# Blazers vs. Clippers Game Thread



## VenomXL (Jan 22, 2008)

Game time approaches. Hopefully the team will be able to grind out a win tonight after the tough loss last night. Oh, how I hate losing to the Lakers.


----------



## alext42083 (Nov 7, 2003)

We better beat this Clipper team...


----------



## VenomXL (Jan 22, 2008)

Brick, brick, brick, brick...

Thank God we've gotten a couple of inside buckets so far.


----------



## wastro (Dec 19, 2004)

We have a Von Wafter sighting!


----------



## VenomXL (Jan 22, 2008)

Von Wafer sighting early!

Wow, his jumper sure looked nice in transition there.


----------



## VenomXL (Jan 22, 2008)

We looked good in the first quarter AGAIN. Can it carry over into the next three quarters?


----------



## RoyToy (May 25, 2007)

So there actually is a team in the NBA playing worse than the blazers right now.


----------



## crowTrobot (Jun 24, 2005)

VenomXL said:


> We looked good in the first quarter AGAIN. Can it carry over into the next three quarters?


not really, the clippers are just playing horrendous.


----------



## yuyuza1 (May 24, 2006)

I'm guessing Sergio is in the dog house. 

Lovely.


----------



## crowTrobot (Jun 24, 2005)

sergio in the doghouse apparently


----------



## yuyuza1 (May 24, 2006)

crowTrobot said:


> sergio in the doghouse apparently


either that or Nate thinks Jack is a PG... again.


----------



## Jayps15 (Jul 21, 2007)

Channing Frye = enforcer!


----------



## nikolokolus (Jan 29, 2008)

gee what do you know we can't hit a shot in the second quarter.


----------



## nikolokolus (Jan 29, 2008)

wafer!!


----------



## nikolokolus (Jan 29, 2008)

I'll give Nilla some major credit, he apparently learned a thing or two in his time with Denver -- how to get easy buckets and drive.


----------



## Jayps15 (Jul 21, 2007)

Outlaw's off tonight, I'd like to see webster get back in and be agressive


----------



## VenomXL (Jan 22, 2008)

The Clippers are looking like the Blazers tonight. Von has had a couple of good moves so far. Still can't buy a bucket. The Clips had missed 17 shots in a row and we couldn't build on the lead.


----------



## Driew (Oct 20, 2007)

Outlaw is tired--he played 41 minutes last night because he started so he's not used to that I think.


----------



## Jayps15 (Jul 21, 2007)

oooohhh, Roy maybe back on friday for the Lakers game


----------



## nikolokolus (Jan 29, 2008)

oof.


----------



## nikolokolus (Jan 29, 2008)

c'mon LMA, just a little more fire -- he needs gasol in front of him


----------



## VenomXL (Jan 22, 2008)

That may be the worst offensive possession I've seen in a while.


----------



## nikolokolus (Jan 29, 2008)

VenomXL said:


> That may be the worst offensive possession I've seen in a while.


wasn't that the Z-bo, dribble, dribble, fumble, recover, air-ball 3 the other night?


----------



## nikolokolus (Jan 29, 2008)

maybe Wild Rice should have made Wafer our "x-factor"?


----------



## VenomXL (Jan 22, 2008)

Ok, the worst Blazer possession then.

Yeah, that Zbo thing was terrible.


----------



## BengalDuck (Jun 19, 2004)

VenomXL said:


> That may be the worst offensive possession I've seen in a while.


I'm not sure which one you're talking about, but Thornton for the Clippers at the end of the 1st quarter held the ball at the right elbow of the 3 pt. line for the last 15 seconds and then tried to hoist a 3 in Frye's face as time expired. Dude didn't even try and dribble at all...


----------



## nikolokolus (Jan 29, 2008)

sweet, the blazers are letting this team hang around


----------



## crowTrobot (Jun 24, 2005)

lol blake not playing now either.


----------



## yuyuza1 (May 24, 2006)

Would it kill Nate to put a real PG in the game?


----------



## nikolokolus (Jan 29, 2008)

yuyuza1 said:


> Would it kill Nate to put a real PG in the game?


Jesus, no kidding.


----------



## RoyToy (May 25, 2007)

Is it just me or is Jack totally ignoring Wafer?


----------



## VenomXL (Jan 22, 2008)

Nice block to end the half. This is some ugly basketball. I can't help but feel that we'll find some way to lose this game. The Clippers can't keep shooting this poorly, can they?


----------



## crowTrobot (Jun 24, 2005)

we actually are playing pretty good defense. if we could shoot we'd by up 25.


----------



## nikolokolus (Jan 29, 2008)

I have a feeling that if Blake were in he'd be just a little more likely to find LMA down in the post without LMA being instantly doubled up ... Jack just makes me groan like I do when Sergio is in there.


----------



## wastro (Dec 19, 2004)

What an ugly game.


----------



## nikolokolus (Jan 29, 2008)

All I can say is thank god I'm not a clippers fan ... though I may be eating my words by the end of the game.


----------



## crowTrobot (Jun 24, 2005)

nikolokolus said:


> All I can say is thank god I'm not a clippers fan ... though I may be eating my words by the end of the game.




you mean like when we said thank god we're not sixers fans in the first half in philly?


----------



## yuyuza1 (May 24, 2006)

16 minutes for Jack, all at PG. Blake played 8. 

Sergio's season high for minutes all season: 20.


----------



## nikolokolus (Jan 29, 2008)

gahhhh!!! Luftman just couldn't avoid the "what have they won?" comment nooooooooo!


----------



## VenomXL (Jan 22, 2008)

The Clips are doubling Aldridge very quickly and daring someone else to make a shot. Webster needs to stay aggressive and keep looking for his shot.


----------



## STOMP (Jan 1, 2003)

wastro said:


> What an ugly game.


the Clips (minus 4 starters) + Portland (minus Roy on the 2nd of a back to back)

...'nuff said

STOMP


----------



## Jayps15 (Jul 21, 2007)

Webster was 4-5 in the 1st half(not counting the 3/4 court 3 attempt he launched at the end of the half), he's got to get more touches tonight. Outlaw's needs to find something other than his shot, which is off, to contribute tonight start giving the ball up or hitting the glass.

And Wafer looks OK so far, let Maggette get a layup on a fast break, and got the ball poked away on a drive. But he can shoot and looks servicable for a young guy.


----------



## nikolokolus (Jan 29, 2008)

crowTrobot said:


> you mean like when we said thank god we're not sixers fans in the first half in philly?


I may have just laid down a jinx ... but the blazers have been doing that on their own lately without my help ... so maybe this is undoing the bad juju?


----------



## RoyToy (May 25, 2007)

The difference between watching a game on tv and on my laptop is drastic. I actually stay tuned into the game when it's on tv. When I'm watching games on my laptop my eyes usually end up drifting towards the tv and I don't pay as much attention to the game. 

A tv deal needs to be reached.


----------



## nikolokolus (Jan 29, 2008)

damn this 3rd quarter scares the hell out of me.


----------



## nikolokolus (Jan 29, 2008)

ugh, what a way to start


----------



## nikolokolus (Jan 29, 2008)

Fhukuk


----------



## nikolokolus (Jan 29, 2008)

we officially suck


----------



## VenomXL (Jan 22, 2008)

I love third quarters.


----------



## nikolokolus (Jan 29, 2008)

weee, more jump shots.


----------



## nikolokolus (Jan 29, 2008)

I think I may have to turn this off soon ...


----------



## nikolokolus (Jan 29, 2008)

everyone feel free to blame me for laying down the jinx ...


----------



## VenomXL (Jan 22, 2008)

Good lord, what is this garbage that I'm watching?

Brevin Knight stops a four on one fast break...


----------



## Jayps15 (Jul 21, 2007)

GIVE IT TO WEBSTER!!!

How hard is it to feed a hot hand!?!


----------



## nikolokolus (Jan 29, 2008)

BAAAAAAAAAAAADDDD game for LMA tonight.


----------



## yuyuza1 (May 24, 2006)

Put in Sergio. At least he passes to the open man.


----------



## wastro (Dec 19, 2004)

Von Wafer, Steve Blake, Raef LaFrentz, Martell Webster and Channing Frye.

That's who is on the floor right now for the Blazers.

Yikes.


----------



## nikolokolus (Jan 29, 2008)

I thought the Sonics game was the lowest point of the season a few nights ago ... I was wrong.


----------



## alext42083 (Nov 7, 2003)

This is a little embarassing...


----------



## VenomXL (Jan 22, 2008)

We are so going to lose this game, this is unbelievable.


----------



## nikolokolus (Jan 29, 2008)

Jesus, 3 pts for the 3rd?! what the hell?


----------



## nikolokolus (Jan 29, 2008)

well at least Martell has bounced back tonight, Wafer looks solid, and Channing isn't doing too bad.


----------



## nikolokolus (Jan 29, 2008)

I like Nilla wafers.


----------



## VenomXL (Jan 22, 2008)

Maggette is going all Paul Pierce on us.


----------



## wastro (Dec 19, 2004)

If I wasn't such a diehard, I would have turned this game off a long time ago.


----------



## yuyuza1 (May 24, 2006)

*Jack is not a PG!!!!!* 


Nate is a freaking moron.


----------



## VenomXL (Jan 22, 2008)

I hear ya. Being a fan is pure punishment sometimes.


----------



## nikolokolus (Jan 29, 2008)

hell yeah, Von!!!!


----------



## VenomXL (Jan 22, 2008)

I'm kinda liking what I'm seeing from Von so far. A bit of instant offense off the bench can never hurt. Especially nowadays.


----------



## Jayps15 (Jul 21, 2007)

Nice three off the Jack miss handle in the lane.

It would be nice if LMA and Outlaw would show up for the 4th.


----------



## Sambonius (May 21, 2003)

Thing I like about Von is his aggressiveness, I wish Martell played like that. And why does Jack play like he has a steak knife lodged in his hand?


----------



## Jayps15 (Jul 21, 2007)

VenomXL said:


> I'm kinda liking what I'm seeing from Von so far. A bit of instant offense off the bench can never hurt. Especially nowadays.


Hopefully he cuts into Jacks minutes a little


----------



## nikolokolus (Jan 29, 2008)

good god, why sit Martell now?


----------



## yuyuza1 (May 24, 2006)

Wafer has played more minutes through three quarters than Sergio has played in any game this season. 

Good work, Nate.


----------



## nikolokolus (Jan 29, 2008)

Looks like we got "good Jarret" tonight.


----------



## nikolokolus (Jan 29, 2008)

yuyuza1 said:


> Wafer has played more minutes through three quarters than Sergio has played in any game this season.
> 
> Good work, Nate.


I get the feeling that was meant to be sarcastic, but I'm all for it.


----------



## VenomXL (Jan 22, 2008)

How ironic would it be if Jack wins us the game tonight?


----------



## wastro (Dec 19, 2004)

14/8/3 from Jack on 6-7 shooting and 0 turnovers. This is definitely an off night for Jack.


----------



## nikolokolus (Jan 29, 2008)

Who is this guy in Jarret's uniform?


----------



## wastro (Dec 19, 2004)

Von Wafer with the big block! Now that was nuts.


----------



## nikolokolus (Jan 29, 2008)

wow, nice block!!!


----------



## nikolokolus (Jan 29, 2008)

oof


----------



## nikolokolus (Jan 29, 2008)

W
T
F???

Jarret?!


----------



## YardApe (Mar 10, 2005)

I told you guys it's an ACC thing. Nate loves um! We should also let Nate know that Josh is a Duke guy. However being from the ACC that might keep him on the bench.


----------



## nikolokolus (Jan 29, 2008)

ouch, Travis is lost tonight


----------



## Jayps15 (Jul 21, 2007)

Jarrett / Wafer / Webster / Frye / Joel...

sounds stupid but that lineup seems like the best choice tonight


----------



## VenomXL (Jan 22, 2008)

Aldridge and Outlaw aren't just off tonight, they're horrible. Outlaw can't even complete a spin move without losing the ball. The double team has made Aldridge a non-factor.


----------



## nikolokolus (Jan 29, 2008)

Jayps15 said:


> Jarrett / Wafer / Webster / Frye / Joel...
> 
> sounds stupid but that lineup seems like the best choice tonight


LOL

It's amazing to me just how bad this team is without Brandon in the lineup ... I don't want to make too much out of tonight's dismal showing since it's the second of a back-to-back and we haven't beaten the Clips in LA in a long time, but ... wow.


----------



## nikolokolus (Jan 29, 2008)

I think the reason Joel has gotten so many fouls is because he shaved


----------



## nikolokolus (Jan 29, 2008)

we're going to lose this damn game.


----------



## nikolokolus (Jan 29, 2008)

Damn this team is so inconsistent.


----------



## Sambonius (May 21, 2003)

The Blazers have made ZERO effort to get Webster involved in the second half, despite being very effective in the first.


----------



## nikolokolus (Jan 29, 2008)

I can't believe Wafer is tied for most minutes tonight.


----------



## VenomXL (Jan 22, 2008)

Jeez Lamarcus, when it's bad it's real bad. I hope he can make a pair here.

One minute to go for the game.


----------



## nikolokolus (Jan 29, 2008)

ack, damn that was close to being 3 from the charity stripe


----------



## wastro (Dec 19, 2004)

Everyone out there who doesn't get Comcast ... you're lucky tonight. Count your blessings when games like this come around.


----------



## nikolokolus (Jan 29, 2008)

I just don't have a good feeling about this play coming out of the timeout.


----------



## nikolokolus (Jan 29, 2008)

Jarret ... where have you been all month?


----------



## sportsnut1975 (Jul 6, 2006)

Way to go JJ!!!


----------



## PapaG (Oct 4, 2004)

Sambonius said:


> The Blazers have made ZERO effort to get Webster involved in the second half, despite being very effective in the first.


To be fair, at times, Martell makes ZERO effort to get himself involved. Such is life as a stationary player.


----------



## Boredbum88 (Jul 2, 2007)

VenomXL said:


> How ironic would it be if Jack wins us the game tonight?


......interesting... ok...scratch that...still can win though


----------



## nikolokolus (Jan 29, 2008)

Jack with two misses at the line? I didn't see that coming.


----------



## Jayps15 (Jul 21, 2007)

Hello Jarrett Jack, I was wondering where you were tonight... thanks for showing up with 10 seconds left


----------



## Darkwebs (May 23, 2006)

Jack can't make them when it counts. Ugh!


----------



## Sambonius (May 21, 2003)

And this is why Blake > Jack. Never leave the ball in Jack's hands in the clutch. I said this when Jack got stripped in the finals seconds against the Nuggets his rookie year.


----------



## nikolokolus (Jan 29, 2008)

Yikes ...


----------



## PapaG (Oct 4, 2004)

Sambonius said:


> And this is why Blake > Jack. Never leave the ball in Jack's hands in the clutch. I said this when Jack got stripped in the finals seconds against the Nuggets his rookie year.


Nevermind that without Jack the team would be losing by double digits right now.


----------



## HOWIE (Dec 30, 2002)

nikolokolus said:


> Jack with two misses at the line? I didn't see that coming.


It's clear you don't know Jack! :rofl2:


----------



## Jayps15 (Jul 21, 2007)

What the hell are Maggettte and Dunleavy whining about, Outlaw didn't even touch him the whole drive... that's just horrible


----------



## nikolokolus (Jan 29, 2008)

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA ... we put the game in Wafer's hands? Didn't see that coming.


----------



## wastro (Dec 19, 2004)

Von Wafer to ice the game?

Yeah, I totally saw this coming when the game started. I mean, who didn't?


----------



## nikolokolus (Jan 29, 2008)

Good for Wafer making the pressured second shot though ... I like this kid


----------



## BlazerCaravan (Aug 12, 2004)

Well, I won't say that Von Wafer won us the game (thus counting as one of the four Taurean Green wins), but he played well for us.


----------



## nikolokolus (Jan 29, 2008)

Yay!! 30 wins and we're still over .500


----------



## PapaG (Oct 4, 2004)

wastro said:


> Von Wafer to ice the game?
> 
> Yeah, *I totally saw this coming when the game started. I mean, who didn't?*


I don't get Comcast, along with thousands of other Blazer fans, so I didn't see it coming.


----------



## crowTrobot (Jun 24, 2005)

nikolokolus said:


> HAHAHAHAHAHAHA ... we put the game in Wafer's hands? Didn't see that coming.


further proof that nate is clearly insane.


----------



## yuyuza1 (May 24, 2006)

I consider this game a loss.


----------



## Sambonius (May 21, 2003)

PapaG said:


> Nevermind that without Jack the team would be losing by double digits right now.


I don't know that and you certainly don't either. It's my opinion that Blake certainly would have more than made up in Jack's absence. Nobody is ripping Jack for his game, it's the coaching decision to have the ball in his hands in the last seconds... just like Von Wafer's.... He's had what, 8 free throws his whole NBA career? Christ on a stick...


----------



## PapaG (Oct 4, 2004)

Sambonius said:


> I don't know that and you certainly don't either. It's my opinion that Blake certainly would have more than made up in Jack's absence. Nobody is ripping Jack for his game, it's the coaching decision to have the ball in his hands in the last seconds... just like Von Wafer's.... He's had what, 8 free throws his whole NBA career? Christ on a stick...


So which team won the game?


----------



## andalusian (Jun 29, 2006)

crowTrobot said:


> further proof that nate is clearly insane.


Or a mastermind, as the other team did not see it coming either.

I can't see the damn game - so I certainly do not know.

Thanks Comcast.


----------



## HOWIE (Dec 30, 2002)

Jack won the game for Portland tonight, but man this team really looked flat......I sure hope Roy is back on Friday.


----------



## crowTrobot (Jun 24, 2005)

PapaG said:


> So which team won the game?


we tried to give it to them but they weren't taking.


----------



## Jayps15 (Jul 21, 2007)

Sambonius said:


> I don't know that and you certainly don't either. It's my opinion that Blake certainly would have more than made up in Jack's absence. Nobody is ripping Jack for his game, it's the coaching decision to have the ball in his hands in the last seconds... just like Von Wafer's.... He's had what, 8 free throws his whole NBA career? Christ on a stick...


Nah he's had 16 free throws in his career...


----------



## craigehlo (Feb 24, 2005)

Easily the least fulfilling win in recent memory.


----------



## ProZach (Oct 13, 2005)

That game was just so strange and pathetic in so many ways to even comment any further on it.


----------



## Sambonius (May 21, 2003)

PapaG said:


> So which team won the game?


Obviously the Blazers... what exactly is your point? That Jack SHOULD have the ball in his hands in the final seconds or that a career D leaguer with 8 free throws attempted to his credit should take the final free throws to win the game?


----------



## Darkwebs (May 23, 2006)

Talk about winning a game you don't deserve. If we played any of the other 28 teams tonight, this would've been another lost. But we can lucky and played a team that shot worse than us.


----------



## Sambonius (May 21, 2003)

Jayps15 said:


> Nah he's had 16 free throws in his career...


Clippers announces said 8 attempted, 6 made. Either way, a completely retarded move, without a doubt. This can't be argued.


----------



## RipCity9 (Jan 30, 2004)

yuyuza1 said:


> I consider this game a loss.


Consider whatever you want, it goes as a +1 in the win column - and last I checked, that was the goal of both teams every night.


----------



## nikolokolus (Jan 29, 2008)

Sambonius said:


> Obviously the Blazers... what exactly is your point? That Jack SHOULD have the ball in his hands in the final seconds or that a career D leaguer with 8 free throws attempted to his credit should take the final free throws to win the game?


To be fair Jack was smothered on the inbounds play and Wafer (a shooter) was really the only other option on the court.


----------



## PapaG (Oct 4, 2004)

craigehlo said:


> Easily the least fulfilling win in recent memory.


A road win without Roy isn't fulfilling?

Oh brother...


----------



## Driew (Oct 20, 2007)

I like that Nate gave Wafer a GOOD amount of playing time tonight to evaluate if he liked Wafer. Because he's not gonna be able to play much once Roy gets back so Nate figured this game was the game for Wafer to play in. Like the move. And I find it ironic that you guys find ANYTHING to whine about.

BTW, Zach Addy, you were shown on TV by Mike and Mike when they were showing various fans in the arena and they showed you and Rice said, "Oh there's Zach Addy" and then I think it was Barrett that said "And he's sitting next to the owner of the Clippers *laughs* I bet he'll ask him to take the Blazer jersey off" or something to that extent. haha

A win is a win. These SAME clippers blew out the Jazz last week so they can certainly play. But whatever you guys like to whine like little school children so I'll let you guys continue to whine.


----------



## PapaG (Oct 4, 2004)

Sambonius said:


> Obviously the Blazers... what exactly is your point? That Jack SHOULD have the ball in his hands in the final seconds or that a career D leaguer with 8 free throws attempted to his credit should take the final free throws to win the game?


Scoreboard. Look at it.


----------



## crowTrobot (Jun 24, 2005)

nikolokolus said:


> To be fair Jack was smothered on the inbounds play and Wafer (a shooter) was really the only other option on the court.


BS. jack set up well out near the half court line and ran away from the ball into the key. the play was designed for wafer.


----------



## nikolokolus (Jan 29, 2008)

I'm still sitting here struggling to put my feelings into words about this game. I'll just say that if we had lost I'd be drinking heavily right now -- okay, *more* heavily


----------



## BlazerCaravan (Aug 12, 2004)

PapaG said:


> A road win without Roy isn't fulfilling?
> 
> Oh brother...


I think I know what he means, though. I'm glad we won, but man, that was not satisfying emotionally. It felt like We Didn't Lose rather than We Won.


----------



## ProZach (Oct 13, 2005)

PapaG said:


> A road win without Roy and with Zach Addy in attendance isn't fulfilling?
> 
> Oh brother...


Fixed. :bsmile:


----------



## Sambonius (May 21, 2003)

PapaG said:


> Scoreboard. Look at it.


You don't really have a point do you? I didn't think so.


----------



## PapaG (Oct 4, 2004)

BlazerCaravan said:


> I think I know what he means, though. I'm glad we won, but man, that was not satisfying emotionally. It felt like We Didn't Lose rather than We Won.


What did you expect tonite from a struggling team playing without Roy on a back-to-back? 

I see this as one of the best wins in recent memory.


----------



## PapaG (Oct 4, 2004)

Sambonius said:


> You don't really have a point do you? I didn't think so.


My point is obvious. Keep whining about winning road games without Brandon Roy on the tail end of a back to back.


----------



## alext42083 (Nov 7, 2003)

I'll take the win, but man... that was difficult to watch. I would not want to watch that game again.

Bring on the real LA team!!


----------



## Sambonius (May 21, 2003)

craigehlo said:


> Easily the least fulfilling win in recent memory.


Completely agree, wish I wouldn't have sat through and watched it. This is about the only time I regretted watching a Blazers game.


----------



## nikolokolus (Jan 29, 2008)

Does this mean Tony Luftman's appearance in the studio has something to do with us getting back to winning? That's depressing.


----------



## PapaG (Oct 4, 2004)

Sambonius said:


> Completely agree, wish I wouldn't have sat through and watched it. This is about the only time I regretted watching a Blazers game.


That really says more about you than it does about anything else.


----------



## Sambonius (May 21, 2003)

PapaG said:


> My point is obvious. Keep whining about winning road games without Brandon Roy on the tail end of a back to back.


You being confused seems to be a reoccurring theme. I never whined about winning the game. I said it was a bad decision to have the ball in Jack and Wafer's hands in the final seconds.


----------



## Sambonius (May 21, 2003)

PapaG said:


> That really says more about you than it does about anything else.


What does it say? Please clarify if it isn't too much trouble.


----------



## PapaG (Oct 4, 2004)

Sambonius said:


> You being confused seems to be a reoccurring theme. I never whined about winning the game. I said it was a bad decision to have the ball in Jack and Wafer's hands in the final seconds.


Look at the scoreboard. BTW, Jack was the best statistical option on the court. *He shoots 87% from the line*.


----------



## crowTrobot (Jun 24, 2005)

PapaG said:


> I see this as one of the best wins in recent memory.


the clippers played the worst game by a blazer opponent in recent memory and we won by 2. i wouldn't rank it among our best : )


----------



## BlazerCaravan (Aug 12, 2004)

PapaG said:


> I see this as one of the best wins in recent memory.


I'm genuinely glad you're happy. I guess I didn't see much from this game that the team can build off of. Kind of like the Seattle win. It feels like a few years ago when we had that stretch where we could only beat one team (Golden State) at the end. I'm glad to notch a win in the belt, but can we gain confidence from this win? Can we build on it? Is there a future to come out of it?

It's very possible you saw some of that. Maybe I'm just tired, and in a bit of a food coma from the great Vietnamese food I had tonight, but I'm not seeing it.

Believe me, it's depressing me to know I'm feeling pessimistic lately, especially when I was pretty jazzed about the season even before the streak. Again, I'm sorry. I just don't feel sated by this win.


----------



## PapaG (Oct 4, 2004)

Sambonius said:


> What does it say? Please clarify if it isn't too much trouble.


It says that you can't take pleasure in a tired team gutting out a win on the road without their best player.


----------



## Sambonius (May 21, 2003)

PapaG said:


> Look at the scoreboard. BTW, Jack was the best statistical option on the court. *He shoots 87% from the line*.


Karl Malone was an excellent free throw shooter too. You think the Jazz went to him intentionally to shoot free throws? Like I said, confused.


----------



## PapaG (Oct 4, 2004)

crowTrobot said:


> the clippers played the worst game by a blazer opponent in recent memory and we won by 2. i wouldn't rank it among our best : )



How many recent road wins do the Blazers have to compare against?

Man, the negativity here is depressing. If I'm Oden, I'd get out of here quick because you people will turn on him in a second.


----------



## PapaG (Oct 4, 2004)

Sambonius said:


> Karl Malone was an excellent free throw shooter too. You think the Jazz went to him intentionally to shoot free throws? Like I said, confused.


I give you statistics; you give me nonsense. Keep it up.


----------



## PapaG (Oct 4, 2004)

Sambonius said:


> Karl Malone was an excellent free throw shooter too. You think the Jazz went to him intentionally to shoot free throws? Like I said, confused.


I again have to quote this. An 87% FT shooter is on the court and you would go to...who?


----------



## Sambonius (May 21, 2003)

PapaG said:


> It says that you can't take pleasure in a tired team gutting out a win on the road without their best player.


You're either with us or against us? Como? Did you see the roster the Clippers played with? "Gutting?" We didn't have to "gut" it out to get the win, it was just the incompetence of the team to sustain the lead they first had. This is a team without Chris Kaman, Elton Brandon, and Sam Cassell. Seriously.


----------



## ProZach (Oct 13, 2005)

PapaG said:


> What did you expect tonite from a struggling team playing without Roy on a back-to-back?
> 
> I see this as one of the best wins in recent memory.


I think he was just referring to the fact that the Blazers had two quarters of only 16 points, shot 68% from the line, missed 75% of their free-throws in the clutch, had their supposed two best players go 6-22, had their most maligned and criticized player essentially channel MJ during the fourth only to try and choke the game away anyways, had only 16 assists to 13 turnovers - hardly any of which were forced, and played a Clippers team that scored only 29 points in the first half yet found themselves down to said team in the fourth. It was just a bizarre game. Our bench outscored our starters by double-digits. Forgive me if I'm not pissing myself with joy.

EDIT: I might as well add that the Clippers didn't have Livingston, Cassell, Brand, or Kaman.


----------



## Sambonius (May 21, 2003)

PapaG said:


> I again have to quote this. An 87% FT shooter is on the court and you would go to...who?


Wafer is an 87% shooter? Oh you mean Jack, sorry. Blake on both accounts mister.


----------



## PapaG (Oct 4, 2004)

Sambonius said:


> You're either with us or against us? Como? *Did you see the roster the Clippers played with?* "Gutting?" We didn't have to "gut" it out to get the win, it was just the incompetence of the team to sustain the lead they first had. This is a team without Chris Kaman, Elton Brandon, and Sam Cassell. Seriously.



I did, and it looks pretty much as good as the Blazers' young roster but with more experience.

Sam Cassell is 38 years old and the Blazers were without Roy and Oden.

Have another beer. This is the third youngest team in NBA history.


----------



## crowTrobot (Jun 24, 2005)

PapaG said:


> How many recent road wins do the Blazers have to compare against?
> 
> Man, the negativity here is depressing. If I'm Oden, I'd get out of here quick because you people will turn on him in a second.




i'm a 4 decade and counting addicted to the death blazer fan for life. i would never turn on the team. i just don't think this qualifies as a quality win lol.


----------



## PapaG (Oct 4, 2004)

Sambonius said:


> Wafer is an 87% shooter? Oh you mean Jack, sorry. Blake on both accounts mister.


Blake shoots 71% from the line and has missed as well late in a game. Or did you forget about that?


----------



## BlazerCaravan (Aug 12, 2004)

Roy and Jones... Oden counts, but not as much right now because he's never played a regular season game. Two big holes in our offense right there though.


----------



## PapaG (Oct 4, 2004)

crowTrobot said:


> i'm a 4 decade and counting addicted to the death blazer fan for life. i would never turn on the team. i just don't think this qualifies as a quality win lol.


Given the current bad stretch, a win is a win. Yet you people are here bashing it.

Unreal.


----------



## PapaG (Oct 4, 2004)

BlazerCaravan said:


> Roy and Jones... Oden counts, but not as much right now because he's never played a regular season game. Two big holes in our offense right there though.


I forgot about Jones.

Let's all get upset about this win. :eek8:


----------



## Sambonius (May 21, 2003)

PapaG said:


> I did, and it looks pretty much as good as the Blazers' young roster but with more experience.
> 
> Sam Cassell is 38 years old and the Blazers were without Roy and Oden.
> 
> Have another beer. This is the third youngest team in NBA history.


What you fail to mention is that Cassell is actually immortal. And I don't drink beer, it makes me bloated. I prefer hard liquor like Mike's hard lemonade.


----------



## BlazerCaravan (Aug 12, 2004)

PapaG said:


> Given the current bad stretch, a win is a win. Yet you people are here bashing it.
> 
> Unreal.


Dude, you're overreacting. Quit acting like we're calling for Webster to be traded or something.


----------



## BlazerCaravan (Aug 12, 2004)

Sambonius said:


> What you fail to mention is that Cassell is actually immortal. And I don't drink beer, it makes me bloated. I prefer hard liquor like Mike's hard lemonade.



Mike's is a malt beverage... it's much closer to beer than liquor.


----------



## Sambonius (May 21, 2003)

PapaG said:


> Blake shoots 71% from the line and has missed as well late in a game. Or did you forget about that?


I did forget, can you remind me? Again, Blake > Jack and Wafer in the final seconds at the line. You're missing the point. This has nothing to do with them being young and all to do with McMillan's decision making in the final seconds.


----------



## PapaG (Oct 4, 2004)

BlazerCaravan said:


> Dude, you're overreacting. Quit acting like we're calling for Webster to be traded or something.


Yes, I am overreacting to being happy that a 7 game road losing streak just ended, not to mention the team had lost 8 out of 9 games overall. 

I am overreacting!!! LOL


----------



## Sambonius (May 21, 2003)

BlazerCaravan said:


> Mike's is a malt beverage... it's much closer to beer than liquor.


Please detect sarcasm. The only step to take after Mike's is heroin.


----------



## PapaG (Oct 4, 2004)

Sambonius said:


> I did forget, can you remind me? Again*, Blake > Jack and Wafer in the final seconds at the line*. You're missing the point. This has nothing to do with them being young and all to do with McMillan's decision making in the final seconds.


Link? Blake has shot 36 FTs ALL SEASON. You don't know what you are talking about. Roy missed two last week as well in a game the Blazers actually won against Seattle. Thank God Travis made 1/2 to seal the win. Now tell me more about how I don't know things.


----------



## YardApe (Mar 10, 2005)

Who gives a fruit pie filled with Vodka? Our team won! We needed it for confidence upon going back to the Rose Garden. Let's take this and run. You don't think the Lakers think they lost last night because we didn't have Roy, Jones and Oden do ya? Hell no! They would take a W if a grade school team showed up. Right now so should we!


----------



## ProZach (Oct 13, 2005)

YardApe said:


> Who give a fruit pie filled with Vodka? Our team won! We needed it for confidence upon going back to the Rose Garden. Let's take this and run. You don't think the Lakers think they lost last night because we didn't have Roy, Jones and Oden do ya? Hell no! *They's take a W if a grade school team showed up. Right now so should we!*


Who exactly is saying we shouldn't _take the win_. All that's being said is it was an ugly win and a game that we really should have lost. 

Think of it as the opposite of a moral victory.


----------



## Sambonius (May 21, 2003)

PapaG said:


> Link?  Blake has shot 36 FTs ALL SEASON. You don't know what you are talking about. Roy missed two last week as well in a game the Blazers actually won against Seattle. Thank God Travis made 1/2 to seal the win. Now tell me more about how I don't know things.


I don't believe there is a link for real game situations. Blake is more clutch than Jack, that's my opinion and I'd bet that most the board would agree to a poll asking that question. Roy is an unreliable free throw shooter as well, I'd rather give the ball to Blake to shoot the free throws than him too.


----------



## Sambonius (May 21, 2003)

YardApe said:


> Who gives a fruit pie filled with Vodka? Our team won! We needed it for confidence upon going back to the Rose Garden. Let's take this and run. You don't think the Lakers think they lost last night because we didn't have Roy, Jones and Oden do ya? Hell no! They's take a W if a grade school team showed up. Right now so should we!


Do you really think we gained any confidence off this win and that will carry over to our upcoming games? I don't see that at all, sorry.


----------



## PapaG (Oct 4, 2004)

Jack scores 13 in the 4th quarter and two missed FTs are the conversation.

Totally ridiculous. I have criticized Jarrett as much as anyone, but tonite he basically willed this shorthanded team to a win. Yet some people don't want an 87% FT shooter on the line at the end of the game. :whistling:


----------



## PapaG (Oct 4, 2004)

Sambonius said:


> Do you really think we gained any confidence off this win and that will carry over to our upcoming games? I don't see that at all, sorry.


Yes, a team that wins an ugly road game by 2 points to end a losing skid will take confidence from it.

My goodness...


----------



## yuyuza1 (May 24, 2006)

I've figured a way to win in spite of Nate's stupidity in terms of game plan and substitutions: amass as much individual talent as possible. 

Tank!!


----------



## Sambonius (May 21, 2003)

PapaG said:


> Jack scores 13 in the 4th quarter and two missed FTs are the conversation.
> 
> Totally ridiculous. I have criticized Jarrett as much as anyone, but tonite he basically willed this shorthanded team to a win. Yet some people don't want an 87% FT shooter on the line at the end of the game. :whistling:


Stop dodging the issue. My criticism was not aimed at Jack or Wafer, rather McMillan's decision making. I think that should be clear after saying it three or four times in this thread. Karl Malone was a great player, but you did not want him taking shots with the game on the line. Sloan was smart to keep the ball out of his hands in the remaining seconds with a one or two point lead, McMillan isn't unfortunately.


----------



## Sambonius (May 21, 2003)

PapaG said:


> Yes, a team that wins an ugly road game by 2 points to end a losing skid will take confidence from it.
> 
> My goodness...


Then I suppose we should win on Friday, Sunday, and Tuesday huh?


----------



## PapaG (Oct 4, 2004)

Sambonius said:


> Stop dodging the issue. My criticism was not aimed at Jack or Wafer, rather McMillan's decision making. I think that should be clear after saying it three or four times in this thread. Karl Malone was a great player, but you did not want him taking shots with the game on the line. Sloan was smart to keep the ball out of his hands in the remaining seconds with a one or two point lead, McMillan isn't unfortunately.



The ball is typically in Roy's hands, but you already said that is a bad move as well.

I'm just glad that YOU aren't coaching this team.


----------



## nikolokolus (Jan 29, 2008)

yuyuza1 said:


> I've figured a way to win in spite of Nate's stupidity in terms of game plan and substitutions: amass as much individual talent as possible.
> 
> Tank!!


Wouldn't that make us the "one and done" Nuggets?

Whatever the case, I'm just glad they escaped with a win. When you play that bad and win, you hopefully get a little boost ... I doubt losing would have provided some sort of catharsis?


----------



## PapaG (Oct 4, 2004)

Sambonius said:


> Then I suppose we should win on Friday, Sunday, and Tuesday huh?


Where did I say that? I just hope they gain some confidence winning on the road without their best player.


----------



## YardApe (Mar 10, 2005)

I think when your team struggles as much as this group has in the last two weeks, beating a wheelchair team would make them feel better! So yes! Against a pro team without our stars either, I'd say this W couldn't hurt!


----------



## Sambonius (May 21, 2003)

PapaG said:


> The ball is typically in Roy's hands, but you already said that is a bad move as well.
> 
> I'm just glad that YOU aren't coaching this team.


Are you illiterate? I said I wouldn't have Roy shooting free throws. Say it with me... freeeeee throoowwwssss...


----------



## Sambonius (May 21, 2003)

PapaG said:


> Where did I say that? I just hope they gain some confidence winning on the road without their best player.


First you said they will gain some confidence, now you said you hope they gain some confidence. Which is it? Wasn't that Seattle win supposed to give us some "confidence?"


----------



## YardApe (Mar 10, 2005)

Would you rather we lost? Geez MAN!!!!! Lakers coming, hate rematch, get focused on that!


----------



## yuyuza1 (May 24, 2006)

YardApe said:


> Would you rather we lost?


kinda... yeah


> Geez MAN!!!!! Lakers coming, hate rematch, get focused on that!


Lakers are a different matter. Even if I want us to tank, Lakers games are all must-wins.


----------



## PapaG (Oct 4, 2004)

Sambonius said:


> First you said they will gain some confidence, now you said you hope they gain some confidence. Which is it? Wasn't that Seattle win supposed to give us some "confidence?"


Gaining confidence doesn't mean they will win three straight.

What is your problem?


----------



## MAS RipCity (Feb 22, 2003)

we won, im ecstatic..where are all the jack haters now? I think this also spells the end for Surge


----------



## Driew (Oct 20, 2007)

Jack had 1 turnover that was very refreshing hehe


----------



## KingSpeed (Oct 30, 2003)

crowTrobot said:


> sergio in the doghouse apparently


Sergio deserves to be there. Don't you watch the games? We don't score when he's in there. He can't shoot or run an offense.


----------



## KingSpeed (Oct 30, 2003)

PapaG said:


> What did you expect tonite from a struggling team playing without Roy on a back-to-back?
> 
> I see this as one of the best wins in recent memory.


Agreed.


----------



## KingSpeed (Oct 30, 2003)

Back in December, we beat a terrible Grizzlies team in their building by only 1 point. We won the next 12.

Let's build on tonight's win.

Go Blazers


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

MAS RipCity said:


> we won, im ecstatic..where are all the jack haters now? I think this also spells the end for Surge


I'm right here. Jack played one good game in the last month and now he's ok? LOL what's the thing about the blind squirrel and a nut?

I feel bad for Sergio. He routinely outplays Jack with inconsistant minutes and has a coach that doesn't believe in him.


----------



## BlazerCaravan (Aug 12, 2004)

ZackAddy said:


> Back in December, we beat a terrible Grizzlies team in their building by only 1 point. We won the next 12.
> 
> Let's build on tonight's win.
> 
> Go Blazers


Alright, I'll bite, even though Outlaw hitting the shot to win is 10,000,000x more exciting and satisfying than watching Maggette brick a couple of shots to lose.

Do you think Jones will be back in time to help with wins 6-13, ala LMA (wasn't he out games 1-5 of the streak?)

Is Roy good to go for the Lakers game, or is he out for longer than that?


----------



## crowTrobot (Jun 24, 2005)

ZackAddy said:


> Sergio deserves to be there. Don't you watch the games? We don't score when he's in there. He can't shoot or run an offense.



i didn't say anything about whether he deserves it or not. duh.


----------



## andalusian (Jun 29, 2006)

mediocre man said:


> I'm right here. Jack played one good game in the last month and now he's ok? LOL what's the thing about the *blind squirrel* and a nut?
> 
> I feel bad for Sergio. He *routinely outplays* Jack with inconsistant minutes and has a coach that doesn't believe in him.


Pot. Kettle.


----------



## crandc (Sep 15, 2004)

I'm glad they won. It was an ugly game.

Things to take from it: ending road losing streak, staying above .500, seeing if Wafer can play at all, Webster's shooting.

OK, would you rather be in a position of making a blockbuster trade and losing every game since, like Phoenix? The Suns were supposed to be a title contender, the Blazers were supposed to be one of the worst in the NBA and it looks like both predictions are wrong.

Quite yer beefin;.


----------



## It's_GO_Time (Oct 13, 2005)

I'm just glad we didn't lose to the Clippers . . .


----------



## hasoos (Jan 3, 2003)

I believe the team was tired this game. It really surprised me how few shots Aldridge and Outlaw took through the game, they seemed sluggish, waiting too long for double teams when they should have been agressive. I was really dissppointed with the fact that Aldridge was passing up opportunities to go inside when they had no shot blocking. Comon man, its not like Dan Dickau as a second defender is going to do anything to stop you. Gnard up and hit some shots.

I thought Martell had a great game, and I thought Von Wafer played very well. He can definitly score.

Jack amazingly enough tried to find a way to lose it even though he had a great game. What the hell is it with that guy. You know when things are going good it's just a matter of time before the balance is restored and something horrible happens. 


Now the thing I want to know is, when Roy comes back, who goes out of the starting lineup. I pray to the dark ones it is Blake, and Nate finally figures out that going big is a very good thing.


----------



## crowTrobot (Jun 24, 2005)

aldridge always waits too long before making his move. he should either go right away, or if he's not comfortable pass out for a re-entry. our post offense with him is starting to look a little like it did with zach :dead:


----------



## It's_GO_Time (Oct 13, 2005)

hasoos said:


> Now the thing I want to know is, when Roy comes back, who goes out of the starting lineup. I pray to the dark ones it is Blake, and Nate finally figures out that going big is a very good thing.


I also like the line up of Roy, Webster, Outlaw, LA, and Joel.

But if I was the opposing coach, I would have my team pressure the ball full court. That is not a good ball handling line up . . . and they certainly aren't a running team.

But why not give it try this season.


----------



## MAS RipCity (Feb 22, 2003)

mediocre man said:


> I'm right here. Jack played one good game in the last month and now he's ok? LOL what's the thing about the blind squirrel and a nut?
> 
> I feel bad for Sergio. He routinely outplays Jack with inconsistant minutes and has a coach that doesn't believe in him.


Sergio never outplays Jack..in fact I think i see Surge turn it over more so than Jarrett. Jarrett has had a really nice post all-star break start, minus the lakers game. All of you sound like minnesota, toronto, denver, and boston fans wen Billups played there...now what? Jack has the ability to take over a game, just like Webster, but he is inconsistent. He is only a 3rd year pro, that will happen. He was a late 1st round pick, don't expect the world from him. Bottom line is Jack has won more games for us than he has lost (no he didn't lose the Denver game, it was a team effort).
I just feel so bad for Jarrett. He already takes the bad performances really hard and it seems like only 10 people actually want Jack on the team. Newsflash, he is our best point guard so deal with it. Blake is just as inconsistent and is an offensive liability when his shot is off, and Sergio is just not ready for the NBA talent wise. I just hate that he i always the scapegoat and even when he plays extraordinary, people still find reasons to *****. If you don't like him fine, but nut up and give the man his credit when he deserves it.


----------



## MAS RipCity (Feb 22, 2003)

crowTrobot said:


> aldridge always waits too long before making his move. he should either go right away, or if he's not comfortable pass out for a re-entry. our post offense with him is starting to look a little like it did with zach :dead:


yea, i was yelling for him to go quick and fast. but i think he will learn to do some in due time, or won't ever face another double team with roy and oden on the court alongside of him.


----------



## nikolokolus (Jan 29, 2008)

crowTrobot said:


> aldridge always waits too long before making his move. he should either go right away, or if he's not comfortable pass out for a re-entry. our post offense with him is starting to look a little like it did with zach :dead:


I think LaMarcus got caught in that trap of thinking about what he wants to do rather than reacting on instinct. I listened to Jason Quick's chat on Olive yesterday and it sounds like he's already well aware of his deficiencies with ball handling and his feeling totally comfortable in the post, and he already has plans to focus almost exclusively on these aspects of his game over the summer (in addition to trying to add more core strength). It wasn't pretty last night, but you almost wonder if he didn't expend so much mental and physical energy in the Laker's game the night before that a letdown was almost inevitable?


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

> Sergio never outplays Jack..in fact I think i see Surge turn it over more so than Jarrett.


Sergio has turned the ball over 47 times, to Jack's 134. So it's not possible for you to have seen him turn it over more.



> Jarrett has had a really nice post all-star break start, minus the lakers game.


So in almost all of his 6 games after the break he has done well. What about his other 50 games? 



> Bottom line is Jack has won more games for us than he has lost (no he didn't lose the Denver game, it was a team effort)


Then why isn't it a team effort when we win? 



> Newsflash, he is our best point guard so deal with it.


This explains the signings and draftings of...(Blake, Sergio, Koponen, Green and the move of Roy to PG since he has been here) It also explains the pursuit of Harris and the common knowledge that Portland needs to upgrade the PG spot.


----------



## hasoos (Jan 3, 2003)

Kiss_My_Darius said:


> I also like the line up of Roy, Webster, Outlaw, LA, and Joel.
> 
> But if I was the opposing coach, I would have my team pressure the ball full court. That is not a good ball handling line up . . . and they certainly aren't a running team.
> 
> But why not give it try this season.



Yea I think you have to give a little of that up in order to make the gains. Also I would remind that the best way to beat pressure is by passing, not by ball handling. 

On the other side of the coin, now the Blazers would be able to say:

1. Ok now you get to try to handle 6'6" Roy with your PG.
2. Lets see how their SG handles our 6'8" shooting guard.
3. We have 2 shot blockers waiting to get at speedy guards who get by Roy.
4. We have a ton of length to disrupt shots and get rebounds.


----------



## Driew (Oct 20, 2007)

The problem with that is then our bench coming in...we'd have Frye, Jack, Wafer, Sergio, Raef and Jones...uh ya...we almost need Outlaw on the bench for some scoring in that second unit I think. But I do like the idea of going with that lineup just to see how it works out.


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

Driew said:


> The problem with that is then our bench coming in...we'd have Frye, Jack, Wafer, Sergio, Raef and Jones...uh ya...we almost need Outlaw on the bench for some scoring in that second unit I think. But I do like the idea of going with that lineup just to see how it works out.


Then Nate needs to adapt and leave 1 or two starters on the floor all the time. It's really not rocket science. Shorten the rotation and play all the starters 30-35 minutes per night, and then 3 reserves the rest.


----------



## Jayps15 (Jul 21, 2007)

mediocre man said:


> Sergio has turned the ball over 47 times, to Jack's 134. So it's not possible for you to have seen him turn it over more.


I think he was talking more on a per possession/minute basis, of which Sergio does indeed turn the ball over even more than Jack.


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

Jayps15 said:


> I think he was talking more on a per possession/minute basis, of which Sergio does indeed turn the ball over even more than Jack.





So then can I talk about his assists per minute? 16th in the league I believe. Jack is 57th


----------



## andalusian (Jun 29, 2006)

mediocre man said:


> So then can I talk about his assists per minute? 16th in the league I believe. Jack is 57th


Should I use the dirty words and talk about FG%, Defense and scoring?

Let's face it. Jack is a backup combo guard. He will win you some games, he will lose you some games and will be below average starter, production wise, at this point.

Sergio, unfortunately, is a garbage time player only right now, production wise.


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

andalusian said:


> Should I use the dirty words and talk about FG%, Defense and scoring?


Sure, Sergio's about where you would expect it to be for someone who plays so little

Jack's defense is extremely overrated

And Sergio given the same minutes would score 8.1 ppg compared to Jack's 9.7. Also remember that Jack plays consistant minutes and doesn't even try to set his teammates up like Sergio does, who would have more assists than Jack given his minutes. As I said, more giev consistant minutes


----------



## andalusian (Jun 29, 2006)

mediocre man said:


> Sure, Sergio's about where you would expect it to be for someone who plays so little


Chicken and egg. Really. He plays as little as he does because he stinks.



mediocre man said:


> Jack's defense is extremely overrated


He is far from a defensive stopper, but compared to Sergio, a 7/8th Oden replica one dimensional carton board is a defensive stopper.



mediocre man said:


> And Sergio given the same minutes would score 8.1 ppg compared to Jack's 9.7.


Yes, he would also do it with a TS% of 0.425 vs. Jack's %0.561 getting you less points a whole lot less efficiently.



mediocre man said:


> Also remember that Jack plays consistant minutes and doesn't even try to set his teammates up like Sergio does, who would have more assists than Jack given his minutes. As I said, more giev consistant minutes


Jack is playing SG. Sergio is playing PG. Of course Sergio should be more of an assist man. But, on this team, Jack is actually the most efficient scorer guard - of course you want him to attack and shoot over setting up. His TS% is better than Roy's, Blake's and Sergio's. Why would you want to replace your backup SG with a less efficient backup SG (Blake, I assume) just so you would have Sergio (a less efficient PG) take minutes from your more efficient PGs (Blake, Roy)? Makes absolutely no sense.

The only people with better TS% on this team are Joel (you are not advocating him taking Jack's scoring attempts, are you?) and Jones. 

Why would you want to give more minutes to a guy that bricks his shot attempts, turns the ball over at a higher rate than anyone else on the team and plays no defense? It is astounding that he gets as much as he does. Honestly, if Sergio does not significantly improve on at least one aspect of his glaring deficiencies over the summer - his biggest contribution to this team might be as an interpreter...

If you replace Jarret's minutes with Sergio - what you get is:

1. Less Defense.
2. More turn-overs.
3. Less scoring from this specific player, and less efficient scoring. 
4. More assists - but unless all of these assists go to Jones - these will be less efficient than having Jack attacking the basket himself...

Jack has a long way to go to become the answer at backup SG or more for this team - but you have to be crazy to want to replace his production with Sergio's.


----------



## yuyuza1 (May 24, 2006)

mediocre man said:


> Sure, Sergio's about where you would expect it to be for someone who plays so little
> 
> Jack's defense is extremely overrated


I agree, mm. Sergio's defense (especially in the passing lanes) is vastly improved this year, and Jack's is quite overrated. 



> And Sergio given the same minutes would score 8.1 ppg compared to Jack's 9.7. Also remember that Jack plays consistant minutes and doesn't even try to set his teammates up like Sergio does, who would have more assists than Jack given his minutes. As I said, more giev consistant minutes




But, it's more than just consistent minutes. He's not put in a position to succeed, and that bugs me the most. Last year, Sergio ran one play: the pick and roll with Magloire, and he just created off that because the big man actually rolled down the middle creating tons of room for Sergio up top. This year, Travis comes around the top, tries to set a pick (notice how he barely even touches the defender), and runs to the side instead of rolling down low. This just creates a logjam up top and all he can do is pass the ball to Outlaw. And this is *the only play *Nate calls for him. All it does is further stagnate our offense and we look like ****. 

I say free Sergio and let him play to his strengths by pushing the tempo and stop running that ****ing high pick and roll every single time down the floor.


----------



## andalusian (Jun 29, 2006)

yuyuza1 said:


> But, it's more than just consistent minutes. He's not put in a position to succeed, and that bugs me the most. Last year, Sergio ran one play: the pick and roll with Magloire, and he just created off that because the big man actually rolled down the middle creating tons of room for Sergio up top.


This is a good observation. Unfortunately, Portland does not have any big, good pick and roll recipients this year. Could change next year with Oden. Maybe there is hope for Sergio after all.


----------



## MAS RipCity (Feb 22, 2003)

MM-
what is your man crush with Sergio? I realize Jack isn't the best PG in the world, but he is our best option. Sergio is worse than Telfair when he was here. He just can not SHOOT the ball! He plays NO D..what so ever. If you want, we can agree that both are turnover prone but Jack is still > on offense and defense.


----------



## Driew (Oct 20, 2007)

mediocre man said:


> Then Nate needs to adapt and leave 1 or two starters on the floor all the time. It's really not rocket science. Shorten the rotation and play all the starters 30-35 minutes per night, and then 3 reserves the rest.


I'm sure Nate knows that--the one thing Nate does well is adapt in his coaching style. I think this year alone he's changed his coaching philosophy three times or so.

The problem with shortening the rotation is that it puts a lot of wear and tear on the starters. Look at Brandon he's been playing those minutes and its starting to catch up with him. Also the sign of a good team is to have a solid bench. When we were playing well it was our bench, not our starters, that were playing extremely well. Our starters would start the game and do their thing, but the game would really open up once Jones and Outlaw stepped on the floor. Also if we can't rely on our bench then we will never win a championship because its bound to happen that either Oden, LMA, or Roy will go down with an injury and we need to have a solid bench to fill the void.

I know I'm preaching to the choir, but everyone else is so why can't I. This forum is meant for people to state the obvious haha.


----------



## Driew (Oct 20, 2007)

MAS RipCity said:


> MM-
> what is your man crush with Sergio? I realize Jack isn't the best PG in the world, but he is our best option. Sergio is worse than Telfair when he was here. He just can not SHOOT the ball! He plays NO D..what so ever. If you want, we can agree that both are turnover prone but Jack is still > on offense and defense.


Sergio would THRIVE in Phoenix. He'd be winning the 6th man of the year award no doubt. Still can't believe Phoenix traded him to Portland for just cash. Sergio is like a mini Nash (once he can hit his shot with consistency). But I do tend to agree with you about Jack. 

The one thing about Jack's turnovers is that his are stupid turnovers. Stepping out of bounds, turning the ball over on a simple fast break cause he can't run a fast break for the life of him etc. Sergio's turnovers are more of the Steve Nash caliber of turnovers. If you notice Nash leads or is pretty close in turnovers per game. Hopefully that makes sense.


----------



## andalusian (Jun 29, 2006)

Driew said:


> Sergio would THRIVE in Phoenix. He'd be winning the 6th man of the year award no doubt. Still can't believe Phoenix traded him to Portland for just cash. Sergio is like a mini Nash (once he can hit his shot with consistency). But I do tend to agree with you about Jack.


Hack, if Sergio could hit the ocean he would THRIVE in Portland...


----------



## Driew (Oct 20, 2007)

andalusian said:


> Hack, if Sergio could hit the ocean he would THRIVE in Portland...


Nah I don't think Sergio will ever thrive in Portland's current system. He's more built for a GS or Phoenix type offense.


----------



## andalusian (Jun 29, 2006)

Driew said:


> Nah I don't think Sergio will ever thrive in Portland's current system. He's more built for a GS or Phoenix type offense.


I disagree. If Sergio could hit his shots and keep the defense honest - he would dictate the style given that Portland has the shooters and athletic guys that can run with him, the way Nash dictates the pace in PHX (prior to the Shaq trade, at least).

But, right now, the defense can just let him dribble and shoot himself, he is just as likely to brick it or turn it over as he is to do something good. Being able to shoot semi-efficiently will elevate Sergio's game a whole lot, not only will it make it easier for him to create for others - it will also make him a viable option next to Brandon. Right now, he is useless if he takes the ball off- Brandon's hand and he can do no damage as a shooter. The situation is just as bad when Brandon is off the court, since he is invited to shoot or make a hard pass...


----------



## MAS RipCity (Feb 22, 2003)

that's the problem though, Sergio just can not shoot at this point, and I haven't seen any progress really.


----------



## hasoos (Jan 3, 2003)

MAS RipCity said:


> that's the problem though, Sergio just can not shoot at this point, and I haven't seen any progress really.


I totally agree with you. Sergios shooting is a complete liability at this point, there is very little reason to even guard him. Play off him for the pass.


----------



## nikolokolus (Jan 29, 2008)

Hrm ... I just realized whose shot Sergio's reminds me of (in terms of mechanics and arc), Clyde ... except for the part where Clyde's actually went in about 45% of the time.


----------

