Gee DNP?

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in
This is just another example of Stotts fooling the opposition. Nobody can scout our roster game to game. It's also sort of last call for playoff playing time and Stotts is giving everybody a shot
 
If you want to hate on Stotts...
Hate on him for not making an adjustment when Utah started to double Aldridge's post up's on the catch that led to turnovers late in the 3rd.
Which directly led to the Blazers being down by 10 going into the 4th quarter.
That is about the only thing I can remember having watched the game that you can specifically call Stotts out on.

Oh, and blame CJ for overdribbling. He turned it over before the entry pass came. Blake too.
 
Last edited:
blue9 said:
I wasn't able to watch the game last night, but I'm more than a little surprised to see that after Gee's solid performance against GSW - and his first extended minutes as a Blazer - he gets rewarded with a DNP. Can I add this to a list of reasons why I think Stotts is mediocre, or was there a good reason for him not playing?

I'm all for getting Crabbe some PT, but in the limited minutes that Gee has played he's proven to be better than his competition (Crabbe & Wright) for back-up SF minutes.
Click to expand...
You are surprised about a player playing a great game only to be rewarded with 0 minutes the next? Isn't that the Stotts system?
 
blue9 said:
I've always been more concerned with HOW we play than whether we win or lose (in the regular season).
Alright - enough bullshit for today. I'm going home. Go Homers!
Click to expand...

Pick up your toys and BOUNCE...
 
Boob-No-More said:
Utah had the second best record, and best defense, in the league since the All-Star break. They just had a 12-game streak where they went 10-2 and held their opponents to: 82, 75, 85, 82, 83, 88, 82, 91, 85, 66, 88 and 73 points. The last time we played them, they beat us 92-76. I'm not sure if beating them makes things hunky-dory, but it's certainly a good win - especially on their floor on the second night of a home-away back-to-back with Wes (of course), Batum and Kaman all out.

Besides, starting a thread to criticize the coach's decisions when you didn't even watch the game, seems disingenuous, at best. That's analogous to critiquing a restaurant after reading the menu online. You might want to actually eat there before telling everyone the food tastes awful.

BNM
Click to expand...


Do any of you haters actually read??? BNM breaks all of the hate DOWN in this post...

Bottom line...: We. Just. Won. The. Game.
 
I didn't watch the game either, didn't watch the last 6 or 7 games but I do have to side with Blue on some of these issues:
1. Gee has got to play. He's our Gee factor.
2. Calling Stotts "mediocre" is far from the truth. He's not close to being good enough to be called mediocre.
 
Blazer4ever said:
I didn't watch the game either, didn't watch the last 6 or 7 games but I do have to side with Blue on some of these issues:
1. Gee has got to play. He's our Gee factor.
2. Calling Stotts "mediocre" is far from the truth. He's not close to being good enough to be called mediocre.
Click to expand...

*facepalm*
 
I haven't watched any of the games, I don't know the players, and I'm not sure of the name of the team.

I think we need to work on how we run down the court. I'd like to see a little skip in our step, maybe the players could hold hands. And would it be so hard to smile and wave?

barfo
 
SlyPokerDog said:
Gee... DNP...

GeeNP!

Cause he's GeeNP, he's dynamite
GeeNP and he'll win the fight
GeeNP he's a power load
GeeNP watch him explode
Click to expand...

party people....


#WinterHawks
 
Blazer4ever said:
I didn't watch the game either, didn't watch the last 6 or 7 games but I do have to side with Blue on some of these issues:
1. Gee has got to play. He's our Gee factor.
2. Calling Stotts "mediocre" is far from the truth. He's not close to being good enough to be called mediocre.
Click to expand...

Man some of you people.... Another MF who didn't watch the game...
 
aka "Troll"

troll_2_38016711.jpg
 
Boob-No-More said:
You admitted in your very first post that you didn't watch the game. So, how can you possibly know HOW we played?

BNM
Click to expand...
(A) I never said that we played well or poorly against UTH. You're tying a quote about my general outlook - in response to a general comment - to a specific game. Par for the course around these parts.
(B) I've watched more than enough games to know how this team plays. Maybe they played really well against UTH - I don't know. Somehow I doubt it...aside from the 4th quarter turn-around.

I'm not interested in your petty pissing matches, so I'm not going to get into it any more after this post. I'm more than happy to have respectful discussions, dialogs, debates, and arguments. But I don't have the time or energy to put into bullshit straw men, semantic, or just plain poorly crafted arguments. (BNM - this isn't wholly directed at you, but is rather a summation of S2 arguments.) The vehemence that's directed at people with unpopular opinions is just ridiculous and really takes the fun out of discussing basketball. We don't have to agree with each other - that would be boring. But I'm a little taken aback by some of you who I previously respected, despite not always agreeing with.

Take a page from Dame's book and: RESPECT - PASS IT ON.
 
blue9 said:
(A) I never said that we played well or poorly against UTH. You're tying a quote about my general outlook - in response to a general comment - to a specific game. Par for the course around these parts.
(B) I've watched more than enough games to know how this team plays. Maybe they played really well against UTH - I don't know. Somehow I doubt it...aside from the 4th quarter turn-around.

I'm not interested in your petty pissing matches, so I'm not going to get into it any more after this post. I'm more than happy to have respectful discussions, dialogs, debates, and arguments. But I don't have the time or energy to put into bullshit straw men, semantic, or just plain poorly crafted arguments. (BNM - this isn't wholly directed at you, but is rather a summation of S2 arguments.) The vehemence that's directed at people with unpopular opinions is just ridiculous and really takes the fun out of discussing basketball. We don't have to agree with each other - that would be boring. But I'm a little taken aback by some of you who I previously respected, despite not always agreeing with.

Take a page from Dame's book and: RESPECT - PASS IT ON.
Click to expand...

Wow.... Where do I begin.... It's not about agreeing or disagreeing at all. It's about you see a DNP-CD for Gee and then you have a bullshit freak out so much that you create this TROLL THREAD disparaging Stotts when....

You didn't even watch the game....
 
blue9 said:
The vehemence that's directed at people with unpopular opinions is just ridiculous and really takes the fun out of discussing basketball. We don't have to agree with each other - that would be boring.
Click to expand...

I believe that this forum would be better if everyone agreed with me.

I agree with what you posted, this forum would be boring if everyone agreed on everything.
 
I'm with blue, isn't this BNM dude the reason we traded T-Rob. and that Dviss is calling people trolls like trolls are the only one who understand basketball.
 
barfo said:
I haven't watched any of the games, I don't know the players, and I'm not sure of the name of the team.

I think we need to work on how we run down the court. I'd like to see a little skip in our step, maybe the players could hold hands. And would it be so hard to smile and wave?

barfo
Click to expand...
when did you hack jlprk's account. This is definitely a jlprk post!
 
blue9 said:
(A) I never said that we played well or poorly against UTH. You're tying a quote about my general outlook - in response to a general comment - to a specific game. Par for the course around these parts.
(B) I've watched more than enough games to know how this team plays. Maybe they played really well against UTH - I don't know. Somehow I doubt it...aside from the 4th quarter turn-around.

I'm not interested in your petty pissing matches, so I'm not going to get into it any more after this post. I'm more than happy to have respectful discussions, dialogs, debates, and arguments. But I don't have the time or energy to put into bullshit straw men, semantic, or just plain poorly crafted arguments. (BNM - this isn't wholly directed at you, but is rather a summation of S2 arguments.) The vehemence that's directed at people with unpopular opinions is just ridiculous and really takes the fun out of discussing basketball. We don't have to agree with each other - that would be boring. But I'm a little taken aback by some of you who I previously respected, despite not always agreeing with.

Take a page from Dame's book and: RESPECT - PASS IT ON.
Click to expand...

Yes it would be wonderful for you to give respect when respect is due. Your words moved me. So in your opinion, because you claim you call what you see, can you admit Aldridge is a fucking beast and you've been wrong about him for a long while?

I mean you did say you want to take a page from Dame's book and all...
 
I think it is safe to say that Terry has an offensive philosophy and he likes to stick with it as much as possible. And that philosophy seems to include 4 outside shooters at all times. ( Aside from the centers) For the most part players like , TRob, Claver, Gee, Earl Watson, Will Barton did not fit that description, ergo did not play much.

Terry already looks like he wants to shorten the rotation. Basically he played 8 guys last night (9 if you count the 5 for Joel) It will be interesting to see how he fits Gee in occasionally because I thought we would need him in the playoffs to hound certain players. However it does not look like we will playing Houston and I thought he could help on Harden. So will we need him against the Clips or SA? Can he help against CP3 like he did against Dame when he was in Denver? How about Kawhi Leonard? I would find Gee 5 minutes a game to find out.

On another note I am not sure about the Kaman line up last night. Chris played well offensively, but I would prefer Joel in there with him to protect the rim . Using Wright as a PF helped spread the floor for Kaman, and also helps on D when the other team has a spread 4, but when the other team is attacking the rim.........Kaman needs help. He does not react very quickly.
 
Last edited:
blue9 said:
No more head-scratching than our general offensive philosophy.
Click to expand...

What's "head-scratching" is that you don't understand an offensive philosophy of getting one of the most efficient shots in the game: 3pt shots.

We're shooting 36% from 3, which is equivalent to shooting 54% from 2. We shoot 48% from 2. If you take out dunks, we shoot about 45% from 2. The league's best 2-pt shooting team shoots less than 52%. Last year we shot over 37% from 3, equivalent to shooting 56% from 2, and actually shot 48% from 2 (45% without dunks). Potentially we should be shooting even MORE 3s if we can scale the quantity while still getting good looks.

It's also "head-scratching" that you don't understand why Gee doesn't fit well in that scheme.
 
What's head-scratching is that you make excuses for Stotts like he's fucking holy when he's one of our biggest weaknesses.
You think a team can win a championship with only 3s? Charles Barkley may not have Stotts credentials but when he says jump-shooting teams don't win championships I agree with him, and points in the paint may be our biggest weakness. Or another Cliche - "you live by the 3. you die by the 3" - not saying having shooters is a bad thing but if that's the only peremeter for success why is Lamarcus our best offensive player and ROLO our best +/- player? If you want to use shooters efficiently, you usualy don't need more than 2 on the floor, 3 tops. You need spacing, you need versatility, you need to be able to attack the rim to get open looks for 3.
It's like you people would rather have blind faith in Stotts than actualy think for yourselves then accuse anyone who thinks for himself of being a troll. I sometimes find it comical, sometimes just sad - depending on my mood.
 
Blazer4ever said:
What's head-scratching is that you make excuses for Stotts like he's fucking holy when he's one of our biggest weaknesses.
You think a team can win a championship with only 3s? Charles Barkley may not have Stotts credentials but when he says jump-shooting teams don't win championships I agree with him, and points in the paint may be our biggest weakness. Or another Cliche - "you live by the 3. you die by the 3" - not saying having shooters is a bad thing but if that's the only peremeter for success why is Lamarcus our best offensive player and ROLO our best +/- player? If you want to use shooters efficiently, you usualy don't need more than 2 on the floor, 3 tops. You need spacing, you need versatility, you need to be able to attack the rim to get open looks for 3.
It's like you people would rather have blind faith in Stotts than actualy think for yourselves then accuse anyone who thinks for himself of being a troll. I sometimes find it comical, sometimes just sad - depending on my mood.
Click to expand...

1. I don't think you're a troll. Just how many people have called you one? Most will discuss/debate you without calling you anything.

2. I think Stotts has done a great job of allowing players to play to their strengths instead of forcing them to play into a system. There is a reason why Nate McMuffin hasn't gotten a job as a head coach again. Too rigid, tried to put square pegs into round holes. LMA has had career years under Stotts. Batum is utilized much better under Stotts. Under Nate he was just a jump shooter, now he initiates the offense. Matthews game expanded. The development of Lillard has gone perfect, improving his game every season.

3. Many of the players on the Blazer's roster are good 3 pt shooters, why not take advantage of that? You put your players in positions that allows them their best opportunity to succeed. Stotts seems to do that well.

4. I don't think that liking what Stotts is doing means we have blind faith in the guy.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Back
Top