Observations from tonight's game
by douglast on Oct 16, 2010 10:17 PM PDT
Email
Print
- Batum and Aldridge were fantastic.
- Miller had a nice stretch in the 3rd were he just worked his smaller defender in the post repeatedly, leading to FTs, baskets, and good passes
- Rudy was once again electric. Not only is his 3 pointer just so dialed in right now, he's playing with more energy and passion than I've ever seen. His court vision and flair for the highlight pass are back as well.
- Matthews played sparingly.
- Babbit had some nice offensive moves, but can't guard me.
- Armon Johnson is a Nate PG all the way. Pressuring full court, setting up the offense. He even scored well tonight, and hit a couple jumpers.
- Bayless looked hesitant to shoot kickout 3s a few times, still dribbles the ball far too much to go nowhere, and just looks like he trying to force it too much.
- Roy was completely out of sync. We made concerted efforts to force feed him the ball in both halves. When we gave it to him out top on the iso or pick/roll, it was ineffective at best. He wasn't able to get to the rim, and his instead had to either hit the popper for a long 2, or pass it to reset the offense. Worse yet, we were trying to feed him the ball in the post area, usually on a cross screen. He couldn't even get open enough to get the ball in most cases, resulting in having to abandon the play, a forced pass, or Roy catching it far out of where they wanted to. Nothing good happened on any of these possesions, and the offshoot was the other 3 guys standing on the weakside.
- Conversely, the offense flourished when players were moving, and we were whipping the ball around. Even when Roy was in, when it wasn't a Roy play, he generally stood around the perimeter, not really involved. Meanwhile, the other players on the floor (Aldridge, Dante, Batum, Rudy most noticeably), were back cutting, making quick passes, and playing selflessly. it was highly effective, resulting in a lot of dunks, layups, and close in attempts. We also got out on the break very effectively, with Miller pushing the ball ahead as often as he could. Batum and Rudy both through several alley-oops, with LMA being the main beneficiary.
- I realize this was the Warriors, so take all that above with a grain of salt.
So, maybe the question we need to be asking is: Do we completely rebuild the roster around Roy, which will require a LOT of moves, or would we be better off (I know this is insane), trading Roy while his value his highest, and trying to bring back an all-star talent who might fit the rest of our roster better. I don't know the "right" answer, but it's beginning to seem like the right question to be asking to me.
76 comments
|
3 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
preseason games are very different from reg season
Its strange that so many are forgetting several years of great games from Roy after only a few poor preseason games.
"Sasha? That's a sissy name." -Mike Rice
did I say that?
My last two paragraphs are actually based on watching about 250 Blazers games over the past three seasons. I’m not jumping to a conclusion because Roy has had a few bad preseason games. I’m questioning the fundamental makeup of this roster, which seems to me to be ill-constructed from the core. Roy is our best player. End of story. But he’s blue and everyone else is green. Do you trade 7 green guys for 7 more blue ones so you can have a matched set, or do you trade 1 blue guy for 1 green guy?
"I want to be traded to a contender" is almost always code-speak for "I'm a loser."
-Dave, 2/5/2010: http://www.blazersedge.com/2010/2/5/1297509/no-amore-for-amare
if you could get a Chris Paul for Roy, you’d do it in a nanosecond. I can’t really think of anyone other than LeBron, Paul, Durant, Howard and Wade I’d trade him for though, and obviously all of those trades are nonstarters. Who would you be targeting—Steph Curry?
Roy is a good enough and versatile enough player to fit with the roster. If the coaching staff can’t make it work, they need to be replaced.
I'd probably expand that list to include few more guys, like Deron Williams.
But, mid-season CP3 trade seems to be the best option. Except, I’m not sure NO would go over the cap even if it is for Roy, as he is in his BYC year.
I will run naked through the streets if Oden wins the MVP this season...happily.
I expect that the New Orleans hold onto Chris Paul through this entire season, especially ...
after acquiring Trevor Ariza. Besides, Paul isn’t eligible for a contract extension until 7/9/2011 — although the NBA might be in lockout mode at that time — and I figure whichever team acquires him would want to seal him up to a long-term contract. Sometime right before or during the 2011 NBA Draft on 6/23/2011, I could envision a trade of Vince Carter — whose salary is only partially guaranteed for $4,000,000 in the 2011-2012 season — Jameer Nelson, Daniel Orton, a 2011 first-round draft pick, a 2013 first-round draft pick, a 2015 first-round draft pick, and a 2017 first-round draft pick for Paul, Emeka Okafor, and Ariza. The Hornets could use Nelson as a stopgap at point guard, waive Carter to slash payroll heading into the new CBA, and stockpile future draft picks as assets in a plan to rebuld the roster and possibly relocate the franchise elsehwere.
http://games.espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=2a25koa
"Some things you can't unsee, bro." (The League)
that's terrifying
Ariza would be good again on the Magic.
You can measure skill and talent with your eyes, but productivity is shown through statistics.
any team trading away top shelf players like those
wont want to take back someone who just signed a max deal
unless they ate demanding a trade and won't resign with there current team.
Such as Carmelo.
by hoodieNation on Oct 16, 2010 11:24 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions
My take is that, given our current roster, the Blazers have been successful with the current half court set offense over the last two seasons. One or two games isn’t going to convince me that the Blazers are the new Phoenix Suns. Does that mean we shouldn’t try to run at times? Of course not. This team can definitely play a fast transition game at times. If it’s working, sure, go with it. However, trading our best player and the guy who almost single handedly turned this team into a contender doesn’t seem like a step in the right direction either way.
Even if I agreed with you, I wouldn’t want to trade Roy. Fast-paced offensive teams have consistently lost in playoff series over the last ten years to half court set offensive teams.
"Sasha? That's a sissy name." -Mike Rice
some great teams have been able to modulate their speed according to the needs of the game
based on point guard play. I don’t think Roy wants this, especially after calling for ball dominance. Dre and Roy seem more in a deadlock than ever this preseason…
I see what you're saying
and hope that he can go green for the sake of the team, but have my doubts that this is a possibility.
I would love to have seen the Blazers tonight as I love watching motion offenses and love the Blazer roster.
I've had the secret thought before...
That Roy doesn’t fit with the Blazers.
But I think we should stick with what we got for now.
Roy is simply in first gear.
I really honestly believe that Roy will get his ‘rythym’ soon enough, and things will figure themselves out. We’ll be just fine.
by blazerbeliever on Oct 16, 2010 10:59 PM PDT reply actions
Roy will come to life once the season starts
Though he needs to be involved in said motion offense for this team to operate at full potential, imo.
While I appreciate a little insider info on the game I couldn't watch...
I can’t believe that this post had to degenerate into another,“maybe Roy doesn’t fit” post!
It’s the pre-season!!!… I personally like all different colored guys and think that having all the same colored guys would be boring!
Brandon just signed a MAX deal, is a perennial AllStar and is the face of our franchise. He’s not going anywhere and I…for one… am happy for that!
Do you care to argue
how our bench is doing the best work so far? Brandon hasn’t showed up at all. I don’t pretend to know how to fix the problem but why should we put blinders on to our own perceptions?
Its the preseason,panic now before its to late
by southern oregon on Oct 16, 2010 11:43 PM PDT up reply actions
I'm not freaking out about my frustrations with Brandon
half as much as those trying to defend his every breath.
Is defending him worse then berating him?..
for his performance in games that 90% of commenters haven’t seen?
Nope...
Is this is how a “fan” who pens “More Reasons to call for Patience” proves his point?
If that’s your answer to the question I asked I’ll just go ahead and assume you don’t have one.
Age old debate!.. It’s somehow OK for you to question Roy but it’s not OK for me to defend him.
THAT… is being holier than thou!
My Righteous Brothers
can’t we all just get along…
reality is it is preseason
reality is there are chemistry issues to be worked out.
These things are not incongruous whatsoever.
Let us all be reasonable now and see that while the glass is half empty that naturally implies that the glass is half full as well.
"Oh Yeah!" ~ Kool Aid Man
I love the Righteous Brothers...
It’s all good as they say.
Some would say the glass is just too big…
This should be 2 separate posts
I appreciate the insight from the game. You gave a good recap of what happened. However, what you turned it into, the comments will almost all regard your trade Roy bit. And I think you are off. Trading Roy could make sense in some aspects, but I think it is more complex than just him not fitting. I mean, how does this all look when Oden comes back? What about the Playoffs? We really haven’t had enough to go on to make those determinations despite all of the games that he has played. It does make sense in some aspects, as the log jam behind him, the make-up of the current roster, but you’ve got to admit that he’s the best player on the floor most nights.
I think this is complex, and I’m not the man to really break everything down, not even close. But if I knew I was going to open a “trade Roy” post, I’m not sure if I would have opened this.
It turns out I overestimated my apathy, but not enough to matter.
there's no call for trying to chastise someone based on the way they were thinking after a game. Moments change perceptions and
perhaps what he needed to see to have this opinion, as a Blazer fan, was this game. So in essence it’s still part of his recollection of the game. We’re not journalists.
by panfolk on Oct 16, 2010 11:30 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Nor are we editors...
…or censors…
I agree with einman77’s opinion and support his right to present it.
By telling einman what there is no call for?..
all opinions are equal. Mine is that all the criticism of Brandon is patently ridiculous… as is the predictable Nate’s offense sucks sentiment that is usually projected by the same bunch.
It’s hard to find a post that doesn’t contain this message… Kinda sad to me,
You're right
I came on to the site to find out about the game since it wasn’t televised. I saw the title and thought ‘great, someone else wrote it’. I didn’t want to get into a debate, but it was a short 2 paragraph write-up and there was a topic I had a difficult time walking away from. It’s my fault for opening a link with a misleading title and I should be aware of such an instance in the future.
It turns out I overestimated my apathy, but not enough to matter.
a "trade roy" post?
Please, give it a rest. Don’t read into what I wrote, which was this:
“Do we completely rebuild the roster around Roy, which will require a LOT of moves, or would we be better off (I know this is insane), trading Roy while his value his highest, and trying to bring back an all-star talent who might fit the rest of our roster better. I don’t know the “right” answer, but it’s beginning to seem like the right question to be asking to me."
Please enlighten me, how do you get from that heavily qualified paragraph to calling this a “trade Roy” post?
"I want to be traded to a contender" is almost always code-speak for "I'm a loser."
-Dave, 2/5/2010: http://www.blazersedge.com/2010/2/5/1297509/no-amore-for-amare
That statement isn't the only one.
You had bullet points detailing the game, but the 2 largest by far were with Roy the team did this and without Roy they did that. The weight of that heaviliy qualified statement alone counterbalances the rest of the post and then some, not to mention that you were building up to that. It may not be your intended goal to make it the focus, and you probably felt you needed to build up to that statement, but look at nearly every single comment and tell me what most people got from this post? Can you even find one that doesn’t address the Roy comment directly or indirectly in some type of way? Whether intended or not, qualified or not, what have you, that’s what it became in the end.
It turns out I overestimated my apathy, but not enough to matter.
so I'm responsible for you reading too much into what I wrote?
"I want to be traded to a contender" is almost always code-speak for "I'm a loser."
-Dave, 2/5/2010: http://www.blazersedge.com/2010/2/5/1297509/no-amore-for-amare
I see what you're saying
You’re saying that this wasn’t a post advocating the trade of Brandon Roy, ie. a trade post. Maybe not.
I’m saying this was a post that focused on building an an argument that Roy might not be the best fit for the team, and then trailing out with this:
Do we completely rebuild the roster around Roy, which will require a LOT of moves, or would we be better off (I know this is insane), trading Roy while his value his highest, and trying to bring back an all-star talent who might fit the rest of our roster better.
after which you try and temper that statement by asking a question relative to the question of trading Roy, not to confuse that with actually naming people that we should trade Roy for. I guess that would be a “Should we trade Roy” post. Seems like splitting hairs to me. But, of course you do name people in the comments section…
It turns out I overestimated my apathy, but not enough to matter.
The underlying point I was trying to make
apparently unsuccessfully, is that I am now concerned that the question we need an answer to is whether to:
A) overhaul the roster to better suit Roy’s game
B) try to move Roy for another high caliber player who matches the rest of the roster better.
Those are two bad options. But IF that is the correct question, then we are a lot further away from contending then many people (myself included) previously thought or hoped.
"I want to be traded to a contender" is almost always code-speak for "I'm a loser."
-Dave, 2/5/2010: http://www.blazersedge.com/2010/2/5/1297509/no-amore-for-amare
My original point
was simply that the title was misleading. This was a post about what you just stated. If it was about the game you could have really developed ideas like how “Batum and Aldridge were fantastic” and maybe why “Matthews played sparingly”, and really anything that you bulletted up there it seems like you have the capability to expand on. You had other intentions about the message that you wanted to get across. I guess I’m just asking for you to call a spade a spade if you could so I can go about reading actual game wrap ups. That was really my gripe.
It turns out I overestimated my apathy, but not enough to matter.
see my clarification below
I already owned up to the fact that I shouldn’t have combined my bullet point observations with my deeper, long-developing concern.
To assume it was all intentionally misleading from the start is a bit presumptive on your part. When I post, I tend to just blurt out what I’m thinking, and I don’t spend really much time at all agonizing over editing my thoughts and worrying about how it might possibly be construed. As I’ve said twice now, I made a mistake. Assuming it was part of some nefarious misdirection is also a mistake.
"I want to be traded to a contender" is almost always code-speak for "I'm a loser."
-Dave, 2/5/2010: http://www.blazersedge.com/2010/2/5/1297509/no-amore-for-amare
I never meant to imply that your intent was furtive
but you did start a long way from where you ended up, which is why I said this should have been 2 separate posts. Again, the title was my biggest peeve. My frustration comes not from your post, but the fact that in no way am I able to watch the game. I thought there was a light to guide me out of the darkness, but instead it took me to a darker place. Forgive me for reacting in a less than appreciative manner, but I try not to open posts like this because I get too wrapped up in them.
What I still find curious is that you construct an appology and an in depth breakdown of your mistake because (I presume) you want to let people know that your intentions were misrepresented. You even follow this conversation with me to the depths. Yet you: “don’t spend really much time at all agonizing over editing my thoughts and worrying about how it might possibly be construed.” This wasn’t something that was construed due to a faint lead or reference, this was the meat of the post. You seem to be saying two different things right now, and meanwhile your actions are also standing on the side of agonizing over editing (correcting after the fact rather than before it) your thoughts and worrying about how they might possibly be (have been) construed".
It turns out I overestimated my apathy, but not enough to matter.
good conversation
You are honing in on my wacky nature….I tend to not agonize/edit when I type a post (or a comment), but then I tend to over-analyze myself after the fact. A bit messed up I do admit…
"I want to be traded to a contender" is almost always code-speak for "I'm a loser."
-Dave, 2/5/2010: http://www.blazersedge.com/2010/2/5/1297509/no-amore-for-amare
The end of the rabbit hole
Glad we made it there. That’s a funny quirk. I’m the exact opposite when it comes to my posts. I pour over them trying to get my meaning down as specific as possible, and reply to nearly every comment that I feel needs commenting. I’ve actaully let a few saved posts die while waiting in the wings due to the fact that I knew the intent would be misconstrued and I didn’t want to just put out flames for the next little while.
It turns out I overestimated my apathy, but not enough to matter.
Okc has done a good job of getting players that complement KD
We have not,JB and Dre are never going to be a good fit with Roy
by southern oregon on Oct 16, 2010 11:42 PM PDT reply actions
I believe you are right...
instead by taking the BPA types we’ve overloaded on “back ups” for Roy instead of surrounding him with complimentary talent.
Well, regarding OKC, I wonder what'll happen with Jeff Green, who's a poor fit next to Kevin Durant.
"Some things you can't unsee, bro." (The League)
"Does Brandon fit?" is a startling question,
yet, I think this is a reasonable question,which, I suspect, has never occurred, or been put, to Roy. Of course, part of it is a preference for the style of play we heard tonight, which is certainly more entertaining to me, and, of course, to all the players being so involved really playing the game in a flowing, creative and challenging way.
Maybe the new assistants and Nate are opening things up. Maybe Brandon is lost in a less structured environment. Think of Greg joining in with the team we saw tonight. I like that vision. This notion of building around our ‘best player’ Brandon is a recipe for frustration and mediocracy, as well as possible exhaustion/injury for Brandon, at which point all the “build around” is for naught. It disrespects the potential of the other talented players we have. Not the way to go. I am so for the “team” concept, and we have a lot of talent, and potential talent, all of which needs attention and development.
I am not giving up on Brandon. So why criticize ? Because improvement is possible, but only if the need is recognized. And Brandon’s recent interview, longing to go back to the good old days, betrayed a blindness to the road forward Brandon needs to take with the whole team. I am hoping this will somhow be made clear to him, for the good of all concerned. He could possibly do it, if he is asked to. I am hopeful, with the coaches guidance, things will work out. This is not just a Brandion vs Andre issue. We, once again, are a bit unsettled on just how the team will play, and who we will have, at the start of the season. We have plenty of reasons for optimism and I am hopeful. We shall see, and that, in it’s self, is at least interesting.
"You be realistic," Oden said. "I’m going to stay happy. All right?"
I think you hit a lot of good points
It’s no longer just Brandon v. Andre. More and more, the issue is Brandon v. the rest of the team. This problem needs to be addressed. Ultimately, I believe it comes down to the coach. Can the coach make it happen? If not, do we need a new coach?
I'm a McMillan supporter
with that said I think you try things with a new coach before trying without Brandon… if it comes to that.
by greg6582 on Oct 16, 2010 11:59 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
I was at the game too, and watched every Roy possession. I knew some fan would write more panic
comments. Roy couldn’t get to the rim? How about Roy didn’t even try to get to the rim.
The Blazers were trying to force feed Roy in the post and they were doubling Roy on the catch. When they turned it over trying to get it into Roy, next time Roy did get it, he was doubled right away.
The two open jumpers I saw Roy make were catch and shoot. Which looked good. I’m not worried about Roy at all. Why would he trying to get to the hoop in a meaningless game? Pull a hamstring trying to get a preseason basket. Real smart.
I like the sounds of your observations better
however I’m assuming that actual state of the Blazers and Roy falls somewhere in between
Thanks for the observations!
Well posed— appreciate the mix of description of on-court action that most of us weren’t able to see, and being willing to give your angle on it.
The questions raised obviously can’t be answered now, and are going to take a longer, harder look before we can really have a quality discussion on it. But it will be interesting to see if these develop into ongoing storylines of this season or not. We definitely saw hints of these roster and style-fit questions at certain points during last season, too. Then it was excused by a grace period to incorporate new players, and then a very forgivable injury roster roulette. Now it’s also (fairly) excused by this being preseason. Life may move on and we all remember that Brandon Roy is an incredible player and the best thing we’ve had in this town for a long time. He may also have a lot to do with how we are an efficient, superior team, instead of a semi-improved version of the Golden State Warriors. But these roster clash issues also feel like they could be something we’re all talking about a couple of months from now, too.
If .. If so— and it may get resolved and become much ado about nothing— but it may make for an uncomfortable look in the mirror. It’s probably safe to say that most of us are 1. Blazer fans and 2. Brandon Roy fans. I feel like this is totally looking too far ahead, but if this max contract marriage turns out to be an unhealthy relationship … we kids may need some quality child therapy. I hope Dave’s up the task.
On the Roy situation
This city owes him too much to be pining for a trade, even if you are right.
That said, I want to play it out with this roster. I know that is what we were saying last season at this time but honestly we were lucky to make the playoffs given the lifeboat the injury situation forced us into last year. Roy is that good and he will find a way to get others involved. It is the next natural step in the development of a team. As Dave pointed out earlier in the week, Brandon had no veteran mentor on this team as he was taking the reins so some of this stuff will be more a process of self discovery
Roy’s hands are firmly on the wheel of this offense, as it should be, he needs to make sure the engine is well oiled now.
"Oh Yeah!" ~ Kool Aid Man
A Couple of clarifications
- In retrospect, adding the last two paragraphs onto this post was a mistake. It gave the impression that the observations on the game led to the . For the most part, that is inaccurate. What I wrote in the last two paragraphs has been a concern that I’ve been thinking over (and posting about) for a long time. What has recently occurred to me is the idea that we either need to remake the rest of the roster around Roy (wholesale changes), or flip Roy for a star player more fitting the rest of the team. Neither of those options are easy, or very palatable. But I’m increasingly concerned that we have to do one of those things if we want to get to the next level. This is a jarring concern.
- My Roy-centric comments on last nights game were not meant as a criticism of him as a player. As I stated, he is our best player easily. If he’s still just mailing it in for the preseason, I’m not worried. What I am worried about, and the reason I posted that stuff, was that our TEAM OFFENSE looked predictable, easily defendable, and terribly ineffective when we were forcing the ball to Roy (i.e. – ‘getting him his touches’). Our TEAM OFFENSE looked it’s best when we were playing a free-flowing style with lots of movement. This led to easy looks by Dante, LMA, Batum, Rudy, and others. We weren’t “calling X’s number”, we were just probing the defense and taking advantage of the openings, no matter who they were for.
"I want to be traded to a contender" is almost always code-speak for "I'm a loser."
-Dave, 2/5/2010: http://www.blazersedge.com/2010/2/5/1297509/no-amore-for-amare
I just think that last year
was going to really be an integration phase and that completely got derailed with the injuries.
We are not back at square one of this phase, but we are still way to early to begin to make any type of final judgement on the roster vs Roy type arguments.
I tend we will be fine if the core can get on the floor and acutally play together some. WQe have yet to see RAMBO on the floor together for goodness sake…and now we have RAMBO 2 as well…
"Oh Yeah!" ~ Kool Aid Man
skipped a whole bunch of words!! goodness gracious
I tend to think we will be fine…
"Oh Yeah!" ~ Kool Aid Man
Forget the "Fire Nate" campaigns
I’m starting a “Fire PDXBuckeye’s keyboard” campaign.
When the world knows Nico Batum as "The Inevitable", I'll be very happy with where he is as a player.
I wish it were the keyboard
but is purely an operator problem unfortunately…
"Oh Yeah!" ~ Kool Aid Man
PEBKAC
You can measure skill and talent with your eyes, but productivity is shown through statistics.
I thought that
But I didn’t say it…
When the world knows Nico Batum as "The Inevitable", I'll be very happy with where he is as a player.
15 inch error
tech support classic response “ma’am, the real problem is located 15 inches in front of your monitor…”
When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
That's a good one too
Tech support guys usually have a good sense of humor. They need it, too.
When the world knows Nico Batum as "The Inevitable", I'll be very happy with where he is as a player.
I think what you're saying is something we've been talking about for awhile
and Roy said it himself earlier this week, he doesn’t do well in a free-flowing, unstructured offense. A lot of his teammates do, as was seen/heard last night in the 2nd & 4th quarters. Nate seems content to run different sets for the starters and bring the reserves in to pick up the tempo. I’ve already shared my concerns about this being a sustainable strategy (especially during post season) but as long as McMillian is the coach and Brandon’s the star, it may be the best compromise available.
I would still like to see the rotations staggered so Bayless plays with Roy more than Miller, and Andre plays more with the 2nd unit than Brandon, but that may be asking too much of Nate. As long as Roy and ’Dre can take turns posting up small PGs and passing out of the inevitable double-teams, they should be able to collaborate, at least until crunch time.
When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
Too much has been invested
in the idea that Roy is the cornerstone of this franchise to consider moving him, at least for the time being. However, if we continue to suffer first-round exits, it could become a reality sooner than you think… perhaps as early as next summer.
I've said all along...
that Greg is the key, and the cornerstone, of the Blazers championship aspirations.
I said last year that this team would be better with Roy coming off the bench, and running with the first unit instead of the second.
I still strongly believe both of those statements are true. Virtually every Blazer except Roy plays better uptempo. Roy has effectively killed any potential for a fast break with his comments, and his on court play.
BRoy’s a great player, but IMO, his comments about wanting touches ARE selfish, and do not lead me to believe he is a leader for a championship team. He’s been propped up as such by the org and the media, but I’m not seeing leadership on the floor, or from his comments.
BTW, why do people think he needs to be traded for a point guard, like CP3 or Deron? It looks to me like the far more pressing need is for a big man… I started to do some analysis of the top 20 players, to see who on that list might be a reasonable trade partner for Roy, taking the other team’s roster into account, but it was going to take me too long to do a good job at it, so I bagged it… So I don’t have an answer as to who we should trade him for… But a veteran big man would give us a great roster:
Dre, Matthews, Batum, LMA, Greg.
JB (or, my preference, AJ), Rudy, Dante, , Camby
That first unit would run most other first units out of the building. And I might even swap Matthews for Rudy, as a second unit of (AJ, Matthews, Dante, (Big), Camby would be a great defensive squad to balance the running first unit…
But I fully realize that the odds of that happening are infinitely small, at least until another first round exit occurs…
So, instead, I hope Roy matures to the point where he can truly understand what a leadership role on this team means: shut up about wanting your touches, play hard nosed D every possession, and lead by that example…
My bad,....
Yeah, that’s confusing…. OK, so Nate has intimated that this year they might try to run with the second unit a little more… problem is, second unit has a much inferior PG in JB running it… My thought is, if Dre, Nico, LMA are on the first unit, then let’s put Rudy out there with the first unit, and let them push it hard at the beginning of every game….
You can then bring Roy in off the bench in a role that would likely bring him sixth man of the year, still give him plenty of minutes, and let him play in a slower, methodical style he prefers, while giving us an awesome first unit.
Dre, Rudy, Nic, LMA, and GO when healthy (Pryz or Camby to lesser extent): we have a dominant D rebounder, and somebody who could definitely be taught how to make an effective outlet pass… A great running PG in Dre… And three gazelles who like to play up tempo ball: Rudy, Nic, and LMA…
On the second unit, you have JB playing next to BRoy, Wes another good outside shooter playing the 3, and Dante/Babbitt and (Joel/Camby) to grab some boards… Wes can D up the best offensive threat on the other team… And BRoy can play his little iso game, with JB and Wes to shoot when Brandon tosses them his famous flaming bag passes…
It seems to make perfect sense to me, but unfortunately with with BRoy’s ego and Nate’s lack of imagination (and guts to tell his star to come off the bench), I know it’ll never happen…
In theory that'd be awesome,
but I can’t see any coach bringing Roy off the bench when he’s in his prime. Rather I’ve come to the conclusion, perhaps ill-informed, that Roy’s slow start is him figuring out how to fit in the faster motion offense. If correct, the Blazers could be dominant come AllStar break.
stagger the rotations
we already know that the idea re: bringing Brandon and Andre off the bench is a non-starter (or perhaps I should say you-must-start-me)
So a workaround would be to replace Miller with Bayless at the 6 minute mark and play Rex-Roy for awhile until Brandon needs a blow, then bring Matthews (or Rudy) in for #7
repeat this in the 3rd quarter
it’s not ideal, but it is the best compromise I can come up with. The Blazers tend to try and establish LMA at the beginning of the game, anyway. It’s a pipe dream to expect them to sprint out of the gate, either at the beginning of halfs or the beginning of the regular season…
When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
I think modern stars have too many voices in their ear saying, "you're the greatest." Maybe it's always been that way, but...
I’ve heard some on this site proclaim his call for the ball as a sign of maturation, rather than seeing it as going around Nate to the media and protesting the direction the team is taking.
If Roy truly doesn't fit the Blazers
then trade him as far away as possible cuz I don’t want to think about playing against him.
by hellsfrozenover on Oct 19, 2010 10:31 AM PDT reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
NBA Playoffs Content Module
Related FanPosts on Blazer's Edge
Related FanShots on Blazer's Edge
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
In Association With
Ball Don't Lie - NBA - Yahoo! Sport
- Behind the Box Score, where the Boston Celtics are moving on to the conference finals
- NBA Playoffs Fan Fiction: San Antonio Spurs vs. Oklahoma City Thunder
- The Indiana Pacers? Gone till November
- Shaquille O’Neal is in a Chinese beer commercial, too (VIDEO)
- ‘Deep Thoughts’ and Cheap Thoughts: San Antonio Spurs vs. Oklahoma City Thunder
