Andre Miller May Not Be Your New Starting PG
by jscot on Jul 25, 2009 4:35 AM PDT
212 comments
(With apologies to thrilliam, but this is just too long to put as a comment in your excellent thread, and it is based on a different type of analysis. But you saved me some work!)
The thread by thrilliam doesn't go into great detail, but it makes an adequate case for Andre Miller being a better player than Steve Blake. I love Steve, he is one of my favorite players on the team, but I'm not foolish enough to think he is better than Andre. The purpose of this post is not to discuss which is a better player, but to analyze the individual strengths of the players and assess what is the best fit.
KP2 (Kevin Pelton) said Andre Miller is a good player, but not a good fit for the Blazers. Initially, I agreed with that assessment, but I slept on it, and think differently now -- I am just arrogant enough to be willing to publicly disagree with even Kevin Pelton. If KP and Nate think a guy is a good fit, and I don't think so, it might be time to reassess my thinking. Maybe they are thinking about fitting him into the rotation in ways differently from what I anticipated.
More after the jump....
Some Assumptions (for discussion's sake)
Some of the following assumptions may not be true, but they are likely enough to be true that it is worth using them as the context of the discussion. If you disagree with these assumptions, you may well disagree with some of the conclusions. That's fine. I'm operating, for these purposes, on what I consider to be the most likely scenario for the rest of the rotation, and then trying to figure out where Miller best fits. I don't really want to debate these assumptions, I want to discuss the fit of these two PGs (Blake and Miller) with our other players. That said, here are my assumptions:
- KP is done. We will sign Pendergraph and Cunningham, and go into the season with our existing lineup. (I think KP may try to upgrade backup PF, but no guarantees he has the flexibility to do this without giving up more than he wants for a limited role player.)
- Martell will return to health and form enough to be either our starter or backup at SF. Nic will progress enough in his game to be either our starter or backup at SF. We may use a situational 3 guard lineup with Rudy, Roy, and PG. Travis will get limited SF minutes, if any.
- Greg will be our starting center.
- Travis will be our backup PF. Pendergraph will be used situationally if Travis is being abused by stronger PFs, and will be injury cover at the 4-5. Cunningham will not be in the 12 active players unless someone is injured.
- Bayless is not at this point ready to surpass Blake (or we wouldn't have picked up Miller), so our main two PGs are Steve and Andre. Bayless will shoot 30,000 3 pointers a day, watch 14 hours of film a day, play in blowouts, and if his D improves, get spot minutes when we need to slow down an opposing PG.
- Miller is better than Blake and will probably play more. The question is not who is better and who will play more, but who will be on the court more with which players?
Our non-PG main rotation (Nic and Martell may be reversed, doesn't matter much for this discussion):
| Starters | Reserves | |
| SG | Brandon | Rudy |
| SF | Nic/Martell | Martell/Nic |
| PF | LMA | Travis |
| C | Greg | Joel |
The question, then, is what is the optimal use of our two PGs, Miller and Blake, with these two lineups? It is not necessarily a question of which is better, but of maximizing the strengths of each. To discuss that intelligently, we need to look at relative strengths.
Not "Which is Better" but "Which is Better at What?"
To analyze the best fit, you need to look at individual strengths.
A) Defense! Defense!Which of these guys is the better defender? I'm going to call this even. Some have suggested that Andre is a little better because he is stronger. That may be, but within a team defense, Blake is already used to playing with our guys, and that probably cancels out any marginal advantage Andre has.
B) Shooting from DowntownBlake is very good from the three point line. Andre is rubbish. Spare me the suggestions that Brandon will get Andre more open looks so he'll get better. If he hasn't been able to put together a good season at this by the time he is 33, he isn't magically going to become high quality. He doesn't waste possessions by taking shots he is going to miss, but he just isn't a deep threat, while Blake is a very good one.
C) Running the FastbreakAndre is good at running the fastbreak, and can take it to the hole. Steve is good at running the fastbreak, and pulling it out and setting it up. Steve did on occasion start to hit LMA on the break, and he was decent on the break for Denver. Still a significant edge to Miller here.
D) Taking it to the Hole and Scoring or PassingMiller is very effective at this. Blake can take it to the hole and dish to the open man, but there isn't always an open man, because the defense doesn't respect his scoring threat when going to the hole and doesn't collapse.
E) Creating His Own ShotAndre is effective at this, and drawing fouls. Steve created his own shot to win a game at Toronto. Once. I'm sure that some other time somewhere he created and made his own shot in a key situation. Perhaps in college some time. Or high school. (I used to create my own shot in my driveway playing against Walt Frazier. Clyde could never stop me -- in my driveway. I never talked about it because I didn't want to humiliate the guy, getting scored on by a junior high kid all the time.)
F) Running the Pick and RollMiller is much more effective at this.
G) Posting up Opposing PGs.Miller is good at this. If I were to suggest that Blake would be good at this, you would first spit coffee on your monitor. Then, you would become angry at me for insulting your intelligence. Then, you would probably begin to feel compassionate towards me, and call the men in the white coats to come and take me away. Therefore, I will not make that suggestion.
H) Flexibility/Ability to Adjust His GameI've got to give Steve a significant edge here. He has accommodated his game to the Blazers starters. Andre is 33 years old, and set in his ways. If his game doesn't fit now, it isn't likely to change much.
I) Alley-Oop PassingAndre is one of the best. Steve does this occasionally.
J) Familiarity with the Rest of the TeamAgain, a big edge to Steve here. He's been playing with Brandon, Travis, LMA, and Joel for two years, a year with Nic, Martell, and Greg. He knows where they like the ball, he knows where they will be. The more a team plays together, the more they can utilize each other's strengths, and cover up for weaknesses. We began to see improved team defense late in the year last year, and this was probably partly because of increasing teamwork due to greater familiarity. By the time Andre has as much familiarity with this team as Steve has now, he'll be retired. On-court chemistry matters.
Matching Up Strengths with Lineups
Let's look at that probable non-PG rotation again:
| Starters | Reserves | |
| SG | Brandon | Rudy |
| SF | Nic/Martell | Martell/Nic |
| PF | LMA | Travis |
| C | Greg | Joel |
Since this is effectively a push, I don't think it matters much which one plays with which lineup.
B) Shooting from DowntownIf Martell starts, we have one pure 3 point shooter in the starting lineup. If not, we have two guys (Brandon and Nic) who are reasonable threats. We do not want teams to be able to collapse on Greg (and LMA, when we run a double low post). On the other hand, the reserves have a lot of distance shooting. In this respect, Steve is a much better fit with the starters than Andre.
C) Running the FastbreakOur starters have a big man to clean the boards and start the break. So do our reserves. All of our forwards can be very good on the break -- but a fastbreaking unit will not maximize Roy's talents the way it will Rudy's. Would it be nice to see Brandon in a fastbreaking unit? Yes, I would like to see that -- but it might not actually improve his game that much. Put Rudy in a fastbreaking unit, and he becames significantly more effective. Andre's ability to run the fastbreak is a much better fit with Rudy than Steve's, and Steve's relative weakness is not a significant hindrance to Brandon. Considering only Roy/Rudy, you would want to see Steve spending more of his court time alongside Roy and Andre spending more of his alongside Rudy.
Another factor is Joel. Love the big guy, but he isn't an offensive threat. In general, we are playing four on five offensively in the half court when Joel is in the game. But Joel can be a great fastbreak starter with his rebounding and blocked shots. And if Joel starts the fastbreak and you have an effective fastbreaking PG, then you reduce the number of four on five half court possessions. Joel starting the break, Andre pushing it, Rudy and Martell/Nic and Travis on the wings/filling the lanes? That could be a pretty effective fastbreak unit.
On the other hand, LMA can be extremely effective on the break, so if Andre is pushing the break, he could make LMA more effective. And if Greg regains his speed, and builds his stamina, he will beat his man downcourt on the break 5-6 times a game (or more), if he plays on a fastbreaking unit. So Andre's fastbreak ability can help increase the effectiveness of two of our main guys on the starting unit.
All things considered, though, I would suggest that there is a lot of appeal in having Andre get a significant amount of his playing time running the break with our second unit.
D) Taking it to the Hole and Scoring or PassingMiller's strength here will be useful on either unit. There is a danger, though, of clogging the middle, because this is Brandon's greatest strength, and Greg will be in the low post, and LMA will make it a double low post at times. I think that our second unit full of shooters will actually maximize Andre's strength here -- the middle will be less clogged on the second unit. On the other hand, Andre will provide Greg a few more easy looks, and that could be important. He will also draw fouls and get Greg in position to draw fouls, and I like the thought of getting the opponents in foul trouble before Greg gets in foul trouble.
I can see this strength of Andre's as being beneficial on both units, but perhaps it will be more enhanced with the reserves. Another reason for him to see some PT with the second unit.
E) Creating His Own ShotAndre's skill here is beneficial with both units. But we really only have one creator/facilitator (Brandon) at this point, though Rudy might become one. It would be good to have one on the court at all times, which again calls for Andre to see significant time with the second unit. This skill may have more impact on who finishes games than who starts them.
F) Running the Pick and RollMiller's effectiveness at this could play well with Joel's skill at setting picks, but I really, really want to see Greg running the pick and roll with someone who is good at it. LMA, too. And I want Jerryd to be sitting on the bench watching that and seeing it done right over and over again, until he sees superb pick and rolls with Greg and LMA when he closes his eyes at night. If you have Greg Oden and you pick up Andre Miller, you want them to run the pick and roll together. This says Andre has to see some time with the first unit.
G) Posting up Opposing PGs.This is a nice skill for your PG to have, but it really is just a bonus. And in the starting unit, Greg Oden is going to be in the low post. You say we can have two low posts at times? You are right. Who do you want that second low post to be, Andre Miller or LaMarcus Aldridge? I will give you 10 tries to answer that question, and if any of your answers have the initials A.M., you fail the test. If you want to see LMA in the high post, it is not to make room for Miller down low, it is to make it harder for teams to effectively double-team Greg.
What about on the second unit? Well, actually this could be useful. With Travis out in the corner for the 3, Joel on the other low block, and Rudy and Martell spotting up or cutting, I could see Andre's ability to post up other PGs as being quite valuable on this unit.
H) Flexibility/Ability to Adjust His GameSteve's edge here has made him more effective with our starters than his talent might dictate. Andre would find his effectiveness limited in some ways with the starters if he could not make some adjustments, while those adjustments will be less with the reserves. Why adjust his game significantly? Won't it be better just to let him get significant time with the guys whose skill-set fits better with his?
I) Alley-Oop PassingHmm. Who is going to be a better target for Andre's alley-oops, Roy or Rudy? I want him to get some significant time with Rudy, don't you? Nic/Martell? I'm not sure that one matters much, both could be effective on the end of an oop (assuming Martell is healthy). Travis/LMA? I love LMA on the break, but whose game will be most enhanced by the occasional alley-oop pass for a dunk? That threat can turn LMA from good to very good, but it is the kind of thing that can set Travis alight -- and we all know what can happen when Travis gets on a roll. Which PG is more likely to bring out the good Travis rather than the bad Travis?
With Andre's skill at the alley-oop, I hope he sees some real time with the reserves.
J) Familiarity with the Rest of the TeamSteve's edge here is that you don't disrupt the chemistry of the starting lineup if he continues to start -- and our starting lineup was very, very good last year, and will almost certainly be better this year simply due to internal development of young players.
So, Should Steve Start?
It is an interesting question.
- Usually, your best players start, and Andre is better than Steve.
- One of the most important things for our future is to further Greg's development, and Andre starting could help that in several ways, especially on the pick and roll.
- There are many ways (as detailed above) in which Andre is a better fit with our reserves. They may actually do more to make his game better than our starters, and he may do more to make their game better than Steve would.
- If you run Andre with the second unit most of the time, you have potentially four starter-quality players on your reserve unit -- Andre, Rudy, Martell/Nic, and Joel, and a wild-card in Travis who can on a given day play like an all-star. The likelihood of shutting down our bench and bringing them to a standstill has become very, very low. If Andre starts and Blake plays with the reserves, the chances of shutting the reserves down are much higher. In neither case are you likely to shut down our starters.
What I Expect -- Some Conclusions
- I expect Andre to play at least as many minutes as Steve, and probably more.
- Depending on game situations, I expect Andre to get more run at the end of close games than Steve -- that scoring threat is probably more important than the three point threat.
- I expect both PGs to get significant run, at least at first, with both units.
- I expect Andre to be a great fit with our second unit, and a "meh" fit with the starters.
- Assuming everyone stays generally healthy, I expect Blake to end up getting most of his time with the starting unit, and Miller to get significant time with the reserves.
- If all that happens, I expect our second unit to be absolutely devastating at times.
26 recs |
212 comments
Email
Print
Comments
i think blake will start
with all this talk from miller about him knowing about the team and understanding what roles he will need to play and so on and so forth. but either way, meh.
"There are a few teams you have to watch out for in the fourth quarter."
"Yeah, but Portland definitely is not one of them."
-New Orleans Hornets broadcasters at the end of the third quarter with the Hornets leading 74-59. Portland later ends up winning 97-89.
"They don't mind him shooting that shot at all. Rudy Fernandez is not that great of a 3pt shooter."
-New Orleans Hornets broadcasters right after a Rudy Fernandez missed 3pter. Rudy Fernandez finished the game with three 3pters on six attempts.
by Tofu Anonymous on Jul 25, 2009 5:57 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Great Scot! Nice analysis my man, jscot.
Excellent job of moving the discussion forward. Time to move from reacting to the signing, to discussing how it will work on the floor.
In general, I agree with your central premises:
1) Miller is a better player than Blake.
2) Blake is a better fit with Roy.
3) Miller will help our bigs score more, and easier, points in the paint.
It does create a bit of a quandary regarding the rotation. However, I don’t think any of us can work out the solution in the abstract. Nate has to see the team on the floor to start weighing and balancing his options.
One of the things I like best about signing Miller, is the fact that it gives the Blazers a lot of different ways to put the ball through the hoop. If you think back to last season, and the Blazers struggles on the road against good teams, the common scenario was the Blazers’ inability to hit shots from distance. When the shots stopped falling, the shooters started pressing. Roy was forced into lots of isos and the defense collapsed. Roy would try mightily to bring us back, but usually it was too little, too late.
Above all else, I think the signing of Miller makes the team far less dependent on Roy’s isos and long distance jumpers. Now we are going to have alternative ways to attack teams when the jumpers aren’t falling or teams are clogging the middle. If you look at the Blazers lineup, the number of possible line-ups and combinations is just plain breathtaking. Nate should be like a kid in a candy store. He can go big, or bigger. He can go fast, or faster. He can load the floor with shooters. He can load the floor with penetrators.
Above all, Nate now has a floor coach in Miller, who really understands the game. I think there are likely to be some growing pains as Miller and the team, especially Roy, learn how to play together, but overall, I think this has given the Blazers more ways to win.
by upper left corner on Jul 25, 2009 6:05 AM PDT reply actions 1 recs
Nate?
oh yeah…I remember him..he is the ACTUAL coach of the Blazers. I was beginning the think WE were the actual coaches of the Blazers. It will be really interesting to see how it all works out during camp. Wish I could quit life and just live in the Bleachers while this shakes out.
You make a great point that it may actually be Roy who has the most growing pains. I consider this a good thing. I am sure he will adjust. Might even be a relief for him!
Nice re-analysis
RoadBlazer
by Roadblazer on Jul 25, 2009 8:00 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well done
Great analysis.
We know Nate likes to use two lineups — a bench squad an a starter squad to be often switched en masse.
I think it’s important to keep Martell and Miller in the same lineup, to aleviate the lack of 3pt shooting from Miller. Therefore it makes sense to have Miller as a starter with Martell and Batum on the bench as the defensive presence to go alongside scorers in Outlaw and Rudy. Having Rudy-Outlaw-Martell on the bench is almost too much offense!
"You've been warned...!"
A Stern Warning : http://www.asternwarning.com
by mookie on Jul 25, 2009 7:46 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
THIS is why I love BEDGE
Great work. For the most part I agree with your well thought out analysis. I think Blake will start for the first part of the season. But Nate will want to mix it up and get Andre some time with the starters too. Something to be said to playing Rudy and Andre and Travis some heavy minutes and running the socks off opponents.
Thanks for taking the time to lay this out. I get weary of Junior G.M posts and whiney “why don’t we trade Bayless for CP3” posts. But the Chemistry part of Basketball fascinates me.
Good stuff,
RoadBlazer
by Roadblazer on Jul 25, 2009 7:55 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
A couple things.
1.) Since when is Blake good at running the fast break?
2.) I don’t really get the idea that Blake is a better fit next to Roy. Would Blake be a better fit than Parker playing next to Ginobili? Would Blake be a better fit than Rondo playing next to Peirce? Since when is three point shooting the most important aspect of a PG? Roy is going to benefit playing next to a PG who is actually above average. I don’t care if Miller gets all his buckets by tossing in shots backwards and blindfolded. It’s the end result that counts. Fit be damned.
3.) Blake has the Flexibility/Ability to Adjust His Game? What? I imagine it might be hard to adjust your game when you only do one thing exceptionally well. There is a reason he stands around waiting for open threes. There’s a reason the ball isn’t in his hands a lot. There’s a reason the Blazers have basically opened up a PG factory in desperate search of any possible replacement. Blake happened to walk into a situation where the one thing he excels at is valuable. I don’t think he really adjusted anything.
If Blake is still the starting PG at the start of the season I will be shocked and amazed. It has about as much chance of happening as Bayless stealing the backup SG spot from Rudy. It’s possible, but it seems really unlikely.
by Nick Van Excellent on Jul 25, 2009 8:05 AM PDT reply actions 2 recs
1. Reread the post above with your irony detector on.
2. Parker is a much more dangerous scorer than Miller. Rondo has caused Peirce problems offensively—but Rondo is a great defender. If Miller were as good of a defender as Rondo or as dangerous of a scoring threat as Parker , then I would definitely agree your argument. The difference between Miller and Blake may be small enough that fit makes a difference.
3. The argument that Blake lacks flexibility is an argument for trying to get him minutes with Roy. In other words, if you know Blake is going to play some minutes, who do you want to be playing SG when he’s in the game? Roy or Rudy? Is the efficiency gained from playing Blake with Roy (compared to Blake with Rudy) bigger than the effectiveness lost of playing Miller with Roy (compared to Miller with Rudy)? That’s the calculation that’s relevant.
by PoliSam on Jul 25, 2009 8:54 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
and
If Parker and Giniboli are such a perfect fit for each other, why has Ginobili come off of the bench so often?
by PoliSam on Jul 25, 2009 9:03 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
If Duncan and Ginobili are such a perfect fit for each other, why has Ginobili come off of the bench so often?
Ginobili comes off the bench because he wants to. It has nothing to do with Parker, Duncan, Bowen, Bonner, Oberto, or anyone else.
by Nick Van Excellent on Jul 25, 2009 9:18 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
1.) Thank you. It’s early and my brains not works so good yet.
2.) The difference between Miller and Blake on offense is astronomical. Defense not so much obviously. It should be noted that Miller was the most efficient offensive Player on the 76’ers. He ranks 12th among point guards in PER and is about even with Billups in that regard. The guys is simply fantastic on offense, even without a three point shot.
76’ers PER
________
Andre Miller- 18.71
Andre Iguodala- 18.49
Marreese Speights-18.01
Louis Williams- 16.39
Thaddeus Young- 15.40
Samuel Dalembert- 13.22
3.) I don’t see why Blake needs to see any minutes quite honestly. If it’s three point shooting you want I would rather just pair Rudy and Roy in the backcourt for short stretches.
by Nick Van Excellent on Jul 25, 2009 9:14 AM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
good poinits too
Here’s where I’m coming from: I watched the 76ers pretty closely early in the season last year because they happened to be on NBA TV a lot and I had Iguodala on my fantasy squad. With a starting line-up of Miller, Iguodala, Young, Brand, and Dalembert, the 76ers were a disaster on offense. They didn’t have enough outside shooting. Brand and Miller did not play well together. Iguodala got few good looks. It was ugly.
When Brand got injured, they replaced Brand with Green in the starting line-up and even though Green is a much worse offensive player than Brand, the 76ers offense improved dramatically. They moved to a faster paced offense and cleared out the lane for Miller and Iguodala to drive. Brand’s negative effect on the 76ers offensive come through loud and clear in on court off court stats: http://www.82games.com/0809/08PHI10.HTM#onoff
It’s fair to question whether or not the 76ers experience last year has any bearing on Miller as an offensive player. Maybe it’s more about Brand… But it does illustrate the importance of fit. Brand was 3 points better than Green in PER last year, but Brand still hurt the 76ers on offense. (Playing in the 76ers offense also seemed to hurt Brand’s numbers as well). Watching the games, it seemed pretty clear that problem for the 76ers was a lack of outside shooting. Would a line-up of Miller, Roy, Batum, Aldridge, and Oden have enough outside shooting? I wonder. Perhaps you fix that by starting Rudy. I don’t know, but I think it’s worth thinking about.
by PoliSam on Jul 25, 2009 11:50 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Right
And by the way, I’m not suggesting that because Blake is a better fit with the starters that he should get more minutes than Andre. I expect Miller to get more PT than Blake. Rather, it is just that the most valuable way to utilize what we now have is to have most of Blake’s minutes be with the starters, and make sure Andre plays significant time with the second unit.
When I rule the world, everyone will know how to use Excel.
by jscot on Jul 25, 2009 11:57 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
jscot, why do you say that Miller would be in to close games with Roy?
If Blake is more effective with Roy, shouldn’t Steve be playing then?
I think it is because you understand that Miller is simply a more effective player. I love Steve’s game and he is a great fit here, but flexible is not Steve. He is built and his game is built to do what he can do best. He doesn’t have the hops to do much more with it. Miller sweats out more basketball talent in a quarter than Steve can show in a half. Life is like that.
by LaoTzu on Jul 25, 2009 12:46 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Couple comments
1. I think Steve has been very flexible. He came here as a PG with a decent 3 point shot. He reinvented himself into an off-the-ball very good deep threat. He was always a ball-in-his-hands PG who adapted to be a complementary player to Brandon.
2. The main question, why would Miller be in close games at the end with Roy. Let me put it this way. Suppose that Miller + starters gives us 100% possible efficiency. Suppose that Blake plus starters gives us 95% possible efficiency, because Blake, while not himself as effective, is such a good fit with Roy that it doesn’t reduce total team efficiency very much.
Now, suppose that Blake plus bench gives us 50% possible efficiency, while Miller plus bench gives us 80% possible efficiency, because his skills are such a good fit with the rest of the bench.
I don’t think those numbers are necessarily too far off. In that case, I’m willing to suffer the 5% loss of efficiency of having Blake’s PT be with the starters in order to gain the 30% efficiency of having Miller with the bench.
I’ll still want Miller to have time with the starters, because 100% > 95%. And I’ll still want Miller to be with the starters at the end of close games (in most situations) for the same reason. At the end of the game, you aren’t worrying about who is going to be playing with the bench in 6-8 minutes, and having that be an efficient unit. You are focused on gaining the maximum efficiency right now.
When I rule the world, everyone will know how to use Excel.
by jscot on Jul 25, 2009 1:14 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
You're welcome
“Well thought out” and “Correct” are not always the same thing, of course. Time will tell on a lot of this stuff.
When I rule the world, everyone will know how to use Excel.
by jscot on Jul 25, 2009 1:28 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I may be totally wrong
But hasn’t Blake ALWAYS had a backcourt mate who handled the ball a lot, like Roy does now?
I very much like the rationale of Miller bringing the bench up enough to offset the difference between him and Blake with the Starters.
All that said, I want Miller to start and get 32 or so minutes at least.
by TheThinWhiteDuke on Jul 26, 2009 12:36 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
why would Miller be in close games at the end with Roy?
I think we’ll have to see how the two of them interact before we can come to any conclusions. It’s just as likely that neither Blake or Miller will be on the floor when the Blazers need a key bucket, it could just as easliy be Roy as the “PG” with Rudy and Martell at the wing positions, spotting up
The idea of Roy and Miller “sharing the ball” is similar to the discussions we briefly had when it looked like Hedo was coming to Portland. One the one hand, both players need the ball in their hands to be effective. On the other hand, having a 2nd creator on the floor (who can break down the defense if they try to double up or trap Brandon) could be very beneficial.
Like I said at the beginning, I think we’ll all have to wait and see how Roy and Miller interact before jumping to any conclusions about optimal rotations (for either starting or closing) ballgames. Training camp and preseason games will be the final determinant, and injuries could crop up, as well. I’m just extremely pleased to have 2 quality veteran PGs on the team and I hope it stays that way for a couple more years so that “everyone” can develop the kind of chemsitry that will be necessary to win a championship
When reached 39 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
by two4larue on Jul 26, 2009 1:40 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
"I hope it stays that way for a couple more years "
The only way it won’t stay that way is A) Bayless takes huge steps forward and they decide one of the vets is superfluous to needs or B) a phenomenal deal comes our way for someone even better, and KP just can’t help pulling the trigger.
When I rule the world, everyone will know how to use Excel.
by jscot on Jul 27, 2009 12:23 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I agree
but there a lot of folks who think Blake is a short-timer due to his expiring contract, same thing with Joel and his “opt-out” clause
They both could be gone in a few years, I suppose, but knowing how Nate/KP feel about them I wouldn’t count on them being dealt away, any time soon
When reached 39 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
by two4larue on Jul 27, 2009 2:06 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I will be surprised if Blake leaves
Veteran role player, likes the team and the town, doesn’t demand huge money, has something to offer.
Joel? If he has a year like last year, and Greg really develops, Joel may deserve a lot more than we can afford to pay a backup who gets limited minutes. I wouldn’t blame Joel for opting out for more money, and I wouldn’t blame KP for deciding it doesn’t make sense for us to pay him as much as another team would to get him.
I could see Joel leaving, though I would hate it. I will be surprised if Steve does.
When I rule the world, everyone will know how to use Excel.
by jscot on Jul 27, 2009 3:14 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
As to why would Miller be in close games with Roy
You are right, we will see how they work together. But they are both very high IQ players, and I think they will find a way to work effectively together. I think it is very likely Miller, Roy, Rudy, LMA, and Greg closing out games. But we will see.
When I rule the world, everyone will know how to use Excel.
by jscot on Jul 27, 2009 12:25 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Rudy/Roy/Miller could work, I think…. When Roy initiates offense, we can stick him on the side that Rudy is on… two man game between them.
optimism ftw
by Cablinasian on Jul 27, 2009 9:23 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I agree to a degree.
I was forced to watch a ton of 76’ers games on league pass because they are my friends favorite team.
The lineup of Miller-Iguodala-Young-Brand-Dalembert looked awkward at first but started to gel a little later before Brand got hurt. They actually ended up having the second best plus/minus of any five man unit on that team (+63) and also logged the second most minutes together. (342) So it’s not exactly the disaster you make it out to be.
That’s because Miller eventually adapted to a style that fit Brand better. Fortunately for us Aldridge runs the floor about twice as well as Brand.
Brand didn’t hurt the 76’ers on offense and they were statistically worse with Green in the lineup. The only guy on the Blazers that really prevents Miller from running an effective Break is Steven Blake. Fortunately they probably won’t be seeing a whole lot of time together.
There is no real chance (IMHO) that Miller doesn’t start. The talent/production disparity between him and Blake is just too big. I could see the Blazers subbing Miller out early if they want to spread the floor more, but I don’t think it will be a problem.
by Nick Van Excellent on Jul 25, 2009 1:33 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Brand didn’t hurt the 76’ers on offense and they were statistically worse with Green in the lineup
I hate to nitpick, but the 76ers were clearly worse offensively with Brand in the line-up. The unit you mentioned did have a good overall plus minus, but it was tied for the worst offensive lineup in the top ten. They were okay because it was a very solid defensive unit. They only scored 1.02 points per possession. Compared the 76ers other units or the blazers, I don’t think disaster is too far off of a description http://www.82games.com/0809/0809POR2.HTM.
A comparison of Brand and Greens numbers say the same thing.
http://www.82games.com/0809/08PHI4.HTM#onoff
http://www.82games.com/0809/08PHI10.HTM#onoff
by PoliSam on Jul 26, 2009 9:17 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Great thoughts
Here’s an additional thought:
Rather than affecting who starts, considerations of fit may also affect when substitutions are made. Perhaps MIller starts, but Blake is the first player off of the bench, so that Blake gets the majority of his minutes playing while Roy is in the game, while Miller gets additional minutes with Rudy. Considering Oden will probably rotate out fairly quickly, this would also match-up Oden with Miller and Blake with Pryzbilla more often.
by PoliSam on Jul 25, 2009 8:37 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
This is a very good point
In addition, it’s no secret that Nate likes to establish an inside presence during the first five or six minutes of the game. We almost exclusively see LMA post-ups, Roy attacking the paint, or Roy/Oden pick-and-rolls during that time. Miller will be a far superior player to Blake in terms of aggressively probing the lane for scoring chances and setting up his teammates for easy buckets, which works well with the tone that Nate tries to set from the outset.
Then, once the Blazers are in a rhythm offensively and the lane is starting to get clogged with help defenders, Nate can bring in Blake and Martell to start teeing off on wide-open looks from downtown. I like your Blake substitution at the 5-6 minute mark for these two reasonsn as well.
The Michael Ruffin of BlazersEdge, cuz Amlmart said so.
by BlazersOrBust on Jul 25, 2009 9:35 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yes, that is a good thought
I do think Nate is going to want most of Blake’s minutes to be alongside Brandon. They’ve been a very good tandem offensively.
When I rule the world, everyone will know how to use Excel.
by jscot on Jul 25, 2009 10:38 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Right
Blake has been less effective playing with Rudy. He is less creative getting Rudy the ball, and less effective on the break. Plus, Steve and Rudy can both turn into three point shooters. You need somebody out there who can drive and kick.
To me, this means limited PT for Blake. Maybe 15-20 MPG.
by LaoTzu on Jul 25, 2009 12:49 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I would guess about 20
Andre is an iron man, but we can afford to keep him fresh for the playoffs, and limit the chance of injuries, by keeping his minutes under 30.
When I rule the world, everyone will know how to use Excel.
by jscot on Jul 25, 2009 1:16 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
how about this, mcmillan will flip a coin before the start of the game
to see who starts between miller and blake, oden and przybilla, and webster and batum.
"There are a few teams you have to watch out for in the fourth quarter."
"Yeah, but Portland definitely is not one of them."
-New Orleans Hornets broadcasters at the end of the third quarter with the Hornets leading 74-59. Portland later ends up winning 97-89.
"They don't mind him shooting that shot at all. Rudy Fernandez is not that great of a 3pt shooter."
-New Orleans Hornets broadcasters right after a Rudy Fernandez missed 3pter. Rudy Fernandez finished the game with three 3pters on six attempts.
by Tofu Anonymous on Jul 25, 2009 8:38 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Miller will start
I think the points you made about Oden and LaMarcus running the pick and roll with Miller and Miller being able to get the ball to them on the break, and the fact that Miller is an all around better player than Blake will make him the starter. I think Nate will start his best players and then adjust his rotation to get guys out on the floor together to take advantage of match ups.
Also, I don’t understand why you wouldn’t post up Miller with Oden and Aldridge in the game. If you send him on the block, you are trying to make the defense adjust. If they don’t, Miller is an effective post player against most guards. If they double team, Oden and/or Aldridge will be working to establish inside position as the ball is rotated and sent back inside. They should have better position as the defense is forced to switch and rotate than if the defense can hold their position. Miller will put pressure on the defense that should open up better opportunities for everyone.
PTB Liberation Day - 2/10/04
by tssbro on Jul 25, 2009 8:52 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Why wouldn't you put Miller on the low post?
Because Aldridge is also an effective low post player, probably much more effective, and if you are going to have two guys down on the block establishing position, you want them to be the best offensive rebounding C/PF tandem in the league. You don’t want LMA drifting outside so Miller can be on the low post, and take him out of the rebounding equation. Maybe a couple of times a game, but not as a regular feature of your offense.
If LMA isn’t in the low post, it should be because they are spreading the floor to open penetration for Brandon or Miller, or isolating Greg on the low post.
You may be right about Miller starting, and largely for the reasons you mention, but I doubt we will see him in the low post much with LMA and Greg in the game. He’s a better shooter than LMA, if we go to a double low post single high post offense, I’d put him in the high post.
When I rule the world, everyone will know how to use Excel.
by jscot on Jul 25, 2009 10:45 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I am not talking about regularly featuring him on the block...
If you have an advantage with Miller on the block and you force a double team, you have Roy on the wing feeding Miller, Aldridge at the top of the key and Webster on the other wing/corner, and you rotate the ball. As the ball rotates, the defense is out of position and Oden can use the opportunity to get deeper position in the post. You can do the same thing by putting Aldridge on the block but if he is at the top of the key, he can feed Oden in the post as the defense rotates. He would be able to see and deliver that pass better than a smaller guard.
All I was saying is you can utilize the post up abilities of Miller when you have a mismatch even with Oden and Aldridge on the floor. It is an option that Blake does not give you. And if Brooks is running around killing you all over the floor, why not back him into the post and make him stop Miller and put pressure on them to make defensive adjustments.
PTB Liberation Day - 2/10/04
by tssbro on Jul 25, 2009 11:07 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I suppose it's possible
but as you said, you’ve got to put Aldridge at the top of the key to do that.
It is easier to help on Miller posting up than to help on Aldridge or Oden posting up. Size matters in that position.
And I still don’t really want Aldridge at the top of the key, if I’m looking for a double postup, I want him where he can work the boards.
But yes, it could be done. I don’t expect to see it much with Aldridge and Oden on the court together, though.
When I rule the world, everyone will know how to use Excel.
by jscot on Jul 25, 2009 11:54 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don't think it will be a go to play, but it will start happening against certain teams as Miller abuses his defender
If they double team, Miller is great at feeding the bigs rotating through the lane. If they don’t the bigs will get some put-backs.
I see this happening on secondary fastbreaks, for instance, and when Miller happens to be iso and at times when Miller man rotates back onto him on the pick-n-roll.
by LaoTzu on Jul 25, 2009 12:53 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I can see that
I wouldn’t really call that a post up, though, it just means he will exploit opportunities to score close to the basket. That is a lot different from designing halfcourt plays for this.
I could see us designing such plays if he is playing with the reserves, where there really isn’t a low post threat.
When I rule the world, everyone will know how to use Excel.
by jscot on Jul 25, 2009 1:18 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
OK
You were making the argument that one possible reason he wouldn’t start is because they could utilize his post up abilities on the second unit. There is no room for him on the block with Oden and Aldridge on the post. That is certainly one way to see it.
The scenario in which it becomes preferrable to put AM on the block with the starters is when he has a decided advantage. It wouldn’t be your best play to continue to post up Oden and Aldridge if Scola and Yao (yes I know he is out for the year) are manning up, one-on-one and Battier is causing Roy problems. Put Miller on the block and you create a mismatch and get the defense moving out of position to try to cover. It isn’t just against Houston that this would be effective. It is all about mismatches and not necessarily who is the “better post-up player”. You just have to create a situation where the defense has to move out of position to try to help and then you can reposition deeper in the post.
I am not even arguing that this is the most effective way to use Miller. I just think it is as plausible as saying he isn’t going to start because they want him to be the low post player on the second unit. You can use his post up ability with the starters to get better opportunities for everybody.
PTB Liberation Day - 2/10/04
by tssbro on Jul 25, 2009 3:45 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Exactly, you must deform the defense to cause gaps
And have a great driver and passer who can exploit those gaps. And not just BRoy.
by LaoTzu on Jul 25, 2009 4:22 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yao would just sag off of Oden
and help out on Miller.
If Oden were a shooter, you might be right. That isn’t part of his game right now.
When I rule the world, everyone will know how to use Excel.
by jscot on Jul 25, 2009 10:57 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
That is the point
Getting the defense to move. When Yao sags, Oden repositions deeper in the post. You can’t sag and keep Oden out of the deep post at the same time. Or you might even force a switch on the rotation and get Oden matched up on a smaller player.
PTB Liberation Day - 2/10/04
by tssbro on Jul 26, 2009 8:36 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
If you sag off Oden, then Miller beats you with the lob
Winners outs.
by LaoTzu on Jul 26, 2009 2:32 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think you make a good case
I also think that Andre Miller will start, mostly because he’s just a better player than Blake.
by jksnake99 on Jul 25, 2009 9:37 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Well, that was what I thought
but the “fit” concerns, and the fact that KP said he was only looking for a good fit, made me think again. And Andre is a great fit with the second unit.
But you still might be right about him starting. If he does, though, I suspect before long he is going to be seeing a significant portion of his minutes with the reserves, whether he starts or not.
When I rule the world, everyone will know how to use Excel.
by jscot on Jul 25, 2009 10:47 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I agree
But you still might be right about him starting. If he does, though, I suspect before long he is going to be seeing a significant portion of his minutes with the reserves, whether he starts or not.
I think Nate really cares a lot about the balance of talents on each unit. And, he’s definitely not afraid to play around with things to make sure that the units are well balanced. I don’t know how it will happen, but definitely think we’ll see a unit of something like Miller, Rudy, Webster, Outlaw, and Oden quite a bit.
by PoliSam on Jul 25, 2009 11:58 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
That was my first impression as well after sleeping on the signing...
At first, I hated Miller with the first unit. Now I see how it can work and I trust Nate/KP’s judgement. Then I thought about how sweet he would be as the playmaker with the reserves, that could be a deadly bench unit. I think Blake takes more of a Batumesque starting role, but Miller gets more minutes, and specifically all of the minutes that Broy isn’t in the game…
by Rudiculous on Jul 25, 2009 3:01 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
The thoughts Miller himself brought to his meeting with KP and Nate sounded logical and original
That could include how he fits with the whole roster and with specific combinations. When KP said he shut up and listened to Andre and Nate and that Andre talked like a coach it seemed to clue this strategy.
by lee3022 on Jul 25, 2009 8:04 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Will teams be put in the penalty earlier with Miller starting?
Portland's PG of the Future - Meet John Wall
Treat people well because Karma can hit you at any second.
by Net Ranger on Jul 25, 2009 10:13 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
i should think he would help a lot with that
considering that last season alone Miller attempted more free throws (409) than Blake has in his entire career (402)
Able but unwilling
by 1badbadger on Jul 25, 2009 10:18 AM PDT up reply actions 2 recs
Nice find on the FTAs
The Michael Ruffin of BlazersEdge, cuz Amlmart said so.
by BlazersOrBust on Jul 25, 2009 10:20 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
jeesh. well then with him and BRoy in there the opposition should be
in the penalty within the first 5 minutes. :p
Portland's PG of the Future - Meet John Wall
Treat people well because Karma can hit you at any second.
by Net Ranger on Jul 25, 2009 10:25 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Wouldn't that be nice?
Seeing the opposition’s big men riding the pine with early foul trouble?
Able but unwilling
by 1badbadger on Jul 25, 2009 10:30 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Especially if Greg can have just one good offensive move
If so, he’ll draw fouls, too.
I mentioned this aspect above, the fact that Andre could be very good with the first unit because of his ability to draw fouls, and also to help our big men get the ball in positions where they will draw fouls.
When I rule the world, everyone will know how to use Excel.
by jscot on Jul 25, 2009 10:48 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Grag has shown
that he is very effective at drawing fouls. If I remember correctly, I have figured that he made a trip to the free-throw line on something like 64% of his field goal attempts
Able but unwilling
by 1badbadger on Jul 25, 2009 11:51 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don't know the stats, but you are right about his effectiveness
With Brandon and Andre on the team, we should have opponents in foul trouble a lot more than we are in foul trouble.
When I rule the world, everyone will know how to use Excel.
by jscot on Jul 25, 2009 11:58 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Except without a couple of 3-point shooters on the floor the opponent packs the paint and prevents drives
For every move there is a counter-move. If Andre could do both he would be an All-Star.
by lee3022 on Jul 25, 2009 8:07 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Except without a couple of 3-point shooters on the floor the opponent packs the paint and prevents drives
With 5 legit 3 point bombers in the main rotation (Roy, Rudy, Blake, Webster, and Outlaw) – any 2 of them will be on the floor at the same time more often than not.
Portland's PG of the Future - Meet John Wall
Treat people well because Karma can hit you at any second.
by Net Ranger on Jul 25, 2009 8:42 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
That Wall kid is SICK
Man he would be enjoyable to watch. I am twisted enough to want to see him play alongside Travis.
by LaoTzu on Jul 25, 2009 12:58 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Doubtful that Portland picks that high in the next decade
by lee3022 on Jul 25, 2009 8:08 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
lol too true.
Portland's PG of the Future - Meet John Wall
Treat people well because Karma can hit you at any second.
by Net Ranger on Jul 25, 2009 8:43 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
You want to establish the inside game first.
Dre is definately the starter for this reason alone, with Blake probably the first man off the bench. I think there will probably be less of the hockey style rotation this year & more situational rotation.This will force other teams to adapt to us.I love the versatility of this team. Miller is a pro it won’t take him long to adapt as vets almost always do this better then the youngsters.
He did it! Yes he did!
by We-B-Dunkin on Jul 25, 2009 10:26 AM PDT reply actions 1 recs
I don't know
Nate has used platooning in the past. It has the advantage that a group of guys really get used to playing together, and become a unit.
I personally am a believer, if you have the depth, in using platooning near the end of the first or start of the second quarter for about 6-8 minutes, and then using situations substitution in the second half. That way, you get the advantages of both approaches.
It helps your subs to be mentally prepared when they pretty much know exactly what to expect — “I will be coming in at 10-12 minutes with these guys, and we will go very hard and do a job for 6-8 minutes.” It helps people to be confident and comfortable in their role. It also means that the guy who thinks he should be getting more minutes in the second half has a legitimate chance to prove he deserves those minutes.
When I rule the world, everyone will know how to use Excel.
by jscot on Jul 25, 2009 10:53 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
For Those Who Think That Chemistry Means Time Together
Chemistry is more than time together. Time helps, but it is what you can be that matters.
It’s like in pool. Minnesota Fats would come into town and play you on your favorite table. He would hit a few balls off the rails to warm up, and before you knew it, he’s using the idiosyncrasies of your table against you.
I like to think that the PG position is kinda the same. A PG with amazing amounts of talent and a quick mind, whose has been in numerous situations, can adapt to new situations quickly. He sees where the ball should go, how the play will best unfold with each future he creates.
YES. I am geeked.
by LaoTzu on Jul 25, 2009 1:06 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
"Pool" is a SOLO game . . .
you don’t have any teammates ! Basketball is a TEAM sport
and you have to have chemistry to win !
It's GO time !
by walkoff41 on Jul 25, 2009 11:15 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Inside-out requires credible outside shooting
Blake has it.
Andre not so much.
by lee3022 on Jul 25, 2009 8:10 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
It doesn't have to come from the PG
Roy,Batum,Rudy,Martell,Travis& Blake are all capable 3 pt. shooters we will still be fine in that regard.Now we have another penetrater which will open things up even more for our shooters!
He did it! Yes he did!
by We-B-Dunkin on Jul 26, 2009 6:52 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Starting should not matter on this team
Very nice analysis – what did Nate think when he called you this morning?
Nate is the big winner here. According to reports the Blazers ID’d the top three free agents and went after them in perceived Best Talent Available order. Luckily it worked out that the one that stuck was also the position need. And a vet. The draft said they didn’t want to wait on point development as they ignored the big crop.
Andre don’t know threes but he can play. He provides an other proven attacker to play off Roy, he is a great passer (PERFECT for this team), and a fantastic pickup for injury depth at no talent cost via trade.
KP’s summer grade changes from C- to A- overnight.
Oden is the Blazers Edge!
How cares who starts. They need to make the minutes bigger by pressing hard and wearing out the other teams. Nate has two legit starting 5’s. They need to run more and Go-Go-Go.
I like these for mixes, but Nate is gonna have tons of fun playing mix and match. I hope he remembers the Ebony & Ivory Towers at crucial moments:
Joel____________Greg
Lamarcus _______Travis
Martell__________ Nicolas
Brandon ________ Rudy
Steve___________ Andre
This is gonna be fun!!!
by Sashland on Jul 25, 2009 10:42 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
What did Nate think?
He’s had this for days, obviously. I sent it to him after Utah matched Millsap, and he and KP talked it over with Andre, so he knows he gets lots of PT with the reserves (making our reserves the 10th best team in the league). Andre bought in to my analysis, so they decided to make the offer.
I would LOVE to see them press hard and wear out the other teams. When it comes to the playoffs, that is the one way that depth can really help you — if you leave the other team gasping for breath by the last 3-4 minutes of each half.
I’ll have to send Nate another memo.
You are absolutely 100% right:
This is gonna be fun!!!
When I rule the world, everyone will know how to use Excel.
by jscot on Jul 25, 2009 10:58 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
PowerRanking Blazers-2
Great Idea – Where would a team with a starting line-up of
Oden/Outlaw/Nic/Rudy/Andre rank?
Seriously, would you have dreamed of this group as a core to build around four years ago? that’s our BENCH.
I suspected jscot did this BE stuff as more than a sideline…
please remind Nate that it is OK if Oden fouls out a few times – they give ’em 6, why not use them?
by Sashland on Jul 25, 2009 11:26 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'll send that point over by ESP
I think Oden starts, but put Joel in with those other guys and you really would have a pretty decent nucleus.
When I rule the world, everyone will know how to use Excel.
by jscot on Jul 25, 2009 12:00 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
We speculated about it last year...
maybe Nate “unleashes” the offense this year.
Miller is good at setting up the transition game.
Don’t be shocked if we finally run more.
But I like to be here. Oh, I like it a lot! Said the Cat in the Hat. To the fish in the pot.
by you'vegottomakeyourfreethrows on Jul 25, 2009 10:56 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Offense was pretty good last year - defense not as good
But this move deepens our bench and improves our versatility and that should help both offense and defense.
I may be wrong but I think running often requires leaking out while a shot is going up reducing your defense and your rebounding. Denver is case in point. It also seems to require a good outlet pass and that has not been our strength in the past. We are not bad – just not Bill Walton good. Perhaps it can be taught?
by lee3022 on Jul 25, 2009 8:19 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
envision this:
Oden grabs the board (incredible rebounding rate for him, so this isn’t too hard to envision). LMA (not a notorious rebounder though better than given credit for) leaks as does Martell/Rudy/Batum (take your pick). Oden passes to Andre who’s midcourt already to push tempo. He spies LaMarcus B-lining for the rim and has M/R/B and Roy alongside filling lanes. He’ll then have Oden as the secondary break as he catches up to the play.
That’s a lot of very talented and versatile players running the court with the ball in the hands of a crafty facilitator.
I’d be disappointed if our fastbreak points don’t go up this year.
But I like to be here. Oh, I like it a lot! Said the Cat in the Hat. To the fish in the pot.
by you'vegottomakeyourfreethrows on Jul 27, 2009 9:37 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
you'vegottomakeyouroutletpass
When I rule the world, everyone will know how to use Excel.
by jscot on Jul 27, 2009 11:45 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think the Blazers need to get away from a one on one post game
unless there is a clear advantage for LMA or Oden. I’d rather see more pick and rolls, it’s the hardest play to defend in basketball.
I’m working on a post on why Miller is a great fit with the starting unit because of the pick and roll. When you’re picking off defenders, you don’t have to worry about them “packing the lane”.
Patty Mills - PG of the future. Book it.
by Blazerholic on Jul 25, 2009 11:16 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
That's great
as long as you have enough shooters to punish a zone. Pick and roll offense can work against a zone, but execution can be a little trickier, especially if they are switching up their zones on you — you may not know where to set the pick.
That’s ok if you have shooters, though, because you move the ball around a little and you’ll get some wide open looks.
But I am concerned about starting Miller and facing zones all the time. If Martell is back and firing 3s at 40%, that would help. Otherwise, zones can give us some trouble. So you might want to address that in your post.
When I rule the world, everyone will know how to use Excel.
by jscot on Jul 25, 2009 12:04 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
"I don't think they know what type of guy they got"
“Portland is going to be a much better team”
Philadelphia forward Andre Iguodala(notes) said he sensed Miller would seek a team on the West Coast because he is from Los Angeles.
"Portland’s a good team, a young athletic group and he’ll fit in perfect with them. He’ll thrive in that system without having to do too much. Portland’s going to be a much better team," Iguodala said. "I don’t think they know what type of guy they got."
by Sashland on Jul 25, 2009 11:32 AM PDT reply actions 2 recs
So glad we got another guy how can break down a defense by getting to the rim!
Portland's PG of the Future - Meet John Wall
Treat people well because Karma can hit you at any second.
by Net Ranger on Jul 25, 2009 9:00 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
if miller starts
the only thing i dont like is the potential make up of the bench. You put blake rudy batum and joel out there and it looks like too many specialty players. Where is the guy who can drive or create his own shot. I would love to see rudy improve his handles and his drive and his mid range game for next season.
by dmperry03 on Jul 25, 2009 11:33 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I think there will be less platooning of squads
There will be more consideration of getting the right players out there together.
by LaoTzu on Jul 25, 2009 1:16 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Bayless
With Miller playing 30+ minutes a game (why wouldn’t he? He’s the best PG on the team), and Roy playing some point with Fernandez at SG, the remaining 10-12 minutes go to Bayless. Few believe this now, but Blake’s ability to shoot 3s has little value when you look down the bench and see Fernandez as your other option. Bayless will play because he is the only player with the ability to guard quicker PGs and because, as long as he is in Portland, he is the future at PG. I think McMillian (if he disagrees)will give in to management on this issue.
by chemistrymajor on Jul 25, 2009 10:22 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I like the "both depending opponent" option.
Nate isn’t afraid to tinker with the starting line-up.
The one thing I don’t agree with, but will probably happen, is Greg at the starting center. For the first half of the season let him gobble up second string centers to build confidence. As far as earning your spot goes, Joel should still be the starter.
Life is hilarious.
by SolGoode on Jul 25, 2009 11:49 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I don't think Greg starts unless he earns it
But I expect him to earn it in training camp and/or preseason. The guy is a monster on defense and the boards, even better than Joel (at least on the offensive boards), and is an offensive threat where Joel simply isn’t.
But I don’t think Nate will hand it to him. Joel has earned a starter’s spot, and Greg is going to have to be good enough to take it. If he is, let him start. He’s going to gobble up a lot of first team centers, too.
When I rule the world, everyone will know how to use Excel.
by jscot on Jul 25, 2009 12:07 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I agree with SolGoode
I am disappointed that the starting spot was forced on Greg. I think it stunted his development. If he is ready, great, if not, here’s GO, The Force, comin’ at you off the bench.
by LaoTzu on Jul 25, 2009 1:18 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, I don't think he was ready
The difference this year is that I, at least, am persuaded he will be ready.
If Greg is not starting, that might well change my thoughts on how Andre would best be used.
When I rule the world, everyone will know how to use Excel.
by jscot on Jul 25, 2009 1:21 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
It would make Miller coming off the bench with Greg a better idea
by LaoTzu on Jul 25, 2009 1:25 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I thought at the time that Greg earned the spot in training camp
He clearly was not the same player after the injury and he clearly was not healed from his micro-fracture surgery in the sense of regaining his explosion. This year should be drastically different. But Nate does not strike me as giving anyone anything they do not earn.
by lee3022 on Jul 25, 2009 8:31 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
How much longer will the be a 2nd unit?
I think the days of having a full on 2nd unit that plays extended minutes is coming to a close, and that a more traditional 8 or 9 man rotation will begin to become apparent. I think the volume of discussion we have about the 2nd unit is already disproportionate to the minutes they logged as a group.
Everyone was on their best behavior this year, but they all want to play bigger minutes. Being a starter is very important to most of them, and understandably so.
Rudy will not be happy as Roy’s backup forever (or even another year, is my bet), and for all our dreaming and scheming Roy is and always will be a prototypical shooting guard. Not a big 1, not a small 3, but a 2.
Outlaw began speaking out last year about his desire to be a starter, if not on the Blazers then on another team. There were rumblings that Pryzbilla will opt out next summer because he (again, reasonably) wants the same thing (and Oden will be the starter, at least by All-Star weekend). Do we let him walk or try and get something from, say, Houston? I would not be shocked if all three of those guys are on other teams 1 year from now.
Having so many great young guys on our team has been a lot of fun. But it is not sustainable. No NBA team can sustain for very long a full 2nd unit that is competitive against the NBA’s best. Hording all the good talent was one of the things the cap was designed to prevent.
My guess is that Fall ‘10 we’ll be looking at a rotation like this:
1: Miller / Blake /Bayless
2: Roy / Webster / Bayless
3: Batum / Webster
4: Aldridge / veteran big man X
5. Oden / veteran big man X / random stiff Y
And that no one will be happy with what (if anything) we got back collectively for the pieces we had to let go.
by matthewcc on Jul 25, 2009 12:18 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
"Rudy will not be happy as Roy’s backup forever ...."
That is a pretty definitive statement…..no chance at all this might not happen?
"My avatar picture is of the favorite vehicle I ever owned" -Me
by 92wastheyear on Jul 25, 2009 12:44 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
none
Especially literally, as forever is a very long time.
But even in a figurative sense,I would be willing to place a bet that Rudy will not accept a 3rd year as Roy’s backup, and that one of two things will happen by the end of Summer ’10: he will be traded to a team where he can start, or he will go back to Spain.
by matthewcc on Jul 25, 2009 1:16 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Must be neat to see the future so clearly
"My avatar picture is of the favorite vehicle I ever owned" -Me
by 92wastheyear on Jul 25, 2009 1:36 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I know that Rudy doesn't want to be Roy's backup forever
He might theoretically be happy with it for 12-15 years or so, but at some point he’s going to say, “No mas.”
When I rule the world, everyone will know how to use Excel.
by jscot on Jul 25, 2009 1:39 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
wow ...what happened there?
I guess someone didn’t think that comment was in good taste
"My avatar picture is of the favorite vehicle I ever owned" -Me
by 92wastheyear on Jul 25, 2009 5:25 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Are you surprised?
When I rule the world, everyone will know how to use Excel.
by jscot on Jul 25, 2009 11:01 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yeh a little
Ya it was because it was in bad taste or because it was off topic?
"My avatar picture is of the favorite vehicle I ever owned" -Me
by 92wastheyear on Jul 26, 2009 12:28 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Bad taste
It wasn’t going to redirect the thread, so the OT factor probably didn’t drive that one getting zapped.
That’s my guess, anyway.
When I rule the world, everyone will know how to use Excel.
by jscot on Jul 26, 2009 12:31 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Oh well
It wasn’t my most brilliant bit anyway….although I liked the dialog part.
"My avatar picture is of the favorite vehicle I ever owned" -Me
by 92wastheyear on Jul 26, 2009 12:32 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Matt, you horribly underate Joel in that post
by LaoTzu on Jul 25, 2009 1:21 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
in what way?
Do you think I underestimate his willingness to play as a backup?
Possibly. But one thing to factor in is that the Blazers aren’t going to sign him to an expensive long-ish contract if he opts out, or the following year.
I think both a desire for playing time and for more money will lead to Joel being gone next summer. There is a strong possibility the market it so bad, however, he decides not to opt out and instead become a free agent in 2011. I would certainly be happy about that, as I am a big time fan of Joel, especially as a backup.
by matthewcc on Jul 26, 2009 1:20 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
How about by not even listing him by name
Joel is a top 20 center in this league.
by LaoTzu on Jul 26, 2009 2:33 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
He didn't list him
because he doesn’t think Joel will stay around.
When I rule the world, everyone will know how to use Excel.
by jscot on Jul 27, 2009 12:30 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I doubt Blake will be resigned for '10
by chemistrymajor on Jul 25, 2009 10:25 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Why?
He won’t affect the cap any, and won’t be asking for a max contract, and is generally a very reliable and affordable guy so why not?
"Life is a meaningless sequence of events in between Blazer championships"
by broggerboy19 on Jul 25, 2009 10:34 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
I really like what Steve brings
Good thoughts, too.
by LaoTzu on Jul 25, 2009 11:28 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I believe I have a suitable solution to this whole starting pg issue
We start Miller and petition the league to institute a “pinch 3-point shooter” rule so Blake can run out on the floor and take Miller’s 3 attempts.
Able but unwilling
by 1badbadger on Jul 25, 2009 12:21 PM PDT reply actions 1 recs
We already ran the six man play
and the league didn’t like it.
When I rule the world, everyone will know how to use Excel.
by jscot on Jul 25, 2009 1:23 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I hate it when the league changes a rule just to hurt one player!
by LaoTzu on Jul 25, 2009 1:26 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
David Stern still holds a grudge against us
It was probably the Darius telegram that did it. Well, except I think that game was before the telegram, but it was still probably the telegram. David Stern is like that.
When I rule the world, everyone will know how to use Excel.
by jscot on Jul 25, 2009 1:30 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Where is that Locknar when you need it?
STERRRRNNNNNNN!
by LaoTzu on Jul 25, 2009 1:32 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Great Information...
…and well put together. The only thing I hope is that things go as Nate has said they would and there is a competion for the starting job. Steve deserves the chance to fight for his position because he’s been such a integral part of this teams growth and is such a “team” guy. If Miller wins the job great but he should have to earn it.
Intellectually it’s easy to think maybe they both start situationally but realistically I don’t think that works. It’s kind of like platooning your QBs in the NFL… Looks good on paper but seldom works.
I admit that I wasn’t for getting Miller but now that he is a Blazer I will back him and love him like I’ve done with almost all the guys who’ve worn the pinwheel… even some that probably didn’t deserve it. Afterall he is a quality, experienced true PG who seems to really want to be here.
So… GO BLAZERS!!! and give em hell Andre
by Ilikeemall on Jul 25, 2009 12:48 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
My Take on the PG Issue
First, I love reading all the opinons on BE. Lots of good thoughts and concepts and this one is no exception.
Here are some of mine:
Blake is better with Roy:
I do not agree with this one in general. Basically it comes down to "How does Blake get Roy the Ball and vice versa". Blake in most cases delivered the ball to Roy in a slow down, defense set, position and Roy was left to create his shot or in some cases returned to Blake for an open three when Blake’s man sagged to double. With Miller able to begin a set off the dribble and with possible penetration (which is not Blake’s game) it is very possible that Roy gets the ball with less pressure on him as his man sags to help on Miller and possibly even have more opportunities for three’s himself. Instead of relying on Roy to do the penetrating and "breaking down" the defense, Miller can actually do this also. Now you have two on the court that can accomplish this which could lead to a more "straight up" defense being played and additional easy buckets being had by LMA and Joel/Greg.
*Miller does not have the outside skills of Blake: *
True. This however does not concern me in the least. Blake averaged 1.17 points per shot (PPS) and Miller averaged 1.28 last year. Miller 5.0 FT per game, Blake 0.9. Higher point average, more assists, more rebounds. Does this mean he will do this with the Blazers? Not really, but is does show that Miller has the skills to play this game, skills that are different than Blake’s, and probably more diverse. What I see happening is that Nate will be able to take these skills and adjust the team concept to maximize them. Why does Miller have to "fit the Blazers"? Maybe the Blazers need to adjust to "fit the skills Miller brings". Last year Blake’s skills were put to use starting the offense in a slowdown set, hang at the three point line (over 50% of his shots were from there), and be in the right spots if the ball was coming out of the paint. This is not Miller’s game so I am sure the type of game will change with him in the lineup.
As for not having someone who can create a shot with the second team:
You may very well see either Miller or Roy on the court a huge % of the time. Maybe Miller sits early like Batum does, then comes back to give Roy a rest while Blake moves to SG in a smaller backcourt. Who says Miller can’t create open shots for Blake, Rudy, Outlaw, Martell (whoever is in at this time). Any way you look at it the rotation of players this year will change and some minutes will be lost as Miller will need more minutes than Sergio got and Martell will possible get some too. This leaves Blake, Outlaw, and Rudy with possibly less minutes then last year
Just my thoughts from down south!
_________________________________________
If "It's Only a Game", then why do we keep score?
by MSPatton on Jul 25, 2009 12:58 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
We're actually on the same page re: the second team
It isn’t that I don’t see Miller as good with the first team, I just think having him on the same court with Rudy, etc, can be very, very good. We need a creator on that unit, which means Miller is going to put in significant time when Roy isn’t on the court.
I guess, in effect, I’m seeing Miller as the second string PG and Blake and Miller as sharing first string, since I think both will see significant time with the first unit.
When I rule the world, everyone will know how to use Excel.
by jscot on Jul 25, 2009 1:27 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Totally Geeked! Finally, a Pure Point Guard! It's FAST BREAK time in the Rip City!
Count me down as 110% stoked over this deal!
1. Andre is an awesome passer. Greg and Rudy will be the biggest beneficiaries. I think Blazers fans have forgotten what a fantastic drive and dish point guard can do for your offense. Alley oops to Rudy are back (post Sergio, I was worried).
2. We should now have a devastating fast break. My greatest hope is that we run, run, and run some more at the start of each game and half, to wear down the opponent and get them in foul trouble, then hit their reserves with the highly efficient offense…(And full court pressing D, with Rex in there for a few minutes, would be awesome as well…)
3. I agree with posts that state the Roy and Blake fit really well, I think that’s because Steve is more like a 2, hitting long distance, and Brandon is more like a point, at least at the end of the game…
4. I can’t want to see Miller driving and dishing to Rudy for the three; I think they will be incredible together.
5. Miller to Oden on the pick and roll alley-oop will be our bread and butter, and it will be a thing of beauty to watch.
So, I know this is heresy in the land of Brandon, but I think best units, with the most balance would require us to – gasp! – not start BRoy…
Starting Five: (Fast Break game and half opening unit):
Greg (who will be a monster this year), LA, Batum, Rudy, Miller
Second Unit (Efficient slow paced offense, better free throw shooting after starting five wears out the opponent): Joel, Travis, Martell, Roy, and Blake.
The Unit We’ll Usually Finish Games With (I’m expecting us to set a record for most wins over 10 pts this year):
Bayless, Rudy, Travis, Dante Cunningham and Jeff Pendergraph
If Nate wants to start dominating the inside first, he’ll probably start BRoy with Miller, Batum, LA and Oden… But I’d love to see BRoy out and Rudy in at about 6 minutes, and really run like crazy!
Fast breaks = Easy points = Many Blowouts
Many Blowouts = Happy, winning, rested team poised for a championship…
We ARE now one of the 7 teams that can win it all this year: LA, SA, Denver, Portland – wow what a race this will be for top 4 spots this year), along with Boston, Cleveland, and Orlando.
Great job KP! And thank you Hedo, because I am MUCH happier spending $14 mil on 2 years for Andre then way too much money for Hedo for 5 or 6. And thank you Utah, Miller is a huge upgrade over Milsap for our needs…
Go Blazers!
by Visionary1 on Jul 25, 2009 2:02 PM PDT reply actions 1 recs
Andre millers does play defense!!
Andre is from the old school and plays chest to chest hard nose defense kindof in the form of jared bayless. This guy plays great perimiter and above average interior defense READ A SCOUTING REPORT OR TWO PEOPLE!!! Im tired of seeing posts on here about his below or average defense… comparing his defense to blakes is a complete joke i promise you aaron brooks wouldnt be putting up 30 on this guy. Andre miller is an excellent penetrating guard that has a complete understanding of how to run a team in the nba. The only downside is that he cant hit a 3 but we have martell outlaw rudy.. the list continues to do that. All these haters are going to be biting their lip when we get into the season.
by wood1tx on Jul 25, 2009 2:38 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I was curious from your rant about scouting reports so I took you up on your challenge
Yahoo search for “Andre Miller”“Scouting Report” the first 10 pages of links yielded:
There is one here.
Assets
He drives the lane like an NFL fullback and either finishes well or finds the open man. Displays great court vision and defends well. Takes high-percentage shots. One of those rare players who makes his teammates better.
Flaws
He has never been great from the perimeter and struggles with his three-point shooting. Could be more efficient with the ball.
Career potential
Star point guard.
Another one here:
Scouting Report
Average outside
Very steady driving to the hoop
Very effective on the break
Solid ability to draw fouls
Average from the free throw stripe
Has decent three point range
Quality passer
Needs to protect the ball better
Does a nice job handling the ball
OK defensively
Extremely solid player
And from France:
Scouting Report
Decent outside
Decent inside
Strong driving to the hoop
Pretty good from the foul line
Solid passer
Very good offensive rebounder
Will get you some steals
Commits fair share of turnovers
Needs some work on the handle
Good defensively
Solid player and a definite starter
Not a great sample and not definitive but interesting.
Could you supply some better links?
by lee3022 on Jul 25, 2009 10:19 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Funny,
The Unit We’ll Usually Finish Games With (I’m expecting us to set a record for most wins over 10 pts this year):
Bayless, Rudy, Travis, Dante Cunningham and Jeff Pendergraph
"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
by timbo on Jul 27, 2009 6:36 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
The biggest glaring weakness to your analysis, Jscot,
…is that we don’t substitute lines like in hockey. How many minutes will all the starters be sitting on the bench and all the bench players be in the game? Often it’s a mishmash of the two lineups, probably more often than not. Roy and Aldridge averaged 37ish minutes a game last year—essentially, Miller will be playing with Roy probably about as often as with Rudy, if not more. And sometimes both at the same time.
So while I appreciate your analysis, I think that its usefulness is a little diminished by the mix and match nature of NBA lineups.
"HA HA HA HA HA
I'm not laughing, I'm just listing the five ugliest Blazers ever."
- rockingharder
by jamon51 on Jul 25, 2009 3:03 PM PDT reply actions 2 recs
It's true that we don't want to sub 5 for 5.
We had Roy or LMA in the game nearly all the time last year and that should continue this year. Miller gives us another scorer at PG so that provides a few more options than Sergio did. I think we will see a 10-man rotation in the first half of the year, but the backup PF is only going to get 10-12 minutes while the backup SG (Rudy) will get maybe 28 minutes. So there has to be a lot of mixing and matching in the lineups. I see three different guys playing PG (Blake, Miller, Roy) and three different guys playing SF (Batum, Martell, Roy) in most games. The actual minutes any given game are dictated by match-ups and foul troubles but I could see a target rotation looking something like this (see my post below for some of the reasoning):
PG – Blake(18), Miller(24), Roy(6)
SG – Roy(20), Rudy(28)
SF – Batum/Martell(38), Roy(10)
PF – LMA (36), Backup PF (12)
C – Oden/Joel (48)
by BlazerFanSince1970 on Jul 25, 2009 4:36 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
It's hard to argue with that!
I might suggest that Miller play a little more at PG, upwards of 30 MPG, depending on how effective Roy/Miller are against the opponent that night.
I see a third unit, the Newbie Attack, emerging in the form of Bayless, Rudy, Cunningham, Pendergraph, and X (maybe Travis, maybe Joel, maybe Greg if he needs more work). At least I hope that we will coast to some wins this year.
by LaoTzu on Jul 25, 2009 5:04 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
i lolled
the Newbie Attack
Portland's PG of the Future - Meet John Wall
Treat people well because Karma can hit you at any second.
by Net Ranger on Jul 25, 2009 9:11 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
What about Outlaw?
Backup PF? We are just a little too stacked…need to just cut someone out a la Channing Frye last year.
"HA HA HA HA HA
I'm not laughing, I'm just listing the five ugliest Blazers ever."
- rockingharder
by jamon51 on Jul 25, 2009 9:57 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Travis until he can be moved for a real PF.
We have plenty of PF trade assets, including using Travis and Bayless plus cap space (we will be under the cap again after the season starts. There is another thread on how to fill the PF spot including cap space comments.
by BlazerFanSince1970 on Jul 25, 2009 10:53 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
^^ Clarifying - We are probably about $700K under the cap right now
if we are paying Miller $7M the first season (it may be a little less if there are salary increases in the contract). But when we sign the two rookies we will be at or over the cap again. But once the season starts the Euro’s cap holds come off for the season, so we will be back under the cap again. There are other things we could do to get under the cap during the summer if we needed to, but I doubt we will.
by BlazerFanSince1970 on Jul 25, 2009 11:01 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
A big part of that is injuries as Nate actually did plan initially to play a "white" team together in reserve
But you are correct that the matchups may dictate the lineup from team to team. With Miller a second unit without LMA or Roy is doable.
by lee3022 on Jul 25, 2009 10:22 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I have had the impression
that Nate would like to platoon a little bit, but couldn’t because he didn’t have any reliable offense off the bench. Running Andre with the second unit could change that.
When I rule the world, everyone will know how to use Excel.
by jscot on Jul 25, 2009 11:04 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
First coach to do that is gonna revolutionize the game... I wonder if D'Antoni has tried it...
The biggest glaring weakness to your analysis, Jscot,
…is that we don’t substitute lines like in hockey.
"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
by timbo on Jul 27, 2009 6:39 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hubie did that in Memphis in the earlier part of the decade.
optimism ftw
by Cablinasian on Jul 27, 2009 9:24 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Good stuff
I wish the media and Jaynes would put this much thought into a subject before they shared it with us.
by tominhawaii on Jul 25, 2009 3:42 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Most of them would have to acquire a brain first.
"Aneurysm".
When Outlaw wins a game on a last-second shot, it’s called an "annthefaneurysm". QualityPie
by annthefan on Jul 25, 2009 9:14 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Where does one go to do that?
When I rule the world, everyone will know how to use Excel.
by jscot on Jul 25, 2009 11:05 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Maybe they are in trouble
When I rule the world, everyone will know how to use Excel.
by jscot on Jul 25, 2009 11:06 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yep. Probably too late.
"Aneurysm".
When Outlaw wins a game on a last-second shot, it’s called an "annthefaneurysm". QualityPie
by annthefan on Jul 26, 2009 1:38 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
The Magical Land of Oz, Silly Pants!!!
Most of them would have to acquire a brain first. —Annie
Where does one go to do that? —Scot
"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
by timbo on Jul 27, 2009 6:40 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Good analysis.
My feeling is that Miller will beat out Blake the starting point. From what I understand the theory goes you put your best player to start a position. This has been true in Nate’s tenure here so I don’t expect that to change. The first unit will be Miller, Roy, Batum, Aldrige, Oden. I believe Nate wants Martell to start but it’ll take a while for him to really get back into bball shape after a year off. Blake will come off the bench with Rudy, Travis, and Joel. The reality becomes in Nate’s system there are various combinations throughout a game, so starting won’t equate to value. Blake will still get solid minutes and hit some big 3’s.
by BBallBrent on Jul 25, 2009 3:45 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Did we really like how Blake ran the team in the playoffs?
The Blazers have a reputation as a jump shooting team. Just dont see this changing with Blake as our floor general. Our bigs have got to be the focal point of our offense. They need to be getting their shots from closer to the rim, and Brandon creates magic, when initial options dont work. We just cannot continue having Brandon as our primary option all game long and have the team stall when he is double teamed.
it appeared above that options (d) taking it to the hole and passing; and (f) pick-&roll were the two ways of getting the bigs involved closer to the rim. [It also appeared that (i) Andre’s alley-oops would not be targeted to the bigs].
Surely there are more options to get our bigs (and even our SF) shots that are at point blank range. How would Steve and Andre be rated at passing on the move (not just during pick and rolls) so that a slasher, gets the ball near the rim? How about Brandon makes a move, draws the defense, kicks the ball out, rotates to Andre, who finds a cutter on the weak-side? How would you Steve and Andre rate at making good post-up entry passed?
The point guard plays a huge role, in getting our bigs to pound the ball hard. We have size and speed and we need to flex it from within our half court offense. Athleticism is not just about running a fast break. We need a floor general, and Blake is not it. [Brandon is not good — YET — at marshaling the front court]. And of-course Andre plays a little bit of a post up game himself.
We have got move away from being a jump-shooting team. Giving Andre 12-18 minutes as backup PG is not going to change the flavor of our team. To me he has got to play significant minutes as the primary option, or this move was a bust, and some trades get made. And during the two years that we have Andre for, a different style of ball, different team dynamics, should be firmly entrenched amongst all 5 players on the floor. Jerryd is not the only player who should be learning from Andre’s veteran leadership.
[PS: On defense, if nothing else Andre is not going to get posted up on. With Steve, we worried about not just faster, but also bigger/stronger point guards. Baron Davis, Jason Kidd, Rajon Rondo. Andre’s also going to be able to handle defending the mismatch of an opposing big, a lot better than Steve did. Andre may be on the decline, but he was much better than Blake and we get to see how much he has left in him, while the WHOLE TEAM learns around him. A good PG is a second coach].
by FromAfar on Jul 25, 2009 4:17 PM PDT reply actions 1 recs
You raise some good points
This analysis did not predict Andre at 12-18 minutes but only split time with both starters and bench for Andre. The minutes are there if it is working. If the opposition packs the paint we still need shooters.
It appears that a sizable population of Philly fans want Louis Williams to be the starter and are waving bye bye to Andre. Sort of what some here feel about Travis. So perhaps your are overselling Andre’s ability to be all those things consistently,
In the playoffs this year Andre had an assist rate of 23.7% and an offensive rating of 107 while Steve had an assist rate of 26.7% and an offensive rating of 114. However Andre also had a turnover rate of 14.1% and a defensive rating of 110 while Steve had an turnover rate of 15.8% and a defensive rating of 114. These statistics do not refute your theory at all but at least raise the question of both players being somewhat similar in their results. (Both Portland and Philadelphia lost in the playoffs 2-4 against very tough opponents).
by lee3022 on Jul 25, 2009 10:41 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Blazers have to stop being a jump shooting team
Think that bringing Andre in is supposed to accomplish that, and he gets sizable minutes with the starting unit. Andre was brought in at $7M and Steve Blake was brought in at $4M. Surely the Blazers are expecting value for their money, and that Andre ought to be far better than Steve Blake. I’m not trying to sell Andre’s ability. I’m suggesting that management might know more than us, and would not throw $7M without some expectations. They have been too careful with their assessments to be chaotic at this point.
I’m suggesting to us at Blazers Edge, that we should shift our thinking from how does Andre fit into the team, and instead to how will Andre change the team. If he fails then this is a bust. But that is what I believe we should look for.
It took us a while to get our heads around the Hedo move. We were wondering what was the management thinking. At $50M/5 years, and with the Point Forward model, the situation forced us into examining a changing of flavor. This change is not as in our face, but I dont think that it is any less significant. Bringing in a PG at $7M per is not a subtle sliding in of second option at backup PG.
Cant speak to Philly fan expectations. Maybe after Elton Brand went down for the season, at $10M per which was Miller’s previous salary, Philly fans expected Andre to fill in as 2nd superstar alongside Andre Iguodala.
by FromAfar on Jul 26, 2009 9:36 AM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
you are right on
with Andre I see a far more productive Oden for example. Andre’s game is similar to Mike Conley’s game, the guy oden played with since 6th grade or something. andre can get the ball into the post. that wasa problem for the Blazers last year and often times, when they got the ball down there it was in a tough place for the centers to use. Oden has a lot of offensive talent that will be more exploitable with a guy like Miller than with Blake. While our offense should not run through Oden, opening up that possiblity more puts more pressure on an opposing team.
Goodbye Deke. The NBA will miss Mt. Mutombo
Support families in crisis in Portland www.give10tell10.org
by PDXBuckeye on Jul 26, 2009 1:53 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
I do trust KP and Nate to know what they are getting so in no way am I negative about Andre
But if he struggles some of the time (as all players do) I don’t want expectations to come crashing down on him either. I am anticipating good things and hoping for excellence without forcing that on him. It is going to be a fun ride to see how Nate uses both his new and his improved toys.
by lee3022 on Jul 26, 2009 7:34 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
What I'm proposing is "outside the box" thinking
I realize that.
I’m proposing that your best player at a position, and the one who plays the most minutes, does not necessarily start, and only spends half his time with the starters, because it benefits the team more to play him differently.
You don’t seem to be following what I’m suggesting here.
I do think you are right that Andre is definitely going to change the dynamics of the team, and I think that will be very good. But you are just looking at the Blake/Miller comparison.
Blake is at $4 million, Andre at $7 million. That does NOT mean that they are going to adjust the whole team to fit Andre. Brandon is going to be at max money, and he is a superstar. Brandon has dominated the offensive dynamic of the starting unit. If you are proposing significantly changing the offensive dynamic of that unit simply because Andre makes more than Steve, I will suggest that Brandon’s $14 million (or whatever it will be) trumps Andre’s $7 million, and you don’t adjust Brandon’s game just because you brought in a $7 million FA. You only adjust Brandon’s game if it is going to improve it — in which case relative salaries are irrelevant.
As far as spending $7 million, if it gives you not a starter, but a weapon that makes your bench devastating, more flexibility for creating matchup problems, and one more threat for the end of games, that’s probably a pretty good buy. Were they thinking non-starter when they spent the money? I don’t know. But they were willing to spend even more for a non-starter at backup PF.
When I rule the world, everyone will know how to use Excel.
by jscot on Jul 27, 2009 12:47 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
See: Odom, Lamar
As far as spending $7 million, if it gives you not a starter, but a weapon that makes your bench devastating, more flexibility for creating matchup problems, and one more threat for the end of games, that’s probably a pretty good buy.
"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
by timbo on Jul 27, 2009 6:43 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
A few comments
As to post-entry passes, I’m not sure I see a huge difference in ability between the two. Where there might be a difference is in feeding the post off of penetration — Andre can draw defenders when he penetrates, and if he feeds the big man then, he’s broken down the defense and the big man gets an easy shot instead of having to work for it. But I’ve covered that above. If you are just running a play for the man on the low post, Steve can get the ball into him as well as Andre. This is more a question of Nate calling those plays.
I am NOT suggesting Andre only plays 12-18 mpg. Rather, I am suggesting that his fit with the reserves indicates that he needs to get all the minutes when the reserves are on the court, as well as some of the minutes the starters are on the court. The makeup of our reserves maximizes his talents.
I expect Andre plays 25-30 mpg in non-blowouts.
When I rule the world, everyone will know how to use Excel.
by jscot on Jul 25, 2009 11:15 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Getting 30 mins, very different than getting 24
At 30 minutes per game, Andre is the primary option (Blake is only getting 18 minutes, unless they are both on the floor at the same time, and with all the other players that we have, that would be odd). At 24 minutes per game, they are splitting the time. If Andre is getting 30 minutes a game, then he is running the show. he is playing a lot of time with the starting unit and he is playing alongside Brandon. In this scenario we have become a winning team without a 3PT-PG. The flavor of the team ought to have become something very different.
Nah, I dont think you bring someone like Andre in, and not have him change the team. The Blazers have got to shed the image of a jump shooting team. This means the primary unit, the unit that gets 30 minutes of burn with each other. If Andre cannot pull this change off, then this move was a bust. he may not be the starter when the season starts, but for real change, he’s got to be the starter by season end.
Batum won the starting spot. He only played 18 mpg (or so) because he was a rookie and there’re still a lot of rookie mistakes that teams can exploit. He is also still developing his offensive repertoire. Blake is no rookie, if he is only playing 18-20 mpg, then he’s the backup.
This is Steve Blake’s final year on his contract. What scenario would it take for the Blazers to need to re-sign him at season end? Probably, the determination that Bayless is not ready to take over at even the backup PG spot for the next season. If Bayless is working out, then by Feb trading deadline, we should see Bayless as the PG for the 2nd unit, providing that scoring punch, and we find Blake a spot on some other team.
by FromAfar on Jul 26, 2009 9:13 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
You sound a little like Sir Charles, there
I agree that the Blazers cannot be a jump shooting team and get all the way there. We need to exploit our bigs down low, and we need another penetrator. That is one reason Travis has been so effective for us during some of those fourth quarter runs, that and he can get his own shot.
It is funny to me that whatever we do, Barkley puts us in a box he doesn’t like. Maybe this will be the move that gets us out the box.
And by the way, Chuck knows what it takes to not win a championship!
Regarding Blake, why release him even if Bayless develops this year (which may be premature, since he is so young and not the most natural player at the one)? The market will be tough. I like offering Blake something reasonable to stay — say $3M per for three years, team option 3rd year.
by LaoTzu on Jul 26, 2009 2:42 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Keeping Blake
Will Blake stay? Guess it would depend on whether he’s getting offers from other teams. If Bayless has developed and is the clear #2 option, would Blake stay on as 3rd string PG, or would he want to go someplace with a bigger role for him? On the other hand, maybe he stays if he sees that its only for 1 year because Andres 3rd year option wont be picked up, and Blake inherits the backup PG spot.
Salary cap restrictions might make it hard to keep Blake. Isnt it next year when Brandons and LMAs new contracts will start to hit the books. We’ll probably be over the cap (in a year where cap has been severely reduced), and would need to use exceptions to keep Blake.
Chuck is an oddball — never know what he’s going to come up with next. Hope it doesn’t detract from the points, even if Chuck concurs…
by FromAfar on Jul 26, 2009 4:28 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I believe we will have Bird exception rights with Blake and can sign him to anything up to the max
The problem is the luxury tax meaning he costs 2x his salary if (most probably) we are over. (and I realize that is an exception)
by lee3022 on Jul 26, 2009 7:38 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I haven't heard a lot of buzz on other teams' sites about Steve Blake being the answer if only he can be snagged from Portland...
"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
by timbo on Jul 27, 2009 6:45 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
George Karl would like him back
and Philly asked for him in a S&T for Miller
but you’re right, most execs probably see Steve as a quality backup PG on a contending team…which is exactly what he will be for the Blazers, and hopefully for years to come
When reached 39 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
by two4larue on Jul 27, 2009 2:12 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
"Starter fixation"
Manu has a significant impact on the dynamics of his team and doesn’t start.
I think we need to recognize what has just happened. We have become contenders, and we are now a destination for veteran FAs who have won nothing, and want a chance to win it in the last couple of years of their career. That is exactly what has happened. Everyone has talked about it happening someday, but can’t seem to see it when it does happen.
Is Andre here to remake Brandon’s game? I don’t buy it. Andre is here to perhaps refine Brandon’s game a little bit, and enhance some other players. But this is not going to be Andre’s team. He’s a veteran looking to slot in and help where he can.
If that means he plays 28 mpg and Blake plays 20, and most of Blake’s time is alongside Brandon, he’s happy and so is everyone else. Whatever makes the maximum use of the playing assets we have. It’s all about team success now for Andre. He can help this team win, and wants to. He doesn’t have to drastically change the team to do that. To drastically change the starting unit, you have to drastically change Brandon.
Blake re-signed? He is re-signed under the following scenarios, I think.
1) Bayless doesn’t show significant progress by season end, and KP gives up on Jerryd. Then, we keep Steve for around MLE, perhaps a little less. Steve can probably get near that on the open market. We would still need a PG of the future, but at least we would have a solid player in the role.
2) Andre’s game starts to decline or he has significant injury, and we don’t have any confidence that he can be useful for us the following year. Again, we’d try to sign Steve for around MLE. This would be true even if Jerryd is looking like our starter — we would want Steve as backup.
3) Jerryd is progressing and looks like the heir apparent at PG. Steve’s minutes are declining. But he still wants to stay in Portland, even if it means a very reduced role for one more year behind Andre and Jerryd, and then after Andre is gone 12-15 mpg as a backup. We offer Steve $3 million a year and he takes it rather than move elsewhere to earn MLE and start for a mediocre team.
When I rule the world, everyone will know how to use Excel.
by jscot on Jul 27, 2009 1:04 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I agree with your "starter fixation" argument...
Look at Nic Batum last year — he was the “starter” (76 of 79 regular season games and 5/6 in the playoffs) but he averaged 18.4 minutes per game.
So was being the “starter” really all that important in the big scheme of things.
If Miller meshes with Oden better than Blake, I look for Miller to be paired with Oden. If Oden is the starter, Miller will be the starter. If Oden comes off the bench, Miller will come off the bench. I personally couldn’t care less one way or the other, because due to the nature of Oden’s games and 6 fouls being what they are, Oden and Pryz are pretty much going to split time down the middle. Pryzzy racked up a career high in minutes played last year WITH A HEALTHY ODEN. I doubt he’s worried.
The huge, valid point the Scot makes is that it really doesn’t matter all that much if Miller starts, because he will get his minutes either way. And we should not necessarily assume that he will start, any more than we should assume that Nic Batum will start over Marty, or that Marty will start over Nic.
"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
by timbo on Jul 27, 2009 6:53 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
timbo and I agree again
Write it down.
When I rule the world, everyone will know how to use Excel.
by jscot on Jul 27, 2009 7:23 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I agree with you.
Miller should be getting 36 minutes a game. His minutes will most likely overlap with starters and bench players. Blake’s effectiveness with the 2nd unit should not be a roadblock to the Blazers developing a formidable pick and roll game.
"I'm at the thingamajig talking the yakety-yak" - Kenny Smith
by blzrfan on Jul 26, 2009 1:31 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
If Andre plays 15 mpg with the bench
and 15 mpg with the starters, we’ll see a much more effective pick and roll game. He will work with Greg on setting good picks, and how to roll, and others will take advantage of Greg’s improved skill even when Andre isn’t in the game.
I don’t think you play Andre 36 minutes per game. His skill may be that much better than Blake’s, but that underestimates the value of Steve’s deep threat to Brandon’s and LMA’s game. Steve will get more than 12 mpg, and I still expect to see a Rudy/Roy backcourt at times.
Andre isn’t young, and you want him fresh for the playoffs. He shouldn’t average more than 30 mpg. We can get a good playoff seed without wearing down our starters in the regular season. If all goes well and he’s a good fit then he might play that much during the playoffs, but hopefully not in the regular season. It isn’t about trying to win 70 games.
When I rule the world, everyone will know how to use Excel.
by jscot on Jul 27, 2009 1:09 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
It would be foolish to play the 33 year old Miller 36 minutes with a healthy Blake.
A straight time split with Blake strikes me as much more likely.
"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
by timbo on Jul 27, 2009 6:55 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I agree with your analysis and posted basically the same conclusion yesterday.
Here’s my post from yesterday.
Miller/Rudy is a much better backcourt than Blake/Rudy while Roy rests,
Miller will get Rudy more open 3-pt shots than Blake, and he will run the fast break with Rudy while Brandon is out. Rudy provides the 3-pt threat while Miller is in. Roy isn’t going to run the break much, he creates his own shots, and Blake provides a 3-pt threat when playing with Roy.
So I can see Blake starting 1st and 3rd quarters with Roy for about 6 minutes, but Miller getting more total minutes than Blake (maybe 24-18, with Roy getting 6 minutes at PG). Sort of like Batum starting last year, but then only playing about 18 minutes. Match-ups probably determine whether Miller or Blake finishes games with Roy, Rudy, LMA, and Oden (or Joel depending on GO fouls).
Rudy got about 26 minutes last year and probably figures to get 28 minutes this year. If Brandon rests 12 minutes, and plays 6 minutes at PG and 10 minutes at SF, it works out pretty well for target minutes with a 10-man rotation.
PG – Blake(18), Miller(24), Roy(6)
SG – Roy(20), Rudy(28)
SF – Batum/Martell(38), Roy(10)
PF – LMA (36), Backup PF (12)
C – Oden/Joel (48)
LMA 36
Roy 36
Rudy 28
Miller 24
Blake 18
Batum/Martell 38
Oden/Joel 48
Back up PF 12
The disadvantage of Blake starting is that GO will probably start and Miller and GO would be a stronger pick and roll combination. That assumes that GO learns to run the P&R.
Anyway, whatever we think Nate will decide who starts based on some reason that will seem like a 2nd level priority to most of us. I’m not saying he will be wrong, but he usually has a different take on the priorities than most of us fans.
I just hope that KP is able to secure a better backup PF than Outlaw. It’s time for Outlaw to move on to a bad team that values scoring rather than passing, rebounding, and defense.
by BlazerFanSince1970 on Jul 25, 2009 4:19 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, we're on the same page
But if Miller gets significant time with Greg, it doesn’t have to be starting minutes. The main thing is that Greg learn to really set picks and run the pick & roll. Andre can work that with him while they are in together, and it will pay off for years.
When I rule the world, everyone will know how to use Excel.
by jscot on Jul 25, 2009 11:18 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
'The main thing is that Greg learn to really set picks and run the pick & roll."
Dead on. I couldn’t believe the “picks” he set last year on the P&R. Sadly, Greg came out of college with very few refined basketball skills (didn’t know how to set picks, no P&R, hideous baby hook, poor foot work, etc.) Bill Walton he wasn’t. But considering his overwhelming size and athletic advantage over a mediocre crop of other centers in one year of college, it’s understandable, but also indicates either poor coaching or poor coach-ability. I hope it’s the former and not the latter.
by BlazerFanSince1970 on Jul 26, 2009 12:17 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Remember
He didn’t really have a full year of college, either.
It was obvious that Ohio State wasn’t really trying to develop him, since they never worked on getting him the ball. They had a lot of skilled players, and they just let them play, and used Greg as a cleanup man on the offensive boards and a defensive force.
Probably helped them win games, but didn’t help Greg develop. We could use Greg that way, too, but it would be a waste of potential. They were looking at one year, we’re looking at a career.
When I rule the world, everyone will know how to use Excel.
by jscot on Jul 26, 2009 12:34 AM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
I'm interested to see how MIller and Roy interact
We can all anticipate the obvious (MIller’s defender sagging off him and clogging the paint because he knows that Andre can’t “beat” him with a three ball) but what about the subtle ways that Miller could elevate Brandon’s game?
All that I’ve heard re: Miller from the Philly reporters is how Miller makes all of his teammates better, why couldn’t one of the guys who benefits from Andre’s experience and BBIQ be the Roy wonder? If nothing else Miller should be able to push the tempo and get Brandon to fill a lane and run a little more (like he did in college?)
I keep thinking about that conversation that Nate and Andre had over dinner (maybe Nate could call it “My dinner with Andre”?) where MIller was telling Nate how he could help the team. What if part of that conversation centered around Roy, and how Brandon could use some help running the team?
Instead of thinking about how they won’t play well together, maybe it’s time to use a little imagination and visualize how the two players could complement each other. For one thing, they both could post up a smaller PG, so that would make it hard for a team like Houston to defend a Roy-Miller backcourt with Aaron Brooks. Same thing with Tony Parker. We’ve also heard that Miller give the L*kers fits, so it will be interesting to see what Andre brings to the table in a lot of ways, regardless of who starts at PG.
When reached 39 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
by two4larue on Jul 26, 2009 10:11 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Haha! I wondered when someone would use that.
I keep thinking about that conversation that Nate and Andre had over dinner (maybe Nate could call it "My dinner with Andre"?)
"Aneurysm".
When Outlaw wins a game on a last-second shot, it’s called an "annthefaneurysm". QualityPie
by annthefan on Jul 26, 2009 10:21 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Dang it. That's supposed to be in block type.
"Aneurysm".
When Outlaw wins a game on a last-second shot, it’s called an "annthefaneurysm". QualityPie
by annthefan on Jul 26, 2009 10:22 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Don't worry your pretty little head over it
In my world, there will always be room for mindless and beautiful women.
When I rule the world, everyone will know how to use Excel.
by jscot on Jul 27, 2009 1:12 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
You are such a snot, oh august potentate.
"Aneurysm".
When Outlaw wins a game on a last-second shot, it’s called an "annthefaneurysm". QualityPie
by annthefan on Jul 27, 2009 1:26 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Like everything else I do
If I set out to be a snot, I do it superbly.
When I rule the world, everyone will know how to use Excel.
by jscot on Jul 27, 2009 1:27 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I worry about your lack of self esteem.
"Aneurysm".
When Outlaw wins a game on a last-second shot, it’s called an "annthefaneurysm". QualityPie
by annthefan on Jul 27, 2009 1:48 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Don't worry
It’s just false modesty.
When I rule the world, everyone will know how to use Excel.
by jscot on Jul 27, 2009 4:10 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well, that's good, because without false modesty you would have
none at all, oh my audacious autocrat.
"Aneurysm".
When Outlaw wins a game on a last-second shot, it’s called an "annthefaneurysm". QualityPie
by annthefan on Jul 27, 2009 4:11 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
My motto
Always do the best you can with what you have…..
When I rule the world, everyone will know how to use Excel.
by jscot on Jul 27, 2009 11:46 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
You Excel at it, my continental caliph.
"Aneurysm".
When Outlaw wins a game on a last-second shot, it’s called an "annthefaneurysm". QualityPie
by annthefan on Jul 28, 2009 12:39 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I really ought to keep a list of these titles
though I live on an island, not a continent. :)
When I rule the world, everyone will know how to use Excel.
by jscot on Jul 28, 2009 3:10 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
That had to be the most boring movie I can remember seeing
the little bald guy from Princess Bride (who was also the voice of “Rex” in Toy Story) sitting at a table (or was it a booth?) in a fancy restaurant and listening to some French dude talk about his escapades and dalliances? Zzzz
I would’ve rather been a fly (doing the backstroke) in the soup at the dinner table when Nate and KP were interviewing Miller. What a basketball lover’s smorgasboard that would’ve been, eh? A veritable plethora of Blazers inside stuff!
When reached 39 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
by two4larue on Jul 27, 2009 12:01 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
quotes from Arnold's column
“He took a lot of pressure off me,” Philadelphia forward Andre Iguodala said. "My scoring went up, but I took fewer shots. The game was easy and I didn’t have to work as hard. He made it easy for all of us.
“Those guys are going to love him. Roy and Aldridge’s games are going to go up to another level. Everybody’s game is going to step up because of Andre.”
“He’s deceptively athletic. He’s not gonna wow you with dunking over people,” New York Knicks forward David Lee said. “He knows what to do using shot fakes and using deception. Just at the time you think he can’t finish in the lane, he shoots a floater over you. When you think he can’t shoot, he’s hitting the little 15-footers over you.”
“He has the same demeanor, he doesn’t change and plays the same way,” Iguodala said. “The same risky pass he makes in the first quarter, he’ll make in the fourth quarter and he’ll complete it. When you get into situations that are really tense — where it’s a last-second shot or the game is really emotional — you look to your point guard. That takes a lot of pressure off his teammates.”
Miller’s teammates in Philadelphia said they were sad to see him leave the 76ers to join the Blazers.
“’Dre was one of the best guys I ever played with,” forward Thaddeus Young said. “’Dre was a great guy to have on the court and around the locker room.”
http://www.oregonlive.com/nba/index.ssf/2009/07/nba_insider_miller_will_make_p.html
Now I’m going to head on over to the new fanshot re: this same article…
When reached 39 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
by two4larue on Jul 27, 2009 12:06 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I also
am interested to see the Miller/Roy interaction.
We know it is going to happen a lot, and I do think Miller+Roy is likely to be marginally better than Blake+Roy.
I don’t think we’ll see a huge shift in Brandon’s game, but I think we will see some changes, and Andre was able to sell Nate on those changes. I do hope we see fewer Roy isolations. That iso is an extremely effective weapon, but it seems to me it has been significantly overused, and it tends to wear Brandon down.
If we can get even the same effectiveness on the offensive end with less strain on Brandon, it will be a big plus. We might also see Brandon’s defense improve if he doesn’t have to work so hard on offense. We know he has the capability to be an outstanding defender, but he expends so much energy on the other end that he rarely brings it on the defensive end.
I also hope Andre helps Rudy take his game to another level, and think he will. If that happens, we might see Brandon taking longer breaks as well, which is all to the good, IMO.
When I rule the world, everyone will know how to use Excel.
by jscot on Jul 27, 2009 1:17 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Help me out
I have read this sight for about a year now and just recently started commenting. I brought up this same subject recently, with decent feed back, then about two hours later my comments dissappeared. Now they have resurfaced above??? I am grateful for the discussion, just curious about my deleted comments. Any help?
by trailblazeraddict on Jul 25, 2009 7:30 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
This thread is turning out to be one of the most well written and
thought out threads I’ve come across here at BE. Great dialogue guys.
Portland's PG of the Future - Meet John Wall
Treat people well because Karma can hit you at any second.
by Net Ranger on Jul 25, 2009 9:17 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
This is par for the course bro!
Other sites have maybe one or two bloggers I bother to read. This one has more than I can count, including Dave and Ben.
"Life is a meaningless sequence of events in between Blazer championships"
by broggerboy19 on Jul 25, 2009 10:38 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
awesome
Portland's PG of the Future - Meet John Wall
Treat people well because Karma can hit you at any second.
by Net Ranger on Jul 26, 2009 8:53 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Very nice analysis and excellent discussion
My overall thoughts before I started reading this remain – that Nate and KP have often referred to flexibility and Andre give us even more. There are so many ways to mix and match that opponents will have to prepare for the probable and be surprised by the actual.
1) Nate wanted to platoon last year. Will he repeat that attempt?
2) Nate wanted to improve our overall defense and our end-game offense. Will that happen with Andre?
3) Nate and KP and Brandon have all emphasized the need for toughness. Does Andre fit that definition?
4) Portland enjoyed a deeper bench last year than most opponents but that did not seem to matter in playoff games.
Will that improved bench mean much in a 8 or 9 man rotation?
5) As noted above it is going to be a fun year! Can we all sit back and enjoy the process of growth now?
by lee3022 on Jul 25, 2009 10:50 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
A deep bench in the playoffs
isn’t as important because you don’t have back to back games, or four in five nights.
How can a deep bench help your playoff chances?
1. Helps you get a higher seed, which gives you home court advantage in more series. That is always a help.
2. Gives you injury cover in case someone gets hurt.
3. If your coach has the guts to use them a lot, it keeps your starters fresh through the regular season, which can help them in the playoffs. Nobody gets worn down. It might cost you a few regular season wins, but might make you more effective in the playoffs.
4. Again, if your coach has the guts to use them a lot, it reduces the chances of injury to a key player. Tired players have a greater likelihood of injury, and fewer minutes reduces the chance of wear and tear injuries.
5. If your coach is willing to run a very aggressive high-speed game for 48 mpg, your deep bench can also help during the actual playoff games by wearing down the opponent. They will shorten their rotation for the playoffs, because they aren’t as good at 9-10, but that means they will get tired if you make them work, and work, and work.
When I rule the world, everyone will know how to use Excel.
by jscot on Jul 25, 2009 11:26 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think you are right about the season until the last 20 games
That seems to be the push to get rotation rhythm for the playoffs. If your 9 and 10 guys are getting killed by their starters back in won’t getting the opponent tired be overruled by the need to keep it close?
My memory of the 1976-1977 team was Jack did platoon most of the year and some of the playoffs. But the league has changed a bit since those days.
by lee3022 on Jul 26, 2009 7:51 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
My memory of the 1977-78 team
was that Jack kept pushing his starters to play more minutes (or at least, he didn’t rein them in) because they were going for the best W-L record and homecourt though the playoffs. The ‘77 team all loved playing together as much as possible, and they were a joy to watch. But sometimes discretion has to be the better part of valor. (We see coach Pop rationing his veteran’s minutes during the regular season, by resting Duncan on back-to-back nights, etc.) Nate has a younger team, but he could still “cut back” on his starter’s PT and save their legs for the games that will really count, in May and (hopefully) June
When reached 39 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
by two4larue on Jul 26, 2009 10:26 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Jack Ramsay did what I think is optimal
He platooned in the first half, and occasionally in the second half if things were going well. But a lot of the time, he just used situational substitutions and/or individual substitutions in the second half.
I’m a big believer in first half platooning. Your starters go hard for 10-12 minutes. They know what is happening, they go and do a job and push the ball and work hard for that limited time. They know their rest is coming, they don’t have to pace themselves that much. They know their role, and they do it.
Then, you bring in the subs. They are mentally prepared, they pretty much knew exactly when they were coming in. They know their job, they know when they are going to do it, they are getting PT at a time in the game when it matters, so they know their job is important, and they go hard for 8-10 minutes. The other team has a choice of leaving their starters in and getting them worn down by your bench, or putting their inferior bench on the court and possibly letting the game get away.
That’s what Jack did. Even if a guy doesn’t play in the second half at all, if he got important first half minutes he’s had an important role, which is mentally and emotionally valuable to him.
I think it is only effective if you are going to have both starters and bench push the ball and force the pace defensively as well with pressure defense. Then, you turn fatigue into a weapon. You never let them ease off for the full 48 minutes.
When I rule the world, everyone will know how to use Excel.
by jscot on Jul 27, 2009 1:26 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
1) Will Nate platoon? I don’t want him to unless his goal is to run the other team into the ground. Will he?
2) Our overall defense and end-game offense improve with Andre Miller, yes. One of the things Miller brings that few comment on is excellent rebounding from the guard spot. Imagine an even higher percentage of rebounds. No second chances for you!
3) Andre Miller is tough. He is also physical. I have been worried about Steve’s head ever since he blew those free throws and cost us that Clippers game.
4) Read jscot. Also, with flexibility the bench means something. Against certain teams, *cough*"Houston"*cough*, we could have used another penetrator. Against another team, Blake might be a hard matchup or be needed to spread the floor. Houston’s speed and commitment on the perimeter killed us as bad as their ability to keep in front of Brandon.
5) No. There is that banger 4, and enough people love this guy and hate that guy’s game, and what about so and so, and what would it take to sign Odem, blah, blah, blah.
by LaoTzu on Jul 25, 2009 11:41 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Good points - both of you
I especially like the point of flexibility. Nate and KP have emphasized that repeatedly. Also for injuries we have some added ability to recover.
by lee3022 on Jul 26, 2009 7:54 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
2) Nate wanted to improve our overall defense and our end-game offense. Will that happen with Andre?
A couple of things Nate emphasized in Casey’s video was how impressed he was with Miller’s “know-how” re: “time/score situations” and how Andre knew when to communicate with his teammates that a “stop” was needed on defense. While it’s true that he’s lost a step on defense, Miller already knows his opponent’s tendencies and will “shade” a penetrator towards help and away from the player’s strength. He has veteran savvy and is a great team defender who will raise the BBIQ of his teammates
When reached 39 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
by two4larue on Jul 26, 2009 10:19 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
sorry i didn't read the comments
i’ll suggest one point is that the ability to create for others.Why it’s importent is because you have a second option(besides Roy), it can cause the opponents lots of problems, and it is why Hedo is a good fit, seems like A.Miller is our new Hedo.
C Creg Oden
PF LarMarcus Aldridge
SF Nicholas Batum
SG Brandon Roy
PG Jerryd Bayless
by asiafan on Jul 26, 2009 3:23 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Am I the only one who remembers the Blazers constantly behind in the first quarter last year?
Early double digit deficits were a common occurrence on the road. Adding Miller would embolden the starting lineup. He can be a scorer and a playmaker, take the pressure off LMA in the 1st quarter and allow Roy to play off the ball early to save his energy for the 2nd half. Roy is a slow starter, he takes awhile to get into the game.
I don’t want to see slow starts next year. I don’t want to see Blake waste the shot clock driving half way to the free throw line and picking up his dribble. If Blake plays only 10-12 minutes a game, I think that would be great. He was basically the best of the worst options on the Blazers.
Blake is a player who needs very good players around him to succeed. His best attribute as a spot up shooter is completely dependent on his teammates. The Blazers 2nd unit doesn’t have offensive players like Roy and LMA to draw the defense and give Blake open looks. It’s funny, I’m a pessimist in regards to Bayless, but I could possibly make an argument that Bayless is a better fit for the 2nd unit than Blake.
Miller has been a starter in the NBA for his entire career. He had a great season last year. He is a much better PG than Blake. Miller can work the pick and roll with Oden, take the early pressure off LMA, and be a 3rd scorer on the floor. If Blake can’t work with the 2nd unit, then maybe Bayless should get a look instead of forcing Miller to the bench.
"I'm at the thingamajig talking the yakety-yak" - Kenny Smith
by blzrfan on Jul 26, 2009 1:03 PM PDT reply actions 1 recs
Wow, strong analysis
I’m sold.
I like Blake better than you do. I think he was a good option, st not a top-20 PG. I love his handle and smart decision-making. He helped us grow, but he could have been more creative.
I agree that he is better with Brandon, and worse with the quicks and perimeter shooters in the 2nd line-up.
Quandary!
by LaoTzu on Jul 26, 2009 2:48 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
exactly. Our first quarter deficits just killed us last year… it was often because LMA’s shot wasn’t falling, Brandon took too long to get into the game, and Batum/Blake/Przybilla were incapable of creating offense. Putting Miller on the floor changes that… I’d be willing to bet that Roy would play off the ball in the first quarter, conserving energy. He’s shown in the all-star game, the 14 games that Sergio started, etc. that he can be very good off the ball.
I think it can be a Ginobili/Parker thing, when either Miller or Roy is on the court at all times. Let one of them be initiating. No more Steve Blake pick and pops.
life is better as an optimist
by Cablinasian on Jul 26, 2009 9:38 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
One thing Blake does that he doesn't get credit for very often
is run a half-court offense, and make rhthym passes to wing players. I could foresee the 2nd unit running Rudy and Martell off of screens (Joel’s speciality!) and Steve hitting them at that split second they come open for catch and shoot opportunities.
Up until now, the Blazer’s starting five has been known as a “grind it out” bunch that reiled on Roy’s ISOs and the post play of Aldridge. But LMA and Batum can run as well as any forwards, and we’ve even see Brandon fill the left-hand lane and finish, even though he’s reluctant to push the tempo when he has the ball. Miller could transform the starting 5 into a more uptempo unit, and Blake could increase the half-court efficiency of the bench players with a set offense that features Rudy and Webster coming off screens and knocking down jumpers.
Where would Travis fit into that bench unit? Umm, he doesn’t. That’s kind of the point. A veteran PF to back up LMA and help Joel set some nasty screens would seem to be in order, someone like…Jeff Foster, perhaps?
When reached 39 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
by two4larue on Jul 26, 2009 10:41 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Excellent excellent post!
this was fantastic.
I tend to favor what I know about Miller’s game over what I know about Blake’s game with the starters. I think the missing piece to your analysis is how Miller will make Oden better on the offensive end. Face it, Blake is good, real good at running a strong perimeter offense. he is calm but assertive on most occassions (not always but mostly). The one thing he just can’t do consistently is get the ball to the center position in a place where the center can use it.
Miller’s game aligns much more closely to Mike Conley’s game than Blake. One of the key features of Conley’s game, when playing with Oden, was the combination of his ability to drive the lane (a miller trait) or fire a high, precise pass to the center position on what normally appears to be a tough angle (his much noted prowess at getting his passes to the rim indicates a similar trait). Miller’s skill set opens up Oden’s potential offensively. Blake could just never get the ball in consistently enough in a good enough position for Oden to use it. Granted Oden was slow last season, still coming back from his surgery, but still the passing to the interior was not great either. I am not claiming that we should run our offense through Oden, not with Roy on the roster, but just think how much more punch we will have with Oden posted and a more viable offensive option than last year.
Just think about the set on the court. Would you rather defend Blake who is strong at getting the ball around the perimeter, can step back for the 3 and can occassionally drive the ball for a pitch out or Miller who can consistently drive the ball, hit perimeter shooters, create his own interior shot, pitch it out, or if by some chance you cut him off at the key and take away perimeter passing options he can still take you over the top with a tough but effective pass to the post.
So you don’t have the step back 3 available with Miller, but the threat count is higher with Miller on the court rather than Blake. i am a big Blake fan, he works hard, obviously gives his all, but that added dimesion that Andre brings moves him into the starting position in my mind.
Goodbye Deke. The NBA will miss Mt. Mutombo
Support families in crisis in Portland www.give10tell10.org
by PDXBuckeye on Jul 26, 2009 1:11 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Agreed.
And what Andre can do for Oden, he can do for LMA as well. Getting the ball into the post, when/where the post can do something with it, is not a skill that Blake excels at. Hope Andre can change the Blazer post game, and maybe Brandon picks it up as well.
by FromAfar on Jul 26, 2009 2:00 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
The improvement of Oden
would be the biggest reason to start Andre, and it may trump all the other factors.
I am concerned that with Andre in the starting lineup, we may not have enough shooting in that lineup to beat a zone. Teams can pack in a tight zone, and who will shoot them out of it?
If you want to slow down Brandon, run a zone. If you want to slow down Greg, run a zone. If you want to keep LMA from being effective in the low post, run a zone, and make him hit the 18 footers instead.
Having a shooter on the wing in the SF spot and a spot up 3 point threat at PG makes running a zone pretty dangerous, especially since Brandon is a good shooter, too, if not the best 3 point shot in the world. With Blake, you run a zone against Portland at your peril — he can not only hit the 3, he is good at finding the open shooter. Maybe if Martell comes back you lessen that problem.
When I rule the world, everyone will know how to use Excel.
by jscot on Jul 27, 2009 1:39 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I hope Brandon is working on just that
because if he can get that down…my oh my…
Goodbye Deke. The NBA will miss Mt. Mutombo
Support families in crisis in Portland www.give10tell10.org
by PDXBuckeye on Jul 26, 2009 2:41 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
My vote is for Andre
Weren’t we trying to find someone to take the pressure off Roy and get a second option to create scoring going to the hole next to him?
Has anyone noticed that Roy seems hesitant to drive in the first half? I see our first possessions being started by Miller. Roy is a good shooter and could be deadly with inside-outside shoots coming from Miller. He can also do a huge amount of damage taking the ball to the hole when the D is recovering from a Miller drive (and Miller can do the same after a drive from Roy)
Having two people on the floor who want the ball in their hands does not scare me, at least not now. Aside from the chock against the Magic, would anyone argue that the Cavs got worse by adding Mo Williams and Delonte West to the starting lineup to take some of the pressure off James.
This view is subject to change as the season goes on but I’d say if Andre proves himself a better individual player the starting spot should be his to lose.
by lawgdawg12 on Jul 26, 2009 5:12 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Conclusion #2
Doesn’t make sense to me. I would think that defense and 3-point threat would be more valuable in a close, end-of-game situation, no? Wouldn’t you want someone who can spread the floor and punish other teams for leaving him to double Brandon?
"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 Jul 26, 2009 8:32 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Even if Blake's not in the game
Roy could still have Rudy or Martell to kick the ball to behind the arc, in those situations. And if Roy was doubled or trapped, Miller could be his “outlet” and then Andre could “make some hay” by driving the ball against the remaining 3 defenders
By the same token, if Miller was the penetrator and was cut off he could toss the ball to Brandon who would then have the option to either shoot the 3, or pump-fake and drive around a defender who was flying out at him, and then weave his way through the weak-side defense (who would be scrambling to recover from their concentration on Andre’s original drive) and find an easier path to the hoop than he normally sees when he’s the #1 focus of the opposing defense
When reached 39 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
by two4larue on Jul 26, 2009 10:52 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Except that
Steve Blake can’t play any type of defense or run any sort of fastbreak.
by sabonis11 on Jul 26, 2009 9:27 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Come out swinging and adjust as necessary.
Miller/Rudy/Roy/Aldridge/Oden
by blazeraider on Jul 26, 2009 9:51 PM PDT reply actions 1 recs
Like that...
I think those are our best 5. I bet these 5 finish the games a lot….
by Visionary1 on Jul 26, 2009 10:38 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Nice post, I've only now managed to read it.
I think the idea that Miller will match up best with the running ponies of the 2nd unit is fundamentally correct.
However, I think that KP & Nate want to play Oden max minutes and to start him ASAP. And I think Miller will do wonders for Oden.
So I will phrase it this way: Miller and Oden will be a pair, whether they start or whether they come off the bench.
"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
by timbo on Jul 26, 2009 10:56 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Could be true
When I rule the world, everyone will know how to use Excel.
by jscot on Jul 27, 2009 1:40 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
One or the other is going to start, screwing with diff starting lineups is going to cause problems.
I think it’s silly that we all know Blake should be a back-up, and so we finally get a legit starting PG…..and people want to bench him in favor of Blake. ?????
Couple things I take issue with:
Blake is a seriously inferior defender. He’s too scrawny to guard big players and too slow to guard quick ones. I don’t know that much about Miller’s defense because I didn’t watch him in 82 games last season like I did Blake. I can tell you that Blake is horrible on defense. Other than plain inexperience, there are reasons Greg picked up a ton of fouls last season and it wasn’t because Blake was locking down dudes on the perimeter.
Also there’s no way Blake shoots a career high 3 pt % again like he did last season (43%). I expect him to be closer to his career numbers this season (39%). Still good, but not good enough to consider it a major reason to play him alongside so and so.
Blazer Fan
by leeroyjenkins on Jul 28, 2009 2:10 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
That said...though he can't stop anybody on D Blake is saavy enough to guide his man to a certain spot on the floor
But if your big guys can’t hog the inside w/o fouling, directing your guy to a certain spot doesn’t mean much.
Blazer Fan
by leeroyjenkins on Jul 28, 2009 2:12 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
Related FanPosts on Blazersedge
Related FanShots on Blazersedge
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
Certain photos copyright © 2010 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.
