Out of the frying pan into the fire: the Blazers imminent playing time controversy

Have you checked your calendar lately?  In the next two weeks, the Blazers are going to be getting Steve, Rudy, and Nic back.  For the first time, the team will have its full complement of eight perimeter players.  On one hand, it is great to see help on the horizon, on the other, this is sure to create another round of PT controversy.  Coming on the heals of months of controversy about our PG rotation, this isn't likely to be pretty.  

Nate has had trouble dealing with four guards, now he will have five (plus Mills).  Equally important, Nate's primary way of dealing with the problem, which has been to play a lot of 3 guard lineups, is likely to become less attractive as the team adjusts to having both Nic and Martell for the first time.  Given our lack of a true center, playing a real SF, rather than a 3 guard line-up, is one way to improve our rebounding and defense.

So what should we do, and is Nate likely to strike the right balance?  Follow me across the jump.

I'm not particularly optimistic that this transition is going to be smooth.  Guys are going to be rusty coming back from injury.  Guys who have been playing are going to be disrupted by a changed rotation.  Everyone is going to be nervous about their place in the rotation and "trying too hard" is almost inevitable.  Couple these realities with the fact that Nate's handling of the PG rotation over the past few months has not exactly inspired confidence, and I think there is reason for real concern.

Let's look at each of the three perimeter positions:

SF:  I am starting here, because I think this is the easiest position.  Martell has been coming around.  It has taken a while for him to knock a year of rust off his game, but his performance over the past couple of weeks seems to indicate that while still streaky, he is becoming productive on a fairly consistent basis.  I think it is pretty obvious that you continue to start Martell and gradually ramp up Nic's minutes based on production and defense.  Both guys have some general similarity in their game.  Martell is a shooter who can defend, and who has the athleticism to make plays in the open court and occasionally around the rim. Nic is a defender who can shoot, and who has the athleticism to make plays in the open court and occasionally around the rim.

Both guys help our defense, both guys can spread the floor for our penetrators, and both guys help our rebounding compared to playing a three guard line-up.  Obviously it will depend on match-ups, but I don't think it is going to make sense to continue to play 3 guard lie-ups for more than a maximum of 10 minutes per game. 

SG:  Roy is obviously going to get the bulk of the minutes here.  Hopefully, Nate will no longer have to play him as much, but lets face it, the team needs its star on the floor for at least 36 minutes per game.

The back-up minutes are more of a challenge.  Rudy is obviously the teams back-up SG.  He is a proven international star and set the record for mosts 3 pointers by a rookie last season.  On the other hand, Bayless has shown he can be an extremely dynamic scorer off the bench, and while not a great defender against longer, taller SGs, he is no longer a defensive liability, using strength and quickness to make up what he lacks in length.  

Rudy is likely to get most of these minutes, but there may be certain situations where Bayless would be a more powerful weapon off the bench.  Against teams without dominant shot blockers, or late in quarters where an opponent is in the penalty, Bayless' ability to get to the line may be a better choice.

Over the long term, Bayless' development does create the possibility that Rudy could be traded.  I doubt that the team would be willing to part with such a promising young star on an affordable rookie contract, but Rudy would likely have the highest trade value of any Blazer I would be willing to part with.  If KP could score an outstanding big man (not past his prime) it would be worth considering. What do the rest of you think?

PG:  It doesn't take a rocket scientist to see that 4 PGs is too many.  Somebody almost has to go by the start of next season.  

Mills is the least accomplished of the four, but he doesn't seem like the guy who is most likely to be departing.  Why would the team have signed Mills, if they were not convinced that he had potential?  As a late 2nd round pick who has not had a chance to show much, he has minimal trade value.  The only logical reason to sign him is to develop him, either for our team, or for a future trade.  Mills has certainly shown flashes of real potential.  At a minimum, he seems like a good candidate to be the teams third string, change of pace, see how he develops, emergency back-up for next season.

Bayless isn't going anywhere unless the Blazers get back a young, accomplished, starting PG.  There shouldn't be much doubt at this point that Bayless has enormous potential as a scorer.  He is still working to develop consistency on his jumper, and he is still learning how to deal with NBA shoot blockers, but his potential as a shooter and a penetrator is there for all to see.  Very few players have Bayless' combination of a lethal first step, strength to finish at the rim, and the ability to stop on a dime and rise up for the jumper.  Once he gets a bit more consistent, he is going to be virtually impossible to defend one on one.  If you get up on him, he will blow by you.  If you sag off him, he will rise-up and hit the jumper.  

Bayless already requires constant attention from the opposing defense, this is creating openings for Roy and for the perimeter shooters.  Just thinking of Bayless and Oden (or Aldridge) running a full range of P & R options has me drooling.  Judging from the limited success Bayless has already had with Juwan and Dante, I can only imagine how successful he could be with someone as big, fast, and powerful as Oden.

Bayless has also made progress in three other areas besides scoring. 1)  He seems to have gotten his foul rate under control.  2)  He has made big strides in reducing TOs and now has the lowest TOV% of any of our PGs.  And 3) he is quickly becoming a pretty decent distributor and now has a higher Assist % than Blake. He certainly isn't Andre Miller,  let alone Chris Paul, but he is a guy who is rapidly figuring out how to use his ability to penetrate to create openings for teammates.  How good of a PG Bayless ultimately becomes is still something of a question, but the oft repeated lament that, "he isn't a PG, and never will be," should be laid to rest.

Given that all the injuries have most likely taken the team out of WCF contention, I think developing Bayless, in general, and nurturing a Bayless/Roy back-court, in particular, should be among the teams highest priorities.   Whether the team is better with Miller, or Blake, or Bayless, on the floor in a certain situation is almost beside the point.  Bayless is no longer a liability defensively or as a distributor, so whatever marginal difference may arguably exist is outweighed, in my mind, by the need to develop Bayless for next season and beyond.  If Bayless isn't getting at least 20 minutes a night, I think the team is making a huge mistake.  If Nate is responsible for that mistake, I will be seriously questioning his future with the team.

Miller  is clearly the best all-around PG on the team.  A glance at his career stats makes this obvious, and a look at the team's play since Dre became the starter confirms this reality.  Miller isn't a perfect compliment to Roy because of his limited shooting range, but they are effective in taking turns as the initiators of the offense during the first three quarters of the game.  Miller helps get our other players involved and helps us score a few more easy hoops with fast breaks, lobs, and penetration.  We are still predominantly a jump shooting team with-out our big guys in there, but Miller makes us less so.

Personally,  I think Nate has been using Miller effectively for the past few games.  I want to see Miller with Roy as an alternative scorer during the first three quarters when Roy does not dominate the ball as much.  In the fourth, I like seeing Roy paired with Bayless and Martell or Rudy.  Bayless requires a lot of defensive attention because he, like Roy, is a multi-threat scorer who can shoot or penetrate.  Miller can't shoot, and Blake can't penetrate.  Bayless can take the ball on roughly a third of the possessions to give Roy a bit of a breather and use his penetration and the P&R to get open looks for other LMA, Juwan, and Martell or Rudy.

Blake,  in my mind, is the odd man out.  What he brings to the table is largely replicated by other players.  He may be slightly better as a team defender than Miller or Bayless, although I would argue the point, but whatever difference there may be is probably slight.  He is certainly the best shooter, but that skill is less critical with the return of Rudy and Nic, and with improvement by Bayless and Martell.  

The bottom line is pretty clear.  Blake isn't good enough to be the starter, and he is in the way of developing our two young PGs.  If it comes down to a choice between Blake and Miller, choosing Blake hurts the team in the short run.  Miller is a better scorer and a better distributor.  Miller is also a better mentor for the two young PGs whose games are built around their ability to penetrate.  Blake might be nice to have for the rest of the season because of his ability to shoot and his comfort with a lot of our players, but he is almost certainly not a good fit for the team long term.  Blake's utility to the team largely rests on his ability to play off of Roy.  Blake is not a good fit with the second unit which is filled with shooters and needs a penetrating PG who can push the pace to take advantage of the second unit's athleticism.

If you are not going to resign Blake in the summer, does it make sense to keep him for the rest of the season?  I don't think so.  If we were in contention, his shooting and steady hand would be valuable, but if we are not in contention, what marginal value does Blake bring to the team?  Bayless is a better scorer.  Bayless has a lower TOV %.  Bayless has a higher Assist %.  Bayless is probably a better one-on-one defender.  Blake is a more proven spot-up shooter, but this season, even that has been very inconsistent for long periods.

Conclusion:  Nate is going to have an extremely difficult time getting adequate minutes for four guards given that we will have both Nic and Martell at SF for the first time.  Trying to find minutes for five guards is going to be impossible.  If Nate reverts to overplaying Steve, as has been his pattern in the past, it is likely going to create significant unhappiness on the part of Dre, Jerryd, and Rudy.  Steve is a nice guy who has done a lot for this team over the past three seasons, but his time is now past.  The team has outgrown his skill set.  KP should try to see what he can get for Blake's expiring contract.  Blake could potentially be paired with a variety of other assets to create a package that might return a badly needed big man who could help us both in the short term and for the long haul.