Blazer's Edge: An SB Nation Community

Navigation: Jump to content areas:



Sports blogs for fans, by fans.
Around SBN: Steve McNair Dead - Former NFL QB Shot and Killed


Projecting Next Season's Rotation (Shows major changes ahead?)

Updated: Now with 100% more Power Forward and Projected Rotations!

 

Like almost every Blazer fan here I have spent time wondering which players are here for the long haul and who I'll have to shed a tear for in the upcoming off-season. Looking back at last season it seemed almost destined that Jarred Jack was going to leave. Even though Jack was likable (to some), played great with Roy, and was one of the toughest players on a soft team, he had two deadly strikes against him: He didn't fit in with the next season's rotation and his upside didn't seem to fit in Portland's blueprints.

 

Extrapolating Jarred's situation to this season's team, I want to mainly work through a projected rotation to see if I can make a good guess at who stays and who goes. No favorites, cute bottoms or crazy 11 man rotations. Nate has hinted that he prefers an 8 man rotation, and I don't blame him. Its hard watching situations like Sergio last season or Frye this year. I hate situations where guys get only 10 rotational minutes a night, and according to Hollinger, this is not only rare, but performance is negatively affected. So, lets have some fun and trim 13 worthy and likable players into an 8 (or 9)-man rotation.

 

First, the center rotation since it is probably the most set in stone with Oden starting and Przybilla as the back-up. Personally, I think Przybilla's status as the back-up is cemented because Oden and LMA are such a perfect pair that it almost requires both of them to be on the court at the same time, and consequently off the court at the same time too. This means separate back-ups at both positions, and no 3 quality big man rotation at both spots (as I found out when I tried to pencil out the minutes for an Okur, Oden and LMA rotation... it just doesn't work). Portland couldn't asked for a better back-up center than Joel, and since he is on the team it's worth leaving alone.

 

Next, the guards, and since Nate doesn't want another 10 man rotation the guards are a perfect place to start trimming. A 3-man rotation at guard: Roy, Rudy, and Blake. Each can get at least 30 minutes, and based off the first few games this year, I think this is Nate's ultimate plan (but has since started to play Sergio more). However, I could see Blake getting swapped out for some one else (Hinrich?). But (for next season at least), Blake is a vet, can set up the offense, and is cheap. It's worth noting that Bayless is the perfect back up in this situation, since he can play both SG and PG, would settle for injury and blowout PT for another year and is currently on the Blazers.

 

Finally, PF and SF. LMA obviously starts PF, but back-up PF minutes are up for grabs. SF is where it starts to become a real guessing game, since it is mathematically impossible to spread 48 minutes between Webster, Outlaw, and Batum. I'm going to guess that the least likely to go is Batum (cheap, upside), leaving an either/or between Webster and Outlaw. KP will probably wait until the season is over to pull the trigger (especially since Webby hasn't played yet), but I am going to take the plunge and go Webster over Outlaw because of Webster's extension. Webster starts and Batum not only gets the back-up SF minutes, but also as much as he can handle of the back-up PF minutes to further cut down on rotation (but its worth noting that Batum starting and Outlaw backing up both positions might make the most sense). This leaves a projected 8 and 9 man rotations of:

 

Guards: Roy (34mins), Rudy (32mins), Blake (30mins)

F: Webster (32mins), LMA (34mins), Batum (26mins) or Batum (16mins), Freeland (14mins) 

C: Oden (32mins), Przybilla (20mins) or Przybilla (16 mins)

Backups: Bayless (guard PG/SG), Freeland or draft (big PF), and random (SF).

Game Flow of 8 man, with small ball second unit:

Picture7_medium

via i187.photobucket.com

And a 9 man rotation for teams with a true back-up PF (like everyone pointed out Batum is just pretending to be an actually PF to get more minutes) with my pipe-dream Freeland.

Picture8_medium

via i187.photobucket.com

 

(This is just my example of streamlined rotations).  My favorites, Sergio and Frye, don't make the cut. Neither did the loser of Webster/Outlaw. Ike also looks increasingly like he will try to find greener pastures in the off-season. In conclusion, I think Sergio, Frye, Webster or Outlaw, and Ike are all likely candidates to feel the pressure of a tighter rotation. Just not enough PT for everyone, and its time to stop giving players only 10 minutes of PT a night.  However, I didn't add any new players for Reaf's contract or FA 09, which if it is a big addition would probably just replace some one in the rotation.  

 

Basically, what  I am saying is that if you pencil out every minute, there isn't enough PT for a solid rotation for everyone who deserves it on the Blazers next season.  So be prepared to get your heart broken.

 

Now it is your turn, how do you see the roster shaking out based on your own projected rotations for next year.

Poll
What Do You Think
Yes
20 votes
No
34 votes
I’ve been wrong so many times I just agree with Dave
25 votes

79 votes | Poll has closed

3 recs | Comment 57 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Display:

Great

Why reference “according to Hollinger”… He has never coached.

Time For The Spanish Guard To Step Up

by TheGreatDane17 on Nov 17, 2008 10:36 PM PST reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Because if you can look at stats

That tell you 10 rotational minutes drops your TS% like Frye’s has dropped this year, it doesn’t take a coach.

"Hightide was the only "Yes" vote" - parkinglotj

Joel Freeland=Stud

by hightide on Nov 17, 2008 10:48 PM PST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Doesn't matter

Using the method you are using, phasing Sergio out, down to a 8 man rotation… It won’t happen.

Sergio is here for a while & will get his opportunity to be our future starting PG. He is on his way with his strong performance this year.

Time For The Spanish Guard To Step Up

by TheGreatDane17 on Nov 17, 2008 10:53 PM PST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Remember that this is for next season

And If you think there is enough PT for everyone you like, you will be disappointed.

"Hightide was the only "Yes" vote" - parkinglotj

Joel Freeland=Stud

by hightide on Nov 17, 2008 10:58 PM PST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Next Year

By then, Bayless or Blake could be traded.

By then, Martell or Outlaw could be traded.

Just too many what ifs.

Time For The Spanish Guard To Step Up

by TheGreatDane17 on Nov 17, 2008 11:09 PM PST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

exactly

Something has to happen, and I think it just might be pretty big.

"Hightide was the only "Yes" vote" - parkinglotj

Joel Freeland=Stud

by hightide on Nov 17, 2008 11:11 PM PST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

In that case...

Sergio
Roy/Rudy
LeBron/Batum
Aldridge/Frye/Hill
Oden/Przy

Time For The Spanish Guard To Step Up

by TheGreatDane17 on Nov 18, 2008 12:24 AM PST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Alternatively, his trade value is up from "zero" to "decent throw-in" and he will be gone at the deadline, on schedule.
Sergio is here for a while & will get his opportunity to be our future starting PG. He is on his way with his strong performance this year.

"Sergio is clearly the MJ of 3rd string point guards!" —Mortimer Pritchard

by timbo on Nov 18, 2008 9:34 AM PST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Bayless

Will be gone for a 2009 draft pick to a terrible team.

Time For The Spanish Guard To Step Up

by TheGreatDane17 on Nov 18, 2008 10:48 AM PST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

I'm not sure about Blake

tominhawaii and a few others think Blake will retire here. Blake is a backup who keeps beating out the starters for their minutes. One day, Bayless will step up and take those minutes and Blake will slide in as a backup. He’ll turn into that “calming influence” guy, when he comes off the bench.

Unless Sergio and Roy get something going, Sergio’s days are numbered.

by tominhawaii on Nov 18, 2008 12:23 PM PST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

?

Where is your link/proof that says Hinrich is what Nate wants in a PG?

Have you guys not been here Sergio’s last few game? He has been playing good defense, his 3 ball is coming around… Now he is even starting to get some minutes with Roy. A good sign of things to come.

Funny to think Sergio has been playing better then Rondo the last 5 games.

Time For The Spanish Guard To Step Up

by TheGreatDane17 on Nov 18, 2008 12:34 PM PST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

The sentence in brackets should be read as: And if that's the type of PG Nate wants

I don’t know what long-term solution at PG the Blazers are looking for, only that Nate lets Blake start. I also don’t know if they are interested in Hinrich, it’s just a rumor that keeps coming up and he is more similar to Blake than to Sergio.

They seem to like him together with Rudy in the second unit. If he wants more playing time, I believe it’s more likely they will make room for Bayless to become the backup of Blake or someone else than for Sergio to become the regular starter now.

by Norsktroll on Nov 18, 2008 1:08 PM PST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Hollinger is playing checkers

while KP is playing chess.

His numbers don’t take into account chemistry, synergy and quantum improvements.

No wonder he was so wrong in predicting our record last (based on losing Z-Bo, our “best player”).

Hollinger will be wrong again this year.

by Bust a Bucket on Nov 17, 2008 11:26 PM PST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Hollinger power rankings are okay,

But can’t take into account Brandon Roy!

"Hightide was the only "Yes" vote" - parkinglotj

Joel Freeland=Stud

by hightide on Nov 17, 2008 11:27 PM PST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

good analogy

KP takes a lot into account. But then again Hollinger doesn’t claim to work on that stuff either.

in process of learning the Dvorak keyboard so my typing might be short, slow, & generally suckish.

by prezofdeath on Nov 18, 2008 10:22 AM PST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Cool Chart

But I think some of the lineups aren’t so great. Batum as a PF is not so super. For right now or next year. Those are probably Outlaw’s minutes for the near future at least. The final quarter lineup with Roy, Rudy, Martell, LaMarcus and Oden is great though.

I'm very important. I have many leather-bound books and my apartment smells of rich mahogany - Ron Burgundy

by zotsi on Nov 17, 2008 10:42 PM PST reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Puke

Batum at PF is just dumb. It will get destroyed easily by big PF teams.

Time For The Spanish Guard To Step Up

by TheGreatDane17 on Nov 17, 2008 10:54 PM PST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Thats why I said

That Nate would have to break out the back up Big PF for such teams (Ike, Freeland or FA).

"Hightide was the only "Yes" vote" - parkinglotj

Joel Freeland=Stud

by hightide on Nov 17, 2008 10:55 PM PST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Why keep Ike when you have Frye and Outlaw...

… and what makes you think Freeland ever makes it on the 15 man roster, let alone become a rotational player?

hakkaa päälle !

by timg56 on Nov 18, 2008 9:54 AM PST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

KP

I trust his scouting skills. He has been scouting him for years, he wouldn’t have drafted him if he didn’t have the talent. Can he put it together, like other Euro’s? We will have to watch.

Time For The Spanish Guard To Step Up

by TheGreatDane17 on Nov 18, 2008 10:50 AM PST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

You show Marty and Nic on the floor at the same time. Who's the 4?

"Sergio is clearly the MJ of 3rd string point guards!" —Mortimer Pritchard

by timbo on Nov 17, 2008 10:42 PM PST reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Nic, its a stretch, but he did do a good job on AK47

For half the teams in the league it might work. The other half with big PF’s, the rotation would have to be expanded to 9 players to include someone like Ike or Freeland.

"Hightide was the only "Yes" vote" - parkinglotj

Joel Freeland=Stud

by hightide on Nov 17, 2008 10:46 PM PST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Nic is not a power forward...

Until the Blazers figure out that there is such a position and either get somebody on the roster to play it (I’m looking at you, LMA) or find somebody to play it via trade, they’re gonna be stuck one rung below the top echelon in the NBA.

"Sergio is clearly the MJ of 3rd string point guards!" —Mortimer Pritchard

by timbo on Nov 18, 2008 9:36 AM PST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

10 man roations are fine

For the playoffs, its good to tighten it to 8 men, but there’s nothing wrong with playing 10 guys during the regular season.

Boomshakalaka

by jksnake99 on Nov 17, 2008 10:49 PM PST reply reply actions actions   0 recs

But I worry

With Roy, Rudy, LMA, Oden and maybe Martell/Outlaw getting 30+ minutes, how you fit everyone else in?

"Hightide was the only "Yes" vote" - parkinglotj

Joel Freeland=Stud

by hightide on Nov 17, 2008 11:06 PM PST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Outlaw/Martell

So far haven’t proved to be worthy of 30+

Blake has proved he could lose some minutes to Sergio & has been for a week or two now.

Channing’s minutes will lessen, as will Batum’s.

I trust Nate to figure it out.

Time For The Spanish Guard To Step Up

by TheGreatDane17 on Nov 17, 2008 11:11 PM PST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Having a deep roster is not a problem.

I continue to wonder why so many people here think it is one.

A deep roster provides a coach with increased options, as well as insurance against a major injury derailing a season.

There are multiple options availabe to handle playing time.

1) The NBA is often about match ups. With a deep roster, Nate can tailor his lineups to better take advantage of possible mismatches.

2) The NBA season is a grind. Most teams don’t have the luxury of being able to give their starters a reduced work load from time to time. Most coaches would kill to have a center combo like Greg & Joel. There is no reason Oden can’t play 25 – 30 minutes when Joel is available. The drop off is not significant enough to offset the advantage gained from keeping both players fresh throughout the season. The same applies to the other positions.

3) Injuries happen. Portland started the season without two projected starters. Yet we are playing .600 ball. That is a clear example of what having a deep roster can do for you. Look at last season when LaMarcus went down early in the Streak. The other guys picked it up for a couple of games, but it was Channing Frye stepping in and performing well that ultimately allowed us to keep winning with Aldridge. Same at the end of the season. Frye’s play was NBA starter quality.

4) In addition to exploiting match up advantages, a deep roster allows a coach to employ unit substitution. You don’t have to worry about your bench guys being able to mesh with the starters. They can develop their own identity and chemistry. It also makes the job of the opposing coaching staff more complicated. They now have to game plan against two teams, not one.

5) Cutting MPG averages is not the only option available on a deep roster. Granted that a player may not do as well averaging 10 minutes per game, verses 20 – 25. But if he gets to play 25 miuntes in the games he gets into, it is less likely to effect his performance by playing him some games and sitting him others. If Channing is on fire early or Batum has it going, it does not hurt the team if LaMarcus gets just 21 minutes that night or Outlaw watches most of the game from the bench, so long as they know that a) it’s helping the team win and b) they will likely get their chance the next time out.

In summary, all the talk about how Portland has to trim their roster is – in my opinion – just illustrates a view of the game that is limited by blinders of conventional wisdom.

hakkaa päälle !

by timg56 on Nov 18, 2008 10:52 AM PST to parent up reply reply actions actions   1 recs

There is a difference between deep roster and the regular rotation

I’m all in favor of having a team that goes 12 deep, but consistently playing 10 or more guys every game just reduces the effectiveness of the players who are only getting 10-12 minutes. For example, I have no problem with keeping Bayless on the active squad even though he’s just on the bench the whole game. He can step in and play his game if Blake or Sergio tweaks an ankle or something.

1. No one outside our top 8 or 9 (whatever the standard rotation ends up being) is going to win a game for us. They just won’t be a gamebreaker or a huge advantage.

2. This is true. Everyone could use a bit more rest especially late in the season. Chances are though, that if we are okay with only using Roy for 30 or 32 minutes we’re either already winning big, losing big or have a playoff spot locked up. Otherwise, we could very well be sacrificing a Win by giving our main guys extra rest.

3. Yep. A deep roster is a good thing, but we don’t need a deep rotation to have that advantage.

4. I sincerely hope that our whole team can work together. I don’t want to have 2 separate units with players that can’t cross over to the other unit. I know that’s not really your point, but a distinct 2nd unit isn’t that big of an advantage. An opposing coaching staff that can’t handle that complication probably isn’t winning too many games anyway.

5. I don’t…..IMO, plugging in whoever is hot at the time seems like a bad long term solution. Sure, maybe Frye wins us a game like he has before, but what about all the times Roy or Aldridge has a bad first half and then lights it up later in the game. I don’t think any kind of consistent team play can be achieved if we’re always looking for ’who’s on’ that game.

And hey, what’s wrong with a little conventional wisdom? There’s got to be some reason most coaches use a defined rotation. Anyway, I hope my points make sense. I liked how you presented these alternatives, they really got me thinking. thanks

WWKPD?

by Magnum on Nov 18, 2008 3:00 PM PST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

I am going to enjoy this year

before I start worrying about next. Its not like we are rebuilding anymore

Woof

by Charles Barkley McLovin on Nov 17, 2008 11:15 PM PST reply reply actions actions   3 recs

Exactly.

Time For The Spanish Guard To Step Up

by TheGreatDane17 on Nov 18, 2008 12:21 AM PST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

10-4 Good Buddy

We got a game today and tomorrow, I only know what I know about GS from Dave’s post today and I know even less about the Bulls. I wish people would write about match ups with upcoming opponents or a breakdown of an upcoming opponent or player. This is a well written post but it is an off season conversation. I want to live in the now.

by tominhawaii on Nov 18, 2008 12:29 PM PST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

I think people are missing the point

Its not so much about what I think Nate will do, player by player. But, if you do the work, and pencil out every minute, it shows how players you wanted to keep might not make the cut.

"Hightide was the only "Yes" vote" - parkinglotj

Joel Freeland=Stud

by hightide on Nov 17, 2008 11:22 PM PST reply reply actions actions   0 recs

and that's everyone other than Oden, Roy, Aldridge and Rudy...

… are candidates to be traded. The Blazers have more capable players than they can use. I think a 2 for 1 or 3 for 1 trade is likely in the not too distant future.

Boomshakalaka

by jksnake99 on Nov 17, 2008 11:26 PM PST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Yep

I would bet it will be a 3 or 4 for 2: a 2 for 1 or 3 for 1, plus RLEC for bad contract.

I think its gotta involve losing one of our guards, one of our small forwards, and one of our back up PF, to get a starting PG—that one move would consolidate everything, perfectly.

Personally, I think it’s Blake or Sergio, Travis, and Frye or Diogu plus RLEC for starting PG. It may be giving up a lot, and I would hate to see any of those guys go—especially Frye, I just love the guy—but this move would remove all obstacles to our eventual coronation—it would be the the defeat of Pompey’s forces and the way would be clear for our second consulship.

by TimG on Nov 18, 2008 9:54 AM PST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Batum won't be a 30 minute a night player next year

If we’re cutting down the rotation, Outlaw is a great guy to have around for both backup forward spots. Give him most of his minutes at backup 4 and split minutes with Batum at backup 3. Also, I don’t see how we get by with just one true point guard no matter how good Roy is at distributing the ball. It’s not as big of a concern as having Batum backup both forward spots because Rudy can handle the ball well enough. Hopefull Martell can improve his handle, that would make it way easier to go with that guard lineup.

I don’t think we can keep bringing Frye off the bench for 10 minutes and expect him to shoot well. Very few players can immediately find their shooting rhythm coming off the bench. He’s going to be inconsistent in that roll and he provides very little value elsewhere. As much as I love Channing, I don’t think he works long term.

WWKPD?

by Magnum on Nov 17, 2008 11:42 PM PST reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Outlaw would be probably the best choice for a true 8 man rotation

But I had to choose and went Webster.

If you penciled out your minute with Batum, Webster, Outlaw and another PG there just isn’t enough time. Take Back up PF, SF, SG and PG minutes. Roy and Rudy take up around 66 minutes, Webster takes 28, Outlaw backs up Aldridge for 14 and then splits the extra 20 minutes at SF with Batum. And now how do you have enough minute for more than one PG? You used up all of the SF minutes already and you sure aren’t taking time away from Roy or Rudy.

Roy:34 Rudy:30 Webster:28 Outlaw:24 Aldridge:34 Batum:10… See, only 32 minutes for a PG, so unless you want to spilt it up like 20, 12 between 2 true PGs you are stuck. You would have to get rid of somebody, like Webster, and move his minutes to Roy to be able to get another guard in.

This is what the post is all about, you have a good idea, but if you break out the minutes, a player you love has to go for the good of the others.

"Hightide was the only "Yes" vote" - parkinglotj

Joel Freeland=Stud

by hightide on Nov 18, 2008 12:03 AM PST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

I think the problem with us wanting an 8man rotation

is that we want both Rudy and Przybilla. Przy is only a backup center, he has no position flexibility and that’s fine because we want a sure fire backup for Oden, but it leaves us in a weird spot for an 8 man rotation. Rudy is amazing, but I don’t know if he can pull off point guard like duties. He’s a great shooter and energy guy, but it looks like he’s always going to need someone to set him up. We’ll see. That leaves both forward spots and the point guard spot uncovered. We can get by with Blake, Rudy and Roy sharing ball handling duties, but we definitely need a backup forward, Outlaw works great in that regard.

WWKPD?

by Magnum on Nov 18, 2008 12:35 AM PST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

I agree that I've been drawing the 8 man rotation line a bit too hard

9 is probably even better, but I just don’t like 10 man rotations and what it has done to my favorite Sergio and what it is now doing to Frye. Its just hard to watch guys only get 10 minutes of run.

"Hightide was the only "Yes" vote" - parkinglotj

Joel Freeland=Stud

by hightide on Nov 18, 2008 12:39 AM PST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

definitely

those guys deserve minutes

WWKPD?

by Magnum on Nov 18, 2008 12:42 AM PST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

???

Have you not been watching? He is averaging 17.6 mins a game the last 5 games, including playing a season high 24 in New Orleans On THE ROAD, IN THE CLUTCH. McMillan seems to be starting to trust Sergio.

Time For The Spanish Guard To Step Up

by TheGreatDane17 on Nov 18, 2008 12:38 PM PST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

I was talking about last year

And apparently I wrote it in letters you can’t read.

"Hightide was the only "Yes" vote" - parkinglotj

Joel Freeland=Stud

by hightide on Nov 18, 2008 12:48 PM PST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

yup

But I feel better if he stop spaming this post, and instead take 10 minutes to write one of his own.

"Hightide was the only "Yes" vote" - parkinglotj

Joel Freeland=Stud

by hightide on Nov 19, 2008 12:25 AM PST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

rotation

Next year…

Frye will probably be gone

Outlaw will backup PF for a season

Josh Childress will be acquired in FA

Kirk Hinrich will be a blazer after trading Sergio and RELC

PG: Hinrich, Bayless
SG: Roy, Rudy
SF: Childress, Webster
PF: LA, Outlaw
C: Oden, Pryz

Webster and Bayless will lose time as the season wears on… leaving 8 players in the rotation.

by neilan on Nov 17, 2008 11:51 PM PST reply reply actions actions   0 recs

I like it. I like it

But I don’t know about Hinrich. I kind of like Sergio and Blake is ok by me too. All we need is a serviceable lunchbucket PG. Hinrich is really not much of an upgrade.

The best aspect of your projection is Travis playing full time at PF. I wish Nate would stop playing him at SF.

The perfect is the enemy of the good.

According to James Kunstler, who writes a well-respected if slightly profane financial blog whose title I cannot repeat here, "The Republicans must be clearly identified as the party that wrecked America... it's hard to imagine the American people giving the clean-up task to the very group that created the mess -- no matter how many cute little faces Sarah Palin can make on TV."

by vavoom on Nov 18, 2008 8:15 AM PST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Barf

Hinrich is terrible. There is no way that trade would work. The cap fluxuation is too much. Childress won’t leave Greece, you are crazy to think he will.

Time For The Spanish Guard To Step Up

by TheGreatDane17 on Nov 18, 2008 12:39 PM PST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Good argument, but doesn't seem to fit what actually happens in the league

If you spend some time looking at the best team in the league they almost all use a nine-man rotation in the regular season. L@kers. Suns, Celtics, Pistons, etc all play nine players for more than 14 minutes per game. Actually only one of the major contenders uses a strict eight man rotation, and that is the Cavs, and I think that this is probably because of their lack of depth on the roster. Many lesser teams seem to use a 10-man rotation, but this is probably because they are in a state of flux, trying to figure out what they have and how to squeak out a few more wins.

For the Blazers I agree with most of your roster but would have to say that not having a true backup for LMA is probably your biggest weakness. If there is any position that we need a capable scorer for it is that one. Unlike other teams that often sub their PF for a center, we have two true centers in GO and Pryz. The weakness of that is that neither one would be a very good substitute if LMA was to get hurt, and replacing his offensive contribution would be a priority.

I believe we probably get rid of one of our point guards, and either Trout or Frye will lose their place on our team, mostly dependent on how they play with their respective units.
This means we will probably end up upgrading one or more positions as well, making predictions for next year’s lineup difficult, but I will give it a go anyway.

Starters:
PG – Blake (Or player gained through trade)
SG – Roy
SF – Webster (Or player gained through trade)
PF – Aldridge
C – Oden

Definite Backups – Rudy, Pryz, Batum, and one of Frye/Outlaw

The players I can see being traded if the right deal came along, in order of value, are: Outlaw, Webster, Frye, Sergio, Bayless, Blake, and Ike.
If we make any trade I see Outlaw having the most value so I would expect my definite backups above to include Frye

by Blodgett on Nov 18, 2008 12:18 AM PST reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Thank you

This is what I was hoping for and I added another flow chart with Freeland for an actually PF. I mentioned it before but I decided to go all out and make one so it wouldn’t keep poping up as an issue. I was just thinking that against some teams like the Warriors and others Batum could side over the PF to get a real nights worth of work done, but it is probably too early for that yet.

"Hightide was the only "Yes" vote" - parkinglotj

Joel Freeland=Stud

by hightide on Nov 18, 2008 12:34 AM PST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

the pf case here seems very weak

and i’m unaware of any evidence that freeland will ever play in the nba.

ignacio

by ignacio on Nov 18, 2008 4:40 AM PST reply reply actions actions   1 recs

Thoughts

You pointed out that typically Oden and Aldridge will be off the floor at the same time, and then made the case for Pryz behind Oden. What you did not do is make the case for who plays behind Aldridge.

I would also point out the the SF position is affected by Rudy. You place Rudy as one of the three guards in a three guard rotation – but right now he’s picking up minutes at SF when Mac decides to go small. This crowds the forward spot for minutes.

My take is that when Webster comes back, Batum will go to the bench, and then there’ll be a battle for SF minutes between Webster/Outlaw/Rudy, and between Outlaw/Frye for the back up minutes to Aldridge.

In the future, I suspect the guards are about right. It seems like Roy/Rudy/Blake/Bayless are likely to play the minutes there. And this has to do with the fact that Sergio wants minutes, and his game is better fitted to a running team, than to Mac’s 1/2 court offense. And Bayless can never develop if Sergio is getting the minutes needed for that development.

At forward, I suspect that Webster/Rudy will pick up the majority of minutes at SF, and that Batum will pick up those that remain. This leaves PF, which indicates that either Frye or Outlaw will eventually be the choice. Outlaw can play SF/PF, whereas Frye has indicated he can provide minutes at PF/Center. Someone is out here.

The only other possibility in several years, would be a Roy/Rudy/Bayless starting unit – if Bayless can improve. We’ll see.

by Eben Calder on Nov 18, 2008 6:02 AM PST reply reply actions actions   0 recs

I anticipate the following will be gone by the start of next season: Travis, Frye, Sergio...

…………………………… and I hereby #25 myself for AnntheFan.

"Sergio is clearly the MJ of 3rd string point guards!" —Mortimer Pritchard

by timbo on Nov 18, 2008 9:46 AM PST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Without going into a lot of detail as to the reasoning behind it,

I’ll just agree that Travis, Frye, and Sergio out is a pretty safe bet.

Something has to give and this scenario is the one that signs have been pointing to since midway through last season, if not longer. Outlaw’s production will likely be missed in the short term, and I will be a fan of his wherever he lands, but his game is developing in a different direction than what the Blazer’s are shaping for the future.

lickety-brindle

by Billy Ray Bates on Nov 18, 2008 10:05 AM PST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

A site by Blazer fans, for Blazer fans
Start posting about the Trail Blazers »

Join SB Nation and dive into communities focused on all your favorite teams.

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recommended FanPosts

Small
Nicolas Batum interview in REVERSE (french mag) of July
Small
HAVE WE LOST OUR MINDS
N1313394467_27679_4745_small
Hedo Turkgolu: 7 Stages of grief (now 14)
Small
The Official I _______ Turkoglu Thread (UPDATED w/Poll)
O_001_small
Junk Drawer 7/3 - Why signing Hedo means we'll have to trade Batum?

Recent FanPosts

100_4977_small
JD 7/5
Small
Creating an Offensive Advantage
Small
Interesting take. What are your thoughts?
Small
David Lee begets a SF in the Future
Peacock_small
Dimitris Diamantidis
Small
David Lee? Nate Robinson? general Panic, what gives?
Iraq_christmas__small
Why not Roy?
Small
Here's the trade we NEED!(Wonder if Blazers will hire me?)
Small
Commitment
Small
The pg we need may already be on the roster

Post_icon New FanPost All FanPosts Carrot-mini

FanShots

Quick hits of video, photos, quotes, chats, links and lists that you find around the web.

Recommended FanShots

Greedo Turkoglu



"E lo tolo Pritchard????"
See Ya Later Hedo! It was fun while it lasted :)
fooled us!
Hedo Rejects Deal, Ends Talks
Hedo in red and black. Bustabucket whipped out the Photoshop

Recent FanShots

Victor Claver Video Interview
They do not teach pronouns at the Toronto Sun
New Canzano column re: Hedo
Think he'd sign for veteran's minimum?
The Ron Artest Soap Opera Reviewed (by timbo)
Monty Williams might be a top candidate for Wolves
How going after Lee makes sense
Blazers strike back, switch D-League co-affiliate from Toronto to Denver
Nothing to do with basketball
Just tired of Hedo talk

Post_icon New FanShot All FanShots Carrot-mini


Editors

Kitten_small Dave

Ben_small Ben.

Moderators

Pict1126_small -ken

Polar_bear_small jorga

151054601_tp_small prezofdeath

Small usmcr3049

Jesus_icon_i_small T Darkstar

Wallpaper_small geoffm

Official Partner of Yahoo! Sports