Making your teammates better (or not)

by -ken on Feb 22, 2009 8:32 AM PST Comment 66 comments

If you haven't already done so, I strongly encourage you to read this article on Shane Battier. If this article is to be taken completely at face value - and it certainly rings true for me - Battier is a prime example, if not the prototype, of a player who makes his teammates better by just being on the floor.

This got me to thinking about our own team and who makes their teammates better. I think number one is Steve Blake. By spreading the floor with his three point shooting, by spotting the open man and knowing when to get him the ball, and by protecting the ball at all times, Steve makes his teammates better. Brandon is an obvious and I believe Oden has huge potential (yes, I still hate the word) in this regard.

There is a flip side. I think Outlaw and Bayless might be the worst at making their teammates better. (This is a far different thing than saying I wouldn't want either of them on my team.)

League wide I believe Zach Randolph might well be the "star" player who is the worst at making his teammates better.

When I think historically of helpful players, the players who come to mind are ones who I personally love but who might have been overshadowed by their team's stars. Players like Sean Elliot, Toni Kukoc, and Joe Dumars.

I'm not going anywhere in particular with this. I do think it brings up a million other questions, though. It's mostly established fact that you need two stars to win a championship, do you also need one or more of these "no stat stars"? Who are the best and the worst in history as far as helping teammates be better? Is this a definable trait or, like art, is it just something you know when you see it?

Who would you rather have (re)join the current Blazers, Zach Randolph or Shane Battier?

10 recs | Comment 66 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Rex has just stopped passing the ball to referees recently, give him a little while before you're so sure he can't rack assists...

………………………………. let alone the question of defense, which you omit. Does a good defender not “help make his teammates better” vs. a weak defender?

Why is Channing Frye still here? Anybody??? Anybody???

by timbo on Feb 22, 2009 9:00 AM PST reply actions 0 recs

Assists alone...

don’t necessarily equate to making your teammates better, at least that’s my belief.

Defense is, of course, the other side of the ball. I didn’t so much omit it as I just didn’t go into it. It certainly should be part of the conversation. I’ll start it:

I think Dennis Rodman might be an example of a good defender who made his teammates better on defense. I think that Ruben Patterson might be an example of a(n arguably) good defender who did not make his teammates better on defense.

"You are never (fanatically) dedicated to something you have complete confidence in." Robert Pirsig

by -ken on Feb 22, 2009 9:54 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

rodman was amazing

“didn’t make that one mr. jordan? hang on, let me get the ball back for you. here you go”

time to unleash Roughin’

by northwestj on Feb 22, 2009 10:23 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

role playing

i think that a lot of the criticism some of the players get (esp bayless) seems unfair. bayless may not have the vision that sergio has, but its not like he has poor vision. bayless’ offensive role seems to be just get to the basket/draw fouls. just because he isn’t getting a ton of assists every night isn’t because he is lacking vision, but bc nate has set expectations for him as he does for all of our role players.

The most hated Blazer is like the least hottest supermodel - Sabonis4Ever

by Philthyanimal on Feb 22, 2009 7:56 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

well first of all

Who would you rather have (re)join the current Blazers, Zach Randolph or Shane Battier?

I still would take Channing Frye over Zach, so I’m not sure that is the best question. But even if I ignore how much I dislike Zach from a leadership, lockerroom, and off-the-court p.o.v., I completely agree that even when he is in perfect 20, 10 mode that his game just doesn’t facilitate the rest of the team. I think ’A’m’a’r’e’ is another one just like Zach..

I think Rudy is the one Blazer you didn’t mention who really has a ton of “potential” in this area and has already shown more than Greg.

And I think Bayless shows more and more glimpses than he is not only a one-on-the-world player. But it has always seemed like AI was another player whose struggles to really raise his teammates up. Not sure why, he can get assists, but he seems to prefer to make his own shot. I think Bayless might be like an AI if i was on one of the horrible teams in the league right now as their #1 or #2 option as opposed to the blzrs 10th man. If he can stay dedicated to on the ball defense, I think he’ll at least be a guy who is able to provide help on d which is not making your teammates better but making your team better.

Travis will probably never really make his teammates better.. but I don’t know if every guy on a team can really do this. If Travis got to the level of Josh Smith who is at least very inconsistent in how his play helps his teammates play better but can use a lot of individual ability to dominate to take a lot of defensive and rebounding burdens off of his teammates… well.. I sure as heck would take that..

"Slum dunk? You just go to the rim, and crush.. crush the ball in the rim."
- Nic Batum

by idoltime on Feb 22, 2009 9:02 AM PST reply actions 0 recs

If Travis got to the level of Josh Smith who is at least very inconsistent in how his play helps his teammates play better but can use a lot of individual ability to dominate to take a lot of defensive and rebounding burdens off of his teammates… well.. I sure as heck would take that..

He sure did that against Atlanta. Six rebounds and a block. You’re right — that game plus a little bit of smart passing would be a happy future for him.

Sticking up for Travis Outlaw since 2008.

by Kaboomm on Feb 22, 2009 9:24 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Interesting reading re: Josh Smith over at the Hawks blog

…they hate him right now. Standing around on offense, poor shot selection, letting rebounds drop, bad defensive rotation – “when will J Smoove grow up and not just rely on physical gifts…..” And not just Friday’s game. Comments eerily like what we here about a highschool draftee in the league for 5-6 years over here

"its tough to play with one eye, unless you're a pirate." Delonte West
"una canasta a Pau en la cara" Rudy

by Honka Playboy on Feb 22, 2009 9:46 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

And in defense of Trout the Black Hole

when the ball does end up in his hands and never comes out, it usually seems to be designed to get him a shot against his defender, or there are only a few ticks left on the shot clock. With Zach it was different: he gets the ball on the wing, his teammates cut and cut but they might as well be merry-go-round horses. Zach will shoot, come hell or triple team

"its tough to play with one eye, unless you're a pirate." Delonte West
"una canasta a Pau en la cara" Rudy

by Honka Playboy on Feb 22, 2009 9:52 AM PST up reply actions 1 recs

Agree

And T-Law plays within the team. He is not the black-hole that Zack was. Travis sets up at the three point line just line Nate wants the play to run. If the play breaks down that’s when Travis has the green light to make his own shot. And he does pass the ball, but most of the time its passed to either the point or Brandon who then passes for an assist to an open player. I’m aware that he makes mistakes (sometimes bad ones.), but IMO he does more good for the team than bad.

by Dmartyparty on Feb 22, 2009 11:06 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

he was a black hole

but he has been playing within the offense this year. its definitely refreshing to see. i’m not sure how much of it was by design or his growth as a player. as one of trouts harsher critics i’m glad hes attempting to round out his game this year giving people less to complain about.

The most hated Blazer is like the least hottest supermodel - Sabonis4Ever

by Philthyanimal on Feb 22, 2009 7:58 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Yes...

Travis is far from Zach in terms of playing within the team. When he does not have a shot or drive he passes out. Usually he will find a way to shoot, but he is not close to Randolph in selfish play.

I will forever remember Zach for the jab 5 times and shoot or drive with no idea if he is being single or double teamed or if anyone else is open. (That and shooting after offensive rebounds in close games with a lead and under 1:00 left in the game.)

PTB Liberation Day - 2/10/04

by tssbro on Feb 22, 2009 12:14 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

I think the conventional wisdom on Travis is impervious to evidence

The fact is that travis on ball defense has improved, his passign has improved, his tranisiton defense has improved, he is no longer a dead certain black hole when he gets the ball, and his rebounding has improved, his move to the basket has improved, his handle has marginally improved and his three point shooting has improved. And he’s a beast clutch player when you need a basket late in the game. He has no nerves or consicence, a good thing at times.

He’s not the same player he was a year ago, but it’s easy to keep burping up the same platitudes about his game rather than actually seeing him play.

he defensive rotations still suck though.

by raoulduke on Feb 22, 2009 9:29 AM PST up reply actions 1 recs

fair enough

I do notice Travis’ improvements, but they are still not consistent and that is not a platitude. And I am not asking for him to be perfect, but despite the fact that he has improved he is still not a player that you know what you are going to get. Except that he will find a shot…

"The Edge… there is no honest way to explain it because the only people who really know where it is are the ones who have gone over. " -hst

"Slum dunk? You just go to the rim, and crush.. crush the ball in the rim."
- Nic Batum

by idoltime on Feb 22, 2009 9:53 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

I agree that he's not consistent, but the fact that he continues to show improvement

across several dimensions of his game gives hope. It means that he is not at his ceiling. Some players peak early, som elate. Look at everyone’s favorite, Joel. He’s a classic example of guy who didn’t even begin to find his game until his mid twenties and he continues to get better. he can actually catch a pass with his feet moving – that happened for the first time this year.

I think we can still see a lot more from Outlaw, and I wouldn’t have said that a year ago, but we’re seeing signs of that this year.

by raoulduke on Feb 22, 2009 10:27 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Travis does some nice things

but it’s usually later in the season. My recollection is he starts every year poorly, playing sloppy in every aspect of the game, then only gradually improves. Even now, late into the year, he’s had a few stinkers. He’s in there for his scoring, as a finisher, and finishers don’t make their team mates better except for one area – the win column.

by oregonslee on Feb 22, 2009 11:17 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

I think clutch baskets in a close game are the ultimate energizer and morale booster

He can breathe now life into the blazers when they need it most. He doesn’t make them better in the same way that Battier or Roy does, but when travis goes off, evereyone else elevates.

by raoulduke on Feb 22, 2009 11:23 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

It's a valuable contribution

and it makes him a great role player. As long as he never ever never demands to be a starter for us we can keep him.

by oregonslee on Feb 22, 2009 11:43 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

To bring this back...

somewhat to my original point, which regular rotation player on our team is less likely to make his teammates better than Outlaw? Remember that this has nothing to do with whether or not you like Outlaw or whether or not you want him on the team. Both of which I do.

"You are never (fanatically) dedicated to something you have complete confidence in." Robert Pirsig

by -ken on Feb 22, 2009 11:55 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

If Travis would stay in Portland and work out with teammates over the summer, we could see some real strides.

Instead, he goes home every summer and spends half the season playing himself into shape. He’s looking a lot better the past few games, but I can’t help but think he would have started the season like this had he worked out for basketball instead of honing his fishing skills.

Jerryd Bayless has two emotions: Kill and Win.

"I want to put points on your face."
-Rudy to Pau Gasol

TRADE TRAVIS OUTLAW FOR A CHAIR

by rockingharder on Feb 22, 2009 9:52 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

AI was one I struggled with...

pertaining to this topic. He does get a ton of assists but from where I sit it is inarguable that he simply does not elevate his teammates. To be fair, Iverson is a player who is counted on to score and score a lot. There is something to be said for that.

On the flip side you have someone like Tim Duncan. His primary task has also been to score a lot with a minor in rebounding, but it is just as inarguable that he makes his teammates better.

In neither case can I, as you said with AI, put my finger on why exactly.

"You are never (fanatically) dedicated to something you have complete confidence in." Robert Pirsig

by -ken on Feb 22, 2009 10:53 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

There is no stat for "Making your teammates better"

Assists is one to look at maybe… but there are some high assists guys who don’t make the others better, they just have the ball so often the assists come. AI is obviously the prime example of this.

AI is better than Billups, there is no real debate here. However, Billups makes him entire team better, hence the improved Denver.

Jermaine is another one who doesn’t seem to make his teammates better, despite his nice looking numbers. This also might be the biggest thing seperating Jordan from Kobe. Jordan made everyone around him play better than they should have been able too. Why? We can speculate on leadership and all that good stuff, but who knows.

by Zaig on Feb 22, 2009 7:02 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

The Kobe/Jordan argument

most def holds some bearing. Why was Jordan better? Who really knows. Like you said in your subject, there just isn’t a stat for making your teammates better. Never will be. That’s part of the fun of playing GM; who can you bring in who will make everyone on the team better? Isn’t that the point of the game?

Then I rose, wiping the blunts ash from my clothes
Then froze only to blow the herb smoke through my nose

by Illmatic88 on Feb 22, 2009 7:57 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

I'm not sure I agree with the idea that Jordan made all his teamates signifiantly better

Jordan was a great player, but he also had a great supporting cast. His teammates were always good players from the start, not mediocre players who suddenly became good when Jordan played. Even in the year when Jordan was retired and playing baseball the Bulls still won 55 games in the regular season and nearly made it to the conference finals.

by trk on Feb 22, 2009 11:53 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Jordan's supporting cast

I’m not sure of applying “great” as Jordan’s supporting cast with the exception of Pip.

Jordan had skilled role players who were all made that much better by Jordan’s abilities, namely teams needs to focus so much attention to stopping Jordan.

Bill Cartwright? Eh, the memory of that shot makes me shiver. Craig Hodges? He could drain 3’s that wouldn’t have been there if not for Jordan sucking up so many defenders which allowed Hodges free looks. Pax? Smart player who knew how to play with Jordan, but by no means “great.” Will Purdue? C’mon.

Rodman stands out on his own, I must say. His defensive game and rebounding prowess were second to none as a package.

Jordan exceptional abilities made for an incredible team, but one that would have been little more the basement dwellers without.

"Travis is so cool in the clutch that the ice-water running through his veins has stopped global warming in its tracks."-- jscot

by bow4meow on Feb 23, 2009 11:56 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

basement dwellers??

Like I said before, the Bulls without Jordan were still a 55 win team. That was in the year where Jordan did not play at all. A 55 win team is not a basement dweller.

by trk on Feb 23, 2009 12:12 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

zinged

"Travis is so cool in the clutch that the ice-water running through his veins has stopped global warming in its tracks."-- jscot

by bow4meow on Feb 23, 2009 12:38 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

55 looks good, until you compare it to with Jordan.

Also, IIRC they were 1st and 2nd round knockouts those 2 years? Each of the 3 years around it they were Champs.

by Zaig on Feb 23, 2009 2:26 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

2nd round

Without Jordan the Bulls swept the Cavaliers in the first round, then lost to the Knicks in 7 games in the 2nd round.

The 2nd year they had Jordan back at the end of the season, though he was probably a little rusty and not playing his best. They beat the Hornets 3-1 in the first round before losing 4-2 to the Magic in the 2nd round.

by trk on Feb 23, 2009 2:55 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

This is a good example

of the fact that it depends on who your teammates are! AI went to the NBA finals with a scrappy group of other guys who played D, set good screens and let him do his thang on offense. AI in his prime was a player you could build around, albeit it was unconventional. Dwight Howard wouldn’t make his teammates better if his teammates couldn’t shoot 3s. Elton Brand’s struggles in Philly are another example.

by kickbrass on Feb 22, 2009 7:09 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Yeah, it's a weird topic...

Dwight makes his team better.
Dwight creates open 3s for his teammates.
I don’t know if Dwight makes his teammates better though.

There’s no real logic behind it. You simply watch some guys and feel that everyone gets better because of them. I guess a prime example would be Rudy moving more when Sergio is on the court. Unfortunately, Sergio doesn’t have this affect on everyone.

by Zaig on Feb 23, 2009 2:28 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

it is tricky

I think that dedication to making your teammates better is very similar to the type of dedication it takes to be a great member of any community. It involves spending a lot of time and mental effort knowing your teammates and where to sacrifice an individual shot to setup a teammate who has a perfect shot, or even who really needs to get the ball in the perfect place to start building some confidence.

The most amazing players, imo, are guys like Russell, Bird, and Magic.. because they figured out from the get-go that the most important thing is winning and that they would spend a lot of their time during practice and in games doing things with the purpose of helping their teammates, not just involving them in plays. Jordan didn’t always get this and you can watch his development and how, when Phil joins the team, his biggest changes are entirely around how he could use the level of dominance he had attained individually to help his teammates.

One stat that I think needs to be developed more (and I’m sure many teams have ways of tracking aspects of this) is how a possession develops and how that relates to the result. Assists are such a poor measure of teamwork. It misses extra passes before shots. It also measures any made shot off an assist equally, but there is a difference between an assist that lead to a high percentage FG (and possible a 3 or a FT) and one that just happens to get to a guy who happens to get a shot to fall.

Many teams measure hustle stats and I think having access to these stats reveals a lot more than what we all look at..

"Slum dunk? You just go to the rim, and crush.. crush the ball in the rim."
- Nic Batum

by idoltime on Feb 22, 2009 9:27 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

assists continued

you cant forget would be assists when the scorer gets fouled and misses the bucket which doesn’t give credit to the assister.

The most hated Blazer is like the least hottest supermodel - Sabonis4Ever

by Philthyanimal on Feb 22, 2009 9:32 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Yeah

The league should add that as a new category, free throw assists, one free throw =1/2 assist.
OK maybe not the best idea but somehow the assist man should get credit.

by Dmartyparty on Feb 22, 2009 11:00 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

yea it'd be nice

If nothing else.. it would be nice if there was an easy to to count the number of points that a pass leads to.. something that would take into account free throws and three pointers (incl old fashioned ones)

"Slum dunk? You just go to the rim, and crush.. crush the ball in the rim."
- Nic Batum

by idoltime on Feb 22, 2009 11:52 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

I was going to bring up AI and Duncan as well..

Both are obviously very skilled at basketball. Both are perrenial all stars. The difference is that one wins rings, and the other sees every team he joins have a dropoff in winning %. Duncan and AI seem to be on opposite ends of the spectrum with this one.

AI is actually the reason I worry about Bayless a little bit. Shooting guards that are trapped in a pg body generally make me pretty nervous when they are asked to run a team. I think the thing Rex has going for him is that he is so young and inexperienced that he might be able to break down some of those bad pg habits that come from having a scorers instincts, and rebuild them. I think it is a bigger project than some would like to admit, but the Blazers have plenty of time to be patient…

RUDY > MJ

by myemic23 on Feb 23, 2009 10:43 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

That is my biggest Bayless fear

The AI factor.

by Zaig on Feb 23, 2009 2:30 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Shane Battier!!!!

That’s like asking “Hey would you rather sip on some ice cold lemonade, or drink transmission fluid out of a sweaty jock strap?”

Not saying Shane’s my favorite player, but you said it yourself, he’s a great team basketball player. It comes from playing a Duke, under Coach K, and just being an intelligent person. His stat line doesn’t jump out at you, but if you ever watch him play, you can see how he hurts teams in other ways.

Zach is the absolute king of scoring while losing. He only cares about getting his numbers so that he can blame the team’s failure on someone else. He’s missed (or gotten blocked) on so many isolation plays, which subsequently led to fast breaks and easy buckets for the other team, that I’ve lost count, along with any faith in him as a player. Not to mention he’s a total dumbass gang banger. Let it go Zach, no one cares that you think you’re hard, stop trying to keep it real, you’re a millionaire.

Blazers Prophecy.
3-5 championships in next decade.
You heard it here first.

by mjm6783 on Feb 22, 2009 9:05 AM PST reply actions 2 recs

Speaking of Duke

I think Grant Hill is another player who makes his teammates better. Amare has got a lot of Zach in him. Thank God we didn’t get Amare.

by BrewDude on Feb 22, 2009 10:25 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

rec'd for the first sentence.

I love that metaphor.

Jerryd Bayless has two emotions: Kill and Win.

"I want to put points on your face."
-Rudy to Pau Gasol

TRADE TRAVIS OUTLAW FOR A CHAIR

by rockingharder on Feb 22, 2009 9:53 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Mmmm....transmission fluid

And here I’ve been drinking it out of dirty sweat socks. Shows you what I know.

by DonkeyShins on Feb 23, 2009 8:50 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

You have to strain it through the socks to get rid of some of the impurities.

hakkaa päälle !

by timg56 on Feb 23, 2009 11:30 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Wow!

That is one of the best articles I have ever read… and I have read thousands. Very informative and interesting if you are patient enough to read the 8 pages.

It is great what the article says about conventional basketball statistics, probabilities and luck. The way that Battier is described makes me see a parallel with Batum’s approach.

by QuebecBlzrFan on Feb 22, 2009 9:48 AM PST reply actions 0 recs

Ken makes BE better

"I determined early in my career, the only important statistic in basketball is the final score." Bill Russell

by Dragline on Feb 22, 2009 12:32 PM PST reply actions 2 recs

Way better than Travis does

by oregonslee on Feb 22, 2009 12:41 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Thank you, Tom.

You aren’t getting my Bud Light.

"You are never (fanatically) dedicated to something you have complete confidence in." Robert Pirsig

by -ken on Feb 22, 2009 4:44 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Batum

Nic (and Rudy) have a court sense that permeates their game which adds to the team as a whole…some of their contributions never show up….being in the right place at the right time ….disrupting passing lanes, breaking teams out of their sets, being aware of the play enough to anticipate where that loose ball might show up or go, being in position for a rebound that might otherwise have gotten away . . just being in the proper position on defense and rotating properly…

Sad to see Bayless getting dissed here…is it just Sergio love? Being unstoppable to the rim makes those around you better – - because once you show that you can do that, defenses collapse on you and you end up with 8 assists….prob 4 of those were for dunks — – and those should count twice…

when you have shown you can & will drive and finish at the rim, it puts the whole defense back on it’s heels and creates space for the jump shooters….if you don’t show the league that first, you’ll never get the respect you need to get the defensive attention that creates the opportunities for assists – - – anyway – - my 2 cents…commence complaining…

"..[Travis Outlaw] could jump, grab a rafter, eat a sandwich, and then dunk.."
tmundal 12/30/07

by LetsBlaze on Feb 22, 2009 1:10 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

He's not hating on Bayless or loving Sergio

“(This is a far different thing than saying I wouldn’t want either of them on my team.)”

You’ll also notice that he doesn’t mention Sergio in the positive category either.

by Zaig on Feb 22, 2009 7:06 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

I disagree about Nic

At least at this point in his development, the Blazers are better off when he isn’t playing. I think he has the right mindset and will develop the skills, though.

by kickbrass on Feb 22, 2009 7:10 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Nic has excellent +/- numbers though

That seems to indicate that the Blazers are better off when he is playing.

by trk on Feb 22, 2009 11:57 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

+/- numbers have a lot to do with rotation

Unlike the other starters who play more often throughout the game, Nic mostly plays with the starters at the start of the halves. I think this says more about what +/- means than anything Nic is specifically doing.

"Slum dunk? You just go to the rim, and crush.. crush the ball in the rim."
- Nic Batum

by idoltime on Feb 23, 2009 8:50 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

take a look at the +/- in our recent losses

It seems to me that our poor 1st quarters correlated very strongly with Batum. I just don’t think he’s all the way there yet. He just needs some time.

by kickbrass on Feb 23, 2009 10:16 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

I would not at all be surprised

To see Nic’s performance improve next year – however, his minutes are sure to go down unless we move people in the off-season (perhaps Frye is packaged, Trout moves to exclusively to the 4 and Batum becomes the White Unit SF). I think his biggest problems are:

1. Rookie nerves
2. Hitting the rookie wall
3. Still thinking too much

He’s got a nice shooting stroke, is an excellent defender, has great court vision and can run baseline-to-baseline like a gazelle. I’m high on Batum.

by DonkeyShins on Feb 23, 2009 8:52 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

I am on the other side of you in regards to Nic...

I love what he brings to the game. He played very well against Atlanta, despite only getting 2 rebounds and 2 points on 1 of 6 shooting. If Outlaw goes 1 for 6 in a game, you can pretty much guarantee he is urting the team. Batum brings so much else to the game with his hustle and defense that don’t show up in the boxscore. The more I watch Batum, the more I want to see him take some minutes away from Outlaw. I have really liked his contributions as of late….

RUDY > MJ

by myemic23 on Feb 23, 2009 10:52 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

The OP does seem unnecessarily hard on Bayless

just because of how early it is in his career, but at the same time, being able to get to the rim doesn’t automatically make everyone around you better. It could, potentially, but there are plenty of guys with a similar ability to get to the rim or draw fouls that are do almost nothing to make their teammates better. Guys like AI, Maggette, Starbury, or Van Exel are/were great at getting to the rack, but outside of getting their numbers, they never really seemed to elevate players around themselves.

Just like it’s a fallacy to say that because Sergio can pass well he automatically makes everyone around himself better, saying Bayless makes people better just because he can get to the rack is just as bad.

by Royster on Feb 22, 2009 11:22 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Agreed

The OP didn’t mention Sergio as one that makes the others around him better.

Sergio makes guys who move around him better. Sadly, that’s only Rudy and Przybilla from what I’ve seen. Batum probably would if he was on the second unit, but his job is to hit 3s, run fast breaks, and play D.

Last night was a session on why you move. Yes, the Clippers were beat up, but Roy was still getting free layups that he didn’t have to create. This wins games because they are 95% shots and they requite no more effort than normal running. Creating your own layups typically means tougher layups and more moves.

Back to the topic at hand. Sergio needs a certain type of player for his game to improve them. Portland isn’t loaded with that type of player, which… is probably why he’s not long for this team barring some beefing up over the summer. (I still think his size is why his defense seems off at times and why he never draws fouls even when he gets floored.)

by Zaig on Feb 23, 2009 2:38 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Not only would Shane fit in here like a glove,

Nate would LOVE him. He is a prototypical Nate player.

My favorite teams are the Blazers and any team that is playing the Lakers.

by OCBlazerFan1 on Feb 22, 2009 2:14 PM PST reply actions 1 recs

rec for truth...

RUDY > MJ

by myemic23 on Feb 23, 2009 10:52 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

a better way to put it

than “making your teammates better” is to use the term “make the game easier for your teammates”. that’s really what it comes down to. i can’t take credit for that idea, btw—i stole it from Eric Snow on NBATV. he’s a very smart guy.

roy, blake, joel, and nic—as well as Rudy, often in spectacular fashion—all make the game easier for teammates game-in and game-out. they make the right plays at the right time, generally make very few errors, they communicate, etc. even when those guys don’t shoot well, they still contribute heavily. this is also true of LMA, who always seems to be in the middle of things when it feels like the whole team is firing on all cylinders.

by Biddy77 on Feb 22, 2009 6:24 PM PST reply actions 0 recs