Some very concerning statements by Roy

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in
A couple of things:

1. I think Roy is right. The team does go off of him, and if his energy isn't there, there are only a few other guys on the team whose motors are running if he is there or not.

2. I don't buy the Roy and Miller not able to work together thing, becaue the only time they started together as "Starting Back Court" with NO Blake was 2 games during the pre season. That has never been given a chance to work in the way it should. Every time they played together as starters during the regular season Brandon was at SF and unhappy.

3. I still think the team needs to really think about just making Roy the PG, and go big. I don't give a shit if it makes Blake and Miller happy. I could really care less about what those two want at this point.
 
it's_GO_time said:
I'm not trying to make it complicated . . . but I am having a hard time understanding why Miller and Roy can't be effective together. It seems like you get it, but doesn't seem that obvious to me.
Click to expand...

I believe that John Wooden (UCLA's iconic basketball coach) always said that good basketball offense starts with spacing. This is especially true in this day and age in the NBA with uber-athletes that are big and fast and cover lots of space really quick.

I think that since the first game I saw in person (the Atlanta game in the RG) - I thought the other teams had a much easier time to clog the middle when Roy was handling the ball and Miller was on the court.

I believe that if you pay attention to what Nate is saying - this is exactly what he is noticing as well.

This is from BEdge and Nate's comments about Webster last night:

http://www.blazersedge.com/2009/11/21/1168667/media-row-report-blazers-106

With that group, that first group, he's a spreader. Brandon and LaMarcus are seeing double teams when they play and you need a guy who can keep that defense honest. And if they don't he has the ability to hurt them with the three point ball. If they play single coverage our guys should be able to take advantage of that. He really helps spreading the floor.
Click to expand...

It's all about spacing, in the offense that Portland runs. You can argue that there are other types of schemes that can overcome this - the Lakers run the triangle that tries to create the spacing in a somewhat more sophisticated way - but at the end of the day, our best offensive player is Roy. Our biggest offensive mismatch is trying to contain Roy when he has the space to attack the rim and make a decision if he wants to shoot himself or pass.

With Miller in the game, defenses sag from him, clog the middle - and can recover quickly to cover the other jump shooters (mostly Blake). With Miller handling the ball, Roy's role is reduced to be a jump-shooter mostly and we take away our biggest offensive mismatch.

It is not hard to see that this is the way it works in the NBA. You adjust the system and players to the best player, not the other way around.

We saw it last year in PHX as well. Nash is one of the best in the NBA at making decisions in a fast pace offense. If the system is adjusted to his advantage - PHX is a good team. When they tried to bring Shaq and adjust Nash's game to Shaq - it did not work too well.

For the record - Wooden's book can be seen here:

http://books.google.com/books?id=kg...resnum=1&ved=0CAgQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=&f=false

Look at the "Principles for offensive success" chapter. The first item - is spacing.
 
andalusian said:
I believe that John Wooden (UCLA's iconic basketball coach) always said that good basketball offense starts with spacing. This is especially true in this day and age in the NBA with uber-athletes that are big and fast and cover lots of space really quick.

I think that since the first game I saw in person (the Atlanta game in the RG) - I thought the other teams had a much easier time to clog the middle when Roy was handling the ball and Miller was on the court.

I believe that if you pay attention to what Nate is saying - this is exactly what he is noticing as well.

This is from BEdge and Nate's comments about Webster last night:

http://www.blazersedge.com/2009/11/21/1168667/media-row-report-blazers-106



It's all about spacing, in the offense that Portland runs. You can argue that there are other types of schemes that can overcome this - the Lakers run the triangle that tries to create the spacing in a somewhat more sophisticated way - but at the end of the day, our best offensive player is Roy. Our biggest offensive mismatch is trying to contain Roy when he has the space to attack the rim and make a decision if he wants to shoot himself or pass.

With Miller in the game, defenses sag from him, clog the middle - and can recover quickly to cover the other jump shooters (mostly Blake). With Miller handling the ball, Roy's role is reduced to be a jump-shooter mostly and we take away our biggest offensive mismatch.

It is not hard to see that this is the way it works in the NBA. You adjust the system and players to the best player, not the other way around.

We saw it last year in PHX as well. Nash is one of the best in the NBA at making decisions in a fast pace offense. If the system is adjusted to his advantage - PHX is a good team. When they tried to bring Shaq and adjust Nash's game to Shaq - it did not work too well.

For the record - Wooden's book can be seen here:

http://books.google.com/books?id=kg...resnum=1&ved=0CAgQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=&f=false

Look at the "Principles for offensive success" chapter. The first item - is spacing.
Click to expand...

Ok if it's all about spacing, then why isn't the guy next to Roy in the offense the guy that is shooting over .500 from 2 point land and shooting .400 from 3 point land. Named Rudy.
 
hasoos said:
A couple of things:

<snip>

3. I still think the team needs to really think about just making Roy the PG, and go big. I don't give a shit if it makes Blake and Miller happy. I could really care less about what those two want at this point.
Click to expand...

On paper, I agree with you. My fear, however, is that Roy will react to playing with Rudy the same way he did to playing with Miller.
 
oldmangrouch said:
On paper, I agree with you. My fear, however, is that Roy will react to playing with Rudy the same way he did to playing with Miller.
Click to expand...

I don't think so. Rudy does not necessarily need the ball to play. He plays very well off the ball, and in fact, is one of the better guys moving without the ball in the league IMO. He could handle the ball on the posessions where Roy needs a break.
 
hasoos said:
Ok if it's all about spacing, then why isn't the guy next to Roy in the offense the guy that is shooting over .500 from 2 point land and shooting .400 from 3 point land. Named Rudy.
Click to expand...

Because Roy would be playing SF again.
 
B-Roy said:
Because Roy would be playing SF again.
Click to expand...

No he would be playing point. Rudy would be playing SG. A lot of folks think Roy plays SG just because he is listed as that on the starting lineup. If you look what he does, he plays PG. Blake plays as a spot up shooter. That is the shooting guard. Paper says one thing. Eyes say another.
 
So, Blazer fans want an elite player, but if he recognizes his importance to the team...the fact that his performance gives confidence to other players and lets them perform better...and honestly states his assessment of how he can best maximize his performance and help his team win, then he's guilty of being an egomaniac in some of your eyes.

I think Roy has it exactly right. I think that because the team has gotten away from maximizing his chances to do well by pitting him against bigger players and taking the ball out of his hands, his teammates have felt more pressure to carry a bigger burden. When they start missing a few shots, it snowballs from there to where nobody can hit from the perimeter. Roy's not being selfish in his assessments, he's just saying what he thinks is in the best interests of the team winning. I'm glad he's speaking up.
 
e_blazer said:
So, Blazer fans want an elite player, but if he recognizes his importance to the team...the fact that his performance gives confidence to other players and lets them perform better...and honestly states his assessment of how he can best maximize his performance and help his team win, then he's guilty of being an egomaniac in some of your eyes.

I think Roy has it exactly right. I think that because the team has gotten away from maximizing his chances to do well by pitting him against bigger players and taking the ball out of his hands, his teammates have felt more pressure to carry a bigger burden. When they start missing a few shots, it snowballs from there to where nobody can hit from the perimeter. Roy's not being selfish in his assessments, he's just saying what he thinks is in the best interests of the team winning. I'm glad he's speaking up.
Click to expand...

Stars win games. Role players fill in the holes.
 
hasoos said:
No he would be playing point. Rudy would be playing SG. A lot of folks think Roy plays SG just because he is listed as that on the starting lineup. If you look what he does, he plays PG. Blake plays as a spot up shooter. That is the shooting guard. Paper says one thing. Eyes say another.
Click to expand...

So you're saying substitute Rudy for Blake? Or Rudy for Webster?
 
B-Roy said:
So you're saying substitute Rudy for Blake? Or Rudy for Webster?
Click to expand...

Rudy for Blake. Webster would still be at the 3. All perimeter players would be over 6'6" tall. The Blazers defensive scheme now is the same one as when Nate played in Seattle, and Rudy is thriving in it now. He is averaging almost 2 steals a game even in his limited minutes. He has been shooting the lights out as well. He could be that 3rd scorer we have been looking for.
 
hasoos said:
Rudy for Blake. Webster would still be at the 3. All perimeter players would be over 6'6" tall. The Blazers defensive scheme now is the same one as when Nate played in Seattle, and Rudy is thriving in it now. He is averaging almost 2 steals a game even in his limited minutes. He has been shooting the lights out as well. He could be that 3rd scorer we have been looking for.
Click to expand...

It's a nice first unit, but who's going to make a shot when the subs come in?
 
hasoos said:
Rudy for Blake. Webster would still be at the 3. All perimeter players would be over 6'6" tall. The Blazers defensive scheme now is the same one as when Nate played in Seattle, and Rudy is thriving in it now. He is averaging almost 2 steals a game even in his limited minutes. He has been shooting the lights out as well. He could be that 3rd scorer we have been looking for.
Click to expand...

But that would mean benching Blake...

In all seriousness though, could Rudy defend point guards? For all the flak that Blake gets, I feel that he has actually done a respectable job on defense this season.
 
ABM said:
I think it's safe to say that Roy doesn't play as well alongside Miller......
Click to expand...

The hell it is.

We don't even know that much because Roy has NEVER played SG with Miller at point. Blake has always been in there with them.
 
hasoos said:
Ok if it's all about spacing, then why isn't the guy next to Roy in the offense the guy that is shooting over .500 from 2 point land and shooting .400 from 3 point land. Named Rudy.
Click to expand...

Because they are both SG's.
 
yuyuza1 said:
The hell it is.

We don't even know that much because Roy has NEVER played SG with Miller at point. Blake has always been in there with them.
Click to expand...

Except for those two horrible games in pre-season. :sigh:
 
MARIS61 said:
Except for those two horrible games in pre-season. :sigh:
Click to expand...

Nope you are wrong. Those horrible games in the pre season was the 3 guard lineup with Blake in there, and Aldridge at center. Go back and watch. The one game Miller started with Roy and no Blake, the Blazers actually busted out to a pretty big lead before the lineups changed.
 
e_blazer said:
It's a nice first unit, but who's going to make a shot when the subs come in?
Click to expand...

The sub pattern would need to change. I would only sub in up to 3 people, and keep 2 starters in at all times. Of those 2 starters, at least one would be a high end scorer. Plus you would have Miller and or Blake to stabilize the 2nd unit. Lets face it. Portland has a lot of problems bench wise right now because of injuries. That is just something the Blazers have to live with. The whole fact that our big guns don't play near 40 minutes a game is a joke in itself. You don't see other coaches pull out Dwayne Wade, Chris Bosch, or Joe Johnson because they are nearing the 35 minute mark. Most of those guys play 40 plus minutees if needed for the win.
 
I was holding out hope that the two of them would develop some on-court chemistry, but it's never going to happen in the halfcourt system that Brandon seems best suited to playing. After watching last night's game live fifteen rows from behind the Blazers bench I also came to realize that Brandon and Andre's lack of oncourt chemistry also extends to the bench, warmups, and who knows where else.

I was a pretty staunch supporter of Miller starting and the two of them working out their stylistic differences, but between Nate and Miller having a clash of styles and Roy and Miller also having the same clash, I think it's pretty much impossible for him to work here. He's basically a slightly better version of Sergio at this point, and he had to leave for exactly the same reasons Miller is back on the bench.
 
oh great the return of pg roy? we saw how that goes....houston in the playoffs...he needs to learn that he ISNT a PG or SF.

So ROY tanked it to get his way? hhhmmmm since he got paid he is developing some annoying tendencies
 
Actually what cracks me up about most of this is the way a lot of the posters treat Roy about this situation, and if you think about it, if it wasn't for Roy coming on board, this team would be a very bad team, still to this day. He is one of the only reasons this team turned around the way it did. Try and remember that sometimes.
 
hasoos said:
Actually what cracks me up about most of this is the way a lot of the posters treat Roy about this situation, and if you think about it, if it wasn't for Roy coming on board, this team would be a very bad team, still to this day. He is one of the only reasons this team turned around the way it did. Try and remember that sometimes.
Click to expand...

I am amazed at the defensiveness of many posters regarding Andre Miller and his poor play. He had 7 TOs in 18 minutes the game before he fouled out. That's incredibly poor play from a veteran PG. How those numbers prove Miller should continue to be the primary ball-handler baffles me.
 
Uther TheGardener said:
oh great the return of pg roy? we saw how that goes....houston in the playoffs...he needs to learn that he ISNT a PG or SF.

So ROY tanked it to get his way? hhhmmmm since he got paid he is developing some annoying tendencies
Click to expand...

What the hell? Where did you get that? Roy certainly allowed Miller to run the offense. Is that him "tanking" it?

:crazy:
 
I like that our best player and leader can step up and make these kind of statements. I wish more then anything that Brandon and Dre would be our starting backcourt, but they just haven't gelled like I thought they would. As long as Miller can handle coming off the bench, we will be cool. Let's see if it happens though.
 
Uther TheGardener said:
oh great the return of pg roy? we saw how that goes....houston in the playoffs...he needs to learn that he ISNT a PG or SF.

So ROY tanked it to get his way? hhhmmmm since he got paid he is developing some annoying tendencies
Click to expand...

Clearly this team is going to need other people who can step up and be playmakers ... unfortunately I don't think that's going to be Miller. Best case scenario now is they either slowly try to adjust the offense over the course of the season to the point where Brandon and Miller can coexist or they move Miller et al. for somebody who fits better into this "off-guard/point-guard" role that seems to fit what Nate and Brandon like to do on offense.

Best case scenario is probably trying to trade Miller for a wing of some sort who can be trusted to handle the ball a little and create some, but doesn't need the ball in his hands to be effective ... I have no idea who would fit that description out of those players who might also be available.
 
Seems to me we need to split into two squads, and substitute wholesale. Either one team is on the floor or the other. No mixing.

Plodding team: Blake, Roy, Webster, Howard, Pryz.
Running team: Miller, Rudy, Webster, LMA, Oden

That way Roy never has to play with anyone who wants to run, and we don't waste the talents of those who can run.

Obviously we need Batum back to make two full squads, or for Dante to step up.

barfo
 
barfo said:
Seems to me we need to split into two squads, and substitute wholesale. Either one team is on the floor or the other. No mixing.

Plodding team: Blake, Roy, Webster, Howard, Pryz.
Running team: Miller, Rudy, Webster, LMA, Oden

That way Roy never has to play with anyone who wants to run, and we don't waste the talents of those who can run.

Obviously we need Batum back to make two full squads, or for Dante to step up.

barfo
Click to expand...

Webster gets to be in two units. That's UNFAIR.
 
I'm sorry for the Blazers wasting your time Miller. You deserve better.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

OSUBlazerfan
Who are you? God???
Replies
1
Views
393
OSUBlazerfan
OSUBlazerfan
southnc
McMillan: Giving the team back to Roy
2 3
Replies
67
Views
4K
Pontius
Pontius
Chuck Taylor
Roy has played on a torn meniscus before...
Replies
18
Views
3K
handiman
handiman
illmatic99
Even Roy calls for a change in 4th Q offense
Replies
18
Views
1K
Bosco
Bosco
Hunter
No Concern for Roy
Replies
0
Views
596
Hunter
Hunter

Users who are viewing this thread

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