B. Roy: "I called Coach [McMillan] + he said Andre and Greg are coming off the bench. I said, 'Coach, you sure about that?' He said, 'Yeah!'
3 months ago
CroRupt
67 comments
1 recs |
Email
PrintComments
Bens twitter
http://twitter.com/blazersedge
Trade for Luis Amundson!!Do it KP!!
by CroRupt on Aug 11, 2009 11:00 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
if this remains true, then the Blazer's bench
should be able to beat the starters in 9-10 scrimmages
When reached 39 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
by two4larue on Aug 11, 2009 11:05 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Typical Nate
Hopefully both Andre and Greg leave him no choice but to start them with their play in camp and the preseason.
Ben II Blazersedge.com || New to Blazers' Edge?
by usmcr3049 on Aug 11, 2009 11:08 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
who cares if they start... as long as they get 30 + minutes I'll be happy
The NBA is about mismatches and the 2nd unit would have a ton of mismatches. With Miller and Oden closing out games they can easily get to 30 min.
Miller
Rudy
Webster
Outlaw
Oden
Lots of room for Miller and Oden to operate
by neilan on Aug 12, 2009 2:54 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Let the best man win
But, Oden will start.
Nate just likes to underline the THE SPOTS ARE UP FOR GRABS competition in camp.
Mo—
by Mortimer on Aug 11, 2009 11:12 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Yup.
Przy & Blake were the starters, so they will be the starters until someone can prove otherwise. It has always been Nate’s position and I don’t see why people expect he was all of a sudden going to change this year. Yes, this is directed at you Brandon Roy.
*Unless KP has a secret plan that makes this statement incorrect.
by staylost on Aug 11, 2009 11:18 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
It is my personal belief that Miller fits better with the second unit.
A playmaker when Roy is resting, a great lob passer to feed Oden & Rudy, another offensive threat to take pressure off Outlaw in the 2nd unit.
Theoretically, I love the move, it just conflicts with the idiom that Miller is, for all intents and purposes, a bona fide starter in this league.
"Ain't nothin' in this world for free."
by Arby on Aug 11, 2009 11:25 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I like Miller's potential with the 2nd unit too
I’m more about getting Oden and Roy and LMA as much time together as possible, since they are what are The Trail Blazers for the next decade.
Having a 2nd guy who can equal parts score and make plays with both units could be dye-no-mite.
M—
by Mortimer on Aug 11, 2009 11:28 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
What's going on around here? Who ARE you people?!
The starters have twice as many minutes per game as do the reserves, so you always want your best players to be the starters so they can have more time to make an impact on the game.
If two of your best players are reserves, that team might dominate their counterparts on other teams, but for no more than 16 minutes per game. Meanwhile, your starting unit is correspondingly weaker over the 32-36 minutes they are on the court.
by MiledAnimal on Aug 11, 2009 11:51 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Miller and Roy would need to play together as well
I am fine with him starting (whoever is better), but he’d also get more out of Rudy and Batum/Webster/Outlaw than Blake would, while his playmaking would always be secondary alongside Roy.
Blake is a careful ballhandler, but not a very good playmaker. That is totally fine next to Roy. But with Rudy and whoever at SF and Joel? I dunno… we could find our 2nd unit taking a dip.
I want our best players to play most of the game, but I also like Miller’s game (what we know of it as of now) with the 2nd unit core of Rudy and whoever at SF and Joel.
Morty
by Mortimer on Aug 11, 2009 11:59 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Not really
The assumption that starters play “starters minutes” is usually a safe bet in the NBA, but Batum and Outlaw illustrated how this assumption is not always correct. IF—a big all caps “if”—Oden and Miller don’t start, I assume it would have way more to do with rotation and player combinations than actual minutes. Not many teams stay as talented as the Blazers when they go to the bench (no matter who starts), so I would guess the starting rotation including Przy and Blake is all about getting LMA and Roy off early and then just continuing to bring in fire power (Miller, Oden, Rudy, Outlaw, Webster, or whoever else does not start).
The real question, as far as I am concerned, isn’t who starts; it is who consistently FINISHES closes games?
by unemployedreflection on Aug 11, 2009 12:06 PM PDT up reply actions 2 recs
Ginobli comes off the bench. That formula seems to be pretty successful.
I get the paper, so I don't care!
by Name's Ash on Aug 11, 2009 1:59 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I should have written that a team's best players
should play starter minutes, not that they need to be the starters. Or that minutes should be doled-out according to a complicated formula that takes PER, Wins Produced, and Number of Female Admirers into account, among dozens of other factors.
by MiledAnimal on Aug 11, 2009 2:16 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
It is partly of necessity that best players play starter minutes
There are few if any teams as deep as this one. Resting a started brings a drop-off. The other team will have to play starters longer while we rest and mix and match to provide constant mismatches. On this team the only certainty is B-Roy plays at the end. Stats are irrelevant when the wins are coming in big bunches. Can we do this year after year? Highly doubtful. But for now with so many on rookie contracts we can terrorize second units across the league and own the 4th quarter no matter who is playing.
by lee3022 on Aug 27, 2009 2:38 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
RT: The starters have twice as many minutes per game as do the reserves
Not all of them. (Batum vs. Outlaw last year, etc)
If Nate wants to get “creative” with his rotations, then that’s up to him. MIller will play more than Blake, Oden will play as many minutes as his foul trouble (and conditioning) allows, etc
When reached 39 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
by two4larue on Aug 11, 2009 4:12 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think miller is better in either unit
he is just plain better then Blake
Draft Cole Aldrich 2010
by jlarose78 on Aug 11, 2009 12:17 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Sure, he's better than Blake
But you likely get more out of Miller and what he does well next to non-playmakers like Rudy and Batum and Martell and Joel and Travis, and since you can’t play him the entire game anyways you put Blake where he fits best as well.
So, ya start Miller, sub Blake in for him first, get some subs in later on, put Miller back in. He still plays the most minutes, but you get more out of him with the guys not named Roy.
He’s a better player than Blake, but Blake and him will share the PG duties for 48 minutes. Finding the right combo that gets the most out of Blake and Miller, and the rest of the team, may entail Miller being the starter who leaves early and comes back to do battle with the 2nd unit dudes.
Morty
by Mortimer on Aug 11, 2009 12:24 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Believe it when i see it.
"These are dreams that we have." --Rudolfo Fernandez
by bfan on Aug 11, 2009 11:28 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Nate’s just giving the same line as always… competition, no one is handed a starting role.
I think Andre NEEDS to start… we were pretty terrible in first quarters last year, lest we forget. That was our biggest issue.
optimism ftw
by Cablinasian on Aug 11, 2009 11:43 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I saw this on the Bedge twitter also. anyone know the source of the conversation?
I hope I can get a bunch of championships, like 15. " - Greg Oden
by mxpx5678 on Aug 11, 2009 11:44 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
It's the new "bring your best guys in against the second unit" strategy
We will start with Blake, Rudy, Martell, Cunningham, Przybilla/Pendergraph depending on form. Then when we are in a deep hole, Nate throws in the starters to bring us back in the game. Works every time.
"I'm addicted to polo y'all...respect my fresh" - Travis25Outlaw
by Norsktroll on Aug 11, 2009 11:46 AM PDT reply actions 1 recs
Someone should ask Nate if shooting guard is a competition in training camp.
I bet he would say yes despite BRoy and the max contract. That’s just the philosophy.
Every position is a competition. No one is given their spot. Once you have your spot, you don’t lose it to injury, but you have to constantly prove that you continue to earn it.
I have no problem with this philosophy even if it results in ridiculous sounding statements like Miller coming off the bench.
by grigs on Aug 11, 2009 11:49 AM PDT reply actions 1 recs
I would laugh pretty hard if we heard about Rudy potentially moving to the starter spot after camp because he earned it.
*Unless KP has a secret plan that makes this statement incorrect.
by staylost on Aug 11, 2009 11:59 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I know this is Nates way
But Come on your going to have your newly signed 2nd highest paid player coming off the bench? as well as your #1 draft pick/ one of the “big 3”? come on, why don’t you just be honest with your guys nate, Blake, Pryz sorry we love you but you are not part of our long term plans as starters for this team but we would love for you guys to come off the bench.
Draft Cole Aldrich 2010
by jlarose78 on Aug 11, 2009 12:14 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Or how about ....
…. “Steve, Joel, you guys worked hard to earn your starting spot last year. Now don’t assume that they will be just given away. Greg and Andre are going to have to earn it like you did.”
And since when does the amount a player gets paid dictate whether he gets to start or not? If that were so, Raef would have been our starting center last season.
hakkaa päälle !
by timg56 on Aug 11, 2009 12:23 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
He would have been our starting center if he'd been healthy.
I mean, let’s get serious, he made twice as much money as Joel.
by MiledAnimal on Aug 11, 2009 12:45 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I see a lot of sense in Miller and Oden ...
… playing with the second unit.
However I side with the folks who are saying any such comment by Nate has more to do with his old school believe that to win a starting position over an incumbent, you have to out perform him.
Besides, a smart coach understands that the NBA is more about matchups than it is about who starts. He knows that he has to balance the shuffling of his lineup to get the best matchups against creating and maintaining a good rhythym between his guys. Theortically, there is no reason a team can’t have 9 – 10 guys that are all in sync with one another, no matter what lineup they play in. It’s not easy, but it is not impossible.
I believe that’s why Nate has emphasized fundamentals so much. He knows that if everyone is on the same page and truly has the fundamentals of the game down, it becomes that much easier to find a rhythym together, because they are better able to anticipate what a teammate is going to do in a particular situation. It is an aspect of McMillan’s coaching that goes largely unappreciated here at BE.
hakkaa päälle !
by timg56 on Aug 11, 2009 12:19 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Why not start Bayless at PG and Pendergraph at Center....
then we will have the best 2nd and 3rd string PG’s and C’s in the league.
by Escrote on Aug 11, 2009 12:27 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I think Nate is underestimating
the improvements that Oden will have this year. if oden and joel were pretty even last year, oden should be way better than joel this year. here’s our bench:
PG- Andre Miller
SG- Rudy Fernandez
SF- Martell Webster
PF- Travis Outlaw
C- Greg Oden
That’s the best bench I have ever seen. ever.
Roy, Aldridge, Oden, Rudy, Batum, Outlaw, Webster, Bayless, Blake, Miller, Joel... Holy crap!
by axel360 on Aug 11, 2009 12:31 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Ever, ever, ever.
For real.
*Unless KP has a secret plan that makes this statement incorrect.
by staylost on Aug 11, 2009 12:35 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
This is just my opinion, but I don't envision both Travis Outlaw or Martell Webster getting playing time.
It’ll most likely be an either/or situation, with Outlaw staying if Webster isn’t healthy to begin the season or Outlaw traded elsewhere if Webster is ready to go this fall. There’s just not enough minutes to go around for both of them.
Stupid people have stupid ideas.
by AK1984 on Aug 11, 2009 12:38 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
If Martell is healthy
I would think Batum would be the odd man out until someone is moved.
Senior Asian ambassador of Blazers Edge
by Philthyanimal on Aug 11, 2009 10:33 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
That'd be a travesty.
Nicolas Batum > Travis Outlaw & Martell Webster.
Stupid people have stupid ideas.
by AK1984 on Aug 11, 2009 10:57 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
I figured that this would be the case the entire time.
“Under this scenario, Greg Oden and Andre Miller play 28 minutes per game — while on the court together — and, in spite of not being starters, are on the floor to finish each contest. All things considered, that’s the best way to utilize their respective skill sets.
Joel Przybilla and Steve Blake fit well on the court with each other — particularly with Brandon Roy out there, too, since he can run the offense — while Oden and Miller do their thing at a separate time with the pick-and-roll game. Przybilla’s intense man-to-man interior defense somewhat makes up for Roy’s porous perimeter defense, while Blake’s efficient spot-up shooting from beyond the arc allows #7 a guy to kick it out to in failed dribble-drive situations.
Of course, Oden and Miller would have to defer to Roy for a portion of each game — especially during the last 8 or so minutes in both halves — however, with Rudy Fernandez also on the court at the same time to stretch the floor, there’d be little worry about opponents clogging the lane in an attempt to shut down Roy’s iso game or Oden/Miller’s […] pick-and-roll game."
http://www.blazersedge.com/2009/7/29/968519/blake-is-the-starting-pg-thats#18935073
It’s not hard to predict what Nate McMillian will do as a coach.
Stupid people have stupid ideas.
by AK1984 on Aug 11, 2009 12:32 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Before you pat yourself on the back too much...
maybe we should wait and actually see what happens. KP recently said Bayless was a potential starter. Doesn’t mean there’s a chance in hell it actually happens.
It’s not hard to predict what Nate McMillian will do as a coach.
That’s funny, because I totally remember when you called Batum as the starting small forward last season. There is a good chance Oden will start. There is a very, very, very good chance Miller will start.
by Nick Van Excellent on Aug 11, 2009 6:22 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
well, then it just as likely that Oden and Miller come off the bench
IMO that will be the best way to take advantage of Portland’s depth. But, we won’t know until we see it all fit together.
by neilan on Aug 12, 2009 3:01 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Remember...
that Nate had essentially annointed Oden the starter pre-microfracture. Nate is normally very reserved, and I don’t doubt he still tastes a bit of foot.
He’s being careful and providing motivation. Hey! Who does Nate think he is trying to motivate these guys!!??
The cowards never started
The weak died along the way
Only the strong survived
They were the Trailblazers
by lukeyhere on Aug 11, 2009 12:57 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
"I'm focusing on trying to continue to improve my mid-range game. I've watched a lot of tape on Kobe..."
I don’t know if I wanna barf or applaud him.
The Kings have the best bench I’ve seen. There are easily 14 guys on this team good enough for every bench in the league. Now if we could only get some starters, I’d totally jizz in my pants.
Kings fan
by dyshooter182 on Aug 11, 2009 1:16 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I applaud because the why he gave is totally correct.
Good enough to be doubled at the top & at the rim.
The sneak through to the mid range is where people like Kobe, Nash, & Paul make their best passes and make points that don’t involve them hitting the deck and then shooting two more.
*Unless KP has a secret plan that makes this statement incorrect.
by staylost on Aug 11, 2009 1:37 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hmm,
I actually think Kobe relies way too much on his midrange game. A lot of his shots are tough jumpers.
The Kings have the best bench I’ve seen. There are easily 14 guys on this team good enough for every bench in the league. Now if we could only get some starters, I’d totally jizz in my pants.
Kings fan
by dyshooter182 on Aug 11, 2009 2:02 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I agree.
To do it all the time = Wrong.
To do it when as a play-making option when the play has fallen through = Right.
The idea is to do it while looking for the pass, but you need a deadly shot at that range to pull the defenders.
To be honest there are a lot of things Roy could work on to get better. I mean that as a compliment, too.
Defense.
3pt. shooting.
Passing.
I can’t imagine anyone being much better at taking it to the hoop hard, though.
*Unless KP has a secret plan that makes this statement incorrect.
by staylost on Aug 11, 2009 3:57 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
RT: Passing.
especially hitting the big guys diving towards the basket, after he rolls off a screen
Too many “pick and pops” with LMA, they need more “pick and slips” that lead to “and ones”
Miller should help show them all how to get those high-percentage opportunities
When reached 39 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
by two4larue on Aug 11, 2009 9:34 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Nate has always wanted to be a solid 10 deep team
Start Blake, Roy, Batum, LMA, and Joel. Bring in Andre, Greg and Martell/Travis with about 4 minutes left in the first. Bring Rudy and Travis in at the end of the 1st (1 minute left or so) to give Roy and LMA a rest. Roy, LMA come back in with 8 minutes left in the 2nd. Put the starters back in for the 3rd and repeat formula. Adjust in the 4th to the needs of the game.
Starters – Blake, Roy, Batum, LMA, Joel
2/3rd thru 1st – Andre, Roy, Martell/Travis, LMA, Greg
End 1st – Andre, Rudy, Martell, Travis, Greg
1/3rd thru 2nd – Andre, Roy, Rudy, LMA, Greg
Repeat in 2nd half adjusting for the needs of the game.
Roy and LMA play big minutes as usual (35 – 38). Joel, Blake and Batum start but only play 15 – 18 minutes. Andre and Greg get 30 minutes or so. Rudy gets 25 – 28 but has play SF for some it (Maybe not ideal but I think Nate needs to find a way to get Rudy minutes). Travis and Martell get maybe 20 minutes. And Andre plays with everyone except Joel (which will happen if Greg gets in foul trouble).
Why start 3 guys who only play 15 – 18 minutes? First, I think Blake and Brandon works better than Blake and Rudy. Steve is going to get 15 minutes a game regardless so I’d prefer he play them with Roy. Second, I think Nic’s defensive skills are important at the beginning of game. Hopefully, he can slow down the opposing teams best player so he can’t get out to a quick start. And it appears his offensive is improving this summer. Third, Joel starting gives Greg a chance to analyze the other team’s play before going in. Joel’s a vet and won’t get rattled no matter what is thrown at him. Greg often looked lost out there. Teams took advantage of Greg’s inexperience quite successfully. Let Greg warm the bench for the 1st 8 minutes to analyze what the opposing team is doing offensively and defensively. Otherwise, we may just have a repeat of last year – 2 fouls in 3 minutes and no Greg the rest of the half. It may not help, but it won’t hurt.
Nate says he wants to play 10 deep and starting is overrated. He already proved last year with Batum that he’s willing to start a guy and only play him for 15 minutes a game. When Greg stayed out of foul trouble, he played more coming off the bench than Joel did starting. I think Nate really means it. Starting is irrelevant. He’s not stupid. If it doesn’t work, he will change it.
by Sean M on Aug 11, 2009 1:21 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Actually I disagree that Nate wants a 10 man rotation.
It seems pretty clear to me that Nate is now becoming a more “win-now” mode just as how KP and Roy are. In the very beginning of the season, I remember how everyone was fantasizing about our wonderful ten man rotation of the following:
Jerryd Bayless – Steve Blake
Brandon Roy – Rudy Fernandez
Martell Webster – Travis Outlaw
LaMarcus Aldridge – Channing Frye
Greg Oden – Joel Przybilla
It didn’t work like that at all though. Blake started, Sergio took Bayless’ spot, Webster was replaced by Batum, Outlaw couldn’t play SF so he essentially took Channing Frye’s spot, and Przybilla ended up starting at center. In the end, Nate McMillan relied on a 9 man rotation, which was essentially an 8 man rotation plus the 15 mpg from Batum. But even Batum eventually lost minutes in Houston.
The point is this: depth is overrated. It’s better to have the best start five with the worst bench than to have the worst starting five with the best bench. After Dave wrote his article yesterday on concentrating on the playoff wins rather than the regular season wins, the rotation will have to represent that as well. While, we may certainly start with a ten man rotation, perhaps even an eleven man rotation in the beginning of the season, players are going to start being squeezed out. After the first month of the regular season, Nate McMillan will rely on his rotation, which he’ll rarely change. In my opinion, it is one of the reasons why the Lakers were so successful. Their bench was horrible, but they had a great rotation with Lamar Odom as an excellent sixth man. Sasha Vujacic, Luke Walton, and Jordan Farmar may bring some favorable qualities, it’s better to go with your bread and butter of Kobe, Gasol, and Odom. You’ll notice that the very young and experimental teams try to play as many players as possible to give them opportunities. At this point, we should already know what our players are capable of. Look at the San Antonio Spurs’ George Hill. Commonly seen as an excellent PG that doesn’t receive enough minutes, Popovich doesn’t force feed him minutes to develop him. Hill either has to develop and keep up with the team or he won’t receive playing time. Popovich used this same strategy with Tony Parker.
While I certainly agree that Nate McMillan should give minutes alongside players that would best work together, the NBA never seems to be like this. At the point where you’re playing multiple players for only 15 minutes just for the sake of playing them, then they’re going to see a lot of erratic production just like how Channing Frye could never get in his groove. However, I do think that playing Batum and Przybilla for at least 15 minutes each game would be great because they only bring one skill that they can consistently bring each time, which is defense.
It is my belief that Andre Miller and Greg Oden will still start primarily because Andre Miller is still the better PG than Steve Blake. Blake may work better with Roy on offense because he can shoot better, but we saw just how flawed this combination was in the playoffs against Houston. Blake received about 5 more minutes per game. While he certainly produced more, it seemed that he was also losing the battle to Aaron Brooks and Kyle Lowry. I do agree that Greg Oden starting may not be ideal at first, but this is the one case that I believe Nate McMillan HAS to force feed minutes. Oden’s development is the most essential piece to Portland’s future. He either has to learn now or never, and Przybilla is aging as well. There needs to be a definite change in the throne.
I’m one who believes that Nate McMillan has to be ruthless with his minute distribution. If Nic Batum can’t start as well as Martell Webster can than he needs to quickly make that change. If Jerryd Bayless isn’t up to par to play backup again, then he’s going to have ride the pine.
The Kings have the best bench I’ve seen. There are easily 14 guys on this team good enough for every bench in the league. Now if we could only get some starters, I’d totally jizz in my pants.
Kings fan
by dyshooter182 on Aug 11, 2009 2:00 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Agreed, for the most part
depth is very helpful during the grind of an 82 game season. We can replace an injured guy and stay competitive. We can rest guys more and not force our stars to play huge minutes. CP3 is the perfect example of 1 guy being relied on too much by his team and being exhausted by the playoffs.
However, like you said, depth doesn’t win games like a great 6-7 man rotation does.
"It’s a good ol’ fashioned Rip City beat down!"
by Magnum on Aug 11, 2009 2:23 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Rec'd
10 man rotation gets you through the season 7-8 man rotations win C’s!
O.R.
by Odenrising on Aug 11, 2009 3:01 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
There’s no doubt that rotations tighten as the season goes on, and it is possible that by playoff time, the Blazers will have an 7 or 8 man rotation. I hope not, but I had my rose-colored glasses on a bit, assuming everyone would play well. Batum, Martell, Oden are question marks, and we may even see a trade before the deadline to shore up deficiencies for the playoffs. I don’t believe guys should play just because. They do have to perform, and Nate needs to be more ruthless than he was last year. No more development. Time to produce.
However, it’s a long season. No need to make 7 guys play 35 minutes for 82 games. We have depth if we need to use it. Batum at worst can be used a lot as a defensive specialist as can Joel (even as a PF if the situation warrants a garbage man). Depth is important as a safety mechanism. BRoy get hurts, and Rudy isn’t a half bad replacement with Martell or Jerryd as a backup. Steve goes down and Jerryd, Rudy or BRoy pick up some slack at PG. LMA is out for two months and we realize we don’t have very much depth at that position. Travis is too small, Joel is not a scorer, and Duante and Jeff are rookies. Depth does win championships when guys play their roles without egos, without worrying about minutes played or who starts or who makes more money. How many rings does Robert Horry have??? 6? 7? 8? He’s not Kobe Bryant, but teams wanted him because he played a role that helped them win. And he contributed heavily to all those championship wins.
The Blazers got rid of their dead weight. Sergio was unhappy and a huge distraction. Channing at best was a good 18 ft jump shooting PF. He had no post game and limited rebounding ability. Portland is not exactly in need of another guy who can make a jump shot. Nate should be aggressive and demand that guys perform, but he shouldn’t limit play to 8 guys because everyone else does. Or put the 5 best guys in just because they are the best. Sergio generally stunk yet his highlight reels with Rudy are freakin’ incredible. Steve’s better, but Sergio was better with Rudy. Chemistry is so important to this team’s success. This YOUNG team’s success. When have they followed the rules of Basketball 101. 4 rookies in the playing rotation last year and they made the playoffs with the 2nd best record in the conference. When does that happen? 3 rookies in the starting lineup against the defending world champions, and they win. This team will succeed this year if they believe in themselves. That’s not going to happen if 7 or 8 guys play and the rest ride pine. Nate needs to bring out the best in this team, each and every member. That’s how the Blazers will take it to the next level.
by Sean M on Aug 11, 2009 3:20 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Not so fast please. I'm not ready...
…to just hand the starting pg role over to Miller yet. I have a lot of respect for Blake’s game and feel he deserves the chance to defend his position during training camp. Steve’s role has always been quite different on the teams he has played for than Miller’s role has been throughout his career.
It is not really apples-to-apples to just compare statistics when one player has always been a supporting player and the other has been a primary starter expected to score.
by mlsinpdx on Aug 11, 2009 1:44 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
we need a primary starter expected to score, considering our horrible first quarters last year.
optimism ftw
by Cablinasian on Aug 11, 2009 2:04 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
We need Kevin Durant! Oh wait, wrong thread. We need Andre Miller!
"I'm addicted to polo y'all...respect my fresh" - Travis25Outlaw
by Norsktroll on Aug 11, 2009 2:51 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
It is a given
that we need another scoring threat in our starting unit. Last year, we had Nic, Steve, and Greg or Joel, none of which were a significant scoring threat. If we cannot get increased scoring from SF or C, Andre should start.
If either of those positions becomes a significant scoring threat, Nate has more flexibility at PG, and holding Andre out of the starting unit to play with the reserves may make the most sense.
When I rule the world, everyone will know how to use Excel.
by jscot on Aug 12, 2009 5:19 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Wha!
jscot, I’m shocked! I was about to link your fanpost from a couple months ago in which you make the case that Andre should come off the bench!
For the most part, I have two conclusions:
1. Andre and Brandon shouldn’t play in the same unit because it cripples our 3pt threat.
2. Andre and Greg should play in the same unit because of the pick-and-roll threat.
--
by CaptainSexyJacob on Aug 12, 2009 12:29 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I still think it makes sense for Andre to come of the bench
but that is because I think both Greg and Nic will provide more scoring threat this year.
And I think it is still possible that Martell becomes that extra scoring threat in the starting unit as well.
But if none of that pans out, I think the need to reduce the scoring load on Brandon and LaMarcus dictates that we start Andre, notwithstanding all the other factors.
As to your #1, I think Andre and Brandon will play together a lot, and learn to be effective, despite the loss of 3 point threat. Perhaps only when we have Rudy or Martell on the court providing a deep threat, though.
As to your #2, I think we’ll see a lot of that, but we’ll also see Andre in with Joel. Joel is superb at setting picks, and the pick and roll with someone who can execute it well is really the only way he provides an offensive threat.
I want Steve’s minutes, for the most part, to be with Brandon. I want Joel’s minutes, at least half of them, to be with Andre. I want both Greg and Rudy to get significant time (at least 10-15 mpg) with Andre.
I’ve never been in the “Steve must start” camp. I’ve always been in the “I think Steve might start, and it makes a lot of sense to me if he does” camp.
I don’t want Blake playing more minutes than Miller.
When I rule the world, everyone will know how to use Excel.
by jscot on Aug 13, 2009 3:01 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Miller will miss a few outside shots, and everyone will be screaming for Steve Blake back. Thankfully, Nate has a little more respect for a guy’s accomplishments than the typical fan. Miller will likely win the starting role because he is a more complete player. But really Blake excels where Miller doesn’t and vice versa. The two together are one complete point guard.
by Sean M on Aug 11, 2009 3:54 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Almost. You'd have to throw Jerryd in there for youth and athleticism.
by MiledAnimal on Aug 11, 2009 3:57 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
And Nic for defense
When I rule the world, everyone will know how to use Excel.
by jscot on Aug 12, 2009 5:20 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don't know that he/they would need Nic in the mix.
From what I’ve read about Andre, he would play great defense if he had Jerryd’s body.
by MiledAnimal on Aug 12, 2009 11:01 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Arm length, of course
I should flag you for missing such an obvious point.
When I rule the world, everyone will know how to use Excel.
by jscot on Aug 13, 2009 3:03 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Nate being Nate
Anyone want to actually bet AGAINST Miller and Oden starting? Lets get real. Last years team won 54 games. Greg actually started in about 1/3 of them and we were just as good with him starting as with Joel starting. Any MILD improvement moves Greg by Joel leaps and bounds. The reason we struggled in the 1st quarters was the 4 on 5 offense we run with Joel on the floor. Look at Joel’s stats … 4 pts 6bds for his CAREER. That my friends is a back up center. The only reason we could get away with it at all is because Broy and LMA are able to cover up the lack of offense most of the time.
What happened when we ran into a good defensive team that could cover all five guys in the playoffs? Joels lack of offense literally killed us. The primary reason we HAVE to start Oden is to get him comfortable in the offense and get the chemistry between LMA, Roy, Oden, Miller, and probable Batum developed before the playoffs. I would take 4 more losses early in the year just to make this happen. In the end we will go deeper in the playoffs and thus more successful.
As far a Miller goes, he is at least twice as good as Blake end of story.
by Odenrising on Aug 11, 2009 2:24 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I would guess half and half
Greg and Steve start.
But I wouldn’t bet. It’s just a guess. I put Greg at about 70% probability he starts, Steve at about 60%.
Andre will play more minutes, but Steve may start. Andre coming in fresh and running the break with Rudy and Martell (or Nic) on the wings would be devastating.
Hit them for 8-10 minutes with Brandon, LaMarcus, and Greg, and then bring in a second unit when their starters are tired and their reserves aren’t good enough. That second unit would turn small leads into blowouts, even games into good leads, and deficits into even games. You would have legit NBA starters in at least 3 positions, probably 4, on your second unit. And the on-court chemistry would be phenomenal.
When I rule the world, everyone will know how to use Excel.
by jscot on Aug 12, 2009 5:26 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
wouldn't the biggest comp
For a started be the 3? Batum and Martell are gonna go to WAR!
O.R.
by Odenrising on Aug 11, 2009 2:58 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
This doesn't really matter much.
If they are good they will play their way into the starting lineup, of course. And Greg usually is in foul trouble so it’s not like he ever gets to play in the first quarter anyway. Andre is a straight baller and will be super no matter how much he plays, or when. I trust Andre Miller. I trust Joel Przybilla. I do not trust Oden until he shows me something.
The key to our season will be some serious consistent production from the THREE spot. You know, like we didn’t get from Travis (production, lack of consistency) or Nic (consistent, lack of production) last year and so we had to rely on our backcourt.
A healthy Martell and improved Nic will make all the difference.
These are my principles. If you don't like them, I have others. -Groucho Marx
by RDreamer on Aug 11, 2009 3:28 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Miller will not be coming off of the bench, unless...
Nate really wants to have to have more 4th quarter and 2nd half ‘comebacks’. A big reason for getting a creator like Miller is to have a player that will jump-start the team so that they don’t end up being down by 12 and the end of the 1st quarter. They need quick starts to games and Miller will help bring that.
by oregon_fan on Aug 11, 2009 4:03 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
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 © 2009 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.
