Nurk this year vs Last year

[-Ace-]

So 4th or close to 4th in the West, cool.

Extend it to four points or less, the number goes up to nine losses.

 

[-Ace-]

And on the flip side, nine wins by four or less points.

 

[bodyman5000 and 1]

Hmmm... I wonder if a proven big man coach would help.

Oh fuck, never mind. It makes too much fucking sense. It will never happen.

POR pissed away any chance of Meyers Leonard ever being a serviceable NBA player when they fired Kim Hughes. Noah Vonleh is in his third season here and can't even get off the bench. Nurk is still salvageable, but he needs help. And then there are the two 20-year olds we used three first round picks in a deep draft to acquire. With five young players to work with, there is no shortage of work to be done. Hire offensive and defensive specialists. They don't count against the cap or luxury tax.

It seriously boggles my mind that none of Paul, Neil, Terry and the Vulcans can see something that is so fucking obvious. How many first round picks are we going to piss away by not developing the guys we draft (and trade for)? Is this organization still so fucking butt hurt over Kim Hughes breaking the news of losing LaMarcus Aldridge that they are in denial about the value of a good, proven big man coach?

I'm not generally on the fire Neil, fire Terry bandwagon, but those two need to put their pointy little heads together go to Paul and say, "Look, we have FIVE big men, all former first round picks, including three lottery picks, all between 20 and 25 on this roster. We think, to maximize the return on your investment in those young players, we should hire a proven big man coach to accelerate their development".

If they are too fucking stubborn to ask for help, Dame should do it the next time he has a sit down with Paul Allen. He should go to Paul and say, "I know that we have a tough time attracting top tier free agents, and we lack the assets to acquire a star caliber player via trade. So, the best route to contention is developing the young talent we already have." We have drafted and traded for five big men, all young and raw, in my time here. What can we do to help those guys become the players you envisioned when you approved those trades and draft picks? I think a proven big man coach would help. Hire one, or trade me." Ok, maybe leave out that last sentence - for now.

Jeezus, this just pisses me off to no end. Look at the caption below my avatar. Nurk needs fucking HELP. Get him that help and do it NOW.

BNM

It's unbelievable to me. I'm hoping they just want to wait until the off-season....yeah, I'm being positive (or in denial)

Nurk has so MUCH untapped ability that he's getting by on talent alone.

 

[tester551]

Extend it to four points or less, the number goes up to nine losses.

And on the flip side, nine wins by four or less points.

Which makes Portland 9-9 in tight games. We win half of them.... making us exactly what we are -> a mediocre team

 

[Minstrel]

Extend it to four points or less, the number goes up to nine losses.

And on the flip side, nine wins by four or less points.

So essentially .500 in tight games. Essentially what you'd expect.

 

[Minstrel]

Which makes Portland 9-9 in tight games. We win half of them.... making us exactly what we are -> a mediocre team

No, every team should be around .500 in tight games--when it comes down to a possession or two, it's essentially anyone's game. A team with a particularly talented isolation scorer might do a bit better in such situations, but major deviation from .500 in tight games is largely luck. Good/great teams are good/great because they generally avoid it coming down to the last possessions.

 

[tester551]

No, every team should be around .500 in tight games--when it comes down to a possession or two, it's essentially anyone's game. A team with a particularly talented isolation scorer might do a bit better in such situations, but major deviation from .500 in tight games is largely luck. Good/great teams are good/great because they generally avoid it coming down to the last possessions.

I don't buy that it's largely luck. Great teams are more disciplined and deliberate. Bad teams are very error proned in tight games.

 

[Boob-No-More]

Leonard had a flat learning curve with or without Hughes. The natural poet had no athletic instincts, no matter who coached him.

But let's keep the thread about Nurkic.

But, he was much closer to that flat ceiling with Hughes than he has been since. In his third season, he was actually a serviceable NBA back up big man. Since, he has been completely useless.

I'd hate to see a similar fate for Nurk and Collins and Swanigan, and Vonleh. Those guys all have higher ceilings than Meyers. All the more reason to do everything possible to help them reach their ceilings. If Paul was willing to invest in a proven big man coach to help Meyers, would he not get more return on his investment now that we have Nurk, Collins, etc.?

BNM

 

[jlprk]

But, he was much closer to that flat ceiling with Hughes than he has been since. In his third season, he was actually a serviceable NBA back up big man. Since, he has been completely useless.

I'd hate to see a similar fate for Nurk and Collins and Swanigan, and Vonleh. Those guys all have higher ceilings than Meyers. All the more reason to do everything possible to help them reach their ceilings. If Paul was willing to invest in a proven big man coach to help Meyers, would he not get more return on his investment now that we have Nurk, Collins, etc.?

Under Hughes, Leonard was already at his flat ceiling, i.e. not a serviceable center. Red Auerbach and John Wooden could join efforts, and Leonard's ceiling then and now still wouldn't change.

After his wasted rookie year when he should have been embarrassed, at the start of his first Summer League game, he walked out laughing, sociable like a woman. The other players were nervous about the challenge. The goofball floated through the game smiling, even worse than his first Summer League a year earlier when his face turned red whenever he received, smiling and laughing, a Lillard alley-oop.

He was incorrigible until his contract was ending. Then he became stern, probably because the coaches motivated him by informing the moron that all NBA players had no respect for him. Since then he has played harder and it had nothing to do with Hughes, since he was already gone. With the attitude problem gone, he had only one reason left for sucking...he's a dork, not an athlete. No coach can change that.

"But let's keep the thread about Nurkic."

 

[Boob-No-More]

"But let's keep the thread about Nurkic."

So, you're not willing to defend your thesis? No PhD for you Dr. Phil.

BNM

 

[jlprk]

So, you're not willing to defend your thesis? No PhD for you Dr. Phil.

I must have forgotten what my thesis is. What is it?

Originally, it was that Stotts damaged Nurkic' game (see thread title). Did I have a second theme?

 

[Mr. Robot]

I must have forgotten what my thesis is. What is it?

Originally, it was that Stotts damaged Nurkic' game (see thread title). Did I have a second theme?

when coach says: "I didnt run any plays for him", that speaks volumes

most points he gets, its by himself or thanks to Dame

 

[BlazerDuckSeahawkFan94]

Nurk has the body of a real workhorse center but the mentality of a power forward who wants to be flashy with the finger rolls, floaters, needlessly going glass. He needs to finish and finish hard.

 

[1eyejack]

His game will eventually come together and he’ll be a really good center for us. Assuming we don’t trade him

 

[riverman]

Is the forum really going to make Nurk the next Meyers scapegoat around here? The guy is going to be a beast for years to come...he's still growing!

 

[tykendo]

Is the forum really going to make Nurk the next Meyers scapegoat around here? The guy is going to be a beast for years to come...he's still growing!

Totally agree. He's developing, and has a huge upside. It's all there to mode. He and Dame have built nice chemistry that will only get stronger.

 

[Mr. Robot]

Is the forum really going to make Nurk the next Meyers scapegoat around here? The guy is going to be a beast for years to come...he's still growing!

let me give you a compliment: youre a very smart man, I like the way you think!

can I be your friend Mr. @riverman

 

[Mr. Robot]

Totally agree. He's developing, and has a huge upside. It's all there to mode. He and Dame have built nice chemistry that will only get stronger.

people seem to forget, or they dont know it, but Nurk started playing basketball at the age of 14 and by his 19 birthday he was in the NBA

so let me put it into perspective: in 5 years from someone who didnt even know how to run to the NBA... take from it what you want

I believe his flaws are cause of that and that those flaws will get fixed with time and for the sake of the POR, lets hope it happens sooner rather than later

 

[H.C.]

You new o-live posters need to go read this thread.
Some of you older members should also re-read this thread.
Going to be fun to bump this thread in a couple years tho.

http://www.sportstwo.com/threads/c-j-is-horrible.277912/

 

[HailBlazers]

Is the forum really going to make Nurk the next Meyers scapegoat around here? The guy is going to be a beast for years to come...he's still growing!

Going to be? Come on now, millennials can't wait for anything.

 

[riverman]

Going to be? Come on now, millennials can't wait for anything.

 

[Labinot41]

Damn there are really people who still belive that 'Nurkic has Potencial' bullshit haha ok i will tell you, in 5 years he will be still the same inefficiency player without range and still throw akward hook shots or long 2s and misses them badly that's Why we allways be mediocre, because we belive to much in Potencial on mediore Players.

 

[Labinot41]

I was going to post my own Nurk thread. Thank goodness we have one.

Even if the Blazers win this game, I've seen about all I want of Jusuf. Trade him for anything.

Why, when he's only 23 and he gives you a skill set ideal for this team? BECAUSE HE'S A DOG!

He plays hard one game out of five. He plays a lazy game, with floaters and finger rolls. He doesn't hit the offensive boards aggressively. The only thing he does well consistently is set picks.

He just plays so lazy. I've coached players like that, and very seldom does it ever click with them.

I've tried to be patient.

I've been saying this the hole Season

 

[bodyman5000 and 1]

Damn there are really people who still belive that 'Nurkic has Potencial' bullshit haha ok i will tell you, in 5 years he will be still the same inefficiency player without range and still throw akward hook shots or long 2s and misses them badly that's Why we allways be mediocre, because we belive to much in Potencial on mediore Players.

Oh shit. I guess we'll all have to reconsider....hahahaha. lolololololololol

 

[Nikolokolus]

Damn there are really people who still belive that 'Nurkic has Potencial' bullshit haha ok i will tell you, in 5 years he will be still the same inefficiency player without range and still throw akward hook shots or long 2s and misses them badly that's Why we allways be mediocre, because we belive to much in Potencial on mediore Players.

Your nevur gonna grajuate hiskool with grammar liek that

 

[Orion Bailey]

Your nevur gonna grajuate hiskool with grammar liek that

He is from Germany.

 

[Labinot41]

Your nevur gonna grajuate hiskool with grammar liek that

I know my english sucks. Sry

 

[riverman]

I know my english sucks. Sry

no problem..you can relax about the grammar stuff...ich nicht schpreken deustch

 

[Boob-No-More]

I must have forgotten what my thesis is. What is it?

Originally, it was that Stotts damaged Nurkic' game (see thread title). Did I have a second theme?

I was referring to your pop psychoanalysis of Meyers Leonard.

the·sis:

1. a statement or theory that is put forward as a premise to be maintained or proved.

2. a long essay or dissertation involving personal research, written by a candidate for a college degree.

I was combining the two definitions. PhD candidates are usually required to successfully defend their thesis against a panel of experts in order to receive their doctor of philosophy degree.

The Dr. Phil comment was a double entendre. Although the most common abbreviations for the doctor of philosophy are usually PhD or Ph.D., Dr. phil is also used on occasion. It is also the name of this judgmental, sanctimonious asshole who rose to prominence as a regular guest on the Oprah Winfrey Show:

Any joke that requires that much explanation clearly missed its mark. I'll dumb it down in the future.

BNM

 

[jlprk]

I was referring to your pop psychoanalysis of Meyers Leonard.

All you needed to explain it was your first sentence, above. I won't list the degrees of both of my parents, their parents' Masters degrees in the 1910s, my siblings, me, my dog, I have no pets, I am flea-free from me, etc.

I watched 10 minutes of Dr. Phil about 15 years ago, couldn't stand his religiously simplistic Southern-style solutions, and never watched again. Same for Oprah 10 years before that--once, and only a few minutes before I barfed. And I had thought Phil Donahue was bad! Each decade gets worse. Same for the music.

My post about Leonard was descriptive, not analytical. It just recounted surface-level facts that I and others reported on this board in his early years. I didn't delve into his psychology. (I could, if you'd like. Better, how about yours?)

So thanks for explaining American culture as if I'm a new poster from Bosnia, because it will probably make them and the moderators a lot smarter. Everyone should have a motto.

But let's keep the thread about Nurkic.®™