Portland Trailblazers (20-13) vs. Utah Jazz (18-16)

sabi · Post #61 » by **sabi** » Sun Jan 6, 2008 3:41 am

Wow at how much Jack can suck sometimes

doogul · Post #62 » by **doogul** » Sun Jan 6, 2008 3:51 am

Yeah. Without Jack, Blazers don't win the Chicago game (when he's doing good, it rocks) but damn...he's singlehandedly killing any momentum for the Blazers right now. Hopefully he can pick it up.

EGame · Post #63 » by **EGame** » Sun Jan 6, 2008 3:52 am

sabi wrote:Wow at how much Jack can suck sometimes

No kidding. He can either help us win games (refer to the Chicago game) or kill us (usually he kills us). Roy is obviously not himself and that is really hurting us. Also turnovers are killing us as well.

EGame · Post #64 » by **EGame** » Sun Jan 6, 2008 3:59 am

Terrible call, whatever.

edwinko · Post #65 » by **edwinko** » Sun Jan 6, 2008 4:02 am

EGame wrote:-= original quote snipped =-

No kidding. He can either help us win games (refer to the Chicago game) or kill us (usually he kills us). Roy is obviously not himself and that is really hurting us. Also turnovers are killing us as well.

roy has been out since the start of second quarter, wonder if he is ok

EGame · Post #66 » by **EGame** » Sun Jan 6, 2008 4:06 am

If we want any chance of winning we need to take care of the ball!!! That is the sole reason we are losing this game right now.

Milkdud · Post #67 » by **Milkdud** » Sun Jan 6, 2008 4:09 am

enjoy a long game of jack, i dont think we shall see much more of Roy tonight. (Pray im wrong)

edwinko · Post #68 » by **edwinko** » Sun Jan 6, 2008 4:10 am

EGame wrote:If we want any chance of winning we need to take care of the ball!!! That is the sole reason we are losing this game right now.

with roy out, i don't see how we are going to limit turnovers with jack handling the ball :banghead:

EGame · Post #69 » by **EGame** » Sun Jan 6, 2008 4:21 am

No Roy it looks like this half = not good for us.

Post #70 » by **The Sebastian Express** » Sun Jan 6, 2008 4:21 am

No Brandon, this is a loss.

EGame · Post #71 » by **EGame** » Sun Jan 6, 2008 4:22 am

Wow bad call, but whatever.

EGame · Post #72 » by **EGame** » Sun Jan 6, 2008 4:28 am

Wow, Webster is money.

sabi · Post #73 » by **sabi** » Sun Jan 6, 2008 4:30 am

yay Webster! yay!

EGame · Post #74 » by **EGame** » Sun Jan 6, 2008 4:32 am

Webster = a freaking all star

doogul · Post #75 » by **doogul** » Sun Jan 6, 2008 4:33 am

Holy )$*@# Webster! And way to go Joel on your FTs.

J~Rush · Post #76 » by **J~Rush** » Sun Jan 6, 2008 4:33 am

Webster

Butter · Post #77 » by **Butter** » Sun Jan 6, 2008 4:35 am

When Roy is dominating the ball, it seems that Webster has a tendency to fade away. It's almost like last year when Zach was the focal point of the offense.

I think Nate as the coach, and Roy as the floor leader need to start getting/keeping Webster more involved. If he can constantly be incorporated into the game plan, it adds another dimension to this team that is really effective.

EGame · Post #78 » by **EGame** » Sun Jan 6, 2008 4:37 am

Holy cow

EGame · Post #79 » by **EGame** » Sun Jan 6, 2008 4:37 am

Webster, I love you

Butter · Post #80 » by **Butter** » Sun Jan 6, 2008 4:40 am

Webster is going to give Rice a heart attack. On that last three, I thought Rice was going to have a corollary. :vent: