So what went wrong?

[jlprk]

You complained about his points and I answered for rebounds. I should have said points. Might as well look it up...yep, his points per 36 minutes have doubled in Houston.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/c/cambyma01.html

 

[blazerboy30]

Just as I said--Except for Roy, this is the best roster McMillan ever had. Care to show me a better one?

And like I said, saying "except for Roy" makes the entire discussion meaningless and moot. It's like arguing why the Cavs suck... except for Lebron, they have just as much talent.

Stupid post.

 

[jlprk]

I was answering Denny's objection, that we're in the bottom 3 teams because we had a bottom 3 roster. I didn't bother to answer your stupid objection that improving 8 out of 9 top players counts for nothing, and gives McMillan an excuse to muff the season despite being the most experienced and injury-free roster he's ever had. Denny and I are talking. When the adults want to let you talk, we'll call you to the dinner table.

 

[Tince]

I'm reading that a handful of people feel this was one of the more talented teams on paper we've had and there is no doubt there was more emphasis put on running this year like many of the posters were calling for. Yet when the dust settled it doesn't appear this running idea was as great as everyone made it out to be.

Been a tough year for sure.

 

[C_note]

You guys are insane. Our roster was nowhere near as good as when Roy was healthy. He was that good.

We had a bunch of decent role players this year who are either over the hill or one-dimensional and suck when there is no star ball handler to control everything. It's pretty goddamn simple.

Andre deserves a TON of credit for what he did last year. He picked up (to an extent) where Roy left off. That trade was one of the most major fuck-ups this team has made in a long time. Was a million times worse than drafting Oden.

This is a guard's league. If you don't have an all-star guard, your team is pure shit and teetering on the playoff bubble at best.

 

[Denny Crane]

I meant no offense by my post. The Blazers were one of the youngest and most talented teams. They drafted LMA and Roy and then Oden. There was talk of an embarrassment of riches and depth, with guys like Batum, Outlaw, Webster, Frye, Blake, and Przybilla. Plus all the EuroStash guys.

The loss of Oden and Roy saw the team forced to consolidate those young players into older guys on their last legs. As others have pointed out, it was a train wreck, and it was one that happened in slow motion; a trade at a time.

In spite of the craziness in the front office, they actually did their best to win the most games possible. This affected restocking through the draft. Your drafts have been weak because you didn't trade for draft picks towards the front of the draft and the guys you did pick didn't turn into starters.

You had #1 draft pick rookie scale tied up in Oden and Roy had his $MAX contract. This hamstrung your financial flexibility; you weren't players in the LeBron/Bosh/Wade/Boozer/Amare class of FAs.

I've always been a fan of Andre Miller, but he's a symptom of the problem. He's 35 years old, and you have a worse future making playoffs and middling draft picks with him than without.

The Blazers are doing the right thing, IMO, in dumping 30 year old former all-stars for a look at young guys who were once high draft picks, plus one of those picks they get to make on their own, likely near the front of the draft. They're getting their fiscal house in order and beginning to play the roster management game by the best strategy.

OKC and the Bulls have the two best records in basketball. OKC has a core of Westbrook, Durant, and Harden - all their own draft picks and developed with the team. The Bulls have a core of Rose, Noah, and Deng - all their own draft picks and developed with the team. The Blazers WERE on that same path but were devastated by injuries. They're getting back on the path, so I think the future is bright.

 

[Denny Crane]

BTW, the Bulls in consecutive years traded away their #1 scorer.

First it was Jalen Rose, then Crawford, then Curry. It put them in position to draft Deng, Gordon, Hinrich, Noah, Rose, LMA, and to sign a $MAX FA in Ben Wallace (a horrible move in retrospect).

For the most part, they were shuffling the deck chairs on the titanic (good teams, not good enough) until they lucked into Rose.

The point being you will find your next star and have the flexibility to sign a big-time FA, it's just a matter of when. "When" being while LMA is in his prime would be awesome.

 

[C_note]

I meant no offense by my post. The Blazers were one of the youngest and most talented teams. They drafted LMA and Roy and then Oden. There was talk of an embarrassment of riches and depth, with guys like Batum, Outlaw, Webster, Frye, Blake, and Przybilla. Plus all the EuroStash guys.

The loss of Oden and Roy saw the team forced to consolidate those young players into older guys on their last legs. As others have pointed out, it was a train wreck, and it was one that happened in slow motion; a trade at a time.

In spite of the craziness in the front office, they actually did their best to win the most games possible. This affected restocking through the draft. Your drafts have been weak because you didn't trade for draft picks towards the front of the draft and the guys you did pick didn't turn into starters.

You had #1 draft pick rookie scale tied up in Oden and Roy had his $MAX contract. This hamstrung your financial flexibility; you weren't players in the LeBron/Bosh/Wade/Boozer/Amare class of FAs.

I've always been a fan of Andre Miller, but he's a symptom of the problem. He's 35 years old, and you have a worse future making playoffs and middling draft picks with him than without.

The Blazers are doing the right thing, IMO, in dumping 30 year old former all-stars for a look at young guys who were once high draft picks, plus one of those picks they get to make on their own, likely near the front of the draft. They're getting their fiscal house in order and beginning to play the roster management game by the best strategy.

OKC and the Bulls have the two best records in basketball. OKC has a core of Westbrook, Durant, and Harden - all their own draft picks and developed with the team. The Bulls have a core of Rose, Noah, and Deng - all their own draft picks and developed with the team. The Blazers WERE on that same path but were devastated by injuries. They're getting back on the path, so I think the future is bright.

Yeah, the team is on a great path finally. You build through the draft, it's quite simple. Fine tune through trades.

The Lakers are really the only team I can think of that built through trades (kinda) by getting Shaq. Miami doesn't really count because they drafted Wade who later enticed LBJ and Bosh to town. Wade was the foundation.

You really wanna know what went wrong? Drafting Oden 4 years ago. I still think it was the right move, but that was the beginning of the end. Roy could've saved it.

It sucks knowing the team was doomed back when all our hopes were so high.

Who would've thought in 2008 that we would be completely rebuilding (almost) 4 years later?

 

[jlprk]

There was talk of an embarrassment of riches and depth, with guys like Batum, Outlaw, Webster, Frye, Blake, and Przybilla. Plus all the EuroStash guys.

All but a few homers laugh at that statement. I guess I'm the only one here who values experience, but I think the pre-trade roster this season would have been a winner with a normal coach who likes to fast break.

 

[donkiez]

I think this season was the culmination of the last 4 years of injurys and bad luck. You can only keep fighting for so long before you eventually become overrun. The straw that seemed to break our back this season was the Scott Foster BS call against OKC. That one moment seemed to change our outlook from scrappy and hopeful against all odds to disheartened.

I do however have to give Nate and the team props for the last 4-5 years for keeping us winning and (somewhat) focused admist all the adversity.

 

[BBert]

What went wrong? You started sitting courtside. So I guess I have Kingspeed to thank for finally getting Nate the hell out of here?

 

[Pinwheel1]

Even when were winning during the first 10 games, we did not look crisp. We ran but we did not have players who could pass and finish. We won because of home games.

Batum, Wes, Felton and Wallace were all turnover machines on the fast break. It was frustrating to watch. Along with Crawford these were our wing players and they all made horrible unforced errors. You could blame it on coaching but there was little time to run basic drills.

You have to have a half court game as well and Felton, Wallace and Camby were not impressive. As much as I liked Wallace, my first impressions while in Charlotte was correct, he was over rated. It is easy to fall in love with his hustle, but he is open outside for a reason.

We need a few guys like Beno Udrih. A fundamentally sound player... Plays under control... Good knowledge of the game... Good passer... can hit a jumper off the dribble.

 

[blazerboy30]

When the adults want to let you talk, we'll call you to the dinner table.

Don't you have some posts to write about how Joel is worth two LMAs?

 

[Ed O]

I'm reading that a handful of people feel this was one of the more talented teams on paper we've had and there is no doubt there was more emphasis put on running this year like many of the posters were calling for. Yet when the dust settled it doesn't appear this running idea was as great as everyone made it out to be.

The team was running when it was winning. And it was winning when it was running. Is there causation? I dunno. But there's correlation, at least.

Been a tough year for sure.

Indeed.

Ed O.

 

[Ed O]

Your starting C was 38 years old and score double digits 4 times all season. Two of your starters were Bobcats, and they didn't make the Bobcats very good when they were young guys. Your starting SG was Utah's 4th best player. LMA rocks, but that's it. Crawford, in theory, gives you a 6th man of the year candidate. Batum is Scottie Pippen reincarnated, NOT!

I don't know where you get 9 deep.

It was nine deep of mediocrity... and Aldridge. I agree that the team was not that talented/good coming into the year.

Ed O.

 

[Sinobas]

I thought the roster was better too, but ultimately, you have to admit that you're only as "good" as you play on the court. Proof is in the pudding.....(whatever the hell that means)

 

[Tince]

The team was running when it was winning. And it was winning when it was running. Is there causation? I dunno. But there's correlation, at least.



Indeed.

Ed O.

I don't really agree with this assessment. We ran and lost plenty this year; I bet we've lost at least 5 games when scoring over 100 points and lot plenty more high tempo games where we didn't convert in transition. There is no doubt we're playing at a higher tempo, scoring more points, and losing more games this year.

I know I'm in the minority, but I'll take 90ppg game and a 54-28 record over 100ppg game and a losing record.

 

[Ed O]

I don't really agree with this assessment. We ran and lost plenty this year; I bet we've lost at least 5 games when scoring over 100 points and lot plenty more high tempo games where we didn't convert in transition. There is no doubt we're playing at a higher tempo, scoring more points, and losing more games this year.

I don't know where we can find the Pace of the team broken down over time, but the team is currently 16th out of 30... and they were in the top five for the first couple of weeks of the season, if I remember correctly. Assuming my memory is correct, that the team has gone from the top five (and first over all for a while) to the second half of the NBA since then shows how much the team has slowed down.

I know I'm in the minority, but I'll take 90ppg game and a 54-28 record over 100ppg game and a losing record.

I don't care one way or the other, but it seems pretty clear to me that the team has slowed down as it's lost more... although it might have slowed down because it was losing (and Nate's security blanket is slowing down) rather than vice versa.

Ed O.

 

[RipCityInsider]

C
Camby
Kurt Thomas (your starter last year)
F
Aldridge
Wallace
Batum
Rhino
G
Felton
Matthews
Crawford

Just as I said--Except for Roy, this is the best roster McMillan ever had. Care to show me a better one?

It's also a little above-average compared to the league. Most teams are rife with newby no-nothings, or undrafted short-term pickups, in key roles.

Interesting that to disprove how experienced they were, you note Camby's age. His rebounds per minute suddenly decreased this year under McMillan, proving it was bad players, not bad coaching? Betcha they go up under the coach I alone wanted, Kevin McHale.

Look how the "best roster" is playing without a healthy Roy. That should say enough considering Roy took a lesser roster further than it should during the McMillian era, correct?

 

[jlprk]

Bottom line is, I was right the last few years that McMillan makes players look worse than they are, and a year from now, I'll have many slave followers agreeing that Aldridge is unchangeably weak. I am patient. You will all see the error of your ways, yet still you will deny me praise. I am unselfish. I am only here to help you.

 

[magnifier661]

So far it looks like Nate.

 

[jlprk]

Look how the "best roster" is playing without a healthy Roy. That should say enough considering Roy took a lesser roster further than it should during the McMillian era, correct?

We all agree Roy was great. We disagree on whether this season is the fault of McMillan or the players. I say he had good enough players to be over .500 and some say no, it was a godawful roster.

Just to fill you in on what the issue is.

 

[RoyToy]

The team lost by 67 at homes against the Bucks just a game ago. No Nate.

I think this team has trouble with "caring" from game to game

 

[jlprk]

The team lost by 67 at homes against the Bucks just a game ago. No Nate.

I think this team has trouble with "caring" from game to game

We lost Wallace, Camby, and have no real coach. With a normal, experienced, uptempo-loving coach, our earlier roster would have been about .600 and kept us happy. It is just not true to say that the coach was fine, and we should blame the evil malcontented good-for-nothing players, and blame the know-nothing management who traded for them. It was McMillan.

 

[C_note]

Bottom line is, I was right the last few years that McMillan makes players look worse than they are

That's not true at all. There's plenty of guys he made look better than they are. Outlaw, Webster, Blake. Well maybe not plenty...

My point is he definitely made those 3 guys look far better than they are.

 

[Tince]

We lost Wallace, Camby, and have no real coach. With a normal, experienced, uptempo-loving coach, our earlier roster would have been about .600 and kept us happy. It is just not true to say that the coach was fine, and we should blame the evil malcontented good-for-nothing players, and blame the know-nothing management who traded for them. It was McMillan.

So you want D'Antoni?

 

[Tince]

Our PACE is up significantly which a majority seemed to want, yet when the results weren't great, we point the finger else where.

Fast tempo and winning have zero statistical correlation in the NBA.

 

[magnifier661]

Our PACE is up significantly which a majority seemed to want, yet when the results weren't great, we point the finger else where.

Fast tempo and winning have zero statistical correlation in the NBA.

I'm not worried as much about pace as much as defense and hustle plays. We play with heart and dedication we will be good.

 

[Tince]

I'm not worried as much about pace as much as defense and hustle plays. We play with heart and dedication we will be good.

Totally agree!

 

[jlprk]

Just the opposite on Webster. He ruined him. He emphasized defense instead of shooting confidence. D'Antoni is another extremist coach, only in the opposite direction. Just give me a normal coach who has both slowdown and fast break in his repertoire, and not just one arrow in his quiver.