Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: Jerry Sandusky's Wife Tries To Run A Reporter Over

THE Link

I am only putting one link up today and I am leaving it even above the Gameday Thread, at least for this morning.  It's from Quick, from Behind the Blazers' Beat, it's about Nate and Sergio, and everyone needs to read it because it talks about some of the exact...same...things we talked about in the coaching section yesterday.  And I mean dead on.

Hopefully this will put some things to rest, at least for a while.

Link

--Dave (blazersub@yahoo.com)

P.S. (sigh) OK, two links. Mike Barrett just confirmed that Channing Frye will start at center tonight.

Comment 39 comments  |  0 recs  | 

Do you like this story?

Comments

Display:

I don't know about this move....
(the Frye one), but I'll give it a chance.  

by jksnake99 on Nov 7, 2007 12:28 AM PST reply actions  

I think it shows
what a big hole we have at that spot.  I don't think it's anybody's idea of an ideal move, but I can see why it might be tried.  I think the theory is the first unit can compensate a little more.  Maybe Lamarcus can set enough picks and get enough rebounds to make it a wash with Channing in there.  Also that unit is a little more cohesive and able to score (and thus overcome deficiencies).  That second unit is so dang small and rebound-less and defense-less with Travis at 4 and Channing at 5.  Plus nobody is setting good picks on a regular basis.  Maybe Joel does make more of an impact there.  Plus it doesn't mean that he's necessarily getting fewer minutes, just that many of them are coming at a different time.

I don't know that it works long-term either, but you might as well give it a try.

--Dave

by Dave on Nov 7, 2007 1:03 AM PST up reply actions  

I agree
on paper, these two changes seem like a good idea. More defense, rebounding, and toughness in the 2nd unit, and for the starters, more offense and a big that can spread the floor for Roy and LMA.  I think starting Blake was obvious at this point, he will help speed things up and hopefully get LMA some easy buckets on the break.
RUDY > MJ

by myemic23 on Nov 7, 2007 10:47 AM PST up reply actions  

I would have been really upset
with this move but it was made much more palatable in my mind after reading the great explanation proved by Jason Quick yesterday.

No doubt our interior defense will suffer from the move though.  We're obviously short on centers so I'm perplexed as to why we don't try to use Raef a little bit more.

by TwoDeep on Nov 7, 2007 6:58 AM PST up reply actions  

mght be time to use that GO injury exception
Might be time to sign a big stiff. Someone intimidating who can fill up the paint on D.
When church and state marry, the devil pays for the reception.

by fisheyes on Nov 7, 2007 9:52 AM PST up reply actions  

too late
if I remember correctly it couldn't be used without releasing someone currently under contract and it had to be used by Oct 31. I don't think it was feasible. We all just need to hope Josh McLovin comes out on a mission to rebound and defend.
October, October, October, October, October...... (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Odin)

by Idog1976 on Nov 7, 2007 11:08 AM PST up reply actions  

its all about the 4th quarter
I like how Nate emphasizes that its not who starts a game, but who finishes(maybe I should go back and put that in the positive Nate comments). Hopefully all the team got that as a take home message, but Jack's comments after he learned about his fall from the starting line up did not seem to reflect that.

When they announce Frye as a starter can someone please yell "Whats with the long face Channing you're starting buddy." That joke will never wear thin with me.

by jonestr on Nov 7, 2007 1:28 AM PST reply actions  

Redundant
Didn't we do this last year? Man it's frustrating to have the same ole' problems. I just hope Quick doesen't writer another "Jack was so upset he watched game tapes with Nate all night" story. I swear I read like 3 of those last season.

by jayseyfield on Nov 7, 2007 1:32 AM PST reply actions  

Hmmm, I don't think Nate's answer
to the question of why Sergio doesn't get much (or no) playing time provided all that much explanation. Yeah, I understand that defensive shortcomings are at play, but Jack's performance in his first 3 games have displayed defensive, scoring and assist shortcomings, yet he is logging abundant minutes.

I guess the answer lies in Dave's explanation that Nate is relucant to be too critical of Sergio to the press so that we're not hearing what Nate really thinks .... although it seems to me that  "DNP-CD" next to Segio's name provides plenty of implied criticism.    

by TwoDeep on Nov 7, 2007 7:16 AM PST reply actions  

Definitely unsatisfying...
This sounds a lot like last year's piece when fans were clamoring for more Sergio and The Oregonian printed an article about the differences between the two point guards (Jack and Sergio at the time).

We get it- Sergio struggles on defense and, for awhile, he struggled with the language barrier.

Regardless, it still seems like if a guy can come off the bench and get 4-6 assists in 10 minutes running the simple pick-and-roll, it doesn't seem like he should be getting DNP-CD's.

As fans, I don't think many of us are saying "Make Sergio the starter," but when the Blazers go through one of their inevitable 4 or 5 minute streaks without scoring an easy basket, why not throw a little El Mago in there?

by Champs2009 on Nov 7, 2007 7:57 AM PST up reply actions  

Agreed. Zero answers, more of the same.
Nothing new here, and the same suspect reasoning. All these points have been discussed here ad infinitum, but I wish i could just shake Nate and say "We are real fans we watch the games, we see both the flaws and the greatness. And we want more Sergio. Nate, the +- don't lie!* The Blazers have scored more points than their opponents with Sergio in the game, and whoever has the most points wins!"

I mean, come on, we've all seen with our own eyes this season Sergio outperforming Jack overall. Yet, Quicks article says that Sergio has a lot of work to do to get to 20 minutes a game. No sense, i tell ya.

*the +- can and does lie, in actuality, when trying to pull more from that stat than should be. All i'm saying here is that if his defense is such a huge problem, then let's see it reflected in the +/- before we start giving it such overwhelming importance. Sergio's defense can be the worst defense the NBA has ever seen but if we outscore opponents, I don't see the problem. Of course, he should be working on his defense and from what i can tell, he is.

by sergioFTW on Nov 7, 2007 8:43 AM PST up reply actions  

whoops, sorry for the italics
looks like the BE text parser had some problems with two of my /s i had in there between some plus/minuses.

by sergioFTW on Nov 7, 2007 8:50 AM PST up reply actions  

Did you read Nate's comments?
He doesn't just get beat on defense.  He is playing zone while everyone else is playing man.  He doesn't get the plays from the sidelines to run on offense.  It isn't good for a team to have the point guard not relaying the plays and getting everyone on the same page.

I think that is what most people who are trying to give Nate the benefit of the doubt have been saying.  He looks great and full of potential but he is not following through with what the coach wants him to do.

by tssbro on Nov 7, 2007 10:49 PM PST up reply actions  

Unfortunately, this won't put anything to rest.
For many partial observers, only familiarity will breed contempt.

by webted on Nov 7, 2007 8:28 AM PST reply actions  

averaging 8:47 a game
Quick was a bit misleading to say that Sergio is averaging 8:47 a game. That's only the average # of minutes Sergio has in games he gets to play in, not his average in Blazer games. In fact, over the first three games, Sergio is averaging 5:51 per game. Not. Very. Much.

by sergioFTW on Nov 7, 2007 8:49 AM PST reply actions  

anything
has to be better than jack, and it's not like blakes been a stud either.  heck, Nate might as well let green and sergio run the show for a game or two if we're behind by halftime and it's going to be a struggle just to get to single digits then why not....  

I don't understand the rebuilding if i don't see any rebuilding.  Doing the same ol same ol is not rebuilding.  going back two seasons with our lineup is not rebuilding...  Jack is not a starter.  Might as well try adapting instead of being so obstinate about Jack. Nate's refusal to admit how bad Jack sucks compared to any other point guard on our team has me scratching my head.  Sometimes I get the feeling he thinks the fans are scrubs who can't tell defense from offense.  (I still think he's a great coach, though).

Get busy livin', or get busy dyin'. -the shawshank redemption.

by pdxborn on Nov 7, 2007 8:56 AM PST reply actions  

Where's Green?
That's been my issue so far with the point guards.  They've been shooting badly and not playing any defense.  Green does those!

by robrun2 on Nov 7, 2007 9:51 AM PST reply actions  

I'm baffled as to why
Sergio and Green don't get more minutes. If they aren't going to be developed then we ought to get rolling on that trade that brings us a PG we don't need to develop. Seeing as that is not happening we need to develop those two guys ASAP before not after Oden arrives they need to understand Nate's system.
October, October, October, October, October...... (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Odin)

by Idog1976 on Nov 7, 2007 11:28 AM PST up reply actions  

sign a veteran PG
Three steps toward improving our PG and C situations before the end of this season:

  1.  Sign a veteran PG,

  2.  Trade Jack and Blake for a decent backup center,

  3.  Play Sergio and Green at backup PG, with Sergio getting maybe 12 minutes per game and Green 6.
When church and state marry, the devil pays for the reception.

by fisheyes on Nov 7, 2007 9:58 AM PST reply actions  

I guarantee
there is no free agent point guard better than Blake.  Remember multiple teams fighting for Blake during the offseason, something tells me there is a reason that portland, denver and miami all wanted Blake. In fact, Denver or miami probably would have started him.
RUDY > MJ

by myemic23 on Nov 7, 2007 10:59 AM PST up reply actions  

Can't trade Blake
he has a no trade clause this year. We need to trade Jack and...someone. If a trade is going to be made at all. It will probably come in a wild flurry either during the trade deadline or when the moratorium on trades in lifted in the summer.
October, October, October, October, October...... (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Odin)

by Idog1976 on Nov 7, 2007 11:27 AM PST up reply actions  

The first question
is whether we need to improve the PG and C situations before the end of this year.  I think the short answer is no.  The team needs to have a prospective approach (i.e. solving problems that will occur in two years time), not a knee-jerk reactive one (i.e. 3 bad games from PG use all cap flexibility to sign a veteran in or close to decline).  Patience is going to be a virtue, and one that I think KP has.  What we really need to do is develop Frye, and work with all 4 of our PGs to find which one is the best fit.  When our current big contracts run out, make sure Roy/LMA/Oden (and increasingly Webster) are happy, and then take the extra cash and fill a hole.

by TearsforDuckworth on Nov 7, 2007 12:26 PM PST up reply actions  

Nate, Sergio, Blazer culture
Maybe this is behind the Blazers' Sergio thinking... Nate (and KP) are trying to establish a culture of winning, and they believe that practicing hard and showing improvement is part of it.  That means performance and effort in practice is figuring into who gets minutes, not just performance in games. Possibly, Nate has established some benchmarks for Sergio (intensity, defense, knowledge of offensive and defensive sets) that he's not meeting.  Combine that with not hearing or understanding calls from the bench during games, and it's hard to bump his minutes up, even though his actual performance in games is better than that of other PGs on the roster.

I'm in the pro-Sergio camp, but I don't think it's unreasonable for him to accept the challenges that Nate has set for him to earn playing time. And if it IS part of a long-range approach (THIS is what the culture will be like here), then it's hard to argue, even though it's hard to see Sergio on the bench during Blake's dull stretches or Jack's ineffective ones...

by barryj on Nov 7, 2007 10:04 AM PST reply actions  

Middle ground...
Some thoughts...

Before we throw Jack under the bus, we need to realize that we're only 3 games into the season. Players go through slumps all the time, especially young players, and part of "development" is learning how to play through and play out of these slumps.

On top of that, we need to realize that our own impressions of Sergio might be blown out of proportion (and this is coming from a HUGE Sergio fan). Last year, he came out of relative obscurity to cement himself deep within our hearts as a fan favorite because he was our one player (2 if you count Outlaw) that would consistently push the tempo. We loved him for that and, most importantly, we wanted to see more of him.

The problem is, as Nate pointed out, that Sergio has flaws. Last year, he had the language barrier on top of the fact that he was a rookie point guard. This year, he has more experience, but the playbook is noticeably simplified when Sergio is running the show. We become an up-tempo team that uses the pick-and-roll as it's bread-and-butter. Period. This isn't necessarily a bad thing; it's just simpler than some of the rotations that the first line run.

Secondly, don't put too much stock in the predicted success of Sergio Rodriguez by ESPN.com and SI.com. I think Sergio will be an awesome, exciting point guard, but any player who averages 12.3 assists per 48 minutes is going to appear to be future star. I think the Wages of Wins article about future stars was a real eye-opener because 3 of their 5 "Future Stars" are no longer in the NBA... You can also think of it this way- If Josh McRoberts comes in and grabs 2 rebounds in 1 minute, he's carrying a 96 rebounds per 48 minutes average. Should he be predicted to be the next Dennis Rodman?

Thirdly, if we did add Sergio to the first line right now (or increase his playing time to `first unit' minutes), it's not difficult to predict some of the problems that we might have.

1.)    Sergio seems to have improved his jumper this summer but our sample size is limited because he hasn't really shot a lot this season and preseason. Opposing starters might just take their chances and let Sergio shoot all night, which probably isn't in our best interests.

2.)    As Nate pointed out and we mostly agree on, Sergio's defense isn't quite ready for `first line' exposure. None of our point guards have been all that intimidating on the defensive end, but the difference is, that Jack and Blake look comfortable in both man-to-man and our team defenses. Sergio looks a little lost, especially when we are in our Zone defenses.

3.)    And we can talk + / - numbers all day, but the bottom line is that NO team coached by Nate McMillan will result to simply "scoring more than their opponents." I don't know if you knew this, but when Coach McMillan sleeps, he doesn't snore. Instead, he twitches and mutters "Defense, Defense, Defense."

4.)    Sergio is also at a disadvantage because he doesn't naturally mold into an off-guard when Brandon Roy plays the point. I think they could eventually work this out, but as of now, either Sergio or Roy would lose something when they're both on the floor together.

Now, I'm not in love with Jarrett Jack either, but I think yanking him out after 3 rough games is the worst possible scenario in the BIG picture of our future dynasty. Jack has a lot of the physical tools to be a very good player in the NBA. He's thick, he's got some speed, and when he's playing aggressive, he's got a really solid offensive game. He just needs to get his swagger back, sort of like Matt Damon in "The Legend of Bagger Vance." Does anyone know if Will Smith is available?

I guess we really need to redefine the term "rebuilding." I don't think you can say that the Blazers are "rebuilding" in the sense that they are overhauling the roster and starting over. We've "rebuilt." Now, we just need to find out what still remains and develop that.

by Champs2009 on Nov 7, 2007 10:20 AM PST reply actions  

Well put.
Definitely shows more thought than posts that call for trading for a veteran PG (like, who for example) or giving PT to the fourth string rookie.

And what is so difficult to grasp about why Sergio does or doesn't get more court time?  Do a significant percentage of fans here really feel like Fizbin (in his diary post)?  That you are as knowledgeable about basketball and about coaching an NBA team as McMillan or at least knowledgeable enough to feel insulted by Nate's comments regarding Rodriguez?  I sure don't think I could step into his shoes.  And if you don't believe you can do that, then you really are not in a position to be critizing the guy.

I do understand enough about the game to know that there is more to it than individual performance.  I've heard people state that "Sure, Sergio is a poor defender, but he can't be any worse than Jack."  Problem with that is it just isn't true.  Jack might be getting lit up in individual matchups, but if he's managing to play in accordance to the defensive schemes, he is at least less likely to screw up the rest of the guys.  Based on McMillan's comments, it's not just a case of Sergio being a poor defender.  It sounds like he doesn't know where he's supposed to be or what to do.  Like fighting through a screen or going under it, switching or staying with his man, rotating to the right player or spot when a teammate gets beat.  If he is failing at tasks such as these on a regular basis, then he's messing up everybody's defense.

People just need to relax.  Every indication which matters shows that both the GM and the coach are high on Rodriguez.  His name was not bandied about this summer in trade talk, other than comments that other teams asked about him and the answer was always no thanks.  His coach, away from the media, talks about him all the time and in a positive manner.  His teammates like him.  If we are not seeing him a lot on the court, it's pretty safe to assume it's because he's not ready and/or that he's not the best PG on the team right now.  Assuming the coach has a bias against him or doesn't know what he's doing is not a reasonable conclusion.

by timg56 on Nov 7, 2007 12:37 PM PST up reply actions  

Nate just fans the flames
I am quite sure that everything Nate says about him is true. I still think he should be given playing time.

The fans see that he's special and they're not wrong about that.   With playing time he can learn defense and discretion, but neither Jack nor Blake are going to develop his court-vision.

I understand Nate's hesitancy. Sergio's the fastest horse but has no reigns. It will be a bumpy, white-knuckle ride. It's loss of control of the whole offense. Popovich used to describe that fear everytime he put Ginobilli in the game.

PS: Nate is a great coach and JJ is a shooting guard.

by cantdunk on Nov 7, 2007 10:45 AM PST reply actions  

I don't know how this can put things to rest,
it's the same stuff we've been hearing for awhile now. Apparently Sergio is not a good practice player so Jack and Blake have "earned" their time. But as I've said before, you can be the greatest practice player in the world and that may not translate to actual gameplay. Eventually you have to look at performance on the court.

Jack is letting defenders drive by him.
Jack is committing a lot of turnovers.
Jack is shooting 20%.

I'm not hearing how Sergio is worse in anything McMillan says. I'm not saying Sergio should start, but he should get more time based on Jack's numbers. I think Nate is more worried about Jack's ego and betraying Jack's trust than he is in what's good for the team right now. And that's disturbing if it's true.

by Blazerholic on Nov 7, 2007 10:47 AM PST reply actions  

You hit upon the crux of the issue
Nate IS worried about Jack's ego but not for the reason you outline but rather BECAUSE he is worried about what is good for the team. Jack has a LOT of friends on this team and is well respected by his team mates. This is a problem when Jack is the ONLY player on the team that I have seen say suspect things in the Media. We have had several benchings and a few rough nights yet the ONLY player to have not taken responsibility for their own game is Jack. This is a huge HUGE tip off to me that he may have the Stoudamire gene. He's amazing when he is on, he really isn't a TRUE PG, and he is dangerous in the locker room if other guys get "HIS" minutes. This is clear from his media statements. If he is saying those sorts of things in the media then what is he saying behind closed doors?

I noticed that Roy looked rattled in pictures of him from the charity work he did with LMA. He was looking not his jovial self according to the reporter. My theory on this is that I think Roy knows there is a problem with Jack and that bothers him because they are friends. Sadly this league doesn't care much about friendships when players are worried about themselves more then the team. I know the position Roy is in because at my work we have lots of transfers from one part of the Sprawling bureaucracy to another and I "Lose" friends this way all the time.

 At the end of the day all you can do is go out, do your job and not complain, at least not to the media. let's hope Jack will accept a combo guard off the bench role. If he does that it will be a HUGE boon to this team and his own stats if not...I see Jack gone before the All-Star break.

Blake should start with serious back up minutes depending on our needs for Sergio (Offense) and Green (Defense late game 3's). Jack needs to get touches as a 2 guard that is where he will flourish.

October, October, October, October, October...... (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Odin)

by Idog1976 on Nov 7, 2007 11:42 AM PST up reply actions  

So you're saying
that Jack's ability and career are defined by the last 3 games?

Is it possible that the 80 game sample of last year is more valid then this 3 game road trip?

And your thought that Nate would sacrifice the "good of the team" for the sake of jack just seems unfounded. I don't think there's an iota of evidence to support that contention.

Unless I'm mistaken, blake is starting tonight.

by moldorf on Nov 7, 2007 11:45 AM PST up reply actions  

I don't think I said that at all.
People keep bringing up last year. What for? When we talk about Webster's solid performance, it's not comparable to what he did last year. I'm not talking about someone's career stats. I'm talking about someone slumping hard right now.

Blake is starting tonight. Will the backup minutes go to Jack or Sergio? If they go to Jack, you have to ask yourself if it's good for the team at this point in time - not using someone's career stats or how popular they are to justify playing time.

by Blazerholic on Nov 7, 2007 4:03 PM PST up reply actions  

by that logic
you could replace someone in the starting lineup after one bad game. Maybe Brandon Roy should have been benched after the Spurs game.

That didn't happen of course, because the coaches knew that wasn't indicative of his ability. How did they know that? In no small part because of last year. There is relevance to what a player has established in the past.

Jack has been replaced as the starter which is demotion enough.

And by the way, trying to say that jack get's playing time over sergio because jack is more "popular" is totally absurd. Sergio's popularity knows no bounds these days.

And frankly, in my opinion, your insistence on implying that Nate is making decisions without the good of the team in mind (you've done it twice), needs to be offered with some proof or discarded as a debating point.

by moldorf on Nov 7, 2007 4:55 PM PST up reply actions  

Why Sergio fans seem overenthusiastic
I believe some people feel Sergio's fans are overenthusiastic. And Nate's reaction just expalains it.

"I have talked with McMillan several times over the past year about Sergio, and his lack of playing time. At times, McMillan has become defensive, and I would say probably more than any other topic, the questions about Sergio tend to rankle McMillan the most."

Nate have been treating Sergio in a very special way, compared to others. He might still like him but he's been extraordinarily strict to his turnover. We barely heard his praise about Sergio. He deosn't substitute Sergio in a logical and consistent way. He is sending mixed message.

People aren't asking major minutes for Sergio. They are asking consistent sub pattern. They want to make sure our coach is giving players fair chances, motivating them, and encouraging them.

Last year I asked more PT for Aldridge. I was pissed that Nate gave Magloire all the PT but gave Aldridge some DNP in December. But from Jan. things were getting better. Aldridge didn't play major minutes but he could always get some PT and learned. That's what I want for Sergio. I need to make sure he'll be given fair chance.

by spring610 on Nov 7, 2007 12:30 PM PST reply actions  

That DNP for LMA
didn't work out very well did it, oh wait it did.  And his treatment of Webster, and the development of Outlaw, and Rashard Lewis.  Four examples of players developed under Nate that have eventually flourished when they were ready.  Is it possible that Nate sees the development and positive direction in Sergio but knows he just isn't ready for the load yet?  And that he is getting defensive because he likes the same things that everyone else does and he is just waiting till those positives can be developed in game situations properly?  Is it possible that Nate as a coach and former player just wants to develop his player without the fans telling him whats best for Sergio?  Theres defensive because you don't want to do want to do the rigth thing, and there is defensive because you are doing the right thing and everyone is hounding you to change.  I hope Nate is defensive because of the later.

by TearsforDuckworth on Nov 7, 2007 12:47 PM PST up reply actions  

LMA's DNP
did what to his improvement? I didn't see it.

From LMA's very first game, at Rose Garden against Mavs last season I knew he was a real deal and he just needed PT to learn the game. He got in foul trouble too early but as soon as he got used to NBA he would be fine. There wan't necessarily anything about the DNP.

And yeah I also HOPE Nate is defensive because he's doing the right thing that fans don't  appreciate it. I'm just not very sure from what I've been observed.

by spring610 on Nov 7, 2007 1:57 PM PST up reply actions  

The point is
that the results cant be argued with.  You may have questioned his methods at the time, but LMA was traded to Portland because he was a project.  Now after less than a full regular season (remember he missed the early season last year) he is more than a solid contributor.  So while you were questioning Nate's methods with LMA last Dec. you are not questioning the results now.  At the end of the day, my point is let the coach coach.  He is the professional, and a darn good one at that.  

by TearsforDuckworth on Nov 7, 2007 2:33 PM PST up reply actions  

In Defence of Nate
Portland is 0-3, but they have progressed over three years. Back two years ago, they were getting blown out with nary an effort. Last year, they were getting big holes, but learning how to scrap and fight back and win close games. This year, they'll still get big holes and still scrap and fight back - but they'll be doing so using a more fluid style that will make them more flexibly able to handle a variety of opponents in years ahead. The Blazers will be ready for the time when Roy becomes PG (with Sergio behind) and Rudy and Oden in the lineup.

by jcox on Nov 7, 2007 3:30 PM PST reply actions  

How hard is it to set a screen?
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 7, 2007 4:12 PM 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