Blazers vs Suns game thread with *link*

[Jayps15]

How has Miller's approach worked out in the playoffs?

Nice strawman, but I'm not arguing about Miller's past playoff performances (although while we're at it he's performed far better than Blake has in the postseason). What I'm saying is that for this team, we need more than what Blake gives us on offense in the postseason. The Rockets keyed on Roy and everyone else shit the bed because no one else can consistently create shots with the dribble.

KS said Parker wouldn't fit this squad, and I couldn't disagree more. Tony Parker would be the perfect backcourt mate with Roy. What team could stop both Roy and Parker from shredding them? You can only reliably take the ball out of one of their hands at any given time, and doing so will expose your defense to being absolutely abused by the other.

 

[Nikolokolus]

How has Miller's approach worked out in the playoffs?

How has Brandon's?

Not to say Brandon is a bad player (of course), but circumstances and surrounding cast can have as much (or more) to do with post-season success as individual performances.

 

[Natebishop3]

Re: B ROY??

Roy needs to stop scoring and learn how to play off the ball.

 

[PtldPlatypus]

How has Brandon's?

Brandon's career playoff record is 2-4; 1 appearance, too small of a sample size to draw any conclusions.

Miller's career playoff record is 7-20. 5 appearances, easily a large enough sample size to draw conclusions.

Any more silly questions?

 

[Natebishop3]

How has Brandon's?

Not to say Brandon is a bad player (of course), but circumstances and surrounding cast can have as much (or more) to do with post-season success as individual performances.

Why do you even bother arguing with him? It's the same weak ass comebacks every time.

1) Miller has never won in the playoffs.

2) Miller has taken a bunch of shots in the PRESEASON so he must be a ballhog.

3) Miller and Roy haven't spoken to each other at all off the court.

4) Miller is anti-social.

We could just put together a PapaG comeback generator and we would probably get virtually the same responses every time.

 

[Ed O]

Brandon's career playoff record is 2-4; 1 appearance, too small of a sample size to draw any conclusions.

Miller's career playoff record is 7-20. 5 appearances, easily a large enough sample size to draw conclusions.

Any more silly questions?

There's no way that 27 games is enough to draw conclusions. That's barely more than a quarter of a single regular season's worth of games.

Ed O.

 

[PHXBlazer1]

There's no way that 27 games is enough to draw conclusions. That's barely more than a quarter of a single regular season's worth of games.

Ed O.

Gotta agree with Ed O. here. I play a lot of poker, and I hesitate to draw conclusions from a sample size less than 100,000 hands played. Obviously, NBA basketball is a VERY different animal, but one season should be a MINIMUM. 82 games minimum. Not even taking other variables into account like: team members and their varying abilities to do different things at different levels of competence, amount of games played with said teammates, teams played most frequently, conference played in, etc...

Then taking into consideration that most arguments/threads here recently are based on ONE PREASEASON game??!! Many of you, whether or not I agree with you, make intelligent arguments. But when you fail to recognize the importance of sample size, it all means nothing. But keep jerkin your knees!!!

 

[PHXBlazer1]

I hate being that guy that posts twice in a row. But if you want to use a sample size of one game, you could find a way to argue that Charles Smith is better than Michael Jordan, or that Shelden Williams is better than Karl Malone. Or, maybe, that Sergio Rodriguez is in the same league as John Stockton.

 

[Mediocre Man]

Greg Oden needs more than 7 shots period. I know it was only 23 minutes, but he has to have 10+ every game.

 

[blazerboy30]

Dude.. I'm taking about THIS team. On THIS team, we don't need our PG to score a lot and we certainly don't need him to lead the team in FG attempts as he did during the preseason by a mile. Blake is the best fit for this starting lineup. Our best players are LMA and they need the ball. Period. There are no shots available for Miller in the starting line up on THIS team. On the Spurs, they NEEDED Parker to score to win their championships. For the last three titles, they needed Parker to score cuz there was no one else in the starting lineup besides Duncan who could do it. Parker would be a bad fit on our team. He is not the kind of PG that will fit our starting lineup.

Kingspeed, you need to chillout man, seriously.

You have been bitching and moaning for a long time how this team needs a legit 3rd option to help take some pressure off of Roy. Miller can do that both by handling the ball,creating for others AND by scoring on his own.

Now you are bitching and moaning that we should just keep what we had last season with not enough help for Roy and no legit 3rd scoring option.

Get a grip. Learn the game. Then post.

 

[PtldPlatypus]

You have been bitching and moaning for a long time how this team needs a legit 3rd option to help take some pressure off of Roy. Miller can do that both by handling the ball,creating for others AND by scoring on his own.

Now you are bitching and moaning that we should just keep what we had last season with not enough help for Roy and no legit 3rd scoring option.

So, why is it that Oden can't be a "legit 3rd option"? Because someone needs to feed him the ball?

 

[MrJayremmie]

In my opinion, our options are as follows.

1. Roy
2. LMA
3a. Oden (as he gets better he will be alone here)
3b. Andre
4. Rudy
5. Outlaw

I think those should be our scoring options.

Anyway, I was pretty pleased with this game. I agree with the starting lineup to start the season. I think that right now, that lineup gives us the best chance to win. I also think Miller should probably see more time than Blake.

Webster hasn't really impressed me this preseason, but then again, I haven't watched any games. Hopefully he continues to improve because he really needs to show us something.

I'm excited for the season, and kind of nervous because there seems to be too many players who need PT. But God willing we should roll this year.

Go Blazers! (and Ducks)

 

[blazerboy30]

So, why is it that Oden can't be a "legit 3rd option"? Because someone needs to feed him the ball?

I didn't say Oden can't be. But he hasn't yet proven that he can. Andre has.

Also, Oden being a 3rd option doesn't take as much pressure off of Roy, since, as you said, Oden still needs somebody to get him the ball.

 

[noknobs]

Brandon's career playoff record is 2-4; 1 appearance, too small of a sample size to draw any conclusions.

Miller's career playoff record is 7-20. 5 appearances, easily a large enough sample size to draw conclusions.

Any more silly questions?

Well Garnett had a 13-18 record at Minnesota over eight seasons, then moved to Boston and has a 23-17 record including an NBA championship in two years.

Garnett has been one of the best PF's in the game for a long time and even his post-season success was determined by his situation and team. Judging and drawing conclusions about a good role player, like Miller, on a 7-20 post season record is even more silly than judging Garnett the all-star on his 13-18 record at Minnesota. It's worthing noting, but shouldn't be used as evidence of how he'll fare in Portland.

 

[andalusian]

When you see Roy diagonal to the floor and slicing between all the other guys - it's all good.

 

[Blazer_Hippie]

When you see Roy diagonal to the floor and slicing between all the other guys - it's all good.

Yes sir!

 

[PtldPlatypus]

Well Garnett had a 13-18 record at Minnesota over eight seasons, then moved to Boston and has a 23-17 record including an NBA championship in two years.

Garnett has been one of the best PF's in the game for a long time and even his post-season success was determined by his situation and team. Judging and drawing conclusions about a good role player, like Miller, on a 7-20 post season record is even more silly than judging Garnett the all-star on his 13-18 record at Minnesota. It's worthing noting, but shouldn't be used as evidence of how he'll fare in Portland.

See, that's a much better comparison. The main point I was driving at was that it is silly to use Roy's one postseason appearance as evidence that Miller's postseason record is irrelevant. Garnett's Minnesota record is much more relevant. Well done.

By the way, Garnett was also an MVP, multiple-time all-star, and did make it to a conference final in Minnesota. None of the same can be said about Miller, so it's still an apples-to-oranges comparison.

 

[BrianFromWA]

I think the point is that, if a semi-transcendant superduperstar like Garnett can't single-handedly will a team to playoff victory, it's not really correct to get on Miller's case for lack of doing so.

 

[jlprk]

Gotta agree with Ed O. here. I play a lot of poker, and I hesitate to draw conclusions from a sample size less than 100,000 hands played.

Man, you play a LOT of poker!!

 

[PHXBlazer1]

Man, you play a LOT of poker!!

Lol! Ya I know, it's pathetic, but for now it beats a real job. And when you're playin 6-8 tables at a time online you'd be surprised how quick it adds up. I fold about 77% of hands, so I should have said 100,000 hands dealt, not hands played.