I hope this doesn't mean tonight's starters become permanent

Discussion in 'Portland Trail Blazers' started by B-Roy, Nov 6, 2009.

Moderators: 6

Moderators

  1. BrianFromWA
  2. Chris Craig
  3. Darkwebs
  4. Ed O
  5. PtldPlatypus
  6. SlyPokerDog
Page 2 of 2
  1. Boob-No-More

    Boob-No-More Why you no hire big man coach?

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2008
    Messages:
    19,094
    Likes Received:
    22,763
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Bingo! If you're going to go with a three guard line-up you better have a big man behind them to protect the basket and control the boards.

    BNM
     
    Boob-No-More, Nov 7, 2009
    #21
  2. axs88

    axs88 Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2008
    Messages:
    651
    Likes Received:
    28
    Trophy Points:
    28
    I think Blake could do well in the backup backcourt with Rudy. Rudy can play like a (very) poor-man's Roy and create, and Blake can spot up.
     
    axs88, Nov 7, 2009
    #22
  3. Denny Crane

    Denny Crane It's not even loaded! Staff Member Administrator

    Joined:
    May 24, 2007
    Messages:
    72,978
    Likes Received:
    10,673
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Never lost a case
    Location:
    Boston Legal
    I remember posting in some thread during the pre-season that the Blazers should play 3 guards. The light bulb seems to have gone off over Nate's head and you're seeing the results.

    A lot of teams play three guards, or they'll counter a team playing three guards with three guards. I've watched it for years with the Bulls, who used to play Duhon, Gordon, and Hinrich together for long stretches. The results for the Bulls were somewhat surprising, as they were near the top in team defense for several seasons while winning 47 and 49 games.

    Kirk Hinrich guarded SFs a lot of the time, and Luol Deng often guarded guys like Kobe while the guards guarded forwards. Roy is bigger and can do it better; he's a better player at everything, period.

    When I made my comment/suggestion, I was merely looking at the team roster and saw that this is best suited for the team's personnel. It's not unreasonable to play 1 guard and 3 forwards, too, but the Blazers don't have a problem guarding forwards, they get killed by quickish guard types. Three guards gives Nate the flexibility of choosing the defensive match ups against those types of teams.

    Steve Blake isn't out there to play PG. He's there to play co-PG, or combo guard. His job is to be a 3pt threat, handle the ball some, and to defend guys that Miller can't or shouldn't. You can't have Outlaw or Webster guarding those guys, that's why they're not in the game instead of Blake. You also saw last night, the assist to basket ratio was huge - thanks to three PG types setting the tempo and using their ballhandling/passing skills.

    Another thing about the 3 guard lineup is that you don't have to play it full time. If the opponent solves it, it's no biggie to sub in a real forward for one of the guards. Certainly the 2nd unit minutes aren't 3 guards much of the time.

    Anyhow, you're seeing that Miller is still pretty good for his age. He's fine as a PG on offense, but needs some cover on defense. The offense is quite potent - imagine if Roy had a typical game last night!

    As for Oden, it looks like Nate is pulling another trick out of Skiles' playbook. Skiles used to start Eddie Curry to get some offense at the beginning of games, then he played Tyson Chandler at the end of games (and Chandler came up with some massive game saving blocks). The point being, when you have two quality Cs (or near the same quality), it's good to find a substitution pattern so they know what's expected of them. At this point in his career, Oden is the starter and finisher; it looks like he's going to start and get the first 5-8 minutes of PT and then Joel is going to be in there. It looks to me like Oden also plays that Tyson Chandler defense role at the end of games.

    I haven't seen enough of Nate to know him like you all do. As a newcomer to watching the Blazers (I've not missed a game this season), all I can do is point out that he's simply not stupid and that he's also not demonstrated he's a championship coach (like Phil Jackson). We'll see how it plays out by the end of the playoffs this season.
     
    Last edited: Nov 9, 2009
    Denny Crane, Nov 9, 2009
    #23
  4. andalusian

    andalusian Season - Restarted

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2008
    Messages:
    15,250
    Likes Received:
    14,680
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    San Marcos, CA
    I agree with pretty much anything you say - but I would like to point that if Batum was around for the start of this year - I would not have been surprised to see him do some of that. Travis and Webster are better offensive players than what we saw from Batum last year (who knows if it is still the case - he was supposed to take a big step up this summer) - but on defense, he is simply in a different league than them.
     
    andalusian, Nov 9, 2009
    #24
  5. mook

    mook The 2018-19 season was the best I've seen

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2008
    Messages:
    8,309
    Likes Received:
    3,944
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Buy a recipe binder at CookbookPeople.com
    Location:
    Jolly Olde England
    This lineup looked great last night, but there are a few opponents it's going to really struggle with. I just don't see it doing well against Carmello or LeBron. We're just giving up too much size and power, and our bigs are going to pay for it with foul trouble.

    I wonder if Nate will adjust the starting lineup to include Webster over Blake on the nights we face a really bruising SF. Nate doesn't generally change his lineup situationally, which in many ways is good. You want to settle on a rotation and force other teams to adjust to you. But in this case the smart play is to probably move Webster into the starting lineup.

    Whatever. The important thing is that Nate seems to have bought into Miller dominating the PG position. Not just starting Miller. Not just giving him more minutes while Roy runs the show. But actually dominating the position to the extent that it's really going to be up to Roy to adjust to Miller, and not the other way around.

    BTW--I really, really liked the way Blake looked last night. He was aggressively looking for his midrange shot, taking four midrange jumpers to his two trademark 3's. He's always been labeled as "a decent-to-good backup point guard." But I'm beginning to wonder if that's just the wrong label for him. He's always been paired with a more aggressive shooting guard, even going back to college with Juan Dixon. So as a "fit-in" kind of guy, he's always played PG. Maybe, though, he's a PG by circumstance more than by talent.

    Even when he's been put in there with another PG, it's always been more of a "two PG lineup." Where he would trade off in setting up the offense with Jack or Telfair or whomever. When he plays next to Roy at PG, he neither looks for his shot nor really runs the offense. He gets the ball to Roy or somebody else and just camps at the three point line, passively waiting for the ball to eventually (or not) get to him.

    Last night, he was given one marching order: let Miller do everything the PG does and aggressively play like a shooting guard. Instead of just "spacing the floor," actively go out there and create your own space on the floor, and plan on taking the shot without hesitation if it's there. Blake still didn't score a lot, but he just looked better out there. More confident.

    He only put up 6 points, so I guess it seems weird that I'm gushing about it so much. But it was just the way he did it--by actively moving around the court and being an option when he wasn't just camped at the three point line.
     
    mook, Nov 9, 2009
    #25
  6. magnifier661

    magnifier661 B-A-N-A-N-A-S!

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2009
    Messages:
    59,328
    Likes Received:
    5,588
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Cracking fools in the skull
    Location:
    Lancaster, California
    I think he will. Webster looks like he's up for the challenge against those marquee players. Of course he can't stop them, but make it tough for them to score. Kinda like get them out of their comfort zone, or get under their skin.

    It may be he starts the same line-up, then brings Webs in a little sooner than normal? Who knows.

    I really believe having Miller be more of the playmaker for most the game, will free up Roy to take over the 4th quarter. Let Roy cruise for most the game and use all his energy to take us home in the 4th. That's why I thought Roy's performance last nice was a moot point. I think there was no urgency for Roy to dominate the game offensively.

    I think the whole "Blake vs. Miller" caused some uneasiness and confusion. Now that Nate is starting both, I think Miller and Blake aren't uneasy anymore. They feel comfortable in their new roles.
     
    magnifier661, Nov 9, 2009
    #26
  7. TP3

    TP3 Member

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2008
    Messages:
    105
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Nice to have a Blazer team with so much IQ on the floor at the same time...rare...and refreshing.
     
    TP3, Nov 9, 2009
    #27
Page 2 of 2

Share This Page