The Natives are Getting Restless
by jscot on Dec 13, 2009 11:13 AM PST
Email
PrintDear Blazer Braintrust,
It's me again. I haven't written to you in a few weeks, but I'm noticing a minor groundswell of opinion among Blazer fans, and thought perhaps it out to be mentioned. Perhaps you've noticed it.
As you gentlemen probably know, there are those who like to call me a Blazer homer. I prefer to view myself as a realist. Let me just lay out my credentials on that point.
I'll start at the top. Paul Allen is the best sports owner ever. That isn't homerism, that's realism, and I know it to be true. I'll go right down the list. KP is the best GM the world has ever seen. Nate is the best coach ever. The only reason Monty hasn't been hired away (he'd be the second best coach in the league) is because he knows it is futile to coach against Nate. Our specialist assistants are top notch, our medical staff is the best in the league, our announcers are better than anyone else's. This isn't homerism, this is all realism. I can prove I'm not a homer, because I think our mascot is pretty pathetic -- that should demonstrate my bona fides.
Michael Jordan was simply the precursor to Brandon Roy. I'm willing to concede that Tim Duncan in his prime might have been as good as LaMarcus is. Greg Oden embodies all the basketball virtues of Wilt, Russell, Kareem, and Hakeem. Steve Blake is like Steve Nash -- his only problem is he's a late bloomer. I could go on, but you get the picture. I fully expect us to win 8 out of the next 10 championships, and exceed 70 regular season wins at least twice. Realism, for sure. Since we're going to accomplish those things, I'm being realistic to expect them. I don't know why people don't recognize that.
Yet, gentlemen, even a Blazer realist like me is starting to wonder what in the world is going on with this team, and I'm hardly alone. Sure, I don't go to the games, the commute is beyond me, but some of my money has flowed into your coffers this year. If you sell a product to your customers and it isn't working the way it is supposed to, usually those customers will start to ask questions. If you want to keep selling it, you might want to think about providing some answers. I won't stop supporting the players, but I have limited time to watch games, and limited money to spend on entertainment, and this entertainment doesn't seem to be entertaining as well as it ought to be.
I do not care that we are losing games. Losing some games is expected when you lose so many key players to injury. I care about how we are playing the game.
So here are some of the questions that even the Blazer realists like me are asking.
1. Why Do our Players Move so Little Without the Ball?
One of the reasons I buy League Pass is so my kids can watch the best in the world play the game. I do not have to explain to the Blazer Braintrust why off the ball movement is so important. I don't even have to explain it to my kids any more. Our team is demonstrating how standing around on offense brings poor results. I thank the Blazers for the educational experience for my kids, but the lesson has been learned.
2. Why can Cleveland Run the Pick and Roll to get Multiple Easy Baskets but We Never Can?
The pick and roll is one of the most basic plays in basketball, but our execution of the pick and roll is lacking (I'm being charitable here). Do we need to hire a designated pick and roll coach?
3. Why do We Take so many Shots in the Last 3 Seconds of the Shot Clock?
Are we practicing our end-of-game heroics in the first quarter? Has anyone done research to compare shooting percentages in the last three seconds of the shot clock to shooting percentages in the first 21 seconds? Are we doing this by design because we think it is better, or because of poor execution of the offensive scheme, or because every team plays super-heroic defense against us beyond what they do against anyone else, or is it because our offensive scheme is flawed?
4. Why do We Never get any Easy Baskets?
You know the ones I'm talking about. The ones where guys run off of a screen and cut to the hoop, and get the ball for an easy layup. Or the kind where the man setting the pick rolls to the hoop, gets the ball, and scores. Or the kind where we go out on the break, fill the lanes, and dish to the open man for a layup. Even our points in the paint are on back to the basket stuff by LMA, most of the time, or offensive rebounds. We rarely get a fastbreak, and our offense virtually never generates layups or dunks. Every team in the league, almost certainly, gets more layups than we do. And they don't do it just on the fastbreak, they run an offense that results in easy layups, that creates off-the-ball pressure so that eventually there is a breakdown.
5. Has Andre Miller Aged Ten Year in the Last Six Months, or is it our System?
We were told when Andre came to Portland that he would bring the following:
- Run the pick and roll with the bigs, getting them easy baskets at the hoop. How often has this happened?
- Run the fastbreak, getting us easy baskets. How often has this happened?
- Provide spacing (even if he doesn't shoot the 3) with a highly effective mid-range jumper. Hmm.
- Prevent offensive stagnation by providing a complementary threat to Brandon Roy. Well....
So, is Andre just not effective anymore, or are we not using him well?
6. Why are We told that the Players will Determine Who Plays by how Well They Play?
I watch the games. I see all the little things that Steve Blake does that make a difference for this team. I am not so foolish as to think that the box score tells even a quarter of the story of a player's performance. Maybe there are things that I'm not seeing, too. But according to my eyes, all the statistics, and the read of thousands of knowledgeable basketball fans, by any standard of which I am aware, Steve Blake (this year) is the least productive of our four healthy guards, and is consistently getting more minutes at the guard position than any of the others (yes, he's getting more guard minutes than Brandon, by far -- in one game, he got more TOTAL minutes than Brandon).
I am a Blake fan, and believe that the Steve Blake of last year, even of the year before, could be the PG on a championship team, with all the firepower we will have when healthy and our key players hit their prime. But he is not the Steve Blake of last year.
Gentlemen, the boxscore doesn't tell the whole story, but sometimes it tells a story, too.
| FGM | FGA | 3PM | 3PA | FTM | FTA | AST | TO | |
| Last 5 Games | 10 | 35 | 4 | 20 | 1 | 2 | 22 | 11 |
In the last five games, Steve is only 20% on 3s and 40% on 2s, has only drawn one shooting foul, scored 25 points (5 per game) and has a decent but hardly great 2-1 Assist/TO ratio (4.4 assists per game). He has accomplished this in three hours, seven minutes, and thirty seconds of playing time (37.5 mpg, third on the team). That works out to approximately one point and one assist every 7.5 minutes. On the other hand, it does take him a full 17 minutes to accomplish a turnover, and he only misses a shot once every 7.5 minutes as well.
Over these five games, for every seven and a half minutes on the court, Steve has racked up 1 point, 0.8 assists, 1 missed shot, and 0.4 turnovers. Extrapolated across a full 240 team minutes in a regulation game, if we allocated all of our playing time to players who produce at this level, this would give us 32 points per game -- but we would have 25 assists. That's right, if we played an entire team of PGs producing at Steve's level, we'd manage to rack up an average number of assists for the game.
Despite what some Internet "experts" think, Steve is a pretty decent defender, but he certainly isn't the lockdown guy that you would play even if his offensive production lags.
Of course, I'm a Blazer "realist", so I know that Steve is just in a slump. After all, he shares the same name as that former MVP in Phoenix, and Nash has slumps, too, sometimes. So I looked at his stats for the prior five games.
| FGM | FGA | 3PM | 3PA | FTM | FTA | AST | TO | |
| Prior 5 Games | 10 | 23 | 6 | 15 | 0 | 5 | 17 | 5 |
Now, this was marginally better, though missing five free throws in a row wouldn't even impress Shaq. Shaq couldn't miss against us -- yes, even O'Neal has been shooting FTs better than Blake recently.
Better assist/turnover ratio, though not that many assists (3.4 pg). Good 3 point shooting (though nothing to torch the league). Those stats are the stats of a decent role player, a guy you like coming off your bench to give you 15-20 mpg. If the guys ahead of him get injured, he might step it up, play 30 mpg, and bump up his stats. But even those stats don't look like a 40 mpg player, do they? Well, unless we'd just been awesome when he was in. But we weren't.
| FGM | FGA | 3PM | 3PA | FTM | FTA | AST | TO | |
| Last 10 Games | 20 | 58 | 10 | 35 | 1 | 7 | 39 | 16 |
Those don't look like a 40 mpg player, either. Do they? Not to me. And Steady Steve is 1-7 on FTs in the last 10 games? Something is wrong with this picture, really wrong.
7. Why am I Focusing on Steve Blake?
Well, gentlemen, it's pretty simple. I don't care about the stat lines of various players, if what we are doing is working. I'm not talking about wins and losses -- the injuries are going to cause losses. I'm talking about items 1-4 above. What we are doing is not working. It is extremely hard for me to accept the idea that having Steve Blake helps our offense to run more effectively, because it isn't being run well at all.
The only reason we are scoring is because we've got one of the premier scorers in the league, because we have a big man who hits a very high percentage on contested turn around jumpers, and because we've had some nice cameo appearances from other guys making unexpected shots. But our offense is not being run well, as evidenced by the points above.
Now, I know full well that I don't know as much about basketball as you, my friends in the Blazer Braintrust. I know that there may be things that we are missing. Perhaps you might consider just explaining those things to your paying clientele. Sure, there are some rabid folks who wouldn't want to listen. But most of us are always willing to learn new things, and none of this makes any sense at all to us.
I don't want to dump Blake. I don't want to throw him under the bus. He's a good solid role player. But right now, he's playing abominably, and his minutes have gone UP? Does there ever come a time when he plays so badly that he has to sit down and let someone who is playing better give it the old college try? If so, how much more exactly is it going to take? Just how bad does he have to get? The "give him a chance to play through it" approach appears to have completely jumped the shark.
If the offense runs like a juggernaut when Blake is in, even if he isn't producing numbers, I'll shut up. If he completely shuts down the opponent's best scorer, I can live without offensive production. But when the offense is stagnant, there are never any easy buckets, we're constantly on the verge of a shot clock violation, AND he isn't producing, the natives start to get restless. When those same natives see other players come in and produce, when the offense is less stagnant with those other players, when the defense is at worst only a marginal dropoff, the fever pitch in the jungle starts to rise.
That fever pitch has been going up, and up, and up. Even the homers realists are becoming infected.
Yours sincerely,
A Blazer Realist
92 comments
|
36 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Good stuff, Scot.
I’ve given up on ever seeing the Blake of yesteryear again.
Just get that guy out of the way and give him run in situations where the Blazers need a quick 3 ball. That’s really all he can do anymore…
"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
Wow steve is good he has made 23 field goals on 10 attempts. No wonder he gets 30+ a game
Nate must be looking at these same stats.
That's not the last five games
That’s the previous five when he was playing better than he is now.
#52
as should
FTA and FTM but good things none the less
/////
((o))
/////
Has Bunker Mentality
Become the mindset of Blazer Management?
"Pickin' up the pieces of my sweet shattered dream, I wonder how the old folks are tonight."
by RandyinParadise on Dec 13, 2009 11:50 AM PST reply actions
How about our pick and roll defense?!
I wasn’t happy to see Aldridge standing up at the top of they key while Varejao rolled to the rim for layups all night when we played Cleveland.
Portland > Tacoma
by CaptainSexyJacob on Dec 13, 2009 12:01 PM PST reply actions
That wasn't Aldridge
That was lack of defensive rotations. Aldridge was stopping LeBron from running wild, and it was obviously part of the defensive scheme. But whoever was supposed to rotate to cover Varejao never did.
And yes, that was disastrous. You have to at least make them make two passes, maybe one of them will go astray.
#52
Most NBA teams defend the pick and roll by having their big "show" for just long enough to stop the ball handler from driving
and allow their co defender to get around the pick setter one way or another and get back in front of their original man. The show man then gets back to his original man and it renders the screen ineffective. Boston is GREAT at doing this. Of course Its difficult when the pick setter “slips” and doesn’t even really set the screen, instead setting like he will and then popping out for a jumper or rolling to the basket. LA is great at doing this. Just about every pick and roll I saw Varajao and James play though was pretty basic. What I saw was LA doing a little bit of everything which is fine but not when your co defender doesn’t know what to expect. I generally notice him wanting to switch in most cases…which is again fine, it just results in mismatches. In the Cleveland game however, his defense on pick and rolls ended up in open layups. Varajao sets a solid screen, LA comes out on James, not enough to contest his shot, but far enough to allow Varajao an open path to the basket. The guard ends up chasing James because, well he apparently doesn’t know what thee hell LA is doing.
In most bad pick and roll defense plays I blame the screen setter defender, just because the original defender can’t always fight through the screen. At this point though I wouldn’t even mind seeing constant switching and mismatches as long as all the players are on the same page. Better than watching a layup drill…
The Blazers as a whole are far more like my wife than like me in the sense of their physicality on defense.
-Dave
by chrischa on Dec 13, 2009 6:52 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
Good stuff
Just a couple comments.
First, when it is LBJ, I’m not going to assume that LMA wasn’t supposed to “show” longer than normal. That would be a reasonable defensive approach.
Second, no matter how Varejao sprung free on the pick and roll, your other defenders have to recognize what is happening, and be prepared to rotate as soon as the pick comes. Especially after the first, second, and third time.
You always, always, always give up something in the pick and roll, if the offensive players are alert enough to exploit it. The best you can hope for, if offensive execution is good, is forcing them to make three or four good quick passes to the open man before they get a relatively easy shot. The fact that we were giving Varejao an opportunity to roll means nothing — the greatest problem is we were not at least rotating to force another open pass.
Without knowing the defensive game plan, I can’t tell you whether LMA was playing the pick and roll the way he was supposed to or not. I can tell you that whatever was happening 25 feet from the basket, Varejao shouldn’t have been getting easy layups every time.
#52
Nate only sees what he wants to see.
He has been looking after Blake to ensure he gets a fair run, like he “did not” in Seattle. BTW Didn’t the Sonics go further with GP as PG? Where was all this looking out for Blake when he set a record for assists in a qtr(it was the 1st qtr, with a whole game to go mind) and sat Blakie the rest of the game when he at least had a shot to breal the record for assists in a game? Given these instances of behavior and we wonder why Nate does not like young PG’s/give them time on the court to grow. Nate apparently only has room and sympathy for his reality and experiences. Quite possibly he was wrong about being better than GP. In essence it’s possible his handling/evaluation of situations was wrong then and NOW.
We can justify all of this all we want, over and over and with different reasons. The fact is it stinks out there and Nate should be accountable. He is causing most of the drama. You don’t want drama? Start Miller to check it out. Fans are not going to roast you if it does not work out, but at least you checked. Instead you want to tip-toe, dance, walk the line on some pretty obvious moves. Andre is suspected of being the #1 player on the trading block this year and Nate hasn’t let him run the team as starter once. This is rediculous!
Nate needs ot be held acocuntable for his decisions and in all honesty, they are WACK! They may have always been, WACK.
Land Rondo.
"He needs to realize that he can't stop every shot, especially from a smaller and offensively potent player. Get your hands up, make him shoot it over you, but let him shoot every once in a while. They score a little but you stay in the game a lot. And when you stay in the game...smashy smashy!" Dave on Greg Oden
To more directly answer your question the reason we do or dont do the things you listed
are based on Nate’s gameplan. Most of the decisions IMO are stupid. How the hell can 20 shots a game rushed at the buzzer be a good thing? Maybe it keeps the scoring lower, but how many of these close games could have been 10 point wins? No ball movement, Good thing, doubt it? We are all giving Nate this credit like he may be a mad genius that knows what we, past coaches turned announcers, possibly management and now the players do not.
Some of this stuff
Land Rondo.
"He needs to realize that he can't stop every shot, especially from a smaller and offensively potent player. Get your hands up, make him shoot it over you, but let him shoot every once in a while. They score a little but you stay in the game a lot. And when you stay in the game...smashy smashy!" Dave on Greg Oden
by loyal_blazer on Dec 13, 2009 12:24 PM PST up reply actions
You overlook something about that Nate interview
He said it was the best thing for Seattle that he, the incumbent, was benched for Payton. Go back and look it up.
Nate was not saying that the incumbent should never be benched, or anything like it. He was saying that you treat the incumbent with respect and let him fight to keep his job. But he was also saying that sometimes the best thing for the team is for the incumbent to be replaced.
What we’re seeing on court goes far beyond what Nate was talking about in that interview. So to decide, based on that interview, that this is all something about what happened with Gary Payton, does not make sense.
As to your other comments, is it Nate’s game plan, or poor execution? Either way, something needs to change. The best way to keep getting poor execution is to not do anything to communicate to the players that it must change.
Blame Nate? Not necessarily. Hold Nate responsible to find a way to change it? Absolutely. If it IS the game plan, blame Nate. If it is execution, blame the players, but Nate has to fix it.
#52
by jscot on Dec 13, 2009 1:02 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
Oh you are so right!!!!! I remember that game and wondered what was on McMillan's mind when
he pulled Blake before Blake could break the record. He’s doing Blake no favors now either.
Last year to this year...
31.7 MPG last year and 30.5 MPG this year. I know you brought up a lot more than just Blake and his minutes and it does seem like Bayless and Miller should be getting more opportunities but his minutes are down this year. I was expecting him to be up around 35 minutes a game with how much people are complaining about his minutes.
He has taken over the role of Jack and Sergio for this year’s team for many folks (not including you in that group). Things are not going well and we need a goat. I guess Steve is it.
You ask some great questions. It is getting really hard to watch the shot clock wind down to 8 seconds before anyone makes a significant move towards the basket. It is like the first few weeks of practice when you run through the offense just to get a feel for it. Don’t shoot or make a move to the basket. We want to make sure we get a good look at all the options. The difference with the first few weeks of practice and during the season is there are defenders out there pushing them further and further out as they jog through the options. I don’t know if it is the players’ or coaches’ fault at this point ;but eventually it will fall on Nate to get them moving towards the basket and attacking instead of letting the defense push them around.
PTB Liberation Day - 2/10/04
MPG
The thing that is bugging me is that it has been 37.5 in these last five games while he’s played horribly.
The other thing is that his minutes were expected to go down because we’ve brought in Andre, who is a better PG, and we’ve had Rudy most of the year, who Nate said he was going to find minutes for. And on top of that, Jerryd has been far better than either he or Sergio were last year, while Blake has been worse. So there were many reasons for Blake’s minutes to go down, yet they haven’t, even while his play has declined from last year considerably.
And I know Steve is the goat this year, and I hate writing something that sounds like I might be buying into that. But he simply has not played well, and yet we’ve increased his minutes, at the expense of others who have played better. Andre has been inconsistent, but he’s been better than Blake.
#52
Something like this was bound to happen.
Blake played the best basketball of his life last season and at 29 I’m not sure how anyone expected it to be anything but an anomaly. He was bound to come back to Earth at some point and while I think he’ll eventually regress back up towards his career mediocre self, it was always fools gold to think Blake would be able to maintain what he did last season.
Even then, what he did last season wasn’t all that great. He drew one of the lowest foul rates per possession for a PG in the history of the NBA. I actually couldn’t find a starting PG in the last 20 years who won a championship while drawing so few fouls. John Paxson was pretty close in 1992, but he only played the eighth most minutes on his team, and he had Jordan of course.
The point is, even at his absolute best, Blake probably couldn’t have been a starting PG on a championship team. He would have to overcome unprecedented holes (complete inability to draw fouls) in his game. The long term plan couldn’t and shouldn’t have been Blake starting at PG. Even his best wasn’t good enough.
It’s time to move on and I suspect the organization knows it. They didn’t draft Bayless and bring in Miller for no reason. They can’t possible be happy with the production coming from that position.
by Nick Van Excellent on Dec 13, 2009 12:26 PM PST reply actions
I said this at the beginning of the year
That both Blake and Przybilla had career years last year. People laughed. I feel vindicated.
Pryzbilla is playing BETTER since he's been starting. Maybe not a career year but WAY better
than Blake has been playing.
Blake had a good year the year before, too
Not as good as last year, but much better than he’s played this year.
#52
Confidence
is what percent of the change?
"Pickin' up the pieces of my sweet shattered dream, I wonder how the old folks are tonight."
by RandyinParadise on Dec 14, 2009 7:09 PM PST up reply actions
Who knows?
But increasing his minutes hasn’t solved it.
Some players do struggle because of confidence, and giving them minutes can sort it out. I don’t think Blake is that kind of guy, and he’s had minutes.
If there’s a confidence issue, it is because he’s playing in front of a player who is better than him. There may be something to that, because in general he did a decent job when he and Andre were both starting.
In any event, what we’re doing isn’t working. He’s playing poorly, not making shots, and giving him even more minutes has (if anything) made it worse.
I understand the philosophy of sticking with a player who is struggling, figuring he’ll come through it and the shots will start dropping. I can’t understand increasing his minutes when he was already getting 30 a game.
#52
I can undertsand leeching some clock
But when we have Webster wide open for three with 8 seconds left, Quit passing out to someone => for a more rushed shot against the buzzer. I mean a wide open 3 from Webster is pretty much what we are looking to get the guy, right? He in his brain should be eable to say, “wide open, I am stroking this one”. Instead he has to evaluate wether or not he should take 4-6 more seconds off the clock by passing out or dribbling in.
To pass up the obvious shots, cuts to the basket, easy scores is a downright mystery. Everyone on the team looks like they have this problem as well. No flow, constant swimming up river.
Land Rondo.
"He needs to realize that he can't stop every shot, especially from a smaller and offensively potent player. Get your hands up, make him shoot it over you, but let him shoot every once in a while. They score a little but you stay in the game a lot. And when you stay in the game...smashy smashy!" Dave on Greg Oden
There is no reason to leech some clock
You should be running the offense with a threat to score at any point in the shot clock, but patient if nothing develops in the first 15 seconds. But after 15 seconds, you need someone to attack.
Of course, part of our problem is the only starter we have who can attack is Brandon, and everyone knows it, so from 12 seconds on they deny him the ball, and if he gets it after 15 seconds, they run two men at him.
#52
RE: "Of course, part of our problem is the only starter we have who can attack is Brandon, and everyone knows it, so from 12 seconds on they deny him the ball, and if he gets it after 15 seconds, they run two men at him."
Totally agree, we do however have someone, check that, two players on the bench who can…..Miller and Bayless. It does remain a mystery why they dont play a ton more and Blake a ton less.
by blazerbeliever97504 on Dec 15, 2009 7:02 AM PST up reply actions
unless
flaming bags are part of the offense. I see multiple instances of 3 seconds on the shot clock, pass the ball to Miller so he can hoist up a pallet of bricks. It’s as if there is a secret punishment we don’t know about if you actually take a shot before the clock gets down to 5 seconds. I’ve seen LMA pass the ball to teammates with 2 seconds left and turn and run toward the other basket. If that’s part of the offense, I don’t know what to say.
If we could be any more stagnant on the offensive end, I don’t know how they could pull it off. Maybe stand around and watch broy iso 1-5 and don’t try to rebound. Oh yeah, they are already doing that successfully.
I’ve seen high school ball with more movement and integration than what the Blazers are running and it’s getting real old, fast.
I know we have injuries and lots of them, but that does not excuse poor execuation. Missed shots with good ball movement if ok, but standing and watching is not. I see too many times where they just stand and look at as if that’s going to make the ball go in the hoop.
One bright spot, Dante Cunningham, rebounds, sets good picks and takes good shots. Plays in your face defense and blocks out his man. We need more of that, let him play. I can’t understand for the life of me, why Howard is playing more than Dante. Howard is 1-2 years away from a retirement home, no disrespect intended. Dante is a young up and comer and deserves some development, and right now is the perfect time, along with bayless, let’s at least develop some players if we are going to get handled the rest of the year by cellar dweller teams.
just my .02.
btw, rec’d for being true and for being a better writer than me.
Get busy livin', or get busy dyin'. -the shawshank redemption.
Last night I saw a flamer that definately made me laugh
I believe it was a well defended LMA who had the ball with about 5 seconds left on the clock. (he had attempted a move that really did not work) HIs next step of superior offensive basketball was to throw an attempted flamer over to Andre, but he left to much time on the clock, and Andre was anticipating it.
The ball hit Miller’s hands and returned to LMA in classic flaming bag style—like when a boomerang comes back unexpectedly. I just had to laugh and yell, “good job Andre,” at my TV!
#52
by KINGofMACct on Dec 13, 2009 4:33 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
Very well done sir. Wreck'd.
Unfortunately it is pointless. I am now under the theory that Blake has damning evidence of KP and Nate, and will play 40 minutes a night for as long as he is breathing.
Oden fan for life
Roy / Clock Management
Nice post.
It seems clear to me that Steve Blake is only playing because Roy finds it “comfortable” to have him out there and Roy is not playing all that well yet. The coaching staff is trying desperately to get him going by giving him anything / everything he wants. But the way Blake is playing is putting a lot of pressure on them. It’s also putting a lot of pressure on Roy, who really wants someone like Blake around to otherwise do all the things he doesn’t want to do, like bring the ball up the floor, play defense, and play off the ball.
I’m also puzzled by the “play early or play late” doctrine. How much is all the shooting late in the clock the result of this doctrine, and how much of it is Roy just “not forcing” things? I think the team needs more good shots, regardless of where they’re at in the clock. When you’re open, shoot it, etc., not before and not after. I’m almost positive the coaching staff doesn’t want them doing what they’re doing now, which is repeatedly shooting with 3 or less on the clock. And especially late in the game, I see Roy dribbling while time ticks off, even when they’re behind, and basically not doing anything for a good 8 seconds at a time, where, if he went, he might be able to create a good shot for people or run a play.
To me what needs to happen is, start MIller, bring Bayless off the bench ahead of Blake, and play Roy off the ball more, even if he’s not quite comfortable with it. After enough losses, I suspect this will happen. But until that point, Roy gets a ton of leeway to show that what he’s doing isn’t quite working.
Maybe Roy slows things down because he has been WORKING so hard in his basketball
life to get a basket. Seems like every bucket he gets involves way too much work. Oh he also works hard to get many of his misses as well. Wouldn’t it be nice if instead, he used some of this energy to run without the ball and make EASY shots…seems like a no brainer that a coach who had any brains would point out… I hope very much that these coaches figure something out. For instance…coaching vs trying to do what someone thinks works yet didn’t work last year in the playoffs..hasn’t worked this year…instead of trying to be BFFs.
The whole thing about "play early or play late" doctrine is that
You want to either get an easy shot by pushing the ball up and forcing mismatches, or make the defense work for whole 24 seconds so that we’ll wind up with a good shot. It does not mean that we have to shoot with 2 seconds left on the clock! Unfortunately, we are not pushing the ball up (well, more fair to say we never did push the ball up consistently) and everyone is standing around until there’s until few seconds left and throwing up a bad shot.
What I wonder is that even though the coaching staff says one thing, they also tolerate the players not following instructions. Is the proper message getting across to the players and is there a proper punishment scheme in place for not following those instructions? Since our offensive dysfunction has been going on all season, I am inclined to say nay.
52 + 88 = 140% better team.
Players or Coaches?
Is it on the players for not doing what the coaches want, or the coaches for giving bad instructions? Nate’s been here for years now with this core group and if they don’t understand or can’t properly run his system by now then something is wrong. Either these players are too to do it or the players are doing what they’re told and it doesn’t work.
This can’t be the vision Nate had for the offense, the question is what he sees when he watches it happen. Does he say “What the heck are these guys doing? That’s not what I told them to do!” Or does he think to himself “That’s the right idea but they aren’t good enough to make it work.” Maybe he just watches and thinks “Man, if I were coaching the Spurs with this system I’d look like a genius.”
Probably bit of both, I think
In real life, very rarely the 100% of the fault is due to one side. My guess is that the players are not executing the offense as how Nate wants it, but at the same time, Nate does not actively discourage the players when they do not execute. Ultimately, the fault lies on Nate because he is the coach (and technically, their boss). I know people will argue (and correctly) that this is a player’s league, but one that is left holding the bag at the end of the day is the coach, especially when the team loses.
52 + 88 = 140% better team.
Great minds think alike
Here is the comment I started at 9:00 this AM over in Dave’s post-game thread Had to spend some time with my grandson so didn’t come back to finish until about 11:30 and did not notice your excellent post. Either we have been in a Vulcan Mind-meld or you and I are on the same page. Notice my first line. Yours is better, but definitely similar.
Dear Nate
The natives are getting mighty restless. You have already lost a pretty good slice of the fanbase, and an even larger share is teetering on the edge. I would estimate that you have about two weeks to make significant changes or you are going to find mobs with pitchforks and torches gathering outside the Rose Garden.
I realize that you have done a lot for the franchise. You have taken us from lottery hell to the brink of contention. You have taught our young guys to play hard and be good professionals. We thank you.
I also realize that a lot of the criticism you are receiving probably feels unfair. You are not responsible for six players being injured and out for extended periods of time. It sucks.
Having said all this, you need to understand that your margin for error is now razor thin. Expectations were extremely high, that has made the disappointment that much harder for the fans to bear.
Your handling of the PG situation has been a slow motion disaster. You dis’ed Andre Miller from the start. Your determination to start a clearly inferior player was bound to cause stress and strain all around. Blake has been completely unable to handle the pressure. Miller has been inconsistent and disrupted. The whole team has been affected.
Bayless has shown dramatic improvement and started living up to the expectations that many of us have had from the beginning. Your unwillingness to reward his play with more minutes and a larger role has only exacerbated the Blake/Miller situation.
The only way for you to address this situation is to do what you said you would do at the beginning of camp. You need to let the players determine their roles with their play. Miller should be starting and Bayless should be given the bulk of the back-up minutes. Blake can be used in spot situations if his shooting comes around.
I know this is hard for you. You obviously like and identify with Blake. But you need to look at the bigger picture. Miller is the guy who may be able to get this team past the first round if he can learn how to play with the rest of the starters. Bayless is the kid who may be our long term answer at the point. Given all the injuries, we need to place a greater emphasis on developing our young players.
Blake has no place in the team’s long range plans. He isn’t good enough to be the starter and he is the way of the player we need to develop. We can’t afford to resign him next summer and so we should trade him before the deadline. Package him with Trout or other assets for a strong 4-5 backup.
On other subjects, show a little trust in Webster. He is a talented player who is struggling with rust and confidence. Give him consistent minutes and he may develop into a solid, consistent contributor. Give Cunningham as many minutes as y9u can, our team will be better for it in the long run.
I know that trusting young players is difficult particularly when you are feeling the heat, but the fans understand about the injuries, and will show some patience if they feel like you are moving the team in the right direction and developing the right players for the longer term.
With Miller and Bayless playing a larger role, you need to work on increasing the team’s pace. We have a lot of greyhounds, we need to use them. We need more motion on offense. Let’s see Roy and Webster coming off screens. Let’s see Bayless using picks to set up his penetration. Four guys standing around watching an isolation play is not an offense. Keep working on pick and roll defense it is inexcusable to see our 7’0" center on a super quick PG time after time.
If you want our continued support, you need to show some flexibility and you have to be willing to trust some of the young guys. It may cost us a few games in the short run, but it will be better for everyone in the long run.
Good Luck,
Upper Left Corner
by upper left corner on Dec 13, 2009 2:17 PM PST reply actions 2 recs
Please post your "Dear Nate" letter! Also it would be great to actually SEND this posting to
McMillan. I wonder if there is any way the fans can directly communicate with the coaching staff et al.
YAAAAAY.
Blake has no place in the team’s long range plans. He isn’t good enough to be the starter and he is the way of the player we need to develop. We can’t afford to resign him next summer and so we should trade him before the deadline. Package him with Trout or other assets for a strong 4-5 backup.
"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
I would send Blake out...
But I’m not sure about Travis, unless KP made a sweetheart wink wink deal with him that he would still look to sign him this summer for the midlevel or something. I think Travis is an important bench scorer and locker room presense for this team going forward. I’m not sure Blake can or should even be the back up point guard on a contending team (because his low risk low benefit style doesn’t mesh well with other bench guys) but Travis can definitely be a bench scorer for a contending team – especially if Nic develops as anticipated into a solid starter. This team doesn’t want to depend on Travis, but he’s a heckuva luxury if they can afford him this summer.
Q: Is Greg favoring his knee?
Frye: He favors dunking on your head, that's what he favors.
LOL
The more people who think like me, the easier will be my world domination. Nice post in general, though I don’t agree with it all.
I can see Blake here long term as a 2nd or 3rd PG. In my perfect world, Rudy improves his ball handling to the point where we use a three guard rotation of Brandon, Jerryd, and Rudy, with Blake as injury cover and a dangerous spot up shooter when we need multiple 3 point threats on the court.
I tend to agree on Martell. Cunningham, perhaps, I’m not as sure. But if we are going to hold on and make the playoffs this year, we need to find a way to get Martell cranking. The last two games have had some encouraging moments. And if we can rev up Martell, that is very positive for the future, as well — he could end up an important role player on a championship team. Cunningham, on the other hand, may never have a key role. At SF, he is likely to be behind Nic and Martell, at PF he is likely to be behind LMA and whoever we get with our MLE this summer. At best, he’s likely to be our fifth forward, so I don’t see a lot of point in trying to develop him. Use him if it helps us win this year, of course.
I’m not sure who should be starting at PG. I could make a case for Bayless as much as for Miller, since Andre has been so inconsistent. I’m not even sure it shouldn’t be Blake. What I do know is that if he never shoots, and when he does he can’t find an ocean in which to sink the Titanic, his mpg should go from 30 to 20 or less, rather than from 30 to 40 or more.
I wouldn’t be bothered if they had kept starting Blake, but reduced his minutes with his slump. But to increase them?
#52
I agree with JScot’s post. It seems accurate and poignant without making assumptions or coming across as condescending (that’s a first). I can’t get behind ULC’s letter, at all, ever. It is actually pretty appalling to me that anyone would presume so much of themself to write something like this. Facts behind Nate losing a pretty good slice of the fanbase? Facts behind him having 2 weeks before losing lots more? A fan with zero power in the organization basically offering the coach ultimatums. Stating Nate dissed Andre from the start as if it were fact, when it isn’t. The presumptions and made up “facts” go on and on. To be honest I had a hard time deciding whether I agreed with ULC or not because the way in which the post is written was so glaringly biased, rude, and presumptive.
My opinions are facts.
Nice to see that you take all this so seriously.
Lighten up. My posts seem to consistently rub you the wrong way. You have been pretty aggressive with your responses.
Of courser I have absolutely no power or influence, nor do I delude myself into believing I do.
I do believe that a lot of my posts seem to resonate reasonably well with a lot of B Edgers. I am sorry that you are not among them.
by upper left corner on Dec 16, 2009 5:35 PM PST up reply actions
My sentiments exactly! Let’s all lighten up. I am but a but a poor soul floundering amongst the vitriol of fan posts. I pray for more self control, but I am weak, and being such have become a product of my environment. The negativity arouses my ire, yet again I find myself dancing with irony. I was a choir boy before I came to BEdge.
My opinions are facts.
OMG! actual analysis and thought!
As usual I agree with you….it bothers me every time, but I do. This whole “I Hate Blake” movement denies one thing…. NO one player is going to make the Blazers flow the way we all think they can. The defense and the offense have a lot more problems than Mr. Blake.
Number 4 is the most curious to me. And the answer is probably because we are so ineffective at Number 1. We need movement. We miss Rudy for that. Perhaps Bayless would help? I have seen no indication that Andre has the answer in that category.
Great post again,
RoadBlazer
I think I'll post a totally mindless and incoherent rant
that everyone can safely disagree with. This tension of always being right and people having to agree with me all the time is getting to me.
I think you are absolutely correct about Number 1 being the cause of Number 4. What I don’t know is whether it is the scheme or the execution. Probably both.
#52
Nice post
This native is getting restless for sure
by southern oregon on Dec 13, 2009 2:47 PM PST reply actions
I continue to be baffled by the strange loyalty to Steve Blake
The way Blake is being used by the Portland coaching staff, you would think he’s Steve Nash.
Obviously, they can’t be happy with his current level of production. His PER is below 9. He is one of the worst point guards (not just starting point guards) in the league right now. And yet he continues to play huge minutes. So the Blazers must expect his performance to improve based on the way he’s played in the past.
But Steve’s play this year isn’t that far off his career norms. If anything, last year was the outlier. Steve has TWICE in his seven year career had a PER higher than 12.01. The other four seasons have been pretty similar to this one.
Now, if Nash were playing like poop this season, obviously, you dance with the girl you came with. You would expect him to improve. I’d say to a lesser extent, Miller has earned the same type of “rope.”
But Steve Blake? He’s been mediocre most of his career. He had a nice year last year and everyone expected him to regress to his career averages. This is no surprise.
So why does the Blazers coaching staff continue to treat him like he’s a career starter? My theory is that it’s pretty simple. It boils down to this comment in Hollinger’s player profile of Blake, based on his performance last year:
Here’s the thing: Over the course of a season, the absence of negatives has to be juxtaposed against the lack of any overwhelming positives. No, Blake didn’t hurt the Blazers, but he didn’t do a lot to hurt the opponent either.
Note, again: that’s what Hollinger said about last year, when Steve’s PER was more than 5 points higher. This year, Steve is doing far less to help the Blazers and doing a few things to hurt them, as well.
Basically, though, here’s the problem: Nate confuses conservative play with smart play, and aggressive play with careless play. They are not always the same thing. You need some aggression. When the Blazers are forced to toss up a quick contested 23 footer with one second on the shot clock, that’s almost as bad as a turnover.
I believe PoliSam put it well, at some point – watching Steve dribble sideways and waste time without doing anything to advance the possession is bad basketball just like it’s bad basketball when Trout launches a contested fadeaway 21-footer with 18 seconds on the shot clock. It’s just less obvious. And apparently it’s completely lost on Nate, Dean, etc.
Unfortunately for Blazers fans, Bayless is an aggressive player. Nate is disposed not to like aggressive players. So even though it’s obvious to anybody’s 85 year old grandmother that Jerryd’s more effective than Steve, Nate doesn’t necessarily agree.
Q: Is Greg favoring his knee?
Frye: He favors dunking on your head, that's what he favors.
by KP Corleone on Dec 13, 2009 3:43 PM PST reply actions 6 recs
Couldn't agree more
Everything you say here is accurate, from what I can see. Blake doesn’t necessarily hurt the team all too often, but he certainly doesn’t help the team much either. Players like this can be seen at all levels of basketball, and their steady presence is needed for many high school and even college teams. However, this quality is expected to at least some extent in every NBA player.
Like you point out, consistency is often mistaken for smart play. Consistency or predictability? These two terms often go hand in hand, but one holds a positive connotation while the other negative. Fans and coaches alike typically get frustrated with streaky players who don’t maintain a level of consistency they can depend on (even more so for the point guard position). Blake removes a lot of ambiguity for a fan or coach because we know his myriad limitations. This is not to say it isn’t helpful knowing a player’s limitations; it certainly is. It is much easier to build a game plan, as well as make adjustments, around a predictable player. But trading in a talented wildcard (which isn’t even so much of a wildcard anymore) for security/predictability? I see why Nate falls back to what he is comfortable with, but with all that has happened this season, a new approach may not be as tough a transition as anticipated.
The NBA is made up of the best basketball players in the world, where each player has to bring a collection of skills that can successfully impact the team. Even in the past I have felt Blake resembles a consistent player – a consistently ineffective one. It only seems to have intensified this year. In short, Blake’s skills are not intrinsically bad, but they simply don’t fit nor meet the caliber of an NBA team with playoffs in mind.
"Beggars can't be choosers, but I wish I was playing more." - Jerryd Bayless
Oh, and rec
for many things, but primarily for stating the thing that many rants on Bedge ignore.
The reason Nate plays Blake is not because he is blind or Brandon likes Blake or because Gary Payton was given his job or anything dumb like that. It is because Steve plays the style of play that Nate likes. Few mistakes. He only misses a shot every 7.5 minutes, and only makes a turnover every 17 minutes, in these recent games. Everybody else misses shots more frequently than that, and everyone else who handles the ball much makes turnovers at least that often, too.
#52
by jscot on Dec 14, 2009 12:02 AM PST up reply actions 1 recs
With the same starting lineup that we had two years ago...
I have resigned myself to the fact that we are only a .500 team. I have adjusted my expectations accordingly.
Now if Miller were the starter and Bayless played a little more… hmmm…
Fun post, jscot
But it should be pointed out that the Blake of last season will probably reappear the moment he’s (finally) demoted. Right now, Blake would clearly seem to have a case of “Looking-over-your-shoulder-itis.” A bad case.
Remember a couple seasons ago when Joel Przybilla stunk it up? After the season was over, he confessed he’d suffered from the awareness that the guy who was outplaying him in practice every day (Magliore) was coming off the bench behind him. Nate had never explained to Przy that he didn’t want Magliore and Zach in there together clogging up the lane. So Joel spent the entire season looking over his shoulder, pressing badly, and wondering when Magliore was finally going to get his starting spot.
Maybe both Blake & Miller would be playing better if Nate had sat the two of them down together at the end of the preseason and said something like the following. “Here’s the deal, guys. Andre has earned the starting spot. Hell, he’s one of the all-time NBA assist leaders. But I don’t like starting the game with Roy & ‘dre on the court together. The chemistry just isn’t right; it’s like two generals trying to run a battle together. So you’re my starter Steve, and you’re my second team leader Andre. That’s the way it’s going to be all season.”
Of course, for all we know Nate did say just that. But I doubt it, judging from the sub-par performances we’ve seen from both Blake & Miller to date. What I’m seeing out there is “Looking-over-your-shoulder-itis” from Blake and “Why-in-the-world-aren’t-I-starting-itis” from Miller.
Most likely, Nate’s seeing the same thing. As a result, look for Miller to start ASAP—possibly as soon as the next game. Nate already had signaled his intention to make this change before the Achilles injury altered the timeline.
I was born in '52, and I believe in #52. Hang in there, GO.
by hurryup09 on Dec 13, 2009 5:26 PM PST reply actions 2 recs
You may be right
But it should be pointed out that the Blake of last season will probably reappear the moment he’s (finally) demoted.
I hope so.
The Achilles injury had nothing to do with Nate’s decision to start Blake against Houston. If anything altered that, it was the fact that Rudy was out — and Rudy is still out.
#52
What makes the Blake of last season more likely than the Blake of seasons before that?
You guys remember that we let Blake walk not long ago right?
Blazer Fan
by leeroyjenkins on Dec 14, 2009 2:00 PM PST up reply actions
no, people here don't remember that.
they dont remember us waiting longingly for ASW during the preseason, when bayless would finally be ready to start. Then again Nate played Sergio ahead of Bayless that year. Fact of the matter is aside from last year, Blake has been middling at best. At best.
Please, for the love of all that is holy, please stop using the following: "Book it.", "FTW", "Epic" & "Fail".
...no seriously--stop.
I'd take the Blake of two years ago
over this year’s Blake, in a heartbeat.
#52
I would too, but people are using the standard for Steve Blake as last season which was a career season
that’s not right
Blazer Fan
by leeroyjenkins on Dec 15, 2009 6:45 AM PST up reply actions
This is a terrific series of posts led off by Jscot. Thank you!
Here’s what comes up for me in response. (I seem to run wordy and wish I could do better.)
Teams like people develop habits which in the aggregate might often be declared character. Habit contributes to winning or not on the levels of aggregate outcomes and down to patterns within games and in individual players. It would seem to me the job of the coaching staff for which Nate is responsible to keep their eyes on such matters and to encourage or demand adjustments where appropriate.
Sometimes these things, at least to this fan, seem like mysteries. Like last year the Blazers had a habit of falling painfully behind in the first quarter and then needing 4th quarter heroics generally from Roy to pull out a victory. We came as fans and likely as team to rely upon Roy being always able to pull his magic out of the hat just as it was most needed. It was exhilarating; can’t deny that. Lurking within falling into the expectation that things would go this way always was also the seeds of its own destruction.
It’s is a bit like relying upon three pointers and jump shots as the teams arsenal by which to win games. It can work. It is fun when it does work. And no less than Charles Barkley would lay his considerable whole self on the line for the proposition that no team can win that way consistently enough to win championships. Three pointers and just jump shots are fickle friends. One day they are with you and the next day not.
The other major element of trouble is to always be relying upon one, one and only one guy to make magic every night. Lebron and Kobe are close but even they fail at that. Wade is another of the few totally true elite players and as good as he is it is not enough to put Miami seriously in the running for championships; the same for CP3. Wade and Paul need help and can’t pull it off alone. I might suggest that Roy approaches the level of those elite players but there is a line of distinction to be seen and the truth is that he also cannot make magic happen every night often enough to win championships.
Two teams stand out to illustrate what works, Boston and LA. Boston has three guys from which to chose who will carry the team that night if necessary and they have a couple more who pitch in a lot or occasionally to carry the team. As good as Boston is when they lost Garnett last year they were thereafter a different team. LA similarly has three or four guys who can carry the team on any given night and enough talent that occasionally someone else will also step up. They were not the same team they are today before Pau Gasol came along and Bynum seems to be emerging this year as yet another major talent.
It is interesting to note that both of these teams play generally unselfish ball. They are happy when someone else steps up. When they see it, they shift gears and all of a sudden Rondo or Shannon Brown will emerge with 25 pts and 8 rbs or assists. It seems like it is just obvious and natural for them to do this. My guess is nobody draws up a play or anything else. It is just quickly obvious to players of that quality who is hot tonight. Once identified there is no hesitancy to make Mr. hot hand the hero of the night. When Shannon Brown is hot Fisher’s minutes go down; they don’t pull Brown because of some predetermined time schedule. If Vujacic is hot Kobe can rest up for tomorrow. For Boston there are nights when Eddie House is a house afire. When that becomes obvious they let him play it out before finding it essential to reinsert Rondo. Those observations and actions in response are a lot of what coaches Jackson and Rivers get paid for. The thing with Dre as I hear it is that he has the experience and skills to feel and see what is going on for the team on the whole floor the whole time. Then he has the skill generally to lead the way to a successful possession. That is a coaches vision. Nate appears to have his own vision which he works out ahead of time in the privacy of his head. It follows a pretty predictable pattern, and it’s a plan by damn so don’t mess with it. That approach in my opinion has great value but it cannot win championships. It cannot deal with the flexibility of the elite teams.
I would suggest that the Blazers were put on notice that it was going to be up hill running the same route again this year by the fact that and how Houston controlled Roy in the playoffs. Adelman is a great coach and he or someone down there figured it out. I believe Houston’s success did not go unnoticed and that a large part of what seems diminished about Roy this year is attributable to the fact that everyone now knows the secret. Roy is still great and often beyond control by many on an ordinarily good night for him, perhaps most opposing teams. But, the Bostons, Clevelands, Houston, Denver and LA among others are almost never going to let the same gambit fly as high this year as it did last.
What that means in simple terms is that the Blazers must adapt in order to have the same success as they once enjoyed. So far there is little evidence that the coaching staff which is where responsibility chiefly lies even sees the issue. The other element is that the Blazers do not now enjoy the luxury of three all-star players. Most of our guys, even the much maligned S Blake, are capable of catching fire on some given night but are not dependable to produce the same magic the next night. Sorry, that is just the way it is. Sadly, it does not likely lead to what most of us had in mind for how this year would go. We have two pretty much dependable, nightly threats for 20 points with rbs or assists. Oden was to be our third and this was the year of his emergence. It was not yet well established when Greg went down.
In the case of each of these players there is a case for tragic flaw being in the way of greatness. Oden cannot be the next Dwighgt Howard or Bynum unless he is supported in the goal of becoming the complete center. For hard to discern reasons it appears that this was not a firmly established team goal. LMA as handsome and talented as he is in my view cannot be great until he takes the ball the the hoop at every opportunity. BRoy is great but he seems to be slipping and in my view will remain questionable until some approach other than or in addition to the 1-5 ISO becomes his main modus operandi. Just my opinion with no claim to expertise.
The Blazer’s clumsy public relations department seems once again to have misled public expectations. And, we did as fans want more than is real. That’s the nature of being a fan is it not. So what now? Without Oden we are dreaming of Christmas. Without a change in approach we are dead ending ourselves. My view would be to plan and work for the future because there is no open window until at least next year. Even then we may well be over reaching. Juwan Howard, who I happen to respect and like a great deal, is not the future. Bayless, Cunningham, Pendergraph, Webster, Batum, Fernandez and Mills are possibly the future. LMA, BRoy, Blake, Miller, Oden, Outlaw and Pryz are the present with cracks in the veneer. I would assume that at least Blake and Travis will be pursuing other opportunities next year. Seems to me we would want to use the rest of this year to prepare an effective approach to playing for next year. Some serious change might well and wisely be considered.
by blazer_believer on Dec 13, 2009 6:43 PM PST reply actions 3 recs
Nice comment, well thought out and presented
I agree that over-dependence on Brandon is a problem, though I would not classify it as the biggest problem.
#52
The Buddy system is what we currently have
No expectations for our starting point guard. Play badly? Shoot the 3 ball poorly. No reason to worry when you have the buddy system in place. A wink and a nod from Nate. Blake is scrappy on defense however he is not a threat to score on you or to get to the free throw line. The thing I liked about Blake last year is he could Hit the 3 ball. This year he has looked fearful when taking the 3 ball and now its just not going in. The other part is we have a better point guard now. Better at getting to the free throw line, Can post on people and can pass it to people in the right spots. However in Portland we now have the Buddy system. Pick a buddy and ride it out with him. I know its going to be bumpy but dont worry when the wheels come off the car we can always say it was all about the injuries and not about making the tough calls. Coach make the tough call.
I disagree
See this comment above by KP Corleone. The reason Nate plays Steve is not some “buddy system”. It is because Nate is persuaded that Steve plays the style of ball that will help win games — no risks, no mistakes from the PG.
It works adequately when Steve’s assist/TO ratio is 3 to 1 or better and he’s knocking down the 3s. Not great, but adequately. The problem is, his turnovers are up, and his 3s are out.
#52
starting the offense with 12 seconds on the shot clock
Great post jscot! With regard to movement and the shot clock…
Last game i got so frustrated at the stagnant offense that i started noting when in the shot clock the blazers did the first thing that might generate a shot for someone (made a cut, set a screen…etc.)
Possession after possession blake would walk the ball up, dribble around, make a pass or two around the perimeter and the first action would occur with between 12-14 seconds on the shot clock.
I’m not sure what’s average but it seemed too late to be starting the offense. I found myself constantly yelling “lets get going already! go go go! do something!”
jscot, you are getting predictable ...
Predictably good.
"These are dreams that we have." --Rudolfo Fernandez
The interestring thing is another week or two might change the whole perspective
The playing time decisions are based on more factors than we can be aware of at this time.
1. With December 15 coming this week Andre is eligible to be traded (and Howard as well). If the decision was made to trade Andre some time ago would it make sense to throw out Blake now when we would need him post-trade? We are certainly not going to get a starting PG in trade for Andre. If Andre is traded Blake might feel freer and return to shooting form.
2. Andre puzzles me by failing to deliver on any of the expectations I read we would receive. When he comes into the games too often now the wheels come off. He does not shoot well but often. But Andre has been playing most of the minutes as well (31/game over the past 5). We simply don’t seem to have shooters who can hit.
I do see the need to play Bayless more. The trade scenario makes the most sense. That would open the door for Bayless to play more as a 2 guard and a 1. We do not know where Patty Mills is in his recovery or his usefulness but he does present a backup plan if Miller is traded. As for Blake being traded – I don’t see many teams wanting him except for cap relief.
"I could almost fall asleep when he's got the ball," Demopoulos said of Roy. "That's how comfortable I feel with him. He always comes through."
Yes, if Andre is being traded
then I don’t see benching Blake like some people want.
But I do see limiting his minutes rather than increasing them, since he’s struggling so badly.
I agree about trading Blake. The only team that would want him would be a playoff bound team that is strong at other positions, and has one of their rotation PGs go down to an injury. They would want someone to come in and steady the ship and not make a ton of mistakes so their stars can do stuff.
#52
If I could Rec this a thousand times I would
And I actually don’t think Blake is horrible. But I do think that our coach needs to do something or risk losing my support forever. This is not a small offensive set problem, or some unquantifiable belief that he doesn’t know how to draw up plays, it is a GLARING problem that can be seen by anyone who has watched a Blazer game all year long. It is the coaches responsibility to win games, even if he pisses some players off.
Bottom line: the product is bad
i still watch because i lead a boring life, but i can certainly understand why people with better things to do wouldn’t
Blazer Fan
by leeroyjenkins on Dec 14, 2009 6:53 AM PST reply actions 1 recs
Blake isn't hitting the shots he needs to in order to stay on the floor
I’m not sure which little things you are referring to? Do you mean stepping on the out of bounds line?
A lot of guys do little things like getting rebounds or setting great picks or being a great leader. In all seriousness which of these types of things is Steve doing???
Blazer Fan
by leeroyjenkins on Dec 14, 2009 6:57 AM PST up reply actions
Several things
First, he’s been getting some rebounds, for a PG. His spacing is always excellent. His defensive positioning is usually perfect. He’s not quick enough to stop the quicker PGs, but you can’t fault his positioning. When he got switched onto LeBron, he played perfect position defense. LeBron shot it over him and scored, but he’d have made that shot over any PG — he wanted to drive, but Blake denied it.
He always works hard on defense. He’s aware of the shot clock. He’s not going to throw a ball up from half court with four seconds left. He doubles down when he’s supposed to.
You’re always banging on about so and so didn’t put out effort. There is no way you can ever fault Blake’s effort.
I suspect there are other things the coaches could tell you, or that I could pick up if I could watch film over and over.
But you are right that he isn’t hitting the shots. He’s also getting more turnovers than you want to see out of a low-threat PG. If a guy is only a threat as a spot up shooter, you’d want his assist/TO ratio to be over 3, anyway.
#52
I'll disagree that he's a good rebounding guard
2.5 reb in 30+ minutes?
Spacing? ok. that and a quarter gets you a glass of water
I’ve seen Blake make suspect decisions in regards to the shot clock so I’ll disagree there also.
Positioning and effort on defense? Ok, ill give you those as well. Still he can’t stop anyone. ANYONE.
Blazer Fan
by leeroyjenkins on Dec 14, 2009 8:58 AM PST up reply actions
I didn't say he was GOOD at rebounding
but he’s had some 5 rebound games, which shows he’s working at it.
#52
hey listen, i like steve blake personally and i like that he makes the most out of what he's got
that said my opinion remains the same as it has for several years: Blake is a back-up caliber PG
Blazer Fan
by leeroyjenkins on Dec 14, 2009 10:55 AM PST up reply actions
I understand
You asked what the little things are, and I answered. I’m not claiming any of the little things are big things. Blake is a decent role player going through a slump right now.
#52
And I appreciate your answer, I just disagree on some of it
Blazer Fan
by leeroyjenkins on Dec 14, 2009 1:59 PM PST up reply actions
That's fine
It’s ok to disagree with me. Just remember my former signature line — “I’m frequently right, but always certain.”
In this case, I’m both right and certain. :)
#52
im usually wrong but my passion makes up for it
Blazer Fan
by leeroyjenkins on Dec 15, 2009 6:46 AM PST up reply actions
LOL
“I’m wrong, but I’m intense about it.”
You could probably get elected to Congress on that motto.
#52
I lol'ed
you get a rec. I agree with both sentiments.
"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 Dec 14, 2009 9:39 AM PST up reply actions
Not another...
…it’s all Blaze The Trail Cat’s fault post. Pathetic? I think Blaze’s spilled bucket full of confetti on planted Blazer fan execution is among the best in the league. Couple that with the crazy tail and the bobbing head and you’ve got All-Star mascot happening.
Just give Blaze a break. You know there’s a language barrier and he’s had to adjust to all the sudden injuries. He had a whole season of routines worked out with Travis Outlaw involving catfish and a lazer pointer. Unfortunately those are out the window.
I hear McMillan has Blaze on a pretty tight leash. No unicycles (injury risk) and no 1/2 court shots, if he makes a few he’s afraid fans will want Blaze to start ahead of Steve Blake. It’s not easy being a mascot, Blaze deserves our support. Especially after coming back from his Microfiber surgery.
GO BLAZE! Best mascot in the N.B.A.!
"Mother Nature started this fight, I think it's about time we ended it!"
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.
