Myths, Combinations and Conflicts for our Backcourt

by WarEaglePDX on Jul 3, 2008 5:20 PM PDT

Myths

The most prevalent Myth amongst Blazers Edge (Myth #1) : "Brandon Roy is our starting PG of the future"

Realty: Brandon Roy can fill in at PG in choice situations, but the Blazers and Roy's games will suffer if he plays a majority of his minutes at PG. Roy does have the ability to run a half court offense extremely well. Most likely just as well as quality point guards in the league. However, the other aspects of his game would suffer. He would only be decent at running the fast break and MOST IMPORTANTLY (which I see as the achilles heel of the BRoy at PG argument) is that he will spend a tremendous amount of energy and focus defending the opposing team's pointguard. Most PGs in the league are faster than Roy, and he would have to waste a lot of energy just to be a barely adequate defender on an opposing quick PG. Phil Jackson and the Jordanless Bulls of the mid-90s tried Pippen at PG midseason, and the experiment was quickly scrapped. The reason: Pippen was quickly gassed chasing around PG's on the defensive end. Ultimately, Roy being our starting PG would work offensively but additionally would mildy hurt our fast break game and make us moderately weaker defensively.

Let me be very clear here, I am not arguing that Roy shouldn't play any PG minutes, but my argument is he shouldn't be our starting PG or spend a great deal of minutes in the rotation as PG. There will be many opportunities for him to play PG when the opposing PG isn't of the quicker variety and when our game plan is to play at a slower pace.

Minor Myth #2: Rudy can play PG.

Reality: He has shown no indication to be a PG. His skillset is purely as a off-guard/wing. Has he ever played PG in Spain? See Myth #1 for reasons why Rudy at PG would hurt us defensively. He doesn't have the playmaking ability of Roy. I don't want to spend too much time dispelling this myth because it holds much less water (and is less trumpeted) than the Roy to starting PG argument.

Conflicts and Challenges

I see some of our backcourt combinations having some possible conflicts this upcoming season and in the future.

The combinations I see working well together are:

Blake + Roy (most likely our starting backcourt on opening night, 2 playmakers, outside shooting in Blake and somewhat Roy, slashing ability in Roy, solid defensively, just about as veteran a combo as you can find for us on the roster)

Blake + Rudy (playmaker in Blake, outside shooting in both, slasher in Rudy, a little shakey defensively, best suited against a 2nd unit)

Bayless + Roy (looks to be our starting backcourt of the future. Playmaker in Roy, someone to run the fastbreak in JB, bring the ball up in JB, defend the opposing PG in JB, shooter/slasher in both JB and Roy, solid defensively.) This is the closest I think we will see Roy as a PG for long stretches. He will take over a lion's share of the halfcourt offense PG duties while Bayless is in the game. This (on paper) looks like it could work very very well.

and to a lesser extent Sergio + Rudy/Roy (If Sergio makes some improvements in his shot and defense he can still get playing time...big IF. Sergio playing hinges on how effectively Bayless can play PG not next to Roy)

The conflicting combos that might have serious flaws:

Roy + Rudy (at the 1/2, not the 2/3). This looks like it could be a very potent combination on the offensive end. The major question is who defends the other teams PG? Once again, this combo can work with a lesser opposing PG (slow, poor offensively, bad first step) but I'm thinking you are not going to see this guard combination for long stretches of the game. With this combination you are playing someone to their weakness (someone is playing defense against a PG) rather than to their strengths. Ultimately a combination like this could lead to more of the much feared GOFT (Greg Oden Foul Trouble) we are expecting this season.

Bayless + Rudy. Who runs the halfcourt offense? Bayless hopefully suprises and can do an adequate job of running an offense his rookie season, but thats also very questionable. Both are rookies. This combination will really show us how much improvement JB needs for his PG/playmaking skills. If Bayless is poor in some PG areas, expect Sergio to take a chunk of his minutes.

So there you have it, a rather long post even though I tried to simplify it and not throw in any stats or combine measurements. I'm not arguing these are conflicts, challenges and conclusions that are set in stone, but things to look for in the coming season. I do beleive you will see Nate use Roy at PG, and some of the guard combos on the court Ive argued have flaws this upcoming season. However, the question is, how effective will the team be with these combos?

15 recs | Comment 84 comments

Read Related

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

I like this post a lot

It’s well-thought-out, and you argue with some of the prevailing conventional wisdom without being disparaging of it (or others) in the least. A credit to the site.

I’m pretty sure I share your leanings about Roy at point. I can almost guarantee it’s going to be tried at some point, either this season or in the future. I suspect he’ll be decent there but that he won’t be comfortable filling that role full time, or even from an extended period of time.

I also think Bayless and Roy is the best chance at a long-term combo if you only count players on our team already. They seem to mesh, at least at first glance. Of course we haven’t seen them on the court. I wonder, too, if that would be too much offense in the backcourt when you consider the need to feed Lamarcus and Oden. Roy would step back a little but you don’t really want him to. Bayless will probably want to fire. Lamarcus needs shots. You won’t want to ignore Oden. That may recommend Bayless more as a sub. But we’ll see.

—Dave

by Dave on Jul 3, 2008 5:36 PM PDT 0 recs

Something I never thought about

Very interesting…...if we do kind of the hybrid starting guard combo with Bayless and Roy in the backcourt, we are ultimately making Roy more of the distributor and Bayless more of the scorer, which might be counterproductive. Specifically can Bayless be a better/more efficient scorer than Roy in the half court? If so….fantastic, if not, I suspect that a true pass first PG logging a majority of the minutes at the 1 will be what we go out and get (one with a tad bit more scoring punch and a lot more athleticism than Blake)

Gimmicks don't make dynasties

by WarEaglePDX on Jul 3, 2008 7:55 PM PDT up 0 recs

Yet that would defeat the purpose

Of having Blake. Your reasoning for pulling Bayless in favor of Blake is the need to distribute and to curtail shots for the PG. The last sentence says (one with a bit more scoring punch) which is exactly what we don’t need. I think Blake is a great fit for us. If you notice teams with more than one scorer (like Denver) are dying to get him back. I am worried about the shots to go around with Jerryd, as you are, but I think in the end the talent will win out.

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

by GreatOden'sRaven on Jul 7, 2008 11:47 AM PDT up 0 recs

More specifically

If Bayless is more of a 20 ppg scorer that only will average 3 apg, that might not be the best fit. We would probably looks for someone with Blakes a/to ratio (5.1/1.4) but scores a little more like 12 ppg than 8.5 ppg. The hole in Blakes game on offense is he lacks in slashing ability (or finishing ability). This was problematic last year because JaJones, Web and Trout all were weak as slashers as well, leaving only Roy and Jack.

Gimmicks don't make dynasties

by WarEaglePDX on Jul 7, 2008 3:28 PM PDT up 0 recs

I totally agree

I also would not be surprised to see 3 of the four on the floor at the same time. There were several situations that Roy defended the SF taking the challenge against Anthony, LeBron and even Koby. I could easily see Roy at the SF (Point Forward) with both Rudy and JB on the floor. That group in a small ball offense with Outlaw at the 4 and LMA playing the 5. I can easily see them being the best offensive set for the Blazers. They would be adequate defensively depending who they are matched up against.

by inallthetime on Jul 3, 2008 5:49 PM PDT 0 recs

Our offense is not dependent on PG play

Let me rephrase that, our offense does not rely on a single playmaking individual to create opportunity for others. New Orleans runs an offense dependent on PG playmaking . The Blazer offense is isolation, post oriented, pick and rolls, staggered screens, and, with the addition of Oden, high-low post. I don’t think we will have problems with most of the guard combinations.

First, Roy is excellent off the pick and roll. If Bayless or Rudy can play off the pick and roll, then I do not see any problems with our offense since each is competent as a shooter, passer, or finisher. Sergio is a great passer, but due to his shooting deficiencies, he cannot run a half-court offense. In addition, our post offense will also alleviate the playmaking responsibilities of the PG. I anticipate Bayless and Rudy will be able to run the pick and roll or drop a pass into the post.

Second, Bayless and Rudy are excellent transition guards. They are athletic, capable of pushing up the ball and making plays. Not every possession will be a half-court set next year. Joel will shore up the rebounding on the second unit and allow the Blazers to run.

Third, defensively, Bayless and Rudy will be weak. Fortunately, they will have either Oden or Przybilla to cover for them. Since they will most likely come off the bench, they will be playing against 2nd stringers.

I think we will be fine with any combination of guards. Like Roy saids, if he plays PG, the other team has to guard him too.

BINGO, BANGO, BONGO

by blzrfan on Jul 3, 2008 6:05 PM PDT 2 recs

I agree 100%

And to add to blzrfan’s defensive points we probably play the most zone in the league already, and last season it was shown to be very effective for stretches (just ask Utah ;)). Having our zone schemes in the back-pocket really takes a lot of pressure off chasing quick PGs around, and makes added length advantageous on the perimeter for challenging shots.

Can we go big in the backcourt all game with a zone? No, but it is an option, and Nate has a LOT of 4th quarter G minutes opposite Roy to fill now that Jack is gone.

by Devenex on Jul 3, 2008 7:11 PM PDT up 0 recs

Reversal of Causation

I think how our offense was run and our defensive zone schemes were stopgaps. I think a big reason we didn’t run an offense that took advantage of a playmaking PG is because we didn’t have one. Blake is close, but he just has trouble finishing at the rim (athleticism/explosiveness) and creating off the dribble. We created offensive schemes that worked with the talent we had. Bayless brings a different look, hes probably already a better shooter and maybe a better slasher than Jack. Jack was used because he was our only PG that offered a slashing game at that position (it was especially needed because all 3 of our SF’s didn’t have very strong slashing games either)

As for Zone, I doubt we will use it nearly as much. We used it moreso to make up for Frye and LMA playing center and Outlaw playing PF. The biggest downfall of our zone is we struggled to rebound while in the zone (and because of the personel defecit) and that also cut down on fast break opportunities because we had to focus so much on rebounding.

Gimmicks don't make dynasties

by WarEaglePDX on Jul 3, 2008 8:10 PM PDT up 0 recs

True

I doubt we’ll use the zone so much this season, but I think that will make it more effective when employed as we can use it when its most advantageous. At the very least we can use it to punish teams if they don’t have shooters on the floor, or in a short burst to knock a team out of its offensive rhythm.

Anyway I didn’t mean to say we’d use zone as much this season, I just meant to point out that we have an option that can buy a few minutes with a big guard lineup without making us too vulnerable to quick PGs. Although I wouldn’t be surprised if we were still one of leaders in using the zone as most teams employ it merely as a quick one or two possession gimmick or last ditch effort when their getting pounded in the paint.

by Devenex on Jul 3, 2008 9:32 PM PDT up 0 recs

I definitely see Rudy more as a one two guard than as a small forward

He is simply not strong enough to play the position in the NBA now, and also a little undersized for it, so I don’t understand the discussion to play him at three unless you want to go really small with three guards a la the L*kers in the playoffs (but they have you know who playing SF then, and he is definitely bulkier than Rudy – or Roy).

Judging from some videos and international games I’ve seen, in contrast to that Rudy is definitely quick enough with his feet and hands to effectively defend a lot of (point) guards in the league. His passes (oops), dribbles and crossovers are solid. With some little help (screens, mismatches, etc.) he can easily create his shots against all sorts of defenders, though he isn’t controlled in all situations. And straight down the court on fastbreaks he is literally breaking away from his opponents fast. But you are right in that he can’t be our solution to get major minutes at the point.

P.S.: Instead of people comparing him with Ginobili, I would be happy if after one season you could honestly compare his performance with that of his much more experienced countryman Juan Carlos Navarro (also a SG/PG).

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

by Norsktroll on Jul 3, 2008 6:08 PM PDT 0 recs

Roy actually

Weighs more then Kobyashi…

k@be:

Height 6-6
Weight 220 lbs.

Roy:

Height 6-6
Weight 229 lbs.

from ESPN.

He's Coming! Oden Slayer of Giants

by Idog1976 on Jul 4, 2008 12:45 PM PDT up 0 recs

Did you

just call Brandon fat????????????

Gimmicks don't make dynasties

by WarEaglePDX on Jul 4, 2008 12:56 PM PDT up 0 recs

It is all muscle

Remember the Brandonator photo?

"Some of Dave’s greatest gifts are unanswered posts."

by 92wastheyear on Jul 4, 2008 1:02 PM PDT up 0 recs

He's probably at 235 now..

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

by GreatOden'sRaven on Jul 7, 2008 11:53 AM PDT up 0 recs

+1... Good post.

I look at it like this:
1st Quarter Blake starts, gets subbed 6 minutes in. Roy (starting obviously) takes the point, and Rudy comes in for the last 6 minutes. At the 2:30 mark, Roy sits and Bayless comes in. By the end of this quarter, we’ve got our full second unit in and they play a little faster and less set than the first unit (they’ve got less post presence with Przy, Outlaw, and Frye, so this makes sense). Sergio is substitutionable for foul trouble, injury, etc.

2nd Quarter starts like the 1st ended, with Bayless and Rudy (less) bringing it up. Against most teams 2nd units, it’s tough to say how this works. But if the other teams’ second units were really good, they’d be starters… Me thinks that these two guys’ speed will factor favorably for the Blazers. At the 9:30 mark, Blake and Roy enter. At the 3:30 mark, Rudy comes back in (for that extra scoring punch at the end of the quarter… we struggled in finishing quarters strong last year) and Roy takes care of the point.

Copy this for the second half.

The result is that Roy plays PG minimally, but does so in crunch times when we want/need the ball in his hands. Rudy gets to play the SG where he belongs. Blake does his veteran thing and lets Roy play his effective SG game. And Bayless/Sergio get some burn. Roy ends up averaging 38 minutes per game, Blake 24 minutes, Rudy 24 minutes (I’m pretty certain that this was near his average last year), and Bayless gets 10 minutes… and again, Sergio is somewhere in there for foul trouble and blowouts and stuff.

I think this maximizes these four guys, gives everybody good time (10 minutes ain’t shabby for a rookie), and should let the 1st and 2nd units overlap a little, letting everyone play with everyone a little.

by you'vegottomakeyourfreethrows on Jul 3, 2008 6:56 PM PDT 0 recs

first

roy would not guard the other teams’ PG, he would defend the 2. Nate’s words not mine.

second: Roy’s minutes will drop from last year because of Rudy, so 35 is probably more accurate than 38+.

third: Roy will miss his annual 20 games with injury, which will boost up all the guards minutes.

fourth: sergio plays quite well with rudy, so I see increased backup minutes in his future.

fifth: was Bayless the right choice?

by PippenAintEasy on Jul 3, 2008 7:21 PM PDT 0 recs

Not so sure about Roy being hurt

Sure he had his heel as a rookie, but that was under control last season and he played 74 games (meaning he missed 8) and that was due to Ben Wallace LAYING him out and hurting his back (if I remember right). Add in the fact that he was playing 37.7mpg, which should drop now that we have Rudy backing him up, and the chance for something like the Wallace play becomes smaller.

I can only hope he plays all 82 this season as he hasn’t done it yet, but I’d have to say that it is very unlikely he’ll miss as many as 20 games due to injury.

by Devenex on Jul 3, 2008 7:45 PM PDT up 0 recs

Caron Butler

taking him out at the half court line. Some Chicagoan knocked him down and bruised his tail bone (in the double OT game). Family emergency lost some games there. For a total of 8 games missed

"Some of Dave’s greatest gifts are unanswered posts."

by 92wastheyear on Jul 3, 2008 8:15 PM PDT up 0 recs

Great analysis

This post sums up several of the points I’ve been making. I just haven’t had the time to flesh them out as well as WarEagle has done.

Roy has professional pride and would accept the challenge of playing PG full time. Should he? No. For the reasons WarEagle mentioned above.

Bayliss and Fernandez are both guards with a scorer’s mentaility. Jerryd is 19 but has a killer’s instinct. Rudy is 23 with years of international experience. I see the potential for explosiveness, in a good and bad way. Who will defer to wo? (Does either man even know the meaning of the word “defer”?)

It’s up to Nate and coaches to put these players into combinations where they can succeed. Yes, McMillian will play a zone but (as we’ve seen with Sergio) he is not going to settle for a guard who consistently lets his man get by him or is slow to rotate out on a defender. To say a guard’s defense lapses won’t matter as long as they’re outscoreing the oppostition doesn’t fly with me, because Nate knows that sooner or later to win games, you have to make stops.

Steve Blake is a crucial element to the guard rotation, IMO. Not that he’s better than Rudy or Jerryd, but his steady play is indispensable while the two rookies are learning the league. I’d like to see a rotation where either Roy or Blake is on the floor 90% of the time, unless it’s garbage time. This won’t be easy if Blake and Roy are the starters, but it might work if Blake is substituted for early and comes back in to replace Roy later in the first quarter, etc. The less Rudy and Jerryd play together at the beginning of the season, during critical stretches of the game, the better for their development.

by two4larue on Jul 3, 2008 7:47 PM PDT 0 recs

When Bandon Does Play the Point..

it would be interesting to see the Blazers go “BIG”.

Brandon may have to guard their PG, but in a lot of cases Brandon will dominate their PG,( when Blazers are on O.) so much, it will more than offset his opponent’s advantage on the other end.

Going “BIG” guarantees/insures the opponents’ PG has to guard Brandon.
(Maybe Brandon Posts him up, Maybe he backs him down with the dribble) Either way, Brandon ; Draws a double; Scores; Gets fouled; or both. He Kills their guy on the boards, all this while also physically “wearing him out” for 5-6 min.

By “BIG”, I’m thinking Martel, Frye, LA, and Greg or Joel. That’s a pretty big team.. But very versatile Athletes, on O and D
... Hi-Post offense; Post Brandon; Pick n Pop w/ Frye; Run Martel off some “mean Double Picks” and let the bigs go to the offensive glass, or finish Alley-Oops. (Take your pick)

Finally… You just Zone-up on D.
Protects Greg or Joel. (if its Joel, and someone does attempt to go to get to the rim, Joel gets to use one of his “Don’t Come In Here Fouls".
Lots of "Long Arms" in the Zone… Force tough, outside jumpers while Webster & Frye "Run-out" for Fast Breaks.

I think it could be effective at times… What do you Guys think?

by Rick D. on Jul 3, 2008 9:23 PM PDT 0 recs

I like what you've got to say....

going big makes the game tough on smaller point guards….especially while playing a zone. Why? because it moves the game out to the perimter. meaning there’s less chance getting to the rim….

That said, i don’t think its a great line up all the time, but in stretches…...wow! say Lebron has been getting to the rim all game (not likely cuz of oden, but still…)..this line up changes all that.

Another idea worth toying with is the ocassional use of both Oden and Pryzbilla for stretches…This too, isn’t great as a line up always, because you lose some offensive power in Lamarcus…But, lets say we’re matched up with Gasol, and Bynum..Taking them out of their game for stretches isnt a bad way to change momentum…...

Appreciate the post Rick D

by BroyTheTruth on Jul 5, 2008 10:29 PM PDT up 0 recs

press/traps

I’d like to see some full court press and half court traps every once and a while to try and rattle THIER PG’s…...
With the speed our new players have to offer Coach Mac, he may want to play a little Phoenix ball.

always look on the bright side of life........

by SGTDAN on Jul 3, 2008 10:56 PM PDT 0 recs

We saw Lamarcus do a little bit of this at the start of last year

Travis and eventually Batum would be good for this also

by tweener on Jul 3, 2008 11:02 PM PDT up 0 recs

Rex and Roy are the guards of the future...

........................... and I STILL say that Rudy is gonna wind up as a 3.

"You don't live by the jumpshot, you die by the jumpshot." ---Charles Barkley, 2/7/08

by timbo on Jul 3, 2008 11:06 PM PDT 0 recs

I think so too

I think Roy will have no problem deferring some of the scoring (dropping to 16-17ppg) and raising assists to maybe 8per. This lets Rex (Gator) get his. Just think…...Rudy, Roy an Rex tearing upcourt after a G.O. rebound and hitting a trailing LMA for a nasty throwdown. On defense it could work too. Rex guards the 1, Rudy the 2 and Roy checks the 3.

This wouldn’t be all the time but I thinks it could really work. Anyone of the three could bring it up and Roy would run the half court sets.

Am I crazy? Of course! Will it work? It just might

"Some of Dave’s greatest gifts are unanswered posts."

by 92wastheyear on Jul 3, 2008 11:17 PM PDT up 0 recs

Does Roy run?

I’m not sure why everyone thinks Roy will suddenly be a fastbreak monster, it just hasn’t come through as his style. He just doesn’t race down the court, preferring to play at “his pace”, which to be fair has worked very well for him.

LMA, Blake, and Jack were our most consistent fastbreak players last season. Roy would make the occasional effort (ex: dunk on Dalembert), but I don’t think it was enough last season to say he’ll be gunning down the court every other possession.

by Devenex on Jul 4, 2008 9:44 AM PDT up 0 recs

You don't think Brandon can get upcourt if the situation demands it?

Brandon …I think will do what needs to be done. He just hasn’t had the rebounders to get the ball out till now (I hope).

"Some of Dave’s greatest gifts are unanswered posts."

by 92wastheyear on Jul 4, 2008 10:46 AM PDT up 0 recs

your right

just look how he ran in an all-star game when Chris Paul was on the break. Brandon wont be the one thats running the fast break, but he will be the trailer that finishes it. I know that Bayless will push the ball and it will give Brandon alot of easy buckets. watch and see.

by RipCity on Jul 4, 2008 12:31 PM PDT up 0 recs

It also might help...

that there is a bit more depth in the 2 guard category with Rudy coming. We didn’t even have another 2 guard on the roster until Wafer joined the team in February. I would wager that much of Roy’s pace had to do with conserving energy because he had to be ready to play 38 minutes or more. If he knows he can get some rest with Rudy out on the court, he might not have to pace himself as much.

PTB Liberation Day - 2/10/04

by tssbro on Jul 4, 2008 4:50 PM PDT up 0 recs

There's no way Roy

will hurt our fast break. He has plenty enough speed but most important is his ability to see the court, make good decisions and pass. He is also an excellent finisher. I’d love for him to be in the middle of fast breaks. Without Jack hindering the break, I expect to finally see the Blazers run more this year. We need some of those easier buckets and I think we’ll be getting them this season.

by TwoDeep on Jul 5, 2008 1:16 PM PDT up 0 recs

Good post (recced)

I agree with almost everything. I can see that 3 guard offense. Oden and LMA cover the boards and Rudy and Bayless run, run, run.

The only beef is Roy defending the PG, which already was touched on already. Was Iverson required to guard the SG when he was teamed with Snow? No. He was the SG on offense and PG on defense. The same thing would happen here. The players switch.

Now if they switch, Portland will give up a few easy baskets because of miscommunications that are sure to happen. You have to live with that. Teams will also try to keep the Blazers from switching to create mismatches. Again, I’ll live with that.

by parkinglotj on Jul 3, 2008 11:31 PM PDT 0 recs

Myth: Brandon Roy is a pure 2-Guard

Let’s flip it around. Roy is not a pure shooting guard aka Reggie Miller. Bayless is not a pure point guard, aka Chauncy Billups. In the interviews I’ve heard, Kevin Pritchard makes it sound like he views the assigning of players a position title such as point guard and shooting guard puts those players in a box. He gives the example of all-stars like Kobe, Lebron, Roy being the ones to bring the ball up the floor in the 4th quarter of games. Technically, if they are bringing the ball up the floor, they are being point guards. He prefers to call these guys playmakers instead. Soooo, if Bayless is able to develop the way we hope he can, don’t be surprised to see Roy bring the ball up on offense, and then see Bayless defend the opposing point guard on defense.

Can I buy you a fish sandwich?

by silkybrown on Jul 4, 2008 2:01 AM PDT 0 recs

Billups isn't really a pure point guard.

If somebody hits you with an object you should beat the hell out of them.-Charles Barkley

by Winchester on Jul 4, 2008 3:36 AM PDT up 0 recs

I'm not sure how reliable that scale is

It has Tony Parker as a borderline combo guard/small 2-guard.

Can I buy you a fish sandwich?

by silkybrown on Jul 4, 2008 4:59 AM PDT up 0 recs

It's based on assit to field goals attempted.

It’s hard to say because those labels don’t really mean much anyway, but I think that’s a perfect place for Tony Parker. He has three shooting possessions for every assit he makes. He’s small, but that doesn’t make someone a more pure PG.

If somebody hits you with an object you should beat the hell out of them.-Charles Barkley

by Winchester on Jul 4, 2008 5:31 AM PDT up 0 recs

cough cough

Allen Iverson cough cough. Shortest 2 guard in the NBA. He would of won 8-10 consecutive MVPs if he was in the league in the 50’s

Gimmicks don't make dynasties

by WarEaglePDX on Jul 4, 2008 9:21 AM PDT up 0 recs

He is borderline

He’s shoot/drive first.

It's GO time !

by walkoff41 on Jul 5, 2008 1:45 PM PDT up 0 recs

I just decided to check out the PG's in the draft on this scale

FGA/Assists for the top for points in the draft:

DJ Augustine: 1.47(Pass first point)
Derrick Rose: 2.31(Combo guard)
Russell Westbrook: 2.34(ditto)
Jerryd Bayless: 3.12(small two-guard)

Obviously their teams in college would effect that greatly, but it’s interesting.

by danielfarrell on Jul 5, 2008 7:52 AM PDT up 0 recs

Bayless played the 2

for the majority of college. Nic Wise was the PG

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

by GreatOden'sRaven on Jul 7, 2008 11:56 AM PDT up 0 recs

Wise was hurt for a while

True, but Wise was hurt for a while last year and JB played the point then. His stats should reflect more 2 guard time though, so you are correct.

by danielfarrell on Jul 7, 2008 2:00 PM PDT up 0 recs

I agree

Roy isn’t a pure 2…he can do alot of the things in the half court that we wouldl consider the duties of a 1. That is why so many teams passed on Bayless and we didn’t. Bayless isn’t going to make a good shooting guard and he isn’t going to make a great point guard. He has the opportunity to be a great combo guard when paired with Roy. Although Roy does have alot of skills that translate to PG ability, he isn’t the guy you want guarding the other team’s fastest player. Bayless is.

Gimmicks don't make dynasties

by WarEaglePDX on Jul 4, 2008 4:47 AM PDT up 0 recs

agree

I’ve been thinking about this also, and this is one reason which i see a
bayless/roy starting with blake/’rudy coming off of the bench, hate to throw jerryd into the fire,
but i’d also hate to have 2 rookie guards coming in off of the bench.

by contemnor on Jul 4, 2008 11:27 AM PDT 0 recs

You forgot some.

Koponen + Roy. A big backcourt that can both score and distribute (Koponen is close to 6’ 6”).

Koponen + Rudy: a high-flying backcourt that can run and finish the fastbreak.

Koponen - PG of the future. Book it.

by Blazerholic on Jul 4, 2008 11:32 AM PDT 0 recs

Koponen is high-flying?

Would be good, but unlike Rudy who can even dunk backside alley-oops I have never seen it.

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

by Norsktroll on Jul 4, 2008 1:32 PM PDT up 0 recs

What,

you haven’t seen the Koponen jams in all the Finnish league games you’ve taken in?

by Clevelander among roses on Jul 5, 2008 10:15 AM PDT up 0 recs

I have seen him miss a dunk ;-)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ngUpE4nUme8

I could have watched him in the Euroleague. If he would play there, that is. Like it has been said before, the Finnish league unfortunately is pretty much at the bottom of the European leagues. So nobody outside of, uhm, his home country watches it and his performance there against pretty weak competition is not an adequate gauge of his abilities. Summer League also isn’t (remember Belinelli looked amazing last summer?), but at least the opponents will be somewhat better.

Oh, and a combo that has worked in the past: Koponen to Batum
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RU9irScsBK4

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

by Norsktroll on Jul 5, 2008 10:18 PM PDT up 0 recs

Good Post.

We are stuck in the mud. We can dig out but it’s going to be a mess before we’re done. Steve Blake is our only competent PG. He’s really very good,definitely a bona fide starter, but he has not got a skilled backup. We need a 2nd unit that can lock down the opponent. Maybe Sergio can be a change of pace player but his poor defense will kill us when the 2nd unit is out there trying to shut down the opposition while we get some rest. Does Bayless have the skill to play pro ball his rookie year? We are going learn a lot this year.

by oregonslee on Jul 4, 2008 3:51 PM PDT 0 recs

Strongly disagree with the notion

that Roy and Rudy cannot play together. Both run the pick and roll to perfection. Both are quick and fast – look up the measurements on lane agility per Draft Express:

Of the 37 guards drafted in the last 5 years in round 1, only one is quicker than Rudy at 10.48 and that one is Rashard McCants at 10.39. Rudy has the quickness to stay with anyone. Roy at 11.13 is slightly below (1%) the average of 11.03 but is quicker than DJ Augustine (11.27), Jerryd Bayless (11.26), Derrick Rose (11.69), Mike Conley (11.63). and Javaris Crittenton (11.63). Deron Williams (10.83) and Chris Paul (11.09) are a bit better than Roy. So can Rudy and Roy stay with and defend the PGs? I would say yes. But most of us have not yet seen Rudy play. Roy can guard nearly anyone (ask Carmelo!) and will not need all his energy for offense next year.

The game is about matchups, fundamentals and taking good shots. This year for the first time Coach Nate has the matchup players to play small, play big, play offense, play defense (big assumption that Martell will step up here). So this is no MYTH. You will see Bayless and Blake both get minutes and the first half year is not included in this analysis. It will take time to work combinations but no matter who you play at guard, except for Sergio, he can score. Double teams will find easy shots for these guys with passing and patience.

Aldridge said. "We feel like we can beat any team. We feel like we can beat the Spurs, Suns, Lakers, Mavericks, whoever any night right now, and we'll still be here when those teams get old and their guys retire. We're going to be here for a long time."

by lee3022 on Jul 5, 2008 2:46 AM PDT 0 recs

Also wanted to note

Martell talking about Rudy last month described him as a point guard. That had to come from internal team discussions?

by lee3022 on Jul 5, 2008 2:05 PM PDT up 0 recs

very interesting...

i kinda look at rudy in the mold of a langthy scoring point guard…. he’s a slashing playmaker who plays well uptempo

by BroyTheTruth on Jul 6, 2008 11:19 PM PDT up 0 recs

The highlight video is all perimeter jumpers and receiving alley oops...

............................... not slashing or distributing.

He’s a 2 that MIGHT work as a 3.

"You don't live by the jumpshot, you die by the jumpshot." ---Charles Barkley, 2/7/08

by timbo on Jul 8, 2008 8:11 AM PDT up 0 recs

i agree to disagree, because i know he can also throw the lob.....

not to mention he is comfortable in a system pushing the ball down court. meaning he’s used to either outleting it quick. or dribbling the ball down quickly enough to catch the other team outa position…a lot of those alley oops came from people being outa position like in transition

just sayin’

by BroyTheTruth on Jul 9, 2008 10:35 PM PDT up 0 recs

Rudy if faster than almost all in lane agility

but i’m not so sure you can say lane agility times necessarily translate to championship level defense for long stretches. For instance, Sean May had a better time (11.04) than Chris Paul (11.08) but I an certain you wouldn’t want Sean May defending Chris Paul for any stretch. I do think much more goes into being a solid defender other than lateral quickness…but I’ll completely admit that its a great starting point.

I do think you will see Rudy and Roy playing together at the guard spots, but I don’t think its the best combination for our primary (starting) lineup. I still think the effort required for Roy or Rudy to stay with a PG will take away from their overall game if, night in and night out, they are spending a majority of their minutes doing so. Its not a dichotic argument….its a possible flaw in the lineup combinations that if used abundently could be exposed against certain teams (most likely a quality team that we could meet in the playoffs)

Gimmicks don't make dynasties

by WarEaglePDX on Jul 5, 2008 4:29 AM PDT 0 recs

Lane Agility is not a perfect measure

but it is indicative of quickness and since we have little else this illustrates a facet of Rudy that confirmed for me his ability to play with Roy. I am not worried about Chris Paul with two 6-6 quick defenders on the perimeter and outstanding paint defenders, He not only has to get around his defenders, avoid a big man help on the block but avoid being blocked from behind and reduced passing lanes from added wingspans defending him. I am waiting for that patented lob to Chandler picked out of the air a few times before it gets to Chandler. That alone will disrupt NO’s offense in a big way.

I see your point about defensive effort expended but the inverse is also true and the Blazer added offense will require a defensive matchup and effort as well. Rudy and Roy and Bayless in a three-guard rotation will allow either Roy or Rudy or both to be on the floor at all times (as I remember MJ and Scotty rotations). How do they defend that?

by lee3022 on Jul 5, 2008 2:03 PM PDT up 0 recs

How did the Spurs beat the Hornets?

They started the series with their best defender on Paul and were unable to shut anyone down. Once they moved Bowen over to Peja, they began to make Paul less effective because they took away his major weapon in the first two games.

I bring this up because the only problem I have with all of your figuring is that no one shuts down Tony Parker, Chris Paul, Steve Nash or Deron Williams with one-on-one defense. Teams develop schemes to get the ball out of their hands or keep them from getting the ball to their primary scorers. Roy is completely capable of playing defense on any of these guys in the context of a larger scheme.

I have concerns about Roy playing the PG position as his primary position but I think we are going to see it a lot this year to see if it can be effecive in the future or if the Blazers need to make some changes to bring in someone to fill the PG need next year.

Don’t you think Greg Anthony would be the perfect compliment to Roy?

PTB Liberation Day - 2/10/04

by tssbro on Jul 5, 2008 7:40 AM PDT 0 recs

Mighty Mouse

Greg Anthony could only play well next to Roy if we had Damon pouting on the bench. #14 and #15 on our rosters this year? Every team needs 5 point guards.

I agree that we don’t need Roy or Rudy playing shut down one-on-one defense against The Parkers and Pauls of the league. Ultimately in the long run, team defense is probably the best indicator of sustainable success in the league. I would argue that playing Roy and Rudy together excessively would strengthen our offense at the expense of our defense.

Gimmicks don't make dynasties

by WarEaglePDX on Jul 5, 2008 12:06 PM PDT up 0 recs

Possibly

I cannot comment with any degree of accuracy on Rudy so I won’t. But Roy is a top flight situational defender when called upon to defend. He has the IQ and the athleticism to play anybody on defense in a scheme that includes Oden, LMA, and Pryzbilla (in some combo).

What will be required of both of them is the ability to push their man to the baseline where the help will be waiting and then rotate to the open man as the ball is passed around the outside. The quickness and IQ is also there in the defensive post to make this type of defense effective. I mean, as much grief as Jack took for his defense, he was a smart defender that pushed his guys into the spots he was supposed to. We know Roy can do this.

Like I said, I am not sure about Rudy only because I have only seen highlights. I just want to see it all play out. Can I get a fast forward to November?

PTB Liberation Day - 2/10/04

by tssbro on Jul 5, 2008 12:28 PM PDT up 0 recs

Excellent post

Fun read and good thought behind it. I’m enjoying the discussion in the comments also. I like the general philosophy behind the argument for where the minutes will go in the original post. I absolutely cannot wait to watch it all unfold in the coming season.

Trust in KP and McMillan.

lickety-brindle

by Billy Ray Bates on Jul 5, 2008 9:12 AM PDT 0 recs

Problem is

it’s going to take awhile for our rookies to learn how to defend. It’s about positioning and understanding what the other team is running. Roy and Blake will be our best defenders this year. Call me crazy, but I think Sergio – putting more emphasis on defense, which he will be required to do to survive – may be more effective defending than Bayless or Rudy this year. Sergio certainly has the quickness to become an OK defender.

Flatly, we really have too many PG’s. I really doubt Kope will stick this year but if he does we will be absolutely jammed. Look for a trade I would think.

by TwoDeep on Jul 5, 2008 1:30 PM PDT 0 recs

Bayless + Roy ?

Solid defensively ???
I love BRoy (Stay Humble !), but he is only an average defender
man to man and good in the zone. Bayless ? All indications are
below (slightly ?) average in college and it’s primarily zone.
If you are projecting down the road, please give some evidence
in your post, as my experience says defense is the last to come
around. Hopefully Nate & Staff will focus energies on T-Rexxx
at the other end of the court.

BRING BACK OUR BLAZERS TO SO. OREGON ! DIE COINCAST,
DIE DIRECTV . . . Well you know . . .die charter

It's GO time !

by walkoff41 on Jul 5, 2008 1:52 PM PDT 0 recs