Professional and College Basketball Forums banner

Official Game Thread: Portland Trail Blazers @ Toronto Raptors (1/11/04)

753 views 26 replies 14 participants last post by  Trader Ed 
#1 ·
Portland (16-18, Away: 2-13) at Toronto (18-16, Home: 11-6)
Game time: 10:00 AM PST, 1:00 PM EST

Local (Portland) TV: FSNW
Local (Portland) Radio: 750 KXL AM,
Local (Portland) Spanish Radio: 1150 KRMZ

Local (Toronto) TV: global
Local (Toronto) Radio: The Fan 590 CJCL AM

----------------

I think the Blazers get road win #3. No real reason, just a feeling.

They've won the other 2 road games that I've made threads for anyway...
 
#5 ·
Is there any team more offensively challenged than us right now?

Right now Dale and Q are being a spark...

47 - 41 Raps, Dale has 12, more than 25% of our points :eek:
 
#7 ·
63 - 50 Raps end of 3rd

Dale has 14 pts, 6 rbs

man we are stinking up the place... shooting is horrible, just horrible 19-64 from 2, 1-9 from 3
 
#11 ·
Fun Stats:

Derek Anderson- 0-10 FGs (open jump shots)

Vladimir Stepania- 0 rebounds in 13 minutes

Dale Davis- 15 pts, 13 rebs, 2 blks, 2 assts, 0 turnovers


Dang, you know, when Zach was playing so well in Nov-Dec, it seemed too good to be true. Seemed like he made every shot he took. And his stats were like no 22 year old had put up in 30 years. Now that the scouting report has been completed and faxed around the league, he doesn't even look like a worthy starter in this league. What happened to his rebounding? Cheeks used to say that we could get 20 pts out of Z-Bo without running a play for him. We ran plays for him all day today and he struggled to score 10. He's not working the offensive glass anymore. He's not getting to the line. He's just throwing up soft hooks that anyone can block now that they've studied his tape. Terrible. THIS is who we're going to build around?
 
#12 ·
Yes, Zach is struggling. No, that doesn't change anything about the outlook for building around him (although, I've had reservations all along). The primary reason he is having such a tough go of it is because he has so little offensive help. Teams are able to put their center on him and bother the shot (much like teams used to do against Rasheed late in games), knowing Dale/Vlad/RBB/Slavko won't cause them matchup problems. On the other end of the floor, having a less mobile big front line against our defense doesn't matter, because we're not good enough to stop anyone regardless.

Get Zach some legitimate offensive help and I guarantee his effectiveness will shoot back up.

Can't say I'm surprised by DA...

Dan
 
#13 ·
One of the saddest things? Dale Davis has gone from the 5th- or 6th-best player on the roster to start the season to suddenly look like the BEST player.

And he's done this after taking a snow break during the MN game.

:no:

Ed O.
 
#14 ·
What good is it to surround Zach with "help" if he won't pass to that "help"?

Why are we building around a defensive liability whose offense has been scouted to a dead halt? We don't really know very much about Z-Bo, how he will deliver over a whole season and more, etc.

This is also a guy who punched a teammate in the face and drew large amounts of blood. Is Z-Bo worth it?

I'm no answering these questions. I'm just saying we need to consider them.
 
#15 ·
Originally posted by <b>NathanLane</b>!

This is also a guy who punched a teammate in the face and drew large amounts of blood. Is Z-Bo worth it?

I'm no answering these questions. I'm just saying we need to consider them.
I think they're fair questions, but I think that in answering that, you need to consider the alternatives... this isn't a Bill Walton-or-Moses Malone situation, a Vince Carter-or-Tracy McGrady situation, or even a Magic Johnson-or-Paul Westhead. This is either build around a young, very productive PF or don't... I don't see any other direction the team COULD go at the moment.

The team SHOULD be figuring out what the value of ZR is around the league. They should for every player on their roster.

But Zach's cheap, effective, hard-working and liked by the fans. I doubt Portland could get enough value for him that it would be worth moving him.

Ed O.
 
#16 ·
That was pathetic.

I can't believe I woke up early for that garbage.

I think the Blazers are last year's Bulls team. A 54 win team at home, but a 6 win team on the road.

Also remind me of the '76-'77 Sonics.

I don't know anymore... I'm about ready to give up on this season once and for all.
 
#20 ·
Originally posted by <b>HearToTemptYou</b>!
That was pathetic.

I can't believe I woke up early for that garbage.

I think the Blazers are last year's Bulls team. A 54 win team at home, but a 6 win team on the road.

Also remind me of the '76-'77 Sonics.

I don't know anymore... I'm about ready to give up on this season once and for all.
Wow, how did the Bulls get to play that many home games? :D
 
#21 ·
I'll try to post some pics tonight from the Air Canada Centre. The Blazers looked good for the first 10 mins of the game, they were leading easily up until the 12min mark then it definately all fell down.

Q had a couple wicked shots and was looking pretty good overall. DA is definately still hurt. He was laying on the floor with hot towels or ice packs for most of the game when he wasn't on the court and he was clearly very stiff almost the entire game. Mr. (un)popular was Damon who EVERYONE clearly hates in Toronto. Anytime he had the ball the stadium started booing. I was amazed he was able to get any free throws in.
Vince Carter pulled off some amazing moves though it was interesting to see he was never called for travelling when he clearly did several times.
 
#22 ·
Originally posted by <b>Gym Rat</b>!


Wow, how did the Bulls get to play that many home games? :D
What I said up above is just kinda goes off what their record was.

The bulls won 30 games last year, 3 on the road, 27 at home.

You play 41 games at home and 41 on the road.

Since the bulls won 27 of 41 games at home, one can assume that if they were to play the entire season at home, they would have won 54 games, since (27/41) = (54/82). They won about 66% of their home games.

Now, the same goes on the road. They won 3 road games. If we assume that they had played their entire season on the road, they would have only won 6 games, assuming they won the same percentage of road games. They won about 7% of their road games.

So, at home, the bulls were a 54 win team. On the road, they were a 6 win team.

Does this make any sense now?
 
#23 ·
Originally posted by <b>HearToTemptYou</b>!


What I said up above is just kinda goes off what their record was.

The bulls won 30 games last year, 3 on the road, 27 at home.

You play 41 games at home and 41 on the road.

Since the bulls won 27 of 41 games at home, one can assume that if they were to play the entire season at home, they would have won 54 games, since (27/41) = (54/82). They won about 66% of their home games.

Now, the same goes on the road. They won 3 road games. If we assume that they had played their entire season on the road, they would have only won 6 games, assuming they won the same percentage of road games. They won about 7% of their road games.

So, at home, the bulls were a 54 win team. On the road, they were a 6 win team.

Does this make any sense now?
wow....

Yes, it does make sense now.
 
#24 ·
Is it a coincidence that we did so poorly offensively and that Mc Innis and Person only played together five minutes in the entire game? It seems to me that these two work very effectively together and they create open shots for each other. Mc Innis also occasionaly creates a layup for a teammate by driving and dishing. And of course Person is the best passer into the post. Since we are a rebuilding team maybe it doesn't make much sense to play Person, but does it make any sense to play Damon, unless we"re hoping to get a lottery pick? At least if Person plays maybe the young guys will get an idea how an offense should work.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top