Why the Sessions silence?

by meru on Jul 17, 2009 12:33 PM PDT

Here's a question: has there ever been a single mention even of the name of Ramon Sessions from anyone officially connected with the Blazers? If there has, I haven't seen it. Why? The depressing interpretation is that Pritchard/Nate really believe that Blake is a "better fit". This is supported by Pritchard saying (to Rick Kamla when interviewed during one of the non-Blazer Summer League games, I forget which) that we "don't need a traditional PG because of Brandon" (I'm paraphrasing). This belief meant that we didn't pursue Andre Miller at all, and I fear it is meaning the same for Sessions. In fact, Sessions is one of the players getting no love in free agency. The first mention of him I've seen all Summer was Mark Stein saying yesterday that the Clippers are said to prefer him over Iverson. This would be odd for two reasons: (1) it would be startling good sense for that benighted franchise, and (2) what about Baron Davis and last year's athletic PG draftee Taylor? Is it only us that thinks that Sessions is a quality starter in this league?

Also, while I'm asking, I read somewhere that the Bucks had signed Carlos Arroyo, but now I can't see any reference to this claim. Anyone else heard this? That and Brandon Jennings' great play in Summer League (he's a TRUE PG and the most fun player to watch in the whole thing) along with Ridnour would seem to make Sessions not a great priority for a rebuilding franchise.

Tweet Comment 30 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

I forgot to mention

that the Bucks, now that they’ve signed Ilyasova, are perilously close to luxury tax hell. Even a relatively non-toxic offer to Sessions would probably do it.

by meru on Jul 17, 2009 12:36 PM PDT reply actions

I agree. I'm pretty sure Sessions would be a nice upgrade.

Another player who can create and get to the rack would only open up more possibilities. And what young PG wouldn’t want to play with all of our scorers and big men. I just don’t see why we haven’t gone after him, unless KP has his eye on someone better.

by dario argento on Jul 17, 2009 12:48 PM PDT reply actions

i think the biggest reason

we havent gone after him is that he is not a good three point shooter. I have also heard (havent seen since I have only watched him a couple of times) that he is a pretty bad defender.

by ggassen85 on Jul 17, 2009 12:53 PM PDT reply actions

He is not. He holds his opponents to a PER of 14, which is better than most point guards incl. Paul and Harris and Rondo

Then again he doesn’t play all his minutes against starters. And they have offensive PERs above 25 or even 30, whereas he is around 21 which is still a lot better than anyone we have on PG.

by Norsktroll on Jul 17, 2009 3:28 PM PDT up reply actions

Sessions

is a good young player that slashes and gets to the hoop, but has a broke jumper. We have that in Bayless, and Bayless will likely develop a better shot. I know Sessions is more proven than Bayless, but I think we would have to pay Sessions more than he is worth.

I am a big believer that any point guard that plays with Roy needs to be able to shoot the at least a little bit. Sessions is 9-41 from downtown in 96 career games. Gotta shoot the ball better than that to be an effective point guard on the Blazers.

by Blazas! on Jul 17, 2009 1:05 PM PDT reply actions

good points

and Bayless is less than half the price of Sessions for the next 3 years. So why would we do that?

Plus there is the prospect of having our money tied up another week only to see the Bucks match, which they likely would.

How did you guys win that?
"We scored enough points. We scored 107, they scored 105.
-Nate McMillan Postgame, 3/4/2009

by douglast on Jul 17, 2009 1:08 PM PDT up reply actions

Bayless is NOT Sessions!

Sessions has the Bucks record for assists in a game (24?). Bayless doesn’t look likely to hit double figures any time soon. Sessions also has a triple double (against the Lakers, I believe).

What would be bad would be if Sessions had shot a lot from three and still had a crappy %. But he hardly shoots from there. That’s good! You don’t want a young player gunning. That doesn’t mean he can’t develop a three pointer. Early in his career Rip Hamilton NEVER shot from 3, but now is great at it. Trevor Ariza developed a three point shot this year alone. Shots can be fixed, and the stand still 3-pointer is the easiest NBA skill to learn. On the other hand Bayless is attempting to learn the absolute hardest skill – running a team – that Sessions already has.

by meru on Jul 17, 2009 1:10 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs

The problem is to play PG for the Blazers he’d need to be able to play well off the ball and hit open jumpers or else he’s really only a viable option when Roy isn’t in the game, Sessions hasn’t proven he can do either yet as his strengths run counter to that style of play. Being able to penetrate and create his own offense and others would be great if they were a bonus on top of his being able to play without the ball and hit open threes. If he can’t do that reliably, we either play Roy off the ball which isn’t his greatest strength or allow teams to sag off of Sessions to stop penetration.

Sessions is a good young PG, he’s just not the type of PG we need for this team to work well. In all honesty, Blake is probably a better option at starting PG than Sessions would be for us.

by Bryan72076 on Jul 17, 2009 2:54 PM PDT up reply actions

Now here's where we get into the thick of it

What if Sessions was the back-up PG? Now the Bucks aren’t paying OR starting Sessions. He would probably take one, and get onto a contender while at it. He would be great for our back-up, and he would be really valuable as trade bait or a better alternative than Bayless. Picking up a rising point guard seriously capable of running a team during the only time we have extra cash for the next decade seems to be a no-brainer. He could be the best back-up point guard in the league or see how he goes with Roy and the starters (yes, the 3 is really helpful there) and if he’s not the right fit anyone would be obtainable if we put the right number of chips into play for a trade. He could be a major one. He has so much value in so many ways. I would like to see something happen, even if he wasn’t picked up to play the starting role.

It took my two years to come up with an avatar and sig
and this is the best I could come up with.

by einman77 on Jul 18, 2009 11:26 AM PDT up reply actions

how could a young Andre Miller clone not be worth taking a run at

That’s right. Steve Blake can shoot the 3. Let’s just ignore all his other deficiencies.Is Bayless even ready to be a solid backup?

by 52therim on Jul 17, 2009 1:31 PM PDT via mobile reply actions

And it's not unheard of that a player can improve his perimeter shot

Heaven knows we hope Bayless’ shooting improves over last season. Sessions FG% and eFG% is excellent. There’s something to be said about creating easier opportunities for yourself and your teammates. We need interior scoring. We have perimeter scorers. We have interior non-scorers. We have Brandon & sometimes LMA that take it inside. Better interior scoring would make us a better team.

by 52therim on Jul 17, 2009 2:04 PM PDT via mobile reply actions

Most players do improve their jump shot

Remember Jerome Kersey in his later, jump-shooting years? He played for the Spurs and Lakers. My laker fan friend called him “the curse.” It was hilarious.

by goblazer1 on Jul 17, 2009 2:19 PM PDT up reply actions

just to go along with that

look at Travis! While I know he’s not that popular amongst Blazers fans right now, the dude did improve by leaps and bounds from when he first came into the league. A lot of it has to do with work ethic.

"Smile! You're on a poster!!" - Mike Rice

by lefty6283 on Jul 17, 2009 6:53 PM PDT up reply actions

Because he's not a good "fit" or has "character issues"

I believe the reason Portland hasn’t gone after a lot of the available free agents is because they have some information or believe they have some information about that player that leads them to believe the player either does not want to play here, would not fit in basketball or personality-wise, or has some character issues that risk the team’s chemistry. Of course, they would not be likely to talk about such assessments, so what you hear is silence.

by goblazer1 on Jul 17, 2009 2:15 PM PDT reply actions

Blazers brought Sessions in twice two years ago

They took a long look at him. A looooong look.

Ultimately, they decided that while he would probably be a solid contributor in the NBA, he doesn’t have a skill set that meshes well with what the Blazers are trying to do on offense or defense. Specifically, our offense isn’t predicated on movement, which players like Sessions and Miller thrive in, but is instead almost entirely pick and rolls with the occasional back and cross screen.

To be blunt: guards who aren’t significant threats as shooters are not going to be coming to Portland. Bayless’ greatest shortcoming this past year wasn’t even his terrible A/T ratio or decision making, it was the fact that he shot the ball so poorly from the perimeter. If he doesn’t shoot better this year, the rest doesn’t matter.

by baduk on Jul 17, 2009 2:55 PM PDT reply actions 1 recs

Hollinger

has said he is the second best pick and roll player in the NBA. He did not shoot that well last year, but has a Roy like ability to get the hoop and is fouled at a very high rate.

If there is a possibility of teaching him how to shoot at a decent clip from behind the arc and you can get him for less than a full MLE contract then it seems like a no brainer. Dude is still only 23.

We will probably hear more about him if KP cannot land a a targeted player in a lopsided trade.

Life is exhausting when you are this stupid.

I will talk about DeJuan Blair no more forever

by jonestr on Jul 17, 2009 8:21 PM PDT up reply actions

I hope so

I really really do.

It took my two years to come up with an avatar and sig
and this is the best I could come up with.

by einman77 on Jul 18, 2009 11:29 AM PDT up reply actions

This may be the reason why

Portland heavily favors 3pt shooters:
http://basketball-statistics.com/howtheshootingabilitiesofpointguardsaffectoffenses.html

by Pheesh on Jul 17, 2009 3:36 PM PDT reply actions 1 recs

and that's why

I’ve been mentioned Keyon Dooling for the past week or so

When reached 39 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!

by two4larue on Jul 17, 2009 10:01 PM PDT up reply actions

Incomplete graph

Is that a graph of all time or last season? Playoffs, regular season? Starters or back-ups? Winning percentage? I mean, if we’re talking about a Golden State Warriors phenomenon, I’ll pass.

It took my two years to come up with an avatar and sig
and this is the best I could come up with.

by einman77 on Jul 18, 2009 11:38 AM PDT up reply actions

Also..

it shouldn’t start at 102 and go to 114 – a two point difference would look negligible if it started at 0, but here it looks gigantic.

I know two points can win games, yadda yadda, but exaggerating the point doesn’t serve anyone.

It's = It Is
Its = Belongs to It

by 12sharks on Jul 20, 2009 9:53 AM PDT up reply actions

Remember, silence could mean that a deal is in the works

When there are a lot of rumors, the deal never happens. When we hear nothing (a la Bayless draft last year) it could mean something.

"What we have here, is a failure to communicate."

by with_a_z on Jul 17, 2009 5:13 PM PDT reply actions

To the OP

did you try the search engine

I know that I have at least a dozen comments mentioning Sessions, and argento has definitely spoke out on him as well as Norkstroll.

apologies to everyone else I have seen discuss Sessions.

Life is exhausting when you are this stupid.

I will talk about DeJuan Blair no more forever

by jonestr on Jul 17, 2009 8:23 PM PDT reply actions

He's asking..

if anyone “officially connected to the Blazers” has mentioned anything.

It's = It Is
Its = Belongs to It

by 12sharks on Jul 20, 2009 9:54 AM PDT up reply actions

I think it's probable

looking at the TurkeyStew thingie that we want a play-making forward, allowing us the luxury of 2 combo guards in the backcourt (Roy and Bayless in this case).
Getting Sessions or Miller would be giving up on that plan.
Although I can’t think of any other forwards who fit the bill besides Prince.

by TheThinWhiteDuke on Jul 17, 2009 8:53 PM PDT reply actions

I can’t think of any other forwards who fit the bill besides Prince.

Lamar Odom?

When reached 39 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!

by two4larue on Jul 17, 2009 10:02 PM PDT up reply actions

He's really a PF

Plus I just don’t trust him to work hard for us.

by TheThinWhiteDuke on Jul 17, 2009 10:10 PM PDT up reply actions

Great article on Sessions

…<a href=“http://[URL=”http://myespn.go.com/blogs/truehoop/0-42-95/The-Best-Free-Agent-Nobody-is-Talking-About.html"]" >including a video interview with Dan D’Antoni (Mike’s bro, and Knicks assistant) who says he could become one of the top guards in the NBA.

by meru on Jul 18, 2009 10:35 AM PDT reply actions

I'll try that again

The article is here.

by meru on Jul 18, 2009 10:37 AM PDT reply actions

Can't shoot the 3

This is Sessions’ problem and probably why they haven’t targeted him. Isn’t he just a more experienced version of Bayless? He’s a scoring PG who can’t shoot from the outside. I’m ok with a scoring PG, because we have Roy, but he better be able to knock down the open 3.

by oregon_fan on Jul 18, 2009 10:41 AM PDT reply actions