If you want consistency, you can't platoon your point guards
Joe Freeman's feature story on Oregonlive today focused on the Blazers quest to find consistency.
Beyond these lingering issues is another far-reaching problem: Consistency. Or, more specifically, a lack of consistency.
I'm sorry, but this isn't rocket science. It is very hard to get consistent play when you are actively experimenting with lineups and can't decide who your primary point guard is going to be. There's a reason why good teams don't split the available minutes at the point guard position. The point guard is the player who provides the consistency; he is the floor general. And Nate McMillan is playing two different guys--guys who have very different playing styles--roughly equal minutes every game. That's a surefire recipe for lack of consistency and continuity on offense.
If you doubt this, I encourage you to look through the stat archives and find me a good team that gave equal time to two guys at point guard. Here are the average minutes of the league's point guards last season. Note how virtually all starters averaged more than 30 minutes a game (the only exceptions seem to be due to injury or moving into the starting lineup mid-season).
Nate's problem is that he doesn't seem to have the stones to demote either Blake or Miller to a secondary role. If I were running the team, I would have long ago designated Miller as the starter and simply let that lineup get used to playing together. There would be an adjustment period, but before long everyone would adjust to one another and learn to compliment each other's strengths and playing styles.
But since Nate seems genuinely unsure whether Blake or Miller is a better fit at point guard, allow me to suggest a simple way of proving this empirically. Here's what you do. For the next five games, start Blake in the first half and start Miller in the second half (or vice versa). That way, each game, both Blake and Miller will get to play a good solid stretch of time with the other four members of the starting lineup. It's a perfect controlled experiment. At the end of the five games, it should be perfectly clear who is the better fit. The evidence will be right there in the open for everyone to see and neither player will be able to complain. Whoever does better becomes the primary point guard and thereafter gets the most minutes. Simple, really.
2 recs |
7 comments
| Add comment
Comments
Not to beat a dead horse, or the team's drum... or..
But it’s- FIVE games. Give Nate a chance, he’ll fix this…
Sure, looking back, I think even Nate wishes he just started Dre. But I think Nate made the decision to start Blake for any number of good reasons, among them perhaps:
- he saw some chemistry issues, and rather than try to play them out in front of 17,000 people, he figured Blake could plug the gap until Dre got it going.
- Miller always starts slow, lets get what we can out of Blake early
- perhaps KP asked to start Blake to showcase him for a trade
- Brandon asked him too…
But since Blake couldn’t stop Grand Mama (he’s got to be what, 50?) and can’t hit the hoop with a hula, starting him doesn’t seem to look like such a good idea… now..
Hopefully Miller will use this opportunity to push the tempo so that he can get into his comfort zone (and what I hope becomes all of the Blazers comfort zone this year)…
The big positive from starting Dre will be more feeds to Greg.
I’m positive that Brandon can see the light, and learn to save his body by passing the ball, and learn to love to move without the ball, and hit the shots off picks
by Visionary2 on Nov 5, 2009 9:53 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Wow, only two votes for Blake.
I wonder if Nate realizes that the fans all want Miller to start.
www.blazerguy.com
by Blazer Guy on Nov 6, 2009 6:57 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
maybe, but I bet he also realizes that the fans have no real say in who he plays
Those who ignore the past are doomed to repeat it
by The Arkitect on Nov 6, 2009 8:25 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Well
i think you raise a good point. the Pg IS the floor general…I mean on any team, the person controlling the ball and running/initiating the offense is always a starter/plays heavy minutes. Relate this to football. How often do teams play well when they have two quarterbacks sharing significant minutes? The more uncertainty surrounding these positions, the worse the team is likely to do.
by kajuayn on Nov 6, 2009 12:21 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
trade blake and outlaw for one solid role player
trade blake and outlaw… for a solid perimeter defender/ 3-point shooter. consolidate starting 5 and surround them with role players. Get someone like Tayshaun Prince and let Bayless into the rotation. Tayshaun helps with defense and 3 point shooting to offset Bayless’ lack of defence, and we have a clear-cut starting point guard.
by living on Nov 6, 2009 5:49 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Guess I should have added a fifth option
Starting them both (as Nate did tonight) wasn’t something that occurred to me. Seemed to work okay tonight, though I’m not sure it’s much of a long term solution. I don’t think we can have Roy playing huge minutes at the 3 against guys like Melo.
www.blazerguy.com
by Blazer Guy on Nov 6, 2009 10:41 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

by 





















