Add Steve Nash, Nate Robinson and Title number 2
Both can create there own shot, penetrate the defense, run and Shoot from distance. Steve nash can still hit the three with great accuracy, and is one of the best passers in the game. Nate is more of a streaky 3 pt shooter at 35% for his career. Steve Nash Shot 50% for the field, 44% from 3 and over 93% from the line.
Steve is old, tough and wise, Nate is young, tough and a little crazy. I believe We can aquire both by signing Nate for around 5 or 6 million a year and trading Bayless and Outlaw to Phoenix for Nash. This leaves us with the question of what to do with Steve Blake.. I have no Idea but that is why Pritchard makes the big bucks.
I just love looking at this rotation:
48 Min PG Nash(28), Robinson(10), Roy (10)
48 Min SG Roy (16), Rudy(22), Robinson (11)
48 Min SF Batum (13), Webster(23) Roy (11)
48 Min PF Aldridge (35), Batum (13),
48 Min C Oden (28), Pryzbilla (20)
M
Roy 37
Aldridge 35
Oden 28
Nash 28
Batum 26
Webster 23
Fernandez 22
Robinson 21
Pryzbilla 20
That gives a great nine man rotation where everyone plays at least 20 minutes a game. Obviously you have to factor in injuries and maybe someone playing better than expected and someone playing worse, so minutes will always be fluid. What this line up gives us though is Some great experience with Nash, Pryzbilla and Roy, some almost all star play in Lamarcus, and a ton of up and coming talent (Oden, Batum, Fernandez, Webster, Robinson.) We would have some defense with Pryz and Batum, with up an coming defenders in Roy and Aldridge. Our shooting would be lights out with Nash, Webster, Fernadez, Roy, Robinson and Aldridge….a little bit from Batum as well. We could post up with Oden, Aldridge and Roy(although this would be one of our weaker areas.) Drive and dish, and pick n roll could be unstoppable with the shooters spreading the floor, Nash, Roy and Robinson running the show, and Aldridge, Oden and Pryz diving to the hoop. The Blazers would have Great length and rebounding ability with Pryz, Oden, Aldridge, Batum, Webster and Roy. Finally they would have great leadership and clutch play from Nash and one of the 2 or 3 best closers in the game in Brandon Roy. I really think this would be a team that has almost everything it needs(maybe a little concern with perimeter defense, but I think Roy, Batum Robinson and Webster can all be above average in time).
I think our biggest weaknesses last year were toughness, defense and lack of shot creators on offense. With the addition of Robinson and Nash I think we get tougher and add two good to great playmakers. The defense will get better as our young players better understand how to do it. We have guys will all the tools to be good defenders, they just need experience.
If the ball bounces are way and we get a little bit of growth from the young players thru out the year anything would possible, including a championship.
0 recs |
12 comments
Comments
i want bayless and outlaw
i dont understand why everyone has given up on bayless already
The Blazers will play beautiful basketball.
Brandon will shoot the lights out. Blake will run and LMA will finish strong at the hoop. Bayless will play because we’ll be so far ahead in the 4th quarter, giving all the Jerryd fans something to smile about.
But wait, that’s not all. Rudy will go 5 of 5 from distance. Batum will posterize someone. And Channing will NOT lead the team in points.
qoute from ofred
by Kingzilla on Jul 4, 2009 11:28 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I haven't given up on Bayless
I was just thiking they could be a great team now with the additions I mentioned. Bayless may or may not be a player down the road, I do thnk it’s safe to say he isn’t quite ready to contribute to a Title contender
This is Jack burton from the PorkChop Express and I'm talkin to whoever's out there.....
by Jack Burton on Jul 4, 2009 11:42 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
out of the players on our roster only Broy is ready to contribute to a title contender
We are not a title contender yet guys the playoffs went to everyones head next season ( after this one) we will be with Oden Batum Rudy and Baylees gaining more experience but our role is not title contender its playoff spoiler
The Blazers will play beautiful basketball.
Brandon will shoot the lights out. Blake will run and LMA will finish strong at the hoop. Bayless will play because we’ll be so far ahead in the 4th quarter, giving all the Jerryd fans something to smile about.
But wait, that’s not all. Rudy will go 5 of 5 from distance. Batum will posterize someone. And Channing will NOT lead the team in points.
qoute from ofred
by Kingzilla on Jul 4, 2009 12:04 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Problem
Batum isn’t built to play the 4, and there is no way Robinson can play the 2. He is way too small
There are no stupid questions, only stupid people
by blazersfan50 on Jul 4, 2009 11:30 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Nate Can play the 2
Just not with Nash at Point, when Roy is playing the one you move Robinson to the 2 gaurd. I think Batum will be able to play some 4, I agree his slight frame could be problematic though.
This is Jack burton from the PorkChop Express and I'm talkin to whoever's out there.....
by Jack Burton on Jul 4, 2009 11:40 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I don't want to get better this year if it means making the team worse for the next five years.
The point is to use the cap space to build, not gut and stuff.
by raoulduke on Jul 4, 2009 11:51 AM PDT reply actions 1 recs
If we really did this deal for nash
and had to include B-Rex outlaw and/or Blake why not just bring over Koponnen?
by DephlatorMouse on Jul 4, 2009 12:15 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Nash's playing style is completely incompatible with Nate's offense
He’s also horrible on D and isn’t too far off from a precipitous decline.
by ninjasocks on Jul 4, 2009 12:18 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Really?
That sounds like a self destruct plan. Nash is one or two injuries away from retirement and Nate is a shrimp and neither of them would fit our system. Bayless stays.
"I been ridin' the midnight train, got ice water in my veins." -Bob Dylan
"Sasha? That's a sissy name." -Mike Rice
by koyote on Jul 4, 2009 1:40 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

by 
























