According to the ESPN box-score (I don't have access to the game now), Greg came in at 9:19. To me, the Twin Towers made zero sense in a game where Yao ming is not scoring the basketball and Greg/Joel were doing fine on covering him. What I saw was a situation where the Rockets were doing well from the mid-long range jumpshot all game. That was on the defensive side of things. Offensively, both Oden and Joel cannot shoot midrange jump shots. Why would you have two guys like that, the Rockets will not play honest defense if they draw outside and if they are down on the block, they clog the middle. Just led to some very strange matchups...and at the time was quite puzzling. What ended up happening is that Also, when they are in somewhat of foul trouble, having them both in isn't the best move either because you have a situation where you may run out of leverage if they do foul. This is what I said in the game thread at the time: http://sportstwo.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2000760&postcount=444 What happened the next play when they had that midrange threat? Blake got an easy, uncontested layup because Aldridge's defender was out guarding Aldridge on the mid-range perimeter area instead of the low block. .
i am all for giving the rockets their due when they beat us because of them. you didn't hear me bitching about the officals or any of that other crap after game 1. they beat us that game fair and simple. tonight they didn't beat us. we beat ourselves from the get go and nate is a major factor in this beating. just how i see it.
A time out would have VERY LIKELY gotten a better shot than a rushed airball. They could have drawn a potential game-typing 3 at that time. Which time outs was he referring to, specifically? If you said that there was a TV timeout at about the 8 minute mark, why would Nate take a full about a minute later? To stop some kind of flow to the game?
If the 9:20 mark is the same point Yao came into the game, then that is correct. I haven't looked at box score, so I'm sure you're right. Your point about the next possession being successful makes me think that it was wise for Nate to use that timeout. I think we would all agree that that the second LMA was rested, it made more sense to have him in at PF as opposed to Joel or Greg.
Agree to disagree? Let's get them in game 4! Hopefully Nate makes all the right decisions, our players hit all their open shots and follow the gameplan, and the ball bounces our way on Sunday night.
I knew he had to take that timeout...he made a mistake and had to correct it. While the rockets may have only outscored them by one, the feel and flow of the game was quite bad...clogged lane.
The section you put in bold made no mention of the twin-tower lineup. All he is talking about is how Greg OR Joel are always in the game, so Yao can always be in the key. This entire time we've been talking about the twin tower lineup, and I have yet to see you mention that we shouldn't have either of them in the game.
IMO, the problems are exacerbated if both are in there. Both are there just to stop Yao..however, then we are missing a midrange shooter offensively while the middle is clogged up or the defenders can cheat a bit and help out on the wings. When the blazers are on defense, what good is it to protect the low post when the Rockets are not really running a low post offense? It leads to more spacing for the jump shooters.
You know why you think he had to take the timeout. You don't know if he took it because he thought the twin tower lineup was horrible (after being outscored by 1 point) or if LMA was finally rested and he wanted to get him in ASAP because he feels LMA is a better power-forward than Joel or Greg. I think you are mistaking the difference between "knowing" something and "thinking" something. You thought it was a bad lineup, and you think that is why he took the timeout. You nor I have any proof of why he took the timeout. I personally think it was to get his 2nd best player in the game who was getting his only 3 minutes of rest and was not a reflection of his dislike towards the Joel and Greg being on the floor together. I can't prove that I'm right, and likewise, you can't prove that you are right.
uhhh...yeah, we're relatively anonymous message board posters, we can only speculate on anything really. I thought it was assumed that everyone's post was an opinion, not a fact???? what, should I put some disclosre on every post that the words in my post cannot be proven...perhaps some kind of legal disclaimer? Please, its just casual sports talk.
I think we agree on this. I'm not defending the twin tower lineup either. I actually think our best offensive lineup would have LMA at the 5, pull Yao out of the key competely. I think having Greg or Joel is there allows Yao to stay in the key at all times, which is causing Roy and Aldridge tons of problems in the paint.
I'm still putting a lot of blame on Nate for these losses. The offense looked absolutely rank. The thing was, ESPN panned to him 2 or 3 times where he essentially told the Blazers they needed to stop going one-on-one..yet they weren't really listening....the execution was horrible. Its really sad that we only played one point guard the entire game in a game where the offense was stagnant. Travis Outlaw should not have gotten 11 shots in that game. Rudy Fernandez deserved a LOT more playing time... I just don't get Nate McMillian right now. I really don't. He seems to be getting severely outcoached here.
Message boards are full of both facts and opinions. The way you described your opinion came across to me as something you thought was fact, so I guess that is what I took objection to, especially since I didn't believe your opinion/fact to be true. I love your passion for your opinion, and more importantly, I love breaking down the game with someone such as yourself.
Is that's a player issue then? If Nate is telling them to do something, and the player is choosing to do another, how is that on the coach? If my teacher tells me 2+2=4, and then I take a test and say 2+2=3, is that the teachers fault? The teacher gave me all the information I need to do the right thing, but I failed to listen. The players know exactly what Nate is saying when he says don't go 1:1, so if they continue to do so, they should be the ones who are at fault. I guess this is where we are miles apart. I agree with more of the Utah philosophy where they tell incoming players that they are playing for Jerry Sloan, and if there is ever a conflict between the player and the coach, the player is the one who will be leaving. You seem to like the Atlanta Hawk philosophy of, if you (the player) doesn't respect the coach, we'll just keep changing coaches until we find one that has the respect of the players.
Likewise, I hate when we lose! I don't think I get as angry as you (referring to your OT thread), but it burns me for sure.
The thing is, he seems so set on his rotations, that even when they don't listen, he will not pull them. Even when a lineup doesn't make sense (i.e. Twin Towers), he'll throw it in there just to say he did. They were just taking god-awful shots in the first half, many weren't dropping. I would have loved to see what Sergio could do out there...Rudy only getting limited minutes was just sad. He was nailing all those 3s....he needs to be a bigger part of this team. I'm not on a fire nate bandwagon, but we can't give him these freebies when he can't get his house in order. You are measured by your results...and he needs to get past the first round either this year or next, or I am pretty certain he won't have a job in Portland after that. I like the guy and want him to succeed but he needs to step it up. I never expected 54 wins and maybe I'm expecting too much of the blazers...but fuck it, its the playoffs...win or go home. Perhaps the next game will be different but as I posted somewhere else here tonight to an older thread, he AVOIDED going over Game 1 tape at practice after that loss...rather focusing on "working hard"...and the problems come back. The blazers have to be more mentally ready than they have been. Slow starts, long periods of the game of not scoring and confused offense.
I really do understand what you are saying, and I think it's valid opinion, I just don't agree with you. Having played and coached, I understand the importance of set rotations. I know what it feels like to tell a team to do something over and over, and it seems like they understand it, they tell me they get it, but then come game time, one person, or a couple people screw it up. Then I get to hear someone in the stands say "why don't they work on their zone offense?" Guess what buddy, we worked on our zone offense for a freaking hour yesterday, and that is not how we ran it or taught it yesterday in practice. There are also instances where opposing coaches made great adjustments. I can only imagine at this level, you have the brightest coaches in the world, watching hours of film, and trying to take advantage of anything you might do. Sometimes another team has the personnel, experience, or talent that make you feel like you are helpless as a coach. And to your watching film of Game 1; they did end up watching film, just not the next day. They waited until before Monday's practice to go over film, so it's not like he ignored it completely. I read the same article you did, so I know why you think they never watched film. That's the problem with only reading one news outlet, it sometimes they are wrong, but you don't know any better than to believe them. From there, you take some professional journalists misinformation, hold it against the coach, and consequentially look misinformed yourself.
well, they came out with the same energy and many of the same mistakes, so it was easy to assume they didn't learn anything.
