Is It Still Bayless Time?
Back on December 10 -- 23 games into the season-- I crunched the numbers and argued that increasing Jerryd Bayless's playing time was more than warranted. In limited minutes as the Blazers' third string point guard, Bayless had shot the lights out, drew fouls at an absurd rate, limited his turnovers, played solid defense on the league's back-up guards and promised a scoring spark that a flat-at-the-time Blazers team badly needed. Steve Blake was struggling with his shot, Andre Miller wasn't yet clicking on all cylinders with his new teammates and the Blazers were just coming to grips with the loss of Greg Oden.
It's been less than three months but so much has happened. Blake got pneumonia and then was traded, Andre Miller has come around, Brandon Roy joined Greg Oden on the shelf for a month. As the team inches closer to full health and this season's final stretch approaches there's a new confidence in the air. Where does all of that leave Jerryd Bayless?
A Look at Bayless's Playing Time
To find out where Bayless stands, let's look back at what he has accomplished this season. To begin, let's take a quick look at how his minutes have fluctuated. Click here for a full size version.
Moving left to right on the X axis moves us through the season from start to current. The Y axis is simply Bayless's raw minutes played per game.
If I was a self-absorbed columnist or drive-time radio host, I might take credit for Bayless's sharp increase in playing time immediately after I posted "It's Bayless Time." I'm not. So instead you can see that Nate McMillan adjusted to the losses of Greg Oden and Joel Przybilla, the continued absence of Travis Outlaw and Nicolas Batum and the sickness of Steve Blake by expanding Bayless's role off the bench. Bayless responded with a few monster December nights: 29 trash-talking points in a nationally-televised win over Phoenix on 12/17 and a season-high 31 in a huge road win over San Antonio on 12/23. But there were some forgettable nights too: a cringe-inducing 3-13 in a 12/19 loss at Orlando and an unproductive o-fer in a 12/28 home loss to Philadelphia.
In late January and early February, Bayless briefly moved into a starting two guard role due to the extended absence of Brandon Roy. Around that time, he enjoyed his most consistent scoring streak of the season: 8 straight games in double-figures. Unfortunately, that production didn't translate to Wins as the Blazers went just 3-5.
While a large bump in minutes in January and February might have been expected, it didn't really materialize. Despite starting for a stretch, Bayless hasn't topped 30 minutes played since January 18th. He hit his monthly high-water mark in January -- at a shade under 24 minutes per game -- but that barely topped his December numbers. February saw the trade of Steve Blake -- which theoretically opened up an extended playing time window for Bayless -- but the returns of Nicolas Batum and Brandon Roy wound up cutting sharply into his run and point production. That's a lot of moving pieces around him.
Here are Bayless's top-down monthly splits courtesy of Basketball-Reference. Click here for a full size version.
Revisiting Bayless's Key Metrics
Shifting roles -- from point guard to two guard and from scrub to rotation player to starter to rotation player -- is one of those difficult facts of NBA life. To what degree has Bayless succeeded in dealing with those changes?
If you glance quickly at his monthly splits above, you might notice that his shooting percentage seems mostly steady while his minutes and points show related peaks and valleys. You'll also notice that his three point shooting since the turn of the new year has been abysmal. To fully address Bayless's production given his varied playing time, it's helpful to return to advanced, per-possession statistics to gauge his impact.
Let's look back at some of the advanced metrics I used to argue the case for increasing his playing time. I have listed the numbers I used back in December side-by-side with the numbers he has put up over the last 20 games.
These metrics include Offense PPP (overall offensive efficiency), Defense PPP (individual defensive efficiency), Offense %FT (the percentage of possessions a player uses that end with him being fouled), Offense %TO (the percentage of possessions that end with him committing a turnover) and Defense Foul Rate (the percentage of his team's defensive possessions during which a player commits a foul). All but the final measure are courtesy of Synergy Sports. The last measure is courtesy of Basketball Prospectus.
I've also included Andre Miler's numbers for an easy side-by-side comparison as I did back in December.
I find these updated numbers quite revealing. Remember: these are splits rather than cumulative stats so we're comparing how these players have played over the last 20 games to how they played during the first 23 games rather than looking at an updated, running total.
First Miller. As expected, his offensive efficiency (PPP) and turnover rate (%TO) show late-season improvement as he had some time to adjust to his new team and is fully entrenched as the starting point guard. Those first string point duties have caused his defensive efficiency to take a step back. This isn't a huge surprise: playing one on one defense against the league's starting point guards is an infinitely more difficult task than checking back-up point guards. His shift to starting point guard has also led to a late-season drop in %FT, a by-product of increased facilitating and distributing on the first unit (6.8 assists per game in February compared to 4.8 assists per game in November) rather than attacking the hoop as the primary offensive option on the second unit. Nothing super surprising or worrisome here.
Now Bayless. The good news: He's committing less fouls recently and his overall defensive efficiency has improved slightly, despite the fact that he's been guarding better players. The bad news: There are two big-time drops, Offensive PPP and %FT. It's not uncommon for a player's PPP to drop when his minutes are increased or his role is expanded. In Bayless's case, his PPP was dropping from an all-world 1.06 that was put up in limited second-string minutes at the beginning of the season. Much less important than the fact that his PPP almost inevitably fell is where he ended up. .96 is a solid number over a 20 game stretch that included a number of starts. All things considered, Bayless is still generating points efficiently.
That said, Bayless's drop in %FT goes a long way to explaining his drop in efficiency. In limited time off the bench to start the season, defenses struggled to adjust to his quickness and ability to get to the rim. Nobody was game-planning for Bayless and, to his credit, he was able to continue to take advantage of his surprise attack element as his minutes increased. Bayless's free throw attempts nicely mirror his overall numbers. In December, Bayless went to the line 4.7 times per game. In January, 4.2 times. In February, as his playing time has decreased, his free attempts have also fallen to 3.3.
What %FT tells us is that Bayless's free throw attempts has steadily dropped whether his playing time has increased or decreased. In the first 23 games of the season, Bayless drew a foul during 1 of every 4 of his possessions. Through the first half of the season, Bayless drew a foul on roughly 1 in 5 possessions. Over the last 20 games, though, that number has fallen to roughly 1 in 6. So if Bayless isn't drawing fouls as often as before, what is he doing?
The short answer: Making lay ups and missing spot up jump shots. The longer answer? Keep reading.
Bayless's Situational Usage and Production
The following chart shows three key baseline measures for Bayless's role on offense during different portions of the season. First, it shows which situations he is used in. Second, it shows how efficient he is in each situation. Third, it shows his field goal percentage in each situation. All measures courtesy of Synergy.
Here, I've extended our comparison to include the entire first half of the season versus the last 20 games. Click here for a full size version.
It's interesting to note that Bayless's situational usage hasn't varied much at all even though his role and minutes have changed. Bayless is finding his number called on the pick and roll an almost identical amount of the time. His spot up shooting and usage in isolation remain relatively steady. His transition usage has picked up slightly and his performance in that situation has been extremely efficient. Bayless is viewed as a good finisher around the rim so it's no surprise his efficiency in transition is quite high. Lots of run out layups, dunks and fouls drawn.
But if a single number jumps off this chart, it's Bayless's 28.1% shooting on spot up jumpers, a catastrophic fall from the strong 45.1% he put up through the first half of the season. His related fall in spot up PPP -- from 1.15 to .74 -- is both humongous and atrocious, especially considering that the presence of the three point line generally inflates spot-up shooting PPP.
On yesterday's Wingcast, KP2 noted that Brandon Roy ignored a wide-open Bayless on a late-game possession in Memphis, opting instead to drive into 3 defenders and take a contested shot. After encouraging Roy to seek out LaMarcus Aldridge in late-game pick and rolls more often, I jokingly urged Roy to continue to ignore Bayless. Unfortunately 28.1% and .74PPP on spot up jumpers -- which are regularly wide open looks given the nature of the Blazers' drive-and-kick, floor-spacing offense -- is no laughing matter.
I noted above that Bayless's field goal percentage hasn't varied much from month to month even though his 3 point shooting has taken a nosedive in 2010. This situational breakdown elaborates on these observations nicely: An increased efficiency is transition and improved shooting/scoring off of pick and rolls has masked a big time drop from the outside. In total, Bayless is indeed making roughly the same percentage of shots as he has throughout the year. He's just making more in some categories (at or near the rim) and way less in others (outside) as the season has progressed.
Where does this leave Nate McMillan when it comes to determining Jerryd Bayless's role going forward?
McMillan can now safely view Bayless as a known quantity in a number areas. He has put up respectable one-on-one defensive numbers and proven that he is capable of not committing large quantities of dumb fouls. He has continued to prove that he has the ability to finish well at the rim and to get to the rim regularly against both first and second team defenders. He has proven that he's still a solid weapon when it comes to drawing fouls and, overall, that he can generate points at a good but not great efficiency clip. In short, Bayless's year over year progress on both offense and defense, even though it has tapered off some as the year wore on, continues to be undeniable.
That progress likely warrants Bayless a first-half run through the rotation no matter what. Tempo-changing, paint-attacking, foul-drawing offense and solid second unit defense are valuable playoff commodities.
Unfortunately for Bayless, a fierce competitor who surely wants to play when it really matters, all of that progress is easily sabotaged by his shaky jump shot. And if he cannot improve his outside shooting quickly -- and dramatically -- it is next to impossible to play him meaningful second-half playoff minutes.
Indeed, a trustworthy jumper is Bayless's best argument for second-half minutes. Miller offers more experience, better decision-making, much better passing in every offensive situation, the ability to post up his defender and similar defensive efficiency. If Bayless isn't knocking down his shot -- and he definitely isn't right now -- what is the argument for McMillan to play him with the game on the line, the court spread and the ball in Roy's hands? There isn't one.
-- Ben Golliver | benjamin.golliver@gmail.com | Twitter
PS Many thanks, as always, to the Invisible Ninja for his research assistance. If you're not fiddling with his insane motion chart, you're missing out.
147 comments
|
1 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Who will be the new Outlaw/Blake/Sergio?
Bayless?
Rudy?
Miller?
LMA?
Martell?
In Bayless I trust.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><>
Bayless and Rudy seem to be fan favorites that are mostly free from criticism from most BEdgers...
Miller really caught he** the first couple months of the season but most of the hate for him dissipated (save for you know who) once people realized how good of a player he is, how steady he’s been, and how he has really helped carry us through a multitude of injuries.
LMA hate come in waves. Usually after a sub-par game, the core naysayers come out for a while with more ammunition, firing away blindly, and not recognizing what he brings the other 90% of the time.
Lately, it seems like Webster is becoming the next goat because of his recent slump in both production and playing time.
Regardless, and as I have mentioned multiple times, I don’t see how both Rudy’s and Bayless’ inconsistent play exonerates them from criticism while allowing it to go on in regards to Miller/LMA/Webster. IMO, everybody on the team deserves both both praise AND criticism. You can’t just cherry pick the good from the bad. Each and every player has skills with varying degrees of proficiency. Some are better at one or more things than others. Even NBA players are rarely good at everything. If they all brought the same game, it would be boring. But for some strange reason, certain players are put on the proverbial pedestal above the rest while others are criticized to the extent that the casual observer would think they don’t even belong in the NBA!
We'll miss you #2 & #25!
by clinchmobb on Mar 3, 2010 5:24 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
I went with Yes, Partially.
That doesn’t mean he’s my first choice to take a critical shot down the stretch, but his ability to shoot FT’s as well as get to the rim means you don’t lose that aspect if Andre needs to rest or is having a poor game. I think it comes down to each game. Is the opponent one that is more likely to give up the open three or one that isn’t that good at protecting the paint. If the first, then maybe you want Rudy in there. If the second, then Jerryd.
Clarence, It's better to have a gun and not need it, then need a gun and not have it.
maybe you want Rudy in there
I’d feel better about having Rudy in there in late game offensive possessions if he had been more-prepared to shoot when Roy passed him the ball in the corner with 40 seconds to go in regulation, vs the Bulls…I’m not saying that that’s the reason why Nate went with Jerryd down the stretch in the Griz game…I’m just throwing it out there. (I suspect Nate wanted Bayless in the game for his defense on MCJ at the other end of the floor…)
When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
That's my point.
Nate is going to go with what he thinks is the best matchup or lineup at that particular instance. I’m ok with Jerryd, Rudy, Martell, Miller, Dante, etc. I trust both our guys and our coach. They won’t always come out successful, but I believe they will do so more often than not.
Clarence, It's better to have a gun and not need it, then need a gun and not have it.
We have to make the most of what we have.
We need help at PG, we have Mills on the bench. I’m all for giving the kid a shot to see what he can do. We have gotten lucky before. We don’t have a lot to loose here. I, for one, would find it entertaining, and that, after all, is what I am a fan for. Need I remind people that we had a speedball named “Johnny Davis” who did well for the Blazers once upon a time.
Re-sign Travis Outlaw !
I understand.
That is why I was a big Sergio supporter. Even if he didn’t make the Blazers a stronger team, he made them a more entertaining one. And I still think some who had no use for him last year may eventually regret that he was traded.
#52
What is your point?
Whether or not your guess is correct that “Sacramento didn’t like him”, it’s still true that Sergio is an entertaining player and that there is yet time for him to show enough to make some people regret that he was traded.
If you look at the Kings roster you can see that Evans, the probable ROY, and Udrih, who’s been having a career season were both in front of him. That’s arguably a PG tandem better than any of Miller-Bayless, Miller-Blake, or Blake-Bayless. And Sacramento didn’t just dump Sergio — he was part of a major trade involving 3 teams. The Knicks’ D’Antoni apparently did want Sergio.
#52
What's YOUR point?
Meadowlark Lemmon was an entertaining basketball player. Billy Ray Bates was an entertaining basketball player. I think most people find winning games trumps entertaining players.
My point is that for me, and apparently for "Berkeley" as well, your assumption is incorrect.
It seems to be very difficult for some people around here to comprehend, but there are those of us who don’t “just” want a winning team, even “just” a championship team. If that’s all we cared about, we might just as well become Laker fans. Or the kinds of fans who would think it was great if somehow the Lakers and the Blazers could just swap players.
I would not be a Blazer fan if they had a 10-foot tall guy who could just drop the ball in the net from outside the paint and could block every shot the other team put up without even moving his feet, and the Blazers could win every game 200-0 en route to a perfect season and a sweep of the playoffs. I say I would NOT be a fan of that team. Too boring.
I like energetic and exciting basketball. More than I like winning. Incidentally, it also matters to me that the guys on our team seem to be pretty decent human beings. I would prefer losing with character to winning with thugs.
I don’t claim that my point of view is better than yours or anyone else’s. Different strokes.
#52
I think you have summed up why I have always been a Durant guy.
I love the grace and excitement of skillful team basketball, as opposed to “circle sumo”, where the biggest big wins, a-la Shaq. Our one Blazers championship team was that kind of team.
Re-sign Travis Outlaw !
I'm sort of half way between what you say ....
… and those who say only a championship team matters.
I want a team I can respect and like. I also would like them to be successful. I don’t believe that success is only measured by winning a title. I can certainly understand where someone (like you for instance) would want to watch an exciting team. That’s just as valid a reason to support a team as my wanting to see a group of guys with solid values who work hard – preferrably winning more games than they lose. I just happen to be willing to trade some excitement for dull wins.
Clarence, It's better to have a gun and not need it, then need a gun and not have it.
Actually that is NOT my point. That is simply my response to you.
My point is that I got a bit annoyed with someone who apparently could not tolerate the expression of a mildly positive opinion where he or she apparently has a more negative one.
#52
Ummmmmm . . . .
Meadowlark Lemmon was something like 12,000 – 2 in his career. Dude WAS a winner. And entertaining.
You're right, bad example
But you know that eventually the Washington Generals are going to get a good draft pick.
I have to agree with superfly.
Even if you take the position that sports are a form of entertainment (which I’ll agree with), it is more important that a team win than it is that they be entertaining. Ultimately a successful franchise is determined more by its performance on the field or court of play than anything else and that success is primarily measured by wins.
Clarence, It's better to have a gun and not need it, then need a gun and not have it.
Fine. Your opinion certainly places you in the majority on this question.
But, there is no right or wrong here. I simply expressed what it is that I, personally, look to get out of Blazers basketball, while you and others have different expectations.
I probably wouldn’t have bothered except to point out that, despite the inability of some to fathom my point of view, it is nevertheless the way I and at least some others really see things.
#52
I aknowledged that in another reply.
Clarence, It's better to have a gun and not need it, then need a gun and not have it.
Johnny Davis was a superior defensive PG who could take off from just inside the FT line and dunk
I knew Johnny Davis, Patty Mills is no Johnny Davis
When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
definitely not Dan Quayle or JFK
I don’t think Lloyd is still with us…but I could be wrong
When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
A quick Google search shows he died in 2006. Thank God!
I just say that because I recall that his appearance at the time he ran for VP was startlingly similar to what I’d seen in an old film clip of him circa 1960. The guy had apparently not aged a day! But … I guess he was mortal after all.
#52
well I guess you got me,
though I did root for Johnny at Dayton, when they took Walton’s Bruins to 3 overtimes in the NCAA tourney. :-)
I would say that, we don’t KNOW just what Mills is, any more than we KNEW who Batum was after his first summer league. Just, give the kid a chance.
Re-sign Travis Outlaw !
It's not up to me
the Blazers are giving Patty a chance every day they hold a practice. If Mills is still on the team next fall, then we’ll know that he’s got enough game to impress the coaches and KP (we already know how the owner feels about him…) But fans wishing Mills would be inserted into actual NBA games right now is silly. Portland’s trying to win games, not develop yet another young PG who might be on the team next fall
When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
The flaw here is that Portland does have something to lose.
It is called “games”.
Developing talent by letting it play is fine. But unless you are a team that only has up as a direction to move in, you do not want to sacrifice wins. Any season in which you can make the playoffs is a season in which you have a chance for the title. It may be small, but it is still a chance. Giving the ball to Mills and letting him have some significant playing time – and that is what is required for him to get that shot you are asking for – puts Portland at risk for losing games they might otherwise win (or have a chance at winning).
I like Patty Mills. But I doubt he is such a talent that what he can bring to a game will outweigh the mistakes he will make. He might on a couple of occasions, but the majority of the time he won’t. Nate isn’t going to place the development of Mills ahead of getting victories with those kind of odds.
Clarence, It's better to have a gun and not need it, then need a gun and not have it.
I think the difference is
That Mills is kind of like Green, he’s just filler, if he was part of the future, he would be playing for his development.
I don't have a problem with what Nate is doing with Mills so far.
Last nigh was a nice example of giving him a bit of time on the floor without risking a game. Some more of that is not a bad idea when, say, we may have an ankle sprain and we need some emergency help. He could contribute. He could well be better than our new 15th man.
My main “give the guy a chance” is to posters who seem to have dismissed Patty prematurely.
Re-sign Travis Outlaw !
I'm of the opinion there was a reason KP drafted him ...
… and elected to use a roster spot to keep the rights to him.
Clarence, It's better to have a gun and not need it, then need a gun and not have it.
Great read.
Although I’m not a big Jerryd Bayless fan, I love his tenacity and ability to get fouled driving to the basket. Ultimately, he’ll continue to improve and make a great backup at the 2 – either on this team or for another.
Treat people well because Karma can hit you at any second.
Go JayBay!
He’s a work in progress, but he can be an effective change of pace from Miller in crunch time. I’d be especially inclined to go with Bayless if Miller cannot post up the opposing PG.
A question: if Bayless’ spot up shooting is worse now than it was at the start of the season, why would it stay the same now?
A question: if Bayless’ spot up shooting is worse now than it was at the start of the season, why would it stay the same now?
Perhaps JB will have more time to work on his jumper with Townsend (etc) now that Portland’s schedule has slowed down (relatively speaking)
When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
The problem with these stats
is that they still don’t allow for situation. Does Bayless get the ball with 3 seconds on the shot clock after a Roy iso didn’t materialize. I agree he hasn’t reached his potential and would like to see his jumper improve, but with the current line up, Bayless isn’t getting the same shots.
Huh? Wait, what was the question?
Look, you break it down in a lot of interesting ways. But for me, I just look at Bayless and see a second year guy who hasn’t had a great deal of or a consistent amount of playing time yet, and who is still adjusting to the NBA game and to his role in it. In particular, he is still learning to think and react in the brief intervals that make the difference between baskets and bricks.
As you say, there has been some evident improvement and more is still needed. If I were coaching him, he’d be up the creek. But I would probably continue to give him about 20 minutes a game, more or less depending on how he responded. I don’t see him as a consistent difference-maker this season. Maybe next, though.
As for trusting him in crunch time, I guess I’d handle that situationally as well. It seems to me Nate is more apt to play Jerryd late in games when the other team is in the penalty and he can draw fouls. Under most circumstances this year, my crunch-time unit would consist of Brandon, Andre, LaMarcus, Nic, and either Camby, Rudy, or Martell, depending on matchups and the need for offense or defense.
So I guess I just said that Bayless is my 9th guy at crunch time, or possibly 10th or 11th, taking Dante and Juwan into account. In the end, I don’t so much distrust Jerryd as I find that other players may be more useful for now. As you say, a reliable jumper could make a big difference in this assessment.
#52
I trust Miller more
Bayless is a scorer, sure, but Miller makes better decisions and witht the late shot clock situations we get into, particularly late in games, I like Miller keeping track of things.
Bayless needs to figure out how to make other guys more effective, that is the chief role of a Point guard. Once he demonstrates that capability routinely then I would be more comfortable with him in at crunch time…
"Oh Yeah!" ~ Kool Aid Man
Miller is a ten year vet and has consistently been just below All-Star quality
Of course you trust him more. But Bayless is coming on quickly. If you watched all the games on the recent road trip, Bayless was consistently using the threat of penetration to create open jumpers for the guys on the second team. Rudy, Martell, and Juwan were not hitting a particularly high percentage, but Bayless was getting them good looks.
Certainly there is more to being a good PG than isos and pick-and-rolls, Bayless has a lot to learn. What drives me crazy is the general impatience that so many fans express. You can’t compare a 21 year old, with limited PG experience, to a 33 year old vet. That doesn’t mean that Bayless isn’t going to be good, most indications are that he will be very good (see my post below), it just requires a little patience.
by upper left corner on Mar 3, 2010 5:25 PM PST up reply actions
right
I am not being impatient at all, I love Jerryd’s game, I think he has improved a great deal over the course of the year in terms of PG skills. That being said, crunch time, as we head to the playoffs I trust Miller more…
Another commenter somewhere was talking about the idea of making Rudy a PG and Bayless the 2…interesting thought, not sure how practical that is though.
"Oh Yeah!" ~ Kool Aid Man
Stats
Stats tend to normalize, Bayless is not as good as the first 23 nor as bad as the last 20.
For the season Bayless is at .98PPP in spot up situations and is shooting 38.4 % and roughly 34% when those are 3 pt attempts.
But the downward trend is troubling.
Follow me on Twitter @invisininjapdx
the rest of the year
More Dante, Less Juwan
Get Nic up to 32-36 minutes a game
Miller out early in 1st/3rd to run the 2nd unit in early 2nd/4th
Closing lineup of Roy/Rudy/Nic/LMA/Camby, assuming the opponent only has either a quick PG or a strong SF, not both.
"I want to be traded to a contender" is almost always code-speak for "I'm a loser."
-Dave, 2/5/2010: http://www.blazersedge.com/2010/2/5/1297509/no-amore-for-amare
Oops, I meant the title to read "I like the first three suggestion..."
I’m not sure about that closing lineup, though. Just not sure.
im not sure either, but I'd like to see it tried.
how many times lately late in games have we seen Roy drive to the rack only to kick it out to a wide open….Andre Miller, who then proceeds to reset the offense.
"I want to be traded to a contender" is almost always code-speak for "I'm a loser."
-Dave, 2/5/2010: http://www.blazersedge.com/2010/2/5/1297509/no-amore-for-amare
Stats
Great info on this post. On the last road trip JBay’s number were actually pretty good. 9 Pts pg, 2.4 assists, .08 turnovers, while shooting 45%. I think he is making his game a little more like Blakes as he sems to be playing a litle more conservatively. His outside shot does seem to be broken though, but he does not shoot much from outside lately.
As for crunch time, with Roy out top it would be either Bayless or Miller in the right corner of the offense. Neither of these two excites me taking a deep shot from there. I do think Bayless is our best defender against smaller quicker guards. So crunch time may be a situational thing as to what is most needed at that time.
Bayless could improve
by talking to the refs less. Are there any stats that cover Arms waved at officials?
he's learning from the team leader
"I want to be traded to a contender" is almost always code-speak for "I'm a loser."
-Dave, 2/5/2010: http://www.blazersedge.com/2010/2/5/1297509/no-amore-for-amare
I've always thought it surprising
that refs don’t in some way reward guys that never say anything and just play hard. Refs must be terrible parents.
by superfly05 on Mar 3, 2010 4:02 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
First off, once again excellent post
And many thanks to the InvisibleNinja for getting Ben the information to put together quite possibly the most informative and best Blazer post, that’s been put together this year.
While it is interesting that Bayless’ spot up numbers are poor, this seems like a return to the same form as last year. If I remember correctly Jerryd didn’t have this problem while at the U of A, but for some reason both last year, and now this year again this has once again become an issue. Can we say that his great numbers in the previous 20 games were a fluke? Probably not, but we can say that this is an area that he needs to work on, and the work that was done by the Blazers training staff for Travis means that this is something that the Blazers org has the tools and the ability to correct. And they probably will, which is great.
Another really good thing that we can see are the areas that he has been having problems with (iso’s and spot up shots) do not make up more than a third of his shots. Which to me at least says that he recognizes his problems, and does not try and do things that are outside of his ability. That combined with the fact that even though the differences are slight, he’s been taking less of these low percentage (for him) shots.
All in all, even in a slump, Jerryd seems to be recognizing what he has got issues with, and the Blazers mgmt has the tools to help him.
You're saying that they look like they're giving it their all. And you know why they look that way? Because they're bad, and it literally takes them the maximum physical effort to accomplish basic baseball tasks like throwing the ball from short to first. When David Eckstein throws the ball to first base, he has to wind up like a shot-putter, spin around forty-three times, and launch it at an angle 89 degrees from the horizontal. Afterwards, he undergoes an IV drip for a fortnight and he's so out of breath that he requires several months of acupuncture to regain the power of speech. For this we laud him. -Junior of Deadspin on 'scrappy' players
Your welcome
I’m glad that you appreciate whats being done.
Follow me on Twitter @invisininjapdx
by InvisibleNinja on Mar 3, 2010 3:54 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
Lots of good juicy stats
Thanks.
I do think Ben focused a little bit too much on the trees and neglected the forest. He also failed to mention the most logical expression for Bayless’ little mini slump in mid February: he was playing with a hurt wrist, a bruised thigh, and a tweaked ankle.
I would be curious to hear your take on my post below. Do you think I am crazy, or committing statistical sins? Seems to me that the larger context suggests that Bayless has been better than he has commonly been given credit for.
I appreciate all the knowledge and information you have added to the site. Learning to be a better fan is the primary reason I spend time here. Thanks.
by upper left corner on Mar 3, 2010 5:48 PM PST up reply actions
Stats
The thing about stats is you can find just about anything that you go looking for. The problem is that we all can back up our assertions with statistical fact. Is Bayless improving… yes, has he been on a bit of a slide yes… is he down in shooting right now… yes, is he still being efficient…yes. I think Ben does a good job of presenting positives and negatives, but the human element comes in when we read and we ignore those points that we agree with, and fixate on those that we disagree with.
Follow me on Twitter @invisininjapdx
by InvisibleNinja on Mar 3, 2010 9:39 PM PST up reply actions
Lots of good stats and insight but I think you got seduced by your stats into missing the big picture.
You “undersell” Bayless’ accomplishments by quite a bit and overstate your concerns.
Bayless is currently 26th in PER among the 67 PGs on track to play more than 500 minutes.
Twenty of the twenty five guys ahead of him are starters. Only four of the over twenty five PGs drafted in the last three years are ahead of him.
Of the PGs with a PER over 15, Bayless is the only one in the league averaging less than 20 minutes of PT per game.
I ran the following Player season finder over at Basketball Reference:
Basically I rounded down the basic parameters of Bayless’ season:
Points Per 36 > 18
Assists Per 36 > 4
Free Throw Attempts Per Game: 3.5
PER > 15
TS%> .52
I got back the following list of second year guards who have equalled that accomplishment in the past twenty years:
K Bryant, Billups, M Ellis, D Harris, T Parker, G Arenas, R Allen, C Paul, D Will, A Iverson, R Sessions, and D Rose.
Thats it. Twelve second year guards have roughly equalled or slightly exceeded Bayless’ production in the past twenty years.
In case you aren’t already sufficiently impressed, sort this table by FTA Per 36. The only player who has exceeded Bayless in the past twenty years is a fellow named Kobe, perhaps you have heard of him?
Now, let’s not get totally carried away, nobody is claiming that Bayless is the next Kobe. However, I think these stats shed some very interesting light on what Bayless has achieved. Every one of those guys has gone on to be a solid starter. Most have become All-Stars, and at least three have become league MVPs.
Signing Travis Diener and claiming that Bayless isn’t up to back-up PG duties seems rather absurd in this context. I think Bayless is significantly under-appreciated. The guy is 21 and has seen his role and minutes fluctuate more than almost anyone on the team and yet he has produced a season on par with some pretty special people.
Bayless needs to play. Nate and the fans need to live with some mistakes. Be very grateful that KP drafted such an outstanding young prospect, and stop writing stupid posts about trading for mediocre PGs. Bayless is coming along quickly and the best available information suggests that he is going to be truly special in the near future.
by upper left corner on Mar 3, 2010 4:02 PM PST reply actions 1 recs
Oh yeah, while I am complaining Ben......
……let me point out that you don’t even mention the fact that Bayless’ little mini-slump, after his run of double digit scoring games, coincided with being hurt. He hurt his wrist and got a deep thigh bruise. His numbers were better on the recent road trip. 3-8 from 3 and over 45% overall.
by upper left corner on Mar 3, 2010 4:18 PM PST up reply actions
Just a cursory glance at your selection
You picked or greater on all of your selections, so anybody with better numbers than Jerryd are going to be on your list. That’s not the same as saying that Jerryd is similar to them. So the fact that the best PG’s in the NBA are on that list is really not surprising. If you put filters that said were within a certain amount on per, a certain amount in TS%, etc. you’d find the guards that are similar to him.
If you just did it with PER you’d be left with only Chauncey, Monte Ellis, and Ray Allen. And of that list both Chauncey and Monte have significantly higher TS%. And in just a cursory look at the stats we can see that Ray Allen and Bayless play a very very different game.
I’m not saying that its not cool that Jerryd has done well, its just that your method of selecting would leave those same players on pretty much all guards that were 22 or younger in their 2nd seasons list.
Maybe more clearly the list you have is a round up of the guards that are better than Jerryd, and were 22 or younger in their 2nd season.
You're saying that they look like they're giving it their all. And you know why they look that way? Because they're bad, and it literally takes them the maximum physical effort to accomplish basic baseball tasks like throwing the ball from short to first. When David Eckstein throws the ball to first base, he has to wind up like a shot-putter, spin around forty-three times, and launch it at an angle 89 degrees from the horizontal. Afterwards, he undergoes an IV drip for a fortnight and he's so out of breath that he requires several months of acupuncture to regain the power of speech. For this we laud him. -Junior of Deadspin on 'scrappy' players
by TheOdenator on Mar 3, 2010 4:39 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
Did you look at my numbers?
I rounded everything down and the selection does not eliminate players who do not meet the Per 36 numbers. Basically it screened for 15 and above for PER, Bayless is at 15.6. It screened for .520 TS%, Bayless is at .535. If I had not rounded down several more player would not have made the list.
Was on the lower end in certain categories and much higher in others. He had the lowest TOs per 36, the second highest FTAs per 36. Ranked 5th in scoring per 36. Ranked 9th in PER.
Overall I don’t think it is a case of cherry picking or unrepresentative comparisons. I played with the selection criteria for quite a while to make sure I wasn’t being an idiot.
by upper left corner on Mar 3, 2010 4:59 PM PST up reply actions
You didn't put a top end on your numbers
So everyone that was better than jerryd, even if they were 50X better would have been on this list. Saying that he compares to Kobe and Chris Paul etc. is disingenuous.
You're saying that they look like they're giving it their all. And you know why they look that way? Because they're bad, and it literally takes them the maximum physical effort to accomplish basic baseball tasks like throwing the ball from short to first. When David Eckstein throws the ball to first base, he has to wind up like a shot-putter, spin around forty-three times, and launch it at an angle 89 degrees from the horizontal. Afterwards, he undergoes an IV drip for a fortnight and he's so out of breath that he requires several months of acupuncture to regain the power of speech. For this we laud him. -Junior of Deadspin on 'scrappy' players
I understand your point
The problem is that if you put in a floor and a ceiling, you take up two of the four search criteria. Putting in top and bottom stops would mean that at most you can only search based on two categories.
I was trying to do the best job I could of capturing the flavor of Bayless game. The most relevant fact is that he has played fewer minutes than almost everyone in the league at his level of production. This makes it essential to use criteria that are based on per minute production. I choose Assists, Points, FTA, and TS%, and then asked for the results to be sorted by PER.
I think the results are surprising. So far, Bayless is on the lower end of that group in terms of PER and the overall production that it represents. The real question is whether Bayless could maintain his level of efficiency if he played more minutes. That is yet to be determined.
But the very fact that Bayless is mentioned in this elite company helps put things in a different perspective. Many folks around here have questioned whether Bayless will ever be a decent PG. These sorts of comparisons suggest that he has a high probability of success.
Predicting the developmental curve of young players is difficult. It is even more difficult when those young players are trying to adapt to a new position and a new mindset. Many around here seem to have formed negative early impressions that have blinded them to Bayless’ rapid improvement.
by upper left corner on Mar 4, 2010 10:34 AM PST up reply actions
Look you did it again
But the very fact that Bayless is mentioned in this elite company helps put things in a different perspective
He isn’t being mentioned in this elite company. Because you didn’t put a top end to the numbers, a guard 100000000000000000000 times better would also be on this list.
This just isn’t a valid comparison. Look I like Bayless a lot, but your selection literally doesn’t omit a single player whose better than him, no matter how much better. Literally.
And you sorted it by TS%, not PER if you sorted it by PER Bayless would be third to last on the list.
This isn’t an argument, I’m just pointing out, that this list doesn’t just show Bayless’ equals or contemporaries, this shows his betters. If a guard was 22 or younger in his second year and was averaging 100 points on 10 shots, perfect FG accuracy, with 50 rebounds, 40 assists, and 0 turnover’s in 5 minutes on the court he would be on this list. And be claimed as ‘mentioned in Bayless’ elite company.’
You're saying that they look like they're giving it their all. And you know why they look that way? Because they're bad, and it literally takes them the maximum physical effort to accomplish basic baseball tasks like throwing the ball from short to first. When David Eckstein throws the ball to first base, he has to wind up like a shot-putter, spin around forty-three times, and launch it at an angle 89 degrees from the horizontal. Afterwards, he undergoes an IV drip for a fortnight and he's so out of breath that he requires several months of acupuncture to regain the power of speech. For this we laud him. -Junior of Deadspin on 'scrappy' players
by TheOdenator on Mar 4, 2010 1:21 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
Please look at the numbers closely
I get the point you are trying to make. I acknowledge your point: it would be preferable to put both upper and lower stops on each of the search criteria. I tried to explain the limitations of the search tool and explain the reasons that I made the choices I did.
The point I am trying to make to you is that Bayless’ numbers are not unrepresentative of this group as a whole. While it is true that his PER is towards the lower end of the group of twelve players identified by the criteria. His production is not significantly lower than most of these guys in most areas. He is better than many of these guys in many categories. If he were at the bottom of a number of these categories I think your criticism would be far more valid, he is not. He is near the median in most of the categories.
Bottom line, I think Bayless deserves to be mentioned in the same breath as this rather illustrious group. I have spent yours playing with the search criteria and have rounded the numbers down 20% in all four areas and I still come up with lists of guys who are extremely impressive. Not that many guys average 18.3 pts, 4.6 assists, and 7.5 FTA per 36 minutes of PT. It is rarified air.
If you still think I am full of BS and hubris, go compare Roy’s second season, at age 23 and a half, to Bayless, at age 21. Bayless’ numbers per 36 and his TS% are extremely close. The primary point is that Bayless has been playing and producing very well. The primary reason it has not been widely recognized is the fact that his per game numbers have been kept down by limited PT.
Whether or not Bayless’ per minute numbers would stay in the zip code if he were getting significantly more minutes is certainly a valid question. We will never know. Bayless has certainly done better and produced more when he has been given more than 20 minutes per game. OTOH, more minutes might mean more minutes against better quality opponents.
Again, I am not stupid or obtuse. I understand your criticism. I think the comparisons I made are broadly valid in spite of those criticisms and I believe you will agree if you take the time to look at the numbers closely.
by upper left corner on Mar 4, 2010 6:55 PM PST up reply actions
you left out that he sprained his ankles too
""..Sometimes the songs that we hear are just songs of our own . . . "
Not to mention
that he he invented the uncontested, fade-away jump shot (and demonstrates it every game). So he is not only “all that and a bag of Chili Cheese Fritos” as you’ve documented above, but he is also a true innovator in the sport.
Seriously, calm down.
What I take away from your detailed analysis is that Jerryd Bayless is better this year than Brandon Roy was in the 2007 – 2008 season. Hmmm… Doesn’t sound right, but stats don’t lie so…
by Sean M on Mar 3, 2010 4:40 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
I would appreciate it if you didn't put words in my mouth.
I don’t think I am making ridiculous claims. I am trying to place Bayless’ season in some sort of larger context. I think that is a valid enterprise. Young players improve. The point is to try to compare Bayless’ performance to other young players to see where they ended up. I was pretty surprised by the results. Just because they are surprising does not mean they are invalid.
If you want to discuss my methodology or the stats, I would welcome that. Ridicule and straw-man arguments, not so much.
by upper left corner on Mar 3, 2010 5:06 PM PST up reply actions
I wonder sometimes if you are Bayless with how much praise you give him.
"Get three superstars and then fill the roster with guys willing to go through a wall to win." - KP
....and some times I wonder if you are Sergio with how much you refuse to acknowledge how much he has improved.
Try responding to the substance of my post rather than just taking pot shots. We might have a better exchange and actually learn something from each other.
by upper left corner on Mar 3, 2010 5:27 PM PST up reply actions
I do like me some Sergio but I definatley reserve my man crush for Conley
"Get three superstars and then fill the roster with guys willing to go through a wall to win." - KP
Who has a PER of 12 and a TS% of .512
Conley is a good player, but I think he is a little undersized to ever be a great defender and doesn’t really have the power to get to the rim in traffic.
It will be interesting to see where Bayless and Conley end up in five years.
by upper left corner on Mar 3, 2010 5:40 PM PST up reply actions
Hopefully Conley A Blazer, Bayless a Grizzlie
"Get three superstars and then fill the roster with guys willing to go through a wall to win." - KP
Them is fightin' words
Not really. Glad we could have a nice exchange.
I am curious to know if you found my original comment interesting or informative, or do you think I have gone off the deep end?
by upper left corner on Mar 3, 2010 5:51 PM PST up reply actions
Lookie here
I don’t doubt Bayless can ball and I do think you make valid points but as taleted as Bayless may be he will never be as effective as he could be on a team that Nate McMillan coaches, so with that said don’t you think that a trade between Memphis and Portland for Conley and Bayless would be a win win for all parties and players involved? I think Bayless could thrive next to Mayo under a coach like Hollins. where as Conley seems to fit the bill of what Nate wants in a PG, which would mean Nate could quit trying to put a Square Peg in a round hole.
"Get three superstars and then fill the roster with guys willing to go through a wall to win." - KP
Bayless is going to be the perfect Nate PG
His 3 point percentage will be over 35% next year, and headed towards 40%. People think Blake is the “perfect” Nate PG, but he isn’t close.
The perfect Nate PG can shoot the three, but also be a superb defender (Blake was good but never going to be great, and Jerryd can be), can take it to the hoop and draw fouls (that’s why Nate always played JJ in crunch time), and will generate easy scores off the fastbreak (just about the only way to get easy scores, because Nate’s offense rarely generates them). Ideally, he could also run an ISO, because Nate’s offense is so ISO heavy, and Brandon won’t play 48 mpg.
Jerryd is going to be ideal.
Give Blake the MLE in 2010!
Farewell to #2 and #25, good luck to you!
#10 #52 -- #5 #7 & #88 are back!
this is slightly off topic..
but you reminded me- why oh why did we not sign will conroy? and, if deiner ever plays ahead of mills, what are we supposed to do?
I liked what Bayless did in the game tonight.
He looked really solid out there. I wish that Bayless would show up every game. I’m looking forward to what another year of experience and healed up ankles will do for him. He’s certainly trending towards the positive.
That said, when I watch him play, I can see why his minutes are fluctuating so much. I think he wants to do well so badly that he pushes a little too hard. He ends up with tunnel vision sometimes. And young players with inconsistent playing time do that. Patty Mills does it worse than Bayless by far. And right now, Miller is very steady and reliable out there. You know what you get with him, and that’s because he’s a veteran.
I think most people’s concerns with Bayless are not statistical. He’ll get his chances to mature, and he will turn into a good player. I’m not convinced that he’ll be as good as the players you compared him to above, but I think he’ll get to start somewhere before too much longer. I hope he’s good enough to do it with us sometime.
But as much as it pains TominHawaii, Miller is steadier out there. The team looks more comfortable with him on the floor compared with Bayless right now. And we’re looking at the playoffs,. We’re not like Sacramento or Minnesota anymore. We’re not playing games with the primary purpose of developing players through playing time. And if Bayless plays more often like he did tonight, we have nothing to worry about.
Wearing the black band for Jarrett Jack, Ime Udoka, Fred Jones, Sergio Rodriguez, Channing Frye, Luke Schenscher, Shavlik Randolph, James Jones, Josh McRoberts, Steven Hill, Jarron Collins, Michael Ruffin, Steve Blake and Travis Outlaw. Sacrificed to the unmerciful god of progress.
Miller has a very low BBIQ
I have never in my life seen a guard who was so inept at catching and shooting. He seriously looks confused when he gets the ball. It is as if I can see the rusty wheels in his brain turning slowly as he wonders, “Should I shoot this wide open jumper? Oh, that’s right I am the worst wide open catch and shoot guard in the NBA, maybe I should dribble a few times towards my defender and throw up a contested shot”.
Miller isn’t so bad when he just dribbles up and shoots but I think he is the worst catch and shoot guard in the history of the NBA.
Nice quilt
er, post.
Bayless took a major step forward this season, is in a minor slump because of injuries, and will be fine.
One quibble:
Signing Travis Diener and claiming that Bayless isn’t up to back-up PG duties seems rather absurd in this context.
These two should not be conflated. The Blazers signed Diener but I haven’t heard them claim he wasn’t up to backup PG duties. Their actions (trading Blake) say they think he definitely is up to backup PG duties. They didn’t know Diener was going to be available when they traded Steve, and they traded him anyway. Signing Travis had nothing to do with Bayless and everything to do with a lack of confidence that Mills is ready to be backup PG if one of our top two PGs goes down with an injury.
The people claiming Jerryd isn’t ready to be a backup PG are not the Blazers’ brain trust (their actions say the opposite), but Bedgers, some of whom don’t know what they are talking about.
I don’t read Ben’s post as suggesting Jerryd isn’t ready to be our second PG, either. It does call into question whether he’s ready for a regular crunch time role, but that’s a completely different question. The fact is, Andre should usually be our crunch time PG except when he’s having one of those clunker games he has sometimes.
Give Blake the MLE in 2010!
Farewell to #2 and #25, good luck to you!
#10 #52 -- #5 #7 & #88 are back!
Care to back up your claim with actual evidence?
See my post just above.
by upper left corner on Mar 3, 2010 4:04 PM PST up reply actions
More pretzels end up under the TV when Bayless is running the offense
QED
Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital. ~Aaron Levenstein
by Tiparillo on Mar 3, 2010 4:57 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
Brilliant
Logic like that explains a lot.
I’ve been wondering for some time why the voters who are pissed at the big banks and gridlock in Congress seem hell bent on rewarding the folks who are obstructing everything and trying to prevent re-regulation of the banks.
Your comment offers interesting insight in to the way people form their opinions.
by upper left corner on Mar 3, 2010 5:15 PM PST up reply actions
There has to be room for the subjective.
Objective logic is certainly valuable. Statistics are valuable. But without a subjective assessment, statistics don’t really mean that much. The reverse is true as well. A subjective feeling devoid of all facts is simply lunacy. In this way, the “pretzel test” can be valuable in determining facts. If we went on statistics alone, we might conclude that Al Jefferson was the center of the future as McHale did. Or that Baron Davis would be a good candidate for a gigantic contract.
Bayless has had some of those head scratching moments. I believe it is a symptom of youth, and that he’ll get over it in time. But that time is probably not now with Houston still breathing down our necks and us trying desperately to gain ground in the West. Getting playoff experience for Roy and Aldridge is more important than developing a promising bench (currently) player.
Wearing the black band for Jarrett Jack, Ime Udoka, Fred Jones, Sergio Rodriguez, Channing Frye, Luke Schenscher, Shavlik Randolph, James Jones, Josh McRoberts, Steven Hill, Jarron Collins, Michael Ruffin, Steve Blake and Travis Outlaw. Sacrificed to the unmerciful god of progress.
I too find the pretzle test very effective
"Get three superstars and then fill the roster with guys willing to go through a wall to win." - KP
Bayless
is great against teams that play matador defense. Charging to the rim is his strength. Directing an offense is not. As far as him being a point guard, it may take him 5 years to learn the position, just like Chauncey Billups did. Could he become as good as Chauncey? Can the Blazers afford to wait 5 years to find out? I think not.
by Original Blazer Fan on Mar 3, 2010 4:07 PM PST reply actions
Bayless isn't right for our team
We have Brandon Roy, one of he best clutch players in the game at the same position
as Original Blazer Fan stated above, Bayless is great at attacking, but not at dictating the offense. Andre Miller is MUCH better at that at this point – just look at the Minnesota game. We had to bring Andre Miller back in after being up by like 24 because we didn’t have any one on the floor to dictate tempo and pace
The guy is incredibly athletic, and good at attacking, but his decision-making is suspect at best, and he’s ALWAYS PRESSING…it’s like he’s trying to prove he belongs out there every second he’s on the floor…at some point you have to settle in, understand your role, and play in the team concept, and he just doesn’t do that. In that same Minnesota game, it was the end of a quarter, and with Brandon Roy on the floor, Jerryd dribbled the ball for 5-6 seconds and hoisted a pull-up jumpshot over his defender with 7 seconds left, which could have given them enough time to rebound and get a score (they didn’t thank goodness) After that the camera showed Brandon Roy walking back to the bench shaking his head and visibly upset that Bayless had completely wasted that possession.
He could end up being productive somewhere, but he’s not a PG (and I don’t think he’ll EVER really be a PG), and we have one of the top 10 players in the league at the SG spot…so where is he going to see any real minutes?
by rip_city_swagger on Mar 3, 2010 4:15 PM PST reply actions
What is it that possesses people to insist that Bayless isn't a PG?
Look at my post a few spots above. Bayless season is very similar to the second seasons of many of the finest PGs of the past two decades.
by upper left corner on Mar 3, 2010 4:20 PM PST up reply actions
Bayless is not a good PG yet...
How long will it take him to become one? Five years? More?
by Original Blazer Fan on Mar 3, 2010 4:31 PM PST up reply actions
I say fifteen.
If you look at the learning speed Bayless is at right now, you can extrapolate where he would be in the future. In 15 years he will be the best PG ever if he continues to improve at his current rate!
Bayless for MVP in 2025!
In Bayless I trust.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><>
I disagree
Based on Ben’s charts, if Bayless keeps changing at the same rate, in 15 years he will be about as effective as a tadpole.
Disclaimer: everything I know about basketball I learned on Blazersedge.
Amazing
From last season to this season Bayless’ PER jumped by over seven points and his TS% by over .050.
He is near the top of an outstanding cohort of young PGs (see my long comment above) and all you guys can do is make bad jokes.
Are you impervious to evidence?
by upper left corner on Mar 3, 2010 5:58 PM PST up reply actions
Those stats don't prove he's a point guard
Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital. ~Aaron Levenstein
show me some stats that say he isn't a point guard.
(as if stats could tell what position you play)
my point exactly
Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital. ~Aaron Levenstein
You are what you can defend
Bayless defends the point.
Bayless’ Assists per 36 are on par with many of the finest young PGs of the past two decades, as my post above points out.
It is like you are sticking your fingers in your ears and yelling because you don’t want anyone to confuse you with evidence. Tough to have a dialogue with someone who just says no. Sort of like trying to deal with the Republicans in Congress.
B Edge gridlock.
I would be happy to have a substantive discussion with any of you as to why you cling to this position.
by upper left corner on Mar 3, 2010 6:04 PM PST up reply actions
Hey now its not just Republicans
Neither side can seem to break their silly little party lines to do what is in the best interests for the country as a whole…
"Get three superstars and then fill the roster with guys willing to go through a wall to win." - KP
by jlarose78 on Mar 3, 2010 6:12 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
I heard Bayless' parents are Republicans
(watch ulc’s head explode)
Give Blake the MLE in 2010!
Farewell to #2 and #25, good luck to you!
#10 #52 -- #5 #7 & #88 are back!
Chuckleworthy
May even be true because the are from Arizona which has been a fairly red state. On second thought, I doubt it. I believe they are both High School counselors, hardly anyone who has anything to do with public education in this country has anything to do with the Republican party. It may have something to do with the wing-nuts jihad against public education in genera,l and against public sector unions in particular.
OTH, it may just have to do with the fact that Shrub could barely read…….
by upper left corner on Mar 4, 2010 7:18 AM PST up reply actions
I expect he could read the diploma
for his MBA. :)
You guys have this red-blue state thing, which has always seemed weird to me. I figured out what you mean by it, but it just seems strange. We have individual constituencies which tend one way or another, but it just seems like if an entire state tends in one direction, that the opposite party would moderate itself in that state — that a so-called red state would have a very conservative Democratic party, and a blue state would have a liberal Republican party, so they could actually be competitive.
Right now, David Cameron is trying to get the Tories to the left of Labour on the environment, for instance. He’ll stay somewhat to the right on spending and taxes, but move way left on other things, because we have a fairly left-leaning electorate. Maybe that happens more over there than I’m aware of.
Give Blake the MLE in 2010!
Farewell to #2 and #25, good luck to you!
#10 #52 -- #5 #7 & #88 are back!
yes, Bayless IS always pressing
and the reason for that is he’ never given consistent minutes, so he always tries to do too much. You’d press too if your playing time was as inconsistent as Bayless’.
What seems to be getting lost in this discussion is how similar Bayless’ numbers are to Miller’s in the data shown above. I get that Andre Miller gives us the best chance of making the playoffs this year, but starting next year why wouldn’t you give Bayless more minutes on a consistent basis given that he is as efficient as Miller in a lot of areas and is much younger and has tons of potential?
I know, I’m one of the crazy people that likes the 3 guard rotation with Rudy and Roy starting and Bayless coming off the bench as a 6th man type, so you’ll probably laugh off anything I say, but I honestly think that next year we have to play Bayless and Rudy big minutes. That is the only way we’ll know if they are for real or if it’s time to trade them away.
I’m one of the crazy people that likes the 3 guard rotation with Rudy and Roy starting and Bayless coming off the bench as a 6th man type
If Batum develops into a point forward that rotation could be viable in a few years. The main concern will be who defends the opponent’s PG and SF?
When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
I think that if you give that rotation big minutes next year
it would be viable much sooner than a few years down the road….Batum is essential along with those 3 guards though, because he can basically guard the best player on the other team at the 1-3 positions while I think Roy could slide over to guard the SF if Batum is guarding one of the opposing team’s guards.
Thats your concern? Really?
Who, out of Batum and Bayless, will guard the opponent’s PG and SF??? If Nate can’t figure that one out, he really does need to go.
the perfect storm
let’s say the opponent has a quick PG and a physical SF…can you put Rudy on the quick PG? (No) If you put Batum on the PG then Roy has to guard the physical SF. That’s a problem. That’s why Bayless starting woth Brandon/Nic and Rudy coming off the bench would make more sense…us ULC has reminded us, a player’s position is who he can guard, and Roy/Rudy both defend SGs…neither player is an above-average defender so they’ll need better perimeters on the floor at the same time
When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
I wish Bayless would get down to being that great defender we were talking about.
Bayless can’t be trusted (with the ball), either!
In Bayless I trust.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><>
Calm down Bayless is only in year two of his career and has lots to learn,remember he came out early as a freshman in college,so damn impatient.
I don't have the power to damn anything, especially not intangible states of being.
In Bayless I trust.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><>
Good response, but are you sure playamademex was talking to you?
Calm down. Bayless is only in his second year of professional basketball and has much to learn. Remember that he came out early, as a freshman in college. One is so damnably impatient.
#52
Still calm, thanks! ;)
In Bayless I trust.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><>
Bayless has made some solid strides this year
Remember this is just his second season and first full season as a non-scrub. I believe that by next season he will platoon with Miller and when Miller’s contract is up he will be ready to take over full-time as a PG. yes, I am very confident of that.
Being groomed I reckon
Sometimes it’s easier to train your own PG than it is to go out and get one with the skills you want. Bayless has the physical tools, the work ethic, the drive and the discipline. Those are the things you can’t teach. He needs next year to work on locking down his man and improving his jumper. If he does that he’ll be an incredible asset.
I’m glad we have Miller for one more year. By his fourth season, Bayless should be ready to start or we should just part ways. but for next year let’s have him learn decision making and intelligent play from Miller and work on his defense and jumper.
by seasnake333 on Mar 3, 2010 4:43 PM PST reply actions 1 recs
Exactly Right ^^^
Bayless is progressing nicely. No one is suggesting that we hand over the keys to the car just yet, but with proper coaching and plenty of minutes on the court, Bayless can/will be the PG we need.
He has the physical tools. He has the desire. He has the work ethic. He has the IQ. Someone just needs to teach the guy how be be our PG. I don’t buy all this “PGs are born . . . it takes instinct, bullcrap”. Basketball is COACHED. You can’t coach height, you can’t coach speed, YOU CAN COACH BASKETBALL. If Nate can’t take a guy who has all the tools AND is extremely motivated and make something out of him, then maybe we have the wrong coach.
Bayless has an elite NBA skill - attacking the rim and drawing foul shots
His cake still needs lots of baking but he has come a long ways from last year. He is fine for now as a back up to Miller with Rudy and Roy sharing his duties. I don’t trust him in crunch time but he is still worth developing because he would be the perfect match for Roy if he develops as expected.
I just can't get on the Bayless bandwagon
The kid is nowhere near Batum in terms of being NBA ready, and he is perhaps one of the most entitled players we have ever had. The guy things he should be starting, and has yet to really prove that he is a capable backup in the NBA. He is somewhere between J Jack and Telfair. He attacks well, but his ability to see the court is pretty bad. His defense is okay, but nowhere near the level it needs to be in terms of it being the skill that gets him on the floor. I would package him with Martell during the draft for a better skill player at pretty much any position.
OMG I just jizzed in my France
OMGrandpa
He thinks he should be starting?
Link?
And don’t show me a quote that says he wants to start, or challenge for the starting job. Every player with talent wants that.
Give Blake the MLE in 2010!
Farewell to #2 and #25, good luck to you!
#10 #52 -- #5 #7 & #88 are back!
Just because there isn't a good reason for Nate to pull Andre and play Bayless doesn't mean it won't happen!
I think Andre has forced Nate’s hand a bit with his play, but I still think Nate dislikes Andre and won’t hesitate to pull him on a whim.
I can't stand by anyone who tattoos there own name on there back in giant letters
"Get three superstars and then fill the roster with guys willing to go through a wall to win." - KP
Do you know how hard it is to DO that???
#52
by CatMan2 on Mar 3, 2010 5:28 PM PST up reply actions 2 recs
Jerryd designed and constructed a do-it-yourself tattoo contraption
featuring robtic arms and strategically-angled mirrors
in his spare time
When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
dj augustin is having a terrible year
but his 3 pt% is still better than jerryd’s. I gave up on JB when he couldn’t play point guard in summer league. If you can’t do it there, how are you suppose to do it in the nba?The biggest problem is that I don’t think jerryd has very good vision and I don’t know how you would go about teaching that
Trade Bayless for DJ Augustin
It isn't his fault
He is from the University of Arizona most of there PG’s are shoot first apoligize later
"Get three superstars and then fill the roster with guys willing to go through a wall to win." - KP
speaking of this
I actually think the best roll for Bayless would be the Jason Terry role, the scoring point guard 6th man.
isn't Jason Terry a SG?
"Get three superstars and then fill the roster with guys willing to go through a wall to win." - KP
combo guard
Awesomeness (ô'səm-nes)
1. n. Something that inspires awe
2. n. Nicolas Batum
by thomasikehara on Mar 3, 2010 5:38 PM PST up reply actions
Could Jerryd be a COMBO GUARD?
??
!!!!!!!!
wOw.
wHAT A REVELATIOn!
Give Blake the MLE in 2010!
Farewell to #2 and #25, good luck to you!
#10 #52 -- #5 #7 & #88 are back!
i think he would've stayed
had lute come back
Trade Bayless for DJ Augustin
I gave up on JB when he couldn’t play point guard in summer league.
During the summer league, Nate was interviewed and said that he would have to “put Jerryd into situations where he can succeed” and that Bayless was having difficulty recognizing when to attack and when to set up his teammates. Shortly afterwards, Pooh Jeter was running the point
I do think JB has come a long way during the regular season. Ceertainly he was given more PT due to injuries than anyone could’ve anticipated, back in October. I also think that Nate has tried to keep another PG in the game with Jerryd as much as possible, so Bayless could attack more and not have to get the other players the ball as much as a “pure” PG typically does.
Then came the Blake trade. Now the rotation should be “staggered” so Roy and Miller are on the court for most of the critical minutes. When Rudy and Jerryd are running the offense as a duo, we’ve seen Portland struggle to score. This could be a real problem in the playoffs, especially if Roy or Miller were to get in foul trouble. Even a 5 minute period of time where the offense stagnates can be the difference between winning or losing a post season game.
But I suppose we’ve got to find out how #4 and #5 are going to handle the responsibiity at some point….mIght as well throw them in the deep end of the pool and see if they’ve learned how to dog-paddle
When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
It seems to me that some people are failing to notice
that the offense has also gone stagnant for long stretches with the combination of Miller and Roy in the game as well, it’s just that since they are the veteran and the superstar, they get to work through those stretches, while Rudy and Bayless get pulled out. Like you say though, the only way to really know what we can consistently expect out of Rudy and Bayless is if they get consistent minutes and some opportunities to play through adversity and rough stretches.
That is correct
We have stagnant stretches no matter who is on the court. And we’ve had some good stretches with Rudy and Jerryd.
Most NBA teams have stagnant stretches, actually. Part of it is that the other teams sometimes play defense. Part of it is that sometimes the shots just aren’t dropping.
Basketball is a funny game.
Give Blake the MLE in 2010!
Farewell to #2 and #25, good luck to you!
#10 #52 -- #5 #7 & #88 are back!
i think you should have used a line chart
Awesomeness (ô'səm-nes)
1. n. Something that inspires awe
2. n. Nicolas Batum
Underwhelming
I’m hoping the moving of Blake, besides getting a center, was a way to showcase Bayless for a trade. He has been in Nate’s system for over a year and a half and he can’t beat out, in my opinion, one of the most overrated point guards of our generation.
Saying he’s 26th in PERs just tells me that there are 25 out of 30 teams that have point guards that will dominate the Blazers. I firmly believe that at least a top 10 point guard is needed to make an impact in the playoffs.
When I combine the slow development of Bayless with one of the most annoying nicknames I’ve ever read, I believe that the point guard of the Blazer’s future is not on the roster at this time.
Tom, have you become a multi-dimensional hater?
Who could have guessed?
It’s the position, isn’t it? You don’t like Mills, either, do you?
Give Blake the MLE in 2010!
Farewell to #2 and #25, good luck to you!
#10 #52 -- #5 #7 & #88 are back!
I like Bayless and don't mind Mills
Both tick me off because neither one of them is seriously threatening Miller for the starting job. I was pretty much promised 2 summer leagues ago that Bayless would be the starting point guard towards the end of last season. If it wasn’t for Blake being traded, he wouldn’t even be the back up point guard. I should be allowed to sue some folks on BE for promising me the world with Bayless and all I got was Estacada.
I don't think I ever went to Estacada
but I vaguely remember road signs for it somewhere.
Is it that bad?
Give Blake the MLE in 2010!
Farewell to #2 and #25, good luck to you!
#10 #52 -- #5 #7 & #88 are back!
Although I shouldn't be ...
… I’m continually surprised with how far you are able to take this. At some point one would assume you’d run out of good material and it when then become tiring. Rather, you continue to find new twists and applications. Outstanding work. You are my role model.
Well, you are my role model for that letter in a bottle thing. But this is definately burnishing your image. You have even made it “Dave analogy” status.
Clarence, It's better to have a gun and not need it, then need a gun and not have it.
I got lots more
I still haven’t figure out how to use “mancrush”. If Bayless played better, then I could say Nate has a mancrush on Miller and Bayless needs to start or get more minutes from Miller. That is in my back pocket, if Miller is still here next year.
I guess that is still a hole in your game.
But I’m confident you’ll bring that aspect around in much the same way Andre has learned to shoot three pointers.
Clarence, It's better to have a gun and not need it, then need a gun and not have it.

by 


























