Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
If you don't move the defense your going have to make tuff passes. Player's just can't stand in one spot and have the move around the arc your not accomplished a damn thing. You move the defense by players also moving while the ball moves.
Exactly. People like @Tince act intentionally obtuse because they irrationally love Terry. What we had before was not working so the new staff is trying to implement new approaches and address the obvious things to improve upon: predictability, lack of ball movement, ease of shot attempts, etc.In my eyes, that is exactly how learning process looks like.
(Little c/o here: some of you, guys, were telling me, that you don't get my parallels. It appeared I'm in the process of diagnosing asparger. So.. They say I may see things differently)
To the point. When you learn riding a bike, on the begining you fall. At that point you will be slower from A to B, than your friend walking.
When you try to walk after stroke, you will be struggling a lot. You can go thru the struggles or give up after three sessions (like Stotts and Lillars did last season).
If you want to talk to Japanese people you can learn Japanese or just stick to you English.
It is learning process, that, after all, will result with much better outcome.
I believe Blazers are just there.
Exactly. People like @Tince act intentionally obtuse because they irrationally love Terry. What we had before was not working so the new staff is trying to implement new approaches and address the obvious things to improve upon: predictability, lack of ball movement, ease of shot attempts, etc.
For example, playing more through Nurk doesn't mean just handing him the ball to let him go to work in the post-- it means putting him in the high post and cutting off him, or using him as an off ball screener to open up shooters, etc etc. And these failed attempts now are not solely on Nurk-- it's on guys to cut hard, and shooters to recognize when to move where, and the like. People like to simplify stuff to criticize because they have a narrative to push. Hopefully this mindset doesn't permeate with the team and they stick with it.
The last like 5 yrs we've been among the leaders in contested shots attempted. We make them at a decent clip in the regular season and win 45-50 games. However, even the most staunch Stotts supporter can (won't but should) admit that this is hardly sustainable in the playoffs. Building from scratch takes time. And when it doesn't work, it looks bad like last night. And the dropped passes and careless turnovers just makes it look worse. The key this regular season is attrition-- how much patience do we have to keep trying these new schemes? If you use some of the fans here as a barometer, it's not much.
Exactly. People like @Tince act intentionally obtuse because they irrationally love Terry. What we had before was not working so the new staff is trying to implement new approaches and address the obvious things to improve upon: predictability, lack of ball movement, ease of shot attempts, etc.
For example, playing more through Nurk doesn't mean just handing him the ball to let him go to work in the post-- it means putting him in the high post and cutting off him, or using him as an off ball screen setter to open up shooters, etc etc. People like to simplify stuff to criticize because they have a narrative to push.
The last like 5 yrs we've been among the leaders in contested shots attempted. We make them at a decent clip in the regular season and win 45-50 games. However, even the most staunch supporter can (won't but should) admit that this is hardly sustainable in the playoffs. Building from new takes time. And when it doesn't work, it looks bad like last night. And the dropped passes and careless turnovers just makes it look worse. The key this regular season is attrition-- how much patience do we have to keep trying these new schemes? If you use some of the fans here as a barometer, it's not much.
lol sureI disagree with your assessment of me and I know you're incorrect about my feelings towards any previous coach we've had.
We'll have a whole year to find out if the issues last year were roster related and we notice a big improvement in wins/playoff success from the past 5 years. I'm still feeling confident this isn't a contending team and I think Billups is more than a fine coach, I like him, and will eventually be called an apologist of him in a couple years.
The changes we're making shouldn't take years, or even months to implement, and since we ran it back (with a slightly more versitile bench), this will be a good test on what the core issue is. I truly hope you're correct that this is a fantastic roster that can be fixed by someone with a dry erase pen.
If you listened to Chauncey's post game presser, he's going to make sure Dame starts playing like Dame going forward. He said it was always his intention for Dame to control the game and sometimes CJ but that Dame is such a good teammate that he's been trying to get other guys going too much and that he needs to start looking to get himself going first... or something like that.
I don't remember it that way. The team was coached by Canales and then they made a number of changes.Stotts got the same gift when he replaced Nate; it'll wear off eventually. Billups, nor Stotts should have to take the blame for it.
After this game the Blazers improved from #19 in defense to #18. Pretty impressive as I thought they didn't play well and have a hell of a lot of potential to improve defensively.
They did slide back from the #1 offense to #17 though.....
I know you know this so it's not me enlightening you....but when a team can go from #1 to #17 in one game it demonstrates the sample size issues for all those kind of stats.
I think you have to wait till at least the 30 game mark before those numbers reveal anything very relevant. And in Portland's case it may have to be the 50 game mark because at 30 games the Blazers will have an 18-12 home/road imbalance and at 40 games, that imbalance jumps up to 25-15.
but yet you keep railing on cj with a three game sample size with a new coach?
not following the consistency here
c'mon man...do I have to add a fucking asterisk to every one of my posts to please you? Of course sample sizes are tiny. Everybody knows that and shouldn't have to add the wiggle words into every post discussing numbers. I'm not the only one mentioning stats 3 games in
everybody is talking about Dame missing 22 three's in the first 3 games. That's 7.3 misses a game. Last year, he missed 6.4 three's a game. So far, he's shooting 2.5 fewer three's than last year, 3.2 fewer FGA's, and 1.9 fewer FT's. BUT IT"S EARLY!!....does that make you happy?
I know you know this so it's not me enlightening you....but when a team can go from #1 to #17 in one game it demonstrates the sample size issues for all those kind of stats.
I think you have to wait till at least the 30 game mark before those numbers reveal anything very relevant. And in Portland's case it may have to be the 50 game mark because at 30 games the Blazers will have an 18-12 home/road imbalance and at 40 games, that imbalance jumps up to 25-15.
Anyone know Paul George's record against Lillard ever since the "wave goodbye" game? I think he bears a little bit of a grudge...
Curious if we were undefeated in the preseason and 2-1 right now..... what would you think the barometric pressure of the forum might be? Honest question.If you use some of the fans here as a barometer, it's not much.
I think he is 10-0 or something.... they showed it on NBATV yesterday he has one of his highest scoring averages against a single team as the Blazers. I think Lillard and or CJ had poor averages against the Clippers.
Get ready for “Its not that they lose it’s how they lose” post coming right up.Curious if we were undefeated in the preseason and 2-1 right now..... what would you think the barometric pressure of the forum might be? Honest question.
just sayin that old numbers should have an asterisk until we see a good sample size with the new coach.
It seems like you are writing off any potential ability to change/improve based on three games.
nope, I'm not writing off anything based upon the three games Billups has coached....I'm just skeptical of CJ changing based upon the 590 games he's played.
I am kind of amazed at how many people are imagining that a 1st time head coach, who actually has less than a year of coaching experience, on any level, possesses some metaphysical/magical powers that will transform the established games of veteran players almost instantly
it appears that Stotts had such a toxic reputation in the minds of so many fans (I wanted him gone myself) that he's getting no credit at all for the offensive games of players like Dame and CJ. It is possible that he actually knew what he was doing on the offensive end. I mean, everything Dame has acheived so far he did under Stotts
If Dame went 8/8, we would’ve won going away. Defense would’ve been better cuz Clippers have to take ball out of net. Offensively, it would’ve had the Clippers scrambling for help. Also we wouldn’t have played the scrubs in the 4th. This loss was solely on Dame in my opinion.I've been in the majority of threads for a long time and I've watched all the games.
I asked a question about how Nurk is being used, you didn't answer it at all, and pointed out that Dame is shooting poorly, which I believe we all agree on. I did not mean to upset you. If you don't want to talk about Nurk for whatever reason, that's fine.
Had Dame gone 8-8 from 3, that still doesn't make up the 30 point difference, so this isn't just Dame.
If Dame went 8/8, we would’ve won going away. Defense would’ve been better cuz Clippers have to take ball out of net. Offensively, it would’ve had the Clippers scrambling for help. Also we wouldn’t have played the scrubs in the 4th. This loss was solely on Dame in my opinion.
