Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: Knicks Beat Lakers With Familiar Strategy

Game 3 Recap: Portland 80 Houston 89

Boxscore

I want to start by addressing a question I'm starting to see more and more around Blazer Nation:  What's Wrong With the Blazers?

The short answer:  Nothing.

Or at least nothing that wasn't always going to be "wrong"...or better put a natural part of the struggling a young team endures while finding its way in the NBA.

Why have we lost three straight, getting blown out in the last two?  The simplest answer is that we've been playing very...good...teams.  The Spurs are the reigning champs.  Houston is considered a serious contender this year.  New Orleans is a playoff-caliber team.  Yes we have talent but everybody has talent.  We do not suit up a single player with one-tenth the résumé of Tim Duncan or one quarter the proven track record of Yao Ming, Chris Paul, Tracy McGrady, or Tony Parker.  If playoff-level teams with those type of players can't beat a team that's still getting used to each other...a team whose stars are entering their second season overall and their first with prime-player responsibility...a team which features exactly one regular rotation player over the age of 25...that means something's wrong with them and they've got serious issues.  

Everyone around the nation got excited on opening night because we played hard against the Spurs.  I'm telling you flat out, we had less chance of winning that game than any of the others.  New Orleans and Houston went pretty much all-out and played great ball.  We knew how far we had to go to make a comeback against them...the scoreboard showed it.  The Spurs played fine but they had another whole gear or two that we didn't even glimpse on opening night.  Don't let appearances fool you.  We've been fighting well outside our weight class every single night.  That's why we're 0-3.

This won't be true of all 82 games this year and it won't remain true for long into the future in any case.  If we're healthy we're going to be the heavyweights in the new decade.  But to expect that to happen this year with Oden injured, with an entirely revamped playing style, and with any number of new players, new minutes, and new positions is just silly.

I've also heard a lot of people blaming Coach McMillan for various things.  I'm not saying he's perfect or imperfect nor am I trying to debate his qualities here.  But I will tell you this:  there's no magic person or combination of people off the bench that would have won us that game tonight, or in New Orleans, or in San Antonio.  You want coach to win games now?  The answer is simple.  Go out and make that Rashard Lewis deal that Orlando made this summer.  Offer Brandon and Lamarcus to Los Angeles for Kobe Bryant.  You will win games now.  You don't like what that does to our salary cap, how it mortgages our future, or how it affects our "culture"?  Then understand that the current roster has been put together with those three things in mind and stop complaining that it can't also handle the World Champions and two playoff teams right now.  This isn't a coaching issue.  It's a philosophical choice the team has made and just about every fan I know of supports.   The cost of that choice is losing games like this sometimes...in streaks of three in a row.

No lineup change this week would have closed the gap enough for a win.  "But what about..." No.  "But when we..."  No.  Every player looks brilliant until he takes the court.  And every player who looks brilliant for 10 minutes seems that way until he plays for 30 and all his weaknesses come out.  Haven't we learned that yet watching Travis and Martell?  Those two are finally in a position to contribute but it took years to get them there.  Neither they nor the team benefitted in past seasons when they got thrown out there for 30 minutes when they weren't ready for it yet.    

Personally I think lineup changes are going to be made.  And yes, it'll be at some of the positions people are fretting and arguing about now.  But if a coach followed the perception of fans he'd be changing players like underwear, especially on a team like this.  When I watch game shows from back around the turn of the century every second contestant on them identified their career as "Day Trader".  These guys switched stocks every ten seconds angling for the best return.  See any of them around today?  The folks who survived are the ones who took their time assessing the right move and then rode with the ups and downs.  Good coaches are more like professional investment firms than Day Traders.  I hope our coach is a good one, otherwise our team will never develop the continuity or confidence it needs to grow.  This isn't a fantasy league or NBALive.  We're dealing with real people and real issues.  The move that seems obvious isn't always the right one.  And rightness is often determined by timing as much as anything.  We have to be a little patient and I don't think five days and three games qualifies.

Before we get to the specific game issues let me quote something I said just a few days ago, before the season started:

There's no reason not to have a ball this year.  We shouldn't be getting too caught up in high expectations or rewards at this point.  It would be a shame if we anticipated too much, too soon and let the team possibly falling short dim our perception of them or the year...   Do not miss the fact that this is the first year we can realistically claim starting the season that we are on an upswing as a franchise.  The little things that go right this year are going to blossom into big things eventually.  Although there will always be things to analyze and criticize--and we will do both--I see no reason to get down on (or about) a team this young with this many promising players who are also trying to do things the right way.

Team Observations:

--I did not like the offense tonight at all.  Credit must be given to the Rockets, who are among the best defensive teams in the league.  But we made it really easy for them.  Check out the Portland side of the shot chart.  By my count it indicates just short of 60 of our 76 attempted shots came from outside the painted area.  That is an automatic "L".  And it's scary how many of those shots were contested.  At no point did our two stars (or any of their subordinates) look aggressive.  Decisions were poor, shots were rushed, and we almost looked relieved just to get something up.

--This may at first seem counter to the point I just made but it actually fits.  There are such things as appropriate outside shots and right now almost all of our wings outside of James Jones and Martell Webster look scared to take them.  I am not advocating guards and small forwards coming down the court and taking the first long shot they see.  But when the ball has gone inside through the offense and comes out to you in the flow of the play and you are wide, WIDE open you must take that shot.  The minute you don't it's like blood in the water for the defense.  They will sag in and just invite you to try and drive.  This happened multiple times this game (and some last game too).  One of our guards would have a good eight feet of space between him and any defender.  He'd receive the ball off of the pass.  He'd hesitate, think, and then drive right into the teeth of the defense for a turnover, ineffective pass, or severely contested shot.  Paradoxically this lack of appropriate outside shooting leads to the exact situation described in the above point.  The sagging defense makes it impossible to go inside after a while.  Also the hesitation and missed opportunities drain the shot clock, forcing you to put up a bad (and often perimeter) shot.  If Roy, Jack, Travis, and Blake cannot take and hit that shot when they are wide open then we need to find somebody who can or we're going to have a lot of trouble scoring.

--Houston's 40% shooting clip seems to indicate a good defensive stand by us and after the first quarter I guess it wasn't awful.  This is especially true when you consider Yao and McGrady are basically unstoppable for us.  But Lord, we have a long way to go.  We have players playing 21 seconds of defense in each possession and relaxing the last three.  We have players letting guys dribble the wrong way or to their dominant hand.  We have inappropriate doubling sometimes and not quick enough doubling others.  Most of all any pick, any two passes, or any secondary or tertiary option in the opponent's playbook just seems to befuddle us.  We needs us some Greg Oden badly.  And again...more experience.

--We really made an effort to stay even on the boards and I appreciate that.  We gave up too many offensive rebounds but Houston is big and tough and that's just life right now.  They got up far more shots than we did but we were trying to get back on defense.  There weren't as many "Aw geez...middle schoolers wouldn't do that" moments tonight as there were in New Orleans.  However I do have a question for you:  When's the last time you saw a Blazer dive down on the floor for a ball that wasn't in his possession to begin with?

Individual Notes:

--Lamarcus and Brandon are getting an education about the difference between being a good player and being a team leader and star.  A casual look at the box score indicates Lamarcus scored 20 and Brandon 23 while Yao and McGrady got 20 and 21 respectively.  That seems pretty good.  But not all 20-point games are created equal.  At no point did I get the sense that our main guys owned this game or were in control of it.  For the second straight night Nate left first unit guys in well after the game was decided and the Rockets had relaxed.  A lot of those points came in that part of the game.  I know it's more of a team offense and I know Roy in particular likes to get other people involved first but this team also looks to these two players to set the tone and lead the way.  Fourth quarter points don't matter much when the game was all but decided midway through the second.  We need an earlier start from each...more good plays, more made shots, more aggression, and a higher comfort level on the floor.  We need the Lamarcus from the first half of that San Antonio game and Brandon right there along with him.

--This was not Joel Przybilla's night and was never going to be.  Yao Ming is the worst possible matchup for him.  Yao is bigger, just as fast, and very skilled offensively.  He used to eat up Theo Ratliff back in the day too.  It's not Joel's fault, it's just reality.  Right now this team has to play "deficit defense" with Yao, meaning forget about stopping him and just put someone out there who will score enough points that you don't get totally killed by the point gap at that position.  Of course that's not Joel's game at all.  Thus the 20 minutes.  Joel did muscle up on the boards and really led the team resurgence in rebounding.  He deserves credit for that.

--Martell had another nifty game, although I wish we would have screened for him a little more.  15 points, 8 rebounds, 2 steals, and a block isn't bad.  He did commit four turnovers though.  Martell is really the most reliable guy we have right now.

--Since we're talking screens we should pop Aldridge back in here and say he set some nice ones.

--Steve Blake's confidence seems to be rising.  He was the best of our point guards tonight though his overall production didn't necessarily show it.  I love that he fills up the box score even if the overall numbers are somewhat modest.

--I thought Channing Frye had a strong night compared to what he's shown so far.  I noticed him hitting some shots and grabbing some rebounds.

--James Jones at least knows what shots to take, even though he didn't hit them tonight.  I like his confidence compared to a lot of our guys.  He committed 3 turnovers though, which isn't going to endear him.

--Travis Outlaw looked lost on offense, meaning the shots he took weren't the best.  I think Travis suffers when the rest of the offense is in turmoil and prospers when team confidence is high.

--Taurean Green got three minutes.  He wasn't able to help much defensively and missed a long shot his first possession down the court.  He needs to identify where and how he can help and not just shoot.

--Right now Jarrett Jack looks like your birthday balloon about three weeks after the big day.  He's just kind of bumping along the ground, mostly deflated and blowing with the wind.  I've said this before, but Jarrett is at his natural best when he's scoring.  Oddly enough, it seems like having plethora of scoring options on this team might be messing with him a little.  Last year the decision tree was pretty simple:  take ball, give to Zach, watch Zach score.  If Zach gives ball back then you can shoot.  This year he doesn't seem comfortable making decisions--whether to shoot or pass, where to pass and to whom.  You can almost feel him looking over his shoulder when he lines up for a shot.  He also is struggling on defense and committing ugly turnovers.  Whatever it is that's not clicking, it appears to have sprung the whole mechanism loose at this point.

--Don't ask me why Sergio got an DNP-CD.  I didn't understand it either.  I thought we could have used more tempo out there, especially when we put all the scorers on the court at once.  Maybe there's something more going on than what we know about.  Or maybe Sergio is being asked to do something that he's just not doing out there.  Either way, what I said above about it not making a difference between a win and a loss tonight still holds.  Sergio wouldn't have saved us.  He might have made losing slightly more exciting though.

It's late, so the Jersey Contest scoreboard will have to wait for tomorrow.

--Dave (blazersub@yahoo.com)

Comment 29 comments  |  0 recs  | 

Do you like this story?

Comments

Display:

If this happened mid-season...
...No one would be this worried.  I guess some are just over-rating the importance of losing 3 games out of the chute versus losing 3 (or 5, or 7) in a row after you've already won 20 games.  Both aren't good, of course, but once you got some wins and become comfortable with what team you got a losing streak is more palatable.

We'll still have a good season.  Maybe even still challenge for the playoffs.  We played 3 good-to-great teams, and they played as they should and we played like a team with two second year players leading the way with an even younger third year player as the next option.  We all know that LaMarcus and Roy are gonna be JUST FINE, all stars, with a few titles maybe even LEGENDS... but right now they are being handed the keys of the franchise and just need to learn on the job how to handle it.

I think we all agree that the right guys have finally been chosen to lead the way, and things will get better.  We just gotta get through this rough patch and have fun with the process.  There will be wins very soon, and VERY exciting play.  Getting burned by teams that should burn us is an important (maybe essential) learning experience for player and fan alike.

LMA knows to vary his attack and play to his strengths while he is still able to be out muscled.  Roy knows he is THE LEADER in all caps, and needs to get his game (and thus, the team's game) going as early as possible.  Martell has likely gained the confidence that can only come with playing well and hitting shots... If he misses, his next shot is going in.  I mean, his DEFENSE has even been mostly good!  Joel has been doing the things Joel should do, and even with a horrible match up with Yao he did what he does when he done its.  

Our key guys have learned important lessons early that playing Minnesota and winning wouldn't have taught us.  Now, hopefully, we are stronger for losing all 3 of thse games than we would have been starting the season off against lesser competition.  Plus, us fanses can adjust our expectations to healthier levels and not overrate our overall chances.  And then raise them again after a mini win streak next month.  

We still got it sweeter than any team in the entire league in the long run.  Hell, we started the season with only 3 for sure players (Oden, Roy, LMA), and now we can add Martell to the core and put Jor-el Shot Guzzlezilla back on the keep list as a back up.  I'll take a rough start to the season with Martell finally having his awakening over a meaningless 2 and 1 start any day of the week.  EVEN TUESDAY.

I'm more worried that Drexler's hall of fame ring is forever cursed by Bonzi repeatedly touching it than I am worried about our future.  I'm more worried that my dog will shoot me in the head than I am about our future, AND MY DOG ABHORS GUN VIOLENCE.  We got only smiles and high fives and boasting on other team's message boards in our future.  You'll travel to other countries and see swarthy foreigners wearing Greg Oden jerseys.  We got it made in the shade with toast and marmalade.

Bad teams start good and good teams start bad all the time.  We are somewhere in between, but we don't know where yet.  So do not fret my sweet pet!  We is fine for the next decade.

Mortimer

by Mortimer on Nov 4, 2007 2:10 AM PDT reply actions  

McMillan
Hey Dave, I'm not trying to start a chant that says fire McMillan. And I understand that these were 3 road games against 3 good teams at the outset of the season.

But I'm getting a deeply unsettled feeling in my stomach because I see these same problems with a team--no evolution whatsoever.

  1. See the quotes after the game? About digging a hole early? We've had 3 years of that. No progress.

  2. Perimeter defense is still bad. It went from Stoudamire, to Telfair, to Blake, to Jake, to Roy... no progress.

  3. I don't understand McMillan's stance on Przybilla. Two years ago he was giving minutes to Ratliff. Last year it was to Magloire. This year it's to Channing Frye. I don't get to see many games--just box scores--but I never see a statistical reason for this. Even last year, Joel--in very limited minutes--would appear to be having a decent game. Last night, you yourself said Joel had a good game. Yet we see Frye in the 2nd half and McMillian is talking about making the change permanent. Why? He says for more offensive punch. Really? With Roy, Martell, Jack, and LMA the answer is more OFFENSE? When I hear us getting killed on the perimeter and lack defensive rebounding, the answer is Channing Frye?

  4. Once again, as I listened to the game last night, we're fighting the shot clock. No movement to the offense. Players unsure who's supposed to take the shot. Confusion. We've had confusion with no progress. This notion of a revamped offense is looking an awful LOT like the last two years. No progress, no evolution.

  5. Many, many people are confused about Sergio, you and me included. His impact on the game is as unmistakable this year as it was last year. Particularly in a game like this; particularly when the coach has vowed for an up-tempo offense. This is a trend that extends into last year. One thing that DOESN'T happen when he's in the game is all the stuff that happened in item 4 above. McMillan's attitude towards Sergio was a sore point last year, is just as sore this year, and I wonder if there's something personal going on.

  6. What point guard CAN play for McMillan? What point guard CAN have success under McMillan's scheme? Whatever player he's trying to create, it's starting to look like he's burning through the professional careers of several players. It's clearly in Jack's head. Sergio can't seem to buy minutes. Blake is not performing like he was in Denver.

  7. I wonder if this is more Pritchard's team than McMillan's. Pritchard got Przybilla back. Pritchard wants the up-temp offense. Pritchard likes Sergio. It's Pritchard's assessment that brought in Roy and LMA. It's Pritchard--and Roy--changing the culture. It's not obvious to me how McMillan is adding to that equation right now.

Again, I'm not trying to throw the team under the bus. But I think you paint an overly rosy picture in your post. What I'M looking for are things changing... and I don't see that. And I'm troubled by that. I'm watching games not to see if we win so much as to see if we have some progress or some glimmer of a plan coming together. I'm fine with 3 losses if I had seen some of those glimmers. But reading about last night's game... honestly, you could have imported the write-up of several spring 2006 games and not known the difference.

by Fizbin on Nov 4, 2007 6:07 AM PDT reply actions  

I was suprised...
  ..to read that McMillan was considering starting Frye over Pryzbilla, that move would make no sense to me at all.

   

"Mother Nature started this fight, I think it's about time we ended it!"

by Krang on Nov 4, 2007 8:56 AM PDT up reply actions  

Well said
Who is Frye going to guard in the post?  He's not the beefiest dude on the team and doesn't rebound all that well given his size.

by torsoheap on Nov 4, 2007 9:36 AM PST up reply actions  

Frye over Pryz?
I'm as confused at that as you are.

Pryz is an excellent back-up center, but I'm not sure dropping Frye into the mix is the answer we're looking for.

I still say we wait until 10-20 games to let the beginning of the season sort itself out.  This is a new team together on the floor, give them time.

We applied the cortical electrodes but we're unable to get a neural reaction from either patient.

by ratbastird on Nov 4, 2007 8:00 PM PST up reply actions  

Sit JJ
The guy just doesn't have it.  And since your PG has the ball in his hands a lot, having a clueless dude as your PG is putting yourself in a huge hole.  Not to mention defense. Sorry JJ, I've been on your side since day 1 but holy crap you haven't improved at all.

by leeroyjenkins on Nov 4, 2007 6:21 AM PDT reply actions  

Your points 3, 5, 6 and 7
are hard to dispute.

Nice presentation of your thoughts.

by TwoDeep on Nov 4, 2007 6:27 AM PDT reply actions  

Bravo
The first half sounds like a lecture to "us fanses", though I doubt you intended that.  However, there are some of us who need it.  I admit I have been crushed to see us blown out (which didn't happen all this much last year) ... I didn't expect wins, but I didn't expect blow outs either.  I didn't have a whole lot of fun watching the last two games.  I just hope that the players understand better than the fans and that these losses aren't demoralizing to them.  They SAY the right words, but it's hard to know if they believe them.  We can only hope.

Bravo, too, to Mortimer for his "I'm not worried" stance and his take on these losses as important to the learning process.  

Fizbin, I think you are right about it being KP's team.  He even uses "I" rather than "we" when he talks about what he wants from the team and looks for in players.  I think Nate definitely has input, but there may be a point down the road at which time he says "I can't take it anymore" if his vision and KP's become wider apart.  

I don't agree about the necessity of seeing improvement in all areas just 3 games in.  Last night Mike Rice used the term "baby steps" and that's what this team is taking.  My worries about Martell are slipping away, I'm thinking that Jones will be reliable, and Frye is getting better ... thse are 3 baby steps we have taken since pre-season and even though they don't make a difference in wins and are individual improvements rather than teamwise, they are in the right direction.  As long as we keep making these baby steps we'll be OK.  (Though to be honest, Martell's improvement was a leap.)

 

by jorga on Nov 4, 2007 7:25 AM PDT reply actions  

Yeah...
I think I cam across more panicked in that post than I actually am. But it seems like these last three games are just an extension of all last season in some ways.

They're going to be screaming for Sergio in the home opener. I hope that doesn't make Nate even more obstinate about it.

But you're right: I can live with baby steps (I need to get better at recognizing them).

by Fizbin on Nov 4, 2007 7:37 AM PDT up reply actions  

Sergio's faults
I admit to being no great basketball expert, and I tend to rely on things like 'our team goes on a 10-2 run' versus 'their team goes on a 10-2 run' when deciding which group I think is really clicking together.  I'm sure there are terrific nuances about the collective performances that I'm not picking up on.  Can anybody spell these out for me to a certain degree please, because we've been hearing since last season about something that Nate sees in Sergio's game that the rest of us are missing out on, which is causing him to play JJ instead.  Maybe a play-by-play breakdown over some stretch of time, which points out how it would have been better if Sergio wasn't in there.  Because, from my simplistic vantage point, JJ plays awful defense (Martell played man defense on Chris Paul better than JJ did -- BTW Webs is a big plus not just on offense), so Sergio can't be too much worse than that; and JJ simply does not run the offense well, period.  And this is not just three games of bad play, he looks very much like he looked last year, when he also would get into trouble and make bad passes, and slow the offense down to a crawl.  He has little feel for a fast break, which the team supposedly is trying to make use of.  Please don't rely on some kind of mystical 'Nate knows' because that is not enough -- explain details.  Plays may break down when Sergio is running the offense, but he puts the rock in the hands of people who are open, and things click when he's in there.  Please talk me out of wanting Rodriguez in there.

I don't need to be scolded about worrying about wins and losses, I don't so much, not yet.  But I do want to see solid young talent get some burn out there, and not riding the pines.  Is there any reason to believe that JJ will develop with time while Sergio will not?

by BrailleTaser on Nov 4, 2007 8:15 AM PDT reply actions  

it's an eternal question
that no one has ever been able to really explain. sergio's d isn't great, but then against neither is jack's. and sergio's d is improving, it seems clear, and as far as i can tell he is really putting in full effort on both sides of the court.

last year sergio did have more turnover's than is ideal and sometimes he seemed a little out of control, but he seems to have vastly improved this part of his game as is evidenced by his preseason and first 2 games this year. he has done an excellent job running the offense in addition to providing the energy and panache that we love him for.

i've suspected for sometime that there is an attitude clash between nate and sergio, one that moreinvolves personalities than actual performance, though nothing has come out about such a  thing--outside of the empirical evidence. if so, nate needs to get over it. for real.

lots of time when criticizing sergio, people on this board are comparing him tot he ideal PG, but that's really missing the point. for now, the only comparisons that matter are sergio vs. jack vs. blake--and sergio compares quite well.

by sergioFTW on Nov 4, 2007 11:05 AM PST up reply actions  

He's
Sergio is in that mode/place where Martell Webster and Travis Outlaw were their first two years: consistency.

Sure, Sergio comes off the bench, provides a spark, the ball gets moving, and the team starts playing well.

I think the game that epitomizes what Sergio has been doing is last year's game against Denver. You all know which one I am talking about. Portland is down double digits, here comes Sergio, and Portland goes on this amazing run to put them up at the half.

But what happened in the second half? Portland got blown out and lost the game by 20 something points [I think].

Dave said it best:

No lineup change this week would have closed the gap enough for a win.  "But what about..." No.  "But when we..."  No.  Every player looks brilliant until he takes the court.  And every player who looks brilliant for 10 minutes seems that way until he plays for 30 and all his weaknesses come out.  Haven't we learned that yet watching Travis and Martell?  Those two are finally in a position to contribute but it took years to get them there.  Neither they nor the team benefitted in past seasons when they got thrown out there for 30 minutes when they weren't ready for it yet.    

Sergio's weakness? Consistency. The same thing that troubled Webster and Outlaw.

And like I said before: CALM YOURSELVES PEOPLE. Dallas started off last season 0-4 before winning 67 games. There is no chance in hell this team will win 67 games this year, but to be hitting the panic button this soon is just begging for a quick fix that this team does not need.

The only solution is time. Let these guys gel for a good 10-15 games. You will see a turn around then.

by damir on Nov 4, 2007 11:06 AM PST up reply actions  

all us sergio fans want
is the opportunity for long minutes. he has put together 6 consistently solid games so far, which is all the cnace he has been given. it's time for more minutes.

by sergioFTW on Nov 4, 2007 11:31 AM PST up reply actions  

I agree
Jarrett is more consistent (as in, '-ly bad'), though I think that shows that consistency for consistency's sake is over-rated.  I like the Martell comparison, though -- it shows that anyone with talent at the level of these guys can make a dramatic improvement in their game if given the chance.  Martell last year was thinking too much -- not something that Sergio would be accused of -- and this year, he solved his mental block and has become very consistent.  This was not a gradual, long-term change in his performance, it was abrupt and dramatic.  Why can't Sergio be expected to make a similar jump in performance?  Is there something that you've seen THIS year that makes you suspect that he hasn't improved?   Well, he did dribble the ball off of his foot once against the Hornets.    Show me a lack of consistency THIS year.

by BrailleTaser on Nov 4, 2007 11:41 AM PST up reply actions  

Hard to say
I don't go to the practices and that seems to be where the problem lies.  As much access as we have to the team, we don't know if there are other issues with Sergio besides his play that we get to see.  

If Jack keeps playing this way, he will get his chances.  As it stands, I think you guys are overstating how bad Jack was last year.  As I have said before, he isn't Chris Paul but he isn't horrible.  He has earned an opportunity to play out of his funk.  If he doesn't, Sergio will get his shot.

By the way, they are teammates and we are fans of the team.  Let's hope both players improve instead of banging on one and lobbying for the other.  Whatever you guys say about Jack this year is deserved so far, he hasn't played well.  I hope Sergio makes the most of his opportunities and forces Nate's hand, if it is good for the team.

by tssbro on Nov 4, 2007 8:21 PM PST up reply actions  

Jack is not that bad
Jack's first 3 games were so bad that if he always plays like this he shouldn't be in the NBA.

I agree that Jack should get his chance to find his rythym. We all agree.

What makes me lose faith in McMillan is after Sergio got a nice game (Hornests game with 13 mins, 8pts, 2 asts) he still got a DNP the day after while Green got some mins and Jack sucked the whole game killing our offense.

A coach sends message by his substitution. What did McMillan send to Sergio was clear: "Hey even you improve your scoring, I think Green is still better than you."

McMillan has HUGE confidence in Jack and Green while he has ZERO confidence in Sergio. That's the problem. Jack's PT is not the problem. Jack has somewhat proven himself that he could always have some PT.

McMillan is BIASED.

by spring610 on Nov 4, 2007 9:33 PM PST up reply actions  

Why no confidence?
My point was that Nate sees more than what we see.  We see the games and we read the reporters' perspectives on what they see in the small doses from practice that the Blazers let them see.

Our response to Nate not playing Sergio can be either he is an idiot/biased against Sergio or there is something going on we don't see.  Nate won't be an NBA coach for very long if he doesn't put the team on the floor that he thinks has the best chance to win because of some bias he has against Sergio.

I tend to think Nate is smarter than that.  He will play Sergio when he thinks he will give the team a better chance to win games.  For some reason, right now, he doesn't have confidence in Sergio.  Maybe by the end of the year he will.

by tssbro on Nov 4, 2007 11:45 PM PST up reply actions  

I tried to believe
I tried to believe that Nate has his reason. I talked to myself 100 times.

I've been watching, listening McMillan's opinion about Sergio for a long time. He always assumes "Sergio can't play" no matter what. What impressed me most was a last season postgame interview with courtside, after Sergio had a really really nice game, when asked if he ever had thought about starting Sergio at PG position, Nate said "if he always plays this good came of the bench, why don't we let him come off the bench every night?"

He never thinks there's possibity that Sergio could ever start. I was speechless. Nate should at least pretend a little bit.

by spring610 on Nov 5, 2007 12:32 AM PST up reply actions  

Ever?
I don't see in that quote that he will never start Sergio.  I think you may be taking that quote a little to literaly.    

I like Sergio.  The comment I made to the guy I went to a few games with last year was, "He looks like the only guy on the team who knows how to get guys the shots they can make."  I still think this is true, although Blake is pretty good at that too.  I think he has great potential.  I think if Jack keeps playing like this Sergio will get big minutes as this season progresses.  

Right now, there is some reason why he doesn't give him those minutes.  It is either because of specific things Sergio has not done or continues to do in practice or in the games that makes Nate unable to trust him with the team.  

by tssbro on Nov 5, 2007 10:32 AM PST up reply actions  

Yeah,
blazer nation has been a little grumpy this weekend.

That old phrase about "eating your young" seems ironically fitting. Young teams don't do to well in the NBA and portland is the youngest. Throwing players under the bus after 3 tough road games against clearly superior AND more experienced teams is crazy.

Yes, Jarret Jack has played poorly and probably deserves demotion. But he shouldn't be stood against a wall and be the victim of the rhetorical firing squad he's been so far. Sit him, start Blake, and see if that improves the play of both and the team. It's an experimental year, and it's not too early to experiment. (and it might be a good idea to do it before Chris Paul shows up wednesday night)

Portland really needs to improve their defense. Maybe some of the preseason time that was devoted to speeding up the blazer offense should have been devoted to slowing down the opponent's offense.

And it would be nice if both Roy and Aldridge had a good game in the same game. That will be essential if portland wants to beat a good team or even an average team.

I've actually been encouraged by some of the things I've seen so far. Roy and Aldridge are showing that they will be good players. Roy had trouble with Bowen, but he was beating battier and battier is an excellent defender. Aldridge was able to score on Duncan and against Yao. Webster has been the most consistent player and this is great news. Joel is back to the form he had 2 years ago and has made 7 of 8 fts. And Jones and frye are showing they can contribute.

KP has talked incessantly about the character of the guys on the roster. This season will test that character because there's going to be a lot more frustration then reward...unless of course the 'longer view' is kept in mind.

by moldorf on Nov 4, 2007 8:44 AM PDT reply actions  

Thanks
I have been encouraged by the same things.  

I am also encouraged that some players (Jack especially) haven't been playing as well as we saw them play last year.  We know they can play better and they will as the season progresses.  

by tssbro on Nov 4, 2007 11:09 AM PST up reply actions  

look at the other boxscores
the chicago bulls are 0-3, so are the washington wizards. in the last two games gilbert arenas has shot 5-20 and 5-15. wouldn't it be fun to watch THAT?

indiana is 3-0. raise your hand if you don't think this is fool's gold.

i admit it's no fun watching portland get blown out, but the texas trip has been horrible for any team in the league for years. i also don't remember us not getting a home opener in the first two games -- ever.

there are lots of weird anomalies around the league in these first few games. hey, yi jianlian scored 17 and milwaukee won!

golden state is 0-3.

so we'll see what happens once things settle into some kind of a routine. maybe indiana will be the surprise of the league, led by mike dunleavy jr and danny granger. or maybe not.

ignacio

by ignacio on Nov 4, 2007 9:22 AM PST reply actions  

I'm glad you made this point
because I was going to make it until I saw you posted it.

To add, Miami is 0-2. Seattle, who is in a similar situation to us in that they traded away their leading scorers and have some good young talent (albeit rookies) are 0-3.

Not one of those teams you or I listed has played 3 straight games on the road to open the season like we have.

by Blazerholic on Nov 4, 2007 10:49 AM PST up reply actions  

I appreciate the analysis
here. Earlier, in another thread I made a post about  how I didn't like the way individuals were being bagged on. I didn't mean their play shouldn't be critiqued, but that some of the posts about them were just nasty.

I spend a lot of time on political message boards and believe me when I say that the consistently civilized tone is one of the reasons I read here. Carry on.

by bubba on Nov 4, 2007 9:29 AM PST reply actions  

random observations...
If you were to tell me a week ago that Webster would be the Blazer's most consistent contributor I'd say, "0 & 3". Good on him and keep it up, but LMA and Roy need to get off to better starts.

LMA had a telling quote in the Oregonian this morning about trying to force the back to the basket aspect of his game rather than flowing with the game. Good lesson.

Dave's shot chart point is important. It seemed nobody was willing to risk getting their shot blocked by Yao until very late in the game which meant no fouls and no rebounds. Next time should be different as a few light bulbs started to come on.

It's way too early but I won't be surprised if they don't put Jack out of his misery later in the season and make him a 2. It's not like there aren't, oh, three or four better ballhandlers capable of playing the point on the team. Maybe if all he had to worry about was shooting his shot would drop.

Look for lots of Roy drives to the basket in the next game.

by jon @ Blazer's Edge on Nov 4, 2007 9:59 AM PST reply actions  

I blame the liberal media
I do not think I'm going to read a lot of the diaries from this weekend.  I thought there was a chance the Blazers would win one game out of the first three.  They did not, big deal.  

I still hope they make the playoffs.  I also did not put any money on it.

If the Blazers go 0-82, do you think they would trade the lottery pick and Raef LaFrentz's expiring contract for veteran?  The last thing they need is another young guy.  

Fatty, Big Daddy on the BE, Man o' international renown, Postin' from his own thrown, Tellin' us what we couldn't see

by tominhawaii on Nov 4, 2007 2:20 PM PST reply actions  

Hadn't considered this
You should make a diary out of that one:  

"What if the Blazers go 0-82? What moves would you make?"

by tssbro on Nov 4, 2007 8:23 PM PST up reply actions  

LMA's adjustment
I just read this whole thread and only two people (Mortimer and Jon) referred to LMA's adjustment last night.  That is, after trying to beat Yao at his own game early on (banging with him), he figured out that he needed to face up and shoot over him.  Bingo: LMA gave Yao fits from that point on.  

The next time the Blazers face Yao, you can bet LMA will remember this lesson--that he needs to vary his approach depending on the strengths and weaknesses of each opponent.  And that'll pay dividends for years to come--long after last night's loss if forgotten.  

That's the kind of progress that this season is all about.  We Blazer fans just need the vision to see the forest for the trees.

by hurryup09 on Nov 5, 2007 1:44 AM PST reply actions  

I like Roy's comments in today's story
I think he's understanding how much winning R.O.Y. meant that teams were going to go out of their way to stop him.  I like that he understands he's got to show up hungry every night and take control of the team.

On the other hand, JJ's comments are really discouraging.  If he truly doesn't understand the issues regarding his play, then he's really a long way from being the PG this team needs.  And I like the guy, I really do.

by leeroyjenkins on Nov 5, 2007 8:33 AM PST 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
The Blazers Future Regarding Free Agent Signings
Small
Thunderous Manboobies
Img_0878_1__small
Why do we hate LaMarcus Aldridge?
Small
Oregonlive "journalists" 2 new posts...same old drivel
2474796688_7cdc78828f_o_small
Greg Oden Suffers Life-Ending Injury; Gets 3-Year Extension

Recent FanPosts

Small
The Blazers' Future Regarding Trades
Small
WHAT TO DO WITH NIC BATUM BECAUSE WE WILL LOSE HIM IF NOT TRADED.
Small
Trade that helps us out now and the future
Small
How can the All-Star game be more fun and competitive?
Small
Earl Boykins!
Small
LaMarcus Aldridge about to become the 10th highest scorer in Blazers franchise  history
Small
New trade that gets us a new point and a three point shooter
Small
Portland getting.....
Small
The Sun Behind the Clouds: Blazers still on track.

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >

FanShots

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

Recommended FanShots

It's pretty clear that the season is over already ;)
Double rainbow of sadness:

1) JBay is getting shorter
2) We never got to see him with a mustache

I miss you tiny raptor man.

via The Basketball Jones http://blogs.thescore.com/tbj/2012/02/09/things-of-note-for-february-9-2012/#more-34561
Blazers Broadcasters Mike Barrett and Mike Rice re-enacted NBA referee Scott Foster's controversial goaltending call on Portland Trail Blazers forward LaMarcus Aldridge, who was defending Oklahoma City Thunder All-Star forward Kevin Durant, during this week's edition of Blazers Courtside. Remarkably, no one was injured during the taping of this segment.

Original video of the play here. 
Quotes from the players and coaches here. 
The NBA admitting it got the call wrong here. 
Dave's  extended thoughts here. 
BlazersMakr's FanShot: Major Vegas action on OKC prior to tip here. 
Audio of Chad Doing of 750 AM The Game going HAM on Foster here.

OK, that should just about wrap up the goaltending discussion.

Courtside video via Blazers Broadcasting cameraman John Curry.

-- Ben Golliver | benjamin.golliver@gmail.com | Twitter
In 2008 Tim Donaghy indicated that Scott Foster was a ref that also fixed games
Blazers Owner Paul Allen Ranked No. 3 American Philanthropist In 2011

Recent FanShots

"You Must Be Known For Your Defense, Because You Definitely Stole My Heart"
Bill Simmons: Deron Williams To Dallas 'Is A Lock'
LaMarcus Aldridge Needs Support Around Him
LaMarcus Aldridge Finds Out He's An All-Star With His Teammates
Congratulations to Portland Trail Blazers forward LaMarcus Aldridge, on his first All Star selection.

As seen on www.trailblazers.com
AWoj: Aldridge an All Star
CRAZY stat from Houston game
NBA MVP Rankings... LMA @ #10

+ 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