COURTSIDE

[chris_in_pdx]

woo hoo they read my email

 

[The Sebastian Express]

Did Rice really lay into Quick? If so could we get a summary of this epicness?

 

[Hype #9]

Read my email as well.. in regards to archived games, to be watched at a later date. They are still working out the details in regards to archived games.

 

[Nikolokolus]

Did Rice really lay into Quick? If so could we get a summary of this epicness?

He didn't call him out by name he just called the Miller coverage about conditioning cowardly (and that was only Quick) especially in light of Miller's long NBA career. He also talked about how he saw a fan lay into Miller at fanfest asking why he was such a loner and wouldn't sit with the team (not enough seats btw) and that the local media coverage of Miller had fed into that negative perception before a single meaningful game had been played.

basically he said Quick crossed a line.

 

[The Sebastian Express]

That's pretty funny. Shame on the fan for laying into Miller for being a loner, though.

 

[illmatic99]

Smith with some decent insight.

 

[Hype #9]

RECAP:

Blazers will stream games this season.

Brian T Smith says Miller situation isn't a big deal.

Mike Barrett calls Mike Rice an attractive man.

Nate McMillan pissed in Mediocre Man's cereal.

Rasheed Wallace is perfect for the Celtics.

 

[maxiep]

Bravo and cheers to the Blazers for opening the door to streamed games. KGW is the first crack; in a year or two they'll have all 82 online.

It's great to see the Blazers put the pressure on Comcast.

 

[Blazer_Hippie]

Bravo and cheers to the Blazers for opening the door to streamed games. KGW is the first crack; in a year or two they'll have all 82 online.

It's great to see the Blazers put the pressure on Comcast.

The way I heard it, only KGW games will be streamed to start, but by 1st of the new year (middle of this season) ALL games will be streamed.

 

[Mediocre Man]

Nate McMillan pissed in Mediocre Man's cereal.

Only because I was eating something that would give me energy to run. Nate doesn't like when people run.

 

[Rastapopoulos]

who said those are mutually exclusive?

Please don't mean what I think you mean. You live with your mom, don't you?

 

[blue32]

Only because I was eating something that would give me energy to run. Nate doesn't like when people run.

We don't have to run to be successful, or win a championship........

Of course it makes for more entertaining basketball..... but it's not the end of our T-Blazer world if they don't..

 

[Tince]

We don't have to run to be successful, or win a championship........

Of course it makes for more entertaining basketball..... but it's not the end of our T-Blazer world if they don't..

I've came to the realization that some people would be willing to give up a little success in order to be able to watch a more entertaining brand of basketball.

For me personally, winning slow/ugly is more entertaining than losing pretty.

 

[Mediocre Man]

If this team wins a title with the slowest pace in the league I will stand corrected. I am not talking about switching to the old Suns offense, but most teams that play for a title are usually in the middle of the pack when it comes to pace.

 

[andalusian]

If this team wins a title with the slowest pace in the league I will stand corrected. I am not talking about switching to the old Suns offense, but most teams that play for a title are usually in the middle of the pack when it comes to pace.

The 2007-2008 Celtics were 19th in pace.
The 2006-2007 Spurs were 27th in pace.
The 2004-2005 Spurs were 23rd in pace.

It is interesting to notice however that both of these teams had really good point guards that excel in a fast game - in Rondo and Parker.

The entire pace argument against Nate's teams is understandable - but really has an asterisk next to it - when your point guards are the like of Jack, Blake, Ridnour and the like - playing fast is just the wrong strategy. The place where we can really see if this argument is logical or just a sound bit is when we inspect what happens for this team's pace with a PG that can run like Miller. Add the fact that these teams were mostly bad to mediocre defensively - and it is hard to run.

The real point is, however, that all championship teams in the recent past were good defensively - and the great ones - that continued to contend for the championship were in the elite defensively - mostly in the top 3.

This, btw - is one of the reasons I do not think the Lakers are a lock to contend again as many do - they were good defensively last year - at 6th in the NBA - but not an elite defensive team. They strike me a lot, statistically, like the Miami Heat - good defensively (the Heat were 9th best), pretty fast (the Lakers were 6th fastest, the Heat were 11th) - and as such - they are not the clear cut favorite, in my mind.

 

[Mediocre Man]

The 2007-2008 Celtics were 19th in pace.
The 2006-2007 Spurs were 27th in pace.
The 2004-2005 Spurs were 23rd in pace.

It is interesting to notice however that both of these teams had really good point guards that excel in a fast game - in Rondo and Parker.

The entire pace argument against Nate's teams is understandable - but really has an asterisk next to it - when your point guards are the like of Jack, Blake, Ridnour and the like - playing fast is just the wrong strategy. The place where we can really see if this argument is logical or just a sound bit is when we inspect what happens for this team's pace with a PG that can run like Miller. Add the fact that these teams were mostly bad to mediocre defensively - and it is hard to run.

The real point is, however, that all championship teams in the recent past were good defensively - and the great ones - that continued to contend for the championship were in the elite defensively - mostly in the top 3.

This, btw - is one of the reasons I do not think the Lakers are a lock to contend again as many do - they were good defensively last year - at 6th in the NBA - but not an elite defensive team. They strike me a lot, statistically, like the Miami Heat - good defensively (the Heat were 9th best), pretty fast (the Lakers were 6th fastest, the Heat were 11th) - and as such - they are not the clear cut favorite, in my mind.

I'm not really sure why you used examples. I said most teams. I think there are many factors to being an elite team. FTA, defense, points in the paint defensive rebounding and easy baskets.

 

[andalusian]

I'm not really sure why you used examples. I said most teams. I think there are many factors to being an elite team. FTA, defense, points in the paint defensive rebounding and easy baskets.

I used examples because in the last decade most teams were either slow or fast - middle of the pack teams did not, actually, win a ring in the recent past... If we consider middle of the pack around 13-17 in pace - only 2 teams (9 and 8 years ago Lakers teams were there - in the last decade). Most seem to be closer to the slow end of the spectrum (lower than 20) with a couple in the 19th spot and 2 or 3 faster.

The only common thing to these teams - is stout defense. Actually, there was only one team in the last decade that was not among the top 10 in defensive efficiency - and that was the 2001 Lakers team which lost both Kobe and Shaq to about a 1/3 of the season each and got them back in the playoffs.

 

[MARIS61]

We don't have to run to be successful, or win a championship........

Of course it makes for more entertaining basketball..... but it's not the end of our T-Blazer world if they don't..

Yeah, it is. I watch the Blazers for entertainment, period. Exclamation point!

I don't give a rat's ass if they win another title, unless they entertain me whilst doing it.

My leisure time is much too valuable to waste watching a cowardly team afraid to take risks.

The entertainment value for me in sports lies 100% in the athlete's risk-taking. Attempting something daring that others are afraid to try because they fear failure.

Without risk, basketball is just a bunch of guys walking back and forth.

If I want to watch someone who is needlessly tending to and correcting every minute detail and every out of place hair while boring and frustrating everyone around him, I'll watch Monk.

 

[maxiep]

Yeah, it is. I watch the Blazers for entertainment, period. Exclamation point!

I don't give a rat's ass if they win another title, unless they entertain me whilst doing it.

My leisure time is much too valuable to waste watching a cowardly team afraid to take risks.

The entertainment value for me in sports lies 100% in the athlete's risk-taking. Attempting something daring that others are afraid to try because they fear failure.

Without risk, basketball is just a bunch of guys walking back and forth.

If I want to watch someone who is needlessly tending to and correcting every minute detail and every out of place hair while boring and frustrating everyone around him, I'll watch Monk.

On behalf of this entire forum, I think we'd now all like to see Nate put in the four corners offense. It will be a shame to lose you MARIS.

 

[Mediocre Man]

I used examples because in the last decade most teams were either slow or fast - middle of the pack teams did not, actually, win a ring in the recent past... If we consider middle of the pack around 13-17 in pace - only 2 teams (9 and 8 years ago Lakers teams were there - in the last decade). Most seem to be closer to the slow end of the spectrum (lower than 20) with a couple in the 19th spot and 2 or 3 faster.

The only common thing to these teams - is stout defense. Actually, there was only one team in the last decade that was not among the top 10 in defensive efficiency - and that was the 2001 Lakers team which lost both Kobe and Shaq to about a 1/3 of the season each and got them back in the playoffs.

I also said most teams that play for a title, not the eventual winner. And why out of 30 teams is only 13-17 considered middle. Maybe 11-20?


you are once again, arguing for the sake of arguing. Frankly, I don't understand why?

 

[Wizard Mentor]

The 2007-2008 Celtics were 19th in pace.
The 2006-2007 Spurs were 27th in pace.
The 2004-2005 Spurs were 23rd in pace.

It is interesting to notice however that both of these teams had really good point guards that excel in a fast game - in Rondo and Parker.

The entire pace argument against Nate's teams is understandable - but really has an asterisk next to it - when your point guards are the like of Jack, Blake, Ridnour and the like - playing fast is just the wrong strategy. The place where we can really see if this argument is logical or just a sound bit is when we inspect what happens for this team's pace with a PG that can run like Miller. Add the fact that these teams were mostly bad to mediocre defensively - and it is hard to run.

The real point is, however, that all championship teams in the recent past were good defensively - and the great ones - that continued to contend for the championship were in the elite defensively - mostly in the top 3.

This, btw - is one of the reasons I do not think the Lakers are a lock to contend again as many do - they were good defensively last year - at 6th in the NBA - but not an elite defensive team. They strike me a lot, statistically, like the Miami Heat - good defensively (the Heat were 9th best), pretty fast (the Lakers were 6th fastest, the Heat were 11th) - and as such - they are not the clear cut favorite, in my mind.

Of course there are many factors going into the making of a championship team - defense and rebounding
are often cited as keys, which I indeed agree with. However, I've always thought that a third important
ingredient is the ability to get "easy baskets".

Play tough defense making the other team work hard, rebound when they miss, and punish the other team by getting some cheap baskets. Lowering the pace and having an efficient offense is another form of defense.

 

[Nikolokolus]

On behalf of this entire forum, I think we'd now all like to see Nate put in the four corners offense. It will be a shame to lose you MARIS.

Signed.

 

[andalusian]

you are once again, arguing for the sake of arguing. Frankly, I don't understand why?

I guess I find myself on the outside looking in with all the repeated bickering...

Nice to see you, Mr. Kettle

 

[Mediocre Man]

I guess I find myself on the outside looking in with all the repeated bickering...

Nice to see you, Mr. Kettle

I'm not sure, at all, how my original post, or my following post was argumentitive, but if it helps you sleep better at night thinking that, no worries.

 

[THE HCP]

I've came to the realization that some people would be willing to give up a little success in order to be able to watch a more entertaining brand of basketball.

For me personally, winning slow/ugly is more entertaining than losing pretty.

That's tough.......... it's like would you rather have a beautiful wife with a dumpy body or a wife that has an amazing body and a face of a Swamp Donkey?!?

 

[andalusian]

I'm not sure, at all, how my original post, or my following post was argumentitive, but if it helps you sleep better at night thinking that, no worries.

I did not think I was arguing for the sake of arguing - I thought and still do that defense is the big thing for championships, not pace - and I am really surprised you find it strange when people discuss pace with you - since you are the one that seems to bring it up frequently... thus the reference to repeated arguments...

 

[blue32]

Yeah, it is. I watch the Blazers for entertainment, period. Exclamation point!

I don't give a rat's ass if they win another title, unless they entertain me whilst doing it.

My leisure time is much too valuable to waste watching a cowardly team afraid to take risks.

The entertainment value for me in sports lies 100% in the athlete's risk-taking. Attempting something daring that others are afraid to try because they fear failure.

Without risk, basketball is just a bunch of guys walking back and forth.

If I want to watch someone who is needlessly tending to and correcting every minute detail and every out of place hair while boring and frustrating everyone around him, I'll watch Monk.

Ahh -- so all of your posts regarding Sergio and Rudy, and all the stuff about running is just for your entertainment requirements. Makes sense now I understand much better now.

 

[alex42083]

RECAP:

Blazers will stream games this season.

Brian T Smith says Miller situation isn't a big deal.

Mike Barrett calls Mike Rice an attractive man.

Nate McMillan pissed in Mediocre Man's cereal.

Rasheed Wallace is perfect for the Celtics.

I think I also heard about the 'incident' at Lloyd Center where Andre supposedly blew off some fan, which was texted into Wheels' show. And they asked Andre if he's ever been to Lloyd and he said no.

 

[MARIS61]

Ahh -- so all of your posts regarding Sergio and Rudy, and all the stuff about running is just for your entertainment requirements. Makes sense now I understand much better now.

Naturally it's all about my entertainment requirements.

Why else would anyone watch people they don't know play a game?

Some sort of self-delusional "they're my imaginary friends" stalking thing?

 

[blue32]

Naturally it's all about my entertainment requirements.

Why else would anyone watch people they don't know play a game?

Some sort of self-delusional "they're my imaginary friends" stalking thing?

Nah, I just meant I understand why you want those players playing. It's not to help the Blazers win, it's so you can see the fancy running team pass crazy passes, (risks, you call it) and do the exciting alley-oops, etc. Has nothing to do with actual basketball per-say.

hell one could argue you'd be better served watching the globe trotters

or maybe i am just reading your post wrong...


I watch because i like the game of basketball, slow, fast, whatever, it doesnt matter to me. and i watch the blazers b/c they are our local team, and they're good young up-and-coming players that are fun to support.

I could care less about the risky-entertainment-crap. that just reminds me of WWF/WWE.