Kelly Dwyer Gets It, Why Doesn't Nate?
by pdxlifer on Nov 19, 2009 7:51 AM PST
Email
Print"Steve Blake hit a three-pointer to seal this game, and he scored an efficient 17 points overall (with two assists to three turnovers), but I just can't help but revert back to 2007 and tell you that this guy should be a bit player. 15 minutes a game or so, mainly because Blake just can't guard anyone.
Point guard defense is possibly the most important aspect of today's game, with no hand checking and cleared lanes, and Blake sometimes single-handedly lets Trail Blazer opponents back into the game. Andre Miller isn't that much better, I admit, but Blake is absolutely terrible on that end these days. And don't look at the stats of the opposing point guard to back me up or take me down - it's all about penetration, and the dominos that fall after that."
Hello? Nate?
http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/blog/ball_dont_lie/post/Behind-the-Box-Score-where-the-Nets-still-haven?urn=nba,203672&post_comment=1&success=1
85 comments
|
1 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Miller can't shoot...
I’m sorry. Miller can’t shoot at all. He is a huge, huge liability and he is ooollld so that’s not going to change. Portland’s defense is very, very good right now. They let Detroit back in the game because of the lack of offensive firepower when the game should have been over had Portland had any depth. Never thought I’d say it but Travis Outlaw will be sorely missed. Brandon and LMA better get used to playing 38-40 minutes per game while he’s out because they have no other consistent offensive weapons. Rudy is the next best option but he is still very inconsistent.
But he can drive
and Blake can’t do that. He can rebound, draw fouls, attack the basket.
Those turnovers by Blake in the last 5 minutes were horrible. He just didn’t know what to do with the double-team.
And isn’t that why you go Miller / Rudy / Roy instead? Roy is a good outside shooter, and Rudy is a fantastic one. I don’t understand why they start Blake over Rudy if they’re going to go 3-guard.
Andre Miller is not your traditional shooter.
But he has scored at a much higher FG%, gets to the line much more often and has had way bigger assist games throughout his career than Blake. Andre Miller is better, a lot better than Steve Blake. To call Miller a liability is kind of ridiculous. Steve Blake has 0 to do with the improved defense so far, credit that to the big boys in the paint. As for the offense if Blake is supposed to help so much there why are the Blazers stuck in the 80’s lately and the offense turns into a slow and sloppy turnover fest with Blake handling the ball in the 4th. There’s nothing Blake does on the floor playing alongside Miller that Rudy couldn’t do. I don’t see the point of starting him and forcing Roy to play out of position. I’d rather have Rudy guarding 3’s than Blake guarding starting 1’s. Blake is a decent 2nd, 3rd and early 4th quarter back up, he shouldn’t play such a large role in crunch time. Forcing Roy to play out of position so Blake can start is not good long term. Andre Miller has been fulfilling the role of play maker a lot better than Blake. It’s time to move Steve to the bench and let the starting back court consist of Roy and Miller.
I like Blake and am glad to have him on the team but we’ve been needing a better starting PG for a long time. We finally get one and at first he doesn’t start, but then when coach decides to start him it comes at Roy and Websters expense. It’s not worth starting Blake right now.
I cringed
on the play late when Brandon got the ball to Blake on the baseline and Blake drove to the hoop. Then he left his feet. Then he threw the ball. Then Detroit had the ball. And I saw that coming too. Blake on the baseline is BAD NEWS.
I would rather see Rudy shooting 3’s ANY DAY over Blake.
Andre gets offensive rebounds more often than Travis and Blake combined. Rudy does too.
Like matthewcc says, Miller can drive/draw the foul. And since Brandon seems to have this love affair with dribbling out the clock (sorry, you’re NOT LeBron/Kobe/Dwyane)
If Miller is in the game, let him run the offense in crunch time. Draw up movement plays for Roy, instead of letting everyone stand around the perimeter and watch him. Miller can create an open shot for Roy a heck of a lot better than Blake can.
And this isn’t just about playing in the final 5 minutes, like the posts seem to indicate. Like Dwyer says, Blake is allowing penetration TOO MUCH.
The Blazers gave up 31 points in the 4th
it was their defense that failed not their offense. Ya they only scored 17 points in the qtr, but if they kept their defensive intensity during the qtr that they showed during the first 3 qtrs they would have won by 15+. Blake was part of that problem letting his man drive the lane over and over, then he compounded it by making bad decisions on offense and not handling the ball pressure.
It was amazing the difference between watching Miller bring the ball up court under pressure and watching Blake do it. Miller easily broke the pressure while Blake just picked up his dribble time and time again allowing the defense to try and trap him. Blake is a point guard right?
Ben II Blazersedge.com || New to Blazers' Edge?
miller may not be the best shooter
he may not be the best shooter but hes shooting better then blake, hes just playing better ball when you look at the stats. So he’s not the best point gaurd but i say give miller the minutes and go back to what most teams play, two gaurds two forwards and a center.
Miller a huge, huge liability??
Miller can’t shoot at all. He is a huge, huge liability
Man, have WE been watching different games… Do you mean Mike Miller?
IT’s funny, you diss Dre’s shot, and then the next sentence is:
Portland’s defense is very, very good right now
Why do you suppose that is, hmm?? It’s Dre (and Oden – and bad competition)…
As one of the drivers of the Dre Bus, I’ll save a spot for you later, once Dre kicks it into gear (he always starts slow). In fact, even last night, Dre’s shots were much better… Don’t worry about Dre, he’ll be there for us in the playoffs when it counts…
Miller gets a lot of those guys you are complaining about easier shots
Miller shoots fine inside the key which he can get fairly often
I agree Miller shouldn’t be shooting anywhere else
Blazer Fan
by leeroyjenkins on Nov 19, 2009 10:34 AM PST up reply actions
Agreed.
Teammates getting easier shots > Miller has a bad jumpshot. In the overall picture, his positives WAY outweigh his negatives. I don’t understand why some fans still can’t see this.
I'd say the vast majority of fans see exactly that.
The criticism of Miller pales in comparison to what Blake’s has been getting or that directed towards Nate.
Somehow the idea that “knowledgeable” fans are those who constantly offer in-depth (or not) analysis of the team’s or individual player’s faults and provides solutions to “problems” has gained sway. Anyone who is enjoying the season without complaint or who believes that there really are not significant problems that can’t be overcome is obviously a homer (Lord forbid) and likely a simpleton to boot.
I think I’m going to had “D’uh” stamped on my forehead, as I have no problem with my team and happen to believe that I am very fortunate to be able to watch these guys play. I would not trade this team straight up for any other in the league.
hakkaa päälle !
by timg56 on Nov 19, 2009 4:46 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
I don't get this
Blake is taking all the blame for Roy being a wimp. All those shots Blake missed in the Atlanta game were because he had to bail out Roy who was afraid to take it to the hole and earn his max contract. Roy and LA need to start earning their paychecks.
by tominhawaii on Nov 19, 2009 8:12 AM PST reply actions 3 recs
fully agree
The ATL loss was on Brandon. He stood around and watched while the rest of the team floundered down the stretch. He’s getting paid to step up.
People are crushing Blake, but the fact is, the Blazers have been over 12 points better per 100 possessions when he’s on the court. That doesn’t mean it has to continue, but so far, it can’t really be denied that they’ve been better with Steve on the court.
Q: Is Greg favoring his knee?
Frye: He favors dunking on your head, that's what he favors.
by KP Corleone on Nov 19, 2009 10:57 AM PST up reply actions
He didn't stand around and watch
he tried to exert his presence and failed. Rarely does that happen, but it did against the Hawks. Roy looked exhausted down the stretch, settled for jumpers too much and didn’t really hit them after settling for them.
Roy is experiencing a major shift on both ends of the floor from what’s been expected from him during the first three years of his career (putting the ball in Miller’s hands on offense, spending the bulk of his time guarding 3’s on defense). He’s being asked to do something substantially different than that which has brought him All-Star appearances and national accolades, and he’s doing it without a peep of complaint.
I think it vastly underestimates the changes to which he’s acclimating himself and his positive attitude while doing so to put ANY loss this year on Brandon…not the least of which when that loss comes in the fifth game in seven nights.
"One of the bright spots of the young season has been rookie point guard Jonny Flynn, whose name sounds like he should be the lead character in a Broadway Musical. "What are you doing here, Jonny Flynn?" "Why I'm here to court trouble, and woo a girl, and build the most fantastical contraption the world has ever seen!" -- Dave, Game 7 Blazers versus Timberwolves preview
by BlazersOrBust on Nov 19, 2009 1:59 PM PST up reply actions
Rec
I think it vastly underestimates the changes to which he’s acclimating himself and his positive attitude while doing so to put ANY loss this year on Brandon…not the least of which when that loss comes in the fifth game in seven nights.
Everybody wants to see the Brandon of 2007-2009, but the team was changed (by design) because what “worked” during the regular season last year was effectively shut down in the playoffs. Changes were necessary, for Roy and everyone else. Then, losing Batum to injury was huge. So, the necessary adjustments are underway, on the fly.
Meanwhile, the team has started 9-4 and the Blazer offense has nowhere near hit it’s stride. Things could be a lot worse
When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
Blake has been a liability on offense
But an asset on defense this year. Not only have opposing point guards failed to put up big scoring numbers. They have failed to put up big assist numbers and the Blazers are near the top of the league in team defense. The dominoes are not falling against the Blazers half-court defense. They main places they have struggled are giving up points off of turnovers (which is an offensive problem) and giving up offensive rebounds. I don’t think Kelly Dwyer get’s it.
by PoliSam on Nov 19, 2009 8:22 AM PST reply actions 1 recs
Crazy as it sounds, this is exactly right
Blake has actually been a huge asset on defense and an liability (for the most part) on offense. I’m not sure what Dwyer is talking about, but the Blazer starting lineup is actually playing remarkably good defense right now. The amount of damaging dribble penetration allowed has been minimal thanks to good zone spacing and funneling of players. Blake clearly “gets” the zone defensive concept as well as anyone on the team and is very good at helping and switching at the right times.
His problem has been on offense. Last night he just about blew the game with his reckless decisions on the offensive end. And he can’t create his own shot to save his life, which makes it easier for the opposing defenses to double team Brandon and LaMarcus.
www.blazerguy.com
No, Dwyer is right.
Blake is constantly letting his man get into the paint. Penetration means points. Not always from his man, but it causes defensive schemes to collapse and the Blazers are TERRIBLE when they get out of their positions and they have to rotate players.
it doesn't hurt as much
when the guys penetrating are Jonny Flynn, Mike Conley, Raymond Felton, and Devin Brown (who?)
Chris Paul went down. (though Mr Darren Collison did have a nice 7-14 FG with 18 points and 4 FTs)
Tony Parker went down. (do the Spurs even have a 2nd true PG?)
Westbrook went 8-12 with 10 FT and 23 points
Aaron Brooks (as usual) had huge games. And theres a reason that Ariza and Brooks shot a combined 14 threes @ HOU making 9 of them (Battier shot 3, Lowry shot 4, Budinger shot 3). Steve Blake can’t do diddly and guys leak off leaving guys open. Brooks shot 6, Ariza 4, Battier 4 in the game @ POR luckily for us they only made 3 of those.
Furthermore…Blake can allow these PGs to penetrate in wins vs teams like CHA/MEM/MIN/OKC/NO because these arent exactly strong teams to begin with. When you take on teams like UT/HOU/LAL/DAL/DEN who have legitimate options elsewhere, the Blazers won’t always be so fortunate to have the luxury of watching Gerald Wallace/Jeff Green/Corey Brewer/Ryan Gomes/Marvin Williams/Rudy Gay clank away.
I like Steve Blake, and I still want him on the team and playing, but I would rather see Dre running the point than Blake or Roy (dribbling the clock down to 6).
Derrick Rose/Deron Williams/Aaron Brooks/Chauncey Billups/Rajon Rondo/Parker/Paul. These are the guys you have to pay attention to when Blake is guarding them. Not the PGs from bottom feeders and perennial Lottery teams.
The Blazers have defended great with this starting lineup
And Parker wasn’t dominating when he went down. And Chris Paul went down at the end of the third, and had 3 points and 8 assists. In other words, he’d done nothing compared to what he usually does.
"Woulda, Coulda, Mighta and Shoulda – the Four Horsemen of the Procrastocalypse" - Red-5
Which begs the question, though
why is Miller’s impact so rarely discussed in terms of the effect of the team defense. It seems like the entire debate has focused on, “well, we’ve defended well with Blake in this lineup”, but I don’t remember us talking about defensive synergy or cohesiveness when Blake was starting and Miller was on the bench.
I’m not making any conclusions as to the relative effects, but it’s strange to me how the entire debate about the lineup has focused on what Blake is supposedly bringing to the table instead of Miller, when Miller was the clear change and Blake has been there all along.
Starters played fine defense before Miller was switched into the starting line-up
and the Blake-Roy-Webster-Aldridge-Oden line-up, in particular, has been one of the best defensive units of the season (and has played against solid competition). (FWIW, Miller has only played 5 minutes as a replacement for Blake with those four players).
I don’t share your perception that no one has discussed Miller’s impact on defense. I’ve seen that argued many, many times. I see plenty of evidence of the team playing solid defense without Miller on the floor.
The arguments have been made
but you’d have to admit that roughly 90% of the discussion of the 3-guard lineup has been the importance of Blake to its cohesiveness, which seems out of whack towards the actual cause. Blake seems to be a positive influence, but probably not 90% of the reason for it.
What I’d like to see, though, is the =/- broken down by quarter, which I’m not sure is available (maybe somewhere on 82games, but I’m too lazy to comb the site). Certainly my perception is that we do exceedingly well early with the lineup when we focus more on involving Oden and Aldridge in the offense and do poorly late when we run a more perimeter-oriented offense. I know last night Blake came in and the Pistons went on like a 15-2 run immediately, but there’s just way too much confirmation bias for me to really trust that proves anything.
but you’d have to admit that roughly 90% of the discussion of the 3-guard lineup has been the importance of Blake to its cohesiveness, which seems out of whack towards the actual cause. Blake seems to be a positive influence, but probably not 90% of the reason for it.
No. My perception has been that 60% of Blazer fans hate it outright, 20% think it works okay but only because of Miller and about 20% think that it’s not abject stupidity. Of the 20% that do not think it’s abject stupidity 90% would prefer Rudy to replace Blake, turning it into an alternative 3-guard line-up…. I mean, how many fanposts were made advocating that McMillan go to the three guard line-up before it happened? Probably none. How many have argued that we should stay with it the entire season? Maybe 2 or 3? And those one’s are fairly measured endorsements. How many have called for the benching of Blake, explaining why the three-guard line-up cannot work long term, or saying it only works because Miller should be starting? 10+?
I agree that there are particular scenarios in which Blake is a fairly substantial liability—as I commented below.
I agree PoliSam...
Another huge factor in…
90% of the discussion of the 3-guard lineup has been the importance of Blake to its cohesiveness
…is that 99% of this discussion stems from a post griping about Steve Blake in one form or another.
By definition cohesiveness involves all the pieces of a unit. As huge of a Blake fan as I may be I am certainly not naive enough to think he’s 90% of the success of this unit and conversely it is every bit as inaccurate to say …
Blake sometimes single-handedly lets Trail Blazer opponents back into the game.
I still do not understand the need to take shots at Steve Blake when we are doing well. I am relatively sure this situation will work itself out in time and that time will be when results indicate a change needs to be made.
That's exactly the point I was trying to make
Not how people feel or what they believe, but that SO much time here has been spent discussing Steve Blake’s importance to the lineup and what he’s doing well to make it succeed. Now, you’re right that a lot of it stems from people starting a post complaining about Blake, but that’s just how it is sometimes.
My issue is, that the reason the unconventional lineup is able to work defensively probably has more to do with the tone Dre is setting with his communication, and his ability to defend a couple positions not abjectly horribly. But as I said before, my own inclination is that the success of it all is largely due to the cake schedule we’ve had since it started, and the rest of this is just a minor effect.
Who knows? I’d guess that we probably won’t see this through the rest of November, and my personal preference would be to go back to a more conventional lineup with Webster, but that’s just it, my personal preference.
If that was the point you were trying to make...
but you’d have to admit that roughly 90% of the discussion of the 3-guard lineup has been the importance of Blake to its cohesiveness, which seems out of whack towards the actual cause. Blake seems to be a positive influence, but probably not 90% of the reason for it.
…doesn’t really give me that message.
90% of the discussion has been about how poorly Blake is playing and how Rudy / Martell / anybody should be getting his minutes because “everybody knows” he should be a back up if anything and that he is a liability.
I am the biggest Blake homer here I think and I have certainly never said Blake was 90% responsible for the success of the team… Nor have I heard that sentiment from anyone else. On the other hand I have definately seen Blake blamed for more than his fair share of perceived problems… The evidence of that is in the post we’re replying to…
Fair enough
A more fitting way to describe my intent would have been:
…been the importance, or lack thereof, of Blake to its…
I meant it as less of a critique towards Blake and more of a critique of what’s been discussed ad nauseum recently. Maybe I’m reading different posts from you and PS, but I very rarely see comments about what Miller is or isn’t bringing to the table and seemingly hundreds of comments about what Blake is or isn’t bringing to the table in the lineup defensively.
Blake’s presence in the starting lineup isn’t accounting for 90% of its performance either way, and yet it seems nothing else is being discussed, basically. That’s what I was going for.
And with that I agree...
I’d be very happy to see everyone’s performance…good or bad… discussed more evenly. The constant critiquing of Blake has become redundant and to me a little wore out.
It seems we are missing the chance to analyze the rest of the teams strengths and weakness’ because the majority are so focused on Steve. We need some of theses talented, educated Fanposters to devote their efforts to other topics…
My impression
I’ve said several times that we’re getting great defensive synergy from the Andre/Steve/Brandon lineup.
The reason the focus has been on Blake is because most Bedgers seem to want to bash Blake and say that he’s bringing nothing to the game, or at least to the starting lineup. We’ve heard that a lot. And when I read that, I say that he’s playing excellent team defense right now.
The reason I’ve focused on Blake is because he has been the focus of the attack.
I’m not prepared to say that any one of the three is the key to this defense. To be honest, none of them have played great on ball defense this year. And none of them has looked as good when the three aren’t together.
I still hope Rudy or Martell takes Steve’s starting spot. But what is happening is working because of defensive synergy. It is neither Blake nor Miller, it is them together. They are experienced and intelligent players who know how to play team defense.
"Woulda, Coulda, Mighta and Shoulda – the Four Horsemen of the Procrastocalypse" - Red-5
ditto
Most of what Blake does “right” is like an offensive lineman in football, usually only BB coaches and his teammates will “appreciate” it
Conversely, when Steve does something wrong it’s “out there” for everyone to see, like when a offensive lineman gets called for holding. And if that’s “all you see” you’ll come away thinking that Blake had a “bad” game
(unless you notice his coach and teammates slap him on the rump as they head off the court)
When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
but we're not playing man to man
Since the switch to the 3 guard lineup, the Blazers haven’t been playing much man to man defense. Blake isn’t guarding one guy. He’s guarding a space. And he’s doing a good job (as is the whole starting lineup). We currently rank as the second best defensive team in the league.
Zone defense isn’t about sticking in front of “your man”. It’s about filling passing lanes and funnelling guys in the direction you want them to go. And Blake does that well.
Moreover, in the post-handcheck era, unless you’re Rajon Rondo, you can’t stay in front of fast PGs. No one can. Expecting Blake to is nonsense.
There are plenty of reasons to question Blake’s continued role as a starter, but they are almost all offensive. He’s played well defensively. He’s a good team defender in a zone scheme.
www.blazerguy.com
We're playing a lot of man
but we’re switching up our defenses.
"Woulda, Coulda, Mighta and Shoulda – the Four Horsemen of the Procrastocalypse" - Red-5
which raises a question
what percentage of the time would you estimate we’re playing zone vs. man-to-man? It’s really hard to tell just from watching the games. I wonder if these stats are kept anywhere.
www.blazerguy.com
there's been more true "zone" when Rudy is in the game
Blake-Miller-Roy are playing more man-to-man—with help side D—to “wall off” penetration and close-out on 3 point shooters
When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
If it's hard to tell
then you know the team defense is good, and you know the opponents are having to take time to recognize and adjust, which is costing them a few seconds on the shot clock on occasion.
Now, those few seconds may not mean much on any one possession, but over the course of a game, it is going to mean a few more rushed shots or turnovers because of forced passes.
"Woulda, Coulda, Mighta and Shoulda – the Four Horsemen of the Procrastocalypse" - Red-5
Tape?
How about a breakdown of every defensive possession, highlighting the number of times Steve Blake got beaten to the paint.
I watched the entire game and to be honest, I didn’t see where Steve Blake did any worse at stopping his opposing number than anyone else on the Blazers. In fact I recall seeing some good defensive plays on his part.
Everyone gets beat in the NBA. In particular guards out on the perimeter where they can’t hand check. As PoliSam and Blazer Guy indicate, Portland’s numbers are pretty good defensively. Good overall defense (and a 9-4 record) are a far stronger argument than subjective opinion. A lot of people here don’t like Steve Blake because he’s not Chris Paul or Rajon Rondo or Tony Parker. To them he’s some slow unathletic white dude that is ok sitting on the bench, but not deserving of a starting spot. Funny thing is, he’s managed to earn a starting spot. Three times now. And the response of the Steve Blake critics choir – Nate doesn’t get it. Nate’s an idiot. Nate will never take this team to a championship.
Personally, I prefer performance over appearence and opinion. And Portland sporting some of the best defense in the league right now, guys like Kelly Dwyer are proving my point that opinion counts for little, unless it is backed up with performance. In Dwyers case, that means unless he can back it up – i.e. do the sort of game tape analysis Ben did with Martell & Durant, or interview opposing coaches who will give credence to his argument, he’s just flapping his gums to hear himself speak. Well, in Dwyer’s case, he’s just trying to earn his paycheck, which is understandable. It is also something to keep in mind when reading him or any other columnist. They have to write something. It doesn’t have to be accurate, just in time for the deadline.
hakkaa päälle !
by timg56 on Nov 19, 2009 1:38 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
yes, back it up -- and columnists are full of it
Although I appreciate Dwyer a lot more than many other columnists, because he’s willing to admit that it’s impossible to know everything about every team. He was on some podcast yesterday talking about how he knows that other people follow an individual team very closely, and their insights might be better than his on their particular team. Some guys (Simmons) act like fans who watch their team day in and day out, and ingest every possible perspective on their team are homers and rubes who are blinded to the obvious truth that their opinion is the right one, based on the 2 games they’ve seen on TBS.
He looks like a liability on offense...
and yet the Blazers have still been 7 points per 100 possessions better on offense with Blake on the court. The floor spacing? Ball movement? I don’t know the answer, and it’s certainly possible it’s just random. But for whatever reason, despite the complete lack of production, Portland has been much better on both ends with Steve on the floor.
Q: Is Greg favoring his knee?
Frye: He favors dunking on your head, that's what he favors.
by KP Corleone on Nov 19, 2009 11:19 AM PST up reply actions
yeah.. I think his liabilities seem to be concentrated in particular scenarios
like end of game situations or when playing with 3 or more back-ups. I think if he plays with three other strong offensive options on the floor (Roy, Aldridge, Miller, and sometimes Outlaw, Oden and Fernandez), he’s a nice complimentary player, who keeps the offense moving and can keep the defense honest with spacing.
A unit like Blake, Fernandez, Outlaw, Przybilla, and Webster is a predictably weak offensive team.
Doesn't this then argue for Miller to be paired with the second unit ...
… more so than Blake?
hakkaa päälle !
that was the idea, at the beginning of the season
the bench would be “more balanced” with Miller, etc
But Andre and Greg should be on the court together, as much as possible. So what Nate is doing is taking Miller out early, and putting Rudy in, then bringing Andre back in after Roy leaves. Miller can’t play all 48 units, but he’s helping Oden get touches at teh beginning of each half, and trying to help the 2nd unit find ways to score when Roy is out.
There will always be in-game and mid-season adjustments. Outlaw going down means that the bench unit will have less of a “running” or “spread the court”style. I’d like to see Howard get his minutes backing up LMA when Greg’s in the game, whenever possible. If Andre and Juwan are feeding Oden the ball (regardless of “who else” is in the game at the time…) pounding the ball inside is going to be something good to build a half-court offense on, at least for short stretches of the game.
When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
Miller can’t play all 48 units
*minutes
When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
Honestly, I don't care who starts and who doesn't.
I doubt I would have come up with using Blake and Miller together, but then I think that supports my position that we fans know a lot less then we think. So far, Miller / Blake has been working. That’s all that really counts. When it stops working, I’m pretty sure Nate will try something else. I am dead certain that a lot of folks here will loudly state that he’s waited too long, should that happen.
hakkaa päälle !
yeah, my main concern was for Brandon
playing too much SF against larger players, this is why I’ve been opposed to heavy usage of 3-guard lineups, in the past
but “connected” team defense is the best way to “wall off” penetration. Blake-Miller-Roy have the best BBIQ of the wing players, so Nate is going with them. It seems to be working well, so who are we to complain? If Roy complains about guarding SFs, that will get Nate’s attention, not online polls
When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
Free the Rex.
"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
Here's the real: We don't have a PG who can really stop anyone
Blake plays ok D at times and Miller makes up for some of his lack of defensive ability with brains, but good PG’s are always going to kill the Blazers
Blazer Fan
I don't think so
In the current zone scheme, I don’t think the Blazers are or will get burned by good PGs anymore than any other team. They certainly haven’t been so far. Both Parker and CP3 looked terrible. Brooks looked good, but that was before we switched to the heavy use of zone defense.
What is likely to burn us now is a team with a lot of good shooters. That’s what kills zone defenses. We haven’t faced a team like that yet, but when we do, it will be tough. We’ll either have to switch back to man coverage (and expose our old defensive weaknesses) or stick with the zone and hope the shooters go cold.
www.blazerguy.com
I don't think zone usage is that heavy
It was used a lot in ATL game, but not many others as I remember. They used it briefly last night in 2nd or 3rd quarter for 2 possessions, both resulted in DET wide open scores so they quickly went away from it.
IMO you need a lightning quick PG to break down other teams D in this league...
unfortunately there are not enough to go around so what is the newt best thing? A PG that can post up and physically abuse the little guys which Miller can do and Blake can’t do. Just my opinion though.
Would you rate Steve Nash as lightning quick?
What about Jason Kidd?
Derrick Fisher?
Devon Williams?
Baron Davis?
Ok, including Davis on this list is maybe stretching it a bit.
But I would not agree that you NEED a lightning quick point guard. Yes, I agree that under the current rules, such a player will bring certain advantages to your team. But there are sorts of combinations and types of players that are successfull and a team has to make do with the personnel they have. The fact Portland is 9-4 and among the top defensive teams in the league right now indicates to me that they are making do.
hakkaa päälle !
I can sense someone's blood boiling beneath the surface.
Dear Paul Allen:
Fire Nate McMillan & hire Jeff Van Gundy.
Sincerely,
AK1984
This week on "players whose name almost sounds like a geologic period"
- Devonian Williams
- James Hadean
- Permian Stojakovich
- Danian Dickau
- Joakim Norian
- Marcus Cambrian
- Jurassic Howard
Ceterum censeo Lakers esse delendam
I’m not sure about the merits of Blake, whether he is an offensive or defensive liability. I do know, last night I was uneasy when the ball was in his hands towards the end of the game, and during the same stretch of the game, I felt his acquiescence of stopping the ball on D led directly to an Oden foul.
Finding examples or stats to lean one way or the other is not really foremost in my mind. What I want to know, is what does Blake bring to the court that Rudy does not? Does Blake spread the court in ways Rudy wouldn’t? On Defense, does Rudy’s aggressive nature somehow disrupt the team defense as a whole, or in other words, does Blake’s D mess better with the team D?
Last year we questioned if Roy could play with Rudy. This year we’re questioning if Roy can play with Miller. I’m just wondering if all this talk about Rudy vs Blake is really a discussion about Roy.
Nate Gets It... Why Don't Some Fans?...
Steve Blake is the BEST defender we have right now against PG’s!.. We seem stuck in a notion that Blake can’t guard anyone but actually watching the games tells me a different story. Steve busts his arse on defense. There is no arguing he has some physical limitations but I think they are fewer then people think. His lack of quickness is overly exaggerated. The fact is that the, “no hand checking and cleared lanes” quoted above makes it very very unlikely that any one man can stop the Aaron Brooks’ of the league.
Blake sometimes single-handedly lets Trail Blazer opponents back into the game. Andre Miller isn’t that much better, I admit, but Blake is absolutely terrible on that end these days
This quote is patently ridiculous!.. First, defense in the NBA is a team effort. With the no hand checking rules Aaron Brooks couldn’t stop Aaron Brooks. The rules favor penetration… And second, “Andre Miller isn’t much better” is the statement of somebody that doesn’t watch the games in my opinion. Even though I like Andre’s contribution…his defense is markedly worse then Blake’s on the perimeter. It may be true that he is marginally craftier as a team defender off the ball but on the ball Blake is quicker and stays in front of guys better… much better.
Just for the record… I’m not a cop or anything but shouldn’t this be a Fanshot?.. I didn’t think taking a quote and throwing in a couple sarcastic words was what a Fanpost was suppose to be. Weak Sauce in my book.
Oh well feed the Blake hate machine guys… Look at the bright side in 5 months or so Travis will be back and kind rusty from not playing and you can hate on him too…
by Ilikeemall on Nov 19, 2009 12:16 PM PST reply actions 1 recs
Blake's defense is not that bad.
He’s been doing a pretty good job of staying in front the last few games. He was holding Chris Paul at bay before he got injured the other night. I’ve been seeing Roy getting beat pretty often lately and he’s getting a pass for that. Rudy, surprisingly enough, has been one of their best perimeter defenders, if not the best, as of late.
Keep your expectations low and you won't be disappointed.
The thing is, Blake can't win for winning at BEdge.
Is it because he’s homely or something? People are arguing that Martell should be starting for crying out loud, and he’s playing like garbage lately.
Keep your expectations low and you won't be disappointed.
The solution for the season is simple... ( rant)
Start Rudy at the 2, keep Roy at the 3. Let Rudy try to be enough of a pain for the opposing point guards, let André try to guard the 2’s of the league and Roy… well yeah, he’ll do what he can to.
Why is Blake still starting when he can play better at the 1….? Our second unit would be served well if they were given a responsible point guard to lead them.
We switch so often on D I don’t think the “1, 2, 3” labeling works for us in this case
The Faith don't panic, the faith freaks out, burns out farms, and torchs small villages in the name of The Faith.
If, as PoliSam points out above, the numbers show Portland to be at its best with a lineup that includes Rudy and Blake,
and as Blake’s problems so far have been more on the offensive end, doesn’t that argue that the Blazers would be better served with Miller in the second unit?
As far as I’m concerned it is a non-issue. Portland is playing well with both Blake and Miller in the starting lineup and until the team starts getting beat consistently, I see no reason to be hollering for change.
hakkaa päälle !
It's so obvious this team misses Outlaw down the stretch
Why? B/c Outlaw is really the only guy who can consistently make teams pay for doubling Roy out top. He is the only player (maybe Rudy and Miller to lesser extent) that is not thinking “how can get the ball back to Brandon?” Love or hate him, Outlaw has ice water in his veins, and relishes the late game shots. Plus, his jumper is about as indefensible as any shot, and in the stand around, milk the clock, isolation offense, at the end of games he is the 2nd best perimeter player we have in those situations.
Kirk Hinrich
Best of both worlds.
Someone had to say it.
"What happened to Bayless anyway? Did he turn into a pumpkin? Most teams don’t just let #11 picks rot." - Xiane
by MadBlaze on Nov 19, 2009 1:32 PM PST reply actions 3 recs
Miller's 3-point shot and defense
Okay.
Miller’s “jump” shot on the perimeter is atrocious. And I mean bad. This is not looking at the statistics, this is looking purely at form. He doesn’t jump. Yes his feet leave the ground, but its about three inches, and he moves backwards. This is classic poor form that you often see in kids in high school, this leads to little arc on the ball and a low percentage shot. Miller cannot hit the three-ball with consistency, and his shot is one of the worst of guards in the NBA.
Miller is a very smart basketball player which is why in previous years he simply didn’t take very many. In our current system he is forced to take three point shots, and they look bad from feet, to form, to follow through. With Roy in at the end of games you need both a confident ball-handler (Miller and Blake) when Roy is doubled and someone who can hit a three (Blake) off of Roy’s drive. That is why Nate has Blake in at the end of games.
Miller’s defense is also horrible. I did not realize this when we first signed him. As in oh my god it is bad. He can’t stay in front of his man. At least Blake knows how to move his feet, my god is Miller’s defense bad. If you watch him on the perimeter he gets beaten like the red-headed step child, and with possibly more consistency. Miller does a nice job of helping when his man flattens out to the corner, but his on-ball defense is abysmal. Blake’s is terrible, Miller’s is abysmal.
These are the two reasons why Nate plays Blake down the stretch. Despite the fact that Blake has missed threes in critical moments the last two games (and made one in the last game) he’s a vastly superior option to Miller. Miller can run the break way way better, has better eyes, and is a better passer (but I really wish he would look to Oden down-low, what is the deal with this by the way? I thought this was his calling card?) but when it gets down to crunch time, Miller cannot and should not be counted on to take that shot, nor stay within 8 feet of his man.
If Rudy could handle the ball better, I would say stick with him. As it is though, despite two bad games, Blake deserves the place at the end of games right now, and for the foreseeable future.
You're saying that they look like they're giving it their all. And you know why they look that way? Because they're bad, and it literally takes them the maximum physical effort to accomplish basic baseball tasks like throwing the ball from short to first. When David Eckstein throws the ball to first base, he has to wind up like a shot-putter, spin around forty-three times, and launch it at an angle 89 degrees from the horizontal. Afterwards, he undergoes an IV drip for a fortnight and he's so out of breath that he requires several months of acupuncture to regain the power of speech. For this we laud him. -Junior of Deadspin on 'scrappy' players
by TheOdenator on Nov 19, 2009 1:47 PM PST reply actions 1 recs
+ 1
I’ve been saying this since we signed Miller Time.
Yes, he has herky-jerky skills with the ball, is a very good post
guard and a good passer, but not a good defender and a terrible
outside shooter. Unfortunatly, in order to work his strengths he needs
the ball in his hands. This duplicates the skill of our best player and
All-Star. BRoy will be here for years, Miller a couple.
Whay mess with great chemistry ???
It's GO time !
Ugh
Miller is great and all. His skillset is something this team has been sorely missing. Totally awesome on the fast break, calm and collected. But that outside jumper makes me cringe. literally.
And I’ve heard so many complain about Travis’ shots… Are the same people still on that Bandwagon?
An Oregonian in Texas.
by NoiseMekanik on Nov 19, 2009 8:29 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
haha
+1 Great point.
You're saying that they look like they're giving it their all. And you know why they look that way? Because they're bad, and it literally takes them the maximum physical effort to accomplish basic baseball tasks like throwing the ball from short to first. When David Eckstein throws the ball to first base, he has to wind up like a shot-putter, spin around forty-three times, and launch it at an angle 89 degrees from the horizontal. Afterwards, he undergoes an IV drip for a fortnight and he's so out of breath that he requires several months of acupuncture to regain the power of speech. For this we laud him. -Junior of Deadspin on 'scrappy' players
by TheOdenator on Nov 20, 2009 10:13 AM PST up reply actions
Blake is awful in crunch time!
At the end of games he becomes a turnover machine. Last night Detroit forced the ball into his hands at the end of the game and for good reason. Every time he got the ball at the end of the game last night he looked awkward with the ball in his hands. It was instant death for the offense when he touched it because he can do anything with the ball unless his 3 is falling. Det simply would sag off of blake and basically shift their attention to the 4 other players. Blake is sorry when it counts! Can no one remember his play at the end of games in the Houston series? he killed us then and he will not change at this point in his career. As for Miller he is still very young with this team but he seemed like he has been clutch for the often over matched sixers the last few years epically in the playoffs. I think this will come to light by the end of the season and blake is out of the game with under 5:00 to play come playoff time. … and by the way I do not hate blake. It has nothing to do with him looking weird or being white. I actually think he is a decent role player with a pretty good spot up shot.
Miller has missed all 4 shots he's taken in the clutch
check 82games.com, they do a good job of sussing out exactly what is happening at the end of games.
You're saying that they look like they're giving it their all. And you know why they look that way? Because they're bad, and it literally takes them the maximum physical effort to accomplish basic baseball tasks like throwing the ball from short to first. When David Eckstein throws the ball to first base, he has to wind up like a shot-putter, spin around forty-three times, and launch it at an angle 89 degrees from the horizontal. Afterwards, he undergoes an IV drip for a fortnight and he's so out of breath that he requires several months of acupuncture to regain the power of speech. For this we laud him. -Junior of Deadspin on 'scrappy' players
I could be wrong
But I feel Blake has consistently drawn the ire of fans for a few years now. And I think a lot of it stems from his performance in crunch time. For whatever reasons, Blake has made some untimely turnovers during crucial moments. (Botched inbound passes, and the inexplicable 3 pt. attempt with lots of time on the clock against Houston in the playoffs come to mind.) Which is all rather odd because he normally takes care of the ball pretty well. Blake’s crunch time nerves aren’t on the same level as Roy or Rudy, I guess.
Really the blame should be more on Nate for that.
I have blocked out memories of his houston series follies for mental health purposes. But in Atlanta the other night? Dre was on the bench the whole time that game slipped further away. There’s still no shame in losing to the Hawks (best record in NBA, Phx lost tonight), on the road, at the end of a busy trip. But that game was in reach. A sizable 4th quarter lead was blown. And Andre sat that whole stretch. By the time Blake was screwing up it may have been too late, but he certainly has never been a clutch player, but that’s who coach Nate wanted in there. WHY??
An Oregonian in Texas.
by NoiseMekanik on Nov 19, 2009 8:39 PM PST up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
FanShots
Quick hits of video, photos, quotes, chats, links and lists that you find around the web.
Recommended FanShots
Recent FanShots
In Association With
Ball Don't Lie - NBA - Yahoo! Sport
- Days of NBA Lives: Wherein Roy Hibbert tap-dances to Maine
- Grizzlies Valentine’s Day cards are the key to love
- Kevin Love would like the NBA to take the MLB’s approach on All-Star games
- Kobe Bryant fires a few hilarious salvos at Jeremy Lin
- Brandon Jennings states the obvious regarding his 2014 free agency, everyone goes nuts
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
