Are we in denial as Blazer fans?
by TeamChemistry on Feb 24, 2010 3:42 PM PST
Email
Print
We are starting to see a trend with this team that makes you wonder what is really going on. These players are constantly inconsistent and fighting this upward battle of trying to establish themselves on this team. There are two players that have gotten consistent playing time that still remain on this team, Roy and Aldridge. However you look at all the other players on this team that still remain, we never know what they are going to produce. Everyone jumps on Rudy, Martel, Bayless, Oden, Batum, and Miller for their unpredictably, yet there is a much bigger problem.
I know what I might say may get my post removed, but I'll take that risk. The problem resides solely on the system implemented by the coach. We can continually talk about how certain players aren't achieving success or playing well, but folks the system is designed for one player to succeed, Brandon Roy. I don't care who you have on the team, this style will not win championships period! Everyone who wants to believe otherwise is only fooling themselves into thinking it will work, the fact that its been tried and proven to fail. Any comparisons to Kobe and MJ, you're really looking for something that isn't there, they ran the triangle offense, that has far more player and ball movement than any type of system we run. All the players besides Roy are suffering because of it, yet we are constantly banging on the players.
Its like only feeding your kids fast food, yet you blame them for getting fat. Well feed them something that is real, that has vitamins and natural foods in it, not some fabricated junk food that you want to stuff down your kids throat cause your lazy! You wonder why they're fat? Their body can't break down all the chemicals in the food, what they need is structure and a sound eating habits to help them thrive and grow, kind of like the Blazer players.
The frustrating element to all this is that the media has totally bought into Nate McMillan. ESPN, Blazers Edge, Comcast, and the Oregonian have all given us this Coach of the year mumbo jumbo. Hello these players get thrown under the bus every game when the system fails. Take Utah the other night, do people really believe that the players quit playing hard, didn't scrap enough? Really??? Did anyone really see the game with constant ISO of Brandon Roy? Even peoples posts after the game said we lost because LA and Batum couldn't hit a shot. Folks one or two missed shots doesn't cost you the game, the system cost you the game!! The problem isn't the players here, trust me the players are good to great for the Trail Blazers. The system doesn't make the players any better or help them get any easier shots. The game isn't supposed to be one on one, no its supposed to be give and goes, cuts and screens, back doors, quick precise passing that makes the defense have to adjust which creates easy shots. Instead we play a style which we constantly fight the clock and have to take horrible shots, yet blame Rudy.
Its like reality is completely distorted and everyone who doesn't agree is considered a hater. This is basketball and its learned and developed by many across the world, yet if someone has a varying opinion of the Blazers, they are taken to the cleaners that they think they know more than an NBA coach. Well very possibly they are seeing something that the coach is blind to. How long are we as Blazer fans going to have to watch player after player suffer and want out of the organization before we wake up. If Rudy was playing poorly, and it was solely on him and his lacks, he wouldn't be calling for a change. This is someone who is sorely frustrated and trying to adapt to a system that has only one way of working. Not to anyones strengths but Brandon Roy. The game of basketball wasn't designed to be played this way, but rather to play as a team. What will we do when Batum gets frustrated with his role on the team, we gonna ship him off too? Really is this what we want, to be indebted to one player and one coach who believe in controlling the whole game with slow methodical offense that doesn't translate to winning in the playoffs. Folks this problem will not go away, this will be even more of a problem when Greg plays again next year, how will Roy and Oden coexist? Impossible under this system, and fooling ourselves into thinking it will work will only cause all the players on this team to become more frustrated and dysfunctional as time goes by.
There is clearly one solution, but the media and many Blazer fans don't want to admit is, Nate has to go. You can keep throwing players under the bus, you can blame them after every game, but no matter who the players are, you'll still have a coach who is so limited in his system that the personnel will get frustrated. Nate plays a style that worked in the 90's, isolation like Charles Barkley and Gary Payton use to run, yet the NBA is different now. You can do it for one play, but not for half the game, or a quarter or even a half a quarter. The NBA does watch other games, scouts other teams, so the reality is hitting hard and will continue to until this issue is addressed. Call me a hater, call me a Rudy lover, but I'm neither. I will admit though I really enjoy the game when its played right, with ball movement, player movement and great defense. Its an art form and we are going to see less and less of it until McMillan is gone.
108 comments
|
3 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Well thought out
I really appreciate your post and agree with a lot of it, the problem I see lies in who we’ll get to replace McMillan. I’ve had this same debate with my friends countless amounts of times…it seems right when Nate is on the verge of being fired, he does something with nothing and our players (because of their TALENT not the SYSTEM) bail him out with a short winning streak or a big win, etc. It seems like we play our best ball when we are ‘facing adversity’ or when no one thinks we have a chance at winning anymore. That’s not what championship teams are built on. Anyway, I hope your post doesnt get pulled, I think this is a sound issue that needs to be addressed on the main page.
Yup. I agree our offensive system needs an overhaul if not just a little tweaking, but what coach out there is a clear upgrade?
It’s not an easy answer.
"What people need to know is that those pictures were taken a year and a half ago, and I've grown since then." - Greg Oden
by dario argento on Feb 24, 2010 9:21 PM PST up reply actions
Just because you don't know of a name
doesn’t mean there aren’t people out there. I didn’t know anything about Scotty Brooks other than he was a serviceable backup on the Hakeem teams until he got the interim tag after they canned PJ, and that guy is a terrific terrific coach. Watching that team as much as I do just clarifies for me all the places Nate goes wrong.
It makes me laugh when I remember all the arguments I used to have with folks here about how poor a defensive coach Nate is despite his rep, and folks blamed the players for being young or not having a defensive savior in the post. I think this site even went through the trouble of getting KP2 to write up some apologia about how young players are just supposed to be poor defenders. Folks, the Thunder is younger than the Blazers were two years ago, and have a top 3 defensive team, playing with Krstic and Collison in the middle, two undersized and decidedly mediocre centers.
by howlingfantods on Feb 25, 2010 4:22 PM PST up reply actions
people wail about how awful our D is
But I think by most measures, we have been in the 8-12 range, while allowing the 3rd fewest points in the league.
I think we were 10th in total defensive efficiency last year and 12th this year. Hardly stuff that coaches are fired over. OKC plays good D and Scott Brooks is a good coach but I have no reason to think we could sign him as our coach.
And for every Scotty Brooks, there are countless disasters when it comes to hiring assistant coaches or old players with little experience
Ball handling and dribbling are my strongest weaknesses."—David Thompson
We're currently 17th.
Last year, we were in the same range for the first half of the season, and then went on that great run at the end of the season to move up to 13th. Before that, in 06-07, we were 17th.
OKC is currently 4th. There’s a pretty colossal difference between 4th and 13th. For one thing, keep in mind that half the teams aren’t even competing on any given year. Subtract the New Jerseys and the Warriors of the world, and 13th for a team that’s actually trying is really really really poor.
by howlingfantods on Feb 25, 2010 4:53 PM PST up reply actions
and that argument that "for every success, there's lots of failures"
is a pretty terrible one. It’s hard to get good draft picks too. For every good pick, there’s a dozen Swifts or Darkos or Skitas. Does that mean that you shouldn’t try to find good talent, and should be happy with a serviceable but very flawed guy who doesn’t seem to ever improve?
These things we Nate critics mention- they’ve been happening for years. I never said we should fire him, but I did say he needed to improve. He talks about players needing to improve, but he never talks about how he needs to improve. Well, he does need to, and he never seems to.
by howlingfantods on Feb 25, 2010 4:58 PM PST up reply actions
so we are about middle of the road
with no consistency in our lineup and no Centers.
All I will say is that give Nate his time with a full roster and see what happens. If we end up 20th or worse, then that is probably inexcusable. I just have a hard time finding fault with too much of what he is doing given what he has had to deal with with the injuries
Ball handling and dribbling are my strongest weaknesses."—David Thompson
I'm not sure what you read on BE ....
… but I have a hard time seeing how you can think that most fans are “in denial” when it comes to the coach.
McMillan is probably the subject of more criticism than the top two or three most heavily criticized players combined.
Now I might qualify as one of those fans who may be in denial, but not due to my finger point at any player. I happen to like the players we have.
It is certainly possible that Nate’s offensive sets are too simple and therefore easily countered. And I can see why people are of the opinion that Nate runs an offense designed almost completely around one player. But I don’t see it as being that simple.
For starters, he has only one guy who has proven to be consistent down the stretch. He has a second guy that is a consistent 2nd scorer, but whose offensive game is not currently well fitted to a close fought 4th quarter where every posession counts. Add in a guy who was learning the ropes, but showed so much promise that he just had to be included, only to be lost before the team could learn how to do so.
I can’t help thinking that the school of thought who argues that this team needs to be turned loose isn’t more interested in watching exciting basketball over winning basketball. And I believe that Nate’s system places his guys in the position that offers them the best odds of winning. I could be wrong. Maybe all we need to do is through our guys in the pool and see who swims and who sinks, rather than teaching them to float, then tread water, then swim a basic stroke, before trying to add springboard jumping and high diving to their bag of tricks.
Clarence, It's better to have a gun and not need it, then need a gun and not have it.
Exactly
I’m not sure what you read on BE ….
… but I have a hard time seeing how you can think that most fans are "in denial" when it comes to the coach.
I can hardly recall a game where multiple posters have not criticized some element of Nate’s coaching.
In addition, describing anyone who does not think Nate is a terrible coach as “in denial” is a conversation ender. Is it really impossible that Nate is a decent job that has done a decent job with the talent he has?
I don’t particular like the Blazers offense and would not mind seeing a different coach and yet the tone of this post does not make me want to discuss the topic further.
by PoliSam on Feb 24, 2010 4:40 PM PST up reply actions 2 recs
These are Dave's comments after the Utah debacle
</blockquoteAfter Portland’s offense seized up and the players stood there staring at each other for multiple possessions Brandon Roy figured “To heck with this!” and started taking over the game. It started out slowly with a couple of jumpers but eventually he drove and cut, if not quite in his old form at least somewhat effectively. I haven’t looked it up but he probably scored more points in the third and fourth quarters of this game than he did in every game since he returned from injury combined. Of course Roy starting to dominate didn’t spark any extra ball movement or player movement. But realistically that wasn’t happening anyway. At that point it was pretty much a choice between Roy taking over and Andre Miller continuing to take over. Miller was having a really rough time with his shot and couldn’t score except from the foul line. Since Roy was hitting shots and drawing fouls it was a natural move. The Blazers would have been helped by the energetic presence of LaMarcus Aldridge during the third/fourth quarter transition time but he was stuck on the bench with four fouls. So Roy kept the Blazers afloat with occasional help from his friends.This recap is complete denial of the situation, it was ISO plays called for Roy by Nate, but thats not addressed by Dave at all. Kind of what I’m getting at.
by TeamChemistry on Feb 24, 2010 4:49 PM PST up reply actions
In Dave's defense I like his subjetive game recaps. I think he tries to stay away from what should have happened to just what he saw.
"What people need to know is that those pictures were taken a year and a half ago, and I've grown since then." - Greg Oden
by dario argento on Feb 24, 2010 9:23 PM PST up reply actions
The thought of being turned loose ....
The idea behind this is that you create a system that the player makes the decision while playing. As it stands, its one on one, watching and waiting til the pass comes to you. Its not instinctive, but rather very planned and orchestrated, which is a problem because teams figure out how to play against it. While if the players played the game with freedom, they would play smart, fast and intelligent basketball. These are smart players, Batum, Cunningham, Rudy, Miller, and Oden, they know how to play the game the right way. Yet the coach is preaching, slow, no turnovers, no risk, well that isn’t basketball that wins championships. Risk is removed by obtaining smart players, there aren’t any white chocalates, or zach randolfs or darius miles on the team. They know how to play the game the right way, but aren’t being allowed to do so by their coach. Trust me I’ve played the game under a coach just like McMillan, we had our superstar, he lead the team in scoring every night, we slowed the game down, limited turnovers, yet other teams figure it out.
by TeamChemistry on Feb 24, 2010 4:58 PM PST up reply actions
I did end by saying that I could be wrong and that maybe turning them loose ...
… to sink or swim is what needs to happen.
I am not 100% convinced that this is the wrong approach. I was planning on seeing how this season developed. Unfortuantely it did so in ways we never imagined.
So, while I believe in Nate, that doesn’t mean he has a constant free pass. But he does have one for this season.
Clarence, It's better to have a gun and not need it, then need a gun and not have it.
I agree.
Nate lacks vision. The end of this year will mark the 3rd year I have been off the Nate bandwagon. He is slow to see things even casual fans see. Doesnt make the right adjustments and does not run a good offense. All of the players who are unhappy are the ones he camps out in a corner on offense. We are now getting to our core of keeper players and I dont want them to sail out of town because of this guy.
Batum will be next. He’s got swagger and frankly he will not want to stick around either if he believes the system is a joke. We have already seen articles from France where Batum made comments about playing “Portland Ball”, which is “sitting in a corner and waiting for a shot”.
Nate needs to answer to someone, he has had it setup that no one interferes. KP seemingly has not wanted to step on his toes in the slightest. Frankly, I don’t think Nate deserves that much credibility anymore. He’s got all the freedom in the world to do what he wants to do, yet does not share a whole lot of that with his players.
A peep into the perplexing pshyche of McMillan shows something. Steve Blake breaks the assist record for a qtr and has a chance for a whole game record. McMillan sits him stating that records are not important. He then takes the same Steve Blake a season later and strings out the decision probably because he could relate to Steve’s position from his days in Seattle. The rest of the team could use some relating to Nate.
Blazer Pride.
Speak louder.
We can barely see or hear you standing way back there in our dust.
Clarence, It's better to have a gun and not need it, then need a gun and not have it.
You don't like winning?
The end of this year will mark the 3rd year I have been off the Nate bandwagon
Cause until the rash of injuries …this coach has had his team increase the winning totals each of the 3 previous seasons
Roybot: "Then he said "My girlfriend is from LA." to which I replied "Well then you need to find a new girlfriend."’
by 92wastheyear on Feb 24, 2010 6:49 PM PST up reply actions
it's called "player development"
Did anyone else notice that journalists were starting to criticize Roy, Aldridge, Rudy, Trav, etc for plateauing/not being able to reach their FULL potential/not working with Oden or Miller before the rash of injuries? Nate did what he could (or maybe it was KP’s eye for talent that made it look like Nate was developing the young guys); now it’s someone else’s turn.
That said, Larry Brown and PJ could both be available next year……..
The one thing I can say about the "Fire Nate" movement
is that there needs to be a proven, time tested better option. As much as I don’t think Nate is the answer, replacing him with a dud is even less of one.
If we had Larry Brown, Popp, Philip lined up, sure, let’s do something. Who’s out there and who will come here?
Blazer Pride.
Avery is terrible
Imagine everything you hate about Nate and double it.
Del Harris?
Randy Whitman?
PJ Carlisimo?
Terry Porter?
Chuck Daly?
I think we should go after Chuck Daly.
Chuck Daly??
Would it be like Weekend at Bernie’s 3??
Ball handling and dribbling are my strongest weaknesses."—David Thompson
his voice
"Brandon Roy, Portland’s $80-million man with a $2 hamstring" - Brian T. Smith
by The Most Interesting Man in the World on Feb 24, 2010 5:32 PM PST up reply actions
His ginormous mouth.
And not in a figurative way, a literal one. Seriously, have you seen him open his mouth. He has like 3 times as many teeth as the average person.
"What people need to know is that those pictures were taken a year and a half ago, and I've grown since then." - Greg Oden
by dario argento on Feb 24, 2010 9:24 PM PST up reply actions
Lenny Wilkens for Replacement Coach!
This is Tyrone Willingham with Jake Locker all over again. Not sure if you guys pay attention to what happens up I-5 but we had this sucky, sucky coach that refused to answer to anyone, closed practices and so no one could see his sucky coaching, designed an entire team around one player, and then was surprised when they failed.
Not like the Utah Jazz... it's about REAL jazz. Go Dawgs, Go Blazers, Go Tarheels!
Good Post
I dont agree with it and I will explain why, but I think it is a well thought out argument that I’m sure many people will buy into.
Here are the reasons that i dont buy what you are selling.
1) We won 54 games last year with one of the youngest rosters in league history with this exact system. So what is different now? most notably, the fact that we have been plagued by injuries and have not had the same starting lineup or rotation for more than 10 games at a time. WE ARE STARTING JUWAN HOWARD. So we are basically relying on a mish-mash of old vets and inconsistant youngsters around Brandon and LMA. So Nate’s system seemed to work fine last year when the injury bug wasn’t quite as flagrant.
2) Dovetailing off my first reason, the players just arent good enough right now. Because of all the flack that coach Nate is getting right now, I have started to look at our offense with a fine-toothed comb and I can tell you this with certainty, THE LOOKS ARE THERE. Open shots, open back cutters, lanes to drive in, etc. etc. The players are not making it happen as effectively as they should. Lamarcus missed Howard, Nic, and Brandon on wide open back-cuts last night that would have been gimmes. Players like Lebron, Deron Williams, CP3 etc. dont miss those passes. I really believe that people have over-valued a lot of our players. Really good players make “systems” and coaches look a lot better than they really are and most coaches in the NBA will admit that they all run similar stuff.
3) These players that want to get out of Portland and out of the “system” arent worth worrying about anyways. Sergio is garbage and is on his 3rd team, and Rudy has a very limited game that would only work with teams that can’t play D. I like Rudy, and can see him as a nice player off the bench but I think in his mind he thinks he is a STAR
All things considered, Im not sold that Nate is the coach for this team long term. But I’m also not convinced that he isnt either. I just think that you HAVE to give him a few years with a complete roster and see what happens.
Ball handling and dribbling are my strongest weaknesses."—David Thompson
by Benson on Feb 24, 2010 5:12 PM PST reply actions 6 recs
I could really get to like you.
Nice comments and rec.
Clarence, It's better to have a gun and not need it, then need a gun and not have it.
He's had plenty of years
He’s been a coach for 10 years in the NBA and still hasn’t managed a single season to be average defensively. That’s so far beyond pathetic, there aren’t words for it. All of this in slow paced systems supposedly for the benefit of maximizing defense.
80% of our roster doesn’t fit what Nate’s narrow minded system expects to maximize.
That 54 win season happened, and a lot of that was our players. Our players and talent is top 5 in the league. A coach BETTER get that out of this team. Nate failed out loud in the playoffs. His system has a maximum output and we’re already near that. Coaches with a brain that can change things up are vital in the playoffs. Nate isn’t among them.
I could be mistaken...
but didn’t this team finish as the 8th best defensive squad last year or something?
Too lazy to look it up, sorry.
An offensive rebound in paragraph form. -Mr. Golliver
by you'vegottomakeyourfreethrows on Feb 24, 2010 10:39 PM PST up reply actions
I looked it up...
Hollinger had them as the team with the 10th best Def. Efficiency.
10th has to be considered at least average, no?
An offensive rebound in paragraph form. -Mr. Golliver
by you'vegottomakeyourfreethrows on Feb 24, 2010 11:00 PM PST up reply actions
In a 30 (someodd) team league
that would be above average
Roybot: "Then he said "My girlfriend is from LA." to which I replied "Well then you need to find a new girlfriend."’
by 92wastheyear on Feb 24, 2010 11:31 PM PST up reply actions
You know you argument only holds so much water
Take the Thunder, they have a point guard that is 21, they have the one of the youngest rosters in the league and will possibly surpass our win total. As young as our roster was last year, it was held together by Przybilla and Blake, which had established players in Roy and Aldrige and some rookies filling in. Reality of the Blazers is that they play better with less talent, because then they rely on one player. When you have multiple pieces you have to have a system to incorporated that. What do you think will happen next year with Oden and Roy? Where does Aldrige fit in the system, questions that never got answered this year and won’t get answered most likely in the future. Just players thrown under the bus.
by TeamChemistry on Feb 24, 2010 5:24 PM PST up reply actions
Injuries give Nate an out....
couldn’t agree more about Nate “coaching” better with less talent. It doesn’t matter the roster so much with our scheme. With Roy we have a minimum and a maximum level output at near the same level no matter what’s around it. And that level output isn’t even near that of a Championship.
The Thunder
have drafted extremely well and have had time to “gel” for over 2 years with virtually NO INJURIES. On top of that, they have a dominating scorer that accounts for over 30% of his teams scoring and basically breaks down defenders one-on-one all game long and either scores or collapses the defense.
We still dont know what Roy and Oden will be, if anything at all. Our sample size is what, 60-70 games? And no, we dont play better with less talent because we win at a better % when our best players are on the floor (see last years win total).
Players win games in this league. You think Mike Brown has some great system in place? Lebron makes 90% of that happen. Duncan and Ginobili arent the players they used to be and look what S.A has become. Denver swaps AI for Chauncey and now they are a contender.
I just think that people are blaming a coach based on things they really have very little knowledge about. They know they dont like watching the Blazers lose, so the straw grasping begins. Nate might not be the guy for the future, but to say that we have ’top 5 talent" RIGHT NOW is absolutely absurd. Maybe people got swept up in the Championship Window talk and have yet to realize that window doesnt exist without a certain “you know who” living up to #1 pick expectations
Ball handling and dribbling are my strongest weaknesses."—David Thompson
A good portion of us were saying Nate had to go
before a good portion of what you’re talking about happened. You have to admit Nate laid a gigantic inescapable egg in the playoffs. His system doesn’t get the most out of this roster. His system, and defensive stupidity are issues that don’t just go away. He’s been an NBA coach for 10 years. At this point, like with Outlaw or Blake, he is what he is. And what he is, just isn’t good enough to win Championships.
We lost 4-2
in many players FIRST PLAYOFF SERIES EVER to a Rockets team that took the Champion Lakers to 7 games even without Yao for 3 of the games.
Not to mention that a guy that Anti-Nate folk have been pining for, Rick Adelman, got bounced in the first round of the playoffs with the Rockets like 4 years in a row. And that was with a 1-2 combo of Yao and healthy T-Mac that put Brandon and LMA to shame as far as talent and matchup problems go.
I respect those that just dont buy into Nate from the get go. But acting like this season is some sort of collosal failure and ignoring the INSANE amount of injuries to key players just doesnt jive with me.
jive
Ball handling and dribbling are my strongest weaknesses."—David Thompson
Before the injuries we weren't playing that well either
The injuries were an out for Nate. He wasn’t doing the job. Injuries happened and we continued to perform exactly the same.
Rick Adelman >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Nate McMillan
If you watched the playoff series last year there can be no other conclusion. I don’t know how Adelman could be considered to be ousted four years in a row from the playoffs in the first round when he’s only been the Rockets coach for the last 2 playoffs. One of which was his destroying of Nate McMillan last year.
I disagree with this statement
If you watched the playoff series last year there can be no other conclusion.
A bunch of people have come to a different conclusion
Roybot: "Then he said "My girlfriend is from LA." to which I replied "Well then you need to find a new girlfriend."’
by 92wastheyear on Feb 24, 2010 6:57 PM PST up reply actions
and we all watched the that series
Roybot: "Then he said "My girlfriend is from LA." to which I replied "Well then you need to find a new girlfriend."’
by 92wastheyear on Feb 24, 2010 6:58 PM PST up reply actions
No it wasn't
I was paying attention……I remember thinking that Houston was absolutely the worst matchup we could draw. Additionally, I thought we could still win …as long as we could hold home court….but we got blown out in Game 1 due to inexperience and the refs. The rest of the games went pretty much how I thought the series would go. Win at home….close games in Houston. If they could have reset after game 1 (like a video game) …we would have won in 7. Not really a problem with Nate in all that
Roybot: "Then he said "My girlfriend is from LA." to which I replied "Well then you need to find a new girlfriend."’
by 92wastheyear on Feb 24, 2010 7:35 PM PST up reply actions
No problem with not going small?
No problem with Nate’s part in that first game?
No problem with not adjusting to what Houston was doing?
The only people who came to a different conclusion
live in Portland. The national media were pretty much unanimous, even guys who normally praise Nate pretty consistently.
by howlingfantods on Feb 25, 2010 6:07 PM PST up reply actions
meh...
again I see it differently.
Before the cascade of injuries the team didn’t meet expectations. They were trying to integrate Miller and Oden at the same time. There were clearly chemistry issues (if you believe in that sort of thing anyway, which I’m not sure you do). They were playing exactly like they should have been expected to play given those circumstances and the fact that they’d only played 15-20 games together.
A hot topic at the time was the Miller/Roy “feud”. I don’t hear anybody ever bringing this up anymore. It turns out that if you let them play it out over a season they learn how to play together pretty well. I don’t doubt for a second that if Oden were healthy he too would’ve been integrated by this time of the season… yes, even in Nate’s system.
An offensive rebound in paragraph form. -Mr. Golliver
by you'vegottomakeyourfreethrows on Feb 24, 2010 10:55 PM PST up reply actions
It's more that after they "integrate" in Nate's system
they still wouldn’t be good enough, because Nate’s system has a cap on it. Too much iso, too many mid range jumpers, too poor defense.
how do you know this?
Since when do systems have caps? This idea is new to me.
I’m pretty sure nate’s “system” didnt fall from the sky. I’d be willing to guess that it was taught to him by somebody else who was probably successful with it at some point.
This “blame the system” mantra seems to just be lazy rhetoric with very little thought behind it
Ball handling and dribbling are my strongest weaknesses."—David Thompson
again
We are pining for a guy that has missed the playoffs or lost in the first round for OVER HALF the seasons he has been a head coach. And he has never won the Finals.
Adelman is a good head coach, and I wouldnt mind him being our coach, but I disagree that he is some kind of savant that runs things we have never seen before.
Ball handling and dribbling are my strongest weaknesses."—David Thompson
Rick Adelman =/= Jeff Van Gundy.
One guy has a beard and should be pretty recognizable to Portland Trailblazer fans. The other guy looks like Uncle Fester and should be recognizable to fans of anyone who likes watching little guys cling to players’ shoes while brawls are happening.
by howlingfantods on Feb 25, 2010 6:10 PM PST up reply actions
and the one time he lost in the first round
was after Yao had one of his season ending injuries. Of course, the following year, he got to the playoffs and beat us despite TMac being out with his season ending injury, and made a series of it with Lakers despite Yao getting injured during that series.
Sometimes I wonder whether the folks who post here just started watching basketball last month.
by howlingfantods on Feb 25, 2010 9:35 PM PST up reply actions
I see it differently.
young team, first time in the playoffs, against a team they didn’t match up well with at any point over the whole season.
Game one was the proverbial deer in the headlights, and Home Court took it from there.
i don’t think it would play out like that again.
An offensive rebound in paragraph form. -Mr. Golliver
by you'vegottomakeyourfreethrows on Feb 24, 2010 10:43 PM PST up reply actions
The Thunder will not surpass 54 wins
Not even close. They would have to go 22 and 4 against a very tough schedule the rest of the way.
50 wins would be a superb achievement for them, and one they might accomplish. Or they might end up with 45-46.
They’ll make the playoffs, kudos to them.
Give Blake the MLE in 2010!
Farewell to #2 and #25, good luck to you!
#7 #10 #52 -- #5 & #88 are back!
yep.
yep & yep.
rec.
An offensive rebound in paragraph form. -Mr. Golliver
by you'vegottomakeyourfreethrows on Feb 24, 2010 10:38 PM PST up reply actions
I think you bring up valid points but last year's success is a poor barometer.
The Blazers were off the radar prior to last year. They were improving but were underestimated and teams paid for their lack of gameplanning. Then the playoffs happened. Our team got exposure and opponents took notes. The Rockets had several games to examine us under a microscope and use trial and error to find a flaw. They obviously succeeded. Teams this year now have ideas about what stops us. It’s on us to adjust and add wrinkles to our offensive game to make them pay. But we haven’t…in part because Oden went down (I think he would have single handedly dominated this season in part bc he wasn’t planned for yet but mostly because having him as an offensive weapon in addition to our other options would break our opponents backs).
Anyway to draw an analogy, look at Bayless. He took over a few games and played great! Then teams saw what he did and took away His first (and at times second) option.no more barreling through the lane. He hasn’t played at that level consistently since. Why? He needs to add another wrinkle to his repertoire.
Please, for the love of all that is holy, please stop using the following: "Book it.", "FTW", "Epic" & "Fail".
...no seriously--stop.
by nima on Feb 25, 2010 4:59 AM PST via mobile up reply actions
Some teams succeed despite their coaching, not because of it.
Mike Brown and Mike Woodson didn’t wake up one day transformed into coaching geniuses. Their players just got better, so even though they still do things that hold back their teams (Mike Brown’s offense is still criminally bad considering their offensive players), they have enough individual or collective talent to allow them some reflected glory.
The Blazers have a ton of talent. We probably have one of the highest collections of lottery talent— legit blue chippers— in the league. Just off the top of my head, Oden, LMA and Camby were top 2 picks, Andre and Juwan were top 5, Martell, Roy, and Thrilla were top 10, and Bayless was #11. Very unusual concentration of high draft picks.
Would we have gotten more than 54 wins with a better coach last year? Maybe, maybe not. Would I feel more hopeful for the future if we had Scott Brooks instead of Nate? HELL YEAH
by howlingfantods on Feb 25, 2010 4:37 PM PST up reply actions
ugh
Pat Ewing was a lottery pick too, doesnt mean he is any good anymore. Adam Morrison was a #3 pick too, doesnt mean squat.
A lot of teams in the league are filled with high draft picks. Those guys tend to be the ones that stick around for a while. Doesnt have any bearing on what they are NOW.
Hell, even the terrible Indiana Pacers have 5+ lottery picks on their team, and they still arent any good.
Ball handling and dribbling are my strongest weaknesses."—David Thompson
I think there's a difference
between a #3, #8 and a couple of 13’s and 14s and the collection we have. Pat Ewing? Are you talking about Junior, who most definitely wasn’t a lottery pick? Or are you comparing Senior to some of our older guys, like our guy who was DPOY two years ago, and is #6 in blocks and #4 in rebs this season?
I find it extremely amusing that I have to argue against those pollyannas around here who are convinced with all our talent, we’re definite locks for titles in the future (we’re not) and now am simultaneously having to argue against nate defenders who claim we have an average amount of talent, analogous to Indiana of all teams. Funny, the folks around here.
by howlingfantods on Feb 25, 2010 6:04 PM PST up reply actions
that guy has played one game for us
Ball handling and dribbling are my strongest weaknesses."—David Thompson
And you don't even address my point, anyways.
Do you disagree that some teams succeed despite their coaches, not because of them? Or do you not recall two time NBA championship coach KC Jones?
by howlingfantods on Feb 25, 2010 6:06 PM PST up reply actions
lack of creativity and ball movement on offense?? I dont see that
There are a ton of other teams out in the NBA that run the same kind of boring one man offense, look at Cleveland, Miami, the Lakers….sometimes, and New Orleans…when Chris Paul is healthy, any team with a legitimate all star at the 1,2, or 3 are going to ISO alot…the NBA has turned into more of a one man game, its a superstars league so why would the coaching be any different? I admit the blazers repetitive and often unimaginative offense frustrates me often but if you look around the NBA most teams are running something a bit similar.
by nolan.waters.kinney on Feb 24, 2010 6:26 PM PST reply actions
The difference with those other teams that you mention, especially with Nawlans and LA is that those teams actually use screens
on the ball and away from it. They get cutters in the lanes for easier buckets and actually roll to the hoop for higher percentage shots rather than the Roy / Lamarcus special which is the pick’n pop.
"What people need to know is that those pictures were taken a year and a half ago, and I've grown since then." - Greg Oden
by dario argento on Feb 24, 2010 9:27 PM PST up reply actions
Um Wade, Kobe and Lebron >>>>> Roy
At least right now
Big difference
Jump shooting offenses =/= playoff wins
by Theghostofsomeonefamous on Feb 25, 2010 6:56 AM PST up reply actions
only meant to compare offensive systems not players!
of course Roy is not quite on the same level as those three..he doesn’t have a ring like wade or Kobe or put up crazy freakish stats like Lebron but Roy is a different player than all of those guys! He wont ever lead the NBA in scoring but he is a great all around player…who is consistent.
I do agree with you though that jump shooting offenses dont win many playoff games…. only in the Eastern conference can a jump shooting offense make it to the conference championship!
by nolan.waters.kinney on Feb 25, 2010 8:58 AM PST up reply actions
Rec
Exactly. Great players can make “systems” look really good, and mediocre players can make “systems” look bad.
I watched the Lakers v Mavs game last night and the almighty PHIL JACKSON’s “system” basically looked like “give the ball to Kobe and watch” for a good 5 minutes. Dallas looked like set a pick for Dirk and have him collapse the defense for a kick-out or have him score. Nothing much different from what we do
Ball handling and dribbling are my strongest weaknesses."—David Thompson
Ok so you're basically admitting you know nothing about basketball
Even people who know next to nothing know Phil Jackson is to triangle offense as ben and Jerry are to ice cream.
Or do you think NBA players are criminally stupid that they consistently state how intricate and difficult to learn Phils offense is? I mean if they have trouble learning the Kobe iso, it’s a wonder they can tie their own shoes, right?
Please, for the love of all that is holy, please stop using the following: "Book it.", "FTW", "Epic" & "Fail".
...no seriously--stop.
by nima on Feb 26, 2010 6:04 PM PST via mobile up reply actions
one more thing
what AVAILABLE coach out on the market right now could coach this team any better than Nate has done?? who are the names the blazers could realistically replace nate with at this moment….please nobody say coach K because he is not leaving the college ranks anytime soon!
by nolan.waters.kinney on Feb 24, 2010 6:27 PM PST reply actions
I'm not too big on most of the current NBA coachs but...
As Nate is the worst coach in the league I would have to say any of them would be better.
But I want Lionel Hollins.
by Blazersaurus on Feb 24, 2010 9:13 PM PST up reply actions
Is he available?
Give Blake the MLE in 2010!
Farewell to #2 and #25, good luck to you!
#7 #10 #52 -- #5 & #88 are back!
aweful!
people think Nate is bad…I can only imagine having Lionel Hollins…ugh have you seen his win percentage as a coach?? up until this season its been
wins losses win percentage
31 72 .301
and this season he is 29-28
Nate is 360-363 so just below .500 but is 34-26 right now and Nate has taken his teams to the playoffs 3 times and was in the conference semifinals during the 04-05 season with Seattle I’ll take the guy we already have…because he has been to the playoffs before… Lionel Hollins has not!
by nolan.waters.kinney on Feb 25, 2010 8:50 AM PST up reply actions
I don't think Nate's bad... I know nate's bad
There are a lot of other factors in basketball besides stats. I am looking for a coach that makes his players better. Nate never does. I think he’s stunted virtually every players growth on this team in the last three years including Roy’s. Look at teams like the Spurs and Boston where just showing up there seems to make you a solid player. Houston too is like that if you’re wiling to be a team player.
by Blazersaurus on Feb 25, 2010 1:03 PM PST up reply actions
Disagree
Marty has gotten better, but is still incosistant
Trout got better
Roy has statistically improved every year
Lamarcus statistically improved every year up until this year
Oden was showing improvement
Przybilla turned his career around here
Batum is getting better already in his 2nd season
Boston was terrible for 10+ seasons before they got KG and Ray Allen.
San Antonio has a good track record for developing players, but that has as much to do with smart draft picks as it does with Popp.
I just dont think there is any proof to your assessment. Players usually improve on their own and through competition with better players over the summer and during the season.
Ball handling and dribbling are my strongest weaknesses."—David Thompson
When rookies get better that's what they do
Roy, LMA and Batum would’ve gotten better regardless of coach. Roy certainly has improved more than he might’ve under a different system, but I definitely can’t say that about LMA or Batum. Same basic idea for Martell and Trout. Players drafted that young better improve, and they neither has done it enough to be significant contributors. Przybilla was always a good defender and boarder, I hardly see how you can attribute anything he’s done to Nate.
Um, then what are you saying?
If all those players have improved every year, doesn’t that refute your previous statement that nobody improves under Nate? And no, not all rookies improve, sometimes they get sent to the D league like Hasheem Thabeet or wash out like Vanilla Sky with Milwaukie. The NBA draft is as big of a crap shoot as the NFL draft is. More than half of players dont live up to hype or end up overseas, with or without Nate as the coach.
hakim warrick?
Marvin Williams?
Adam Morrison?
And for the record, Joel has posted 4 out of his 5 best years under coach Macmillan with career high’s in rebounding, FG%, FT% and effeciency
Ball handling and dribbling are my strongest weaknesses."—David Thompson
Please look at the per minute production
for Joel, Lamarcus, Martell, and please explain to me where you see such improvement. Trout is debatable; he was already on the same improvement curve (which wasn’t very dramatic either before or after Nate showed up) that he continued on pre and post Nate’s arrival. Joel’s always been up and down, and one of the years he was up included the the year he was “coached” by Mo Cheeks and KP. LaMarcus has had a little sophomore bump, but otherwise has been the same player statistically.
The only really good evidence of improving players is BRoy’s leap from his second to his third year. Players as good as Roy, it almost doesn’t matter who coaches them. Think Mike Brown is responsible for LeBron’s improvement?
by howlingfantods on Feb 25, 2010 4:48 PM PST up reply actions
The post was that players "DO NOT IMPROVE UNDER NATE"
ragardless of your “improvement curve” data and whatever else you are looking at, players on this roster have improved with Nate as the coach. Case closed.
Maybe they haven’t “blossomed” as much as some would like, but that wasnt the argument. The argument was that he makes players worse and nobody gets any better. the numbers say otherwise, as does the Blazers improvement in record the last 4 seasons, sans this injury riddled year.
Brandon has improved, Nic has improved, Lamarcus got better from year 1-2-3-and has plateaued FOR NOW, Blake put up better numbers under Nate, Oden WAS improving until the injury, and Dante Cunningham is obviously getting better as he plays more.
Ball handling and dribbling are my strongest weaknesses."—David Thompson
No. Case *not* closed.
That’s why I’m asking you to look at the per minute production for the players you listed and ask you to demonstrate where you see improvement. Which you haven’t. You’ve just restated yourself. Not helpful.
Or do you just look at raw points per game and assume that means everything? That’s the conclusion I’m coming to, since that’s the only argument for saying that LaMarcus improved between seasons 2 and 3.
by howlingfantods on Feb 25, 2010 6:13 PM PST up reply actions
per minute production means nothing
nobody uses it as a metric to evaluate players effectiveness or improvement.
Ball handling and dribbling are my strongest weaknesses."—David Thompson
.....
Wow. Just wow.
Every statistical mind in the NBA looks at per minute production to evaluate player effectiveness. All of APBRmetrics is based on trying to normalize statistical production, and the first and most basic steps is to normalize for pace and per minute.
by howlingfantods on Feb 26, 2010 2:26 PM PST up reply actions
Jerome James owes Nate $50 million
Juwan Howard, drafted June 29th, 1994. Netscape first released November 14th, 1994
You will never have a post taken down for having a solid argument with points of discussion.
Unless it’s already on the main page. Or someone else posted one on the same topic just below yours. Or you have profanity. Or you make it about posters instead of issues. Or if it is inflammatory just for the sake of being inflammatory. Well, that might be a lot of reasons, but posts are never taken down just because those who run the site disagree with it.
If we didn’t disagree about issues, then there wouldn’t be any discussion. And this is a well thought out point of view. In fact, it’s a great example of what a fanpost should be, so I’m rec’ing it, even though I disagree with the conclusion, because getting to the conclusion was worthwhile. Thank you.
Wearing the black band for Jarrett Jack, Ime Udoka, Fred Jones, Sergio Rodriguez, Channing Frye, Luke Schenscher, Shavlik Randolph, James Jones, Josh McRoberts, Steven Hill, Jarron Collins, Michael Ruffin, Steve Blake and Travis Outlaw. Sacrificed to the unmerciful god of progress.
I do agree that a team that relies on the 1-4 flat will never win a championship.
I’m not sure if we are destined to stay the team with this predictable an offensive system though. Nate has shown some willingness to adapt this season. I’m not sure if it’s enough, but he has changed a little bit. We don’t run the pick’n pop as much as last year, and are posting up our guards a little more.
I agree our offense needs an overhaul, and I’m pretty sure KP thinks so too. I’m just not sure what the answer is.
"What people need to know is that those pictures were taken a year and a half ago, and I've grown since then." - Greg Oden
Just a thought or two...
I’m pretty sure than any coach would attempt to maximize the 3rd best 2 Guard in the league by running the offense through him. Maybe you’ve heard of this player… Brandon Roy? Yeah, he’s pretty good. He’s legit. IMO, it would be foolish not to run the offense through him. He’s that good.
NBA championship teams always, always, ALWAYS have 2 or 3 franchise/cornerstone/All-Star/superstar players… with one exception. The only champion from recent memory that didn’t was the Pistons… and they just defensed the hell out of everybody else. Think about it:
Kobe/Pau/Odom
KG/Allen/Pierce
Shaq/Wade
Duncan/Ginobili/Parker
Kobe/Shaq
Duncan/Robinson
Jordan/Pippen
Hakeem/Drexler
Thomas/Dumars
etc. etc. etc.
It’s all the same. And right now conventional wisdom says that Roy/Aldridge/Oden has a chance to be that sort of trio.
This isn’t to say that McMillan or his system can’t be improved upon; it’s certainly debatable. But based off your post I’m left thinking, Yes, you are in denial.
The NBA game is the NBA game. The college game is different as is International ball. What you’re describing sounds more like the other two styles than the NBA… that’s just the world we live in.
An offensive rebound in paragraph form. -Mr. Golliver
by you'vegottomakeyourfreethrows on Feb 24, 2010 10:35 PM PST reply actions
Roy is well-suited for a slow half-court system, but I don't think it's the only system he could thrive in
And a number of players on the roster are equally versatile. Some would even benefit a lot from playing at a faster pace.
Its great to maximize your star....
But if the system in place doesn’t maximize all your players abilities and bring out the best in them, you will under achieve. aka T-Mac… the offense teams ran is very similar to Portlands, slow half court offense. This should be a sign to us, change now, because he never got out of the first round,
by TeamChemistry on Feb 25, 2010 10:02 AM PST up reply actions
lolololololol
This is a small town and the Blazers are the only big league team. This city is desperate for them to win and sometimes that desperation includes blinders. It’s cute sometimes and maddening at others.
by Theghostofsomeonefamous on Feb 25, 2010 6:57 AM PST reply actions
It's funny to me that the comments here don't really match very well with the poll numbers.
I guess the Nate supporters are very vocal. I don’t think he’s horrible, and could probably be a very good coach with the right roster. But not for this one! He is far too resistent to make changes. The whole 4th quarter Brandon ISO thing needs a hard look! We are not getting the most out of the talent we have on this roster. He did just fine when we had 7 or 8 players available for a game, but with 8,10, or more healthy bodies to try and incorporate, he fails miserably. And I still can’t forgive him for creating the whole debacle with Blake and Miller to start the year. Yes, I know Andre handled it poorly, but it should have never even been an issue! Period! Say what you want about him being out of shape, he outplayed Blake in the pre-season and was clearly the best PG we had. Wasn’t that the point in signing him?
when teams step up defense in the 4th
NBA teams generally run everything through their star players.
Look at the end of games with Lebron, Wade, CP3 etc. etc.
The Mavs v L*kers game last night hilighted this well. It was basically Dirk v Kobe iso plays over and over again for the game. not unusual for the NBA
Ball handling and dribbling are my strongest weaknesses."—David Thompson
You're right to a point,
but the Blazers usually just clear out a side and everyone stands around watching BRoy. There is no movement at all. And although it might anger BRoy fans, he ain’t Kobe or LeBron! Michael Jordan didn’t reach the championship level until the rest of the team got involved. Look at his numbers early in his career. He actually gave up some of himself for the sake of the team. We may not have as much talent around Roy as MJ had, but we have more than our 4th quarters show we do!
No.
The Faith don't panic, the faith freaks out, burns out farms, and torchs small villages in the name of The Faith.
Head Czar of Amerika <--- Mortimer said so so there!!!
Gregg Popovich thinks Nate is doing a good job
and pop knows more about basketball than me, so I will trust him.
The thing is, Nate has done a good job in the last few seasons, and it seems to me that most everyone recognizes that, but thinks he isn’t right for the future. Well I think Nate has earned the opportunity to try and lead the team, and until he starts doing a bad job and the team under performs, he should be the coach.
Juwan Howard, drafted June 29th, 1994. Netscape first released November 14th, 1994
Yes, of course professional peers with personal relationships with each other
are the best people to listen to when one wants an objective evaluation. I always tell the absolute truth about my peers at my companies to complete strangers in very public forums.
Yall notice how other coaches and ex-jock commentators claim that guys like Westphal or Eddie Jordan or Mo Cheeks are great coaches? Yeah. They’re not. There’s a reason why you always hear about frustrated and confused players, lack of defined roles, inexplicable playing time decisions, guys who were performing pre-injury not given the time to work their way back on the court post-injury, talented youngsters who show lots of promise regressing. Because they’re bad coaches.
Notice how familiar that litany is? Does anyone ever hear those stories from Sloan or Pops or Phil’s teams?
by howlingfantods on Feb 25, 2010 9:20 PM PST up reply actions
go to the spurs message boards
and yes you hear the same thing about Pops
Juwan Howard, drafted June 29th, 1994. Netscape first released November 14th, 1994
No, you're missing my point.
You might hear fans bellyache about Pops not playing DeJuan enough or playing McDyess too much (and DeJuan’s on my fantasy team so I, you know, agree with them) but you don’t see Blair talking to media about how confused he is about his role and see him regress or press when he’s on the court when Pops isn’t playing him as much.
You do see Tyreke and Sean May and Spencer Hawes and Elton Brand and Thad Young and Sergio and Rudy and Andre and Bayless saying to the press that they don’t understand their roles and the coach’s rotations. You hear them talking about how they were told they needed to do X to get playing time, they did X, but still didn’t get playing time.
You see laughably inconsistent responses to the coaching staff when these reports surface— Westphal ignores the harsher comments from Reke but benches Hawes, Eddie Jordan and Nate responds by giving some of the complainers more playing time immediately, some of the complainers less playing time immediately.
You see young players who showed promise in their first seasons (Jason Thompson, Sergio and Rudy, Speights, Thad Young) regress under these coaches. You see guys who were performing really well get injured, and never get enough playing time to get back on the court post-injury even though their replacements aren’t performing at the level they were pre-injury (Speights, Rudy, Kevin Martin).
I work in a management role in a very large company. I work cross-departments so I see a lot of management styles. I can recognize bad leadership, and these guys all exhibit bad leadership. They may know x’s and o’s, but they’re terrible leaders of men. Pops, not so much. I’d trust him to lead any group doing anything.
by howlingfantods on Feb 26, 2010 8:36 AM PST up reply actions
Oh and I didn't even mention the favoritism.
My god, the favoritism. One of my favorite things about Pops is how he gets on the big three just as much, maybe even more, than he gets on the other guys.
Tip for those of you who may be in a leadership role one day: The easiest way to lose a team is to play favorites. Decide that you’ll spend all of your time with your two favorite guys and that you’ll always defend them to the death, but will murder the other guys for the same kinds of things you turn the other way on for your favorites, and you’re guaranteed to have a poisonous team and poor performance. Seen it a hundred times.
by howlingfantods on Feb 26, 2010 8:51 AM PST up reply actions
look at the players you are talking about though!
seriously the players you mentioned have regressed, They dont play consistent enough basketball and thats not completely on the coaches the players are playing to game, if the player cant hit a shot thats not the coaches fault! Also Rudy has not added anything to his game from last year to this year…some guys are always going to be confused about their role…rudy and bayless dont play consistently enough as it is of course they are going to say they are not going to understand their roles! i wish they would just say, I am not playing consistently enough to get the minutes I deserve take some responsibility and stop blaming it on the coach! and please dont put Nate in the same category as Eddie Jordan, and Paul Westphal..those guys are garbage, who coach on garbage teams. If Pops is such a great coach then how come the Blazers have had so much success against them in recent years..this year and last year and explain to me why his team is steadily going down hill…I get the age factor of his players but this could be another instance of the players making the coach.
by nolan.waters.kinney on Mar 1, 2010 10:36 AM PST up reply actions
Greg Oden, Greg Oden, Greg Oden (+Pryz)
is what gave the trailblazer’s a 54 win season. Nate’s system is all about diminishing the shots of the opponents and increasing the shots for the Blazer’s. That way you can survive taking more jump shots when you don’t have a dependable post up game (which last year the Blazer’s didn’t have). Oden (and Pryz) rebounded at consistently high levels both defensively and offensively thus diminishing the number of shots of the opponents and increasing Blazer attempts.
This season Aldridge’s post game has improved greatly. What mystifies me about MacMillan’s approach is why doesn’t he have Aldridge move to the post via a screen more rather thank have Aldridge run to his favorite spot and receive the post pass? Using a screen would allow Aldridge to get deeper post position and he’s becoming devastating down low. In addition Roy should pass to Aldridge because this would cause players defending the three point shooter above the key to cheat toward Roy and Webster and Fernandez both have the quickness to blow by opponents if they cheat. Of course in this system Miller is a liability because he can’t ( at least now) consistently hit a 3-point shot, Bayless would be better.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
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
- Days of NBA Lives: Wherein Roy Hibbert tap-dances to Maine
- Grizzlies Valentine’s Day cards are the key to love
- Kevin Love would like the NBA to take the MLB’s approach on All-Star games
- Kobe Bryant fires a few hilarious salvos at Jeremy Lin
- Brandon Jennings states the obvious regarding his 2014 free agency, everyone goes nuts
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
