Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: Trent Richardson Interviews Fellow Brown Brandon Weeden

Game 14 Recap: Portland Trail Blazers 89, Atlanta Hawks 92

In a Nutshell

The Blazers play their best game of the road trip but can't string together enough consistent offense and commit just a few too many defensive lapses to come out ahead. The Hawks weren't clearly better, just clearly more dependable while playing a similar style to the Blazers. The Hawks can thank their two stars and their bench defense for the win.

Game Flow

The Blazers started this game in great shape on the defensive end. They forced the Hawks outside and, even more critically, rebounded excellently. The latter can't be assumed against the Hawks and the Blazers did marvelously. This kept them in the game even though their shots were not falling. Around the midpoint of the quarter both teams made a concerted effort to get inside. The Blazers went with Gerald Wallace who borked several moves. The Hawks forwards, Marvin Williams and Josh Smith, had fewer difficulties. Atlanta took the first significant lead of the game but the Blazers came back behind a hot start from Jamal Crawford. This also allowed Aldridge the requisite space to get his offense off and he keyed up too. Atlanta led 21-17 after the first period.

Atlanta's bench handed Portland their hats in the second quarter. It started with Janero Pargo hitting multiple open jumpers. Then the Hawks got drives and fouls off of a collapsing Portland defense. They translated the inside pressure into open threes and suddenly they appeared to be hitting on all cylinders. Portland's best offensive opportunities came on breaks off of turnovers Wesley Matthews creating a couple steals in the process. But those were rarer that Atlanta's good looks. Rarer still were Portland's good shots in the halfcourt. The most acceptable ones again came from the hands of Aldridge and Crawford, though the latter also missed plenty (natch). The Hawks ended the half shooting 56% off of their strong second period and led 51-42 at the half.

Portland's third period began with a couple of made three-pointers. Combined with a layup and a couple free throws they quickly found themselves back within a point. But class is in, children. The Blazers always string together a couple of threes during any given game. Pop Quiz: When those three are the mechanism for the comeback, will that comeback last? Time's up. If you said, "No!" you are correct. After missing three straight jumpers of 20 feet or more the Blazers found themselves down by a half-dozen again. They got the ball inside against a momentarily-distracted Atlanta defense and erased the deficit, taking a rare lead. But that spurt lasted only a couple minutes. Atlanta locked down again, pressured Portland drivers, and dared the Blazers to shoot long. Not only did the Blazers oblige their hosts, they put a cherry on the top by not getting back in transition after their misses. Suddenly the Hawks were beating the Blazers at their own quick-offense game. They closed the period on a 14-0 run and led 75-62 after three.

To their credit the Blazers didn't give up. Instead they returned to the lock-down defense with which they had started the game. The result was zero points for the Hawks in the first five minutes of the final period. On offense they let Crawford go to work and he responded with 9 points in less than 2 minutes. When he hit a three-pointer from a suburban peach tree orchard with 6:15 remaining in the period the Blazers took the lead again. That's when Joe Johnson decided to put an end to that. He immediately hit a 15-footer to put the Hawks back up and hit a three a couple of possessions later. Aldridge hit a 12-footer but Josh Smith got it back and then the Hawks relied on their guards (and Portland's lack of guard defense) to close the game. Johnson and point guard Jeff Teague scored 7 of the Hawks' final 9 points of the game, many from the line. Crawford and Wesley Matthews tried to answer but Atlanta's duo was slightly more...reliable. Atlanta walks out with a 92-89 victory.

Take Away Points

In the comment section of one of the threads earlier in the season I said something to the effect of, "The Blazers are undoubtedly talented, have a defined and exciting style of play, and are veteran enough to win games. Their problem will be that other teams' play and methods of winning will be more reliable than Portland's." Tonight was a prime example, as we've said a couple times already. The Blazers played hard. The Blazers played well in many aspects. The Blazers didn't give up. You can even say the Blazers are as talented as the Hawks stacked man for man. The issue isn't that Atlanta's players would outclass Portland's if everybody played their best. At guard, for example, you'd like Joe Smith's scoring ability but you'd also like Wesley Matthews' ability to defend him while putting in points of his own. Raymond Felton and Jeff Teague should be a pretty even matchup on paper too. Giving all of those things due credit, answer one question: Which duo do you trust more? It's going to be Johnson and Teague. How much do you trust Crawford's next shot even when he's having a good game? How reliable is Gerald Wallace? Marcus Camby? There are only two guys on the Portland team you depend on night in and night out: Aldridge and Kurt Thomas. Plus the turnovers and jumpers upon which the Blazers rely are inherently unreliable. Plus the Blazers can't be relied upon to finish at the rim in traffic. Plus their best interior scorer is Craig Smith...nice player but not a guy you'd rely upon to carry the offense in any meaningful way. Plus the bench is seriously hit and miss. Talent? Check. Heart? Check. Smarts? Check. Consistency? Bzzzt. And there you go. The Blazers might have better record with a little less name power and players who, in turn, were less mercurial.

Nevertheless don't let the loss disguise what was a good effort, particularly on the board and even defensively as the game progressed. The Blazers did plenty of things right. The Hawks had to work for the win. It was a good game. Just not quite good enough.

Individual Notes

LaMarcus Aldridge picked his spots and registered an impressive 10-19 shooting clip for 20 points, 11 rebounds, 4 assists, and 2 steals. The only real room for criticism is that he took but two free throws (and missed both in a late-game situation where the makes would have made a difference). That's because he spent most of the game outside. The trade-off for the lack of extra points is that he made most of his shots, as they were comfortable.

Gerald Wallace had a couple of defensive explosions and did some nice rebounding but couldn't get the job done in the post or from the perimeter in the halfcourt offense. He can't key the offense nor is he good in that bail-out corner three role. The Blazers need to keep players and the ball in motion to take advantage of what Gerald brings. 4-12 shooting, 8 points, 9 rebounds, 2 blocks.

Raymond Felton ran the ball multiple times tonight, leaving Atlanta defenders behind. It was among his most aggressive games of the season in that sense. It was a good game overall, at least when measured against his Portland tenure. He looked like a threat tonight. 3-9 shooting, 9 points, 8 assists, only 1 turnover. Part of Felton's problem is that both aggressiveness and ability to make the jumper fade as the game progresses. He comes out like a house on fire but by the second half that's gone. I don't know if it's about getting other people involved or he's just gassed.

Wesley Matthews could not have bought a bucket will Bill Gates' credit card tonight. He went 2-13 from the field, missing whether he was the outlet guy or trying to take over the offense himself. He did go 5-5 from the line but he was 1-7 from the arc and finished with 10 points on those 13 shots. His passing lane defense was exquisite, though. He snagged 5 steals, at one point making Atlanta fans groan in consternation.

Kurt Thomas gave the Blazers 23 good minutes with 9 rebounds, 5 offensive, and 8 points on 4-6 shooting.

Jamal Crawford tried to put the "Hot" back in "Hotlanta" tonight with mixed success. He started and ended his court time strong, missing shots in the middle. But this was going to be his game no matter what. The good news is that he scored 22, making those Atlanta fans groan even more than Matthews did. The bad news is that he took 22 shots to score those 22 points. He packed those 22 shots into 30 minutes of playing time, so you know where his mind was. All in all, though, I didn't mind the shooting. Most of the attempts looked good and he was head and shoulders above the rest of the bench when it came to getting free.

The Nicolas Batum story was the opposite of Crawford's tonight. He played but 9 minutes, missed both of his shot attempts, and registered a rebound, a steal, an assist, and 2 personal fouls. He was knocked out of the game with an eye injury. The Blazers missed him.

Craig Smith was hustling all over the offensive end and the boards tonight. He earned 24 minutes, just edging out Kurt Thomas in that department. It looks like he's the next bench player that Coach McMillan will try to rely on as the 9th man in the rotation. Smith shot 3-5 down deep and 0-1 on a quarter-ending three for 9 points. His questionable call comes in the rebounding department where he had but 3. It seemed like once he got focused on scoring the rest of his game slipped a little.

Nolan Smith fans, rejoice! At least for one game your boy found a way to stay on the floor more than 3 minutes. He defended! Nicely too. He also had 2 assist and almost looked like a point guard...maybe. He had a couple of bad offensive possessions too. 1-3, a three-pointer made.

Fun With Numbers

  • Blazers 13 offensive rebounds, Hawks 5...good game.
  • Blazers 41 total rebounds, Hawks 47...also good when you consider the disparity in field goal shooting gave the Hawks an advantage in this department.
  • Blazers put 92 shots up...where they want to be against the Hawks. They limit Atlanta to 71 shots themselves.
  • Blazers force 14 turnovers and only commit 9. Again good.
  • Blazers 40 points in the paint, Atlanta 36...excellent!
  • Blazers only 10 fast break points, Hawks 22. Oops. Couldn't get back? Part of that is effort and part of that is what happens when you consistently miss layups and long shots.
  • Blazers shoot 38% from the field, 26% from the arc. Hawks shoot 46.5% from the field, 45.5% from the arc. It's impressive how the Hawks refuse to get carried away with threes even when they're making them.
  • Hawks attempt 27 free throws, hitting 21. Blazers only attempt 20...fewer than the Hawks made. Portland also hits only 14 of 20 for 70%. A couple more of those would have been nice seeing as how the finish was close.

Final Thoughts

If the Blazers play this well two wins are in the offing in Toronto and Detroit. That'll make everybody feel better again. Plus nobody should feel that bad about this game. It was a good game to watch...better by far than the win in New Orleans and way better than the losses against San Antonio and Houston.

Take a look at the other side of the story at Peachtree Hoops.

Trail Blazers vs Hawks boxscore

Here's your Jersey Contest Scoreboard for the month. Individual game results are available via the pull-down menu at the bottom of the page. Also here's your form for Friday's game.

--Dave (blazersub@yahoo.com)

Comment 216 comments  |  0 recs  | 

Do you like this story?

Comments

Display:

Actually

we have a starting point guard. Now we need a point guard who can finish.

—Dave

by Dave on Jan 18, 2012 9:03 PM PST up reply actions  

Let me rephrase,

A good starting point guard. Aldridge, Wallace & Matthews all showed earlier in the season they can thrive in an up-tempo offense but we just don’t have the PG who can to get them the ball in an efficient manner. So now we revert to the ISO offense with Crawford, ugh. A 1 who could finish at the rim would be fantastic, maybe even play some defense?!? Of course as Blazers fans we always ask to much of our point guard :\

by 420Phenom on Jan 18, 2012 9:07 PM PST up reply actions  

The guy had 8 assists and actually 0 TO's today (the one they gave him was actually L.A.'s)

yet people still want to run him outta town. If he can run an umtempo Mike d antonio offense and look like an all start, I think he can run just about any up tempo… maybe we should looks else where to see whats going on. How many times do you see him sprint down court and it ends up being 1-4, if we are all going to run we all need to, not 2 players.

by Kazper on Jan 18, 2012 9:31 PM PST up reply actions  

On 3 of 9 shooting

with only 2 free throw attempts in a game where we put together several dry stretches, when typically a lead guard is supposed to get to the line & put points on the board(See Andre Miller last year). He has done a solid job on assists/turnovers this year, but thats it & as Dave said his finishing ability is absolutely terrible.

Lets pull this $#!^ Together Guys !

by 420Phenom on Jan 18, 2012 9:38 PM PST up reply actions  

I'm not saying he was great, but he is the best we have at the moment

And hes not the only issue we are having with our team at the moment. our fans tend to really get on one or two players and don’t let up regardless of the other issues we are having

by Kazper on Jan 18, 2012 9:40 PM PST up reply actions  

Oh I'm really aggressive towards our starting center dilemma as well

as you will see. Seems to be our two biggest problems.

"We gotta get this $#!^ together guys!" - Phil

by 420Phenom on Jan 18, 2012 9:48 PM PST up reply actions  

I feel having camby out is a real issue for us righ tnow

and long term its obviously an issue… it woudl be great if we could just bring in good FA’s, but any stars dont sign for small markets anymore. All the small markets that are doing well do so through the draft, and its to badf our front office really seems to suck in the draft.

by Kazper on Jan 18, 2012 9:54 PM PST up reply actions  

The small markets who did well in the draft?

You mean OKC & San Antonio(Duncan/Robinson- However they were able to win championships with their success in the late rounds with Ginobili/Parker)? All their primary talent is pure lottery. We haven’t had a taste of that since Roy/Aldridge/Oden. In which case only one has survived.

"We gotta get this $#!^ together guys!" - Phil

by 420Phenom on Jan 18, 2012 11:12 PM PST up reply actions  

OKC was very right place/right time for their big two players

KD was a no-brainer and honestly so was Westbrook in that draft spot.

Harden over Evans was a shrewd move. But OKC is as much luck as skill.

While SAS did a wonderful job of finding talent late in the draft (by being in front of the Euro trend with their scouting), they still have zero titles if they didn’t luck into the Duncan pick.

So some credit for shrewd moves to both, but they were both dependent on being very, very lucky too.

by Timmay! on Jan 18, 2012 11:20 PM PST up reply actions  

"and honestly so was Westbrook in that draft spot."

That’s not true. Russ Westbrook was a huge gamble.

"I Am Mine"

by AK1984 on Jan 18, 2012 11:28 PM PST up reply actions  

His stock rose big-time by draft day

There were no surprises when his name was called.

At one point during the ramp-up, Bayless was even discussed as the #4 pick. But by draft day, Russell was seen as a very reasonable choice. The mocks were moving him up quickly

NBA.com listing him at 8 is kind of hilariously out of touch. Bayless was declining and Westbrook was soaring.

by Timmay! on Jan 18, 2012 11:32 PM PST up reply actions  

Still a huge gamble.

You’re wrong on this one.

"I Am Mine"

by AK1984 on Jan 18, 2012 11:33 PM PST up reply actions  

I was watching the draft live, and Westbook was all the talk as OKC picked

They weren’t reaching at all for him.

(I do find it fascinating that Brook Lopez fell so far btw).

by Timmay! on Jan 18, 2012 11:34 PM PST up reply actions   1 recs

That's fine.

It was pretty much OKC by then anyway.

Anyhow, I just looked back at a couple of Sonic sites and the Westbrook pick was still a surprise when it happened.

http://sonicscentral.com/blog/?p=1983

"I Am Mine"

by AK1984 on Jan 18, 2012 11:37 PM PST up reply actions  

There were two surprises that day.

1. Russ rising.
2. Brook falling.

And again, Russ rising was indeed a surprise.

"I Am Mine"

by AK1984 on Jan 18, 2012 11:38 PM PST up reply actions  

Oh, and also Bayless falling.

That was a big surprise, too.

"I Am Mine"

by AK1984 on Jan 18, 2012 11:39 PM PST up reply actions  

Yeah Bayless' drop behind Augustin was a big surprise at the time.

I wasn’t surprised at Westbook’s rise, honestly. I was disappointed when Seattle chose him, I hoped he’d slip by them.

by Timmay! on Jan 18, 2012 11:40 PM PST up reply actions  

Mild surprise

Bayless was a short 2 guard, or a PG who can’t distribute.

Where can you play him?

Now all we need is the rest of the roster to get into "how can everybody help Nicco and Oden" mode. -- Oden Mad, Oden Smash! Sep 29, 2010 7:47 PM

by LaoTzu on Jan 19, 2012 12:31 AM PST up reply actions  

And he has Raptor arms.

Now all we need is the rest of the roster to get into "how can everybody help Nicco and Oden" mode. -- Oden Mad, Oden Smash! Sep 29, 2010 7:47 PM

by LaoTzu on Jan 19, 2012 12:32 AM PST up reply actions  

You mean normal arms

by any other standard than being a freakish NBA player.

by Z-Bones on Jan 19, 2012 10:16 AM PST up reply actions   1 recs

BTW as a non-Seattle fan, it's interesting to hear your reaction to the draft

As an outsider, it was increasingly obvious you guys were drafting Westbook that night. His stock had skyrocketed, even the draft guys were expecting it, but inside Seattle (where I’m sure you guys had talked about the draft ad nauseum at that point), he wasn’t seen as the obvious pick.

I actually find that pretty fascinating just in general. I didn’t realize.

by Timmay! on Jan 18, 2012 11:39 PM PST up reply actions  

It really seems like there's a little hyperbole on both ends

I didn’t find it especially surprising when they took Westbrook, but it was in no way an obvious slam dunk pick. There were about 3 or 4 guys that could have easily gone there without a raised eyebrow, and Westbrook was one of them. Kudos to Presti given that he’s turned out to be the best of those 4, though.

by Royster on Jan 18, 2012 11:42 PM PST up reply actions  

I wonder what would have happened if they grabbed Brook

And paired them up with a well-drafted but possibly lesser PG.

by Timmay! on Jan 18, 2012 11:45 PM PST up reply actions  

As much as I liked Brook Lopez, Russell was ...

clearly the right pick when it’s all said and done.

Looking back, Lopez has fallen pretty far short of my expectations for him. I undersold Kevin Love by a fair amount, too.

"I Am Mine"

by AK1984 on Jan 18, 2012 11:51 PM PST up reply actions  

Brook may have blossomed more a different environment

Hard to say how he’ll do when he gets back to the court.

by Timmay! on Jan 18, 2012 11:53 PM PST up reply actions  

I would have taken Lopez

Now all we need is the rest of the roster to get into "how can everybody help Nicco and Oden" mode. -- Oden Mad, Oden Smash! Sep 29, 2010 7:47 PM

by LaoTzu on Jan 19, 2012 12:32 AM PST up reply actions  

Those who say they saw...

Kevin Love producing the way he does are liars or UCLA fanboys, in my opinion.

"We gotta get this $#!^ together guys!" - Phil

by 420Phenom on Jan 19, 2012 12:57 AM PST up reply actions  

Yeah, I sold K-Love short.

Yet, a lot of people made the same mistake I did.

"I Am Mine"

by AK1984 on Jan 19, 2012 1:06 AM PST up reply actions  

I guess you can never underestimate

the thick white guy with a nose for boards, a sweet shooting touch & an awesome beard.

"We gotta get this $#!^ together guys!" - Phil

by 420Phenom on Jan 19, 2012 1:08 AM PST up reply actions  

I did too

I didn’t want the Blazers anywhere near him. Then again, I still might not.

—Dave

by Dave on Jan 19, 2012 1:13 AM PST up reply actions  

I did not realize I was a UCLA fan boy.

I did think K-Love would be a good pro based on his skill set back then, which include rebounding, passing ability, and deep shooting.

Still, I didn’t think Westbrook was as good as he is now. I was rather high on Collison, though, because of his efficiency in college as well as >50% 3 point shooting in his junior year (I believe)

The cake was a lie.

by xedubx on Jan 19, 2012 8:56 AM PST up reply actions  

To be fair, there's a big difference

between thinking Kevin Love would be a good pro, and thinking he would be the best and most productive rebounder since Dennis Rodman. I thought all three of those UCLA guys would be solid pros, but they still have been much better than I expected to this point.

by Royster on Jan 19, 2012 9:28 AM PST up reply actions  

What I meant by good pro is his production is similar to what I expected, albeit bit higher.

I don’t see him yet in the same line as guys like Aldridge, but I did think he had potential to be one of the premier players in the league. He isn’t one yet but could certainly get there.

I guess my standard for good pro tend to be higher than the usual definition.

The cake was a lie.

by xedubx on Jan 19, 2012 11:09 AM PST up reply actions  

Exactly, Royster.

"We gotta get this $#!^ together guys!" - Phil

by 420Phenom on Jan 19, 2012 12:05 PM PST up reply actions  

Also, I do appreciate that Presti made the right call with that pick

I’m just not convinced it was a heavily insightful or prescient pick; I think many GM’s would have made the same choice. Nonetheless, that doesn’t take away that he made the right pick, when there were other good options.

Still shocked at Brook’s drop though.

by Timmay! on Jan 18, 2012 11:49 PM PST up reply actions  

It wasn't obvious.

There was talk of drafting a few different players, as well as talk of trading down. It wasn’t a sure thing, nope. Not even close.

"I Am Mine"

by AK1984 on Jan 18, 2012 11:49 PM PST up reply actions  

Here is what I know

The whole week before the draft I tossed around scenarios in which the Blazers got Westbrook, because I kind of wanted to take a flyer on him. Zero came to mind. I can’t speak to whether or not it was a surprise for Seattle to take him but he was going to be gone before Portland picked and before any pick reasonably within Portland’s reach (likely up or down 3-4 slots).

—Dave

by Dave on Jan 18, 2012 11:58 PM PST up reply actions  

I do remember thinking

“The Sonics must believe he’s the real deal” when he was selected. So at least there was some doubt about that. It’s not like he was a lock or seen as an obvious value with that pick.

—Dave

by Dave on Jan 19, 2012 12:02 AM PST up reply actions  

That's more or less my recollection as well

He was clearly going somewhere in the top 6 or 7, just not necessarily to the Sonics. I remember thinking that a swap with one of Indy, NJ, or Charlotte was a no brainer for us and would net us whichever of Bayless/Augustin ended up falling, with a slight preference to DJ.

Oh well. Fun and somewhat painful to reminisce about that being our last chance to add the finishing touch to the future dominant core of Roy/Aldridge/Oden.

by Royster on Jan 19, 2012 12:15 AM PST up reply actions  

which is bad drafting by our front office

we know oden had questions about him the whole time, and there ws a sure fire thing with durrant there… and with Roy he gave us a few years but other GM’s even came out and said htere doctors gave him 5 years in the league before his knees were gone, but did or FO listen?
And better drafting lets look at what some of the other FO’s have done in recent drafts:
Notable picks by non lottery teams: Eric bledsoe, Landry fields, Jrue holiday, ty lawson, jeff teague, eric maynor, Darron collison, Rod Beaubois, taj gibson, wayne ellington, dejuan summers, sam young, brockman, jodie meeks, marcus thornton, chase budinger, a.j. price, anthony randolph, robin lopez, javelle mcgee, j.j. hickson, courtney lee, serge ibaka, george hill, mario chalmers, deandre jordan, goren dragic

Those are just a small liste of players in the last 3 years that are still fairly decent rotation players that were all picked after the lottery… its a reason their teams remain at a high level, is there FO does a good job of scouting… where are all our players? D league, bench, or europe… Good job.

by Kazper on Jan 18, 2012 11:30 PM PST up reply actions  

we know oden had questions about him the whole time, and there ws a sure fire thing with durrant there

That’s revisionist history IMO.

by Timmay! on Jan 18, 2012 11:33 PM PST up reply actions  

I remember during the draft when people questioned his size, and ability to stay healthy

There was 1 safe pick and we didn’t take it… and this is hindsight, this was the same argument i made back in the day when it happened.

by Kazper on Jan 18, 2012 11:34 PM PST up reply actions  

You may be remembering people talking about how fragile Durant's body looked.

I thought Durant would get crushed and broken in half by NBA athletes. Dude was just so skinny and frail looking at the time.

by Oden Mad, Oden Smash! on Jan 19, 2012 12:52 AM PST via mobile up reply actions  

Exactly, his whole post is lol.

For the record, I wanted Hibbert instead of Bayless :\

Hate to be that guy but…

Who of this list has truly produced in the NBA:

Eric bledsoe, Landry fields, Jrue holiday, ty lawson, jeff teague, eric maynor, Darron collison, Rod Beaubois, taj gibson, wayne ellington, dejuan summers, sam young, brockman, jodie meeks, marcus thornton, chase budinger, a.j. price, anthony randolph, robin lopez, javelle mcgee, j.j. hickson, courtney lee, serge ibaka, george hill, mario chalmers, deandre jordan, goren dragic

and I wanted most the players who I haven’t struck the name through. I do acknowledge that we have drafted poorly in the latter part of the draft, once again. Thats why I wanted Jeff Bower.

"We gotta get this $#!^ together guys!" - Phil

by 420Phenom on Jan 19, 2012 1:04 AM PST up reply actions  

Or Andre Miller today..

28-10-8 with a +- of +18.

The cake was a lie.

by xedubx on Jan 18, 2012 9:54 PM PST up reply actions  

love his stats, but i never bother to look at the + - stat

that stat really doesn’t mean much…. if your a starter playing against the other teams bench then you probably will have a higher number then players playing agains tthe other teams starters… does that mean you were better or worse then them?

by Kazper on Jan 18, 2012 10:02 PM PST up reply actions  

Dre dominates whoever he plays against

so stats don’t matter

/winestat.

"We gotta get this $#!^ together guys!" - Phil

by 420Phenom on Jan 18, 2012 11:20 PM PST up reply actions  

Dre FTW

Now all we need is the rest of the roster to get into "how can everybody help Nicco and Oden" mode. -- Oden Mad, Oden Smash! Sep 29, 2010 7:47 PM

by LaoTzu on Jan 19, 2012 12:33 AM PST up reply actions  

I don't like +- in general as well.

But, Dre was coming off the bench for the game, so it wasn’t exactly starters vs. bench.

The cake was a lie.

by xedubx on Jan 19, 2012 8:50 AM PST up reply actions  

I agree with your take on +-

but Miller played almost 39 minutes albeit overtime that was as much as the starters. He also plays together with Lawson so he gets plenty of action and against the starters as well.

by XBlazerfan on Jan 19, 2012 10:09 AM PST up reply actions  

True enough.

Then again, if he didn’t play well, he wouldn’t have played that many minutes.

The cake was a lie.

by xedubx on Jan 19, 2012 11:05 AM PST up reply actions  

Hey Dave

“At guard, for example, you’d like Joe Smith’s scoring ability but you’d also like Wesley Matthews’ ability to defend him while putting in points of his own.”

I like Joe Johnson’s scoring ability from guard, but, Joe Smith, not so much. He he.

I hate to say it this early, but, we NEED to trade Felton. Even if his deep shooting gets better, his horrible defense, overdribbling, inablity to run the pick and roll, inability to finish at the hoop, unintelligent passing, and running way too fast arent going to change, hes been in the league 7 years, he is who he is as a player. Hopefully his, late game turnovers and slips/stumbles on the court will change as he continues to get in better shape, but Im not even so confident that will change. His TO average this season is right around his career average, so its not likely that will get much better. I think many blazer fans looked at Felton’s stats(specificly his high assisnt numbers his bloated 3p% of the past few years from NY and Denver) before we acquired him and assumed he was much better than he is. His high assist totals look nice but he really ISNT even better thn Andre. I guess hes a little bit better trade chip for the future but I really really hope thats all the Blazer brass considers him as. Andre put in a 28point 10 assist 8 rebound game last night and single handedly won the game for his team. To be honest I dont see Felton doing that once for the Blazers.

Ruben Boumtje-Boumtje, Vladimir Stepania, Ha(ha you suck) Seung Jin, Travis Diener and Erick Barkley

by blazethenugs on Jan 19, 2012 1:22 PM PST up reply actions  

Jersey contest

Is anyone else’s form scored weirdly? Mine seems to say that the Blazers won, and is scored accordingly.

by Batman_88 on Jan 18, 2012 9:03 PM PST reply actions  

Crud.

I inverted the scores. Wishful thinking.

—Dave

by Dave on Jan 18, 2012 9:04 PM PST up reply actions  

Nate

Said they need to play harder? So who is right?

by Cabbol on Jan 18, 2012 9:06 PM PST reply actions  

I don't see harder

I see better. More crisply. Less selfishly. I think they’re giving enough physical effort. But to an expert not really focusing and executing crisply is the same as not really trying. They definitely matched Atlanta’s athleticism tonight.

Also remember that you’re getting the public explanation from Nate. I assume the message to the team will be more nuanced.

—Dave

by Dave on Jan 18, 2012 9:09 PM PST up reply actions  

"I assume the message to the team will be more nuanced."

If this was Doug Collins coaching, I’d agree with you. With Nate, I don’t think the English language is his strong suit.

"I Am Mine"

by AK1984 on Jan 18, 2012 9:12 PM PST up reply actions  

Maybe

The other thing is, I could see calling out a couple of the guards for a lack of defensive effort. But that’s, like, two players. Nate’s not going to name them publicly. Instead he’s going to say, “We need to play harder”, knowing that he expects Guards #1 and #2 to hear themselves in that message even if he’s not ratting them out in public. The ten other guys are probably playing with an acceptable level of effort but they, too, are supposed to be stung by the team criticism and bring their ire to bear on the couple of guys who are not giving their all on every defensive possession and making them all look bad.

Either way, it still comes out as, “We need to play harder” in the press. I would bet behind closed doors the criticisms are more detailed and directed.

—Dave

by Dave on Jan 18, 2012 9:21 PM PST up reply actions  

In regard to guard defense

I don’t think Crawford & Felton(I know thats your Guards #1/#2 Dave!) can defend much better then they already do, sadly. Trade 4 Hinrich!

Also, on defense, starting center is a huge problem. Especially with Camby out.

by 420Phenom on Jan 18, 2012 9:32 PM PST up reply actions  

And if they aren't making shots, why play them?

I wonder, did Elliot kill Nate’s puppy, or something. Man is getting 0 minutes.

Now all we need is the rest of the roster to get into "how can everybody help Nicco and Oden" mode. -- Oden Mad, Oden Smash! Sep 29, 2010 7:47 PM

by LaoTzu on Jan 19, 2012 12:35 AM PST up reply actions  

"With Nate, I don’t think the English language is his strong suit."

That’s kind of a weird comment. I doubt you’ve ever had a private conversation with the man. What a coach says in public to the news media is obviously going to be quite a distance from what he says behind closed doors. And yes, “more nuanced,” as Dave says.

ignacio

by ignacio on Jan 18, 2012 10:17 PM PST up reply actions  

Nate takes a simplistic approach to his coaching that other teams take advantage of in the playoffs

He seems to lack the ability to make creative adjustments.

Now all we need is the rest of the roster to get into "how can everybody help Nicco and Oden" mode. -- Oden Mad, Oden Smash! Sep 29, 2010 7:47 PM

by LaoTzu on Jan 19, 2012 12:37 AM PST up reply actions  

This is an entirely different topic from in-game adjustments.

I’m strictly talking about communication skills (or lack thereof).

"I Am Mine"

by AK1984 on Jan 19, 2012 12:43 AM PST up reply actions  

I agree with AK on that

…and I like Nate as a coach, but he definitely is bland in interviews.

by jamon51 on Jan 19, 2012 12:46 PM PST up reply actions  

One thing I see from watching Atlanta

It made me miss BRoy. Joe Johnson and BRoy was made in the same mold. We see ourselves when we see Atlanta. If both teams were at full strength, excluding Greg, the results would have been about the same.

Going down the stretch, I could visualize Joe and Brandon battling it out. That is when I realized how much I missed BRoy.

hg

by BBK on Jan 19, 2012 9:38 AM PST up reply actions   1 recs

Except Roy would eat Johnson's lunch on the offensive end.

Efficiency wise, there’s no contest whatsoever.

The cake was a lie.

by xedubx on Jan 19, 2012 11:12 AM PST up reply actions  

Another big problem

The loss of Camby. Our need for a starting center really shined through tonight. We may have got a win with Camby, but if we had MC & KT coming off the bench with say an Okefor or Gortat starting, we could have had this game easily.

by 420Phenom on Jan 18, 2012 9:12 PM PST reply actions  

If wewin the next 2 games and are 10-6,

and Batum returns and plays aggressively, things could be worse. Marcus Camby should also return soon, and the players are getting to know each other as players (like “Don’t give me a bounce pass in the lane” or whatever) and so maybe the team will improve.

This is the same team that beat some good teams and was 7-2. If they go 40-26 that’s still gonna seem like quite a few Ls.

ignacio

by ignacio on Jan 18, 2012 9:17 PM PST reply actions   2 recs

The guards need to watch film of Andre last year

Lob the ball to the bogs. Give it to them up top and let them finish.

“How to Feed the Post 101”

Now all we need is the rest of the roster to get into "how can everybody help Nicco and Oden" mode. -- Oden Mad, Oden Smash! Sep 29, 2010 7:47 PM

by LaoTzu on Jan 19, 2012 12:38 AM PST up reply actions  

bigs

Now all we need is the rest of the roster to get into "how can everybody help Nicco and Oden" mode. -- Oden Mad, Oden Smash! Sep 29, 2010 7:47 PM

by LaoTzu on Jan 19, 2012 12:39 AM PST up reply actions  

Can

Some investigative reporter investigate this “assumption”. There have been a lot of little hints that Nate doesn’t really give his players much direction other then motivation. His players often seem confused. Maybe Nates persona has blinded people at bit. Can we start trying to find out if he really is coaching, defining roles, setting up a system and training his players to play that system. All we get are very weak rather simple and repetitive examples and excuses. The results are not matching the reputation. Start by asking why such a talented individual defensive team is not very good defensively? Why?

by Cabbol on Jan 18, 2012 9:20 PM PST reply actions  

Because defense takes all five people

If 3.5 of those 5 do their jobs excellently the defense still stinks.

Think of it like a dam. A 95% solid dam is still non-functional because all the water leaks through that 5% hole. The water going through, in turn, weakens the rest of the structure.

—Dave

by Dave on Jan 18, 2012 9:23 PM PST up reply actions   2 recs

I

Get that but other teams with less talent have produced better defensive teams. It’s more that maybe its time that Nate is looked at with fresh eyes. I just hear excuses and excuses for him. We’re making excuses for a guy who can’t coach a team out of the first round. Is he really worth that kind of lack of scrutiny, it’s not like he’s earned a title. He and his coaching haven’t really proven anything. His persona just seems so out of wack with reality. I mean Phil jackson got more heat for bad years and that guy proved his system worked.

by Cabbol on Jan 18, 2012 9:30 PM PST up reply actions  

Well

The Blazers are 9th in the league in defensive efficiency. They’re better defending the outside than the inside but you’ll have a hard time convincing me they have the players to mount a strong interior defense. The part of the defense that’s fallen the most since the start of the season has been opponent transition buckets. But that’s not coaching, that’s players making the effort to get back.

—Dave

by Dave on Jan 18, 2012 9:36 PM PST up reply actions   1 recs

effort...am hearing that Matthews hasn't been moving much on offense...

didn’t see the game tonight. The 5th quarter guy is saying Matthews is standing around a lot instead of cutting or putting pressure on the guy defending him.

by Natsthecat on Jan 18, 2012 9:39 PM PST up reply actions  

Effort

Is coaching. Please just view Nate with fresh eyes. That is all I’m asking. For some reason he gets a free ride, but he hasn’t really proven anything other then he knows how to win enough to look good, but not enough to develop a long term strategy of success….with injuries his get out of jail free card.

by Cabbol on Jan 18, 2012 9:40 PM PST up reply actions   1 recs

The team is defending the 3 pt line this year

But our guards can’t stay with the other teams quicks.

Now all we need is the rest of the roster to get into "how can everybody help Nicco and Oden" mode. -- Oden Mad, Oden Smash! Sep 29, 2010 7:47 PM

by LaoTzu on Jan 19, 2012 12:40 AM PST up reply actions  

Free Ride

I don’t know where you have been looking but Nate hasn’t got a free ride on BE since he came to Portland

by vullkem116 on Jan 19, 2012 7:09 AM PST up reply actions   1 recs

He

Has his entire career. He simple is not a playoff winning coach and yet everyone claims he is some coaching genius. What exactly has he done? Steal a playoff series? He finished in the bottom of the division with teams that have had talent. Had teams get rolled in the playoffs. We’ve kind of gone through players and gm, but Nate just keeps getting by without much scrutiny. Make this team the best defensive team in the league, he has the personnel. Then maybe we can call him a defensive great. Right now his entire rep is built around the way HE played, not how his teams have played. We’re just soft jump shooting teams, year in year out.

by Cabbol on Jan 19, 2012 7:28 AM PST up reply actions  

he doesn't get a free ride

when we went on our dreadful east coast swing last year there was talk of him getting fired. As you can see by just losing 4 out of 5, it doesn’t take much to create a wave of negativity toward him. A bad season or a truly elongated bad stretch and I think you’ll find Nate in the crosshairs of Portland sports fans/personalities.

"If I had a dime for every basket I made today, you'd still suck!" - from the book 'John Dies @ the End'

by sammymohawk on Jan 19, 2012 10:09 AM PST up reply actions  

Not to get too "meta" here...

But there are a few folks in the league (various players and coaches, not just Blazers) for whom if you mention them in a negative light, there’s a bit of a “SWARM SWARM SWARM” syndrome, where a number of people come to tell you that you’re wrong, and it’s overwhelming enough to just stop arguing.

Nate’s been historically one of those people. So while he doesn’t get a free ride, he definitely gets an extra-vigorous defense.

It’s just part of being a community, and I accept that. However, I suspect that’s part of the impetus of the “free ride” concept. Nonetheless, Nate definitely had his detractors, and they’re always free to comment about it of course.

by Timmay! on Jan 19, 2012 11:04 AM PST up reply actions  

I get why people feel that way

but at the same time I side more with AK here. Every viewpoint/player/coach has their backers, we just seem to naturally filter out the posters that agree with us and focus on the disagreements, so the level of disagreement is amplified in our mind. It makes sense, obviously it’s not as much fun to debate when everyone’s agreeing with you. Everyone likes to think that they’re somehow vindicated as one of a persecuted minority.

Of course there’s a Blazer bias here overall (this being a Blazer site and all), but even the Blazerphiles seem to feel in the minority. Hence you have the Nate fans always talking about how we’re filled with “Fire Nate” types and vice versa. It really seemed like this was way more obvious back in the Bayless/Outlaw days when you’d see people post polls about how the site was overrun with Trout/Bayless “haters” yet the results of the poll would be something like 80% in favor of whichever guy.

by Royster on Jan 19, 2012 11:20 AM PST up reply actions   1 recs

Yeah I've actually made that exact same argument myself

I think in many cases, that theory is absolutely valid. But I took a step back and went into observe mode for a year+ after I wondered about it. After watching, I feel fairly comfortable noting Nate as one of the rare exceptions. He has a strong, vehement, vocal support base. I’d be surprised if he leaves Portland anytime soon unless he gets an offer he just can’t refuse.

by Timmay! on Jan 19, 2012 11:43 AM PST up reply actions  

Fair enough

Nate is by far the longest tenured Blazer with no connection to the dark days, so it makes sense that he’d have the most vigorous support to me. I would absolutely agree that he gets much more of a pass here than essentially anyone else, but I’m not sure I’d say there’s something fundamentally different about his treatment here compared other franchise figures.

by Royster on Jan 19, 2012 11:50 AM PST up reply actions  

maybe that's because he's the head coach and has been here several years

as such he is a polarizing figure. He has garnered supporters and detractors during his tenure. Combine that with unique cicumstances from a roster and front office perspective and there are many ways to interpret his tenure thus far.

I think the notion that he gets a free ride is absurd though. Maybe from the front office, but what we write here is independent of that anyway. From a fan and media perspective Nate certainly does not get a free ride imo, especially when the chips are down. Like I said, there was a huge fire Nate movement during the east coast swing last season. We lose 4 of 5 and we see it now. Even when things are good there are many who don’t consider him the answer here.

"If I had a dime for every basket I made today, you'd still suck!" - from the book 'John Dies @ the End'

by sammymohawk on Jan 19, 2012 11:51 AM PST up reply actions   1 recs

Also our defense was to force turn-overs

Teams took the Mavs play book as well as Portland playbook and made big effort in not turning the ball over and get the rebounds, Portland is reduced to a mediocre team.

I also feel like our Defense for the most part is effiecient. It is getting the points off the good D that is questionable. Whether that be on Nate or the Players, or both, I don’t know.

hg

by BBK on Jan 19, 2012 9:50 AM PST up reply actions  

Hey Dave;

I like the way you keep it low key and reasonable when everyone is on a Blazer high horse and keep it positive when everyone has ridden that horse to a very tall cliff-side.
In all likelihood you’ve saved a few lives by helping to balance the fanatical.

Can’t say I entirely agree with “it was a good game” because I myself was thinking that over half the game was trash (not a good percentage) – still, I’ll take your word for it and bring the horse away from the ledge.

by blazerblaze on Jan 18, 2012 9:22 PM PST reply actions   1 recs

Just got back from the game

It was painful watching Felton run the point most of the night. You just keep expecting bad things to happen when he has the ball and it seems like they do most of the time. Looking at the box score I was shocked that he only had one turnover. He lost his dribble so many times, it amazes me that Nate doesn’t have him riding the pine. I guess we don’t have any other options, although I did think Nolan handled himself fairly well in the fourth. He wasn’t without his mistakes as well either.

Aldridge could have had his way tonight, but in the first half he looked like he was in quicksand and in the second he didn’t establish low post position enough. When he did a gave Josh Smith a pump fake it was easy pickings.

Matthews couldn’t hit the broad side of a barn and was wide open on a lot of his attempts. Same with Batum in his short stint.

Liked what Crawford gave us in this game and half the Atlanta fans(all three hundred of them) were cheering for Crawford as well.

The stadium was maybe 30% filled and their announcer drives me bananas with his screaming trying to get the fans involved. It’s a shame because Atlanta isn’t to shabby. Easy to get decent seats for $5-10 bucks so I won’t complain too much!

#52

by blazermaniac32 on Jan 18, 2012 9:25 PM PST reply actions  

few comments on your very well written post

-felton actually had 0 TO’s they gave im one that was actually L.A.‘s fault. It happened at the very beginning of the game and we checked espn to see who they gave it to at the time.
-L.A.. should have had his way. We definitely didn’t feed it to him enough. He shoudl have had more like 25 shots tonight.
-Mathews and batum were just terrible.
-people really dislike Crawford on this sight, but hes the whole reason we even came back.
-glad you got some cheap easy seats.

by Kazper on Jan 18, 2012 9:34 PM PST up reply actions  

didn't watch the game. so that may be true.

I did hear that Matthews just stands around on offense at the 3 pt line. Puts no pressure on the guy who is defending him.
Matthews gets caught up in screens…

by Natsthecat on Jan 18, 2012 9:42 PM PST up reply actions  

And

Matthews? Felton? How many 9 minute stretches of garbage from Crawford have we seen? they all have long leashes and they all have far less potential then batum. Strange long term strategy, play hit the ceiling guys, while guys as good with high ceiling sit.

by Cabbol on Jan 18, 2012 9:43 PM PST up reply actions  

I do agree with you onthe idea of playing players with more potential

But if we do that we will probably lose more games which will cause the fans to be upset. I dunno if theres a really win in this situation. Nate doesn’t do a good job of playing young talent in the first place. And nick is stilla pretty inconsistant player, which actually should make him fit in with the rest of our players just fine.

by Kazper on Jan 18, 2012 9:51 PM PST up reply actions  

Crawford

Is a pretty inconsistent player. Wallace is very inconsistent. Matthews? These guys all are. Why does nic get held to a different standard when his game is arguably better? Shame nic wasn’t born in seattle :)

by Cabbol on Jan 18, 2012 9:54 PM PST up reply actions  

hey don't get me wrong im hard on those other players

Crawford has been a huge bust so far this year…. wallace has had a better year then nick so far and was an all star in this league, mathews is in his 3rd year and shows improvement each year, so i dont know where his ceiling is either.

by Kazper on Jan 18, 2012 10:03 PM PST up reply actions  

Two missed threes?

When before that he was shooting 47% on the year, so those were good shots. Complete garbage is an awfully big overstatement.

Also, Dave/Timmay. Is this an acceptable sig? I remember you telling me scrambled characters like such are allowed. Let me know and I’ll change it right away.

"We gotta get this $#!^ together guys!" - Phil

by 420Phenom on Jan 18, 2012 9:44 PM PST up reply actions  

your right, but people say the same thing about mathews which averages 40% himself

those two shots were completely open, but the biggest problem is when batum is missing shots he starts to hesistate on offense. he wasnt attacking the rim or even moving on offense.

by Kazper on Jan 18, 2012 9:49 PM PST up reply actions  

i'm all for moving Batum

as long as we do so in the right fashion… Like for a starting center ;)

"We gotta get this $#!^ together guys!" - Phil

by 420Phenom on Jan 18, 2012 9:55 PM PST up reply actions  

Batum's shots were good shots

Some of Mathew’s shots were off balance. Some weren’t. Mathews’ focus looked off.

However, Batum didn’t play terrible by any stretch of the imagination.

Law of Logical Argument
Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about.

by blacknoiseNW on Jan 19, 2012 1:48 AM PST up reply actions  

As much as you can rate Batum in 9 minutes of play...

I think he got his hands on a couple of passes. At least one ended up a steal. So he was active there.

Was forced to play some post defense (can’t remember who against) and just raised his arms up and was kind of fortunate the guy missed.

Some Hawks players got an offensive rebound and pump faked Batum in the air and then made an easy lay up. There were I think 3 total Blazers around, but Batum was the only one between him and the basket. Kind of cruddy position for Batum, but the guy still scored.

I think Batum gave up maybe 1-2 other baskets to either his man or from help defense. Again, this is all from memory.

So Batum was either making really good defensive players or getting scored on and he was shooting really good shots that weren’t going in.

Overall probably below average but I wouldn’t call it “garbage” either. One thing I’ve noticed with Batum this year more than the past is I notice when he comes in. Especially on defense. Stuff happens. Not always good stuff, but the guy is actively trying to make an impact there. So that’s always good to see.

by Z-Bones on Jan 19, 2012 11:15 AM PST up reply actions  

Nolans mistakes are expected keep playing him.

If he gets the playing time he could start soon.
at least he can see the court and make good passes
He is a better shooter also

by Nadwolf on Jan 18, 2012 9:48 PM PST up reply actions  

what about nates history makes you think nolen will get lots of playign time in the future?

and expecting nate to start nolen as the starter is a joke right? we might as well go for the lottery if thats what we are dropping to

by Kazper on Jan 18, 2012 9:52 PM PST up reply actions  

Miami

Doing pretty well with their rookie pg taken after ours. Ny starting rookie pg. lakers even giving their rookie pg minutes.

by Cabbol on Jan 18, 2012 9:56 PM PST up reply actions  

Ask Rondo,

How easy it is passing to multiple hall of famers/all stars in the Knicks case.

"We gotta get this $#!^ together guys!" - Phil

by 420Phenom on Jan 18, 2012 9:57 PM PST up reply actions  

yeah, and their PG is far better then nolen

Plus our team has done a horrible job drafting and playing any rookies/young players. Its been really frustrating to watch teams like miami find gems in the lower end of the draft, and we don’t even play our first picks.

by Kazper on Jan 18, 2012 10:05 PM PST up reply actions  

What about his history makes you think Smith deserves more playing time

Well I mean with Felton/Crawfords performance he might but…

"We gotta get this $#!^ together guys!" - Phil

by 420Phenom on Jan 18, 2012 9:57 PM PST up reply actions  

thats basically my point, smith hasn't really shown me anything

if anything he has shown to be kind of like armon in the fact that he tends to look for his own shot.

by Kazper on Jan 18, 2012 10:06 PM PST up reply actions  

He's played 42 minutes. For the entire season.

HUGE sample size for determining exactly the type of player he is.

by Aisander D on Jan 19, 2012 9:56 AM PST up reply actions  

How could he be worse then Felton

The word is out the other teams are not even gaurding Felton, they want him to shoot

by Nadwolf on Jan 18, 2012 10:10 PM PST up reply actions  

Read about Joe Smith

And his scoring ability, and now want all my first round picks back.

by except_andrew on Jan 18, 2012 9:32 PM PST via mobile reply actions  

Nice to see Nolan get some time tonight

Two things…

1. Offense is completely disjointed most of the time and rarely seems to know where it’s going. When they’re playing through LMA (even if he doesn’t shoot) the offense finds some organization and good things start happening.

Maybe it gives guys a clearer idea of where they’re supposed to be and what they’re supposed to be doing. Guys start hitting open shots when the offense centers around LMA. Less thinking when it comes time to shoot?

2. LMA and Kurt are the only consistent shooters we have right now. This may very well have to do with #1 and guys just trying to do too much or over-thinking.

by poorwebguy on Jan 18, 2012 10:24 PM PST reply actions  

how much blame does Nate take for the poor offense

We have been saying for years how bad our offense is, and how stagnant it is. So we can’t really blame crawford, felton, mathews, ext….

by Kazper on Jan 18, 2012 10:28 PM PST up reply actions  

Nates new offense is the flex offense ?

Seams to work in short spurts and when you have high energy. Like at home with home crowd.

by Nadwolf on Jan 18, 2012 10:36 PM PST up reply actions  

There's not a whole lot of flex sets to my eyes.

A lot of times it just looks like a sped up version of the high-low offense from years past.

"I Am Mine"

by AK1984 on Jan 18, 2012 10:39 PM PST up reply actions  

I see more at home and more at the first of the year

Still I don’t see it working long term. we need alot more pick and roll or pop!!!!!

by Nadwolf on Jan 18, 2012 10:45 PM PST up reply actions  

How much pick and roll have we seen him run at all?

Nic is a great passer when given the point. look what he did in France

by Nadwolf on Jan 18, 2012 11:02 PM PST up reply actions  

No, he's got neither the handles nor the court vision for it.

The skill set just isn’t there. This isn’t a debatable topic, either.

"I Am Mine"

by AK1984 on Jan 18, 2012 11:32 PM PST up reply actions  

:( lol

Hope nice doesn’t read this – he has been practicing his dribble drives, you know

The tensions are so high because the stakes are so low!

by tylercomp on Jan 18, 2012 11:57 PM PST via mobile up reply actions  

Batum's vision is fine

oh…

Law of Logical Argument
Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about.

by blacknoiseNW on Jan 19, 2012 1:52 AM PST up reply actions  

lol

I do think Batum sees the floor really well for passing. I think he’s got the shot to do pick and roll. I just think his handles are the only thing that might betray his ability to do this kind of thing with consistent success. If he loses the ball as a point forward, it’s basically a free layup on the other side and Nate would go crazy.

by Z-Bones on Jan 19, 2012 11:19 AM PST up reply actions  

Like when Felton's weak passes get run back

At least Nic can run them down from behind.
Felton just stops for ding-dongs

by Nadwolf on Jan 19, 2012 11:45 AM PST up reply actions  

Did you see the first two shots of the game

taken by Wesley Matthews and Raymond Felton? You knew it was going to be a long night when they pushed those so badly. They looked awful, like they were trying to make a halfcourt heave from 20 feet. The form evened out a little bit but the shooting percentages never went up for either.

—Dave

by Dave on Jan 18, 2012 10:29 PM PST up reply actions  

Halfcourt heaves from 20! haha

Crawfords 22 points on 22 shots was hardly a world beater either…We just need to take the open shot and not force it, and start running some more sets for Batum and Wes IMO.

by robbybird22 on Jan 18, 2012 10:39 PM PST up reply actions  

I think Crawford might have had some fingers pointed his way...

The guys defense has been utterly awful. Terrible. His effort on D is a C at best, but his effort to create his own looks on offense is an A. Just try, its not that hard. Not only is his shooting killing us, his defense on the perimeter is putting tons of pressure on our already depleted front line. Aldy and Wallace played 43 minutes each, and I’m sure they are frustrated with having to clean up the guards mess.

by robbybird22 on Jan 18, 2012 10:36 PM PST reply actions  

Crawford gets a lot of steals it seems like.

But you might be right about the overall quality of his defense. I just notice the flashy steals….

by Z-Bones on Jan 19, 2012 11:20 AM PST up reply actions  

With that being said...

Don’t jump off ship. We will be Vegas favorites in 9 of the next 10 games…I expect us to go 8-2 over that period.

by robbybird22 on Jan 18, 2012 10:37 PM PST reply actions  

If we can win the next two we're still in pretty decent shape

Defend home court and at least split the roads games. 2 – 4 would be a disappointment for this road trip but 3 – 3 is acceptable.

by poorwebguy on Jan 18, 2012 10:56 PM PST reply actions  

Glad I slept in today.

I’m exactly 12 hours ahead of EST and caught only the last minute and a half. Thanks for the usual excellent recap, Dave.

by thaisteve on Jan 18, 2012 11:02 PM PST reply actions  

I mean, heck, I realize these guys won't look one another in the eye and concede that they're ...

just plain not good enough. Shoot, no self-respecting professional athlete would do that in front of one another. Still, that’s the honest to goodness truth about this situation. The talent just ain’t there.

"I Am Mine"

by AK1984 on Jan 18, 2012 11:44 PM PST up reply actions  

Well, it's never their job to not say they're good enough

It’s their job to keep trying to improve so they are good enough, whether they’re successful or not.

If every NBA player just accepted he wasn’t good enough, we could dump the most improved player award. Which wouldn’t necessarily be the worst thing ever, which is neither here nor there.

by Timmay! on Jan 18, 2012 11:47 PM PST up reply actions  

No amount of internal improvement will make this team a title contender, though. Those ...

guys aren’t expected to recognize that, though, for having blind faith in their abilities is what’s helped get them as far as they’ve gotten as professional athletes. Ignorance and hubris are a part of what drives these guys’ egos, which is understandable. For example, someone like Jamal Crawford won’t suddenly have an awakening and come to understand his numerous shortcomings as a player. That’s just not in his nature.

"I Am Mine"

by AK1984 on Jan 18, 2012 11:55 PM PST up reply actions  

Yep.

It’s the front office’s job to understand the limitations and make changes, while the players should always keep their egos.

Also cool if the front office never says things like “they’re not good enough” publicly. That’s implied by a trade anyway.

by Timmay! on Jan 18, 2012 11:57 PM PST up reply actions  

I suspect the Blazers are heavily debating internally whether they'll be buyers or sellers at the deadline.

Could be worth being a buyer just to make a WCF team in a weak West before continuing the rebuild.

by Timmay! on Jan 19, 2012 12:02 AM PST up reply actions  

I've given the front office a LOT of grief, but I think they know

They’ll make rosy public statements, but they know. At this point, I think they’re riding this team out until they clear cap space, then will either finish their plan, or start implementing it. (I’m not convinced they’ve formed a plan, that’s for the new GM)

by Timmay! on Jan 19, 2012 12:11 AM PST up reply actions  

Agreed.

I’m not happy with the management setup right now, but I don’t think they’re actively incompetent. They could use a GM with focus, direction, and a long-term plan though IMO.

by Timmay! on Jan 19, 2012 12:13 AM PST up reply actions  

We better be selling.

This team still lacks top shelf talent. Better to stockpile assets and cap room instead of handing out stupid money to someone like Batum.

The cake was a lie.

by xedubx on Jan 19, 2012 9:01 AM PST up reply actions  

Basically, my point is this is on the front office to fix.

No matter what the players do — even going so far has having a players-only meeting — won’t change the core problem, which is a lack of talent.

"I Am Mine"

by AK1984 on Jan 18, 2012 11:57 PM PST up reply actions  

i disagree

If the athleticism and constant effort is there its all up to the mind to bring any player to the next level- team chemistry can make or break a player. I don’t think there is such a thing as talent level, players can change their game, practice, focus, specialize, and improve. I am hoping to see that this season.

The tensions are so high because the stakes are so low!

by tylercomp on Jan 19, 2012 12:03 AM PST via mobile up reply actions  

Well, there are definitely limitations on talent

Some players simply don’t have the dexterity to be a truly great defender, or the reflexes to be a truly great defender, but could have an amazing shooting stroke. For most teams, it’s a matter of meshing a bunch of players who can accentuate their talents while masking their limitations.

But for some players, it’s just a matter of being able to focus and improve, they may simply hit their wall.

IMO, a number of current Blazers have NOT hit their wall. But a few would be smart to better learn their limitations.

by Timmay! on Jan 19, 2012 12:07 AM PST up reply actions  

"I don’t think there is such a thing as talent level"

All of the rah-rah cheering and pats on the back in the world won’t turn Nicolas Batum and Wesley Matthews into LeBron James and Dwyane Wade. No amount of effort, an increase in practice time, or team-wide camaraderie will do it, either. Talent matters.

"I Am Mine"

by AK1984 on Jan 19, 2012 12:09 AM PST up reply actions  

that would be the athleticism

Im not saying a point gaurd can grow into a center. I would say what sets players like wade and lebron apart would be complete dedication – which is probably mental. Maybe batum could start killing it at the rim but we might end up with a less likable psycho. I guess what I was trying to say above is that no player has perfected his game – there is no such thing as perfection. But they can all get better and they can all trust that each other has bought into the system…. and then maybe each players ‘talent level’ will look a little higher

The tensions are so high because the stakes are so low!

by tylercomp on Jan 19, 2012 12:19 AM PST via mobile up reply actions  

Clyde Drexler was one of the best players of his era

Even Jordan discussed how great Drexler was.

Drexler putted around practices, and would often show up at the last acceptable moment for games, and didn’t enjoy warm ups.

He’d step on the court, and dominate due to his natural talent. When age started to degrade that talent, he didn’t have the focus to make up for it.

And then there’s Allen Iverson, rumor is that he never cared about practice, I swear it came up at some point…

by Timmay! on Jan 19, 2012 12:25 AM PST up reply actions   1 recs

But talent isn't enough

otherwise Derrick Coleman would have been one of the best power forwards of all-time. some sort of competitive drive has to be there.

by YoniRap on Jan 19, 2012 3:28 PM PST up reply actions  

It's not dedication that sets them apart

Aside from general basketball skill, it’s the non-obvious elements of athleticism. Things like hand/eye coordination, body control, and balance. It’s easy to separate and measure guys by vertical leap, or wing span, but there remains no good measure for these other things, and they are far more important to basketball skills such as ball handling, finishing around the hoop, passing, finishing in traffic, etc.

These things are just intrinsic to players. As Timmay said, Clyde and AI could just show up and dominate without much dedication or practice, because they had these things in spades. Practice and cohesion can compensate for these to a limited extent, but it’s no replacement

by Royster on Jan 19, 2012 12:37 AM PST up reply actions   1 recs

I think there's a kind of internal rhythm of your body and the sport,

which also leads to an almost telepathic perception of your opponent’s body — and this is how someone can stop and go, for instance, and somehow almost always fake everyone out.

You could witness it very obviously in Hakeem Olajawon, but also during his prime years Adrian Dantley, and Larry Bird. Magic Johnson wasn’t omeone who outjumped anyone, yet he could for a long time penetrate and sense all the other bodies on the court as well as perhaps anyone ever.

It has to do with balance as well as reflexes. You see this very in boxers at a high level. But balance is a huge factor in all of the major sports.

ignacio

by ignacio on Jan 19, 2012 1:57 AM PST up reply actions  

I agree

And it’s a big reason for not only Magic’s success, but also that guys like Steve Nash and Andre Miller are still able to drive on people with regularity even as they approach relatively geriatric ages for NBA guards.

The one caveat I would add is that it’s not enough in and of itself. Even taking advantage of something like that still requires a quick first step, which is another extremely difficult to measure physical attribute. We try to capture it with things like agility tests, but even those do a fairly poor job capturing it, given that almost all of the important motion occurs in the first quarter second or so of the supposed test.

by Royster on Jan 19, 2012 7:06 AM PST up reply actions  

To me talent isn't the issue

as much as skill set. This year’s Blazers players have a lot of overlap in strengths and weaknesses. To reprise a homely comparison I made in another thread, if you assemble a bunch of ducks you expect them to be pretty good at flying in formation, paddling across lakes, and eating bread crumbs. You would not expect them to be able to break down a gate or sing like canaries. The Blazers have plenty of talented ducks. When they’re able to play their game they look great at it. But the set of problems our duck armada can solve is smaller than that of teams that folded in a hippo, weasel, coyote, or wombat here or there.

—Dave

by Dave on Jan 19, 2012 12:11 AM PST up reply actions  

Among superstarless teams, it's true that Portland isn't as versatile or as deep as the ...

likes of Denver, Indiana, and Philadelphia. However, all of those teams are in the same boat as Portland when it comes to being non-contenders. Without an elite talent or two, winning a title is a longshot at best and, in all likelihood, near impossible.

"I Am Mine"

by AK1984 on Jan 19, 2012 12:14 AM PST up reply actions  

"Portland" and "Title" should not be used in the same sentence right now

but I’m not even thinking that far. This could well be a talented team that doesn’t get out of the first round because they’re easy to solve. That would be bad.

—Dave

by Dave on Jan 19, 2012 12:20 AM PST up reply actions  

In that case, I agree Portland is missing a certain balance possessed by teams ...

like Denver, Indiana, and Philadelphia. Yet, whether it’s at the end of round #1 or after the conference finals, all four of those teams will be at home when the NBA Finals is happening. Above all else, that’s what’s important. Winning a round or two is nice, but it didn’t do the 2009 Denver Nuggets or the 2010 Phoenix Suns a lick of good over the long haul.

"I Am Mine"

by AK1984 on Jan 19, 2012 12:40 AM PST up reply actions  

"If Oden gets healthy, Portland has a legit shot at a title every year for the foreseeable future."r the "

Now all we need is the rest of the roster to get into "how can everybody help Nicco and Oden" mode. -- Oden Mad, Oden Smash! Sep 29, 2010 7:47 PM

by LaoTzu on Jan 19, 2012 12:42 AM PST up reply actions  

-r the"

Now all we need is the rest of the roster to get into "how can everybody help Nicco and Oden" mode. -- Oden Mad, Oden Smash! Sep 29, 2010 7:47 PM

by LaoTzu on Jan 19, 2012 12:42 AM PST up reply actions  

To me this is a statement about coaching:
This could well be a talented team that doesn’t get out of the first round because they’re easy to solve.

I know you wouldn’t come out and say ‘Nate sucks’ or some other juvenile sounding phraseology but to me this is the essence of what your talking about in a polite indirect manner. Since I don’t know myself whether or not he is a good or bad coach this is something I’d like to see discussed by BE in more depth. My perception is is that McMillan is a really good organizational coach. I’ve even read an article where they had a picture of Andre Miller reading a pregame plan. He prepares his team well and as you stated earlier has all his ducks in a row. My understanding of his limitations are that he is terrible at strategy (both offensively and defensively) and even worse at designing plays.

When Andre Miller was here, and when he didn’t have to deal with Roy, he looked to me like he was the offensive coordinator. In contrast, Felton does not have Miller’s understanding of the game and is not able to set up offensive sets like Miller could. So even though he gets the same number of assists it is still a very inefficient offense.

The other thing thing I’m wondering about is tempo. It just looks to me like they are just doing the same old thing of missing lay-ups and taking bad shot but doing it earlier in the clock. I suppose that;s a good thing since they no longer have ball .handlers like Roy or Miller. Time after time last night I saw those quick shots and forced lay-ups turn into fast break points for Atlanta. Maybe the only thing good about the fast tempo is that it could wear the opponent out and give us more opportunity to take bad shots.

Anyway,I’d really like to see this put under the BE microscope so that I get a better idea of what’s going on.

by XBlazerfan on Jan 19, 2012 9:58 AM PST up reply actions  

Missed layups...

At the moment the Blazers have the 2nd worst FG% at the rim, above only Indiana (don’t know if that includes tonight’s stats).

http://hoopdata.com/teamshotlocs.aspx

Doers & Makers > Movers & Shakers

by Adam Randall on Jan 19, 2012 12:06 AM PST reply actions  

That's built into the roster, I'm afraid.

Not only do we have guys who can’t dribble in traffic, they don’t like contact on their shot and they don’t get above—often even to—the rim when anybody else is near. Gerald Wallace when running forward on a fast break: “BAAAAARRRRRGGGGHHHH!!! YOU TREMBLE AT MY DUNK NOW!!!!!!!!!!” BOOOOOOM! Gerald Wallace trying to put it up from two feet away against a defender or two: “Jeepers, Beaver, I hope this shot goes in. That would be swell!” Clank.

—Dave

by Dave on Jan 19, 2012 12:17 AM PST up reply actions  

And yet POR ranks 4th in attempts at the rim...

…which I think is a good thing, showing a commitment to easy buckets (even if they’re not so easy right now). Unfortunately, most of those attempts are coming from Wallace (6th most in the league, averaging 64%), and he’s only assisted on 56% of them.

4th in attempts shows me that the coaching staff is doing their job. This team has needed to go to the hoop for a long time. I’m hoping that the players are just adjusting to the new style, and will grow accustomed to more contact in the half court as the season goes on. I’m also hoping that they trade up for a better PG that can get the ball to bigs in better position to score, sidestepping the need to dribble in traffic (PHO is #2 in FG% at the rim).

Doers & Makers > Movers & Shakers

by Adam Randall on Jan 19, 2012 11:14 AM PST up reply actions  

Sonics

I’m surprised by how bothered by all the Sonic talk I find myself. I guess that I’m still pissed about them leaving Seattle, after all these years… The N.W. has such a small array of sports teams, that when one leaves, it really creates a vacuum. Still can’t believe Seattlites let the Sonics go so damn easily. It was shocking, as a local, to watch them leave, without much protest at all…..Thought I was over that by now…Wah

by The Keizer on Jan 19, 2012 5:42 AM PST reply actions  

dude.. don't rip off the scab..

If you think it was seattle that let them leave, you should watch the sonicsgate movie: http://sonicsgate.org/movie/

A displaced Sonics fan that has somehow emerged as a Blazers fan (and loves it).

by anitachampionship on Jan 19, 2012 9:54 AM PST up reply actions  

Nate was a guard

So, why can’t he better coach the guards? They should be a strength – I don’t think the talent-level is too low, to expect more out of the two starters. I like Nate, but, the ‘look at him with fresh eyes’, or however it went, got me thinking about him. Do we defend him too quickly? Should we look elsewhere, for a new direction? Injuries have hurt his chances, certainly. Still, has he done enough with what he’s had to work with, to warrent keeping him?

by The Keizer on Jan 19, 2012 6:12 AM PST reply actions  

Dave

I think you were a little hard on the Beaver…

by The Keizer on Jan 19, 2012 6:14 AM PST reply actions  

Losing is one thing, but the way they lose - turnovers, clanking difficult shot after difficult shot, is what is particularly galling.

These guys are pros, they should know that if the outside shot is falling, they need to take the ball inside, and once they get there, take it strong to the rim, not throw the ball up like it’s a hot potato only to miss again. When you take it up strong, you will get a foul and some free throws. It doesn’t seem to me that this team shoots many free throws. If you take out LMA and Wallace, they may not be taking any free throws at all.

by rhaegar on Jan 19, 2012 7:05 AM PST reply actions  

Matthews also does well going to the basket when the team needs it

He’s a smart player, but agree with you – it is like guys either aren’t trusting the plays being called, or they’re not trusting each other.

by heybabydrinkyourmilk on Jan 19, 2012 7:59 AM PST via mobile up reply actions  

Rotation

In this compressed season, we are going to burn players out (or have them get injured) if we keep playing an 8 (or 7!?!) man rotation. We need to play Eliott and Nolan (and Armon, etc) if for nothing else than to keep the minutes down for everyone else. If they can produce, so much the better. If we end up losing a game or two (or three or four) because we have extended the rotation, that’s better than losing these close games and putting so many miles on Aldridge’s (and everyone else’s) pedometer. . .

by Jackalope 66 on Jan 19, 2012 7:23 AM PST reply actions  

SAME!

Anyone see Wallace go over Matthews’ back in the third quarter for that rebound (which Matthews clearly had), and injure him to where he had to come out of the game, while knocking the ball out of his hands, and out of bounds to the hawks? I understand the guy is in the final year of his contract (now that he’s decided to hold out for more money), and a few more rebounds will look good next to that disparity in production on the road, and in the playoffs when he goes to the table, but it isn’t team basketball, and I’m tired of seeing that crap, and I have to believe Camby is too. And isn’t it odd how the guy with the 27% (I think 14% on the road) keeps finding himself open in the corner, while the rest of the team is playing 4 on 5? Was refreshing to get Chris Mullin’s objective perspective on Wallace last night. Language like “really surprised to see that kind of disparity from a veteran player” and “yikes” regarding the percentages. The novelty around this guy trying hard is wearing very thin.

by heybabydrinkyourmilk on Jan 19, 2012 7:53 AM PST via mobile reply actions  

felton's stats don't indicate

how horrible he his.

they don’t show how he goes on random dribble sessions for 20 seconds of a possession and throws it to a guy’s knees. they don’t show how he has 0 semblance of leadership on the floor. and they don’t show how clueless he is about finding the open man.

PHILLY!

by CleBlazer on Jan 19, 2012 8:23 AM PST reply actions  

good point on stats not telling the whole story,

The PG plays such a significant role on a team. It must be really frustrating for the rest of the team to be dependent on such a dysfunctional central player. And what adds to the frustration, is that the team went out of its way (skip Faried?) to deliberately exchanged a relativly effective PG (Andre) for what we have now. Andre was a floor general, he provided leadership, he set up team mates, he was durable, he could turn it up when the team needed it, he didn’t take getting pushed around – whether it be big boy Griffin, or Nate.

Why mention what is ‘water under the bridge’ ? Simply in the hope that whoever made such a decision is held accountable for it. I am thinking that the teams suffering now has a lot to do with Nate wanting ‘difficult’ Andre gone. A great coach makes the most of available talent – he adapts. Dumping Andre was a coach fail in my book, even if Brandon wanted it. If a coach wants to operate ‘my way or the highway’, his way needs to be effective, or else it is demoralizing.
I tried to believe people telling me to trust in Nate’s judgement, I try to see the positive. But it is difficullt at times. Couldn’t Nate see that Andre is a superior player to Felton ? I expect he can. It just seems more of a ‘submission’ issue, which cost the team. Frustrating.

by Berkeley on Jan 19, 2012 10:01 AM PST up reply actions  

I understand why they did it though. Andre was gone at the end of this season and Felton was a younger player they could audition

for one year with no risk of being stuck in a long term deal. The team would have been better with Miller this year, but really, so what?

It looks like the Felton audition isn’t working out, but again, so what? Next year they will be in exactly the same position as if they had kept Miller, but with a higher draft pick,

by raoulduke on Jan 19, 2012 10:44 AM PST up reply actions   3 recs

well said

"If I had a dime for every basket I made today, you'd still suck!" - from the book 'John Dies @ the End'

by sammymohawk on Jan 19, 2012 10:55 AM PST up reply actions  

You make a sound aurgument

and I partially agree. The one thing they could have done different thought was re-sign Miller. He said in his interview exit he wanted to come back. At the end of the year Miller has always ranked in the top 20 in PER. Last year his PER was over 18 and he was ranked 12. Felton was below the average 15. Miller is far superior to Felton in managing the court. Trying to find a pg at Millers level will be hard. If he was re-signed he could mentor while the pgotf is found. I’m sure Armon will not be re-signed and based on his college career it’s hard to tell whether Smith will turn into one. Elliot Williams looks more like a 2. So they still are far from finding decent guards even though they stocked up on them in drafts. Just throwing away Iron Man Miller when he will probably be around for years to come was a wasteful move IMO. He could have started until they had a legit pg and then played as a sixth man type. I know he grumbled about being a back up both here and now in Denver but that’s a fairly normal reaction from a competitive person. I wish he was still here. I doubt we’d be much more of a contender but I much prefer his style, I liked watching him play and he is a top fave for me.

by XBlazerfan on Jan 19, 2012 11:53 AM PST up reply actions  

oops.. meant to reply directly to you, not start a new comment thread.

see below

A displaced Sonics fan that has somehow emerged as a Blazers fan (and loves it).

by anitachampionship on Jan 19, 2012 12:27 PM PST up reply actions  

This sentence you wrote stuck out to me:
I doubt we’d be much more of a contender (had we hung on to Miller)

Then why get him back? IMO, I have always liked Miller more than Andre, but neither are the answer at this point. Doesn’t look like there’s much we can do to fix it this season, so it’s best to continue to complain about Felton until he improves, or until we trade up for a better PG this summer.

A displaced Sonics fan that has somehow emerged as a Blazers fan (and loves it).

by anitachampionship on Jan 19, 2012 12:26 PM PST reply actions  

ha! Meant to say "always liked Miller more than Felton"

A displaced Sonics fan that has somehow emerged as a Blazers fan (and loves it).

by anitachampionship on Jan 19, 2012 12:27 PM PST up reply actions  

I wasn't aurguing for getting him back or even so much for just this season

What I’m saying is Miller would have been good for the future. He won’t cost that much and you have a solid player that could contribute to a contender in the future. Also it is an unknown as to whether or not we every find a good pg in either the draft or from free agency. So it seems to me we threw away talent for nothing (that is not knowing what a higher draft pick might produce). Like you said neither is ‘the answer’ but Miller would bring cohesion to the team IMO.

by XBlazerfan on Jan 19, 2012 12:48 PM PST up reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

The ultimate coverage and analysis of the Portland Trail Blazers.

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recommended FanPosts

Small
A Junkless Proposition - Five-Two-Six-Two-Aught-onetwo.
Small
Consensus Mock Draft
Photo_3__small
JD 5/22
Bns_small
You're The GM. Whats your move?
Small
Hard to be a fan of a team that is so poorly managed.

Recent FanPosts

Small
My dream is the Blazers signing Jeremy Lin
Small
Would you do this trade? Lowry, Okafor, #4?
Small
Keep an Eye on Great Britain
Small
two options with $20 mill cap space, the #6 pick and some luck
Batum_small
Alternate 2012 Olympics Team
Small
Collective mock draft
Small
GM Poll: K Love or L Train
Small
Off season ideas

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >

FanShots

Quick hits of video, photos, quotes, chats, links and lists that you find around the web.

Recommended FanShots

Assistant Michael Malone interested in the Blazers
The LeBron James Conundrum: A Legacy In Question
Shooting percentages as they apply to certain areas of the court.  Note who one of the best shooters in the NBA from the wing is.  Check out the guy dominating under the hoop as well.  Pretty impressive for a 6'9'' guy.
Fernandez: Joel Freeland Faces July 10 Deadline For Contract Buyout
Church of Basketball: An Interview With Dave

Recent FanShots

Perry Jones III story
Jalen Rose on D'Antoni
Isiah Thomas hoping for return
Ferry in mix for vacant Portland GM job
Where's The GM?
Orlando Magic has decided to trade Dwight Howard
If the Sixers are eliminated by the Boston Celtics in Game 7, the general...
Interesting Quotation from Chad Ford RE: Morway and Rebuilding
Malone is a winner...
Lamarcus aldridge first nba game

+ New FanShot All FanShots >


Editors

Kitten_small Dave

Headshotsmall_small Ben Golliver

Lead Moderators

Getfuzzy-satchel_small Timmay!

Bucky3_small Cablinasian

Authors

Plainlc_small Storyteller

Moderators

Lamb_small T Darkstar

Small douglast

Terryporter_small prezofdeath

Small usmcr3049

Lrg_magpie_small Corvid

Wallpaper_small geoffm