Why Jerryd Bayless Should Start Immediately

by Salem Stephen on Jul 28, 2008 11:30 AM PDT Comment 111 comments

Differences of opinion are most often a product of perceptions and preconceived notions, whether conscious or subconscious, which alter the way individuals interpret facts. Opinions of Jerryd Bayless are very diverse. In general, however, we develop these opinions from the same sources of information (summer league games, shot charts, interviews, youtube videos, scouting reports, etc.) which indicates that our conflicting views is not from a difference in evidence, but analysis. I hold the unpopular opinion that Jerryd Bayless should be our starting point guard as the season begins. Rather than rant and rave about his strengths, however, I would prefer to articulate the manner in which I evaluate his perceived shortcomings and team role. Maybe after sharing the process, some other Blazer fans will begin to believe, like I do, that Bayless would be an excellent fit as our starting point guard right away; or maybe some knowledgeable fans will illuminate some flaws in my evaluation process, which will cause me to change my opinion on this matter.

First, it is always important that analysis begins with an accepted or at least identified list of concerns or shortcomings that we can take into account as we evaluate a player’s potential. My analysis of Bayless would be skewed if I thought “Rex” is just a childhood nickname and not an allusion to his widely criticized short wingspan. The most in depth list of his criticisms that I could find is from his prospect page on DraftExpress. The concerns include:

• Stuck between 1 and 2

• Average wingspan

• Better scorer than playmaker

• Better playing off the ball

• Undersized for SG

• Dominant ball-handler

• Decision-making in half-court

• Struggles to create shots w/left hand

• Shot-selection

• Ability to fight through screens

• Ability to defend SGs

• Needs time to develop

• Team didn't win much

These concerns fall into three categories: Player specific (concerns about Bayless’ physical or mental limitations) Role Specific (an inability to fulfill a function that the team might commonly ask of him) and Superfluous concerns (those that may not even relate to Bayless but surround him… specifically that his “[t]eam did not win much”) Some of these concerns are both “player specific” and “role specific.” For example, “Ability to defend SGs” addresses both a physical shortcoming (his size) but that concern could be mitigated by the absence of a role concern (him being in a situation where he is never required to guard a SG.)

Since many of the concerns about Jerryd Bayless are role specific, it would be prudent to spell out the role of the player who will be joining Brandon Roy in the backcourt this coming season. I intentionally avoid using the term point guard (or even guard at all) when describing the position for the player joining Roy because the tradition labeling of positions connote many assumption about the roles for the player filling that position which may or may not be accurate depending upon the strengths and weaknesses of the players around him.

While it may be ideal to have each player on the floor excel at all of the traditional aspects of his particular position, it is not imperative. The game of basketball is a team sport. Rather than breaking the game down into five individual positions with separate roles for each, teams excel when they look at all the necessary attributes to play the game, and fill them based on the collective strengths of the five players on the floor. While a Center is traditionally a low-post scorer and a wing is traditionally a perimeter shooter, if your center is more comfortable on the perimeter and your “wing” is more efficient with his back to the basket, it would be imprudent for a coach to avoid playing to his players strengths because just because they do not fall within the traditional roles of the set positions. With this in mind, we should evaluate all of the roles that need to be filled on the basketball court from every position and see between our other four projected starters, and see what roles will the final starting position player need to fill.

In his book, “The Basketball Handbook: Winning essentials for players and coaches,” Lee H. Rose does an excellent job articulating the specific roles for each traditional position. Rose describes the characteristics of a traditional Point Guard as:

A coach on the floor like the great John Stockton.
Has peripheral awareness and makes good decisions with the ball.
Un selfish-thinks pass first, shot second.
Primarily a ball handler and distributor who knows who is hot.
The more speed and quickness he has, the better.
Should be able to separate and create space when dribbling.
Directs the offensive and defensive formations.
Pushes the ball for fast breaks and calls half-court plays.
Maintains constant communication with the coaches.
Vocal leader on the floor.
Discusses rule interpretations with the officials.
During dead-ball situations such as free throws and out-of-bounds situations, he passes on information to teammates concerning strategy and matchups.
Knows the time on both clocks, the score, the number of time-outs, and whom to foul.
Size is a plus but is secondary to knowledge and skill. (Rose, 14)

If the debate between Steve Blake and Jerryd Bayless is, “Who does a better job of fulfilling the roles on this list?” then hands down, Steve Blake would win. When focusing on team synergy, however, the argument can be made that other players on the floor (specifically Brandon Roy) fill many of the roles on this list better than either Blake or Bayless which would mean the final starting spot should not go to the player that better fills this traditional list, but better fills the holes in the traditional roles of our other four starters. Since it appears Brandon Roy fills most of the traditional point guard roles, the next step is to evaluate which tradition shooting guard roles Brandon Roy struggles with or does not perform as well as the traditional point guard roles. Once again Rose does an impeccable job of crystallizing the traditional roles of a shooting guard:

“Two Guard – A scoring touch.

Characteristics:

Position requires great skills and perimeter shooting.
Primary role is to score points; can sacrifice defense for offense at this position.
Typically they are big, from 6-3 to 6-7, and athletic, like Kobe Bryant, Allen Houston, Tracy McGrady, and Michael Finley.
Size is not an absolute restriction; smaller guards like Allen Iverson and David Wesley are exceptions who thrive as shooters.
Should be able to handle the ball, beat opponents off the dribble, penetrate, and finish at the basket.
Should have good catch-and-shoot skills coming off pin-downs and baseline screens.
The better ball handler, the more difficult he is to defend.
Good open court player because of ability to pull up for open shots.
Should be a good free-throw shooter because in late-game situations he is involved in handling the ball and taking last-second shots.
Needs to be a good one-on-one player to be highly effective.

In reviewing the roles of the shooting guard, Brandon Roy fills many of these roles as well. Unfortunately, he is only one man and despite Paul Allen’s wealth and copious amounts of research, science has yet to determine a away to clone Brandon Roy. The next best solution is to evaluate which player combination will collectively do the best job of filling all of these individual roles. This is very different than finding the next best player to put next to Roy. In fact, the analysis can lead to selecting the far inferior player, but it will always lead to the best possible team synergy. Here is a theoretical situation to show why the best player is not the best team synergy:

You may think I am crazy when I tell you that I would start Kwame Brown over John Stockton any day of the week, but in certain circumstances this statement is true. Imagine if you have six players to make a team. Five of them are carbon copies of John Stockton and your sixth player is Kwame Brown. Obviously you will have to start four John Stockton’s in you lineup leaving you with only one question, “Who is my fifth starter: John Stockton or Kwame Brown?” Obviously if you are looking at the players independent of the team, you would say John Stockton. In this case, however, Kwame Brown is the better choice. While Stockton offers excellent passing, court vision, stealing, etc. four other starters are just as talented in those areas. While Kwame Brown is below average as a center, he can fill the remaining roles much better than a fifth John Stockton. In this case, the team will play better starting one of the biggest draft busts in recent memory, over one of the 50 Best Players of All-Time.

It all comes down to the law of diminishing marginal utility. That’s right, a good old-fashioned position battle can be reduced to a seemingly mundane economics lesson. The “fifth Stockton’s” value is extremely diminished because the other four Stockton’s have the same strengths and weaknesses; thus, the fifth Stockton’s strengths are diminished and weaknesses are amplified making him less valuable than Kwame Brown.

The same rule should be applied when determining whom the other guard next to Brandon Roy should be. Without getting too detailed, Blake can fill most of the tradition point guard roles and some of the traditional shooting guard roles; Bayless can fill some of the traditional point guard roles and most of the traditional shooting guard roles; and finally, Brandon Roy can fulfill almost all of the traditional shooting guard and point guard roles.

Now… with the laws of diminishing marginal utility in mind, let’s try to determine which combo would make the best backcourt. Rate Roy, Blake and Bayless on their abilities to fill each role for the both guard positions as listed above. (Complete list of roles is also available at the end of the post) Combine the ratings of two players to fill all of the roles of one back-court (trying to make sure that the number of total roles is balanced between the two (even if Bayless or Blake rank lower than Roy, but if Roy has too many roles, give the other player a role that he is close to as good as Roy)) Which combo makes for the best backcourt? For me, a Roy/Bayless backcourt is far better because Bayless’ strengths filled Roy’s weaknesses.

Now that you have your most efficient backcourt, look at the roles that you have given to Bayless. Compare them to Bayless’ weaknesses listed above. Do any of the “Role Specific” weaknesses not apply because Roy fills those roles?

Point Guard Skills:

A coach on the floor like the great John Stockton. Roy:8 Blake:7 Bayless:4
Has peripheral awareness and makes good decisions with the ball. Roy:9 Bl:8 Ba:5
Un selfish-thinks pass first, shot second. Roy:8 Bl:9 Ba:-4
Primarily a ball handler and distributor who knows who is hot. Roy:8 Bl:8 Ba:5
The more speed and quickness he has, the better. Roy:8 Bl:5 Ba:9
Should be able to separate and create space when dribbling. Roy:9 Bl:5 Ba:8
Directs the offensive and defensive formations. Roy:9 Bl:8 Ba: 5
Pushes the ball for fast breaks and calls half-court plays. Roy:5 Bl:8 Ba:9
Maintains constant communication with the coaches. Roy:10 Bl:8 Ba:7
Vocal leader on the floor. Roy:10 Bl:7 Ba: (does the scowl count)
Discusses rule interpretations with the officials. Roy:8 Bl:6 Ba:4
During dead-ball situations such as free throws and out-of-bounds situations, he passes on information to teammates concerning strategy and matchups.Roy:9 Bl:7 Ba:5
Size is a plus but is secondary to knowledge and skill. Roy:9 Bl:7 Ba:6

Shooting Guard Skills:

Position requires great skills and perimeter shooting. Roy:8 Bl:6 Ba:8
Primary role is to score points; can sacrifice defense for offense at this position. Roy:8 Bl:4 Ba:9
Typically they are big, from 6-3 to 6-7, and athletic, like Kobe Bryant, Allen Houston, Tracy McGrady, and Michael Finley. Roy:8 Bl:4 Ba:6
Should be able to handle the ball, beat opponents off the dribble, penetrate, and finish at the basket. Roy:8 Bl:5 Ba:9
Should have good catch-and-shoot skills coming off pin-downs and baseline screens. Roy:7 Bl:5 Ba:8
The better ball handler, the more difficult he is to defend. Roy:8 Bl:6 Ba:8
Good open court player because of ability to pull up for open shots. Roy:7 Bl:6 Ba:8
Should be a good free-throw shooter because in late-game situations he is involved in handling the ball and taking last-second shots. Roy:8 Bl:7 Ba:9
Needs to be a good one-on-one player to be highly effective. Roy:8 Bl:4 Ba:9

31 recs | Comment 111 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Now THAT

is a comprehensive post.

Even though I doubt Bayless will or should start immediately I’m going to do something I rarely do and rec this myself. Thank you for taking the time to write and post it!

—Dave

by Dave on Jul 28, 2008 12:25 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

just a small and unimportant comment

I think it would probably be better that you didn’t say you rec’d a specific post.
This one got 30 recs, I don’t think it’d get 10 without your “help”.
ps. By the way, this is not jealousy, I don’t write fanposts. :)

by Falcao on Jul 29, 2008 9:23 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Really?

This is a thorough, well-written FanPost, and it had four recs before it had a single comment (and before Dave rec’d it). With some of the junk that gets rec’d around here (no pun intended), I’d be amazed if this post didn’t end up with 10 independently.

Jerryd Bayless has two emotions: Kill and Win.

"I think it’s going to be very beautiful game next year."
-Nicolas Batum

by rockingharder on Jul 29, 2008 12:04 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Nice Work

My only criticism, which incidentally is rather fundamental, is that the entirety of your rating system is based on potential and skill projected from Bayless playing against substandard competition. I think that we might see that Blake is better at many of the skills on day one of this season than Bayless. I also question Bayless being a better distance shooter at the moment, particularly how his shot will be effected by the length of NBA players given its inefficient motion. However I am certain that given time Bayless will become the superior player as he develops his skills through the professional level coaching staff and adapts to the speed and subtleties of the NBA game. Ultimately it wouldn’t surprise me if Blake is not brought back after this contract due to the development of the young combo guards on the Blazers: Bayless and Rudy.

by TFan on Jul 28, 2008 12:59 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Good Point

My ratings are based on projection (something I overlooked) which would tilt the analysis towards Bayless’ favor. I guess there is no way to accurately rate Bayless without seeing him against NBA opposition. This would be a compelling reason for him to start the season on the bench even using my process of analysis.

by Salem Stephen on Jul 28, 2008 1:18 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Love the Analysis

I think for the most part it is very accurate and your theories have a high likelihood of occuring, however your ranking of their skills is completely based on your own perspective instead of reality. The truth is we have no idea how Bayless will pan out as an NBA player. The 11th pick could go either way you could get a good role player or a big bum. You could get Jerome Moiso(11th, Boston,2000) or a nice piece like Andris Biedrins although if you look back over the last 7 11th picks not one is seeing serious minutes in the NBA. Lets temper our expectations we could have stolen something fabulous, or we may just getting a little bit excited. Either way it’s fun for now, we get to speculate on next year. One thing we know for sure it’s going to be a lot of fun.

by The Natural ala Mode on Jul 28, 2008 6:58 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

i pretty much agree with you.

If Bayless dominates right away and is good at the things he showed in summer league, then he starts, but the thing is that experience DOES count and blake will likely be the starter until Bayless proves himself. I think half a year, but we’ll see.

Ford: Bill, you're claiming victory already? Have you had a "Mission Accomplished" banner printed yet?

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/draft2008/columns/story?page=DraftDebate-080624

by ratbastird on Jul 28, 2008 3:52 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Terry Porter History Lesson

When the Trailblazers drafted Terry Porter, they already had two point guards- Darnell Valentine and Steve Colter. Terry Porter had never played point guard, ever. By the all-star break, Darnell was traded and Porter was starting.

Much like today’s Blazers, Clyde Drexler had the ball in his hands a lot, so Porter played as much of a shooting role as a pure point guard. And he was CLUTCH! Danny Ainge used to call him (in Spanish), “Big Balls” for all of the huge shots he made in the 4th Quarter.

by ralphzillo on Jul 28, 2008 5:11 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Cohones grande?

by southern oregon on Jul 28, 2008 9:35 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

cojones

I believe.

Ford: Bill, you're claiming victory already? Have you had a "Mission Accomplished" banner printed yet?

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/draft2008/columns/story?page=DraftDebate-080624

by ratbastird on Jul 29, 2008 10:19 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Yo hablo espanol pero

I cant spell that good in english either.

by southern oregon on Jul 29, 2008 9:30 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Just look back one season

Who was our starting point guard on opening night? Jarrett Jack. Who was our starting point guard for 78 games? Steve Blake.

"We, as Blazer fans, are perhaps the luckiest fans in the league."-Idog1976, July 19.

by jorga on Jul 28, 2008 5:54 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

You sound like Nate

Shame on you

by southern oregon on Jul 28, 2008 10:08 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Nicely Done

I agree with the main thrust of the post, although I think it’s difficult to properly rate those three players side by side without seeing how Bayless plays in real NBA games. Having said that, I think you did a very good job of it without that information.

by Wotan on Jul 28, 2008 1:00 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

You forgot one thing

NBA experience: Roy 2, Blake 5, Bayless 0

I think that one factor will outweigh all the rest as far as Nate is concerned.

Asked his specialty in the kitchen, Oden paused and said, "Hamburger Helper and tuna fish."

by MiledAnimal on Jul 28, 2008 1:06 PM PDT reply actions 1 recs

You could take that one step further and say that

that experience constitutes a different social role (as opposed to the basketbal role). Chemistry comes from these social roles, which might be upset if an agent with lesser credibility (socially) were given a position of authority. There’s a pecking order, and it’s not clearly defined by basketball skill and role supply.

I'm a really really ridiculously good looking orange mocha frappaccino drinking manhammer sandwich

by hobobob on Jul 28, 2008 1:18 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I really struggled with the concept of experience

My original position was, if a player filled every role flawlessly, then experience wouldn’t play a factor. That, however, would more likely a scenario where a veteran’s talent + experience does not equal the talent of the unexperienced player (e.g. Pryzbilla v. Oden.) I am still trying to find a way to quantify experience.

by Salem Stephen on Jul 28, 2008 1:29 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Don't beat yourself up

Excellent post. It gives us a lot to chew on.

by parkinglotj on Jul 28, 2008 2:04 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I think experience has two effects

1.) better understanding of plays to make in pressure situation and ability to keep cool.
2.) Trust earned by coaches and team mates.

The trust effects the playing time and it has to be earned. The understanding of plays in pressure situations and keeping cool under pressure helps build that trust. Generally veterans with experience will have that edge because they’ve been there before.

Ford: Bill, you're claiming victory already? Have you had a "Mission Accomplished" banner printed yet?

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/draft2008/columns/story?page=DraftDebate-080624

by ratbastird on Jul 28, 2008 3:57 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I sorta agree

But experience is often viewed in the fourth quarter and the ability to play under pressure. And last year it was Jack who found himself in the role, not because he was more experienced than Blake, but because he filled the role opposite 4th quarter Roy better.

Joel Freeland=Stud

by hightide on Jul 28, 2008 2:41 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

has the experience factor been mitigated by the influx of so many young players?

first off, very polished post.

Hasnt the very definition of veteransmanship been warped? I do believe experience is a powerful factor that cannot be omitted. But as the league devolves into a youth based game, experience seems to take the back seat.

"Meow" --- My cat Bonzi wondering how long we must wait until the season finally starts so we can see just how good the PTB really are.

by bow4meow on Jul 28, 2008 4:08 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Nice Post

Now, consider what Roy said the other day. He likes Bayless because he can see a fit in the backcourt. Bayless can guard the other teams PG, forcing the SG to defend Roy. Bayless (ball-handling) can bring the ball up the court. He can then pass to Roy and slide to the 2 spot and go into motion while Roy executes the play. That sets up the pick and rolls, and drives. It creates mismatches. Few PG’s, after all, have Bayless’s power and size. He’s at 200 – 205 now, and in a few years, will likely play at 210 or so. His 1st step and leaping ability, as well as weight and power will make it very difficult for the smaller PG’s. Indeed, most PG’s.

However, I think that I go with KP and Mac. Start with Blake and give Bayless 40 games and he’ll have muc of it figured out. In the beginning, let him learn. We have the time. And, as he learns, give him increasing minutes. Somwhere in the first year – he’ll probably be the starter. But, I do like this post. And, in the main, I see it pretty much the same way.

by Eben Calder on Jul 28, 2008 1:09 PM PDT reply actions 1 recs

Agreed.

Ford: Bill, you're claiming victory already? Have you had a "Mission Accomplished" banner printed yet?

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/draft2008/columns/story?page=DraftDebate-080624

by ratbastird on Jul 28, 2008 3:58 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Very nice post

I think you did an awesome job describing why Bayless has a chance to be an excellent backcourt fit with Roy. I still am pretty darn sure Blake is our opening day starter at PG. It might not be too long before Bayless is playing crunch time minutes though… unless Rudy beats him to it.

Boomshakalaka

by jksnake99 on Jul 28, 2008 1:10 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Excellent work

You stated your position very very well.
I don’t agree with it, but I can’t say you didn’t do your homework.
Bayless coming off the bench will give him time to get his feet wet, without putting us into a big hole if he doesn’t play well right away.
Let the guy dominate the other team’s bench guards for a while before you give him the keys to the franchise.
This is true of all rookies, but guards especially.

"I like your Christ. I do not like your Christians. They are so unlike your Christ." -Gandhi
"Throw Thag, throw. Throw throw throw throw throw throw"- Far Side

by TheThinWhiteDuke on Jul 28, 2008 1:12 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Recall how Roy started his nba career

He was not projected to be the starter (at draft) but it was clear by the end of trainging camp that Roy would start on opening night. It was originally planned to bring him along gradually as well. My point is that, at htis point in time Bayless should not be the projected starter, but may show to be capable of starting by his play in training camp. I don’ t think this will be the case, as I expect Bayless to fill Jack’s role last season.

Over the course of the season his role may change to starting unit, while Blake shifts as the stablizer on the second unit with Rudy, Outlaw, Frye and Pryz. It all depends on Nate’s confidence in Bayless.

by NWfan on Jul 28, 2008 1:48 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Very good point

We have no idea what happens between now and the start of the season. Maybe Nate runs bayless and roy together in training camp and they become unstoppable.. then do you start Steve? I think not. I do know that I am very glad Blake is on the team to help take care of the ball.

I remember the good old days. The Rasta Monsta days.

by GreatOden'sRaven on Jul 28, 2008 3:21 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Beat me here NWfan, good point.

Roy on Bayless after watching him in Summer League:

“We share a lot of similarities,’’ Roy said. “He’s a little bit smaller, but he’s tough. And he guards … and I think the biggest thing I like about him is he is confident. In this league you gotta be.”.

I think you are on to something. He just might be that good right now. Nate has also thrown about some hints about how JB will play if he desrves it, his rookie status means little. Similar to comments he said about BRoy early on. Already JB has shown that “flash” of brilliance the great ones show early in their careers. Didn’t Roy get similar kudos from the natinal media and nate both after his awesome summer league showing?

Yes Brandon, you and Jarryd do seem to in fact ”...share a lot of similarities.”, eerily so at this point.

Still, opening day starter? That might be a bit of a stretch. A good arguement why he should from Salem Stephan!

The Oden Era, Day 397

by Heymoe on Jul 28, 2008 3:59 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Pretty clear that ...

... Brandon is excited about playing with Bayless. He can do the stuff that Brandon hates about point and allow him to do the stuff he loves about point. That is the starting point of chemisty.

Can’t wait to see Greg, LaMarcus and Brandon out on the floor (with Travis and Jerryd).

by dvcastle on Jul 28, 2008 1:16 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Martell at SF

and Travis off the bench to lead the second unit and what an unit: Rudy, Blake (or Sergio and someday Petteri), Channing and Pryz.

If Martell learns to penetrate to the basket with the athletic ability he has, that starting 5 will be very multi-talented.

Excellent post. I really appreciate the diligent, hard work to put this together. Another amazing post on this great Blazer blog.

Stu Inman: a soft-spoken, witty and brilliant basketball guy -- who had so much to do with Portland's only championship. He believed that you won with not just great players, but with great people. (D Jaynes 2-2-07 Portland Tribune)

by OrygunRod on Jul 28, 2008 7:30 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Shoot, I was going to post this same exact thing

yesterday, but I was too lazy.

Seriously, a great post.

I do feel that the pairing of T-Rex and B-Roy has the chance to be special. I thought this before your post, but you said it more elequently than I ever could.

by parkinglotj on Jul 28, 2008 1:27 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Nice job

The only things I may have to add to this discussion is the fact that, even though I have been high on Bayless for the longest time:

http://www.blazersedge.com/2007/12/19/181434/04

I have to disagree with him starting over Blake for a few reasons:

1. Blake is more experienced and should work better with the first unit, getting them into their groovesoffensively, not needing to take a lot of shots himself to contribute.

2. People are making FAR to big a deal about starting and not starting, IMO. We have to look no further than last year and how the rotation played out to see that starting, while certainly an honor, does not mean that player is the best overall, but rather the best fit at the time. The starting unit had Blake, Pryz and Webster, but during the most important times, the 4th Q of a close game, Jack TO and Joel was in half of the time, but Frye and Jones also were on the court for extended periods of time also.

So even though an important question is who is starting, another equally important question is who is closing.

Also I would add Rudy in there as well, as his talent cannot be overlooked. I have said it again and again that the 96 mins will break down like this:

Roy 34
Bayless 20
Rudy 20
Blake 15 (starts 1st and 3rd Qs for 8min)
Sergio 7

At least for this year, and once we get into the playoffs the rotation will tighten and Roy will play upwards of 38-40mpg and whoever has proved himself to be the best between Rudy and Bayless will get more minutes. I also have stated repeatedly that Blake will retire a Blazer, having the support of the 3 heads of the team, Pritchard, Nate and Brandon. Even if it is in an ancillary role, he is an important part of the team.

by SpyderRyder on Jul 28, 2008 1:36 PM PDT reply actions 1 recs

Sergio will not get seven minutes per game.

BOOK IT.

Jerryd Bayless has two emotions: Kill and Win.

"I think it’s going to be very beautiful game next year."
-Nicolas Batum

by rockingharder on Jul 28, 2008 1:57 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Seems like there should be a sliding scale.

Blake will see more minutes to start out. Bayless will get less, then I think he’ll really come on toward the end of the season. I think that Surgio could get more minutes at the expense of Blake —He might rebound playing with Rudy— Or Surgio won’t improve and will get much less than the 7 minutes a night.

by parkinglotj on Jul 28, 2008 2:10 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Sergio will be traded this year.

"He shoots....................... he scores!!!"

by timbo on Jul 28, 2008 7:49 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Recced your post

Calling it in DECEMBER.

Wow, I thought I was ahead of the curve when I directed my attention to Bayless about 3 or 4 weeks prior to the draft. That was at the first hint that he might drop a few spots down.

I just never thought that Bayless was possible when Portland messed up the chances for a great pick by winning 13 in a row. Darn them. Heh, Heh.

by parkinglotj on Jul 28, 2008 2:22 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Well neither did I

I was all on the “If we can trade up to the 7th or 8th pic AND we get lucky we can get Wesbrook or Gordon” camp in the weeks before the draft. At the time I originally wrote that, we were just starting to heat up and a top 5 pick seemed a reality and anyone was possible.

We really lucked out with Ari playing the hardest schedule and Bayless not getting mucho media attention from the final four. Ari just barely made it in and played horribly in the tourney, but while it was bad for him, it was good for us.

by SpyderRyder on Jul 28, 2008 2:36 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Counting out the Spaniards for a moment

Who’s to say Bayless wouldn’t be better off, for now, as the third in a three-guard rotation? If Bayless is primarily a scorer, he’d benefit from having a true point (Blake) feed him the ball. Then you have these three combinations playing at different times:

Blake (PG) / Roy (SG): Maximizing Roy’s effectiveness.
Blake (PG) / Bayless (SG): Bayless becomes the main scoring option, along with Outlaw.
Roy (PG) / Bayless (SG): Bayless opens up the defense for Roy. If Bayless is effective, maybe this would be the late-4th-quarter lineup.

One question that hasn’t been raised—who’s the best defender against the opposing point guards?

by jtanzer on Jul 28, 2008 2:39 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Sergio

Would do a lot better with GS or PHO and KP would be doing him a favor if he traded him for a pick but I dont see it happening till the trade deadline when it would be too late to sign the Finn. Nate will use JB,Rudy and Travis as the shock troops off the bench and I have high regard for JB’s smarts and willingness to do what Nate asks him to.

by southern oregon on Jul 28, 2008 2:15 PM PDT reply actions 1 recs

are the "laws of diminishing marginal utility"

truly laws? Let me first say that I dont know much about economics, but I do know a little about the difference between laws and theories, and this seems like it falls under theory rather than law due to the fact that economics is seemingly observational rather than experimental, and for a theory to become a law it needs to be repeatedly experimentally verified. If, in fact, you can never truly perform an experiment in economics it seems that you could never move a theory to the realm of law.

Not to say a theory is really an less than a law as it is a very grey area on how many experimental observations are needed for a theory to become a law as both special and general relativity, and quantum mechanics are all still theories even though they are tested and verified everyday.

thanks for reading my pedantic remarks and I will be awaiting tominhawaii’s reply about how I just need to the schoolhouse rocks song about how a theory becomes a law.

As for the basketball discussion I would say that Blake starts as Roy has a tendency to be passive at the beginnings of games so there is less point point redundancy in first quarter. When we start the fourth quarter I definitely expect lots of Bayless/Roy backcourt action.

Life is exhausting when you are this stupid.

by jonestr on Jul 28, 2008 2:39 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

While we are waiting for Tom's, no doubt brilliant, rebuttle

I decided to answer your obviously well thought tretise on the semantical difference between the words: Theory and Law. So here goes:

OH YEAH???!

Homer: "Oh no!! A Bear is eating my father!." (On seeing Selma kissing Grampa)

by 92wastheyear on Jul 28, 2008 3:00 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

You Crazy Guys

I can’t go off topic just days after we were all reminded not to go off topic. Is this a paradox, because I’m still going off topic even though I did not want too?

You want a link? I'll give you a link. www.google.com

by tominhawaii on Jul 28, 2008 3:14 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

when were we told not to go off topic?

I was out of town this weekend and must have missed it.

Speaking of my weekend….(totally predictable and totally not funny)

Life is exhausting when you are this stupid.

by jonestr on Jul 28, 2008 4:49 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Cause I Said So..

"Well, Travis just showed us that we can go to Travis Outlaw." - Nate McMillan

by 12sharks on Jul 28, 2008 5:05 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

http://www.blazersedge.com/2008/7/26/579942/a-reminder

by tominhawaii on Jul 29, 2008 3:50 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Hate to say it

But Sergio fits in the diminishing marginal class because his D is sub-marginal and is a whining bricklayer

by southern oregon on Jul 28, 2008 7:38 PM PDT up reply actions 2 recs

ouch that hurts dude

I can understand calling him submarginal but why’d ya have to throw in the crack about him being a whining bricklayer. Dang dude that’s harsh. You’re gonna hurt someone’s feelings. People are sensitive about stuff like that around here.

Winning is everything.

by MT Suit on Jul 28, 2008 8:30 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Sergio is a good guy

But if he is not even good enough to sit on the bench for El Espana and might get some time with a no D outfit like GS or PHO.

by southern oregon on Jul 28, 2008 10:01 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Why Bayless Could be Roy's Perfect Backcourt Mate

Change the title and I agree with the rest of the analysis 100%

by PoliSam on Jul 28, 2008 2:56 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

"Good enough" point guard (and 2-guard) to complement Roy

I like the structure of the post, but rather than focus on starting, I’m more concerned about who is going to better complement Roy. A big part of that complementary role will be determined by how Roy’s role(s) may change significantly (e.g., in the Quick opus, Roy says he’s working a lot more on his off-ball skills; being aggressive for longer spurts; not wanting to guard point guards; not wanting to bring the ball upcourt; and, in general, wanting to be the playmaker when he’s on the court).

So I think we start with the premise that Roy is going to be THE combo guard, and the question is who best complements him. The problem is that when Roy is in PG mode (offensively, anyway), the best complement is probably different than when he is in SG mode and his mode might change with every trip down court.

Personally I’m interested in how Fernandez fits in as much as how Bayless fits in. (As a total aside, I don’t see Sergio or Koponen [if signed] getting any significant minutes as “pure” PGs.). It seems like Rudy and Brandon should be able to play together productively, but Roy seemed to really like the idea of playing offensive PG but having Bayless playing defensive PG. (I’m assuming that if Rudy were the SG with Roy as PG, Roy would have to guard the opposing PG.)

So, it may be that Bayless is the best complement to Roy, but it seems like we’ll probably start with the stability that “good enough” Blake brings to the point and then we’ll see how Bayless and, I hope, Rudy get factored in as the season progresses.

by vcubed on Jul 28, 2008 3:08 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Excellent post

You verbalized my thoughts as to why Bayless is the perfect fit for us and Roy and made a good case for Bayless starting.

I stand by that it won’t happen to half -way through the season (earliest), but I think it’ll definitely happen and, that as long as we have Roy, Bayless is our starting PG of the future.

Ford: Bill, you're claiming victory already? Have you had a "Mission Accomplished" banner printed yet?

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/draft2008/columns/story?page=DraftDebate-080624

by ratbastird on Jul 28, 2008 4:00 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Holy Posting Batman!

Mr. Bayles will not, in my opinion, start this year. He has to win that role and wrench it from our Vet Steve Blake.

Sophia

Leaders build cultures that create self-esteem, generate and sustain trust, elevate the dignity of work , create community and foster open communication, and finally encourage growth and learning.

-Warren Bennis USC Professor

by BlazerFan1 on Jul 28, 2008 4:16 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

That won't take a whole year...

"He shoots....................... he scores!!!"

by timbo on Jul 28, 2008 7:46 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I with you

He can’t start immediately because he hasn’t practiced with the TEAM. They have not played any games together, including the preseason. Nate values defense and no way in heck anyone can convince me a 19 year old rookie is going to beat out the VETERAN Steve Blake.

Bayless throws a wrench into my Rudy and Roy starting together idea but I still think Rudy is ahead of Bayless right now. Lets just say that Blake gets hurt two weeks into the season, who starts at point guard? My guess is Roy, and Rudy starts as the shooting guard. Then Sergio comes off the bench as point guard and Bayless as a shooting guard.

Right now, Bayless is an undersized shooting guard. I think he’s determined to start, so in a year, he’ll be a good sized point guard.

by tominhawaii on Jul 29, 2008 4:02 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I accept the Brandonist Pritchardism that it doesn't matter what you call a playmaking guard...

...................................... Bayless defends the speedster PGs and carries the ball to the halfcourt line, from which Roy runs the offense.

It’s a little bit convoluted but this is not and never will be a fast-breaking team… It would be nice to see them COMPETENTLY run the break opportunities that do present themselves, which was one of the worst parts of The Blazer Experience last year…

"He shoots....................... he scores!!!"

by timbo on Jul 29, 2008 9:11 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I think Bayless is a starter of the future

I just have serious doubts about starting a rookie point guard, who seems to be more of a shooting guard, when we’ll probably be starting a rookie center. Rudy should be more polished and get more minutes in the start of the season as well.

I see the guards playing time, starting the season, in this order: Roy, Blake, Rodriguez, Fernandez, Bayless. I think at some point Rodriguez gets moves and then we’ll have a three guard rotation of Roy, Bayless, and Fernandez with Blake getting the scraps. I am sold on the upside of Bayless just not on his experience. A 19 year old with only a year of college playing out of position is not going to force Nate to play him for at least four months.

by tominhawaii on Jul 29, 2008 9:31 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Is there another Rodriguez I don't know about?

Or do you mean Sergio will make a cameo in the rotation ahead of Rudy and Bayless? Interesting. I think Bayless will own Sergio (and, to a lesser extent, Blake) in practice and Nate will love his ability to draw fouls and get the team into the bonus. But I’ll grant you that Nate will open camp with Sergio ahead on the depth chart. So you may be right, to an extent – but there’s no way Bayless stays behind him for four months. Too much talent, game is too refined, too unlike most rookies. The kid is not all potential – he’s got a real NBA game. (Whether he’s got a real NBA point guard game, granted, remains to be seen. That probably needs to develop.)

Bayless isn't the second coming of Jordan.
Jordan was the first coming of Bayless.

by KP Corleone on Jul 29, 2008 10:25 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

How long do you think it will take him to really crack the rotation?

I watched more than one summer league game and I don’t think Bayless ever passed the ball. I don’t think he can learn to be a point guard in four months. He’s quicker than Blake but Blake is more crafty and can get into position. His defense will get him playing time but I don’t think he’ll get that much until he learns to pass the ball.

by tominhawaii on Jul 29, 2008 10:49 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

It was Summer League

Concluding that the way Jerryd played in Summer League is the extent of his game is like listening to a pianist playing Lizst and concluding that he can’t play Mozart. Maybe Bayless really is just a scorer, but we should probably wait until he’s played at least a few minutes with his new team before passing judgment.

Asked his specialty in the kitchen, Oden paused and said, "Hamburger Helper and tuna fish."

by MiledAnimal on Jul 29, 2008 11:37 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I'm only doing what everyone else is doing.

by tominhawaii on Jul 29, 2008 3:47 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Since when do YOU follow the crowd?

Asked his specialty in the kitchen, Oden paused and said, "Hamburger Helper and tuna fish."

by MiledAnimal on Jul 29, 2008 4:27 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Granted, his summer league grade for passing would've been "incomplete"

But I thought he showed signs of being a good distributor in the first couple games, before he realized that virtually no one on his team was capable of even inadvertently making a shot. He doesn’t like to lose, so he opted to stop creating de facto turnovers by allowing other guys to build a brick house. He probably could’ve picked up 4-5 assists per game, though, with better shooters. He averaged 4 at Az despite spending time at shooting guard.

He at least made noise about understanding that his role, when in the game with Roy, LMA, Oden, et al, will be to facilitate, so we’ll see if he has the ability to do so. At worst, though, I think he sticks with the second unit early in the season as a scoring threat.

Long way of saying I think he’ll be in the rotation in some capacity by opening night (though not at the start of camp).

Bayless isn't the second coming of Jordan.
Jordan was the first coming of Bayless.

by KP Corleone on Jul 29, 2008 11:44 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

He's still doing it

“I could tell [Bayless] wanted to put his head down and go to the basket, but that’s not what they wanted him to do” Buchanan said. “They wanted the Senior Team to work on defending some sets so he couldn’t really do that. But I thought Jerryd had a great showing.”

by tominhawaii on Jul 29, 2008 3:59 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

We do not need a PG who can do that

as per Brandon,

“That’s why I tell people who say he is not a point: ‘If he was a point, it would take away from what I do, so it’s almost fine that he’s not a point.’‘

by SpyderRyder on Jul 29, 2008 7:20 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

"Almost fine" means that it is not fine.

I wonder what his life partner would think if he was “almost faithful.”

by tominhawaii on Jul 30, 2008 3:37 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

LOL

and 1

"Doing research= good
Making up things=bad."

---jksnake99

by ptwnblzr on Aug 1, 2008 8:57 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

"Mr. Bayles" sheesh im on a roll today, Bayless

Leaders build cultures that create self-esteem, generate and sustain trust, elevate the dignity of work , create community and foster open communication, and finally encourage growth and learning.

-Warren Bennis USC Professor

by BlazerFan1 on Jul 28, 2008 4:17 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Great Approach to the Guard Situation

Disclaimer: This is my first real comment here on BE! I apologize for its length, but after a year of reading I need to join the discussion. Stephen, thanks for your quality post that has catalyzed my participation. I’m open to criticism on my basketball thoughts, but I’m not an expert by any means, so please keep that in mind if I’ve diddled in the water dish.

Much of the discussion regarding Bayless’ role with the Blazers this year revolves around the fact that he is not a pass-first, "coach on the floor" point guard. He doesn’t fill the specific needs of the 1 as well as Blake – a more experienced player who knows his role as facilitator. It’s good to point out (and many do) that the requisite qualities for a “point guard” are of course relevant when integrating a new player into an already blossoming system. More simply, we need to know if Jerryd is a 1 or a 2 before he can be truly put to work.

I tend to be of a more freewheeling mindset. With a player of Bayless’ caliber, I’m willing to let the more rigid definition of the point guard occupy less of my already congested brainwidth in order to let Jerryd do his thing. Besides, I’m sure Roy can assume some of those traditional pg capacities: distributing, communicating, and leading the team in general.

That’s also something I see brought up often – visions of a seamless Roy/Bayless backcourt. Inherent to such postulation, though, is the need to elucidate how Roy’s and Bayless’ abilities will complement each other, without deferring to my gut.

That’s why I really like your post. You recognize that the traits laid out by Rose, whether for a point guard or for a center, are all substantial ingredients for a successful basketball team. It’s a great idea to regard the needs of the 1 and 2 positions not as mutually exclusive; they can be divided up in different manners by guys with unique skill sets. What I REALLY like is that you combined the textbook definitions of point and shooting guard and rendered them into something more abstract, a mold to be filled by malleable and developing young players. It places more emphasis on the team as a unit while still playing to our guys’ greatest strengths.

Your comparison was a better way for me to look at our guard situation without reverting back to a more instinctual approach – I knew I liked Bayless in the starting role, but now I might be able to explain why.

by sheriff outlaw on Jul 28, 2008 4:17 PM PDT reply actions 1 recs

Nice first post

keep it up

Homer: "Oh no!! A Bear is eating my father!." (On seeing Selma kissing Grampa)

by 92wastheyear on Jul 28, 2008 4:21 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Wow! 20 recs in four hours!

Thanks—this is a very informative analysis and it’s sparked a good discussion. I don’t have much of anything to add, other than I’m looking forward to future posts from Mr. Salem Stephen.

by Corvid on Jul 28, 2008 4:27 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

No comment about Laser Eyes?

The scowl got a mention, OBV.

Nive post. I think you overrate JBay in his first year, underrate Blake slightly, and slightly overrate Brandon (may I not get banned for saying so).

'77

by LaoTzu on Jul 28, 2008 4:30 PM PDT reply actions 1 recs

The missing factor: Defense

The post concentrates on a guard’s duties on offense, and demonstrates nicely that Bayless and Roy are complementary.

However, there is that other side of the ball… and this is where Bayless will be made or broken.

Brandon Roy is a good, but not great, defender against 2 guards. He’s a smart player who plays good honest D, but he’s no lockdown defender. He can get overpowered by larger guards-guys like T-Mac, Artest, and LeBron (OK, King James is really a 3) have given him mucho problems-but he does a credible job against many wing players. OTOH, he’s poor at guarding faster guards, particularly point guards—he’s not fast enough to stay in front of the quick guys in the league.

Much of the same can be written about Steve Blake, though Blake is a less accomplished defender than Brandon is. Blake will make his guy work, but a topnotch offensive player is going to get his points against Blake. Expect Brandon to improve more than Blake as he gains experience; Brandon is a far more studly stud than Blake will ever be.

Which brings us to Bayless. He has, in college, an excellent reputation as a defender. How that will translate into the NBA remains to be seen; JJ1 was regarded as the best defensive PG of the 2005 draft class, but couldn’t stay in front of NBA-caliber point guards. Bayless, on the other hand, is much quicker. Due in some part to his short wingspan, he had trouble bothering the shot of bigger guards (he spent much time playing 2) in summer league.

My thought is-who gets the eventual starting nod is who is a better defender. If Bayless-a “quickness” defender in college (whereas JJ1 was more of a physical defender), can become a good defender against quick guards, expect him to start one day. If, OTOH, he becomes another Jarrett Jack-a guy who gets scored on at will-expect him to stay on the bench.

by EngineerScotty on Jul 28, 2008 4:35 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Nice points, Mr. Scotty

Bayless’ defense was the first thing to grab me when he began to slide prior to the draft.

I remember that there were debates by the MSM about if Westbrook or Bayless would be the better defender. Sorry, no link. I don’t remember who said it.

But, there was and is no mistake about it. We needed a better defender to go against the best PG’s.

by parkinglotj on Jul 28, 2008 5:30 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

woo doggy what a great post

I recced it too. But I still think that Blake will start the year at PG. That’s just how Nate rolls; he’ll go with the steady hand, the veteran, to get the team off to a good start. Bayless may well end up playing more minutes than Blake, and the minutes he plays might be more crunchy (crunch time minutes), but still Bayless will be coming off the bench. Blake is the starter because he earned it last year and Nate respects him.

Winning is everything.

by MT Suit on Jul 28, 2008 4:41 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

KP knows what he is doing

And so does Nate[who is licking his chops thinking about matchups],outstanding post.

by southern oregon on Jul 28, 2008 4:53 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

I think your argument

is valid for the long run but not for the “who should start by november?” question.
I have no doubt that Bayless will be the better player and a better fit in the long run, but we don’t know if that’s true by the beggining of the season. This season every game will be important for us, because it can decide if we’re going to the playoffs or not, so I’d prefer to start Blake ( less risk) and let Bayless fight to earn the spot.

Another point is that even more important than the starting line up is the end game line up, in which I think Rudy has a pretty good chance of being a regular.

by Falcao on Jul 28, 2008 5:19 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Boohyah

Nice Post. I think Blake will start at the start of the season, but J-Bay will get his minutes & is our explosive backcourt guard of the future. Boomshakalaka.

K*be is a rapist.

by Pritchslap on Jul 28, 2008 5:24 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

More observations on Jerryd and LMA from the Olympics scrimmages

Trail Blazers Center Court, with some comments from KP and scout Chad Buchanan. The biggest take-away: No fear of the big names.

Odenied: Coach, I promise I wasn't running hard ...

by Norsktroll on Jul 28, 2008 7:01 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Negative Four?!? Wow, that's harsh...

Un selfish-thinks pass first, shot second. Roy:8 Bl:9 Ba:-4

"He shoots....................... he scores!!!"

by timbo on Jul 28, 2008 7:39 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

That was more of a joke

Since I obviously knew that that particular role would not be delegated to Bayless… I thought I would have some fun with it. He will defer more especially when surrounded by better talent.

by Salem Stephen on Jul 28, 2008 11:24 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I think Brandon's recent quote is probably pivotal...

................................ what Bayless does well complements what Roy does well; and Bayless has IT.

Lots and lots and lots of IT.

Starter at the beginning of the year?

Not a chance.

By the All Star break?

Book it.

"He shoots....................... he scores!!!"

by timbo on Jul 28, 2008 7:45 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

With Rudy and Travis

Coming off the bench? Hello nightmare.

by southern oregon on Jul 28, 2008 8:12 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

+1

Bayless’s skills, athleticism, and drive put most vets in the league to shame. His age does not reflect his gravitas. Blake is a leader on this team and will continue to be – he starts probably the first half, maybe the whole season – but either way, Bayless is going to be pivotal in any kind of playoff run (if that happens). Both his skills and his attitude.

Blake shouldn’t (and won’t) be overlooked, though. Incidentally, even though his PER wasn’t anything special last year, the Blazers were about 6 points per 100 possessions better when he was in the game. Some of that has to do with Jack’s ineffectiveness as a de facto two, but still, Blake’s positive contribution in keeping the ball moving and playing unselfishly seemed to have a pretty strong statistical impact.

Bayless isn't the second coming of Jordan.
Jordan was the first coming of Bayless.

by KP Corleone on Jul 29, 2008 6:49 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Sure why not?

Rudy and Travis off the bench. They will cause conniption fits in our opponents. I’m not sure what a conniption fit is (or even whether I have spelled it correctly) but I read the term in a book once and I wanted to use it.

Winning is everything.

by MT Suit on Jul 28, 2008 8:27 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Only 1 "n"

I think

Homer: "Oh no!! A Bear is eating my father!." (On seeing Selma kissing Grampa)

by 92wastheyear on Jul 28, 2008 10:22 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

You forgot to mention one thing, the thing that is the primary reason I think Roy/Bayless will be our best combo

Who’s going to guard the ultra quick PGs that killed us over and over last year:

Roy/Blake —err, Blake I guess
Roy/Bayless -- Speedy Bayless… who is unproven as an NBA defender, but I’m optimistic

Then again, best combo doesn’t necessarily mean starting combo.

by Gargen on Jul 28, 2008 8:31 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Blake vs Bayless '08 - '09 year

Blake has been and continues to be a capable NBA point guard who would start for many NBA teams and probably be in the rotation for most teams. He will serve a very important role in the training and NBA education of Jerryd Bayless. Given he is a known commodity to Nate, I believe he will start for most of the year as JB learns in practice were Nate will want to see he can play before he gets a chance to learn on the job.

I am very high on JB and do believe he will be the PG of the Blazers’ future. Summer League does have several players with 1 or 2 years of NBA experience so I think it has a a little more value as a measurement of his ability than many here have allowed. But he also did not have a complete team around him for him to distribute passes for assists. He did average 4 assists last year at Arizona. So, the jury is still out on his pure PG skill level. But he definitely gave proof of his SG skills. So in that sense he can be seen as a combo guard but do not dismiss his PG ability even before his actual NBA career starts.

by OrygunRod on Jul 28, 2008 9:13 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Excellent post

I think Bayless will get more minutes than Blake against speedy guys like Tony Parker and Steve Nash. Blake will probably get the nod against the bigger dudes like Jason Kidd. Basketball is all about matchups and having both Blake and Bayless gives the Blazers flexibility depending on the opponent.

by torsoheap on Jul 28, 2008 10:09 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Blake isn't bigger

Blake is 6-3 and weighs 172. Bayless is 6-3 and weighs 200. I think Bayless will be able to hold his own against the Deron WIlliams’ of the league much better than Blake.

by danielfarrell on Jul 29, 2008 4:51 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

We're building

The key word is “complementary” – as in skills. Just as we evaluate Bayless, we will also, in the future, be looking at Fernandez – a more classically sized 2 guard who appears to also have some of the attributes necessary to complement Roy. And, he’s got the length to handle the bigger PG’s – if that’s a concern. As far as defensing “guards” like Kobe, we might also take notes from Paul Pierce of the Celtics, who shifted over given Kobe is in fact an SF who generally plays as a combo-guard in the LA system. And defensed him well. Good teams often have one or more weapons that other teams cannot easily defense. As will we. Can, for example, Derek Fisher guard Bayless – and who on LA can effectively guard Roy? The game thrives on mismatches. Outlaw at SF almost always can create mismatches given his size. Oden and Aldridge will also create mismatches inside. In a practical sense, it appears the Blazers, with Roy, Oden and Aldridge will be as well positioned as anyone. Add in the leavening of the option of using a 6”3” 205 lb quick leaper like Bayless, or a 6’6 player with that outside touch like Fernandez appears to have, and then the option of going 6’7 or 6’9 at SF, and we seem to be adding increasing options to bedevil the other teams. And then, of course, never forget the bench. Bench’s are worth 25% or more points. Further, mismatches off the bench force starters play longer, wearing them out for our own starters. I believe that with Frye/Pryz/Diogu and Roy/Bayless/Blake/Fernandez, we’ll begin to see some of this evolve next year too. How many benches can play with ours?

That bench will win a lot of games. Pryz would start for a lot of teams. And, of the 4 guards, two would also likely see starting minutes for a lot of teams. In a real sense, we may just hammer the opposition in waves.

by Eben Calder on Jul 29, 2008 7:15 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

It's not about the best starting unit...

It’s about what’s best for the team. I’ll explain after a few notes:

First off, this is my first comment…so hurray!!! Time to jump in with both feet.

Second, I like the premise of your analysis, but I think the actual number crunching (ratings) is inaccurate due to projected performance (like Tfan said). Not only of Bayless, but based upon Roy’s interview it sounds like his game has evolved more. Although he is such a good creator, it is feasible that he becomes significantly better off-ball shooting guard and thus we need a more traditional pg. Personally I don’t think this will happen, but it’s possible.

Third, I think Bayless could be a perfect complement to Roy if he develops properly. I love to envision dual combo guards in the backcourt. Two guards who can create and score with the guard friendly NBA rules? Ouch. But as for now? Let him ease into it a bit.

Now, as for my argument on what is best for the team. I think we can all agree that the team goal next year is more than just player development, but team progress. It’s time for them to really push for the playoffs, and not by mortgaging their future in any way, but creating the situation for them to succeed. With that being the case:

1. Blake should start because the starters will have to integrate Oden. If 1-4 is more fluid because of their experiences together, the better Oden will perform and the faster we can rely on him. IMO, developing Oden >>>>>>>> Bayless… at least for now.

2. The second unit will have Pryz at the 5, so it’s best to put more scoring (Bayless) than creating (Blake) with that group. Travis creates on his own. Rudy should have an all-around game. Frye hits his little jumper to keep the PF honest.

Putting Blake in the reserves means we can’t score at the rim consistently with the 1, 4 (Frye got better at the end of last year, but mostly a shooter), and the 5 (why does Pryz have his dunks blocked?). So much for points in the paint. I see lots of deep and/or contested jumpers leading to long rebounds which lead to transition buckets against a group of unproven or mediocre defenders (sans Pryz, who wouldn’t help in that scenario anyways because he’s on the other end of the court).

Doesn’t seem like a good plan. I think Bayless’ ability to finish at the rim will compensate for that issue.

3. This one is minor, but Bayless will also need to figure out the nuances of the game and we know Nate doesn’t have much patience for that. Wouldn’t be the best thing for us to be pulling our pg 5 mins into the game because he completely blew an assignment (which he will do, he’s a rookie).

Oden and LaMarcus and Roy, oh my!

by Quik_Baller on Jul 29, 2008 11:32 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

I whole heartedly agree that the number crunching is off (that is why I had originally hoped that everyone would use their own numbers and arrive at the same conclusion.)

To address the concept of Bayless “easing into his role,” I think that his role as a starter would be much easier for him to perform than leading the second unit. In a back court with Brandon Roy, Bayless would be required to bring the ball up the court and score… two things that he is very comfortable doing.

His role on the second unit would require him to distribute the ball and run the offense. Even though Outlaw can create for himself and Frye shoots only shoots uncontested jumpers, his role would still be one that goes against him preferred style of play.

I agree that the integration of Greg Oden trumps the development of Bayless; however, while Greg Oden will eventually be an offensive force, his presence will require the team to adjust on the defensive end. I don’t believe that Bayless and Oden’s presence are mutually exclusive. In fact, I believe the transition is much easier in training camp than midway through the season.

Your second point about Steve Blake in the second unit rests on an assumption that I am going to address in my next fan post… that the team next year will have a black and white unit. Without going into too much detail, playing basketball with “units” as opposed to “subs” is atypical. The factors that lead to the Blazers playing two separate units included: depth of talent; diversity in playing styles between subs and starters; and team chemistry. While some of those elements still exist, others have changed which brings about the possibility that the Blazers will revert back to the standard substitutions rather than form two distinct units.

by Salem Stephen on Jul 29, 2008 12:49 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

That is well stated

It follows my train of thought on this as well. Essentially , Rex starting, not because he is better than Blake, but because he works better with Roy and plays to his (Bayless’s) strengths. This leaves Blake to run the second unit offense lets Rudy do his thing and also ease into his role on the team (as a slashing scorer/3 pt shooter) too.

Homer: "Oh no!! A Bear is eating my father!." (On seeing Selma kissing Grampa)

by 92wastheyear on Jul 29, 2008 6:01 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Also I think this makes sense defensively too

Roy needs to be the playmaker on O….but needs someone to take the PG on D and I like Rex in that role better than Blake

Homer: "Oh no!! A Bear is eating my father!." (On seeing Selma kissing Grampa)

by 92wastheyear on Jul 29, 2008 6:09 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I like points 1 & 2

I haven’t looked at how the first and second units will work together. Everyone has discussed at great length the Outlaw v. Webster quandry. You bring up a great point in both instances. I’ve really only gotten to how Rudy and Surgio would work together.

by parkinglotj on Jul 29, 2008 12:05 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Does Bayless need to start?

Assuming he has a smooth transition to the NBA game, and it becomes apparent that he has the talent to start, will Jerryd be patient and wait for his number to be called? Or will we see the Bayless face get tighter and tighter? I’m hoping for the former, but, some guys need to start and some don’t. He’s still a bit of a mystery as far as his mental make-up.

by hellsfrozenover on Jul 29, 2008 1:12 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Nah

I think he’s smart enough to know why he is not playing. Nate just has to say, “Blake is doing this and you are not. That is why he is in the game.” After, hmm, I don’t know, four months, he’ll have most of it down and he will be starting.

If Bayless starts at the begining of the season, this is what will happen: Oden will rebound and pass it to Bayless. Bayless will know he has to move the ball to the other end of the court then get it to Roy, so he’ll do that. Roy will check his options and pass it to Bayless so he can pass it to another player and Bayless will charge the basket like Ram-Man at gates of Snake Mountain. He’ll the be the anti-Sergio. Defenses know that Sergio is going to pass and Bayless is going to go to the rim. I’m not saying the guy is not a starter. I’m just saying he’s a rookie shooting guard who has to learn to be a semi-point guard.

by tominhawaii on Jul 29, 2008 4:10 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

"I think he's smart enough to know why he is not playing."

This is the thing that bothered me about Jarrett Jack. If he had a bad game or series, he would sulk and Nate would keep throwing him back in there. Not to equate emotion with a lack of smarts, but Jack would let his emotions get the best of him.

I don’t see Bayless sulking if he has a bad game or three bad plays in a row. I see him keeping his chin up, doing his best to become a better player and prove himself. In fact, I think this is one of the reasons Nate will fall in love with J-Bay: He’s a mentally tough Jarrett Jack.

Jerryd Bayless has two emotions: Kill and Win.

"I think it’s going to be very beautiful game next year."
-Nicolas Batum

by rockingharder on Jul 29, 2008 4:51 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

A mentally tough Jarrett Jack

who’s twice as quick, jumps twice is high, shoots better from the field, has a better midrange game, and finishes stronger.

Bayless isn't the second coming of Jordan.
Jordan was the first coming of Bayless.

by KP Corleone on Jul 29, 2008 5:34 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Bayless also uses better his compass and setsquares.

Mentally, I mean.

The Midnight Rambler

by amlmart1 on Jul 30, 2008 5:34 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

and laser range finder

Homer: "Oh no!! A Bear is eating my father!." (On seeing Selma kissing Grampa)

by 92wastheyear on Jul 30, 2008 9:46 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Speculation

I know that everyone has an opinion of who should start, how many minutes everyone should have, and how the rotation should be.
I think we have not seen Rudy play, we do not know how Bayless’ game will transform to the NBA game, we have not seen Oden play in an NBA game, we have not seen if Lucas can teach Oden how to avoid fouls and still play rock solid defense and we have not seen how they play together. I think we have a lot of talent but it will be up to the coach how this talent can be put together to have a winning program. We can speculate all we want but the true test will be when they start to play and we can see them perform. Not to be a wet blanket but there is a lot we do not know. Let’s win the first championship before we start talking dynasty.

by dkhaines on Jul 29, 2008 1:58 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Bayless Vs Blake

I think if Nate says its an open competition for the starting PG position, that Bayless’ attitude and talent will trump Blake’s right from the get go. The guy has this other-worldly confidence, tenacity and toughness. He knows he’s better than Blake, and he’ll spend the entire training camp proving to everyone that he deserves to be there. I think a lot of people here overestimate Blake. His talent level is comparable to Jack’s, and he was dealt for next to nothing. He may be a better fit with his style, but he’s just not in Bayless’ class as a basketball player. The sooner this realization is made, the faster we can start our transition to becoming, the dynasty we’ll eventually (with much luck and work) be.

by as11osu on Jul 29, 2008 2:24 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Nate won't say that

He’ll say it’s Blake’s job and it is up to Bayless to win it away from Blake. He’ll say that because it is the truth.

by tominhawaii on Jul 29, 2008 4:13 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Starter or bench?

the biggest question I have is which will allow Bayless more freedom to attack the hoop. If he is on the floor with B Roy, LA, and GO, how many shots are left. Last year, Roy took about 16 shots per game. While LA took about 15. From what I have read, it seems that if Roy and LA are going to move up to an elite level, both will need more shots. Not to mention Joel only avg 3 shots per game, and I assume we want Oden to get a few more touches. Webster only consumes 9 a game, but people seem to want more out of him as well. That leaves the PG position. Last year Blake avg 8 shots a game, and over 40% from 3 pt land. These numbers are not staggering by any rate, but if Bayless starts and puts it up 12-15 times, who’s shots do we take from? Even if our D improves, and we get 10% more shots this year, its only 8 shots per game added, (and most of those are transition). Outlaw and CF are proven contributers off the bench. I also read a lot of fans want Rudy to contribute off the bench, (which again he will need more shots). I guess my point is I would love to see Bayless start, but if he only gets 5-6 shots starting, is that really the best situation for him. Where as we put him with the second unit, and let him create, could that fit his style better.

by bad karma on Jul 29, 2008 2:44 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Can I recc this Fanpost again?

I’ve been here for quite a while and am having a hard time thinking of a more interesting and thought provoking Fanpost. Maybe the postings about the Cap Holds? Seems like there should be a place where truly special Fanposts could be stored.

A hall of fame for Fanposts?

by parkinglotj on Jul 29, 2008 8:44 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Feeding the Post

Our team will change next year. I like the idea of BRoy sommitting to more agression, and having the ball in his hands, more. But with Oden and LMA working down low, we will see some old school power offense that the Blazers have not had for a long time. That factor will need to be weighed in deciding who gets PT. I think that is where Nate is going with his interest in starting Blake. Let’s feed the post and see if the other team’s bigs can hang.

'77

by LaoTzu on Jul 29, 2008 3:50 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs