Game 32 Recap: Portland Trail Blazers 97, Atlanta Hawks 77
In a Nutshell
The Blazers bully and out-hustle the Hawks enough to win this game. Out-shooting them as well puts the frosting on the Twinkie as the Blazers demolish Atlanta at nearly every position in nearly every moment of this game.
Game Flow
LaMarcus Aldridge returned to the floor tonight, allowing the Blazers to try their shiny new lineup featuring Nicolas Batum at shooting guard with Gerald Wallace and Aldridge at the forward positions. After the Hawks made three inside shots off of poor defense at the outset of the game Nate McMillan called timeout. When Portland returned to the floor they played as professionally as we've seen them all season. They executed, they shot, they hustled, the pushed tempo, and most of all they rebounded. Boy, did they rebound. Batum, Wallace, Marcus Camby...they just owned the glass. You barely knew Atlanta existed after a shot went up. Raymond Felton made a point of blitzing the ball up the court and, unlike we've seen in recent games, his teammates followed. Early offense seemed to catch Atlanta off guard. With every single starter attacking and on fire frequent shots paid dividends. Only a rush by Josh Smith and Willie Green (two makes each) in the last three minutes kept the game close. Portland led 33-25 after one but Atlanta looked like they didn't know what hit them. They shot well in the period but needed every bucket just to hold on.
Portland's bench couldn't keep up the offensive onslaught in the second period but behind Batum the second unit continued the hustle play and great defense. They may not have scored much but Atlanta scored less. The Hawks were treated to a banquet of blocked shots, turnovers, and offensive rebounds. They scored only a dozen in the period and 5 of those were from the foul line. It was a disaster...or a defensive masterpiece, depending on which side your viewing angle allowed. Portland's 19 was a tidal wave by comparison and Portland led 52-37 at the half.
The greatest testament to the Blazers' effort this evening was that Aldridge went ice-cold in the second and remained that way throughout the third. He gave them 7 points in those two periods combined. Yet Portland didn't miss a beat. Felton kept pushing the offense, Camby, Batum, and Wallace smacked down on defense. The only shots where the Hawks got any daylight were three-pointers. Even then it was more like a glimmer than full sunshine. As a result they shot 7-27 from beyond the arc, 26%. Keep in mind that they usually fire at a 38% clip from distance. Atlanta lost this period too, 20-19, and trailed 72-56 after three.
Portland's fourth-quarter offense was slower, against the clock, but that was understandable given the large lead and the impulse to burn time plus the zone defense the Hawks turned on to try and change up momentum. It didn't work. You could tell the Blazers were still into the game by the technical fouls they picked up arguing non-calls if nothing else. Coach McMillan kept most of his starters in until late when the game was secure. The Blazers never let the Hawks off the carpet in any case. Portland runs away by 20, 97-77. A ton of sweat made this game no sweat at all.
Take-Away Points
I think it's safe to say that Nicolas Batum as the starting shooting guard is a good move. He seems to like starting, for one thing. His shot is confident, his look aggressive from the opening moments. Plus he's as good of a defender as Wesley Matthews and immediately made the Hawks look like children on the boards. If he's going to produce at this level you can't not start him.
Matthews, in turn, looked just fine coming off the bench. He looked more crisp on defense and he made the most of his shooting opportunities. He got close to the same number of minutes and more than his average number of shots. He's more free to be the kind of shooting guard he seems to want to be off the bench.
In short, the Blazers need to ride this horse as far as it will take them.
Individual Notes
LaMarcus Aldridge went 8-19 for 19 points, slightly below his standards. But his offense looked easier as his backcourt hit shots. He didn't take a lot of those painful standstill dribbles. He caught, fired the ball out and got it back if the re-post was in order, then made his move and shot. It's hard to quantify exactly. Often this year his offense has looked like he's carrying the weight of the world on his shoulders, like he's forcing things because he knows he has to. Even with the misses, this was free and easy tonight. Perhaps not coincidentally, his defensive and rebounding energy was high. (Though obviously this could be the days off too.) He had 10 rebounds, 4 offensive, plus 4 assists. He played 35 minutes.
Gerald Wallace shot 7 times, making 4, for 9 points with 5 rebounds and 4 assists in 34 minutes. The numbers are low but except for letting Joe Johnson score those early points posting and backdooring him at the onset of the game he was part of the defensive shut-down crew. Seriously, if Aldridge, Wallace, Batum, and Camby play together and keep their heads in the game opponents are going to have a hard time finding any open shots. Those guys can all cover space.
Nicolas Batum had a masterful game...more so considering this was not one of those nights where he took over and stood out. Or rather, he took over and stood out defensively and especially on the boards, letting the offense come more naturally than, say, his 9-three-pointer effort. He was a whirlwind with his hands and feet, kept multiple good players contained, ripped down 8 rebounds, and still managed to shoot 9-15, attack the lane, offensive rebound, fire 3-6 from distance, and score 22.
Marcus Camby had 8 rebounds, 8 points, and 2 blocks in 20 minutes. He looked like he was having more fun with people playing defense around him. It seems like Camby has made a contract with his team. If everybody else is going to slough off then he's not going to lay it out there, burning his energy trying to turn around the game himself. But if the team gets in the flow and works a little he's a great defensive weapon.
Raymond Felton. Hello. Don't fall asleep on the fact that he set the tone for Portland's offensive game from the jump. When I say he "pushed the tempo" I mean he dribbled hard, kept his head up, found the right guys, and all but demanded his team get into early and effective offense. Also (knock us all over with a feather) he hit his shots. And this was not the typical "I'm going to drive to the rim 3 times in the first 3 minutes of the game and then loft jumpers off the dribble for the other 45" Felton special. He actually caught the ball when the interior guys were covered and put it in the hoop with minimal delay or dribbles. He was an outlet playing off of other players instead of having to dictate the game himself. 6-11 shooting, 2-5 from the arc, 14 points, 8 assists, and a standing ovation here. Nice game!
Wesley Matthews, as mentioned, went 6-13 from the field for 13 points. The excellent defense didn't flag when he was in. He didn't look like he was forcing shots. Other than once again showing he's not the guy you want anywhere near a fast break he did everything you want a good bench player to do.
Nolan Smith got 15 minutes of burn and played well! The biggest development was him adding his voice to the defensive chorus. He looked active, played smart, moved his feet...some of what was promised when he was drafted but has yet to be shown. The bulk of his offensive point-guarding was taking the ball up the court and then passing to someone else who was going to conduct the real play, but that's OK for now. He had 5 points, 3 rebounds, 2 assists, and a steal in 15 minutes.
Jamal Crawford played 13 minutes and did one of those "I'm getting perilously close to J.R. Rider" things where he refused to accept the ball, returned it immediately when it was sent anyway, and generally avoided anything close to a shot attempt. That said, he did play within the defense so it wasn't like he was tanking the game or hurting his team that much. But a 0-1 stat line doesn't reflect Crawford at all unless his total playing time is 13 seconds, not 13 minutes. Not helping: 1 block, 1 assist, and 1 turnover are the only other non-zeroes in his stat line.
Kurt Thomas played 18 minutes tonight. Here's what you like about this guy. His offensive confidence is about the size of a baby pea right now. He went 1-5 and just looks awkward, timid, however you want to say it. Still he got 10 monstrous rebounds in those 18 minutes and bodied up against the physical Atlanta big guys. Even though his offensive production wasn't any better, this makes up for a couple of the more brain-dead-seeming games he's had lately. Also of note here: this schedule is probably killing him and will continue to do so.
Elliot Williams splashed 2 shots in 2 minutes for 5 points. Man, if this guy ever gets on a roll...
Craig Smith got 2 rebounds in 2 minutes. Chris Johnson got 2 minutes.
Luke Babbitt played 3 minutes tonight. Did you ever know that guy who always thinks of the perfect thing to say two minutes after the timing would have been right for it? That about describes Babbitt on the court. He's reacting to everything instead of anticipating or playing in the flow. That's not unusual for a young guy but he's also reacting slowly. He's a one-man museum of where the play was two seconds ago.
Fun With Numbers
- Hawks 27 rebounds, Blazers 50. You read that right. The kicker? Each missed exactly 43 shots. That is domination. Also Blazers 15 offensive rebounds, Hawks 4. They're not good offensive rebounders but they average 10.
- Blazers 47% shooting, Hawks 41%. Points in the paint and fast break points were nearly identical, so it's not like the Blazers were getting easy buckets. They just hit their shots tonight.
- Speaking of...Blazers 9-22 from distance, 41%. Thanks small guys! Way to come through!
Final Thoughts
Feels a lot better to be a Blazer fan right now than it did five days ago, eh? Lakers are next. If the Blazers play with this kind of energy that game ought to be fun.
You can read about the horrors of bullying at Peachtree Hoops.
Hawks vs Trail Blazers boxscore
Your Jersey Contest Scoreboard and the form for the next game.
--Dave (blazersub@gmail.com)
134 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Wallace was 2-7?
Free throws got him to 9, along with another made 3.
Definitely like Batum on the floor with Wallace, whether in the 2/3 or 3/4 combo.
Law of Logical Argument
Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about.
"He's a one-man museum of where the play was two seconds ago."
Haha, that is hilarious. A good win for us that we really needed, and Batum has just been awesome. If Felton can finally get it going an Wesley keeps producing of the bench, maybe we’ll get back up to that top 4 seed it seemed we thought we’d have near the beginning of the season. Go Blazers!
Crash. Coming soon to an arena near you.
Crawford is being cryptic on twitter:
@JamalCrawFans: @JCrossover I know you’re happy about getting the team win but I’m not used to you playing like that! Hope all is well…
@JCrossover: —im not used to it either, but at this point it is what it is..good win tho.
Followed by a more ambiguous one liner, directed at no one in particular:
@JCrossover: I was warned, didn’t listen to the advice from lil bro…
hes done this before
going all emo.
and he changed his profile pic to one with the hawks logo
PHILLY!
Nate
Nate. God I hope we don’t seriously think we can get a top fa next year. Players have caught on to the Nate game.
Nate is still highly regarded around the league by almost everyone except
Blazers fans
"Luke is our go-to Chalupa man," Matthews said. "Designated."
National press
"What began as a credible protest against bank bailouts, crony capitalism and the like has, in large measure, been hijacked by crazies and criminals,"
by 92wastheyear on Feb 19, 2012 10:46 AM PST up reply actions
That's been my impression too.
I’ve gotten the vibe that hometown fans are harder on their coach than is everyone else in general too. Kind of interesting. I don’t think I’ve ever heard of an example where the hometown fans valued their coach more than the rest of the nation. Or world or whatever. Guess the game’s not just here anymore.
The questions about coach Nate McMillan‘s grip on the situation started a while ago, long before last night’s deflating performance
The national media rarely pays close attention at the team level, and often play catch-up on local team issues. In the national media, once a direction is chosen (such as “Nate is a defensive coach” or “Aldridge plays soft”) it’s hard to change in less than a year.
Sekou Smith's article aside, Nate McMillan's narrative nationally possesses mostly ...
a positive spin to it. Shoot, even if McMillan’s tenure in Portland ends on a sour note, he’ll continue to be very well-respected — to the point of being overrated — on a national level.
Like you said, it’s difficult to change a narrative in such a short period of time.
On the other end of that wide spectrum is Xs and Os guru Doug Collins. Despite the calls by some media members for Collins to be leading the pack for this season’s NBA Coach of the Year Award, he hasn’t yet entirely shed the label of being a bull-headed taskmaster who wears on players.
Heck, as recently as last month, many media members foolishly argued that Ty Corbin — who’s mediocre at best — was either equal to or ahead of Doug Collins in the COY race, which shows how horrible the national media sometimes is at ranking coaches. Collins, without question, can coach circles around Corbin.
Nate has gotten many kudos for getting the team to play well when
90% of them were out injured…so that’s about all I’ve heard NATIONALLY.
That’s what the national head pieces have said on ESPN and TNT.
And Nate took a team from 21 to 41 to 54 wins…with an especially gifted couple of players.
However…I have a feeling that Nate’s rep amongst veteran players who have come to play in Portland…who have been coached by others…may not be glittering gold.
On a national level, Nate McMillan is held in pretty high esteem.
I’d say McMillan is one of the more overrated coaches in that regard; conversely, one of the more underrated coaches nationally is Frank Vogel.
Ummm. Here's a little more context on that tweet.
Mark Thompson gswscribe What? That you shoulda never ate Jack in the Box?
RTJCrossover I was warned, didn’t listen to the advice from lil bro…
A little more context is always helpful.
#52--------I believe in Greg Oden
"Mark Thompson" was responding to Jamal's original tweet.. not the other way around
not to mention this tweet by Jamal
@gswscribe —-nopeeee!!! That’s not it….life’s about choices though
lol, isaiah thomas just tweeted him
RT @JCrossover: I was warned, didn’t listen to the advice from lil bro… Live and learn big bro like u tell me
jamal responds
@Isaiah_Thomas2 —ur right bro
here’s a stretch – Isaiah thomas is on the kings. Jamal was choosing between the kings and the Blazers this offseason if you don’t remember. Jamal said originally “didn’t listen to the advice from lil bro…”. 45minutes~ later get’s this tweet from Isaiah Thomas. Note the “big bro”. If Isaiah Thomas is the “lil bro” in question, maybe the advice was to sign with the Kings?
DUN DUN DUNNNNNNN
Keep in mind
Let me put on my conspiracy hat for a moment… Jamal is Roy’s friend, and Roy probably could have warned him about internal issues. Roy is probably lil bro.
by Waynearchetype on Feb 19, 2012 12:07 AM PST up reply actions
Its pretty well known
that LMA was recruiting Jamal.
If jamal thinks the Kings would have been a better choice.
He really thinking he would have gotten a ton of play time with all those guards? Why do bad players complain so much?
I hope he says more and sits on the bench
I think Elliott will be the better player after all is said and done anyway.
by AR-15 on Feb 19, 2012 12:29 AM PST up reply actions 4 recs
Nico taking minutes at the 2 complicates some things
especially if Ray actually continues to play like a PG. If we try to play Nolan into that backup PG slot it will make it even worse for Jamal regarding minutes.
Maybe play We$ more at the backup 3? Should be fun for Nate to figure out. I’ll be surprised if he has hair left on his head after this season.
Probably a trade soon will clear some of these issues
Or maybe make them even more complicated, but hopefully not.
"Wide, girthy. Just like a Rhino. Sometimes my horns are visible."
Trade Felton and Jamal
for a real PG? Ya ya Felton had a good game, hasn’t proven anything yet.
You can not trade Jamal (I don´t know the reason why).
You can get Ridnour and a PF from Minnesota (either Tolliver or Anthony Randolhp) for Matthews. This trade gives more wins for both teams.
we prefer batum
it would be a starter and we will give him the 10m$ contract he want
by SMB on Feb 19, 2012 1:04 AM PST via Android app up reply actions
Save your money for your big three (the Spanish Unicorn, the Pekerwood and the Kung Fu Panda). You will need it.
I´ve heard Kahn is sloooooooowly developing Wes into his own Batum. Probably even Wes prefers Batum, but My Point Still Stands %
you can trade him after march 1st
it"s got something to do with the whole fact that we signed his contract this year.
ridnour is O.K., but i like this trade better.
http://games.espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=7gke4bk
We get Mo Williams and Rodrigue Beaubois for Gerald Wallace, giving us two starting-quality guards, one of them already having experience playing with Batum.
Mavs get Gerald Wallace for Marion, allowing them to clear up space this summer for Deron.
Clippers get Marion for Mo Williams, giving them an upgrade on the wings and clearing space for Bledsoe
"Wide, girthy. Just like a Rhino. Sometimes my horns are visible."
With Nic playing the 2 successfully...
This trade leaves us with ZERO SF’s (outside of Luke Babbitt…) and a roster with 4 guards 6’2" and under.
Mo Williams is… by numbers… a similar player to Ray Felton and can in no way be considered our PGoTF. Beaubois is a decent back up PG but I’m not sure his ceiling is any higher then Nolan’s.
If we’re going to trade Gerald I expect, or at least hope, for much better than that! His $10million cap space should yield much more then two little PG’s especially if it leaves us weak at the 3.
#7... GO BLAZERS!!!
the plan was to play roddy at the 2 and batum at the three
wes matthews can back up at the three. Roddy’s got a big wingspan and tends to play at the 2 in Dallas. he’s got a bright future and can at the very least play a Jason Terry role as a sixth man, if not a starting SG. Mo Williams is a somewhat above average PG, which is good enough to keep us afloat while we search for a PGOTF, but you can think of a better PG we can get for Shawn Marion, then that’d make this trade better.
"Wide, girthy. Just like a Rhino. Sometimes my horns are visible."
A 6'2" back up 2 and a 6'5" back up 3 sounds a little small...
…I am not down on Beaubois but saying, after two years playing 18minutes/game and averaging 7.5 points/game, that he can “at very least play a Jason Terry role as sixth man, if not start at SG” is more than a stretch.
With Roddy as a starter we’d be small and weak. I can’t imagine him guarding Kobe… or DWade… or basically any real 2 guard.
A line up of Mo Williams – Roddy – Batum – LMA – Camby doesn’t sound nearly as good as what we currently have. That team is too small to defend or rebound the way we saw the team do last night.
#7... GO BLAZERS!!!
Beaubois has been incredibly efficient during those minutes,
and really stepped his game up after Kidd went down, though he’s now back to a smaller bench role since Kidd came back. he’s talented, but the Mavs are too loaded to play him. He started at the 2 for Dallas last year until he sprained his foot right before and he has a 6’9" wingspan, which can make up for his height.
"Wide, girthy. Just like a Rhino. Sometimes my horns are visible."
It was what...27 games?..
I’m not saying he is a bad player. I’m not even necessarily saying he couldn’t find a place on the Blazers and be effective.
What I am saying is that he and Mo Williams are not what I would hope to get out of $10mill. worth of cap space. With the Mavs so loaded at his position we should be able to get him while retaining Gerald as an asset on the floor or for a bigger deal.
I would prefer to have Nic at 6’8" and his 7’1" wingspan at the 2 and Gerald Wallace or another physical 3 everyday of the week. The rebounding, shooting and defensive Nic can supply at the 2 is a potent combination and Wes in not a 3 no matter how much we may want him to be.
We need a PG and a Big… Beaubois is neither of those things.
#7... GO BLAZERS!!!
Wes
is more of a 3 then a 2 really, aside from his height.
I've read that opinion a few times...
…and I can’t agree with it.
Wes doesn’t rebound like a 3… or post up like a 3… or defend like a 3. As a matter of fact if you are who you guard like some say Wes is most definitely a 2 and is even asked to guard 1’s occasionally.
What makes Wes a 3?.. He certainly can’t guard a LeBron or Camelo. Iggy has similar size and is listed as a G/F but he gets over twice as many rebounds per game.
I guess in the right situation Wes can play the 3 but that doesn’t make him one any more then Gerald playing the 4 makes him one.
#7... GO BLAZERS!!!
"if you are who you guard like some say"
I’ve never been a fan of that mindset. A player’s position on the court should be dictated by what they play on offense. Hell, just because a guy like Jared Jeffries can occasionally step out and defend opposing 1s doesn’t mean he that should run the point.
Another example of that is LMA, who frequently defends guards on switches and would never be asked to play in the backcourt on offense.
That is not what I meant...
Wes is asked at times… like vs the Clippers… to, by assignment, guard the PG (Paul in this example).
Of course LMA isn’t a PG because he switches on the P&R (which I hate by the way… those mismatches drive me crazy) and Nic OR Wes aren’t equipped to initiate the offense just because they are asked to defend Paul or Westbrook.
I think it is valid though that a guy who can defend a PG is less likely to be able to guard a real 3 like Durant or LeBron or even Gerald. Nic is one of very few who are that versatile.
#7... GO BLAZERS!!!
If we are making arguments based on Wes is not a 3 because he cannot guard LeBron or Carmelo..
Guess what, most of SFs in the league cannot be considered a SF, as practically no one can guard those two.
Look at Wes’ skillset and compare it to the current NBA. There’s no question that he is a 3. Not many 3s these days sport a post-up game. Main difference between 2 vs 3 these days come from ball handling and part of the floor they like to operate in, hence why I prefer to call both positions as wings instead of categorizing it separately.
The cake was a lie.
I could be wrong...
…but I think most every player categorized as 3 that is close to Wes’ size would have a pretty significant athletic advantage on him. Iguadola comes to mind.
I fully agree with the wings designation versus 2&3 and think any other designation is kinda splitting hairs. That’s why I can’t agree with,“There’s no question that he is a 3.”
I can only use our own team as an example. Gerald is a true, natural 3 and a near prototype for the position in my mind. Wes absolutely doesn’t fit that mold.
#7... GO BLAZERS!!!
Andre Iguodala posseses tremendous handles and ...
has keen court vision, which is why he can play the 2 at an optimal level.
Gerald Wallace, by the way, isn’t a natural 3; rather, he’s a 3/4 combo forward.
It's just an opinion but...
mine is that Gerald Wallace is exactly what a 3 should be physically and skill wise.
In a perfect world he’d have a little better outside touch but for me he is 100% small forward.
Iguadala may be an offensive 2/3 but his athletic ability is what allows him to be a defensive 3 and where Wes would fall short.
#7... GO BLAZERS!!!
That's a sure problem for Wesley Matthews.
He’s a 3 on offense and a 2 on defense, which is a poor combination.
"Not many 3s these days sport a post-up game."
Yeah, it’s no longer the ’70s or ’80s — much to the chagrin of some people — so the 3 is less a frontcourt position and more a wing position nowadays.
“Main difference between 2 vs 3 these days come from ball handling and part of the floor they like to operate in”
That’s 100% accurate.
One of these nights.
Hopefully I’ll be able to watch these guys play. Between NBA TV, TNT, blackouts from SacTown and Bay Area games, and just plain being busy, I don’t think I’ve seen a game in two weeks.
Found out there are other things I like to do, like talk with my wife, play with my kids. watch Foyle’s War on DVD. Apparently I have a Netflix account too.
"Anybody might guess beforehand that there would be blunders of the ignorant. What nobody could have guessed, what nobody could have dreamed of in a nightmare, what no morbid mortal imagination could ever have dared to imagine, was the mistakes of the well-informed." - G. K. Chesterton, The Common Man
Blazersedge.com || New to Blazersedge?
Actions -> Rec and Flag. Blazersedge works right when you use these two things.
The "RayNate" Deal
For Nate to really show Ray, that Coach was behind him…early in this season, Ray and Nate came up with a plan, being called the “RayNate” Deal. Coach, if you promise the following:
- Let me have until the AS Break to get in shape and average my typical numbers
- Don’t pull me from the starting lineup…no matter what, even if people are calling for your head.
If you stick to that…and I don’t do what I say I’m gonna do…I’ll take $1.5 next year and sit next to G.O., producing the same.
So here’s to Nate keeping his word…when I thought for sure he would not.
by BendBlazerFan on Feb 18, 2012 11:30 PM PST reply actions 1 recs
Batum!
The man can do it all.
"The only 'Advanced Metric' that matters is what you see with your eyes." -Timbo, Nov., 2009.
Confusion...
I’m not aware of what’s going on with Crawford and why he is being “emo”? I’m missing something so can someone be so kind and fill me in? Thanks.
by Theory2002 on Feb 18, 2012 11:34 PM PST via mobile reply actions
Hmmm...
Jamal Crawford played 13 minutes and did one of those “I’m getting perilously close to J.R. Rider” things where he refused to accept the ball, returned it immediately when it was sent anyway, and generally avoided anything close to a shot attempt.
As to why, one can only speculate that it’s a combination of 13 minutes of playing time plus maybe a heart to heart talk (or public criticism) of all those one-on-one shots he took in the fourth quarter of the Clippers game. I don’t see the latter as being entirely his fault, by the way. But either way, the “why” is something only he knows.
—Dave
Also consider
Nolan Smith played 15 minutes in this game. That’s 2 more than Crawford and those are usually his minutes.
All of you clamoring, "Why doesn’t Nate just play the young guys and develop them? He’s HORRIBLE at that! It’s so obvious!"…now you see. This was one game and we get Crawford hanging out in shut-down corner and apparently Tweeting junk alluding to being unhappy. What’s the reaction going to be if this becomes a nightly thing? I’m not necessarily saying it shouldn’t happen. Maybe Smith should get some time at Crawford’s expense and regardless of his reaction. But making those decisions is neither as simple nor as consequence-free as it seems. How many friends and allies does Crawford have in the locker room? What does it do to team chemistry? What about situations where the team really needs him? How would management feel about their prize free-agent signing becoming a weeping paperweight? What happens when Smith screws up, as all rookies do, and he knows Jamal is seething in the corner because he feels he’s the better player? Does Smith now look over his shoulder every time he takes the floor? What does that do to his confidence and play?
Coaching is dead simple from a keyboard.
—Dave
by Dave on Feb 18, 2012 11:50 PM PST up reply actions 2 recs
imo
this is just why you don’t draft a guard and sign a guard when you needed a big before the draft even started
I guess this has been my general feeling too
How this team has been constructed has had far more bearing on the season than how it’s being coached.
—Dave
“One-man Museum” sounds like something you’d see on the marquee at the Mt. Tabor Theater. On a Tuesday night.
by JonathanPDX on Feb 19, 2012 12:09 AM PST up reply actions
I don't agree with you about that...
and this either: Feels a lot better to be a Blazer fan right now than it did five days ago, eh?"
Obviously, none of us-me, you, or the Bedgers have the credentials to coach any NBA team that Nate does. However, it does seem like a rather odd coincidence that those of us who write in this space have to scream bloody murder about what Nate SHOULD do before he finally, half heartedly, DOES do it. If he knows what he’d doing, why does it take him so very long to do what many fans and sports writers have been saying all along? You know, things like starting Nic, giving the rooks some playing time, etc? I don’t think any of us actually are deluded enough to think that Nate ever reads Bedge, so whatever goes on in that hard head of his takes a very long time to come to fruition.
No, it doesn’t make me feel any better about this team after last night knowing that the guy who’s making the decisions still really doesn’t get it. Nor that we still don’t have a GM or an owner who actually understands that not having a GM is a problem.
As for Nate’s comment about him understanding that the fans evaluate him based on what’s he’s done for us lately, he’s got to be kidding. Just what has this .500 coach done for us in the last 7 years? Not deliver a consistent winner nor a team that could get past the first round. It’s not like he won a championship 4 years ago and now has fallen on hard times and we’re being unfairly critical of him for cripes sake!
Just to clarify...
my post is in reaction to Dave’s “How this team has been constructed has had far more bearing on the season than how it’s being coached.”
.500 coach took us through a rebuild
The whole .500 thing is being overplayed. McMillian is young for a coach and has coached through rebuild years for near 20% of his career at this point. Those years don’t include his first years as a coach either.
OK, how about this, then...
Nate’s career record, including five years in Seattle is 475-444 for a .517 w/l percentage. For that same time period, he’s 14-20 in the playoffs for .412 percentage. I’ve looked back at the Sonics’ roster for the years Nate was there and they had some pretty decent players. Hardly a re-building process up there. Yes, I know he had a couple of real bad teams here, but it all balances out, doesn’t it. .517 is .517. Mediocre!
How does it balance out?
Did it balance out for Phil Jackson for instance…who never had any rebuilding projects? When you are the coach of a rebuilding team …it skews your coaching record…it just does. So how bout we ask the question, that supposedly rules the day in this era. : “What have you done for me lately?”
Last 4 seasons (plus this years record so far) ….210-133 …a .612 winning percentage (which calculates out to a 50 win team on average). Not world beating by any means …but certainly respectable and way more relevant that the ancient history that you are referring to.
Q: “What have you done for me lately?”
A: “Plenty!”
"What began as a credible protest against bank bailouts, crony capitalism and the like has, in large measure, been hijacked by crazies and criminals,"
by 92wastheyear on Feb 19, 2012 12:19 PM PST up reply actions 3 recs
Last 4 seasons (plus this years record so far) ….210-133 …a .612 winning percentage (which calculates out to a 50 win team on average).
I’ve always found this to be a bit of cherry-picking when it’s brought up (and I’m sure you understand I don’t mean any offense when I say that). Here’s why…
If you take only the years when Nate had someone like Brandon Roy and, now, LaMarcus Aldridge, you’re basically saying “Look, he’s a good coach when he has good players!”… but I could simply reply by showing the years when he had lesser teams and say that he’s a below-average coach. The full record reflects how he handles both good and bad teams, so I think it’s more fairly reflective on Nate as a whole. Honestly, I think Mo Cheeks would have a similar record in Portland the last 4+ seasons. Or at least, he’d also have gone to the playoffs without reaching the second round the past 3 seasons.
Now, I could totally understand the argument that this simply proves that the players (and by proxy, the GM who chooses them) are a lot more important to regular season success than the coach. And I’m definitely open to that philosophy. But then that brings up the playoff record, where coaching is more important…
Ok ...but if Phil and Nate had the same kinda teams
we could talk …but the fact is that Phil never had to endure a rebuild ..ever. That is not to say that Nate would have been Phil’s equal if he only the chance …but to say that you are what your record says you are …regardless of any extenuating circumstances (such a team that is being rebuilt) isn’t even remotely fair.
On a side note …those rebuilding team not just bad teams that lacked roy…they were atrocious teams ….I mean truly horrible….they were so bad that only that even with Zach and Rookie of the year Roy they only could get to 32 wins …that is a bad team
"What began as a credible protest against bank bailouts, crony capitalism and the like has, in large measure, been hijacked by crazies and criminals,"
by 92wastheyear on Feb 19, 2012 2:15 PM PST up reply actions
"those rebuilding team not just bad teams that lacked roy…"
You mean that instead of those, right?
“they were atrocious teams”
You mean it was instead of they were, right?
Remember, Nate McMillan only had one pre-Roy season in Portland.
by AK1984 on Feb 19, 2012 2:54 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
Yeah pretty much
"What began as a credible protest against bank bailouts, crony capitalism and the like has, in large measure, been hijacked by crazies and criminals,"
by 92wastheyear on Feb 19, 2012 2:59 PM PST up reply actions
"they were so bad that only that even with Zach and Rookie of the year Roy they only could get to 32 wins"
Truth be told, I think a more defensive-minded coach could’ve had that 2006-2007 squad rank higher than 26th in defensive rating (i.e., points allowed per 100 possessions) and, in turn, gotten them up to 40 wins.
I bet that Mike Dunleavy, Sr. — who coached the Los Angeles Clippers that season — could’ve possibly done it.
http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/POR/2007.html
http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/LAC/2007.html
Would had to have ridden Z-Bo hard on defense, which could’ve gone one of two ways admittedly. But yeah, that’d’ve been one odd alternate reality.
"but I could simply reply by showing the years when he had lesser teams and say that he’s a below-average coach."
On that note, I’ve always had a ton of respect for coaches who could take a garbage roster and somehow turn it into a serviceable group of guys. Even if serviceable meant just being below average, that’s still impressive when dealt a 2 and a 7 off suit.
One guy who can do that is Scott Skiles, although he obviously comes with his own set of problems. Nevertheless, Skiles can make chicken salad — which is a bland, yet filling meal — out of chicken crap.
by AK1984 on Feb 19, 2012 2:47 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
I presume this is also related to why you like Doug Collins
He does some good work, re-teaching the basics and enforcing it.
"Did it balance out for Phil Jackson for instance…who never had any rebuilding projects?"
In all fairness to Phil Jackson, he had a pretty good run coaching in the minor leagues — where he led the Albany Patroons to the 1984 CBA championship — before he jumped to coaching in the NBA.
Then again, minor league coaching accomplishments are just that … “minor.”
Unlike Jackson, some guys have trouble translating from the minors to the big show like, oh, the late Bill Musselman — the father of Eric Musselman, yes — or even Mo McHone, who’s still toiling around in the minors as head coach of the D-League’s Sioux Falls Skyforce.
by AK1984 on Feb 19, 2012 2:23 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
In Seattle, there were indeed some underachieving years under head coach ...
Nate McMillan during the early part of the Y2K decade. Before the shocking run to win the Northwest Division in 2004-2005, McMillan was on the hot seat after four mediocre years.
To illustrate that point, here’s an excerpt from a 2004 article by Percy Allen of the Seattle Times.
No one has publicly said McMillan’s job is on the line, but he has been around long enough to know the score.
“I’ve said all along, a one-year deal is what our country has been built on,” McMillan said.
“… I’m excited. It’s a challenge for me to get this team to play the way I want them to play. And if I don’t, then someone else needs to be here.”
In four years as coach, McMillan has guided the Sonics to one playoff appearance. Last year, the team finished 37-45.
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/sports/2002054211_soninotes05.html
It's funny, I've been pretty open at the concept that we could probably use a fresh voice
But honestly, even if the Blazers tank and miss the playoffs, I wouldn’t fire him. That’s what the offseason is for. Unless it’s public that he’s a lame-duck, and he’s unhappy with that (and understandably so!), just give him the season, then clean house. I just don’t think bringing in a new coach will make a huge difference this year, and he’s under contract, so let him finish up the season, then start a new era.
Of course, if the team has a bad offseason, and they tank next year after Nate departs (which is very possible with or without Nate, based on the various contract statuses, and players available in free agency), I’ll prepare in advance for some unhappy people.
Are you talking about letting him finish out his contract at the end of next season?
Sheesh, talk about giving McMediocre enough rope…
I personally don’t have nearly that much patience. Then again, the new owner (which seems to me to be a real possibility within the next couple of years unless Allen hires a strong GM SOON) can do the dirty work…
Who that is available
would you like to replace Nate?
That's for the front office to deal with.
We could argue all day about “who’s better than Nate”, but honestly, nobody will ever agree. And since a number of the best candidates are assistant coaches, it’s really hard to make a concrete comparison anyway.
I just think a majority of the "fire Nate" group
is a majority of the “grass is greener” group. If you think getting a new coach is the answer, you would think you would have an idea of who should replace said coach to fix this problem. Everything we talk about here is for someone else to figure out, so should we just stop blogging?
Well there have been like 20 options mentioned for other coaches
Everything from popular assistants, to waiting and trying to steal Pops (which is of course unlikely)
But I’ve found the conversations don’t go anywhere. If a person likes Nate, none of them are any better. If a person dislikes Nate, they’re all promising. Kind of goes in circles after a while.
Sounds like
almost any topic on BE. Half the people think one way, the other half the other. Yet we keep coming back for more.
What can I say? It's irresistable.
But for the whole coaching replacement topic, I’m out. I’ve seen it not go anywhere too many times. Especially when it comes to replacing him with an assistant that has no head coaching history.
You just have to trust that your front office knows what it's doing
Because it’s pretty rare for a coach to be with a team as long as Nate without existing the first round sometime along the way.
I can agree with that
though arguably the only year he should have gone past the 1st round was I believe 2008 when we played Houston.
Yeah Game 1 killed us that year. Never recovered.
I mean, they even lost Dikembe in that series and we couldn’t take advantage.
But shelf lives for coaches are typically very short, over time players tend to tune out a little. It’s not surprising if time has arrived for a fresh voice anyway.
I’m not convinced the front office is prepared to do a proper coaching search.
2009, yeah.
Not having Joel Pryzbilla front Yao Ming — so as to deny him the ball on post entry passes — was a lunkhead move.
Yep he's the current popular example
He had a big buzz about him when he got hired. There are other assistants who are rumored to be extremely good, ready for the big time, but don’t have the same buzz.
I wonder if Doc
will leave Boston after this year, and if he will be looking for a new job. IDK how he feels about Portland, but I would love to see him coaching our guys.
Doc was hated as much or more than Nate until he got the big three
"What began as a credible protest against bank bailouts, crony capitalism and the like has, in large measure, been hijacked by crazies and criminals,"
by 92wastheyear on Feb 19, 2012 9:22 PM PST up reply actions
Yep I think Nate wins a title with the Big Three too
They were internally motivated to win a title together.
I disagree there.
I bet Nate McMillan would mishandle Rajon Rondo, wouldn’t defer enough to Tom T. on defense, and wouldn’t manage those giant egos as well as Doc Rivers.
I, however, believe McMillan would win a title with the Miami Thrice.
But not w/ Boston’s “Big Three” core, no way.
Doc Rivers signed a five-year extension.
http://sports.espn.go.com/boston/nba/news/story?id=6540602
Also, Doc Rivers owes much of his success in Boston from 2007-2008 to 2009-2010 to Tom Thibodeau.
"If a person dislikes Nate, they’re all promising."
That’s false.
I can name a ton of potential head coaching candidates I wouldn’t hire for the job.
I wouldn’t hire Larry Brown, Jim O’Brien, Mike Woodson, Eddie Jordan, Sam Mitchell, Michael Curry, Terry Porter, Kelvin Sampson, Terry Stotts, Marc Iavaroni, Phil Weber, Brian Shaw, Lester Conner, Chuck Person, Jack Sikma, Patrick Ewing, Mario Elie, et al.
Some guys, however, I’m a bit torn on, with Quin Synder being an example. Somebody such as Synder wouldn’t be an automatic no, but he’d be further down on my list.
In fact, he’s probably the at the cut line.
Other potential hires I’d be fine with as lead assistants, but wouldn’t hire as a head coach. Eric Musselman is a prime example of that, as I’d prefer to have him on Mike Fratello’s staff as associate head coach.
Additionally, I hope that Paul Allen doesn’t bring in John Calipari from the college ranks — which’d be like he did with Pete Carroll in Seattle — to hire him in the dual role of VP of basketball operations and head coach.
During the past several months, I've named numerous ...
former head coaches and current assistants who could be potential replacements.
Do I need to name them again? Or, perhaps, people could do the research themselves for once.
It ain’t that hard, folks.
Quite frankly, those unaware of the potential replacements — and I’m not referring to Phil Jackson or Jerry Sloan, who won’t come here — is ignorant about the topic of coaches.
Y’know, I could even talk about guys NOT to hire under any circumstances. An example of that would be Scott Layden, who’s one of those legacy kids. Can’t forget how he ruined the New York Knicks as GM during the pre-Zeke era, either.
I know YOU have mentioned some guys
But thats why I didn’t ask you, cause I know where you stand.
No, at the end of this season, if they feel it's the right choice
Thank him for his years, speak glowingly of his time, and move on to a new era.
Yeah, I don't see any point now in a mid-season firing of Nate McMillan.
Any front office and coaching staff changes should happen during the time between the end of Portland’s season — which should occur sometime in late April or early May — and the 2012 NBA Draft in late June.
“Of course, if the team has a bad offseason, and they tank next year after Nate departs […] I’ll prepare in advance for some unhappy people.”
Though, I wonder if most people will blame the new GM, the new coach, or ownership if this happens.
In the scenario of a full-on rebuild, I think that Paul Allen draws most of the ire from casual fans who’d be upset at the new direction. It’s probably one of the reasons why he’s got an aversion to doing a much-needed rebuild, since it’ll kill ticket and merch sales for a couple of years as the team gets back on its feet to compete.
Another possibility is Allen has Larry Miller hire a new GM, who attempts to retool with minor moves — similar to this past off-season — with the twist being there’s a new coach at the helm. In this scenario, I assume the new GM and head coach draw most of the ire if things once again go amiss. In consequence, the pro-McMillan coalition — which is strong in numbers — could act like the pro-KP coalition has the past two years.
Not deliver a consistent winner??
Since when is making the playoffs 3 straight years not consistent…granted the team hasn’t advanced but they have won in the regular season
"What began as a credible protest against bank bailouts, crony capitalism and the like has, in large measure, been hijacked by crazies and criminals,"
by 92wastheyear on Feb 19, 2012 10:57 AM PST up reply actions
With you on that one
Some of that is on Nate, some of it on the front office (in particular – Larry Miller):
1) Miller and company ostensibly sign Mathews. While it wasn’t a bad deal – we had Rudy Fernandez on the roster – not to mention Roy. Why sign a 3rd shooting guard to that kind of money??? Insurance for Roy? Dissatisfied with Rudy? In either case, by keeping all three, it simply contributed to an unbalanced roster.
2) The Mathews issue segues into the Felton and Crawford issues – and these are on Nate. Not from a coaching perspective, but from a “I want players in their prime” issue. Nate didn’t want an aging Andre, didn’t want to rely on rookies. Nate wanted his rotation players to be players in their prime.
Frankly, I don’t think he wanted Batum in his primary rotation, this season. He wanted Wallace to get the lion share of SF minutes. He wanted Felton, Mathews and Crawford in a 3 guard rotation. He wanted Thomas off the bench as his primary big, and he just wanted to use Batum, C. Smith and N. Smith for spot minutes, here and there.
Batum’s play complicated that rotation plan quite a bit – but not as much as Felton, Mathews and Crawford’s play.
McMillan’s adjustments have lead to McVillan status – but there is some logic to it.
Batum has taken minutes from the 3-guard rotation (less of any of the three, on a given night). Batum has taken minutes from the backup 4 (less C. Smith). Veterans still get preferential treatment over rookies, most nights (last night was strange!).
Law of Logical Argument
Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about.
by blacknoiseNW on Feb 19, 2012 12:29 PM PST up reply actions
I can't disagree with any of this.
This season was inevitably going to be mediocre for the Blazers, barring a breakout player or an injury, and there is indeed plenty of fault to be found. Some with coaching. Some with the (seemingly) mess of a front office. And some with the players themselves, who just don’t seem to be inspired many nights, whether due to exhaustion or other reasons.
This will most definitely be seen as the transition season in retrospect.
Unless a major move is made at the deadline, I wouldn't call it a transition season.
At this rate, the transition season should happen next year.
Its kind of
the transition into the transition, if that makes sense. This year we transition into the post Roy era, next year we transition into the LMA era, or who ever we choose to build around next year.
Why should the coaching staff placate to an inefficient chucker like Jamal Crawford?
As I see it, LaMarcus Aldridge made a grave mistake recruiting a ball pounding, inefficient chucker, defensively inept like Crawford. All told, the team deserves whatever crap comes its way when that hack Crawford whines like a petulant child about a lack of touches.
Reap what you sow, reap what you sow.
Ugh, I made an ugly syntax error there.
Oh well, it’s late and I’m prone to mistakes.
Still, my point remains this: Jamal Crawford shouldn’t be coddled, even if he acts like a baby.
by AK1984 on Feb 19, 2012 1:02 AM PST up reply actions 1 recs
Nate McMillan needs to grow a pair and learn how to manage
personalities. He had the same problems with Roy, when Roy didn’t like Andre Miller’s play and preferred Blake.
IMO a good head coach’s job is to make the players happy with WHATEVER role they have that produces WINS.
Phil Jackson had to deal with MJ’s ego and Kobe’s ego to get them to play team ball…he also had Rodman and World Peace on his hands…I can just imagine how well Nate would coach any of them…J Crawford is NOTHING in comparison.
Being the better player means you get all the playing time only matters if your name is Andre Miller
"What began as a credible protest against bank bailouts, crony capitalism and the like has, in large measure, been hijacked by crazies and criminals,"
by 92wastheyear on Feb 19, 2012 10:53 AM PST up reply actions
I doubt Crawford cares about Nolan playing at pg but at no time has anyone else had there minutes actually reduced
Nolan would allow Crawford to play off the ball so I doubt he cares about that but Crawford has played very well this month and out of position but Wes and Raymond still played there minutes no matter what .
You cant have a true rotation without it being based upon whoever is playing well that night gets the minutes . Once you take away actually playing well as a incentive to more playing time it becomes favoritism and hand holding.
Felton and Wes no matter what have played 30+ mpg no matter how poorly they have played .
But even then Nate made the problem worse because he refuses to simply cut Wallaces minutes and give them to Nic when wallace disappears .
hes been so afraid to touch that subject that he basically moved Nic to SG and that has screwed up minutes in a trickle down effect. As I said the other day the Bobcat duo is affecting the lockerroom .
You have one guy who said he cant be told how to play and the other one who even playing his normal starters minutes doesnt feel the coaches love and so cant perform .
You cant sit them or mess with there playing time in any kinda way it seems .
But at the end of the day youth prevails
If you leave Nic at SG and Wes is the 6th man then Crawford has no role on the team and we should move him to fill a hole . Several teams were chasing JR Smith we should dangle him and try and see what we can get
by Willie Beamon on Feb 19, 2012 12:26 PM PST up reply actions
Nate avoided a tough decision two years ago by going to a three guard lineup, is he doing the same thing by now going to
a three forward lineup?
Although, I gotta say, if Nic can legitimately play the 2, then his length at that position is a huge plus.
Dave there is no frosting on a Twinkie
that would be a Tasty Cake, just sayin…
!!!o o!!!
OMG I just jizzed in my France
OMGrandpa
by sug on Feb 18, 2012 11:43 PM PST reply actions 1 recs
Oh man!
That would be a killer idea for an end-of-season topic. Name (or coin) the quasi-literary work that best encompasses the Blazers’ 2011-12 season. Please remind me of that when the playoffs are over!
—Dave
Nothing has changed
either way on that. They’re right in the expected range, a lower-seeded playoff team.
—Dave
by Dave on Feb 19, 2012 12:25 AM PST up reply actions 1 recs
Hm, I'm stumped, but how about opening lines to novels -
It was the best of times, it was the worst of times…
Batumsie got block of the night!
http://www.nba.com/video/channels/top_plays/2012/02/18/20120218_botn.nba/?ls=iref:nbahpt2
#52--------I believe in Greg Oden
by annthefan on Feb 19, 2012 12:27 AM PST reply actions 1 recs
"If the Blazers play with this kind of energy that game ought to be fun."
The Lakers like to slow it down, while the Blazers need to do the same.
Blazers aren't built to play a methodical pace
This edition is too vulnerable to half-court execution failures (e.g., defend the Blazers by doubling LMA, rotating to strong side shooters, trapping any dribble penetration, switching on any P&R and….well that’s petty much all you have to do to stop the Blazers).
However, when the Blazers score in transition – not just fast breaks, but before the defense gets set – then they are much less vulnerable to scoring droughts.
When the Blazers do get into half court sets, they need to remember that the ball moves faster than the feet and make the defense chase the ball.
Law of Logical Argument
Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about.
by blacknoiseNW on Feb 19, 2012 12:40 PM PST up reply actions
I don't agree.
When Felton starts hitting shots of the pick-and-roll I might be more inclined to agree with you. As it stands if Aldridge gets double teamed the best offensive option is to let Crawford go iso… at least in Nate’s offensive scheme.
by Oden Mad, Oden Smash! on Feb 19, 2012 3:09 PM PST up reply actions
Hitting cutters
while using he PnR hasn’t been to bad lately.
Great win, sooo glad batum starts now, he gives u way more than wes.
OSU '06
GForce Crash Wallace FTW!
by TyboOSU on Feb 19, 2012 4:03 AM PST via mobile reply actions 1 recs
Did you mean to write that Crawford played within the defense? I thought he played within the offense.
There was no need for Crawford to shoot, he made smart plays in my opinion.
If Elliot ever gets on a roll?
You mean, when Elliot gets the minutes, wherever that may be…
by travis13 on Feb 19, 2012 9:56 AM PST reply actions 1 recs
Disagree...Batum is a BETTER defender than Wesley Matthews..esp this year.
Plus he’s as good of a defender as Wesley Matthews

by 
































