This is a simply amazing fact (re: Blazers record)

[julius]

This year, Portland is 27-24 after 51 games.

Last year? Portland was 29-22.

That is just crazy to think that had they beaten the Pacers and Nuggets on this trip (in addition to the Cavs), they'd have the same record as last year at this point.

For a different comparison, two years ago the team was 32-19, and 3 years ago (41-41) they were 28-23.

I totally did not expect that they were as close to last years pace as they are, given that their best player has been a non factor most if not all of the season.

 

[BLAZER PROPHET]

This year, Portland is 27-24 after 51 games.

Last year? Portland was 29-22.

That is just crazy to think that had they beaten the Pacers and Nuggets on this trip (in addition to the Cavs), they'd have the same record as last year at this point.

For a different comparison, two years ago the team was 32-19, and 3 years ago (41-41) they were 28-23.

I totally did not expect that they were as close to last years pace as they are, given that their best player has been a non factor most if not all of the season.

Given the severity and number of injuries this year and our overall talent level on the bench, our record is amazing to me.

 

[Nikolokolus]

Oddly enough they'll be getting Camby back around the same time of the year that Blanker and Catfish were traded to the Clips for him last year.

 

[julius]

Given the severity and number of injuries this year and our overall talent level on the bench, our record is amazing to me.

Yeah, in a way I've been disappointed with the record of the team until I checked last years team and thought about exactly what you posted. That's why I posted it, because it was such a shock to my system. I knew earlier in the year it was a similar record compared to last year but I didn't expect it to be this close this much into the season.

Honestly, IF the Blazers make the playoffs, I don't see how Nate can't be CoTY.

Haha, i almost said that with a straight face, CoTY will obviously go to Scotty Brooks.

 

[B-Roy]

Oddly enough they'll be getting Camby back around the same time of the year that Blanker and Catfish were traded to the Clips for him last year.

Hopefully we'll get Roy back too. I think everyone knows now that even a hobbled Roy will help take the pressure off everyone playing 40+ minutes.

 

[Nikolokolus]

Hopefully we'll get Roy back too. I think everyone knows now that even a hobbled Roy will help take the pressure off everyone playing 40+ minutes.

I guess it all depends on whether or not we get hobbled Roy who wants to run the offense through him or hobbled Roy coming in off the bench for 15 to 20 minutes a night.

 

[jlprk]

This year, Portland is 27-24 after 51 games.

Last year? Portland was 29-22.

That is just crazy to think that had they beaten the Pacers and Nuggets on this trip (in addition to the Cavs), they'd have the same record as last year at this point.

For a different comparison, two years ago the team was 32-19, and 3 years ago (41-41) they were 28-23.

I totally did not expect that they were as close to last years pace as they are, given that their best player has been a non factor most if not all of the season.

We seem consistent in the standings despite roster changes because our Coach is the one producing the win record.

If we have bad talent, McMillan pulls our record up. If we have a healthy Oden, Roy, Przybilla, etc. his slow system pulls our record down.

He's like a car that always goes 35 mph. He may exceed expectations or fall short of them, but he only knows how to go 35 mph, on the freeway or on a little street.

In our current condition, McMillan is a good coach for us. I was saying the opposite when we had Oden, Roy, Przybilla, etc.

 

[MARIS61]

Last year we were 2 games better at this point.

Amazing?

How about disappointing?

 

[VanillaGorilla]

Last year we were 2 games better at this point.

Amazing?

How about disappointing?

How is it disappointing considering the circumstances?

 

[B-Roy]

How is it disappointing considering the circumstances?

Sergio's not on the team.

 

[jlprk]

Last year's injuries happened suddenly, and required frequent sudden lineup changes. This year's injuries are costing us as many missed games, but over longer periods, so the lineup doesn't change as often.

I didn't verify that, but that's how it seems to me.

 

[TradeNurkicNow]

Good teams don't make excuses for their bad records

Sorry to say it folks but the Blazers are pathetic for not having a better record from last year. i predict our next gmae we will lose and it willk forever define the season and the franchise for ever and ever

/mixum

 

[THE HCP]

Last year we were 2 games better at this point.

Amazing?

How about disappointing?

How could you possibly be disappointed with our record considering what we have gone thru?

 

[mgb]

We seem consistent in the standings despite roster changes because our Coach is the one producing the win record.

If we have bad talent, McMillan pulls our record up. If we have a healthy Oden, Roy, Przybilla, etc. his slow system pulls our record down.He's like a car that always goes 35 mph. He may exceed expectations or fall short of them, but he only knows how to go 35 mph, on the freeway or on a little street.

In our current condition, McMillan is a good coach for us. I was saying the opposite when we had Oden, Roy, Przybilla, etc.

We've never had that team together long enough to know that for a fact. When they didn't do well was at the beginning of the season with Oden trying to be added to the team. By the time the team started to play well with Oden playing well he got injured.

 

[Sug]

Nate sucks.

 

[MrSelfDestruct]

Good teams don't make excuses for their bad records

Sorry to say it folks but the Blazers are pathetic for not having a better record from last year. i predict our next gmae we will lose and it willk forever define the season and the franchise for ever and ever

/mixum

You forgot:

Sorry, but it's the truth!

 

[TradeNurkicNow]

You forgot:

Sorry, but it's the truth!

Aghhhhh I knew something was missing!

 

[andalusian]

Aghhhhh I knew something was missing!

Maybe you will learn the game and then post!

 

[Public Defender]

I find it about right that the Blazers are about 4% crappier than they were last year (the rough value of 2 games out of 51).

Basically, LaMarcus Aldridge's growth as a player has nearly made up for the loss of Brandon Roy. But not quite.

I am impressed with how McMillan has managed to keep the Blazers from sucking completely, but much like last year, the Blazers are going to have to really work to get into the playoffs as a 7th or 8th seed.

I don't agree with the "McMillan only knows how to go 35 mph" analogy. Whether or not McMillan can successfully coach a completely healthy Blazers' team is just as unknown as the overall capability of such a Blazers' team, regardless of McMillan. It's probably academic, though, frankly, because we'll never see a fully healthy Brandon Roy again, and we may never see a 100% Greg Oden, either.

 

[mook]

I find it about right that the Blazers are about 4% crappier than they were last year (the rough value of 2 games out of 51).

Basically, LaMarcus Aldridge's growth as a player has nearly made up for the loss of Brandon Roy. But not quite.

Actually, I think Aldridge's growth as a player has made up for the loss of Roy.

It's Matthews growth as a "second banana" that hasn't quite made up for the loss of Aldridge as a second banana. The fall-off in quality there is easily enough to account for a 4% crappier team.

 

[BlazerBeav]

Actually, I think Aldridge's growth as a player has made up for the loss of Roy.

It's Matthews growth as a "second banana" that hasn't quite made up for the loss of Aldridge as a second banana. The fall-off in quality there is easily enough to account for a 4% crappier team.

Completely agree here - which is no knock on Wesley - it's just a further watering down of the roster. It is amazing watching quality teams like Dallas tank while their best player is out two weeks, while we keep moving along, slowly but surely.

 

[Public Defender]

Actually, I think Aldridge's growth as a player has made up for the loss of Roy.

It's Matthews growth as a "second banana" that hasn't quite made up for the loss of Aldridge as a second banana. The fall-off in quality there is easily enough to account for a 4% crappier team.

Yes, good point. Matthews/Batum/Miller as a #2 option is not consistently at the level that Aldridge was last year. That's a difference. I think there are also intangibles, confidence, etc., that the Blazers had behind Roy that they don't have to quite the same degree behind Aldridge.

Oh, and the absence of Marcus Camby the last few weeks could well have translated into an extra loss or two --- and that alone could have evened the Blazers' current record with last year's.

 

[Kaydow]

Yes, good point. Matthews/Batum/Miller as a #2 option is not consistently at the level that Aldridge was last year. That's a difference. I think there are also intangibles, confidence, etc., that the Blazers had behind Roy that they don't have to quite the same degree behind Aldridge.

Oh, and the absence of Marcus Camby the last few weeks could well have translated into an extra loss or two --- and that alone could have evened the Blazers' current record with last year's.

No doubt about it. As good as LA has been, Roy was one of the best closers in the game. Say what you want about the offense stalling with all his iso play, but the guy made big shots. The intangible part is what it did for the psyches of guys like Outlaw, Blake, Rudy, etc. Not only did they benefit from the defense paying so much attention to Brandon late in games, but it gives you confidence to see your best player confidently take/make big shots. Again, LA has been great but you can't just give him the ball at the top of the circle and say "go win us a ballgame" like you could B-Roy. No knock on LA. not many PF's can create their own shot with the game on the line.

 

[Mediocre Man]

But we're not efficient?

 

[maxiep]

Aldridge puts up numbers, but where we miss Roy is at the end of games. It's one of the reasons I think we're so inconsistent in the 4th quarter. We used to put the ball in Brandon's hands and he'd either score the bucket or get to the foul line.

 

[andalusian]

I love what LMA is doing - but he does not had the ability to take a game over as consistently as Roy did - and that's not just a end of the game situation. Roy had plenty of good 2nd or 3rd quarters where he would just take over a game - and the rest was history.

 

[hasoos]

It seems to me that some people have forgot that fact that we had a huge part of the middle of the season before we got Camby where we lost quite a few games and didn't perform that well, before winning quite a few games near the end of the season.

 

[BlazerCaravan]

I love what LMA is doing - but he does not had the ability to take a game over as consistently as Roy did - and that's not just a end of the game situation. Roy had plenty of good 2nd or 3rd quarters where he would just take over a game - and the rest was history.

Didn't LMA have 18 points in the first quarter very recently? He's also put up double digit numbers in any quarter you can name in the last month or so.

 

[andalusian]

Didn't LMA have 18 points in the first quarter very recently? He's also put up double digit numbers in any quarter you can name in the last month or so.

Consistently was the key word I was trying to convey. Roy could take over a game almost game in, game out. LMA can't do it - which is not diminishing from what he is doing - but he just can't do it as consistently.

 

[BlazerCaravan]

Consistently was the key word I was trying to convey. Roy could take over a game almost game in, game out. LMA can't do it - which is not diminishing from what he is doing - but he just can't do it as consistently.

I disagree, but don't have the data to back me up, so I'll finish with a vague insult towards you. But I don't have one ready to go, so I'll just let this emoticon substitute for that vague insult.