# Quick: Martell Doubtful, Inactive; Udoka starts; Roy over Dickau; Graham In; etc...



## Samuel (Jan 1, 2003)

http://behindblazersbeat.blogs.oregonlive.com/



Jason Quick said:


> The Blazers submitted their opening day roster to the NBA today, and surprisingly went with 15 players, which meant Stephen Graham is temporarily on the team.


Not a bad idea. This gives Graham a chance to prove himself on a team in need of impact players. It also gives Portland flexibility at the 3 with Webster out.



Jason Quick said:


> The Blazers' inactive players were LaMarcus Aldridge, Darius Miles ... *and Martell Webster.*
> ...
> Not exactly uplifting news for those who were hoping Webster's lower back pain/spasms would improve enough for him to play in Wednesdays's season opener at Seattle. But keep in mind that teams can change their inactive list up to 60-minutes before tipoff.
> ...
> After Monday's practice, coach Nate McMillan called Webster questionable. Then later, he called him doubtful.


Under the new CBA, Martell can be moved on and off the IL on a game-by-game basis, 60 min. before tipoff. The move just gives Graham a spot on the roster in case the back doesn't start feeling better.



Jason Quick said:


> If I had to guess, I would say *Ime Udoka is going to get the start.* He's shown he is a solid defender, and the Blazers will need that at small forward on Wednesday in guarding Rashard Lewis, one of the league's future stars who has already begun to blossom. Also, there's a growing vision around headquarters that sees using Travis Outlaw as an spurt/energy guy off the bench. I also sense that Nate likes Outlaw more and more as a power forward who can spread the floor, leaving him open for additional, albeit sparse, minutes when Zach Randolph gets a breather.


This is solid managing. Outlaw has very little understanding of help defense, and the only thing he can really do on that end of the floor at this point in his development is block shots. Moving him to the 4 when opposing teams go Phoenix on us makes sense and gives Outlaw more minutes.



Jason Quick said:


> In other lineup related news, McMillan today said that *his backup point guard will be Brandon Roy, not Dan Dickau. *


That Dickau isn't beating out Roy at the PG spot doesn't surprise me. What does surprise me is management's apparent willingness to baptise Roy right over the fire. It will be very interesting, then, when Roy passes last season's total of 33 games on January 6th against Sacramento. Let's hope he can stay healthy enough for that type of workload.



Jason Quick said:


> My guess on the captains: Zach Randolph, Joel Przybilla and Jarrett Jack. I told McMillan my choices, and he smiled coyly. I'm pretty sure I'm right. We'll see.


That's a good guess on Quick's part. Przy is a shoo in, as is Jack. The third is either Roy or Randolph, and Randolph might be the correct choice here. It's obvious that management is ready for him to finally best his performance in 02-03 and take a leadership role on the team. 

I think he's up to the challenge.


----------



## Xericx (Oct 29, 2004)

*Re: Quick: Martell Doubtful, Inactive; Udoka starts; Roy over Dickau; Graham In; etc.*

I really hate this guard juggling, which I believe is the cause of a lot of turnovers. When there is no dedicated POINT GUARD and the SG is assuming the roles, then we get into a situation where there is no direction on offense....as far as in a traditional sense in which the PG is running the show. I DO NOT want to see Dickau or Jack playing at the 2-guard spot. Roy needs to have the SG mentality and its hard when he is being asked to play the PG. I'd play Dickau at the backup PG.

What about NBDL? I'd send Sergio over there for a bit until the rotations make themselves more clear. 

I really hope we run the offense through Zach often this year. It worked really well in the one preaseason game I saw and I've been advocating that the last few years.


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

This is why Nate shouldn't be coaching the team. Ime is a nice story, and a better perimeter defender than Travis, but Outlaw has busted his *** this year, and shown that he can actually play. He's much better offensively than Ime, and also a better off the ball help defender for blocks. He wants to put Travis at the 4 where we have Zach, Raef, Magloire, and Aldridge already at that possition. While it might be his best possition going forward, right now we need him at the 3....(where he can play).


Here's to Udoke starting out as well as Charles Smith last season when Nate proclaimed he was the best option for starting. :cheers:


----------



## GOD (Jun 22, 2003)

mediocre man said:


> Here's to Udoke starting out as well as Charles Smith last season when Nate proclaimed he was the best option for starting. :cheers:


I've been thinking the same thing.


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

Nate McVillain said:


> I've been thinking the same thing.




There's a reason these players haven't made it in the NBA yet. He's a nice story with a good defensive mentality, but in no way is he a starting caliber player.....even on our team.


----------



## It's_GO_Time (Oct 13, 2005)

mediocre man said:


> There's a reason these players haven't made it in the NBA yet. He's a nice story with a good defensive mentality, but in no way is he a starting caliber player.....even on our team.



But neither is Travis. Nate would start Webster there, but he is hurt. Ime v. Travis, my thought is who cares between the two . . . they will both get more minutes than they deserve.


----------



## mgb (Jun 26, 2004)

It may be that Nate is thinking about who is going to be on the floor when the second unit comes on and he wants Outlaw to be part of that.


----------



## tlong (Jan 6, 2003)

Udoka has played better than Outlaw. That's why he's starting. It's as simple as that.


----------



## GOD (Jun 22, 2003)

tlong said:


> Udoka has played better than Outlaw. That's why he's starting. It's as simple as that.


Ime was asked to do less. It's easier to look better when expectations are lower.


----------



## TheBlueDoggy (Oct 5, 2004)

Nate McVillain said:


> I've been thinking the same thing.


Hey, hold on just a minute. Charles Smith was a badass...



















For all of a few games back when he was healthy and played for the Spurs


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

tlong said:


> Udoka has played better than Outlaw. That's why he's starting. It's as simple as that.




Hmmm, let's see. 

Ime:
scored more
more assists
had more steals
had a better 3 pt%


Travis:
had more rebounds
shot a better fg %
shot a better ft %
had more blocked shots


To me it looks pretty even. Travis scored 1 point per game less in almost 10 less minutes per game and still had more rebounds and blocks. He only had slightly less steals per game also. 

The other thing Travis does is make us longer on defense. Something Whitsitt used to preach about when he was making up his teams. Length is key, and Ime at 6'5" is not as effective as Travis at 6'9" 

I'll just be happy when Webster's back because he's the best of the pack.


----------



## TheBlueDoggy (Oct 5, 2004)

I think Nate's reasons for starting Ime over Travis are about controlling the flow. Travis has really improved from what I saw in the preseason, and once again I get the feeling he could be something great in a few years. BUT, he still has inconsistency both with his play and with his focus. Udoka is, imo, about as good as he'll get right now, and nothing spectacular, but what he does bring to the table is solid enough numbers, consistency, and control.

It's like a Jack vs Telfair comparison. Sure, telfair will probably put on a lot more fancy flashy shows than Jack. Some argue he has more potential then Jack, etc. But if you're looking for a more consistent roleplayer, I think most people would take Jack, and it seems clear to me that's the kind of players Nate is looking for right now.


----------



## Samuel (Jan 1, 2003)

Tracy McGrady, Andriy Kirilenko, Rashard Lewis... these are just a couple of the SFs in the Western conference. I know Outlaw has a better offensive arsenal than Ime, but I think it's more about not getting torched when the first unit is on the floor. Nate has to put his team in a position to stay close, and if Outlaw was in there, they'd go at him every time down. 

Off the bench, he matches up with a different guy, which allows him to have more success and builds his confidence.


----------



## yakbladder (Sep 13, 2003)

*Re: Quick: Martell Doubtful, Inactive; Udoka starts; Roy over Dickau; Graham In; etc.*



mediocre man said:


> This is why Nate shouldn't be coaching the team. Ime is a nice story, and a better perimeter defender than Travis, but Outlaw has busted his *** this year, and shown that he can actually play. He's much better offensively than Ime, and also a better off the ball help defender for blocks. He wants to put Travis at the 4 where we have Zach, Raef, Magloire, and Aldridge already at that possition. While it might be his best possition going forward, right now we need him at the 3....(where he can play).
> 
> 
> Here's to Udoke starting out as well as Charles Smith last season when Nate proclaimed he was the best option for starting. :cheers:


Go back and read the post. He likes Outlaw more than he did previously at the 4. It doesn't say he'll be there exclusively. I believe he will get minutes at both the 3 and the 4.

I thought the slow-ball is why Nate shouldn't be coaching this team? I thought [fill in one of your earlier 20 gripes] is why Nate shouldn't be coaching this team? Come on, man, you can only pick one, so pick it so I can get my "best standard gripes" list compiled and sent to press!


----------



## SLAM (Jan 1, 2003)

*Re: Quick: Martell Doubtful, Inactive; Udoka starts; Roy over Dickau; Graham In; etc.*

Perhaps Ime is more of a placeholder for Martell at the starting SF position. If Nate knows he wants Martell in the starting lineup with Outlaw coming in as the energy guy behind him, then it makes sense to keep Travis in that role and start Ime while Martell heals. After Martell returns, I'm guessing Ime won't see much court time.


----------



## Reep (Jun 4, 2003)

I agree that Martell is starting SF once he gets back and healthy.

I would start Ime or Graham ahead of Outlaw. Outlaw has great top 10 plays, but still doesn't get team offense and defense. He's better than last year, but still not there.


----------



## tlong (Jan 6, 2003)

Udoka stats:

Year Team G GS MPG FG% 3p% FT% OFF DEF RPG APG SPG BPG TO PF PPG 
06-07 POR 5 4 34.4 .490 .455 .667 0.2 3.0 3.2 2.6 2.4 0.4 1.40 3.20 12.2 


Outlaw stats:

Year Team G GS MPG FG% 3p% FT% OFF DEF RPG APG SPG BPG TO PF PPG 
06-07 POR 8 5 24.9 .500 .125 .750 0.5 3.4 3.9 0.9 1.2 0.9 1.13 1.80 11.1 


I think Udoka is outplaying Outlaw and I think Nate agrees.


----------



## blakeback (Jun 29, 2006)

mediocre man said:


> This is why Nate shouldn't be coaching the team....
> 
> Here's to Udoke starting out as well as Charles Smith last season when Nate proclaimed he was the best option for starting. :cheers:


LOL, oh man that's hilarious. You were trying to be sarcastic, but you forgot that Charles Smith actually played pretty well at the start of last season. :laugh:


----------



## TheBlueDoggy (Oct 5, 2004)

tlong said:


> Udoka stats:
> 
> Year Team G GS MPG FG% 3p% FT% OFF DEF RPG APG SPG BPG TO PF PPG
> 06-07 POR 5 4 34.4 .490 .455 .667 0.2 3.0 3.2 2.6 2.4 0.4 1.40 3.20 12.2
> ...


The problem with using those stats to point out anything is, they are a dead heat almost. Where Udoka outplays Outlaw in an area just slightly, Outlaw outplays Udoka in another area slightly. But here's the big difference. Those stats are for Udoka getting about 38% more time on the court per game. Projecting those stats for Travis with equal minutes, aside from 3pt fg%, he clearly outplays Udoka.

That being said, I still think Udoka brings a more calming, intelligent, and well rounded game for the time being. My hope is that the further we get into the season, Travis will continue to develop consistency and make further strides to improve and we don't have to think of Udoka as anything more than a roleplayer off the bench.

Edit: To demonstrate with my quick and sloppy, yet fairly accurate math (I hope?):

Projecting stats for same minutes played per game as Udoka:

Travis: 15.3ppg 5.4 rpg 1.2 apg 1.7 spg 1.2 bpg 1.6 to 2.5 pf

Udoka: 12.2ppg 3.2 rpg 2.6 apg 2.4 spg 0.4 bpg 1.4 to 3.2 pf

So, Travis outscores, outrebounds, with a much higher FG%. His assists are less than half, and his steals are not as good, but those numbers for both players are nothing to write home about to begin with. Travis's blocks per game is far better, turnovers only slightly worse, and good bit better on fouls comitted.

Winner stat wise, IMO, is clearly Travis. But stats from one guy don't always equate to a team running better as a whole.


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

blakejack said:


> LOL, oh man that's hilarious. You were trying to be sarcastic, but you forgot that Charles Smith actually played pretty well at the start of last season. :laugh:



You must be thinking of someone else. Charles Smith averaged less than 4 pts, 1 rbnd per game. He was horible and found himself out of the NBA quickly.


----------



## blakeback (Jun 29, 2006)

> Here's to Udoke starting out as well as Charles Smith last season




```
Date        Lg   Tm   Opp  GS  MP  FG FGA  3P 3PA  FT FTA ORB DRB TRB AST STL BLK  TO  PF PTS  W-L  
+-------------------------+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+-----+
 2005-11-02  NBA  POR  MIN   1  21   2   5   1   3   0   0   0   0   0   0   1   1   0   0   5  0- 1
 2005-11-04  NBA  POR  DEN   1  24   4   9   1   2   2   3   0   1   1   3   1   1   0   1  11  0- 2
 2005-11-09  NBA  POR* NYK   0   2   0   0   0   0   0   0   0   0   0   1   0   1   0   2   0  1- 2
 2005-11-27  NBA  POR  ATL   0   7   0   4   0   1   0   0   0   0   0   1   0   0   0   1   0  2- 2
 2005-12-16  NBA  POR* SEA   0  19   6   8   3   5   0   0   0   0   0   1   0   0   1   4  15  2- 3
 2005-12-18  NBA  POR* WAS   0  12   4  10   1   4   0   0   2   1   3   0   0   0   1   2   9  3- 3
 2005-12-20  NBA  POR  DET   0  12   1   2   0   1   0   2   0   2   2   0   0   0   0   3   2  3- 4
 2005-12-21  NBA  POR  MEM   0  14   1   3   1   2   0   0   0   2   2   2   0   0   1   4   3  3- 5
 2005-12-30  NBA  POR* MEM   0   1   0   0   0   0   0   0   0   0   0   0   0   0   0   1   0  3- 6
 2006-01-01  NBA  POR* LAC   0  13   3   3   2   2   0   0   0   4   4   0   0   0   0   4   8  3- 7
```
not a bad start for CS last season, I'm sure Udoka and Nate would be perfectly happy with that.


----------



## Blazer Maven (Sep 27, 2005)

mediocre man said:


> There's a reason these players haven't made it in the NBA yet. He's a nice story with a good defensive mentality, but in no way is he a starting caliber player.....even on our team.


Udoka is a solid role player who has the defensive intensity the team needs now. He is far from a go-to player, but could easily fill the Luke Walton role on this team. Quinton Ross has filled a similar role for the Clippers, and Adrian Griffin for the Mavs.

Just because someone is not a star does not mean he can't be a valuable member in a supportive but starting role. He is a better all around player than Monia was and is on a par with Khryapa, who started quite a few games last season.


----------



## Samuel (Jan 1, 2003)

blakejack said:


> not a bad start for CS last season, I'm sure Udoka and Nate would be perfectly happy with that.


Shirley, you can't be serious.


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

Blazer Maven said:


> Udoka is a solid role player who has the defensive intensity the team needs now. He is far from a go-to player, but could easily fill the Luke Walton role on this team. Quinton Ross has filled a similar role for the Clippers, and Adrian Griffin for the Mavs.
> 
> Just because someone is not a star does not mean he can't be a valuable member in a supportive but starting role. He is a better all around player than Monia was and is on a par with Khryapa, who started quite a few games last season.




First of all Viktor is a lot better than most of the people on this board give him credit for. He is also 6'9" and was traded as an after thought. Why on earth would Udoka be starting.


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

Samuel said:


> Shirley, you can't be serious.




I think he is, and don't call him Surely.


----------



## BBert (Dec 30, 2004)

*Re: Quick: Martell Doubtful, Inactive; Udoka starts; Roy over Dickau; Graham In; etc.*

Thanks for doing the math, BlueDoggy. IMO, Travis is better and will have a better career than Ime. 

OTOH, as you've alluded earlier, Ime is the kind of player, like Roy, who facilitates better team play, helps his teammates be better, plays solid defense, and will play more intelligently and consistently than Travis on opening night. 

Given all that, I still feel the best argument for starting Ime over Travis was SLAM's suggestion that if Travis is going to be comfortable in the 6th man role, it might help him to settle into it now rather than demote him later when Martell comes back.


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

*Re: Quick: Martell Doubtful, Inactive; Udoka starts; Roy over Dickau; Graham In; etc.*



BBert said:


> Thanks for doing the math, BlueDoggy. IMO, Travis is better and will have a better career than Ime.
> 
> OTOH, as you've alluded earlier, Ime is the kind of player, like Roy, who facilitates better team play, helps his teammates be better, plays solid defense, and will play more intelligently and consistently than Travis on opening night.
> 
> Given all that, I still feel the best argument for starting Ime over Travis was SLAM's suggestion that if Travis is going to be comfortable in the 6th man role, it might help him to settle into it now rather than demote him later when Martell comes back.



OTOH If Travis starts and plays well there is no reason to demote him to the bench. If he plays well enough to contribute, but not to start then it's an easy transition to Martell.


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

*Re: Quick: Martell Doubtful, Inactive; Udoka starts; Roy over Dickau; Graham In; etc.*

Nate knows talent. Reggie Evans and Damien Wilkins were both undrafted players that he gave a chance and they both turned into quality contributing players.


----------



## Redbeard (Sep 11, 2005)

Short list

Outlaw has way more potential and right now has a better game.
However, we start the game in a hole with him starting.
Therefore he will be more effective coming of the bench.
As a PF he caused a couple mismatches where his speed got us back in the game
Travis will be a backup exclusivley when our whole roster is healthy, so he should get used to playing that role.

Ime moves the ball well and doesn't make a ton of mistakes.
Has some IQ and does what he is told.
Played his heart out and gave the best he could, which still isn't great, but have to give him credit for.
The starting five should work at not digging a hole and should be getting our stars warmed up, Zach Roy and Jack.
Outlaw doesn't need to get heated in the opening minutes.
Ime will fall back to the bench when Webster and Miles come back.

IMO, not bad decisions by Nate and it fits his game plan.
Just be thankful Dixon isn't starting.


----------



## yakbladder (Sep 13, 2003)

*Re: Quick: Martell Doubtful, Inactive; Udoka starts; Roy over Dickau; Graham In; etc.*



mediocre man said:


> OTOH If Travis starts and plays well there is no reason to demote him to the bench. If he plays well enough to contribute, but not to start then it's an easy transition to Martell.


But we already know Martell is a much better shooter than Outlaw and from what we've been able to discern, blocks aside, even Martell plays better defense and knows where to be. Just keep reminding yourself we aren't playing Phoenix basketball. :biggrin:


----------



## 2k (Dec 30, 2005)

*Re: Quick: Martell Doubtful, Inactive; Udoka starts; Roy over Dickau; Graham In; etc.*

Graham?
Udoka?
Outlaw?

hmmm good prospects
keep Webster at SG

keep Roy as backup PG

I think Graham could be a steal.


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

*Re: Quick: Martell Doubtful, Inactive; Udoka starts; Roy over Dickau; Graham In; etc.*



yakbladder said:


> But we already know Martell is a much better shooter than Outlaw and from what we've been able to discern, blocks aside, even Martell plays better defense and knows where to be. Just keep reminding yourself we aren't playing Phoenix basketball. :biggrin:



I don't have to, I just look at the records and scores of each of our teams and know right away.


----------



## It's_GO_Time (Oct 13, 2005)

*Re: Quick: Martell Doubtful, Inactive; Udoka starts; Roy over Dickau; Graham In; etc.*



mediocre man said:


> I don't have to, I just look at the records and scores of each of our teams and know right away.



Of course knowing it, and accepting it, are two different things.


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

*Re: Quick: Martell Doubtful, Inactive; Udoka starts; Roy over Dickau; Graham In; etc.*



Kiss_My_Darius said:


> Of course knowing it, and accepting it, are two different things.



I totally accept that this team isn't going to win a lot, what I don't accept is a boring offense where the ball is forced into the low post and everyone stands around while the ball is either forced up or turned over. How any of you can accept that is beyond me.


----------



## Reep (Jun 4, 2003)

*Re: Quick: Martell Doubtful, Inactive; Udoka starts; Roy over Dickau; Graham In; etc.*



mediocre man said:


> I totally accept that this team isn't going to win a lot, what I don't accept is a boring offense where the ball is forced into the low post and everyone stands around while the ball is either forced up or turned over. How any of you can accept that is beyond me.


I'm not trying to start a fight, but have you watched any of the preseason games? I was at the Clippers game where Zach hit for 33 pts, and even then, you never got the feeling the team was dumping it into the post and standing around to see what happens. The ball movement was good, it was just a little slow. Once the can spead it up a little, and cut down the turnovers, they will be fine. I agree there was too much of this last year, but things are starting to change. If the number of turnovers in the clippers game had been reduced to something reasonable, the Blazers would have walked out with a road win over one of the best teams in the west. And don't say it was just preseason--Dunleavy wanted to win that one and played his stars quite a bit.


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

*Re: Quick: Martell Doubtful, Inactive; Udoka starts; Roy over Dickau; Graham In; etc.*



Reep said:


> I'm not trying to start a fight, but have you watched any of the preseason games? I was at the Clippers game where Zach hit for 33 pts, and even then, you never got the feeling the team was dumping it into the post and standing around to see what happens. The ball movement was good, it was just a little slow. Once the can spead it up a little, and cut down the turnovers, they will be fine. I agree there was too much of this last year, but things are starting to change. If the number of turnovers in the clippers game had been reduced to something reasonable, the Blazers would have walked out with a road win over one of the best teams in the west. And don't say it was just preseason--Dunleavy wanted to win that one and played his stars quite a bit.



I can appreciate that things are changing, but if you look at the game logs for this pre season you'll see the only reason the Blazers won any games was because they somehow made jump shots. On most nights those shots aren't going to fall as often as they did in those two games. Zach is a beast, and should get a lot of touches. I just feel they should do it with more of a flowing offense to take advantage of the new rules created by the NBA to allow teams more freedom offensively.


----------



## It's_GO_Time (Oct 13, 2005)

*Re: Quick: Martell Doubtful, Inactive; Udoka starts; Roy over Dickau; Graham In; etc.*



mediocre man said:


> I totally accept that this team isn't going to win a lot, what I don't accept is a boring offense where the ball is forced into the low post and everyone stands around while the ball is either forced up or turned over. How any of you can accept that is beyond me.



I want to win. Whatever style the Blazers need to play to get there is fine with me. 

I appreciated Dean Smith's four corner offense for what it did. I appreciated how Stanford would slow the game down to give them a chance to win against UCLA. I understand the strategy of slowing the game down and can appreciate any strategy that leads to wins. I also appreciate the up tempo run and gun stlye of play. As long as a coach is implementing a stategy to give their team the best chance to win, I will probabaly appreciate the strategy. I understand it might not be the most entertaining for some fans, but I guess I take my basketball one step beyond entertaining.

I don't think there is one universal strategy on how to play basketball and I hope you think the same thing. Obviously you feel the up tempo game is the best way for the Blazers to develop and win, I disagree. Is that so beyond you?


----------



## Utherhimo (Feb 20, 2005)

*Re: Quick: Martell Doubtful, Inactive; Udoka starts; Roy over Dickau; Graham In; etc.*

it was flowing a least more than last year, MM why dont you watch a game and not the logs? Logs never tell the whole story its like reading about being in a fight yet never actually being in one!


----------



## blakeback (Jun 29, 2006)

Samuel said:


> Shirley, you can't be serious.


Do you like movies about gladiators?


----------



## Reep (Jun 4, 2003)

*Re: Quick: Martell Doubtful, Inactive; Udoka starts; Roy over Dickau; Graham In; etc.*



mediocre man said:


> I can appreciate that things are changing, but if you look at the game logs for this pre season you'll see the only reason the Blazers won any games was because they somehow made jump shots. On most nights those shots aren't going to fall as often as they did in those two games. Zach is a beast, and should get a lot of touches. I just feel they should do it with more of a flowing offense to take advantage of the new rules created by the NBA to allow teams more freedom offensively.


I really do think that is coming. Roy moves the ball almost immediately, as does Sergio. I think Ime and Graham also help there. Jack has the right focus, but still needs to work on speeding the ball around the perimeter. I think the main thing holding down the ball movement in the half court is not an overemphasis on the post, but is due to a bunch of young players who are still thinking rather than just reacting. My guess is that this will speed up throughout the season. The primary key will be that Roy should be the guy running the offense no matter what position he is playing. He has that perfect balance of knowing when to score and when to move the ball (quickly). That kind of movement requires good basketball IQ, and not all the team is ready yet. Travis isn't even close. Once they get the rotation set and the guys get familiar with each other's movements, I think you will see a lot more scoring. 


I also would not discount the outside shooting. Roy, Ime, Jack, Graham, Webster (the guard rotation) all can shoot at least the mid range jumper reliably. Dixon seems to be either on fire, or on ice. I don't think it is a fluke that the shooting has been good. The ball movement is so much better that guys are getting more open looks.


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

*Re: Quick: Martell Doubtful, Inactive; Udoka starts; Roy over Dickau; Graham In; etc.*



Utherhimo said:


> it was flowing a least more than last year, MM why dont you watch a game and not the logs? Logs never tell the whole story its like reading about being in a fight yet never actually being in one!



I was only able to watch the game against the Kings....undoubtably their worst of the pre season....so my opinion is definately going to be skewed a bit. However going on that game and every game last season what am I supposed to think. Juan Dixon shot over 50% in the two games we won. Can you seriously think he's going to do that in most games? That game against against the Kings was hard to watch. I realize Zach didn't play, but the team was constantly trying to force the ball into the post instead of moving the ball and the post player around and taking advantage of Roy and Outlaw's ability to finish at the rim.


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

*Re: Quick: Martell Doubtful, Inactive; Udoka starts; Roy over Dickau; Graham In; etc.*



Reep said:


> I really do think that is coming. Roy moves the ball almost immediately, as does Sergio. I think Ime and Graham also help there. Jack has the right focus, but still needs to work on speeding the ball around the perimeter. I think the main thing holding down the ball movement in the half court is not an overemphasis on the post, but is due to a bunch of young players who are still thinking rather than just reacting. My guess is that this will speed up throughout the season. The primary key will be that Roy should be the guy running the offense no matter what position he is playing. He has that perfect balance of knowing when to score and when to move the ball (quickly). That kind of movement requires good basketball IQ, and not all the team is ready yet. Travis isn't even close. Once they get the rotation set and the guys get familiar with each other's movements, I think you will see a lot more scoring.
> 
> 
> I also would not discount the outside shooting. Roy, Ime, Jack, Graham, Webster (the guard rotation) all can shoot at least the mid range jumper reliably. Dixon seems to be either on fire, or on ice. I don't think it is a fluke that the shooting has been good. The ball movement is so much better that guys are getting more open looks.



LOL the one player you didn't mention was Zach though. And he's the one we run the offense through.


----------



## Reep (Jun 4, 2003)

*Re: Quick: Martell Doubtful, Inactive; Udoka starts; Roy over Dickau; Graham In; etc.*



mediocre man said:


> LOL the one player you didn't mention was Zach though. And he's the one we run the offense through.


Yeah, I didn't leave him out by accident. What I've noticed at the games is that they move it to Zach when he's open in the offence. The ball starts around the perimeter and goes in when the timing is right. It's really not a matter of coming down and automatically looking for Zach. Zach has also been working on passing out of the double/triple teams. He still needs to do it more quickly, because he is getting trapped. However, he really is attempting to move the ball out when he sees the second defender. 

The plan is a good one, the execution is what needs work.


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

*Re: Quick: Martell Doubtful, Inactive; Udoka starts; Roy over Dickau; Graham In; etc.*



Reep said:


> Yeah, I didn't leave him out by accident. What I've noticed at the games is that they move it to Zach when he's open in the offence. The ball starts around the perimeter and goes in when the timing is right. It's really not a matter of coming down and automatically looking for Zach. Zach has also been working on passing out of the double/triple teams. He still needs to do it more quickly, because he is getting trapped. However, he really is attempting to move the ball out when he sees the second defender.
> 
> The plan is a good one, the execution is what needs work.



If they did that I would be so happy. The only game I watched was the sacramento game in which the team came down, set up on one side, posted Magloire every time down, and then forced the ball into him.


----------



## Utherhimo (Feb 20, 2005)

*Re: Quick: Martell Doubtful, Inactive; Udoka starts; Roy over Dickau; Graham In; etc.*

MM just sit and watch and see what happens!


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

*Re: Quick: Martell Doubtful, Inactive; Udoka starts; Roy over Dickau; Graham In; etc.*



Utherhimo said:


> MM just sit and watch and see what happens!




Um.....as apposed to what?


----------



## Blazer Maven (Sep 27, 2005)

*Re: Quick: Martell Doubtful, Inactive; Udoka starts; Roy over Dickau; Graham In; etc.*



mediocre man said:


> If they did that I would be so happy. The only game I watched was the sacramento game in which the team came down, set up on one side, posted Magloire every time down, and then forced the ball into him.


My impression is that Nate was letting Magloire show what he can do on offense. Magloire failed.

I doubt that posting Magloire will be a fixture of the gameplan come Wednesday night.


----------



## chairman (Jul 2, 2006)

mediocre man said:


> This is why Nate shouldn't be coaching the team. Ime is a nice story, and a better perimeter defender than Travis, but Outlaw has busted his *** this year, and shown that he can actually play. He's much better offensively than Ime, and also a better off the ball help defender for blocks. He wants to put Travis at the 4 where we have Zach, Raef, Magloire, and Aldridge already at that possition. While it might be his best possition going forward, right now we need him at the 3....(where he can play).
> 
> 
> Here's to Udoke starting out as well as Charles Smith last season when Nate proclaimed he was the best option for starting. :cheers:


I have only seen one game. But after watching the Sac game on TV, I came way with thinking just the opposite. Raef and Mags can not play the PF spot. They are both way to slow against most of the new breed of pF's. I thought Travis should get more minutes there, at least until Aldridge gets back. I lke when Portland goes small up front. They play better.


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

*Re: Quick: Martell Doubtful, Inactive; Udoka starts; Roy over Dickau; Graham In; etc.*



chairman said:


> I have only seen one game. But after watching the Sac game on TV, I came way with thinking just the opposite. Raef and Mags can not play the PF spot. They are both way to slow against most of the new breed of pF's. I thought Travis should get more minutes there, at least until Aldridge gets back. I lke when Portland goes small up front. They play better.


Raef has played most of his career at the PF spot. But, I too think that Raef should play more at the C spot. He has good range, which opens things up for Zach down low.


----------



## ryanjend22 (Jan 23, 2004)

*Re: Quick: Martell Doubtful, Inactive; Udoka starts; Roy over Dickau; Graham In; etc.*



mediocre man said:


> This is why Nate shouldn't be coaching the team. Ime is a nice story, and a better perimeter defender than Travis, but Outlaw has busted his *** this year, and shown that he can actually play. He's much better offensively than Ime, and also a better off the ball help defender for blocks. He wants to put Travis at the 4 where we have Zach, Raef, Magloire, and Aldridge already at that possition. While it might be his best possition going forward, right now we need him at the 3....(where he can play).
> 
> 
> Here's to Udoke starting out as well as Charles Smith last season when Nate proclaimed he was the best option for starting. :cheers:


well, lets reserve judgement at least for a few weeks concerning nates coaching of the team...he certainly has played a role in determining the squad with the style of play he demads.

i.e. why we traded telfair...

so, im not too keen on his decisions or coaching style either. i think we need discipline and thats great. however, i never liked watching the sonics play, and i feel like nate is trying to go in the same direction. 

with a youthful squad we need to play a phoenix style offense, where as right now we seem to be inclined to more half-court play. which to me, sucks.

but hey, it is what it is. he IS our coach and this is the year i make my final judgements as to his hiring. 

this is just one of those seasons where none of us know what the hell is going to happen, so lets wait and see...then criticize. i know criticism will continue to happen regardless here :biggrin: but lets give the man a chance. so far, im 50/50 on the decision for nate to helm the ship.

on a side note, was anyone else impressed with tyrus thomas tonite?...right now i MUCH rather would have him than aldridge. such defensive explosiveness, and when he harnesses that energy he is going to be first team all defense later in his career.


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

*Re: Quick: Martell Doubtful, Inactive; Udoka starts; Roy over Dickau; Graham In; etc.*



ryanjend22 said:


> well, lets reserve judgement at least for a few weeks concerning nates coaching of the team...he certainly has played a role in determining the squad with the style of play he demads.
> 
> i.e. why we traded telfair...
> 
> ...


There is a reason Chicago drafted him. There was no way wecould have drafted Thomas. Chicago was taking him. Charlotte was entertaining offers for Aldridge at that pick which is why we were able to trade with Chicago. 

So sleep well my friend. We did not have a shot at drafting Tyrus Thomas


----------



## Masbee (Dec 31, 2002)

*Re: Quick: Martell Doubtful, Inactive; Udoka starts; Roy over Dickau; Graham In; etc.*



mediocre man said:


> There is a reason Chicago drafted him. There was no way wecould have drafted Thomas. Chicago was taking him. Charlotte was entertaining offers for Aldridge at that pick which is why we were able to trade with Chicago.
> 
> So sleep well my friend. We did not have a shot at drafting Tyrus Thomas


It is true that we couldn't have.

But it is also so that Pritchard was quoted as saying their draft board looked like this:

Bargnani/Aldridge
Roy

Thomas was never mentioned by him, or by any other Blazer I recall as being of great interest.

I think the Blazers were soured on the idea of super raw, super athletic "projects".

All the guys they focused in on are more fundamental. You know, dribble, pass, shoot.


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

*Re: Quick: Martell Doubtful, Inactive; Udoka starts; Roy over Dickau; Graham In; etc.*



Masbee said:


> It is true that we couldn't have.
> 
> But it is also so that Pritchard was quoted as saying their draft board looked like this:
> 
> ...



Also wasn't it Thomas that refused to workout for us?


----------



## It's_GO_Time (Oct 13, 2005)

*Re: Quick: Martell Doubtful, Inactive; Udoka starts; Roy over Dickau; Graham In; etc.*



mediocre man said:


> Um.....as apposed to what?


Pacing and constantly running from the television to the fridge to the bathroom during the game. You might a lot of the game, but it is a lot more entertaining . . .


----------



## Samuel (Jan 1, 2003)

Let's not jump on Aldridge too early here. TT may jump out of the gym, but it's hard to tell how guys like Thomas project. 

The only thing keeping Aldridge from succeeding this year is playing time. The guy has post up moves, a hook shot and a nice mid-range jumper. If his footwork turns out to be better than we thought, he could end up with some nice numbers later this season. 

It will be years before Thomas puts it all together.


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

Samuel said:
 

> Let's not jump on Aldridge too early here. TT may jump out of the gym, but it's hard to tell how guys like Thomas project.
> 
> The only thing keeping Aldridge from succeeding this year is playing time. The guy has post up moves, a hook shot and a nice mid-range jumper. If his footwork turns out to be better than we thought, he could end up with some nice numbers later this season.
> 
> It will be years before Thomas puts it all together.



Careful, you're likely to bring out the A_am Morrison backers with possitive comments like that.


----------



## Blazer Maven (Sep 27, 2005)

*Re: Quick: Martell Doubtful, Inactive; Udoka starts; Roy over Dickau; Graham In; etc.*



ryanjend22 said:


> on a side note, was anyone else impressed with tyrus thomas tonite?...right now i MUCH rather would have him than aldridge. such defensive explosiveness, and when he harnesses that energy he is going to be first team all defense later in his career.


Thomas is a Shawn Marion type player minus the jump shot. He will get more WOW highlights than Aldridge, but Aldridge is that rare big man who can play inside/outside and run the floor. When you can grab a:

Bosh
Garnett
Jermaine
Sheed 
Duncan
Amare

You jump at the opportunity. The Blazers did and will be getting 16/10 and 2.5 blocks/game from Aldridge for 10+ years.


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

*Re: Quick: Martell Doubtful, Inactive; Udoka starts; Roy over Dickau; Graham In; etc.*



Blazer Maven said:


> Thomas is a Shawn Marion type player minus the jump shot. He will get more WOW highlights than Aldridge, but Aldridge is that rare big man who can play inside/outside and run the floor. When you can grab a:
> 
> Bosh
> Garnett
> ...



I'm not sure he's quite as athletic as Bosh or Jermaine, but I agree with the upside.


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

*Re: Quick: Martell Doubtful, Inactive; Udoka starts; Roy over Dickau; Graham In; etc.*



Samuel said:


> Let's not jump on Aldridge too early here. TT may jump out of the gym, but it's hard to tell how guys like Thomas project.
> 
> The only thing keeping Aldridge from succeeding this year is playing time. The guy has post up moves, a hook shot and a nice mid-range jumper. If his footwork turns out to be better than we thought, he could end up with some nice numbers later this season.
> 
> It will be years before Thomas puts it all together.


Yet, all those skills only got him 15 and 9 in college.


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

*Re: Quick: Martell Doubtful, Inactive; Udoka starts; Roy over Dickau; Graham In; etc.*



zagsfan20 said:


> Yet, all those skills only got him 15 and 9 in college.



I hate to say I told you so..............but


In all seriousness Zags, I hope Morrison goes off for 30 every night he's not playing the Blazers. He's a good kid that works hard and it would be nice to see someone like that succeed.


----------

