SB Nation - Nicolas Batum

Wednesday Practice Report

Ben. — Wed, 02 Dec 2009 22:14:06 -0000

Forget about it.

The theme of Nate McMillan's comments today was his team's defense and, particularly, its poor perimeter defense. In response to a question from Brian T. Smith, McMillan said...

We're not up close enough. We're not able to get into the ball and do the things (we should be doing).

We're missing key guys. Nic really set the tone for defensively how we played. Now we have guys who are working at that. They're not as good but they're working at it.

The interesting thing about McMillan's "not close enough" observation is how universal this complaint is among basketball coaches at every level. I've heard it from AAU coaches this summer, college coaches, I can even remember my grade school coaches harping about it.

No question, the spatial relationship between ball-handler and defender is a building block of any defensive system. So, why do defenders back off? There are three main reasons why this happens, regardless of what level of basketball you're talking about.

One, they don't trust their footwork or foot speed and give extra space to compensate.
Two, they don't trust or understand their help defense or defensive system and give space to prevent a bigger breakdown.
Three, they are simply not committed to defense on every possession.

At times over the last week, we've seen all three of those situations. Steve Blake has given space to prevent getting burned. Martell Webster struggled with forcing players away from their hot spots and towards his teammates. Brandon Roy and Andre Miller take plays off, content to allow jump shots over the top.

I turned back to Nate McMillan for his thoughts on this subject. When he watches game tape what sticks out the most to him? What is he looking to correct?

Blazersedge: You said guys aren't close enough. Can you pinpoint a reason for that? They don't trust their footwork, their team defense or is it just an effort thing?

I think it's -- you're all of a sudden asking some guys to do something that they haven't had to do [in the past].

Martell [Webster] has now become one of our guys that we are trying to put on the best offensive player. Well, he's been a shooter all of his life. And now going from a mindset of what I do best to what the team needs you to do.

Brandon [Roy] is having to take on some of that this year.

Rudy [Fernandez] has that assignment. Rudy is a scorer. And he's had to take on that assignment because we don't have [Travis] Outlaw, we don't have Nicolas [Batum], he has to become a defender. He has to defend better. Somewhat become a stopper.

Now it puts even more pressure on guys like [Steve] Blake to have to become better defenders on the perimeter.

With that answer I think you get a pretty harsh dose of reality of what this team is facing right now. Simply put, the Blazers perimeter defense is stretched dangerously thin.

As McMillan notes, with Nicolas Batum and Travis Outlaw out for a long time, everyone is being asked to do more. Average defenders are now drawing above-average assignments. Below-average defenders are now drawing average assignments. Wing defenders are playing more minutes and thus are at greater risk for exposure.

There's no quick fix for that. Personnel might improve but it's not going to happen overnight. If you're in Nate McMillan's shoes and you're thinking about ways to improve this team, a minor trade for a perimeter defender might make a lot of sense. Otherwise, you're faced with the prospect of running out these same players who have struggled defensively for months to come.

That's a tough, tough pill for a coach to swallow. How many hours of tape of bad defense can you watch?

For a second look at the Blazers' recent defensive struggles, Kevin Pelton tackles the subject with graphs over at Basketball Prospectus. His conclusion: teams have simply shot better against the Blazers over the last five games.

Is that a product of weak perimeter defense, luck or both? Feel free to weigh in down below in the comments.

Some other quick-hitting notes from a nearly empty practice gym today. I guess there's this Civil War thing going on that has most of the local media distracted.

Patty Mills was in the gym dressed for practice but didn't participate in drills aside from some light shooting.
LaMarcus Aldridge did not practice and was receiving treatment in the training room for the knee contusion that kept him out of last night's game. Nate McMillan currently says he is a gametime decision for Saturday. The Blazers won't practice tomorrow so that will give Aldridge something like 72 hours of time for his knee. If that's not enough and he misses practice again on Friday it might be time to get a little bit concerned.
Greg Oden did not practice due to a tweaked ankle, although he was in the gym getting shots up and had a smile on his face as he joked with coaches. McMillan seemed pretty confident he would play on Saturday. I think they were mostly just giving the big guy a rest.

-- Ben Golliver | (benjamin.golliver@gmail.com) | Twitter

Nate McMillan Talks Zone Defense

Ben. — Tue, 24 Nov 2009 22:35:06 -0000

More photos » by Rich Pedroncelli - AP

Browse more photos »

It's no secret any more: John Hollinger's numbers love the Blazers. A weak opening schedule, large margin of victories and a slow-down style that encourages efficient play have combined to shoot the Blazers up to 3rd place on Hollinger's power rankings.

Like last year, the Blazers again find themselves in the upper echelon of teams from an offensive efficiency standpoint this season. The surprise this year? The Blazers are currently ranked #2 in defensive efficiency, a nice accomplishment for a team that lost its best perimeter defender, Nicolas Batum, to long-term injury and fiddled with an unconventional three guard lineup for much of the early season.

There are a number of reasons for the team's early defensive success: the continued development of Greg Oden, the improvement of Rudy Fernandez, the giveaway of Sergio Rodriguez and, of course, the extremely weak early season schedule.

One other reason that hasn't gotten a lot of play, though, is the team's use of zone and matchup zone defenses. This isn't something new -- Nate McMillan has had both in his system for years -- but the zone looks appear to be working quite well this season. The first half in Atlanta stands out in particular. That night, the zone was used for long stretches of the second quarter, helping hold the Hawks, one of the league's elite offensive units, to just 20 second quarter points and 43 first half points.

After practice today I spoke briefly with coach Nate McMillan about his zone defenses. During our conversation he makes reference to a "straight zone" (players defend set areas rather than specific bodies) and "match-up zones." Here's a nice, simple definition of a match-up zone courtesy of Coaches Clipboard.net...

Match-up zone is a "combination" defense, combining elements of man-to-man defense (on ball), and zone defense (away from the ball). This is a zone defense that acts a lot like a good man-to-man defense. The on-ball defender closes-out and plays tight like in a man-to-man. The zone away from the ball resembles man-to-man "help-side" defense.

Here's a transcript of our conversation.

Blazersedge: You've been playing some match-up zone recently on defense. What prompted you to go in that direction this year?

That's a part of the package. We have a zone package that we play. It's not just one zone. We've got really four zones. We've got a "2", "2 Black", "3" and "3 Black".

The "Blacks" are matchups and the "2s" and "3s" are straight zones.

Depending on what a team has out on the floor as far as players, whether they have shooters, we are able to cover the perimeter [with our 3]. If they have bigs as well as shooters we go to our 2, which can cover the perimeter as well as the paint.

Blazersedge: What triggers the switch into the zone? If your opponent comes out shooting cold or is it a personnel thing?

It could be a lineup, it could be that they are hot and we are trying to disrupt them, get them out of a rhythm.

Last night we tried to go to it because Chicago started to get a rhythm offensively. We wanted to change their attack and get them standing and not moving. I think they were able to score once or twice off of it.

We use it for a number of different reasons. It's just part of our defensive package. We go to it when they go to certain lineups or if we're trying to break a rhythm.

Blazersedge: Is it true that we are more likely to see the zone if you're going smaller with the 3 guard lineup?

Possibly. Possibly. Because they do have maybe an advantage somewhere and we can keep our paint tight and stay away from teams trying to post up one of our small guards.

Blazersedge: What brings you out of the zone? They shoot over the top of it or... ?

It depends. It depends. Sometimes they are shooting over the top of it but we're keeping them on the perimeter. It all depends on the game and their lineup and how they are scoring. If they are scoring over the top of the zone with a hand in their face, we sometimes stay in it.

Blazersedge: There's a lot made about how difficult it is to rebound defensively when you're in the zone defense, because the bigs have to go actively find a body to box out. Is that a reality in the NBA or is that a misnomer?

Yeah, you look at all of that.

In the NBA, you can't play your traditional zone because you can't keep a middle man because of the illegal defense. It's some zone-like rules but it's not your traditional zone.

Blazersedge: In general, would you say your players prefer to play zone or man-to-man?

It's just part of our package. We've explained why we use it [to the players]. We use it different times and against different teams and we try to take advantage or disrupt or catch a team, surprise a team with falling back into a zone.

Blazersedge: Do you try to run out off the zone or are you looking to slow tempo?

You try to run out on both man and zone. It's the same. Sometimes the zone is even more difficult for teams to match up with their player (in transition) because their guy might be on the other side of the court.

About halfway through, you probably noticed Nate McMillan make passing reference to the NBA's defensive 3-second rule and how it prevents a "middle man" from running a "traditional" zone by camping out in the key. Yet another thing for a young big man like Greg Oden to worry about.

-- Ben Golliver | (benjamin.golliver@gmail.com) | Twitter

Around the League #1

Dave — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 08:05:37 -0000

Welcome to a new, hopefully semi-regular end-of-week feature we're trying called "Around the League". Things being what they are, I get so caught up in talking Blazers that I seldom have a chance to address things that go on beyond our confines. In these posts we'll do exactly that, plus mop up some Blazer topics that we didn't have time to treat in earlier conversation. My intention is not to play the expert here as much to share opinions which could lead to interesting discussion. So away we go!

Get Well Paul Allen

The most important real-life news out of the league this week came from our own franchise, as Blazers owner Paul Allen was diagnosed with non-Hodgkin Lymphoma. There's nothing revolutionary we can say about this other than facing any kind of cancer makes for a tough fight but we know Paul Allen is a tough fighter. However I'd like to add my personal well-wishes, however humble they may be compared to what is needed.

Things like this transcend our normal relationships. We know you because you're the owner of the Blazers, Mr. Allen. We appreciate you because of what you've done for (and with) the team over the last two decades. But even though a life is measured by one's accomplishments it cannot be wholly defined by them. It's time to show support for Paul Allen the human being...not the billionaire, the final decision-maker, but the person. No matter what happens with the team, the season, or anything basketball-related we support you, Mr. Allen. We are with you, sending our hopes and prayers in your direction, and if ever you doubt that you need but ask. I'm pretty sure thousands of pick-me-ups are at your fingertips anytime, day or night. Thank you for being who you are. Strength and peace be with you in this struggle.

Thoughts and prayers also go out to others in our Blazersedge and greater Blazers community who are also fighting this fight.

Click through for a bunch more topics.

Whither Allen Iverson?

Everybody outside of Tennessee knew that signing Allen Iverson to the Grizzlies ranked right up there with clamping your tongue to live jumper cables on the Good Idea Scale. Few anticipated his tenure in Memphis would be this short. He's just cleared waivers and is available to anyone who wants him. Should anyone bite?

I don't believe Iverson is a wholly toxic player, even now. He has some game left and could be an asset in the right situation. You just have to realize that he's going to be super-mega-nuclear toxic if both of these situations are true:

1. You don't plan to play him 38 minutes per game. And...

2. You're not going to win 50+ games.

Memphis acquiring him was three-O's stooopid because they're developing young scorers and ball-handlers already and they were going to be on the low end of mediocre no matter what Iverson did for them. The amount of ball-handling time he requires when unchecked would have killed them. The amount of losing they were going to do didn't give them any leverage to say him nay. However this does not apply to every team equally.

If you're a lousy team that just wants to run the AI Show, complete with caustic interviews and 32 shots per game from him, by all means go ahead. You might at least sell some tickets. You'll certainly generate some national media attention. But that avenue is pretty much a waste of everyone's time. The more intriguing possibility would be a team with a strong identity, perhaps a firmly-ensconced superstar already, who could legitimately tell Iverson to play along or take a hike. The team would also have to be on a straight road to the deep playoffs even without Iverson. Obviously it would also require 30-ish minutes to play him. He's not going to play along entirely, of course, but if his runaway self-absorption could be kept even halfway in check he could give you something. He might be willing to pick up an oar for a year in order to get back to the Finals and have his name associated with winning again.

Keep in mind that at this point he's a relatively cheap experiment as well. You can probably have him for the minimum required. At that rate there's no reason to rue cutting him if things don't work out. I'll be interested to see if anybody, even one decent team, takes a chance. The hot rumor is the Knicks but were I them I really wouldn't bother. It's a total Isiah move. The only way it could be more so is if they immediately offered him a multi-year, eight-figure deal. They don't have the infrastructure to withstand Hurricane Allen. We'll see what happens.

Meanwhile, Back at the Hall of Justice

Having booted The Flash out of the Superfriends for being not-so-friendly the Grizzlies took a chance on The Green Lantern, a.k.a. Jamaal Tinsley. Tinsley is more of a true point guard than Iverson was. But he's had off-court problems, injury problems, attitude problems, and last I heard wanted to be more of a scorer, except he lacks any visible capacity to score. One of the things that made him special in his prime was his defense. Defense equals effort. Effort is often hard to eke out of guys with attitude problems when they're not being featured in as prominent of a role as they'd like. So you can probably strike that off of the list even if Tinsley gets and stays in playing shape. So what did we end up with? Half of a point guard with all of the potential problems. My only conclusion is that Memphis management hates Lionel Hollins. With a passion.

Speaking of Attitude Problems

The trade of the week was the Stephen Jackson-Raja Bell swap between Golden State and Charlotte. (Plus players to be named later. Ooops! My bad. They were named already. Vladimir Radmanovic and Acie Law. Neither of those players is going to be named much later.) Color me underwhelmed by the deal. On the surface it makes sense, as the Bobcats desperately need more offense and the Warriors haven't even heard of defense. But Bell is injured and even if he weren't it's pretty hard to champion an entire defense from the shooting guard position when you're the only one playing defense at all. A center might do it. Maybe even a power forward. But Bell is going to be sticking his finger into a hole the size of Crater Lake. He's probably just going to get wet. And the fact that the Warriors were willing to part with Jackson for damaged goods should tell you something about where he is right now. The wrong-est move in all of this was signing him to a secure contract. You got some pretty good play out of him when his deal got short. Then you went and gave him four years of license to Jax you up. Smart.

LeBron Changes Numbers

I know it's old news but I never weighed in officially. This Jordan #23 thing is silly. Michael was a great player for one team. He should be honored to the moon by one team. The rest of us can remember him every time we play that one team. Michael changed the marketing and coverage of the NBA and the change in marketing and coverage led to a whole raft of new hoop dreams for a new generation. I understand that fully. But that's not why you retire jerseys even in one town, let alone in all of them simultaneously. You could make a stronger argument if he were the all-time scoring leader by a huge margin but he's third on the list. You could make a stronger argument if he was the most prolific stat guy ever but there was Wilt. You could make a stronger argument if nobody in history won nearly as many championships as he but you have vintage Celtics waving seven blinging fingers at you. Besides if you're going to count championships you better retire Pippen's number league-wide alongside Michael's. They never won without each other. The fact that LeBron is changing his number to that of Dr. J and Bill Russell only makes the fallacy more evident. They each had a pretty big impact on and off the floor. This is just like somebody saying that U2 should be forever enshrined above all bands because they were the defining group of a generation and more. That may be true but the impulse is also, by definition, generational. People from an earlier era are going to start asking about the Stones and the Beatles then. People before them will latch onto Elvis. Who was really the greatest? Each generation has its argument and its claim and that's the way it should be. There might not be another Michael, but there will be somebody else who impacts the league as strongly in a different way. Let them be compared and debated without attempting to freeze our moment in time and labeling it the greatest of all conceivable times.

AROUND THE SITE...

Part of this feature will be addressing topics that have gotten some play in the comments and sidebar. To wit:

Is ~~Marc Stein~~ DOH! Bill Simmons a Tool? (Sorry, Marc.)

Maybe, but he probably doesn't care. In the old days of professional wrestling people cheered the good guys and booed the bad. This is how each made their money. Then people smartened up to how the game worked. Nowadays a great bad guy is as likely to get cheered as booed, simply because people appreciate how good he is at being bad. We probably need to smarten up to the media circus as well. Anybody who gets you riled up is making bank off of just that. If Simmons is good at cheesing off Portland fans it's because he relishes it. If you like that kind of thing then by all means get cheesed and have fun with it. If you're really angry and want to take action, ignoring it is the best thing you can do. Cheers are good. Boos are good. Silence is crushing.

Would Gerald Wallace Make a Good Blazer?

Yes and no. He's definitely that kind of crazed, charging bull that this team lacks. He's also the kind of crazed, charging bull that will want to start at small forward. In the short term that's not a problem, but Nicolas Batum might be just as valuable in the long run. Plus he'd be expensive to get. On the other hand you wouldn't have to worry about rebounding anymore. On the other hand he might have to moderate his game with age and as soon as he starts shooting jumpers instead of driving the lane he's much less of a player. If the Blazers did get him I think they'd need to concentrate on two things at the point guard position: distance shooting and the ability to run. You'd depend heavily on the frontcourt to beat everyone up and reserve the backcourt for running and shooting. Everything else would take second-fiddle. I don't think that point guard is on this team right now. I think Andre Miller and Jerryd Bayless specifically don't fit that mold. So you'd need to plan another move sooner or later. Given all of that, it's not likely to happen.

Any Chance the Blazers are Ready This Year?

This question was posed by jksnake in our live chat but he posed it at quarter-after-midnight when I was on my way out the door. Specifically he wanted to know what I perceived the difference to be between this year and next, since I've opined that the window is still shut this season but it starts opening thereafter. Is it just an experience difference?

Experience is part of it...not just experience in the league but experience playing together. We haven't even got a regular lineup right now. Even without injuries we'd still be juggling that. Players are starting to trust each other and are learning to work together but it's still a work in progress. Frankly when they get under stress things tend to break down still instead of the team stepping up. One or two guys might bail us out of trouble but five together can't. The playoffs bring a ton of stress. It's more intense, sustained, and targeted directly at your weak points. The team should be far more settled by the time they reach the post-season but in reality you have to learn your lessons all over again once you get there. Teams that are learning might win a series or even two but they won't win four. Next year we should enter the year knowing what we've got. We may see a couple roster changes but they should be specific and hopefully only in one critical area instead of the three or four we're juggling now. Next year we'll also have more playoff experience and a better idea of what going deep is like (knock on wood).

The other critical factor is Greg Oden. You can already see what a monstrous difference he makes for this team. But in basketball terms he's just taking his first steps right now. He'll need to make more of a difference more consistently for the Blazers to march to a title. It's too early to pin that much on him. He's still getting in regular foul trouble, feeling his way around the offense, rushing shots, turning the ball over, and a ton of other little things that he'll need to work on throughout the year. He'll be good come playoff time but he won't be great enough to make the difference we need. Next season the expectations get higher for him.

Finally, as I always say when these things come up, you can tell we're not there by how we have to envision making it. "We match up better than most against the L*kers. We should be able to take San Antonio this year. If we can get by or avoid the Nuggets we should have a chance." You can switch around the names in those various sentences however you wish. The fact remains that if you have to say those things you aren't the dominant team. You don't want to be the team that plays the L*kers well. You want to be the L*kers. This kind of talk screams Minnesota '03-'04, not L.A. ‘08-'09. Name me a team that's won it all recently that came into the season thinking they might have a chance instead of coming into the season knowing they were going to win. The L*kers knew. The Celtics knew. The Spurs always knew. Shaq and Wade's Heat, the Pistons, Shaq and Kobe's L*kers, both sets of Michael's Bulls...they all knew too. This is NOT to say that there's one, predestined team each year. It's perfectly possible for multiple teams to come into the season knowing that they're going to take the title. Only one of them turns out to be right, but the others still had that confidence and attitude. (Drexler's Blazers knew in '90-'91, for instance, as did the '99-'00 ‘Sheed-led squad.) You probably have to go back to our own '89-‘90 Blazers in their first Finals before you can find a sneak-ish team. But even they had an inkling what was going to happen when they got Buck Williams. Plus their situation was much different, staffed as they were by veterans in their early, but legitimate, primes. (Porter was in his 4^th year and Duck his 3rd but Clyde was in his 6^th, Kersey his 5^th, and Williams his 8^th. Between them the starting five had 23 combined years of playoff experience. The current Blazer starters have 11 combined and 5 of those are Miller's. I'm not sure the entire squad put together has much more than 23.) The Blazers aren't even at the point where they know themselves yet, let alone knowing that they can dominate the rest of the league no matter what comes. That'll take time. It's actually pretty bold to think that it has a chance of happening next year even. But this team has always been a little ahead of the curve.

--Dave (blazersub@yahoo.com)

Travis Outlaw's Injury: What Now?

Dave — Mon, 16 Nov 2009 07:41:23 -0000

No rest for the wicked and/or weary. The inbox is jammed again with people offering questions and suggestions about what to do now that Travis Outlaw is down for the next couple of months. Is Juwan Howard the answer? Should the Blazers have kept Ime Udoka or Jarron Collins? Are we now to rain curses upon the Kings and Suns for snatching them up after we dumped them? Should Portland make a trade to address this situation? How badly will/does this mess things up? Are the Blazers snakebit?

OK...stop. Deep breath. Go to your happy space. 8-3...8-3... There. Better? Now, let's talk.

There's no doubt the Blazers will miss Travis. Nicolas Batum's injury cost them their best individual defender. Now couple that with losing their best offensive player off the bench, their clear 6^th man, and the loss is significant. Best defensive player, one of your best offensive players...no matter how your roster is built that's going to reverberate. You might not see it on a nightly basis, but over time you're going to miss those players.

The Blazers are in a position to mitigate much of the potential loss of Outlaw's injury because they have one of the best reserve power forwards in the league waiting in the wings. Perhaps you've heard of him. His name is LaMarcus Aldridge. Sure he's the starter, but he's a starter averaging a shade over 31 minutes per game right now. He's young, he's fit, and despite the relatively slow start to the season he's awesome. You could easily bump those minutes up to 40 for the next six weeks without crimping his style too much. If you can't rely on Howard or Przybilla to fill 8 minutes per game between them then what are they doing on an NBA team? Plus, what is Outlaw's job description? If you said, "Score, baby!" you're onto at least two-thirds of it. What would LaMarcus dearly love the chance to do more of? If you said, "Score, baby!" then you've just quoted my first six girlfriends after we...uhhh...I mean you've just described Aldridge's Christmas Wish List. He's averaging 12.3 attempts per game right now. Give him two-thirds of Travis' shots and he's still only at 18. Granted they score in different fashions but nobody said you were going to be able to dig up an exact Outlaw clone. You probably have to run a few more set plays and you have to run them through LaMarcus, but that's a legitimate option for the Blazers. The key here will be the centers keeping out of foul trouble, as the Blazers no longer have the luxury of filling with a scoring power forward if Aldridge has to slide to center. As long as you can keep Oden or Przybilla on the floor LaMarcus is going to remain your best option at power forward no matter what time of the game it is. No matter what the coaching staff says they're going to try, my guess is they're going to end up calling on LaMarcus in this situation and sticking with him.

The same argument could be made for Martell Webster covering whatever small portion of the small forward minutes Travis was taking. Martell should get a little rub and more chances to drive to the hoop if he's so inclined. But I think a hidden beneficiary of the injury could be Rudy Fernandez. Rudy has come on strong in the last week in every area but scoring, where he's still basically an afterthought. If the Blazers are forced to run a small lineup Rudy will probably get time in one of the wing positions. The Blazers will also need somebody to initiate the offense. Neither Fernandez nor Webster has proven great off the dribble but Rudy appears to have more options with the ball in his hands than Martell does right now. Also if you tell Rudy to get aggressive he's probably going to respond. Again it's not a one-for-one correlation to Travis but the overall effect could be similar.

I don't see a lot of other options that make sense right now. I believe J. Howard can still contribute to this team but he hasn't shown a lot with the minutes he's been given so far. He's probably not a reliable 15-minute-per-game guy. You're not going to find guys on the free agent market who will make a difference either, especially when you consider they have to acclimate to the team. Dante Cunningham probably isn't ready yet. Making a trade specifically to address this situation seems the most unlikely option of all. You don't make a permanent move to address a six-week situation. Plus anyone you bring in will have that learning curve as well. Most importantly, who are you going to send? The most likely names are Outlaw himself, Webster, Blake, and Bayless. Outlaw's injured. Who are you going to get with Webster or Blake? If you send the two of them together...BOOM goes the rotation. That's practically the apocalypse right now, not because of their respective talents, rather the roles they're occupying. You don't move Jerryd for a stopgap either...partially because he wouldn't bring back enough right now to warrant the risk of him being good later and partially because you'd create another roster hole if another injury occurred. The only way a trade would make sense is if it were for a clear starting small forward or a strong combo-forward off the bench. Either of those moves would have been planned long before this and would have nothing to do with this injury (except perhaps being ruined by it if Travis was part of the deal).

In the end the Outlaw and Batum injuries may cost us a couple games. On the other hand maybe they provide opportunities for players to shine who otherwise may have been overshadowed. Either way they aren't season-derailing events. It ain't good but it ain't the end of the world either.

--Dave (blazersub@yahoo.com)

Game 1 Recap: Blazers 96, Rockets 87

Dave — Wed, 28 Oct 2009 05:59:01 -0000

More photos » by Don Ryan - AP

No. Try it again against Golden State tomorrow.

Browse more photos »

One down, 81 to go.

General Observations

This game was decent by opening night standards. The Blazers were sloppy, somewhat inconsistent, and seem to get distracted for stretches but they executed the basics on both ends of the court, they kept their heads, and they never came anywhere close to falling apart or even getting rattled. They looked like a team that was finding itself but they also looked more mature than in years past. It was the kind of win you'd hope to see on an imperfect night.

The evening began decently enough with Portland relying on LaMarcus Aldridge for early offense while trying to make the Rockets work hard for outside looks on the other end. LaMarcus came through, scoring 7 points in the first three minutes of the game. Brandon Roy bolstered him with a couple of buckets off of nice passes from teammates and the offense was rolling. On the other end the Blazers did a nice job of shutting down the middle but they had to rotate and swing so much that they left the perimeter wide open. The Rockets took advantage by hitting threes. When Portland tried to get out and cover those they couldn't recover back to the middle quick enough when the Rockets drove. Houston didn't get actual buckets off of penetration as much as free throws. Houston had 12 free throw attempts in the first quarter to go along with their 7 three-point attempts. Between the two ranges they hit enough shots to stay even with the Blazers. Neither team was ecstatic with their start but both survived it just fine.

The pivotal moment of the first half came when LaMarcus Aldridge picked up his second foul with 7:30 left in the first quarter. That's when he came out in favor of Travis Outlaw. At first this looked like a bad deal for the Blazers, as Aldridge was their main scoring threat to that point. But Travis went all wang-dang diddly wubba SPROING wow-wow on everybody as soon as he hit the court. You could see it in his step as he walked out there and in his early defensive movement. He looked assured. And then he started hitting. And hitting. And hitting. These weren't Travis Specials from years past either. There was little dribbling involved and almost no spinning. It was catch, step, shoot OR catch, drive, float OR catch, hit that three all night long. Nobody on Houston's end had an answer for him. When Andre Miller came in and pushed the pace right on through the second quarter everybody started scoring. For a while it didn't look fair. Houston wanted to run but Portland wanted to run A LOT. The Blazers never sat with the ball and seldom walked it up. The extra time allowed them to run more cuts and screens, leading to some nice, easy points even when the fast break wasn't producing. They balanced that by draining multiple threes, stretching the defense and opening up the lane even more. After being tied at the end of the first quarter Portland found themselves up 13 at the half. Everybody who had hit the floor outside of the centers had scored a bunch. It was happy time.

The third quarter saw the Blazers attack the rim even harder. They eschewed the outside game and generated points in the paint. They even drew a few foul shots, which was the only part of the arsenal that had been silent (providing Houston a lifeline). They continued to protect the lane on the other end, daring the Rockets to generate points any other way they could. Houston ended the quarter down 19 and would fall to the full 20 points behind early in the fourth.

At that point the Blazers let up. They started walking the ball up, going one-on-one, and letting the Rockets get to balls first. Defending single players and hustling are two of Houston's strong points this year. The Rockets kept chipping away at the lead and the Blazers failed to respond consistently. Houston cut the lead to 9 with seven minutes to go before Andre Miller stepped in and hit a couple of nice shots, one an open three. Everyone figured the game was in the bag at that point but again the Rockets refused to fold. They trimmed the margin to 6 with two minutes left but at that point everything had to go right for them. Brandon Roy, Travis Outlaw, Steve Blake, and Greg Oden scoring wasn't right for them. Even with the let up the Blazers ended up with a 9-point victory.

Several things looked good on the Portland side of the ledger tonight. Chief among those was the rebounding. Houston can bang and board but the Blazers obliterated them, finishing with a 51-33 edge. Portland also patrolled the middle with intensity. The Rockets never got uncontested shots close to the basket unless they were on a flat-out break. And they didn't even get that many of those. The offense looked good on the run and when the ball was moving. The Blazers looked like they knew each other and they played unselfishly. You didn't see very many forced shots nor did it look like Houston could contain the Blazers to a certain area or type of shot. As mentioned above, cuts through the lane were pretty. Portland also set picks and used them pretty well, especially when compared to years past. The offense as a whole looked more professional as well as coming easier to the players. Everybody seemed to have confidence in everybody else. Obviously the team depended on Brandon and LaMarcus more than anybody else but it didn't look like it was a stars-or-bust affair. In fact the bench players carried the night for much of the game. The Blazers made their second unit count...working around Houston's defensive strong points and wearing them down. Finally I'll mention again the complete lack of panic, desperation, or rattling. Composure was the order of the night.

On the other hand, some things raised concerns...or at least left unanswered questions. Much of the masterful paint defense came down to the centers. This is certainly part of the Portland game plan and has been for some time. But let's face it...the big guys had a night off against the Houston centers and had defensive attention to spare. The individual defense on the perimeter wasn't consistent and the Blazers never were able to stop the ball moving or contain the dribble for long. If that doesn't change more accomplished offensive teams are going to bring us woe. In general, and especially in the early part of the game, Portland seemed content to start their plays outside. It looked like everything from the post to the perimeter would be more effective if started 3-5 feet closer to the hoop. But few of the Blazers were able to muscle into position. Until the game neared its conclusion and Brandon Roy started driving the Blazers lacked strong finishes around the hoop. Yes there were a couple dunks but in general aggression at the rim was lacking. This also contributed to the relatively low foul rate compared to decent shots generated. And, of course, Game 1 is a little too early to be assuming wins after three quarters, even for a good team. That's not likely to be repeated, but it does show how composure can sometimes slip into complacency.

This was a nice shakedown cruise for the team. Most things worked well. Whatever bugs showed up can be worked out. There's no reason for overconfidence and even less for disappointment. It was right down the middle which is just where this team needs to be right now. You don't want to stumble out of the gate but you can't complete an entire season on October 27^th either.

Individual Notes

Brandon Roy had a 5-18 shooting night but he was also the only Blazer scoring from the foul line, hitting 10-11. It wasn't the perfect game for him but he didn't overcompensate either. He played solidly within the team framework for the early part of the game, asserting himself only to provide some scoring support for LaMarcus. Later in the game he took over the ball more and drove hard. That's mostly what you want to see out of your star.

LaMarcus Aldridge seemed to relish the early scoring role and owned his matchup until fouls took him to the bench. He's the spike that the Blazers are going to try to hammer in to crack the opponent's façade. After that his teammates will exploit those cracks. It's a good enough battle plan and he's more than capable. He shot 5-10 on the night for 11 points. He started grabbing some rebounds late and ended up with 6. He also had 4 turnovers but it's not like he was killing the team with them. He played only 24 minutes.

Travis Outlaw was the superstar of the evening. The Rockets just didn't know what to do with his compact, efficient, yet deadly-athletic offense. He ended up 9-14 for 23 points in 33 minutes. He also played some decent defense, grabbed 4 rebounds, and notched 2 assists, 2 steals, and a block.

One of the big questions of the evening was how well Greg Oden would do. It depends on which end of the court you were watching. He really played a controlled (and controlling) game defensively. He looks so much lighter on his feet than he did last year. He's quicker to jump and quicker moving sideways. His arms and feet are moving but poised. That increased mobility makes him look a ton more experienced, as he's able to hit his spots on time. He earned 5 fouls in 26 minutes but only one of them was a head-scratcher. He intimidated the Rockets with 5 blocks. The was also a Hoover on the boards. Anything he was near he grabbed, finishing with 8 defensive rebounds and 12 total. His offense was timid, however. On the good side he set some strong picks, which is great to see. On the other hand he's still not accomplished at getting position in the post. He's setting up farther out than he needs to and it leads to harder shots than he should be taking. When he did really grind down low he was never able to stand still long enough to make a pass possible. All night he was radiating that "don't pass it to me, please" vibe, which is not what you want to see out of your low post trigger guy. When he did receive the ball he got it stripped as often as he got a shot up. He ended up with 7 turnovers on the night. Not all of them were in post situations but enough were. He scored 2 points on a dunk off of an offensive rebound. There's little doubt he was a net positive for the team, though. They didn't need his missing offense but they sure prospered from his lane patrol. They'll take 12 boards and 5 blocks any night.

Martell Webster looked pretty good tonight. You could tell he was shaky at the start of the game, but he had the wisdom not to do too much. He played respectable defense, made a couple nice passes, and hit the three when he was open. In fact he hit a couple shots that Nicolas Batum would not have been able to make in his place. He looked smarter than the Martell we remember from years back. He doesn't look like he's going to hurt you a bit and his shooting can sure help. 14 points on 4-7 shooting, 4-4 from the free throw line, 2-4 from the arc, 3 manly rebounds, 2 assists, 2 steals, a block, and a couple turnovers. Welcome back, Martell!

You can pretty much ignore Andre Miller's 3-11 shooting night. Two of those three shots stifled the Houston run in the fourth quarter. The misses didn't matter as much as the way he pushed the pace and found his teammates diving down the lane. He made a couple of Tivo passes tonight...as in, "Rewind it so I can see how that happened!" He was the second-unit catalyst, affecting the game almost as much as Outlaw but in a different way. 9 points, 7 assists, 4 rebounds in 26 minutes.

Steve Blake had a good night with the set-up three, hitting 2-5 from distance to earn 7 points overall. He also had 3 rebounds, 2 assists, and a steal. But when he wasn't draining it his game looked pedestrian. You know Blake well enough not to judge based on a single outing but on the other hand you also know that once he puts the ball on the floor his part of the possession is essentially done. Blake got some time with Miller as well as Roy. I wonder how long that will last.

Joel Przybilla spent 16 minutes cleaning up after Oden. He did a good job in the interior and snagged 10 rebounds and 2 blocks. (That's 22 rebounds and 7 blocks for our center tandem if you're counting.) He had some trouble catching the ball and collected 6 fouls, but what the hey. Like Oden, his defensive work more than compensated for brief moments of consternation elsewhere.

Rudy Fernandez looked rusty but managed a nice 8 points on 2-3 shooting from distance (quick-draw style too) and added 4 rebounds, 2 assists, a steal, and a block. He looked pretty much like the Rudy you expect: a little out of position on defense, a serious knack for being in the right position on offense, a couple of inspired plays plus one or two that should have been more basic. Between him and Webster, though, the shooting was deadly. Teams are going to have a hard time covering them while still watching the main guys. Rudy tried bringing the ball up the court and setting the offense a couple times to mixed results. It's early though. You could tell he hadn't seen time in the pre-season.

Final Thoughts

You expected the Blazers to win this game. They should be able to win again Saturday in Houston but I am curious to see if they actually will. Games like that are going to be the test of the season.

Boxscore

Don't forget to read the other side of the story at TheDreamShake. And don't forget Ben's report from press row is forthcoming.

--Dave (blazersub@yahoo.com)

Batum Shoulder Surgery

Dave — Mon, 26 Oct 2009 19:17:04 -0000

More photos » by Rick Bowmer - AP

Watch the shoulder. (AP Photo/Rick Bowmer)

Browse more photos »

Blazersedge learned this morning, and the Blazers confirmed shortly before noon, that Portland Trail Blazers starting small forward Nic Batum will undergo shoulder surgery on a torn right labrum later this week.

Batum injured his shoulder last season and again this summer while playing for the French national team. He injured it again earlier during training camp, which nearly caused him to miss Fan Fest. Batum injured it yet again during yesterday's practice, according to this report from Joe Freeman. At practice today, Batum stated that he knew surgery was likely for months and that he had hoped to play through the pain.

The team stated Batum's recovery timeline will be determined after surgery however a source close to Batum expects him to miss a substantial portion of the 2009-2010 NBA season.

Nate McMillan said that Martell Webster practiced with the starting unit today. He also was quite clear in stating that cohesion with the fellow starters, rather than any particular match-up against an opponent, would determine whether Webster or Travis Outlaw fills the starting 3 role. Nate pointed to defending elite perimter players, knocking down the open shot and general fit with Blake, Roy, Aldridge and Oden as his criteria for determining his starters. All signs, at least initially, would point to Webster.

Batum was in the gym today in sweats but did not practice. His mood was relatively upbeat for the cameras but he was clearly disappointed.

-- Ben (benjamin.golliver@gmail.com)

Update (2PM): Further details from Joe Freeman.

Batum said he has been told that the recovery time for his surgery will be three to five months. That means the best case scenario for his return is early February.

....

But Batum said the pain had gradually become too much to play through over the last two weeks. He routinely aggravated the injury during games and practices, when he would run into screens or have his arm tugged by a defender. He dinged the shoulder in the first quarter of the Blazers' last exhibition game against the Suns on Thursday and the pain had become too much.

NBA.com's Annual Survey of General Managers

Dave — Wed, 07 Oct 2009 05:30:11 -0000

In the midst of discussing the Blazers' inaugural pre-season contest you might be interested in checking out NBA.com's annual survey of NBA General Managers. Much like the census bureau or an over-eager first date, they put a ton of questions to the league's GMs. Then, much like the census bureau or an over-eager first date, after it was all over they blabbed about it to everyone in the universe.

Not every GM responded to every question. Percentages are based on the responses given, not the number of GMs overall. I believe the Honorable Mention occurs if even one GM (~~possibly your own~~ Edit: Can't do that. I'm relieved.) puts your name down, so bear that in mind. Still, it's as good a look as we can get at the collective wisdom of a bunch of guys who base their livelihoods and reputations on knowing the game inside and out.

A few of the general questions to whet your appetite before we talk about the Blazers specifically:

Which team will win NBA Finals 2010?

L.A. Lakers - 60.7%

Boston - 17.9%
Cleveland - 17.9%
San Antonio - 3.6%

Last year: L.A. Lakers - 46.2%

Which team will win the Eastern Conference?

Boston - 50.0%

Cleveland - 42.9%

Orlando - 7.1%

Last year: Boston - 74.1%

Which team will win the Western Conference?

L.A. Lakers - 75.9%

San Antonio - 24.1%

Last year: L.A. Lakers - 66.7%

Who will win the 2009-10 MVP?

LeBron James, Cleveland - 69.0%

Kobe Bryant, L.A. Lakers - 17.2%

Dwight Howard, Orlando - 6.9%

Also receiving votes: Tim Duncan, San Antonio ; Dwyane Wade, Miami

Last year: LeBron James - 55.6%

Which team made the best overall moves this summer?

San Antonio - 71.2%

Orlando - 17.3%

Also receiving votes: Cleveland , Toronto , Washington

Last year: Philadelphia - 51.9%

Which team will be most improved in 2009-10?

Washington - 48.3%

L.A. Clippers - 17.2%

Oklahoma City - 13.8%
4. Toronto - 6.9%

Also receiving votes: Boston , Memphis , Minnesota , San Antonio

Last year: Miami , Portland - 25.9%

As you can see, the Blazers got no mention in any of these categories. Where did Portland show up?

The biggest category was Northwest Division victor, where the Blazers edged out the Nuggets 42.9% to 39.3% (which is pretty much 1 vote). The Jazz ended up with 17.9%.

As you just saw, nobody predicted the Blazers to win the Western Conference Finals nor (obviously) the NBA Championship.

The Blazers got no votes for best offseason acquisition but they did tie for 4th (with five other teams) for the most underrated offseason acquisition in Andre Miller.

Portland finished 3rd with the L*kers behind Cleveland and Utah for best homecourt advantage.

The Blazers got no mention for best offensive or defensive schemes. In fact they did not show up anywhere in the defensive categories period, team or individual,

On the plus side Portland got an honorable mention as the team that's most fun to watch.

The Blazers fared a little better in the individual categories, but not much. The most striking result was three Blazers getting honorable mentions as being the most likely to have a breakout year. Those three were Greg Oden, LaMarcus Aldridge, and Brandon Roy. One wonders how much farther Roy can break out, or whose notice he has escaped.

Brandon Roy also got honorable mention for best shooting guard in the league, which was probably the most prestigious individual accolade a Blazer received in this survey.

Rudy Fernandez didn't get any votes for best international player but he did finish first in the Most Likely International Player to Have a Breakout Season category. Nicolas Batum got honorable mention in that same category. Evidently somebody somewhere thinks everybody on the Blazers will bust out big time this season. The only thing missing was a Przybilla vote.

Six coaches were listed as possibilities for best coach in the league but Nate McMillan was not among them. Nate did get an honorable mention vote in the category of Best Manager/Motivator. 14 names were listed as possibilities for most valuable assistant coach but no Blazers were among them.

Brandon Roy made honorable mention in Best Basketball IQ. Nobody cast a vote for him as the player you'd want shooting with the game on the line though...which seems like a significant omission from here.

No Blazers got any votes in the categories of Best Leader, Best Finisher, Player Who Forces Opposing Coaches to Make the Most Adjustments, or Best Pure Shooter. Depending on your definition some Blazer shooting guards could have certainly qualified.

And that's about it. If nothing else it's interesting to see the forest perspective when we've all but chained ourselves to the trees. If you had to sum up an impression of the Blazers from this survey it would probably read "Interesting...perhaps intriguing...but not yet distinctive or elite." Portland certainly got more mentions than average or low-end teams but not as many as Blazer fans would want. Overall it seems like a reasonable assessment given where the team is and what it's accomplished. Perhaps next year's survey will feature more (and higher) mentions.

The link above will take you to the survey index page from which you can peruse all of the questions and responses.

--Dave (blazersub@yahoo.com)

Breaking Down the Udoka Invitation

Dave — Sun, 27 Sep 2009 06:20:05 -0000

More photos » by Layne Murdoch - NBAE/Getty Images

Blazer fans were abuzz about the possibilities of getting one of the guys in this photo this summer. Which name ended up in Kevin Pritchard's briefcase? (Photo by Layne Murdoch/NBAE via Getty Images)

Browse more photos »

The mailbox is full of questions regarding the Ime Udoka signing and its significance. The responses range from mystified to excited to concerned. So let's clear it up and break it down.

First of all, this is a training camp invite. The contract is non-guaranteed, meaning the Blazers and Ime can part ways at any time the team chooses. Technically it's not different than any of the other invitations the Blazers have issued. Kevin Pritchard will be visiting a few guys between now and mid-October to let them know he appreciates them, respects them, and could they please clean out their locker now. Ime may well be among those.

Second of all, this is a competition for what ends up being the 15^th roster spot and no higher than the 13^th spot in the rotation. Only 12 guys suit up on a given night. You're not exactly looking for a franchise-altering move here. And this isn't one. Ime averaged a respectable 15.4 minutes per game in 67 games for the Spurs last year but his production slipped significantly from his prior seasons. His shooting, free throw shooting, and most importantly three-point shooting percentages tanked. ~~His defensive rating went down as soon as he left Portland.~~ (Edit: Never mind that. I was BRILLIANTLY going by the wrong data. Aplogies to you and Ime. --Dave) Basically he played half the minutes you remember from his tenure with the Blazers and didn't play them nearly as well. He's wading onto a roster stocked with players at his position, meaning he either really, really loves his hometown and is willing to risk an opportunity to stay in the league and any salary raise he could get playing more minutes elsewhere for a long-shot chance here OR he didn't get any decent offers. This should color expectations somewhat. He really is in the lower roster now if he makes the team and his chances of rising above that are slim.

I can already hear the choruses of, "That's what people said LAST time he signed with the Blazers!!!" so let me cut you off at the pass. This 2009-10 Blazer team is far different than the 2006-07 team that Ime contributed so much to. Outlaw and Webster were younger and even less tempered than they are now. Aldridge and Roy were rookies. The old-timers on the team were Jamaal Magloire, Raef LaFrentz, Juan Dixon, Fred Jones and Dan Dickau and the main guy was Zach Randolph. Udoka played the 4^th most minutes of anybody on the team that year because there existed both opportunity and desperate need for his steadiness, his defense, and his three-point shooting. Nobody was solidly in front of him at small forward. Nobody in the starting lineup or really anywhere in the upper rotation knew how to sell out on defense or how to play hard while being a contributory player instead of a main focus. Half the team was too young and the other half just didn't sport that kind of player. The differences between the names listed above and a mature Brandon Roy and LaMarcus Aldridge, Andre Miller and Steve Blake, Nicolas Batum and Rudy Fernandez should be obvious.

Ime is like that really nice pizza you had as a kid. (Mine was the now-defunct Manhattan's Pizza...one in the Hollywood District and one up on Palatine Hill as I recall.) It was delicious and you loved it for good reason. But then you moved to Chicago or New York and started sampling pizza and while none of them held the place in your heart that the childhood favorite did, slowly you got attuned to a different style and quality. Then you return home and you find that while your childhood pizza is still good, maybe your memory or experience gave it a fonder spot than it strictly merited. You loved it as much for what it did for you and meant to you as its inherent quality. The latter made it decent, the former made it special. You still like it, but you wouldn't replace any of your new favorite pizzas with it.

So what does this training camp invitation mean? There are three possibilities. After chewing the fat with some people who usually know what they're talking about I'm going to list them in order from least likely to most.

There's a small, small chance this really is a significant event heralding the next Blazer move which is to trade away a small forward or two. Perhaps Ime did have significant offers elsewhere but somebody telegraphed to him (or he cleverly intuited) that the Blazer offer was the one to take. In this case Ime becomes a lower rotation player and the move makes wonderful, magical, and exciting sense.

There's a somewhat larger chance, but still not huge, that the Blazers don't have complete faith in Martell Webster's foot yet. In that case the choices at backup small forward range from Outlaw to Fernandez to Roy, none of whom are completely suited for the job. Ime would be an acceptable insurance policy in that instance, though one wonders what he gives you (besides experience) that Batum doesn't.

The overwhelmingly likely explanation is that this is just what it appears to be. Ime worked out in Portland this summer. He has positive history with people in this organization. He didn't get any good offers to go elsewhere. There's no harm in the Blazers bringing him into training camp under those circumstances nor is there harm in him accepting. This is the right percentage move for both parties. Udoka probably doesn't make the team but he might attract notice elsewhere. If he does make the team he's waiting for an injury or a trade to play.

We'll have to see how it works out. I have as much fondness for Udoka as the next guy and I'd not be sad to see him make the squad. He's another one of those players that you'd never regret having on your team. But I'm not expecting miraculous, or even steady, contributions even if that happens.

--Dave (blazersub@yahoo.com)

Around the Association: 2009-2010 Portland Trail Blazers - The Fire Keeps Burning

R Dizzle — Thu, 24 Sep 2009 19:51:00 -0000

Can't read their, can't read their, no, you can't read their Poker Face!

I must say, the Portland Trail Blazers might go down as my second favorite team. Why? They went through some troubled times a few years ago, broke down their team, brought in a new mentality, drafted really well, and now they're succeeding.

Sounds like a pretty ideal situation right? Realize your mistakes and then do something about it. Like make trades. Search for great young talent in the draft and then build upon them. Make it to the playoffs. Win a series and get into round 2. Sure, you might lose there, but you take a look back at your season and understand that your roster has plenty of room to grow unlike the team that just beat you. The old only get older. So you keep your roster and don't make too many drastic changes because you know that it'll soon be your time.

Why does that sound waaayyy too familiar as a Warriors fan? Hmm...maybe someone can answer that for me.

Whateves..R Dizzle will make you, jump jump!

The Old - "The Jail Blazers"

Instead of looking back at the 08-09 season, I thought it might be fun to take a gander at what i considered to be the funniest team ever assemblied. Not "ha-ha" funny but "OMG-this-is-terrible-I-hope-Dave-Chappelle-eventually-makes-a-skit-about-it-to-lighten-the-situation" funny.

From the years of mid-90's to the mid-00's, the Blazers saw...

Jermaine O'Neal (on his way to his prime) being traded for Dale Davis (way out of his prime)
The addition of Shawn Kemp (Twinkie-sized)
Addition of Rod Strickland leading to a first round exit first round of the 2001 playoffs
The hiring (and firing) of Mike Dunleavy Sr. (good move with the firing)
Added a registered sex offender - Ruben Patterson
Qyntel Woods pleaded guilty for staging dog fights in his house
Rasheed Wallace suspended for 7 games for threatening a referee
Zach Randolph sucker punched a teammate in practice (some things never change!)
Isiah Rider's arrest for marijuana possession
Rasheed Wallace's arrest for marijuana possession
Damon Stoudamire's arrest for marijuana possession
Qyntel Wood's arrest for marijuana possession

Guess the grass DOES grow differently in Oregon...

The Now - "They on Fire"

Just out of curiosity, have any of you guys had a look at the Blazers' roster lately?

Let's just say it's a bit stacked...

You've really go to be kidding yourself if you think this team isn't going to end in the top 4 of the Western Conference. Hate all you want on former #1 pick Greg Oden, but HE'S ONLY HAD ONE SEASON IN THE NBA. Plenty of room to improve. He was a beast in college and he WILL BE a beast in the NBA. Of course, who knows how long that will last since all 40 year old NBA players tend to be injury prone.

But hey, just for the heck of it, let's go down the list.

PG - Steve Black with free agent aquisition Andre Miller and Jerryd Bayless coming off the bench? Check.

SG - All-Star Brandon Roy with Rudy Fernandez coming off the bench? Check.

SF - Nicolas Batum with Travis Outlaw? Check.

PF - LaMarcus Aldridge and rookie Dante Cunningham.

C - Greg Oden followed by Joel Pryzbilla

Um...excuse you...this is young developing talent at its finest (forget that they're all on rookie contracts and the combination of guys won't last that long). This team is going to contend. I predict they'll end #3 in the West (Lakers, Spurs, then Blazers) and they'll make it to the Western Conference Finals..to get beat by the Fakers. I'm excited to watch them play and destroy the lower-end Western teams.

Ya ya, there was that whole Hedo Turkoglu thing..but I don't want to talk about that. Go to our RaptorsHQ if you want some science on that.

Want some proof?

Brandon Roy Mix (2008-2009) (via frederlk)

Like I said, this just goes to show what happens when a team

Realizes its mistakes
Does something about such as making trades
Searches for great talent in the draft
Builds upon them
Gets into the playoffs
Wins a series
Loses, but then takes a second to look back and realize that there is plenty of room to grow.
Does not break up their team
REALIZES THAT IT IS ALMOST THEIR TIME.

If only some other team could follow that philosophy...

For more coverage on the Portland Trail Blazers, hit up Blazersedge!

2009-2010 Around the Association

Introduction
Atlanta Hawks: Sorry, Mrs. Jackson. The Hawks are for real.
Boston Celtics: Sheed in Green + Another Answer
Charlotte Bobcats: They Do Exist
Chicago Bulls: Ring Around the Rose-y
Cleveland Cavaliers: Now or Never
Dallas Mavericks: The Curse of the Dampier
Denver Nuggets: If it ain't broke...
Detroit Pistons: The Return of the Bay Boys
Houston Rockets: Yao-ch!, that's gotta hurt
Indiana Pacers: A One Man Show
Los Angeles Clippers: Warriors South No More
Los Angeles Lakers: Big Brother, Little Brother
Memphis Grizzlies: Going Back to Vancouver
Miami Heat: Need to get the point
Milwaukee Bucks: Saving a few buck$
Minnesota Timberwolves: Donde esta Senor Rubio?
New Jersey Nets: The Year of the Yi
New Orleans Hornets: Two first names, one great point guard
New York Knicks: Is it summatime yet?
Oklahoma City Thunder
Orlando Magic: Are they Vinsane? You be the judge
Philadelphia 76ers: Are they (Elton) Brand New?
Phoenix Suns: Who knows?
Portland TrailBlazers
Sacramento Kings
San Antonio Spurs
Toronto Raptors
Utah Jazz
Washington Wizards
Rewind

Poll

How far do you think the Blazers are going to go this year?

Lottery

41 votes

First Round of the Playoffs

147 votes

Second Round of the Playoffs

300 votes

Western Conference Finals

236 votes

NBA Finals

96 votes

820 votes | Poll has closed

Defensive Improvement

Dave — Thu, 24 Sep 2009 07:04:32 -0000

When we did our "What One Thing Do the Blazers Need to Succeed?" survey the other day we got a lot of brilliant answers. Many revolved around Greg Oden. Some mentioned Andre Miller. But the most intricate discussion surrounded the team's defense. I'd like to explore that further, as I tend to agree that this could turn out to be the factor that defines whether the Blazers are darn good or legitimately great this coming season and beyond. Fast or slow, the offense is going to be more than fine with the current cast plus the addition of Andre Miller. Despite fielding some individually mediocre rebounders, as a whole the Blazers will be taken care of on the boards as long as Greg Oden and Joel Przybilla are around. Defense, not a traditional strong suit around these parts, has far more wiggle room. And if you're looking to be great, wiggle room is not the best characteristic to have.

This is not to say the Blazers are poor defensively. To the contrary, they racked up a fairly impressive defensive season last year. They were 11^th in defensive rating, 4^th in points allowed (thank you, slow pace, but it was part of the +5.3 point differential), 17^th in opponent field goal percentage, 18^th in opponent three-point percentage, and 4^th in free throws allowed (thanks again, slow pace fairy). By the metrics you could easily rate the Blazers in the high average defensive range. How much you think that needs to improve depends on your assessment of the offensive and rebounding strengths. We're not going to be that comprehensive yet. Suffice it to say that the Blazers will need to improve if they are to eke out those difficult-to-get extra wins above 54 and challenge for greatness and defense is the general category with the most room for improvement.

The Blazers were actually quite strong in their paint defense last season. Their design has been basic: deny the easiest shots no matter what the cost and make the opponent subsist on perimeter attempts. Anyone who remembers the halcyon days of Zach Randolph, Theo Ratliff, and Sebastian Telfair when the lane regularly parted with sweet sorrow can attest to the wisdom of such an approach.

The cost of vigilance in the key has been a reliance on scrambling and rotations outside. The oft-mentioned pick and roll schemes are an example. The Blazers put heavy pressure on their big men to get out and shadow opposing dribblers. You also see extra pressure on high-powered opposing penetrators and rotations away from distance shooters. You see a fair amount of zone-man switching and disguised defenses as well. These schemes are hardly unique to Portland, but they require considerable vision, knowledge, and timing...sometimes in rare supply on a team populated by young 20-somethings known for their offense.

The Blazers need to keep their interior defense strong while finding a better rhythm, and perhaps more individual responsibility, on the perimeter. Upon what (or whom) will the Blazers rely in order to achieve such improvement?

Having another year under their belts individually and as a team Portland should see some natural progression in their defensive reliability, if nothing else because of recognition. But aging alone won't make the decisive difference. Defense takes physical repetition. If you've been playing a certain way for years it's going to be hard to change that pattern even if your knowledge of the game improves. You actually have to start playing better in order for better play to get ingrained. Seeing where you should have gone above the screen doesn't help until you actually do and that process becomes instinctive. For that reason it's doubtful the Blazers will have improved leaps and bounds over the summer.

There's some hope that body development will also provide an edge. Nicolas Batum is a prime defender with room to grow physically. Martell Webster has an impressive physique as well. LaMarcus Aldridge may be stronger this season. That's the advantage of being young. You always hope there's more forthcoming.

Beyond that, the two names mentioned most often as providing possible edges are Oden and Miller. (Keep in mind we're not talking best defenders here, we're talking the best chances for providing improvement.)

Oden, assuming he remains healthy, should get a handle on defending the interior this season. That's his stronghold. His strength makes the most difference down low. He looked no more impressive last year than he did against the lumbering behemoth Yao Ming when Yao was playing with his back to the basket in the playoffs. That ought to continue. The obvious rub is that the Blazers have already been strong down there. What they really need from Oden is the mobility and awareness to get outside to impede an opposing wing and then back in when called for. Coupled with that comes the need for better decision making on when to take a foul or let a play go. Not coincidentally, these are the parts of Greg's game that will be the hardest to develop both in a physical and mental sense. Offensive rebounds? Pencil in Oden with an exclamation point. Show and recover? Better put a question mark.

Andre Miller is not a premier defender. He's a well-seasoned veteran who's seen approximately 92 billion screens in his career, which is the great hope. You don't expect him to stop opponents single-handedly. You want him to be able to help instead of getting rubbed off every time someone sneezes. He should be able to handle that. That should make the Blazers at least marginally better, causing a chain reaction by which less pressure is put on rotations, especially those involving Oden. That's the hope anyway.

But this is my point. When you're talking offense the Blazers are walking tall. When you're talking rebounding you can bank on production. When you're talking defense you're still leaning on question marks and hopes. Those question marks could straighten out and hopes could come to fruition, but it's generally true that when you start from that basis you're going to struggle. The Blazers shouldn't be worse, but you can't say definitively they're going to be better defensively next year.

This is the issue, more than any other except Oden's physical condition, that should have us holding our collective breath. In the end defense will probably demarcate the line between the first or second round of the playoffs and something more special. We'll have to see how things shake out.

--Dave (blazersub@yahoo.com)