Notes from Practice
The Blazers had a low-key practice today. They huddled at the beginning and end but mostly just shot around in between. The coaches seemed to sense that the guys were tired after two games straight. Also last night's game was so funky with the missed points and all it was hard to draw real lessons about winning and losing from it.
Still, even seeing these guys shoot around reminds you of the difference between players at this level and mere mortals. I doubt there's a one of us who has not thought, after hitting 13 straight shots in a pick-up game, "Hey...I might have some real talent! I wonder..." Stop wondering. Watch a practice like this and you'll see guys who couldn't hit the ocean with a catapult in a game drain shot after shot in practice or a light scrimmage. The best shooters on the team barely miss. Add in their athletic ability to defend, rebound, and leap and you start getting into truly scary territory. Yes, even in Summer League.
Another thing this highlights is that the difference between making it into the league or not depends on small margins. A guy's a split-second slow or just a shade off on his shot rotation. Other things being equal, somebody else is going to make it. Court smarts, aggressiveness, and heart also play a role...a reality that's easy to miss when you're young.
Let's not kid ourselves. We're not looking at a dozen Brandon Roys here. But these guys can all play and they're all trying to get picked up somewhere. It'll be interesting to see how it filters out.
--Dave (blazersub@yahoo.com)
P.S. That Channing Frye Marcus Camby (!) trade was quite the buzz here last night. It shows the potential value of cap space beyond just signing free agents.
0 recs |
35 comments
Comments
Do you mean Marcus Camby?
Gotta be Marcus Camby.
by grigs on
Jul 16, 2008 1:35 PM PDT
reply
actions
0 recs
Wait, what?
Channing Frye trade? What are you even talking about?
"I think it’s going to be very beautiful game next year."
-Batuuuuuuuum!
by rockingharder on
Jul 16, 2008 1:35 PM PDT
reply
actions
0 recs
My bad
It was the Marcus Camby trade. I don’t know why I had Channing on the brain. Sorry.
—Dave
by Dave on
Jul 16, 2008 1:36 PM PDT
reply
actions
0 recs
Phew!
I had a brief flash of “I’m scared!” followed by the reassurance of, “KP knows what he’s doing.”
MAN it’s good to finally have a solid GM.
"I think it’s going to be very beautiful game next year."
-Batuuuuuuuum!
by rockingharder on
Jul 16, 2008 1:43 PM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Question Dave,
Is it just me, or does Bayless have a Allen Iverson quality about him? He gets to the line alot, check. He gets to any spot on the floor that he wants to, check. His handles are solid, but he’s only 20 years old, check. He’s better creating for himself than others, but once again, who is he going to pass to?
p.s. Please ask Mr. Allen what his favorite Star Trek episode is. My guess “The super Computer”.
2-4 the who
by 24thewho on
Jul 16, 2008 1:51 PM PDT
reply
actions
0 recs
Hey24!
I agree, my very first assessment after Monday’s game was the very same.
To be honest it was soley based on his uncanny ability to penetrate, S.L. I know but still it was uncanny.
Those guys he broke down were no chumps, and by the second half the rest of the team knew what was coming.
The Oden Era, Day 385
by Heymoe on
Jul 16, 2008 5:49 PM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Pull back on those reigns a second...
Let’s not get ahead of ourselves. Yes, Bayless can get around most other guards in summer league. Yes, he can handle a lot of contact, but seriously, Allen Iverson? I like the kids playing style, aggressiveness and ability to get to the stripe but his shooting stoke has a lot still to be desired. AI can do it at the rim, from 15, 18, half court (wherever he wants to make it rain, it rains). Bayless is good but I don’t see the resemblance to AI…at least not yet.
by PtownJake on
Jul 16, 2008 6:18 PM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Thanks for the wake-up call.
Thanks for that wake-up call… I guess I am merely mortal. But I’m still going to imagine myself on the Blazer’s roster whenever I’m shooting around on the blacktop.
“Time’s winding down… 3… he pump-fakes… 2… dripples into the key…. pulls up for the floater in the lane 1…. 0… BLAZERS WIN!!!”
by sagebru5h on
Jul 16, 2008 3:09 PM PDT
reply
actions
0 recs
Don't be dumb
Everyone knows that I’m the guy who gets the game-winning shot for the Blazers.
I’ll let you be the guy who feeds me the ball, though.
Other people don't have as much practice at being wrong as I do -- HT, timbo
by jscot on
Jul 17, 2008 12:03 AM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
I've always been of the opinion
that the margin between making it in a pro sport and “almost” is pretty thin. Which is why one of the best pieces of advice is to work hard.
by timg56 on
Jul 16, 2008 4:00 PM PDT
reply
actions
0 recs
Bayless's lack of assists so far
is purely a function of how terrible (by NBA standards) most of his teammates are. I’ve heard a lot of commentary about how his performance demonstrates that he can only create his own shot – but he’s created a number of shots for other guys, many of which were wide open; it’s just that nobody’s knocking them down. My take on him so far: he’s a stronger version of Monta Ellis with a (potentially) better outside shot. Other than the TRex arms (they barely reach his waist!), he’s a physical specimen. Lightning fast, extra gear, nasty crossover, and he can sky. That play early in yesterday’s game when he split the double team, picked up his dribble at the college three-point line, and took two huge steps to the rim for an easy layup was not something many guys in the league are physically capable of doing. If he can knock shots down consistently from the outside, I think he’s a potential all-star in a few years.
Batum, on the other hand, has done nothing to indicate he would be a good D2 college player, much less a pro. But he looks like he’s about 15 years old (and very “French” – not that there’s anything wrong with that), so maybe once he hits puberty, his game will pick up. The positive spin would be he’s not comfortable in the chaos that is the summer league, but he would look much, much better in a more organized setting. Apparently his D has been solid, but it’s been hard to tell on tv.
PK (or as the announcers call him, “the Finn”) is somewhere in the middle. Decent (if a little wild) stroke from outside. Doesn’t appear to have a ton of upside, but he’s probably flashed enough potential to get a contract. If he matures, he could be a bigger, (possibly) more athletic version of Steve Blake. As with Bayless, though, it’s hard to judge his playmaking ability because most of his teammates are incapable of finishing a play that’s gift-wrapped for them and served up on a platter.
by KP Corleone on
Jul 16, 2008 4:28 PM PDT
reply
actions
1 recs
"...a bigger, (possibly) more athletic version of Steve Blake."
With: Roy, LMA, GO, Rudy, Martell, Trout, Frye and Bayless,
the more athletic version of Steve Blake could be just what this team needs.
by Montavilla Steve on
Jul 16, 2008 4:53 PM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Welcome to the Edge!
Great post.
Also: Fantastic screenname.
"I think it’s going to be very beautiful game next year."
-Batuuuuuuuum!
by rockingharder on
Jul 16, 2008 4:55 PM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Monta Ellis Arms (6' 2.75")
according to the questionable measurements of Draftexpress.com, are shorter wingspan than Jerryd Bayless (6’ 3.5) arms.
Ai lists at 6’ 3.25’, with TJFord posted at 5’ 11.5’. Rudy listed at 6’ 7.5” and BRoy at 6’ 8’’.
"There's something in my library to offend everybody" Washington Coalition Against Censorship
by OBJuan72 on
Jul 16, 2008 5:31 PM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
But AI, TJ, and Ellis are 6 ft. or shorter
whereas Bayless is listed at 6’3”. He’s not a midget or anything – he’s just a regular person (as far as wingspan is concerned), as opposed to guys like Rose and Westbrook (who I believe have wingspans closer to 6’6” or 6’7” even though they’re the same height as Bayless). All it means is that he’s not quite the defensive force those guys could be. He’s fine guarding most PGs – but, unlike a guy like Westbrook, he probably can’t D up at the 2 spot. On offense, I don’t think it makes much difference, particularly considering how quickly (and high) he gets up.
Thanks rock.
by KP Corleone on
Jul 16, 2008 5:51 PM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
My bad
Ellis is listed at 6’3”, as well
by KP Corleone on
Jul 16, 2008 5:53 PM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Whether a guard is a defensive force
is NOT based on wingspan. We aren’t talking major shotblockers here.
What determines defensive ability is A) effort B) quickness C) effort D) positioning E) effort F) instincts/court smart G) effort H) experience and I) effort.
For a small guy to D at the 2 spot, he primarily needs to be strong enough not to get pushed around down low. That’s a lot more important than wingspan. Positioning matters, and if he knows how to get position and is strong enough to hold it once he gets it, he can defend. It’s hard to defend a guy who is six inches taller than you, but three inches isn’t that much if you are a really quality defender.
Other people don't have as much practice at being wrong as I do -- HT, timbo
by jscot on
Jul 17, 2008 12:11 AM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Come on jscot
Everything you said was great, but you can’t downplay the role wingspan has on defense. It may not be one of the most important things that you mentioned, but long wingspans are going to help fill up the passing lanes, and they will contribute to tipping away passes and such. T-Rex was a deadly dinosaur without a wingspan. Can you imagine how nasty he could have been with a good wingspan? The same is true for Bayless, and any defender for that matter.
Can I buy you a fish sandwich?
by silkybrown on
Jul 17, 2008 5:41 AM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Really?
Jerryd has a wingspan of 6’3”. Westbrook has a wingspan of 6’7” (I’m trusting the numbers above, I haven’t looked them up). That means each arm is able to reach precisely 2” further.
Now, 2” is not nothing, but simply placing your foot 2” further in the way the pass is going makes that up. Good grief, just leaning slightly that direction more than makes it up. Being quick enough to take a step in that direction dwarfs wingspan.
That’s why wingspan is far less important than quickness, instinct, experience, and positioning. A 2” longer reach may make the difference in tipping away 5-7 passes a year. All the other things matter so very much more.
Again, we’re talking a guard, not a shot blocker. Wingspan matters a lot more for a shot blocker or a rebounder. But it still doesn’t count as much as instinct and positioning.
Other people don't have as much practice at being wrong as I do -- HT, timbo
by jscot on
Jul 17, 2008 6:28 AM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Wingspan is more important
than height to NBA GMs these days. In fact, according to Chad Ford, height is considered irrelevant – only wingspan and standing reach matter, which makes sense if you think about it. The point is, a guy who has a 6’7” or 6’8” wingspan (Westbrook, Rose, Gordon) plays more like a guy who’s 6’6”. A guy who has a 6’3” wingspan plays like a guy who’s 6’3.” You can’t just reduce it down to “2 inches per arm” and write it off as insignificant. If your wingspan is 6’3”, you can’t guard a shooting guard who’s 6’6” or 6’7” – because you can’t challenge his shot.
All that being said, I think Bayless will be fine on D. He won’t guard two guards because he won’t have to. I think he’s a better prospect – and certainly a better fit for the Blazers – than all three of the aforementioned guys. Even including Rose. (I acknowledge that I may be drinking a little too much of the summer league kool-aid, but I think Rose was given too much credit for Memphis’s success, and Bayless too much blame for Az’s problems. One guy does not make a championship run. Switch those guys – put Bayless on Memphis, Rose on Az – and I don’t think it changes things much.)
by KP Corleone on
Jul 17, 2008 8:54 AM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Any rumors in Vegas
about why the Nugs dumped Camby’s salary? They’ve got to be clearing space for somebody, but who?
by grimc on
Jul 16, 2008 4:47 PM PDT
reply
actions
0 recs
they do get
a huge trade exception if my understanding of the deal is correct, which could be very helpful (think JJ3 from Phoenix)... but people aren’t talking about that part very much.
by Blindsteepler on
Jul 16, 2008 5:22 PM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
From what I see at HoopsHype
the Nuggets can’t afford anybody. They’re in luxury tax territory. Dumping Camby’s 10 mil was a 20 mil savings. AI, Nene, Carmelo and Kenyon Martin are draining that franchise dry.
by fat27 on
Jul 17, 2008 2:38 AM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
No kidding
Occasionally I’ll shoot with the perfect stroke and it will swish in perfectly. Then I imagine how NBA players can do what I just did only they do it off the dribble with a guys hand in there face. They also can zip by defenders, jump higher, move their feet quicker, and have more stamina than me. The typical NBA scrub is probably 10 times the player I am and that’s discouraging.
I can tell you what though. If I was 6-5 I would be at the gym every day, doing cardio, sprints, practicing dribbling with both hands, shooting thousands of jump shots a day. These guys get payed a lot to do what they love to do. I do think a lot of people don’t realize how good these scrub players are.
by BRoyInThe4th on
Jul 16, 2008 8:56 PM PDT
reply
actions
0 recs
I love your comment BRoy
I bugs me every time I hear players at this and the NBA level referred to as “scrubs”. It’s a ridiculous term to use for these players. Real scrubs play at open gyms and city park courts. I know because I used to do all of that.
by fat27 on
Jul 17, 2008 2:48 AM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
You will never convince me of this
I’ve seen Joe Klein and Will Purdue play in the NBA. They were scrubbin for a good while there.
Can I buy you a fish sandwich?
by silkybrown on
Jul 17, 2008 5:44 AM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
I think it depends on the context
Yeah, even most ‘scrubs’ kick all of our butts in a real life game of basketball. But in the context of the NBA, there are scrubs who ain’t that good—for NBA players, which is what we’re discussing.
I think it goes without saying most of us aren’t as good as NBA players.
HOWEVER… does anyone here think they are NOT better at basketball than Ha Seung-Jinn?
When we’re talkin’ NBAers, some are great and some are not. We don’t need to ammend every negative opinion about a player with a ‘oh but he’s better than any of us still because he is in the NBA’. You can say someone, a friend, you play with is really good and not feel like you need to add ‘but not for the NBA you are a scrub in that context’.
Mortimer
by Mortimer on
Jul 17, 2008 11:18 AM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Admirable restraint
“I think it goes without saying most of us aren’t as good as NBA players.” (Italics mine)
"Shoot, I don't even have anything to put in my own sig"
These are the modest words of pualo, posted on June 20, 2008.
Yes, pualo, an extraordinarily discerning BEdger with a knack for subtle expression.
by CatMan2 on
Jul 17, 2008 11:36 AM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Better Than Me
Whenever I manage to get a perfect shot I always imagine myself playing with the pros. But you are right the sheer skill it take to play at that level is amazing. Good Job.
by D.S. on
Jul 17, 2008 10:01 AM PDT
reply
actions
0 recs

















