Preseason Melt-down; How the Jazz wrecked the Blazers

Last night was the first pre-season game I have been able to attend this year. I settled comfortably into my old home, took a picture with my camera phone of the Rose Garden and sent it to a couple co-conspirators under the title, "I'm Home!" and got ready to watch the game.

About the time they announced the first starter, I went, "Uh-oh!"

Now, make no mistake about it. Juwan Howard will be a very, very valuable player for the Blazers as he has already shown. His veteran leadership, much ballyhooed, has already proven its value as he has gotten Greg Oden several touches, he has shown players little moves they can do to enhance their effectiveness, and so forth. His teaching has been extremely valuable.

He also can still play a bit. There is a reason he is the last man standing from the Fab 5.

But that is the problem, too...he was part of the Fab 5, a reference that is probably lost on a great number of NBA fans. In basketball terms, Howard is old. His value now lies in practice, in teaching veteran type things, and in short stints off the bench against second line players. He is not, at this point in his career, a starter-quality player.

By the time the stating line-up was read off, it looked like another poor start. Joel Przybilla, Howard, Nicolas Batum and Steve Blake all get their points by playing off other players. Only Brandon Roy is really a point producer in that line-up.

At the same time, while Przybilla and Batum are strong defenders, the other three are not strong enough defensively to match up with a high scoring team like the Jazz starters.

It did not help when 54 seconds into the game Batum went down with an injury and would not return. In came Travis Outlaw. this was both good and bad.

When he is in Super-Trout mode, Outlaw can carry the team. He is very capable of 10-15 point quarters. Scratch that, he is capable of 10-15 point 5-minute outbursts. He is also capable of going 3-9 and having 10 points for the night...as he did on this one.

Nor was Roy on his game in the first half, ending the first quarter with more turnovers than shots attempted.

This just in; Deron Williams, Carlos Boozer, Mehmet Okur, Ronnie Brewer and Andrei Kirilinko are good enough to destroy a Blazer team that is without LaMarcus Aldridge, Greg Oden, and Rudy Fernandez unless Roy, Outlaw and Andre Miller score in bunches.

It did not help watching Blake try to defend Williams. I would not really call it defense. Maybe Blake-fense. And his Blake-fense on Williams showed why Williams is going to put up some huge numbers this year.

It is not just that Blake is not fast or agile enough to keep up with Williams. Honestly, how many players in the NBA are? Short answer; not very many. The problem is, he does not have the anticipation skills to impede Williams in any meaningful way, yet he consistently tried to body up on Williams, only to get torched again and again and again.

While on the subject of defense, this just in; Jarron Collins against Boozer is a mis-match, and not in Collins' favor. Strongly dislike him or hate him, there is no denying that Boozer is a beast on the court and he clearly showed the Blazers will need Aldridge to step up his defensive game if they want to stay ahead of the Jazz this season.

There is not a whole lot of point to dissecting this game. The players both teams threw on the floor for significant sections of the game clearly illustrated this was not a meaningful game. If Portland has Jerryd Bayless, Dante Cunningham, Jarron Collins, and Juwan Howard on the floor together for more than 30 seconds at a time this year, it means either the game was won quite early by the Portland studs or else the Blazers are headed for the lottery.

And while I do not follow the Jazz all that closely, I would say the same thing about Matthews, Fesenko, Dupree and Koufos. Nothing against them as players, but they are not the guys Utah wins with.

What this game was valuable for was as a study tool. The Blazers have a tremendously talented roster. Roy, Aldridge, Outlaw, Andre Miller, Fernandez, and Martell Webster all have the ability to score well into the teens. Oden might be added to that mix if his pre-season play is any indication.

Przybilla and Batum provide above average defense, Aldridge is getting there, and Oden looks like he has a chance to be a game-changer on defense this year.

Yet with all that talent, Portland can still put combinations on the floor that are not going to be effective.

Look again at the starting line-up; Przybilla might get you 5 points in a game, Howard another nickel, Batum another nickel, Roy 20+ and Blake roughly 10 if they are full-time players. You are not going to win many games with a team that is going to score 45 points but is not tough enough defensively to hold the team to 44 or less.

Yeah, I know...pre-season, blah blah blah.

The point stands. With all the talent at their disposal, Portland is capable of putting line-ups on the floor of players who regularly play that will lose games. In bunches.

Of course, they are also capable of putting out line-ups that will win games in bunches.

And that is where we get to Coach Nate McMillan.

As important as Roy, Aldridge, Oden, Miller, Webster, Outlaw, and Batum are to the Blazers chances this year, the defining factor might be McMillan.

Somehow, some way, he has to find the right combinations of players to provide enough scoring punch combined with solid defense. He has to find that combination not just for the starters but also for the bench.

People have been talking about Oden having earned the starting job with his strong play and lingering antipathy towards Blake combined with the exciting tools Miller brings to the table have led to the same argument there. But I am going to argue that starting the same guys as last year is a better move.

They have built some chemistry together. Never underestimate the sum being greater than the parts when you know how a teammate will react to any given situation. With Roy and Aldridge creating, there are enough shots created for Blake from distance, Batum from the corner, and Przybilla off pick and rolls. Put Przybilla, Blake or Batum on the bench and their inability to create their own shots limits their effectiveness.

At the same time, Aldridge and Roy are going to dominate the shots in the starting line-up. Putting in Oden or Miller is going to minimize their potency.

It is not that they are better or worse as players, it has to do with how they fit together. Steve Blake hanging out by the 3-point line keeping defenders from sagging on those spectacular Roy drives is a good thing. It makes Roy better and makes Blake better.

Blake hanging out by the 3 point line with the ball in his hands while the other players try to figure out how to get open? Not so good.

By the same token, Miller has a similar game to Roy but does not have the distance shooting capabilities, which allows his man to sag and clog the lane. So despite being a better offensive player than Blake, playing in the starting line-up could potentially make Miller, Blake, and even Roy worse even while playing with greater talent.

As has been pointed out, there are ways around this. Drop Webster on the side of the court with Roy and nobody is sagging off Webster. Yet this still does not seem to make the best use of Millers talent.

It is figuring out how to maximize the tools at his disposal that will determine whether McMillan guides this team to the dizzying heights they are capable of or produces a disappointing season.

Having watched him for several years, both with the Sonics and now the Blazers, I have little doubt that he will do a great job. McMillan is a tremendous coach who has always seemed to get more from his players than seemed possible. I look for that to continue.

Now to get the taste of the Jazz game out of my mouth...

What can you learn in the pre-season?

Lase season, the Blazers were done in by two things in the post-season; first, they were not physical enough and second, when they absolutely had to score they could not do so.

So as this pre-season gets rolling, they have several questions to answer. Will LaMarcus Aldridge turn into the dominating defender that showed up in flashes? Will Travis Outlaw find a home as a back-up power forward? Will the Greg Oden Portland drafted return or will we still see the walking wounded coming back from micro-fracture surgery?

Obviously there are more questions, but there is a mantra that you hear over and over from good teams.

"There is only so much you can learn from pre-season".

There are things you can learn, however. Here are some examples.

Oden spins on Spencer Hawes, leaves him searching for his jock strap, and throws down a thunderous jam. Now, deep in the regular season, you will still be excited, but it is in pre-season you learn to suppress the "YYYYYYYYYYYYYYYeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeesssssssssss!" scream accompanied by a double fist pump.

It can be quite awkward trying to explain you truly are thrilled by the opportunity to step up and do more than your share due to the staff reductions just announced that you missed because you had a radio headphone discreetly tucked into your ear.

So pre-season is a good time to get your surreptitious listening skills fine-tuned.

Do the Blazers need to bring in outside players?

When last season started, I was considered unreasonably optimistic. Respected sites  with good reputations pointed out that the jump from 41 wins to 50 wins was much more difficult than the jump to 41 wins had been, yet I confidently predicted a 53 win season which was itself exceeded by their 54 wins.

Looking at next season, I feel confident that 60 wins is not only reachable, it is on the low end of what we can expect to see from this young, talented, exciting Blazers team. Even now, most of the same sites are saying holding steady at 54 wins will be difficult enough but a couple of wins more might be attainable if the Blazers make no new acquisitions.

That is flawed thinking. The Blazers did have flaws last year, and the Rockets exposed two of those in their upset of Portland in the first round.

First and foremost, the Blazers did not display the defensive reputation or intensity they needed to. The Rockets had the reputation and were very intense and as a result were allowed to hack, clutch, grab, push, and shove their way to a marked advantage. 

Secondly, the Blazers starting line-up had only two primary scorers and one secondary scorer. Neither Joel Przybilla or Nicolas Batum was any scoring threat at all. As a result, when Blake missed shots he normally made, it allowed the Rockets to focus even more attention on Brandon Roy and LaMarcus Aldridge which limited their effectiveness. 

This off-season is an opportunity for the Blazers to correct both of those short-comings, and they do not need any other players to do that. Before I go further into this analysis, I should point out a couple of things.

First, one reason I really, really love this edition of the Blazers has to do with the make-up of the team. Both Roy and Aldridge have been Blazers since draft day. So have Greg Oden, Rudy Fernandez, Travis Outlaw, Nicolas Batum, Jerryd Bayless and Martell Webster. Though neither Joel Przybilla or Steve Blake started as Blazers, they both made a conscious choice to come here when the team had a poor record and have spent enough time here that they "feel" like they  have been career Blazers.

Second, one of the joys for me of watching a team is watching the development. I remember well watching Clyde Drexler, Jerome Kersey, Terry Porter, and Kevin Duckworth go from (other than Drexler) essentially unknowns into a team that twice in three years got to the NBA Finals. Now, in contradiction to this post, that was in no small part rue to the import of Buck Williams, but I will address that shortly.

The first and most dangerous short-coming was the defensive intensity. My bias is clear, so it is obvious that in that series with the Rockets it was very, very frustrating to watch Luis Scola body-slamming Aldridge at one end without getting called for a foul, then watch Oden get called for a touch-foul outside the free throw line at the other end. It was even more frustrating to watch Ron Artest hand-check, clutch, grab, and shove Roy all over the court and never get called while Blake was getting called for doing much less in trying to contain Aaron Brooks.

And topping that off was watching Yao Ming hack anybody in sight, yet the call go against the defender. Again and again Przybilla or Oden would get to the defensive spot first, Ming would come down, give them a full-out two-hand shove, and when they tried to get back in position the referees would whistle a foul on the Blazer big men.

It was not fair officiating, it had a huge impact on the outcome of the series, and it illustrates the first thing the Blazers need to do. Th Rockets got away with fouling as defense because they have the reputation of doing that. So the Blazers need to get that reputation.

In every game they need to come out over-aggressive. They need to learn to push and shove, to clutch and grab and foul until the referees decide "that is how they play defense" and stop calling it on Portland, just as they have done for the Rockets, for Bruce Bowen, for Dahntay Jones, and so forth.

By establishing a reputation as "rugged, physical defenders" they will begin to get calls that are more in line with what other teams get. 

That is a horrible thing to say because it is not good basketball. If I want to watch men clutch and grab and push and shove each other, I will go watch wrestling. One reason to love basketball is for the athletic  prowess they display. Their agility, leaping ability, and speed are far more entertaining that watching people foul each other and see who gets the calls. But if you aren't going to be allowed to play a skilled game, then go with what you have to do. So foul early, foul often and start getting the "respect" you deserve.

The Blazers already have a few players that would benefit mightily from this new attitude and at least two of them would cover one of the biggest deficiencies they faced last year.

First, Jerryd Bayless. He has a reputation as a "defensive bulldog" who plays tough, in-your-face defense. He got called for a lot of touch-fouls last year which limited his effectiveness but if he were allowed the same leeway that Artest, for example, received then he would be able to more than adequately defend the Aaron Brooks type point guard that was an Achilles Heel all year for the Blazers. He has the speed, agility, and mind-set to be a top perimeter defender.

Nicolas Batum would be another. He was already the best perimeter defender the Blazers had. He did an excellent job on even Chris Paul and Dwayne Wade while still matching up with small forward like Carmelo Anthony. He would only get better if instead of using his feet and skill to defend he just started hacking and grabbing anybody who beat him but not getting called for fouls. 

Inside, Greg Oden would be even more effective if he got time on the court instead of the bench. There is no doubt he commits fouls. Well, let me rephrase that. According to THE RULES there is no doubt he commits fouls. But if he were called the same way Ming or Shaquille O'Neal were officiated, he would be a defensive menace and far more effective offensively as icing on the cake.

If Portland had players such as Bayless and Batum to anchor the perimeter and Oden and Aldridge to anchor the interior, they would quickly become one of the very best defensive teams in all of basketball. That is by using the same players they now possess.

The second issue can also be addressed with the same players they now have. Lets start with perimeter scoring.

Going into last season, Martell Webster was the starting small forward. He was coming off a third straight season of improvement and had upped his scoring average to 10.7 per game. More importantly, he had watched James Jones for a year and was learning things he could do to make himself more integral to the Blazers offense. More often would he ball fake from his corner post and drive into the lane. It created a whole extra element to the Blazers offense. Had he played last season, it is not unreasonable that he could have added 2 - 5 points to his average and provided that third reliable scorer somewhere in the middle teens.

A Blazer squad with Roy scoring 22, Aldridge 18, Blake 11, and Webster 13 points looks a lot different than that same line-up where Batum and 6 points replace Webster and 13. Too often this season Batum passed up wide open shots and was such a non-factor in the offense that it allowed teams to sag off him and double-team Aldridge or Roy.

That is one reason Coach Nate McMillan tried starting Rudy Fernandez late in the Rockets series. However, it fouled up all the rotations and reduced the once-formidable scoring punch of his bench without providing a commensurate spike in their defensive ability. 

This season, with the return of Webster, he will have the ability to provide that scoring punch in the starting line-up. Either Webster will start or, should they choose to keep Batum in that role, the pressure of having Webster and Outlaw behind him will force Batum to look for his shot more aggressively. When the small forward position is scoring, the Blazers are a much more potent offensive team.

All of which leads to the most important point. The Blazers will be much improved this year due to natural development and they have an excellent roster to ensure that. Let me explain.

Larry Bird has often been quoted (included in his autobiography Drive:The Story of My Life) as saying players such as Greg Kite were instrumental to the Celtics Championships. Now, those of you who recall those Celtic teams may recall that Kite saw little to no playing time. Those years saw guys like Kevin McHale, Robert Parrish, Dennis Johnson, Austin Carr and so forth take the bulk of the playing time.

But right behind them were talented players who pushed the starters to continue to excel lest they lose their spot on the floor. Now look at the Blazers.

Joel Przybilla will never be an offensive force but he is certainly a stalwart defender and rebounder. Greg Oden wants that position. Those two will push each other hard and the result can only be that both players will improve.

Additionally, Oden should now be almost completely recovered from micro fracture surgery. With all his prodigious speed and agility, he will be much improved from last year and thus create yet one more issue for opposing coaches when game-planning for the Blazers.

Aldridge continues to improve. The last month or so of the season saw the light click on for him defensively. There were stretches where he controlled games defensively and other times he dominated offensively. Look for those stretches to become more frequent and for him to be an All-Star very soon. His improvement alone should be worth a couple extra games for the Blazers.

It is Small Forward where we might see the greatest improvement. Martell Webster, Nicolas Batum and Travis Outlaw will battle for the starting role. I believe Webster is the odds-on favorite to win it, but regardless of which player comes out on top, the battle will force all to improve.  

The triumvirate of players gives Portland tremendous flexibility. They can go Batum for defense, Webster for long-distance shooting, or Outlaw for someone who can create his own shot at will. And should Batum develop an offensive game or Webster a defensive mentality, this position could shift from weakness to strength in a heartbeat.

Shooting Guard is of course the strongest position the Blazers have. Roy continues to improve every year. He knows what needs done and works on that aspect of his game. He knows defense was a weakness last year so should be improved there. 

Behind him is Rudy Fernandez. Rudy will be hard-pressed to improve on his numbers from a year ago and indeed seems the most likely player to slightly regress. Yet even if he should slip a bit, the Blazers know they have options; Bayless and Webster both are comfortable in the role.

Which brings us to Bayless, perhaps the most potentially important improvement for the Blazers this upcoming season.

Last season he got caught up in his own press clippings from Summer League. By his own admission, scoring 30 a game there was the worst thing that could happen to him. This year he is focusing on applying the things he learned last year watching Steve Blake, one of the most under appreciated players the Blazers have.

Blake is not fast, is at best an adequate defender, cannot create his own shot and really doesn't create good looks for other players. He is not flashy and does not score a lot, nor rack up a lot of assists. As a result, many Blazer fans put a lot of the blame for last years playoff collapse on him.

That is not knowledgeable basketball criticism. Blake performs his role very well. He gets the Blazers into the correct offensive set, gets the ball into the hands of the people who should have it, stretches defenses with his normally reliable shooting, and most important, accepts and embraces his role.

This year will be key for Blake. Bayless will push hard for playing time. He is a superior defender who can penetrate the lane seemingly at will. With a year under his belt, he should finish more effectively and, if he sticks to his plan, will be a better distributor this season. That improvement alone will help the entire team and take strain off of several players.

The bench should be a strength again regardless of who ends up there. Lets assume the starting line-up is what many people thought it would be last year: Oden, Aldridge, Webster, Roy and Blake. That is a line-up that can score and rebound. Defense might be a problem.

That would leave a bench of Przybilla, Outlaw, Batum, Fernandez and Bayless.  Depending on how Batum and Bayless develop, they can catch up with massive firepower or hold/extend a lead with a defensive focus. They are very versatile; Outlaw is often best when playing power forward but has also been featured at small forward and spent time as shooting guard. Batum and Fernandez both slide between small forward and shooting guard. Bayless can play either guard position.

This is a team with three primary weaknesses; defensive toughness, experience, and injuries. Natural improvement should handle the scoring issue discussed earlier and teams tend to improve defensively as they grow together. This roster is deep enough to absorb some hits injury-wise, even to key players.

And all of this is without adding a Paul Millsap, Andre Miller or other player. Yes, McMillan wants a "veteran" player, but it could be argued with Przybilla and Blake, they already HAVE the type of players they would be bringing in. Why not stick with an essentially home-grown team that is good enough to start winning championships soon?

The Blazers as they are, with natural improvement, are a talented, versatile team that can score and rebound and, soon, defend. That is a pretty good recipe for success.

Why Jason Kidd Would Ruin the TrailBlazers

A few years ago the Trailblazers were making a run at the title. They had a very talented roster with players such as Rasheed Wallace, Scottie Pippen, Arvydas Sabonis, Brian Grant, and Damon Stoudamire leading the charge.

Many Blazer fans believe only a 4th quarter collapse against the hated L*kers prevented a second championship from coming to Portland...yet even during that run there was a distinctive lack of excitement around the team.

That lack of excitement has regularly been attributed to the character of the players on the team. The Rasheed Wallace technicals....the Qyntel Woods dog-fighting, the players cursing out Coach Maurice Cheeks, Damon Stoudemire choosing tin-foil as a masking device for the marijuana he was trying to smuggle through airport security, Ruben Patterson and his sex offender problems, Zach Randolph being Zach Randolph, and a host of other issues.

The team was winning but nobody really cared. 

Along came GM Kevin Pritchard and the famed draft that saw the acquisition of LaMarcus Aldridge and some guy named Brandon Roy. Travis Outlaw was already on the scene. 

Suddenly the character of the franchise changed. These are guys in the Brian Grant/Terry Porter mold who are visible members of the community. Roy has a lot of notable charities going, Channing Frye does (did? in light of his not receiving a qualifying offer) and so forth.

These are guys who are of good reputation off the court to go along with their talents on the court. 

And the fans have responded. Attendance is up. TV ratings are up. Merchandise sales are up. There is heavy discussion in the off season about what the Blazers will do.

And one name comes up over and over that just crushes me every time I see it. 

Jason Kidd.

Kidd should end up in the Hall of Fame when his playing days are done. He is among the best passers of our generation, a tremendous ball-hawk with fast hands who played the passing lanes very well, a superior rebounder for a guard, and a guy who got the Nets to the Finals.

He is also a guy who should never set foot on the court in a Blazers uniform.

Part of the interest in the current incarnation of the team is the nature of the guys. Gone are the days when players with great talent but horrible personalities were a welcome part of the team. Scottie Pippen nearly brought a Championship to Portland while turning off fans with his boorish behavior in restaurants, for example. But he was a good guy in comparison to Kidd.

No need to detail here the incidents that led to Kidd being jettisoned from a very good Suns team to New Jersey, nor to go over the things that came up during his divorce. Suffice it to say, he is not the type of good-character guy that makes up the current Blazer roster.

He would be a return to the win-at-all-costs mentality that led to the Jail Blazer era we all still suffer shame for.

Sure, the Blazers need some defensive help at the point which Jerryd Bayless may or may not provide this year. And nobody questions that Kidd would be an improvement over Steve Blake from purely a talent aspect. But he would be a huge step back in the character department and is not a guy I would ever want to see in a Blazer uniform.

How positive am I about that? Should Kidd become a Blazer, I would sell my season tickets and not renew them, nor would I purchase tickets again for some time after he was gone.

No Kidd in Portland. Not now, not ever. 

Keep the team the way they are; fun, likable, and good guys. Let other teams take flyers on guys like Kidd. There is a place for him in the NBA. It just isn't Portland.

Baseball Steroids and Sports Officiating:The Myth of the Level Playing Field

It is time to say what should have been said a long time ago. The complaints about baseball steroids are ridiculous, nonsensical, and disingenuous. 

The most-cited argument is that since steroids are performance-enhancing, their use intrinsically creates a playing field that is not level. Players who use them receive a distinct advantage over players who do not which destroys the integrity of the game.

Fair enough. Except for one small thing; the field is already not level. The officiating makes it a very slanted field, particularly in baseball and basketball.

Several years ago I was watching the Baseball Game of the Week. Greg Maddux threw a pitch a couple inches off the plate which, by the rules, is a ball. It was called a strike at which point the commentator said something very similar to this:

"Because he has such great control, when Maddux throws the pitch there it is more likely he meant to throw it there so he will get that call whereas a pitcher with less control won't."

What? He deliberately threw a ball, but since he intended to throw a ball it is a strike? 

That creates a competitive advantage for him. Hitters who lay off pitches out of the strike zone lose that advantage and Maddux gains one without the use of steroids. I later heard a similar comment regarding Barry Bonds.

That comment said that if a pitch was close and he laid off, umpires were likely to call it a ball because Bonds was known to have such a good eye for the strike zone.

Forgive my ignorance, but is it not the job of the umpire to determine whether a ball is in or out of the strike zone rather than interpret the intent of the pitcher or rely on the good eye of the batter? The name of the player does not matter according to the rules, why does it matter according to the umpire?

The same concept holds true in the NBA. Just a couple nights ago in a key NBA Eastern Conference Finals game in the last minute LeBron James took 3-1/2 steps, one of the most egregious travels I have seen this side of the average Magic Johnson move in his heyday.

The announcers were aghast. "You are going to call traveling on LeBron James in this situation?"

Well, yes. As a matter of fact they should. That was a good piece of officiating in an otherwise horribly officiated year. The playoffs have been very hard to watch because they are being heavily affected by very biased officiating. 

In the interest of full disclosure, let me make clear my biases before continuing. I will be quite happy with either a Magic or Cavaliers Finals appearance. I would be ecstatic for the Nuggets to make their first Finals appearance. If the Lakers lost every game they play from today forth by over a hundred points apiece and Kobe Bryant never made another shot I would be ecstatic.

With that said, every team is suffering from the officiating.

Last night I watched Dahntay Jones deliberately trip Bryant. I watched him give him a shove in the back. I watched him clutch and grab and hack and foul again and again with nothing being called. That creates an unfair advantage when he is allowed to play dirty and break the rules in what is called "defense".

At the same time, I watched Bryant fend off with the off arm, push off from the defender to create space and not get called. Ask any Utah Jazz fan or Cleveland Cavalier fan if the offensive player gains a distinct competitive advantage from that maneuver.

Again, I wanted the Bulls to win their Finals match-up with the Jazz. I never want to see the Jazz win a game as I always despised the offensive foul-machine Karl Malone. With that said, when Michael Jordan illegally shoved Bryon Russell and was not called for it, he created a distinct competitive advantage. By missing that call the officiating heavily influenced the outcome of that series.

Watching Hedo Turkoglu fend off with his off-arm the entire time while watching the defender get called for placing a hand on his hip is disgusting. Watching Dwight Howard set an illegal moving screen that knocks the defender into Turkoglu and causes the defender to get called for a foul is dis-heartening.

Watching James initiate contact with a stationary defender and having them get called for the foul is obnoxious. Watching him run over people to block their shot and not being called for a foul is borderline ridiculous.

Make no mistake, Turkoglu, James, Howard, Bryant and so forth are tremendously talented players as were Malone and Jordan, players I addressed earlier.

But the advantage they receive when the games are not called honestly and fairly impacts the game. Fair, impartial officiating should be the hallmark. Instead we regularly get commentary along the lines of, "You are not going to get that call on the road," or ,"You are not going to get that call against a player of his stature" or the most idiotic statements of all, "They are letting them play" and "they are letting the payers decide the outcome". 

The last two are usually brought up when fouls are being committed willy-nilly with nary a call or when a key foul is committed but not called in the final moments of the game.

In truth, by breaking the rules by not calling the game according to the rules it is the officials who are heavily influencing the outcome by allowing one player to gain a prohibitive competitive advantage over the other.

Jordan was clearly a better player than Russell. But on that play in 1998 where he gave Russell a shove in the back at the top of the key in plain view of the officials and was not whistled for a foul he gained an illegal advantage that led to an easy shot opportunity.

There was no level playing field. Jazz fans probably still feel the sting of that one just as anyone who ever watched their power forward get called for a foul for sticking his head in the way of Malones' elbow feels wronged. 

Anyone who has watched Shaquille O'Neal run over a stationary defender and watched the defender get called for a foul knows that pain. Giving superstars calls that break the rules gives them an even bigger competitive advantage and one for which there is no redress. 

You can work to make yourself faster, stronger, more agile. You can study people's tendencies to learn how to defend them better. But you cannot in any way personally affect rule-breaking officiating. There is no way to level that playing field yourself.

As a life-long and die-hard Blazer fan, I fully realize the following comments will be taken with a grain of salt. With that said, I truly believe the officiating had a huge impact on the outcome of the series.

Throughout the series we watched as Ron Artest clutched, grabbed, impeded progress, and knocked to the floor Brandon Roy. We watched as Luis Scola pushed, shoved, clutched, grabbed, hacked, and fouled LaMarcus Aldridge repeatedly without getting called for a foul. 

At the other end of the floor only Joel Przybilla and Greg Oden did anything even remotely similar. There can be no doubt that much of what they did against Yao Ming was a foul. They should have been called for fouls just as Ming should have been called for fouls when he would come down the floor and give Oden a double-hand shove to gain position.

Sure, play gets more physical in the playoffs. But if you allow one team to play physical and not the other it creates a distinct advantage for one team.

There was a key moment in Game Five where Scola was shooting to the top of the key past a Ming pick. Aldridge was clear of Ming so Ming jumped out and hip-checked Aldridge. It was a gorgeous hip-check that any hockey fan could be proud of. It was also a moving screen and illegal contact. It knocked Aldridge into Scola. When Aldridge hit Scola, that certainly should be called a foul...except the correct call was on Ming. Instead they called Aldridge for his 5th which forced him to the bench for critical minutes.

It was very frustrating as a Blazer fan to watch Ming, Scola, Artest, and Shane Battier commit fouls by the armload without getting called while at the other end the Blazers were called for much less contact. There was no competitive balance.

The series can pretty much be summed up in the following sentence. Brandon Roy fouled out of a game while Artest and Battier never encountered foul trouble a single time in the entire series.

Now, even I am not going to claim that the Blazers were going to the Finals this year. I will not even argue they were definitely going to win the series against the Rockets. What I am going to argue is that as a fan it was heart-breaking to watch bad officiating create a competitive advantage for one team.

For one team to receive an advantage it must, by definition, create a disadvantage for the opposition. That is one reason I find the hysteria over steroids so ridiculous.

If the complaint is truly that steroid use creates a competitive advantage and creates a playing field that is not level, what does that say about sports officiating that ignores rule-breaking, gives the "benefit of the doubt" to the more famous player, allows one player to break the rules but not the other, and so forth?

Bad officiating creates more of a competitive imbalance than all the steroid use in the world ever could.

While I very much want to see the Nuggets beat the Lakers, I do not want to see that win occur  because Jones is allowed to play dirty and break the rules in what is charitably called "defense" against Bryant. If they cannot win it fairly they should not win at all.

I do not have a strong preference for who wins the Cavaliers/Magic series but I would really, really like to see it decided by a level playing field that allows the better team to play within the rules rather than gaining an advantage through officiating that favors one team or another.

It is time to stop officiating that favors certain players and create a level playing field. Once we clear that up, perhaps then it will be legitimate to complain about "performance enhancing substances".  Until then, such complaints are the height of hypocrisy.

The Legend Grows: Roy leads the Blazers past the Rockets in game 2

Prior to the game I was shocked at how demoralized Blazer fans were. For example, at work there were 4 co-holders of season tickets. Two of them assumed the series was over to the point where one of them actually bet five bucks the Blazers would lose game two against the Rockets. 

All season I have had a very solid read on this team, from my pre-season prediction of 53 wins down to how they would fare in each month. As a result, they sometimes turn to me for my take on the game.

Blinded by my man-crush on LaMarcus Aldridge, I said, "L.A. will come out and have a huge game, Roy will have a better game, and the Blazers will win this one. It will probably be pretty close, but they will tie the series.

Got to the game and was talking with the guy who convinced me to get season tickets on my own, a good friend and poker buddy. He also thought the series was basically over.  I told him the same thing but he remained discouraged, even going so far as to say, "I don't even really want to go to a game 5 if they are down 3-1."

Nor was he alone in his sentiment. The buzz in the crowd was very similar. That game one crushing had the fans completely demoralized.

About five minutes into the game I turned to my wife and said, "They were right. Portland is going to lose." 

She looked at the scoreboard which showed the Blazers tied at 15. "Why would you say that?"

I pointed out that home teams which get humiliated in the first game typically come out super energized, build a nice lead, and then end up needing to hold on in the end. Visiting teams typically try to withstand the opening blitz without losing contact and then take over the game. Yet Houston not only withstood the blitz, they had led most of the way.

Furthermore, I had expected Aldridge to come out strong, looking for his shot, and take over the game. Instead, he was playing tentative, not taking the shots he normally took, and was a complete non-factor on offense.

Still, this team was so much fun to watch all year that we settled back to enjoy the ride.  And what a ride it was!

Some how, some way the Blazers overcame every obstacle. They overcame the demoralization from game one. They overcame being outnumbered eight to six on the floor. They overcame having scored 100 pints or more just once in a jaw-dropping 29 attempts against the Rockets. They overcame Ron Artest hitting some ridiculous, ridiculous shots.

Artest, by the way, deserves a lot of credit. He has rightly taken a lot of grief over the years for some of his actions, both on and off the court. But he has also done some things people ignore or do not know about. For example, during the down time between games one and two he searched out and performed some charity work. This was not well publicized.

He has also toughened up Houston and given them an edge that they did not have in prior years. More importantly, he saw this game was up for grabs and he did everything he could to grab it. Nicolas Batum is far and away the Blazers' best wing defender. He did a really great job on Artest. Several times he forced Artest into falling away to the left fade-away jumpers at or even beyond the three point line.

And Artest hit them. Sick, sick shots. He was destroying the Blazers. Roy was trying to match him but Portland needed someone to give Roy some help. As the early years of Michael Jordan  showed, no player, no matter how good, can single-handed win a playoff series. It takes a team.

Sometimes two players can. At the 8 minute mark of the second quarter we finally saw the Aldridge I expected early in the game. He hti a couple of post moves which opened the lane for Roy to score five quick points. Then he went back on the block and scored on four consecutive possessions. 

That forced the Rockets to double and triple team him, to focus their defense on him which then allowed Roy to go back to work.  Together they had 36 of Portland's' 53 first half points. Aldridge shot 8 for 10 in the first half. This was the guy I had expected to see.

Instead of passing the ball off and letting Luis Scola control him, he was imposing his will on Scola, on Yao Ming, on anyone who came near him. With the Rockets forced to divide their attention, Roy was carving them up inside.

The Rockets were also relying on two guys. In the first quarter it was Artest with 15 points. In the second quarter it was...well..unexpected. Yao Ming? I would believe that. Aaron Brooks? Yep, we have seen what he can do. But it was Von Wafer scoring 12 points of his own that kept Houston in the game. He simply could not be stopped.

At half time several things were obvious. First off, the Blazers were at a severe disadvantage. This was one of the worst officiated games I have seen in a long time. As in game one, the Blazers were getting into the paint with regularity. The Rockets were staying on the perimeter more except for Wafer. Yet the Rockets had a marked advantage at the line.

Unlike game one, this was not because they were playing solid defense. This was blown call after blown call. The real reason the calls were blown was because it was not being called the same way for both teams. Artest, Shane Battier, Scola, and Ming were allowed to knock people down without being called for fouls whereas  the Blazers were being called for a lot of pretty questionable calls. A couple of second half examples demonstrate it pretty well.

Scola ran off a screen on the left block. Aldrdige was getting by Ming, so Ming hip-checked him with a screen that moved about 3'. This hip check threw Aldridge into Scola, knocking Scola to the floor. We started celebrating that Ming would be picking up his fifth foul. Instead, it was called on Aldridge. Now, sure, he DID foul Scola...because he was fouled by Ming. This was Aldridge's fifth foul and would play a big role.

Greg Oden was under the basket on the defensive end. Brooks drove to the basket and Oden, seeing he could not stop him, stood there with his arms raised just as Ming had done at the other end. Moments later Brooks was at the line and Oden had fouled out. Had they made that call against Ming he would have fouled out in the first five minutes. 

If the games are officiated this way in Houston, look for two blow-outs because Portland cannot continue to compete five on eight. They were only able to in this game because of Roy and Aldridge. IN the second half, it was primarily Roy.

He scored 11 of the first 13 points in the second half, keeping them in the game until the rest of the team was finally ready to join him. The Rockets were scoring with regularity and only Roy kept this game from turning into a blow-out.

All game long it was Roy who kept the Blazers in contact when the rest of the team struggled except for the mid to late second quarter when Aldridge took over.  Roy scored from inside. He scored from mid-range. He scored from outside.

At one point late in the fourth quarter the Blazers were clinging to a tenuous 93-90 lead. Roy was given the ball at the top of the key with very little time left on the shot clock. Defending him one on one was Artest, a guy who is certainly one of the better wing defenders in the league. 

In fact, it was the ability of Artest and Battier to defend that had many Blazer fans convinced the Blazers would be unable to pull off a win in this game. And now, in a key moment, here was the match-up Blazer fans feared. There was a real feeling this possession could decide the game. And here was Artest via Roy with all the advantage to Artest:little time to work, no screens to free Roy, and officials who were unlikely to call a foul. Yeah, I know...he did shoot 12 free throws in the game. He should have had 20+.

Be that as it may, Roy did what All-Stars are supposed to do in these situations, even when matched up with top defenders. He found a way to score. He ball faked, got Artest moving and hit a contested three to give the Blazers a six point cushion. 

This game was about several things. First, it was Aldridge stepping up and having a big game. He did that. It was about Roy dominating, which he did with 42 points while adding seven rebounds and coming up with a key late block.

And it was about Joel Przybilla, Greg Oden, Aldridge, and everyone else focusing on not letting Ming dominate as he did in game one. 

They fronted, they double-teamed, they switched up on him, they came at him from a variety of angles, and just generally kept him from scoring. Certainly,. that opened things up for other Rockets to score as evidenced by six Rockets  scoring at least 10 points apiece. However, instead of shooting 60% plus when the game mattered, in this one they shot 50%. Still too high, but much more manageable.

By the time Roy hit a free throw with five seconds left to give Portland a 105-100 lead it was apparent that Portland had learned a lot of lessons from the first game. They grew up fast.

They never got down on themselves even when Houston took a five point lead early in the second. Roy hit all the right notes to keep the Blazers in the game. Przybilla provided some veteran leadership and Nate McMillan did a fantastic job of coaching to get their heads back in the game.

Even when normally reliable Steve Blake started to melt down, missing open shots and making uncharacteristic turnovers that led to dunks for the Rockets, the Blazers refused to cave in. They fought and battled their way.

Nor was it just Roy and Aldridge. Travis Outlaw showed us flashes of his Super-Trout persona, Greg Oden had a key follow-dunk, Rudy Fernandez had a crowd-inspiring steal and dunk, and the Blazers showed that yes, Roy is far and away their best player, but they are still first and foremost a team.

Roy could not win this game alone and the Blazers showed why they have been so good all year, turning in a team performance that resulted in overcoming an incredible final minute by Aaron Brooks in the final minute to hold on for a 107-103 victory.

Brooks is way more talented than advertised. His first desperation three was awesome. His ankle went about seventeen different directions as he tried to hold back from crossing the line, he went up for a desperation three that was well contested and somehow found the bottom of the net. Much as I hate any former Duck, that shot was simply spectacular.

In the end, it was everything we had expected from the first playoff game. The crowd was raucous and into it, even when the Blazers got down by a few points. They recognized the greatness they were seeing from both Roy and Aldridge, recognized the calls but did not get so caught up in hating on the referees that they forgot to enjoy the game, and in large part controlled the methods of cheering.

What I mean is instead of chants starting with the announcer or Blazer mascot, they started organically with the crowd. "Lets go Blazers" was probably the most popular one, though the ubiquitous "MVP" with Roy at the line and the "These refs suck" made a brief return when Oden fouled out. The point is, these chants did not start from electronic admonitions but from the fans getting juiced and rolling with it.

It remains to be seen if the Blazers have grown up enough to do what they need to do which is go into Houston and reclaim home court. Make no mistake, the Rockets did exactly what they needed to do in Portland which was get a split. Now the onus is on the Blazers to prove they deserved the higher seed by winning in Houston, which is no easy proposition.

They have only won once in the new Rocket arena and that was two years ago. It is tougher to win in the playoffs, but the Blazers have the talent to do it. Do they have the mental toughness? Perhaps I am blinded by my unapologetic love of the Blazers, but I think they do and will win one of the two. 

Then again, Houston is an excellent team that has the home court advantage. Games three and four should be a real war. Let's go along and enjoy the ride.

Game 1 Requiem:What does losing a home game mean to the Blazers?

I was looking for the right word to describe the first Blazer playoff game in six years. Destruction? Annihilation? Crushing? Ah, wait...I have it. Humiliation.

Make no mistake, Houston came out and pummeled the Blazers beyond all recognition. They started with a punch in the mouth. When Portland got up Houston got serious. They started the renewed assault with a kick in the groin followed by another punch in the mouth and then, as the Blazers lay there bleeding, they dropped a few elbows and followed those up with a piledriver that put the Blazers through the floor. They then started to walk away before returning to kick the prone body once more for just one measure.

The Blazers, for the first time since the first game of the season when they Lakers humiliated them in similar fashion, looked young, inexperienced, and unprepared. They also looked like a team that felt they had accomplished all their goals just by making the playoffs.

 The Rockets, by contrast, for the first time in recent playoff memory, looked like a team that not only wanted to make the playoffs, they wanted to get out of the first round.

It all started on the first Blazer possession. LaMarcus Aldridge posted up Luis Scola on his strong side, the low left block. This allows him to either spin baseline or come across the lane with a sweeping hook that is pretty tough to defend.

Unless, of course, you are 7'6", come off your man and swat it away as Yao Ming did. He executed a shot block so spectacular and intimidating it took Aldridge out of the game for the rest of the half and part of the third quarter. By the time Aldridge recovered, it was too late as the game was out of reach.

It was not only Aldridge who struggled, though. Early on it looked like Nicolas Batum might be a force. He ball-faked on the perimeter, drove baseline and hammered home a dunk. That opened things up. Brandon Roy started driving aggressively to the hoop and scoring regularly.

Unfortunately, that would be the last points for Batum, no other Blazer was scoring, and Houston started collapsing on Roy every trip inside and he stopped shooting. 

Meanwhile, Houston went inside to Ming early and often and he delivered. Barring injury or a precipitous fall-off in talent level, Ming will be in the Hall of Fame some day and in this game it looked like that day should be now.  His 9-for-9 shooting in the game (all in the first half) was more than enough to put the Blazers in a hole too deep to ever climb out of.

The good news is there are perhaps two Blazers who did not have the worst games they will have in the entire series. Those two were Greg Oden and Brandon Roy, though Roy is unlikely to play that poorly either.

Oden did what you are supposed to do against shot blockers. He used ball fakes to get them in the air and scored virtually at will. Roy also scored well. But they were nowhere near enough in light of the team approach taken by the Rockets. Aaron Brooks was every bit as demoralizing to the Blazers in the second half as Ming was in the first and go plenty of help from Ron Artest. 

At some point in the third quarter the fans decided this was the fault of the refs. Admittedly there were a few rather questionable calls, such as Roy fouling the air three feet behind Shane Battier and Battier going to the line for three free throws. Problem was...that had no effect on the outcome.

Had the Blazers benefited from every call they would have still lost by 20. They did not get hosed in this game. 

True, they outscored Houston in the paint by 24 points (56-32) yet were out shot at the free throw line by 12. However, that had more to do with Houston's defensive prowess than it did any brutal refereeing hatchet job as the fans seemed to believe with their recurring, "These refs suck!" chants that threatened to rival the boos they lavished on Darius Miles when he returned with the Memphis Grizzlies..

That was partially fan disappointment at watching their team get absolutely drilled by a team that, on this night, was simply better.

Post-game comments by the players acknowledged as much. Ming talked about how the Blazers looked the way he had felt after his first playoff game. Roy talked about how many Blazers succumbed to the pressure, did not take the shots they normally take, and how little energy they played.

The good news for the Blazers is three fold. First, this was just one game. Yes, they lost a home game, but that was likely to happen at some point in the playoffs. They are quite likely to win one in Houston, thus recapturing the home court advantage. 

Second, outside of Greg Oden (who may miss the next game) and Roy, every player had what will probably end up being his worst game. 

Third, the entire Rocket starting line-up had unbelievable games. Ming did not miss a shot of any kind. Luis Scola shot an improbable 7-9 and added 8 rebounds. Aaron Brooks had 5-8 from beyond the arc and 10-17 total. Ron Artest was a solid 7-12.

In any given game you might see one of them repeat that, but it is unlikely they can repeat it as a group over the course of the series.

Sure, it was disappointing and discouraging, but it was also just one game. The Blazers have the right coach and players to recognize this and deal with it. Watch for the Blazers to come out more focused, relaxed, and ready for game two. 

Look for Aldridge to come out strong as he generally does after a poor outing. He will come out focused and ready and not allow himself to be taken out of his game again. Roy typically makes a point of establishing himself early in must-win games, which game 2 unquestioningly is. 

When those two are on their games, the Blazers are very, very tough to beat. Game two will be a nice bounce back, and after the Blazers take either game three or four in Houston, it will help us see that, though disappointing, the loss was just a bad start to a good run. It will start with a game two win.

It is unlikely to be a blow-out and indeed is quite likely to come down to the final few minutes, but they got their stinker out of the way early and are now ready and primed for a long playoff run. Much as the situations with the Spurs, Celtics, Heat, and so forth, the series is just getting started. 

In a seven game series, the better team generally wins. This series should be no different. Houston has a very good team that can win any game but the Blazers, as this series will bear out by the end, should prove to be better.