Hornets @ Blazers 1/25/2010 Game Thread

Inexplicable. There are some games when dribble penetration by our playmakers allows Blakey to sit out at the 3 point line and shoot darts - last night wasn't one of them. No Roy, Miller couldn't get by anybody last night, and Bayless wasn't out there with Blake. When there are no open 3's for Blake to shoot, he shouldn't be in there. He doesn't do anything else well enough to justify it. Just incredibly poor substitutions by Nate (and I'm not a Nate basher, but last night was awful)

 

Do you think it's possible his minutes were limited considering he is playing with a sprained ankle? I know that would really throw a wrench in the point you are trying to get across, but I would be shocked if Jensen didn't limit his minutes just like he limited Batums. Barrett said in pregame that Bayless was unsure if he'd even be able to go.

 

There you go, using logic again.

 

I believe the coach makes the decisions as to who should have been in. When Bayless was in there, Paul was getting "No Bueno" on th pentration. As soon as he swapped him out for Blake, he went off on us like no tomorrow. This is the bullshit I was talking about before with Nate. I have been extremely worried that as soon as players started coming back, he would start cutting Bayless numbers, and sure enough it has happened. IMO it shows that Nate really hasn't done anything special coaching. He did what he had to do, and it just happened it got player playing time who really deserve it, and now he has gone back to screwing them again for the sake of Blake, a guy who will never improve anymore and is lacking a complete game, when we could be developing guys who are already better than him, to make their game a complete game. Infuriating. But reality.

Andre Miller looked like he was dog ass tired last night. I can believe it with the number of games the Blazers have played the last 4 days.

Is it a problem when Rudy out rebounds your starting PF?

 

I'm glad I was not the only one who thought Bayless was playing excellent defense on Paul. I was beginning to think I was a bit biased (since Bayless is my favorite current player on the team and I think he deserves more playing time) with that assessment, but it did look like he was containing Paul for the most part. Oh well, that makes two of us.

 

I would challenge anybody who didn't think that was the case to sit down and watch a recording of the game again so we could isolate on it. Bayless had him shut down hard. He was fighting through screens, and several times Paul literally tried to body up on him and bounced off of him. Then Blake and Rudy are in, Rudy held his own for a few by scoring some, and then Rudy, and followed by Blake, both got owned.

That last posession was the topper, where Blake, with the decision to run between Paul(who actually had the ball) and Peja, chose to run and cover Peja, leaving Paul to take the jumper. For all the folks who talk about how savvy Blake is, how savvy is he now?

 

He sure didn't look gimpy nor did he look like he wanted to come out of the game.


So yes I considered his injury and no I don't think it should have prevented Nate from putting Bayless back in the game for the final 3 minutes.


I don't understand why in the world you would defend this. I get that Nate is a good coach and all. Far better then I would ever be.

But this isn't some obscure concept. Portland couldn't get points at the line because the one guy available to play who could do so was played as few minutes as a guy who has been out for the last 4 months.



And frankly, if Bayless was so fucking gimpy why the hell was he in the game for the last shot. Nate sure felt he could go then. Why not 180 seconds earlier?

 

If his gimp ankle can shut down Paul, I wonder what he can do fully healthy? Obviously this was a bit sarcastic, but my point stands the same: Him doing a tremendous job on Paul should have let him play most of the 4th anyway, let alone one of our only guys who can drive and put pressure on both Paul (making him work on D) and the interior defenders. Makes no sense.

 

I apologize for mist interpreting your point. I thought you were upset he only played 15 minutes and wanted him to play significantly more. I didn't know you were just talking about three minutes.

I'm also confident Batum could have played more, but stupid Jensen limited him to 7 minutes a half. Oh well...

 

The correct answer is 'dish to a wide open Martell.' We also had only ONE player in any kind of rebound position and four players on the three-point line. That was a sad ending to a very good game.

 

Wait, limiting him was a bad idea? Gimme a break. I can't imagine this place if he went over his limited amount, and aggravated his injury.

 

It wasn't the amount of minutes, it was when they were played that bothered me more.


Comparing the situation of Batum (out for 4 months after shoulder surgery) to Bayless (listed as day to day with a moderate ankle sprain) is absurd. I kind of think you are smarter then that.


A bigger issue is that without Bayless or Roy on the floor Portland doesn't have anyone that can attack the rim and get to the line. Miller can do it from time to time but not with the same consistancy as Roy and Bayless.


All of this is a long way of saying I wish Portland's second best player was more aggressive and got to the line more. He doesn't and it hurts the team badly.

 

wasnt bayless the one to get under pauls skin when they were trying out for the USA team or was that another PG?

 

It was Bayless. He and Paul got into it during a scrimage when Bayless wouldn't back off on defense.

 

I'm confident Batum could have played more (same with Bayless) but that doesn't mean I think it would have been a wise move. I understand/agree with the idea of limiting minutes of players coming off an injury.

 

When Blake came in for Rudy with 1:42 left in the game, I turned to my son and said, "they brought in the wrong player, they should have brought in Bayless".

It's not that I think Blake is useless. He has his place, but this wasn't it. In addition to Bayless doing a good job guarding Paul in the first half, he also absolutely killed Collinson who was attempting to guard him on the other end. Unlike Miller (and Blake), Bayless has the quickness to take Collison off the dribble. Combined with his size and strength advantages and Collison looked totally helpless trying to stop Bayless in the first half.

So, instead of bringing in Blake and letting Paul guard him and trying to let Andre Miller unsuccessfully repeatedly beat the much quicker Collison off the dribble, Nate should have brought in Bayless and let him abuse Collison like he did in the first half. This would have the added bonus of Bayless, rather than Blake, guarding Paul on the other end.

There was so much wrong with Nate's play calling and substitions during the last three and a half minutes of that game I don't see how anyone can possibly defend him. Nate cost the team that game, and should receive the blame (just like the Memphis loss on the 5th).

And before we get another round of the "if you're so smart why aren't you coaching in the NBA" chorus, I have never claimed I'd be a better coach than Nate McMillan. Roger Ebert has never directed a successful movie, but he's certainly capable or critiquing them. Nate's mistakes are so obvious they are easy to spot - especially as they are part of an established pattern that I've seen all too often. Even smart people occasionally make mistakes. Truly smart people learn from those mistakes and avoid repeating them. I'm waiting for Nate to learn from his mistakes. If he can't/won't, I'm all for not offering him a new contract when his current one expires. He's a good coach in some ways, but his offensive play calling and subsitution patterns cost this team wins. If this team is to truly contend for a title, they need a coach who won't cost them games they should have won.

BNM

 

I agree, but I was called out on the bashing of him. Nate may be doing well with the pieces he currently has, but last night was not a job well done with the rotations especially because our bench was outplaying the starters for the most part last night. I try to keep my bashing of Nate limited, mainly because other have that job under control, however, I found it necessary to do so last night especially putting Blake back in.