Game 56 Recap: Portland 102, Boston 112
Losing to the Celtics is hardly surprising. However I left with a much better feeling after this loss than in either of the previous two. This was a hard-fought game where we had energy and drive. We can't help it that we can't pull Paul Pierce out of a hat when our two other superstars are shut down. Well...for NOW anyway. Just you wait about four years...
The first thing I want to say is that I loved me some first quarter. We said in the preview that the Blazers had to come out with abandon, playing free and loose, taking advantage of the GOOD things about being young. Darned if they didn't. It looked like a LOT of fun! They were stealing, breaking, shooting, and passing like it was a pick-up game. They had their hands on every rebound and loose ball too. We really needed that after some of the stuff we've seen the last three weeks. Doubling up the Celtics 32-16 didn't hurt any either. You knew it wouldn't last that way but it was nice to see them come out just like they should have.
Throughout the game, even early on, it looked like we made a conscious decision to take away Boston's inside points and make covering the perimeter a secondary priority. It worked in the sense that Kevin Garnett never went off. However Paul Pierce and Ray Allen played Bobby Brady to our Peter and made us slaves for the day. Allen scored 19 points on 7-8 shooting. Pierce scored 30 on 12-14 shooting. Each hit 4-5 three pointers, the outside shots opening up the inside drives in Pierce's case. Once again we see that we just don't have the defensive horses to shut down everything. We have to choose one or the other. Problem is you lose either way with the Celtics.
We also got taken out of the game in the second half, first physically, then mentally. This was the only part of the game I'd categorize as a real disappointment. We have to stand up stronger when opponents start smacking and woofing at us. It looked like we let the refs take us out of our game as well. To my view it really wasn't that bad. (I see Myemic has a diary that seems to lean the other way and you're welcome to check there too.) Either way, it doesn't matter.
I write a ton of material. I think I'm pretty on most of the time, but I don't tend to talk about that much, nor hold myself up as someone who should be listened to more than others. But on this matter, this once, I am saying that the players, the announcers, the fans, everybody who comments in the Gameday Threads (which I haven't read yet either), EVERYBODY NEEDS TO LISTEN TO THIS...
There is one, and ONLY ONE, response when you just got knocked to the floor and the ref blew the whistle on you:
Shut up, Get up, "D"-up.
That's it. Nothing else. The first time, the twelfth time, every time.
Outside of perhaps the Shaq-`n-Kobe L*kers there hasn't been a team who got anywhere in this league who has not had to fight against perceived or real injustices from the refs. It happens on your way up against more established teams. It happens again in the playoffs from time to time. Good teams are the ones that OVERCOME that and WIN ANYWAY. I promise you calls will go against us at some critical juncture in the second round or the Western Conference Finals or somewhere really, really important. When that happens I want a long track record of having fought our way through and having won our share despite all that. I don't want a long track record of fans and announcers and coaches whining and the players getting completely distracted and giving up points and plays. I don't care. It doesn't matter. Shut up, Get up, "D"-up. That is all.
As far as the rest of the game, it was a mixed bag tending towards bad. We ended up losing the rebounding battle by 6, although we owned a nice 15-10 lead in offensive boards. We gave up 44 points in the paint and only scored 26 there ourselves. We did end up with a significant free throw advantage, attempting 26 to their 15 and making 22 to their 10. But we kind of wasted the 12 points they spotted us there by letting them shoot 58%. We did get 17 turnovers with 13 steals, which was surprisingly aggressive for us. In the end we just couldn't cover enough shots...that was pretty much the story.
Individual Observations
--Brandon Roy was noticeably limping through the middle sections of the game. He was finally removed and taken to the locker room with ankle difficulties and an MRI is pending. As 2011Champs has noted in a diary this recap mentions something about Brandon saying he may be out up to two weeks. I would not put a ton of stock in that until I'd heard more from local sources and until the MRI results are in.
--Lamarcus started out with a ton of energy tonight but couldn't seem to sustain it in the face of mounting defensive pressure as the game wore on. He ended up 4-11 for 14 points. He had 3 steals and a really sweet block but only 2 defensive rebounds and 5 total.
--Joel Przybilla played one of his better games, I thought, really helping to bother the inside players for the Celtics. He had 7 points and 9 rebounds, plus 2 blocks. He also stood up to KG, which is something the other Blazers can't quite manage in the same way.
--Jarrett Jack scored 17 and was one of the guys who really turned it up a notch tonight. He committed a couple of turnovers on the break down the stretch en route to 5 and he had trouble watching the Celtics' guards. (But then again, who didn't?) He ended with 5 rebounds, 3 assists, and 2 steals. He also drew 6 free throws, one short of the team high set by Lamarcus and Travis. We need that from him.
--Steve Blake lit it up from the three-point arc. It was a flashback to earlier months. He only shot 4-12 but all four makes were bombs. We'd take 12 points, 8 assists, and no turnovers from him every night.
--Travis Outlaw was the star off the bench tonight. He shot 9-19 and confounded the Celtics for 24 points. Just as strikingly he had 4 assists, which for Travis is like a million. This is going to become increasingly important as he handles the ball more. Already when he gets it the rest of the team has a tendency to stand, knowing he's going to shoot. Eventually that will kill us and him. Every time he passes well I get all tingly. As mentioned above he drew plenty of free throws tonight too, which also makes my toes curl. No defensive rebounds in 31 minutes is not good though, and even 5 offensive boards don't make up for it. Travis was also a case in point for why I say that single-game + / - stats don't mean dookie. He was clearly a huge star in this game, giving Boston all kinds of fits. His + / - line? -14.
--Martell didn't start all that aggressively and early on it looked like the guys might even have been going away from him a little. But he did warm up for 8 shots, hitting 4--all of them threes--for 12 points total. It's a good start. More please.
--Raef LaFrentz got 11 minutes of burn at the expense of Channing Frye. Guess Nate figured we needed a bigger body out there. He grabbed a couple of steals and a rebound.
--Apparently there's a mini-Sergio controversy going on surrounding this game, which often happens when Sergio does well. He did well tonight. He shot 3-6 and had 7 points, 2 rebounds, and an assist in 8 minutes. I'm not sure why there has to be a ruckus. For one thing this was kind of like him poking his head out for Groundhog's Day. We've seen it before. If he played like this every game he'd be playing more minutes. He doesn't, and that's the bottom line. Folks tend to forget the 2-3 mundane-or-worse outings he's had and just fixate on the exciting flashes. Second, in a game where Paul Pierce, Ray Allen, and even Rajon Rondo are going off you don't want to send Sergio out there in critical minutes. He's not going to help defensively. On offense you want the ball in Travis' and Lamarcus' hands anyway. Maybe he does do better on those two breaks but what about the other 20 plays? I'm not dogging him. He deserves the same leeway for being young that anybody else does. You celebrate his ups a little more than you castigate him for his downs. But him playing or not is a non-issue when it comes to winning or losing this game. With all due respect to the questioners if Nate did walk out after the 902nd time being asked that question this year I don't entirely blame him. It's like a NASCAR driver fine-tuning his car all week, memorizing every line of the track, fighting through an entire race, then people want to keep blaming him losing every sixth outing on a funny-colored decal by the rear fender.
One-Sentence Game Summary:
OK basketball gods...we can handle losing the game, but losing Brandon again?
--Dave (blazersub@yahoo.com)
41 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
BOO HISS BOOO
Why?
NASCAR REFERENCE.
NASCAR?
Of all the great and mighty auto sports out there, you pick, by far, the most mundane and mind boggling boring one of them all?!
Shame on you Dave.
Next time, I expect a Formula 1 reference.
Preferably talking about how awesome Michael Schumacher and Ayrton Senna were.
NASCAR????
BOOO HISSS BOOOOOOO
I don't know squat about either
I like the pretty decals?
:::hanging head in shame:::
--Dave
New season
Speed channel will carry the feed most of the time.
http://www.formula1.com/races/calendar.html
Oh, and if you think NBA Dancers have, uhm, good "decals" you should check out the girls that hold the umbrellas for the drivers in the pit lanes!

PS: Always root for Ferrari. Throw garbage and mud at the cocky cry-baby Spaniard that is Fernando Alonso.
I used to work for Champ Car
RIP
You are making
I feel like...
by 2011champs on Feb 24, 2008 11:43 PM PST reply actions
There's enough of us that we can share.
Shut up, Get up, "D"-up. That's it.
He was purposely pushed out of bounds so as not to be involved in the play. Hrmmm...this is the NBA, Right? Where does this kind of "Male Bovine
Excrement" end? And how many injuries have to happen before the blind eyed among us have to revisit our Shut up. Get up. "D" up attitudes?
I could go on about the other non calls in the game but instead, I will leave you with this... that is your Son/Daughter in a game. They wind up being carried off on a stretcher, all because the "Ref's" decided to call, what they wanted to call. This game we call Basketball is supposed to be a contest between atheletes. If all I am going to get when I turn on my TV is league sponsored thuggery, I will pass. I can get thuggery walking a block over to the Max...and I don't have to pay for it.
dave, im with you
because you can't do anything about it. it leads nowhere.
Exactly the point!
Using your mindset, from a purely military point of view, we would now be Nazi's. How would you like that? Or possibly Communist? If you are content with the status quo, and what it holds for our future, I pity you. What you are about to receive, is on Your shoulders. Enjoy it.
Wow, only eight comments
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin's_law
Pray tell how you managed to tie Nazism or Communism into your reply? I'm trying to find the connection but it's just making my head hurt.
What is your proposal; what should "WE, The Fans" do? Start a letter-writing campaign to David Stern? Boo especially loud at the referees so they know we don't like it when calls go against us? Hey, that might work. Firebomb the league office while screaming, "I grow weary of these weak excuses!"?
Calls will go against your team. Calls go against every team. And irrational, nonsensical posts will do nothing to change that reality.
by BlazersOrBust on Feb 25, 2008 4:34 AM PST up reply actions
Thank you for pointing me to Godwin's Law.
I know coastrider was trying to express his horror at the situation in the terms of an analogy. We all do these things. If something happens which we think is horrible, we try to express it as intensely as possible, and the Nazi reference works for that. But Godwin's law is right. Using it here does cheapen the atrocities.
How horrific and unimaginable would it be if you were forced to execute your own son by the mob? The emotional pain and anguish would excruciating. This is a fraction of the atrocity which the Nazis committed. (I actually had a more atrocious example, but this is a family site, and I have no desire to scar young minds for life. This example too was incomparable to the Nazi regime.)
If it executing one's own child is too harsh a metaphor for the officiating tonight, then the Nazi reference also is. I understand the useage of the metaphor and the outrage over last night. But for the sake of recognizing true atrocity when it happens, please, please use this as a learning experience, and find a more accurate and appropriate metaphor in the future.
Explaination please
Nate walked out during the press conference?

"Walked out" may be too strong
He then said something to the effect of "Jack is doing alright" (the exact quote is in my recap below) and with that his time was up and the press conference was over.
He was already winding down so it's not like he stormed out. It just happened to be the last question and he didn't exactly answer it directly.
by Ben Golliver on Feb 25, 2008 9:11 AM PST up reply actions
So Dave, let me make sure i understand
i mean, i'm ok if we come to the conclusion that Nate has given up on developing Sergio for this season, and that's the end of the story. but to carry on the fanciful myth that Sergio just hasn't earned more playing opportunities is just ludicrous.
also, just to note for those who didn't watch the game, in reality Jack had one more turnover and Sergio had one less. somehow the stats people gave Sergio the turnover when Jack through a pass to him in the corner that was at least 3 feet over his head and thrown very hard--unfortunately for Sergio he caught it while landing out of bounds from his jump to get it. that is 100% jacks fault, giving him a 2:1 turnover to assist ratio for the game.
*poorly meaning he plays about 4 minutes, commits, say, one turnover, and misses two shots
Jack also had a few mistakes
What I've noticed about Nate this year is that he has a rotation and he sticks with it. He routinely benches players even if they're hot so as to keep his rotation consistent (he did that with Travis last night). For Sergio to get more playing time, he has to look good over and over again in practice and games. If he plays well in his first stretch at the end of the first quarter, he's still only going to get about 8 minutes, because that's how Nate runs his units.
by Lance Uppercut on Feb 25, 2008 8:36 AM PST up reply actions
well . . .
honestly, i just don't think that Nate is objectively looking at how Sergio performs relative to the other guards.
I mean, Jack had 42 minutes last night. 42! and he did not even have a good game. His scoring was inconsistent and irregular, his passing and playmaking were outright HORRIBLE and his defense was poor as well, outside of a few small bursts of energy. and he committed one of the stupidest clear-path fouls i've ever seen at a crucial moment of the game. and Dave is wrong above where he says Jack's TOs were in the break. he had 3, THREE, in a five minute span in the 4th, all in the half-court set.
whereas Sergio came in, hit 3 for 5*, got two effortless layups and hit a 3, and ran the offense effectively while committing zero real turnovers, and pulling down a couple boards--in 8 minutes. he isn't getting a lot of credit for it, but Sergio has stopped all the dribbling out possessions (while it seems like Jack has started to do the opposite) and has become proficient at running the plays Nate calls--which, btw, often take the ball out of his hands--and committing way, way less silly turnovers. in other words he is doing everything right that Nate wants him to do, even if it has meant changing the style of his game . . .
and then he gets 8 minutes to Jarrett's 42. to say that Nate treats Jack and Sergio equally fairly in regard to playing opportunities . . . well, the case just can't be made.
like i said, if Nate just comes out and says he isn't trying to develop Sergio this season, an this is the time to prioritize giving Jack the chance to prove he belongs here, then i'm all for it. but he shouldn't carry on the illusion that Sergio is just failing to earn a spot--it's not good for the fans who can't understand the decision-making, and it certainly isn't good for a young kid like Sergio to be almost tortured while trying to earn playing time. from Sergio's perspective, can you even imagine the pressure and frustration he must be feeling?
[*the 6th shot shouldn't have counted as it was after the horn at the end of the quarter, and a 3/4 court shot]
I mostly agree
His playing time
If you want to ask, "Why isn't Sergio playing more?" I'm all on board with that.
Asking why Sergio didn't play more with the implication that he would have won this game for us is the part I think is silly...and from what I can tell from the stuff I read that implication was in there.
As far as the playing poorly/well thing, the other thing to remember is that there is a certain threshold to move up in the lineup. And that's really what we're talking about here...minutes aren't floating out in space for the grabbing. One player getting minutes means another player loses minutes. Right now there's a spot near the bottom of the Blazers' rotation where a guy can get from 5-10 minutes a game (depending on the situation and how well he's playing). Sergio has that spot. He beat Taurean Green for it. In order to beat somebody out for the next spot up the ladder--which is one of the 25-30 minute regular rotation spots--Sergio is going to have to show conclusively, with consistency, that he's earned it. That hasn't happened. I mean, we can talk about this game or that game or the relative merits and foibles of Jarrett Jack all we want, but that doesn't change that basic truth...Sergio hasn't shown it yet with the spot he has, which means he's not going to be moving up to the next one.
Occasionally I think you could see exceptions if he has the hot hand or if Nate somehow determines that the matchups are favorable. He seemed to have something of a hot hand last night but the matchups and situation weren't that favorable.
So yeah...I think Sergio is in a spot right now where he should concentrate on excelling every night with the minutes he has rather than worrying about getting more. Him playing well one night doesn't change it unless he plays well for, say, a month straight.
BTW...this isn't a Sergio phenomenon either. Every team has players in this situation...most of them young also.
--Dave
i think you should reconsider the criteria
and you know me Dave
however (heehee) just to play devil's advocate, i do honestly think if Sergio was in instead of Jack during the 4th that we would have had a better chance of winning. of course, this is all with hindsight, but even if Sergio had a plain vanilla performance, we would have gotten 3 turnover's back, erased the world's stupidest clearpath foul which gave them 5 points, and the 3s that Ray allen was hitting with Jack covering him would have still counted for just 3 with Sergio covering him.
I know you
I will be very excited at the point where Sergio finally does make it...and part of that excitement will be excitement for you.
--Dave
I can reconsider all I want
But honestly, while I understand the feeling and the argument, I don't think Sergio is in a special or different situation than any number of young kids trying to make it in this league. He's not being singularly put upon or disadvantaged. If he shows consistency in some of the things he did last night he will get his chance and move up. This year, next year, at some point it will happen. But taking advantage of the minutes he gets has to come first.
--Dave
Is the Martell Experiment about Over?
James Jones has been out for weeks and Martell hasn't stepped it up. Roy leaves the door wide open in this game and Martell has minimal impact. At what point to do you say, this isn't the guy?
I've never seen a player want to get the ball out of his hands faster than Martell. He rarely explores making a move before slinging the rock to somebody else like its a hot potato. And the D? He probably gets beat more than any other Blazer, except for maybe Sergio.
The only remedy I see is to start to get greedy and forget about making mistakes. You can't play scared in this league. And after three years in the big time, you can't keep hiding behind the "just a kid" tag.
by ralphwood on Feb 25, 2008 9:14 AM PST reply actions
I don't know
I am curious to hear what others thought of Martell's game last night. Did you think he played well? Was it enough?
--Dave
martell defies radar
martell didn't do enough last night for my taste. as many people have pointed out, he can be a defensive liability a lot of the time so my take on his individual performance generally hinges on his offensive production. the 3s were nice but how many did we (he) give up that simply cancelled those out?
when brandon is out, i would like martell (even more so than travis) to start taking on the alpha male go-to-the-basket domination, either by posting up on the block against a smaller defender, looking for pull-up mid range jumpers or trying to get to the foul line. more than anything he needs to stop hovering. until he does that, i generally see his individual performance as a wash (except on those rare occasions when he is red hot).
just my two cents on martell as of late.
by Ben Golliver on Feb 25, 2008 9:59 AM PST up reply actions
For a shooter
by bubba on Feb 25, 2008 11:09 AM PST up reply actions
Don't feel too good....
Boston is a top team this season featuring 3 great players and they had just lost 3 games, so it was probably a lot to expect a win. Brandon was hobbled. But don't tempt me with inspired, agressive play for 16 minutes, only to slowly retreat and end up playing like puppies. If you are going to come out growling, end the game growling. I don't see that lately and I can't feel too good about it, or even better about it. Maybe we weren't as intimidated by Boston this time around but we did nothing to try and intimidate them after about the first 16 minutes of the game.
We did get intimidated
However maybe we learned by how Boston handled it.
--Dave
Yes...
I guess you can take some heart from the first 16 or so minutes, but it's those first, well played 16 minutes that make the 32 following minutes so frustrating.
I think Nate should let Roy sit
Worst case scenario, we get more lottery balls.
by bubba on Feb 25, 2008 11:11 AM PST reply actions
I'm a Martell watcher
He got frustrated with the refs I think, more than usual for him, reaching an apex when he got shoved out of bounds by All Star Eddie House (I think the ref thought Martell flopped, because Martell DOES do bad flops sometimes... he needs to work on his acting). I didn't notice him getting burned on defense much, nor messing up and leaving someone open. I could have missed it though, and most of those type of mistakes were team wide anyways. I don't know how long you gotta be in the NBA before you get a rep for hitting 3 point shots all day long, but I'm pretty sure Ray Allen has that rep(utation).
How I see a successful game for Marty: ENERGY and focus on both ends of the court. Some games he becomes so apprehensive on offense to try anything aside from shooting 3's, and when he mixes in at LEAST the mid range jumper he's much more useful. On defense, I've been pretty happy with his growth as I think he's a pretty decent one on one defender now. He uses his big body to his advantage, and while still gets beat by quicker guys or tricky guys like Paul Pierce, I wouldn't say it's embarrassingly so-- just as much as any non-lockdown defender would get beat. It isn't like teams can go right at him like previous years; though I think moving him to small forward is a big part of that. He doesn't have the quickness to guard good 2's in the NBA.
Martell looked like he was taken out of his game and is still prone to intimidation. LMA seems the same way, though LMA tries to talk back and glare back more than Marty does. This wasn't a bad game for Martell, but it wasn't one I'd point to and say he's growing. It's an "ehh" game.
IF ONLY he could dribble, he wouldn't pass the ball away so quickly. He clearly just doesn't trust his ability to put it on the floor, especially when there's any sort of pressure. Luckily, that is one of the few offensive skills that can be improved EASILY if one works on it. I hope he and LMA take the same ball handling class so they can become buddies and make cookies together and I can taste a cookie and tell them it is delicious and that I believe in them and I am glad they are taking a ball handling course in how to dribble a basketball because it will help them immensely.
I think Martell has shown a heaping ton more than Outlaw showed his first 3 years in the league, and while both shoulda' gone to college I'm glad we got them now. I don't see any reason to give up on the kid, but he still has lots more to learn to be as good as he can be consistently. I think he's got the body, the brain, and the natural skills to be a great NBA scorer (and not be a liability on defense). He needs to keep developing that brain and b-ball skills.
Mortimer
Sounds like I need
I went to the UH baseball game and watched them get smoked 12-2 instead of watching the Blazers get smoked. I still had fun. Isn't that what life is about?
get up, shut up, D up
The refs were clearly intimidated by KG and company. I have seen the refs walk all over us before because of our tendency to not complain. Roy is the best example, he has never gotten the calls he deserves, and this is likely due to his calm demeanor. Refs can miss a call on roy and not hear anything about it, but if KG doesnt get a whistle they can expect KG in their ear for the next couple of minutes. If I am a ref I am trying to shut KG up so my night isnt so stressful, this will lead to the bias whistles we saw, and in this case, that is exactly what happened. I am sick of refs looking at the blazers and thinking "I can miss a call against this team and not get much of a backlash for it, so if its a questionable call(or not in last nights case), I will just favor the other team"...
If the refs miss a call on Roy
I don't want Roy to be a complainer, and I find the "HEEEEEY" endearing, but I think you gotta work the NBA refs a bit to get calls to go your way. So, while Roy might look like he's complaining more, I think it's in his (and our) best interest.
HEEEEEEY!!
Mortimer
I think refs might di it better
"All kinds of sadness Ive left behind me.
Manys the day when I have done wrong.
But Ill be yours for ever and ever.
Climb in the saddle and whistle along."
"The Wistler".
Woo
by tominhawaii on Feb 26, 2008 10:38 AM PST up reply actions
Officials and Mike Barrett
I figure you have some pull. Would you please take Mike Barrett aside and tell him to give it a break on the officials. I have never heard an announcer whine more than Barrett in all my life. It is becoming awful.
You are right with Shut up, Get up, "D"-up. The refs suck sometimes, and it sucks for us when they do. BUT GET OVER IT.
by ziggythebeagle on Feb 25, 2008 5:47 PM PST reply actions

by 
























