I can tell you one reason why Miller coming off the bench could be considered a bad thing. Slow starts and playing from behind. Steve as the PG doesn't do much to exploit the opponent which is something Miller does very well. Take the lead hold the lead.
exactly schill... miller would get us the lead.... and demand more respect from the opponent then lil blake
Every year Nate is here I see more and more questioning of his methods and decisions, even though our results get better. He had a similar stint in Seattle.
Ok I am really weirded out right now... I am making sense to MIXUM. So either he's coming around or I need to see a doctor.
oh god... barrett liked what he saw. see thats why its hard to take him seriously. hes a good announcer and a real nice guy but man yesterday he was down playing the loss to the jazz... tonight he sounds like we won a playoff game http://mikebarrettsblog.blogspot.com/2009/10/very-positive-end.html
All signs point to mixum >>>>> gagging about the the steve blake news. All signs point to Aaron Brooks>>>>> fantasy owners being really excited for week 1 play.
oh and like ive said for weeks.... Blazer fans should go rent Major League 2 cause i think that movie will be a perfect match to our season in a lot of ways.
Steve Blake is zeroed in on two players while he is out there. Brandon Roy and LaMarcus Aldridge. I don't know did any of those three look for Oden in the post this evening? If this continues, might this stymie his development? Or will this coach finally get a clue, take control of this team, the players, the personalities and finally make the right decisions for the group?
I have neither seen or read anything that would lead me to believe Nate is losing his players. My best guess is that every player but one is supportive (some maybe lukewarm) of his choices for the starting five.
i think brandon roy would be more likely to get portland the lead(along with aldridge and oden). miller would then come in to have someone to run the offense when roy comes out of the game and so roy doesn't have to carry the load all the time when he's in the game(though i'd assume to start games he'd be pretty fresh so would be ok with initiating the offense then). and really, i think nate starting the guys he feels fit together best is a good thing. because he's shown that if games that matter start to prove him wrong, he'll make the switch to what's working best.
Hmmm...tonight our likely opening night starting line-up dominated the Suns who were also playing their starters...that sounds like a good reason to feel good heading into opening night. Utah game - we got man handled when Oden, Rudy, LA didn't play at all and Batum got hurt and went out right at the start...doesn't sound like a reason to be concerned unless we're going to be playing without those 4 guys come Tuesday. Nope, Barrett seems spot on in this case...
Haha. You called the preseason a "disaster" when the team was at 3-4. Dude... you overreacted and look (again) more than a bit silly. Is MB overreacting? Perhaps. But no more than you have for the past... hmm... 30 months? Ed O.
Well, you usually are about the doom and gloom. McMillan has major control issues and seems to pick "his" guys at point every season. It was Jack, now it's Blake. Is it just a mind game to get Miller to play harder? It could be. Everything isn't as black and white, especially when it comes to motivating million dollar athletes. A slow start to games is what was most frustrating last year. Miller seems like he would have fixed that with his style of play. But we'll just have to wait and see how it works out. We've got too much talent with Roy, Aldridge, Oden, & a decent bench NOT to win a lot of games this year.
I agree with this except I think Oden's and Webster's move into the starting lineup should be a month or two into the season. It would help with health, production and your record of course this assumes they play to their ability
Steve Blake does one thing better than Andre Miller, shoot threes. Andre Miller does everything else better than Steve Blake. It's gonna take a few months, but we will be much more likely to win games against the other elite teams in the playoffs with Miller as the starting PG. One preseaon game does not amount to a valid agrument, no matter who you think should be our starting PG. Andre Miller is a starting point guard in this league. If we didn't sign him to start then we shouldn't have signed him at all. I would bet that at least 28 NBA GM's and/or head coaches would agree. It's painfully obvious. The few regular season losses that may or may not occur as a result of Miller learning to play with our big 3 are nominal compared to the amount of playoff wins we would gain once they are clicking. I don't claim to be an expert, but if you ask those that do, aka front office personnel and coaches, they will almost all tell you that Andre Miller should be our starting PG if we want to maximize our potential.
