Effort and execution

by Seijeff on Feb 28, 2011 8:58 AM PST

We've all seen the amazing phenomenon over the last couple of seasons, where Blazer teams of various compositions come together to weather the storm of injuries and being perpetually undermanned. The results have been amazing. Players that you would never have imagined could have stepped up in a big way (Juwan Howard), others seem to have only been waiting for a chance to show what they had all along (LaMarcus). McMillan's coaching coupled with the desire of a depleted team to not lay down and be walked on has been great to watch However, I'm seeing a trend that isn’t encouraging.

Call me crazy; maybe I’m way off in my interpretation, but it has been a consistent problem in the last few years that the team has a tendency to push themselves only when they feel they have no other choice. In other words, with a depleted roster, in order to even compete guys have no choice but to step up and push themselves out of their comfort zones, demanding higher performance from themselves and each other. Yet when a full complement of players is available, many of them seem to coast and do not give the same effort, rather they seem to relax and depend on those around them to pick up the slack.

Marcus and Roy came back in last night's game and the rest of the team seemed to move slower, decisions weren't as crisp giving Atlanta the ability to adjust on defense almost effortlessly and the whole thing became an ugly disjointed mess.

I know the media is saying that it takes time to adjust the team to working with more bodies, but really that seems a very weak excuse to me. The team is not unfamiliar with Brandon Roy's game, neither are they a stranger to Marcus Camby. Yes, Gerald Wallace is significant new piece, yet his performance last night didn't seem to my mind at all forced or an imposition on what the rest of the team wanted to do.

What I'm seeing is a cultural issue: The team relaxes when everyone is available, the concentration isn’t there, and the urgency is gone. They are relying too much on everyone around them instead of doing what they’ve done when they had limited resources.

I don’t blame McMillan though; what is the guy to do when individuals give him Jekyll and Hyde performances? The rotation gets screwed up because one or more of the guys aren’t doing what you’ve come to expect from them and Nate takes them out of the game. Next, everyone is trying to figure out their role as all of a sudden they’re in the game during a period or playing a position that they’re not used to. It really is a cascading problem that has no easy solution.

Anyone that has struggled with their own attitude or self-discipline will know that pushing yourself to do what you don’t want to is always the correct solution, but conversely it can be the absolute hardest thing in the world to accomplish and transform within yourself. At times it takes losing and losing big over a long period of time to really drive the point home; that regardless of what I expect from everyone else around me, the only thing I can control and what I am ultimately responsible for is my own effort, energy and desire for success.

Perhaps the addition of another tough-minded veteran in Gerald Wallace will help some of the younger guys like LaMarcus, Batum, Rudy and Matthews make that transition in mindset. I know one thing, pride and “swag” are not going to get them all the way.

Time will tell. As much as dependence on those around you can be a good thing for a team, it is something I think the team is going to need to grow past to get to their potential. How that will look in implementation I have no idea. And while Nate McMillan has been the only coach that could get what he’s gotten out of the players individually when they needed it most, his eagerness to pull guys when they aren’t performing may just be the wrong recipe for the next step of their growth to a team that is willing to sell out regardless of who they have around them.

Am I crazy? What do you see in this situation?

Tweet Comment 9 comments | 2 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

If anything I saw us up 3 when LMA went out strugled (worry) when he came back

down 6 and the team had got cold (real cold 1 for 16 from 3) some calls kept from getting anything going, If had not been down by 23 when they finally got going might of saved it. Bad shooting, emotional calls and no calls ( I mean clear to basket slight touch call take back the basket – drive to the rim laying it up clear foul across the arm no call, etc…) yes they were out of the game someday s happens.

by prof.mike on Feb 28, 2011 11:13 AM PST reply actions

Great observations. I draw a parallel to diet.

Controlling one’s diet can be very difficult, but often it is the first step towards healthy living. Everybody knows this. Eating Micky-D’s isn’t going to take anybody into old age. Likewise, disappearing during games isn’t going to take a team to the 2nd season. Every player knows this. Often it takes a catastrophe to initiate change. This team might need a heart attack.

Have they had that already? The injuries have shown this team what can happen when they change their approach, but the lesson hasn’t been learned. The Blazers can still coast to 50+ wins on the talent they have left (this was evidenced last season and seems to be repeating). However, they can’t coast to the 2nd round. In other words, the injuries have not been the “heart attack” that kept them away from the Drive Thru.

I think it might take missing the playoffs to wake these guys up. Until that happens, they can find myriad excuses for failing to advance: the coaches, the injuries, the schedule, the refs… Missing the playoffs is on them. I hope it doesn’t come down to that, but it would certainly be a gut check that could lead to a change in philosophy. To keep the analogy going: the day they can’t squeeze into their prom dresses is the day they stop eating Big Macs.

Stealth > Wealth

by 500dogs on Feb 28, 2011 11:18 AM PST reply actions

you're not crazy.

it’s an interesting thought, but that was a really tough team to play when integrating two key players coming back from injury and one entirely new player.

couple that with foul trouble to the only two guys over 6’8 on the team and it was a really rough situation.

let’s wait a couple of weeks and see if your theory proves true – it very well might. i hope not!

by SaveOden on Feb 28, 2011 2:21 PM PST reply actions

We need some meaness on this team.

Aldridge got hurt because Horford was kneeing him constantly in the butt to push him out from his normal spot. Look the refs are gonna let you play unless they are forced to get involved. With a team like Atlanta, LAL the other night, they look to mug you when their athleticism is challenged. So someone on the blazers has got to knock someone on their ass and get the refs involved early. We don’t need to hurt anyone but a nice pick to lay some one out or a Miller cross body block should do the trick.

This has to be done to protect Aldridge now that he’s a marked man.

by 7677maniac on Feb 28, 2011 2:50 PM PST reply actions

we need przy back... or juwan.

by SaveOden on Feb 28, 2011 7:45 PM PST up reply actions

Dre lays a mean running body check.

Ask Jughead.

by manfredi on Feb 28, 2011 9:55 PM PST up reply actions

excellent point!

by SaveOden on Mar 1, 2011 5:04 AM PST up reply actions

Besides Roy and LMA, the Blazer players have come and gone during Nate's era

I don’t blame McMillan though; what is the guy to do when individuals give him Jekyll and Hyde performances? The rotation gets screwed up because one or more of the guys aren’t doing what you’ve come to expect from them and Nate takes them out of the game. Next, everyone is trying to figure out their role as all of a sudden they’re in the game during a period or playing a position that they’re not used to. It really is a cascading problem that has no easy solution.

I don’t think you can pin this on the players and absolve McMillian when there’s been ambiguity re: roles and responsibilities. How often have we heard Nate say “we didn’t shoot well” or “we need to scrap more” after a loss? How about the coach discussing substitution patterns and play calling instead of giving the reporters a cold stare whenever they dare to bring these subjects up?

Should the players be more focused and execute the fundamentals better? Sure. But when they don’t (or won’t) at some point you can’t just keep going out and finding new players who will only listen to the head coach for awhile.

When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!

by two4larue on Feb 28, 2011 11:44 PM PST reply actions

I would agree with you

if this were happening in an environment where all of our guys were healthy. In that case there really is no excuse, the lack of effort is on the coach just as much as the players because it is the coach’s responsibility to coach the player, not the players to coach each other.

However, the ambiguity I’m talking about relates to the situation I’m referring to, which is the changing nature of the roster on any given evening. Without any consistency in what a player’s role is, how is a coach to define it? At that point, doesn’t the balance of responsibility shift to the player more than the coach? Beyond trying to stick players where the coach has a need because of absence – an area in which McMillan has done a good job – what can a coach do?

I would think that it is only natural for a player that is playing out of position to give an exceptional effort because of the discomfort in that role and their awareness of their own inadequacies in that role. What the some of the younger players need to realize is that they need to have that same discomfort and drive regardless of what position or role they are filling and how comfortable they are in it. That urgency and uncertainty should be something that they tap into every game, not just the games where the team is short-handed.

I think this is a maturation process and is related to the team’s tendency to play down to competition with poor records. They don’t dominate the teams they should because they don’t give a consistent effort from game to game. They don’t give a consistent effort because they don’t feel it is necessary at times when they can rely on guys like Roy to bail them out on offense and Camby to bail them out on defense. This attitude problem needs to be solved and while the coach is responsible for a large part of his team’s performance, the players are responsible for how they apply his directions and how aggressive they are on the court.

"She turned me into a newt!
A newt?
...I got better."

by Seijeff on Mar 1, 2011 1:49 PM PST up reply actions