Game Thread 2022-23 Game #21 BLAZERS VS CLIPPERS - NOVEMBER 29, 2022 - TUESDAY - 7:00 PM (PDT) TNT

Tough, tough loss. Love how Ant and Grant look lately, but they aren’t getting any consistent help AT ALL.

 

People keep putting Grant in when talking about the RoCo/Powell trade. Can’t do that. It is those two vs Winslow and Keon. Ouch.

 

Enjoyed reading this thread on the plane.
We all just got to our rooms here in LA…. Have a feeling some of these guys might be tired tomorrow night. This is a tough back to back coming off a late TNT game. Sleep well FAMS.

 

OK Clipper replay guy.

 

Problem here was Hart could barely move. He obviously was playing hurt.

Totally agree with you on this. Seemed like Chauncey could have made it a priority to stop him when he got cooking. Ty Lu obviously had made the decision they were not going to let Simons beat them.
Like i said above i think Hart was a little too gimpy to hold his own against Powell and they were forced to deal with the Clippers switching to Simons pretty much every time down the court.

 

But you just said it was "inconclusive"?

 

We have you on record WITH A CLIPPERS SHIRT ON!

 

They got a lot of problems on this team one this has to one weakest bench I seen a long time for this organization. Two you got center that's jump maybe 3 or 4 times on rebounds or even shooting Nurk got a few blocks but I don't see that fire in him like I seen when we got him from Denver. I his injuries have caught up to him but he still serviceable center but not one that will take you to the next level. Plus Watford needs play like he did this summer because right now he just non factor in game. Little got hurt but he also no factor in this game up to the injury. I said we are middle of the road team that's still needs a lot of work to be a top 4 team in this western conference. I think if we had Dame we probably would have won the game because then we would have had 3 scorers on the court instead of 2 and one foul out at end.

 

I was really hoping that Naz would have a breakout season and maybe he still can? But, to me he's been the most disappointing veteran so far as I know he's talented enough to earn more minutes and produce consistently.
Hoping this injury doesn't sideline him too long as I think he's a key in the team achieving potential going forward.

 

lol....no, it was not a "clear" charge, according to the rule, and you pulled the "less than 5%" out of your colon

 

I just did a search in this thread for any post I made with the word "inconclusive" and nothing came up. Not saying I didn't say it, but I can't find it.

 

Nas is a big joke. Zero development

 

I don't know what body part it came from, but I'll take your word for it.

Note @THE HCP saying the broadcast crew looked at multiple angles and it was a good call. And the Blazers coaching staff having looked at it and deciding not to challenge. All this points to the same conclusion.

 

yeah, some of these little factoids are less than nonsense

that said, the Blazer bench does lack any consistent scoring punch, and Payton sure isn't going to help that

too bad Sharpe isn't further along and Billups had the gumption to make Ant the 6th man

 

Nurk is fine. Anyone who needs to be double and triple teamed is obviously creating a problem for the opponent.
Nurkic Is Not a problem on our offense.
The problem is Chauncey playing guys who can't or won't shoot. Nurk is not one of those guys.

 

Why isn't Jabari Walker even seeing the floor?
Ridiculous.
Chauncey seems to really like players who can't shoot.

 

Billups is obsessed with defense to a fault. He seems to forget his team had himself, Rip Hamilton and Sheed to score the ball. It wasn't just Ben Wallace playing crazy defense they had guys who could score too. Playing Watford and Winslow is insane unless you have AT LEAST two shooters next to them. I'm also not impressed with Watford most of the time and Winslow is starting to grate on me.

 

So I looked back. Not hard to find but the context of the statement might not have been what i had referred to as a statement that the call was "Inconclusive".

I see you meant that it would not have been conclusive to overturn but it would have been if it was called the other way.

The way i see it, (the call) and i have looked back at it. That was indeed the correct call. It was a charge and it would have been held up as the correct call.