Then you don't understand the different between process and results. I consider execution of an offense process, while making shots is results. I don't think so. Rudy should shoot a three pointer EVERY TIME HE IS OPEN except in dramatically atypical circumstances. I don't care if he's 6-7 and "due to miss" or 0-7 and "shooting terribly", if he's on the floor and he gets the shot he should take it, because he's got an excellent chance of making it and by taking and making those shots it spreads the floor and opens it up for the rest of the team. That's a straw man. Outlaw's shot selection is not determinative of how he played overall. He wasn't where he was supposed to be. He didn't do what he was supposed to do. I don't see how you can read what has been admitted to and then deny it or try to equivocate it with a few missed layups by Sergio. I totally disagree. Taking a step or two in will not increase the chances of making the shot by 50%, which is the additional value of a made three pointer. Again: totally disagree. Sergio did a very good job of breaking his man down and getting to both the rim and the line. He should have converted a few layups, but even when he missed it put our guys in a great position to rebound. I'm focused on the last two minutes or so. You are the one trying to expand the inquiry to deflect criticism of Outlaw, for some reason. Ed O.
The only thing I said is that the game is played for 48 minutes - so there is more than one play that determines the outcome of the game. I also did not say that Outlaw was right (nor did he)... This is like groundhog day (or spin-cycle). I think I should just quit. I can't wait for the NBA100 - where all games are played for 100 seconds...
I actually used to think he should start, mostly for lack of better options. (I still contend he's better than a healthy Webster, but that's setting the bar pretty low. There are around 28 better NBA starting Small Forwards than Webster. There are about 23 better than Outlaw.) Outlaw is pretty clutch, in the respect that doesn't underperform when the pressure is on. Batum has hit something of a wall lately, but he's still better than Outlaw. He's by far the best defender of the three and he seems like he'll be a competent scorer, and really, what else do we need at SF? None of the three will likely ever be top 10 small forwards. But Batum is definitely the best player, and the best fit, of the lot.
I am wondering if you consider Prince, in his prime, to be a top-10 small forward - because I hope he can be that good at some point. But - generally speaking - I agree. Of course, it does not matter - what's really important is to understand that Von Wafer is the best SF ever in the NBA100 - where every game is won and lost in 1:40 minutes;
Add up what all the players put out on the court, and you have a TEAM result. No one play made or broke the Blazers. What did lose the game was that the team effort was short. Defensive lapses for almost whole quarters of the game. Falling in love with the 3 pointer when Orlando was in the penalty. Lack of touches in crunch time for the players who bring the scoring to the team (ROY, Aldridge, Rudy.) If anybody was playing badly in the game, the coach can always pull them out. Nate chose to have out there, who he felt was best. Sometimes, it just doesn't work out. When you have a young team, sometimes they don't make the best decisions, or become confused easily and over think things. All you can hope for, is they learn from the experience, and get better.
You have to be kidding. I'm looking for the "/sarcasm" at the end of one of your posts. Lemme spell this out: Travis Outlaw and Steve Blake were almost entirely responsible for our team blowing an 8 point lead with 100 seconds left in our last basketball game. Travis made 4 mistakes: 1) not looking at the 24 second clock (to be fair, iirc this was with about 3 min left) and getting a shot clock violation without even realizing he needed to shoot, 2) taking a contested 3 from the top of the key with over 10 seconds left on the shot clock up 8 with less than 90 seconds left, 3) not remembering/understanding his assignment on the last offensive play, and 4) not denying the ball on the winning play, or realizing that you have to be up on Turk, b/c a 3 kills you, while if he drives by you and somehow scores it just goes to OT. Since no one's talking about Blake right now, I won't go there. Your penchant for putting this on Sergio/Rudy/Roy is comical, as is trying to say "it's a 48-minute game". If that's the case, why have you and PapaG made a living the last few weeks of telling me how "clutch" Travis is? You've lost a lot of cred with me about this. You're almost in PapaG territory, though I won't go there b/c you don't call me names . Quitting with dignity on this point might be the best option. But I'm not trying to tell another person what to do.
If Portland is a 6 seed and we end up losing on the road in game 7 of the conference semi-finals, can we point to that game as the reason we were eliminated? Or should we remember that the reason we were on the road is because we lost a few more games than we should have during the regular season, so that ONE game wasn't the reason that we were knocked out. Or last night... did Hedo's shot not win the game for the Magic? After all, Nelson and others scored earlier in the game. His shot was the last part of the game, but it didn't really WIN it since it was only in the last three seconds of a game. Back to Outlaw and the rest of the guys that were in the game for the last one hundred seconds: they lost the game. They had the lead and they blew it. That Frye did something or that Sergio did another in the second quarter is not relevant to the lead that was lost and the fact that Roy, Outlaw and the rest of the guys fucked it up. I fail to see why those last 100 seconds are less subject to scrutiny and less worthy of attribution of responsibility than the last play on its own or the final game of a season. Ed O.
No, no, Hasoos, what you say makes sense - and this is the Blazers board. We do not work this way. The game was lost by ZBo. Oh wait, my calendar was wrong. It was Jack. Shoot. Mistake again. It's Outlaw. I really need to get a better calendar. Sorry for the mistakes.
The two that hosed this game up most at the end were a 6th year veteran in Travis and a 6th year vet in Blake. Why are people making excuses? They're grown men who messed up, should definitely know better, and deserve to be called out on it. Nate obviously thought so. I don't know why Blake's getting off relatively free on this.
As long as we trade Travis like the other two for better fits, no worries. And by better fits, I mean people that won't consistently contribute to our team losing. But keep thinking everything's ok, if that's what helps you enjoy the game better. Far be it from me to take that from any fan.
They are not. And there is not controversy. Blake and Outlaw fucked these 100 seconds. But the game was not lost because we were perfect the other 2780 seconds - it was lost because we played about one very good quarter of basketball, one OK quarter and a couple of questionable ones - the only difference is that these 100 seconds were at the end of the game.
No one is claiming we were "perfect". However good or bad we were, it was good enough to be ahead by 8, though. Ed O.
Yes, but we were also down by 9 in the first quarter. There is a big deal about it because it was the end of the game and we made 2 big mistakes in 100 seconds. I understand it. It is also clear that Outlaw was one of the guys that made one of these mistakes - heck - he understands it. But overall - there really was no better option last night - because Nic had a miserable game and Outlaw was not stinky-bad (shot a decent percent, got to the line, no turn-overs). What I am saying is that if we took Outlaw's 100 seconds of stink and switched them with his play in the 2nd quarter when he was balling - the outcome would be exactly the same and no one would be getting their pitch-forks for him. Overall, during this game, Outlaw was not bad. He shot a high-percentage, he did not fire like a black-hole, he did not cause turn-overs. He broke a play at a bad time, he admitted to it (No one else said anything about it to the media - so you have to give him props for that). That's all that really happened.
Who cares? Seriously. Why even mention this? Again: who cares? Why even mention this? He fucked up repeatedly at the end of the game. That has nothing to do with how he played earlier NOR how Sergio played. Of course, Outlaw is not the only one who fucked up repeatedly at the end of the game, but that's not relevant to the fact that he fucked up. I don't care if anyone says anything to the media. Players could never say one thing in public in their lives and it wouldn't impact me one iota. I give him no credit for publically admitting his mistake because it won't help us win the game just finished nor win the next one. Ed O.
Outlaw takes blame for Orlando loss T. Outlaw fessed up to the press and took the blame for the fouled up play at the end of the game which resulted in a shot clock violation. When asked about the play Nate was willing to tell reporters only that it wasn't executed properly. Outlaw threw himself under the bus and accepted responsibility for not cutting to the ball the way he had been instructed to do. http://blog.oregonlive.com/behindblazersbeat/2008/12/blazers_slip_down_stretch_agai.html#more" I admire Travis for his accountability. He made a mistake. He owned it. But the loss shouldn't fall completely on his shoulders. The fact we blew an 8 point lead in less than two minutes was not something he alone was responsible for. I'm a fan of our coach, but I do question some of the choices he made during the last minute and fifty seconds of the game. 1. In retrospect from the comfort of my couch its easy to see that pulling the guy who had the hot hand (Sergio) in running the offense and inserting Steve Blake stalled the offense. As did changing the offensive plan to Brandon Roy ISO. Brandon didn't execute at the foul line, and that resulted in a 8 point lead turning into a two point lead with just thirty seconds to go. That of course left us just one more screwed up posession and a Turkoglu 3 pointer away from a loss. 2. When the only plays you run at the end of the game are Brandon Roy ISO's other teams ARE going to figure it out, and they are going to come up with ways to stop it. Time to mix things up a bit, our offensive strategy is becoming predictable and thus vulerable to being shut down. 3. The zone defense Portland had been using to neutralize Dwight Oden was broken down by the Magic. They scored at will at the end of the game and there were no adjustments made. From the comfort of my couch its easy for me to say that a move back to a man to man D would have made a difference. Losing a game this way bugs me. But the one catchphrase you always hear analysts say about games like this is that the next game is never far away. So tomorrow night we travel to Utah to play Jerry Sloans Jazz. Sloan just this week won his thousandth game as a head coach. Even though it was announced today Carlos Boozer isn't expected to play, Paul Milsap has been playing very well in his absence. Along with the suitcases and the jerseys we better bring our A Game if we expect to beat the Jazz in Salt Lake.
We have a gaping hole at SF right now. Batum is a 19 y/o rookie - he's not ready for big minutes. Outlaw's lack of basketball IQ kills us. Webster's status is unknown. Will this be a lingering injury? I can see KP packaging Raef for a Caron Butler, Gerald Wallace, or [pipe dream]Rudy Gay[/pipe dream].
so you're saying that you've chosen to live life in a vacuum... fine for you, but it's not for me. I prefer to look at the big picture which had a lot of Blazers contributing to the loss and a prayer answered by Turk to seal it STOMP
Travis made his mistakes in the game. But he did have a hand in Turkoglus face. Turk just made a great shot. Look at the video at this link and you can clearly see for yourself. http://www.clubblazers.com/post11892.html#p11892
Please, I'm not trying to start an argument, I'm asking a question. Mainly at STOMP and Andalusian. Please tell me, please....how does being up 108-100 with "100 seconds left" and then losing, due in very large part to the multiple boneheaded moves by 2 players, how is that "living in a vacuum"? So you're saying that the aforementioned multiple boneheaded moves wouldn't have been boneheaded if Turkoglu misses the shot? Seriously? Or that they wouldn't have been boneheaded if Roy makes 2 more FTs, or Sergio's layup goes in? How is that living in a vacuum?
