Blazersedge: An SB Nation Community

Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Sports blogs for fans, by fans.
New Blog: RSL Soapbox for Real Salt Lake Fans!

Game 48 Recap: Blazers 100 Bulls 97

Boxscore

Team Observations

Let's deal with one of the big questions of the night first:  Why Martell to the bench?  I haven't read around too much so it came as a surprise to me, though we had speculated over the last few weeks that it's a move that might need to happen.  I apologize if this has been explained more officially elsewhere, but here are the explanations I can see:

  1.  As the Mikes mentioned we need shooting in the second unit.  The starters are all about Roy and Aldridge when things are moving smoothly.  Steve Blake is a nice shooting outlet and Jack can hold his own when open.  The second unit, though, really depends on spreading the floor.  It's no accident that the White Unit got famous when James Jones was unconscious from distance.  I don't know if I buy that this was done for Sergio's sake as was mentioned on the broadcast, but it certainly does help him...and more importantly Travis Outlaw.  With Jones out Martell finds more of a home with those two.
  2.  We need to make life hard on opposing guards.  One of the best ways to do this is make them play defense.  Unfortunately Martell has become an easy cover lately.  All his man has to do is camp out with him on the weak side at the three-point line and stand.  Tonight was a perfect example of the kind of mismatch problems the Brandon/Jack/Blake trio can cause.  You're going to have trouble guarding Brandon with your small forward.  You can't put him on Jarrett either.  So what do you do?  Granted had Deng played it might have been a different story on the other end, but this shakes things up a little at least by making him play both ways.
  3.  Jarrett Jack has been playing well and adds a little more driving potential to the first unit.
  4.  Martell has been doing some things well.  He's a had a couple of monster streaks.  But even during those it's still been either him scoring OR others scoring, seldom both.  He'll rip six in a row on consecutive possessions or he won't score at all.  Both the streakiness and the unilateral scoring are more second unit traits than first unit, especially on this team.  Plus, let's face it, outside of those streaks he hasn't been hitting that many.  Yes we want Martell to rebound and move his feet but that doesn't change the fact that he's a shooter.  He must shoot and he must hit to be effective and that's not happening right now.  Maybe coming off the bench allows him some space to work that out.
The big question I have is who sets screens for him.  He really needs them to get his jumper off.  On the other hand if he keeps attacking like he did tonight maybe he doesn't need them as much.  (More on that later.)

Another thing that really jumped out at me tonight is how much better the Blazers are offensively when they're pushing the ball up the court.  We've said this before.  It's not that they're fast breaking.  The point guards are just running it up instead of walking.  It's happening a lot more and that's good.  In the Zach years whenever I watched a game on Tivo I could hit a quick burst of fast forward after every Blazer defensive rebound, knowing I wasn't going to miss a thing.  If I try that now I miss the play half the time.  Hustling up the floor sets the tone for the offensive possession, keeping guys moving and aggressive.  It also allows more time for more passes and options...including re-setting the play if the first try doesn't work out.  That helps us immensely.

One of the questions both the Mikes and Gavin Dawson asked about the game was why we can't seem to blow things out.  As the Mikes said part of it is attitude and experience.  But that's not all of it by a long shot.  Defense is the short answer.  We play decent defense as a team but that comes over the long haul, averaged out.  On individual possessions as individual players our defense is actually somewhat spotty.  Oftentimes if an opponent needs a critical bucket they'll get it.  Chicago got quite a few critical buckets tonight after getting down.  How many open looks from mid-range or off drives did you see?  Our defense involves a lot of gimmicks...often effective, but compensatory nonetheless.  We play a lot of zone, leaving creases to move and shoot.  When we play man-to-man we switch on every screen to cover the lack of footspeed and individual defensive chops.  That leaves a lot of plays with, say, Przybilla guarding out near the three-point line or Jack defending in the post.  To blow people out you either need to run them out of the gym like Golden State or defend them really well one-on-one.  We don't really do either.

As far as the actual game goes, it wasn't exactly rocket science.  We outrebounded the Bulls which is 90% of the battle.  We scored a little more from the line than they did.  We drove the ball and scored in the paint.  Our big guys stayed out of foul trouble for the most part, which made the game easier.  Plus Brandon and Lamarcus both went off in the same game, which is always a great sign for us.  That was enough to do it.

This was an important win for our confidence if nothing else.  It would have been very hard going on a road trip facing Detroit, Indiana, Houston, and Dallas having lost 2 straight and 3 of 4 at home.  It's a sure bet we're going to lose a couple (likely three on paper) on this trip.  It's not so important that we might lose.  It's more important what losing could mean or do to our confidence.  When you're suffering physical and mental fatigue you need all of the reminders you can get that you are a good team and you can win.  That winning confidence could make the difference in one or more of these games.

Individual Observations

--Brandon Roy was six kinds of fantastic tonight.  Mike Rice said something about him getting easy shots.  Those shots weren't easy!  He made them look easy, but that's a different thing entirely.  He was hitting jumpers with very little clearance, sometimes off of spins and turn-arounds.  He was just unstoppable out there...a commanding presence.  I marvel every time I see him.  He doesn't overpower you like a Drexler.  He's not a massive Scottish claymore bludgeoning you into submission.  He's like a double-fisted dagger-wielder.  Stab here, stab there, stabby-stabby-stabby...what?  You're bleeding from a thousand different cuts?  Best fetch some Bactine, boy.   And while you're at it tell your coach to send in somebody who can guard me.  Wait...make it two somebodies.

--I loved Lamarcus' offensive game tonight.  Not only did he start out aggressively he looked comfortable doing it.  He was aggressive but not rushed.  You can tell when he's thinking, "OK, this play is for me so I better shoot!"  There was none of that tonight.  It was more "Resistance is futile."  He "Borged" it up for 18 points on 8-15 shooting.  We'll win a lot when he's shooting that much and that well.

--Let's talk about Martell from the bench.  He missed all 5 of his three-point attempts.  Fortunately he started driving like a pop-star's kid after her Sweet Sixteen party.  I loved, no...LOVED, his jams tonight.  I also loved how he started woofing like a Big Dog after the second one.  Normally you'd wonder about sportsmanship and such but Martell NEEDS to have that energy and attitude.  Anything that gets him not disappearing into the woodwork I'm all for.  Fire in the eyes is the secret ingredient to Martell's transformation from Yellow Power Ranger that Nobody Recognizes to full-blown Megazord.

(I'm embarrassed I said that, but I will say I'm not completely sure I said it right.)

--Travis Outlaw shot 5-10 and played a supporting role tonight, but it was a good supporting role.  He didn't dominate, but he did make the Bulls say, "Oh what now?  You too?!?"  That's absolutely perfect.  When Outlaw is on he makes defending the Blazers like playing a vicious game of Whack-a-Mole.  You might hit one, but there's always another coming.  Maybe two.  And you never know from where.  He scored 14.  Whenever Travis' points exceed his shots taken by a reasonable amount he's doing great.

--Jarrett Jack did a fantastic job in the starting lineup.  Brandon and Lamarcus going off really set him up.  8 free throw attempts per game is great even if a couple of them did come on making-up-ground fouls at the end.  He scored 17 points on 8 shots.  Plus he hit 2 three-pointers, dished 6 assists, and only committed 2 turnovers.  He saw his opportunity and went for it.  Way to go.

--Steve Blake had 7 points and 7 assists plus 2 steals.  That's OK for 40 minutes (especially the assists) but this still wasn't one of his great nights.  1-6 from three-point range hurts.

--Joel had some nice interior defense, Sergio had a nice drive, Channing had a couple nice rebounds, and Raef had a nice minute of playing time.  And there you have it.

One-Sentence Game Summary

When our two stars play well it makes everybody look better.

--Dave (blazersub@yahoo.com)

0 recs  |  Comment 25 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Display:

Scottish Claymore
"He's not a massive Scottish claymore bludgeoning you into submission."

True.  An entire nation awaits the coming of Oden.

by jscot on Feb 7, 2008 12:36 AM PST reply actions   0 recs

hoping
i was hoping to see sergio more today since jack was in the starting lineup....sadly it didnt seem like he would have fit in well tonight yet he did get two quick assists.  

by Philthyanimal on Feb 7, 2008 12:37 AM PST reply actions   0 recs

me too
i'm glad we won the game but i too was disappointed Sergio did not get more time. two assists and 1 for 1 from the field with a nice layup and a rebound, (and getting to the line on a lay-up attempt) with no turnovers in 4 minutes seems like it should be good enough to earn some playing time especially when we are running a 3 guard line-up. it is also worth noting that he had a +7 in just 4 minutes, so you can't really argue that he didn't 'fit' in the game. sigh.

by sergioFTW on Feb 7, 2008 11:38 AM PST up reply actions   0 recs

Roy
"[Roy is] like a double-fisted dagger-wielder.  Stab here, stab there, stabby-stabby-stabby...what?  You're bleeding from a thousand different cuts?  Best fetch some Bactine, boy."

Sheer poetry, Dave.

"Ime caught the guy in mid-air with a fist and calmly continued his dispatching of oncoming people." -Gabe Muoneke

by hurryup09 on Feb 7, 2008 1:13 AM PST reply actions   0 recs

One quibble
You say the Blazers don't blow people out because of their less-than-dominant defense.  As a rule, that's probably true.  But in my opinion, they would have blown the Bulls out tonight if they'd just made a reasonable percentage of their open 3-pointers.  The Blazers hit 3 of 17 from distance, or 17.6 %.  This from one of the league leaders in 3-point percentage.  

If a few more of those 3-pointers had gone down--particularly early--I think the fight would have gone right out of the undermanned Bulls.  But to their credit, the Blazers hung in there and pulled out the win.  

"Ime caught the guy in mid-air with a fist and calmly continued his dispatching of oncoming people." -Gabe Muoneke

by hurryup09 on Feb 7, 2008 1:22 AM PST up reply actions   0 recs

Portland is 24th in the league in 3 pt shooting
I wouldn't hold my breath game by game waiting for a bunch of 3's to drop.

by leeroyjenkins on Feb 7, 2008 7:11 AM PST up reply actions   0 recs

24th?
They're 15th in attempts and 2nd in percentage hit.

--Dave

by Dave on Feb 7, 2008 7:55 AM PST up reply actions   0 recs

They are actually 2nd, which renders my argument
totally moot.  

Still, I'm not enamored of the idea of depending on 3's and/or long jumpers to fall to get wins.  Never have been.

by leeroyjenkins on Feb 7, 2008 9:51 AM PST up reply actions   0 recs

I was gonna say, dude
I was wondering if you didn't remember how the 3-ball has saved our butt time and time again and how we got (had) the best 3-shooter percentage wise and all that.  LAST year we sucked at it, this yearb we're one of THE best.  

Every game that is close there is often something our guys didn't do that they normally do, and 3 point shooting is something we almost always do well so it's not way out of line to think "well, if we just make 30% of them it's not a close game".  It's part of our game plan and utilizes the weapons we got, so 3 point shooting is something we can rely on AND it's why we got so many wins-- despite our defenive and rebounding woes.

Of course, this sort of thing makes it hard to win games when you can't hit a 3, but they've pulled out a few.  Once we got good rebounding and defense (coughodencough), it'll be much easier to overcome the bad shooting nights.

But that's why if we make the playoffs we won't go far... unless our shooting is obscenely hot.  THAT you can't bet on, but you should expect GOOD shooting from this team.

Mortimer

by Mortimer on Feb 7, 2008 10:44 AM PST up reply actions   0 recs

Gotta have a mix
When I watched Lebron the other day, the thing that strikes me most about him is the versatility with which he can score.  He can drive down the lane for a dunk, he can penetrate and pull up, he can hit 3's, he can rebound and dunk, he can fast-break and dunk, he can lead a fast break and still dunk.  I'm not saying neer shoot outside shots, but you have to have the right mix.  Trout is no LBJ, nobody is, but think about how much more effective he'd be if it was:

drive and dunk, rebound and put-back, long jumper, pull-up jumper, drive and dunk, medium range jumper

instead of:

long jumper, medium-range jumper, long jumper, long jumper, long jumper, drive and dunk, long jumper, long jumper

by leeroyjenkins on Feb 7, 2008 11:35 AM PST up reply actions   0 recs

I completely agree
The dependence on jumpers will be our downfall, if never rectified.  You need good shooters, and we got some great ones, but good shooting has bad nights all the time and can't be relied on.

I was just saying that our good shooting is the main reason we've won so much, and I thought it was funny that you thought we were a bad 3-point team.  Our shooting has made it possible to overcome bad execution, bad rebounding, and bad defense.  It isn't the key to long term success, of course.

Thank God for Oden!

Mortimer

by Mortimer on Feb 7, 2008 11:54 AM PST up reply actions   0 recs

Shooting is key
And you'll notice that our leading scorer, Roy, is not enamored with the 3 pt shot. That means that the 3 pointers come from within the flow of the offense. That's EXACTLY the kind of long range shooting you want. And having two of the NBA's top 5 3pt % shooters doesn't hurt, with another (Webster) with that kind of potential.
The good thing about Jack inbounding is that he's already standing out of bounds. - Fizbin

by jamon51 on Feb 7, 2008 11:37 AM PST up reply actions   0 recs

DAVE
Megazord?  Whack-a-mole? You're letting your true colors show man.
I'm hip, I'm slick, and all the women want my phone number!

by silkybrown on Feb 7, 2008 5:08 AM PST reply actions   0 recs

Good to win
But the Blazers really need to learn how to step on the other team's throat.  You get the sense the Bulls didn't expect to win, yet they almost did despite being behind the entire game.  I'm not sure that's a great sign for the Blazers.

by leeroyjenkins on Feb 7, 2008 7:08 AM PST reply actions   0 recs

Amazing trend
One amazing thing about this game: Had you told me on opening night that I would be mildly disgusted they would only beat the Bulls on Feb. 6th by three points I would've thought you were as clear thinking as that pop-star's kid around midnight at his 16th birthday party.

by jon on Feb 7, 2008 7:30 AM PST reply actions   0 recs

Fast
IS is just me, or does B-Roy have one of the fastest dunks around. Some guys really jam it home and it rattles the rafters (LeBron), but B-Roy just speeds it in there ... like lightning. Blink and you missed it.
RipCity's a state of mind

by Y5k on Feb 7, 2008 8:02 AM PST reply actions   0 recs

Told you so!
Nate had to do something. From his post game comments -- nothing's easy with this squad -- you can tell that he is disgusted having to fight from behind every night. Why not get out on a lead and punish the other team? Less wearing, and a better percentage play.

So of course Nate makes a move to energize at tipoff, inserting his 4th quarter guy Jack into the starting 5. Let the other team play from behind for once.

I am a bit surprised that another change wasn't made. Joel does not play in the 4th qtr, and it's not because he is a free throw liability like he used to be. So why start him?  I likes my "Prybzilla". He brings alot. But we needed more energy to start games, and starting Outlaw, going small, might deliver that.

The Blazers will have Oden playing next fall. Maybe Nate's keeping Pryz in as a starter to retain the shape of the team to come. Even the Suns -- right or wrong -- are moving away from small ball.

'77

by LaoTzu on Feb 7, 2008 9:14 AM PST reply actions   0 recs

I like the move
I don't know if it needs to be permanent, but among other reasons I like the move is that Martell just isn't playing well enough or aggressive enough to be a starter.  

by leeroyjenkins on Feb 7, 2008 9:44 AM PST up reply actions   0 recs

definitely not aggressive enough
Webster's been playing decent D, and rebounds well enough for a guy his size, but I agree that he very often lets himself become a non-factor on offense (with the exception of an occasional big 3rd quarter). If we want to bury teams early, all five starters need to come out pressing hard, and Martell just hasn't been doing that in the first q for whatever reason. Maybe a bit of bench time will energize him, like it does for Outlaw? He definitely responded with some good throwdowns last night.

by abdelnaby on Feb 7, 2008 10:15 AM PST up reply actions   0 recs

The thing I don't understand is
The Power Rangers reference.  I mean I could see it if Dave had an 8 year old son and watched the show because of his son.  This means Dave watches Power Rangers by choice.  I wonder if he watches "The Suite Life of Zach & Cody."
"I knew a guy who was dyslexic. He was also cross-eyed. So everything came out right." Tummler from Gummo (1997)

by tominhawaii on Feb 7, 2008 10:22 AM PST reply actions   0 recs

Also
I remember a Hanna Montana reference in some post before by Dave.  Hmmmmmmm...

Last year an unmarked package in a plain brown envelope appeared in my mailbox.  I took it upstairs with the rest of my mail and opened it-- it was two kiddie magazines, with like Hanna Montana and High School Musical and Zach and Cody and Chris Brown all over it!  It was addressed to my place (my old apartment here in LA), but had no name or return address.  It was packaged like porn!

I have no idea what the name of the magazines were, but it was any sort of glossy kid magazine you'd see on a magazine stand.  The fact it was wrapped up in such a dirty fashion made me queasy... if it's meant for KIDS, why is it packaged like that?

It was the first time I learned that the kids love their High School Musical, though.  I was "out of the loop", as the kids say, on that one.  The magazines also had a lot about Paris Hilton, which I didn't know was something the little kids like also.  That isn't right.

All I'm saying is, Dave gets these magazines delivered weekly in plain brown packages.

Just for the references.

Mortimer

by Mortimer on Feb 7, 2008 11:02 AM PST up reply actions   0 recs

As someone who fenced, I'd compare Roy
more to a Kendo master.  He combines power, agility and quickness in an extremely fluid, almost choriographed (sp?) manner that leaves his opponent in shock and not realizing he's dead.

by timg56 on Feb 7, 2008 12:50 PM PST reply actions   0 recs

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

A site by Blazer fans, for Blazer fans
Start posting about the Trail Blazers »

Join SB Nation and dive into communities focused on all your favorite teams.

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recommended FanPosts

Images-2_small
At what point do we admit we are being out-coached?
Un_bohemien_small
Is Roy a Good Teammate?
Kpavatar2_small
Just Another Junk In The Wall:  11-18-09
Terryporter_small
Blazers Edge Community Podcast Episode 008
Small
Why is the Blazers’ offense bad this year? Why is the defense so good?

Recent FanPosts

Small
From Benefit of the Doubt to Just Plain Doubt.
Un_bohemien_small
Is Joe Johnson a Good Teammate (Roy Revisited)
Small
December contest......Win a Blazers jersey or hoodie
Small
BYRON SCOTT OFFENSIVE INSPIRATION
Small
game changing stretch of the 2nd quarter
Small
Nate McMillan: Mediocre Coach or Evil Genius?
Small
Junk Drawer 11/21 Dun dun dun
Small
Blake: Breaking Up Is Hard To Do
Portland-trail-blazers_small
Individual Observations - Little Mac

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >

FanShots

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

Recommended FanShots

A modest proposal: Fire Mike Rice and Antonio Harvey!
For Ann, and Travis.
FREE GREG ODEN
"It's been good for us," Oden said. "We're going to stick with it. We have...

Recent FanShots

Anyone who is sad from yesterday's game
Greg Oden with a Kimbo Slice/Baron Davis beard. What do you think?
Andre Miller is tough
Michael Jordan says "don't retire my number"
Charles Oakley to the Blazers? He says there are talks
Lamarcus: The King Cobra?
Surprising Stats from Basketball-Reference
Oden #5 and Rudy #9 ranked soph espn.com
NYT: The Pick-And-Roll is the NBA's Old Reliable

+ New FanShot All FanShots >


Editors

Kitten_small Dave

Ben_small Ben.

Moderators

Pict1126_small -ken

Polar_bear_small jorga

Terryporter_small prezofdeath

Small usmcr3049

Jesus_icon_i_small T Darkstar

Wallpaper_small geoffm