Why GO First?
Seems to be a some growing debate between the camps believing Oden should be brought off the bench and those believing he should start. I just wanted to chime in with my 2 cents worth. First of all Greg Odens talent and potential in my opinion is greater than Joel Pryzbillas. No knock at all on Pryzbilla whom I think is a great defensive center who brings energy and toughness. Pryzbilla also of course has experience that Oden does not have. Brandon, Blake, LMA all have played with Pryzbilla a lot more than Oden. All that being said I say you must start Oden.
You must start Oden because we drafted him not just as a project, not as just another 1st round pick but because he was the 7ft center of our future. Since this latest foot sprain there seems to be a movement to back off Oden, to give him less to worry about, to move him from starter to back-up. I think this is maybe subconciously a desire to protect him. Injury prone or Iron Man, this is not the correct path to player development in Odens case. If you still believe and I do, that Oden is our All-Star center of the future then you must give him the starting spot. The quicker our starters get used to Oden and Oden to playing with our starters the better.
Yes, it's been a rocky start, to say the least, for Greg Odens N.B.A. career. However I think the worst thing we could do would be lower our sites as to what Oden could mean to this team. Unless you've given up on Oden already, then in my opinion you must believe he is a starting center. Sure he's going to show you growing pains that you wouldn't see with Pryzbilla. An occasional missed assignment, some painful schoolings from the Yao's and Shaqs of the league. But that's the quickest, best way for Oden to learn. Keep in mind you will also see the occasional monster dunk from Oden. Hopefully the occasional fast forward flash to the complete package that hasn't yet arrived.
As far as the stanima and conditioning arguement, I agree that obviously Oden isn't in N.B.A. game shape yet. Coming off micro-fracture it might be a whole season or two until we see the complete 100% recovery of Oden. But if he is fatigued, or his stanima isn't what it should be then starting and playing is still the best way to improve that area. If fatigue and stanima are a problem then the responsibility is on Nate and coaching to monitor the starters minutes he is getting. If he's dangerously tired or fatigued sub him out. The old truth cliche is that you can get injured in 1 minute as a back-up, or 20 minutes as a starter. No way of predicting what might happen in any given moment on a basketball court.
The biggest danger I see in not starting Oden is the lowering of expectations. Whether people admit it or not I see it as putting the bubble wrap back around Oden. Bring him along slowly, let's let him catch up, lets take some pressure off him, let him develop his game against #2 centers instead of starters...Pop, pop, pop it's bubble wrap. Sure- talk to Oden during the game, limit his minutes to avoid dangerous fatigue, but with a talent like Odens you MUST let him play and to be the best and get better you must play against the best, that means being a starter. It was always the role projected for Oden and in my opinion still is.
2 recs |
7 comments
Comments
poll?
I would like for him to start. but I don’t want him being given the ball and expected to bully his way in. let the kid rebound and if the opertunity for an easy bucket for him is there, do it, otherwise let roy and aldridge take the shots and get oden accoustototoomeed to banging with the big boys.
The Faith don't panic, the faith freaks out burns out farms and torchs small villages in the name of The Faith.
by faith on Nov 1, 2008 11:23 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
dunno about that
I don’t agree that Oden has to start the moment he’s back just because he’s our center of the future. It’s totally normal for players with incredible upside to play off the bench until they’ve demonstrated they can deliver more effectively than the current starter.
Right now there are a few question marks for Greg, none more so than his durability. Why interfere with the cohesion of the starting 5 until GO demonstrates that he can stick around for a few games? And why not wait until he can stay on the court as long as the rest of the starting squad? I fully believe he will, but I also think it’s fine to let that happen first.
You mention a few times that coming off the bench is “not the correct path” for Oden. I’m not so convinced. At this point I wouldn’t question Nate for going either route, but I see some clear advantages with starting him off the bench.
Here’s the question I’d like to see answered: For those who think Oden should come off the bench, how long do you think that should last? Personally, I think if he’s kicking ass off the bench for a couple weeks, get him in the starting lineup. But I have no problem with easing him back in at first.
by shralpster on Nov 1, 2008 11:28 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I am in total agreement with your point of view regarding G.O.
+1
Blazer's Edge Ambassador to The Dream Shake Blog
by LaMarvelous on Nov 2, 2008 1:13 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
stanima
I think that was a great post, I don’t like to be picky . So I apologize for pointing our that you spelled stamina as “stanima” twice. I thought it might be funny if that’s how you pronounced it “stan-ima”. I am now going to begin saying it like that.
Otherwise I agree with you generally, I think I would like to see Greg coming of the bench, but only for a few weeks. Just to get his feet wet. I would hope that it would then quickly become apparent that he should start.
by twggyy on Nov 1, 2008 12:33 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
What can I say?
I’m a spelling idiot.
"Mother Nature started this fight, I think it's about time we ended it!"
by Krang on Nov 1, 2008 3:31 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I agree
You start Greg because you want to give him the most minutes possible to speed up his development as much as possible. He needs to play against the other teams starters. We might not do as well until he gets his legs under him, but it will be better in the long run.
by MavetheGreat on Nov 1, 2008 12:54 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
don't agree
not to reahash the same discussion we had on another thread, but I just don’t agree. I see no harm whatsover in bringing him off the bench for a couple weeks/months until he’s in shape. I also do think your argument is very well thought out and makes sense. I think this is a case where both sides have legit cases, and we’ll just have to wait and see what happens when he comes back. TRUST ME, if he comes back and plays reasonably well, I’m not gonna complain if he’s starting or coming off the bench!
myspace.com/marktwainindians
by mark twain on Nov 2, 2008 9:38 AM PST reply actions 0 recs



























