Season Scapegoat Thread game.

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in
blue32

blue32

Who wants a mustache ride?
Joined
Oct 15, 2008
Messages
8,613
Likes
2,102
Points
113
Okay, So I was thinking since we all like to bitch about certain players or coaches during our games, we should keep a running tally, just as a game or entertainment sorts.

So, it should kind of go like this:

GAME1: vs Rockets
Loser = LMA
Winner = Travis Outlaw

GAME2: vs Denver
Loser = Blake
Winner = BRoy


Your thoughts? Should we just keep the scapegoat there and leave out the winner? I'm just more interested to see at the end of the year, if we can keep a tally of our scapegoat totals, and see who flunks the season :)
 
nate+mcmillan.jpg
 
I don't think it will last, but I think it's fun.


Game 1

Loser = LMA
Winner = Oden


Game 2

Loser = Nate
Winner = Rudy
 
Mediocre Man said:
I don't think it will last, but I think it's fun.
Game 2
Loser = Nate
Winner = Rudy
Click to expand...

Isn't Nate your loser for every game?
And oddly, although Rudy put up nice numbers, he was -10 in 23 minutes, only "beaten" by Aldridge's -13 in 40 minutes.

Now I know that +/- is a "noisy" stat, and maybe we would've done a lot worse were it not for Rudy, but something ain't right. A lot of Rudy's shots looked pretty desperate, even though they went in, and maybe they caught his teammates off guard? I dunno. Our biggest "+" in the Denver game was Webster, with +9 in 30 mins. He was also a +14 in 25 mins against the Rockets.
 
Rastapopoulos said:
Isn't Nate your loser for every game?
And oddly, although Rudy put up nice numbers, he was -10 in 23 minutes, only "beaten" by Aldridge's -13 in 40 minutes.

Now I know that +/- is a "noisy" stat, and maybe we would've done a lot worse were it not for Rudy, but something ain't right. A lot of Rudy's shots looked pretty desperate, even though they went in, and maybe they caught his teammates off guard? I dunno. Our biggest "+" in the Denver game was Webster, with +9 in 30 mins. He was also a +14 in 25 mins against the Rockets.
Click to expand...




Obviously Nate is not my loser every game since he wasn't my loser in the first game?

I saw the +/- number for Rudy, and I took it into consideration. I mean Travis had a +5, so that tells me those stats aren't always telling the whole story.

Webster has probably been our most consistant player thus far, followed by Greg.
 
Shit i should make this into a poll! every game, lol then add up the results at end of year.
 
blue32 said:
Okay, So I was thinking since we all like to bitch about certain players or coaches during our games, we should keep a running tally, just as a game or entertainment sorts.

So, it should kind of go like this:

GAME1: vs Rockets
Loser = LMA
Winner = Travis Outlaw

GAME2: vs Denver
Loser = Blake
Winner = BRoy


Your thoughts? Should we just keep the scapegoat there and leave out the winner? I'm just more interested to see at the end of the year, if we can keep a tally of our scapegoat totals, and see who flunks the season :)
Click to expand...

I think LMA get's the scapegoat award for Game 2 as well. He ain't playing like a player that is on a mission to go to the all star game.

Does he seriously have intentions on going? Usually if you do, you play like a monster. There is nothing monsterish about his game right now which makes me think he has zero intentions on going.
 
I don't think you can have a loser if we win or a winner if we lose.
 
blue32 said:
Okay, So I was thinking since we all like to bitch about certain players or coaches during our games, we should keep a running tally, just as a game or entertainment sorts.

So, it should kind of go like this:

GAME1: vs Rockets
Loser = LMA
Winner = Travis Outlaw

GAME2: vs Denver
Loser = Blake
Winner = BRoy


Your thoughts? Should we just keep the scapegoat there and leave out the winner? I'm just more interested to see at the end of the year, if we can keep a tally of our scapegoat totals, and see who flunks the season :)
Click to expand...
Roy?

Sorry, he wasn't very good.

Missed a ton of jumpers.

Took a ton of jumpers.

Looked helpless against Carmello.

Missed a free throw in the 4th that was the beginning of all the misses.

Rudy on the other hand was on fire.
 
Masbee said:
Roy?

Sorry, he wasn't very good.

Missed a ton of jumpers.

Took a ton of jumpers.

Looked helpless against Carmello.

Missed a free throw in the 4th that was the beginning of all the misses.

Rudy on the other hand was on fire.
Click to expand...

Also 2nd last on the team in =/- and led the team in TOs. His offense was nice, but Roy is the reason the Blazers had a chance at the end.
 
Masbee said:
Roy?

Sorry, he wasn't very good.

Missed a ton of jumpers.

Took a ton of jumpers.

Looked helpless against Carmello.

Missed a free throw in the 4th that was the beginning of all the misses.

Rudy on the other hand was on fire.
Click to expand...


Roy missed 5 jumpers, without being fouled. The other 9 FG's he was sent to the line.

Roy looked helpless against Melo because they doubled him every time he touched the ball late. Did we double Melo?

Did we figure out how to get the ball to the open man when Roy was doubled -- yes, but unfortunately that was Miller, who sucks at shooting jumpshots.
 
Rastapopoulos said:
Isn't Nate your loser for every game?
And oddly, although Rudy put up nice numbers, he was -10 in 23 minutes, only "beaten" by Aldridge's -13 in 40 minutes.

Now I know that +/- is a "noisy" stat, and maybe we would've done a lot worse were it not for Rudy, but something ain't right. A lot of Rudy's shots looked pretty desperate, even though they went in, and maybe they caught his teammates off guard? I dunno. Our biggest "+" in the Denver game was Webster, with +9 in 30 mins. He was also a +14 in 25 mins against the Rockets.
Click to expand...

"noisy"?

+/- is beyond "noisy" for 1 game. It is completely worthless.
 
blue32 said:
Roy missed 5 jumpers, without being fouled. The other 9 FG's he was sent to the line.

Roy looked helpless against Melo because they doubled him every time he touched the ball late. Did we double Melo?

Did we figure out how to get the ball to the open man when Roy was doubled -- yes, but unfortunately that was Miller, who sucks at shooting jumpshots.
Click to expand...

I meant Roy looked helpless defending Melo. Sorry.
 
blue32 said:
Yeah.....:(

Roy 6'6 205

Melo 6'8 230
Click to expand...

Exactly. It was more of an indictment on Webster not being able to defend Anthony. I have to think that Batum would have been a better option.
 
blue32 said:
Yeah.....:(

Roy 6'6 205

Melo 6'8 230
Click to expand...

Roy looked a lot better against Melo (although still not brilliant) when he weighed around 215.

I was a little nervous when I first read that Roy decided to play a little lighter this year, and it seems to me that I had good reason to be. It's turned him from a 2/1/3 player into a 2/1 player. He lost versatility and strength and hasn't really made up for it with any apparent addition in speed. And it's made it that much harder to play Rudy.

It's still really early, and it may be that he's still getting used to his new weight. And he started slow last year, too. But if I were him, I'd seriously consider going back to the shape that was working last year.
 
I thought Webster did well against Melo, made him at least work for the shots. He bodied up good on him. When T-Law was on him, it wasn't as good. Any one know if we can get a breakdown of points scored against whom?
 
Anyway, although I like the concept of this game, you might want to change the name. "Season Scapegoat" seems awful negative, when you are really trying to track both the scapegoats and the best player of each game. Besides, if we go on a 10 game winning streak, it'll seem kind of silly to have a thread titled "Scapegoat."

How about "Stud and Dud"?
 
mook said:
Anyway, although I like the concept of this game, you might want to change the name. "Season Scapegoat" seems awful negative, when you are really trying to track both the scapegoats and the best player of each game. Besides, if we go on a 10 game winning streak, it'll seem kind of silly to have a thread titled "Scapegoat."

How about "Stud and Dud"?
Click to expand...

Perfect. I'll make a poll.


Edit: So how um, do you make a poll w/two questions and up to 6 choices? lol
 
Last edited:
blue32 said:
I thought Webster did well against Melo, made him at least work for the shots. He bodied up good on him. When T-Law was on him, it wasn't as good. Any one know if we can get a breakdown of points scored against whom?
Click to expand...

You can read the play-by-play, and it'll tell you about who was in the game...but not if there was a switch or something (like when Roy got out-strengthed after the runout).

Gimme a few.
 
Webster started and played until Outlaw came in at 3:59. Melo: 3/3, 1/1 3pt, 7pts, 1 foul.
Outlaw played until 9:49 of the 2nd, when Webster came back in, though Melo went out at 10:12 of the second: 1/1, 3/3 FT, 5pts.
Melo came back in at 7:05 of the 2nd. Both Outlaw and Webster were in the game, though I think Webster was doing the defense on Melo until Webs went out at 3:08. 0/2, 2TO, 2/2FT, 4pts.
Outlaw played Melo for the rest of the quarter. 1/1, 1 TO, 2/2FT, 4pts
3rd quarter--Webs played from the start until both went out with 1:23 left. Melo: 1/6, 2pts.
9:48 in the 4th both came back. Martell plays until taken out at 6:20. Melo 2/3, 4pts.
Roy and Miller take turns guarding Melo. 3/4, 7/8 FT, 13 pts.
Martell reinserted at 1:39. Melo 0/1, with the 2/2FTs at the end of the game. 2pts.

Martell- Melo was 6/15, 4/4 FT (including the 2/2 at the end) for 17 pts in 28 min.
Outlaw- Melo was 2/2, 7/7 FT for 11 pts in 8 min
Roy/Miller - Melo was 3/4, 7/8FT, 13 pts in 5 min.

One could make the observation that it was 81-78 when Webster came out, after playing decent D on Melo all night, and it was Melo outscoring the Blazers 13-10 over the next 5 minutes that led to us being behind at the end.
 
Last edited:
BrianFromWA said:
Webster started and played until Outlaw came in at 3:59. Melo: 3/3, 1/1 3pt, 7pts, 1 foul.
Outlaw played until 9:49 of the 2nd, when Webster came back in, though Melo went out at 10:12 of the second: 1/1, 3/3 FT, 5pts.
Melo came back in at 7:05 of the 2nd. Both Outlaw and Webster were in the game, though I think Webster was doing the defense on Melo until Webs went out at 3:08. 0/2, 2TO, 2/2FT, 4pts.
Outlaw played Melo for the rest of the quarter. 1/1, 1 TO, 2/2FT, 4pts
3rd quarter--Webs played from the start until both went out with 1:23 left. Melo: 1/6, 2pts.
9:48 in the 4th both came back. Martell plays until taken out at 6:20. Melo 2/3, 4pts.
Roy and Miller take turns guarding Melo. 3/4, 7/8 FT, 13 pts.
Martell reinserted at 1:39. Melo 0/1, with the 2/2FTs at the end of the game. 2pts.

Martell- Melo was 6/15, 4/4 FT (including the 2/2 at the end) for 17 pts in 28 min.
Outlaw- Melo was 2/2, 7/7 FT for 11 pts in 8 min
Roy/Miller - Melo was 3/4, 7/8FT, 13 pts in 5 min.

One could make the observation that it was 81-78 when Webster came out, after playing decent D on Melo all night, and it was Melo outscoring the Blazers 13-10 over the next 5 minutes that led to us being behind at the end.
Click to expand...
Interesting stats.

So it seems that although no one was stopping Melo, or even slowing him a whole lot, that Webster made him work for his offense, whereas Outlaw/Roy/Miller put little real resistance and resorting to fouling as a form of "defense".

That makes my puzzlement during the game over why Martel didn't get back in in the 4th all the more intense?

Why did Nate hold him out?
 
you don't think holding Carmelo Anthony to 40% shooting and 2 FTs (I'm deliberately not counting the 2 at the end that were deliberate) for 17pts in 28 minutes is "stopping, or even slowing him down a whole lot"? Holding him to 1.1 pps?

Man, tough crowd.
 
Nice stats BrianFromWA, appreciate that. I really think Webs should have been in there at the end, with Rudy and Roy.

Miller guarding Melo is ridiculous!
 
Nice job, Brian. Definitely seemed like Webster was doing a nice job on him. Well, as good as can be expected.

Masbee said:
That makes my puzzlement during the game over why Martel didn't get back in in the 4th all the more intense?

Why did Nate hold him out?
Click to expand...

If you could get an honest answer from Nate, I'd bet it'd be, "We made a mistake."

And really, it's the kind of mistake you can understand. Webster's been out a full season. Even back when he was healthy, he was usually on the bench in crunch time. Nate went with guys who are more used to playing in those minutes. Besides, Webster has traditionally been a pretty mentally fragile player. Nate might have been gun shy about putting him in a position so early in the year where he's got to make a pressure shot or pair of free throws.

I'm sure that now that he's had some time to look over the tape, he'd probably do it differently and leave Webster in there.

Long-term, it's really encouraging to have a guy like Webster who can go in and play against the beefier swing men. Batum has always had a problem with them.

Maybe we eventually choose our starting SF situationally, using Batum on guys like Hamilton, Wade, Granger and Durant, and Webster on LeBron, Carmello and Artest.
 
mook said:
Anyway, although I like the concept of this game, you might want to change the name. "Season Scapegoat" seems awful negative, when you are really trying to track both the scapegoats and the best player of each game. Besides, if we go on a 10 game winning streak, it'll seem kind of silly to have a thread titled "Scapegoat."

How about "Stud and Dud"?
Click to expand...

No, it won't. You've been around long enough to know that a cloudly lining can be pulled from a silver cloud around this place. :cheers:
 
I blame PapaG's absence for our one-game losing streak.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

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