Jaynes on shortcomings of Blazers offense

Do you agree with Jaynes' assessment of the Blazers' (and Rockets') halfcourt offenses?

If you agree that the Blazers' halfcourt sets are lacking, what do you think needs to happen to improve them (change in personnel? coaching philosophy? player buy in to coaching philosophy? commitment by players?

about 2 years ago mangas 28 comments 0 recs |

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Of course Jaynes is critical

we just won, right?

" Welcome to the Bedge....where good, is never good enough"…Rudiculous

by 92wastheyear on Dec 21, 2009 4:06 PM PST reply actions

Change the coaching staff...seems to me the coaches are the ones who are

supposed to teach offense/defense. Get rid of N Mc and any of his followers. Monty Williams is from San Antonio so probably knows something about teaching defense..same with Pronty (?sp). Say good by to Nate and Dean. And for more reasons than just the offense/defense coaching!

by Natsthecat on Dec 21, 2009 4:29 PM PST reply actions

Dwight is never going to give Nate credit for anything

because McMillian’s system will never measure up to Rick Adelman’s or Jack Ramsay’s (blah blah blah)

Reading Jaynes is tiresome. He just circles the “criticism drain” with no reasonable suggestions for improving the status quo

Now, I’m not completely sold on Nate as a championship-caliber coach, either. But at least I’ll float a name who could reasonably be pursued as McMillian’s replacement:

Tom Thibodeau

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

by two4larue on Dec 21, 2009 4:56 PM PST reply actions

great on D,

but what’s he got on O?

I could, of course, be basing my opinion on nothing but fluff since Thibodeau has a rep as a D architect and not much has been said that I am aware of. Well, lets say that this is true and maybe half his brain got cut out and he doesn’t understand NBA offense… We could still get Rambis to be a lead assistant after he gets fired from the Wolves and try to run the triangle.

I’m sure there are better ideas for an O coach, but Tom T is one of the very best at building and teaching defense. I mean Ray Allen and Paul Peirce were 2/5ths of a monster D team, craziness…

Worst case scenario, our offense could just be “pick/roll/pop/slip/watch Roy”

Come on you gotta listen unto me,
lay off that whiskey and let that cocaine be. ~Johnny Cash

by HurraKane212 on Dec 21, 2009 8:09 PM PST up reply actions

there's no doubt TT would need an offensive-minded assistant

but at least he probably would be willing to admit his shortcomings, unlike Mr. Sonic

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

by two4larue on Dec 21, 2009 9:07 PM PST up reply actions

Jaynes is indeed triresome. In this case he may be right,

which will just, in the long run, make him even more tiresome.

by raoulduke on Dec 21, 2009 5:25 PM PST reply actions

doesn't help

even if Dwight is proven wrong he’ll just plow ahead with another criticism. Jaynes has got an unimpeachable track record, as far as he’s concerned

Dwight and Kenny Vance have the advantage of being around the league for 30 years and they’ve got some long-term “NBA sources” but how this helps them re: “breaking” inside info or diagnosing “what’s wrong” with the Blazers is dubious, at best

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

by two4larue on Dec 21, 2009 6:26 PM PST up reply actions

Jaynes was trying to draw Dave into the "Nate's offense is bad" debate, this morning

check out the MSP archives

http://www.955thegame.com/Shows/Morning_Sports_Page/

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

by two4larue on Dec 21, 2009 6:40 PM PST up reply actions

Important to note

that I don’t necessarily disagree with Dwight’s assessment on the face of it. This team is way too jumper-dependent right now to have long-term success. Given that half of the expected rotation is out inlcuding our only true low post player I just don’t see it changing very soon no matter what is tried. The offense right now is, and has to be, mainly LaMarcus and Brandon. That means a lot of jumpers except on the occasions when Brandon or one of the point guards take it to the hole. There’s no magic post guy off the bench. If the Blazers try driving into the teeth of the defense right now the opponent will collapse and dare them to hit…guess what? Jumpers. This is not a good setup. But until the roster changes, either due to trade or recovery, there’s going to be no magic fix.

—Dave

by Dave on Dec 21, 2009 8:24 PM PST up reply actions

I thought you made your point well, then Gavin took over the interview

The hope was that Miller would bring more offensive versatility, when he was signed last July. That was the gyst of that dinner meeting in Vegas: Andre told Nate that he saw some things about the Blazer’s offense that he thought he could help fix, like running sets to the 3rd or 4th option, etc.

So, has Nate helped or hurt the “transition” to a more-uptempo style that leads to easy baskets earlier in the short clock? Honestly, I’d have to say Nate’s “treatment” of Miller since fall camp began has been shameful, but I admit that I haven’t “been there” to see how Andre has practiced. (All we know is what we hear from Quick, Freeman, Holdahl, BT Smith and Ben.) Sure, the injuries have thrown a monkey wrench into Nate’s best-laid plans, but even before the players started dropping like flies there were concerns re: the starting PG position and the team struggled to “flip the switch” during preseason

Like you said, what’s happening right now is Roy and Nate have gone back to their roots, so to speak. (It’s been a successful regular-season formula, so it’s hard to knock it.) But part of the reason why Turk and Miller were pursued as FAs was because the Roy “ISO attack” was too predictable and shown to be easy to defend by the Rockets (and it will be again, by any above-average defensive team who has time to prepare for it, in the playoffs) So I guess I also agree with Dwight to some extent, but when he constantly fails to provide solutions, Jaynes comes off as a whiny old man who thinks everything was so much better, back in the day.

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

by two4larue on Dec 21, 2009 9:23 PM PST up reply actions

loss of our low-post scorer is part of the problem..

no question about that. But do you buy Jaynes’ suggestion that there is something fundamentally defective or deficient about the way the Blazer offense runs?

This year’s Yao-less Houston team seems to generate a lot of quality shots without a great low-post threat or a ton of high-quality talent on the roster. How do we account for that? Is it the coach and the sets they are running? Is it on-court chemistry? Motivation? Or are the Houston players way more talented than anyone gives them credit for?

I think we win games mostly because we have a bunch of great jump shooters, not because we are generating a lot of easy shots. I believe that it’s a recipe for another early exit from the playoffs. So what needs to change for the Blazers to get more easy shots?

Seems like most fans want to blame the coach. I understand that. As a fan, blaming the coach is very tempting, since it offers the promise of fairly quick/painless fix: new coach + new sets = big wins. But if the missing element is something slippery like “chemistry”, the path to the promised land appears much longer and less sure.

by mangas on Dec 21, 2009 10:45 PM PST up reply actions

Yes, I buy it to an extent

But here’s the caveat. Before this year the offense ran that way because the team was capable of handling it and because frankly the team was still short people to run a different one. This year was supposed to be different. But the shakedown cruise started in chaos and ended in a litany of massive injuries and we ended up with not even the same team we had last year, rather less of one. Taking away Oden, Outlaw, and Rudy will kill any offense. Right now the team is in emergency mode. Of course it’s inadequate, but at least they know how to do it and it’s generating some wins.

Recall also when Portland did try to alter the offense some by going in to the post more we heard rumors of muttering on the bench from a couple of star players pining for the land of milk and honey which was the 2008-09 offense.

The Blazers will need to alter their offense at some point in order to be successful. But they need more ingredients in the kitchen before the new recipe can be tried, let alone served.

—Dave

by Dave on Dec 22, 2009 12:17 AM PST up reply actions

Dave

what you don’t seem to be addressing here is that even with the current players Portland has, offensive sets are still available to get clean open looks at the basket. This team doesn’t set or use screens effectively, Roy especially doesn’t seem able to actually use a screen, he backs up until he has to pass because he lets himself be doubled while LMA, (who normally sets the screen) is completely open. But lets say Roy does pass the ball to LMA, he would now be out above the 3 point line most of the time because they use so many high screens, it takes away the roll option, and makes it easy to defend. The Blazers rarely use off the ball screens to do anything more than try and get LMA post up position, which is another pet peave of many fans, because LMA sets up position too far away from the paint to do anything more than shoot a tough fade away turnaround jumpshot. If he was forced by the coaching staff to get lower position he would be fouled more, and make a higher percentage than he does now, which is pretty scary since he is making close to 50% on mainly jumpshots. Get him in close and he could lead the league!

Injuries have reduced some options, but they have not taken away all of them, this team can do more than what they are doing with a little teaching and effort.

Ben II Blazersedge.com || New to Blazers' Edge?

by usmcr3049 on Dec 22, 2009 8:22 AM PST up reply actions

adjustments

this team can do more than what they are doing with a little teaching and effort.

There’s not a whole lot of practice time during the season. I’m not trying to give the coaching staff a free pass, but like Dave said they’ve got their hands full right now just in pre-game prep.

Like I wrote above, most of the reason why Turk and Miller were attractive as FAs is they had offensive skills that would “show” the kids how to find easier baskets. During the preseason, we heard that Roy and LMA went to Nate on the plane with their concerns that they weren’t getting the same kind of “touches” that they had last year. “54 wins and a great run at the end of the regular season” would argue that “it’s not broke, so why fix the offense?” but the Rocket’s series exposed this fallacy…teams with above-average defenses who have time to prepare for the Blazers can slow Roy down and take LMA away…so then how does Portland score enough points to win playoff series? The hope was that Hedo then Andre were going to be that “3rd” option, and to help get Oden more involved.

Well, Greg’s out of the picture but Andre is still around, but Miller hasn’t been integrated into the starting lineup from the beginning, which is in part due to Roy and LMA’s desire to remain “option 1” and “option 2” Now that the ranks have been depleted, thetwo young stars are getting “their’s” again, just like last year. Will it result in playoff success? Color me pessimistic. Even if Portland reaches the postseason, the team’s overall development is in a “holding pattern” this year, with the possible exception of Bayless.

The league has made “adjustments” to Portland’s system, so how well will Nate, Brandon and LMA make “counter adjustments” in the future? Right now, they’re just doing what works to win regular season games, without learning many lessons from the playoff series, last spring

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

by two4larue on Dec 22, 2009 9:29 AM PST up reply actions

I don't subscribe to the

“there’s not enough practice time” excuse. Maybe when the team is playing every other day, but there are plenty of 2 offday, 3 offday, or even 4 off day periods throughout the season to practice. But even more so, the preseason should have used to do this, why it was not is beyond me. Everyone is still young, Roy and LMA are in their 4th seasons, so this team still has plenty of growing to do, but this coaching staff is letting them down in my opinion by not producing an offense that can succeed long term.

Ben II Blazersedge.com || New to Blazers' Edge?

by usmcr3049 on Dec 22, 2009 12:09 PM PST up reply actions

well, there should be more practice time, later

Portland has played more games than average through the first half of the season

grumping about Nate and the coaches is everybody’s favorite indoor sport, but I unless the Rose Garden seats aren’t renewed and advertising dollars don’t drop through the floor (like in 2004) then there’s little chance that they’ll be replaced…unless the players tune McMillian out but I’m not expecting that to happen any time soon

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

by two4larue on Dec 22, 2009 5:08 PM PST up reply actions

also, there is no star to focus on, so everyone is an equal threat for Houston, which, somehow works

kinda like a shotgun blast, eh? Each pellet by itself is not that bad, but the full blast is killer. Of course, you have to be on target to get the ful effect.

Come on you gotta listen unto me,
lay off that whiskey and let that cocaine be. ~Johnny Cash

by HurraKane212 on Dec 22, 2009 10:17 AM PST up reply actions

Can't figure out Jaynes and

that guy Kenny V. at 95.5; except maybe they are just angry former newspapermen that got laid off well before their retirement date. On a personal level it’s easy to relate to that experience but I don’t get the Nate, Aldredge, Martell and Blake bashing coupled with this totally unreasonable crush on Miller. What’s the point, except all the bashing and thrashing makes them a hotter property on air.

by oregonslee on Dec 21, 2009 6:00 PM PST reply actions

Jaynes is right on

I couldn’t agree more. The blazers offense doesn’t create easy shots, it doesn’t even create advantages for anyone. So they rely on players have to create that advantage one on one.

I rarely can, but recently did catch a few non-blazers games recently and it was amazing to see teams running offenses that actually created shots. Cuts, screens, movement… all stuf f i almost forgot existed watching the blazers.

I live in Seattle and love Nate, but the man is over his head. He’s got to go for offense to get anywhere.

by seablaz on Dec 21, 2009 6:43 PM PST reply actions

It doesn't matter if Jaynes is always critical

he is right about the Blazers Offense. No easy shots, very little movement, and hardly any real complicated plays are run. Most of the time it is high screen, or side screen, or 1-4 iso, or LMA on the block iso, etc… How about a few back screens with cutting off the ball? How about a few double screens to get Brandon a clean mid range jumpshot that he is hitting at about a 70% clip it seems? How about forcing LMA down to the block, instead of having him get the ball with his back to the basket at 13 feet out?

So much could be done with these players to create offense, yet so little seems to be being done.

Ben II Blazersedge.com || New to Blazers' Edge?

by usmcr3049 on Dec 21, 2009 8:15 PM PST reply actions

the lack of off-ball movement

is troubling to me. Aside from Rudy (who usually appears to be freelancing, not executing a set play), it seems like we do a lot of standing around without the ball. Are there any objective measures of this (by Synergy Sports or others)? I’d be really curious to know how we stack up against other teams.

by mangas on Dec 21, 2009 11:15 PM PST up reply actions

Coach I'd plug in

Not sure if Nate is the answer or not. He sure has been during his tenure, but is he too stubborn to adapt his system to his players? Is it true players will tend to tune out a coach after awhile if things always remain status quo? One coach who I think would be a great hire, if the position opened up, is Lawrence Frank. Players really liked him. Great x and O guy, and passionate. Injuries and impending new ownership meant he finally was let go, but he did a great job for many years with marginal talent. My 2 cents..

by DCBlazerinPDX on Dec 21, 2009 9:05 PM PST reply actions

Blazers are an awful at screens

Przybilla is the only guy that actually puts a body on someone. Players can’t get good separation most of the time. The offense is entirely dependent on jumpshots. No fastbreaks or interior passing.

"I'm at the thingamajig talking the yakety-yak" - Kenny Smith

by blzrfan on Dec 21, 2009 11:06 PM PST reply actions

Jaynes knows nothing more than an attentive fan

and he has loathed mcmillan going back to the 2007/2008 season (maybe longer i can’t recall). he will use any opportunity he has to pile on the guy when things aren’t going well.

i would think that last year’s “Houston is the best possible playoff match up for the Blazers” piece would have proven to everyone just how little he understands about this team or the nba in general but apparently some people still pay attention to this guy.

go figure.

i do not.

by colinmarsh on Dec 22, 2009 7:52 AM PST reply actions

so are you saying

that you love the Blazers Offense as is? Just because you might not like Jaynes doesn’t mean he isn’t right.

Ben II Blazersedge.com || New to Blazers' Edge?

by usmcr3049 on Dec 22, 2009 8:14 AM PST up reply actions

"Houston is the best possible playoff match up for the Blazers"

Yeah, I called him out on that last spring and he deleted my response on his blog. That’s when I knew he was too thin-skinned and decided to “part ways” re: posting below his articles

But maybe he really “knew better” re: Adelman and the Rockets and his intent was to “set Nate up” for disappointment in the fan’s eyes?

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

by two4larue on Dec 22, 2009 8:53 AM PST up reply actions