And Blakey definitely played better than Miller tonight, as many of you have been so quick to point out. That's one out of eight meaningless games. Whether or not you want to recognize the reasons why his BOX SCORE looked better, you'll draw your faulty conclusions no matter what anyone says. All I care about is that the Blazers win games, which we did tonight. Blake is the better "fit" with the starting 5 RIGHT NOW, because he's played with them for 2 years. But, personally, I want to watch the Blazers in June, and if its gonna happen in June of 2010, Nate needs to establish the chemistry between Miller and our other starters ASAP.
I like the argument of who is going to start between Miller and Blake, much better than the arguments last year of who had to start Blake or Sergio
As has been pointed out before, just because Blake starts doesn't mean that Miller and Roy won't share significant time on the floor together. There's no reason to think that they won't have time to develop some chemistry together, even with Miller coming off the bench. I've come around to the thinking that Blake starting is what's best for the team right now. Roy is used to Blake, and he can get into a rhythm in the first 6 minutes or so while Blake is out there. Then, by the time Miller comes in, Roy is in full Roy-mode, and Miller (hopefully) will be adjusting to the already-established flow of the game, as opposed to the other way around. And, if it comes about that the lineup with Blake in it has dug a significant hole, then adjustments can be made. I guess I fail to believe that a significant percentage of games will be won or lost in the first six minutes, but I do believe that a player's rhythm for the game can often be determined in that time frame. I'd much rather that we cater to Roy than Miller in that regard.
Totally agree with you. With all the shots Dre jacked up, the very poor percentage the team shot as a whole, and the VERY few minutes our core spent on court together, I just hope people don't forget how important Miller will be come May and June. I'm fine with Blake starting at this point.
Blake shouldn't be starting. Miller and Bayless have both outplayed him this preseason. Miller understands that getting the ball into the lane and getting layups for him and others is important while Blake sets people up for jumpers. I don't think this is a very good decision at all. As far as Nate saying he works hard, big fuckin deal. Bayless works harder than anyone, and will be rewarded with multiple DNPCD's this year.
I was pretty concerned that Miller, Oden and Batum were even debatable starters. So it's nice to see two of the three appear to be going where they belong. Schilly brought up a fantastic point about Nate's tendency to swap lineups within the first three games. To me, that's more a sign of strength than weakness, though. He sees what isn't working early on and makes the right adjustments. It's easy in hindsight to say, for example, that Batum shouldn't be coming off the bench over Outlaw. But Batum was a 19 year old rookie, and opening night he'd have had to start against Kobe Freakin' Bryant. You can see why Nate decided to go with Outlaw. Anyway, Miller has outplayed Blake. I think he'll wind up being a starter within a few games. If not, though, he might work well as a super-sub like Ginobili, logging 30 mpg from the bench. In some ways it may make it simpler for Nate to always be sure to have either Roy or Miller on the floor (which is a much bigger priority than who starts). This is all a little concerning. But as zagsfan says, at least Sergio is out of the picture, and as hasoos pointed out the other day, no matter how grim it gets it'll never come close to starting a lineup of Blake/Dixon/Miles/Khryapa/Ha.
No doubt. If the NBA was just about effort, Shaq would've been out of the league a decade ago. Talent matters. Miller has a lot more of it.
Not to be picky, but what from last your gives you the idea that Roy will contribute to fast starts in games? Brandon notoriously starts slower and picks up the level of his play as the game goes on. That is why we are able to come from behind so much.
well the good news for miller.... when blake bolts next summer... nate will have no choice but to start miller. same thing with oden. joels gone next summer.
On a separate but related note, I'm holding out hope that the insertion of a fully-recovered Greg Oden into the starting lineup in place of the offensively-challenged Przybilla will alleviate the "slow-start" issues. If that proves to be the case, then Blake starting shouldn't be a problem at all.
If you actually look at the game log of last season - you will see that we usually got in a big hole in the 2nd quarter when our 2nd unit was stinking up the place. My gut feeling is that Roy knew that was going to happen and he knew he was going to have to go like gangbusters in the 3rd and 4th to fix it - so he coasted in the first. My gut feeling is also that if he trusts the 2nd unit not to do it this way, he will go out and drop 17 points in the first quarter to seal the game from the get-go. Hmmm....
All signs point to Miller being the better PG of the two... regardless of who starts, I'm pretty sure he'll play both more minutes and have the more substantial role on the club this season. I don't get why some people get so hung up on the starting honor. STOMP
This is what I want to avoid more than pretty much anything--the Goddamned slow starts. I really hope it isn't an issue this year, otherwise I may just end up intentionally missing the first quarter, because it absolutely drives me crazy, only because in most cases it's so unnecessary. Unless Blake got better at this in the offseason or preseason, Oden won't be getting the ball much in the post from Blake. Even with Oden in the starting lineup (which I'm very happy to hear), the slow starts could continue as Oden really doesn't have anyone to effectively (and consistantly) feed him the ball.
Because all signs point to a lot of people making the wrong connection between their ability to watch TV and type on a keyboard and their ability to coach an NBA team.
Two things I haven't seen anyone talk about in the thread. This is only from listening, and not seeing, but I didn't hear of a single pass of Blake's last night that was more than a pass to a jump shooter for a made shot. That's great when LMA and Roy are both hitting >55%, but not so much when they're not. A "good" stat line of 7pt/7ast on 40% FG in one preseason game doesn't alleviate that. Oden had 7 shots, but 5 came off of offensive rebound putbacks and one was a "Moses Malone Special"...throwing the ball near the hoop so you could get around your man, get the rebound and put it back in. So our boy Greg got the ball passed to him one time in 24 or so minutes in a position to take a shot. Blake's good at making the safe pass to one of our two stars, and shooting the open 3. That's it. That's great in a guy who's not playing a lot of minutes, and if starting Blake is some grand scheme to get Blake 10 minutes with Roy at the start of a game so Roy can get a quick 17, then ok. But it's not someone you want on the floor against teams who play a modicum of defense...which could be a reason we went 1-12 against the WC Top 9 on the road last year and got spanked in the playoffs. And I know that Oden's recovered for the most part, where last year he was sluggish...but the starting unit that was just reported had the 3rd-worst win% of any five-man unit the team trotted out there last year at 40%. I ask the people happy with the lineup--what's changed from last year to this year in this lineup? Sure, Oden's healthier. But if he got the ball passed to him one time in 24 minutes, that's not alleviating our reliance on the jump shot--one of the major weaknesses in our super-efficient offense (which, btw, wasn't very efficient with this lineup playing last year). # Unit Min Off Def +/- W L Win% 1 Blake-Roy-Batum-Aldridge-Przybilla 560 1.19 1.01 +174 29 16 64.4 2 Blake-Roy-Batum-Aldridge-Oden 276 1.14 1.10 +6 10 15 40.0 Second point: for all of you LOL'ing about the "doom-and-gloom", what would be your reaction if Joel started over Greg Opening Night? Would you say "INMIT"? "Coach knows best"? B/c that's what the coach said last week. As I said then, I'm fine if Nate says "we're trying out lineups, seeing what works" or "we'll play the best fit for the team" or whatever coach-speak he wants....that's the way the game is played. The way the game isn't played is by announcing to the media, team and fanbase that you're starting an inferior player on Opening Night, when Opening Night is two weeks away. I guess the moral of the story is: don't pay attention to Nate when he's talking about lineups. He's either confused or not telling the truth. Just see who trots out there before tip-off.
Statistically speaking, the 1st quarter was our worst. Assuming you don't include OT. http://www.82games.com/0809/QSORT11.HTM
But...but...that is not true!!!!!! Take it back.... Some people here are so enamored with Roy that they can see no wrong in anything he does... He is wrong here....
