# GAME THREAD: Blazers vs. Warriors



## loyalty4life (Sep 17, 2002)

<center><font size=6><font color=red>Portland Trail Blazers</font> 
*VS* 
<font color=orange>Golden State Warriors</font></font></center>

<center>11-3-06
TV: FSNW
7:30 pm PST

 *<font color=red>VS</font>*  </center> </center>
<center>

_*Main Matchup*_

 *VS* 



_*Other Matchups*_

 *VS* 
 *VS* 

*X-Factor:**
Travis Outlaw*
</center>
<center><font color=red>*Portland (1-0)</font> <font color=orange>Golden State (0-1)*</font></center>

*Click on the pictures up above to access more information on the players and teams involved in the game.*


----------



## loyalty4life (Sep 17, 2002)

It's going to be a tough game for sure. GS just lost against the Lakers, and none of them will want to lose 2 straight home games to start off the season.

If Roy can continue from the game in Seattle, and if we can get some decent production from our centers, this is a winnable game.


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

Jack needs to redeem himself against Davis. The regular season is where it all matters.

btw, I like these game threads, keep em' comin'.


----------



## MAS RipCity (Feb 22, 2003)

ugh, how is lal winning without kobe...wtf phoenix and gsw..blow them out!


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

MAS RipCity said:


> ugh, how is lal winning without kobe...wtf phoenix and gsw..blow them out!



LAL win win a lot without Kobe. In fact I think they would win more without him this year than they will with him. 


As for the game, Zach needs to rebreak Murphy's nose. Punish him big man, punish him. Hopefully Juan on one is as effective as he was last night, and Roy continues to blossom.


----------



## Verro (Jul 4, 2005)

I think Dixon will probably be the x-factor, if he's the hothanded 8/10 sparkplug off the bench he was vs Seattle we have a good chance. If he's the 2/12 gunner who shoots us out of games, we'll be in trouble.


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

Verro said:


> I think Dixon will probably be the x-factor, if he's the hothanded 8/10 sparkplug off the bench he was vs Seattle we have a good chance. If he's the 2/12 gunner who shoots us out of games, we'll be in trouble.




Hopefully Nate realizes he has other options. If Juan on one comes out and shoots 0 for 3 or something like that then sit him down and play Martell, or Travis, or someone else. Then put him back out htere in the second half and see if he's better. No need to let him shoot the ball 12 times if he's not hitting shots.


----------



## hasoos (Jan 3, 2003)

MAS RipCity said:


> ugh, how is lal winning without kobe...wtf phoenix and gsw..blow them out!



They are vastly improved IMO. To point out a few particular areas, one of which scares me a lot: Andrew Bynum has improved a lot, and he is 7' and 275 pounds, and he appears to be learning pretty darn well. Other improved areas include Farmar, who by the end of the year I am sure will take over point guard for Smush Parker. Luke Walton is ripped and appears to finally be comfortable playing a smaller position then he did in college, and last but not least, Lamar Odom is playing as agressive as you could hope for. The only question is, will Lamar Odom fade back into black again once Kobe shows back up.


----------



## wastro (Dec 19, 2004)

Is Richardson back from injury? If so ... wow, I don't know, it'll be tough. If not, well, it'll still be tough. Tough but winnable.


----------



## yakbladder (Sep 13, 2003)

I'm getting a little tired of seeing Seattle and Golden State...especially Davis.

I'm thinking the only thing we haven't tried is putting Outlaw on Davis..it just might work because nothing else has...


----------



## mook (Dec 31, 2002)

we actually have options this year at SG and PF. that should be the biggest difference for McMillan in controlling his players. if Dixon has a single game this year where he goes 2/12, it'll be because Webster, Roy and Jack have too many injuries. otherwise, any time Dixon goes 1/5, he's on the bench for the rest of the game. 

anyway, Zach should feast on this front court. he went for 27/12 in the preseason, and I don't see that much has changed. 

they are basically playing Nelly ball with Troy Murphy at center. we might find ourselves very early in the game going with Zach at C for matchup reasons again. it'll be interesting to see if our improved defensive guards make this a more viable option for us than it was last year, or if Seattle was just a fluke.


----------



## drexlersdad (Jun 3, 2006)

I think we are DEFINATELY going to win this game. Baron Davis is a great talent, he just doesn't really care about winning. And Zach down low against Murphy as thier center??? I expect complete domination. Also Roy is too heady of a player for J Rich to handle, and Roy should put up some resistance with great D on him.


----------



## TRAILBLAYZA93 (Oct 15, 2006)

Zach is going to tear things up against Golden State inside and look for Roy to have another great game and be a facilitator for all our players. Let's hope we go back to Portland 2-0 for our home opener!

Who else is going to the home opener?


----------



## hasoos (Jan 3, 2003)

TRAILBLAYZA93 said:


> Zach is going to tear things up against Golden State inside and look for Roy to have another great game and be a facilitator for all our players. Let's hope we go back to Portland 2-0 for our home opener!
> 
> Who else is going to the home opener?


Yea that would be pretty sweet if somehow for a few games the Blazers were on top of the Northwest division, undefeated with victories over NW Division foes, even if it is short lived!

And of course, I will be at the opener screamin my throat hoarse as normal.


----------



## mgb (Jun 26, 2004)

TRAILBLAYZA93 said:


> Zach is going to tear things up against Golden State inside and look for Roy to have another great game and be a facilitator for all our players. Let's hope we go back to Portland 2-0 for our home opener!
> 
> Who else is going to the home opener?


I'll be there! I'll be the one yelling 'take it inside!'.


----------



## ProudBFan (Apr 29, 2003)

Key injuries for both teams heading into game-time?

PBF


----------



## crandc (Sep 15, 2004)

Bay fans, want to get together? Looks like mgb is going, so will I (without cake or camera). Stomp?


----------



## mgb (Jun 26, 2004)

crandc said:


> Bay fans, want to get together? Looks like mgb is going, so will I (without cake or camera). Stomp?


You're going to the home opener against the Wolves? If you or anyone wants to say hey I'll be sitting here:


----------



## crowTrobot (Jun 24, 2005)

neither jack or roy could even slow down BD in the preseason game. something has to change there or we won't win.


----------



## Redbeard (Sep 11, 2005)

As long as we focus on the rest of the Warriors and get Zach to the line we should be fine. Zach can get them in foul trouble and collapse their front court. Davis could get 30 and we still have a chance of winning. It takes more than one player to win. We just can't settle for jumpers all night unless someone is on fire.

Pound, pound, pound until they are fouled out.


----------



## dudleysghost (Mar 24, 2006)

Zach will score against Murphy and Dunleavy, but in the preseason we saw that he and Outlaw can't guard Dunleavy. Davis also destroyed us twice. Also this game is in GS. Bet on the Warriors to beat the spread if it's around +5 or +6 (but still root for the Blazers!).


----------



## bruindre (Jul 18, 2004)

Zach is going to eat up the interior vs. the Warriors. Golden State let Rony Turiaf dismantle them from the inside (not to mention Andrew Bynum followed up his strong performance vs. Phoenix with a half-decent game in Oakland). It looks like it's the Blazers interior game vs. the Warriors guard play in this match-up.



wastro said:


> Is Richardson back from injury? If so ... wow, I don't know, it'll be tough. If not, well, it'll still be tough. Tough but winnable.


Yes, J-Rich is back, but far from his old self. He missed the entire preseason, having barely practiced a few times going into the regular season. He showed a lot of rust in the Lakers game and should take a while to get back up to the J-Rich of old. He shouldn't be that big of a factor against the Blazers.



ProudBFan said:


> Key injuries for both teams heading into game-time?
> 
> PBF


Besides J-Rich not playing at 100%, Troy Murphy is struggling to play w/ a mask (thanks to the elbow from Zach in the preseason). 

On the inactive list for the Warriors: Zarko Cabarkapa, Dajuan Wagner, and the beloved Adonal Foyle.

*****I couldn't find information about the Blazers' inactive list (or any other team, for that matter). Anyone know a good source for finding who's on the IL? (espn.com, foxsports.com, cnnsi.com, and nba.com all don't have this info on their web pages).

Feel free to come and discuss the game at the Warriors thread for the game as well.

Good luck Blazers fans!

-bruindre


----------



## alext42083 (Nov 7, 2003)

When was the last time the Blazers won at Golden State?
I don't even remember. It seems to be one of those places that the Blazers have struggled to win at, including Denver, in recent seasons. Not just because the Blazers have been bad, but when Sheed and Co. was here, the Warriors always seemed to play well against us.

If Baron can lbe held to less than 25 points and less than 10 assists, Blazers will have a shot. Give him different looks, stick Jack, Roy, Udoka on him.


----------



## Reep (Jun 4, 2003)

Here is my hope for the game. BD has eaten Jack alive. Jack played a lot of minutes last game. I'm hoping he gets a little more rest this time and we put ROY and Udoka/Graham in the backcourt. Any of those three have more muscle to guard Davis. Davis is just a bad matchup for Jack.

If Warriors stick with Davis, Richardson, Pietrus, Dunleavy (PF?) and Murphy, then Blazers should go, ROY, Udoka/Graham, Webster, Outlaw and Zach. However, since Murphy isn't much of a scoring threat, the more traditional ROY, Udoka/Graham, Outlaw/Webster, Zach, Joel might work well. Can you imagine Dunleavy guarding either of Zach or Joel?

As to the X-factor, I think it will be Martell. It sounds like practice went well and he will be able to log some minutes. I'm hoping he comes out firing off the bench.


----------



## Samuel (Jan 1, 2003)

Reep said:


> As to the X-factor, I think it will be Martell. It sounds like practice went well and he will be able to log some minutes. I'm hoping he comes out firing off the bench.


I hope he starts at the 3. Dixon looked great on Wednesday, Outlaw has shown he's suited to come off the bench and Udoka, while clutch down the stretch, can't influence the game like Webster's outside shooting can.

If he woke up this morning pain free, I'd love to see Webster get the start. The pick 'n' roll will be a touch more dangerous with a Webster three-ball waiting in the midst.


----------



## Reep (Jun 4, 2003)

Samuel said:


> I hope he starts at the 3. Dixon looked great on Wednesday, Outlaw has shown he's suited to come off the bench and Udoka, while clutch down the stretch, can't influence the game like Webster's outside shooting can.
> 
> If he woke up this morning pain free, I'd love to see Webster get the start. The pick 'n' roll will be a touch more dangerous with a Webster three-ball waiting in the midst.


From what I understand, it is not about any pain at this point. Rather, the team put in a bunch of new plays, and Webster was out at that time, so he has some catching up to do on the Xs and Os. I also hope he starts, or at least gets a lot of minutes. Udoka is solid, but he isn't going to lay 25 on anyone. I wouldn't mind seeing Graham get some burn tonight. He was impressive in the Clippers game that I saw.


----------



## bruindre (Jul 18, 2004)

Don Nelson, after this morning's shoot around, has announced a shake-up in the Warriors' starting line up:

PG - Mike Dunleavy Jr. 
SG - Baron Davis
SF - Jason Richardson
PF - Troy Murphy
C - Adonal Foyle

Inside the Warriors: Nellie shakes up his starting lineup 



> What does it mean?
> 
> As Nelson said after Wednesday's debacle and again today, he's convinced that Dunleavy can't rebound, that Davis is best at scoring, and that his young centers have played well enough to have a bigger role. We'll see how long this new look will last ...


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

bruindre said:


> Don Nelson, after this morning's shoot around, has announced a shake-up in the Warriors' starting line up:
> 
> PG - Mike Dunleavy Jr.
> SG - Baron Davis
> ...


It surprised me when Nellie said earlier this preseason that Dunleavy was going to get some time at the point. I just don't think that Dunleavy has the ball handling capabilities to play the point. I might be wrong though.


----------



## Nightfly (Sep 24, 2002)

alext42083 said:


> When was the last time the Blazers won at Golden State?
> I don't even remember. It seems to be one of those places that the Blazers have struggled to win at, including Denver, in recent seasons. Not just because the Blazers have been bad, but when Sheed and Co. was here, the Warriors always seemed to play well against us.


The Blazers won a game on a Wallace last second shot in... I think it was the '02-'03 season.

I just remember the end of that game because that was when Chris Mills came out and challenged the team bus, among other crazy things that happened that night.

I don't know off hand if that was the last time the Blazers won in Oakland or not, but it did come to mind.


----------



## bruindre (Jul 18, 2004)

zagsfan20 said:


> It surprised me when Nellie said earlier this preseason that Dunleavy was going to get some time at the point. I just don't think that Dunleavy has the ball handling capabilities to play the point. I might be wrong though.


More than his ball handling skills, I'm wondering if this 'lineup' is how we defend as well. Dun Dun couldn't rebound as a PF....is he suppose to be able to guard smaller guards? Look for Jarrett and ROY to have fun going against Dunleavy.


----------



## Reep (Jun 4, 2003)

If Nelson stays with this lineup, it could be interesting. It allows us to stick with Joel/Magloire, which should help cut damage from penitration, but it pulls Dunleavy outside. I guess we will see the standard lineup then. 

My new key to the game: Jack. If he really plays opposite Dunleavy, then Jack needs to be aggressive and take it inside more.

The game becomes more winable merely because GS will have a new lineup/rotation that will have chemistry issues.


----------



## SheedSoNasty (Dec 31, 2002)

I hate to sound pessimistic, but Golden State has almost always given us a hard time regardless of team makeup or era... from my recollection, anyway. This will be a tough one for us and I just can't see us winning.

On the flip side, I don't think that Dunleavy is going to have the same kind of game he had against us a few weeks ago. Regardless, I'm excited to watch it.


----------



## crandc (Sep 15, 2004)

Actually the Blazers have done well against Golden State. There was a period during the mid 90s when Portland could not win here, but there was also a stretch of 2-3 years when they never lost.
Portland did not win at GSW last year but did the year before. That was one of the first, if not the first, games of the season when Nick Van Exel went off late in the game and blew it open. The previous year Portland won both games at Golden State.


----------



## alext42083 (Nov 7, 2003)

bruindre said:


> Don Nelson, after this morning's shoot around, has announced a shake-up in the Warriors' starting line up:
> 
> PG - Mike Dunleavy Jr.
> SG - Baron Davis
> ...


If that's the case, Blazers need to full court press Golden State all night and force Dunleavy to make decisions in the backcourt, and force him into some TOs.

And Roy and Udoka are going to have their hands full....


----------



## Utherhimo (Feb 20, 2005)

man I hate FSNW no pregame but seattle gets one!


----------



## Blazed (May 24, 2006)

What radio station is this on? Blazers.com doesn't list one.


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

Beautiful ball movement by the Blazers so far!

I also love how they actually enforce traveling nowadays


----------



## crowTrobot (Jun 24, 2005)

joel is definitely into the game - dominating on D


----------



## mgb (Jun 26, 2004)

Great start. Now if the bench can keep it up.


----------



## Blazed (May 24, 2006)

Crap play by Outlaw. Pass the ball [email protected]!


----------



## yuyuza1 (May 24, 2006)

Blazed said:


> What radio station is this on? Blazers.com doesn't list one.



750 AM KXL, 

kxl.com


----------



## Samuel (Jan 1, 2003)

Portland needs to get that ball into Randolph. What's the offensive gameplan right now?


----------



## mgb (Jun 26, 2004)

They are taking away the post play which is stagnating our O.


----------



## Samuel (Jan 1, 2003)

Dixon shooting only 33% from the field. Ouch.


----------



## mgb (Jun 26, 2004)

Instead of just kicking it out when double team inside and taking a 3, kick it back in again!


----------



## Samuel (Jan 1, 2003)

Thank God, Roy is back in the game for Dixon. Guy was shooting us out of the game.


----------



## Utherhimo (Feb 20, 2005)

they are killing us with rebounding!


----------



## Samuel (Jan 1, 2003)

Man, Ice cold. Better figure out this zone fast.

Why isn't Webster in the game? He's the guy that can break a zone.


----------



## Verro (Jul 4, 2005)

I wonder if Webster's back is still bad... I'd love to see him take more of Graham, Udoka, and Dixon's minutes.


----------



## mgb (Jun 26, 2004)

The zone is hurting us. Did you see when they had two on Zach and he didn't even have the ball? We have to get some short jumpers off instead of always going deep when that happens.


----------



## SheedSoNasty (Dec 31, 2002)

It seems as though we're at our best when Roy's in the game.

I'm glad it's only a 1 point game thus far. Maybe my 16 point loss prediction won't hold up. I'd love to be wrong!


----------



## GOD (Jun 22, 2003)

We should come out after the half with a little more passing which with the zone.


Joel started out great and then yanked. Ime and Dixon kept screwing up but didn't get yanked.


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

Nate McVillain said:


> We should come out after the half with a little more passing which with the zone.
> 
> 
> Joel started out great and then yanked. Ime and Dixon kept screwing up but didn't get yanked.


Ime got yanked. Ime was the first player yanked.


----------



## Samuel (Jan 1, 2003)

This game is definitely up for the taking. Jack looks good, Zach looks hounded and Roy hasn't had much of a chance to take his man.

Dixon is 2-7 with mostly outside shots. I understand the zone is difficult to break, but if Nate doesn't yank him he'll keep shooting.

If Portland can start passing, and maybe get Martell Webster going along with Roy, the middle will open up for Zach. 

*Positives:*
- Portland is outshooting their opponent yet again.
- Portland has more assists than their opponent.
- Another hot night at the free throw line with only one miss. Would like to see some more attempts though.

This would be a huge win. Let's go Blazers!


----------



## Fork (Jan 2, 2003)

Samuel said:


> Thank God, Roy is back in the game for Dixon. Guy was shooting us out of the game.


5 misses is shooting us out of the game? Whatever. Golden Boy Roy is 2-7 too. No criticism for him? Make it 2-8 for Brandon Roy...yank him!!!!!!! (Or just realize that sometimes guys will miss a couple shots and roll with the punches.)


----------



## Samuel (Jan 1, 2003)

Fork said:


> 5 misses is shooting us out of the game? Whatever.


Dixon doesn't often shoot his way back into a game. Usually the first 7 shots are a pretty good indication of whether Dixon will be hitting, wouldn't you say?


----------



## Fork (Jan 2, 2003)

Samuel said:


> Dixon doesn't often shoot his way back into a game. Usually the first 7 shots are a pretty good indication of whether Dixon will be hitting, wouldn't you say?


What I WILL say is that Dixon gets criticism for misses that other guys DON'T get. Roy is 2-8. Yet Dixon gets ragged on? I don't get it.


----------



## Samuel (Jan 1, 2003)

Fork said:


> What I WILL say is that Dixon gets criticism for misses that other guys DON'T get. Roy is 2-8. Yet Dixon gets ragged on? I don't get it.


When I posted, Roy was something like 2-4. Dixon had the second most shots in the game behind Zach.


----------



## Samuel (Jan 1, 2003)

Huge moment in the game. Can Portland keep up the pressure without Zach in? I'm assuming Nate wants to leave him in for the entire 4th.


----------



## Fork (Jan 2, 2003)

Samuel said:


> When I posted, Roy was something like 2-4. Dixon had the second most shots in the game behind Zach.


So what? Just goes to show that a few shots is WAY too early to tell whether a guy should be pulled or left in or whether or not we should rejoice at aguy being replaced by another guy.

BTW...the Golden Boy is 2-10 now and is completely shooting us out of the game. (And I like Roy a LOT more than Dixon, but my point remains...a few misses doesn't mean ****.)


----------



## mgb (Jun 26, 2004)

Fork said:


> What I WILL say is that Dixon gets criticism for misses that other guys DON'T get. Roy is 2-8. Yet Dixon gets ragged on? I don't get it.


It might have to do with it being Roy's second game or maybe that he does other stuff as well. But I'm sure enough people will be critical of him if he keeps taking and missing outside shots.


----------



## obiwankenobi (Jan 31, 2004)

I'm not liking how Magloire is playing tonight.


----------



## Samuel (Jan 1, 2003)

Fork said:


> So what? Just goes to show that a few shots is WAY too early to tell whether a guy should be pulled or left in or whether or not we should rejoice at aguy being replaced by another guy.


7 shots for a bench player is a bit much _in the first half[/b]. I understand he's a 'shooting guard', but unless he's hot let's give it to some guys who shoot at a higher clip. 

Did he shoot us out of the game? No. Was he in the act of shooting us out of the game at the time? Yes.



Fork said:



BTW...the Golden Boy is 2-10 now and is completely shooting us out of the game. (And I like Roy a LOT more than Dixon, but my point remains...a few misses doesn't mean ****.)

Click to expand...

What's your contention here? Roy looks bad, Dixon looks bad. If I were Nate, would I give a longer leash to Roy? You betcha. He's a more important player than the backup shooting guard (and even that's debatable once Martell comes back).

Ease up. It's just one game._


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

How the heck does Magloire, an NBA veteran, let Andres Biedrins consistently beat him out for position downlow? That shouldn't be happening.


----------



## obiwankenobi (Jan 31, 2004)

It's Magloire's hands and feet of stone that have me worried. We've gone small now - so we'll see what we do without him.


----------



## mgb (Jun 26, 2004)

Come on Martell! Light it up!


----------



## Samuel (Jan 1, 2003)

There must be something we don't know about Martell Webster if they limit him to about 10 minutes in a game where Portland jacks up over 20 three pointers. 

I don't get it.


----------



## mgb (Jun 26, 2004)

Well GS had a good game plan against Portland, don't let Zach do anything, and executed it pretty well. Refs didn't help considering the flops, but GS just played a good game.


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

I was reminded of why I hate the Warriors 2nd most of all teams in the NBA.

a non passing grade for everyone tho. I don't get why Martell didn't play much, and why Travis kept playing.


----------



## bodyman5001 (Jul 1, 2006)

zagsfan20 said:


> Ime got yanked. Ime was the first player yanked.



He should be the first player waived. WTF?


----------



## mgb (Jun 26, 2004)

Sergio! Glad he got a bucket!


----------



## Yega1979 (Mar 22, 2003)

Why was Nate playing Mag over Przybilla? Joel could have at least affected all of the inside crap the Warriors were getting. And the refs. **** them! They kept calling complete crap.


----------



## mgb (Jun 26, 2004)

Our starters did well at the beginning of the game and I said now lets see if the bench could keep it going. Well they didn't and that's more than anything is the reason we lost this game. Our bench got out scored pretty bad.


----------



## GOD (Jun 22, 2003)

Yega1979 said:


> Why was Nate playing Mag over Przybilla? Joel could have at least affected all of the inside crap the Warriors were getting.


That's what I was thinking.


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

That's the Nate I know and loathe. What the hell is Udoka playing so many minutes for? Webster was shooting well, and couldn't have played any worse than Ime did. Why not play him more? 

Dixon as predicted would shoot us out of games. Actually Rot shot poorly also, but did so many more things it's ok. ALL JUAN ON ONE CAN DO IS SHOOT, tonight he didn't shoot well. Udoka sucks. Sorry guys he's a bench player period. Outlaw had a rough night as well. The Blazers had no answer for the double teaming of Zach in the 4th quarter. 

The Warriors announcers were singing the praises of Roy all night. They also questioned why Webster didn't play more.....I'm assuming it was his back, at least that's what Nate should say when he has to defend that. 

I realize the Warriors went small, but Joel seemed to be doing fairly well in the early part of the game. I wonder why he didn't seem to play much?


This is what I expect all year. They played hard, and that's all I care about.


----------



## Samuel (Jan 1, 2003)

*Positives:*

- Sergio Rodriguez gets his first two NBA points. Congrats.
- Martell Webster ties his career high for 3 pointers made in a game with 4.
- Zach Randolph keeps his 20-10 streak going.
- Brandon Roy proves to be the only guy who can get past the Warriors' zone with 10 FT attempts. He finishes with 19 points, not bad for a rookie.

Not a pretty game, but it's a learning process with this team. And they finish the road trip 1-1. I'll take that any day with this team.


----------



## crowTrobot (Jun 24, 2005)

ack. didn't understand the rotation or substitutions, particularly taking zach out right in the middle of a run in the 3rd, and not playing joel more when their bigs were scoring at will. hopefully nate is still just trying to figure out who he can rely on.


----------



## Samuel (Jan 1, 2003)

Yega1979 said:


> Why was Nate playing Mag over Przybilla? Joel could have at least affected all of the inside crap the Warriors were getting. And the refs. **** them! They kept calling complete crap.


I have a feeling it's going to be like that all season. One game, Mags plays the heavy minutes, one game Przybilla gets the heavy minutes.

I'd like to see Joel out there more, but at the same time, he won't hold up all season if we consistently play him a full game. That's a fact.


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

mediocre man said:


> That's the Nate I know and loathe. What the hell is Udoka playing so many minutes for? Webster was shooting well, and couldn't have played any worse than Ime did. Why not play him more?


Im not upset that Ime played as many minutes as he did, but why Graham played. Sure, he didn't play horrible defense, and had 2 shots go in..

but how do you break a zone?

Outside shooters.



> Dixon as predicted would shoot us out of games. Actually Rot shot poorly also, but did so many more things it's ok. ALL JUAN ON ONE CAN DO IS SHOOT, tonight he didn't shoot well. Udoka sucks. Sorry guys he's a bench player period. Outlaw had a rough night as well. The Blazers had no answer for the double teaming of Zach in the 4th quarter.


you say Udoka sucks, yet just that Outlaw had a rough night? Outlaw was simply putrid tonight. There's no excuses for his 3 offensive fouls tonight.



> The Warriors announcers were singing the praises of Roy all night. They also questioned why Webster didn't play more.....I'm assuming it was his back, at least that's what Nate should say when he has to defend that.
> 
> I realize the Warriors went small, but Joel seemed to be doing fairly well in the early part of the game. I wonder why he didn't seem to play much?
> 
> This is what I expect all year. They played hard, and that's all I care about.


I just hate the warriors, so it's clouding my opinion of how we played.


----------



## GOD (Jun 22, 2003)

Even with the loss and the bad play of Dixon, Outlaw and Maglorie, there were some bright spots.

The Blazers will be much better when Martell can play 30 min. Tonight he had 12 pts 1 blk, 1 ast in 16 minutes on 4 of 6 shooting with all four coming from behind the arc. 

Zach battled real hard tonight and did a good job. 22 pts, 3oreb, 8dreb, 11tot reb, 1stl in 38 minutes with 50% shooting.

Brandon Roy had a hard time shooting but he got to the line nonstop to add an extra 9 pts. He had 19 pts, 6 reb, 5 ast, 1 blk and ZERO turnovers in 38 minutes but only shot 5 of 16. 

Jack had a very good game with 10 ast, 12 pts, 1 reb, 3 stl in 38 minutes on 50% shooting. He did have 4 tournovers however.

Joel only played 11 minutes but had 3 blks and 4 rebounds in that short time. He also had 2 turnovers.

Everyone else was decent at best and some outright sucked.


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

Hap said:


> Im not upset that Ime played as many minutes as he did, but why Graham played. Sure, he didn't play horrible defense, and had 2 shots go in..
> 
> but how do you break a zone?
> 
> ...



Outlaw was God aweful, but I thought 2 of his fouls were a little questionable. Didn't play well anyway though.


----------



## MAS RipCity (Feb 22, 2003)

*My thoughts on the game*

* The better team lost
* If Martell was healthy and able to go for 30 mins, we win. He is the zone buster
* Although Roy had an off shooting night he still played a nice game, defensively too.
*Pietrus and Ellis > Baron and JRich, those 2 look real good.
* Mags has hands of stone and needs to own the boards
* we had a off shooting night and were still competitive, that's a good sign.


----------



## Yega1979 (Mar 22, 2003)

I definitely want more Martell Webster and less Stephen Graham. More Joel, less Magliore.

Portland had poor ball movement tonight. Several times I saw someone wide open for three, but the Blazers didn't get him the ball. If Portland is going to be a half court team, they need to learn to be patient and exploit the defenses weakness. Also, if they are going to play bigger ball than other teams GET THE ****ING REBOUND!!!!


----------



## 2k (Dec 30, 2005)

These are the type of games I like. I want the team to play well, play together, play hard improve and lose enough to get one of the top four picks. I'm sorry but with the cap situations this team is no more then a 2007-2015 1st or 2nd round playoff exiter. You add Young, Durrant, or Oden to this team and they are a title contender in 08-015.


----------



## BBert (Dec 30, 2004)

Yeah, Travis was bad, and the refs treated him like a rookie. 

Joel only played 17 minutes against Seattle and 11 tonight? What's up with that? I thought the team was better with Joel in than with Magloire. Are the Blazers desperate to get Magloire in game shape -- for a trade? It would be nice if we could get a few baskets from the center position. 

Roy had a good game while having a tough shooting night. That's a good sign, right? When you aren't hitting, do all the other things, and get to the line, I've always heard. Roy's defense is pretty good for a rookie -- a few rookie lapses here and there but overall surprisingly good.

Martell in limited minutes was automatic from 3. That's a good sign. 

I didn't realize how well Jack did until I looked at his stat line. Tough player. 

We couldn't get Zach the ball enough. He really had to fight hard in traffic for his rebounds tonight. He's a work horse.

We have to rely on too many rookies (and sophs) and too many bench quality players, to win a lot of games. And we sucked on defense. That's the game.

There's always tomorrow!

:cheers:


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

I should mention (as someone who chides him a lot) that Zach played a really solid game toinght. Smart passing, hustle, effort and rebounding.

2 solid games in a row for Zach, bravo!

Also, Brandon had 2 good games against proven (and all star quality) SG's. That says a lot for a rookie.


----------



## Spud147 (Jul 15, 2005)

Samuel said:


> *Positives:*
> 
> - Sergio Rodriguez gets his first two NBA points. Congrats.
> - Martell Webster ties his career high for 3 pointers made in a game with 4.
> ...


Also, I was impressed that Zach kept his cool with all those offensive fouls. Blazers of old would have racked up about 5 Ts, 1 ejection, and tried to start a scuffle. What was up with all the offensive fouls, what was Zach doing wrong? I always seem to be looking at another player when they called them.

Brandon wasn't shooting well but was able to contribute in a lot of other ways and once again his defense was sweet.

Got to see a little more of Martell this game, that shot is mighty perty.

Eventhough the Blazers were playing a game where nothing was working for them I saw only very brief lapses in energy. They refocused quickly when they started to get frustrated and still kept fighting. I like the concentration and heart of this team, it's not easy to rattle them. 

This is a game they can study and build on... the inexperience really showed with the turnovers. They killed us tonight.

And on a side note, I really felt like the refs were way too involved in the game on both ends. They wouldn't let either team get into a flow at all.

The good thing is these guys are going to regroup and get a home opener win (wish I was going)!

GO BLAZERS!!!!!


----------



## Seattle2Finals (Nov 1, 2006)

good game you guys played good....all positives cant win em all though


----------



## Public Defender (May 5, 2003)

Looks to me, from the box score, like tonight's game may well be representative of some of the Blazers' struggles on the road: the bench tends not to score as much, and the home team's often does. That basically means you need better scoring from your starters - and with Zach not having a superlative game, with Roy and Jack pretty much max'ing out in the teens, the Blazers need something from guys at SF and C (and Udoka and Przybilla did pretty much squat on the offensive end). 

Doesn't look like too bad of an effort from the Blazers, especially considering GSW was majorly hungry for their first win.


----------



## baler (Jul 16, 2003)

crowTrobot said:


> ack. didn't understand the rotation or substitutions, particularly taking zach out right in the middle of a run in the 3rd, and not playing joel more when their bigs were scoring at will. hopefully nate is still just trying to figure out who he can rely on.


A key point in the game......pulling Zach. Another coaching blunder by McNugget. Did well Wednesday against Seattle, tonight.....not so good!


----------



## rx2web (Jul 27, 2004)

I watched the game and went back many many times to rewatch plays on the Tivo. I have to say I'm extremely pleased with the team as a whole. Yea there are a few things I would like to have seen different to night. Less Graham, more Martell for example. But GS has always seemed to have our number. Doesn't seem to matter what players they have or we have...I always groan when I see we are playing GS. Anyway.

Positives:
* Zach busted his *** for his 22 points. With effort like that all season, he is going to put up some monster numbers and keep this team afloat.
* Brandon Roy, this rookie is going to average high teens in points for the season. But he didnt' start really trying to score until late in the 2nd or 3rd. He played to get his guys involved. Drive and kick or drive and score. Nice.
* When did Jack get 10 assists? Talk about quiet. But I love seeing it. He and Roy both upped their assist totals and it showed with a team high 22 assists for the game. Very very nice.
* Martell, god we have GOT to work an offense that starts with Zach on one side and Martell on the other. In to zach, if no shot pass it out and then around the horn swiftly to Martell for the open 3. He's going to be money. Work him into the offense looking for him to score and he's going to drop 20+ on people in 3's alone easy. I would also love to see Portland take on a screening style like the pacers had for Reggie Miller. Give Reggie or Martell a little space and BAM. 3 to the heart.
* I actually liked Ime in this game. He was in the game at the beginning, we ran ahead, he came out and others went in, they switched to Zone and we just couldn't break it. I think Ime is a fairly smart player He really doesn't turn the ball over much, looks to give it to our main scoring weapons, but can score himself.
* Magloire finally showed up in my eyes. He was pretty active at least on the rebounds. The whole team was. But I actually noticed Mag's tonight. I cannot say as I've really noticed him much before this.
* Rebounds are up, Assists are up, our free throw percentage is up, even our shooting percentage is higher then last year. 

Now they get to re-group after the loss, and come back tomorrow night and dish it up again against the wolves. For me, the questions remain, 

Can Zach and Roy keep up the scoring averages of nearly 20 a game?
Can we keep our asisst totals up?
How do we keep our turnovers down?
Will we continue to see a little more of Martell then in the last couple games?


----------

