Deja Blake (RE: last month's "We Want Blake" diary)
Six weeks ago I wrote a diary titled "We Want Blake." Several people replied with doubts about Steve being a fit with our team and our finances. And several questioned his talent. After today's Blake article linked on TrueHoop from the Baltimore Sun (http://www.baltimoresun.com/sports/basketball/bal-sp.blake12aug12,0,4108438,full.story) and his re-signing with the Blazers, it's interesting to look back and see if opinions have changed in the last six weeks. Here's the diary I started six weeks ago. And I'll include the same poll below. Still want Jack or Sergio to start over Blake? I'd like to know if opinions have changed substantially. Does Taureen Green have a shot in hell of making this roster?
http://www.blazersedge.com/story/2007/7/2/184839/4483
Here are a few of the comments from the July diary in case you'd rather not follow the link.
------------------------------------------------
i don't think we want too many players from
our losing days. Almost all of them sucked. Blake played the season we only won 21 games, as did Pryzbilla and friends. We don't need any of those guys back. The only reason we have fond memories of these guys is because everyone else sucked and Blake may have looked good. Again, thanks to Oden, we're a team with championship aspirations within the next 3-4 years, Blake is not a pg you win championships with. I'd much rather just stick with Jack and see what happens.
Having a 3 pg lineup never works. Evidenced by the Jack, Telfair, Blake trio we had. You can really only have 2 pgs on a team, each with defined roles.
by ssa400 on Mon Jul 02, 2007 at 05:33:48 PM PDT
Steve blake
doesn't have a place here anymore. KP said that we are building and developing players that fit in our timeline to win a championship. JJ fits, blake doesn't.
Steve Blake is WAAAY overated, especially by Oregonians. Because he was a mediocre defender, he became the BEST defender on the Blazers cause the rest of our guards stunk.
by BlazerBandit on Mon Jul 02, 2007 at 05:45:43 PM PDT
agreed
You want Blake is more appropriate. While he is a fine point guard, he is nothing too special. I like him, but I would rather see Sergio grow into the starting role eventually.
by clonigro on Mon Jul 02, 2007 at 06:05:05 PM PDT
I don't want Blake.
Why would we want to blow the mid-level exception on a player that can not play the lateral d, ie can not keep the opposing guard from driving to the basket, who is not as good as JJ and does not have the potential of Sergio?
by mrwonderfull on Mon Jul 02, 2007 at 11:48:04 PM PDT
I wouldn't have minded Blake
before the draft, but SIX point guards??? No can do.
--Dave
by Dave on Tue Jul 03, 2007 at 01:09:17 AM PDT
24 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Steve Blake starting,
by EnglandDan on Aug 13, 2007 2:50 PM PDT reply actions
even I
A full roster takes time
Until then we have a group that will be acceptable for our short term goals and if one of them excels then we stay with them, if not then we have enough cap and trade bait to make a move in the future.
I would rather see them be patient than to make a marginal move now.
by lonevoiceofreason on Aug 13, 2007 3:56 PM PDT reply actions
I stand by my previous read
good points, abdelnaby . . .
I was against signing Blake
Alot of the arguments for Blake don't make alot of sense. I've read from posters that he's "clutch". I really really do'nt know what they are referring to. He played on a 21 win team, I'm not sure what he could have done back then that was clutch. Brandon Roy is clutch, as is a bunch of other players (Kobe, Carmello, etc.) Blake is not one of them.
Another argument for Blake is that he hasn't peaked yet. And the best evidence of this is to compare his stats to Nash, and then compare ridiculous intangibles like heart and desire. Nash is one of the best point guards to ever play the game. His career arc shouldn't even be looked at, he's on his own level. We should look at all other pgs who have put up medicore numbers throughouut their career and see how they've turned out. Comparing Blake to Nash even slightly is simply amazing.
His defense is another "positive". I know that Jack isn't a good defender, but he's big and has only 2 years under his belt, and only 1 with any consistent playing time. It's severely premature to brand him as a horrible defender, if he's at the same level in 2 years, then we'd be apt in making some conclusions. I have no idea what Blake's value is as a defender, but i can't imagine him instilling fear on any PG in the league.
His jump shot is another huge perceived advantage. His 3% was slightly less than Jack last year. Jack seems to have been working extremely hard on that shot and the percentage jumped dramatically from his rookie year. I don't think it's completely inconceivable that Jack doesn't bring that 3% up a little more.
All in all, until we see the team play, there's no way we can come to any real conclusion about this signing. I'm still disappointed that Jack is going to be losing minutes and might not start. I just think we should have some sort of stability in the lineup, and Jack has had a whole season playing with 2 of our cornerstones. That cohesiveness in itself is worth something. I just hope Blakes role is to be a backup pg and occasionaly backup 2 guard.
green*blake
to be fair
Not to mention...
All of the Blazers point guards come from winning programs, the only question is which will turn the Blazers into a winning program?
by Champs2009 on Aug 14, 2007 10:09 AM PDT up reply actions
My opinion evolves.
I also accept the logic here that Jack is uncertain of his role here and is insecure, like most of us, and would mostly likely excel in a space where he felt valued.
Let him start.
I think that there's an excellent chance he grows more and more among solid defenders, with starter's minutes and in a coach-assigned leadership role.
I hate Sergio's and Martell's defensive games. Their offensive abilities, let alone potential aren't particularly improtant to me without defensive competency. I say give 'em each garbage minutes until they show the ability to be solid guys on the defensive end.
This makes Blake my first backup to Jarret (Jarrett?) and Brandon playing 20 to 25 minutes a night.
In such a role, at his current cost and at his current contract length, he's a great addition.
He significantly can accelerate the development of our three young bigs with solid, consistent (relatively) mistake free play on both ends.
Here's hoping that younger Blazer guards not Named Jack learn to combine Blake's gifts with superior basketball ability and push him down the bench as they watch him and improve.
by ojala on Aug 13, 2007 8:37 PM PDT reply actions
agreed
As a side note, I am holding out a little hope that Martell becomes adequate on defense--you don't see Ray Allen on the All-Defense team, but he does just fine. Martell looked a little more heads-up on D during Summer League, though yes, I know, grain of salt. That being said, Sergio's defense was awful in Summer League. In Summer League, fer cryin out loud! (yes yes, grain of salt...)
Just wondering
I would see
Sergio
Not to be a mean person ...
But thanks for bringing this back up ... because I didn't see it before and never got a chance to respond.
Blake is a young veteran, but he is STILL a veteran. Okay he started most of the year on a team that only won 21 games (2005-06), but also take into consideration who was on that team with him. This time out he'll be playing alongside the likes of Brandon Roy and LaMarcus Aldridge -- guys who have great attitudes and WANT to be in Portland. They're also good players. Not to mention what's to say that Blake hasn't grown as a player (and as a gentleman) in the year that he's been away?
That's my piece.
by soonerterp on Aug 14, 2007 1:40 AM PDT reply actions
Well if you are going to quote me in the post...
The reasons my views can change is usually due to more complete information and better understanding of the CBA. This leads to understanding what the Blazers are trying to accomplish with the particular move.
With the Steve Blake case the initial report was a 3 year deal but we all now know it's a 2 year deal with the Blazers option on the third. This takes care of my cap concern.
KP has been all over the media stating that he wants competition at all levels. So I now understand the motive and am cool with the signing of Blake. Although I would have preferred to use the mid-level exception to attain a player that is clearly better than a previous starter, that doesn't mean any were available or would have been a good fit.
What I don't understand
Why some fans still say that Blake's signing has to mean that they are not done yet and Jack will be traded soon. They are just not paying attention to what the Blazers are saying.
What it does mean
Parsing KP's words carefully "all levels" instead of "all positions" and looking at the off season moves, especially this one and you'll understand that in the Blazers opinion, Sergio is not competition for Jack, Green was brought in to be competition for Sergio, and that they consider these later two guys at a different level than Jack and Blake are at now. I agree.
The bottom line
The Jack and Blake competition is not just with each other and not just for this year. It's a competition with themselves to be the Blazers best option when free agency becomes a factor for the 09-10 team. Steve or Jack have to show they are better than anyone else available that year. One of them, COULD make the 09 team, but not both. Both will earn too much money for one to be on the bench. I did read the article mentioned and at this point I wouldn't bet against Blake because of his work ethic but I wouldn't bet against Jack either. May the best man win and best of luck.
by mrwonderfull on Aug 14, 2007 2:09 AM PDT reply actions
I think you all know what I think of Steve Blake.
I also have every confidence in Jarrett Jack. The player I think of most often when Jack's name comes up is Terry Porter. I believe Jack has a real future in this league and I expect that to be with Portland.
Mrwonderful has what I think is a good perception of what the Blazers are thinking. I do not see Blake's signing as an indication that Jack's days with Portland are limited. I think it's up to him to show he's the best option and that he will get every chance to do so. I like the idea of a three guard rotation of Blake, Roy and Jack - with each getting about 30 minutes. That doesn't leave much for Sergio or Webster, but so what. If they want minutes, let them earn them in practice.
Blake will start...
I think having 4 pg's serves a purpose for us, as we don't have a premier player at that position. If someone gets injured (which will happen at some point) we have another body. If we get in foul trouble (which will happen) we have another body. If we package up a trade (which will happen) we have that third guy still.
I think JJ will be a really solid PG... at some point. Same goes with Sergio. And Green will make the roster... he has a contract.
Meanwhile, the team will hack it out and maybe a gem will rise to the surface. We have 15 roster spots, we might as well use them all, right? And it's not like we need more talented bigs, right?
by you'vegottomakeyourfreethrows on Aug 14, 2007 9:53 AM PDT reply actions
ok
"not in love here...
I would only want to sign Blake if we traded JJ, no need to have both of them on the roster, it would just take time away from Sergio who needs this year to impress us and earn his spot on this roster.
by usmcr3049 on Mon Jul 02, 2007 at 04:38:53 PM PDT"
I am still in the same frame of mind. I don't like having both jack and blake on the roster, as I feel it takes time away from sergio, and if the blazer want to see him develop they need to give him time.
I think jack will be traded by the deadline, his value is still pretty high, much higher than steve's, imo, as he is still younger and has the potential tag still.
Green will make the roster, I don't see us giving him a contract and then cutting him and eating it. Granted it is a small contract by NBA terms, but still, like fatty said, he has the resume of a champion, you don't just cut those guys without giving them a chance.
I was a huge Blake advocate..
I think that we speak dismissively of
Blake getting thirty minutes takes so much pressure off Jack. If we lose it's for not playing him enough instead of being his fault.
And we're gonna lose.
Blake guarding quicks and slashers instead of Sergio means it's Blake's fault that we lost, but it doesn't mean that Oden had four fouls in four minutes. Those extra minutes playing in our defeats is why he'll blossom in year two.
by ojala on Aug 14, 2007 10:07 PM PDT reply actions
Previously...
I pretty much stand by my original comments.
I'd rather we'd have resigned Ime.

by 






















