Call me crazy, but

[magnifier661]

How about we wait until the season starts before we worry too much about the line-ups. I thought the "pre-season" was for the coaching staff to evaluate the "scrubs" and possible line-up trials.

Regardless, I think the media's attention regarding some of the "confusion" of our star players and "comments" made is just "reporting what's been said". Now if this stuff was being said during the regular season, especially if we start the season off with a losing record, then we can start worrying.

 

[MIXUM]

i agree but you can already see there will be chemistry problems... and god help us if we lose 3-5 in a row and get off to a slow start.

in every sport... a team that has a good season...catches breaks and things go right when they arent suppose too. look at us last year. everything gelled and it went perfect. look at the jazz last year... just kept getting worse.

but when things go bad early.... usually it snowballs... injuries which lead to major letdown seasons.

lets hope thats not us but this pre season has all the making of a letdown so far.

and roy complaing isnt helping.... hes really changed imo since the contract dispute. too bad him being humble was always my favorite thing about him. hes different then he use to be.

 

[magnifier661]

i agree but you can already see there will be chemistry problems... and god help us if we lose 3-5 in a row and get off to a slow start.

in every sport... a team that has a good season...catches breaks and things go right when they arent suppose too. look at us last year. everything gelled and it went perfect. look at the jazz last year... just kept getting worse.

but when things go bad early.... usually it snowballs... injuries which lead to major letdown seasons.

lets hope thats not us but this pre season has all the making of a letdown so far.

and roy complaing isnt helping.... hes really changed imo since the contract dispute. too bad him being humble was always my favorite thing about him. hes different then he use to be.

I agree. I think this is the time for our "Leader" to lead and settle everyone down. But I won't hold it against him.

 

[BlazersBlood]

Sadly, I think I'm gonna have to take a break from the board. Way too much drama for preseason for my taste. For a season that should be very exciting and the bar is now high, there's way too much "sky is falling" stuff that is getting over-analyzed. There seems like there was more optimism around here when we were destined for a 20 win season.

 

[SodaPopinski]

i agree but you can already see there will be chemistry problems... and god help us if we lose 3-5 in a row and get off to a slow start.

in every sport... a team that has a good season...catches breaks and things go right when they arent suppose too. look at us last year. everything gelled and it went perfect. look at the jazz last year... just kept getting worse.

but when things go bad early.... usually it snowballs... injuries which lead to major letdown seasons.

lets hope thats not us but this pre season has all the making of a letdown so far.

and roy complaing isnt helping.... hes really changed imo since the contract dispute. too bad him being humble was always my favorite thing about him. hes different then he use to be.

Who had "three games into the preseason" on the MIXUM all-hell-is-breaking-loose pool?

 

[DaRizzle]

Sadly, I think I'm gonna have to take a break from the board. Way too much drama for preseason for my taste. For a season that should be very exciting and the bar is now high, there's way too much "sky is falling" stuff that is getting over-analyzed. There seems like there was more optimism around here when we were destined for a 20 win season.

Another "Im done with this board post"...nice

Cmon man, most wait until the All-Star break to tell everybody to fuck off!

 

[Wheels]

I look at it this way... remember how AWFUL the Ducks looked game 1 against Boise St... They lost Blount, there was negativity surrounding EVERYTHING, and I had to come a few people down (not really on here lol) But it seemed like the season was lost, there was nothing left. Whats crazy is how long ago that seems... and it was actually just over a month ago. But no one even talks about that anymore. Time and winning will heal everything. And proves that bad things dont always "snowball" into worse things.

 

[Wheels]

Sadly, I think I'm gonna have to take a break from the board. Way too much drama for preseason for my taste. For a season that should be very exciting and the bar is now high, there's way too much "sky is falling" stuff that is getting over-analyzed. There seems like there was more optimism around here when we were destined for a 20 win season.

and yes... sometimes its sad like a bunch of screen names on here were made by members of the MSP on 95.5. I found it funny this morning when they were saying "come on KP you know better than that" I love how everyone could make EVERYTHING all better. When in reality this isnt NBA 2k9 where you can turn trade override on, and force people to make trades.

 

[LittleAlex]

How about we wait until the season starts before we worry too much about the line-ups. I thought the "pre-season" was for the coaching staff to evaluate the "scrubs" and possible line-up trials.

Regardless, I think the media's attention regarding some of the "confusion" of our star players and "comments" made is just "reporting what's been said". Now if this stuff was being said during the regular season, especially if we start the season off with a losing record, then we can start worrying.

I would say folks should wait until mid December before freaking out about chemistry issues and such.

 

[anonymous gambler]

I, for one, will be disappointed if Andre Miller isn't starting- all accounts say that he's looked better than Blake.

It's a legit issue if Nate starts Blake.

 

[BlazersBlood]

Another "Im done with this board post"...nice

Cmon man, most wait until the All-Star break to tell everybody to fuck off!

Oh I'm not done man. I just have to really pay attention and resist opening retarded threads. It makes surfing the board a chore. With school, work, kids, wife, puppy, & the holiday season coming, I don't need any extra stress.

 

[magnifier661]

Sadly, I think I'm gonna have to take a break from the board. Way too much drama for preseason for my taste. For a season that should be very exciting and the bar is now high, there's way too much "sky is falling" stuff that is getting over-analyzed. There seems like there was more optimism around here when we were destined for a 20 win season.

LOL seriously, I think many Blazer fans have been so used to the "Trade Checker" and micro-analyzing every game, instead of looking at the big picture. We won't be winning all 82 games this season, so there will be some tough losses. Maybe even losses to teams that many expect us to win. With that said, I think the over analyzing for "pre-season" should be looked over.

 

[magnifier661]

I would say folks should wait until mid December before freaking out about chemistry issues and such.

DING DING DING! We have a winner.

 

[magnifier661]

I, for one, will be disappointed if Andre Miller isn't starting- all accounts say that he's looked better than Blake.

It's a legit issue if Nate starts Blake.

Miller will be starting IMO.

 

[andalusian]

I, for one, will be disappointed if Andre Miller isn't starting- all accounts say that he's looked better than Blake.

It's a legit issue if Nate starts Blake.

Looked better in a vacuum or looked better in the starting unit?

There is no doubt that he looked better individually and with fast break players like Rudy, Webster and Travis. There is also no doubt, based, to be honest, on very limited data, that he looked a lot worse in the starting unit who was all out of sorts against the Clippers...

 

[barfo]

Hey, Crazy Butt!

barfo

 

[PapaG]

LOL seriously, I think many Blazer fans have been so used to the "Trade Checker" and micro-analyzing every game, instead of looking at the big picture. We won't be winning all 82 games this season, so there will be some tough losses. Maybe even losses to teams that many expect us to win. With that said, I think the over analyzing for "pre-season" should be looked over.

Now look who is Mr. Negativity!

 

[Masbee]

How about we wait until the season starts before we worry too much about the line-ups.

Thanks for the suggestion. I will take it under advisement.

I thought the "pre-season" was for the coaching staff to evaluate the "scrubs" and possible line-up trials.

There is a little bit of this. Very little. Most of this is done in training camp. Pre-season is to get your team real game time action.

Regardless, I think the media's attention regarding some of the "confusion" of our star players and "comments" made is just "reporting what's been said". Now if this stuff was being said during the regular season, especially if we start the season off with a losing record, then we can start worrying.

These issues have been brewing for a long time. Last season we were "bailed out" by the season-long injury to Webster and the terrible seasons from Sergio, Bayless and Frye, and the poor offensive game and limited by fouls Oden, thus obliterating 5 players justifiable claims to minutes and shots.

Webster is back.

Oden is healthy.

We replaced Sergio with Miller.

Travis is still here.

Blake is still here.

LaMarcus wants to prove he is an all-star.

Rudy expects more.

Roy EXPECTS the ball. (See recent quotes from Golden Boy)

Bayless, who?

It's on, like Donkey Kong!!!

Roll out the ONE ball fellas. Sorry.

 

[magnifier661]

Thanks for the suggestion. I will take it under advisement.

There is a little bit of this. Very little. Most of this is done in training camp. Pre-season is to get your team real game time action.


These issues have been brewing for a long time. Last season we were "bailed out" by the season-long injury to Webster and the terrible seasons from Sergio, Bayless and Frye, and the poor offensive game and limited by fouls Oden, thus obliterating 5 players justifiable claims to minutes and shots.

Webster is back.

Oden is healthy.

We replaced Sergio with Miller.

Travis is still here.

Blake is still here.

LaMarcus wants to prove he is an all-star.

Rudy expects more.

Roy EXPECTS the ball. (See recent quotes from Golden Boy)

Bayless, who?

It's on, like Donkey Kong!!!

Roll out the ONE ball fellas. Sorry.

Very very very nice analogy! You get a kudo referral from me! Thanks!

 

[blazerboy30]

Sadly, I think I'm gonna have to take a break from the board. Way too much drama for preseason for my taste. For a season that should be very exciting and the bar is now high, there's way too much "sky is falling" stuff that is getting over-analyzed. There seems like there was more optimism around here when we were destined for a 20 win season.

But we had Victor and Monia!!! And Telfair!!!

 

[Tince]

Didn't Shavlik Randolph, Sergio, Luke Jackson, and Bayless all start a game or two last preseason?

 

[Wheels]

Didn't Shavlik Randolph, Sergio, Luke Jackson, and Bayless all start a game or two last preseason?

havent seen you on here recently.. how the hell ya been? and yes good point on who started.

 

[anonymous gambler]

Looked better in a vacuum or looked better in the starting unit?

There is no doubt that he looked better individually and with fast break players like Rudy, Webster and Travis. There is also no doubt, based, to be honest, on very limited data, that he looked a lot worse in the starting unit who was all out of sorts against the Clippers...

Even the clipper game reports seemed to comparatively praise him-

Quick said: On Friday, Miller was particularly effective in driving and finishing at the rim. Each drive was either set up, or accentuated, by a convincing pass-fake. There were some careless turnovers, but there was also the sense that, as a veteran, Miller understood this was a preseason game.

Quick also said: Steve Blake is a real nice player, but he is not in the same league as Miller. Simple as that.
link


Mortimer- from Blazer's Edge- had a similar opinion.
I like Steve Blake. He is great in his Blakeness. But it is so mind blowingly obviously that Andre Miller is a much, much, much better player.

link

 

[BlazerWookee]

Okay, Crazy Butt!

 

[Tince]

havent seen you on here recently.. how the hell ya been? and yes good point on who started.

What's up Wheels! I'm around here every so often, but I haven't been posting too much.

I'm working my normal job, plus coaching high school hoops, and scouting for Syngery (when I have spare time). How in the world am I going to make it to the Blazer games?

Your Bronco's are something else right now. And our Ducks keep finding new ways to win, I love it!!

 

[Wheels]

What's up Wheels! I'm around here every so often, but I haven't been posting too much.

I'm working my normal job, plus coaching high school hoops, and scouting for Syngery (when I have spare time). How in the world am I going to make it to the Blazer games?

Your Bronco's are something else right now. And our Ducks keep finding new ways to win, I love it!!

dang sounds like you been busy! and yeah the Broncos have already won 2 more games than I thought they would.. I can admit I think I was wrong about coach McKid. And yes the Ducks have been such a surprise since that opening week. I can hardly remember it, thats how good they have been, and have erased the opening week debacle. Fun times.. especially when my Football teams are a combined 10-1, and the Baseball playoffs are here, and Basketball is upon us.. what a GREAT time of year!

Good to hear from you though, and glad all is well.

 

[andalusian]

Even the clipper game reports seemed to comparatively praise him-

Quick said: On Friday, Miller was particularly effective in driving and finishing at the rim. Each drive was either set up, or accentuated, by a convincing pass-fake. There were some careless turnovers, but there was also the sense that, as a veteran, Miller understood this was a preseason game.

With all dues respect for Quick and to Miller's ability to finish (which is very nice and was never disputed) - the fact is that at least so far - the Blazers fell in a hole quickly with Miller on the starting unit - something that did not happen in earlier games. Does it mean that this would not have happened with Blake? I do not know - maybe yes, maybe not - but to say that Miller earned it and the team looks better with him starting than with Blake is just a fallacy, at least with the data we have so far.

 

[LittleAlex]

With all dues respect for Quick and to Miller's ability to finish (which is very nice and was never disputed) - the fact is that at least so far - the Blazers fell in a hole quickly with Miller on the starting unit - something that did not happen in earlier games. Does it mean that this would not have happened with Blake? I do not know - maybe yes, maybe not - but to say that Miller earned it and the team looks better with him starting than with Blake is just a fallacy, at least with the data we have so far.

Unlike last year when Portland fell in a hole in the first quarter of 60% of all their games?

The bottom line is they need to get off to a better start then last year no matter who is in the starting lineup. Nate needs to find a combination that gets it done. Portland can't count on getting 18 come from behind wins again this year if they want to get out of the second round. It's harder to stage big come from behind wins in the playoffs. Better to keep it close the whole game.

 

[andalusian]

Unlike last year when Portland fell in a hole in the first quarter of 60% of all their games?

54% to be precise, and I do not think they were 8 or 9 points under in most of those, they were usually 2-3 points behind...

The bottom line is they need to get off to a better start then last year no matter who is in the starting lineup. Nate needs to find a combination that gets it done. Portland can't count on getting 18 come from behind wins again this year if they want to get out of the second round. It's harder to stage big come from behind wins in the playoffs. Better to keep it close the whole game.

I agree with this, in theory - but again, looking closely at the data - the place where they really fell off into a hole was usually in the 2nd quarter where the 2nd group would dig us in, and I suspect that one of the reasons the first group got behind as often as they did is because Roy always seemed to conserve energy in the first quarter because he knew he would not to go into superman mode to climb out of the hole the 2nd unit got us into.

I other words, if this suspicion is correct - and just having Roy play hard from the get go knowing his minutes will be lighter than a year before and he will not need to take over games so often because the 2nd unit is better - this problem can be fixed just by having big-game scorers like Miller and Oden in that 2nd unit...

All of a sudden, the Blazers are a bit better in the first quarter, a lot better in the 2nd (because not many teams will be able to contain a group that has Miller, Rudy, Webster, Travis, Oden with their 2nd team, or even their already tired 1st team)...

In other words, the real problem the Blazers had last year in the first half of most games did not come because of the 1st unit, and fixing the 2nd unit will also indirectly help the 1st quarter problem)...

Again, I want to make sure that people understand that if Nate and company think that Miller and Oden in the first unit is the way to go they should not - what I object to is people saying that "if Miller and Oden are not..." it is a mistake - when the data so far does not support it...

 

[LittleAlex]

54% to be precise, and I do not think they were 8 or 9 points under in most of those, they were usually 2-3 points behind...

I remember it different. When Portland didn't lead after the first quarter, they tended to be down pretty big. I don't have the numbers to back this up, but it sure seemed that way.

I agree with this, in theory - but again, looking closely at the data - the place where they really fell off into a hole was usually in the 2nd quarter where the 2nd group would dig us in, and I suspect that one of the reasons the first group got behind as often as they did is because Roy always seemed to conserve energy in the first quarter because he knew he would not to go into superman mode to climb out of the hole the 2nd unit got us into.

I other words, if this suspicion is correct - and just having Roy play hard from the get go knowing his minutes will be lighter than a year before and he will not need to take over games so often because the 2nd unit is better - this problem can be fixed just by having big-game scorers like Miller and Oden in that 2nd unit...

All of a sudden, the Blazers are a bit better in the first quarter, a lot better in the 2nd (because not many teams will be able to contain a group that has Miller, Rudy, Webster, Travis, Oden with their 2nd team, or even their already tired 1st team)...

In other words, the real problem the Blazers had last year in the first half of most games did not come because of the 1st unit, and fixing the 2nd unit will also indirectly help the 1st quarter problem)...

Again, I want to make sure that people understand that if Nate and company think that Miller and Oden in the first unit is the way to go they should not - what I object to is people saying that "if Miller and Oden are not..." it is a mistake - when the data so far does not support it...

It's not like Portland didn't have high powered scorers on the second unit, what with Outlaw and Rudy. It seemed like the problem was defense on the second unit. Sergio, Rudy, Outlaw, Frye and Oden was not a team full of stoppers. Oden was ok, the rest were horrid. I would say they need the opposite on the second unit. That second unit needs to be better defensively. Having Joel on the second unit would be a good start. I am hopeful Martel can get it done. Blake may not be the greatest defender he isn't the complete pile of shit that was Sergio. That leaves Outlaw and Rudy.