Quick: Blazers React to Jazz Loss, Surprised by Miller's Benching
Jason Quick of The Oregonian looks at the locker room after Saturday night's loss to Utah and discusses, among other things, the benching of Andre Miller for the entire second half...
-----------------------
And, of course, there was Miller's benching, which caught everyone by surprise, none more so than Miller. It appears Miller has the team's full support, as he engaged in lengthy conversations with Przybilla and Blake on the bench, and then drew the concern of Roy. Then, after Miller gave a noncontroversial interview, during which he answered every question professionally, Oden tapped him on the knee and offered a fist, which Miller bumped.
-----------------------
-- Ben Golliver | (benjamin.golliver@gmail.com) | Twitter
about 2 years ago
Ben Golliver
186 comments
0 recs |
Comments
This is so a non-issue, the team listnens to nate, cause he says when to go into the game or not, tonight miller looker better with blue cold mt's on the bench
i look at nate sitting miller more as nate standing other guys up.
trying to see if he could spark a win from perhaps the likes of dante’s inferno or the reincarnation of the fab four
Welcome to the Terror Dome
by BlazermaniacAndy on Nov 29, 2009 2:00 AM PST up reply actions
I agree. Miller hasn't played well at all the past 2 games. Just because his name is "Andre Miller" doesn't mean he automatically deserves minutes.
by hotstuffdb22 on Nov 29, 2009 5:42 AM PST up reply actions
Miller only played 6 minutes.
I don’t see how he’s supposed to do anything if he gets pulled for 6 bad minutes. Granted, he hasn’t played great, but the previous two games he had still outplayed Blake by a mile.
Miller: 46 minutes, 23 points, 8 assists, 1 turnover, 6-15 shooting.
Blake: 49 minutes, 8 points, 6 assists, 2 turnovers, 3-9 shooting,
by Nick Van Excellent on Nov 29, 2009 6:08 AM PST up reply actions 2 recs
He needs to stop shooting.
"Oden is a man among cub scouts."
by Tyrusmancrush on Nov 23, 2009 9:08 PM PST
by Sabonis4Ever on Nov 29, 2009 9:10 AM PST up reply actions 2 recs
when he gets the ball with one second on the shot clock
he doesn’t have much of a choice…
by blazingjim on Nov 29, 2009 12:55 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
It's hard to be a leader when your coach treats you like a scrub.
I guarantee we’d be seeing the same Andre every other team has seen when he’s actually treated like the starter he is, and not Steve “are you joking?” Blake’s back up.
by Coastie07 on Nov 29, 2009 3:00 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
Miller hasn't played any better than Blake
by tominhawaii on Nov 29, 2009 3:20 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
that is about as wrong as you can get
Miller has been so much better than Blake it isn’t funny (it isn’t funny because while they have both been bad – Blake has been utterly dismal)
by blacknoiseNW on Nov 29, 2009 3:23 PM PST up reply actions
They're both playing like turds
Maybe Miller is playing like a shiny turd, but as Gertrude Stein said, “A turd is a turd is a turd.” Neither one of them deserves to start on an NBA team.
by tominhawaii on Nov 29, 2009 4:30 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
I agree Miller isn't playing well but he's outclassing Blake by a mile
Blake has been pretty much useless this season.
P.S. Blake is supposed to be the shooter (according to you guys) and Miller is shooting a higher % – sup with that
And you’re telling Miller not to shoot????“?”???
Blazer Fan
by leeroyjenkins on Nov 29, 2009 5:33 PM PST up reply actions
I'm not telling Miller anything nor am I a "you guys"
Apparently, I’m the only person here who thought the Blazers would not go undefeated this season and now everyone is freaking out over a couple losses.
I also have enough common sense to know the Blazers problems only involve Blake, Miller, and Nate. I could easily list over half a dozen reason why the Blazers aren’t playing well.
A couple losses? They've lost a couple games?!!!
“This is the big one, Elizabeth!” (says Fred Sanford, dramatically clutching his heart).
"We don't back down to nobody." --Joel Przybilla
Did you forget a word in this sentence?
I also have enough common sense to know the Blazers problems only involve Blake, Miller, and Nate.
"Aneurysm".
When Outlaw wins a game on a last-second shot, it’s called an "annthefaneurysm". QualityPie
That would fit right in. :)
"Aneurysm".
When Outlaw wins a game on a last-second shot, it’s called an "annthefaneurysm". QualityPie
He has played better than Blake.
Nate is a good man, but unfortunately, not the right coach for this team.
by RenoBlazerFan on Nov 29, 2009 6:10 AM PST up reply actions
Bayless played
of course he played better than Miller. And I could play better than Steve Blake right now.
Steve! Quit driving the lane!
i agree. what worries me more that this note seems to suggest the blazer players are coming together.
its an old sociological fact that inorder to come together and patch up some clevages you have to have a common enemy. so that common enemy is either their collective losing or the coach.
im gonna guess it isn’t hte losing cause in the nba that usually just means internal finger pointing.
Damn Drama
It sure looks like drama. Been saying there was drama coming, but can’t say I’m happy to see it.
Brandon Roy ought to read his press quotes sometime, cause he sure does come across as a Diva. Especially in the context of his almost demonstrativeness on court.
I thought He and Nate were buddies.
Goes to show, it never pays to buddy up to a player if you’re the coach.
Actually makes me feel pretty sympathetic towards Nate.
All conjecture, but my guess is he tried to keep everyone happy. And I think Roy was gonna make something like this happen regardless.
Still, I wonder if Nate had committed to Andre from the first moment he was signed, if this could have been avoided.
Guess we’ll find out what happened when Greg writes his memoir!
Drama queens!
"The only 'Advanced Metric' that matters is what you see with your eyes." -Timbo, Nov., 2009.
This is great.
Nate WANTED Andre Miller on the team. He actively sought him out and was vocal about the management acquiring him. Miller is the last person on Earth that McMillan can throw under the bus. Either he’s not being used properly (by the coach) or he should never have been recruited in the first place (by the coach).
Also, when did we start benching our PG’s for playing bad?
by Nick Van Excellent on Nov 29, 2009 1:40 AM PST reply actions 1 recs
Every single time
the PG wasn’t named Steve Blake. Sergio, Jack, Bayless, now Miller.
by TheThinWhiteDuke on Nov 29, 2009 2:42 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
lol.. See ya, Nate
“I don’t know. That’s why coaches coach,” Roy said. “I just go out there, you know? He’s the coach.”
Saw that too. Other players who were quoted as saying "he's the coach":
- Alan Iverson, multiple times
- Shaquille O’Neal, multiple times
- Ben Gordon, multiple times
- John Stockton, about Jerry Sloan (that was in admiration)
- Pat Riley, before firing Jeff Van Gundy
- Darko Milicic, when talking about a potential return to Europe
- Adam Morrison, before being traded to LA
- Jerryd Bayless, about Nate last year
Ceterum censeo Lakers esse delendam
Other players who have said "he's the coach" at some point in their life...
Michael Jordan, multiple times
Bill Russel, multiple times
Babe Ruth, multiple times
Wayne Gretsky, multiple times
Muhammad Ali, multiple times
OJ Simpson, multiple times
Tiger Woods, multiple times
Lucky, from Lucky Charms, multiple times
Steve Jobs, Apple, multiple times
“Red”, Morgan Freemons character from Shawshake Redemption, multiple times
by TrentEdwardsHoF2018 on Nov 29, 2009 9:18 AM PST up reply actions 2 recs
Pat Riley never fired JVG, but rather SVG.
Dear Paul Allen:
Fire Nate McMillan & hire Jeff Van Gundy.
Sincerely,
AK1984
by AK1984 on Nov 29, 2009 4:58 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
He's gone within 2 weeks of last night. Start the clock.
by Free Bayless on Nov 29, 2009 9:16 AM PST up reply actions
I'll take that bet.
I'm a really really ridiculously good looking orange mocha frappaccino drinking manhammer sandwich
So would I
We’d have to see two more weeks of blowouts for that to even be possible. Ain’t gonna happen. The team will get some badly needed rest & practice and, probably, put this bump in the road behind them.
If things DON’T come together, Nate might get fired. But probably not this season, and certainly not in a couple of weeks.
"We don't back down to nobody." --Joel Przybilla
i am just ticked about Nate's "the players need to figure it out" line
what is a coach’s job after all?
Nate is a system guy, and that is fine, but his sytem does not exploit the talents of the players he now has. That the ‘players need to figure it out’ line tells me he either does not know what they need to do to take advantage of the talent they have or he just it interested in that style of play.
That coupled with the benching of Miller after 6 minutes (the one guy that knows how to take advantage of the inside out game) tells me Nate does not know how to coach to that style of play and that he does not like it when the players run the game that way.
"Oh Yeah!" ~ Kool Aid Man
Nothing is going to happen during the season
And Nate will be allowed to “Not renew his contract”, rather than being told he’s fired. KP doesn’t seem to like change during the season. Of any kind. Makes sense, but it makes it hard to be “Slam-the-Panic-Button” fan.
by TheThinWhiteDuke on Nov 29, 2009 2:44 PM PST up reply actions
If Nate doesn't renew his contract, he'd still have 1.5 years with the team.
He renewed for the year after this one, before the season.
Correct, I tend to agree that Nate McMillan will at least coach out this season.
After that, though, he’ll be gone if the team doesn’t make an improvement from last season.
Dear Paul Allen:
Fire Nate McMillan & hire Jeff Van Gundy.
Sincerely,
AK1984
Not a chance.
The fans, and maybe some of the players, are the ones that have a problem with Nate right now. It’s going to be a year of underachieving until management wakes up from their Nate lovefest.
Nates system (or lack there of) is killing our potential.
His rotations are totally illogical and he has single handedly killed the morale of this team.
Roy is not the problem. Roy worked very hard in the off season as did the rest of the roster, And Nate, in his usual clueless fashion, for the third consecutive season, declares that he has no freaking clue who will start. Then after starting Blake, Roy, Webster, Aldridge and Oden and coming out sluggish, he pulls off the absolute dumbest move in coaching history by announcing he will start Miller, Which was great, until he said " With Blake and Roy" WTF!? So after that debacle didn’t work (to put it lightly) He makes a grrrreeeaaat coaching move, he goes back to the original mistake because he is so lame, stubborn and petrified that he absolutely refuses to start Andre Miller with Roy, Webster, Aldridge and Oden.
And why in the world does he always have to pull Oden out with 6 minutes left in the 1st? When we played got murdered by the GSW Oden was killing them and Nate pulls him out just because " it’s time " He did the same thing with Webster against Memphis. Basically, if you get hot, you’re coming out.
And with Blake, Nate always says " We need him to spread the floor " It’s like he doesn’t understand pace and tempo or something. Andre Miller would set the table for everybody to eat, he showed that before he was demoted in favor of Blake again.
NATE CANNOT LEAD US TO A CHAMPIONSHIP!!!!!!!!!!
Oh yea and a little newsflash to the Nate faithful….. Nate has NEVER won on any level!
Not high school, Not college, Not the NBA, Not as a player and not as a coach, he didn’t even win in the biddy ball league! At least Avery Jonson and Byron Scott actually no what a real and successful Championship run feels like, Nate hasn’t even been close! WHAT A JOKE!!!!!!!!!
Miller is an iron man, but even they get hurt. They just ignore it.
I’m the same way, I can be sick as a dog but that doesnt slow me in the least. I’ve had times where I was literally order to go home and/or hospital. Some people actually need to be forced into stopping.
Miller has sprained both his ankles repeatedly recently as well as that hard landing last night, most likely Nate saw him limping after a play and decided he’s done enough for the day. Of course, when you do such things you are supposed to tell him thats why you are doing it but who knows what he’s thinking.
Portland could coast along with their superior talent and stay right with us. Now that Portland woke up, the hammer cometh down.
by Batumshakalaka on Nov 29, 2009 3:48 AM PST reply actions 1 recs
Wow...
if Miller was really “benched” for 2 missed FBP threes, that’s a heck of an indictment on Nate’s unwarranted/insane favoritism for the “courageous” Blakee
how many times has Blake missed a few threes in a row coupled with an ill-advised turnover or two without being pulled from the game?
Miller didn’t play very well in his limited time, but he certainly didn’t lower the bar from Blake’s performance
…and the quote from Roy, “i just go out there, he’s the coach” whoa, where did Bill Simmons get his crystal ball?
it’s still early & 12-7 is a good place to be, but there’s a potential implosion on the horizon and it needs to be attended to NOW
Yup. When does Blake get benched?
Nate’s an idiot.
Nate is a good man, but unfortunately, not the right coach for this team.
by RenoBlazerFan on Nov 29, 2009 6:09 AM PST up reply actions
i can't imagine he got benched
for taking two shots at buzzer. that seems odd.
Only imagine if our schedule started out like last years...
You could reverse that 12-7 record then.
I knew
miller was a problem but oden…..hmmm i guess i was wrong. But how can oden be a problem when he gets 10 touches at maximum? LA seems to be in on this too. I never thought i’d see things come to this between nate and roy.
That's what majority of us were complaining about Roy, game after game
It’s not about Miller, but it’s about Oden. I don’t care too much if Roy and Miller does not get along or Miller does not get minutes AS LONG AS Roy involves Oden into the offense. For most of our games, Roy just doesn’t seem too interested in getting Oden involved in offense while Dre, for the most part with exception to the last couple games, does get Oden involved.
I wouldn’t worry too much about LA, though. He’s comfortable being second or third wheel as long as he gets his # of touches and team wins. He just does his own thing like Joel and really doesn’t take sides..at least that is my take.
It's sad
that Roy can’t use picks very well (at all), because he two of the best at C. Przy is simple the best at the actual physical screen, and Oden is frightening when he slips the screen and charges towards the hoop. Roy refuses to pass out of double on the screen-and-roll, ever. Why do we run these plays if all the other team has to do is double?
by TheThinWhiteDuke on Nov 29, 2009 2:48 PM PST up reply actions
Soooo.... in other words skrew Mcmillian and his stupid dumb irrational coaching roatation...and brandon is short to follow if everyone else in the world gets it but him.
The Faith don't panic, the faith freaks out, burns out farms, and torchs small villages in the name of The Faith.
Head Czar of Amerika <--- Mortimer said so so there!!!
by faith on Nov 29, 2009 5:15 AM PST reply actions 9 recs
oh no!!!! ...
see this is why dave banned me just no self control whatsoever……..
I honestly didn’t mean to hit post on this one…. I was looking for my cancel button… then figured the last line needed to come out and didn’t delete..oh man this is a foul any way you cut it.
The Faith don't panic, the faith freaks out, burns out farms, and torchs small villages in the name of The Faith.
Head Czar of Amerika <--- Mortimer said so so there!!!
somebody flag it!!!!
Please!!! mod could ya do me a favor before this brain fart gets me burnned …….
The Faith don't panic, the faith freaks out, burns out farms, and torchs small villages in the name of The Faith.
Head Czar of Amerika <--- Mortimer said so so there!!!
by faith on Nov 29, 2009 5:17 AM PST up reply actions 1 recs
rec
Recently I was talking about the desirability of having a self-flagging capability. This is why.
2nd userid works
"I play, Coach stays. He goes, I go." - Jimmy Chitwood
by DucRider on Nov 30, 2009 12:04 PM PST via mobile up reply actions
This is what happens ...
When you have as much talent as the Blazers do. Integrating components, especially Greg and Andre when the last couple of years have been the Brandon and LA show. To add to the frustration and rotation problems you lose Nic and Trout for the foreseeable future and things are definitely messy.
I don’t get Comcast so I have rely on box scores and the games when they are KGW but it seems like trying to shift the offense from the pick and roll game that has been effective to the in and out game with GO is creating some growing pains. People are still adjusting to their roles and understanding how they all fit into this offense.
It’s up to Nate to see what is working against any given opponent and it doesn’t seem like he is. Some games it might be the PNR that’s going to be the mainstay of the offense and other nights it’s going to be the Greg show.
I'm starting to compose my apologies letter to the Sports Guy
The "You Thought We’d Take Another Leap, But Instead We Went Backward Because Expectations Were Too High, We Tinkered With Our Chemistry And Our Young Guys Tuned Out Their Coach" Team – Bill Simmons about the Blazers in his season preview. He also predicted 41 wins and finishing behind OKC, which I still don’t believe. In fact I bet on it.
Ceterum censeo Lakers esse delendam
miller plays poorly for the first half, he gets benched
blake plays poorly the entire season save a few games, he starts
bayless leaves over my dead body
Start Andre (in a 2 guard lineup)
"Good defense always beats bad offense."-Al Iannazzone, Yes Network
Very true
Even if Nate has some loyalty to Steve and feels like he deserves a longer leash, he has to realize how a “performance based” benching of Miller looks when you take into account Blake’s poor play.
The Blazerverse and The Wire: A comparison
Brandon Roy = Stringer Bell (smooth technician dedicated to his craft)
Nate McMillan = Cedric Daniels (well intentioned leader, but he can be too rigid for his own good at times)
Martell Webster = Wee Bey Brice (straight up solider who follows orders; every organization needs these guys to be successful)
Jerryd Bayless = Marlo Stanfield (he's new to the game, but he's watching and waitng; he will take over and there will be casualties)
Rudy Fernandez = Jimmy McNulty (he gets results, but the leadership wishes he was less of a wild man; the ladies love him)
Greg Oden = Michael Lee (he started off a quiet kid, but he's beginning to tap in to his huge potential to change the game)
Andre Miller = Lester Freamon (do not let the laconic demeanor fool you, the veteran knows what's up)
John Canzano = Scott Templeton (scummy muckraker who stays up at night polishing his award)
by blazeraddict on Nov 29, 2009 9:19 AM PST up reply actions
Yes, yes, yes!
You don’t have to be a rocket scientist or a basketball coach to figure out that Nate benched the wrong PG.
His stubborn loyalty to Blake in the face of sustained poor play is causing inevitable problems. Will Nate figure this out before the team fractures and the fan base revolts? Stay tuned.
by upper left corner on Nov 29, 2009 9:55 AM PST up reply actions
Blake for Brandon Bass
my dream trade right there. Saves Nate from himself and scores the Blazers a very good backup PF who is being under-used in Orlando
The Blazerverse and The Wire: A comparison
Brandon Roy = Stringer Bell (smooth technician dedicated to his craft)
Nate McMillan = Cedric Daniels (well intentioned leader, but he can be too rigid for his own good at times)
Martell Webster = Wee Bey Brice (straight up solider who follows orders; every organization needs these guys to be successful)
Jerryd Bayless = Marlo Stanfield (he's new to the game, but he's watching and waitng; he will take over and there will be casualties)
Rudy Fernandez = Jimmy McNulty (he gets results, but the leadership wishes he was less of a wild man; the ladies love him)
Greg Oden = Michael Lee (he started off a quiet kid, but he's beginning to tap in to his huge potential to change the game)
Andre Miller = Lester Freamon (do not let the laconic demeanor fool you, the veteran knows what's up)
John Canzano = Scott Templeton (scummy muckraker who stays up at night polishing his award)
by blazeraddict on Nov 29, 2009 9:58 AM PST up reply actions
Fortunately we don't seem to have any rocket scientists or basketball coaches here.
Therefore we can be assured that most of the comments we see are right on the money and all Kevin Pritchard needs to do is let the fans at BE run the team for him. Think of the money he can save by not having to pay a coach.
And as for the fan base revolting – ype I’d agree wholeheartedly with that. I consider it pretty revolting that people who bitch and complain as much as is seen here call themselves fans.
Seriously, two games and people are acting like the wheels have come off. Last year it was Oden is a bust. And so far this season, with Greg showing he may be the player we all wanted when he was drafted? People are pointing fingers at Nate and Blake. Lets ignore the fact that even Roy has said that the problem is the team is still trying to adjust to a different style of play. And why? Because of Oden.
It is not a video game. You just don’t plug a new player into the lineup and suddenly get his stats line performing for you. And there is only so much a coaching staff can do. Sure, they can diagram out plays and have the team practice them – when they have the time for practice. Unless some of the people here have missed it, Portland hasn’t had much time for practice this season, playing more games than any other team. And even with time to practice, it is still up to the players to recognize what is having in a game and to adjust and execute. Unless I’m totally unobservant, I have yet to see McMillan or any other NBA coach standing on the sidelines with a joystick or other game controller in his hands.
But to all of the “Blazer fans” – feel free to throw all the stones you want. I prefer to sit back and wait until the players figure out how to mesh their games with one another while playing within Nate’s system. I believe it will happen. I just don’t know how long it will take. But I figure that offers me an opportunity to practice my patience.
hakkaa päälle !
But Blake's a shooter!!!111
Blazer Fan
by leeroyjenkins on Nov 29, 2009 5:39 PM PST up reply actions
...I usually like Nate... but this article gets me thinking
The Blazers players are most concerned about the offense, which has undergone a decided change from last season, when Roy and Aldridge dominated the ball and shots with pick-and-roll variations. This season, with Oden becoming a formidable and effective option, the offense more often revolves around entry passes to Oden.
McMillan says it is up to the players to figure out how to make that dynamic work
Wait… so he is offering no advice and benching all the good players? Well good luck figuring that out.
...and that's a good thing
Why are people concerning themselves over Miller and Blake?
Jerryd Bayless: 9.2 minutes played per game, .474 shooting percentage, .710 free throw percentage, 2:1 Assist to Turnover ratio, 5 points per game, and he draws fouls like fat kids love cake…or something like that. Oh and I keep hearing that his defense is only “adequate”. Well if last nights performace was adequate then I’ll take a player like that instead of the 30 year old turnstile that Steve Blake has become.
If you look at the first 1/4 of the 2009/2010 season and compare Blake to Bayless there is absolutely no reason Binkie should be eating up Bayless’s minutes.
Unless the life of bust known as Andre Miller turns into a Disney movie where he eats magic rocket dust and reverse ages 5 years, the development of Bayless needs to be a priority for this franchise.
Our window is closed this year. There is no way we are going to win, as the road team, against the Suns, Lakers, Nuggets, and Magic this postseason. We have no chance to win 16 when the regular season finishes.
Get well soon Nic Batum
by TrentEdwardsHoF2018 on Nov 29, 2009 9:09 AM PST reply actions 1 recs
Our window is wide open
...and that's a good thing
by In Walks Rudy on Nov 29, 2009 9:15 AM PST up reply actions
Tell that to...
Orlando, Boston, Atlanta, Cleveland, Pheonix, L.A., Denver and Dallas.
The only way we win multiple championships this season is if we start Bayless in the 1 and 2 spots from here on out.
by TrentEdwardsHoF2018 on Nov 29, 2009 9:20 AM PST up reply actions
Sign of Bayless homer:
thinking that not only should he start, but he should start at TWO positions.
the poster formerly known as sergioftw, in recovery
by NoLook on Nov 29, 2009 11:49 AM PST up reply actions 2 recs
Yeah...
I have to agree that our window is not open this season. Here we are, looking down the barrel of December, without a starting lineup. Our big off season signing has not yielded great results, and our star players still have not hit their stride. This has gone from being a season where we give the big dogs a run for their money, to a season where we continue to grow our young talent. That being the case, we should be giving our young talent all the minutes they can handle.
I am a big Bayless fan, but I’m not quite ready to see him in a starting role. I think he still has a few things to learn from Miller before he could handle the starting PG spot with poise. 1st PG off the bench? Absolutely. Mostly, I want to see the young man master the alley oop pass, and I can think of no better teacher.
Another player that has really been showing his stuff is Dante Cunningham. I am very pleased with the way Coach has been reacting to this young man’s talent. The “McMillan” thing to do would be to play Howard over Cunningham by merit of his experience. Instead, Nate has once again stepped out of his comfort zone and been rewarded with positive results—much like last season when he started Batum. Dante is an intelligent player that takes solid shots and plays great defense. He deserves every minute Coach can find for him.
Finally, I wonder what kind of impact Patty Mills will have? He could be the most talented PG on the team, but chances are he’ll only see garbage time minutes unless there’s a big trade, which I would be totally fine with. We could loose Blake, Miller and Outlaw by the deadline and I wouldn’t have any new wrinkles.
And yeah, get well soon Batum.
Good-better-best ? ? ?
Miller is just a scapegoat for this team…a team of no identity, no clear direction and lack of fundamental soundness….they are a team that is not having fun, lacks athletic skills and quickness….They also lack a skill in a coach that can get the most out of what players he has……this team doesn’t even hustle and scrap for loose balls….there is something wrong with this team that is deeper than most people would like to admit…..Sadly, Roy and Aldridge (the stars?) are at the forefront…..It’s getting more and more apparent that we have not assembled a good team….maybe they just aren’t that good, but pouting doesn’t help (this is a team that is not happy and their play is not entertaining because of that…..instead of going out and playing the game, they keep miring themselves in high expectations (a recipe for disaster)
by WyEast on Nov 29, 2009 9:16 AM PST reply actions 2 recs
I've been saying this for the past 6 years...
LaMarcus Aldridge can not be your 2nd option. He’s a 3rd option at best. I started saying that in 2003. Now who’s the crazy one?!
by TrentEdwardsHoF2018 on Nov 29, 2009 9:23 AM PST up reply actions
I think it is you still
either that or you are clairvoyent. Aldridge was a freshman at Texas in 2003, wasnt drafted until 2006, and wasn’t relied upon as a 2nd option until after the Zbo trade in 2007…
RUDY > MJ
the crazy one is the one you thinks
trent edwards is going to the hof.
you've gotten funny
while you were away, I like it.
Come on you gotta listen unto me,
lay off that whiskey and let that cocaine be. ~Johnny Cash
by HurraKane212 on Nov 29, 2009 1:14 PM PST up reply actions
Agree
I agree with a previous post….Andre has been nothing but the scapegoat for this team. Drives me crazy…all he did was get hired. What has changed from that wonderful dinner meeting in Vegas with Andre they gushed about til now? They knew who Andre was, has been, what he could and could not do….what gives? Not like it was a secret or anything. Now Brandon is wondering why Andre gets benched? Oh please Brandon STOP your passive agressive BS!! Funny how when “your team” is not performing it is your buddy McMillans fault. Andre is shining the spotlight on problems that were here before he came. I think the team is with Andre and his value and Brandon is the lone wolf who now is backtracking…Brandon you are NOT a vet….stop trying to act like one…Greg’s gesture with Dre speaks volumes to me…
by debra31098 on Nov 29, 2009 9:47 AM PST reply actions 1 recs
Nate is the NBA's Jim Tressel
without a system good enough to win at the highest level (Tressel system can work, his inflexibilty loses him games hr should not lose at times though). Nate is inflexible.
The Memphis game went south when he took Oden out at the 6:00 mark. Oden is helpimg the team up off the mat last night and yet, benched at the 6"00 mark again.
Webster too, he was the only guy hitting in the firdt of either of the last 2 games, still the 2nd guy to the bench. Keep your hot guys on the floor early, if a star is struggling a bit, put him on the bench for a minute or 2 to allow them two watch what is going on and re insert them quickly to see if they can collect themselves.
Also Nate never knows when to call a time out. We never put a string of 4 or 6 points together that the other does not take a time out to cool us off. Nate lets the run go to 10 or 15 before considering a time out most of the time, and that is even when we are looking lost. Granted, I don’t think we would have won last night even if Nate was making sound decisions, Utah was super hot, but we did not even have a chance with the way the game and players were handled.
This whole, play my way thing works great with kids learning the game, but these guys have been around long enough now to be given freer reign, Nate will not give that up. My guess is that Andre was benched is because he adjusted something in Nate’s system on the fly and Nate was pissed.
"Oh Yeah!" ~ Kool Aid Man
2003 fiesta bowl
dinasour type of guys choir boys
by mittsabishy on Nov 29, 2009 11:14 AM PST up reply actions
That is why I say that his system can work
plus all of those titles in AA ball at youngstown state. Nate’s has no proven track record and this team looks so out of sync even in its wins it is scary.
"Oh Yeah!" ~ Kool Aid Man
Is this perception of mine totally incorrect?
It seems to me that Nate has a game plan in mind and regardless of whether or not that works in the actual game he seems to stick to it. Sure, he’ll change people in and out seeing if any of them can do better in the scheme he already put together, but usually I don’t see him totally changing directions in the middle of a game to try something else.
If it is broke, fix it… preferably before the game is lost.
It can’t all be on Nate and it can’t all be on the players. Both of them need to take a look at themselves to see where they aren’t getting the job done, but I’ll tell you one thing: If Roy, LA and others are having a hard time figuring out what their roles are this far into the season then Nate needs to realize it isn’t exclusively an effort problem.
"She turned me into a newt!
A newt?
...I got better."
Hmmmmm. That article is a little concerning.
Is Nate losing this team? The players saying they haven’t talked to him is also a little concerning. A win at home vs the Heat would sure help this drama right now.
if Nate isn't the guy
we need some drama to trigger a move sooner rather than later…
I like Nate with a young team, he has gotten us where we are, but I am just not seeing any change from him although his team has changed dramatically in experience and make up. Oden returning to full health is a big change for these guys.
Roy should be option 1, but the offense should go through Oden more. the coach needs to get the guys to recognize this. He has not, nor does he seem interested in doing so.
The most concerning statement for me, is nate saying these guys need to work that out. um, you are supposed to coach them. he should have said something more like’we need to work that out’ at the least.
"Oh Yeah!" ~ Kool Aid Man
Its all Nate's fault;
darn guy can’t shot to save the team.
Somebody else besides Nate should be taking those critical jumpers. Nate should at least take it to the rack more if he can’t find an open teammate to shoot it…
Would somebody just bench Nate already?
I think we are over dramatizing what is going on
Everyone is pissy and tired. Everyone is young. These sorts of problems happen.
The quotes are passive aggressive passing the buck nonsense. I doubt they all mean what they say, they just don’t know what to say. And of COURSE the players will support their fellow player in the locker room right in front of him… you’ve never done that, taken the side of someone in front of them, when you knew why they were being fired/grounded/benched, etc? Does it mean you don’t get it?
It means you are being nice and supportive of your teammate and friend.
We over dramatize stuff and make it into a soap opera. This is our stories!
Mortimer
by Mortimer on Nov 29, 2009 11:10 AM PST reply actions 11 recs
The voice of reason. I agree. I also think we miss Travis. This team could have used an offensive spark
and he certainly wouldn’t have made the defense any worse.
surprised more people aren't talking about the absence of Travis
As talked about in another rather humorous thread, Travis is an excellent hot-potato shooter when passed the ball with about a second on the shot-clock. Miller, not so much. Maybe it turns out that the chaos factor that Travis adds (and drives us crazy with sometimes) is more important to the team than any of us would like to admit.
people haven't talked about this
because it would be essentially they were admitting they were wrong about his relative value to the team. the loud majority has been shouting that the team would be better without outlaw for awhile. since the opposite has happened, you’ve not heard much.
These last two games are the kinds of games where Travis would go 1-15 from the field.
I don’t miss him one bit.
But I love you :-(
by Mortimer on Nov 19, 2009 7:04 PM PST
Thanks for saving me the time of thinking of that myself.
I'm a really really ridiculously good looking orange mocha frappaccino drinking manhammer sandwich
by hobobob on Nov 29, 2009 11:50 AM PST up reply actions 1 recs
You’re absolutely right about the over-dramatizing of the player’s comments and reactions, but there is something going on here that smells funny. There’s no reason that a team as talented as ours should be looking at a loss after the 1st quarter.
No, something is wrong
I don’t disagree with that.
We make even minor problems as huge rifts in long term relationships. We often forget how much we fight and disagree with those we work with, or friends.
Every problem is not a problem, and I think our guys will figure it out.
Things ain’t right right now, that’s for sure.
Morty
by Mortimer on Nov 29, 2009 12:58 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
Only thing...
"We don't back down to nobody." --Joel Przybilla
by hurryup09 on Nov 29, 2009 2:00 PM PST via mobile up reply actions
Dang Blackberry
I wanted to say that when we get into little spats, it doesn’t get splashed all over the media. Quick threatens to turn this molehill into a mountain.
"We don't back down to nobody." --Joel Przybilla
by hurryup09 on Nov 29, 2009 2:07 PM PST via mobile up reply actions 1 recs
quick is doing his job
i find it amazing that many people would seem to prefer to have cheerleaders rather than journalists.
Well put, Mort
"We don't back down to nobody." --Joel Przybilla
by hurryup09 on Nov 29, 2009 1:57 PM PST via mobile up reply actions
All the problems encapsulated in one moment . . .
At the end of the 1st quarter, Brandon got the ball with 9 seconds left, and the Blazers were down 15 points but with 3 quarters still ahead of them, and a chance to get a tiny bit of momentum and cut the lead to 12 or 13.
9 seconds is plenty of time to get a good shot, push the ball down get into the paint, draw some double teams, find open shooters—to make something happen by expending a little energy.
Instead Brandon walked the ball down the court as slow as possible, crossed half court with 3 or 4 seconds left, dribbled a few times while standing still, and then with about 1 second left, passed the ball to Andre Miller who was standing, guarded, 2 feet outside the 3-point line, who was forced to chuck up an contested three.
At 11:50 of the 1st quarter, our star had already given up on the game, and wasn’t even trying to hide it—his disgust, and perhaps even contempt, was on display for all to see.
Something is going on inside the team, and only the team knows what it is, and it is serious.
the poster formerly known as sergioftw, in recovery
i also watched that play
and i wish i could interpret differently than you but i just can’t. it almost made me wonder if he passed it to miller because he knew he couldn’t hit that shot. it made no sense.
ditto
I saw that play as well….then of course the backlash of Andre continues….what IS the guy supposed to do but not try and get a shot off….Brandon….I put this on you…and for the coach for allowing it to happen….messy boundaries in Nate and Brandon land….coming back to roost…
I sure hope that wasn't done on purpose by Brandon.
Was he saying screw you to Andre with that? I find it hard to believe that Brandon really was that clueless about the clock.
Whiny babies!!!! I hate listening to people whine, but it's much worse to listen when that person earns about 100 times more than me
I’m not going to one game or paying anything to watch a bunch of whiny millionaires. Roy, get it together buddy. You’re super rich, man. Miller, that’s the way to talk.
I’m glad I won’t be in Portland until mid December, so I won’t have to pay anything to watch them until that point. If they haven’t solved this issue by then, it won’t be worth watching them anyway.
I'm a really really ridiculously good looking orange mocha frappaccino drinking manhammer sandwich
Why don't you leave now
and take a look in the mirror son if you’re talking about whiny babies
"We didn't start the fire. It was always burning. Since the world's been turning." - E. E. Cummings
by Sexual Tyrannosaurus on Nov 29, 2009 6:50 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
The problem with Nate ... (And this is not a "Fire Nate!" post)
Is that when a bench player plays badly for 3 minutes he benches them for extended time periods. He did it last year with Sergio and is doing the same with Miller now. Problem is, somebody like Miller who has proven time and time again that he can get the job done, doesn’t play well when he feels questioned by the coach at all times.
People like Blake get a longer leash because they’re “veterans” or something. Bottom line, Nate has very little patience with some players, and its working against him now.
Turbulence, before a growth spurt.
Couple of undercurrents that were disturbing.
Roy’s comment “And more than anything why the change from last year, when we were a good team” might suggest that at heart he believes that our playoff failures were merely a factor of inexperience, and that a better honed version of last year’s strategy will get us to the promised land. Wonder if not playing Andre, was Nate telling Brandon, OK go see how well you can do with last years team. That Nate is trying to get Brandon to make the quantum leap and buy into the new program. This is all of course total speculation, armchair q’backing, and looking glass viewing, and all that.
By the same token, Jason Quick has fanned a lot of flames in the past. The Greg Oden fiasco being the most famous. We are most likely picking up on innocuous comments and over-dramatizing them. “McMillan says it is up to the players to figure out how to make that dynamic work. The players say the system now isn’t working because both Roy and Aldridge are struggling.” If trust was truly disrupted, then this could be a very serious, telling indicator that the season goes south.
However, getting back to title subject. I’ve referenced in the past a great book on comparing corporate growth to human life stages and the turbulent change that has to be successfully navigated. Think teenage troubles when growing to be a young adult; also, for some its not easy giving up the single life to “settle down”; mid-life crisis is that next spot of bother. The theory is that organizations (companies, teams, …) go through similar growing pains. The key is to recognize and manage the turbulence to a successful outcome; or you get the proverbial kid gone bad.
We are in the turbulence of growth. It has the potential of break-through leap-ahead, but it could also crash and burn. Given that this is the first time for most — players and coaches alike — there is learning for all involved. Hope that we make it through successfully.
by FromAfar on Nov 29, 2009 12:05 PM PST reply actions 1 recs
Of course, the chances of the guys working thru this "spot of bother" would be far greater without Quick shining a spotlight on it
I feel the media coverage—The Oregonian in particular—has been damaging to team chemistry. It certainly ain’t helping.
But that is what it is. The players will need to develop thick skins—and guarded mouths—in order to deal with it. Just one of the many obstacles to becoming an NBA champion…
"We don't back down to nobody." --Joel Przybilla
it's not quick's job to be supportive
he’s a journalist and i for one like that’s he’s bringing this stuff up.
Sports coverage ain't Watergate
We don’t need muckraking. Every hack wants to be bob woodward. This crap is hurting the team. If fans don’t complain, it’ll continue.
"We don't back down to nobody." --Joel Przybilla
by hurryup09 on Nov 29, 2009 2:16 PM PST via mobile up reply actions
can i complain about your complaining?
Quick is not the problem…
by blacknoiseNW on Nov 29, 2009 3:32 PM PST up reply actions
I'm not saying, "Quick is the problem"
I’m saying that he threatens to turn a minor, transitory problem into a big one.
Here’s an analogy: say you and your wife / girlfriend have an argument. Things are said that were better left unsaid. But if the relationship is sound, the next day it’s as though nothing ever happened. A week later, you probably have forgotten all about it. No harm done.
But now say that you and your girlfriend are celebrities, and the argument is caught on tape or photos. It’s splashed all over the media, and now there are all kinds of complications to putting the squabble behind you. Friends and family are getting involved, because they’ve read all about the terrible things you said to each other. Reporters are shoving mics in your face asking if you’re getting divorced. Tabloids are claiming that you’re stepping out on each other, and publishing false quotes from each of you about the other. Suddenly, your relationship is in serious trouble.
Now: was the media “the problem?” Strictly speaking, no. After all, you two DID get into an argument. But the fact is, they turned a molehill into a mountain.
That’s what’s beginning to happen to the Blazers, in my opinion. Look at the fishbowl the Blazers are living in. In order to have a private discussion on the bench, Roy & LMA have to cover their mouths with a towel. Otherwise, presumably, Quick et al will be reading their lips & publishing THAT.
Sure, Quick & Co. are trying to earn a living in a tight economy. If they don’t get ratings, they’ll be out of a job. So, if they’re lacking in journalistic ethics, they’re going to stir up controversy anyway they can, including by exaggerating—even creating—conflict.
That’s one side of the equation. The other? As media consumers, WE have the right to object to this yellow journalism. If we don’t buy it and encourage others to follow suit, the media will stop peddling it.
"We don't back down to nobody." --Joel Przybilla
A molehill into a mountain
should be the slogan of the Oregonian.
Canzano, Quick, and that other guy who runs the Blazer blog over there.
"We didn't start the fire. It was always burning. Since the world's been turning." - E. E. Cummings
by Sexual Tyrannosaurus on Nov 29, 2009 5:21 PM PST up reply actions
well
the stuff he reported they were saying on the bench didn’t seem all that bad, it was the comments players made, actually my biggest gripe is with what McMillan siad, during the interview sessions in the locker room and in the media room. This is not a heated moment caught on tape, it is part of the routine every night for every professional basketball team.
the coaches comments reveal a lack of interest in coaching these players, I mean what coach basically tells his struggling team is to ‘just figure it out’. Well Nate just did.
Any reading in anyone is doing about Roy’s comments are just that, reading things into it.
"Oh Yeah!" ~ Kool Aid Man
Nate clearly needs a rest as badly as his players do
Hopefully, he’s gotten some since that post-game interview.
"We don't back down to nobody." --Joel Przybilla
Big difference between opinion and investigative pieces
If he was to offer an opinion, then say so. Its fine to put forward an opinion if its prefaced as such. It can even be a well researched opinion to reassure that its not merely conjecture.
However, “factual” reporting where one is divulging details, is best done dispassionately. It is far too easy to lead the reader to a conclusion, by an injudicious filtering of statements; sort of only reporting those facts to help make a story. Might as well be a statistician — “Lies, Damn Lies and Statistics”.
Quick’s articles often appear one sided stories, maybe in an effort to sensationalize. [This of course, is just an opinion. I am not, and do not claim to be, a journalist.]
his job isn't simply to report facts
that’s one of the must overdone criticisms of the media ever. he’s supposed to provide some analysis of what the facts seem to point to. you can disagree with his analysis but to say he’s not doing his job by providing it is silly.
it’s funny that’s what people do all day here at bedge and yet when the blazers lead beat writer does it and it doesn’t paint the team in a glowing light, it’s criticized.
Er, well there's that little detail that the Blazers' beat writer has an audience of tens of thousands
He also has the privilege—and responsibility—of “backstage” access to the team. We’re just a little informal fan club blogging away to each other. Big difference.
"We don't back down to nobody." --Joel Przybilla
yes he does have a responsibility
to actually report things that may not be positive. when he does this, people kill him for it.
he got killed for initially reporting that there were hard feelings between the team and roy during his negotiations. people went crazy and called quick a drama-queen and a dozen other less than kind things.
within 24 hours brandon roy went on live radio in seattle and said he was frustrated and that there was a 50% chance he’d stay in portland. at that point it should have been abundantly clear that quick had some good insight on that story but even now people criticize what he said back then.
sure things settled down later but quick in this instance did his job, he got some of the inside story and provided some analysis on it.
roy said what he said about “he’s the coach, i just play”. should he have not told us about this because it seems to imply that there is a rift between the team and nate?
what do you think would have been the appropriate way to handle this?
"Seems to imply"
You said a mouthful there. There’s a LOT of hints and implications being used to draw conclusions in Jason Quick pieces these days. I’m not a professional journalist, but I took enough journalism classes to know that Quick is making a hash of journalistic procedure & ethics. The professors I had would have flunked him out of Journalism 101. Which is a shame, because the guy CAN write.
If I can take a page out of Quick’s book and make a conclusion based on flimsy evidence, I think Quick not only knows he’s crossing the line journalistically, but he feels very uncomfortable with it. Watching his interview with Zach Randolph the other night, I was struck by how Quick kept looking off to the side and smirking. He seemed to know the way he was conducting the interview was sleazy.
In a different time, Quick would be getting reined in by his editor. But with the entire newspaper industry crashing & burning, there are no standards anymore. So guys like Quick & Canzano are off leash. Not that Quick is quite in Canzano’s category. He hasn’t gone entirely over to the dark side yet, and he does have some talent.
"We don't back down to nobody." --Joel Przybilla
by hurryup09 on Nov 29, 2009 4:35 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
canzano is a columnist
he’s paid to have opinions; controversial ones at that. quick and canzano aren’t at all similar in what they do.
No: that's the problem
Namely, that Quick has strayed into columnist territory. Namely, he’s not just reporting. He’s editorializing, drawing unfounded conclusions not supported by the evidence, injecting himself into the story, etc.
And by the way, not all columnists stir up controversy for controversy’s sake. Some have enough talent & integrity to leave yellow journalism alone.
"We don't back down to nobody." --Joel Przybilla
media coverage is light handed in pdx
in comparison to markest where championships come often. LA, Chicago, Boston are the easy examples.
Quick is just reporting what the people are saying, heck he isn’t even characterizing the statements, just quoting them and noting behavior. In other words just doing his job.
"Oh Yeah!" ~ Kool Aid Man
Not characterizing the statements? Say what?
Agreed though that the Portland media aren’t as bad is in the cities you cite. But those cities win championships in SPITE of their shark-like media. They win championships because of a number of factors, including the desirablity of their cities to pro athletes. Portland will always lose out based on that criterion. This town needs all the help it can get, and the local sports media are not helping.
"We don't back down to nobody." --Joel Przybilla
point out one thing that was a characterization?
other than the headline. I imagine the oregonian has a headline righter that is not the reporter doing the job as most papers do. The headline is supposed to be sensational.
If you read the article Quick just reports what he saw. he did not say Oden heald out his fist as a gesture of support, he did not say Roy was antagonizing Miller on the bench by asking him that question, he just reported what he observed. Roy reached over, tapped him on the shoulder and asked why he didn’t get more minutes or whatever.
He did say Roy supportivlely reached over, or sarcastically or angrily or any of that kind of thing. He reported what he saw and what was said.
"Oh Yeah!" ~ Kool Aid Man
Calm down, folks! How do YOU do when you're way over-worked? You lose your energy, concentration & your cool, right?
Geez, I thought I was concerned until I came over here to BE. The team may have serious issues. But we won’t have a clue until they get some much-needed rest and practice, and they’ll be getting that this coming week.
Most likely, the team will work out the kinks, get some fresh perspective, and come out firing on all cylinders. The key is that you’ve got talented players with good character. They’ll work it out, even if the coaching staff doesn’t have all the answers.
At least, there’s still plenty of reason to think that way. I KNEW the guys were starting to run out of gas after that New Jersey game. They’ve played a lot of games in a short period of time, and that’s going to catch up with you. The teams they’ve been playing have been well-rested in comparison. But that dynamic is about to change.
"We don't back down to nobody." --Joel Przybilla
by hurryup09 on Nov 29, 2009 12:12 PM PST reply actions 2 recs
good positive
It’s Ok to be positive because it may pay you back at some point…..As I said before, it is IMO, that this team has deeper issues….but this is not from a fan’s perspective…it’s from having been involved in organized ball for 35 + years.
It could be said that they are tired (some normal bench relief are sidelined for the moment)………. but good teams don’t let this bother them at length……..The team is at a transition point and they are making a very pathetic attempt at getting it done…..“The next level” is proving to be an extremely difficult task for them…..How do you get there? Well there is one thing I could honestly relate…..: that is; fundamental soundness, and, of course, the hard work and desire that go along with it….Any good team will always fall back on fundamentals to get the ship righted….if the Blazers could show me this, I could easily change my mind about them
Not quite sure I agree. When organizations break new ground and run into problems, it's not so much
fundamentals thy return to as whatever it was they were doing before the problem arose.
In this case it takes the form of Roy and LMA longing for the good old days before Oden had to get touches and Miller needed to have the ball in his hands. It’s natural to regress and resent change. As Mort has been saying this is a predictable stage of progress.
And injuries to Batum and Outlaw have hurt a lot more than most people expected, I think.
by raoulduke on Nov 29, 2009 2:18 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
You say good teams dont let this bother them at length
I say its still early in the season. Where’s the at length? Good fans don’t panic at the first bump in the road.
"We don't back down to nobody." --Joel Przybilla
by hurryup09 on Nov 29, 2009 2:24 PM PST via mobile up reply actions
Actually
I was counting the past 3 years….looking at some fundamental issues that have carried over from each season…..and I am not, at all, in a panic mode…..it takes more than a few basketball games to get me in panic…(or even a whole season for that matter) .There is nothing at stake for me….but I do like to watch good basketball and enjoy watching it played with desire and compassion……
Everyone has their own opinion of how the Blazers play ball…..I don’t like their style, but I could still get some enjoyment out of their play, if they showed some hustle and could get a grasp on the transition game (both offense and defense…..this is clearly their Achilles heel (IMO) Because of a poor transition game, They have to work too hard to score(they get very few easy baskets)
Physically they are reasonably athletic, but lack quickness…..also an Achilles heel (especially on defense)….. The easy hoops (usually obtained from good defense and then transition to offense ) and lack of quickness will be two factors of fatigue that will wear this team down,,,playing the full 48 becomes difficult if you don’t have the fundamentals to fill in to make up for what’s lacking in quickness and possibly, good conditioning….Pulling up for the outside “J” is actually the easy way out, and may be a sign of fatigue?
Sorry that we disagree, but thanks for the conversation…..I still think that this team has many positives, but it’s these simple weaknesses that continue to hurt this team….Many fans, like you, still think we ain’t broke and don’t need fixing….just some adjusting …….this could be the season to prove it out….I will stop short of offering a prediction, because , as always, the games will be played and the walk quickly replaces the talk…
I think we have the talent we need
we just don’t have the coach.
I am not in panic mode, but that does not mean I don’t think nate needs to move along. I am less panicked than angry at Nate’s comments about the ‘players need to figure it out’ in terms of an inside out game. they need to be coached to do it, not left to figure it out on their own. it is the principle function of the coach to train a team to the strategy being deployed. His comment shows he either has no idea how to do that or. at the least, no interest in doing it. That being the case my ongoing frustration with his game management has blossomed into, fine you don’t want to cach then I don’t want you as coach.
I think this talented team has a good horizon even this year, even if nate remains at the helm, I just don’t think they will reach their potential under this guy anymore. He needs to go, the sooner the better.
I don’t imagine he will go before the end of the season, but that does not change the fact that I think he needs to go now.
"Oh Yeah!" ~ Kool Aid Man
I'm not sure about the coaching as well
I see some things i would change. but it’s a lot easier for us armchair coaches …I think, as fans of basketball, we have the right to question some coaching tactics and Nate usually gives us plenty to second guess over…..it is IMO that Nate would be much better suited as an assistant…..he definitely has something to bring to the party…..But as a head coach, he still has a lot to prove……He certainly did not have this team ready at the start of the season….and a lot of the basic fundamentals are either not being taught, or like you said, he expects the players to figure it out?
Sorry but this kind of talk makes no sense…(even though it could have been distorted some by the media)……this is especially true for a young team with very few years of college experience.(this is where a lot of the basic fundamentals are taught and refined. this kind of tutoring will usually help get average or “potential” players to the next level)….
Simply put, there is just too much confusion and lack of organization, for a professional team….there are reasons, but continuing to add rationality and then hope for a better return, is a failure of coaching…..A change in coaching will be on many peoples lips if things don’t improve..(they are usually the first to go, because you can’t fire the players)….Hard to tell if the team is just in a funk and will wake up and mature into a good team, or if this is a signature of a team that’s reached it’s full potential and is what it is……………
You make good points
I think the main thing that’s been exposed to date this season is Roy’s limitations and lack of flexibility. When everything is built around him—his abilities, his pace—he’s an exceptional player. But a team built that way won’t contend for a championship. As you say, you need to be able to get easy buckets—on the break and from post-ups—and that’s not Roy’s strong suit.
My issue with the media coverage is that it’s blowing this issue—and others—out of proportion. Teams struggle to integrate new players & approaches all the time, especially early in their season. Look at the Lakers last year: with the return of Bynum, Odom was forced to the bench, and he was plenty unhappy about it. But in time he came around (no doubt thanks to some careful massaging by Phil Jackson), and the Lakers cruised on to win a championship.
Working in the Blazers favor is that Roy and the rest of the guys are relatively unselfish. As frustrated as they are, they don’t seem to be at each other’s throats. That bodes well for the future.
"We don't back down to nobody." --Joel Przybilla
I agree about Roy
He is what he is…..and he has to be a disappointment to many……He has anguish on his face and is not having fun…..along with the rest of the team…..Roy slows this team down…His forte is bump and grind, and he is quite good at it…..But he lacks quickness, can’t run the floor, and is not always consistent in his play…(I’m not talking about having a bad game or two)……So he’s a very good player, but has flaws… sadly the system is geared around him, and it could be the very reason they are struggling at this point
it is apparent that good teams will exploit this team’s weaknesses and, for the moment, they have plenty
As for the Media, they are usually just looking for a story…..A story that will have a lot of drama filled with adjectives and adverbs to spice it up…..They lay something out there and look for a reaction…..usually Blazer fans will not find out what’s wrong with a team from the media, because they just fill in the blanks with gossip and that usually reverberates down many different paths and angles…….
I think Roy will be fine
with a strong inside out game, with the talent he has, it is a big adjustment from what he has been used to doing though. It does not seem as if the plan is terribly clear though.
Roy would be a fantastic cutter on the weakside for Oden to hit with an assist for example. He can also enter the ball to Oden and drive on the Oden’s pitchback. But the offense has to move in ways it just did not when Roy was the sole focus with LaMarcus taking advantage of openings provided by Roy. That is the real adjusment the team needs to make, it is not about spreading the floor and watching Brandon do his thing on 40% of the posseions anymore. It is moving the ball into the post, cutting to the hoop, being ready for the pitch back or coming in on the weakside for the easy rebound.
Look last we burnt 12 seconds of the clock dribbling a lot anyway, now spend that twelve getting the ball inside and out. Greg takes a few bad shots (mostly not really bad shots, he still hurries a bit too much from time to time) but most of the time he pitches that ball back out if position is not there.
I know Roy is willing to adjust, i just don’t think it is clear to him what the adjustment actually is.
"Oh Yeah!" ~ Kool Aid Man
Don't tell me any of these guys are overworked
Maybe momentarily exhausted but, overworked? I think not
I honestly dont get your point
The nba schedule is a grind, and the blazers just complered the most busy stretch of the season while trying to incorporate major changes. They’re frustrated & exhausted. I’d call that overworked. Or do you think they make too much money to get overworked?
"We don't back down to nobody." --Joel Przybilla
by hurryup09 on Nov 29, 2009 2:32 PM PST via mobile up reply actions
I'll buy the exhausted argument
(“overworked” might not be the perfect way to say it). However, it is certainly plausible that playing so many games in so short a time led to the defensive fiascoes of the last two games.
Nice thing is, there will be an opportunity to test this theory in a couple of days. Bad thing is, cause and effect probably won’t be recognized if they do regain their mojo and it was all about mental/physical exhaustion.
by blacknoiseNW on Nov 29, 2009 3:37 PM PST up reply actions
I gotta lol at the people using the OMG we've played so many games as an excuse
I guess whatever helps you sleep
Blazer Fan
by leeroyjenkins on Nov 29, 2009 5:35 PM PST up reply actions
Its a lot like last year's "OMG we've played so many road games".
How about “OMG the schedule has been creampufftastic and the Blazers are only 12-7, 3-5 against teams .500 or better.”
by Free Bayless on Nov 29, 2009 8:31 PM PST up reply actions
like i said...its a rational argument - but one that probably could never be proven even if true
but if tired wasn’t a problem, teams would travel better than they do.
by blacknoiseNW on Nov 29, 2009 9:26 PM PST up reply actions
I don't really get it????
I thought a coaches job was to put together a winning game plan (system) for their players to execute and then put their players in a position (thru practice and rotations) to win games when they execute on that game plan.
(Anecdotal Side Note: My coach used to say, I will give the other team our playbook because if we execute properly, it cannot be stopped. I agreed and I’ve always felt this way about basketball. It’s no mystery what LA does, or Cleveland, or Boston, or Orlando. If they execute, you cannot stop it).
So what is Nate’s system? What is Nate’s winning game plan/playbook that the players are supposed to be executing on? I feel just as lost as most of the players on this team…
Kenny Wheaton #20; The Pick - 1994 v UW. Matthew Harper #20; The Pick #2 - 2007 v USC. John Boyett #20;...
I dont blame him for benching Miller.
I do blame him for Miller being left shooting long jumpshots with time running out. Thats on Nate and so are a lot of other things.
Miller should have been benched. He makes horrible turnovers at the worse time, and his defense is a guessing game. Bayless is already a better defender, and he doesnt make the stupid turnover. When you are down you need ball security, defense, and three point shooting. Playing Bayless made sense.
why not bench blake
he has been worse for much longer periods of time than miller, and really brings nothing to the table when his shot isnt falling, like it hasn’t all season
bayless leaves over my dead body
Start Andre (in a 2 guard lineup)
"Good defense always beats bad offense."-Al Iannazzone, Yes Network
by thomasikehara on Nov 29, 2009 3:51 PM PST up reply actions
Threepoint shooting, ball protection.
chemistry with Roy, better defense against isolation sets though Blake sucks against the pick and roll. He just cant beat contact. When is the last time he drew a moving screen because a big man had to stretch to set a pick.
Bayless makes a ton of dumb fouls and has no clue how to set the big guys up
But toher than that, sure. You do realize of course that Andre Miller has been a top 5 or 6 PG for a decade, but I’m sure you’re right and he’s horrible.
Blazer Fan
by leeroyjenkins on Nov 29, 2009 5:38 PM PST up reply actions
Good point, Leeroy
Miller is being judged as though this were his rookie season. The guy didn’t just jump off the turnip truck, folks. As I recall, he’s something like #25 all-time in assists. Is he stinking it up at times? Sure. But we know what kind of player Andre Miller is and what he can do once he’s acclimated, in shape, and—importantly—once his teammates have learned how to play with HIM.
Basketball is a group improvisation—a dance, if you will. If one dancer is tripping over his feet, it might be partly because his partners have no clue what to do. That’s especially true if the guy in question has been a top pro dancer for over a decade.
Why in the world did Nate only play Miller 6 minutes last night? I take Nate at his word on that one: he sensed or suspected that Miller the iron man was playing hurt and not owning up to it. Is that a reason to hate on Miller? Last I heard, guys who acted like that were called, “gamers.”
"We don't back down to nobody." --Joel Przybilla
the last thing this team needed was a temporary stop gap that the current core had to adjust to
Milller, to be a good signing – has to be the one that fits in and adjusts his game to the talent already here. Miller has been a problem, in my estimation, because he feels he is the talent.
This isn’t mere hyperbole – Miller is on record saying how he should be getting more respect for his past accomplishments. Roy is on record wondering why this team should be adapting to a player obviously past his prime and who will be gone in two seasons.
Would I prefer this team be more flexible and adaptable? Yes. I think they could and should all learn to play nice together. I also think this is another symptom of a too rigid role philosophy from Nate. Nate is a control freak and loves to pidgeonhole roles.
by blacknoiseNW on Nov 29, 2009 9:32 PM PST up reply actions
I disagree
Roy’s discomfort this season isn’t just with Miller’s play. It’s also with the need to incorporate Greg Oden into the offense. And part of the reason Roy isn’t meshing with Miller is that Miller is making a concerted effort to get Oden the ball.
Roy is simply going to have to adjust his play for the team to progress to the next level, and he’s struggling to come to terms with that. He realizes he won’t necessarily be doing the things he does best at all times. To his credit, Roy’s been trying to adjust, but his heart isn’t in it and he shows.
This is a problem, but Roy loves to win, so I think he’ll adjust in time. When that happens, he’ll embrace the added weapons that Andre Miller and the improved Greg Oden provide the team.
"We don't back down to nobody." --Joel Przybilla
I haven’t seen any dumb fouls from Rex. I see a player trying to gage how tight he can guard certain players and how much hand contact he can get away with. That is great to me. The team lacks aggression on the perimeter. I have never seen anyone blow right by Bayless like they do Miller and Blake. Offensively Bayless is a work in progress but he is a better fit in the current scheme. Changing the scheme to fit Miller is on Nate. This isnt all one person’s fault.
how long does it take to gauge this?
because he has a foul rate that rivals even greg oden. most of his fouls are well away from the basket as well.
i wonder what would constitute a dumb foul to you? i think most people, myself included believe that fouls committed when the offense was not imminently about to score are dumb.
hand check fouls on the perimeter pass that test for me which is why i think of them as dumb. he hasn’t committed one or two of these, he’s been doing this all through the pre-season and in his limited minutes in the regular season.
did you get a chance to see the Tinsley "flail" that drew a foul on Bayless
bad call. Bayless has been better in the foul department, but not perfect.
by blacknoiseNW on Nov 29, 2009 9:52 PM PST up reply actions
Nate wants to play oden with miller
so he takes him out early to put back in with the 2nd group.
I have a better idea to greg and andre together: Start Miller and let Oden play 11 minutes of the 1st.
bayless leaves over my dead body
Start Andre (in a 2 guard lineup)
"Good defense always beats bad offense."-Al Iannazzone, Yes Network
Agreed
Nate’s strategy makes sense at first glance. But taking GO out when he’s just getting into a rhythm is counterproductive. The Blazers’ recent nose-dives have occurred immediately following GO’s 1st quarter moves to the bench. That can’t be coincidence.
Not that there’s a perfect solution. Until Roy & Miller get the knack of playing together, that is.
"We don't back down to nobody." --Joel Przybilla
He could always make a slight change to his strategy and bench Blake at the 6 minute mark
That would make more people happy, right?
Blazers win!
Especially if Martell can keep up his recent shooting from 3
As the first 5 does need somebody to space the floor
The Blazerverse and The Wire: A comparison
Brandon Roy = Stringer Bell (smooth technician dedicated to his craft)
Nate McMillan = Cedric Daniels (well intentioned leader, but he can be too rigid for his own good at times)
Martell Webster = Wee Bey Brice (straight up solider who follows orders; every organization needs these guys to be successful)
Jerryd Bayless = Marlo Stanfield (he's new to the game, but he's watching and waitng; he will take over and there will be casualties)
Rudy Fernandez = Jimmy McNulty (he gets results, but the leadership wishes he was less of a wild man; the ladies love him)
Greg Oden = Michael Lee (he started off a quiet kid, but he's beginning to tap in to his huge potential to change the game)
Andre Miller = Lester Freamon (do not let the laconic demeanor fool you, the veteran knows what's up)
John Canzano = Scott Templeton (scummy muckraker who stays up at night polishing his award)
by blazeraddict on Nov 29, 2009 7:05 PM PST up reply actions
Par for the course
Another lackluster effort, another clueless stretch of hoops, more finger pointing, another game I turned off at halftime.
Bill Simmons might’ve been right. I already see half the team tuning Nate out.
Blazer Fan
Leave it to Quick,
to stir the pot after a couple of losses to sell news.
Since I don’t have anything nice to say about the last 2 games, I will say that, I do seem to remember that Miller wasn’t the only Blazer normally playing more minutes, to sit in Utah.
"That's just how I get down"........ Andre Miller
Sergio is beasting it up tonight.
Sounds like instead of Sergio/Rudy now, it’s Sergio/Casspi over there.
It doesn make you wonder about the way Sergio and Frye were used in Portland.
Clearly they didn’t fit Nate’s system. Just as clearly they are NBA players who are able to contribute and the Blazers never found a way to make that happen.
root cause and effect
couldn’t be any more clear than that…..and this Blazer squad is beginning to chafe under the McMillan yoke…
by blacknoiseNW on Nov 29, 2009 9:35 PM PST up reply actions
frye has had a great season
sergio has had a nice week. he’s not being given consistent minutes yet. udrih is playing well which probably complicates things for him although you would think he’s solidly in the rotation now.
on the other hand
are these two losses combined as bad as Denver losing at home to Minnesota?
well 2 losses is worse than 1 certainly...
but i would say no. losing at home to minnesota is literally unfathomable to me. i wish i could get a tape of this game because i think minnesota is the worst nba team i’ve ever seen and after the 2nd minnesota game ( the one on the road ), i predicted that the worst ever season record ( 9 wins?) might be broken.
i remember looking at the schedule earlier today
and thinking – “OUCH” – losing to Memphis at home hurts even more because Denver has Minnesota at home….
I think this is an extra double whammy for Denver given those circumstances – a chance start building a lead on Portland. Instead of a 2 game lead – its only one.
by blacknoiseNW on Nov 29, 2009 9:47 PM PST up reply actions
George Karl
said he was getting concerned that his team was relying on their offensive game over their defensive game…actually I watched some of the game on NBA Broadband and Minnie did well…
wow ryan gomes went crazy
12 of 18, 2 assists, 2 blocks, 3 rebounds
well unless you go by loss column
in which case they still have a 2 game lead i think
Miller has been royally disrespected this year.
Blake has gottin’ his minutes—-even when being consistently outplayed by Miller and, lately, even when fairly ineffective in his shift. Blake always gets back in there though, even if the guy he is replacing is having a great game.
That said, Miller has not looked right the last couple games at all.
I'm just not crazy about player nick names...
by Hipster Olympic Team! on Nov 29, 2009 9:57 PM PST reply actions
Down to earth blog by Geoffery C. Arnold on Oregon Live
Check out Geoffery C. Arnold’s comments about what he thinks is happening. Food for thought with no panic button to push. http://blog.oregonlive.com/nba/2009/11/nba_no_time_for_blazers_to_panic_news_notes_and_links.html
down to earth more like...
puff piece. i want that 2 minutes of my life back. the blazers are in 2nd place in the northwest division but no mention of the cupcake schedule they’ve played or their 3 and 5 record against teams over .500.
not to worry though, the blazers are better off than new jersey. what a joke of a post.
I disagree
His central point—that the emergence of Greg Oden’s offensive skill is behind much of the current struggles—is on the money. Miller gets the blame around here, but Andre Miller is doing what Nate wants him to do: getting the ball to GO down low, not just clearing out of the way and letting Roy work.
The Blazers are going thru a necessary transition right now. Arnold may be understating how rough the transition will get. It may take all of this season for the Roy-centric Blazers to evolve. But teams go thru this kind of thing all the time when integrating new weapons and schemes in an effort to progress to the next level. Call it growing pains.
"We don't back down to nobody." --Joel Przybilla
New Direction
I agree with all the talk here, it’s time for a change and I’ve done some research to help the Blazers plan for the future. I picked up a copy of NBA 2K9 the other day, that’s over fourteen dollars out of pocket, and once we win a few rings I expect a refund.
I moved things forward to this season and used the Xbox as a Magic Eight Ball (the most powerful clairvoyant tool of all) to see what the finals hold. And I kid you not, the future was foretold and the finals will be: Kings vs. Nets. Also, Steve Blake ended up in Cleveland somehow but that’s beside the point.
With this new information I think it’s critical that we trade rosters with the Nets before the deadline. Ours is imploding while, as my Xbox clearly shows, they are going to peak not in November or December, but in June.


























