# Game Thread: POR @ SEA



## SheedSoNasty (Dec 31, 2002)

We seem to usually play them pretty well so it'll be interesting to see how our young guys play tonight. And please, no more Damon!


----------



## keebs3 (Feb 19, 2004)

Hellllllllooooooooooo...

We're playing a decent game here, where is everyone?

JMK


----------



## Playmaker0017 (Feb 13, 2004)

We've played EXTREMELY lucky.

Darius is coming back down to Earth.

It's frustrating to watch us at times. We just don't know how to play a smart game of basketball.

Play.


----------



## Spoolie Gee (Feb 3, 2005)

Telfair is looking really good


----------



## QRICH (Feb 2, 2004)

Telfair is killin' Luke so far! :clap:


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

Yeah Telfair is looking pretty darn good.....he is outplaying Ridnour in all aspects.....


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

I love Viktors help defense.....He always seems to get a poke at the ball and disrupt the opponent.....his hustle is always great....I love his game and we would be foolish to get rid of him....


----------



## Spoolie Gee (Feb 3, 2005)

zagsfan20 said:


> I love Viktors help defense.....He always seems to get a poke at the ball and disrupt the opponent.....his hustle is always great....I love his game and we would be foolish to get rid of him....


No kidding, just imagine how good his D will be once he gets respect from the refs.


----------



## Sambonius (May 21, 2003)

Luke Ridnour is losing to the "project" Telfair. I wish we could trade Telfair for Ridnour because Ridnour isn't a "project." I am in absolute awe of Telfair tonight. In the first half alone he has 16 points and 7 assists, shooting 7 of 9 from the field. That is great, I do however dislike his 2 missed free throws.


----------



## RipCity9 (Jan 30, 2004)

What makes Telfair's domination of Ridnour even sweeter is that he's 4 years younger than Luke. As Jay Bilas said on draft night: "Luke Ridnour can't guard the chair I'm sitting in."


----------



## Spoolie Gee (Feb 3, 2005)

Telfair-

7-9 fg's 16 pts 7 ast 1 TO


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

I strongly dislike Damon Stoudamire.......

BTW anyone check out our bench? It's as thin as I have ever seen it...


----------



## barfo (Jan 2, 2003)

Sambonius said:


> Luke Ridnour is losing to the "project" Telfair. I wish we could trade Telfair for Ridnour because Ridnour isn't a "project." I am in absolute awe of Telfair tonight. In the first half alone he has 16 points and 7 assists, shooting 7 of 9 from the field. That is great, I do however dislike his 2 missed free throws.


Also, I've heard he's short.

barfo


----------



## TheBlueDoggy (Oct 5, 2004)

> Darius is coming back down to Earth.


Probably because his shoulder got bruised on a play. Of course, this may be Darius just coming back down to earth, but odd coincidence he starts missing badly after hurting his shoulder.


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

Lets put Outlaw in their more in the second half.....Even though that was a stupid clear path foul on his part....


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

TheBlueDoggy said:


> Probably because his shoulder got bruised on a play. Of course, this may be Darius just coming back down to earth, but odd coincidence he starts missing badly after hurting his shoulder.


He has been shooting pretty badly all year....

Outlaw and Viktor are our future SF IMO......Miles will be out this summer....


----------



## Playmaker0017 (Feb 13, 2004)

TheBlueDoggy said:


> Probably because his shoulder got bruised on a play. Of course, this may be Darius just coming back down to earth, but odd coincidence he starts missing badly after hurting his shoulder.


3-7 before the shoulder injury isn't lighting it up.

Play.


----------



## RedHot&Rolling (Jun 26, 2004)

Telfair is giving Blazers fans a glimpse of the future! And the PG position will be good.

He's taking what the defense gives. He is penetrating and finishing. He is dishing. He is getting to the line. He is limiting his turnovers.

I love it.

Second half - probably won't be the same for him - but the glimpse was worthwhile for me.

Go Bassy Go!!


----------



## Playmaker0017 (Feb 13, 2004)

I'm still not sold on Telfair. I think he's DEFINITELY got skill, but I just don't like his game.

I like his play sometimes -but he's a PG. He can get some of those shots at any point in the game. He has to try to get people involved rahter than shooting it 5 straight times.

Now - before anyone says something about his assist numbers - they were pretty garbage assists. Swinging it up top for 5 straight jumpers isn't getting good assists. 

He had two plays to Joel that were nice looking, but one of them is a STUPID pass that is stolen 9 times out of 10. 

I just see too much Damon Stoudamire in him. 

Play.


----------



## RedHot&Rolling (Jun 26, 2004)

zagsfan20 said:


> I strongly dislike Damon Stoudamire.......
> 
> BTW anyone check out our bench? It's as thin as I have ever seen it...


That's because you're so young!! Back in 1978, after starting 50-8, the team ended up signing three guys to finish the season - they had only 5-6 regulars healthy. We would suit up 8 guys for the last games, and we didn't know the names of three of them.

It was ugly.


----------



## barfo (Jan 2, 2003)

Playmaker0017 said:


> I'm still not sold on Telfair. I think he's DEFINITELY got skill, but I just don't like his game.
> 
> I like his play sometimes -but he's a PG. He can get some of those shots at any point in the game. He has to try to get people involved rahter than shooting it 5 straight times.
> 
> ...


Also, I've heard he's short.

barfo


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

Playmaker0017 said:


> I'm still not sold on Telfair. I think he's DEFINITELY got skill, but I just don't like his game.
> 
> I like his play sometimes -but he's a PG. He can get some of those shots at any point in the game. He has to try to get people involved rahter than shooting it 5 straight times.
> 
> ...



You are really good at pulling a lot of negatives out of a positive situation....I'm not sure which game your watching but Telfair has a path down the lane for a lay-up why not take it?.....


----------



## Utherhimo (Feb 20, 2005)

james is a thug punk


----------



## Playmaker0017 (Feb 13, 2004)

zagsfan20 said:


> You are really good at pulling a lot of negatives out of a positive situation....


No, I'm not negative or positive.

For every negative I said, I also said a positive. I'm unsold. I think he'll be a good player - but I'm not sure he'll be a good PG.



> I'm not sure which game your watching but Telfair has a path down the lane for a lay-up why not take it?.....


I don't mind the drives -- I do mind him taking three contested jumpers. He made them, but they aren't high percentage shots.

Play.


----------



## Playmaker0017 (Feb 13, 2004)

This team is so dumb. WE ARE NOT A RUNNING TEAM. WE ARE NOT A JUMPSHOOTING TEAM!

We are a frontcourt loaded team. Miles, Reef, Przy ... get it to the post.

These jumpers are stupid.

Play.


----------



## Playmaker0017 (Feb 13, 2004)

Has anyone other than a guard taken a shot out of our offense?

This is awful.

Play.


----------



## Spoolie Gee (Feb 3, 2005)

Khryapa showing his versitility. Guarded Ray Allen in the first half and is on Collison now.


----------



## SodaPopinski (Aug 10, 2004)

Danny Fortson is a waste of skin.

-Pop


----------



## SodaPopinski (Aug 10, 2004)

Pritchard needs to replace Damon with Khryapa right now. Damon has been horrid on offense tonight, and Ray Allen can just shoot right over Damon.

-Pop


----------



## Trader Ed (Jun 17, 2002)

Well we are still in the game... have the ball and down by 3 with under a min to go


which is more important... a better draft pick possibly.. or being a spoiler?


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

Trader Bob said:


> Well we are still in the game... have the ball and down by 3 with under a min to go
> 
> 
> which is more important... a better draft pick possibly.. or being a spoiler?


when it comes to beating the Sonics and the Lakers, it's always about the win.


----------



## TP3 (Jan 26, 2003)

Sure is fun watching Damon get torched by whoever he is attempting to guard.


----------



## Trader Ed (Jun 17, 2002)

yeah I hear ya

there is nothing better


----------



## SodaPopinski (Aug 10, 2004)

Down 2, 13.7 seconds left in the game.

Call me a pessimist, but I say the Blazers tie the game with a two, then the Sonics go down and win the game on a Ray Allen three-pointer at the buzzer.

-Pop


----------



## Spoolie Gee (Feb 3, 2005)

Great play. Glad we took a time out to draw that one up.


----------



## Sambonius (May 21, 2003)

Let Telfair take the final shot.


----------



## SodaPopinski (Aug 10, 2004)

God I ****ing hate Seattle.

-Pop


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

SodaPopinski said:


> Down 2, 13.7 seconds left in the game.
> 
> Call me a pessimist, but I say the Blazers tie the game with a two, then the Sonics go down and win the game on a Ray Allen three-pointer at the buzzer.
> 
> -Pop


close, but same result.

bad shot selection to end the game, even if Shareef had been doing good.


----------



## Playmaker0017 (Feb 13, 2004)

That was stupid. 

What type of play was that? 

It was a good iso - but if that is what you spend a timeout drawing ... yuck.

Play.


----------



## SodaPopinski (Aug 10, 2004)

Hap said:


> close, but same result.
> 
> bad shot selection to end the game, even if Shareef had been doing good.


I disagree. Shareef should have taken the shot, he just pulled the string on it because he was trying to avoid the foul rather than taking it to the defense. Bad decision by Shareef, but good decision by the coaching staff to have him take the shot.

-Pop


----------



## Xericx (Oct 29, 2004)

Reef should at at least LOOKED to pass. 

:curse: 

Frahm would have been an easy pass in the corner. Oh well, another ping pong ball!!

:banana:


----------



## Playmaker0017 (Feb 13, 2004)

Xericx said:


> Reef should at at least LOOKED to pass.


Did you see the court?

There were no passes.

Darius fell down on the right side and Damon ran around covering the left side.

There wasn't much hope for that play once the ball came inbound.

Play.


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

SodaPopinski said:


> I disagree. Shareef should have taken the shot, he just pulled the string on it because he was trying to avoid the foul rather than taking it to the defense. Bad decision by Shareef, but good decision by the coaching staff to have him take the shot.
> 
> -Pop


I meant that it was a bad selection because they should've gone for a 3.


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

you know, considering the fact that the Blazers were short handed (had only 8 bodies) and lost by 2 *on the road* to the division leader..thats not the worst thing.

And, and least there's a game tomorrow were they can get destroyed again and we can forget about this game.


----------



## Nightfly (Sep 24, 2002)

Hap said:


> you know, considering the fact that the Blazers were short handed (had only 8 bodies) and lost by 2 *on the road* to the division leader..thats not the worst thing.
> 
> And, and least there's a game tomorrow were they can get destroyed again and we can forget about this game.


 Well, they had 9 bodies (Ha didn't play, but he was there) but other then that, so true.


----------



## Tince (Jul 11, 2004)

Could someone explain to me how it's a foul on Portland when Daniels flys through the air, kicking his legs out backwards to make contact with the defender? I'm no expert on the rules, but I can't imagine that's the correct call.


----------



## Playmaker0017 (Feb 13, 2004)

Hap said:


> I meant that it was a bad selection because they should've gone for a 3.


I disagree. 

I never like the idea of going for the win on a lower percentage shot.

Play.


----------



## quick (Feb 13, 2004)

SodaPopinski said:


> God I ****ing hate Seattle.
> 
> -Pop


I do too. Not because they're a good team but because of some of the players on that team.


----------



## Playmaker0017 (Feb 13, 2004)

Tince said:


> Could someone explain to me how it's a foul on Portland when Daniels flys through the air, kicking his legs out backwards to make contact with the defender? I'm no expert on the rules, but I can't imagine that's the correct call.


No - it wasn't. 

But - on the flip side - where was Damon's defense? He matadored that one right into the hoop.

Play.


----------



## Tince (Jul 11, 2004)

Playmaker0017 said:


> I disagree.
> 
> I never like the idea of going for the win on a lower percentage shot.
> 
> Play.


I would typically agree with Hap on this, but not with the Blazer current situation.

Guys like Telfair need as many minutes as they can get, especially meaningful ones. A five minutes overtime session, would have been the best possible result. Didn't SAR miss an easy one last week against Seattle when it mattered most?

Anyway, I would normally agree if you're the worst team, playing on the road, take a hard drive and if the defense caves in, kick it out for the win. If you're at home or you're the better team, overtime is the way to go.


----------



## Tince (Jul 11, 2004)

Playmaker0017 said:


> No - it wasn't.
> 
> But - on the flip side - where was Damon's defense? He matadored that one right into the hoop.
> 
> Play.


Better yet, when Damon is 0-10 in the last 3 quarters, why is he even in the game? His defense is such a liability, that when he's giving us no offense, he becomes worse than worthless.


----------



## TP3 (Jan 26, 2003)

I like that they went to Shareef but I would have preferred him to catch it at 15 on the left wing...fits his game better.


----------



## Tince (Jul 11, 2004)

TP3 said:


> I like that they went to Shareef but I would have preferred him to catch it at 15 on the left wing...fits his game better.


Unless you've got a Tim Duncan on your team, I'm not a big fan of guys who have little elevation or quickness to have the ball for the last shot.

Sadly, Portland doesn't have much for players who can elevate and get their own shot. If the day ever comes that Outlaw is comfortable and can make great decisions in a close game, he's the type of guy I'd like with the ball in the final seconds.


----------



## Playmaker0017 (Feb 13, 2004)

Tince said:


> Unless you've got a Tim Duncan on your team, I'm not a big fan of guys who have little elevation or quickness to have the ball for the last shot.


Interesting.

Tim Duncan's one weakness is often considered to be his "un-clutch" play at the end of games.

I think it is hogwash - but take it for what it is worth. I just don't think you can expect post players to deliver in the closing seconds. Fouls just aren't called. 

As Jordan has said:
_"I've missed a lot more game winners than I ever hit."_

Play.


----------



## Tince (Jul 11, 2004)

Playmaker0017 said:


> Interesting.
> 
> Tim Duncan's one weakness is often considered to be his "un-clutch" play at the end of games.


That's news to me. I've never heard of him as being "un-clutch." The closest thing to "un-clutch" that I've heard is in regards to his bad FT% and his boring style of play. 

More times than not, he's called "MVP", "2-time NBA Champion", "One of the top 3 players in the NBA."


----------



## Tince (Jul 11, 2004)

Playmaker0017 said:


> As Jordan has said:
> _"I've missed a lot more game winners than I ever hit."_
> 
> Play.


I don't know what that quote has to do with anything.

Are you comparing Jordan and SAR clutchness?


----------



## Playmaker0017 (Feb 13, 2004)

Tince said:


> That's news to me.


[EDITED OF MY OWN FREE WILL]



> I've never heard of him as being "un-clutch." The closest thing to "un-clutch" that I've heard is in regards to his bad FT% and his boring style of play.


Regardless to what you have and have not heard - it has been said. Numerous times.

It's quite simple reasoning though - and not Duncan's fault. He doesn't CREATE shots for himself very well. Expecting him to get through traffic and get a good shot is ridiculous. 

The same was said of Webber - and most PFs or Cs.



> More times than not, he's called "MVP", "2-time NBA Champion", "One of the top 3 players in the NBA."


Wow. That's just the most non-sensical, pointless statement ever made in the history of mankind. One has NOTHING to do with the other. Do you think that my pointing out one quote makes these untrue? The purpose of mentioning these is beyond me. 

Play.


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

Playmaker0017 said:


> We've played EXTREMELY lucky.
> 
> Darius is coming back down to Earth.
> 
> ...


Uhhh ohhhh did you just say "we", and "us"?


----------



## Playmaker0017 (Feb 13, 2004)

Tince said:


> I don't know what that quote has to do with anything.


Fair enough. [EDITED OF MY OWN FREE WILL], so I'll walk you through it:

*(A) SECTION 1*
In this section I try to point out another hgih-end PF who is often mentioned as unclutch. 

_Interesting.

Tim Duncan's one weakness is often considered to be his "un-clutch" play at the end of games.
_

*(B) SECTION 2*

In this section, I mention - using my opinion and the reasons behind this opinion - that I think these ascertations are silly. I think they are unfounded and unfair to post players.

_I think it is hogwash - but take it for what it is worth. I just don't think you can expect post players to deliver in the closing seconds. Fouls just aren't called.
_

*(B) SECTION 3*

In this final remark, I was trying to point out that even one of the most clutch players in the game admits that being clutch has a lot to do with luck and he's ended up losing more often than not on those shots. So, what can be said of guys that are considered "less clutch"? If Jordan thinks he isn't even 50% in that situation, where does that put "less clutch" guys?

_As Jordan has said:
"I've missed a lot more game winners than I ever hit."

_



> Are you comparing Jordan and SAR clutchness?


I would never be so stupid. I would never compare a post player to a dribbler.

See, you've missed the entire point ... [EDITED OF MY OWN FREE WILL].... 

Look at the guys that are considered the "most clutch" in the league. Run through that list and look at their characteristics.

What SHOULD stick out to the logical thinker is that the majority of the players considered "clutch" are pure jumpshooters or guys that are extremely capable of beating their man off the dribble. 

This does not usually apply to guys like Shaq, Reef, Duncan, Webber, Garnett , etc etc etc. 

Play.


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

I'll have to disagree with you on your belief that Duncan is "un-clutch".....I have seen several games where he has hittin game winning jumpers.....


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

I'm kind of curious why Outlaw played such a short stint in the 2nd half. The couple minutes he had he made a couple baskets, got a rebound or 2 blocked a shot, then sat while Frahm did very little to affect the game. Didn't make senes, but no biggy.


----------



## Tince (Jul 11, 2004)

> Well - from what i can tell - most things are news to you.


Not sure where the personal insult came from. I apologize for upsetting you.




> Regardless to what you have and have not heard - it has been said. Numerous times.
> 
> It's quite simple reasoning though - and not Duncan's fault. He doesn't CREATE shots for himself very well. Expecting him to get through traffic and get a good shot is ridiculous.
> 
> The same was said of Webber - and most PFs or Cs.


We disagree about Duncan, and that's OK. If you go back to my main point, it's that I like guys who can elevate and create their own shot having the ball in their hands at the end of close games. 

I think a simple survey would prove most think Webber is much more unclutch than Duncan, but I could be wrong yet again.



> Wow. That's just the most non-sensical, pointless statement ever made in the history of mankind. One has NOTHING to do with the other. Do you think that my pointing out one quote makes these untrue? The purpose of mentioning these is beyond me.


Kinda like this one...



Playmaker0017 said:


> As Jordan has said:
> "I've missed a lot more game winners than I ever hit."


I also disagree that one has "NOTHING" to do with the other. How many players in the NBA that were former multiple MVP winners or considered one of the top 3 players in the NBA, were also considered unclutch? I'm sure it's a very very small percentage.


----------



## Playmaker0017 (Feb 13, 2004)

zagsfan20 said:


> I'll have to disagree with you on your belief that Duncan is "un-clutch".....


You have the reading coprehension of [edited of my own free will].

Re-read. 

Wherein did I agree with the assessment? Wherein did I defend the statement?

In actuality, I did the reverse. I said I thought it was an unfair moniker. 



> I have seen several games where he has hittin game winning jumpers.....


I've seen several games where Reef hit the game winner. So what of it? I hardly consider Reef "clutch" in the same way I would Damon Stoudamire.

Play.


----------



## RipCity9 (Jan 30, 2004)

I can't wait to see that classless team get sent packing in the first round of the playoffs. The amount of crap the refs let Fortson, Collison and Evans get away with down low was unbelievable. That's the worst excuse for a division champion from the West in a long time.


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

Playmaker0017 said:


> You have the reading coprehension of Tince.
> 
> Re-read.
> 
> ...




Your right man, Reef is the clutchest player in basketball history.... :kiss:


----------



## Xericx (Oct 29, 2004)

Playmaker0017 said:


> Did you see the court?
> 
> There were no passes.
> 
> ...


Reef was a black hole. Frahm was open.


----------



## Tince (Jul 11, 2004)

ZagFan-

We have the same reading coprehension. Bet you didn't know that?


----------



## Playmaker0017 (Feb 13, 2004)

Tince said:


> Not sure where the personal insult came from. I apologize for upsetting you.


Then I too apologize. I thought you were trying to be snippy, so as usual I take it to the next level.



> We disagree about Duncan, and that's OK.


There is nothing to disagree with - unless you think that Duncan is "unclutch".

I never stated that *MY PERSONAL OPINION* is that Duncan is "unclutch". In fact, I went as far as to say that I think in the land of PFs and Cs, he is very clutch. But, outside of them, he can't be compared properly.

I said the title as "unclutch" is unfair to label on post players as their game isn't a game around being able to get up quick shots or getting separation.



> If you go back to my main point, it's that I like guys who can elevate and create their own shot having the ball in their hands at the end of close games.


I also agree. I would rather have the ball in Damon Stoudamire's hands for the final shot than any other PF in the league. 



> I think a simple survey would prove most think Webber is much more unclutch than Duncan, but I could be wrong yet again.


I agree that they would. But, I think that is an unfair statement again. Especially in the past few years ... where he has really developed a jumper. He's far more "clutch" when he can drop that shot ... again, it goes back to position on the court and the type of player that you are.



> Kinda like this one...


No, nothing like that one. You just were unable to put 2 and 2 together. You lost track of where I was going. Either I didn't lead well, or you didn't follow. Either way, I explained it in a subsequent post.

Play.


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

Tince said:


> ZagFan-
> 
> We have the same reading coprehension. Bet you didn't know that?


Yea,

But Reef for president in 2008

I'm already printing off signs and fliers :cheers:


----------



## Playmaker0017 (Feb 13, 2004)

zagsfan20 said:


> Your right man, Reef is the clutchest player in basketball history.... :kiss:


First - it is "you're" as in YOU ARE.

Second - where did I ever say Reef was clutch or unclutch? At what point did I make a judgement call?

I simply said that PFs are often considered unclutch. Unfairly so, as their game does not revolve around that style of shot. But, since you want to pigeon hole me...

Among PFs in the league ... I'd say he's 3rd to 5th. 

*I* would rank them like this:
(1) Dirk
(2) Webber
(3) Reef
(4) Duncan

I give Webber and Reef the nod over Duncan, because they are better off the dribble and better jumpshooters. Thus, can create better. 

BUT - in the case of a set play that is run to proper execution (as SAN AN does very well), I'd put Duncan at #2.

But, outside of Dirk, I wouldn't put any of these guys above Damon Stoudamire. Heck, I might even want the ball in Telfair's hands before these guys. He can just do a lot more than these guys.

Play.


----------



## Tince (Jul 11, 2004)

Ok Play, I know where we got off track.

When you started putting Webber and Rahim in the same category as Duncan, I disagreed. I would say Duncan is clutch, SAR has average clutchness, and Webber is unclutch.

As far as the Jordan quote, I just don't follow how pointing out that Jordan missed the majority of his game-winners proves anything to how clutch someone else is. If you said Jordan was clutch and then proved the SAR made a high percentage of his game-winners, that would prove your point.

Either way, don't take everything so personal. I actually really like Rahim and would rather keep him and trade Randolph. I just don't want SAR being the guy who has the ball the entire last play at the end of a game.

Last, we're all Blazer fans, no need to put each other down. 

Rip City!


----------



## Target (Mar 17, 2004)

Am I the only one that thought SAR was a defensive liability tonight? Seems like he couldn't box out anyone and Collison and Fortson seemed to have their way with him. 

To his credit he played big minutes and awesome offense. But maybe they should have rotated Ha in for a few minutes if for nothing more but to lay some hard fouls on those punks. Ha could do that.


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

> First - it is "you're" as in YOU ARE.


.......



> hgih-end


is actually high-end.....


Thanks for the English lesson... :greatjob: 



> Second - where did I ever say Reef was clutch or unclutch? At what point did I make a judgement call?


Oh, I was just assuming that it was the reason why you were argueing.....Well if you dont feel that way, I still stand behind my comment that he is the most clutch player in the league....


Zag.


----------



## Playmaker0017 (Feb 13, 2004)

Tince said:


> When you started putting Webber and Rahim in the same category as Duncan


Let me restate then: They aren't.

I think Duncan is the best player in the league. Period. 

I think he benefits from a VERY structured team and very efficient coach, but he is also a VERY talented guy. So, it is a symbiosis ... he benefits and so do they. 



> I would say Duncan is clutch, SAR has average clutchness, and Webber is unclutch.


When it comes to clutch - I stated how I would rank these guys. 

Depending on the play ... if it is a well thought out play and it is run properly, I'd want the ball in Duncan's hands. I'd give it to him before most other players. Unfortunately, only a few teams can consistantly perform to that level.

For instance, if you put Duncan in Portland and asked him to run the play Reef was asked to run ... it's a TO or a miss. Webber on the other hand, hits and misses that shot. Reef is the same. 

When it comes to "shot creation" ... I'd want Reef or Webber to have the ball over Duncan.



> As far as the Jordan quote, I just don't follow how pointing out that Jordan missed the majority of his game-winners proves anything to how clutch someone else is. If you said Jordan was clutch and then proved the SAR made a high percentage of his game-winners, that would prove your point.


Ah. See, the reason you didn't follow it was because I wasn't referring to Reef at all. I was using it as a general statement to defend all PFs, specifically Tim Duncan. 

That whole post was more about defending Duncan from the statement that he isn't very clutch. I don't agree with the statement. The only way it holds true is if you compare him to players in the SG or PG spot or a very talented SF. 



> Last, we're all Blazer fans, no need to put each other down.


Go look, I edited.

Play.


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

> But maybe they should have rotated Ha in for a few minutes if for nothing more but to lay some hard fouls on those punks. Ha could do that.


That would have been awesome....Ha can be our John Bryant (the Temple player who broke the player from St. Joe arm).....We can put him in at the end of games to lay the smackdown....


----------



## Playmaker0017 (Feb 13, 2004)

Target said:


> Am I the only one that thought SAR was a defensive liability tonight?


Heck, I hope people aren't that blind.

Reef hasn't tried in three weeks. He's doing little more than showing up. It's frustrating as heck.

He seems much more interested in getting the kids involved than doing his thing. 



> Ha could do that.


I wanted Przy to drill Fortson ... I HATE Fortson.

Play.


----------



## Playmaker0017 (Feb 13, 2004)

Xericx said:


> Reef was a black hole. Frahm was open.


He may have been, but there was little chance to get him the ball. I just rewatched it on Tivo. 

Reef wanted to pass it off as soon as he touched the ball. It was supposed to go to Miles and then I think back to Reef (or possibly swung around).

But, Miles slipped. 

The left side of the court clouded up and any pass would have been dangerous.

Reef tried to wait and probe a bit, but was wasting clock.

It wasn't a good situation ... not at all.

Play.


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

> Reef hasn't tried in three weeks. He's doing little more than showing up. It's frustrating as heck.


Well than he hasn't tried his whole career.....Because I can never remember him being a very good defender....


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

I was playing with my son and kinda keeping an eye on the 2nd half, but it seemed to me that in the 2nd half Damon really dominated the ball as the PG. Telfair never really seemed to get the chance to get back in the flow of the game, from what I could tell. 

Did anyone else get this impression?

Also does anyone else get the impression at times that Pritchard intentionally goes away from what is working?


----------



## Playmaker0017 (Feb 13, 2004)

zagsfan20 said:


> Well than he hasn't tried his whole career.....Because I can never remember him being a very good defender....


Ah. 

Can Zagsfan say "Zaggie want a cracker"?

I mean, really, why not parrot the same crud that has been said since his first year. It's what the media does, because they can't come up with anything new.

Reef is certainly not a top tier defender, but he's hardly a poor defender. At the beginning of the year - he was probably our best starting defender (which isn't saying much, but still). Theo was the best team defender, but is VERY subpar man-on-man, as he leaves his man to go for the block too quickly. 

I mean, every coach has said that they are suprised how good a defender Reef is and how the title of "poor defender" is unjustified.

Even our own beloved Cheeks said it.

Play.


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

Ok guys time to wrap it up. If you want to start a new thread to discuss it that's fine but it's getting way off topic from the thread.


----------



## Playmaker0017 (Feb 13, 2004)

Schilly said:


> I was playing with my son and kinda keeping an eye on the 2nd half, but it seemed to me that in the 2nd half Damon really dominated the ball as the PG. Telfair never really seemed to get the chance to get back in the flow of the game, from what I could tell.


Didn't miss much. Here my first four minute synopsis of the second half:

Damon shot from the left side 10 feet out. Miss.
Damon shot from the left side 10 feet out. Miss.
Damon shot from the left side 10 feet out. Miss.
Damon shot from the left side 10 feet out. Miss.
Damon shot from the left side 10 feet out. Miss.

By then we were pretty out of it. 



> Did anyone else get this impression?


Most definitely.



> Also does anyone else get the impression at times that Pritchard intentionally goes away from what is working?


It seems that way. But, I have to say that it must be hard to coach this bunch and have ZERO bench.


----------



## Playmaker0017 (Feb 13, 2004)

Schilly said:


> Ok guys time to wrap it up. If you want to start a new thread to discuss it that's fine but it's getting way off topic from the thread.


Schilly,

The game is OVER. There isn't much to discuss anymore. No reason to stay ON TOPIC. 

Play.


----------



## Tince (Jul 11, 2004)

Schilly said:


> I was playing with my son and kinda keeping an eye on the 2nd half, but it seemed to me that in the 2nd half Damon really dominated the ball as the PG. Telfair never really seemed to get the chance to get back in the flow of the game, from what I could tell.
> 
> Did anyone else get this impression?
> 
> Also does anyone else get the impression at times that Pritchard intentionally goes away from what is working?


Shilly, I'm with you to some point. Damon did seem to control the ball a lot more in the 2nd half. Usually him controlling the ball mean he score 20, but nobody gets involved. Tonight, he didn't score a lick after the 1st quarter, and it was difficult for people to get involved.

I feel Prichard has done a great job of letting the players who are playing well, stay on the court. Telfair had a poor 3rd quarter and didn't really have much of a chance to dominate Seattle since Nate hardly played Rid who had no chance of guarding Telfair.

Telfair has yet to put together a full game this entire season. I'm not ripping him by any means, he just isn't at the level where he can play really well in both halfs.


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

Playmaker0017 said:


> Schilly,
> 
> The game is OVER. There isn't much to discuss anymore. No reason to stay ON TOPIC.
> 
> Play.


True, but you're all just saying the same things over and over and flirting with the edge of personal attacks. I figure it might as well be it's own thread.

I'm going to bed in a few anyway so if you want to keep going at it in this thread, doesn't matter to me, just keep it civil, as it has been for the most part.


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

> Also does anyone else get the impression at times that Pritchard intentionally goes away from what is working?


No, I dont really see it....

When Mo was coaching he went away from what was working a lot.....I'm not sure if it was intentionally or unintentionally.....I think that Pritchard has done a much better job as a coach, but has just had a lot less talent to work with(actually not less talent, the right word it "developed" talent)

The closer it gets to offseason, the more I get excited to see what kind of coach we will be getting and to see what kind of new players we will have to work with....


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

I think it's more a matter that they have a draft Target in their sights and want the best possible chance of getting that piece...AKA their Tankin it, and I ain't complainin.


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

> I'm not ripping him by any means, he just isn't at the level where he can play really well in both halfs.


being only 19 will do that......

Consistency will come with experience...I'm not worried at all about Telfair...


----------



## Target (Mar 17, 2004)

I'm hoping that instead of planning to beat a specific team they are running their offense with a 'lets try this, this and this and see what kind of success we have' plan.

Where if they were in a playoff race they would try to isolate and exploit the other teams weakness. 

They should be balls to the wall on defense though. Portland's zone is some gawdawful looking crap right now. They don't rotate...they collapse. How many times did Ridenour or Allen get the ball tonight when no one was 10 or even 15 feet from them.


----------



## MAS RipCity (Feb 22, 2003)

Hot Damn, I seemed to have missed another Rahim potential game tying duece..all I can say is "What else is new?"


----------



## SheedSoNasty (Dec 31, 2002)

SAR for Pope!


----------



## MAS RipCity (Feb 22, 2003)

Sebastian or Travis should have taken the last shot.


----------



## barfo (Jan 2, 2003)

SheedSoNasty said:


> SAR for Pope!


Nah. I think Patterson would make a better pope. Pope Ruben I!

barfo


----------



## Tince (Jul 11, 2004)

MAS RipCity said:


> Sebastian or Travis should have taken the last shot.


Was Outlaw even in?


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

MAS RipCity said:


> Sebastian or Travis should have taken the last shot.


Good way to shoot down a young players confidence....


----------



## Tince (Jul 11, 2004)

zagsfan20 said:


> Good way to shoot down a young players confidence....


That depends on the outcome, but a valid point assuming they would miss.


----------



## TP3 (Jan 26, 2003)

You go to your hot player at the end of the game, Shareef was the hot player. Just give him the ball in his most effective spot. Common sense. Haven't we seen enough tiny pg's jacking perimeter shots at the end of the game for a while?


----------



## Storyteller (Dec 31, 2002)

I didn't get to see the game, but looking at the box score and the play by play, some things seem clear:

Damon starts the game shooting 50% in the first quarter, then doesn't hit a FG the rest of the way. That hurts.

Telfair hit a bunch of driving layups in the 2nd quarter. I wonder why he stopped doing this the rest of the game....

Telfair turns the ball over 3 times to start the second half. Seattle's ability to capitalize is perhaps the turning point of the game.

SAR got to the line a lot in the 4th quarter.

Joel gets 13 boards and 4 blocks. Another good game. Clearly, I underestimated him when the Blazers first obtained him last fall.


Am I right on all this?


----------



## mook (Dec 31, 2002)

Telfair was completely abusing Ridnour in the first half. the Blazers realized this and let him dominate the ball. Damon sat down and we ran Outlaw or Frahm at the 2 and we went from being down 7 to up 5 or so. Seattle started concentrating on stopping Telfair (and succeeded when Ridnour went out). Damon comes back in and dominates the ball, and Ray Allen easily shoots over him on the other end. 

Their guard lineup of Allen and Antonio Daniels (man, I wish we'd kept him. he's exactly what we need right now) just dominated our small guard lineup, as have so many other teams. 

it's not that Damon lost the game for us, although his really crappy shooting didn't help the cause. it's really that we have no height in our back court when Damon and Telfair are both in the game. 

how is either guard really supposed to cover a shooting guard who has a 5 to 8 inch height advantage? 

you get a really great interior defensive presence like Przybilla (or Rasheed when he was still here) and you use up all that defensive capital trying to cover for crappy guard defense. just imagine how good a defensive team we could have if we even had a competent defender at the 2 like Rip Hamilton, let alone a really good lock down guy.


----------



## MAS RipCity (Feb 22, 2003)

zagsfan20 said:


> Good way to shoot down a young players confidence....


Negative,with either of those guys, just showing them that the coach wants you to take the last shot would have gave them all of the confidence in the world.


----------



## MAS RipCity (Feb 22, 2003)

TP3 said:


> You go to your hot player at the end of the game, Shareef was the hot player. Just give him the ball in his most effective spot. Common sense. Haven't we seen enough tiny pg's jacking perimeter shots at the end of the game for a while?


Ugh, Reef could be shooting 15-15 in the game adn I still wouldn't let him come within 10 ft of taking the last shot. There is something about shtos with the game on the line that he doesn't enjoy, and it shows in the outcome when he takes the shot. Not only does he miss all of those shots, he makes bad decisions. I saw the final play last night; he had Richie Frahm wide *** open in the corner ,but he failed to see him. I am not trying to be down on Reef, jujst stating he shouldn't be taking anymore game winners anytime soon.


----------



## Playmaker0017 (Feb 13, 2004)

MAS RipCity said:


> Ugh, Reef could be shooting 15-15 in the game adn I still wouldn't let him come within 10 ft of taking the last shot.


I guess the 3 game winners he hit this year alone don't justify the three he's missed?

Go figure.



> I saw the final play last night; he had Richie Frahm wide *** open in the corner ,but he failed to see him.


He wouldn't have been able to make that pass easily, and it is smarter to take a shot than to turn the ball over.

Second - how many times is that missed DURING the game?

I think it's stupid to expect someone to see everything YOU see during the game on the chair. I saw plenty of times that Telfair had guys open and failed to make the pass ... in fact, he dribbled it into the defenders and lost the ball.

I'd say the same thing if it were Randolph or Miles ... hitting a game winner or expecting someone to play at some superior level on the last play is silly. It doesn't happen. 

Play.
Play.


----------



## Iwatas (Aug 3, 2003)

Playmaker0017 said:


> I'd say the same thing if it were Randolph or Miles ... hitting a game winner or expecting someone to play at some superior level on the last play is silly. It doesn't happen.
> 
> Play.
> Play.


Jordan did it, time and again. I have seen it personally when, on last-possessions he did a clear-out and jinked his defender for the winning shot. His footwork (stutter-drive) was so fast that *in replay* it looked like a normal speed.

Yes, he upped his game winners for last shots. Truly great players do it.

iWatas


----------



## Playmaker0017 (Feb 13, 2004)

Iwatas said:


> Jordan did it, time and again.


Jordan was:
(A) The best player to ever play the game.
(B) A guard.
(C) The first person to tell you he missed more game winning shots than he ever made.



> Truly great players do it.


No. Truly great guards do it. 

Name the last "clutch" PF. The last PF that you wanted to have the ball in the final seconds ... none. None should be mentioned ... not in this generation of basketball.

Play.


----------



## Fork (Jan 2, 2003)

Playmaker0017 said:


> Name the last "clutch" PF. The last PF that you wanted to have the ball in the final seconds ... none. None should be mentioned ... not in this generation of basketball.
> 
> Play.


Robert Horry.

Duh.


----------



## Playmaker0017 (Feb 13, 2004)

Fork said:


> Robert Horry.


 :biggrin:


----------

