Game Thread GAME# 25: KNICKS @ BLAZERS - DECEMBER 10, 2019 - TUESDAY, 7:00 PM, NBCSNW

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in

What do you think of Nassir's new hair cut?

  • Total voters
    45
  • Poll closed .

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
in the last two games Dame has averaged 40 minutes and Portland has lost by an average of 18 points. Is there any chance Stotts stops grinding Dame down chasing wins that aren't there?
 
Last edited:
wizenheimer said:
can we agree that people are leaning way too heavily on this excuse?

* start with Hood: it's clear Portland wasn't going to beat the Lakers even if Hood had played the whole game. So, essentially, the Blazers were 9-14 with Hood. His injury has had no impact on the won/loss record yet, and he's been around for just about every minute of the crappy play

* last season, the Blazers were 11-2 with CJ out; In the regular season, they were 8-2 without Nurkic, and CJ & Nurk missed many of the same games. And from when Nurk went down till game 1 of the WCF, the Blazers were 16-6

* everybody knew Nurkic was going to be out till at least sometime in January. His absence was already baked into the equation, and factored into expectations. Last season, they had Kanter, this season, they have Whiteside. Kanter does a couple of thing better than Whiteside, but Whiteside does some things better than Kanter. It's essentially a push

* finally, Collins. Zach had 0.1 winshares in 3 games. Multiply by 8 (for 24 games) and he would have 0.8 winshares...less than 1. Double it because of Olshey stocking nothing behind him, and maybe, with Zach, Portland has an 11-13 record right now. But if Zach doesn't go down with injury, it may very well be the Blazers don't have Melo so there might be an offset that drops the Blazers back to 10-14. I think even the most rosy homerific scenario would put Portland at .500 with Zach

yeah, Portland 'would' probably be a better team with those 3 guys (but remember, no Whiteside). But Hood was injured 3 days ago, and Portland went 16-6 without Nurk last season and 11-2 without CJ (and 7-2 without both). Why were they so much better without Nurkic and CJ last year, than without Nurkic and Zach this year? What has happened so far this season can't all be explained away with the injuries excuse because we have some extremely relevant benchmarks from 8 months ago
Click to expand...
Before the season I looked at the schedule at thought if their 10-10 after 20 games, the schedule lines up well for them. Who knows if Zach, and Whiteside (he missed a few games in there too), healthy they get to that, but My guess is they’re much closer to .500 if healthy than they are right now.
 
wizenheimer said:
can we agree that people are leaning way too heavily on this excuse?

* start with Hood: it's clear Portland wasn't going to beat the Lakers even if Hood had played the whole game. So, essentially, the Blazers were 9-14 with Hood. His injury has had no impact on the won/loss record yet, and he's been around for just about every minute of the crappy play

* last season, the Blazers were 11-2 with CJ out; In the regular season, they were 8-2 without Nurkic, and CJ & Nurk missed many of the same games. And from when Nurk went down till game 1 of the WCF, the Blazers were 16-6

* everybody knew Nurkic was going to be out till at least sometime in January. His absence was already baked into the equation, and factored into expectations. Last season, they had Kanter, this season, they have Whiteside. Kanter does a couple of thing better than Whiteside, but Whiteside does some things better than Kanter. It's essentially a push

* finally, Collins. Zach had 0.1 winshares in 3 games. Multiply by 8 (for 24 games) and he would have 0.8 winshares...less than 1. Double it because of Olshey stocking nothing behind him, and maybe, with Zach, Portland has an 11-13 record right now. But if Zach doesn't go down with injury, it may very well be the Blazers don't have Melo so there might be an offset that drops the Blazers back to 10-14. I think even the most rosy homerific scenario would put Portland at .500 with Zach

yeah, Portland 'would' probably be a better team with those 3 guys (but remember, no Whiteside). But Hood was injured 3 days ago, and Portland went 16-6 without Nurk last season and 11-2 without CJ (and 7-2 without both). Why were they so much better without Nurkic and CJ last year, than without Nurkic and Zach this year? What has happened so far this season can't all be explained away with the injuries excuse because we have some extremely relevant benchmarks from 8 months ago
Click to expand...
Last year they play as a team plus our assist total was up too. Better ball movement because Dame knew he do it by his self. This year with good ball we very successful but when everyone wants go iso then you got many standing. We must start moving the ball better that usually have someone with rythem shot.
 
wizenheimer said:
can we agree that people are leaning way too heavily on this excuse?

* start with Hood: it's clear Portland wasn't going to beat the Lakers even if Hood had played the whole game. So, essentially, the Blazers were 9-14 with Hood. His injury has had no impact on the won/loss record yet, and he's been around for just about every minute of the crappy play

* last season, the Blazers were 11-2 with CJ out; In the regular season, they were 8-2 without Nurkic, and CJ & Nurk missed many of the same games. And from when Nurk went down till game 1 of the WCF, the Blazers were 16-6

* everybody knew Nurkic was going to be out till at least sometime in January. His absence was already baked into the equation, and factored into expectations. Last season, they had Kanter, this season, they have Whiteside. Kanter does a couple of thing better than Whiteside, but Whiteside does some things better than Kanter. It's essentially a push

* finally, Collins. Zach had 0.1 winshares in 3 games. Multiply by 8 (for 24 games) and he would have 0.8 winshares...less than 1. Double it because of Olshey stocking nothing behind him, and maybe, with Zach, Portland has an 11-13 record right now. But if Zach doesn't go down with injury, it may very well be the Blazers don't have Melo so there might be an offset that drops the Blazers back to 10-14. I think even the most rosy homerific scenario would put Portland at .500 with Zach

yeah, Portland 'would' probably be a better team with those 3 guys (but remember, no Whiteside). But Hood was injured 3 days ago, and Portland went 16-6 without Nurk last season and 11-2 without CJ (and 7-2 without both). Why were they so much better without Nurkic and CJ last year, than without Nurkic and Zach this year? What has happened so far this season can't all be explained away with the injuries excuse because we have some extremely relevant benchmarks from 8 months ago
Click to expand...

The main difference is the power forward position. We got rid of our starter Aminu then Collins got injured. We wouldn’t have gone far last season with the power forward options we have now.
 
wizenheimer said:
can we agree that people are leaning way too heavily on this excuse?

* start with Hood: it's clear Portland wasn't going to beat the Lakers even if Hood had played the whole game. So, essentially, the Blazers were 9-14 with Hood. His injury has had no impact on the won/loss record yet, and he's been around for just about every minute of the crappy play

* last season, the Blazers were 11-2 with CJ out; In the regular season, they were 8-2 without Nurkic, and CJ & Nurk missed many of the same games. And from when Nurk went down till game 1 of the WCF, the Blazers were 16-6

* everybody knew Nurkic was going to be out till at least sometime in January. His absence was already baked into the equation, and factored into expectations. Last season, they had Kanter, this season, they have Whiteside. Kanter does a couple of thing better than Whiteside, but Whiteside does some things better than Kanter. It's essentially a push

* finally, Collins. Zach had 0.1 winshares in 3 games. Multiply by 8 (for 24 games) and he would have 0.8 winshares...less than 1. Double it because of Olshey stocking nothing behind him, and maybe, with Zach, Portland has an 11-13 record right now. But if Zach doesn't go down with injury, it may very well be the Blazers don't have Melo so there might be an offset that drops the Blazers back to 10-14. I think even the most rosy homerific scenario would put Portland at .500 with Zach

yeah, Portland 'would' probably be a better team with those 3 guys (but remember, no Whiteside). But Hood was injured 3 days ago, and Portland went 16-6 without Nurk last season and 11-2 without CJ (and 7-2 without both). Why were they so much better without Nurkic and CJ last year, than without Nurkic and Zach this year? What has happened so far this season can't all be explained away with the injuries excuse because we have some extremely relevant benchmarks from 8 months ago
Click to expand...

Damn reading this was great. You nailed it. Only thing I can say is curry, kanter, harkless, aminu were much better than the guys who replaced them.

Curry was huge for us last year not only his shooting but defense was above average. Simons has been completely useless all season except the first 5-6 games. And I guess Tolliver, Baze and Mario are complete dumpsters compared to Mo and Aminu
 
Strenuus said:
I say stupid shit all the time. It wasnt that hard.
Click to expand...

iu
 
BonesJones said:
Because they werent going to beat the Warriors?
Click to expand...
Not sure about that? At that point Kanter was completely healthy. The injuries they were dealing with happened in the first round for the Warriors. The Blazers may have played a much better series and fought just as hard. Nobody thought they would get by Denver without Nurkic. As a matter of fact if you go back to March 26th nobody thought they would get out of the first round at all. Also Curry was nursing nagging injuries through the second round also.
 
Curry had nagging injuries, Thompson had a nagging injury that he then made much worse, Durant was out....and they still swept us. It was nice sneaking by a 2nd round matchup of a Nuggets team that had almost no playoff experience and whose two biggest stars were 23 and 21, but they weren't close to being a contender. Yes, they had injuries....but so did the Warriors and they were without a much better player than we were.
 
TBpup said:
Curry had nagging injuries, Thompson had a nagging injury that he then made much worse, Durant was out....and they still swept us. It was nice sneaking by a 2nd round matchup of a Nuggets team that had almost no playoff experience and whose two biggest stars were 23 and 21, but they weren't close to being a contender. Yes, they had injuries....but so did the Warriors and they were without a much better player than we were.
Click to expand...

Kanter was hurt. Obviously Nurk was already down with a broken leg. We lost because we got smashed on the boards. We definitely could have beaten them with a healthy center.
 
tlongII said:
Kanter was hurt. Obviously Nurk was already down with a broken leg. We lost because we got smashed on the boards. We definitely could have beaten them with a healthy center.
Click to expand...

Per @wizenheimer : In the close-out playoff series for the Dame-CJ teams since 2015-16, Portland is 1-16 and have lost 14 in a row; and the only win came against the Warriors 4 years ago when Curry didn't play.

I highly doubt they were winning that series with a healthy Nurkic.
 
tlongII said:
Kanter was hurt. Obviously Nurk was already down with a broken leg. We lost because we got smashed on the boards. We definitely could have beaten them with a healthy center.
Click to expand...
Kind of think they would have at least gave them a run. Beating them? Who knows? But it would not have been certain for sure.
 
TBpup said:
Per @wizenheimer : In the close-out playoff series for the Dame-CJ teams since 2015-16, Portland is 1-16 and have lost 14 in a row; and the only win came against the Warriors 4 years ago when Curry didn't play.

I highly doubt they were winning that series with a healthy Nurkic.
Click to expand...

With a healthy Nurk we would have crushed them.
 
My sources tell me this one's going down to the wire. too close to call.
 
I always say Go Blazers and they keep losing. This time I’ll say Go Knicks and maybe they can win.
 
I’m just the opposite here.
Blazers win this by 20+ is my prediction.
 
Jesus christ how is it that OKC has a better team than Portland? EVERYONE was predicting them to just be awful. I am at a loss here. Baffled. Stunned. Speechless.
What is a path to real change? Patience??
 
Cugel said:
Jesus christ how is it that OKC has a better team than Portland? EVERYONE was predicting them to just be awful. I am at a loss here. Baffled. Stunned. Speechless.
What is a path to real change? Patience??
Click to expand...
Yep. Next year bro. Next year....
 
Im wondering how stotts Will lose this game for us.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top