Game 67 Recap
This was a very, very good win. Not so much because it was a good game, mind you. It was pretty ugly on both sides out there tonight. But we fought back against a decent team and were really quite poised going down the stretch. But most of all it would have simply crushed the guys--and probably all of us--to lose another one in dramatic fashion (as was looking possible in the final seconds) and for that reason alone it's a great victory.
Wizards 98, Blazers 100
Boxscore
Team Observations:
--The shooting out there was nothing short of gross...for both sides. It was a hard game to watch...surprisingly so for two relatively inept defensive teams. However we hit far more clutch shots down the stretch than they did. We also shared the ball far better in the second half than they did (or than we, ourselves had done in the first half). It felt like the first bunch to come together as a team was going to win this game and that turned out to be us.
--We didn't get pasted on the boards! Woohoo! And what a job we did team rebounding! We ended up outrebounding them by 2. We didn't get a whole lot of offensive rebounds, but even though it may seem sacrilegious to say on a team that scores quite a few points that way, I think offensive rebounds are one of the more overrated stats out there. You get very few of them by percentage and when your team really thrives on that you often get your pants beat off in transition because guys are hanging back under the hoop instead of running back. In other words, I don't care much that we only got 8 offensive boards. This was still a great night rebounding for a young and mostly undersized team.
--We didn't turn the ball over and we only trailed the Wizards in foul shots by six (by 4 in made foul shots). That gave us a chance to win.
--Despite all that, the biggest reason we won this hugely imperfect game was one Gilbert "Colonel Klank" Arenas. His shooting was awful. No...no...wait. Let me try that again. His shooting was AWFUL. He went 4-16 for the night (one better than his 3-15 effort earlier in the year). The only ways he scored were layups and free throws. Anything else was repugnant. And nothing more so than his last-second shot to tie the game. We were up 100-98 and he had the ball at the top of the three-point arc with three seconds left. Instead of hoisting for the win he drove. He beat the socks off of his man and pulled up before he could be bothered by the next layer of defense. This left him a wide-open 10-12 foot shot. He had beaten his man so badly my instinctive thought was, "Dang! Here comes overtime!" Colonel Klank didn't even live up to his nickname though. That 10-foot shot never touched rim. It fell a good THREE FEET SHORT. It was the most amazingly pathetic shot I've seen in...forever. In his book "Loose Balls" Terry Pluto describes the last shot of prolific scorer Marvin Barnes' career. He rose up and lofted a ball that fell way short like a duck that had been shot out of the sky. That's an apt description of this shot. Of course the good Colonel is at the apex of his career and not the end, but does that make the shot better or worse?
Individual Observations
--Brandon Roy was the MAN tonight. To be honest in the first part of the game it looked like he was having trouble dealing with all of the extra attention the Wizards were throwing his way. But when it came down to the fourth quarter and we needed shots he was the Clutch-o-Matic in spades. Have I mentioned how much I love this guy? He's not just our future, he's our present. He's started to prove that in the last part of this season. And, by the way, on a night when we needed extra rebounding he grabbed 12. He had 5 turnovers too, but we'll give him a pass on his first night as Da Man.
--Lamarcus Aldridge was the other brilliant player. You'd think maybe with Zach out he'd put extra pressure on himself to carry the load. But he didn't do anything outside of what he's capable of doing. I swear he looked like a ten-year vet out there in that sense. It was wonderful! He ended up shooting 9-15, drawing 8 foul shots, grabbing 8 rebounds, and adding 2 assists, 3 steals, and 2 blocks along with 25 big points. Wow.
--The rest of the starting unit also played within themselves. There was little panic in this game. In fact if anything there was too little energy at first. Ime, Jamaal, and Jarrett all filled their roles.
--Travis Outlaw really needs to hit some of the open shots his teammates are setting him up with. His 12 shots were by far the most among the second unit guys but he missed 9 of them.
--Sergio had 9 points and 9 assists in 22 minutes. The Espresso junkies can relax...you're going to get another shot or two based on this game. He had a SPECTACULAR alley-oop to Freddie Jones that should make SportsCenter tonight.
--Martell Webster came alive in the fourth quarter! When we needed it he hit two key three point shots plus later he got a conventional three-point play off of a strong drive. 11 points, 4 rebounds, an assist, and a steal ain't bad for 20 minutes.
--Fred Jones hit 3-4 tonight but his outside shot still looks iffy. That dunk though. WOW. I like him.
Miscellaneous Observations
--Antawn Jamison had a really great game. I was actually far more scared that he'd attempt the last shot of the game than Illbert.
OK...how many nicknames can one guy have? Just as long as I don't end up on the pages of his blog myself, I guess. "Dave had THREE typos in ONE post! And his use of parentheses for everything is craptacular. I bet he's a Swagless Wonder in real life." Then, of course, I would be forced to challenge Mr. Arenas to an exotic dance-off and that would get really messy.
--Dave (blazersub@yahoo.com)
0 recs |
16 comments
Comments
Webster
LaMARVELOUS ALDRIDGE haha.. what a stud. A stat filler for the next decade.. amazing.. When we drafted him I was worried cause I'd read alot of bad scouting reports, saying he was to soft, to skinny, bound to be a bust.. who knew he could drain 18 footers like nothin.
Roy.. only a matter of time till Nike discovers that killer crossover. Sometimes he makes defenders just disappear off screen with that weapon.
That dunk.. = WOW... Last time his oop didn't make sportscenter, if it don't tonight, then Bristol can go to hell. (sorry)
by junit3123 on Mar 20, 2007 11:06 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Rookies led every major stat category
Has this happened for us before? Maybe I just never noticed it, but I can't remember a group of rookies for the Blazers lead us in everything.
We got the best youngsters in the league.
Mortimer
by Mortimer on Mar 20, 2007 11:23 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I wish
by JPop on Mar 21, 2007 12:32 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
so roy, aldridge and rodriguez
that's a YOUNG team. some have progressed faster than others, but you have to give the coaches credit. this is in the realm of the fab five at michigan 10-12 years ago.
by ignacio on Mar 21, 2007 1:25 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Okay
Does this make any sense? That Gilbert play was nothing spectacular. Sergio does that 3 times a game with LMA.
by damir on Mar 21, 2007 2:11 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Dave
by damir on Mar 21, 2007 2:16 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Washington Post - Blazers-Wiz wrap
by dcblazer on Mar 21, 2007 2:25 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
"most hated man
Ra's one of my favorite non Blazers too. I guess I'm out of touch with Blazer fandom...
by howlingfantods on Mar 21, 2007 8:51 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Funniest 24 seconds of the night
I have to say I liked the way the second unit looked ;last night better than the first unit. I take that back. I liked the second unit + Aldridge, and sometimes Roy. Roy actually seemed to slow the pace when he got in, like he wasn't sure how to play with Sergio/Martel/Outlaw/Jones. Sergio may end up with more TOs than Jack, but he puts the defense on their heels and gets all of the other four guys invested in the game. They know that if they get open, they have a great chance of getting the pass.
by HarryManback on Mar 21, 2007 8:38 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
not too many TOs
by sergioFTW on Mar 21, 2007 9:47 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Oh, I'm surprised you didn't mention it
In other Roy news, Bargnani's out for the season after getting appendectomy surgery. They can start engraving the name on the statue now.
by howlingfantods on Mar 21, 2007 9:10 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
If that statue
--Dave
by Dave on Mar 21, 2007 9:27 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hah
Roy's got a tougher row to hoe playing for a cellar dweller with a bad recent rep like the Jailblazers. Hell, ray allen, who is about where I consider Roy's upside is, had to be an injury sub this year as an allstar playing for another cellar dweller. And while I love Roy's clutchness and crossover penetration moves, he's not exactly the second coming of the human highlight film.
Team record has never mattered too much for ROY, but it's something to hang your jacket on if you're the NBA and consider that Toronto's a much bigger market, and you want to promote and recognize Canada basketball more than our little market. It's always worthwhile to remember that awards and trophies are ultimately just marketing pieces.
by howlingfantods on Mar 21, 2007 9:45 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Larry Bird never looked all that good
And Roy is getting it done.
From what I have seen of the Barge (which is admittedly little), he hasn't looked any more flashy than Roy has. Mostly just jumpers and an occasional post move.
by shenanigans on Mar 21, 2007 12:39 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
We've got some decent free throw shooters.
And yet, our rookie center is pretty much nails--take THAT, Shaq!
In fact, there's not a guy on our team I would describe as sub-par at the charity stripe.
(Yes, I'm still bitter over that 10-for-20 performance in the Spurs game.)
As for offensive boards, I look at it this way: they turn missed shots into passes.
Sometimes, when combined with superior overall rebounding,
a points-in-the-paint advantage and getting to the line more,
it can paint a picture of better work and hustle--but not O-boards by itself.
I also view turnovers as the equivalent of a missed-shot/defensive-rebound sequence.
(There's also giving up easy baskets to consider, but I think
points off turnovers is a better indicator of that;
some turnovers are NOT easy-basket opportunities for the opposition,
such as offensive fouls, traveling, passing to the bleachers--
anything that stops the clock and makes them inbound from their backcourt.)
So here's what I often do when looking at a boxscore, especially if
the winning team seems to have a worse shooting percentage than the losers:
Take the turnovers and offensive boards, and adjust the "shots attempted" by the difference.
(Since a turnover is a missed shot that never got taken to be credited,
and an offensive board is a pass, credited as a shot attempt.)
If turnovers are greater than offensive rebounds, ADD the difference
to the shot attempts; if turnovers are fewer, SUBTRACT the difference.
It's really simple (about 5th-grade-level math, in my opinion) and tells a lot.
It doesn't get into what kind of game was played, or break down
how the stats got to where they were or anything too complicated or analytical.
It just breaks down non-free-throw possessions into 2 categories:
1) Gave the other guys the ball without us scoring.
2) Gave the other guys the ball because we scored.
It's just that simple.
by QualityPie on Mar 21, 2007 11:33 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

by 






















