Thread Tools

Display Modes

**sa1177** · 03-29-2006, 05:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tlong

They would make a lousy trapping team. They don't have enough size to bother people and they would not get any calls being as young as they are.

Exactly my point...no size, horrid rebounding, Telfair's D' sucks, Jack's is better but can't "run and gun" like Telfair so neither PG would really work in a "run and gun" system.

yakbladder · 03-29-2006, 10:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mediocre man

So you don't think that Telfair/Jack, Outlaw, Webster/Miles, Khryapa and Joel would make a decent trapping team?

I think that team would do much better playing that type of defense than the one they play now where Dixon gets posted up every time down the floor, or guards drive the lean with ease through our zone.

As much as I am astounded by your ability to count backwards from 24 most of the time (because I, myself, always get caught up around 14 trying to remember what I was doing), I'm curious as to whether you didn't see, are forgetting, or expecting a different outcome than when Rick "I'm only good for college, please pity me" Pitino tried to run something similar with the Celtics.

Now if by run and gun you mean winning-through-attrition Loyola Marymount, then I can better understand your tactics.

**BBert** · 03-30-2006, 03:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by yakbladder

Now if by run and gun you mean winning-through-attrition Loyola Marymount, then I can better understand your tactics.

That ALMOST worked for the Nuggets. But not quite. Thanks for the memory. You just don't see many 140 point games any more!

mediocre man · 03-30-2006, 03:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by yakbladder

As much as I am astounded by your ability to count backwards from 24 most of the time (because I, myself, always get caught up around 14 trying to remember what I was doing), I'm curious as to whether you didn't see, are forgetting, or expecting a different outcome than when Rick "I'm only good for college, please pity me" Pitino tried to run something similar with the Celtics.

Now if by run and gun you mean winning-through-attrition Loyola Marymount, then I can better understand your tactics.

Thanks for the support on the 24 thing. I certainly could have worded run and gun better. I'd like the Blazers to push the ball at every opportunity. Last nights game was a prome example. At one point the ball was moved quickly ahead to Blake who instead of popping the quick 15 foot jumper, he paused and let the defense catch, and shot the same shot anyway. I'd like the Blazers to trap a bit more than they do and create turnovers. That's all.

blue32 · 03-31-2006, 08:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hasoos

Is there some reason you keep on throwing direct insults on the guy for stating his opinion? He did not say in any way that he was smarter then Nate. He said that he thought it was a better idea to play them more, which I agree with. I don't give a rats *** if you or Nate think its the right thing to do, the young players are the future of the team, and Juan "I never met a shot I didn't like" Dixon and Steve Blake are in it as backups, at best. So when the season has melted down to the point it has now where the games mean very little as there will be no playoffs, the young guys should be playing and getting experience, not held back so we can experience the wonderful growth of Dixon and Blake that isn't going to happen.

Secondly, I can solidly say over the last few games the young guys have EASILY out played Dixon and Blake. Scoring a bunch of points Dixon does from time to time does not make you a good player, all it shows is you have a knack for scoring. Maybe if Dixon wasn't playing so much 1 on 1 ball and jacking up every shot like it was his last, the other guys might have had some better stats then they did. Can Juan defend anybody? I doubt it, not at the NBA level.

Maybe if Blake, Dixon, Zbo Kryapa and Joel hadn't dug the Blazers double digit deficits in the beginning of each half of the last few games, and the younger players who played them to a standstill, the Blazers might have won a few of those games.

i have to disagree with the comments made about the young guys outplaying Blake.

They've all had their inconsistancies.....and Blake has been just as consistent as anyone else on the team, if not steadily improving with the time he gets. In fact, his shooting percentages are getting pretty damn good.

Steve will most likely be the main PG in the future with Telfair backing him up. I dont see him leaving.

Now Dixon on the other hand......I like him, but he's probably going to be going...specially if Blake and Martel swap at the 2, JJ and telfair swap at the 1.

**Talkhard** · 03-31-2006, 09:24 AM

I'm glad Nate is coming back, and that he has every intention of completing his contract. But I was a little surprised by his performance during the interview. To put it bluntly, he didn't seem that articulate. I thought his coaching success was based on great communication skills, like Pat Riley or Phil Jackson, but perhaps I was wrong. Anybody else ever hear him speak on other occasions? Was this just a bad performance, and not indicative of his communication skills?

blue32 · 03-31-2006, 10:05 AM

not indicative. I've heard him speak elsewhere in public. he does a great job.

i think hes probably just tired of the constant stupid questions about the team and its future.

Thread Tools Display Modes

Thread Tools

Display Modes