Oh the O.. .

[Mr Odd]

Im going to bring up something that was
touched on around the start of the season.

The reason why is because now I think its
more easier for people to see. Perhaps
before it wasnt as clear to people.

The offense system, or lack there of.

When the Blazers were on their winning
streak they were scoring well & it seemed
like the starting of the season offensive
problems were fixed!! But thats far from
the case, the reason why it seemed to be
fixed was because James finally started to
get some good playing time which spread
out the court, that was half of it. The other
half was ball movement, passing the ball
to the open guy & knocking down the shot.
Just about everyone was hitting their shots
so it seemed the offense was fixed.. .At
the time of the winning streak Barkley
said something that made me pat myself
on the back because I noticed it aswell &
that was the Blazers got no easy buckets.
Everything was, find the open guy and hit
the jump shot. There were no cuts, no pins,
no fastbreaks, low amount of dunks, it was
basically all jump shots. Ok, im rambling a
little bit so I'll just cut to the chase.. .

My question to you is:

Does the offensive problem point to the players or Nate??

Now some of you are going to say that 95ppg isnt
bad for young players & I agree, but if this team
had some type of set offensive system it would
most likely bump to 98-102ppg. Its just hard to
watch the Blazers work so hard to score when
I see other teams have guys open under the
basket from pick & slips, cuts and screens.

[Yadadimean]

Id say 65% players, 35% Nate. It seems like EVERYBODY wants to be a jump shooter. It looks like Roy , Rodriguez and Jack are the only ones who want to get anything going towards the basket. Our offensive rebounding is virtually zero because nobody is close to the basket on offense as everyone is hoping to get a jump shot attempt, not a short drop step and a hook, not a dunk not a layup. Oden coming in and an offseason in the weight room for LMA should drastically improve our easy basket situation.

[Yadadimean]

sign Robert Paulsen and everything will be solved. He has b*tch tits.

[Wizenheimer]

There is far too much of overestimating the talent on this team.

IMO, it's ridiculous to say if only the blazers had a better coach, they'd be doing better.

In almost every game. portland is 'better' in only one or two positions.

Look at last night, rondo is better then blake, allen is better then jack, pierce and roy is probably a draw with the edge to pierce because Roy is playing out of position, garnet is better then LMA...only pryzbilla was better then perkins. And boston's bench was better then portland's bench.

The blazers have a talent deficit. Some of that is due to youth and inexperience, but a lot is due to weak players.

And if anyone thinks that Doc Rivers is a better coach then Nate, they are delusional.

Portland starts one player that would be starting on most teams...just one. LMA is borderline. The other 3 starters are in reality, little better then most bench players...and maybe not.

The cold fact is, nate really doesn't have a lot to work with.

If anybody should be blamed for the condition of the blazers it should be Whitsitt, Patterson, and Nash.

[d-train]

Nate hasn't made a jump shot all year so I blame him.

[Mr Odd]

So in a nutshell, coaches only win with good players??

If thats the case, what makes a good player?? Talent alone??

Just trying to figure out how people think.

[Red Robot]

There are two problems as I see it. The first is the total lack of points in transition. I haven't seen the stats lately, but Portland is probably still the worst fast break team in the NBA. Last season they were dead last by a wide margin. I think this one's mostly on Nate, but I don't really know. I wouldn't be surprised if this changed as soon as next season.

The second problem is an over-reliance on jumpshooting. I don't think the Blazers really have the personnel to do a lot of scoring in the paint right now. Only Roy and Jack have any ability to score on penetration. The bigs are jumpshooters plus Przybilla. Yeah, to some extent you could tell the players to take it to the basket more or to spend more time in the post, but that wouldn't be playing to their strengths. Oden should help a lot, but this is still something Pritchard and co should look to address in trades or the draft.

Portland's half-court offense is actually pretty good. The Blazers get a decent number of points per possession even without getting any in transition. With some post scoring and an average fast break, this will be one of the better offenses in the league.

[Mr Odd]

Hey Red Robot, havent seen you in awhile.


I hope youre right about the change in
transition points next season. That can
help with some easy buckets which
this team needs in the worst way.. .

[PDXKnight]

I'd say it's more the players than Nate. During the winning streak, everyone was hot at the most important times in games and they were able to pull out a 13 game winning streak. The only offense used during that time frame was players shooting jumpers and players driving in on a very rare occasion. The Blazers look very lost on offense much of the time and I really think Nate has a lot to do with it. McMillan's been given young players that are open to learning new philosophies and really hasn't taught them much offensively or defensively. Nate's a mentor, and not much of a coach (as your avatar says, Odd), and I'm really not convinced otherwise from what I've seen out of the Blazers. I know you have to expect some errors from young players but it seems like nate's offensive playbook is rather thin and he leaves the rest up to the players.

[d-train]

So in a nutshell, coaches only win with good players??

If thats the case, what makes a good player?? Talent alone??

Just trying to figure out how people think.

A good player makes a good player. And, a good coach makes a good coach.

Correction: Brandon Roy makes a good coach. In generic terms, great players make a coach good.

[Mr Odd]

So whats Nates job when it comes to
the offense of the Portland TrailBlazers?


Thanks for letting me pick all of your brains.

[Tim Lehrbach]

Yeah, to some extent you could tell the players to take it to the basket more or to spend more time in the post, but that wouldn't be playing to their strengths.

I think this is the key point. Even when the jumpers aren't falling, there is a higher probability of the next jump shot going in than probability of a squad full of inexperienced jump shooters taking the ball to the rim and finishing or getting to the line. Changing the approach to the Blazers' offense just wouldn't do any good, most likely.

[d-train]

So whats Nates job when it comes to
the offense of the Portland TrailBlazers?

Nate's job is to assess his talent then develop and deploy a game plan that gives his team their best chance to succeed. To be successful Nate needs the players that can get the job done because without the players Nate is nowhere. Nate also has to be a politician and a salesman because he needs the players to believe in him and his game plan.

[Yadadimean]

And if anyone thinks that Doc Rivers is a better coach then Nate, they are delusional.

realest ish you ever said.

[Yadadimean]

So whats Nates job when it comes to
the offense of the Portland TrailBlazers?


Thanks for letting me pick all of your brains.

bitchtits

[Mr Odd]

-= original quote snipped =-


Nate's job is to assess his talent then develop and deploy a game plan that gives his team their best chance to succeed. To be successful Nate needs the players that can get the job done because without the players Nate is nowhere. Nate also has to be a politician and a salesman because he needs the players to believe in him and his game plan.

I agree with that.

Im just wondering tho in developing a game plan
if Nate has any plays to help his team score. It
seems to me there arent any. At best its move
the ball around & find the open guy or pick'n roll.

I know you can only do so much with the players you have.

[Billy]

-= original quote snipped =-



I agree with that.

Im just wondering tho in developing a game plan
if Nate has any plays to help his team score. It
seems to me there arent any. At best its move
the ball around & find the open guy or pick'n roll.

I know you can only do so much with the players you have.

I think a lot of it has to do with the players. Without the right players the best game plan won't work. That's not to say Nate is fantastic at calling plays on offense, but the players have to be able to execute the offensive game plan.

80% of all offenses are pick and roll. Some teams do varying degrees of disguising their pick and rolls, but for the most part it all comes down to that. Other than that, you look at PHX, GS, Dallas and other high powered offenses and you'll see that ball movement is key to all of that.

Right now the Blazers are suffering more from too much ball movement than it is suffering from just passing the ball around to find offense. Basically, what I'm saying is the team is too eager to make the extra pass right now than it is to shoot. Obviously as they mature, and with the help of Nate and the coaching staff they should get past that. It's on Nate to make sure that guys know that they have his trust to take a shot--even if it's not usually in their skill set. It's on the players to take the shot.

I also think that in general the Blazers roster makes it tricky to fully gain an offensive identity. One reason is the youth, the other is strictly the type of players Portland has.

Jones was huge for Portland because he was consistent. His confidence spread like wild fire, and the Blazers looked a lot more willing to fire up shots when he was out there than they are now. These young guys like Outlaw, Webster, and even Jack and Roy are still streaky. When their shot is on they are fearless, when it's off they will get complacent to various degrees--obviously Roy much less than the others.

When you look for an offensive post presence on the team you won't find much of one. Aldridge still doesn't seem fully committed to it, Joel can't and Frye is hit and miss. That begins to limit what Portland can do offensively outside of pick and rolls and extra ball movement.

The other thing is the whole defense for offense argument. Joel is never going to average 10 points a game. But you have to play him to keep the game close. Frye can net you 20 points if you give him the looks, but he's never going to be able to control the paint like Joel. But if you can't really use 1 of your players on the offensive end other than for screens or the occasional roll to the hoop you are facing more double teams both in the post on Aldridge/Frye or up top on Roy.

Nate I think is doing well considering that the players he has. They are still young and learning, and you can just see the glaring difference between having some experience on the floor (Joel, Jones, hell even Raef) versus playing with a lineup with a combined 7 years NBA experience.

I hope that Nate continues with his new philosophy of getting the ball to Aldridge early and often. That has added a new element to Portland's offense. But McMillan has to stay committed to running that offense and the players have to be committed to get the ball in the right place.

[d-train]

I agree with that.

Im just wondering tho in developing a game plan
if Nate has any plays to help his team score. It
seems to me there arent any. At best its move
the ball around & find the open guy or pick'n roll.

I know you can only do so much with the players you have.

There is nothing Nate can do that would eliminate the need for his players to outplay their opponent. One thing I like to see is a team that exploits its advantages over their opponent. I don't see the Blazers doing very much of that. But, you tell me what advantages this team has. For the most part, Blazers are a team of jump shooters that can't create their own shots. The only advantage the team can ever manage is if Roy can draw a double team then move the ball to an open player. Good teams have 2 or 3 advantages they can exploit repeatedly throughout a game that no team can defend. I said it a couple times during the win streak that I'm surprised at the success the team is having with nobody other than Roy that can create easy opportunities.

[Yadadimean]

"...half man, half ant - he's MANT!!!"

[Mr Odd]

So if the team is full of jump-shooters (which is true)
why arent there more screens and pins to free up the
players?? I also agree that the Blazers need to
exploit its advantages with player matchups.