Celtics vs Blazers Gamethread - Wednesday, January 16th

[Al n' Perk No Layups!]

-= original quote snipped =-



You win the championship, you are the best team.

Last time I checked, no one has won the 2008 NBA championship. So with that being your deciding factor, how do you conclude that the Pistons are the best team in the league?

[DynastyInTheMaking]

So observing from court side:

-We missed a lot of easy shots and did not produce many second shot opportunities.

-Clear as day, Ray Allen wasn't hesitating to shoot and I think that's exactly what he needs to do - just play his game.

-While his play will not show up in a box score, Gabe was solid and played with confidence. His steal at the start of the 4th quarter (as they have Ellis Hobbs saying 4th quarter and so on and have the noise meter going) really gave us momentum and kept that lineup on the floor longer.

-Big Baby looks very beefy, I thought he lost weight?

-The Garden is an awesome place to catch a basketball game these days. They didn't do everything that they normally do for entertainment but the atmosphere was unbelievable.

[farzi]

-= original quote snipped =-



Last time I checked, no one has won the 2008 NBA championship. So with that being your deciding factor, how do you conclude that the Pistons are the best team in the league?

I didn't call them the best team, someone else did.

[DaVoiceMaster]

Hey guys, sorry about the few Blazer fans that were over here stirring the pot. Most Blazer fans are pretty cool, but we have a lot of new Blazer fans this year. They're still in the potty training stage. We'll get there though. Good game tonight. Hope to have a different outcome next time!

[theGreatRC]

Hey guys, sorry about the few Blazer fans that were over here stirring the pot. Most Blazer fans are pretty cool, but we have a lot of new Blazer fans this year. They're still in the potty training stage. We'll get there though. Good game tonight. Hope to have a different outcome next time!

I don't, but good game. Only two players I like on your team though are Outlaw and Roy.

[RayBourque]

Good game tonight. Boston's experience definitely showed itself. Since the Blazers turned it around a month and a half ago there has been at least one player every game who has been near exceptional, but tonight no one on the team was. I credit the job the C's did on defense in the second half - keeping Portland out on the perimeter and in their face - to be the big reason why.

The Blazers also didn't respond well to the aggressiveness of the C's. I don't know if that was intimidation by the team with the best record or something else - I sure wish that when Portland fouled they would have at least made it count and fouled hard. Young team and we're learning I guess, and at least they stayed in it until the end.

Then there was RayRay. Just like Seattle days watching him get hot and having your hope fade.

[darrendaye]

Whew, I hope this marks a return to an assertive offense. Star calls? Maybe, but then again, that's a reality in the league that "established" players get the benefit of the doubt. While I don't know how many were really questionable, if that's the perception, I don't care. But in order to generate calls, star or otherwise, you have to take it to the defense which is something we saw a re-emergence of in this game. And I pray something that stays for a while and becomes more infectious with this team.

Driving doesn't mean not taking perimeter shots. But rather, it contributes to finding more wide open perimeter shots and also, by design, leads to having more offensive players under the basket and increases the likelihood that you are drawing defensive players away from the basket. The result, better opportunity for rebounds through positioning.

On the whole Posey vs. Perkins argument at the end of games. If the offense is truly clicking like it was during the second half, there's less need to concern yourselves with half court size disadvantages. In some games, like Washington, where they had PF who can, and was, battling KG to a draw on the boards, the presense of a legit big man gave the Wizards such a tremendous advantage that I believe it necessitated a deviation from the norm. But on most nights, if KG can win the battle against the other team's 4 and fight to a draw with the 5, the use of Posey provides much greater benefit than harm.

[humblebum]

I agree Darrendaye but the reality is that I don't think Doc truly can distinguish one situation from the other. He feels that that is his BEST lineup and won't go away from it until the team or a particular matchup has been almost completely exploited. By then it's practically TOO late to make the change. That's the one problem that I have on a consistent basis with Doc this season. The House/Posey plus the three stars lineup should be used more sparingly while Baby and Perk should get more minutes. Most of the time the team needs inside scoring because all too often this team falls in love with the jump shot.

Now if that Posey/House plus the three stars lineup is being used effectively than there will be a LOT of slashing from the guard spots because the paint should be clear for the drive. If that's not happening than this lineup usually hurts the team more than it helps.

[Tenbomber]

On the whole Posey vs. Perkins argument at the end of games. If the offense is truly clicking like it was during the second half, there's less need to concern yourselves with half court size disadvantages. In some games, like Washington, where they had PF who can, and was, battling KG to a draw on the boards, the presense of a legit big man gave the Wizards such a tremendous advantage that I believe it necessitated a deviation from the norm. But on most nights, if KG can win the battle against the other team's 4 and fight to a draw with the 5, the use of Posey provides much greater benefit than harm.

I agree with what you said....Portland was unable to exploit this angle the way the Wizards did...

Doc made a right decision last night in staying with "an advantage".

But I just hope he's able to realize when small ball "is not working" and make the adjustment and have Perk help close the door before the cattle leave the barn....

[darrendaye]

Humble, I was critical of Doc for what I called in the game thread at the time, coaching on auto-pilot. So, I recognize that if this is a trend that continues it's something that is subject to criticism about his aptitude for making adjustments. And this can be debated, of course. I'm just offering my perspective.

I don't know what he's thinking at the time, so I always hesitate to judge aptitude unless I understand the motivation or the logic in acting in a certain manner. And, it's rare that someone from the media will actually go into this level of detail and ask him directly what he was thinking in arriving at that decision. It's probably rarer that he will allow himself to expose this information for fear of such criticism. So, personally, I'm left to recall the circumstance, see if he makes the same decision if the same situation presents itself, and arrive at a conclusion from there. The damning evidence in the Washington game was that he actually made the suggested substitution, but the momentum had already shifted with the move from a 7 point lead to a 2 point lead. You, and I, also don't have tangible evidence that this would have altered the course of events as the momentum did not take a reversal after the substitution was made.

Just food for thought.

[darrendaye]

-= original quote snipped =-



I agree with what you said....Portland was unable to exploit this angle the way the Wizards did...

Doc made a right decision last night in staying with "an advantage".

But I just hope he's able to realize when small ball "is not working" and make the adjustment and have Perk help close the door before the cattle leave the barn....

Sorry for the delayed reply, but I missed you posting this as I was replying to Humble. We agree with the principle, it would seem. What made matters worse, in my mind, is the fact that the team has been sputtering offensively. I suppose one could make an argument that you can win despite of defense by slugging out victories. The quirk in that logic is offensive rebounds when you talk about using a smaller unit. But, at least I can accept it as a viable theory. But, when the recent play suggests you take a "hold on tight" approach when you have a lead, because of an offense that has gone on prolonged scoreless stretches recently, I am less receptive to the score at all costs philosophy.

So, as we both discussed in the game thread, I was very much against his decision in this circumstance. I just don't know that you can attribute it, at least referencing just this one incident, to a condemnation of his general philosophy. Even if there is a consensous opinion that this was a poor decision, what is the benchmark for determining how many mistakes qualify someone as being a poor tactician? I mean, my impression is that he is not a very good one at this time, but I need a little more evidence before I'm so certain that he's a poor one that I call for his head.