Media Row Report: Blazers 105 Warriors 89
Well, there are a number of good reasons that the Golden State Warriors are 9-23 on the season after losing to the Portland Trail Blazers 105-89 in Portland Saturday night. They're young. They're undisciplined and inconsistent. They have issues rebounding. They're stretched health-wise. Their roster is suffering from a high-end talent vacuum after trading away Stephen Jackson. And, perhaps most importantly, Monta Ellis isn't as good as he believes he is nor as good as he said he was after Golden State's November defeat of the Blazers.
Ellis's line -- 30 points, 5 rebounds, 4 assists -- approximated the numbers put up by Brandon Roy -- 37 points, 6 rebounds, 5 asssists-- but the similarities stopped there. Ellis used 25 shots to get his 30. Roy used 16 to get his 37. Ellis took 4 free throws. Roy took 14. Ellis had 6 turnovers in 47 minutes. Roy turned the ball over once in 41 minutes. Ellis exploded then disappeared. Roy chugged along, slowly but surely, saving his best for last: 13 fourth quarter points. After the game, Nate McMillan said simply, "[Roy] has stepped up. I've talked about what the rest of the team is doing. But what he is doing for this team right now by example it's MVP type of stuff."
Out of the Blazers' top ten scorers last year, Roy was the only one to suit up tonight. Of the eight players that dressed, just four were Blazers last year. Two of those four -- Martell Webster and Shavlik Randolph -- combined for 42 minutes total last season. Webster, who put up a sparkling 21 points, 11 rebounds, 3 assists, 2 blocks performance, played 46 minutes tonight by himself. Two totally different worlds.
While Roy carried the scoring load, particularly in the wake of a relatively awful 2-11 performance from Jerryd Bayless, the Blazers were able to fight back from a double-digit first quarter deficit thanks to their defense, which again mixed man-to-man and zone looks to frustrate their opponent. After a hot start, the Warriors were unable to hit from distance (just 3 of 12). Minus a few Sportscenter slam dunks from Anthony Morrow and Anthony Randolph they struggled to get clean looks from anywhere on the court. After putting up an amazing 41 points in the first quarter, it took the Warriors 31 minutes 58 seconds of gameplay to score another 41 points. In other words: Ice freaking cold. Check the chart, which shows the two teams' field goal percentage splits at each of the four quarters.
They went so cold you might call them Enron.
The overall defense from the Blazers was solid but somewhat gimmicky again. Webster moved up to the power forward spot and brought great effort. Dante Cunningham, considered a combo 3/4 by Blazers scouts when they drafted him, slid all the way up to the 5 for extended periods tonight, manning the middle of the zone and going eye-to-eye with Golden State's smallish bigs. After the game I asked Cunningham if Blazers management or coaching staff had ever mentioned playing him at the center spot at any point during the pre-draft process, over the summer or at training camp. "It was never center," Cunningham said. "I don't think I was ever, ever stretched out from the 6'9" area to be a center."
At what point exactly did Cunningham know he was going to be the man in the middle, a spot previously held down by defensive stalwarts Greg Oden and Joel Przybilla? "Tonight," he grinned. "I'm learning [our defenses] every day better and better. It's not that hard any more. And you know, our offense is built in such a way that you can be out there and you can be able to easily change the 4 to 5, it's pretty much the same. We had Martell [go] from the 2, 3, 4, all the way down. It doesn't matter with this offense."
Willing to do whatever it took to get the win. Led by their all-everything captain who stood a cut above the competition. That was the difference, again, for the Blazers tonight.
Random Game Notes
- A few hours before the game, Stephen Curry warned up while the Junior Blazer Dancers practiced their routine just a few yards away. The Rose Garden looked and felt more like the Les Schwab Invitational than an NBA arena.
- What he lacks in professional facial hair Curry makes up for in professional work ethic. He and Anthony Morrow were going hard for the better part of an hour prior to the tip tonight. They each got up more than 100 shots and worked on a variety of game-like situations: creating space at the rim, rubbing off of high pick-and-rolls, pulling up and shooting floaters. Both guards were taking their work seriously. Curry put the development into practice once the game began, making a layup at the rim almost exactly as practiced and throwing up a floater over a taller defender late in the game as well.
- In case you were wondering, Corey Maggette flops during pre-game matches of one-on-one with an assistant coach, too. Seriously. On offense!
- In his comments below, Nate McMillan praises Brandon Roy for how he leads by example for the younger players. Both Cunningham and Bayless paid their respects after the game. Cunningham complimented Roy's determination and resolve in battling adversity and setting the tone. Bayless distracted Brandon Jr. with a basketball so the 2 year old's father could finish his interviews.
- Steve Blake is expected to miss roughly a week with his case of pneumonia. In his absence, there was a lot to like from Andre Miller (23, 5 and 6 plus 10 free throw attempts), minus his 6 turnovers. A few were of the "I thought you were going to be somewhere that you didn't end up being" variety. Hopefully the extended minutes Miller will see over the next week or so will help iron out those kinks.
- LaMarcus Aldridge is expected to miss Monday night's game in Los Angeles but is hoping to play Tuesday night.
- Jeff Pendergraph bruised his shin tonight but McMIllan did not attribute Pendergraph's short playing time (just 9 minutes despite his first career start) to the injury. McMIllan said Pendergraph was expected to start again Monday night. I didn't get a look at the bruise but it was said to be pretty noticeable after the game. He was all smiles during interviews, as always.
- Brandon Roy explained after the game that he started tonight wearing a shoulder sleeve because his shoulder was bothering him yesterday but removed it during the game because the sleeve was too restrictive and he didn't feel he needed it.
- The Blazers remain undefeated (2-0) since signing Shavlik Randolph.
Nate McMillan's Post-Game Comments
Difference on Defense tonight?
I thought we got up and we played. We got closer to these guys. I thought we did a better job of squaring up and keeping our shoulders square and containing and not giving them penetration. Our transition defense was pretty good throughout. But halfcourt, we just acted like we couldn't guard these guys so it was a challenge. Offensively we scored 31 in the first. We knew we could score but we just had to start playing defense. We started doing that, containing and contesting and they started missing some shots. We give up 41 in the first and then for the 2nd, 3rd and 4th we give up 48. So the defense tightened up, offensively great job of playing off of Brandon and Miller in the post. And getting to the free throw line and just another solid effort by our guys.
Injuries mount up, winning continues. What does that say to you?
Well, I think it was, for me, it says, it's an old saying that it's amazing what you can do when no one cares who gets the credit. Ok, and I think early in the year we were concerned about minutes and rotation and shot attempts and combinations and this team is just playing. And they're playing free and they're playing guys whatever minutes they play with or get they're going out and they're making the most of it. They're rotating them in and they're executing down the stretch on both ends of the floor. I think you see a team now that's free as far as their thinking and how they're playing. They've been able to come up with some good wins.
Martell's best game of the year?
He was great tonight. I thought he did a nice job of filling in at 4. We started out big and they jumped on us really quick and went with Bayless and moved Martell to the 4. He's been rebounding, I think, all season long. I felt like he's been doing that. Tonight he had a couple of big blocks and then when he's knocking down his shot we have that lineup, that's a hard team to defend. We had to make that adjustment to go small with Miller, Brandon, Bayless and Martell and basically due to the injuries, we could do that and it worked out for us tonight.
Cunningham instead of Pendergraph because they were smaller?
Late in that game I was just trying -- Brandon and Miller had played pretty much the whole game. I was trying to rotate those guys, between Bayless, Brandon, Miller, get them a quick breather. Get them back in the game. DC started doing a nice job of rebounding and defending so I stayed with him late in the game against Corey [Maggette] and he did a nice job, I think he came up with a steal, a stop, and then he was knocking down his shots, some big rebounds and we went back with Miller. It just felt like he could play against Randolph when they had their smaller lineup.
Brandon's Play
I thought it was great. This guy has stepped up. I've talked about what the rest of the team is doing. But what he is doing for this team right now by example it's MVP type of stuff. Where you talk about a player that's most valuable for his team, what he's doing, not only is he scoring but he's trusting his teammates and that is big, when you have a young guy like Bayless and Martell taking big shots, if they miss he's telling them to continue to shoot. When the game is on the line, he's stepping up and making the play. He's been great for the last month.
Pendergraph short minutes
Just a matchup. Howard could post up, he can shoot the ball as well as defend.
Aldridge Timeline
I'm hoping ... we'll see tomorrow how he feels. Yeah, we think he's close.
Blake is two weeks out?
Hopefully it's not that, we're not that far out. Maybe these next few games but hopefully we can get him back.
Jeff starting next game
The matchups tonight wasn't for Jeff to be out on the floor. Howard and DC was doing a good job so I stayed with that group.
Limited Golden State to 5 Fast Break Points
That was the key. Not turning the ball over. We turned the ball over late and they were able to run out and get some easy buckets. But at the half we had maybe six turnovers so we started pretty much like we did when we played in Oakland. We started turning the ball the second half, we lost control of the game, eventually we lost the game. Tonight we started to turn it over, we cleaned it up and we went into the post. It was the same game plan in Oakland, we had bigs they kind of took out. But tonight Brandon and Miller were the two guys we wanted to post up and play through. We got to the free throw line, they made good decisions and we were able to get this game.
Does Andre Miller benefit from the freer play you described earlier?
I think it benefits all the guys, it's not just Miller. When I talked about freer, I meant the group as a whole, not individually. Early when we had so many guys everybody was worried about their time and their roles and who they were playing with and their shots. This group is not worried about that, they're playing basketball. When their number is called, they're going out there and doing what it takes.
-- Ben Golliver | benjamin.golliver@gmail.com | Twitter
0 recs |
153 comments
|
Comments
I'm sad that I am up at this hour
and i didnt get FIRST
I'm going on a Dave boycott until AK1984 is brought back.
"Did they really expect me to bow down to Jesus?!?" ~Sophia
You'll always be first with us Philthyanimal
First right after Stellera.
by Emperor_Doom on Jan 3, 2010 11:09 AM PST up reply actions
Extension of your point on how Roy and Ellis accumulated their point totals
Ellis – 13 points in the 1st Q
Roy – 13 points in the 4th Q
Thats why our guy is the all-star!
The haters can't deny
Nate has been coaching out his backside.
Brandon Roy has been carrying this team
Lets put the credit where it belongs. Even Mike Brown looks like a COY with Lebron James…
RUDY > MJ
The knocks on Nate came from his starting line up and rotation decisions. At least this is what I couldn't STAND.
Starting Blake when Miller had clearly earned this role. Limiting Bayless’s minutes. Pulling anyone (EXCEPT BLAKE) the minute they made a mistake…Bayless, Webster, Miller. Pulling people when they had the “hot hand” just BECAUSE..it was now 6:00 minutes into the quarter. Pulling people with 2 fouls..LA…making them sit out for long stretches so when they came back in they were now cold and we’d now lost a lead…all sorts of frustrating moves. NATE now has NO CHOICE but to go with the hot hand and let players PLAY FREE . Maybe he will learn from this. SILVER LINING. Also I think some of the new guys KNOW how to box out and play defense bc they have learned this from their previous coaches. .And I think Monty Williams has something to do with this as well.
I can understand disagreeing with some of the things Nate does...
I really can. But don’t you think it’s a bit over the top to indicate that when the team is not playing well, it’s Nate’s fault, but when they play well, it’s the players?
"I'm a man, but I can change.....if I have to......I guess." - Red Green
by antediluvian on Jan 3, 2010 10:00 AM PST up reply actions 2 recs
I think Natsthecat's point is
that it depends on where this more sound fundamental play is coming from that should determine who deserves the lions share of the credit. Every body involved deserves some credit.
But who deserves the most credit, the he players and previous coaching or Nate? Of course the same question could be asked about about the previous poor fundamental play. Did that come from the individual players and previous poor coaching, or from Nate? If we were playing a lot better fundamentally and the players were the same, it would be a lot easier to say, “Great job Nate!”
#52
I think Natthecat's point is...
…to come into every post… no matter the topic and trash Nate.
Same redundant message in every thread… I get it… you don’t like Nate!
GO BLAZERS!!!
by Ilikeemall on Jan 3, 2010 9:47 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
Natsthecat may be a little overenthusiastic?
I see that, but …
Maybe he will learn from this. SILVER LINING. Also I think some of the new guys KNOW how to box out and play defense bc they have learned this from their previous coaches. .And I think Monty Williams has something to do with this as well.
There is a positive point being made here as well. Everyone deserves some credit here (even Nate) and Nate may be learning here as well.
NATE now has NO CHOICE but to go with the hot hand and let players PLAY FREE.
Maybe this is a good thing, and maybe Nate is learning from it as has been posted on recent threads by non Nate haters.
I personally find this point to be quite interesting, will Nate allow more freedom on a more talented and higher BBIQ team? Coaching a group of talented mature players is a different challenge than coaching a team of young underachievers.
As for myself, I am not a Nate hater (I think he and the team are excelling right now.), not a llikeemall hater, and not a Natsthecat hater, although I may disagree with some of what you all do or say. The best of all for me is that we are all pulling in the same direction—disciplined play, and another championship.
#52
It's also possible that it's a combination of things...
Like playing Blake all those minutes early in the season was to a) get Brandon’s season going, which had a very slow start, and b) save Miller’s old legs for later in the season when we’ll really need him. Brandon, Bayless and Miller all need the ball in their hands to be effective, Blake not so much. Playing Blake gave Brandon a chance to get in his groove, which may have something to do with why he’s so effective now. If Bayless has shown anything this season, it’s that he can still be very inconsistent.
Good points
It shows the difficulties of reading minds, although I must say that I am very good at it ;(
#52
This is great analysis.
Not only is success due to the players and failure due to the coaching, but now you have identified the further causitive dactor of players knowing what to do because of coaches other than McMillan.
Personally, I think he needs to be fired, as I’m tired of the rain. When it is sunny out, it is due to God smiling on us. When it rains. it’s Nate’s fault.
(And isn’t it about time he did something about the economy? )
hakkaa päälle !
by timg56 on Jan 4, 2010 8:53 AM PST up reply actions 1 recs
Webster says the Blazers have nothing to lose.
I still count 8 players on our active roster…
"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 Jan 3, 2010 1:32 AM PST reply actions 2 recs
Another case for Brandon winning the MVP (not like he will actually win with Kobe and LBJ playing):
Andre Miller
Jerryd Bayless
Martell Webster
Jeff Pendergraph
Juwan Howard
-——————————————
Dante Cunningham
Shavlik Randolph
^^^ That team wins next to no games without Brandon.
We're 1-0 without him this year
He’s a serious drain on our record.
#5 #10 #52 #88
And they are 2-0 with Shav.
Randolph is the real rabbit’s foot.
"I'm a man, but I can change.....if I have to......I guess." - Red Green
by antediluvian on Jan 3, 2010 10:00 AM PST up reply actions
Bench Brandon
and play Shav for less than a minute and set him up to miss a dunk.
#5 #10 #52 #88
Nate on too much talent:
“Early when we had so many guys everybody was worried about their time and their roles and who they were playing with and their shots.”
Nate, that’s your job, to get a team with a ton of talent rolling like the Blazers have been for the last couple of weeks.
Brace yourself. Next season, take two, Nate. Get it right, get them going.
by travis13 on Jan 3, 2010 1:52 AM PST reply actions 3 recs
Like it's Nate's fault Miller played like crap coming of the bench
Next year hopefully Miller will be gone and Nate won’t have the trouble of “guys” worried about minutes.
by tominhawaii on Jan 3, 2010 1:56 AM PST up reply actions 2 recs
Nate is going to have Rudy and Nic back "worried " about minutes soon
I hope it is Blake and Miller’s minutes that they get
by southern oregon on Jan 3, 2010 2:03 AM PST up reply actions
Nic won't have to worry because he's a forward
I doubt Rudy has to worry too. I’d put money on Nate liking Rudy more than Miller. Rudy doesn’t turn the ball over as much and his trajectory doesn’t look like it’s being inhibited by an enlarged prostate.
by tominhawaii on Jan 3, 2010 2:29 AM PST up reply actions 5 recs
The tracers on the trajectory of Andre Miller's jump shot spell "W"
That stands for “Win”, in case you were wondering.
Nate liking Rudy more than Miller?
I hope you are not refering to Rudy as playing the point because that would be soul crushing for Rudy. I can see him having the ball stolen from him 20 times a game. I can see us going with J -bay and Roy sharing the PG tasks without Miller in the future but for now we need him. Players give him space because he can’t shoot and they foul him because he can’t jump. Hes a very special player.
Give it up already!
You’re still complaining about a story line that’s roughly a hundred years old. Andre Miller is a Portland TrailBlazer. Andre Miller is a starter for the NW Division leading Portland Trail Blazers in the year 2010.
It’s absolutely pathetic for you to hang on to whatever grudge you have against Andre Miller. Perhaps you should root for a team that has a crappy PG and actually loses games. I suggest the LA Clippers or NY Knicks as a starting point.
by BlazerTag on Jan 3, 2010 2:05 AM PST up reply actions 3 recs
you might want to watch your back
I take care of Toms light work,if you cant take a joke you should consider counseling
by southern oregon on Jan 3, 2010 2:14 AM PST up reply actions
Asking me to stop hating Miller is like asking liberals to stop hating Bush
Not gonna happen. I am a card carrying member of the “I Hate Andre Miller And You Should Too Club”.
Signing Miller was a huge mistake and I don’t have to like him because everyone else here is slurping on him.
It’s absolutely pathetic for you to care if I hate Andre Miller. Perhaps you should read comments by homer lemmings and ignore mine.
by tominhawaii on Jan 3, 2010 2:24 AM PST up reply actions 3 recs
Go to the Knicks website
Say it with me, "Chris Duhon sucks!’.
Feel better tom?
Go to their website and complain about their starting point guard. At least they’re below .500.
I don't care about he Knicks
The Blazers are my favorite team. There is no rule to fandom that says I have to like every player on the team. If that was true, a lot of folks would have left this blog a long time ago because of Steve Blake.
by tominhawaii on Jan 3, 2010 2:31 AM PST up reply actions 2 recs
If you are a fan of the Portland Trail Blazers than you should enjoy this recent win
It just happened today. Yaaaaay!
Andre Miller was at least 1/8th a part of it. The math is easy because the Blazers only suited up 8 people!
I'm happy about the win and never want the Blazers to lose
When Blake was starting, some folks were wishing for a loss in the pregame thread so that Miller would start. I’ll never stoop that low.
by tominhawaii on Jan 3, 2010 2:43 AM PST up reply actions 1 recs
Thank you!
I’m not a Blake hater or Andre hater, but a Blazer Believer.
Let’s enjoy this thrilling, unprobable win together.
Andre Miller was 22% of the win
if you use points scored as the basis.
He was 18% if you count minutes played.
He was only 12.5% if you count number of players used.
He was 17.5% if you use net +/-.
The math is even easier if you actually do some.
by blacknoiseNW on Jan 3, 2010 11:35 AM PST up reply actions
better a nerd than a fool, any day
by blacknoiseNW on Jan 3, 2010 3:13 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
rek\
(our) great industrial nation is controlled by its system of credit, our system of of credit is privately concentrated, the growth of our nation, therefore, and all our activities are in the hands of a few men... who necessarily, by very reason of their own limitations, chill and check and destroy genuine economic freedom.
We have come to be one of the worst ruled, one of the most completely controlled and dominated governments in the civilized world - no government by free opinion, no longer a government by conviction and the vote of the majority, but a government by the opinion and the duress of small groups of dominant men.
--- Woodrow Wilson
And another thing that pisses me off is
Insert complaint of choice,I am mad that Shav did not get more burn
by southern oregon on Jan 3, 2010 2:40 AM PST up reply actions
Just curious...why DO you hate Miller so much? Is it his competitive nature? His ability to see the court and throw lob passes
to the guy at the basket for the dunk? Or maybe it’s his posting up or getting to the line and MAKING his foul shots? Another thing that may annoy you about him is his going end to end on the court? Just wondering.
I've grown tired of explaining why I don't like Miller
He’s mediocre an never wins. It’s like the Blazers were driving a old Ford Taurus and we were promised a brand new Lexus, instead we got a slightly newer Mercury Milan. The upgrade of Miller over Blake isn’t worth $7 million a year.
by tominhawaii on Jan 3, 2010 9:25 AM PST up reply actions 1 recs
analogy
the only prob is you are comparing two versions of the same car one dressed up more pretty like. the difference between the two PG though is vastly different due to the skill sets they bring. nothing wrong with a ford taurus if you want to go from A-B but it isnt a sexy ride.
/////
((o))
/////
We've grown tired of you explaining why you don't like Miller
Quit complaining and it’s a win-win.
by BlazerTag on Jan 3, 2010 1:06 PM PST up reply actions 2 recs
I don't think I complained once in this thread
It all started with me saying that Nate won’t have as much trouble coaching next year once the Terrell Owens of the Blazers 2009-2010 season is gone. Not a complaint, a statement of fact.
just a few things ... I still like the guy
- turnovers
- bad jump shots
- doesn’t post up nearly as much as he should
You forgot fastbreaks on his own where he misses a layup
He’s a $7 Million dollar Sergio Rodriguez just with fewer alleyoops to Rudy.
What's really pathetic is to pick on someone as pathethic as Tom.
Poor guy is confined to a wheel chair and only has one nut. He’s in a very technical job, but his company thinks he’s an undocumented alien and therefor only pays him at a quarter of the normal pay scale. And to top it all off, the guy is pale skinned – almost an albino. Can’t be exposed to direct sunlight for more than 10 minutes at a time. A bit of a problem when you live in Hawaii.
It takes a really big man to pick on a smuck like Tom.
(Tom – Never let it be said I don’t have your back buddy.)
hakkaa päälle !
No need to make this about Blake
I hated George Bush and John Kerry in the 2004 election and stopped voting after that.
The Bayless Factor....
despite shooting 2-11 from the floor… he was still +20
"You can lose lots of money chasing women, but you will NEVER lose women chasing money. " - Mr.Landis
good point
Seriously, that was one of the best two for eleven games I have ever seen. He flat out draws attention and has to be accounted for whether he is hitting or not.
#52
I see good team basketball out there
Everyone playing good solid basketball. Blake goes out and web starts hitting the 3 point shot. Miller stepping up playing big minutes and had a great game. Roy another MVP game. Bayless had another so-so game. I expect it from him so no biggie, he is going to have nights were he looks like a starter and other nights were he looks great coming off the bench. I like Bayless, but a starter? Nah. Howard had a good game.
Good team defense tonight. Everyone helping one another. I really like our team right now and I am glad we didnt make any silly trades. I liked that we stayed the course. I liked Blake coming off the bench he was starting to look like the old Blake from last year. Bummer him getting sick. Good game tonight. The only problem is that if everyone doesnt play there A game its gonna be hard to win because of the lack of bodies to sub.
Other teams might've packed it in after the first quarter, but
Portland continued to battle. It didn’t hurt that Nellie played to Portland’s strengths by going small. He must have something against dudes taller than 6’7". Even more confounding, when he went small, he didn’t try to run Portland out of the gym. Portland had 8 dudes who could play – two rookies and one dude just signed – so why wouldn’t you try to tire out the main guys? Most people know Roy does not max out on defense so why not go after him all night?
Anyhow, glad Nelson dropped the ball because it was great to watch three quarters of hustle result in a big win.
Of course, neither SI nor ESPN has a story up on the Blazers because Arenas is pullin’ gats and Mike Leach is suin’. Is it too much to ask for major sports sites to have some West Coast-based people who are up late enough to write a story?
No one is looking over their shoulder afraid that they're gonna get jerked for a mistake.
I like Nate, but my one concern has been that he kills players’; confidence. I wonder if recent play isn’t evidence that that might be the case.
by raoulduke on Jan 3, 2010 7:12 AM PST reply actions 2 recs
I hate to agree with that assesment but I do.
I also think that Nate is likely learning from this.
Still, what can Nate do? When he has a loaded squad and is trying to give everyone some playing time, I guess it makes sense to pull the ones not playing well at the moment to give others a run.
So deal me in on this consolidation talk thing. I see the need to downsize our young talent a bit to provide an upgrade at a position or two and to add a couple of players who willingly accept riding the bench.
If this Blazer team doesn't light your fire, then your wood is wet!
Nate's comments
for me, it says, it’s an old saying that it’s amazing what you can do when no one cares who gets the credit. Ok, and I think early in the year we were concerned about minutes and rotation and shot attempts and combinations and this team is just playing.
When I talked about freer, I meant the group as a whole, not individually. Early when we had so many guys everybody was worried about their time and their roles and who they were playing with and their shots. This group is not worried about that
Comments like these make me think that Nate s not “owning” the problem, he’s blaming it on the players. Before fall camp there was talk about the plaers needing to “buy in” and “make sacrifices” but through preseason and the first week of the regular season (at least) there was a disconnect. (Who can forget the “option 1” and “option 2” conversation that Nate had with Roy and LMA on the plane?)
Right now Nate is doing the light lifting, he’s got a small roster and everyone is going to get to play as many minutes as they want (except for Shav) But in a few weeks the true test will resume, when Rudy and Nic return. Has Nate really “learned something” these past few months, or has he had his work “cut out for him” by circumstances? Will the players “buy in” better when their minutes are cut, or will the “concerns” about PT resurface?
What’s the solution? The front office needs to see these events approaching and take steps to “thin the herd” at the trading deadline. It won’t take a major overhaul, just a little pruning. The team has Blake and Miller, one of them has to “go” to carve out room for Bayless and Rudy. The team needs a center…so take one of those PGs (plus other assets, like Freeland’s draft rights) and rebalance the roster so there’s enough bigs and not so many guards.
Don’t give Nate enough rope to hang himself with, again. Keep the roster tight, and properly balanced with 2-3 experienced veterans who won’t complain about their PT when everyone’s healthy
When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
by two4larue on Jan 3, 2010 9:07 AM PST up reply actions 3 recs
Rec
Mostly on the Nate part, I think it will be next to impossible to trade small for big in a position of weakness and get a remotely fair trade. Unless we want to pay Okafor who knows how much for quite some time to come off the bench
count me in the "couldn't screw this up if he tried" camp
Head coaching in the NBA is about schemes and personnel. You have to either fit personnel to the schemes or schemes to the personnel; you have to divvy up minutes among personnel; you have to devise schemes to exploit matchups; you have to make adjustments to schemes and personnel to mitigate bad matchups or exploit good matchups.
A really good head coach does all this without being second-guessed by his own players, by his management team, and to a much lesser extent – his team’s fanbase.
If a player buys into his schemes and agrees with the personnel decisions – he will be a motivated player and will work hard to execute the schemes.
The injury situation has defined both Nate’s schemes and his personnel choices. I think this situation really highlights that Nate is a bit over his head when forced to manage a truly high-end roster with superior players at multiple positions.
Nate wasn’t good with a healthy roster. Nate doesn’t need to tinker or micromanage this current roster – and that is a good thing.
by blacknoiseNW on Jan 3, 2010 11:44 AM PST up reply actions
Ya, I actually put the blame on KP more than Nate for the early season struggles...
You really cant go into a season with 11 or 12 legitimate rotation players, somebody is not going to get the time they deserve. It has worked out so far because of our horrendous amount of injuries, but the front office has to hope these circumstances are an aberration, and plan accordingly. To me, that means consolidation was, and still is going to be needed at some point. For this season, I dont think you do anything crazy, move a pg + another small asset if necessary(claver, freeland, picks) for a serviceable center to stay competitive. There is no way that Juan Howard can continue to play 30+ mpg and be our primary center, he is playing way over his head right now, he will come back to earth eventually.
That said, I think Nate handled our depth terribly early in the season, nobody was playing well. Players were unsure or unhappy with their roles, we weren’t winning as many games as our talent level indicated we should. Steve Blake played more minutes than anyone not named Roy or Lamarcus. The team was under performing and it simply looked like a poorly coached team. Now that there really isn’t major rotation decisions to be made, things are going much more smoothly.
RUDY > MJ
I dunno
Bayless plays in spite of poor sooting and Pendegraph sits because of matchups in spite of having a great few last games. It worked well. I think nate is fine. Early on, find a player who flat out gave it all. I think Batum is a no brainer given his defense. Players will find roles
by Hermistonmelons on Jan 3, 2010 9:22 PM PST up reply actions
I take it from your comments that you don't consider the current combativeness
and willingness to grind out victories to be related in any way to Nate’s coaching?
The fact that the team is exhibiting exactly the sort of characteristics that Nate espouses and was known for as a player is most likely a coincidence.
BTW – go ahead and pick any three Blazers you want and consolidate them. Then ask yourself where Portland would be right now.
hakkaa päälle !
That's easy
Consolidate Joel (size and strength), Travis (hops and one-on-one scoring), and Rudy (shooting and clutchness) into LeBron.
We’d be in great shape. If only KP had used his mind-control stuff on Danny Ferry, we’d be good to go.
#5 #10 #52 #88
I don't buy that we have a looming crisis
First, what we have is working, and everyone knows it, so there’s going to be no major readjustment. Second, Rudy is the first one back.
Add Rudy back in, and he’ll take some minutes from Steve, a few from Jerryd on the games he is struggling and none when he’s playing well, maybe 3-4 from Brandon (to get him back under 40 mpg), and a few SF minutes from Dante. Dante will get a few more minutes from Juwan, perhaps.
Add Nic back in, and he’ll play some PF, and Juwan will see his minutes drop significantly. Martell will drop some minutes, too, but Nic is likely to only play 15-20 mpg at first, until he gets into the flow, and many of those minutes will probably come from Juwan.
We have four players who can absorb a drop in minutes without it being a problem at all: Blake (his stamina is likely to be low for several weeks), Roy (he doesn’t need to play 40+ long term), LMA (same as Roy), and Juwan (he wasn’t even supposed to be activated unless someone was hurt, and then was only supposed to get 10-15 mpg at most).
It’s easy to plug two more players in, unless they are expecting 35 mpg each. Neither should be expecting that. And neither expect the offense to be built around them.
A consolidation trade might well be a good idea this summer, but there is no minutes crisis this year, and a small for big trade which is good value for us is not a likely scenario. We’re probably going to have to play out the string with what we have.
#5 #10 #52 #88
I agree. Webster didn't have to worry about being pulled the second he made a mistake. Same with
Bayless, and on and on…also not being pulled to sit entire quarters after 2 fouls. The players are ABLE to play free…hmm..wonder if Nate will LEARN anything from this?
He obviously needs to ...
… seeing as you know how he should be coaching the team and he doesn’t.
hakkaa päälle !
Hmmm
Wonder if Greg LEARNED anything from having to sit entire quarters with two fouls? Yes, as a matter of fact, he did! The foul problems were improving!
Seems like Nate’s plan was actually working! How could someone so slow to learn have stumbled on something which worked?
#5 #10 #52 #88
To raoulduke above:
REC! We essentially heard this from Martell last night.
I have been all over this point from the beginning of the season, but in fairness it is not all Nate’s fault. Players instinctively look over their shoulders because they sense the talent and competion for playing time around them. This may be something new for Nate to a certain extent and my hope is that he and KP are developing a proactive plan to deal with this for next year.
#52
I have no idea of the background of most people here ...
… but it apparently is different enough from mine as to be almost alien.
What is with all the amatuer sociology stuff? Players, bing unsure and looking over their shoulders? Sounds like either an excuse or bullshit. I know I don’t look over my shoulder (unless I’m changing lanes on the freeway) for anything. I don’t worry about someone taking my job or out performing me for a raise or promotion. If I have to compete with someone I know that the only thing I truly control is the amount of effort I put out and the quality of work I do. Everything else is superflueous.
I have no idea if guys like Martell and Miller and Rudy worry about getting yanked for making a mistake of because they know there is a guy on the bench that is probably as good as they are and wanting to take their minutes. If they do and it is impacting their game, then I say that is their problem, not the coaches. Perhaps as we develop into a society that expects the nanny-state to take care of things for us we are forgetting what it takes to be a man.
hakkaa päälle !
I have no idea of the background of most people here … … but it apparently is different enough from mine as to be almost alien.
Site rules/personal attack?
Sounds like either an excuse or bullshit.
Site rules/personal attack?
Perhaps as we develop into a society that expects the nanny-state to take care of things for us we are forgetting what it takes to be a man.
Site rules/personal attack?
I might respond to your comments in more detail but you apparently had too much on your mind to get the point that I was actually making. I.e. that environmental factors play into the team culture as well, and when something new comes up it is not always Nate’s, “fault,” even if it may be his job to make any necessary adjustments. In short, we added two wiley veterans to the mix this year and we have had a rocky adjustment period—do we blame Nate, or do we give him some time to make it work?
#52
What is the site rules personal attack stuff about?
Just how high do you set your sensitivity levels? And exactly where do I refer to you personally in the entire post?
And I get your point. I just don’t think much of it. When people start using terms like environmental factors, they are usually trying to look for excuses. Human beings are inclined towards shaping their environment far more than they are to be shaped by it.
Taking the specific example you use – two players of relatively equal talent and qualification are both in line for the same job. The fact one might be constantly looking over his shoulder and suffering from doubt or uncertainty about their position – enough so for it to effect their performance – says far more about that person then it does about the environment. If someone can’t handle the pressure of competition, then tough.
It seems pretty apparent to me that one of McMillan’s strong points is that he believes in hard work, good execution (i.e. not making mistakes) and earning what you get. He has also demonstrated that everyone has the same opportunity to earn their position and that having earned it, it is yours until such time as you stop working as hard as you can or someone else comes along and out works and out performs you for the job. That is about the best work environment a person can ask for.
hakkaa päälle !
And exactly where do I refer to you personally in the entire post?
Slippery, very slippery : ^) Personal attacks are not defined by the # of people involved, they are defined by the personal nature of the statements. Example:
nanny-statemight just be a bit personal and offensive to a large percentage of the female population on this site. As far me being the issue here, I don’t think I am.
What is the site rules personal attack stuff about?
As far as the site rules go, you may be wise to rethink them again for your own benefit as well as everyone else’s. Even if there were no rules against it, questioning other peoples manhood because they disagree with you, is more that a little bit immature?
I could go on but I want to adress a couple of points you attempted to make.
And I get your point. I just don’t think much of it
I would agree that you don’t think much of my point, but it is precisely because you do not, “get it.” And frankly it does not look like you get the Social Sciences or the role of environment in shaping human behavior. Let me appeal to you on a less academic level. Did you ever see the movie Trading Places? The movie was pointing out that circumstances can affect behavior in some rather dramatic ways. And in funny ways too.
I know I don’t look over my shoulder (unless I’m changing lanes on the freeway) for anything.
“Thus me thinks you protest too much.” (I believe that is from Shakespeare.) Your statement reflects all or nothing thinking that is not supported by the mountain of research that has been done on the subject. People function in groups, and “roles” change for individuals as they move from group to group. In short, a persons, ‘personality," may appear to be completely different from one group to the next. Here is an example from Blazer-land: (As noted in one of the articles about Andre Miller.) at the same practice he behaved one way with the press, another way with his teammates, and another way with his son. This is not unusual at all—please don’t think that Andre has a split personality ; ?)
You then go back to talking like you were defending Nate in your comment to me.
It seems pretty apparent to me that one of McMillan’s strong points is that he believes in hard work,….
Why? I thought, according to you, that you got my point? I was saying that even if people were looking over their shoulder’s, it was not all Nate’s fault and that we ought to give them time to work it out.
#52
Yep, the the politically correct sensitivity level is all the way over to the stops.
A reference to nanny – state is personal and possible offensive to women? Don’t tell me you are a nanny. About the only way that could be construed as personal (and I would have had to have known that prior to making the reference). As to it being offensive to women – maybe those who go out of their way looking for offense.
As for going out of one’s way – you certainly gave an excellent example by claiming I questioned your manhood. I make a general statement that perhaps too many people in our society are expecting things to be given to them and look for excuses when they fail, rather than knuckling down and trying harder (i.e. being a man) and you take it as a personal attack of your manhood. Well, I have to give you kudos for having a vivid imagination.
What it really interesting is that after trying to call me out for making a personal attack – something I know this site takes seriously, you then make direct comments about my knowledge level and indirectly about my education and intelligence. (FYI – one of my three degrees is in one of the social sciences (History) and I’ve done graduate level studies in another (Military Sociology). That’s not to say I have nothing left to learn on such a broad subject, but I’m betting I don’t automatically take second place to you. I also know better than to form opinions on a subject based on what I see in a movie.)
People make careers over arguing about Nature vs Nurture. However that is not at play for the topic under discussion. Even with one of the youngest teams in the league, the Blazers come to the team pretty much already formed with regard to their personalities. Travis Outlaw by all accounts is a laid back, fun loving guy who is rarely in a hurry. He was that way when he came to the Blazers and he’s pretty much still that way. The difference is he’s learning that if he wants to continue to improve himself he can’t slide by as he may have in the past. He has to work. And he has. Is that his environment shaping him? To some degree. The competative level of the NBA requires one to put in the effort. But it is also Travis coming to the realization that he not only has to do it, but actually making himeslf do it. In this case Travis is trying to shape his environment. Forcing the coach to play him by his performance and perhaps forcing teams and GM’s to decide he’s worth a better contract.
hakkaa päälle !
My primary concerns are not personal: they involve an apparent lack of facility with certain areas of modern social research and common knowledge when it comes to discussing the Blazers.
It is the repeated attempts to suppress this knowledge and experience through personal attack that I am concerned about. Your repeated attempts to make this personal with me, (saying that I am offended by this or by that statement) when I could care less about who you are or what your education is or what you say about me—no disrespect intended, I just don’t know you and this is a public, not a private site.
I was actually most disturbed by the mocking of Natsthecat up above. And that also has nothing to do with anything personal; I do not know either one of you. I am on the other hand not in favor of of such displays on this site. The overall level of decorum here is part of the reason I enjoy the site.
And I apologize if to you now if I have in anyway come across as being personal, when that is not my intention. My concerns are more along the lines of maintaining the quality of the site.
#52
Bayless
I thought Bayless played tolerably well other than his outside shooting.
However, with regards to:
“despite shooting 2-11 from the floor… he was still +20”
I suspect applying +- analysis to a team with only 6 players who played any appreciable minutes is sort of like trying to use technical analysis on a stock in a gold exploration company with a market cap of $5 million.
(we all know how foolhardy that is, right?)
uh
you lost me at “technical analysis on a stock….”
But I agree with the Bayless assessment. Something is off with the outside shot (0/4 3-pt) and he has forced it a bit on the drives. But he is still drawing fouls, passing the ball, playing good defense (except one or two plays where he didn’t fight through the pick or put a hand in a face), etc.
by blacknoiseNW on Jan 3, 2010 11:48 AM PST up reply actions
playing time
“The players are ABLE to play free…hmm..wonder if Nate will LEARN anything from this?”
Hopefully he will. However, in my view the incredible play we’re seeing from this skeleton crew underscores that the “too much talent” problem they had going into this season is a genuine problem.
If and when this team stabilizes as far as the injury situation (hopefully next season), it is something they are going to have to deal with, and probably by having to give away some players for pretty much nothing in return.
(They can’t trade away 3 or 4 middling players for a all-star or near all-star because financially it is not going to be possible to afford a fourth high-paid player assuming Oden winds up getting healthy and commanding a large salary along with Roy and Aldridge.)
Once the team is healthy, to get the team to the point of being a championship contender they will have to thin the herd and fix the talent surplus problem.
Unfortunately what that means is that a team with enough talent but not too much talent would not hold up in the face of an injury epidemic the way this team has.
On the other hand, if KP can keep finding good players in the second round of the draft or in the creases in his couch or wherever, maybe they could find a way to stay deep and but not have that be a liability for the team like it was earlier this season.
They can’t trade away 3 or 4 middling players for a all-star or near all-star because financially it is not going to be possible to afford a fourth high-paid player
This is true, but they can deal role players from positions of “too much” depth to acquire role players where the roster is thin
if KP can keep finding good players in the second round of the draft…maybe they could find a way to stay deep and but not have that be a liability
Ideally, some of these draft gems will be coached up then flipped for other assets, and not “let go for next to nothing” when their rookie contracts expire. Having a few rookies every year is a good thing, because they won’t feel entitled to X amount of minutes. Having a few 30+ year old veterans on a contending team is also a necessity, for the same reason—plus the vets can be of instant service in the post season or in case of injuries to the core players
When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
Where is the roster thin?
We have 2 starting caliber PG’s (Miller & Blake), plus a rookie who lit up the D league in his first game and played extremely well in the Olympics.
We have 2 SG’s with either great skill sets or great atheletic ability (Rudy & Bayless)
We have an All-Star 3-postion swing player.
We have 2 starting caliber SF’s (Nic & Martell)
We have 5 PF’s. One not so traditional, new school PF (Aldridge). Two “swing” PF’s capable of creating matchup problems. One crafty veteran PF/C and one bruising rookie PF/C.
We have two starting caliber C’s.
Exactly where is it we are thin?
hakkaa päälle !
Juwan is not a PF/C
No one ever called him a center until this year, I would bet.
We weren’t as thin as a lot of people thought, because Juwan could actually play PF or C in a pinch, and Pendergraph has turned out (apparently) to be able to play C. We looked really, really thin at center when Greg went down because Jeff wasn’t active yet, but from what we’ve seen, he looks like he can be a decent third string center. If so, we aren’t so thin after all.
And I’ll say this. 24L thinks rookies are a disaster in the playoffs, but I think a “nothing to lose” banger PF/C like Pendergraph is going to do ok, if we make it that far. I like his chances against Chuck Hayes or Okafor, for instance, and think he might do better than expected against Amare (he’ll get torched one game and do fine in another), and against Utah we’d put LMA on Okur and use Pendergraph on Boozer/Millsap. His game is simple enough that I think he’ll be fine, and probably like the extra banging that sometimes happens in the playoffs.
#5 #10 #52 #88
Really?
I’m surprised. Anyway, he certainly wasn’t seen by anyone as a center coming into this season. But he’s been able to do so pretty well, so my whole point, that we were deeper than anyone really thought at center, still holds.
#5 #10 #52 #88
This basketball is a lot better than the basketball they were playing earlier in the year
One thing that goes through my mind as I watch these games is that we don’t really miss LMA that much.
Blazer Fan
by the way
I still haven’t figured out whether the Blazers are calling Mills back from D-League.
Might be a short callup if Mills goes on the bench as soon as Blake is back, but for the moment it seems like they could sure use him.
2forlarue said:
“Keep the roster tight, and properly balanced with 2-3 experienced veterans who won’t complain about their PT when everyone’s healthy”
Couldn’t agree more.
We have learned bigtime this year both the upside and the downside to having too deep a roster.
But it does seem like if your GM makes smart decisions then there is some possibility of having the best of both worlds. Have 8-9 regular rotation players and then fill out the rest of the roster with players who can:
a). play if needed
don’t expect to be playing on a regular basisc). Can be on the bench for long period of time but switch on their game at a moment’s notice
Right now it seems like they have three such players, Howard, Pendergraph, and Cunningham. If Mills can come in and pinch hit then they may have yet one more. Maybe Randolph, we haven’t seen enough of him to know what sort of asset he could be.
Unfortunately, no player probably is going to fit that mold for more than a season or two. Old players will retire and the better rookies will be looking to further their NBA careers rather than sit on the bench as pinch hitters.
So it seems like if you want to have a strong NBA team with depth, you need to be finding a couple more of that type of player every year.
The Blazers certainly found their share of them this season. KP deserves a lot of credit for that.
if you want to have a strong NBA team with depth, you need to be finding a couple more of that type of player every year.
That’s how Red Auerbach did it, back in the ’60s. He would sign a few aging vets every year who were near retirement but still able to play limited minutes, and these vets would “buy in” to the winning program in hopes of ending their careers with a ring
When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
Webster
I imagine most everyone has noticed that Martell Webster has improved his game a good deal as this season has progressed.
I would say he along with Roy were the keys to the win over Golden State.
It’s great to see him reaching more of his full potential.
Webster was out for almost a whole year
Rust was inevitable – the kind of rust deep in the joints that can’t be removed by scrubbing – only by using
by blacknoiseNW on Jan 3, 2010 11:51 AM PST up reply actions
Add to the rust
He stepped into a starting role that consists of defending first (wears you down for Offense) and not being an early option on offense. I think he will prosper offensively when Batum comes back
by Hermistonmelons on Jan 3, 2010 9:25 PM PST up reply actions
Don Nelson
I’m very happy with our win, but if I were a Warriors fan, I would be so irritated. Is there any team in the league against which you feel more like you are playing the coach than a Don Nelson-led team? He’s really, really horrible. His all-time winning pct is just over .500 and he’s got a losing playoff record. It’s really weird that he still gets jobs in this league. It’s like he has some really bad dirt on David Stern. I don’t get it at all. I would hate to have him involved in a franchise I was rooting for. Sorry, Bay Area. We’ll take the win. Get a new coach.
Nelson builds the basics
but not necessarily the basics of the game it is being played today. Move him to a Don Zimmerman role and everyone would laud him. He still keeps units tight, makes even the most advanced coaches think about how they’ll play his squad. Should he be front-line? No, but he should get a letter of rec from every coach he’s faced throughout his years as being a hard coach to compete with.
All that said, I would love to be my 32 year old self that he yelled at when I was 12. I think I could answer with some numbers that weren’t available to me at the time.
by mostly_running on Jan 3, 2010 5:53 PM PST up reply actions
Great win
I still can’t believe how little Pendergraph played. Under 10 minutes? Sure it wasn’t his style of game, but he could have helped lessen the load. Basically a 6 man rotation! “Man that’s crazy” as Charles Barkley would say.
Travis Outlaw fan from the beginning.
Seing a lot of talk about bad PGs
Has anyone checked out the line from Mills’ first D-League game? PPG: 38.0, APG: 12.0, FG%: .520, 3pt%: .700. I realize that’s only his frist game, but you can’’t help but grin at those numbers. Still think we need to trade for a new PG?
Anthony Tolliver had 25pts 12rbs and 7 blcks in that game, and we all saw what he could do in the nba...
I am also optimistic for Mills, but unfortunately, the D league really is that crappy. Their best players are borderline nba players…
RUDY > MJ
actually, none of us saw what Tolliver could do in the NBA....
by blacknoiseNW on Jan 3, 2010 12:13 PM PST up reply actions
Actually, if the D-League is that bad, then I retract my previous statement.
But then again Bayless had huge numbers in the summer league last year and has only matched that performance a couple times. Meh. Cheers to potential, I guess!
by JusChilln345 on Jan 3, 2010 12:17 PM PST up reply actions
DLeague stats don't prove you belong in the NBA, but.....
if you can’t play there, you certainly can’t play in the big show
3 possesions defines an NBA career?
sample size hyperbole seems appropriate, here.
I thought Beasley went to rehab for that.
"Oden is a man among cub scouts."
by Tyrusmancrush on Nov 23, 2009 9:08 PM PST
marty
has been stepping up big. Although I would prefer Nic starting for his defense, I think Marty can be a 1st-2nd option scorer off the bench.
I'm not saying, I'm just saying.
by RyanRTE on Jan 3, 2010 12:05 PM PST reply actions 1 recs
I hope they both start when Nic comes back
and let Juwan come off the bench.
#5 #10 #52 #88
it's much easier
to put the puzzle together when you have less pieces…..things are so simple, right now, the players just go out and play…..like they should always do….
it is clear that Nate’s leadership is in question…he does not have the ability to organize without ego-laden control… thus letting the players natural abilities control the flow of the game…..
this is not about Miller, Blake, etc……. it’s about being a team…..something the Blazer’s have just recently discovered (enlightened, no doubt, by the all the recent injuries) ……This is, in no way, a compliment to the coaching staff…….they have nothing to be proud of……This team would be no worse even if Homer Simpson was the coach…..However they could be better with a coach that is focused on team play and the sound fundamentals that support it………the rhetoric, after the game is over, is for the fans and media…..
Oh by the way, Ben…..your opening couple paragraphs explaining the win by the Blazers over GS??…I’m sorry, but this undisciplined, young team, for some reason, always seems to give us fits…. Is Nellie a good coach?…nah , probably not…..but he usually is pretty good at getting the most out of the players talent and often out-coaches Nate …….. Hmmmmmmm…. the game line using and comparing the individual talents of Ellis and Roy …….I don’t get that one either……..sorry, no offense, but IMO this is somewhat misplaced ….they both played their style and contributed…this particular time Roy played better……Next time, on their floor, maybe Ellis is the star…….
please....no more...ellipses...
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
really???????
or should I say “really………….”
by Hermistonmelons on Jan 3, 2010 9:30 PM PST up reply actions
A guy...
no matter how articulate and clever he thinks he is who compares Nate’s coaching ability to Homer Simpson has no credibiltiy with me. Your judgement of his "ego-laden control " doesn’t carry much water when it proceeds a comparison to a cartoon character.
At least that foolishness wasn’t followed by an unsolicitated critique of the article Ben was kind enough to supply for us at 1:08am after the game.
Oh and by the way……. you’re….. using……. too ….. many …… of …..these………. in my opinion.
GO BLAZERS!!!
First of all,
I do not claim to be clever and articulate (I truly feel I’m in the “D league” in Blazers Edge, but thanks just the same) add; An opinion is not a ‘judgement". I wouldn’t attempt to step into those big shoes.
Also,( IMO) there should be a coma after guy, is, and Simpson. Also;
At least that foolishness wasn’t followedThis should have read; That foolishness was followed by;
Sorry, I have never commented on people’s grammar before. It just never bothers me as much as it does some people. (just like someone thinks, when they get a questionable Christmas present,…..It’s the thought that counts.)
You might also care to understand, the people that offer up opinions, are doing just that. This whole site is based on opinion and the debate over certain aspects of a game called basketball…..I was attempting to compare Nate’s coaching (IMO) as having little effect on the outcome of games. You can be the best coach in the league, but if you don’t have the players, or the execution , you will usually lose more games than you win. Perhaps, using Homer Simpson, was a bit harsh. (it was just being used as a figure of speech)
Who should I apologize to? You or Nate?
Yeah Opinions Make This Site...
…and my opinion is that, in my opinion, you don’t know enough about Nate and the nuance of coaching an NBA team for me to hold any stock in YOUR opinion. Doesn’t mean you can’t have it… just means I don’t agree.
For what it's worth
I always value your insights, though I don’t always agree with them. But since others mentioned it, I also find your comments hard to read with all the ellipses. It’s distracting, simply because it is non-standard communication.
I’ll keep reading even if you keep ellipsing :), but I’ll find it easier if you just use a period between sentences. Thought you might want to know, and if you don’t want to, sorry for the off-topic comment.
As to the Ellis/Roy comparison, it is because there’s been a lot of Ellis/Roy comparison coming from the G.S. end (including Ellis himself) due to one game down there, claiming that Ellis should be the all-star this year. Ben is just pointing out that it can go the other way, and doing so without being nasty to them about it. If Ellis is going to boast about how he showed up Brandon in one game, he shouldn’t mind too much if someone points out when Brandon badly outplayed him.
#5 #10 #52 #88
I can only
(humbly) describe myself as an abuser of ellipses…….. I can’t, for the moment, remember how this happened to me(pauses in the brain, from always being last in line) …..Do you think there is a cure?
Yes, I realize Ben is just creating conversation. It just seemed way too embellishing and lacking (in tying it to the outcome of the game). The play of the players usually replaces talk in a hurry. Not to mention the end result. And IMO, that’s the outline you should use to comment on the game….I’m just not a hype guy, so I let it bother me more than it should.
I question your interpretation of recent history.
1) Portland has not just recently discovered how to play as a team. It was a learning process that occured through much of last season, with the team finally starting to understand how to do it around February. From that point on, they were easily one of the best performing teams in the league.
1a) The fact Portland started off the season not as the finely tuned machine they were at the end of the previous season can almost certainly be ascribed to their having to integrate 3 new players into the starting lineup.
2) To claim that the Blazers would be better off with a coach that is focused on team play and sound fundmentals is beyond understand to me. You have just described two of Nate’s most basic coaching principles (along with hard work). What coach do you know that is markedly superior to McMillan on those two counts?
I have stated repeatedly that I believe most of what happens in a game is the responsibility of the players. I’d say that at least 90% of why a team wins or loses any game is due to the efforts and performance of the players. So yes, praise and accolades for the hustle and grit we have seen from this team the past few games goes primarily to the players. But to claim that absolutely none of it is due to coaching is an indefensible position to take. If in fact Homer Simpson could coach the Blazers and get the same results, then explain why Paul Allen is paying Nate McMillan a few million a year? Why spend that money when for $20 bucks per game you could get some clown to dress up as a cartoon character to sit on the bench? (I’m betting there are fans here who would do it for nothing. Hell, I’d do it for nothing if I didn’t have to dress up as Homer, just for the opportunity to see the game up that close.)
hakkaa päälle !
Yeh, me too
It was just a figure of speech.
I think we may have some agreement on players and coaches…except maybe you might be giving Nate more credit than he deserves….It’s not that he is doing nothing, because he is.
To me, it’s about adapting your style, and getting the most from the players you have…..He gets the most from his players, if they execute, the outside shots fall, and Roy and Aldridge step up…other than that,(IMO) he has never shown enough flexibility, at times when it could be applied….
This is usually done at practice, in game preparation, and much of it, before the season starts. The lack of evidence for this is: fundamental soundness…An element that good teams should be able to fall back on when the shots don’t fall, Roy has a bad night, etc.
You should always be able to fall back on the basic fundamentals to get you through the rough spots…
I agree with you .These are the attributes I thought Nate would excel in. However, I can not say that I see this being translated out onto the floor during game time……except recently, there has been an increase in intensity, hustle, and desire…..This is what builds teams…a togetherness that is backed up with sound fundamentals. Since, I haven’t seen good defense, a good transition game and more flexibility, prior to the injuries, then I must give a majority of the credit to the players and not the coaching staff
I guess the way I stated my thoughts, I could have led people to believe that coaching was token only…..I retract that to say , coaching deserves a lot less credit than Nate admirers would like to embellish.
I might also add….there are not many coaches out there that have 5 star ratings….this is why the players get the big bucks and the coaches are always expendable….IMO Nate is probably in the middle of the pack or slightly higher…I just think i may have been expecting too much out of him. Especially in the team building category.
It is a lot easier being on the “armchair” sidelines, with no accountability, than actually getting it done…Critical fans like the Blazers too………..We just want them to get better…..
Never thought Homer Simpson and……………….,would generate so much controversy. But at least, I got some conversation
On the topic of fundamental soundness ...
… could you expand?
I’m not sure I could explain it all. I’m not a coach. But to me fundamentals include things like:
- the ball can more faster than a player – i.e. keep it moving with passes until you find the open shooter. Portland does this a lot.
- play defense with your feet, not your hands – some Blazers are pretty good at this (Nic, Blake, Joel, Martell).
- don’t make turnovers – Portland seems to do pretty well on this.
- rebound – the team that controls the boards usually wins. Portland does this well.
- make your freethrows – we’ve ranged from 4th to 1st in the league this year.
As I understand it, the only way to truly master the fundamentals on any sport requires lots and lots of practice and repetition. This is supposed to occur by the time a kid makes it to college, with college being a sort of finishing school. That doesn’t happen much now. AAU coaches are not interested in teaching fundamentals. A significant number of players get little coaching prior to college and then do 1, maybe 2 years and then go pro. And once they get to the NBA there isn’t the time.
Portland has all sorts of assistent coaches trying to help players improve their game. I’m betting these guys spend a lot of their time teaching fundamentals. But at the end of the day, if the players don’t put in the time (or just don’t have the time) working on them, then they won’t have them to “fall back on”.
hakkaa päälle !
Yes
(sorry this is a bit longer than intended)
I could not explain it all either….but if you could bundle it up and have it become the foundation for your team, it would usually point to intangibles that often don’t make the individual stat line.
1. one of the mainstays, in today’s game, would have to be transition
(this is both offense to defense and defense to offense) IMO the Blazers do not take advantage of offensive transition which usually starts with tough defense.
examples of fundamental defense
a. Keep your feet in front of you and square to the player you are guarding
b. Guard the players belly, with one hand high and the other low and turned over face up
c. overplay the side the player likes to go to (or force the player into your defensive rotation plan….or maybe away from their offensive set plan)
d. when you rotate, make sure you at least, get between the hoop and the ball (this helps you cover the passing lane)
e. blocking out on the boards (this is a flexible fundamental because you, many times, have to play the angles on the shot, which will keep you from blocking out) but the theory is putting a protective ring around the hoop (no opponents bodies between you and the hoop)
There is a lot more to fundamental defense . It’s a lot of playing together as a team that helps to refine them (not to exclude good conditioning) Of course the main thing is to get back on defense in the first place) The Blazers get burnt a lot on this one
As you transition to offense, the fastest way to get the ball to the other end is, pass. pass, pass (the Blazers dribble way too much)….and starts with a good outlet pass and players having a good position on the floor to receive the ball and continue with the transition…the whole idea is to keep the transitioning defensive team on their heels and behind the play. This could lead to a lot more “easy” hoops and usually gives your big men a break (although big men, trailing the play, can be productive as well)
I believe in the Jack Ramsey philosophy (which means I’m old) If you take care of defense, and the necessary fundamentals that go along with it, the offense will take care of itself. The game has changed some, with the addition of the 3 point shot, but I still think there is a lot of merit to this……
Of course, I do have a bias view; in that, once you’ve deemed you’ve seen the best, it’s hard to accept anything less.
That said, without good players, coaches deserve more credit than they get. Ramsey had a star that he built his system around . Without Walton, the team is not the same. The thing that impressed me with Ramsey, was his ability to get the most out of his players and to make sure the fundamentals were the foundation to his team.
I think we have good players, but like you said, they are young. The very system they play under, promotes under-developed fundamentals (drafting talented players, but possibly lacking many basic fundamentals, or the refinement of)…..
As for Nate and his staff, they have an abundance of this “underdevelopment” to teach and refine….It is a tough chore and the Blazers still have a way to go. My sense is, that Nate would be a great assistant coach and would suit his talents more.
That said, the job of teaching fundamentals can be quite ugly and without glory. When they show up in your team, you will not get much credit either…
When I played, I hated the drills and constant repetition. But they made me a better player and gave me something to “fall back on” when the shots didn’t fall or the ball just didn’t feel right in my hands, etc. In other words, I could contribute to the team in other ways and help get the hot players the ball or stop my player from scoring, etc.
Nice post.
I’ve formed the opinion that Portland has been falling back on the fundamentals this season. At least as much as can be expected.
I have felt the same as you regarding too much dribbling. I lose count of the number of times I yell (or at least want to yell) at the tv when this happens. I would love to understand why it happens so much. Roy, Miller, Alrdridge and Blake all do this. Hell almost everyone on the team but Greg and Joel (and now Pendergraph, Juwon and Cunningham). However my first instinct is not to blame coaching, at least a lack of coaching fundamentals. If I had to take a guess, I’d say it appears that the players are over thinking. BUt I don’t really know. Whatever the case, I don’t think it is a fatal flaw and is one that will improve as the players become more comfortable with each other.
hakkaa päälle !
Nate
A couple things in defense of Nate:
1). Even with the small number of players it is more than just a matter of throwing the guys on the court. Look at what happened in the first quarter against GS! It took some smart coaching to successfully respond to GS’s small ball strategy.
2). Dealing with the glut of players before all the injuries was not a trivial coaching challenge. People complain about Nate yanking guys when they make a couple of mistakes. However, if he kept guys in who were playing poorly while he has guys on the bench that are also deserving of playing time, who’s to say that’s any better of a way to handle the situation?
Not a single Bay Area recap mentioned Monta's number of shots it took to get 30
Roy lets his game do the talking. Sit down Ellis.
"Oden is a man among cub scouts."
by Tyrusmancrush on Nov 23, 2009 9:08 PM PST
Let's just hope
That they bring this same intensity, hunger and team work to games once they have more of the roster back in uniform. I’m hoping lessons are being learned and that they stick.
"Easy for you to say coach, you don't have Big Greg rolling up on your blind side about to lay the wood to you." - Batum
by No you di'nt on Jan 3, 2010 7:36 PM PST via mobile reply actions
Sad, a sad day at Blazersedge
Ben,
This is just shocking. Monta Ellis is just a human being, like the rest of us. He has joys and fears and he kisses babies and feeds the homeless when not trying to entertain you. So why do you have to hate on him? Can’t we all get along for just one day? He is a fine basketball player, I mean he’s no Steve Blake, but who is? Who can really have all that talent rolled into one body? 30 points, 5 rebounds, 4 assists may not be a superstar statline, but he tries to be the best he can be. Can’t we give him a break and quit with all the hate for one night?
And this writer Dave. Talking about Pamela Anderson’s breasts fitting into a training bra. I thought this was a family site. I have a whole orphanage filled with orphans logging onto your site and they have to see this pornography? I think one of the orphans went blind when they read that scandalous statement. Could you ban Dave for the children? Or have the bourgeois rulebooks been retooled for the proletariats?
I hope not to see these terrible things in the future. Now let us all sit around the campfire, sing kum by yah and discuss why Nate and Blake are the greatest duo since Paul McCartney and Stevie Wonder…
#52. Get well soon.
by Eat Politicians on Jan 3, 2010 8:19 PM PST reply actions 2 recs
let me wipe some of the foam/froth off the lips of you blazer foaming frothheads
yes brandons effort was mvpish, but my chuckleheaded 300 lvl analisis of the shots taken are that brandon took 16 shots + 7 (14 freethrows/2 because someone would have got a shot on those if he wasnt fouled) thats more like brandons 23 attempts vs the full monte’s 27, now the monte played an extra 4 minutes so extra props to the captain, and the lack of turnovers was pretty nice.
I understand your trying to downplay one of the most efficient outings by a player in league history and I don't like it...
Lets pretend fouls don’t exist in the NBA. Then your logic works. Until that happens, Roy took 16 shots and scored 37. Not 23 attempts.
“14 freethrows/2 because somebody would have got a shot on those if he wasn’t fouled”
Lets say for a second Roy doesn’t get to the line and instead takes 7 more attempts. Who is to say he would miss all 7? Given the night he had, it would make more sense to credit him with 14 more points.
Here’s some math: Roy scored 37. Take away 12 freethrows, thats 25 points on 16 attempts. Add 14 points for the 7 phantom attempts that never happened. You get 39 points on 23 attempts. Regardless of the outcome each scenario is miraculous.
What if Roy turned the ball over, or committed offensive fouls? Reality is Roy earned his trips to the FREEthrow stripe.
by Gremarcus Roynandez on Jan 3, 2010 10:20 PM PST up reply actions
The tone was peckish, but the analysis was solid
Free throws mean that they are unguarded. They don’t mean extra possessions (not counting Ts or flagrants, etc., which should be accounted for differently from regular FTs if we want to be thorough). If a guy hits 2/2 FTs after a foul, while another hits 1/1 FG, the benefit to the team is the same (not counting the residual effect of the foul, but again that should be accounted for based on a foul’s value, whatever that may be, and not by pretending these are “free” points).
Were any of Brandon's free throws
on made shots? I don’t remember. But even if they weren’t, even using this analysis, Brandon gets 37 on 23 shots, while Ellis gets 30 on 27. That’s a huge gap in efficiency.
And of course, Ellis had fewer rebounds and assists in more minutes. But it was a nice game for Monta, one that you might even call all-star worthy, if it had helped his team win the game….
#5 #10 #52 #88
i would like to have seen a few more minutes from pendegraph and shav
seemed like we mostly played 6 guys all nite and eventually guys are going to get tired then we may see more SHAVNPEN than we want to
When I break into your house and need to hack your computer
I’ll keep SHAVNPEN in mind
#52. Get well soon.
by Eat Politicians on Jan 4, 2010 7:34 AM PST up reply actions
I almost wonder
If Pendegraph was being saved a bit for the Clippers Game? Huge Speculation I admit. But he does match better against that Front Line and we will definetly need some size and Rebounding more there
by Hermistonmelons on Jan 4, 2010 10:46 AM PST up reply actions
Saved, no
He didn’t play much simply because it was a matchup for Dante. But it wasn’t “saving” him, the dude can’t be tired.
Pendergraph will likely get a lot more burn against the Clips than Dante. That’s what happened last time. Shav might, too. Those guys have so much size on us, even if we had LMA.
Nate will use the rooks and Shavlik based on which matchup is likely to be better.
#5 #10 #52 #88

by 























