I am so sick of Greg Oden.

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in
Yep, you just have to feed the monster down low early and often, and let him build up steam!
 
If Nate's 30 minute talking-to did this, then Nate should talk to him before every game.

barfo
 
drexlersdad said:
lame-o

go is going for almost 8/8/2 in 22 mpg at 20 yo

alhorford is around 10/8/2 in 33 mpg at 22 yo
Click to expand...

Actually it's 11PPG

Horford job isn't to be a scorer on the Hawks, with all the offensive talent we have already. If you watch him play you can see he's much better than his numbers suggest.
 
I loved watching Durant in college and, like many, was torn as to who the correct pick was. The thing I kept coming back to is how Durant couldn't carry a team as well as 'Melo did, despite having arguably better teammates and better individual stats.
 
o.iatlhawksfan said:
Actually it's 11PPG

Horford job isn't to be a scorer on the Hawks, with all the offensive talent we have already. If you watch him play you can see he's much better than his numbers suggest.
Click to expand...

Not sure what your point is, since Oden's job isn't to be a scorer yet either. Horford shoots 8.2 times a game, Oden shoots 5.3 FG's a game.
 
The Blazer players need to get better at getting Oden the ball. They miss him open all the time.

Defensivly, he needs to keep his hands off folks and just keep them straight up in the air most the time. That will keep most of his fouls from happening. That will increase the playing time, and get him to effect the game.
 
noknobs said:
Not sure what your point is, since Oden's job isn't to be a scorer yet either. Horford shoots 8.2 times a game, Oden shoots 5.3 FG's a game.
Click to expand...

I wasn't comparing Oden and Horford, my point waz Horford's number doesn't indicate how valuable he is to the team.
 
If number of championships is all that matters, Paul Allen should be sending Phil Jackson cash as we speak trying to lure him away. I am sure that old hippie wouldn't mind Portland.

Oh wait, didn't he have MJ and Pippen and Shaq and Kobe? Yep, it was all Phil though.
 
Oden is what he is: An inconsistent rookie coming off MF surgery with a ton of potential. If people are bashing him now, they might as well jump off the bandwagon.
 
Anyone else confused like me that he had 14 pts on 4-6 shooting (and 6-6 FT) in the first half, and got one single blurbin' shot in the second?
 
HurraKane212 said:
Since I did not make any of the above assertions you seem to be replying to, you must not be replying to me. either that or you are putting words into my mouth to create straw men to fight. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man.

As far as Carlisle getting a T, yeah, sure, that is why the Mavs won the game! Us letting J.J. Motherfucking Barea grab 7 boards had nothing to do with it...

I know Popovich gets a T now and again, I've been looking and I haven't been able to find stats on coaches getting T'd up. I'd really like to see a graph that shows the stats of a team both pre and post technical and then pre/post ejection and the win/loss post technical correlation.

It seems to me, when Nate gets tossed, we pretty much always lose.

However, unless you get stats to back it up, the only stat that matters is that opposing teams most likely get a free point (if not two) when a coach gets T'd up and basketball is a sport where you try to score more points than your opponent and allowing them to shoot fts is typically a losing proposition.
Click to expand...

You mean Carlisle's tech didn't matter because it fired up his team AND he teaches his players how to grab loose rebounds instead of letting guards not box out their own man!

FASCINATING! What amazing things happen when getting a tech doesn't cost your team a win because you can teach them fascinating things like fundamental basketball skills and have more than two offensive plays.

Color me impressed.
 
HurraKane212 said:
Obviously that isn't what I said. I said that Carlisle getting a technical was not a significant factor in their victory. Our missed fts and our lack of rebounding cost us that game.

Again, see the above post for the link to what a "Straw Man" argument is. You are putting words in my mouth that I did not say.

You did not refute my assertions, you simply attempted (and failed) to use sarcasm to win the point by supposedly awe-ing me with your "superiority" or something and push your own agenda.

So, would you like to address any of the points I made in my post? I'd LOVE to hear a refutation backed up with some evidence. Then your post would be a valuable contribution to this forum and a possible learning tool. As of the moment, we are not having a discussion, you are arguing in monologue.
Click to expand...

Your points don't address my point because my point had nothing to do with winning or losing because of a technical foul. You brought up the win/loss ratio, pre-tech and post tech ratio - not me. If we lost by one point because Nate got a technical foul protecting one of his players I'd be pretty okay with that. Especially during this season.

You seem to be misunderstanding that I want Nate to get a tech just for shits and giggles or to fire up the team entirely. That isn't what I want. What I would like is for Nate to get a tech to protect his rookie big man who has been getting hit in the head and arms on the offensive end and not getting a call while barely touching someone on the defensive end at times and getting an immediate foul. I want Nate to send a message to Greg that he has his back (despite having his players switch screens and leaving Greg on the perimeter to pick up ticky tacky fouls against much quicker players at this stage in his development) and he'll stand up for him when he's getting shit treatment from the refs.


As for putting words in your mouth you are the one that initially brought up giving free points with a tech as if it would cost a team a win - I then pointed out Dallas had four technical fouls in Thursday game, including one from Carlisle and it didn't cost his team anything. You then pointed out that those possible free points meant nothing because one of Carlisle's players was able to grab a high amount of rebounds. I then pointed out that Carlisle's team was able to over-come free points because of sound play and being able to exploit Blake, Brandon and Travis not boxing out their men when Greg was affecting shots and tipping out rebounds towards his teammates (only to have JJ and Kidd run by and grab them as the aforementioned three players kinda stood around flat-footed).

My point in that statement was that you argued that the Mavericks were able to over-come free points off technical fouls because one of their players got a large amount of rebounds - I was counter-arguing (in an admittedly very sarcastic way) that if Nate taught his guards how to box out in that situation (along with many more things like having more than three or so offensive plays) that in the future if he were to get a technical foul that the Blazers would be able to over-come that free point he gave them if he taught them how to do little things like boxing out a 5'9 guard.

To sum it up: Carlisle gave us a free point, it didn't hurt his team due to sound coaching. If Nate had sound coaching, he wouldn't have to worry about getting a tech standing up for his rookie big man.
 
MAS RipCity said:
HAHAHAHA, I love when knee-jerk threads are made. They are just ripe for bumpin.
GO will be FINE..he was a manchild tonight! The key to Greg's success is staying on the court! When he isn't worried about fouls, he is so much more into the game.
Click to expand...
Hey Mods -- let's just sticky this thread! :ghoti:
 
BrianFromWA said:
Anyone else confused like me that he had 14 pts on 4-6 shooting (and 6-6 FT) in the first half, and got one single blurbin' shot in the second?
Click to expand...

YES!!! I don't understand the play calling. I can only assume it's the coach's decision to setup that Brandon Roy one on one play for most of the fourth. They absolutely did not involve Oden in the second half. It was frustrating to see, because of the solid first half and his lack of foul trouble.
 
Bob Dobalina said:
YES!!! I don't understand the play calling. I can only assume it's the coach's decision to setup that Brandon Roy one on one play for most of the fourth. They absolutely did not involve Oden in the second half. It was frustrating to see, because of the solid first half and his lack of foul trouble.
Click to expand...
Also -- they finally passed to him on a pick and roll -- of course they only did that once, but it might be the first time this year.
 
Zybot said:
Also -- they finally passed to him on a pick and roll -- of course they only did that once, but it might be the first time this year.
Click to expand...

I think it's the second time. lol. I believe Blake has dropped it to him a couple of times and it usually ends in a dunk.
 
The major malfunction of the team right now is they are not throwing it to the bigs in deep. Not often enough anyhow.
 
Bob Dobalina said:
I think it's the second time. lol. I believe Blake has dropped it to him a couple of times and it usually ends in a dunk.
Click to expand...

Blake seems to find the ever stone-handed Przybilla in the perfect place to where Joel never seems to miss anymore, I wish he and Oden would work on the same type of gives.
 
Last edited:
LMAO @ the OP. You sir are a reactionary.
 
I was at the game last night courtside - A friend of mine has front row season ticks.

I've been on GO pretty good recently - I'll admit it. Last night was a breakout night for him. I saw a few things last night that I haven't seen from him before. He was quicker and more aggressive with his post moves. Early on when J O'Neal blocked his baby hook . . . Oden took it back up and packed it. I thought, "where did that come from?" Last night was the best I've ever seen Greg Play, and was the best BY FAR against a quality big man. He still makes a lot of mistakes, and can't guard anybody who faces up (Last night whether he was guarding JO or Bosh - they would pop out to 15-16 ft and drain jumpers over and over. When GO closes out on that, he picks up fouls. When he doesn't, it leaves an open 15 ft'er.) I'll live with those mistakes all day long if he shows the kind of determination, effort, and focus he had last night and continues to improve on his weaknesses.

I'll admit that I was perhaps too critical of GO the last few days. I say this knowing full well he has PLENTY of 2 point, 3 rebound, 6 foul box scores in his future. At least I saw something last night that gives me hope. He went toe to toe vs quality big men and held his own. He looked like he belonged - the speed of the game didn't overwhelm him, he played hard and showed heart/aggression, and he didn't get down on himself when he made a mistake (s) Like I said, best I've ever seen him play. The best thing about the win last night was that it just might kick start GO's confidence. He went toe to toe with JO and I think you can say it was a push. I didn't think he had a game like this in him (at this point) and I was wrong.
 
HurraKane212 said:
From listening to mike and mike, it "seems" (Warning, subjective analysis)that Nate is pretty vocal, they mention him barking at the refs or being up and "hopping mad." Perhaps he just doesn't use the "magic words" that get coaches T'd up.

I agree with you that a coach should argue calls and stand up for his players. Where I disagree is that getting a technical is better. It seems that you are saying that if standing up to the refs is good, then standing up to them unto technicals/ejection is better. In my opinion, there are diminishing returns after the initial protest-per-incident. If the coach yells and barks at the refs, the message is sent to the player being "wronged" and the refs that the coach thinks the call was BS. I don't see how getting the coach tossed or giving the opposing team freethrows re-enforces that message to create a benefit greater than the detriment of not having the head coach in the huddle or giving the other team free shots.

Perhaps if you're down 15 in the fourth and you're looking for a last-ditch method of trying to get a team to compete, getting the coach tossed would be beneficial. With our young players, I feel that they would be even more discombobulated. In my subjective observation, it seems that after Nate gets tossed, our execution goes down under Demopolis.

You see what I'm trying to say here?
Click to expand...

I understand what you're trying to say - and I will agree that the execution seems to get even worse under Dean than it is with Nate and would not want Nate to get ejected.

We'll just have to agree to disagree on getting one tech (I agree on not getting ejected) to stand up for your player.
 
BatumKaboom said:
He sucks. He is nothing. He is not a #1 pick. He is a 2nd rounder. We fucked up yet again. We should have taken Durant. Can you imagine our team with another scorer as good as Roy, if not better?

JJ Barea with 8 rebounds and Greg with 5? Wow. Greg sucks. I am off the Oden bandwagon.
Click to expand...

deleted, personal attack
 
Last edited by a moderator:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

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