Hornets @ Blazers 1/25/2010 Game Thread

[The_Lillard_King]

Well I would have if he let one of Rudy/Bayless stay in the 4th, but instead, he put Blake in when he really hadn't done anything the whole game. That was very frustrating to see and not needed. Rudy was awesome at rebounding and made some big shots and Bayless, with his ability to drive and put pressure on the Hornets defense as well as pick up fouls is better than what Blake brought tonight. I cannot hold what he has to play with against him, but I can hold him bringing in Blake when he should have not done at all.

I thought Rudy played a lot in the 4th if I remember right. Blake played less than Rudy and porobably would have played less than Bayless had Bayless been 100%. There is a reason Bayless got 13 minutes . . . and I don't think it was because of his play.

As it is, Blake played 22 minutes, went 4-8 with a couple of assists and no TOs. But yes, many on this board get mad when Nate plays Blake (calling Nate all kinds of names) . . . so I understand what you are saying.

 

[The_Lillard_King]

More than Webster wide-open for 3? I'm not saying it's the worst play we ran in the last 5 minutes, but Bayless has to have it in his mind that he's able to a) get to the rim or the line against a single defender, or b) if the help defender comes from the ball-side he has a shooter in the corner. This isn't rocket science stuff...it's practiced all the time.

I don't get it . . . are you blaming Nate or Bayless?

 

[Tince]

Come on, now. What do you want me to say? That I'd have a high-low double-pick worked on in practice so that I'd have more that the PG-ICE play as my "bread-and-butter"? Maybe. Or perhaps the drive-and-kick? Maybe. I don't know what the team runs in practice. I do know that what they do is repeated over and over in the last 3-4 minutes of the game. Whether it's Roy, Miller or Bayless running it, it's the same play.

But you want a play? Rudy and Webster running off of picks away from the ball, and either getting the ball on the move for an open mid-range jumper, or a back-cut rolling to the hoop. There. Miller's ICE play wasn't working, the bigs needed to be near the paint for rebounding, and your two hottest shooters are in the game. Seems to make at least a bit of sense.

It sounds like you're referring to a similar play the Pacers used to run for Reggie Miller and the Pistons run for Rip Hamilton. It's a play I certainly am a fan of as it often results in a corner 3 or a curled 15ft jumper. My guess is that we score 50% of the time off of that play, which is better than our normal field goal percentage. I'd still argue the shot Miller go in the post late the game is a shot he makes 2/3 of the time, so I'll take the higher percentage shot in this case.

I appreciate the play in all seriousness, it helps me understand what type of set you prefer in late game situations. You rarely see a play like that ran down the stretch at the NBA level, but I'm not opposed to it.

 

[BrianFromWA]

Let's be fair. Some get mad when Nate plays Blake when Blake shouldn't be near the floor. Today he was playing well, and deserved the 22 minutes he got. He was playing solid D, making shots, not making brain errors. No problem there.

Starting Blake over Miller while he was bringing a sub-9.0 PER to the table? And playing him 30 mpg? That's where the angst came.

I'm fine with how Blake's played (and been used) since he came back from pneumonia (outside of that first game where he had little business being in, and mercifully was taken out after the airballed 3).

 

[EGame]

Let's be fair. Some get mad when Nate plays Blake when Blake shouldn't be near the floor. Today he was playing well, and deserved the 22 minutes he got. He was playing solid D, making shots, not making brain errors. No problem there.

Starting Blake over Miller while he was bringing a sub-9.0 PER to the table? And playing him 30 mpg? That's where the angst came.

I'm fine with how Blake's played (and been used) since he came back from pneumonia (outside of that first game where he had little business being in, and mercifully was taken out after the airballed 3).

Bayless was playing solid D too. Bayless made shots. I think the only thing against Bayless were his careless turnovers, but he made some fine passes himself. I don't know, as good as Blake may have played in some eyes, I thought Bayless played better, but I am biased towards Bayless as he is my favorite player and maybe he didn't play as well as I thought.

 

[Boob-No-More]

Just got back from the game. Nate has to go. His idiotic play calling cost us another game we had won (just like the Memphis game three weeks ago). We had an 8-point lead with 3:26 left in the game, but were outscored 10-1 over the rest of the game (just like when we had an 8-point lead with 3:45 left in the Memphis game and were outscored 13-1 to lose by 4).

Just like in the Memphis game, we had the lead, the momentum and the crowd behind the team. New Orleans looked defeated. Thankfully for them, we have an idiot for a coach who can't call anything but isolation plays over the last 3 minutes of a game. Just like the Memphis game, the Blazers were scoring with ease due to good ball movement and good player movement. The team was getting lots of easy looks, everyone was involved in the flow of the offense and we had the game won - until McMoron pulls out his momentum killing patented all ISO all the time offense.

The results were painfully predictable. We've seen it all before. We start running ISOs on every play - which results in one of three things: the player with the ball forcing up a bad shot with the shot clock winding down, him passing off to a surprised teammate with less than 2 seconds left on the shot clock who has to force up a bad shot, or a shot clock violation. You will notice all three options have one thing in common - they don't result in the Blazers actually scoring any points.

Tonight's pet play was running an ISO for Miller against Collison on the left side 20 feet from the basket. Not only did this kill all ball movement, all player movement and the momentum we had, it also played right to Collison's strength. Collison is a very small, thin QUICK player. Andre Miller is NOT QUICK ENOUGH TO BEAT HIM OFF THE DRIBBLE 20 FEET FROM THE BASKET. Jesus, it doesn't take a rocket scientist, or even a 4th grade youth basketball coach, to see that. Not surprisingly the play failed, failed and failed again. Good bye momentum. Good bye ballgame.

If Nate wanted to actually exploit Collison's weakness, and not play to his strength, the smart thing would have been for Miller to post him up on the low block and have Bayless or Blake feed him the ball. Then Miller can use his size and strength advantage to simply turn and shoot over Collison. But, that would have involved more than one player. So, it's not in McMillian's late game playbook. As it was, starting 20 feet from the basket, Miller couldn't get past Collison to get close enough to the basket to get off an easy shot.

God that was painful to watch. So, predictable. So disappointing. So avoidable.

BNM

 

[BrianFromWA]

It sounds like you're referring to a similar play the Pacers used to run for Reggie Miller and the Pistons run for Rip Hamilton. It's a play I certainly am a fan of as it often results in a corner 3 or a curled 15ft jumper. My guess is that we score 50% of the time off of that play, which is better than our normal field goal percentage. I'd still argue the shot Miller go in the post late the game is a shot he makes 2/3 of the time, so I'll take the higher percentage shot in this case.

I appreciate the play in all seriousness, it helps me understand what type of set you prefer in late game situations. You rarely see a play like that ran down the stretch at the NBA level, but I'm not opposed to it.

If it was a Miller iso earlier in the game, or if it was mixed in with a set of 3 or 4 plays that were in the "go-to" bag, then I'd be more for it. But other teams and scouts know at least as much (and, aside from MEM, WAAAY more) than me about this, and know that the guard isolation is going to be the predominant play in the last 3 minutes of a close game. Miller didn't have clean looks on his 2 back-downs in the last minute. Especially since Howard brought his man to the ball both times, yet wasn't in rebounding position. I don't blame Nate for the broken play that resulted in the FTs.

Personally, I don't agree with the thought that the guard-iso (whether Roy, Miller or Bayless--though better % with Roy) is better than an open 3 or 15-footer coming off a pick--just b/c of the rut we get into where the D knows it's coming. If it was one of 3 or 4 "go-to" plays, then perhaps.

 

[The_Lillard_King]

Let's be fair. Some get mad when Nate plays Blake when Blake shouldn't be near the floor. Today he was playing well, and deserved the 22 minutes he got. He was playing solid D, making shots, not making brain errors. No problem there.

Starting Blake over Miller while he was bringing a sub-9.0 PER to the table? And playing him 30 mpg? That's where the angst came.

I'm fine with how Blake's played (and been used) since he came back from pneumonia (outside of that first game where he had little business being in, and mercifully was taken out after the airballed 3).

But don't you see, some poster will always be mad when Nate plays Blake . . . as evidenced in this thread.

You draw the line at Blake starting, other draw the line at Blake getting 30 plus minutes, others draw the line when Blake plays at all.

I get where your angst comes, but posters angst about Nate playing Blake comes at many different levels. I know you are convinced you have it right when Blake PT is justified and when it's not . . . from my perspective, someone will complain about Nate every game if the Blazers lose and Nate played Blake.

Not calling you out egame . . . it someone every game.

 

[Natebishop3]

Just got back from the game. Nate has to go. His idiotic play calling cost us another game we had won (just like the Memphis game three weeks ago). We had an 8-point lead with 3:26 left in the game, but were outscored 10-1 over the rest of the game (just like when we had an 8-point lead with 3:45 left in the Memphis game and were outscored 13-1 to lose by 4).

Just like in the Memphis game, we had the lead, the momentum and the crowd behind the team. New Orleans looked defeated. Thankfully for them, we have an idiot for a coach who can't call anything but isolation plays over the last 3 minutes of a game. Just like the Memphis game, the Blazers were scoring with ease due to good ball movement and good player movement. The team was getting lots of easy looks, everyone was involved in the flow of the offense and we had the game won - until McMoron pulls out his momentum killing patented all ISO all the time offense.

The results were painfully predictable. We've seen it all before. We start running ISOs on every play - which results in one of three things: the player with the ball forcing up a bad shot with the shot clock winding down, him passing off to a surprised teammate with less than 2 seconds left on the shot clock who has to force up a bad shot, or a shot clock violation. You will notice all three options have one thing in common - they don't result in the Blazers actually scoring any points.

Tonight's pet play was running an ISO for Miller against Collison on the left side 20 feet from the basket. Not only did this kill all ball movement, all player movement and the momentum we had, it also played right to Collison's strength. Collison is a very small, thin QUICK player. Andre Miller is NOT QUICK ENOUGH TO BEAT HIM OFF THE DRIBBLE 20 FEET FROM THE BASKET. Jesus, it doesn't take a rocket scientist, or even a 4th grade youth basketball coach, to see that. Not surprisingly the play failed, failed and failed again. Good bye momentum. Good bye ballgame.

If Nate wanted to actually exploit Collison's weakness, and not play to his strength, the smart thing would have been for Miller to post him up on the low block and have Bayless or Blake feed him the ball. Then Miller can use his size and strength advantage to simply turn and shoot over Collison. But, that would have involved more than one player. So, it's not in McMillian's late game playbook. As it was, starting 20 feet from the basket, Miller couldn't get past Collison to get close enough to the basket to get off an easy shot.

God that was painful to watch. So, predictable. So disappointing. So avoidable.

BNM

I'm done pointing out the obvious. I've been saying that Nate needs to go for over a year now, and yet some people still think he's a great coach. I've pretty much lost all hope, and I figure the only way he's actually going to lose his job is if we fail next season. The injuries are his "get out of jail free" card.

 

[Boob-No-More]

Personally, I don't agree with the thought that the guard-iso (whether Roy, Miller or Bayless--though better % with Roy) is better than an open 3 or 15-footer coming off a pick--just b/c of the rut we get into where the D knows it's coming. If it was one of 3 or 4 "go-to" plays, then perhaps.

EXACTLY! Stopping the ISO is a LOT easier when you know it's coming (again, again and again). Nothing like killing your own offensive momentum AND letting the defense rest for the first 20 seconds of every late game possession.

BNM

 

[Tince]

If it was a Miller iso earlier in the game, or if it was mixed in with a set of 3 or 4 plays that were in the "go-to" bag, then I'd be more for it. But other teams and scouts know at least as much (and, aside from MEM, WAAAY more) than me about this, and know that the guard isolation is going to be the predominant play in the last 3 minutes of a close game. Miller didn't have clean looks on his 2 back-downs in the last minute. Especially since Howard brought his man to the ball both times, yet wasn't in rebounding position. I don't blame Nate for the broken play that resulted in the FTs.

Personally, I don't agree with the thought that the guard-iso (whether Roy, Miller or Bayless--though better % with Roy) is better than an open 3 or 15-footer coming off a pick--just b/c of the rut we get into where the D knows it's coming. If it was one of 3 or 4 "go-to" plays, then perhaps.

I think the key is you are assuming that Webster or Rudy would come off those screens with an open 15ft jumper. Detroit called a similar play at the end of the game the other day, LMA jumped the curl and poked the ball out without losing contain of the post player he was defending. We got a decent look in our 2nd to last possession, Detroit never even got an attempt up.

I'm guessing when Nate puts Miller in the post against Collison or Paul, he knows the odds of Miller getting a high percentage look or NOH having to double team is high. Putting Blake in the opposite corner makes it difficult for teams to rotate correctly. Now, again, this is assuming all goes right (which obviously it didn't).

Had Miller made that high percentage shot (IMO) then I don't think people would be criticizing the play.

 

[Boob-No-More]

I'm guessing when Nate puts Miller in the post against Collison or Paul, he knows the odds of Miller getting a high percentage look or NOH having to double team is high. Putting Blake in the opposite corner makes it difficult for teams to rotate correctly. Now, again, this is assuming all goes right (which obviously it didn't).

BUT HE DIDN"T PUT MILLER IN THE POST AGAINST COLLISON - unless you consider 20 feet from the basket "in the post". Go back and watch the plays over. Miller started the ISOs on the left wing 20 feet from the basket and was not able to get by the quicker Collison.

BNM

 

[Tince]

I'm done pointing out the obvious. I've been saying that Nate needs to go for over a year now, and yet some people still think he's a great coach. I've pretty much lost all hope, and I figure the only way he's actually going to lose his job is if we fail next season. The injuries are his "get out of jail free" card.

Certainly not a scientific poll or the most renowned NBA source, but it appears many people think you are 180 degrees wrong.

Orlando Sentinel

This will be 3 straight years Nate is likely to be in the discussion for COY...

 

[illmatic99]

To be fair, the people who visit the Orlando Sentinel's blog probably don't have as much exposure to Nate and his ways as we do.

 

[Tince]

BUT HE DIDN"T PUT MILLER IN THE POST AGAINST COLLISON - unless you consider 20 feet from the basket "in the post". Go back and watch the plays over. Miller started the ISOs on the left wing 20 feet from the basket and was not able to get by the quicker Collison.

BNM

With just under a minute, I swear Miller missed a 5-7 foot shot in the post... Am I wrong?

 

[Tince]

To be fair, the people who visit the Orlando Sentinel's blog probably don't have as much exposure to Nate and his ways as we do.

Absolutely correct... It's the same reason Laker fans bag on Phil, Magic fans rip Van Gundy, and even Houston fans shred Adleman after losses. If you watched any team as much as you watched the Blazers, you'd notice opposing coaches flaws too.

I'm lucky to get to watch between 500-1000 games a year to get a real feel of what other teams run and how other coaches handle in of game situations. I'm convinced we have one of the top 5-7 coaches in the league.

 

[ucatchtrout]

Bingo...

Had we gone to Miller or Blake, the question would be why didn't we go to someone who could create their own shot, like Bayless. In 3.9 seconds, you only have so many options, especially with the speed limitations of our guards.

If you want Bayless in at the end of the game, then why sit his ass on the bench the for most of the fourth quarter and put him in with three seconds left?

Thats tough on any player.

 

[BrianFromWA]

With just under a minute, I swear Miller missed a 5-7 foot shot in the post... Am I wrong?

No, you're both right. On the first of Miller's back-down (with about a minute left) he started just inside the 3-pt-line, backed down toward the block, and shot over a double-team (Howard brought his man into the paint and he and LMA were just caught under the basket when the ball rimmed off just long). The second one was the one where he backed down toward the middle of the paint and faded away at the FT line.

 

[The_Lillard_King]

If you want Bayless in at the end of the game, then why sit his ass on the bench the for most of the fourth quarter and put him in with three seconds left?

Thats tough on any player.

Who else do you give the ball with three seconds left? (It should have never come down to that) I say either him or Miller . . . and I don't think that is enough time for Miller to do his thing.

 

[illmatic99]

Absolutely correct... It's the same reason Laker fans bag on Phil, Magic fans rip Van Gundy, and even Houston fans shred Adleman after losses. If you watched any team as much as you watched the Blazers, you'd notice opposing coaches flaws too.

The posts you often see at LG and Clutchfans are often of the knee jerk variety and lack little substance.

You're disparaging BNM and BfWa's posts by indirectly comparing them to the ones made by Laker fans and the like.

 

[Tince]

The posts you often see at LG and Clutchfans are often of the knee jerk variety and lack little substance.

You're disparaging BNM and BfWa's posts by indirectly comparing them to the ones made by Laker fans and the like.

I think there are plenty of posts here that fit under the same category. I'm not saying every critical thread about a coach is a knee-jerk reaction that has typical armchair quarterback commentary, but it seems to be a high percentage here just like any other forum.

I bet those Laker and Rocket fans would come on here after we lost by 1 to the Hornets without Roy, Oden, Outlaw, and Joel and get a chuckle that we are upset about our coach given the success we've had with this hodgepodge roster.

I think BFWA has a great grasp of the game and just because I don't agree with him doesn't mean I'm putting him down in anyway. I think if he were a Rockets fan he would have similar complaints about what the Rockets run down the stretch of close games. And if he doesn't like tons of ISO and P&R over and over down the stretch, he would hate 2/3 of NBA coaches because that's what most everyone runs.

 

[ucatchtrout]

Who else do you give the ball with three seconds left? (It should have never come down to that) I say either him or Miller . . . and I don't think that is enough time for Miller to do his thing.

My point is if you want him in at the end, don't bring him off the bench cold.

Bayless forced that jumper, and he shot it early with just over a second left. If you look at the replay, he could have driven into traffic, taken that contested jumper, or dished to a wide open Martell Webster.

 

[BlazerBeav]

Webster was wide open for the dish from Bayless, and was 4-6 from deep! Ride the hot hand!

We've got a list of bad loses going where we had control of the game and simply choked.

 

[Tince]

My point is if you want him in at the end, don't bring him off the bench cold.

Bayless forced that jumper, and he shot it early with just over a second left. If you look at the replay, he could have driven into traffic, taken that contested jumper, or dished to a wide open Martell Webster.

I think if there were 8 seconds on the clock, he wouldn't have gone in. When you are under 4 seconds and your other 3 guards are some of the slowest in the league, I don't think he had much of a choice. I thought for sure he wouldn't put Bayless in for the same reason you cite, but he gave us our best chance at getting a clean look. I would have rather Brandon Roy get the shot, but that wasn't an option. I'd love for LMA to want to ball and have the ability to catch it at 17ft and take 1-2 dribbles, but he doesn't want the ball down the stretch. Rudy got the ball down the stretch in the Boston game, but that didn't work out so well....

 

[Boob-No-More]

With just under a minute, I swear Miller missed a 5-7 foot shot in the post... Am I wrong?

From where I was sitting, it didn't look like he got anywhere close to 5 - 7 feet from the basket. He started over 20 feet from the basket and maybe got as close as 10 - 12 feet before he forced up a contested shot as the shot clock wound down.

When I say "in the post", I mean on the low block. Against a smaller quicker player, it would be much more effective to have Miller post him up on the low block and then receive an entry pass than try to start with the ball 20-feet from the basket and try to dribble around or through the much quicker Collison.

BNM

 

[ucatchtrout]

I'd love for LMA to want to ball and have the ability to catch it at 17ft and take 1-2 dribbles, but he doesn't want the ball down the stretch. .

And if I'm Paul Allen there is about sixty million reasons that shit pisses me off.

 

[Tince]

From where I was sitting, it didn't look like he got anywhere close to 5 - 7 feet from the basket. He started over 20 feet from the basket and maybe got as close as 10 - 12 feet before he forced up a contested shot as the shot clock wound down.

When I say "in the post", I mean on the low block. Against a smaller quicker player, it would be much more effective to have Miller post him up on the low block and then receive an entry pass than try to start with the ball 20-feet from the basket and try to dribble around or through the much quicker Collison.

BNM

The shot chart shows a shot from Miller taken at or just inside the left block with 55 seconds left. I'm not saying that it's 100% accurate, but my memory was it was somewhere between 5-7ft. I understand you not liking the lack of movement, it's very conservative.

 

[ucatchtrout]

The shot chart shows a shot from Miller taken at or just inside the left block with 55 seconds left. I'm not saying that it's 100% accurate, but my memory was it was somewhere between 5-7ft. I understand you not liking the lack of movement, it's very conservative.

I sat right in front of that play, and in Andres defense, I think you are right the shot was more like five to seven feet and it looked good when he took it. The other breakdowns were more troubling to me. Aldridge not wanting to shoot and dishing it back to Miller with five seconds left....and the lack of ball movement to the outside, when we had been hitting it pretty good there for much of the game.

 

[Boob-No-More]

I think there are plenty of posts here that fit under the same category. I'm not saying every critical thread about a coach is a knee-jerk reaction that has typical armchair quarterback commentary, but it seems to be a high percentage here just like any other forum.

I bet those Laker and Rocket fans would come on here after we lost by 1 to the Hornets without Roy, Oden, Outlaw, and Joel and get a chuckle that we are upset about our coach given the success we've had with this hodgepodge roster.

I think BFWA has a great grasp of the game and just because I don't agree with him doesn't mean I'm putting him down in anyway. I think if he were a Rockets fan he would have similar complaints about what the Rockets run down the stretch of close games. And if he doesn't like tons of ISO and P&R over and over down the stretch, he would hate 2/3 of NBA coaches because that's what most everyone runs.

When was the last time the Lakers lost a game they were winning by 8 points with less than 4 minutes left by scoring only a single point for the rest of the game? When was the last time they did it twice, at home, in a span of less than 3 weeks to teams that lose twice as many road games as they win?

I spite of all the rah rah feel good vibes about this team overachieving in the face of all the injuries, it's still inexcusable to piss away games you have won, at home, because your coach can't or won't call anything but ISO plays over the last three minutes of the game. Not only is it stupid to not learn from your failures, it also does a great disservice to the players who worked their asses off to have a lead, and the game won, only to see it all pissed away by the same stupid, moronic play calling that cost you a win the last time you were in the same situation.

Sorry, as hard as this team has worked, they don't deserve to lose games like this - and they wouldn't if they had a coach who knew how to call plays that involve more than one player. Nate doesn't get a free pass on this. This loss and the Memphis loss rest squarely on his shoulders. I'm sure he'll blame it on "poor execution" down the stretch, but it's hard to execute a play when the other team and everyone in the gym knows exactly what play you're going to run and how to stop it.

BNM

 

[Tince]

When was the last time the Lakers lost a game they were winning by 8 points with less than 4 minutes left by scoring only a single point for the rest of the game? When was the last time they did it twice, at home, in a span of less than 3 weeks to teams that lose twice as many road games as they win?

I spite of all the rah rah feel good vibes about this team overachieving in the face of all the injuries, it's still inexcusable to piss away games you have won, at home, because your coach can't or won't call anything but ISO plays over the last three minutes of the game. Not only is it stupid to not learn from your failures, it also does a great disservice to the players who worked their asses off to have a lead, and the game won, only to see it all pissed away by the same stupid, moronic play calling that cost you a win the last time you were in the same situation.

Sorry, as hard as this team has worked, they don't deserve to lose games like this - and they wouldn't if they had a coach who knew how to call plays that involve more than one player. Nate doesn't get a free pass on this. This loss and the Memphis loss rest squarely on his shoulders. I'm sure he'll blame it on "poor execution" down the stretch, but it's hard to execute a play when the other team and everyone in the gym knows exactly what play you're going to run and how to stop it.

BNM

I'm not sure the answer to your question, but you could look it up as easily as I could. When you look it up, make sure that you are doing it in games where Kobe is out, along with Bynum, and two other significant rotation players.

If you think running ISO plays over and over down the stretch of close games is uncommon from the top teams in the NBA, you are mistaken. In fact, it's is quite the norm. Watch what Cleveland, Denver, LA, and Dallas run down the stretch. P&R for Lebron, ISO for Kobe, P&R for Dirk, ISO for Carmello or Billiups. Over and over, they beat it like a dead horse deep into the playoffs.

Try watching another NBA team for an entire season and you would be shocked at how much smarter you think you are than that head coach as well. The game is really really easy to coach sitting in front of your TV. Trust me, I'm the best ref to never call and NBA game and I do it from my couch on a nightly basis!