Game 69: Portland vs Milwaukee 7:00pm Comcast

[Dame Lizard]

Stotts COMPLETELY mismanaged the last 4 minutes of this game. That 4 point swing when the Bucks went big again and the Blazers stayed small was huge. Not using timeouts at the end of the game to draw up good shots? Piss poor coaching, IMO.

Oh well. Blazers live and die by the 3pt shot. At only 19% on 21 attempts, I'm surprised they were even in the game. I bet they wish they had those 10 missed FTs back...

Agreed. Stotts not inserting Nurkic back on in those final few minutes was a huge mistake. They scored 8 points in a row in the paint, and if Nurkic was there in the paint, I don't think they would have attempted a number of those shots to begin with.

I was calling for Crabbe to be replaced by Nurkic with ~4 minutes left. Crabbe had a clutch block and steal to finish the game which was great and gave us a chance, so he contributed really well there, but we can't have Vonleh being our centre when they have Giannis and Henson on the floor.

We 100% deserved that loss. The crazy amount of turnovers, Stott's small ball which got exposed at the end of the game, Aminu and Turner playing like garbage, the team not being able to buy points during that woeful stretch in the 2nd quarter, really poor decision making by Lillard at the end.

I really wanted us to win that one, but ah well, worst case scenario is we get a better draft pick, so not the worst thing in the world.

[Dame Lizard]

Whilst Nurkic is excellent at getting steals, his first 2 fouls (which had him initially sitting, and which set up him being in foul consideration all game) came from reach-around gambles. We need him on the floor to win, so we can't afford for him to be sitting out for these 'petty' foul reasons.

[zzaj]

Whilst Nurkic is excellent at getting steals, his first 2 fouls (which had him initially sitting, and which set up him being in foul consideration all game) came from reach-around gambles. We need him on the floor to win, so we can't afford for him to be sitting out for these 'petty' foul reasons.

Yeah, the Bucks feed cut to a shot of a fairly miffed looking Stotts after that second foul. Nurkic tends to go for that wrap around reach a lot. He gets away with it sometimes, but IMO that falls into 'trying to make the home run play' territory, and should be addressed. If Nurkic had a good backup, I'd say be aggressive. But the Blazers effectively only have one Center on the roster. They can't afford to have that player getting into foul trouble.

[zzaj]

BTW, folks were saying that Stotts blew it by not calling time outs. He did call time outs. Staying small when the Bucks went longer. Nurcic was reinserted. That Stotts mismanaged the final 4 minutes. The Blazers took back the lead at that time.

I learned a while back not to respond to your baiting, 'I only have an opinion by telling someone else they're wrong' posts, but I'll bite on this one since it's passively aimed at me and since you're spreading unclear information.

The Blazers only took 2 timeouts in the 4th quarter. One at 5:43 and one at 1:39. The Blazers took back the lead by 1 point at 4:31 and extended it by 2 points at 3:46. The Blazers were outscored 8-2 the rest of the way.

The Bucks took a timeout and Henson entered the game at the 3:46 mark. The score was 88-85, Blazers at that time.

Stotts called a timeout at 1:39 to reinsert Nurkic. In that intervening 2:07 the Bucks outscored the Blazers 8-2, making the score 93-90 with 1:39 left to play. 93-90 was the final score. The Blazers had possession 3 times in that 2:07 in which to reinsert Nurkic.

The only 4 shots that were taken in the last 1:39 were Lillard's pull up 30' jump shot, with 18 seconds on the shot clock. CJ's wild layup attempt at :41, with 18 seconds left on the shot clock. Lillard's blocked layup with :06 left. And Lillard's desperate 28' shot as time expired.

Terry Stotts had 4 possessions in the final 1:39 to take a timeout and draw up a play for a shot. But he chose not to.

Here is the play-by-play if you want to look:
http://www.espn.com/nba/playbyplay?gameId=400900452

------

I don't really care what your opinion is regarding the shot selection at the end of the game, or whether it was a good move to stay small for 2 minutes when the Bucks went big. The conventional coaching path is to save and use timeouts to setup 'good' shots in end game situations. Stotts was unconventional and the game ended up as a loss. I'd bet if you asked Stotts if he would have managed the game differently in hindsight, he'd say yes.

[Epicurus]

Please stop presuming so much, starting with "baiting." Disagreement is not "baiting," and ending with your insight into Stotts' hinsight. Thanks for review of the time period. I had already done so both in replays and on NBA play-by-play site. My opinion was based upon that review. It differs from yours, but then I am more reluctant to play the coach scapegoating game (to prove that I not he should be the well paid coach).

[Epicurus]

Oh yeah, the lineup which had a 17-5 run to take the lead (along with a 14-4 in the third, not the same but still small) run did allow an 0-6 counter run near the end. So it had during that quarter a 17-11 advantage. Are you really that sure what a conventional coach would have done? It also didn't turn the ball over nearly as much as Nurk lineups. Maybe that matters in closing out a game, along with for that night better foul shooting.

[monopoman]

Well despite losing this game which was disappointing, at least Denver is following us with a loss in their last game. A win against Milwaukee would have given us the 8th spot in the playoffs due to owning the tie breaker but at least Denver didn't widen the gap with a win.

I think this team will usually struggle against teams that focus on grind it out defensive play and that seems to be the Bucks MO. To even keep it close was a pretty damn impressive feat, especially when both teams are the two hottest teams in the NBA over the last 10 games.

[zzaj]

Epicurus, I'm not really interested in having a philosophical discussion on what presumption or 'baiting' is.

We have different opinions on how the last 4 minutes should have been handled, and that's OK. We can leave it at that.

[Epicurus]

Epicurus, I'm not really interested in having a philosophical discussion on what presumption or 'baiting' is.

We have different opinions on how the last 4 minutes should have been handled, and that's OK. We can leave it at that.

That would be fine except I haven't suggested how I believe that last 3 plus minutes should have been handled. Rather my point is about the context for judging how it was handled.

[Roy The Natural]

Epicurus, I'm not really interested in having a philosophical discussion on what presumption or 'baiting' is.

We have different opinions on how the last 4 minutes should have been handled, and that's OK. We can leave it at that.

Yea, I think most Blazer's fans found the return of unmitigated hero ball frustrating.

http://www.csnnw.com/video/where-was-nurkic-down-stretch

Not the biggest fan of Dusty and Cam, but they hit the nail on the head here. The ending was brutal, and as much as I love Lillard his decision making was ABSOLUTELY a factor in not getting good looks. The video encapsulates EXACTLY what I saw, and said... and probably what the majority of fans were thinking over the last minute or so of the game.

"That's hero ball though, that's just bad basketball." Great quote, absolutely... that is absolutely what that was, and it's frustrating when hero ball isn't what the Blazers have been succeeding on as of late (at least down the stretch), and definitely wasn't what was caused the swing in the game in the 3rd-4th quarters.

[PDXKnight]

Lol can't we all just get along?