cohesiveness isn’t totally unexpected IMO, but it’s frustrating to watch. Nate may elect to begin the season with last year’s starting lineup just because those 5 guys know how to play well together. Honestly, I find the thought of putting RAMBO on the court right now scary as hell. We’ve got Houston, Denver, Houston, OKC, Atlanta and San Antonio the first 6 games. That’s potentially a 1-5 start (I think we beat OKC regardless).

I know that Greg is better than Joel, and Andre is better than Blake. Without a doubt, the RAMBO lineup is how we should finish the season. But mentally, I still think of this team as fragile. When things go bad, the team often falls apart. Then Nate calls a timeout, injects some optimism, and the Blazers get the coveted stat of being the best team after a timeout. Maybe starting the season with the guys who feel the most comfortable with each other is OK in the short term. Joel won’t play 38 minutes even if he starts and neither will Blake. Likely, they will both be used like Batum was last year. I know this defies all basketball logic, but I can see Nate doing it as a crutch.

From what I’ve seen (and heard on the radio), there hasn’t been a lineup that has really worked (even if it looked good on paper). Maybe you start where you left off and let the starting lineup slowly morph into what it needs to be by season’s end.

      

by Sean M on Oct 16, 2009 3:11 PM PDT reply actions   0 recs

It'now on the players

to tell Nate that it’s not a good starting lineup he’s (Nate) decided on. If the players are interested in the next step in team development then they need to hash out what they think is better for the team and then let Nate know it (assuming they agree with everyone else that Miller and Oden need to start). If they do then Nate will be able to change the starting lineup and need not start counseling sessions with players.

This is where Lucas can be invaluable—he could signal players that this would be a good course of action.

by 7677maniac on Oct 16, 2009 3:34 PM PDT reply actions   3 recs

(assuming they agree with everyone else that Miller and Oden need to start).

but what if Brandon and LMA want things to stay just like they were, last year? (“Option 1” and “option 2”?)

All I can say is the “old” starting lineup had better show up on Sunday and Tuesday nights—at the start of both halves of both games. If Blake and Przy come out of the game with the team behind on the scoreboard (and Miller/Oden bring the Blazers back into the lead during their “shift”) it will breathe new life into the RAMBO debate

When reached 39 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!

by two4larue on Oct 16, 2009 9:44 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

People need to realize..

You almost never put your top 5 in the starting rotation.. It’s even more important for this team to split them a bit. Anyone that cannot see how much better the team is with Miller running the bench squad is blind, stupid, or both. No offense to someone who’s actually blind. Brandon, Lamarcus, and Greg, will be fine without Miller starting. (he will still get plenty of minutes) and the bench will be way better with him.

1. Blake, Roy, Batum, LA, & GO (great balance & chemistry)
2. Miller, Rudy, Webster then come in and play with LA & GO for a couple minutes
    (Great scoring and fast-breaking unit that plays a zone defense.)
3. Then bring Travis and Joel in with Miller, Rudy & Webster for a few more minutes.
4. Then bring Roy in for Webster or Miller (Brandon & Rudy get their time together)
5. Then bring Batum in for Rudy for a quick stint.
6. Then finish the last 3 or 4 minutes of the half with Miller, Bayless, Roy, LA &GO

2nd half is pretty much the same as first (but fininsh the 4th with Miller, Brandon, (the SF having the best night or match up), LA and GO….Except for the games that they have a big lead in at the end, (there should be many) Then Bayless, Cunningham, Travis, and Howard get some mop up time with Joel.
We need to take advantage of our depth, and our ability to have balanced starting and bench units.

by Rick_D on Oct 16, 2009 8:02 PM PDT reply actions   0 recs

Sometimes I feel like I'm blind

Like when the Blazers are playing a game and I can only listen to it on the radio. It is kind of hard to see how much better Miller is making the team when you can’t actually see the games.

by trk on Oct 16, 2009 9:52 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Roy doesnt need

 to play with Miller for long stretches. He and Blake do just fine together. What did this team in during the series with the Rockets wasnt Blake but the lack of production from the 3 spot and the bench. If Miller can flow better with the players on the bench who can use his “play-making” ability than thats the best fit for him on this team. He should do great things for Greg who can ease his way into the starting lineup.

by BBG on Oct 17, 2009 1:06 AM PDT reply actions   0 recs

Oden needs to start.

Simple as that.

Mortimer

by Mortimer on Oct 17, 2009 3:14 AM PDT reply actions   2 recs

Captain Morty to the rescue !!!!

      IT"S GO TIME !!!

It's GO time !

by walkoff41 on Oct 21, 2009 2:46 PM PDT up reply actions   1 recs

fire nate

The Faith don't panic, the faith freaks out, burns out farms, and torchs small villages in the name of The Faith.

"New Man Law: If you don't show up for the draft you don't get to come later if you're picked. If you believe in yourself, show up and sit there. If nobody else believes in you, take it and cry like a man...in front of the cameras."

-Dave

by faith on Oct 17, 2009 5:23 AM PDT reply actions   1 recs

Joel must have had a hellaciously terrific offseason

figuring he couldn’t bust the opening day starting lineup with a “rookie” Oden coming off microfracture last year – - – but this year with Greg looking like we all thought he would, super Joel has pushed him to the bench….

stupid idea Nate

no offense

""..Sometimes the songs that we hear are just songs of our own . . . "

by LetsBlaze on Oct 17, 2009 9:56 AM PDT reply actions   0 recs

no RAMBO

this argument has gotten ridiculous.
thank god nate is the coach

i understand everyone is excited… hear me out.

fact: the lineup mcmillan wants won 54 games last year. won their division and made the playoffs for the first time in years.

you don’t always start the best individual players you start what’s suited for the team.

oden wants the starting spot… he’s hungry for it. he WILL have it eventually….
but he’s gotta prove it in regular season play… preseason is a joke… it’s like practice.

steve blake is a perfect compliment to roy,
andre miller is adept at passing. meaning much better suited to fit rudy…oden, travis etc….

the argument that blake can’t lead us out of the first round is tired and ridiculous…
how many times has andre miller been out of the first round?… ZERO

he’s collapsed in the first round how many times? i believe five times.

let nate coach the team.
go back to your game of nbalive.

number one in the hood G

by tedloc on Oct 17, 2009 11:11 AM PDT reply actions   1 recs

Actually
fact: the lineup mcmillan wants won 54 games last year.

that starting lineup won 26

Dude, what are you doing, man? Why you gotta be holding a corn dog when I go for a high-five??

by 1badbadger on Oct 17, 2009 12:52 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

The problem is that Nate is the one who says starting spots are earned in camp and preseason.

Fact is Oden has earned the spot and is the superior player to Joel. Oden fits with either unit better than Joel just because he’s better and there’s nothing Joel does that Oden can’t do unless you count taking charges.

Oden is supposed to be our franchise big, you don’t keep your franchise big on the bench when he’s clearly played his arse off and earned the starting spot exactly the way the coach wanted him to. That’s a pretty bad message to send.

Roy needs to learn to play with any back court mate, period. He is the superstar and it’s on him to be successful regardless oh who he’s got with him.

Roy is going to have to play with Miller whether he starts or not, and Oden will be playing with starters whether he starts or not. It’s not like the units are swapped all 5 at a time. The two guys have earned the right to start according to what Nate always says (spots earned in camp and preseason) and they need to be given their spots. The only debate at this point over who deserves to start should be at the SF position.

by Bskey on Oct 17, 2009 12:55 PM PDT up reply actions   1 recs

Rec'd

The Miller thing annoys me (I can see the rational behind it, but disagree with the decision), but the Oden decision kills me. It’s wrong on both the basketball and player management perspectives, as you point out. It also shows a lack of fortitude on Nate’s part. He point blank said there would be open competition at three spots in camp, PG, SF, and C. You could make an argument that all three of the reserves (if you go with last year’s starters) have outplayed the designated Sunday starters at their positions (although Batum being rested because of EruoBasket fatigue/shoulder issues is a mitigating factor there). Makes Nate look less than forthright imo – open competition, unless I don’t like the results is how this plays, especially at C – Joel has not even been in the same discussion as Oden thus far.

Nate cited his situation in Seattle in re to Payton coming over as a message he wants this team to apply. Here’s a lesson from that same situation Nate apparently has failed to learn – sometimes, when you have a young guy (Payton/Oden) with incredible potential, they get the benefit of the doubt, and a serviceable but in some ways flawed vet (Nate/Pryzbilla) gets a seat on the bench. That decision worked out pretty well for Seattle, imo.

The real issue, as I see it, is Nate is being rigid with his schemes and perceptions of how players will fit them. Rather than change the offense to accommodate for than Barndon and LMA, Nate is sticking with the status quo. Will that lead to a good regular season – yes. But we’ve all seen how a two man offense fairs against a quality opponent in the playoffs.

My final issue with this is, while a lot of people point out Andre and Greg aren’t entitled to a starting job on their status/draft position, by that same token what has LMA done to convince Nate so thoroughly he is the second pillar of this offense? I’m not hating on LMA – he is a great up and coming big man. But if you ask me who is the better post presence, I’ll take Greg right now. The real answer is get your big three going together, rather than coddling your “superstar’s” egos, if that is indeed part of Nate’s rational.

I should probably do what others in this thread and calm down, let the year play out, and evaluate things then. But this team has so much potential, both this year and in the years to come, that it drives me nuts to see Nate make decisions that stunt, rather than stimulate, the potential of this team and its players. I hope I’m wrong, but on this one, I thing Nate is making a horrible call.

I hate Comcast.

by blazeraddict on Oct 17, 2009 2:21 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Typo in my screed

meant to say “for more than Brandon and LMA” in the third paragraph (exhales)

I hate Comcast.

by blazeraddict on Oct 17, 2009 2:25 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Oden will start soon most likely if not opening day, but...

We haven’t won a preseason game other than against a nearly D-league Kings team with Miller and Oden being the focus of the offense. The team has actually not played well, despite those guys playing well on the individual level. That individual play does not equal wins. Team play wins games. Right now the line up we know looks a whole lot better than anything we’ve seen in preseason is the one we ended last year with (not including starting Rudy in the playoffs). It makes sense to play them from that perspective. They are a known quantity who won a lot of games. Personally I would start Blake and Oden with Roy, LMA and Batum, but I wouldn’t start Miller, because the chemistry isn’t there yet, and we need to win from day one to survive the race in the West. Like someone else said; we could start 1-4 over our first 5 if we are out of sorts. We play some very tough teams right off the bat, and even OKC have enough guys who can score, that a lag in our game could let them run away with it just by scoring a lot of points, the way the Suns and Golden State can, even if they play terrible defense. I’m glad Nate is smarter than 99% of the bloggers on BE.

by wingzeta on Oct 18, 2009 12:10 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I agree with you.

I would also start Oden, but I can understand Nate’s position and trust his judgment more than my own.

Oden has shown a lot of potential improvement so far, but his shooting stats against Utah (I obviously couldn’t see the game) weren’t as encouraging. This is the first time he was defended by “centers” in Okur and Boozer (loosely speaking) and he went 3-10 and had two of his shots blocked. His rebounding was encouraging with 9 boards in 18 minutes, but we knew he could do that. I think some people believe he will be an offense force this year based on a couple of preseason games, but it’s way too early to think that yet.

by BlazerFanSince1970 on Oct 18, 2009 12:47 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Wrong

Yes, Nate is very, very smart. I agree with you that he knows much more about NBA basketball than anyone blogging on this site. But he’s also under pressure that can cloud his judgement—pressure to win NOW. A prime example of that type of pressure (applied by fans & media): your implication that starting 1-4 in an 82-game regular season would be some sort of disaster.

You can start 1-4 or even 1-10 and still recover to win a title. Top contenders—e.g., the Spurs—typically get off to slow starts. The NBA season is a marathon, not a sprint. If the Blazers sacrificed a few early season wins for the sake of giving a new, stronger starting line-up time to gel, that would be well worth it.

Fact is, utlilizing Greg Oden in the offense isn’t “individual” basketball—it’s TEAM basketball. When you have a credible weapon in the low post, that opens up everything. This is especially true in the playoffs, when defenses are more aggressive & physical and outside shots become harder to find and make.

Letting Brandon Roy dominate the ball may equal regular season wins, but it’s not truly team basketball, and it’s not truly winning basketball. The preseason and early regular season is the time to make the changes necessary to take the Blazers to the next level, and Nate has apparently just lost the will to follow thru with that plan.

"We don't back down to nobody." --Joel Przybilla

by hurryup09 on Oct 18, 2009 9:53 AM PDT up reply actions   1 recs

re

they are earned…. and coach mac decided that the game flowed better with miller off the bench.

oden maybe superior to joel in the preseason, but the preseason is just practice.
if we’re basing the seasons starting spots going off a preseason statline then roy should be on the bench, backing up jerryd bayless…

let him play a few real games…
let him stay out of foul trouble…
he’ll earn it., keep him hungry.

i’ll re-post this since people just don’t seem to get it.>>>>>
the argument that blake can’t lead us out of the first round is tired and ridiculous…
how many times has andre miller been out of the first round?… ZERO

so. equal ground to me….

>>>> and this>>>>The second unit with RAMBO (what a cheesy acronym) as a starting lineup is chock full of jump shooters who can’t create their own shot or get to the rim consistently.

number one in the hood G

by tedloc on Oct 17, 2009 4:21 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

It's not about stats at all.

Oden has looked terrific, plain and simple. Preseason play is not meaningless for somebody like Oden, its not just simple practice. Roy knows he’s going to start, we all know what Roy is capable of so there’s nothing wrong him sitting back or not putting too much effort into preseason. Oden on the other hand worked harder than any other Blazer over the summer and it’s paid off.

I ask you, what kind of message does it send to everybody on the team when Oden does exactly what coach wants him to, does great in camp and preseason (which Nate himself says is where starting spots are earned) and then ends up not starting even though he’s clearly the best player at the position?

And seriously again, the units are not swapped in and out 5 players at a time. They mix and match. The entire concept of 2 whole units is not realistic. Portland dug themselves out of hole after hole because the starting unit didn’t have enough firepower once teams figured out to start hounding Brandon. Oden and Miller can both increase the scoring of the starting unit over Blake and Joel. And their defense is certainly no worse.

The 2nd unit of Blake, Rudy, Martell, Outlaw and Joel would most games play very very few of any minutes with all of them in the game together. You almost always have at least 1-2 starters in the game for any significant minutes. This whole idea that the 2nd unit needs somebody who should be starting is just not nearly as crucial as people make it out to be. When Blake, Martell, and Joel come into the game you’re likely going to have Roy and Aldridge in there with them. And then it will change up and go to Miller, Rudy, Martell/Nic, Outlaw and Oden. You don’t play the units separate once the game gets going. The start of a game can be really important for setting a tone and getting the pace at the level you want. Last season our first quarters were pathetic and we had to be bailed out time after time by Roy in the 4th.

Blake’s fit with Roy is way too overblown. Even by Roy himself.

by Bskey on Oct 17, 2009 7:22 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Coaches and players are far from infallible.

I’ve always been a big Nate supporter, but in this case I think he would be making a mistake. When Oden plays as well as he has in camp and preseason and there’s no real reason to start Joel over him yes I think Nate would be wrong to not start him.

by Bskey on Oct 18, 2009 5:03 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I actually agree that Oden should start, but that's just my opinion.

I’m confident that Nate has more information than me and better judgment. That said, I wouldn’t be surprised if Nate changes his mind and starts Oden if he plays especially well against Denver and Utah.

However, GO was 3-10 shooting against Utah and had 2 of his shots blocked in that game. That was the only time he faced a real center in preseason. He’s had several air balls on his hook shots and still had the ball stripped a few times. So although he certainly looks physically better, and has displayed better offensive moves, he hasn’t proven he is going to be an offensive force the way some people believe based on a few preseason games against extremely weak opposition.

by BlazerFanSince1970 on Oct 18, 2009 6:06 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Uh, I thought the Clips also had a "real center"

Also, Salt Lake City games are considered one of the toughest back-to-back scenarios the Blazers face. Roy got the night off, and LMA hardly played. So I wouldn’t be too quick to attribute GO’s off night to his facing “a real center.” More likely, he was just a little tired. (Besides which, on a per-minute basis, his numbers were actually pretty strong.)

"We don't back down to nobody." --Joel Przybilla

by hurryup09 on Oct 18, 2009 9:59 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Camby didn't play and Kaman was hurt and only played about 16 minutes.

Against Utah 3 of 10 shooting for a center and getting blocked twice is poor independent of per-minutes basis. I’m still expecting good things from Oden this year, but I’m just saying he hasn’t proven anything offensively yet.

by BlazerFanSince1970 on Oct 18, 2009 11:49 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Obviously, you don't really prove anything in the preseason

I was disputing your suggestion that GO has only looked improved because he’s faced undersized opposition. In fact, he’s played well against bigger guys as well—including Kaman during their brief matchup.

The one game I’ve actually been able to watch this season—the Fan Fest scrimmage—featured GO matched up against a legit center, and one who is very familiar with GO’s game and who was highly motivated to perform well against him—scrimmage or no. That’s Joel Przybilla. I’ve watched that game multiple times now, and GO absolutely dominated poor Joel.

It’s also worth noting that last season, by & large, the more physical the opponent, the better GO did against him. Guys like Kaman and Bynum, who tried to out-physical GO, got dominated. He struggled against finesse players who flopped, took outside jumpers, etc. (Exceptions: Yao and Shaq—GO appeared disoriented playing against guys even bigger than he is. That’ll probably take some more getting used to.)

"We don't back down to nobody." --Joel Przybilla

by hurryup09 on Oct 18, 2009 12:38 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I really don't understand your point about the Clipper game.

Clipper preseason game:

GO (21 minutes) – 3 for 7, 7 pts, 2 of Oden’s shots were blocked
Kaman – (16 minutes) – 6 for 8, 12 pts

I’d say GO wasn’t too great offensively in that game. Two of his seven shots were blocked and he also had 2 turnovers (still getting the ball stripped).

Utah preseason game:

GO (18 minutes) – 3 for 10, 7 pts, 2 of Greg’s shots were blocked

Total of two games where he faced Kaman and Okur:

GO – 6 for 17, 14 points, 4 of Greg’s shots were blocked.

I simply don’t see that as good offensive performance against the two bigger centers he faced. But it certainly doesn’t prove anything, positive or negative. I want, and expect Greg to be quite good offensively. I think he will eventually be much better on offense than people suggested when he was drafted. It’s very encouraging that he worked all summer on offensive moves, and he looks much better (what I’ve seen with my own eyes). But you have to be objective about the results as he progresses. (Fanfest ???? I won’t say anything.)

So let’s see how he does tonight against Okur. Hopefully he will do much better.

by BlazerFanSince1970 on Oct 18, 2009 5:41 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Did you watch--or listen--to tonight's game?

I rest my case. The only obstacle GO faced was the replacement refs.

As for Okur—he’s certainly tall, but that wasn’t what gave GO problems last season. It was Okur’s ability to shoot from outside.

Which was my point: that by & large, GO has had no problem with big centers, save the two aforementioned HUGE ones. His greatest challenge has been with quick, mobile centers who can draw him outside (outside his comfort zone). This season, with GO’s improved mobility, I expect those guys to present less of a problem for GO.

"We don't back down to nobody." --Joel Przybilla

by hurryup09 on Oct 19, 2009 3:20 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Another issue...

We’re not going to catch many teams off-guard this year. Doubling Brandon and LaMarcus was very effective for Houston during the playoffs. I think more and more teams will throw this at us if we keep the same starting five from last season. If we put forward a starting unit of say four or five offensively talented players we can then punish them for any attempted double teams.

Dude, what are you doing, man? Why you gotta be holding a corn dog when I go for a high-five??

by 1badbadger on Oct 17, 2009 12:59 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Doubling Brandon

this was my main reason for wanting to add a 2nd “creator” to the lineup. Philly and Houston were able to trap Roy and get the ball out of his hands, last year. No other Blazer (except for maybe Bayless and Sergio) had the ability to break down the defense from the weak side, when Brandon was doubled. Miller will be effective in this role, both as a passer and a finisher. This will be more important at the end of games, but I’d like to see the team’s best PG and SG on the floor together more often, so they can get used to each other’s tendencies

When reached 39 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!

by two4larue on Oct 17, 2009 4:53 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Blake: 2-0 as a starter in pre-season. Miller: 0-3.

Not that I believe the latter is superior to the former, far from it. Still, don’t pretend that going with The Mother of All Bench Units is completely off the wall……

"A bizarre and extremely rare hybrid Blazer/Laker fan, Timbo has always struggled to contain the Beast Within, like Dr. Jekyll, Bruce Banner, or Ted Kennedy." — Miled Animal

by timbo on Oct 17, 2009 12:43 PM PDT reply actions   0 recs

Whoops, backwards. Miller is superior to Blake, clearly.

The question is: who plays best with Brandon, bearing in mind that Miller and Oden are a pair…

"A bizarre and extremely rare hybrid Blazer/Laker fan, Timbo has always struggled to contain the Beast Within, like Dr. Jekyll, Bruce Banner, or Ted Kennedy." — Miled Animal

by timbo on Oct 17, 2009 12:46 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Who play's best with Brandon?

1) Blake (BRoy says so)
2) Pryz (familiarity)
3) LA (hi / low game)
4) Trout (BRoy’s buddy)

Problem is, for the first two, there is a better player at that position: Miller and Oden. Second two play the same position.

So if BRoy and LMA are a good pair, as are Miller and Oden… Just pair those 4 with any SF, and you’ve got your best two pairs, and the best 5 man unit, in terms of talent. Barring injury, I’d be pretty shocked if those four aren’t starting on opening night of the playoffs…

As much as I like the idea of two solid units, so we can run and gun, I do understand that really only works in practice… rarely in the regular season… and never in the playoffs. I do still hope Andre can teach this team how to run. But if we’re shooting for playoff series victories, with a shortened rotation, then these 4 have to learn to play together. Might as well start now…

by Visionary2 on Oct 17, 2009 1:53 PM PDT reply actions   0 recs

May as well not start now if we want to make the playoffs.

There are only 8 spots. We are not guaranteed one of them. We get there by winning games. We have 82 games to give Miller and Oden time to get in sync with all of the other players on the team. It may take a few weeks, and it may take a few months, but in the insanely close Western Conference race, we can’t afford to take any game lightly, and field a confused, or unbalanced line-up before it is ready to WIN. Miller and Oden starting has not even won a preseason game yet. Fans need to be a little patient, so we don’t have to go through a losing streak while these guys are learning to play together. We have time to mine all the talent on the roster, but we don’t have the luxury of losing many games once the preseason is over.

by wingzeta on Oct 18, 2009 12:24 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Yes, fans need to be a little patient

I.e., they need to not panic when a new starting line-up doesn’t gel instantly. Teams get off to slow starts all the time and end the season strong—even by winning championships. As I commented above (and as many have commented before me): the NBA season is a marathon, not a sprint.

"We don't back down to nobody." --Joel Przybilla

by hurryup09 on Oct 18, 2009 10:02 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Fact: Nate McMillan has coached 723 NBA games over 9 years.

Total NBA games coached by BEdger’s certain that Nate has the wrong lineup: 0

(If one of the critics here has coached an NBA team, please feel free to identify yourself.)

I also think Oden should start, but I’m sure Nate knows more than I do about that.

It’s fun that everyone is expressing their opinions, but funny how people can be so certain they are right and he is wrong before the season even starts.
 

by BlazerFanSince1970 on Oct 17, 2009 3:23 PM PDT reply actions   0 recs

maybe KP will identify himself, as a former NBA coach?

I’ve heard that Kevin reads this site, from time to time

I’m hoping that Ben is “right” and not Quick. Jason has been adamant that Nate will stick with Blake at starting PG, while Mr. Golliver feels that Nate is using the Sunday-Tuesday “retro” starting lineups as a ploy to motivate Miller to reach higher defensive standards. We will see

I’m glad we have both PGs, and that the team will get 48 quality minutes of PG play. But you’ve got to be somewhat concerned about Rudy now, don’t you? He’s missing a lot of “ball handling developmental time” this fall, and Vance says his “body language” has been lousy. Are you still looking for 25-30 mpg out of #5, because he’s going to have to get it “cranked up” pretty soon to be that kind of regular season contributer

When reached 39 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!

by two4larue on Oct 17, 2009 5:03 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

His coaching record is 5-22 (in the majors)

But I’m sure he would be happy to improve that one day :)

"I think he can still play" - Kevin Pritchard on Juwan Howard

by Norsktroll on Oct 17, 2009 6:37 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

nah

I think KP will be more than happy to remain “retired” from the bench.

He did pretty well in the CBA though, IIRC

When reached 39 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!

by two4larue on Oct 17, 2009 7:45 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Yep, concerned about Rudy's health and lack of "experimentation time".

He needed the preseason to work on ball handling skills, defense, and offensive moves. His minutes may be the hardest to earn and the easiest to lose of anyone on the team, because he needs to really excel to justify any minutes beyond just backing up Roy. My prediction was 25-28 minutes (not 25-30). Essentially missing preseason may make it difficult for him to get an opportunity to earn those minutes early in the season. I still think he will get the chance (albeit with a shorter leash) within a couple of months, but it will be doubly difficult to get any PG/SG minutes at all with Roy if Blake starts.

I’ve never had much interest in Vance’s opinions. I heard him float that “body language” crud with several guests last week and no one even nibbled. The fact that Rudy has been experiencing back pain and Vance complains about his “body language” kind of reveals where Vance is coming from.

by BlazerFanSince1970 on Oct 18, 2009 12:27 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Kenny's comments re: Rudy's body language

came well before Rudy’s back was injured, which I believe was during pregame against Phoenix (I definitely saw him head to the lockerroom in the 3rd quarter and wondered what was up, at the time) Before that, no one was talking about Rudy’s back, just that he had tweaked his hammy in August and Nate wanted to give him some time off because he had already played a lot in Europe.

What Vance was really talking about was how Rudy doesn’t appear to be “into” the game as much as he was, last year. He’s not showing the emotion and “flair” that everyone has come to expect from him. Now, there could be a lot of reasons for this, but I think we can agree that it can’t be considered a “good” sign, regardless.

Obviously, Nate should give Rudy as much time as necessary to get himself right. And in the meantime Nic and Martell can play the kind of minutes they probably deserve to be getting, anyway

When reached 39 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!

by two4larue on Oct 18, 2009 3:39 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Like I said, I heard Vance talk about Rudy's body language several times,

and so far I don’t believe anyone has agreed with him while I was listening. I haven’t seen any bad “body language”, just a player that had been tired initially and hurting lately. Batum has looked just as disconnected (tired too I suspect) and Vance said nothing about his body language. But like I also said, I haven’t had any interest in Vance’s opinions ever.

by BlazerFanSince1970 on Oct 18, 2009 5:51 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Quick thinks Miller will start.
“I think Andre has been so commanding, so clearly the better point guard that I think we’re going to see him start, and I think there’s no way you can keep Greg Oden out of the starting lineup. I mean there’s just no way. So I think your going to see something very close to that starting lineup start that first game.”- Jason Quick, October 15, 2009,

by Nick Van Excellent on Oct 19, 2009 3:49 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Where has it been stated that McMillan has already announced opening night's starting lineup?!?!

You gotta link for that? I think maybe you’re being confused by “creative journalism”. Y’know – the kind where things are purposefully being taken out of context to get people all excited.

....formerly GonzoFan. Now, this has been a message from "The People's Alliance to Continue to Encourage Greg Oden on his Path to Dominance"

by bforsythe on Oct 17, 2009 3:52 PM PDT reply actions   0 recs

Calling this "creative journalism" is a stretch

Nate said he was planning to use the Dever/Utah games as a “dry run” of the regular season rotation. I hope he has changed his mind on this point, but the implication that he is leaning toward last year’s starting 5 is pretty clear.

I hate Comcast.

by blazeraddict on Oct 17, 2009 3:58 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I must've misunterstood the poster.

“Nate throws in the towel and says he is starting last years five opening night which is still 2 weeks away”

Wait. No I didn’t.

....formerly GonzoFan. Now, this has been a message from "The People's Alliance to Continue to Encourage Greg Oden on his Path to Dominance"

by bforsythe on Oct 17, 2009 4:00 PM PDT reply actions   0 recs

Reply to blazeraddict (above)

....formerly GonzoFan. Now, this has been a message from "The People's Alliance to Continue to Encourage Greg Oden on his Path to Dominance"

by bforsythe on Oct 17, 2009 4:00 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I'm talking about Quick's article
Looking for better defense and more cohesion, Trail Blazers coach Nate McMillan strongly indicated on Thursday that his starting unit from last season will remain intact as the team approaches its Oct. 27 season opener against Houston.

McMillan said Sunday’s exhibition game against Denver will feature a starting lineup of Steve Blake at point guard, Brandon Roy at shooting guard, Nicolas Batum at small forward, LaMarcus Aldridge at power forward and Joel Przybilla at center.

The Denver game has long been a red-letter game, the contest in which McMillan told the players he will start to implement real-game rotations and allot real-game minutes.

http://blog.oregonlive.com/behindblazersbeat/2009/10/looking_for_defense_and_cohesi.html

Again, strong implication from Quick that Nate is leaning toward last year’s starters. When you said “creative journalism”, I thought this is what you were talking about.

I hate Comcast.

by blazeraddict on Oct 17, 2009 4:12 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Yes. A strong implication from Quick. Not Nate.

There is no quote in tha tid bit. I do know what you mean. Nate did say he was going into “this season” with the same starting five that won 54 game slast year. But what he meant by that was going into trainining camp. Not the regular season.

Yes, he did also say that he is going to use the DEN/UTA games as a dry run. Have you heard who is starting in the Utah game? Again, I like to gamble a bit. If you want to make this a bet and put your money where your thoughts are – I’m all for it. Just for fun.

....formerly GonzoFan. Now, this has been a message from "The People's Alliance to Continue to Encourage Greg Oden on his Path to Dominance"

by bforsythe on Oct 17, 2009 4:25 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Perhaps I'm giving Quick

the benefit of the doubt, but that third paragraph, while it does not include a direct quote, does convey to the reader that Nate McMillan directly told the team Denver will the beginning of the portion of the pre-season in which regular rotations will be used.

I will add to my sig the phrase “In Nate we Trust” if Oden starts opening night (or something else of your choosing) for two month. “bforsythe was right, I was wrong” would also have a nice ring to it. If I’m right and Pryz starts the opener, I want “Free Greg Oden” added to yours.

2 months sound about right for the length of the additions? I say this with all sincerity – I hope you win and my “I hate Comcast” gets some company. Bet?

I hate Comcast.

by blazeraddict on Oct 17, 2009 5:13 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Here's what Quick said the same day.
“I think Andre has been so commanding, so clearly the better point guard that I think we’re going to see him start, and I think there’s no way you can keep Greg Oden out of the starting lineup. I mean there’s just no way. So I think your going to see something very close to that starting lineup start that first game.”- Jason Quick, October 15, 2009, 3:25PM

by Nick Van Excellent on Oct 19, 2009 3:50 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Nice one.

In the words of our new 15th man’s culture – “Good on ya, mate!”

....formerly GonzoFan. Now, this has been a message from "The People's Alliance to Continue to Encourage Greg Oden on his Path to Dominance"

by bforsythe on Oct 21, 2009 4:05 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

On a side-note...

…would anyone in here care to wager on what the starting lineup will be on opening night? I’m game. And I know I’d be betting – because nobody knows yet.

....formerly GonzoFan. Now, this has been a message from "The People's Alliance to Continue to Encourage Greg Oden on his Path to Dominance"

by bforsythe on Oct 17, 2009 4:04 PM PDT reply actions   0 recs

Look at Nate’s numbers in the wins category during his years with the Blazers.
nuf sed

I am behind Nate and his line-up decisions 100%. We need to start off hot this season and build up a cushion of wins before our schedule gets more difficult. A new, less cohesive starting 5 is not the way to do this.
Line-ups are going to change throughout the season and I have every confidence that Nate and his players will get it right. All of the panicked, pre-season, paranoids here will be eating their words and waiting in line to lick Nate’s shoes.

2010 IS OUR YEAR PEOPLE!!!

by RastaMonsta on Oct 18, 2009 1:19 AM PDT reply actions   0 recs

hopefully this is temporary

nate probably feels like miller needs more time to get used to playing with the other starters at a high level, so in the mean time he’ll stay with the group that went 27 and 11 together as starters last year. also, the group that is out there for the first 6 to 9 minutes isnt as important as the group out there the last 6 to 9 minutes. i have a feeling that miller and oden will be in the crunch time lineup of close games until they become starters and take a bigger bulk of the minutes from blake and pryz

cash rules everything around me CREAM get tha money dolla dolla bill yaaaaallll

by staceyaugmon4HOF on Oct 18, 2009 2:29 PM PDT reply actions   0 recs

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

A site by Blazer fans, for Blazer fans
Start posting about the Trail Blazers »

Join SB Nation and dive into communities focused on all your favorite teams.

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recommended FanPosts

Un_bohemien_small
Is Roy a Good Teammate?
Kpavatar2_small
Just Another Junk In The Wall:  11-18-09
Terryporter_small
Blazers Edge Community Podcast Episode 008
Small
Why is the Blazers’ offense bad this year? Why is the defense so good?
P1010399_small
Photos from the Hawks game, 11/16/2009

Recent FanPosts

Small
Rotation...Oden
Small
Impressive Early Season Blazers Stats
Imported_photos_00004_small
The Blazer Guards
Small
Portland and the summer of Lebron
Copy_of_dcp_2180_small
Tough act to follow junk Nov.19
Small
Nate? Avery? Adelman?
Small
How would Ellis fit?
Nike_orangemen_3_small
Oden's minutes compared with other centers in the last 25 years
Img_0529_small
Prayers are with you P. A.

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >

FanShots

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

Recommended FanShots

A modest proposal: Fire Mike Rice and Antonio Harvey!
For Ann, and Travis.
FREE GREG ODEN
"It's been good for us," Oden said. "We're going to stick with it. We have...

Recent FanShots

Greg Oden with a Kimbo Slice/Baron Davis beard. What do you think?
Andre Miller is tough
Michael Jordan says "don't retire my number"
Charles Oakley to the Blazers? He says there are talks
Lamarcus: The King Cobra?
Surprising Stats from Basketball-Reference
Oden #5 and Rudy #9 ranked soph espn.com
NYT: The Pick-And-Roll is the NBA's Old Reliable
At this point, what the Blazers want most is rebounding. That was an...

+ New FanShot All FanShots >


Editors

Kitten_small Dave

Ben_small Ben.

Moderators

Pict1126_small -ken

Polar_bear_small jorga

Terryporter_small prezofdeath

Small usmcr3049

Jesus_icon_i_small T Darkstar

Wallpaper_small geoffm