Jason Kidd on "Fools", LMA on "Fans" RE: Brandon Roy

I'm sorry, but just because Roy was demanding a double team doesn't mean he should have been on the court in the closing minutes. His defense is what cost us the game. Yes he was on the court during that 11 minute drought by Dallas, but I think that had more to do with Dallas missing shots vs Roy playing defense. When Roy was healthy he'd take possessions off on defense to rest. Now he doesn't even really try on defense because of his bad knees. Roy should have been subbed out around the 4 minute mark or something of the 4th at the latest. There is no reason for Roy to be playing the entire 4th. Yes Wesley wasn't hitting his shot (neither was Roy), but his defense was still really good.

Having someone demand a double team does not mean it's the most efficient form of offense. It was a lot of iso'ing with Roy on the court (McMillan's crutch offense in the 4th) and it failed us *again*. I would have much rather had some quality defense being played from our shooting guard vs having a guard that couldn't shoot OR play a lick of defense. Roy's form of defense involves reaching in and that's just ASKING for a foul to be called. I remember one play were dirk had batum at the basket and Batum had his hands straight up playing solid defense and suddenly from behind Roy just reaches in and swipes at Dirk's wrist. You could see Batum in disbelief at Roy saying "Why'd you do that man?!"

Look I'm not saying Roy shouldn't be playing--he just shouldn't be playing in the closing minutes if he had a crappy game (1-8 or something like that) up to that point. If he was playing good that game I could understand it.

 

His defense is what cost the Blazers the game?

The Mavericks made 4 FG in the 4th Q. Explain to me how this is Roy costing the team on defense.

The refs bailed out the Mavs with 19 FT in the 4th Q, plain and simple.

 

Re: Jason Terry on "Fools", LMA on "Fans" RE: Brandon Roy

That's funny cause I have it on DVR too and just watched it after you called bullshit. I saw 5 drives when the defense collapsed on him and he passed 1 outlet to Aldridge for a make, another for a miss, 1 to fernandez for a missed three, another to a Wallace for a missed three, and another to a left wing open jumper to Batum for a miss. But hey, if you want to say what you will about his game, then all the power to you.

 

Re: Jason Terry on "Fools", LMA on "Fans" RE: Brandon Roy

Saying anything negative or bad (honest) about Roy never goes well. People don't seem to see the contested shots his teammateas put up at the end of the clock, or the fact the ball rarely enters into Aldridge early in the clock when Roy is on the floor. All they see is the wonderful player that was able to overcome those things in the past because of his outstanding play.

At some point in this series Brandon will "explode" for 20ish points and people will bump this thread and say "I told you so"

 

Seriously, this is getting out of hand. It's obvious that the ones that think that our lose to Dallas rest soley on Roy will keep with this theory until proven otherwise. These are the same posters that haven't harped on Wallace or Wes for a piss poor performance. Also, these are the same people that didn't bother to mention Batum shot 6-14. Whatever reason, they would put more blame on someone taking 7 shots than:

Batum 6-14

G. Wallace 4-13

and Wes Matthews 1-3 and 3 turn overs.

 

Re: Jason Terry on "Fools", LMA on "Fans" RE: Brandon Roy

I will not say "I told you so". But I will keep on my statement that I strongly disagree with many that think he is all but done. And once he gets a string of "those type of games", then I will say "I told you so", just like I would assume that many of you would say the same if it went the other way.

 

Re: Jason Terry on "Fools", LMA on "Fans" RE: Brandon Roy

We aren't talking about other players are we? I haven't knocked any player based on shit arguments like assists being lower like you. Your argument has many holes because assists aren't like points or rebounds. You are at the mercy of other players to knock em down to get one. So when I replied in terms of "higher percentages", it is a reply that that number is because of your teammates hitting the open shots. UNDERSTAND?!?!?!

 

Who's saying that? People were questioning playing Roy more minutes (And rightfully so), but I don't really see anyone saying Roy was the sole reason for the loss.

 

Read the board. And BTW, Roy has been getting his normal 25 minutes a game. He only had 26 minutes in this contest. Nothing that Nate hasn't been doing already.

 

Let's face it - contracts influence playing time.

Roy's contract is a sunk cost. Instead of accepting that, the organization will pressure Nate to play Roy as much as possible in a futile effort to recoup the investment.

You see this all the time in pro sports. No point in making Nate the scapegoat for a decision that probably comes from higher up the foodchain.

 

I am reading the board. I don't really see anyone saying Roy was the sole reason for the loss. If you'd like to provide something substantial instead of "read the board", I'm all ears.

He also averaged 19.7 MPG the last 10, so yes 26 was a bit of an aberration, when you consider that he wasn't producing very well on offense or defense.

 

Do you need me to find more?

 

Point out to me where Uncle Ty said Roy was the sole reason for the loss. Can't? Well that's because he didn't make the claim.

 

And Wallace? I didn't drag any player out. I didn't say anything about these players. What I'm pointing out is how seemingly hilarious it is that there are so many complaints on Roy, and hardly any mention of the other players playing like shit.

 

Ahhhhhhh, we are getting technical are we? You do know that I am using "Sole reason for loss" as an exaggeration of the point. Kinda like when some of the posters in here over exaggerate to make the point a little more "To the point". You have never done that? So if I find you doing this in previous posts, does that mean I can call you out too?

 

So you admit you're using a strawman? I would hope you don't sink to PapaG's level.

I think you're angry at the amount of people frustrated at Roy's play. If you're trying to argue that he's warranted the amount of playing time he's getting, then that's one thing, but don't call out people on false claims they aren't making.

 

Re: Jason Terry on "Fools", LMA on "Fans" RE: Brandon Roy

Roy played like shit, and so did a few other players. This was started because of the article on Roy; which was my response. It was to the fans, in Cansucko's article, which I referred to mostly. But whatever the case, you can ignore other's piss poor performances and dwell soley on Roy's if that makes you happy.

yes I do agree that "averages" are used to measure the "blue print of a player"; but you and I know, that watching the game tells the true tale. If you saw it differently, then I guess you and I will just disagree. But since we are measuring this game and using stats like you want to toss at me. Roy got 3 assists without a single turnover. He is terrible!

 

You honestly don't think posters in here, fans in Portland and posters in O-live aren't putting blame on Roy for this loss? Really?!?!?! So you think Cansucko would just spit out that article because he just wants to? There is a reason for the article, and if you can't see it, then why are we even discussing it?

 

Roy's terrible and he never was particularly good. Rich man's Jamal Crawford in his prime, which is now over.

He was the sole reason for Portland losing not just this last game, but each of the last two playoff series.

 

This sentence is unintentionally hilarious. "Canzano sucks, but he'd only write an article if he had an excellent, well thought-out point!"