How does Portland adjust?

[dodie53]

no adjustments for them,
they will just lay down and die

 

[Gaddabout]

no adjustments for them,
they will just lay down and die
- George Armstrong Custer

FTFY

 

[Errntknght]

My projection for the next game is that the Suns will be underestimating Portland so badly that they'll hand the game over on a silver platter. Much like game 1 except it won't be Andre Miller going wild.

On offense they will attack Nash, running him thru endless nasty screens. Camby will be setting his share of them then popping over for 15-18 ft jumpers which he can make at a fair clip - no more ugly drives to the hoop. On defense I expect them to harrass Nash more, and more physically - Nate is probably studying tapes of the Spurs beating up on Nash right now, not that he doesn't have a fund of personal knowledge of that tactic from his playing days. If Batum wasn't hurting I wouldn't be surprised to see him taking a turn at guarding Stevie.

I expect Aldridge to be more aggressive on the offensive end. Webster figures to start in place of Batum - he is more aggressive on offense which should suit their plans for this game and he's looked pretty good when he's played thus far. Heck, Rudy F. may come to life and if not, we'll see even more of Bayless.

I think this series is going to go down to wire and if the team doesn't have develop more respect for the Blazers than we're showing on here, they will lose.

 

[mojorizen7]

Was trying to guess what McMillan plans to change for Game 3. Batum is questionable pending an MRI today. I would expect him to play, but considering it's his right shoulder, I wouldn't expect them to put a game plan on his ... um ... shoulders.

I suspect they'll want to get away from Miller dominating the ball unless they go to more high screen and rolls with Aldridge. I doubt they want to do that because I think that will speed up the game in a way they won't want to do. They may, though, if they think they can get points, fouls against, or both. I don't think Miller is a great screen-and-roll point guard because his mid-range game isn't scary. Neither is Aldridge's for that matter.

They could try clearing out and posting up Webster on Nash. That's actually kind of scary, but if Batum is out or not as much of a threat, maybe Richardson could switch out and let Nash guard Fernandez or whomever.

I'm pretty sure of this: They're going to take whomever Nash is guarding and try to score on him. Fernandez has disappeared, but it would only take a couple of screens and some made shots to get him going. Both he and Webster are capable of absolutely going off. Webster scored 24 points in a quarter against the Jazz this season. Webster probably scares me most as a wild card, even though he has absolutely zero basketball IQ.

Solid take Gadd, i think Nate is now in the unfortunate position of having to generate points minus Roy....and i don't think thats a viable solution.

Had Gentry simply countered in gm 2 by trying to reinvent the wheel on offense(like past SUNS coaching)...Nate would have had us right where he wanted us(scrambling to find our own offense,) but Gentry countered with trapping and doubling their only playmaker(Miller) and seducing Aldridge into foul trouble as a result.

If i'm coach McMillan,i'm focusing defensively on Nash and forcing him to the corners (where he's most likely to make a bad pass IMO) and getting in his face,harassing him physically early on...the SUNS have already seen this tactic before(cuing Amare to take over and get force fed down low)...which is exactly what Nate wants us to do because they're too big for Stoudemire down low and the officials will not grant us those calls. Beating up Nash has worked like a charm in the past unfortunately.

As long as Gentry stays focused on stopping their weapons on offense ala Miller/Aldridge we'll be fine IMO. No matter what they do on defense to stop our guys,they simply cant keep up if we continue to take away their few scoring options. They will make adjustments to slow down our scoring....but thankfully D'Antoni isn't here to take that personally.


Oh, and yes Martell Webster IS DEFINATELY capable of going off for 30 on our guards.

 

[AzStevenCal]

As long as Gentry stays focused on stopping their weapons on offense ala Miller/Aldridge we'll be fine IMO. No matter what they do on defense to stop our guys,they simply cant keep up if we continue to take away their few scoring options.

And here's where I disagree with you. This team has neither the mindset not the will to play strong defense for a full game UNLESS the offense is effective. If they can force us into a grind it out pace we will lose this game, IMO.

Steve

 

[elindholm]

This team has neither the mindset not the will to play strong defense for a full game UNLESS the offense is effective.

They've done it before, though. They have two quality wins this year when the offense struggled. They beat Atlanta 88-80 and beat Portland 93-87 (both at home).

 

[Gaddabout]

If the Blazers go full-court or 3/4 pressure/trapping, the Suns need to let Grant Hill bring the ball up, and go with high screens to get Nash the ball to set up the offense.

But that's a worst-cast scenario because that means the Suns are pulling the ball out of the net a lot and that's a best-case scenario for the Blazers. If that's happening, the Suns will be trailing most of the game.

 

[elindholm]

I don't think the Blazers will have the energy to press most of the game. Even with their age, the Suns are the best conditioned team in the league.

 

[Proteus]

They've done it before, though. They have two quality wins this year when the offense struggled. They beat Atlanta 88-80 and beat Portland 93-87 (both at home).

They were 2-10 in the regular season when they scored under 100 points.

 

[Cheesewater]

They were 2-10 in the regular season when they scored under 100 points.

So they scored under 100 points in less than 15% of the regular season. Using that average, they'll score under 100 in ONE game out of a 7 game series. I'll take that loss.

 

[elindholm]

They were 2-10 in the regular season when they scored under 100 points.

Well, it stands to reason that, when they lose, it's because they didn't score very much. I wouldn't read much into that statistic; we already know that they lost 28 games this season. Another way to look at it is that they were held under 100 only 12 times in 82 games.

 

[Absolute Zero]

Batum has gone back and forth, but now says he will play tonight, sounds like he will be in a lot of pain. http://blog.oregonlive.com/behindblazersbeat/2010/04/trail_blazers_backtracking_nic.html

 

[ASUCHRIS]

Batum has gone back and forth, but now says he will play tonight, sounds like he will be in a lot of pain. http://blog.oregonlive.com/behindblazersbeat/2010/04/trail_blazers_backtracking_nic.html

Good news, players toughing it out are often more of a detriment to the team.

 

[AfroSuns]

It will be interesting to see if Nate will allow him play with that shoulder. it pretty much showed they don't have a whole lot of options of what to use to stop the Suns. Which is not a surprise considering all their injuries but i really thought a motivated Webster will do more damage than an injured Batum.

 

[AzStevenCal]

They've done it before, though. They have two quality wins this year when the offense struggled. They beat Atlanta 88-80 and beat Portland 93-87 (both at home).

Are you offering those two games as proof that this team does indeed possess the will and mindset to dominate a game defensively even when the offense is stagnant? I ask because that was my point when I made that statement. If so, consider that we won both those games at home.

Portland controlled the game until the 4th quarter. They were in the midst of a multi-game shooting slump and had struggled in their most recent games because opponents switched to a zone and they were unable to shoot from the perimeter. So guess what we did; we clogged the middle and gave them wide open outside shots that they continually missed. This may work for us again but let's face it, that's less a result of stellar defense on our part than it is a weakness in the Portland lineup.

In the Atlanta game, we played pretty good defense. In fact, it was one of our best defensive performances (maybe our best) since Scott Skiles. But it was fueled by a motivated Amare who was playing in his 1st home game following the stress of the trading period. It was also a different team than the one we have now. We had Robin in there to cover up many of our defensive problems.

Our second team plays pretty good defense. Our first string without Robin plays sub-par defense although it is slightly better than years past. When we gain the emotional lift that our offense can provide these guys tend to step up and play inspired defense (for them) but I just don't think it happens any other way.

Steve

 

[elindholm]

Are you offering those two games as proof that this team does indeed possess the will and mindset to dominate a game defensively even when the offense is stagnant?

"Dominate" might be a bit strong, but yes, that's why I brought those games up.

If so, consider that we won both those games at home.

I wouldn't assume that they can't do it on the road. It's safe to say that they can't (or won't) do it often, but fortunately they shouldn't need to very often. I could also have included the regular-season finale in Utah, where the Suns won 100-86, with the score getting artificially inflated in the closing moments.

So guess what we did; we clogged the middle and gave them wide open outside shots that they continually missed. This may work for us again but let's face it, that's less a result of stellar defense on our part than it is a weakness in the Portland lineup.

But that's exactly what Portland did to the Suns in Game 1. How come it's good defense when the Suns miss open jumpers, but merely luck when Suns' opponents -- who, as a rule, are inferior shooters -- miss the same shots?

But it was fueled by a motivated Amare who was playing in his 1st home game following the stress of the trading period.

Yeah, well, hopefully Stoudemire is still motivated.

When we gain the emotional lift that our offense can provide these guys tend to step up and play inspired defense (for them) but I just don't think it happens any other way.

Well, unless the "other way" includes being at home, or having an especially motivated player, or inducing a few misses from the perimeter, or whatever other disqualifying special event you feel like seizing onto.

The Suns are never going to be a top defensive team, but given their offense, if they can be average defensively, that will be good enough to win most nights. Even in the playoffs. That's all I can ask for. But if you want to paint a doomsday scenario, "What if the Suns can't make an outside shot and Portland shoots really well and Stoudemire gets in foul trouble and everyone on the roster gets rattled by the crowd," well I'd say it sounds like the Suns are going to lose.

 

[AzStevenCal]

Well, unless the "other way" includes being at home, or having an especially motivated player, or inducing a few misses from the perimeter, or whatever other disqualifying special event you feel like seizing onto.

You act as if I'm cherry picking here but it seems to me that you are. I made a general statement and you felt comfortable disagreeing with it by showing we had done it twice in 82 games. And you're apparently ignoring the fact that we are minus our key defensive player which was not the case in 50% of your examples.

The Suns are never going to be a top defensive team, but given their offense, if they can be average defensively, that will be good enough to win most nights. Even in the playoffs. That's all I can ask for.

I'm comfortable with everything you say here. Well, except may "all I can ask for". I'd certainly ask for us to be a better defensive team, I just don't think we're capable of it right now.

But if you want to paint a doomsday scenario, "What if the Suns can't make an outside shot and Portland shoots really well and Stoudemire gets in foul trouble and everyone on the roster gets rattled by the crowd," well I'd say it sounds like the Suns are going to lose.

I didn't paint a doomsday scenario. I expect us to win tonight and I said before the series that we would win in 5 or 6 games and I still expect that. I just believe we're fueled by our offense and expecting or demanding something else is likely to lead to disappointment. If we can maintain offensive efficiency I believe we can play well enough on defense to win. But, IMO, if they are able to shut us down offensively we will lose.

Steve

 

[SactownSunsFan]

The Blazers execute plays with the intent of getting beastly center Jarron Collins out of the game early with foul trouble.

 

[elindholm]

You act as if I'm cherry picking here but it seems to me that you are. I made a general statement and you felt comfortable disagreeing with it by showing we had done it twice in 82 games.

No, I was just taking issue with your contention that it can't happen. Remember, there are very few games where the Suns have been held under 100, so it's not a big sample to draw from anyway.

If we can maintain offensive efficiency I believe we can play well enough on defense to win. But, IMO, if they are able to shut us down offensively we will lose.

But that's true automatically. There are two battles in each game: Team A's offense vs. Team B's defense, and Team B's offense vs. Team A's defense. Whichever team prevails by the greater margin in those two battles is the team that wins. It's just like baseball or football or any other sport where the teams take turns trying to score. The difference in basketball is that the number of possessions is so numerous as to make the game appear more complicated than it is.

I guess you're saying that the Suns are unlikely to win if they don't score well. Sure, I'd agree with that. But it's not like they need to score 120, or 110, or even 105. I think they can win 97-92 if that's what it comes to. If Portland beats the Suns by holding them under 90, tip your hat to them.

 

[Superbone]

Batum has gone back and forth, but now says he will play tonight, sounds like he will be in a lot of pain. http://blog.oregonlive.com/behindblazersbeat/2010/04/trail_blazers_backtracking_nic.html

We need to set lots of picks on him. Go for the jugular!

 

[95pro]

i didnt read much of anything since the last game.

but what we did to them was put a longer/smarter/stronger defender on miller.

i think they do the same(dont know about the smarter part, lol) to us in game 3, but someone long will be on nash to give him some fits now.

 

[AfroSuns]

i didnt read much of anything since the last game.

but what we did to them was put a longer/smarter/stronger defender on miller.

i think they do the same(dont know about the smarter part, lol) to us in game 3, but someone long will be on nash to give him some fits now.

I thought they did that with Batum. When it appeared longer player bothered Nash earlier in the season, almost all the teams started switching on the PnR. Portland did the next best thing by putting a fast and long Batum on him without compromising their interior defense.

 

[slinslin]

Good adjustments by Portland.

 

[Sunburn]

Let me get this straight. This is a thread discussing what the opposing team can do to beat our team. Stupidest thread I think I've ever seen.

 

[dreamcastrocks]

Let me get this straight. This is a thread discussing what the opposing team can do to beat our team. Stupidest thread I think I've ever seen.

Trying to understand your opponents strengths and weaknesses is never stupid. Never.