1. What the Dallas game proved: Felton will win you one game to make up for the five he lost.

2. On a fast break Felton will (pick one) a. dribble off his foot. b. driibble off his ankle. c. dribble off his knee.

3. Dishing on a fast break to his big man Felton will (pick one) a. Hit him on his foot. b. hit him on his ankle. c. Hit him on his shinbone. d. Toss the rock into the second row. e. dribble into a crowd and do one of a-d or politely hand the ball over to one or two of four defenders.

4. When playing defense, Felton's man will beat him by. (choose one or any combination of two). a. going left. b. going right. c. jumping over him. d. going between his legs. e. using a screen. f. sticking out his tongue at him.

5. When the Blazers are behind and need a good play Felton will (choose one) a. Throw up a brick. b. Throw up a brick. c. Throw up an ill-timed, ill-advised, shot.

6. At any crucial point in the game Felton will do any and all of the things listed above.

7. When on ball pressure is required Felton will (pick one): a.Go under the screen. b. Say 'Hi' to his mom to the TV camera. c. Ask a team-mate: Which guy is mine? d. Tell a team-mate, 'I'm not really into this...How about I let my man through and you guard him and I'll stand around and watch.'

8. Anatomy question: Is Felton's head attached to his body, or is this merely an illusion, and it is floating above his body in roughly the right position, but is not actually connected to it?

Imagine, all you ratballers, having the athletic gifts Felton has and abusing them this way...

My expectations are lower for the Blazers based upon their play, and I don't expect them to improve any time soon. Here's the deal.

1. The run the same few, and it is a few, offensive sets. Thus they are quite predictable and easy to defend.

2. A typical set shows initial player movement, which then stops. Often the ball stops also. Many plays end up with a forced jumper with no rhythm. THE BALL DOES NOT MOVE!

3. It's not unusual for no play to develop at all.

4. I find it difficult to think of a really good team that does not have a really good point guard. The closest I can come is the Lakers with Fisher, who has generally be a little more than adequate...although he has high basketball intelligence...needless to say the 'other guard' more than makes up for his weaknesses. How can I have high expectations for a team that does not have a point guard who should be starting on a decent NBA team?

5. On defense there is no pressure on the ball. The defense allows the other team to move the ball at will, allows players to get to their spots, and many times allows players to take wide open shots. The disaster last night in Denver was just the lateste example. How many times was there no coverage on the shooter?

6. For long stretches of many games, these players do not 'leave it on the court.' They play token offense and token defense, It appears their heads are not in the game, that they are just playing basketball, just playing around, but not really focused on winning or working hard. I believe it is at least as much lack of focus and effort as talent that is responsible for many of their losses. This team lacks character...And it is absolutely unable to step it up in the last five minutes. There are stretches where they play well, and even games where they play well, but there are too many times when they bury themselves so deep they cannot dig themselves out. It almost looks masochistic, the way they stumble through a first half, make a belated run in the third, and then finally fold.

I don't know who to blame...Nate's lack of strategy, his leadership, Aldridge's lack of leadership, the players in general...it just seems that the whole operation....sucks. It looks like they have the 'talent' to be a decent play-off team, but the way they actually play - no way!

Who is the last decent point guard to play for the Portland Trailblazers. I have to go all the way back to Terry Porter, who had great skills in all aspects of the game, extremely high basketball intelligence, and an overwhelming desire to compete and win. I remember a signature triple overtime win against the Mavs, where Clyde and Terry sucked it up again and again, never gave up, and finally got the win. Character, yessir! Some people think Strickland was a real point guard, but, Strickland had a habit of coughing up the ball at just the wrong time...a habit he developed early:) Honestly, I can't think of a first rate point guard the Blazers have had since Terry...Can you?

It's been a season where, at times, the Blazers looked like they could really compete and beat anyone (LA, Dallas wins at home), and at other times - too many of those - where the team didn't bring it (early season losses in the fourth quarter to OKC and many other fourth quarter flops).  The team never really developed an identity, and never got consistent outside shooting.  The parts don't seem to fit.  Everyone knows you can have good, or great, players and not have a team.  Barkeley never won a championship even though in his time he was one of the best...Neither did Elvin Hayes, a great center. The 76-77 Blazers were a well oiled machine: only one true all star, a really good power forward (maybe all star), and a bunch of role players.  But they played the kind of team basketball the old Celtics were famous for.  When that team got you down by 10, they kept up the pressure, next thing you knew, you were down by 20 - like OKC in game five against Denver in the first quarter. Our Blazers started game 6 the same way, only, after building a good lead on hustle, pressure and driving to the basket (and hitting a few threes), took the foot off the gas, settled for jumpers, and soon found themselves in a familiar dogfight.  It's been such a disappointing 4 years, so much promise, so much work overcoming adversity, and yet, not getting over the hump to move up a notch.  I'd say the team has done well considering the injuries, but not well when you look at their potential upside against how they played.  By the end, even thought I still wanted to win, I must confess I was also thinking, 'I hope Dallas just puts us out of our misery.'

So, unlike Tuesday night when the Blazers played like they were on downers, last night was a treatfest. For the first four minutes the Blazers settled for mid range jumpers, sinking one, and were down 10-4. They looked afraid of the Laker bigs, afraid to go inside.  After a timeout - thank you Nate - they slashed and burned to the rim, a melody (sorry, mixed metaphor) they played the rest of the night.  I mean, they were committed (see my previous post 'committment...and'. Wallace, Batum and Matthews feasted at the rim, the Blazers got all the loose balls, hands on tons of passes, and lo and behold, the Laker defense looked like a sieve.  The hustle board read: fast break points, Portland 16, Lakers, 0...no typo there. This was perhaps Miller's best quarterbacking game of the season. Some of his alley-oop passes were merely spectacular, some of his dishes more than amazing. On one defensive rebound, it was 5 Blazers surrounding Gasol, so fearsome were the Lakes that Portland would run out on them they were all back on defense...yes, these are our Blazers I'm talking about. Come to find out, L-train is so big, fast and athletic that Miller can merely launch the rock in the direction of the rim and LaMarcus will beat everyone to it - Ka-boom! Who knew that the Laker defense was slow..that the Laker team is, actually, slow.  You can outrun and outpressure them.  Remember this was LaMarcus against Bynum, Odom and Gasol.  Our other 'bigs' were Nic and Gerald.  Really, this game belongs to Wallace, because it is his intensity at everything everywhere all the time that marked the character of this game and pushed the Blazers to, well, push.  Nice job, team.

I was at the game tonight. The Blazers lost primarily because of lack of commitment, and secondarily, because of  poor coaching.  But it's the lack of commitment that has reared its ugly head periodically this season that has soured me on this team.  Some nights they just go through the motions, and this was one of those nights...which is why my group is not renewing next season...I'm still a fan, but its been too many disappointments and then not playing bxxls out every night that has gotten to me.

As for tonight's game, why wouldn't we use our strengths to exploit their weaknesses?  If I was planning to play the Warriors, I'd post our bigger, slower guards up all night long, bring our bigs out, and if there was single coverage, take it to the rack...If doubles came, hit cutters slashing to the basket.  This would also slow the game and mean more ball control, so it takes advantage of the Warrior's weaknesses.  Just an afterthought: Why, in a million years, would anyone ever even contemplate going under a pick playing against Curry or Ellis?

Nuf said,

Diffident

I love watching Wesley, Rudy and LaMarcus play together....It's more fun than I've had since the Drexler era.  I am not a fan of the Bird-McHale-Parrish brand of basketball, even tho' they won a whole lot of games.  I liked the old Issel led Nuggets, and today's Jazz.  Even the insane Warriors of a couple years ago, and of course the Suns - everyone's moving all the time...To me, basketball is most beautiful to watch when played in Brownian motion.  Watching the Roy-led Blazers, well, BRoy was fun to watch, but the other four guys spent a lot of time watching him too. Sure, LaMarcus can pick and pop, and it's pretty in its own way, but don't you just love Rudy driving up the middle and L-train rolling to the hoop??? I mean, we have found LaMarcus' inner self, and he's a beast!  Why have we rarely seen this before?  It's the BRoy style of play that has hidden this little gem.  You can't have BRoy operating in the lane and LaMarcus clogging it up, now, can you?  It's only been a few games, but Rudy and Wesley LOVE to run - and, I think, so does LaMarcus.  There's been so much commentary the past week about LaMarcus, but i think Rudy has been the ignition, and Wesley helps keep the defense honest.

Dear Brandon,

Whether you play for another 15 years or another 15 days, you should always feel good about this: You mark the end of the Jailblazer era and the return of the Walton tradition - a team that works hard, plays together, and plays clean on AND OFF the court.  While basketball is your profession, it's not your life.  As long as you can do it at an NBA level that meets your standards, wonderful.  Whenever the day comes when you can't, well, that's just the way it is.  I was a gym rat and when my body gave up, it took me two years really of grieving before I was able to move on.  After years of just working out, and feeling like I was a bull let out to pasture, I started playing ping pong - my major in college if you base it on what I spent the most time doing - and am now, at 68, playing competitively at the Blitz Ladd's Addition tavern and loving it...It is my last sport:(  Basketball is an incredibly beautiful sport to play and watch.  I think the NBA athletes are the most highly skilled of any athletes in any sport.  Go for it as long and as hard as you can, and then, give it up and move on...I hope long in the future, but whatever it is, it is.

My best to you,

Miller has gotten a lot of compliments for keeping this team going during all the injuries, and a lot of flack for running a stagnant offense.  I must say, watching Utah, for example, I think to myself, 'Why don't we do that?'  I love a motion offense with multiple picks and cuts.  Watching the Blazers, they seem to run a set and if nothing happens, just jack one up - roy or miller usually, with time running out.  Of course anything outside of 15 feet is beyond miller's range.  I remember Bobby Gross, who never stopped running, or Miller with the pacers or rip with detroit.  Fernandez is the only Blazer like that.

My other complaint is what I'd call 'rigidity'.  It was pretty clear early the other night in denver that webster was in a zone...When a player goes in a zone I'd like to see McMillan call his number.  I think McMillan sticks to his game plan too much, through thick and thin.  I'd like to see him coach more flexibly.

I know Nic has started late this year, but given what he is doing, shouldn't he be in this conversation? He guards the best player on the opposing team; his offense is incredibly efficient; he plays great man-to-man and help defense. Tonight he was the only Blazer who could put the screws on Turkalu...and, as recently published on this web site, his offensive numbers are off the charts....At least, he should get the game ball tonight:)

I would start Miller and Webster at guard, Batum at small forward, Aldridge at PF and Howard at center.  It's a big lineup except at center, and should help. I'd post Miller all day long and run the offense off of his posts. I'd run Webster around the court like a Bobby Gross clone, give him double picks  and screens, and give him the green light. I'd have a three guard lineup in the second team - Bayless, Blake and Fernandez, and run like a gazelle with a lion on its tail.

So, a few weeks ago I commented on how much I loved Andre Miller in the post...Now Nate's been posting both Andre and Roy down low, and, how sweet it has been!  I was at the Milwaukee game and you could see that Andre was being used so effectively.  When he posts, single coverage is not enough, and when the double comes he sets up other players...He's a junkyard dog!  On the same post I commented on how multifaceted I thought Webster could be if we asked him to...How's my man been?!  He's done everything - more actually, than even I thought he could. He is tremendously athletic - has the perfect body for basketball - and now, with opportunity, and confidence growing, we are seeing what he's really capable of.

Fun, huh?:)

This was a finely coached game. Only three of the normal rotation players available, what do you do for offense?  Nate's got two big guards and he posts them all night long.  It's our only match up advantage.  Then, drive to the basket and sit on the foul line.  The result: a game slowed down to Blazer pace...Hard to run when you're taking the ball out of bounds after post-up hoops - buckets or short rebounds - or after foul shots.  I love Miller on the block..l remember a game he played against us with Denver where he posted Steve up in the fourth quarter for about 15 points.  When he attacks the basket he still sees the court...I hate it when he comes down the court, dribbles a couple times and then just shoots...lazy basketball.  He didn't do much of that last night, though.

As well as Miller and Roy played, I'd give the game ball to Webster.  Yes, it was Roy's game, but Webster a. had to cover players smaller and faster than he is, and then b. rebound against guys bigger than he is.  I can see Nate telling him what he wanted him to do, and Webster just stepped up.  He is such an incredibly talented kid, I'd like to see him get more offensive responsibility - run him off picks, set up double screens for him.  I'd like to see his offense established early in the game, opening up the court for everyone else.  I also think, if we rely on him more he'll get more confident and better.  I don't think we've seen anything like a ceiling for him...yet.  It was a great game, off to a 1-11 start, and then playing with steady determination.  Again, kudos to the Blazer bench, to Roy's leadership and skills, to grit and determination, and to Nate

I know it's only two games, but what do y'all think about Andre? I was unimpressed at last night's Denver game. He didn't move the ball particularly well, and of more concern, he didn't finish well at all - twice he was at the rim and did not convert in the 4th quarter.  I know McMillan experimented briefly with Roy at the point and Rudy at the 2, and it didn't go particularly well, but I'd like to see a real experiment of this starting guard lineup...After all, Roy already essentially plays the point for 1/3 of the game: the 4th quarter, and any time during the game when the Blazersare stalled and need some offense.

Continue reading this post »