I'm ready for Nate to go.  The lack of chemistry, the horrendous offense, the endless string of meaningless coaching truisms . . . all these were bad enough.  But, to be honest, I would take back Jarrett Jack and/or Jerryd Bayless over Armon Johnson.  What is the guy bringing besides silly turnovers and forced looks?  I don't see it.  Nate leaves him in WAY too long when Andre is the only guy capable of running any semblance of an active, dynamic offense.  In fact, from what I've seen, our best performances this year so far have come when Roy has been out with injury and Nate relied on Andre to come up with something.  Andre has more on-court coaching smarts than Nate does from the sideline.  I'm fed up.

Okay, now that I'm done venting, I'll ask, "What's wrong with Armon?"  Was something good happening this summer that isn't happening now?  Why did he seem to show so well in summer league and preseason and fall apart now?  I distinctly remember reading that he was handling the ball well and minimizing turnovers.  Also, I had the impression he was playing confidently on offense.  Now, he looks confused and desperate--kind of like the whole team during these fourth quarter breakdowns.

As the immortal Tommy Wiseau says in the cult classic film, The Room, "I'm fed up with this WORLD!!"

A note on Nate McMillan: up until this year, I believed the Blazer's rudimentary offense to be a necessity for a young team in need of a simple, reliable system.  But this year has me rethinking that--a veteran point guard on board who knows how to push the tempo, set up post plays, and facilitate off-the-ball movement; a roster (absent Brandon Roy) fully capable, even ideal, for an uptempo game; potentially insanely good distance shooters to run off of screens (Rudy and Martell)---and yet, here we are again relying on the same two-trick dog and pony show: pick and roll (and it's derivations) and iso's for Aldridge and Roy.  Young teams can handle a real offense, Nate.  Every good high school team does it.  Every good college team does it.  Why in the world aren't the Blazers doing it?  We are eeking by on sheer talent alone right now, for lack of any semblance of fluid, creative, or dynamic offense.  If you heard Kenny Vance on the 5th Quarter last night, you'd know he agrees with me.  He called making Miller a starter a farce and a facade, blaming it all on Nate and Roy's "love affair" with Blake.  I think that's part of the problem, but Blake is just playing the game the way Nate wants it played.  I was one of Nate's biggest supporters until this year, but this offense is terrible.  My JR HIGH teams had better offensive sets.

The Rose Garden will be bumping this year--there's little doubt about that.  However, in the early portion of last season, there was some good discussion on both TrueHoop and BlazersEdge about improving the fan atmosphere at NBA games.  I brought up the subject of the team-sanctioned BlazerManiacs, as well as the self-proclaimed BlazerNation.

Link:  http://www.blazersedge.com/2007/12/20/162230/11

Anyone who has witnessed the Timbers Army or seen European football games knows the potential for unified fan enthusiasm in the NBA is not being fully realized.  This is particularly true of early season, off-night games with small-market opponents, the early parts of the 1st and 2nd halves, and blowouts.  Even teams with legions of fans and huge national media exposure (like the F*kers) have miserable fan participation.  The Blazer fans are in a league of their own in terms of vocal support and strong attendance, but more can be done.

I'd like to hear from the Blazers organization on steps that can be taken this year to encourage greater fan participation.  Could BE arrange an interview with someone in the front office? 

The BlazerManiacs section is a great idea, but as a season ticket holder last year, I didn't see enough evidence of it's existence.  Maybe it was just too small.  If they gave away/auditioned 10 or 20 Maniac seats last season, it should be 100 this season.  Heck, they don't even need to give the tickets away.  Just create a system for auditioning/joining the club, then offer a BlazerManiac discount for a reserved section in a highly visible location in the arena.  If it grew too popular, then just allow fans to enter a lottery for discounted single-game tickets in the Maniacs section a few weeks in advance of each game.  Administratively, this should not be too difficult.  The incessant cheering/chanting/energy would also add significantly to the Blazers' already substantial home court advantage. 

Finally, I'd like to hear from fellow BEdgers with suggestions for hyping up our newly expanded Spanish contingent.  The "ole, ole, ole, ole" chants for Sergio last year were very good, but I think we could improve on that.  Any ideas?

Last year, we learned a lot about many of our young players.  In particular, I felt we gained a much clearer sense of both Travis Outlaw and Jarrett Jack.  Though there is certainly room for debate, here's what I've concluded on these two:

Travis Outlaw: highly talented, good team fit, likely on the cusp of an absolute break-out year, potential for significant improvement still.  My conclusion: DON'T TRADE

Jarrett Jack: great teammate, fun personality, disciplined worker, but highly erratic emotionally, unable to distribute effectively on fast breaks (though he finishes individually well), turnover prone.  We have probably seen a good glimpse of what he can do and will be throughout his career: a very solid 4th-7th option on a contender.  My conclusion: GOOD TRADE for the right piece given logjam at point

So my remaining debate lies with who we'd miss more and/or regret giving up when they blossom into the big time?

Sergio or Webster

I absolutely loved both in flashes last year, and certainly both could disappear at times, as well.  However, Sergio stands at a significant disadvantage in that he averaged far fewer minutes than Webster and never fully gained McMillan's blessing.  It's very hard to say what Sergio could do with a regular 15 mpg and a steady green light from the coach.  As a point guard myself, I know that a hamstrung, looking-over-his-shoulder PG tends to disappear for fear of making mistakes.  Sergio can't grow in this model. 

Webster did a great job on many occasions and showed significant improvement over year 1.  Will he continue to stabilize and diversify his game (particularly in getting to the rim and dropping the hot-hammer)?

So my poll question remains:  Who would break your heart more if traded?

Who was that birthday-cake-to-the-face really meant for last night at the Blazers/Wiz game?  It certainly couldn't have been the elderly woman who ended up with it.  Could it??  What a tragedy for Blaze.  For those of you who weren't there, sometime in the third quarter, I believe, the PA began announcing the evening's birthdays.  First up was the name of some guy I've since forgotten.  Big screens all cut to Blaze, in the stands, with a birthday cake.  He starts ascending the 200 level, headed towards an older woman who's cheering enthusiastically.  Suddenly, very very suddenly, Blaze appears to trip, and the woman is completely covered in birthday cake after a direct hit to the face.  It seemed that he really did trip.  And the tension in the air the second we all realized what happened made it clear that was not the intended outcome.  But whose birthday was it?  Her husband, sitting beside her (who could clearly be seen mouthing "What the ?????" on the jumbo-tron in th aftermath).  Let's hope the Blazers hooked that lady up with some freebies after ruining her night and embarrassing her in front of 20,000.  But sympathy aside, that was REALLY funny.  Particularly, in the replay, seeing the poor woman cheering and waving her arms so energetically as Blaze approached.  She was so happy right until the end.  And then, who would have ever thought that a guy in a mascot suit, with a huge perma-grin smile could ever look so ashamed and embarrassed.  After apologizing and feebly trying to help clean her up, Blaze retreats down the steps with slumping shoulders and heads directly for the locker room.  OUCH.  I hope this ends up on YouTube as a study in our ability to both laugh and sympathize simultaneously.

I work in an office near the World Trade Center downtown.  Since today has been another of those beautiful, spring-like sunny days, I took a late lunch to walk to waterfront park and get some coffee.  On the way to the park, leaving the World Trade Center Starbucks, behind a window to my right I see Nate McMillan sitting in a barber's chair, getting his hair trimmed.  I did a double-take, then waved.  He smiled and waved back.  

After thinking about the encounter for a few minutes while I drank my coffee in Waterfront Park, I wrote a message on a Starbucks napkin for Nate, then went back and held it to the barber shop window.  I wrote, "Good Technical.  Kobe is a Punk."  He and the barber smiled and Nate waved again.  Made my day.

There was substantial dissent generated when I posted a "We Want Blake" diary over the summer before we acquired him.  In particular, many questioned my assertions of his shooting abilities.  Please refer to his performance last night (and cumulative performance throughout this run) as irrefutable evidence.  This guy is a very good point guard, AND shooter. http://www.blazersedge.com/story/2007/7/2/184839/4483

Hey all,

I need more info on the exuberant group of youngsters in section 321 (I believe) who are shouting their brains out at every home game, sometimes even drowning out the cheesy PA cheerleading.  They take up 2 or 3 rows in the very back of 321 and are well on their way to becoming the Blazer equivalent of the Timbers Army.  My question is, why can't the organization get these kids down front somewhere?  Or why aren't they sitting under the Blazer Maniacs banner?  There are no maniacs under that banner; they're all in 321!  The best part of it all is exiting the building with this group, particularly in the stairwell.  As they chant "Blazer Nation" or "We got 9 in a row", the joy is truly contagious.  Let's give this group some recognition!  And let's have them share their secret affiliation.  College friends?  A secret society of Blazer believers?  The Timbers Army finding off-season expression for their PDX sports devotion?  I've got to know.  By they way, they sit approximately below the "Coach's Corner" banner, but I highly doubt this is Nate's group of give-away tickets.  Either way, why aren't we hearing more about them?  Their cheers are audible throughout the arena and their number seems to be growing.

In my mind, there is no way the point guards are to blame for our losses.

In reference to the earlier Steve Blake diary, I really cannot see any way in which Steve Blake, specifically, is hindering us.  I think the problem at point guard is due to a lack of both confidence and clarity.  And that is directly derived from Nate's failure to invest in one primary, go-to point guard.  As I see it, the reason Steve Blake is passing on some open shots is because he's trying to stay with the offense Nate is demanding (high pick and rolls and iso's for LMA, Roy, and Outlaw).  Both home games this week, far too often we saw repeated attempts at high pick and rolls in a single possession that went nowhere, ending with a player trapped beyond the three point line with no passing options.  Because that was the whole offensive plan.  Think about it: other than inbounds sets, how often do you see away-from-the-ball screens on this team?  If they're there, I think the players must just be running through them without really rubbing off their man.  The ones I've seen are few and far between.  (In general, we need a lot more attacking the basket, as well.)

Based on what I saw of Blake during the abysmal '05-'06 season, he can score and shoot quite competently when he knows that's part of the plan.  But Nate has not asked Steve to be a scorer in this offense.  So, as a result, Steve is shooting tentatively.  That's all there is to it.  I'm not a big Dwight Jaynes fan, but I have to agree with his article today regarding Nate's endless shuffle at point and the lack of an organized offense or defense.  I think that given the opportunity (by this I mean 30 mins/game every night and not being criticized for every mistake or pulled after 1 turnover) and green light to score, Blake, Rodriguez, and Green could all be very quality, capable starting point guards for us.  I'm convinced that Jack, on the other hand, is really a shooting guard/finisher.  

Another problem the point guards are experiencing is that we are nominally moving towards being a "running team" but none of the necessary infrastructure is there.  Here's what a running team does: designate two guys to crash the boards hard EVERY play (the 4 and 5), they get the ball immediately to the point guard, and the 2 and 3 should already be out running the sidelines and ready for the outlet.  And we're simply not doing this.  Even after made shots, the ball shouldn't touch the floor.  Pryz takes it from the net, gets it immediately in to the 1, who should make a forward pass before he crosses the half court line.  This almost never happens.

Despite the argument that Roy is not a run and gun finisher, I do believe we have the personnel to play this style.  But Nate has to instill/enforce it, instead of asking the team to jog it down and set up another high pick and roll, leading to an elbow isolation.  It's turning into the Rasheed/Z-Bo/isolation-ville fiasco all over again.

As some of you certainly have seen, today's (10/10/07) issue of the Willamette Week (pg. 37) includes a fun proposition.  Submit a letter and your Z-Bo memorabilia to WWeek and they'll ship it off to New York sports bars, as a way of thanking them for taking him off our hands.  For your added satisfaction, they'll also have a reporter in New York documenting the hand-off and reactions.  Send submissions to:

Zach-Off!
c/o Willamette Week
2220 NW Quimby St.
Portland, 97210

Sounds like fun to me!

Six weeks ago I wrote a diary titled "We Want Blake."  Several people replied with doubts about Steve being a fit with our team and our finances.  And several questioned his talent.  After today's Blake article linked on TrueHoop from the Baltimore Sun (http://www.baltimoresun.com/sports/basketball/bal-sp.blake12aug12,0,4108438,full.story) and his re-signing with the Blazers, it's interesting to look back and see if opinions have changed in the last six weeks.  Here's the diary I started six weeks ago.  And I'll include the same poll below.  Still want Jack or Sergio to start over Blake?  I'd like to know if opinions have changed substantially.  Does Taureen Green have a shot in hell of making this roster?

http://www.blazersedge.com/story/2007/7/2/184839/4483

Here are a few of the comments from the July diary in case you'd rather not follow the link.

------------------------------------------------

i don't think we want too many players from
our losing days. Almost all of them sucked. Blake played the season we only won 21 games, as did Pryzbilla and friends. We don't need any of those guys back. The only reason we have fond memories of these guys is because everyone else sucked and Blake may have looked good. Again, thanks to Oden, we're a team with championship aspirations within the next 3-4 years, Blake is not a pg you win championships with. I'd much rather just stick with Jack and see what happens.

Having a 3 pg lineup never works. Evidenced by the Jack, Telfair, Blake trio we had. You can really only have 2 pgs on a team, each with defined roles.

by ssa400 on Mon Jul 02, 2007 at 05:33:48 PM PDT

Steve blake
doesn't have a place here anymore.  KP said that we are building and developing players that fit in our timeline to win a championship.  JJ fits, blake doesn't.

Steve Blake is WAAAY overated, especially by Oregonians.  Because he was a mediocre defender, he became the BEST defender on the Blazers cause the rest of our guards stunk.

by BlazerBandit on Mon Jul 02, 2007 at 05:45:43 PM PDT

agreed
You want Blake is more appropriate.  While he is a fine point guard, he is nothing too special.  I like him, but I would rather see Sergio grow into the starting role eventually.

by clonigro on Mon Jul 02, 2007 at 06:05:05 PM PDT

I don't want Blake.
Why would we want to blow the mid-level exception on a player that can not play the lateral d, ie can not keep the opposing guard from driving to the basket, who is not as good as JJ and does not have the potential of Sergio?

by mrwonderfull on Mon Jul 02, 2007 at 11:48:04 PM PDT

I wouldn't have minded Blake
before the draft, but SIX point guards???  No can do.

--Dave

by Dave on Tue Jul 03, 2007 at 01:09:17 AM PDT

The cult stars post got me thinking about the bygone days of Rip City greatness.  In particular, I was reflecting on the 88-92 era, when the box top was the hairstyle of choice for celebrities and NBA ballers alike.  From the Fresh Prince of Bel-Air to Kid'n'Play and even Vanilla Ice, that hairstyle was everywhere.  And anyone at my elementary/jr. high with the right genetics to rock that style (and the appropriate shaved lines) was automatically made.  So, that got me thinking about the many Blazer greats (and not-so-greats) who joined the box top posse.  Please weigh in on whose hairstyle you most admired.  In the immortal words of Vanilla Ice, "Yo, VIP, let's kick it!"

I'd love to see Steve Blake back with the team this year.  However, some of my friends have told me I have an unjustifiably high opinion of him.  But I insist that in the dark days of the 05-06 season, Steve's consistency, ball handling, and clutch shooting were a rare bright spot.  Even though we know they won't all be here come November, can we feasibly make a place for Steve on our new 5 point guard roster?  And if we can, does it make sense?  I love a rotation of Sergio, Blake, and Jack.  And if we had to sacrifice one, I'd take Blake over Jack as a superior clutch shooter and more natural "pure" handler/distributor.

The Rocky Mountain News reported that Blake met with Mark Warkentein from the Nuggets front offce in Portland yesterday. http://www.rockymountainnews.com/drmn/nba/article/0,2777,DRMN_23922_5611843,00.html

Anyone know any rumors about him meeting with the Pritchard?  And has Steve been working out at the Blazers' practice facility with old friends?

Also, any Taureen Green enthusiasts out there?  (I've never followed the NCAA too closely--too many teams to stay on top of it all.)  Does Green have a shot at cracking the regular season roster?  

Please share your predictions for the big man.  Will riding the bench behind Oden hurt his confidence indefinitely?  Was last year's poor performance attributable simply to the groin injury or indicative of a deeper lack of confidence/assertiveness?  Will Pryz be around next year at all?  If he stays, any chance Pryz can thrive as a 15-20 mpg super sub, a la Alonzo or McDyess?

Assuming that Francis is bought out, Miles retires or rides the bench, and Magloire is allowed to sign elsewhere, who do you see as the stat leader in each category?  I'm curious where fans expect the ball to be going next year.  How many plays will we run for Oden?  As a rookie, can Oden be expected to fill Zach's 20-10 profile?  If not, who will pick up the slack.

My picks:

scoring leader: Roy - 19.5 ppg; Oden - 18 ppg; Aldridge - 15 ppg

rebound leader: Oden - 13 rpg; Aldridge - 10 rpg; Frye - 8 rpg

assists leader: Jack - 6 apg; Rodriguez - 5.5 apg

3 point percentage: ??

FT percentage: ??

minutes per game: ??

Any predictions?

Though we don't know what will go down in the coming weeks, assuming we resign Ime, how much is he now worth?  Should we resign him at all?

I say emphatically, yes, resign him.

As for how much . . . no idea.  I don't know the CBA stipulations well enough.  Please share what you see as an appropriate and legally feasible offer for Ime, if one is made at all.

3 years, 7 million?

Two issues from Canzano's "Big Picture Didn't Include Randolph" article today jumped out at me.  First, Zach made plenty of poor choices during his time in Portland.  And his style of play was incongruent with the team's direction.  Canzano should have focused on these issues instead of opening with the anecdotal, anonymous, and fairly personal criticism of Zach's home life in Stafford.  Smacked of a cheap parting shot, to me.  Especially since Zach, by nearly all accounts, made a very concerted and successful effort this year to step up his game, play with the team, and clean up his public image.  Don't get me wrong--I'm no ZBo apologist.  I'm so glad he's been traded.  But Canzano could have been more tactful, if only for the sake of keeping Zach from forever feeling like a media scapegoat in Portland.

Second, Canzano cites a demand from a prominent Blazer player as the catalyst for the Zach trade.  I haven't seen this reported anywhere else.  Is it safe to assume this was Brandon?  Or Przybilla?  I'd like to know who you think stepped up and made the demand.

Though trading Zach was an imperative, I've yet to hear a good argument as to why Jones and Dickau were included.  Did Isaiah demand these two?  If so, why?  I don't know enough about New York's frontcourt needs, but this seems random and unnecessary.  I'm feeling really bad for the way things have turned out for these two hometown guys.  They fit in with the culture, seemed willing to sacrifice personal glory for team success, and have both shown the ability to produce when given the opportunity.  I got the sense Jones would have given up his first born to stay here and be part of our future.  Now I'm dying for the trade moratorium to pass and KP to bring some resolution.  There has to be some justification for dropping two solid support guys to bring on a declining, moody Steve Francis.  Am I the only one upset by this?