Early plea for sanity after losses--Home stretch and playoffs
I know Portland hasn't made the playoffs yet, but it's looking more and more likely that there is no way that Phoenix and Dallas can catch them. So we're probably going to make the playoffs and be in at least the seventh slot.
I still don't see us as a championship team yet and I see us losing several games in the future. So, when we lose these games I'd really rather see constructive discussions than the usual criticisms of Nate, calls for a new point-guard and a new small forward.
We don't need a new coach. We don't need to make changes to our small forwards and our point guards are not losing games for us.
1. Nate is one of the reasons Portland is doing so well. He has been a fine coach and done some spectacular stuff with a very talented young team. After losses it may be easy to look back at a game and see what he did wrong, but he does so many thing's right it's amazing. He's got two 29 year old players having career seasons after nobody projected much for them. He's got 3 rookies making significant contributions to a play-off bound team. Instead of bombing 2 on 2 web-forums we should be launching a Coach of the Year campaign for Nate.
2. Small-forward is not an issue right now. Our projected starter has been out all season. Since the all-star break Travis has started a campaign to be included in 6th man of the year discussions and Batum has played better than all expectations and will definitely develop into a solid, if not allstar, NBA starter in the next few years.
3. Point guards are not losing the games for us. While point guard may be our weakest position, when Portland loses it normally can't be placed solely on the point-guards. When we've lost, it seems to come from inconsitent play from LMA or Roy coupled with no bench scoring from Travis and Rudy. It's normally on low-rebounding games and games when we settle for a lot of jump-shots. None of this is the point-guards fault. Sure we don't have the best defensive point guards in the league, but they aren't what's killing us. If that were the case we would have lost all our games vs. Utah, New Orleans(although we got one fluke win w/CP3 out), San Antonio, Phoenix and New Jersey. The quality of the opponent's point guard's offense has not been the determining factors in our losses.
This is a pre-emptive post. After the next loss when I see the normal handwringing I can link to post directly and save some breath. I'm not saying there aren't areas to improve, but let's focus on the important stuff.
49 comments
|
11 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Yeah,
I don’t like his defeatist attitude. If he were a real fan he would accept the inevitable undefeated run to the championship where the Blazers beat the Cavs 150-0, 145-0, 132-0 and 175-1 where that last point is a pity point.
I predicted 82
I guess we’ll have to include the playoffs, and maybe some pre-season.
There's nothing wrong with talking about areas the team needs to work on
And keep in mind, people are going to disagree with you. That doesn’t mean that either side is right or wrong.
Unfortunately, this usually only comes up after losses (partially because people shout down anything negative after Portland wins a game).
Also, fans overreact. It’s ok. “Fan” is short for “Fanatic”. Overreactions happen. This is a fan’s site. There will be overreaction.
You may be frustrated. But the best thing to do might be to ignore fanposts that don’t share your viewpoint, instead of telling people not to post them because it’s a different viewpoint.
(The nice part of fanatics? All the excited posts coming when we clinch a playoff spot. You take the good with the bad when it comes to reading fan’s posts.)
by Timmay! on Mar 28, 2009 9:56 AM PDT reply actions 1 recs
I already have mine ready to go ;-)
I know less than half of you half as well as I should like, and I like less than half of you half as well as you deserve.
by haildablazer on Mar 28, 2009 3:42 PM PDT up reply actions
I'm on your side
No reason to shop for coaches when we just won 50+. That point is solid.
All indications are Martell is fresh and ready to run — with the only concern being when is the best time to rejoin the team. Our only problem at the 3 is too much depth.
At point we don’t have a solid starter, yet. But that could be addressed in any number of ways with our current roster. If we do make a move I know it’ll be a good one and I won’t complain.
The ONLY piece I’d strongly like to add is a solid, tough back-up power forward.
why?
I mean why the power forward? Trav is the 3/4, Chann behind that….hell you could go twn towers with greg and joel…Chann’s young yet, getting stronger, and can offer some finnesse too…He’s only hanging around the 3 point line cause he’s been told to…
Nate isn’t gonna give any floor time to anyone else so why even bother filling the spot…?He won’t pull LMA off the floor even with potential brain damage, so it only leaves 5 min a game w/o him out there…they should save the money…could always pick a someone out of the prison league for a ten day-er during the season if a need arises…
"Sergio and I obtained chalupas to understand their power. Then Sergio showed that each one has 427 calories and 27 grams of fat. Leaping upwards, we reviled the accursed chalupa and its pressure. – Rudy Fernandez
That one sounded a bit cranky
lol
"You're welcome friend
I love you."
- Tom "Dragline" inHawaii
by 92wastheyear on Mar 28, 2009 10:41 AM PDT up reply actions
yeah...on many levels
LMA is SO impt that he gotta burn the whole time on the floor…can’t be deciding when to turn it on & off..there is a fatigue point where you #2 becomes greater than your #1 even if only for 3 possesions and a TV timeout.
And the post head injury play will never be ok with me
"Sergio and I obtained chalupas to understand their power. Then Sergio showed that each one has 427 calories and 27 grams of fat. Leaping upwards, we reviled the accursed chalupa and its pressure. – Rudy Fernandez
lol
there is a fatigue point where you #2 becomes greater than your #1 even if only for 3
huh?
I know less than half of you half as well as I should like, and I like less than half of you half as well as you deserve.
by haildablazer on Mar 28, 2009 3:45 PM PDT up reply actions
what that means that
although LMA #1) can outperform Channing (#2), at some point in the game (say having played 30 of the past 33 minutes) LMA’s wooden legs vs Channings fresh legs means that a fresh channing (#2) will be able to outplay a gassed LMA (#1) until LMA has had a minute to catch his breath….right now we get by with this by allowing LMA to go invisible in bursts….rather than do that there might be a rebound or two to be found in some fresh legs
"Sergio and I obtained chalupas to understand their power. Then Sergio showed that each one has 427 calories and 27 grams of fat. Leaping upwards, we reviled the accursed chalupa and its pressure. – Rudy Fernandez
Channing stays outside because Nate told him to do that?
Uhhh…
by MiledAnimal on Mar 28, 2009 10:53 AM PDT up reply actions
yeah...heard it myself on a pre game interview...Nate said how
he avily he was counting ion Channings perimeter play…
Agreed he could be more aggressive and move in for boards….but he was being looked on to be a jump shooter….it honestly made me diffuse alot of frustration right there.
"Sergio and I obtained chalupas to understand their power. Then Sergio showed that each one has 427 calories and 27 grams of fat. Leaping upwards, we reviled the accursed chalupa and its pressure. – Rudy Fernandez
Nate tried last year to get Channing to go inside. It didn't work.
And it was frustrating everyone. I like that Nate can praise Channing for his perimeter play, even if he wishes he would take his game inside more often. But him praising Channing’s outside game doesn’t mean he doesn’t want him to go inside.
by MiledAnimal on Mar 28, 2009 12:31 PM PDT up reply actions
granted...but if the goal had been to move him inside...he would have mentioned it in the pregame
chan has shown so toughness as of late…he has certainly bulked his upper body some…He’s very determined to contribute so I expect I might be a BIT right when he’s been encouraged some to exploit hi jumper….a few times recently he and Sergio were taking turns..and it was rough…
I really had a hard time with his play early in the year (pre-benching) but there has been improvement all around…
I think Quick may be wrong and Channing stays
"Sergio and I obtained chalupas to understand their power. Then Sergio showed that each one has 427 calories and 27 grams of fat. Leaping upwards, we reviled the accursed chalupa and its pressure. – Rudy Fernandez
I hear this "Blazer's should get a power forward" stuff all the time, and I'm embarrassed.
We have a power forward who is so in-shape that he annually wins all conditioning drills, and is able to go longer and harder in the games than any of our other starters. Our best bench player, Travis Outlaw, also plays power forward as well as small forward, and he appears more effective when matched up with the other team’s power forward, since they don’t have a chance to guard him.
Our 2nd best player on the bench, Rudy, splits time between the 2 and 3. If we got another power forward who had to play, then those minutes on the court cut into Travis and Rudy’s minutes. That means that the player we acquire better be significantly better than Travis and Rudy, because I’m sure we have to give up something to get him, and we don’t want to do that if we’re just maintaining the status-quo minutes wise.
If you ever hear of someone punching out a girl scout and stealing her Samoas, it was me
- Mortimer
by Clevelander among roses on Mar 28, 2009 11:02 AM PDT up reply actions
As Timmay said
There’s nothing wrong with talking about areas where our team can improve.
Please let me be clear, I’ve been on the LMA bandwagon for a long time. He is as important to this team as anyone including Roy. The way he stepped up his points and boards starting in January is awesome but I knew it was just a matter of time. He has the stuff.
What I said they should get was a backup power forward. If you want to split Travis and Rudy fine. There’s more than one way to skin a cat. I’m just saying that as I see it, we need another bruiser on the squad. Joel is clearly one, and GO has shown the spirit, but the Twin Towers option doesn’t cut it for me generally because I want them spelling each other. It would just be nice to have a backup 2 who can throw down.
I gotta agree with the don't need a back up PF
I used to think that was extremely important. We’re “going to war” with this squad. The playoffs will ultimately proove what moves need to be made. Looking forward to next year though. Both Joel and Greg will most likely deserve more than 25 mpg each. That can overlay into the twin towers (which has proven effective) while spelling LMA during a time when you need some banging. I’d prefer the twin towers over any other combo of Greg, Pryz and a “back up PF”.
by keepfryealive on Mar 28, 2009 12:43 PM PDT up reply actions
There is nothing wrong with talking about areas where our team can improve
I just question whether power forward really is a spot we should be worried about. We’re fine at that position, especially because we have two true centers, both deserving of playing time, and an above-average starting power forward who’s moving toward all-star status, so all of the minutes given to this new power forward some seem to covet are going to come from our best bench players, Travis and Rudy. Not to mention the fact that we still have Joel Freeland coming over sometime, so that alleviates the need for a developmental forward.
In my opinion, all talk about upgrading the team has to start and finish at the point guard spot. I won’t talk specifics, since Dave put a moratorium on the discussion, but every other position we are stacked with talent to the point where our bench players could start on a third of the other NBA teams – including power forward, with Travis Outlaw (and this is not just me spouting – check Hollinger’s PER numbers, and see how many teams don’t have one player better than our bench guy. Only spot where this doesn’t occur is point guard, at least if you consider Travis our backup 4)
If you ever hear of someone punching out a girl scout and stealing her Samoas, it was me
- Mortimer
by Clevelander among roses on Mar 28, 2009 6:17 PM PDT up reply actions
Instead of bombing 2 on 2 web-forums we should be launching a Coach of the Year campaign for Nate.
That one right there got you my rec. However; I agree that discussing the areas of improvement is completely valid. It’s always going to come after a loss. Losing in the playoffs will hurt, but it will be a lesson. Let’s just hope the losses heading up to the post season are few and far between.
a front article on cnn/si features george karl and denver
and at one point karl elaborates some on all the different coaching decisions one can get wrong, both in-game strategy and just managing the different personalities…. and he estimates that he only makes the correct decision 70% of the time. he repeats this, noting that he’s probably wrong 30% of the time.
we should keep this kind of thing in mind when evaluating nate and the job he does with this incredibly young team.
ignacio
on the PGs not losing games for us
you cannot look at any one players play in isolation.. but that being said.. LMA and roy would be more consistent if they could rely on the PG
"Slum dunk? You just go to the rim, and crush.. crush the ball in the rim."
- Nic Batum
I agree with the first two.
3. Point guards are not losing the games for us. While point guard may be our weakest position, when Portland loses it normally can’t be placed solely on the point-guards. When we’ve lost, it seems to come from inconsitent play from LMA or Roy coupled with no bench scoring from Travis and Rudy. It’s normally on low-rebounding games and games when we settle for a lot of jump-shots. None of this is the point-guards fault. Sure we don’t have the best defensive point guards in the league, but they aren’t what’s killing us. If that were the case we would have lost all our games vs. Utah, New Orleans(although we got one fluke win w/CP3 out), San Antonio, Phoenix and New Jersey. The quality of the opponent’s point guard’s offense has not been the determining factors in our losses.
We get dominated by any remotely quick PG in the NBA. Maybe if Blake played against Steve Nash or Jose Calderon every night we could win a championship with Blake. But we won’t. Things it much harder in the playoffs. Here is a list of NBA PG’s who can easily dominate Blake:
Tony Parker
Chris Paul
Devin Harris
Rajon Rondo
Chauncey Billups
Nate Robinson(Blake get posted up by Andre Miller all night too.)
Jason Terry(Doesn’t play defense)
Andre Miller
Derrick Rose
Russell Westbrook
Mike Conley
Raymond Felton
TJ Ford
Rodney Stuckey
DJ Augustin
Aaron Brooks
Steve Blake is like Mo Williams or Mike Bibby… Hits the open 3’s… Except he can’t defend.
We get almost no scoring from our PG’s past Blake.
Its an issue.
those guys score on everybody in the league
Hear comes Rodriguez, no look to FerNANDEZ - WHAT A PLAY!!?!! HOW did they Pull That Off - FERNANDEZ THE STEAL - GOOD IF IT GOES -AAAAAAAAAAAAAAOOOOOOOOOHHHHHHHH!!!!!!1111!!!!!!!!! - Kevin Harlan
Not true
The top 5 particularly are hard to score on.
You pulled the trigger Kevin. Now you & Mr. Allen must do everything possible to help him succeed. A mentor like Ewing or Olajuwon would be a good start. A franchise PG ? Mike Conley? Lets get it done !
Positive Vibes For Oden
And if you take Tony Parker on that list?
You only have 2 titles from that group. That fact, In and of itself that indicates that it may not be that crucial to have one these guys to win a title.
"You're welcome friend
I love you."
- Tom "Dragline" inHawaii
by 92wastheyear on Mar 28, 2009 5:54 PM PDT up reply actions
Nope
Just crucial to be able to defend them
You pulled the trigger Kevin. Now you & Mr. Allen must do everything possible to help him succeed. A mentor like Ewing or Olajuwon would be a good start. A franchise PG ? Mike Conley? Lets get it done !
Positive Vibes For Oden
The only thing we need to improve on is experience.
Patience is the only thing we should be discussing. This team, at their young age, is out performing almost every team in the history of the NBA who had the same effective playing age. The Blazers have slaughtered the East, taken care of home court, and are amongst the NBA best in rebounding, fast break points, and efficiency per possession.
Oden bashing sucks too. I love to just watch Oden when he is on the court. There is an Oden factor that helps the team get rebounds. For every one rebound that he gets the team gets another 3. Watch him box out. He takes it seriously and often boxes out 2 at one time. In the Phoenix game I saw him box out 3 guys at one time and yet someone else on the team got the rebound.
FIRE NATE!!!
It would be nice if people appreciated what they had, wouldn’t it?
They won’t. I haven’t heard a lot of “fire nate” as of late (see what i did there?) but some people will be disappointed. Heck, there were people who wanted to do trades for kidd and nash and trade away some of that young talent we have. At the end of this season, we can see why that would have been a DUMB idea. Some people seem unable to see long term and can only see the pie that just hit their face.
My point? You can’t stop people from doing what they will do and being what they will be. Just know that I’ve done some polls and others have done polls and it’s always shown they’re a loud minority instead of the actual majority. We’re talking some 10% or less.
Just smile, shake your head and nod and be grateful that KP is running the team and not that minority.
The goal is not to be better, the goal is to be the best.
by ratbastird on Mar 28, 2009 6:29 PM PDT reply actions 1 recs
You're right
the worst post I’ve seen about Nate in the past three months has basically been “We got blown out yet again by a good WC team on the road. If Nate doesn’t start to prove he can win these games, we’ll have to look at someone else as a coach eventually”, and yet this is interpreted as “OMG I HATE NATE SO MUCH, FIRE HIM NOW!!!!”, and people jump all over the poster for daring to suggest that Nate might not be Phil Jackson.
I like Nate as a coach, he’s done great things here, and he’s earned himself a ton of leeway, but do we really have to take the stance that it’s completely taboo to criticize him at all? For example, P&R defense has been horrible all year with essentially no adjustments made, but if anyone ever suggests Nate isn’t doing a good job with it, that person gets attacked because of pick one: a) he was the defensive coach of team USA, b) Our team is young, c) the players are just messing up Nate’s perfect scheme. I mean, really, we’re supposed to believe that there’s nothing Nate could be doing differently to improve this?
I mean, Brandon is allowed more criticism than Nate is around here. I love the guy and hope he stays as a coach, and his positives severely outweigh his negatives, but he’s by no means perfect, and certainly shouldn’t be immune to criticism. And not every person who criticizes a move he makes wants to see him fired.
Besides, attacking the real “Fire Nate” crowd now is like attacking the “Bayless should be starting” crowd. Maybe they’re not dead, but they’re in deep enough hiding that they don’t post because no one takes them seriously at all right now.
P&R defense has been horrible all year with essentially no adjustments made
What makes you think no adjustments have been made? I don’t believe this is the case, and ample discussion—including comments from Nate and trainer David Thorpe on ESPN chat—has come to a pretty sound conclusion that the defense itself is fine but the players’ execution is lacking. Blake simply can’t fight through screens and doesn’t have the lateral quickness to stop the penetrators of the league, Brandon regularly saves himself for the offensive end, Sergio fights through picks but still gets knocked off course too often, etc.
Watching NBA games for two and a half decades, I’ve come to the belief that the pick and roll works exactly by taking advantage of inexperienced or physically disadvantaged defenders. Since Blake’s at his physical peak, the only way the Portland P&R defense will improve is through experience. Watch games—other teams play it just like we do…they just do it better.
by Marvin100 on Mar 28, 2009 9:38 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
um, some do, but that's hardly the only way to play it
Watch the Celtics or Spurs for a while. It’s almost never a straight switch, but almost always a strong hedge or show by the screener’s man allowing the picked guard to recover. As has been repeated ad nauseum here, we do this almost never.
There’s obviously not one “right” way to play P&R defense, or else everyone would play it like that. The Suns with Shaq are going to play it differently than the Hawks, because the Hawks have much more mobile bigs who can D up guards better, so it would benefit those teams to more actively switch on screens. This is similar to the situation that team USA had over the summer, when they’d have Lebron or Melo playing a decent number of minutes at the 4 and 5, so there was no disadvantage from straight switching.
My point is, that there are multiple ways to defend the P&R, and that plenty of teams with slight guards are able to be elite defensive units. What we’ve been doing has been exploited enough that maybe it’s time to start tweaking it some so it doesn’t leave Greg and Pryz out to dry a little more on the perimeter when it’s clear that they’re at their best defending the paint. Bad teams don’t seem to be able to take advantage of this, but consistently when we play well coached teams with smart PGs (Mavs, NO as prime examples), they’re able to exploit it.
Regardless, this is just proving my point. I mention one thing that we’re not doing well, which the coach should carry at least some responsibility for, and the response is that it’s not Nate’s fault at all, but instead it’s entirely on the players and our youth. Just because team USA can do it, doesn’t mean the Blazers can.
Like I said, I think Nate’s a great coach, I just don’t get why we seem to be under the impression that nothing that goes wrong has anything to do with him. I think Brandon and LaMarcus are great players, also, but I also think they make mistakes. Doesn’t mean I want them traded, but I’d still like to see Brandon work on D a little more, and LA keep taking it strong inside. I just feel the same way about Nate.
Yah
but you know Roy and Aldridge will improve on the those things. So will Nate. Everyone in every facet of life has issues to work on. But with our players as with Nate, the good outweighs the bad.
And I agree that you should be able to criticize anyone in the organization including Nate for specific things (such as P&R defense). Just be sure it’s done in the context of the bigger picture like your would with Roy or LMA. Because Nate is the coach of this team now and in the future.
Then I rose, wiping the blunts ash from my clothes
Then froze only to blow the herb smoke through my nose
I'm not anti-criticism, just this specific criticism. It's tired and, imo, wrongheaded.
Look, Nate’s on the record as saying that our D strategy on P&R isn’t to switch indiscriminately. Those hedges and shows you’re talking about? Those are part of our plan, too—but our guys aren’t good at doing them yet.
Seriously, imagining that Nate and the coaches have an inflexible P&R defense strategy is about as armchair quarterbacky as the blogeramuses who claim they know how to fix the Federal Reserve. It’s unfounded and smacks of arrogance.
To be clear, I totally agree that Nate (or any of the coaches) is as open for criticism as any of the players and that you have the right to whatever you believe. In fact, your arguments are thoughtful and articulate. They’re just wrong :)
As for:
plenty of teams with slight guards are able to be elite defensive units
Which ones? Any with as little experience as our guys? And being “slight” isn’t the sole source of the problem. Guards have to have the strength to break through and the quickness to make up lost ground. Bigs have to make their reads and have the footspeed to jump out and then get back when the play moves on.
The switch is just the escape valve. Our guys do it a more than we’d like because they aren’t very good at doing what they’re supposed to be doing. Some of that’s physical, but some of it can be ameliorated with the increased skill that comes from experience and practice.
Rip Hamilton, Tony Parker
Calderon (Raps were top 10 in PPG and above average in defensive efficiency last year), the Heat were a top 10 unit in defensive efficiency the in 06/07 with Jason Williams starting.
Also, to re-hash an old argument, I don’t buy that Kirk Hinrich is somehow a tank compared to Blake.
But really, my point is that I understand the philosophy is “not to switch”, but no matter how often he says that, when the reality is that we’re switching on 80% of the picks, then what does it matter what the supposed philosophy is? We hear all the time about how Travis struggled early in his career because no coach took the time to work with him in a way that he could understand, and we blame the coaches there, but clearly something about Nate’s philosophy isn’t getting through, or else we’d be seeing a situation where switching only does occur in emergencies. Part of that is on the players for not getting it, but part also has to be on Nate for not finding a way to get it through to them.
Now, I’m not saying I’m totally anti-switching, there’s definitely a time and place for it, but I simply don’t buy that 80% of picks are emergencies that require a switch. Have there been some adjustments, almost definitely, but this has been an obvious problem from basically day one of the season, and continues to be a glaring problem. 60 games later.
I’m not super stressed out over it, since I think given Webster, plus Oden a full offseason to recover and work on some of these things could be enough, but that still doesn’t make it something I’m super confident about.
Also, clearly the Fed should just be abolished. :)
Huh?
Hamilton is very long and super experienced. Tony Parker is above-average in size. They’re both waaay above-average in quickness. The Heat were a great D team despite White Carob. Hinrich isn’t “a tank,” but he’s very quick—especially laterally—something Steve Blake, for all his many virtues, is decidedly not. And Toronto…well, I don’t really know why they were so good on D, but having a super-mobile big like Bosh and a defensive specialist at SF (Moon) probably had something to do with it. Calderon is also extremely quick and shocked the league enough with his skills to render TJ Ford expendable almost immediately.
Your point about the philosophy and the coaching failure is pure speculation. I’m not ruling it out as a possibility, but if it is a fact then it’s not just on Nate—it’s systemic. And if there’s some systemic resistance to teaching P&R defense the right way then not a single one of our coaches belongs in the NBA. Since the only people who seem to think so are armchair coaches on the Intertubez, I’m inclined to remain unconvinced.
And as for:
Also, clearly the Fed should just be abolished.
Thanks. It helps me understand your previously-baffling perspective on things ;)
Well, my point
is that we’re given this line that we always have to switch because our PGs are too weak to be able to fight through picks, and yet TP is the same size as Blake, and Rip is even skinnier (I’d hardly call him super long since I have never seen and cannot find anything that refers to his wingspan as being anything special), and those teams manage to not only be elite defensive teams, but those guys also manage to fight through picks. And your point about Miami is exactly what I was trying to say. Having poor perimeter defenders at PG doesn’t mean our team defense should necessarily be bad, but it’s awful.
Also, Rip is super experienced now, but was three years younger than Blake when they won their title as the best defensive team in the league, so the experienced excuse is somewhat bogus.
And as far as the Toronto situation, let’s look back at this: because they have a rookie defensive specialist at SF and a super mobile PF, they’re able to cover for calderon’s defensive shortcomings? Sound like any team we follow? Maybe Batum and Aldridge would have something to say about that? And Pryz is certainly a better defender than Rasho/Bargs.
Right on two of them
I’ve been wondering all year why nate hasn’t been getting coach of the year cred, the blazers are playing out of their minds considering how young they are, and the fact that a lot of them havn’t played together for too long. Nate is the coach for us with out a doubt.
At small forward we get better everyday, outlaw is a beast off the bench, batum’s potential is ridiculous and martell is gonna come back with a vengence next year
but at point guard steve blake just isn’t gonna do it, since we have the most awesome team on the planet people talk about us winning rings some day, and i think we will, but in order to have a championship team you need championship players, and steve blake is not a championship starting point guard. He’d be a great back up, but not a starter. Rondo is a championship player, parker, paul, mo williams. I’m not saying we need a star at point, but we need someone at least as good a derek fisher, blake just won’t cut it long term
It's called
Blazermania
not Blazersanity
"It all depends on where his growth will come and we think his growth will come within us" -- Kevin Pritchard on Jerryd Bayless
by Jumbo on Mar 28, 2009 11:08 PM PDT reply actions 1 recs
+1
The Kings have the best bench I’ve seen. There are easily 14 guys on this team good enough for every bench in the league. Now if we could only get some starters, I’d totally jizz in my pants.
Kings fan
Blake's performance
has been championship rotation/starter quality THIS year. His A/T ratio is excellent, he complements Roy with his 3pt shooting and he is a true veteran who has played in the league for over 5 years. People are wrong to think that Derek Fisher is an upgrade over Steve Blake. Derek Fisher of the Kbe/Shaq Lkers = Steve Blake now. Championship pg’s are not expected to be lockdown defenders, they are expected to play competent defense and overshadow their deficiences with their strengths.
And lest we forget, Blake has not won an NBA championship, but he did lead his college team to a championship. Steve Blake knows how to win.
I hear what you're saying
I do.
But when Nate does something I disagree with I’m going to talk about it. Right now he’s doing an excellent job and I give him kudos. When and if he drops the ball I’m calling him out.
I like our small forwards and swing players. Nick, Rudy, Travis – all good, all playing well. I’m exited to bring back Webster. More so next year than now but if he gets healthy I suspect he’ll be in uniform and active. You’re kind of preaching to the choir here. I’ve been supporting these guys from day one and my faith has proven out over the naysayers and nervous nellys.
I like our point guards and have defended them all year. None of them are great defenders but they hustle and I don’t see them getting burned as bad as most of the rest of BE seems too. I attribute it to mass hysteraria.
I get annoyed when someone complains like you are about people reacting when it’s within a clearly labeled vent thread. VENT thread. A place to vent.
You don’t see us winning do ya. Well that’s common logic. We’re currently the 5 seed. We’ve not been in the playoffs in five years and most of this team has never been. We have four rookies and 3 getting major time. History and Common logic would seem to indicate winning it all or getting close is less likely than doing so. But that doesn’t mean we won’t or can’t. I for one thing we have a great chance of doing anything. I believe we can do it. I also know we can get knocked out in round one by the other seven great teams in the west but my money is on the Black, Red and White.
I’ve read your post, I hear what you’re saying. I do. But I won’t change one iota of what I express on this sight because of it.
by Blazersaurus on Mar 29, 2009 12:41 AM PDT reply actions 1 recs
Rec'd
Free speech rules!
If you ever hear of someone punching out a girl scout and stealing her Samoas, it was me
- Mortimer
by Clevelander among roses on Mar 29, 2009 12:58 AM PDT up reply actions
Not if I don't agree with it
Then it’s lame.
by tominhawaii on Mar 29, 2009 2:48 AM PDT up reply actions 1 recs

by 



















