http://blog.oregonlive.com/behindblazersbeat/2009/11/blazers_seek_right_formula_to.html Roy does not get it. Nate needs to let the offense go. He has to stop calling plays. Maybe design a fucking offense that takes advantage of 3 players. I have done it, so I know it's not hard.
After reading that I can't help but wonder if Andre Miller inserted into the starting lineup and allowed to call plays on the fly and push tempo would alleviate a lot of these concerns. I'm not necessarily calling out Nate's play calling ability (though I'm sure an argument could be made that he's not done the most bang up job of devising an offensive system) but how can a team push the pace if they are always looking over to the sideline to get whatever set Nate wants to run? Two things appear to happen: 1) the defense gets more time to get set, and 2) because of scouting the defense probably has a pretty good idea about what is coming. Maybe I'm crazy, but it seems to me that a huge part of an offenses ability to succeed hinges on the ability to confuse a defense; that can't happen with the current system.
I'll be honest, I was being mostly rhetorical ... I have definite opinions on what should be happening.
I agree with this. A lot of the times, I feel we run our offense similar to the way I used to run my team when I played NBA Live 95 on my Genesis. It was pretty easy to score when you wanted, and I knew I woudl win, so my concern was making sure all of my guys looked good stats wise. So one trip down would be Player A's turn to shoot, then B, then A, then C, etc. There was no fluidity to my calls. I'd run a play for this guy, then this guy, then this guy. Everyone taking turns basically. The offense itself was fine. I was able to score. But it wasn't a team offense, it was plays designed around one player. This is the same way i see Nate's ofefnse. I don't feel like I have a huge issue with the actual looks from the offense. I think the sets are designed well enough to put us in position to score. It's just that, one turn down, it's Aldridge. Then Oden. Then Roy. Then we'll run Martell off of a screen, designed specifically for him to shoot, etc. So it's easy to see where Roy's complaints come from. If it's strictly calling out, ok, this one is LMA's turn, this is Oden's, etc., then I can see a problem with that. And I can see why Brandon would get annoyed about his number not being called that often if that's the way it's going to run. I don't necessarily see Roy as our PG of the future, but I think an interesting experiment would be to eliminate the playcalling from the bench, and as opposed to Miller, allow Roy to call the plays as he sees fit. If he's our leader, he needs to see when guys are hot, see where a guy needs to get the ball, etc. Will he call his number 10 times in a row, will he even things out?
The instincts of a true point guard. If anyone has it, this Kat does. We know Nate never had it during his career. But Andre just by nature if not bogged down will get the ball to the right guys at the right time. Interesting points
Yes. Yes it would. And it has. In fact, that's the exact meaning of my sig. The best I've seen the team perform this year is when that has happened. All two times.
I absolutely agree that we ought to let Brandon and/or Miller run the team. Nate's control freakery on that end and his robotic sub patterns are what drive me nuts the most.
The same is true if Steve Blake was allowed to call plays on the fly and push tempo, and would have been true if Sergio and Jerryd had been allowed to call plays on the fly and push tempo. There was never any need to bring in Andre Miller. He's simply an older, chubbier, slower, less motivated version of the guys we already had. We can bring in 10 more PG's with the same result.
Spoken like someone who never saw Nate play. I'm fairly certain this is the very first time I've ever heard a negative statement about Nate as a player.
