So how many people believed Nate when he said they are going to run more now? Not I. It's kind of like the Boy who called wolf. How many times can you hear it before it falls on deaf ears.
Actually, his Sonics teams ran more than our current Blazers. If Andre can move the team and keep the turnovers down he'll be fine with it.
When has Nate had a point guard, in Portland, who could push the tempo without turning the ball over? He never has. That's why we haven't run the ball more.
You know if you think you have to have a PG running the break every time it happens, you are going to be set up to fail. More than PG can run breaks and handle the ball on breaks. That is just an excuse.
Could you find me the part where he said we were going to run more? All I heard him say is that he'd like us to run more. Obviously the second one is a conditional statement and doesn't mean that we will.
Bottom line: Who cares? Not that I have any objection to some fast breaks now and then, but if the Blazers can continue to improve their win total as a halfcourt team, I'm happy with that.
our other players other than PG would have been even worse at leading the fast break, so not sure what your point is.
Poppycock. Blake ran like lightning at Denver, and Sergio is one of the best, having proven it worldwide before coming here to sit and watch Nate hold the team back every night. Neither turns the ball over more than average, and both had the same high pct of wins when they were allowed to run a bit last season. Contrast that with Nate's favorite PG, Jarrett Jack, who walked the ball yet had the highest TO's in the league for a PG, and damn few wins. This team will not blossom and flourish until Nate leaves, it's that simple.
Actually, that's a very accurate statement. When you get the jump on your opponent, you get easy shots and score at a high pct. When you do that, your D improves as your opponent gets few or no fastbreaks and has a much harder time scoring on you. That's the overwhelming advantage of having a running game. For some bizarre reason, Nate prefers to always be on the disadvantaged side of that formula. He eschews the huge advantage our athletic players give him and prefers to make them work twice as hard for half the reward.
If the idea is to make Outlaw the primary back-up at PF, then having Miller on the court with the 2nd unit makes a lot of sense. That doesn't mean he won't start, but why have an undersized 2nd unit if you don't use the advantage in speed and athleticism? PG - Miller SG - Rudy/Roy SF - Batum/Webster (?) PF - Outlaw/LMA C - Przy Miller, Roy, and Przy are all solid defensive rebounders, so Outlaw/Batum/Webster can leak out and get into passing lanes. I'd like to see what Miller can do with this unit in the exhibition season. So perhaps Nate really does want to run more?
Blake's TOV% when running in Denver was more than 20.2% - that's bad, in comparison - his TOV% last year - about 8th best in the league for a starting PG was 13.6% Sergio's TOV% last year 24.7% which is not average - it is world class bad - only Chucky Atkins was worse last year in the NBA. Jarret Jack's TOV% last year was 16% playing for a much faster pace Indiana team - not great, not bad. In Portland, where he was bad - it was 19.6% (which is still better than Blake's when playing fast pace or Sergio's any pace). Just for reference - Andre Miller's TOV% last year, playing a much faster pace than Portland's was 14%. This is the first PG we had that can really push the ball and make good decisions while protecting the ball for quite some time. I will finish in Kingspeed fashion - learn the statistics and then post. Yahtzee.
I believe McMillan that he'd "like to run more." That doesn't mean I expect to see a lot of it. I'm sure getting more transition baskets is a positive in McMillan's mind. Having the numbers tends to lead to more success than playing five-on-five. However, if things higher on McMillan's list of priorities (like taking care of the ball and not taking risks, or playing to the half-court strengths of Roy and Oden) undermine getting out on the break much, then there won't be a lot of running. It's not logically contradictory for McMillan to like the idea of running more but not actually ending up doing it. I'd like to learn to play the piano...but I don't since I end up prioritizing other things over learning the piano for my free time. All that said, I wouldn't be surprised to see a few more fast breaks a game from the Blazers. Miller has shown he can run without being a turnover machine. It's quite possible McMillan will trust him to push the ball on the lower-risk fast break chances...like two-on-one, three-on-one, three-on-two breaks.
