What's wrong with Roy?

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
BGrantFan said:
You seem to have a lot invested in Roy playing poorly. Have fun...
Click to expand...
Nope. It's just something that I started noticing in the pre-season, and it bothers me, as it should bother all Blazer fans.
 
Shooter said:
Still laughing now, HCP?
Click to expand...

So what are the rules to your game? Was I supposed to come on here after the Raptors game and say, "See SHOOTER, I told you he was going to flip the switch!" Are you going to do this after every poor outing? If that's the way it is, I'll bump this thread after he has a 24/6/3 game vs the PISTONS. Grow up!
 
HCP said:
So what are the rules to your game? Was I supposed to come on here after the Raptors game and say, "See SHOOTER, I told you he was going to flip the switch!" Are you going to do this after every poor outing? If that's the way it is, I'll bump this thread after he has a 24/6/3 game vs the PISTONS. Grow up!
Click to expand...



To the point that we only play well against only shitty teams, the Piston's are 2-5.
 
MickZagger said:
Would you be disappointed if we beat them?
Click to expand...


Absolutely not.


But beating them won't help the fact that something is wrong with Roy (I have told you what, but you didn't believe me) Nor will it change the fact that I don't feel Nate is the right coach to lead this team to the finals. So while I will stay up until the wee hours of the night and watch the game, it won't matter in the long run if we win or lose.
 
Mediocre Man said:
Absolutely not.


But beating them won't help the fact that something is wrong with Roy (I have told you what, but you didn't believe me) Nor will it change the fact that I don't feel Nate is the right coach to lead this team to the finals. So while I will stay up until the wee hours of the night and watch the game, it won't matter in the long run if we win or lose.
Click to expand...

So I'll throw this out there in response to your paragraph. Is any coach the right team to lead this team to the finals? Have you ever considered that there isn't a coach on this planet that could lead this team to the finals.?

If a coach gets everything out of a team that they can, IMO they are successful. Is Nate getting everything out of this team that he can?
 
hasoos said:
So I'll throw this out there in response to your paragraph. Is any coach the right team to lead this team to the finals? Have you ever considered that there isn't a coach on this planet that could lead this team to the finals.?

If a coach gets everything out of a team that they can, IMO they are successful. Is Nate getting everything out of this team that he can?
Click to expand...

No, I don't think anyone could lead this particular team to the finals. I do thin kthere are coaches out there that could get more out of the team in the playoffs. More out of the team on a game to game basis so they wouldn't play to their competition as much. I think Nate has had the team playing hard for the most part, but I think other coaches could do that as well, AND have a better offensive and defensive scheme
 
Mediocre Man said:
No, I don't think anyone could lead this particular team to the finals. I do thin kthere are coaches out there that could get more out of the team in the playoffs. More out of the team on a game to game basis so they wouldn't play to their competition as much. I think Nate has had the team playing hard for the most part, but I think other coaches could do that as well, AND have a better offensive and defensive scheme
Click to expand...

Like the sideline reporter Terry Porter, who you suggested for years?
 
MickZagger said:
Like the sideline reporter Terry Porter, who you suggested for years?
Click to expand...


Maybe? Porter, Monty, some assistant somewhere, Laimbeer, Adelman, SVG, JVG? All I know is that I don't think it's Nate. Porter did well with an undermanned Milwaukee team, and had Phoenix with a winning record. But the players in Phoenix turned on him, so maybe he's not the guy?
 
Mediocre Man said:
Maybe? Porter, Monty, some assistant somewhere, Laimbeer, Adelman, SVG, JVG? All I know is that I don't think it's Nate. Porter did well with an undermanned Milwaukee team, and had Phoenix with a winning record. But the players in Phoenix turned on him, so maybe he's not the guy?
Click to expand...

Players in Phoenix turned on him because he wanted to slow down the pace of the game. Totally going against what the personnel on that team was built for.
 
How about Lawrence Frank? I could get behind that hire. I really wanted Thibedou.
 
Fez Hammersticks said:
Jeff Van Gundy.
Click to expand...

I do not think there was ever a JVG team that was in the top-half of pace, all of them but one was in the bottom 20, most of them in the bottom 25 - he does not strike me as that different a coach than Nate, to be honest.
 
This isn't about Roy having a bad game. Ths is about Roy seeming disinterested on the court, saying some strange stuff after the game and the team he is playing against basically saying Roy isn't right.

Anyone trying to write this off to one game I don't think is looking at the complete picture. There are valid concerns regarding Roy. Not saying Roy is done, only taht something either mental or physical is going on with Roy . . . the fans know it, Roy knows it and I guess other teams now know it.
 
andalusian said:
I do not think there was ever a JVG team that was in the top-half of pace, all of them but one was in the bottom 20, most of them in the bottom 25 - he does not strike me as that different a coach than Nate, to be honest.
Click to expand...



Defensively he would be. He also has the passion on the sidelines that I think this team would benefit from, but ya, his offense seems a little Nateesque.....although with more movement
 
Mediocre Man said:
Defensively he would be. He also has the passion on the sidelines that I think this team would benefit from, but ya, his offense seems a little Nateesque.....although with more movement
Click to expand...

I am not certain that I buy the idea that defensively he would be. JVG always had good defensive teams - when they have a good defensive anchor in NYK and a big guy that takes a lot of space in HOU - but if memory serves, during the short time that Oden was healthy last year - the Blazers were very good defensively as well, at least as far as the numbers were concerned - the Blazers were an elite defensive team during that too short a period.

As for "fire" on the sidelines, I again, do not know how important this is. The Blazers did not see unmotivated even last year with all the crazy injuries - so I am not certain that Nate really lacks in his ability to motivate his team. Maybe the situation is different this year, I do not know, I have seen only 2 and a half games and they seemed pretty motivated to me during these games - so I am not going to speculate about "losing the team" or the ability to motivate.

In other words, until we actually hear about players complaining about him (Rudy excepted, but Rudy's expectations of himself might be a tad out of touch) - I am not sure that he really is the biggest problem for this team. At this point, this team misses Roy's super-play and ability to get into the paint - do not know if it is from injury, mental, adjusting to a new role or just a slump) and the beef inside (Joel/Oden). Love what Camby does, but he is not the same kind of physical presence as either one of these guys.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top