They mentioned it on the Spurs broadcast, I think that our record was misleading because we had played the second easiest schedule. They mention we were 7-9 at the time, so that makes us 7-10 or 7-11 now. My question is, do people still think we should stand pat? Update. No update
I'd like to add Chandler to replace Batum. But many of the games we lost were so close and could have easily swung the other way. Regular season records don't matter, just get into the playoffs. I don't think this team really plays better at home than on the road.
I don't think that stat is correct, as they've lost to the Kings and Minnesota. It's still not a good record against above .500 teams though. They keep it up and it's 1st and out again.
Nice to see you back MM and I agree and have been saying we need to add a good play for weeks, Nic"s continuing awful play only reinforces this need. We already let Green go by (he was cheap IMO) and he strengthened an already very good Memphis team, time for Neil to step up and earn that for yr extension - the heat is on as it should be IMO.
The entire Eastern conference has an easier schedule than any team in the West, so it's a pretty meaningless stat.
For those interested (myself included) I did a list of the teams they played above .500 (not at the time they played but their record now): Spurs (twice) Mavs (once) Toronto (once) Chicago (once) Milwaukee (once) Cavs (once) I count 7 (someone who has more brain power can re-check). The losses: Clippers (twice) Spurs (once) Chicago (once) Memphis (twice) Atlanta (once) G-State (once) Houston (once) That's 9. With two losses to well below .500 teams (Minnesota and Kings) that's 11 losses. On the plus side, if the team is below .500, they're inclined to beat em! 23-2!
A few of those losses came with our starting center out and Batum playing like utter crap. No clue of Batum will play better but it has shown that our supposed improved bench isnt that deep. Take Freeland out then start kaman and suddenly we have blake as the only consistant off the bench. If we're at full health we have a great team and Im not thinking of a major move but with the injuries we need another bench player, preferably a 3.
If you are back for a while MM then I would like you to take on Over/Under again. You are better at it.
I think Olshey is living on the phone right now and unless it's a needle mover, he'll stand pat. I think we're maybe showcasing bench players a bit before the deadline even at the expense of a loss but Olshey has shown me in his tenure here that his office doesn't leak deals. Sort of a photo negative of Morey. Either way, we're better when Rolo and Freeland get back. If a move is made, it'll probably be a pretty small one. Good to see you back MM! Good thread!
I think they need to make a move. But I'm not sold bringing in one player that has the offensive potential that some of the starters have coming off the bench, is going to make that big of a difference. This is a team that spends a lot. The starters do. And I already see a couple of guys in the starting lineup that look spent to me. This is a concern. If these guys have nothing left going into the playoffs. They aren't going to get through it obviously. I guess I trust the GM. But at the same time, after watching the starters deplete their resources. I ask. Neil what in the hell are you doing?! This will be there third year in a row the club didn't have the energy to complete the season. Do something about it! But before they run out of gas. Now it might be too late.
Again? We made 2nd round last year. Maybe you're thinking of the Warriors, Rockets, Grizzlies, or Mavericks. They were first and out. That's not true.
Spurs had a pretty poor poor record last year vs western playoff teams. It sucks to lose to these "good teams" but it's not the end of the world. Personally I don't think any of the players thrown out that the Blazers actually have a chance at move the needle all that much.
Can't keep throwing out "well the Spurs did blah blah blah". We're not the Spurs, in any way, shape or form. What they've done has no bearing on what we're doing.
The whole thing hinges on OKC and Nawlins - we've beaten them twice each. Both of those teams have just regained .500 status, so we're 11-9 vs. +.500 teams. btw, that's tied for 3rd best in the west. http://espn.go.com/nba/standings/_/type/expanded p.s. love the new "upload a file" thing - much easier with the snipping tool.
By the way, the Spurs had this problem. Couldn't beat good teams for most of the year. Then they won the title. Just win as many games as you can. Beat the good teams when it matters. aren't we trying to follow the Spurs' formula?
The Blazers need to start winning a few more against winning teams, but it's pretty normal for playoff teams to beat up on the lower-tier teams and be around .500 against playoff teams. That's where the Blazers were before this last 3-game slump. The Grizzlies are 10-9 right now against teams that are currently .500 or better and that's about typical. Given the injuries to Lopez and Freeland, coupled with Batum's crappy play, I'm not too concerned right now. I'm hoping that the 3-game losing streak is a needed wake-up call. It seems to me that the team developed a kind of lazy approach to first quarter play, but was able to cover for that with strong second half performances. That's not going to cut it against playoff-caliber teams.
