# Blazers vs Nuggets game thread



## hasoos (Jan 3, 2003)

Well here it is, game 2 of the pre season. Lets go Blazers! Who is all listening?


----------



## Hype #9 (Feb 14, 2004)

Listen to the game here live: http://www.kxl.com/listenlive.aspx


----------



## The Professional Fan (Nov 5, 2003)

I am.


----------



## The Professional Fan (Nov 5, 2003)

Webster starting strong. 2-2


----------



## wastro (Dec 19, 2004)

The KXL.com stream cut out for me, but NBA Audio League Pass is free.


----------



## The Professional Fan (Nov 5, 2003)

Sounds like the Blazers are definitely pushing the ball this year. At least more so than in the recent past.


----------



## wastro (Dec 19, 2004)

Denver's started off hot so far tonight.

It sounds like there's some carryover from Martell's first game.

Unfortunately, it sounds like there's also some carryover from Travis' first game, too.


----------



## crowTrobot (Jun 24, 2005)

can anybody provide a direct link? too lazy to sign up.


----------



## hasoos (Jan 3, 2003)

http://broadband.nba.com/cc/playa.p...de=audio_default_include.html&video=undefined

That should do it. Blazers playing well so far, look to score over 100 again tonight.


----------



## crowTrobot (Jun 24, 2005)

hasoos said:


> http://broadband.nba.com/cc/playa.p...de=audio_default_include.html&video=undefined
> 
> That should do it. Blazers playing well so far, look to score over 100 again tonight.



thanks


----------



## hasoos (Jan 3, 2003)

Ouch Aldrige picked up his 3rd.


----------



## wastro (Dec 19, 2004)

Maybe all those "LaMarcus is the truth" thoughts were premature ... three quick fouls tonight.


----------



## drexlersdad (Jun 3, 2006)

outlaw for 3! anda block!from the baseline!with the strip!another 3!!!


----------



## wastro (Dec 19, 2004)

Travis Outlaw is the truth!


----------



## hasoos (Jan 3, 2003)

Wow being carried by the young gunz. Martell with 10 at SG and Outlaw with 13:clap: how sweet it is!!!!!


----------



## crowTrobot (Jun 24, 2005)

we're the new suns i guess. gotta try to outscore everyone.


----------



## Webster's Dictionary (Feb 26, 2004)

Are you watching the game Drexlersdad?


----------



## ROYisR.O.Y. (Apr 1, 2007)

wastro said:


> Maybe all those "LaMarcus is the truth" thoughts were premature ... three quick fouls tonight.


he struggled in the first but dont roll your ankle jumping off the wagon


----------



## The Professional Fan (Nov 5, 2003)

Augmon. lol.


----------



## hasoos (Jan 3, 2003)

wastro said:


> Maybe all those "LaMarcus is the truth" thoughts were premature ... three quick fouls tonight.


On the other hand, what was Nate doing putting Aldridge on Anthony. Ask yourself that one.


----------



## wastro (Dec 19, 2004)

ROYisR.O.Y. said:


> he struggled in the first but dont roll your ankle jumping off the wagon


Dude, I'm not jumping off the wagon by any stretch. I'm just saying ... he was pumped up like crazy on here after one pre-season quarter, and it looks like that might have been premature.

Was it premature by much? I don't think so. I think he'll have a pretty stellar year. But he is still a sophomore, who'll struggle with the things sophomores struggle with ... like fouls.


----------



## drexlersdad (Jun 3, 2006)

Webster's Dictionary said:


> Are you watching the game Drexlersdad?



no just listnin'


----------



## wastro (Dec 19, 2004)

hasoos said:


> On the other hand, what was Nate doing putting Aldridge on Anthony. Ask yourself that one.


Man, I'm taking a lot of crap for that comment. :smile:

For what it's worth, I'm with you. Aldridge on Anthony is just silly.


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

hasoos said:


> On the other hand, what was Nate doing putting Aldridge on Anthony. Ask yourself that one.




I'm always quick to jump on Nate, but let's remember that pre-season is for these types of things. He already knows Aldridge can guard 4's and most 5's.


----------



## crowTrobot (Jun 24, 2005)

durant 5-22 mostly against cavaliers scrubs


----------



## hasoos (Jan 3, 2003)

Rodriguez playing well so far. Amazed Iverson hasn't been going to town on him. But if I remember right, he played well against Denver before.


----------



## hasoos (Jan 3, 2003)

mediocre man said:


> I'm always quick to jump on Nate, but let's remember that pre-season is for these types of things. He already knows Aldridge can guard 4's and most 5's.


Carmello = 3 ??:bananallama:


----------



## crowTrobot (Jun 24, 2005)

time to get webster a shot


----------



## wastro (Dec 19, 2004)

hasoos said:


> Rodriguez playing well so far. Amazed Iverson hasn't been going to town on him. But if I remember right, he played well against Denver before.


Sergio had that breakout quarter against Denver last year. I wish that would have been on television! He's doing well tonight, too.

Portland is doing some things right this game, too. Turnovers aren't quite what they were in game one, but they're okay. Portland isn't getting killed on rebounds. And 10 assists so far is encouraging.


----------



## Nightfly (Sep 24, 2002)

wastro said:


> The KXL.com stream cut out for me, but NBA Audio League Pass is free.


Isn't it just easier to use a regular radio?

I'm in Centralia, and KXL is coming in clear and strong!

I realize this isn't an option for those that are WAY far away from Portland, but if you are in Oregon you should be able to get the Blazers on a regular radio.


----------



## mgb (Jun 26, 2004)

Nightfly said:


> Isn't it just easier to use a regular radio?
> 
> I'm in Centralia, and KXL is coming in clear and strong!
> 
> I realize this isn't an option for those that are WAY far away from Portland, but if you are in Oregon you should be able to get the Blazers on a regular radio.


I'm in Gresham, but am listening to it online at KXL. When I read it cut out for someone I didn't think I'd be able to get it, but it came on no problem.


----------



## Nightfly (Sep 24, 2002)

mgb said:


> I'm in Gresham, but am listening to it online at KXL. When I read it cut out for someone I didn't think I'd be able to get it, but it came on no problem.


Well, what I mean is, I guess I don't understand why you would want to listen online instead of over a radio if you are in Portland. The webstream is delayed by quite a bit, and a regular radio will (in most cases) have better sound quality.

Just curiosity on my part.


----------



## wastro (Dec 19, 2004)

Nightfly said:


> Isn't it just easier to use a regular radio?
> 
> I'm in Centralia, and KXL is coming in clear and strong!
> 
> I realize this isn't an option for those that are WAY far away from Portland, but if you are in Oregon you should be able to get the Blazers on a regular radio.


Normally, you'd be right, but I don't have an AM radio where I'm at.


----------



## hasoos (Jan 3, 2003)

Seems the Blazers melting down. Sigh.


----------



## yuyuza1 (May 24, 2006)

hasoos said:


> Seems the Blazers melting down. Sigh.


Wheels' tone isn't helping. He's great when we're winning, but his commentary gets old quick when we aren't.


----------



## Stepping Razor (Apr 24, 2004)

Nightfly said:


> Well, what I mean is, I guess I don't understand why you would want to listen online instead of over a radio if you are in Portland. The webstream is delayed by quite a bit, and a regular radio will (in most cases) have better sound quality.
> 
> Just curiosity on my part.


kxl doesn't come in that well in san francisco

stepping razor


----------



## TP3 (Jan 26, 2003)

33 min. and 0 (zero) rebounds. This ain't HORSE! Learn the game, MW.


----------



## mgb (Jun 26, 2004)

Nightfly said:


> Well, what I mean is, I guess I don't understand why you would want to listen online instead of over a radio if you are in Portland. The webstream is delayed by quite a bit, and a regular radio will (in most cases) have better sound quality.
> 
> Just curiosity on my part.


We don't pick up AM very well where I'm at. Just as I pull into my driveway I get good reception, but my driveway drops a few feet and the signal degrades quite a bit. KXL doesn't come in well on my home stereo either. I do have a portable AM radio some where that I could listen to it on if I can find the right position to put it, but the batteries are probably dead even if I could find it.


----------



## moldorf (Jun 29, 2007)

TP3 said:


> 33 min. and 0 (zero) rebounds. This ain't HORSE! Learn the game, MW.


exactly, and considering he only had 2 in the first game, maybe the 'new' martell is a lot like the 'old' martell and we'll see that when his shots stop falling


----------



## Sambonius (May 21, 2003)

We got Martell to shoot and score, he's doing that great in just two games. Let's stop complaining. We ain't gonna win this year, even if he gets 5 boards per game. He needs to get confidence and his play going to go with Oden next season. We need individuals to grow, not necessarily the team.


----------



## moldorf (Jun 29, 2007)

Sambonius said:


> We got Martell to shoot and score, he's doing that great in just two games. Let's stop complaining. We ain't gonna win this year, even if he gets 5 boards per game. He needs to get confidence and his play going to go with Oden next season. We need individuals to grow, not necessarily the team.


in 2 games he's played over 67 minutes and he has a total of 2 rebounds. That's terrible for a 6'7 guy with great athleticism.

We've been hearing about the 'new' martell...about his determination not to live on the perimeter. Now it is just preseason, and his rebounding numbers could be an abberation, but they have to be a concern.

After all, Martell's career FG% is LESS then 40%, so there is every reason to believe this hot shooting will cool. He needs to be accomplishing more then taking jump shots when that % goes down.


----------



## yuyuza1 (May 24, 2006)

TP3 said:


> 33 min. and 0 (zero) rebounds. This ain't HORSE! Learn the game, MW.



Considering he was played primarily SG today, it's not that bad. He did draw 5-6 fouls on his opponents which is a good sign.


----------



## sportsnut1975 (Jul 6, 2006)

How many points did Martell finish with?


----------



## moldorf (Jun 29, 2007)

yuyuza1 said:


> Considering he was played primarily SG today, it's not that bad. He did draw 5-6 fouls on his opponents which is a good sign.


J.Pinnock was also playing SG for the blazers, is 3 inches shorter then martell and played almost 20 minutes less and outrebounded martell 4-0.

as a matter of fact in 2 games martell has a 67-14 advantage in minutes played over pinnock but pinnock has doubled martell's rebound numbers.


----------



## Ukrainefan (Aug 1, 2003)

Just looking at the box score, it wasn't a very encouraging game. When Raef LaFrentz has the best stats (4 for 7, 7 rebounds, 3 steals, 3 blocks) on the team, that's a concern.

Joel did get 12 rebounds in 15 minutes but I'm guessing 4 of those were on his own missed shots. Our bigs had 10 turnovers between them, what's with that?

Travis didn't score in the 2nd half and only 6 of 18 for the game, that's two games for him with subpar shooting. As someone pointed out, no rebounds for Webster, and why is a big athletic guy like Outlaw only getting 4 in 32 minutes?

We did out rebound Denver, that was a concern in the first game, however 21 of our 50 rebounds were offensive, due to our poor shooting.

Sergio did a lot of good things, 3 for four shooting, 4 for 5 free throws, 6 assists and 3 steals, but (ouch) 5 turnovers in 19 minutes.

Of course our two steadiest players, Roy and Blake didn't play, but some of these other guys need to show more. Especially I would have expected our bigs to do better with Kenyon Martin not playing.


----------



## yuyuza1 (May 24, 2006)

Since I doubt many of us making judgments from this game probably didn't watch it, I think it's best to not take this Martell's rebounding effort thing too far.

Here's a nice recap of the game: http://blazersedge.com/story/2007/10/13/13456/680


----------



## Sambonius (May 21, 2003)

moldorf said:


> in 2 games he's played over 67 minutes and he has a total of 2 rebounds. That's terrible for a 6'7 guy with great athleticism.
> 
> We've been hearing about the 'new' martell...about his determination not to live on the perimeter. Now it is just preseason, and his rebounding numbers could be an abberation, but they have to be a concern.
> 
> After all, Martell's career FG% is LESS then 40%, so there is every reason to believe this hot shooting will cool. He needs to be accomplishing more then taking jump shots when that % goes down.


If Martell contributes offensively the way he's been doing the last two games then I'm fine. I don't think we'll be needing to rely on Martell for rebounds when we finally get Oden back to pair with Aldridge. If Martell doesn't score in the efficient manner he has been in the past two games, then yea by all means pick on him for not rebounding. I'm happy he's finding his offense efficiently in two games.


----------



## Sambonius (May 21, 2003)

BTW, starting 3 should go to Webster. He is leaps and bounds better than Travis Outlaw. Outlaw would only be a good spark off the bench.


----------



## gatorpops (Dec 17, 2004)

moldorf said:


> in 2 games he's played over 67 minutes and he has a total of 2 rebounds. That's terrible for a 6'7 guy with great athleticism.
> 
> We've been hearing about the 'new' martell...about his determination not to live on the perimeter. Now it is just preseason, and his rebounding numbers could be an abberation, but they have to be a concern.
> 
> After all, Martell's career FG% is LESS then 40%, so there is every reason to believe this hot shooting will cool. He needs to be accomplishing more then taking jump shots when that % goes down.


I agree that his rebounds are very poor for a man his size so far, but..... *he is averaging 23.5 per game and has gotten to the line much better this year.* Those are Zack offensive numbers. Give him a little time to get it all together. I think he will.

gatorpops


----------



## Sambonius (May 21, 2003)

BTW, how subpar has Jack been? He makes my eyes bleed. I think all this talk about Jack is about upping his value and dropping him off to another team. I still don't think he's here long term. I'd love to package him with Outlaw in return for a nice young peice.


----------



## It's_GO_Time (Oct 13, 2005)

Sambonius said:


> BTW, starting 3 should go to Webster. He is leaps and bounds better than Travis Outlaw. Outlaw would only be a good spark off the bench.



This Webster v. Outlaw during the preseason is going to be interesting. I give the edge to Outlaw. But if Webster can show that he can create his own shot and play defense, he could steal it away from Travis. Also, to me Webster has more potential to fit in with the big three, so I wonder if you start Webster just to give him that confidence he can build on. (Mentally, Travis coming off the bench should be fine)


Edit: Here we go with the up tempo game. It can be fun to watch but it can get ugly too. It's just pre-season so I'm glad they are trying it with the young guys. But for me, I would rather have a nip and tuck close game with the Blazers having a chance to steal it in the end v. the game being over before the end of the third quarter.


----------



## Sambonius (May 21, 2003)

Kiss_My_Darius said:


> This Webster v. Outlaw during the preseason is going to be interesting. I give the edge to Outlaw. But if Webster can show that he can create his own shot and play defense, he could steal it away from Travis. Also, to me Webster has more potential to fit in with the big three, so I wonder if you start Webster just to give him that confidence he can build on. (Mentally, Travis coming off the bench should be fine)


I think it'll end up being Outlaw but for no other reason than him being older and more experienced. He's a lot less efficient than Martell and with Roy and Aldridge taking up the shots, we need guys who will be efficient on the offensive end, not 18 shots, 18 points kind of guys. Agreed on Martell can fit in with the big 3. So far, Martell has won the matchup between the two and he's far smarter on the basketball court than Travis. If Martell can continue this efficiency, I don't see the need for another SF in the near future. Could he be taller and a better rebounder? Sure, always room to improve but he's shown efficiency on the offensive end and well played defense as well. Point guard seems like the only weak link if Martell continues this trend. 

PS- I wish James Jones could have gotten some time. He's a long, scrappy, good shooting small forward who I think could beat out Outlaw at the SF position as well. Travis needs to understand that he's not going to get this many attempts at shooting with a healthy Aldridge and Roy in the game, and eventually Oden.


----------



## mgb (Jun 26, 2004)

Not seeing the game I can't say, but another thought is perhaps Martell blocked out his man allowing someone else to get the rebounds. He might not have, but it's a bit early to jump on him about his rebounds.

I haven't heard anything about Aldridge, did he play?


----------



## Nightfly (Sep 24, 2002)

Stepping Razor said:


> kxl doesn't come in that well in san francisco
> 
> stepping razor


KXL doesn't but you can hear the blazers on KPNW on 1120 in SF at night. It's noisy, and you need a pretty decent radio, but it's there! Try it in your car some time.

(KPNW doesn't carry preseason games, so give it a shot during the regular season.)


----------



## Resume (Jul 17, 2007)

I didn't know we got Petway. Wonder if he is any good besides dunking? Wonder if he will stick around


----------



## hasoos (Jan 3, 2003)

A few observations to throw in. Outlaw was hot early and short on shots late. That to me is a sign of what the coaches have been talking about, which is that he came into camp out of shape. It is typical of player not in shape to not have the legs under his jump shot as the game goes on. Travis game shooting last night followed that pattern to a T.

Secondly, the team scored a bunch in a flurry, but the over all shooting percentage stank. . When you miss outside shots, it gives teams that run like Denver the exact thing they are looking for, a long rebound to run off of. Severalplayers threw in their stinky shooting percentage, and you end up with a lot of running opportunities for Denver. 

As for Martells rebounding, in the past that has actually been a strength of his game. I am not worried about that. See the thing with Martell is, if he is hitting his shot, you can leave him out there, he will hold his own. As Nate said, he worries more about Martells spirit out on the court then what he is doing. If he is packing the right attitude, the rest falls into place. 

Portland got into deep doo doo the minute Aldridge got into foul trouble. That is what happens when your bench is short and is lacking scorers. 

As for who is in front in the SF battle right now, I think early on it is Martell. He has been consistent, and I like 2 things in a player: 1. Efficiency. 2. Effort. He has both of those right now. Travis has scored a bunch, but he is very inefficient, and even then he still hasn't scored nearly as much as Martell in the first 2 games. As his legs get under him this could change, because over the last season Outlaw shot near 45%, and Martell shot like 40. I don't think that is going to continue this year. Martell is looking for his shot and is confident. 

Channing Frye needs to pick up his play another level. Between missed shots and blowing opportunities when getting passes in good position is killing the team I don't ask for a lot, all I ask for is that he converts a good percentage of the opportunities presented. Several of Sergios "Turnovers" were because Frye was not ready for or could not handle a good pass.


----------



## gatorpops (Dec 17, 2004)

hasoos said:


> A few observations to throw in. Outlaw was hot early and short on shots late. That to me is a sign of what the coaches have been talking about, which is that he came into camp out of shape. It is typical of player not in shape to not have the legs under his jump shot as the game goes on. Travis game shooting last night followed that pattern to a T.
> 
> Secondly, the team scored a bunch in a flurry, but the over all shooting percentage stank. . When you miss outside shots, it gives teams that run like Denver the exact thing they are looking for, a long rebound to run off of. Severalplayers threw in their stinky shooting percentage, and you end up with a lot of running opportunities for Denver.
> 
> ...


i have not gotten to see either game so far but it seems because of Sergio not getting into the playing mix because of his obligations to Spain, he and Frye have not played much together yet and Sergio is a PG who anticipates the other player and makes the pass accordingly. This would account for some of the turn overs. 

As to Martell and Jones and Outlaw, we got to see Sergio, Jones and Martell together and they did very well. The anouncement was then made by Nate that he would sit Jones for the rest of the pre-season. Maybe coincidence, but doubtfull. Nate had seen enough to know that he can play them together if he wants. 

I would think we will see a lot of this in the season. It of course could also include Roy at PG and would be devestating on offense. On defense Martell and Jones would switch on whoever is the more difficult to guard. Outlaw may get moved to the 4 when this unit is in as well. With Aldridge it would be a great fast, big, "smallball" team, I think.

gatorpops


----------

