Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: Trent Richardson Interviews Fellow Brown Brandon Weeden

Media Row Report: Blazers 87, Pistons 81

When I last spoke to Brandon Roy, prior to last week's road trip, I asked him how he wanted to play down the stretch, how he envisioned his role on this new-look Blazers team.  His simple, confident, declarative answer: "playmaker."  With teams getting hip to the Blazers 1-4 fourth quarter offense, Roy's thinking was straightforward: get by his defender, read the help defense, make sound decisions (pass or shoot) and lead his team.

Since that conversation, the Blazers put away weak competition on the road, Travis Outlaw went down with a serious foot injury and the team collapsed down the stretch against a playoff quality team in Atlanta.  Roy logged the most minutes of any Blazer during the road trip, looked dead tired during overtime against the Hawks on Monday night, was held below 20 point per game for the trip despite the overall weak competition, and continued to adjust to guarding small forwards rather than off guards.  

The wins over the past week helped obscure some of these struggles and changes.  But tonight a new, less certain perspective from Roy was unmistakable.

During the Portland Trail Blazers' 87-81 home win over the Detroit Pistons, Roy provided the offensive spark that blew the game open during the third quarter and then watched as his team nearly blew a 20 point lead during the fourth quarter.  Rushed back into the game to put out the fire, Roy failed to score a point, notch an assist, grab a rebound and only took one field goal attempt in nearly five minutes of fourth quarter play.  The Pistons regularly ran a second defender at him to force the ball from his hands, then did a solid job of rotating defensively, necessitating extra passes. His shot-making taken away, his passing countered, Roy was as neutralized as I can remember seeing him down the stretch, a bystander as his teammates committed turnovers and struggled to break a scrambling Pistons trap.

The Pistons's wild fourth quarter comeback was surprising and confusing and, surely, frustrating for Roy who is now dealing with the dual prospects of playing without Travis Outlaw and playing out of position at small forward for the foreseeable future.  

So after the game I addressed the same topic that we had spoken about prior to the trip: how does Roy envision his role on this team right now?  Does he still see himself as a playmaker? "Nah," Roy admitted. "I wouldn't necessarily say playmaker," he said, pausing to think about it. "I don't know. That's a good question. How would you describe my role?"

It's generally not a good sign when your franchise player turns back to the inquiring writer for help answering this type of question.  It doesn't happen often with a player as cerebral as Roy who is coached by someone as discipline-minded as Nate McMillan.  Roles are generally established in late September, refined in October. It's now more than halfway through November.

"I don't know," I answered honestly. "That's why I'm asking. It seems like you're thinking pass first some times. And then other times you're really looking to get your shot. It seems like it changes play to play, quarter to quarter." 

"Yeah," Roy nodded. "Maybe even game to game [too]. Some nights I think opportunities are there for me to be more aggressive. Other nights I'm maybe not as aggressive as people have seen me in the past. For me, it's just trying to do whatever it takes to help this team win games."

Tonight, Roy relinquished control of the ball and the flow of the game down the stretch. It's not something we're used to watching as observers and it was somewhat terrifying and dreadful.  Sure, a win is a win. But scraping by after giving up a 25-8 run to start the fourth quarter and with your team's star player and best ballhandler taken almost entirely out of the offense during crunch time isn't how you envision it going down.

Through it all -- the double teams, the injuries, the juggled lineups, the mismatches -- Roy has remained impressively flexible, impressively ego-less.  Many doubted that he would last this long playing out of position in a three guard lineup without raising a fuss, either publicly or privately.  But it was clear tonight that Roy is in limbo, forced by recent circumstances into repeating a cycle of reading situations and making adjustments, reading and adjusting, reading and adjusting. "A lot of things have changed," Roy stated. "I'm just trying to make sure that everyone is keeping a rhythm. Now with Greg in the lineup and Dre, I'm trying to figure it out and make sure our offense continues to flow better." Less playmaker, perhaps, and more dance instructor.

At times tonight, things flowed very well for the Blazers, who notched 22 assists on 29 field goals through the first three quarters.  Roy handed out five himself and watched Andre Miller dole out a season-high 11 as well.  One of Miller's dimes found Roy for a pretty break-out dunk, a sign that a connection between the two players continues to develop.  Which made it doubly frustrating when that connection seemed to disappear in the game's closing minutes.

Perhaps buoyed by the victory, Roy remained cautiously optimistic about where he stands.  Although he might feel uncertain about how things will shake out long-term he doesn't feel uncomfortable.  "I'm settling in more and more to [the lineups and rotations]," he said. "Earlier it was tough but now I'm starting to settle in to see what the team needs me to do and just trying to do it." Tonight, against an inferior opponent, Roy did enough to get the win.  On many nights, against many opponents, Roy is capable of delivering victory whether he's settled or not, through his skills alone. 

But with only seven guys playing like they deserve real rotation minutes right now, the physical and mental burden on Roy will only increase.  And sooner or later, clarity will either emerge for Roy or it won't. 

Both for his sake and the success of his team, hopefully the next time we talk roles Roy won't need to turn to writers for help answering the question. 

Random Game Notes

  • Austin Daye will be an NBA All Star before he retires. Watching his thorough, impressive warm-up routine, it was easy to see why, despite his slight frame, he was a darling of the scouts during the pre-draft process. His movements with the ball are crisp, precise and fluid, recalling a slightly less confident Kevin Durant. His footwork before and during catches was excellent, his shooting form consistent and his competitive desire was oozing, even two hours before the game. During the game, he disrupted Steve Blake during the fourth quarter by trapping 3/4 court and he knocked down a three.  His frame is a liability and will remain so for a few years -- not unlike Durant -- but the sky is the limit.  If I was Joe Dumars I would view Daye as my least tradeable asset, Stuckey and Gordon included.  
  • Bill Simmons was spotted chatting up Kevin Pritchard before the game but was not shown on the Rose Garden's big screen. Ken Griffey and Ken Griffey, Jr., however, drew cheers when shown on the Jumbotron and drew autograph seekers to their courtside seats. Juwan Howard and Jerryd Bayless both made a point of getting/giving daps from/to Griffey Jr. during halftime warm-ups.
  • The official box score seems to be in error tonight.  They charged Steve Blake with just 2 fourth quarter turnovers. In actuality, he had 1,378.  Hopefully the NBA will step in and correct this.
  • A clash of generations occurred when 52 year old Juwan Howard posted up 13 year old Austin Daye. It was like slamming together a Discman and an iPod, only in human form.  
  • Rudy threw a pass between Kwame Brown's legs to Greg Oden for a dunk. It was sweet but would have been sweeter if you didn't have the suspicious feeling that Rudy is looking to nutmeg someone on every possession. 
  • Blazers Owner Paul Allen drew cheers when shown on the big screen and dropped in on the locker room after the game. Be sure to read Nate McMillan's heartfelt response to a question about Allen below.

Nate's Post-game Comments

It almost slipped away in the fourth quarter. Thoughts?

You play the game 48 minutes. I've often been criticized for not playing guys down the stretch, you don't play with the game. You don't ever. It was a good game for us. A good lesson. You play that game 48 minutes and you play it the right way and you don't relax because it's never over. I think a bad shot or a turnover can always give a team momentum. That's how I coach -- to win games. When we feel like we have that game under control we'll make substitutions. But we had our guys in there and we had to bring back that group that got us there. We stopped doing the things that we needed to do. Execute both ways. You start launching quick j's, turning that ball over, being loose, playing the scoreboard as opposed to playing the game the right way anything can happen.  I thought for 3 quarters we were good. Coming off the road we wanted to give a strong effort on both ends of the floor. Defensively as well as offensively. And we did that for 3 quarters.

Margin of error slimmed down due to injuries?

I think it's just that it's the margin for error is where it's at because of the group. It's a young group that is still trying to learn how to win and how to win big. We have a lot of work to do. We have one year where we won some games but we're not there yet. We have to play that game the right way for 48 minutes.

What caused the collapse?

The thing is, turnovers and I thought maybe we just relaxed. You turn the ball over, you don't execute offensively. You lose your rhythm. You lose a little bit of confidence. They get excited. And you know make some plays, get some momentum and you start to get a little tight. I know we had turnovers, I don't know how many. I thought some shots, we may have taken some quick shots. And all of a sudden it's a three point ballgame. It was a positive that we won that game. 

Blake's 3 at the end of the game

Well we needed it. We don't want him to hesitate. He had an open look. He can knock that shot down. As you mentioned, last game he had some similar shots that didn't fall. Big shot. Big free throws for Blake. And then those other guys down the stretch.

Brandon and LaMarcus offensively

Those are the guys. We gotta get them going. Tonight to see both of them score, we haven't seen that this season. We had a third guy with Blake, and Miller being able to score. So we were able to, I thought our assists were really good throughout the night for the most part. Turnovers were pretty good until that fourth quarter.

Andre missed his first four free throws. Were you nervous with him at the line at the end of the game?

Those are our best free throw shooters. Miller is an 85 or 86 percent career free throw shooter. Blake is shooting well. And Brandon. So you get up there and you have to knock them down. And he ended up doing that.

How did you address the team in the locker room?  Tough love?

It's a lesson. I've said this always to the team, you don't play the scoreboard. We said that at the start of the fourth quarter. This team was down 25 points last night to the Lakers and came back. And that's what we said to them. This team is not going to quit playing. And we don't play that scoreboard. You play this game the right way. You keep pushing the ball, get into their legs because their legs are tired, they're heavy. And defensively don't give them anything. Offensively keep executing because they've been down before and last night they were down. Now it's a lesson. Sometimes you have to learn the hard way. Lucky us that we were able to pull it out.

Martell

Well, he's getting good looks. Those are shots he can knock down. He's just got to keep shooting that when he gets them. Of course, don't hesitate.

Paul Allen's presence at the Rose Garden and his interaction with the players

We were surprised that he was here. I saw him and just hugged him. He's a strong man. He loves his Blazers. I think it showed the fact that he was getting medical attention just a couple of days ago and as soon as we come back he's here wanting to see us. I think the guys were probably surprised to see him and I didn't see it but I'm sure just like I did, I was happy to see him and we're praying for him. He's a strong man. That's the man. I'm sure they were happy to see him.

Anything unusual with their press or trap at the end that gave you trouble?

Nah, they were scrambling. And just trying to create some turnovers and we gave it to them a couple of times.

-- Ben Golliver | (benjamin.golliver@gmail.com) | Twitter

Comment 170 comments  |  0 recs  | 

Do you like this story?

Comments

Display:

The way that this team still doesn’t have an identity is worrisome.

We miss Nic a lot.

i cry for nic

by Cablinasian on Nov 19, 2009 1:50 AM PST reply actions  

nic's overrated

what’s he really do? block shots? run the floor? provide stifling defense? limited but efficient offense?

I mean beside all of that, what does he do?

"No disrespect to Jeff Blake"

by Eat Politicians on Nov 19, 2009 1:57 AM PST up reply actions   1 recs

We should cut him

who needs a guy like that? Well, other than the Blazers. Get well soon Nic, maybe you should borrow Terrel Owens’ hyperbolic chamber, because the squad needs you

"man, steve blake is clutch *dead*" - Ben Golliver on Twitter

by blazeraddict on Nov 19, 2009 6:40 AM PST up reply actions  

A lot of Blazer fans overrate Batum, comes with the territory

I don’t think his 6 pts and 3 rebounds is the answer

That said I do think down the road Batum will be a solid NBA player. But he’s certainly not the main reason for the team’s issues

Blazer Fan

by leeroyjenkins on Nov 19, 2009 7:18 AM PST up reply actions  

Batum means Brandon Roy at the 3 and Steve Blake at the 2.

i cry for nic

by Cablinasian on Nov 19, 2009 9:59 AM PST up reply actions  

You mean at the 2, no? This means Roy's not sucking it up on defense as much.

He’s getting beat alot these days.

Agreed. It has more to do with the points the opponent doesn’t score. Looking at his scoring isn’t a very salient way to assess Batum’s value, kind of like looking at Przybilla’s scoring.

Keep your expectations low and you won't be disappointed.

by Benjamanic on Nov 19, 2009 11:42 AM PST up reply actions  

I meant to have written “no Batum means…”

i cry for nic

by Cablinasian on Nov 19, 2009 1:26 PM PST up reply actions  

You mean those issues like...

Winning 7 out of their last 8 games during a stretch of 13 days…or winning 5 out of 6 on the road while losing key role players and having guys like Roy and Miller still playing themselves into shape?

Batum’s offensive production numbers have very little to do with his value to the Blazers and the reasons he is missed. Are you saying he wouldn’t have made a difference against the Hawks?.. You think he could have helped out a little defensively?

According to some…everyone is overrated.

by Ilikeemall on Nov 19, 2009 10:32 AM PST up reply actions  

"Austin Daye will be an NBA All Star before he retires," writes Ben.

Wow, dude, you and I really do look at basketball in an entirely different light.

Daye, who’s inefficient offensively and overmatched defensively, will be a bust.

Dear Paul Allen:

Fire Nate McMillan & hire Jeff Van Gundy.

Sincerely,
AK1984

by AK1984 on Nov 19, 2009 2:25 AM PST reply actions  

he has a long way to go

but I once thought Tayshaun Prince, Rip Hamilton and Will Bynum were busts. Somehow, the Pistons get the most out of their players…which is why I bet them to beat the 10 pt spread!

My mom babysat Paul Allen

by shwa on Nov 19, 2009 4:02 AM PST up reply actions  

Something in the middle. Until he doesn’t get a lot stronger and more athletic to defend, I could see Hedo Turkoglu/MIP in his future. That is, if he can speed up his shot.

Ceterum censeo Lakers esse delendam

by Norsktroll on Nov 19, 2009 6:40 AM PST up reply actions  

He didn't even start for the Zags IIRC

I think he’ll be a solid player, but no All Star.

"Good evening Blazer fans, wherever you may be!"-Bill Schonely

by skywaker9 on Nov 19, 2009 8:34 AM PST up reply actions  

Nah, Austin Daye started at the 4 on a Gonzaga Bulldogs team that had a soft frontline last season.

Regarding Gonzaga players with potential, Matt Bouldin may be worth using a second-round pick on in 2010. Bouldin, whose versatile skill set on offense would make him an awesome third-string 2, would fit well in Portland as injury insurance behind Brandon Roy and Rudy Fernandez. Bouldin would surely be a much better fit than a couple of bums currently taking up precious roster spots, Jeff Pendergraph and Patty Mills, who should both be gone by the fall of 2010.

Dear Paul Allen:

Fire Nate McMillan & hire Jeff Van Gundy.

Sincerely,
AK1984

by AK1984 on Nov 19, 2009 9:41 PM PST up reply actions  

If I had to choose, I'd side with AK here.

If you were to look up “soft” in the NBA dictionary, Daye’s picture would be there. In a guy that soft, you’d like to see a freaky degree of flexibility, like Reggie Miller. Best case scenario is Daye is a nice role player.

by PoliSam on Nov 19, 2009 8:43 AM PST up reply actions  

Nobody was more fundamentally sound than Steve Alford

and his NBA career was…well, let’s put it this way…how many of you 20 year-olds even know who Steve Alford was?

When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!

by two4larue on Nov 19, 2009 2:01 PM PST up reply actions  

Are you referring to that guy who coached Iowa?

He played basketball? For real? Must have been back in the days when Hank Iba and Bob Knight were coaching.

hakkaa päälle !

by timg56 on Nov 19, 2009 2:33 PM PST up reply actions  

Who's Hank Iba?

And Bobby Knight used to coach basketball?

by xedubx on Nov 19, 2009 4:07 PM PST up reply actions  

'Miller is an 85 or 86 percent career free throw shooter.'

Not quite Nate, Miller is a career 80.2% FT shooter. Makes me wonder what other incorrect perceptions Nate holds. For example, does he believe Blake is a career 45% shooter? Just interesting.

by Evanescent on Nov 19, 2009 3:04 AM PST reply actions  

Blake shot 43 last year

Subtract a couple dozen half-court heaves and he’s 45% easy.

by levelhed on Nov 19, 2009 8:03 AM PST up reply actions  

no, when I worked up the heaves numbers last year, he didn’t get to 45%.

i cry for nic

by Cablinasian on Nov 19, 2009 10:00 AM PST up reply actions  

Yeah, Blake was rarely in the game

when the heaves usually happen (i.e. end of 1st and 3rd quarters). Brandon was usually the guy going to work at the end of the 2nd and Sergio was usually playing PG otherwise. Not exactly a ton of opportunities for Blake to throw up wild half court heaves.

by Royster on Nov 19, 2009 10:07 AM PST up reply actions  

Sergio and Travis were our designated heavers.

i cry for nic

by Cablinasian on Nov 19, 2009 10:24 AM PST up reply actions  

Sergio's FG% was hopeless anyway

No harm done.

"Woulda, Coulda, Mighta and Shoulda – the Four Horsemen of the Procrastocalypse" - Red-5

by jscot on Nov 19, 2009 10:48 AM PST up reply actions  

and at times, Sergio's defense

made me want to heave

When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!

by two4larue on Nov 19, 2009 1:59 PM PST up reply actions  

I don't know what to make of your opinion on Austin Daye if you think Ben Gordon as one of the "least

tradeable assets". Ben Gordon is a chucker.

I really don’t like how Brandon Roy is just playing passive this year. Small forward is not his spot. Andre needs to learn to play with Roy, not the other way around. Roy needs to start playing shooting guard. Nate needs to move Blake to the bench, and the Blazers need to learn to win with that line up. Roy can’t just be shut down in the 4th like that.

He has not been getting to the rim when we need offense down the stretch.

by BRoyInThe4th on Nov 19, 2009 3:59 AM PST reply actions  

Um, they iso'ed Roy a bunch in the fourth

Then he passed to Blake who bricked some 3’s. Luckily he finally hit one when it counted. Maybe if we took away the security blanket that is Blake, Brandon might actually finish. btw iso’ing Roy constantly is what booted us from the playoffs last season. I would try something different.

Blazer Fan

by leeroyjenkins on Nov 19, 2009 7:16 AM PST up reply actions  

Roy finished plenty last season with Blake in the lineup

I agree, Blake needs to be benched, but saying that he’s Roy’s security blanket seems a little much. They certainly don’t need to iso Roy so much, but they do need to find a way to put him in a position to score.

I’m not sure what happened to Roy, but it seems that he’s forgotten all about his up and under move. At this point, he’s not even getting to his spots, he’s either chucking a jumper or getting caught in the air because he feels he needs to set somebody else up.

Witty Unpredictable Talent and Natural Game

by iDea on Nov 19, 2009 8:14 AM PST up reply actions  

I would try something different.

Something like…what? Put the ball in Miller’s hands down the stretch, instead of Roy’s?

When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!

by two4larue on Nov 19, 2009 10:32 AM PST up reply actions  

I'd rather have Travis back...

hitting those daggers in the 4th, and giving another scoring option.

"That's just how I get down"........ Andre Miller

by FrenchieFan on Nov 19, 2009 12:36 PM PST up reply actions  

that's the easy way

and how much did Outlaw help the team win games late, during the Houston series?

If the Blazers take the time to learn how to execute their offense well at the end of games while Travis is out, it will be “time well spent” when the playoffs roll around

I’m willing to live with some regular season “growing pains” along the way, as long as they continue to show improvement and Nate keeps Andre in the game with Brandon down the stretch, so Miller and Roy can figure out what’s going to “work” between the two of them

When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!

by two4larue on Nov 19, 2009 1:58 PM PST up reply actions  

You hit on one key aspect.

Time to learn how to execute their offense.

There are people who don’t appear willing to give them that time. They want immediate gratification by seeing whatever chages they think need to happen. Apparently forgetting or choosing to ignore the fact this team is still young and learning to play both the game and with one another. Note Nate’s comment above on how the players have to learn not to play the clock. That’s a mistake a team with veterans playing makes fairly often. That Portland makes it should be understandable. For me, the thing to focus on is not that they made that mistake last night, but on the fact that Nate is making sure they recognize it. If you believe in this group of players, then you have to also believe that they are going to get it. Maybe not as fast as some fans would like, but so what. You can’t please everyone.

hakkaa päälle !

by timg56 on Nov 19, 2009 2:41 PM PST up reply actions  

True Larue,

That is the easy answer, but I’m biased when it comes to Travis, and no one can only point the finger at Travis for the Houston series.

LeeRoyJenkins nailed it ^^ on Blake being Roy’s security blanket. Not saying it’s a bad thing, but the team needs to be weaned off Blake and adjust to Miller also at the same time.
Imo, that’s what SHOULD make Nate COY, he showed us all his answer to Miller or Blake.

It’s coming, they just need to learn how to finish the game strong, and quit letting teams come back.

"That's just how I get down"........ Andre Miller

by FrenchieFan on Nov 19, 2009 3:16 PM PST up reply actions  

depending on Travis
the team needs to be weaned off Blake

The bench unit won’t get the opportunity to be “weaned off Outlaw” as their leading scorer, they’re going to have to adjust on the fly. It’s going to take more movement, better screens, attention to detail, and better defense for the white unit to hold leads while Brandon and/or LMA are resting. The talent is there, Rudy and Martell (in theory) should be able to knock down jumpers when they’re open—Joel can set screens for them, and Blake can pass them the ball. Bayless can go into attack mode, when he gets the chance. There’s no reason the Blazer’s bench can’t hold their own, they just have to find out “what works” and get it done, together

When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!

by two4larue on Nov 19, 2009 6:39 PM PST up reply actions  

So because Blake can shoot from the perimeter, it negatively affects the team?

I don’t get it. You’re saying that, since Roy has a reliable outside shooter to kick it out to, he’s not as good as a result. Would you rather have a guy whose defender can sag off and bother Roy on the drive and/or take a charge?

I agree that they do isolate Roy too much and should probably go elsewhere a little more often in the 4th, but that argument doesn’t make sense to me.

Keep your expectations low and you won't be disappointed.

by Benjamanic on Nov 19, 2009 11:53 AM PST up reply actions  

Maybe we could all chip in to get a plane to sky-write this over the practice facility in Tualatin.....
Roy needs to start playing shooting guard. Nate needs to move Blake to the bench, and the Blazers need to learn to win with that line up

.

It just seems so, so…….. so obvioussssssssss!!!!!!!!!!!!

Playing your best player out of position isn’t sustainable.

Not starting your best PG doesn’t make sense.

Needing a bigger stronger SF for defense is clear.

Using zone defenses to try to hide defensive weakness just creates rebounding problems.

Continuing to give the player who has the second worst PER and TS% on the team, the third most minutes doesn’t make sense.

If the Blazers are going to succeed in the playoffs, Roy and Miller need to learn how to play with each other. End of story.

I have been a big Nate defender for the past two seasons, however, I am slowly moving from scratching my head to pulling out my hair. Winning against mediocre to lousy opposition does not hide the fact that the team is firing on about six out of eight cylinders.

by upper left corner on Nov 19, 2009 8:05 AM PST up reply actions   3 recs

I couldn't have said it better myself.

I’ve been trying to defend starting Blake or at least finding some rationale for it, but with each passing game, it gets harder and harder to do. Really I find it surprising that he only had 1378 turnovers in that 4th quarter.

by lickety brindle on Nov 19, 2009 9:01 AM PST up reply actions  

I agree--I love Nate

but I am having issues with him as well. Rec.

I am an oasis of Blazer fandom in a bleak desert of Laker fans.

by RenoBlazerFan on Nov 19, 2009 9:16 AM PST up reply actions  

Agree 100%

"man, steve blake is clutch *dead*" - Ben Golliver on Twitter

by blazeraddict on Nov 19, 2009 10:12 AM PST up reply actions  

I believe I'll invest my money in something a little more worthwhile.

I also get the feeling that the team is not firing on all cylinders, at least not all the time. However that just tells me what a powerful engine we have. It’s my understanding that high performance engines can be rather finicky until you get them tuned in just right. Let’s let the coach drive it around the track a few laps to see what he has. Could be all that is needed is a bit of a tuneup, not an overhaul.

hakkaa päälle !

by timg56 on Nov 19, 2009 2:46 PM PST up reply actions  

Completely agree

I’m tired of everyone saying we should keep the 3 guard lineup because we’re winning with it. Adjustments still need to be made in order to improve.

"The two things you've got to do to give yourself a chance to win games. One, you've got to shoot the ball. Second thing, we've got to play defense."
- Nate McMillan

by ericking on Nov 19, 2009 3:28 PM PST up reply actions  

Improve to what?

10 – 3?

11 – 2?

Hell, why settle for anything less than perfection. This team should be 14 – 0.

hakkaa päälle !

by timg56 on Nov 19, 2009 3:41 PM PST up reply actions  

I don't think improvement necessarily means a better record

They’ve looked bad in crunch time. Every game, including against patsies, they’ve experienced a long drought where things just look painful and forced.

They haven’t handled pressure well, when that was a cornerstone the past couple of years, winning close games and getting it done. This year? Not so much.

Witty Unpredictable Talent and Natural Game

by iDea on Nov 19, 2009 5:36 PM PST up reply actions  

The only improvement that matters now is the won/loss record.

This is no longer a 21, 32 or 41 win team. During those seasons you did look for improvements in how the team played, whether they were learning the basics and understanding what Nate meant by playing the game the right way.

They are still learning, but now they have graduated to being a good team. One that is focused on wins and getting back to the playoffs. It doesn’t matter if they win games ugly or waltz through the league.

hakkaa päälle !

by timg56 on Nov 20, 2009 7:31 AM PST up reply actions  

So we're only playing with 4 guys?

I’ve heard of addition by subtraction but…

"Do me a favor. Put your lip over your head... and swallow." Max Goldman

by clinchmobb on Nov 19, 2009 10:11 AM PST up reply actions  

comeback sure was cool, here's why

I arrived in Vegas an hour before the game started and went immediately to the Sports Book at the MGM to check the line. Blazers -10. Now, born and bred a Blazer fan, betting for Detroit to beat that spread would get me kicked outta my own fam (especially with how much I threw down).

But I was feeling it. Of course I wanted the Blazers to win, just not by 10 or more. My thinking was that the Blazers have had several low scoring games (broached 100 3/12 games at that time [one of which was a loss at Houston]) and although their pace has improved, we still value possessions like few teams do in this run ‘n’ gun era. Yes, our point differential is very good (+7.2, 3rd in NBA), but since our four blowout victories in a row from Nov. 6 – 11 our roster has thinned a bit.

The teller was kind enough to remind me that the Blazers have covered their last 6 spreads (not favored in atl). Still, you gotta trust your gut.

You can imagine my consternation at the end of the 3rd qtr. "Why did I bet against my team, stupid?! Of course they’ll beat the Pistons by more than 10 at the Rose Garden! I just bet on Austin Daye, Will Bynum and Kwame Brown!? Nooooooo."

Making it worse was the guy standing in front of my monitor (lots of games on) pumping his fist in the air every time the Blazers increased their lead…which was a lot . At the end of the 3rd, I needed Detroit to beat the Blazers in the 4th by at least 11 pts. NOT LIKELY. But teams to tend to give up large leads surprisingly quickly, so I stuck around to see if the literal bad boys could muster a comeback.

With stacks of high society on the line (okay maybe less, a lot less, but still a lot for us blue collars) I found myself rooting for every ridiculous Charlie V. jump shot and Rodney Stuckeyism. The combo of rooting against one’s soul and potentially squandered mini-fortune (again I lie) caused Shaq-like beads of sweat to roll down my armpits. "Damn!? I haven’t felt this nervous since I lost my virginity!"

I knew the bet was good when the Pistons cut it to two. The guy who was formerly celebrating the blowout crumpled his ticket and threw it over the Book’s counter! One win down, now for the Blazers to actually win the game. "No! I single-handedly cursed the Blazers by rooting against them for the first time ever!" Had the Blazers lost tonight, I would come forward and accept full responsibility for the loss and publish my apology to the team. As it stands, AWESOME!! Two birds with one stone (vegas) baby.

Moral of the story: You’ll stand to win a lot of basketball bets when you’re personal friends with refs officiating the game. J/K, not like that would happen.

Better Moral of the story: DON’T GAMBLE (unless you get a story from it)

My mom babysat Paul Allen

by shwa on Nov 19, 2009 4:04 AM PST reply actions  

I know someone going to Vegas during the game we play Indiana and wants advice. So hard to say considering

the Blazers always blow huge leads. Also Blazers -10? Everyone knows the Blazers put in Bayless to come in and blow the lead. Lol. I still don’t know what to bet for the Indiana game. I’m pretty sure Blazers will be giving up 10 points like tonight.

by BRoyInThe4th on Nov 19, 2009 4:16 AM PST up reply actions  

Ah, so it was YOU that was paying Blake to play like that...

You’d think he’d be a little less conspicuous with those (ahem) “turnovers” in the 4th!!!

"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 Nov 19, 2009 8:17 AM PST up reply actions  

LOL
A clash of generations occurred when 52 year old Juwan Howard posted up 13 year old Austin Daye. It was like slamming together a Discman and an iPod, only in human form.

"We believe" -Rudy Fernandez

by twiggs on Nov 19, 2009 6:07 AM PST reply actions  

He may have meant to say a Walkman

That’s what we listened to in our horse and buggies.

by Kaboomm on Nov 19, 2009 6:23 AM PST up reply actions  

A BOOMBOX and an ipod...

"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 Nov 19, 2009 8:20 AM PST up reply actions  

great story on Daryl Dawkins and a boom box

Chocolate Thunder had a BIG boombox, ‘way back in the day. One day, he went in to see the trainer complaining that his shoulder hurt. They couldn’t figure out why, until the trainer saw DD carrying his boom box on the same shoulder and so he recommended that Dawkins “switch shoulders” Soon afterwards, Daryl’s shoulder pain mysteriously went away

When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!

by two4larue on Nov 19, 2009 11:26 AM PST up reply actions  

Mine had 7 transistors.

Can you remember the days when the number of transistors determined “the quality” of the radio?

by BlazerFanSince1970 on Nov 19, 2009 3:03 PM PST up reply actions  

Now I know there is somebody here older than me.

Or maybe I’m so old I’m just forgetting that.

I remember going to the electronics & tv repair store with my dad to test vacuum tubes from our old GE black & white tv. I still have the tv, taking up space in my dad’s basement.

hakkaa päälle !

by timg56 on Nov 19, 2009 3:13 PM PST up reply actions  

Yeah, I was the guy in front of you testing my tubes while you and your dad waited.

My first amplifier designs were done with tubes before I started doing transistor amplifier designs in the late 60’s.

by BlazerFanSince1970 on Nov 19, 2009 3:57 PM PST up reply actions  

I have that same memory!

Are you my brother?

"Woulda, Coulda, Mighta and Shoulda – the Four Horsemen of the Procrastocalypse" - Red-5

by jscot on Nov 19, 2009 11:16 PM PST up reply actions  

Unless you are half Slovene ...

… I could only be your half brother. Or cousin maybe. (my maternal lineage is Campbell.)

But even if we are not related, I’d be interested in being your Deputy Assistent Under Secretary for the Licencing and Inspection of Exotic Dancers. I know it’s a thankless job, but somebody has to step up and do it.

hakkaa päälle !

by timg56 on Nov 20, 2009 7:37 AM PST up reply actions  

I wasn't actually looking for help in that position

"Woulda, Coulda, Mighta and Shoulda – the Four Horsemen of the Procrastocalypse" - Red-5

by jscot on Nov 20, 2009 8:29 AM PST up reply actions  

Ben is right about Blake's turnovers

There were three, not two:

4:40 lost ball out of bounds
3:40 bad pass
1:10 bad pass

by Kaboomm on Nov 19, 2009 6:24 AM PST reply actions  

Does that include his "reverse" lay up.

I don’t know if that counts as a turnover, but it certainly should. Any shot that ends up further from the basket than when it leaves your hand should be counted as a turnover.

by lickety brindle on Nov 19, 2009 9:03 AM PST up reply actions  

Nate is such a boring interview.

Sometimes I wish he’d give us more “real” answers – like George Karl or Stan Van Gundy.

"Ain't nothin' in this world for free."

by Arby on Nov 19, 2009 6:49 AM PST reply actions  

Agreed

He’s an unbelievably dull interview

Blazer Fan

by leeroyjenkins on Nov 19, 2009 7:15 AM PST up reply actions  

I want to make a Nate Interveiw Bingo card

You get to blackout a word on the card when he says, all the catchphrases:

Scrappy
Intensity
Run the floor
For the most part
Getting good looks
Play for 4 quarters
Etc

Or a drinking game where you have to swig when he says “uhhhhh” – okay, maybe not (everyone would be on the floor in 1:10)

by Knobby on Nov 19, 2009 8:09 AM PST up reply actions  

I think you mean "nice job"

Nate often uses that a half dozen times after a win. Not tonight.

by Corvid on Nov 19, 2009 11:21 AM PST up reply actions  

You forget Nate's two favorite words in post-game interviews...

1. Blake

2. Brandon

"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 Nov 19, 2009 8:24 AM PST up reply actions  

"Brandon" would be the free square.

“Blake” would be a corner. “Dre” would be the opposite corner.

by Knobby on Nov 19, 2009 8:29 AM PST up reply actions  

The gimme spot in the middle would be

When he starts a sentence, apparently doesn’t like how it’s going, and starts over. He’s good for a few per interview. For example:

“I thought some shots, we may have taken some quick shots.”

“So we were able to, I thought our assists were really good throughout the night for the most part.”

Also, any time he adds one more player who he almost forgot, after the fact, to the list of “players who embody his point.” Good for 1-3 per.

“Those are our best free throw shooters. Miller is an 85 or 86 percent career free throw shooter. Blake is shooting well. And Brandon.”

by Dunemonkey on Nov 19, 2009 10:23 AM PST up reply actions  

reminds me of Steve Jones

he would always have a point “A” but never mention his second point

When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!

by two4larue on Nov 19, 2009 1:45 PM PST up reply actions  

Snapper

he still owes me a Walkman for answering a post game question correctly (forget the question – but the answer was Jerome Kersey). Never did get the prize.

by blacknoiseNW on Nov 19, 2009 2:01 PM PST up reply actions  

we got free tickets at least once

answering those Courtside trivia questions…probably the Sidney Wicks one

“Name the player who’s scoring average decreased every year he was in the NBA…minimum 10 years

My other favorite is…name the NBA player who played college ball at USC, and led the NBA in scoring during the decade of the ’80s

Give up? Alex English played for the U of South Carolina!

When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!

by two4larue on Nov 19, 2009 2:06 PM PST up reply actions  

Okay, I made one in MS XL...

It is pretty doggone funny, I must say. If you want one, shoot me an e-mail.

by Knobby on Nov 19, 2009 10:30 AM PST up reply actions  

Here are all the squares...

The center, or free square, is, “Uhhhhh”

Blake / Intensity / Control the Boards / Jumper / Scrappy
Run the Floor / Easy Baskets / …for 4 Quarters / Deep Post Position / Turnovers
Control the Paint / Brandon / Uhhhhh / Dictate the Tempo / Establish
Second Unit / For the Most Part / Our Bench / On the Glass / Greg Foul Trouble
Hustle / Spread the Floor / Get Good Looks / Pick n’ Roll / Miller or “Dre”

by Knobby on Nov 19, 2009 12:00 PM PST up reply actions  

Dont forget

We was pretty good for three quarters.

"BEER IS LIVING PROOF THAT GOD LOVES US"
- Benjamin Franklin-

by We-B-Dunkin on Nov 19, 2009 1:13 PM PST up reply actions  

"don't play with the game"

“48 minutes”

When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!

by two4larue on Nov 19, 2009 11:30 AM PST up reply actions  

My favorite is

(insert player name) did some things.

Still on the Rex bandwagon.

by dan_the_man on Nov 19, 2009 11:35 AM PST via mobile up reply actions  

Ha.

Yep, that is too true.

“I thought Rudy did some things, coming off the bench” " brought some intensity, and had some good looks"

by Knobby on Nov 19, 2009 11:54 AM PST up reply actions  

While we are on the subject ...

… lets talk about his fashion sense. Can’t the man find a belt that goes with his shoes? It’s almost a disgrace watching him on the sideline.

hakkaa päälle !

by timg56 on Nov 19, 2009 2:55 PM PST up reply actions  

Learn something new on Bedge again

Who knew that my belt was supposed to match my shoes?

"Woulda, Coulda, Mighta and Shoulda – the Four Horsemen of the Procrastocalypse" - Red-5

by jscot on Nov 19, 2009 11:19 PM PST up reply actions  

In your case it's your purse, sporran, or whatever they call that thingy ,,,

… that’s supposed to match your shoes.

Besides, why would you need a belt when wearing a skirt? Uh, excuse me, a kilt.

hakkaa päälle !

by timg56 on Nov 20, 2009 7:40 AM PST up reply actions  

What helps and hurts the team more?

A) Blake playing more as a SF/PG hybrid on offense to get a little more movement and entry passes to the bigs – with everyone then standing around and watching LaMarcus and Greg operate – and Roy having to play against the small forward respectively the best wing player on defense in that scenario, and also standing around more. Miller is also in the game to help with steals and creating fast breaks and offense.

B) Or the rather inconsistent Martell playing more on SF in a Nic Batum role on both ends, “doing the Portland” mostly just sitting in the weakside corner taking open 3s and trying what he can on defense to rebound and block shots, with Roy playing the same role like last year defending shooting guards and initiating the offense himself with the other players watching him standing around. Miller is also in the game to help with steals and creating fast breaks and offense.

I would take B, and hope that Roy himself starts finding Greg more when he is in good position to score, like he seems to be able with Joel at times. A works somewhat, but forces people into roles they are not at their best to succeed. Blake suddenly has to defend a Ben Gordon or Joe Johnson on a switch, and Roy defends guys like a 6’9"+ Jerebko and Marving Williams – or Joe Johnson too.

Ceterum censeo Lakers esse delendam

by Norsktroll on Nov 19, 2009 7:03 AM PST reply actions  

All that work foiled by lame software!

"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 Nov 19, 2009 8:14 AM PST up reply actions  

So you would say the final five should be:

Roy, Blake, Marty, LMA, and (presumably) Oden???

"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 Nov 19, 2009 8:14 AM PST up reply actions  

Thats where I am coming from, although I would like to see...

….a fair number of minutes of three guard with Rudy, rather than Blake, depending on the match-up.

by upper left corner on Nov 19, 2009 8:43 AM PST up reply actions  

If we are behind and need to score it should be Rudy instead of Marty, but that should be the standard starting lineup. I’m surprised how well the Blake-Miller-Roy lineup works defensively, but all in all it’s still a mess. We need someone to fill the role Nic played last year, and the most likely candidate for success to me isn’t inserting Blake and making that Roy’s job.

Ceterum censeo Lakers esse delendam

by Norsktroll on Nov 19, 2009 8:50 AM PST up reply actions  

The Blazers have a stretch of absolute confusion nearly EVERY GAME

Not sure why Nate is acting like this is a one-time deal. Whatever is causing that eight or nine minute stretch of non-basketball, they better get it figured out quick. This scraping by isn’t going to fly once the schedule gets tougher.

That said, it’s a win and a win is a win.

Blazer Fan

by leeroyjenkins on Nov 19, 2009 7:14 AM PST reply actions  

I absolutely agree

How many games have they put together four solid quarters of basketball?

by TheMadKiwi on Nov 19, 2009 9:30 AM PST up reply actions  

1-0 RWOO

Record With Out Outlaw.
I am curious about Nate’s rotation now. One guy gets hurt but Nate basically cuts the rotation two guys….. why? Why didn’t he just do that when the roster was stocked and minutes were scarce?
Blake has to hit those threes because he gives up a LOT on the defensive end. Three TO’s isn’t bad, but all of them in the fourth quarter?
It’s getting weird to read these staements by players, especially Roy, that don’t say anything outright, but basically point right at the coach saying, “your not explaining our roles, your not providing clear expectations and your not being consistant in strategy”. They never say Nates name, but Nate is the only one responsible for what the players have been complaining about (especially Roy) all year.

by zersrule on Nov 19, 2009 7:15 AM PST reply actions  

I'm not sure if Jerryd's ankle is completely healthy
basically cuts the rotation two guys….. why?

this may be why he’s being left out of the guard rotation

When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!

by two4larue on Nov 19, 2009 11:39 AM PST up reply actions  

I think Bayless isn't playing because they need a playmaker with Outlaw out.

When Outlaw is in the game he takes a lot shots and creates his own shots. And Rudy sets up LMA well (although Howard is sometimes in the game for LMA), and occasionally Joel (1-2 baskets a game). But with Outlaw gone LMA alone isn’t enough even when he is in there, and there is no one to set up Rudy and Webster for shots – they don’t create their own shots well. Hence, he wants Miller in the game instead of Bayless.

by BlazerFanSince1970 on Nov 19, 2009 3:22 PM PST up reply actions  

We need another scorer with Outlaw out.

Bayless can fill that role. I agree that Miller is a playmaker and much better at setting up others but what we really need is someone to attack the other team and keep pressure on them to also score. Unleashing Bayless when we were up by 20 last night and telling him to attack the basket (his usual role) would have lead to him scoring or getting fouled (he is rather adept at that). Detroit would have had to score even more than they did to keep up (catch me if you can!). Instead, I think our intent was to use Miller to set up the others but we just relaxed and tried to run the clock down without doing what we had been doing relatively easily for 3 quarters and that is: scoring. And that is what Outlaw does, he scores points. It is his downfall and his upside: unconsciousness on the floor…

"Do me a favor. Put your lip over your head... and swallow." Max Goldman

by clinchmobb on Nov 19, 2009 4:29 PM PST up reply actions  

I agree

And you wouldn’t want him bringing the ball up against that trapping defense right now, I’m afraid, but if he’s the outlet he’d get the ball and attack the hoop before they could trap him, and the whole thing would break down.

"Woulda, Coulda, Mighta and Shoulda – the Four Horsemen of the Procrastocalypse" - Red-5

by jscot on Nov 19, 2009 11:21 PM PST up reply actions  

Tonight's game really punctuated why we need Miller late in games

How laughably easy was it to get the ball out of Brandon’s hands when he iso-ed up top simply by running a hard double at him early in the shot clock? Then, off the double, the Pistons were able to rotate effectively to play 3 on 4 defense while they recovered. As long as Brandon is getting the ball 30 feet away from the basket early in the clock, thigh will probably be an effective tactic.

Miller initiating the possession would allow Brandon to receive the ball close to the basket with less time for the defense to react once he got the ball, enabling him to take his man quickly rather than having two guys rush at him before he makes his move. If a team tries to double Brandon hard off the ball, I have no doubt that Miller could find the open guy for a nice look.

We’re going to have to beat a lot better defenses than the Pistons’ if we want to win anything, so the fact that they were able to completely destroy our “4th quarter offense” is definitely not a good sign.

by Royster on Nov 19, 2009 7:15 AM PST reply actions   1 recs

I thought that's why we got Miller but apparently not

Apparently we’re going to live and die with the Roy iso / pass to Blake.

Doesn’t work so hot when Blake doesn’t have a career year as we are seeing so far.

Blazer Fan

by leeroyjenkins on Nov 19, 2009 7:20 AM PST up reply actions  

Correct twice.

"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 Nov 19, 2009 8:11 AM PST up reply actions  

Well, as Dave said in the chat the other night

Nate’s always been a “go with what works, until it doesn’t” type of guy, and it seems pretty clear to me that this was the point that it stopped working. At the very least, it was the point that the rest of the league got a nice blueprint for dealing with what we’re passing off as an offense in the last 6 minutes of games these days.

by Royster on Nov 19, 2009 7:29 AM PST up reply actions  

Give Detroit some credit

They had an awkward, scrambling trap that was particularly effective last night, and the Blazers added a bit of choke to the mix.

I’m not sure that’s a blueprint the rest of the league will be able to read from. Did Nate really lose his edge from one 12 minute stretch last night? No.

by levelhed on Nov 19, 2009 8:15 AM PST up reply actions  

It's not difficult to simply double Roy up top

and then zone out the key. Seeing as how we were intent on getting the ball back to Roy 30 feet from the basket once another player received the ball, they succeeded in continually bogging down the offense until Roy would get the ball 30 feet away from the basket with 5 seconds on the clock.

And it’s not like this is the first time our 4th quarter offense has stalled. We haven’t exactly seen a lot of different ideas out there for late game offense.

by Royster on Nov 19, 2009 8:22 AM PST up reply actions  

I thought the same thing.

i guess that’s why your are levelhed!

"Do me a favor. Put your lip over your head... and swallow." Max Goldman

by clinchmobb on Nov 19, 2009 10:19 AM PST up reply actions  

When the objective is to win the game ...

… how much does it matter how you won it?

No bonus points are awarded for winning games by double digit margins everytime. A blowout or a two point squeaker still counts the same. And by that standard, last night’s game was definately not where Nate’s rotations stopped working.

Let’s see Portland getting beat more than occasionally before saying the wheels are coming off. At the current pace, this team gets 57 wins.

hakkaa päälle !

by timg56 on Nov 19, 2009 3:09 PM PST up reply actions  

Nobody is saying the wheels are coming off

Nobody disputes that the Blazers are in a solid position regarding playoff position. There are those of us who see issues that need to be resolved if the Blazers are to be a true contender, and want to see more rapid progress on those issues. Nobody is predicting doom and gloom, but the goal is a championship and we don’t look like a championship contender.

by jksnake99 on Nov 19, 2009 3:18 PM PST up reply actions  

When you listen to both the content and tone of a lot of comments here ...

… it sure sounds like doom and gloom.

And as for more rapid progress – well, I’d like to see the stock market back at 14000. By tomorrow. But if it gets there in a year or so, I’ll be perfectly happy. I won’t get into what a championship contender looks like, because personally I don’t think anyone here really knows the answer to that. They might know one answer, or maybe a couple, but the truth is there are a lot of aspects that go into winning a championship and not every championship team has exhibited all or most of them. I will say that if you go into a season expecting your team to win the championship or setting that as the only measure of success, then you are bound to be disappointed for most of your life. I certainly did not start the season thinking Portland had to be a championship team or else they sucked. I started with the idea that they would be an exciting and entertaining team. One to be proud of. One that might even surprise a lot of people by performing better than expected. Just as they’ve done the past three seasons. So far, I haven’t seen anything, other than injuries, that makes me believe any different.

hakkaa päälle !

by timg56 on Nov 19, 2009 3:38 PM PST up reply actions  

I'm glad you wrote that curt, straightforward comment, for I didn't have the energy to do it.

As it is, though, Portland has a decent collection of talent that should win roughly 55 games this season and get bounced in the first or second round of the NBA Playoffs. In the long run, however, that won’t be a satisfactory peak — at least not for a fan who puts winning a title as his or her first and foremost objective — with some personnel changes being necessary for this organization to progress into a true championship contender.

As it stands, Brandon Roy and Greg Oden are entrenched as franchise cornerstones — and LaMarcus Aldridge is set as an overpaid tertiary piece — however, there are huge questions about if some ancillary role players will be able to do their job adequately come playoff time, worries regarding the coaching staff’s level of acumen, and concerns about whether or not the basketball operations department fully understands the importance of balanced roster construction.

Dear Paul Allen:

Fire Nate McMillan & hire Jeff Van Gundy.

Sincerely,
AK1984

by AK1984 on Nov 19, 2009 3:47 PM PST up reply actions  

Thanks, Jake

couldn’t have said it better.

Tim – I don’t understand your stance at all. I understand that you have this binary view of performance (a win’s a win), but at the same time, if we notice flaws, is it not okay to discuss them? After a Blazers win, should the boards be filled with “great win last night, guys” exclusively, no matter if we just blew out the Lakers by 30 or if we just needed a 28 foot buzzer beater to beat the Kings?

Yeah, it was a win last night, but there were some obvious flaws in our play in the 4th quarter. Did I say these are unfixable, or that we’ll never win now because Nate isn’t a good enough coach to sort them out? My stance on our prospects this season didn’t change over night, but seeing how Detroit shut us down added a new wrinkle that Nate will need to figure out. Sure, we can and almost certainly will sort it out, but I’d hardly call giving up a 19 point swing late in a game an encouraging sign.

 I never said I had all the answers, just pointed out what I saw as a problem and offered up a solution. I hardly expect Nate to read BE, come across this and say, “Wow, Royster’s right. I need to start having Dre handle the ball late”, but I think it’s a valid enough position that I figured it was worth putting to the BE masses. Reading any criticism of the team’s play as “OMG, our team sucks, trade Brandon for draft picks” is just unfair. If I didn’t think the team could play much better, I wouldn’t care as much about it playing poorly now. There’s a lot of potential here, and it’s frustrating on some level to watch them continue to play poorly, regardless of what the final scoreboard says.

by Royster on Nov 19, 2009 4:40 PM PST up reply actions  

It's not that I expect everyone to do nothing but heap praise on the Blazers.

What has been bothering me for some time now is what I see as a constant stream of criticism. As if some Blazer fans are still locked into the time 5 or 6 years ago when there was a lot to critiicize. We no longer have a 21 win team whose future is supposedly built around Zach Randolph and Darius Miles. Back then I too dreamed of magical trades that would bring us players I liked and incrediable insight and luck that result in us drafting future all stars.

And guess what, while we didn’t get the first (although trading away Zach and getting Rudy as a result probably should count), we most certainly got the second. And for that Portland fans should be rejoicing. Every single day. That doesn’t mean we can’t discuss things we think could be better. But it would be nice if it occured within the framework of how much we appreciate what we have, rather than not being satisfied until out team has achieved some mythical level of perfection. Because that is what I see going on. How many times have we heard someone talk about us not winning a championship until this or that is fixed? Until we get the right coach or the right player? What happened to watching your team grow into a champion caliber group, rooting for them to go all the way and, if they don’t, thanking them for a great season and lets try again next year? We hear all the time that it is not about the destination, but the journey. Well what I see from a lot of the comments here is that it is only about the destination. That if the Blazers don’t win a title, then they will have failed. No, “Wow, that was a really cool place we stopped at.” Just “Why aren’t we there yet?”

The other part, which is my problem, is that I’m not too impressed by people who think they know a lot about something when the reality is they don’t. I’ve heard the argument that we are all intelligent people and therefore capable of analyzing something and offering up valid solutions. I don’t buy it. By most accounts I’m an intelligent person. I am very good at my job, have multiple degrees, been named to a national standards board in a technical profession (completely different from what I’m doing now), been published and so on. And among the things I’ve learned is there is far more that I don’t know than what I do. Combine that with the fact that I don’t have much truck with someone who can’t do my job as well as I can trying to tell me how to do it and you get a high irritability factor towards certain types of comments.

But as I said, that’s my problem. I’ve learned to ignore most trade discussions and comments. Guess I’ll have to tune out the people who can’t appreciate our team without constantly criticizing it. And hopefully I’ll see more posters follow the example of people like jscot, PoliSam, Blazer Guy and a host of others who can offer critical commentary in a balanced fashion that shows both respect to the people they are talking about and an understanding of their limits as observers.

b)

hakkaa päälle !

by timg56 on Nov 20, 2009 8:23 AM PST up reply actions   1 recs

In the past Roy took the shot

Now that he got his max contract, he’s scared to take a hit in the paint or a difficult shot.

by tominhawaii on Nov 19, 2009 8:22 AM PST up reply actions  

If Kobe drove to the basket and dished to Blake who missed a wide open three

Do you think Kobe would do the exact same thing a few plays later? I don’t. I don’t even like Kobe, but there is a difference between involving your teammates and stepping up in crunch time. Roy apparently forgot the difference.

by tominhawaii on Nov 19, 2009 1:06 PM PST up reply actions  

if that teammate was Derek Fisher

K*be would still pass it to him a 3rd time, even if Fish had missed the first 2

it’s all about shared experience, comfort and a built-up trust level in a veteran teammate who has come through dozens of times, in the past

When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!

by two4larue on Nov 19, 2009 1:13 PM PST up reply actions  

I'm afraid Roy won't have the energy to take over

If I was a rival coach, I’d have my SF leaning on Brandon all night long so he didn’t have any gas left in the tank for the 4th quarter. Roy is “playing the hero” by accepting the challenge to play against SFs, even though he said he didn’t like it, before the season. (Before the injuries)

Unfortunatley, that might mean #7 will be too tired to “play the hero” when the game is on the line, on a consistent basis. It’s a tough decision, because as much as “regular season games don’t matter” and “it’s all about the playoffs” the team still has to keep grinding out victories, while at the same time develop a half-court attack that will be successful during the post season. I think Miller-Roy is a duo that has to somehow find a way to diversify the offense and making defending Portland more difficult. If that means less ISOs for Roy and more late-game ball movement, then it’s an experiment that will need to be given the opportunity to “play out”

When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!

by two4larue on Nov 19, 2009 6:50 PM PST up reply actions  

I agree

"Woulda, Coulda, Mighta and Shoulda – the Four Horsemen of the Procrastocalypse" - Red-5

by jscot on Nov 19, 2009 7:24 AM PST up reply actions  

All keep saying it until it happens...

The final 5 should be Dre, Rudy, Roy, LMA, GO… Why can’t Nate see something so obvious?

by Visionary2 on Nov 19, 2009 8:07 AM PST up reply actions  

I'm going to be contrarian and say this: Oden doesn't play aggressive defense (i.e. Oden isn't Oden) late in games...

Dre, Rudy, Roy, LMA, and Pryz.

"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 Nov 19, 2009 8:12 AM PST up reply actions  

I don't think there's a big enough sample to come to that conclusion

Oden is often in serious foul trouble at the end of games. Some games he looks great, some not. He’s our biggest defensive presence and we need to stick with him. Pryz hasn’t been playing at last year’s level either.

by levelhed on Nov 19, 2009 8:18 AM PST up reply actions  

One of my maxims is that a Center with 5 fouls is useless as a defender...

Oden averages 4.2 for the season.

"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 Nov 19, 2009 8:21 AM PST up reply actions  

Oden needs more minutes, not less. 24 at a minimum, better 28, even better 32. I don’t care if he fouls out 40 times this season, he needs to learn it and play like he did against the Wolves: Not quite as aggressive, but with more impact.

Otherwise he really won’t be more useful than Marc Gasol, Joakim Noah, Jason Thompson, Roy HIbbert, and Brook Lopez, i.e. his draft class peers. Who have better per game stats, but mostly worse efficiency and per 36 stats. Only that Oden will never see regular 30+ minutes if Nate doesn’t feed them to him.

Ceterum censeo Lakers esse delendam

by Norsktroll on Nov 19, 2009 8:55 AM PST up reply actions   1 recs

I know you love Przy

but come on, Greg has gotten some huge late game blocks this season, Landry comes to mind, and he would have snuffed out that Stuckey shot if not for Roy’s foul. I’m pretty sure there are one or two more, but Greg’s been playing well defensively late in games.

The real issue is LaMarcus’s complete inability to box out anyone late in games as we see guys like Josh Smith and Charlie V continually coming up with huge offensive boards.

by Royster on Nov 19, 2009 8:24 AM PST up reply actions  

and if LMA isn't getting defensive rebounds...

late-game defensive lineup Dre, Blake, Roy, Pryz and Oden

Secure the ball…timeout: send in Rudy and LMA for offense

Only downside is if the other team has to foul for possession and they hack Joel before he outlets the ball

When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!

by two4larue on Nov 19, 2009 11:58 AM PST up reply actions  

exactly. it's like a broken record

give Roy the ball 30 feet away, and he will get doubled 30 feet away, leading to a completely broken possession. Give Roy the ball curling up from an Oden downstream (which has worked effectively in the limited use it’s gotten), and he gets the ball at the elbow ready to go to work, with the added bonus of the other defender’s not being set.

I swear, the Roy high Iso play’s right into the defense’s hands.

How did you guys win that?
"We scored enough points. We scored 107, they scored 105.
-Nate McMillan Postgame, 3/4/2009

by douglast on Nov 19, 2009 9:04 AM PST up reply actions  

I think last night's game really puncuated how much this team still has to learn ...

… and how fortunate they are to have Nate as a coach.

Portland made a common mistake. They looked at the scoreboard, while seeing how easy they were taking Detroit apart and they relaxed. It is not unusual for people to throttle back when they realize that they the job is going smoothly and they don’t have to bust their butt to get it done. That might work when you are working against a deadline or some inanimate object, but when the job is against a human opponent it only works if the other guy has given up. Detroit didn’t and suddenly the Blazers realized their job wasn’t done. No big deal. Veteran teams do it all the time. Instead of worrying over how bad things could have been, how about recognizing the fact that Portland did not allow their mistake to hurt them. They still managed to win the game.

hakkaa päälle !

by timg56 on Nov 19, 2009 3:21 PM PST up reply actions  

cause and effect

Blazers weren’t blessed with good coaching from McMillan, last night. He was outcoached – brutally so.

McMillan, in spite of a plethora of talent, has yet to shape this squad into one that has smoothly interacting pieces on the floor. When Detroit trapped, he had Rudy handling the ball, instead of a point guard. When McMillan wanted crunch time scores, he took his best ball handler out of the game. When McMillan wanted to protect his lead, he had the Blazers run the clock down to 3 seconds before trying to find a good shot. When McMillan wants scoring in the paint, he runs isolation posts on clearouts, instead of having his team set screens and picks to help the post get deep position. When McMillan needs a score, he sets up a Brandon drive (defense collapses) or a 3-point shot (defense rotates) instead of running his best mid range guys off screens and looking for good shots a few feet further from the basket. McMillan has completely failed to recognize that teams are packing the paint and forcing the Blazers to shoot over the top. McMillan’s players try to do it his way, and they constantly have bad shots in crunch time because his offense is so predictable and his players are trying to do it his way – instead of taking what the defense gives them.

by blacknoiseNW on Nov 19, 2009 9:16 PM PST up reply actions  

Let's just go through some of this

because while there is grounds for some criticism, some of this is way overblown.

McMillan, in spite of a plethora of talent, has yet to shape this squad into one that has smoothly interacting pieces on the floor.

New floor general, one starter went down after preseason, another key rotation player is now out. This would mess up any team’s chemistry.

When Detroit trapped, he had Rudy handling the ball, instead of a point guard.

He had Blake handling the ball, too, and he struggled worse than Rudy.

When McMillan wanted crunch time scores, he took his best ball handler out of the game.

He took Miller out of the game after he rolled his ankle badly, and was hobbling. He was out a few minutes and then came back. Ever try to play right after you roll your ankle? Miller was moving much better when he came back — he needed those few minutes for his ankle to settle down. Miller was in the game at crunch time.

When McMillan wanted to protect his lead, he had the Blazers run the clock down to 3 seconds before trying to find a good shot.

How strange. I was seeing screens, passes, etc for the entire possession. It looked to me like they were trying to find a good shot but not being very successful at it, just like they weren’t being very successful at finding a good shot in the last 3 seconds. And it seems to me like he was saying we have to learn not to quit playing, which means it wasn’t Nate who “had the Blazers run the clock down”, but rather they didn’t execute. You can to an extent fault him for their lack of execution, but it is ridiculous to say he had them do something which he didn’t want them to do.

Some of your criticisms are sound, of course. But Nate came with a good game plan that built us a 20 point lead after 3, so to say he was brutally outcoached is silly. If you say he was outcoached in the fourth, I would agree, but that basically comes down to one thing — when Andre rolled his ankle, we weren’t prepared to break the trap. Take that one factor away and this is a double-digit win. Fortunately, Andre was able to come back, or we might have lost it.

"Woulda, Coulda, Mighta and Shoulda – the Four Horsemen of the Procrastocalypse" - Red-5

by jscot on Nov 19, 2009 11:37 PM PST up reply actions  

Thanks.

Had I responded, I’d probably be banned.

I would have added that some people put way too much credence in the belief that the coach controls everything that occurs on the court. I’m of the opinion that during the game coaches are mostly an interested observer.

hakkaa päälle !

by timg56 on Nov 20, 2009 8:30 AM PST up reply actions  

Those who can't do, teach!

"Do me a favor. Put your lip over your head... and swallow." Max Goldman

by clinchmobb on Nov 20, 2009 12:20 PM PST up reply actions  

I’m of the opinion that during the game coaches are mostly an interested observer.

Seriously? Coaches have a huge impact in basketball. Subsitutions, calling plays, adjusting between zone and man-to-man defense, handling foul trouble…

i cry for nic

by Cablinasian on Nov 20, 2009 12:36 PM PST up reply actions  

In my 30 plus years of watching the NBA, last night was a 1st!

Miller rolls BOTH ankles and plays 33 minutes! Wow, just wow…….

2-4 the who

by 24thewho on Nov 19, 2009 8:08 AM PST reply actions  

The rubber ankle comment had me rollin'

I’m with you, I’ve never seen anything like that. Both ankles? Hilarious, frightening and wonderful all at the same time.

Witty Unpredictable Talent and Natural Game

by iDea on Nov 19, 2009 8:20 AM PST up reply actions  

You mean the "Oh yeah, he does that all the time in practice" comment?

Yikes! I’m just glad they didn’t show the replay too many time.

by Corvid on Nov 19, 2009 11:31 AM PST up reply actions  

Yeah

If he does THAT all the time in practice, paint me impressed. Most players would be out a week or three (cough cough, Chris Paul).

Witty Unpredictable Talent and Natural Game

by iDea on Nov 19, 2009 5:39 PM PST up reply actions  

Hmmm, fun game.
But with only seven guys playing like they deserve real rotation minutes right now, the physical and mental burden on Roy will only increase.

1. Roy

2. LMA

3. Miller

4. Oden

5. Pryz

6. Rex

Dang, this is harder than it seems…

"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 Nov 19, 2009 8:08 AM PST reply actions  

Oh, RUDY. There ya go. I had to cheat.....

"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 Nov 19, 2009 8:09 AM PST up reply actions  

In Mac's transcript

You forgot all of the uh’s.

Witty Unpredictable Talent and Natural Game

by iDea on Nov 19, 2009 8:19 AM PST reply actions  

I don't agree with the alarmist tone of this piece

I am really happy with the way Roy is handling his role. It will get better. And Roy wasn’t in the game during the bulk of the collapse.

by cantdunk on Nov 19, 2009 8:24 AM PST reply actions  

Interesting game at the Rose Garden last night

What I took from it:
Pistons:
- We would have lost for sure if Rip was in the game.
- We would have lost for sure if Charlie V. was not in foul trouble the whole game. (He has that right-place-at-the-right-time, decent shot, and easy cheap put-back Zach quality to his game)
- We would have probably lost if Prince was in the game.
(Not a doomsayer, but that’s what I saw.)

Blazers:
- Rudy is looking like Rudy again. Gets the ball and starts doing the Ali Shuffle – defenders think, “aww man, I’m gonna be on a highlight reel where he makes me look stupid.”
- Free throws have always been automatic for the greats (okay most of them) of the game for a reason – work on ‘em.
- Martell ain’t right. He’s putting in effort for sure, but it looks like a guy in a rubber raft padding against the Columbia with a hunk of 2×4. Dante time? Martell will be back, but Nate, know when to swap someone out. 12 minutes 3 fouls and a rebound??
- Apparently if you want to cause the Blazers to utterly panic like a middle school team and turn the ball over – full court press ’em. Even with 3 guards in?? Jaysus!
- And yes, we miss Travis

Also, Stuckey would be fantastic in a Blazer uniform. Absolutely fantastic. Love his game and his sportsmanship. A quality player.

by Knobby on Nov 19, 2009 8:26 AM PST reply actions  

Bill Simmons

Did anyone go to his book signing? Any signs at the game for him?

by Alaa Abdelnaby on Nov 19, 2009 8:48 AM PST via mobile reply actions  

Roy was as neutralized as I can remember seeing him down the stretch

It reminded me of the Philly game last April, when Miller was leaving his man to double/trap Brandon. (I’m kind of surprised more teams haven’t employed this late-game defensive strategy against Roy’s ISO)

Fortunately, this time the Blazers had enough of a cushion to hold off the Pistons. Big 3-pointer from Blake

When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!

by two4larue on Nov 19, 2009 8:50 AM PST reply actions  

A different view

Starters and first subs from the bench (Rudy+Pryzbilla) have been playing very well the last two games. The three guard line-up is working fine. The defense has been rather stifling. Roy struggling with his role has not been a major problem.

The problem is that late in the third when the Blazers are trying to put away the other team, there is very little energy, dynamism, or killer instinct at the end of the bench. Rudy is playing hard, but really should not be a primary ball handler. Webster looks confused, cautious, and tentative. Blake is a nice role player if surrounded by the right players, but cannot lead an offense. He’s also a very cautious and tentative player by nature, which you don’t really want when up by 12 points. Howard is old and slow and cannot fight the desperate energy of an opponent clawing back to gain the lead. Neither Przbilla nor Oden can be a go to offensive option. They can block out fine, but the offensive rebounding is coming from the hustle of the other 4 positions. In sum, the Blazers have been playing the end of the third and start of the fourth quarters with a group of players without much offensive spark and without enough energy and hustle to slow frenzied comeback efforts.

Then, when the starters come back in the game they are sulking because the bench lost the lead. At the same time, the other team has gained confidence and plays with more spirit. Sure, the starters haven’t played great in late game situations, but that’s going to be an easy fix. I don’t see the fix for a lack of talent on the bench… I’d like to see Cunningham or Bayless get a shot to inject some energy into the game, but I can see the hesitancy to do so.

by PoliSam on Nov 19, 2009 9:03 AM PST reply actions   2 recs

Not so sure about the starters 'sulking' but I'll rec you anyway.

I think they just relaxed too much. Piston’s made a few play, we missed a few shots, started tightening up, and things spiraled downhill. It took 3 or 4 minutes for us to get back into the spirit and put it away.

I agree that putting Bayless in may have sustained our aggressiveness we had going throught the first 3 quarters. Without Travis, we don’t have a pure scorer (other than Roy) in the regular rotaion. Rudy is close but I don’t think anyone considers him a pure scorer. Bayless, on the other hand, can fill that role. He should have been sent in when we were up by 20 and told to go all B-Rex on them. Instead, we relaxed, tried to run the clock out, and you know the rest of the story…

"Do me a favor. Put your lip over your head... and swallow." Max Goldman

by clinchmobb on Nov 19, 2009 10:33 AM PST up reply actions  

I think the starters lost focus, not that they were sulking.

And yeah, Bayless would’ve been a good spark. It makes me think his sprained ankle is bothering him more than we’re hearing about.

by Corvid on Nov 19, 2009 11:40 AM PST up reply actions  

I can understand Brandon and the tream struggling to adjust to playing with Outlaw.

I mean, it’s a little easier to give Travis the ball at the top of the key and stand around watching him go 1-on-1.

The team brought in Miller to, I assume, play actual basketball. I still don’t get what Nate is debating here with his multiple 4th quarter lineups. Miller/Roy/Rudy/LMA/Oden is your best lineup right now. PERIOD. How can one not see that?

I'm just not crazy about player nick names...

by Hipster Olympic Team! on Nov 19, 2009 9:03 AM PST reply actions   1 recs

and that's the best lineup with Batum and Travis healthy too.

sub in guys at that 3 position to pressure the ball or try to check Mello or Artest if need be but…

I’m scratching my head continually watching this team’s fourth quarter lineups…

I'm just not crazy about player nick names...

by Hipster Olympic Team! on Nov 19, 2009 9:05 AM PST up reply actions  

aren't we all...

How did you guys win that?
"We scored enough points. We scored 107, they scored 105.
-Nate McMillan Postgame, 3/4/2009

by douglast on Nov 19, 2009 9:06 AM PST up reply actions  

Spot on

The fact we’re winning games with (or more accurately, in spite of) the current 4th quarter rotation is only going to make Nate more convinced this is the right way – and that is going to set the Blazers up for a rude awakening at some point

"man, steve blake is clutch *dead*" - Ben Golliver on Twitter

by blazeraddict on Nov 19, 2009 10:15 AM PST up reply actions  

it’s a little easier to give Travis the ball at the top of the key and stand around watching him go 1-on-1…The team brought in Miller to, I assume, play actual basketball

Right. Giving one player the ball on an ISO is a “lazy” way of trying to get a late-game score

OTOH, the league is set up that way, and has been for years.

And the fewer passes and picks during a possession, the less chance of a mistake leading to turnover (like when Roy threw the ball sideline out of bounds because Blake cut to the corner?)

Having said all that, the Blazers need to learn to execute their offensive sets better against superior defensive pressure if they’re ever going to advance in the playoffs

When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!

by two4larue on Nov 19, 2009 1:35 PM PST up reply actions  

I appreciate the narrative

Describing Roy and his recent struggles. But I just can’t see this becoming a season long trend where Roy becomes lost, can’t beat defenders or can’t make sound decisions with the ball. I think that the majority of the time he will be able to defend the 3, however yes there will be some discomforting match-ups.

As often is the case with Blazer fandom, I think we need to step back and enjoy the show and try to not read too much into a few games where the Blazers didn’t win by 40 like we’d all have liked them to.

by thrilliam on Nov 19, 2009 10:05 AM PST reply actions  

I think the question about Roy's role was sort of answered in the piece
Roy has remained impressively flexible, impressively ego-less.

He is not one to declare he is the Man, and it is his way or the highway. Does a contending team need that kind of personality on it to get over the hump?

I get the paper, so I don't care!

by Name's Ash on Nov 19, 2009 10:16 AM PST reply actions  

Yes

It needs several…just not your superstar, if history is any guide.

by Dunemonkey on Nov 19, 2009 10:28 AM PST up reply actions  

Hopefully the Blazers will be able to hold on...

until Batum and Trav come back (if they come back). The west is tight this year and anything can happen. Who thought that Houston, Phoenix and Sacramento would be any good this year?? And Utah and San Antonio are not even in the top 8 right now. Makes me nervous that the Blazers are one more big injury away from not making it to the playoffs.

by jenstcy on Nov 19, 2009 10:39 AM PST reply actions  

Batum

“I don’t think his 6 pts and 3 rebounds is the answer”

Anyone who thinks Nic’s points and rebounds are the basis to gauge how much he contributes to the team’s performance does not have a very good handle on the role he plays.

by lsjogren on Nov 19, 2009 12:05 PM PST reply actions  

It's a good thing we kept Patty Mills instead of that Ime guy

I mean we really have no use for Ime do we? And Patty is filling up that stat sheet for us.

by Coastie07 on Nov 19, 2009 12:55 PM PST reply actions  

lack of toughness

First and foremost, this is not about blaming the officials. But, they did significantly change the way they were calling the game from the beginning to the end. Most of the game was called pretty tightly with a lot of touch fouls getting called. But suddenly, once the 4th quarter got going, they just put the whistles in their pockets and let the players play. Detroit recognized this and took advantage of it; they suddenly became much more physical in fighting for rebounds, position and trying to take the ball away. There were several plays where one of our players, usually LMA, seemingly had the rebound only to have a Piston slap it out of their hands. They were also much more aggressive in pushing our guys out of the way to get the rebound or steal a pass.

Kudos to Detroit- they recognized the change in officiating and took advantage of it. Meanwhile, the Blazers got knocked back on their heels and didn’t make the adjustment. We continually allowed ourselves to get pushed around and out-muscled. On defense, we still played cautiously and followed the ole’ strategy when a Piston drove the lane. I am convinced that we could have started bodying up on defense and maybe slowed the Piston’s comeback.

This is hardly unprecedented. I have yet to see a game this season that is called consistently from start to finish. The Blazers players have to learn to recognize when the flow changes and adjust their play accordingly.

One last point of frustration- from the moment Detroit started coming back, it was clear that the Blazer’s strategy was to hang onto the lead and run out the clock. We lost all of the aggressiveness that allowed us to dominate the 3rd quarter and seemed content to let them score while we just tried to eat the clock. We had several possessions where no one tried to make a play or take the open shot, preferring instead to use up the full 24 second clock even if it resulted in a turnover. This included Roy who spent a lot of time dribbling outside the arc and looking up at the clock.

Our talent and the fact that we have mainly played the cellar-dwellers have allowed us to post a good record so far. At the end of the season, an ugly win is still better than a well played loss as far as playoff seeding goes. But we simply can’t continue like this. Every game seems to be 2 steps forward and one step (or leap) back. If we can’t get a handle on our turnovers and learn to play hard every possession, we may not need to worry about playoff seeding.

by random_rider on Nov 19, 2009 2:09 PM PST reply actions  

Before everyone gets too upset

note that the Blazers are now #1 in the NBA in opposing team FG% and #1 in opposing team PPG.

The 09-10 Blazers remind me a lot of the 03-04 Pistons. Grinding, awful to watch, effective basketball.

by Pooh Richardson on Nov 19, 2009 2:14 PM PST reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

The ultimate coverage and analysis of the Portland Trail Blazers.

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recommended FanPosts

Small
A Junkless Proposition - Five-Two-Six-Two-Aught-onetwo.
Small
Consensus Mock Draft
Bns_small
You're The GM. Whats your move?
Small
Hard to be a fan of a team that is so poorly managed.
Cs-sj_053_small
10 Years of 1st Round Blazer Draft Picks

Recent FanPosts

Small
Portland's Team for next year?
Small
My dream is the Blazers signing Jeremy Lin
Small
Would you do this trade? Lowry, Okafor, #4?
Small
Keep an Eye on Great Britain
Small
two options with $20 mill cap space, the #6 pick and some luck
Batum_small
Alternate 2012 Olympics Team
Small
Collective mock draft
Small
GM Poll: K Love or L Train

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >

FanShots

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

Recommended FanShots

Assistant Michael Malone interested in the Blazers
The LeBron James Conundrum: A Legacy In Question
Shooting percentages as they apply to certain areas of the court.  Note who one of the best shooters in the NBA from the wing is.  Check out the guy dominating under the hoop as well.  Pretty impressive for a 6'9'' guy.
Fernandez: Joel Freeland Faces July 10 Deadline For Contract Buyout
Church of Basketball: An Interview With Dave

Recent FanShots

Perry Jones III story
Jalen Rose on D'Antoni
Isiah Thomas hoping for return
Ferry in mix for vacant Portland GM job
Where's The GM?
Orlando Magic has decided to trade Dwight Howard
If the Sixers are eliminated by the Boston Celtics in Game 7, the general...
Interesting Quotation from Chad Ford RE: Morway and Rebuilding
Malone is a winner...
Lamarcus aldridge first nba game

+ New FanShot All FanShots >


Editors

Kitten_small Dave

Headshotsmall_small Ben Golliver

Lead Moderators

Getfuzzy-satchel_small Timmay!

Bucky3_small Cablinasian

Authors

Plainlc_small Storyteller

Moderators

Lamb_small T Darkstar

Small douglast

Terryporter_small prezofdeath

Small usmcr3049

Lrg_magpie_small Corvid

Wallpaper_small geoffm