Did the 3-guard lineup really fail ?

by jbm01 on Nov 23, 2009 1:25 AM PST

All of this talk by Brandon, McMillian and other Blazer affiliates really has us believing that the 3-guard lineup needed to be changed after the Warriors game. I don't know if its been that long, but I'd like to remind all of you that it was this Blake-Roy-Martell-LA-Oden lineup that got us to a 2-3 record at the begining of the season... and then injecting Miller into the lineup must have stimulated something in our team, as we suddenly got off to a 6 game winning streak... slightly attributed to a series of weaker opponent, but nontheless impressive to see as Portland finished 4-1 on the road, breaking away from the habits of last season when we looked like a different team on the road. This winning streak was followed by another loss to Atlanta, which although was dissapointing, I would still blame it on fatigue.

The team was looking great so far, and everything was dandy. Except that one star guard was feeling a bit out of position and was no longer gonna be quiet about the matter.

And then we lost to the warriors.. a change had to come, and changing the lineup was an option. But who would've known that after witnessing how Miller can single-handedly impact the ball movement of our team, we would once again resort to habits of old ? Blake was not performing well, neither was Brandon, so Miller was indirectly blammed. Did Nate even think about inserting Rudy into the lineup ?

A lineup of Miller-Rudy-Roy-LA-Oden with (Roy and Rudy switching between the 2 and 3 a possibility) would give us:

-A wing that can play off the ball and cause some movement, thus resulting in openings on offense, all while beeing a 3 point threat and performing well on defense

-A point guard that can distributed the ball and create his own offense, all while having the ability to penetrate and draw out fouls

The first catters to Roy's needs... what Blake does, Rudy can do AND MORE! Its only a matter of playing time.. once these two start together, their synergy could increase, and we've all heard the stats of how effective lineups with Rudy and Roy are.

The 2nd gives us an alternative ball handler in Miller, that can give our bigs the ball when we need it.

All in all this results in a lineup that would work well in theory. Its only a matter of time and losses until we all realize once again that Blake will never be the solution to our problems, no matter how much Roy pleads it.

Tweet Comment 12 comments | 1 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

In the Atlanta loss, Nate benched Miller down the stretch

And Miller was injured and re-injured his ankle early on, playing limited minutes in the awful loss at GS.

The Miller “experiment” worked. If Martell is finally ready, then start Miller-Roy-Webster-LMA-Oden, with Rudy and Joel the first players off the bench.

Miller is a winner. He fills the stat sheet. He is a better PG in every aspect except 3-pt shooting than Blake. Roy should be eager to play with Miller. He should find ways, like Rudy, to set himself up moving off the ball. He should have to learn how to make himself available for the pass. Miller will find him. He finds everybody else.

by LaoTzu on Nov 23, 2009 2:42 AM PST reply actions

Blake isn't exactly lighting it up from downtown this year or other non-career years

Blake’s outstanding shooting imo is a myth created by overeager Blazer fans

Blazer Fan

by leeroyjenkins on Nov 23, 2009 6:52 AM PST up reply actions

It was certainly fantastic last year.

We’ll get a chance to look back at it this year.

Blake’s problem is that he makes too many early in the game, and then misses them at the end. (opposite of Derek Fisher)

The problem with having Miller on the court is in a spread offense, he appears to have lowered everyone’s FG% because he can’t shoot long ranged.

With Roy playmaking + 2 three point gunners, it hurts opposing defenses much more.

The real question is whether this offense has a chance of winning deep playoff series.

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

by staylost on Nov 23, 2009 7:30 AM PST up reply actions

It may be a myth created by the organization itself.

The Mikes are always spouting the company line, and yes I can understand why they do, but I’d love it if they would say what they really think instead. When we signed Miller they were excited about it and talking about all the things Miller could do to help the team. They were talking about how excited Andre was to come here and now I don’t really hear any of that at all. Its all about Roy and McMillan and how comfortable Brandon is with Blake.

"She turned me into a newt!
A newt?
...I got better."

by Seijeff on Nov 23, 2009 7:36 AM PST up reply actions

Despite a slow start

Blake is at 37% from 3 this year. That’s not great, but it isn’t all that far from last year.

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

by jscot on Nov 23, 2009 8:37 AM PST up reply actions

(still a small sample size)

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

by jscot on Nov 23, 2009 8:37 AM PST up reply actions

It's the 2nd worst season of Blake's career

37% on 3-pointers is good for most players, but for Blake it is below average. I don’t understand how people can say that Blake isn’t a good shooter except in “career years”. His career average is above 39% on 3-pointers. It is much more sense to think of Blake as a good shooter than to think of him as a mediocre shooter who somehow managed to have “career years” during 6 of his 7 years in the NBA.

by trk on Nov 23, 2009 1:42 PM PST up reply actions

Oh, you want sense now?

by raoulduke on Nov 23, 2009 2:05 PM PST up reply actions

OFfense would be suspect in the 2nd unit

with Rudy out.

Blake
Bayless
Webster
Howard (Dante/Pendy)
Przy

I cringe at our offense just going COLD.

Rip City Baby...People have no idea what is coming.

Follow my twitter www.twitter.com/PDXBlazersFTW, @PDXBlazersFTW. Lots of random Blazer Posts from links I find around the blogosphere.

by lanepete on Nov 23, 2009 2:52 AM PST reply actions

I don't think there should be a 1st and 2nd unit

I think we should play an 8 man game and substitute as necessary. Right now, I’d play the starters, along with Pryz, Rudy, and Miller off the bench.

"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 23, 2009 7:20 AM PST up reply actions

It will be a repeat of last years one and done in the playoffs. And we will blame the outlaw injury for that-

If the blazers wanted to spread the floor they should kept Frye and traded Aldridge and outlaw for Harris. Oden would be the inside presence, Frye and Webster would spread the floor and Roy and Harris would create for themselves and their teammates.

And Oden, once again, is a rookie, so non-stop fast break basketball is like fast-forwarding a song while he's trying to learn the lyrics.

by RipCity on Nov 23, 2009 9:13 AM PST via mobile reply actions

I think mainly Nate went to the 3-guard starting line-up to mix things up when the team was playing badly

And he’s gone back to the original line-up (with Martell in there) for the same reason. On each occasion, the team has responded to the change with improved play. So I agree with you that the 3-guard line-up was NOT a failure. But I don’t agree with you that it’s necessarily a better line-up (even with Rudy subtituted for Blake) than the conventional line-up.

Fans need to understand that Nate is holding this team together with spit & bubblegum until Batum & Trout return. Some moves will help; others will make matters worse. If Martell has more nights like he did vs the Wolves, then Nate will hold off from further tinkering. But if Martell reverts to the pressing, hyper Martell of earlier this season, then Nate will be forced to dig into his bag of tricks again.

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

by hurryup09 on Nov 23, 2009 10:20 AM PST reply actions